The causes of the show trials and purges of the 1930’s

Authors Avatar
There have been many devastating events which have made great marks in history. Events of notable mention are the Nazi Holocaust of WW2, the use of the atomic bomb at Hiroshima, and the great terror of the 1930's in the Soviet Union. This great terror was sparked by a number of events, none more notable than the assassination of Sergei Kirov on the 1st of December 1934. There are many other reasons that the Soviet government use to justify these events, such as to defy attacks by counter-revolutionists, to clean up the Communist Party and to exterminate old ideals that are no longer supported by the Party.

Historians argue these ideas to this very day, with many of them disagreeing on the topic of what actually provoked the purges. Some even argue the fact that Stalin should not have been in power, but instead he simply manipulated the government to his own ideals. However there is one thing that can not be disputed by any historian, and that is that fact that these purges and show trials were all major historical events, with much interest from across the world. The show trials and purges had a mixed reaction around the Western world, but by reading newspapers from the time of the incidents it can be seen that all countries come to a basic consensus. This consensus is that the actions that the Soviet Union took against the accused were inhuman and unnecessary.

The purpose of this essay is to evaluate the causes of the show trials and purges of the 1930's and to evaluate the Western worlds reaction to these events. It does so by examining the processes of the show trials, and by investigating popular publications that deal with current events, from the time of the Sergei Kirov assassination. Based on this examination, it is possible to conclude that Stalin used the purge to rid the Soviet Union of all of his opposition, personal and political and that the Western world saw theses actions as inhuman massacres because the Soviet Union did not offer the accused a fair trial.

As Russia entered the post Great War era there were many issues being faced everyday in the newly communist Russia. One of these questions being raised is who will guide the nation into a new era of prosperity and affluence. The provisional government that forced Tsar Nicholas II to abdicate was quickly overthrown by the Bolshevik party in October 1917 and Vladimir Lenin came into power as the new leader of Russia, the first true leader since the Tsarist regime.1 However, Lenin's power was short-lived as he died on January 21, 1924. 2

Prior to his death, Lenin suffered a stroke in March 1923 affecting his ability to speak.3 This deficiency started the controversy as to who should be Lenin's successor. Many people were unsure as to who would continue to lead the government but there were two obvious choices that many people considered to have roughly the same probability of succeeding Lenin. These two obvious choices to be Lenin's successors were Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. Many believed Trotsky to be the front-runner as he had recently headed the Military Revolutionary Committee and had served as a high-ranking member of the party during Lenin's era. Stalin had long served in the Communist Party since before the revolution and in 1923 had become National Secretary for the party. A primary explanation as to why people chose Trotsky over Stalin because Lenin had supported Trotsky as his successor making the claim that Stalin was too rude to lead the government. This is a highly dispute idea, with many different historians having different ideas about whether Stalin or Trotsky was Lenin's choice as a successor. American historian Richard Pipes, a professor at the prestigious Harvard University, argues that Lenin would have chosen Stalin. He states that Lenin described Trotsky as "not having a clue about politics."4 Pipes also expresses the ideas that Lenin trusted Stalin a great deal and that Stalin was Lenin's right hand man in his final days.5 Although it was not Lenin's wish that Stalin took control of the government, Stalin used his position in the government to manipulate the party and put his supporters in crucial spots of the government, consequently ensuring his eventual victory.6

During the struggle for power between Stalin and Trotsky many differences emerged. Trotsky presented the theory held by Lenin and Marx, which was that in order for the Soviet Union to remain secure, they must ignite a worldwide revolution so that every country had the same ideals as the Soviet Union.7 Trotsky believed that until this task was completed that all efforts should be directed towards that ambition. On the contrary to Trotsky's belief, Stalin presented the idea of 'socialism in one country.'8 For this to happen Russia would have to make herself impregnable to attack and then she would be able to lead the rest of the world in a Socialist revolution.

These were not the only differences between the two potential leaders. The two had a strong dislike for each other, sparked by the differences between them. While Stalin was a bland official, who had reached his position through hard work, Trotsky was a Jewish intellect who had risen to a position of authority through his own personal assertiveness.9 Stalin eventually won the race for power because he had a strong power base within the party. Trotsky made many tactical mistakes along his rise, including a statement that he had made in 1913 about Lenin, saying that Lenin was responsible for everything that was backward in Russia10 and by "categorically refusing" a role that Lenin appointed him to.11 Stalin and his followers made this statements public and before long Trotsky resigned from the Commission of War and took a less prominent role in the government, consequently conceding power to Stalin.12 Later, in 1927, Trotsky was expelled from Russia for opposing Stalin's policy of 'socialism in one country.'13
Join now!


As Stalin became more comfortable with his new power, he began to oppose many of Lenin's ideas and solutions to Russia's problems. After poor grain harvests in 1927 and 1929, Stalin felt a need to put an end to Lenin's New Economic Policy (NEP) and construct a new system that would enhance the Russian economy in a shortened period of time.14 Stalin expressed this idea in a speech in 1931 stating that, "We are fifty or a hundred years behind the advanced countries. We must make good this gap in ten years. Either we do it or they ...

This is a preview of the whole essay