• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Explain why; at the time of Lenins death in 1924 there was no obvious successor to lead the USSR.

Extracts from this document...


12 marker: Explain why; at the time of Lenin's death in 1924 there was no obvious successor to lead The USSR. Lenin's death came as a great shock to many Russians in 1924; he led the October Revolution in 1917 he was seen as father like role to Russians. He had built up a new government and allowed many of his fellow Bolsheviks roles positions in his new Soviet State, and these figures all thought that they have the power and influence to lead Russia. Lenin knew that he was ill and that he would not be able to keep on making key decisions and attending committee and politburo meetings. He felt that the people in his government saw this as an opportunity to try and assert their power and then after his death have a good chance of becoming the leader of The USSR. He wrote a testament, damning five of the people that held high authority in his new government: Trotsky, Stalin, Bukharin, Zinoviev and Kamenev. ...read more.


Ultimately, it showed that there was going to be a power struggle, and that there was no obvious successor. Lenin's Testament highlighted some major concerns of his, that there were five possible successors but none of them seemed obvious to go straight to the leadership position. Trotsky was seen as an alternative main candidate, he had a lot of support from the working class in the two main cities, Moscow and Petrograd. He was educated and a brilliant orator, moving crowds of people that came to visit him speak. However, he had many personal weaknesses, he was not liked by a lot of the main decision makers under Lenin, and he needed their support for a leadership position. He did not understand that Russia was an agricultural country and he had to think of the country's agriculture as much as its industry. Stalin had many important roles within the communist party, commissar for nationalities, worker's and peasant's inspectorate and more. ...read more.


Also, because Lenin's Testament was not published it did not allow the party to make a decision on the leadership, alongside the ban on factions meant that a candidate would just have to seem like a strong runner individually or resort to backstabbing. In conclusion, I believe that by not publishing Lenin's testament, this meant that his personal opinions were not voiced to the party, at the party conference, where hundreds of the most influential communists would have seen that all of the main five candidates had weaknesses and there was not one that Lenin felt was singly good enough to rule the party. He was possibly hinting to a collective government with a coalition between all five, mixing their positive aspects to make a great USSR. Although the ban on factions was important, the Testament would have voiced the weaknesses of the five people in the running for leadership coming straight from Lenin his conclusion would have gained influence from the party that was loyal to him. Therefore, I believe that by not publishing Lenin's testament meant that there was great uncertainty over the role of leader. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. What is Lenin's legacy?

    In 1917, exhausted by the First World War, Russia was ripe for change. Assisted by the Germans, who hoped that he would undermine the Russian war effort, Lenin returned home and started working against the provisional government, which had replaced the tsarist regime.

  2. .Compare the Characters and beliefs of Lenin and Stalin. Lenin and Stalin had many ...

    Lenin believed passionately in the ideals of communism even though he would 'dilute' these if conditions dictated he do so (e.g. advocating NEP). Stalin by contrast ran everything. His policies were often completely different from Communist ideas. People loyal to Stalin (e.g.

  1. Explain why Stalin, and not Trotsky, emerged as Lenin's successor.

    Stalin's ideas were particularly popular with Right wing Communist members, who regarded them as 'safe' and less open to extremism. The ideas of Trotsky however, were far less popular. His views differed greatly to those of Stalin, as he was eager to end the NEP (new economic policy)

  2. The enormous role that Trotsky played in the success of the Bolsheviks up until ...

    This included the middle class, who the Bolsheviks greatly distrusted. By the end of 1918 an assortment of anti-Bolsheviks had united. They were made up mainly of social revolutionaries, Mensheviks, Officers and supporters of the Tsar, landlords and capitalists who had lost a lot of land and money during the revolution and the Czech legion (former prisoners of war).

  1. How important was war in Lenin's securing and consolidation of power in the USSR.

    In the end the Germans allowed him and a small group of socialists to pass through Germany in a sealed train. This shows Lenin's determination and how he used politics to his advantage to get what he needed. On the 3rd April, Lenin finally arrived in Petrograd.

  2. To what extent did Lenin's legacy leave the Bolshevik party in a vibrant and ...

    Therefore the constuent assembly results of November 1917 left Lenin with an immediate problem as the Bolsheviks had only won a quarter of the seats. Lenin had always originally supported the idea of a Constitent Assembly as it followed Bolshevik beliefs as a democratic, peoples party wanting eveyone to have a voice in the running of Russia.

  1. Assess Lenins strengths and weaknesses as leader of Russia from 1917 to 1924.

    They were bound to face military opposition from their wide range of opponents such as the SRs or old tsarist supporters, who were not prepared to accept absolute rule from a minority party. Conversely, it is debated that Lenin?s lack of co-operation was one of his strengths; by banning other parties; in the long-term the Bolshevik party was strengthened.

  2. Assess Lenin's strengths and weaknesses as leader of Russia from 1917 to 1924.

    Lenin gained access to Russia through Germany, and arrived on the 3rd April. Although Lenin was absent from the revolution, It can be argued that his determination to regain control of the Bolsheviks was a major strength. As stated by his wife, once Lenin had heard of the February revolution

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work