How did Stalin win Leadership of the Soviet Union

Why did Stalin rather than Trotsky Emerge as the Leader of the USSR in 1929 and the qualities of both men..

Stalin emerged as the leader of the Bolshevik party in 1929 due to a variety of lucky events and carefully considered political decisions that caused him to eliminate all his opponents, including his most significant rival, Trotsky. Amongst party members Stalin was known as “Comrade Card-Index,” one who assembled and dealt with party paperwork, however they were not aware of “what power [he] was accumulating wherein,” which subsequently brought about their downfall.

Stalin becoming leader of the USSR in 1929 was greatly aided by him taking on many seemingly boring and undermined positions within the party. However they enabled him to accumulate power and influence throughout the whole Bolshevik party, which proved key to his success and to Trotsky’s downfall. Previous historians saw Stalin’s pre 1924 career as a “dull grey blank” (Nicolai Sukhanov-1922) however recent research has shown it as significant to his uprising. As there were few members in the early Bolshevik days Lenin knew them all well and because he liked Stalin’s excellent organisation he included him as one of the six members of the Central Committee, where he helped make policy and wrote the Pravda. His heritage as being Georgian paid off after the October Revolution when he was made Commissar for Nationalities, this saw the beginning of Stalin becoming the cold hearted and ruthless man which he is infamous for. Stalin was given jobs that other Bolsheviks viewed as tedious and unimportant, none of them “saw in the Stalin of 1923 the menacing and towering figure he was to become,” (I. Deutscher, the Prophet Unarmed). Positions such as the General Secretary and the Liaison Officer between the Politburo and Ogburo he used to his advantage. In both of these positions Stalin gathered personal information about Bolsheviks and built up individual files, which would include information such as character and loyalty. As Stalin also had the power of patronage this enabled him to place certain people in key positions within the party, therefore gaining their support and thus having the influence to oppose any policies he did not agree with, and pass any policies he felt beneficial to his cause. Stalin used his control of party membership to supervise the Lenin Enrolment, which began in 1924; this saw the party membership double with mostly young urban workers and uneducated peasants. This was advantageous to Stalin’s rise to power because they were unlikely to contend with any of his ideology and simply follow the instructions which they were given. Culminating this evidence it is most possible that without these positions and the influence they gave Stalin within the party, he would not have been able to gather sufficient support to aid his rise to power against all opposition (including Trotsky) and succession of Lenin as leader.

This is a preview of the whole essay

Luck has often been attributed to Stalin’s rise to power opposed to Trotsky, as several favourable events which occurred without his influence placed him in very favourable positions. One of these such events occurred immediately after Lenin’s death in 1924, and was Kamenev and Zinoviev preventing his final testament being read out in congress. It could be seen that Stalin insulting Lenin’s wife fuelled the dispute between them and resulted in the insult which was recorded in Lenin’s testament, “I am not sure that he will always know how to use that power with sufficient caution.” As Stalin had used the event of Lenin’s death to portray himself as Lenin’s loyal disciple this would prove lethal to his political success. However because the testament also contained other critical opinions of Zinoviev and Kamenev they preventing it being publicised, saving Stalin in the process.This very testament also showed the fact that Leon Trotsky was a very arrogant and un-political man. Secondly the death of Dzerzhinsksy in 1926 who was the head of the Cheka and very anti-Stalin allowed Stalin to finally infiltrate the Cheka with some of his supporters, and gain a footing in the most powerful fighting body in the whole of Russia and finally turn them against his opponents. Lastly due to perhaps the increasing threat Lenin felt, if he had not died when he had then Stalin “would probably have been sent to the provinces to work for the party” (M.McCauley, Russia 19179-41). This would have removed Stalin from Petrograd and the Bolshevik head quarters, which would subsequently have removed him from contending with Trotsky when Lenin died. These lucky events aided Stalin greatly in his emergence as leader in 1929, otherwise he may have been crushed by the Cheka, been removed from the political running or been disgraced publicly.

Although Trotsky had many attributes he also was lacking in characteristics essential for a leader. E.H Carr (Socialism in one country) acknowledged that Trotsky was a “great intellectual, the great administrator; the great orator,” however he also stated he lacked “one quality essential” to be a great political leader. He had no ability and patience to establish support amongst his equals or colleagues of lesser intelligence. He unlike Stalin would not make an effort to give favours and therefore gain support, consequently when it came to votes he always appeared extremely unpopular at Congress. Secondly Trotsky was also resented for being a Jew and for recently joining the Bolshevik party, this was because the majority of the party were anti-Semitist and also felt that new members hadn’t proved their loyalty. As proved in the propaganda war of 1920’s without a power base Trotsky’s abilities were useless against Stalin’s infiltration and support within the party. Trotsky’s odd diffidence and inability to contend against Stalin with the same level of support meant that his efforts to become leader were futile.

Stalin had a harsh and ruthless character with many attributes which proved important in his succession of Lenin as leader. From a young age Stalin was rebellious, involving himself in terrorist activities and robberies to raise money for the Bolshevik government. He was arrested and escaped from prison a full eight times, which earned him a reputation as a loyal and staunch Bolshevik, and therefore earned him respect. One of Stalin’s childhood friends noted “he was a good friend as long as one submitted to his imperious will,” this quotation indicates that he was determined in his aims and also a very formidable enemy. However after Stalin’s wife’s death he stated that with her went his “last warm feelings for people,” this may be seen as a contribution towards his autocratic and ruthless ruling. However despite Stalin’s commitment, loyalty and dedication towards the Bolshevik ideal he was seen as a “shabby and inarticulate man in the background,” (L. Deutscher – the Prophet Unarmed) one which everyone ignored to focus on the seemingly greater threat of Trotsky. Stalin’s independence and disregard for anyone else ensured that he could without qualms mislead and then crush any of his opponents, for example at Lenin’s funeral Stalin tricked Trotsky into missing it, losing him much favour. Stalin’s strengths of loyalty, ruthlessness, and perseverance enabled him to outmanoeuvre all his opponents and where necessary trick them to their downfall, for example when he initially sided with the Left Bolsheviks, knocked them out and then did the same to the Rights. His personal characteristics were vital for his emergence as a leader opposed to Trotsky, as he had to compete with Trotsky’s excellent orator skills in order to remove him as a threat.

Stalin used the differences between his and Trotsky’s policies to display Trotsky as ridiculous and to promote himself as realistic and someone whose key aim was to protect Russia. Stalin’s policy was named ‘Socialism in One Country’ and focused on consolidating the revolution, modernising Russia and turning the USSR into a defensive state. He opted to move on from the NEP, a set of emergency measures to ensure survival during the civil war that most Bolsheviks were dissatisfied with (seemed a betrayal of their communist ideals). The NEP had served it’s purpose to bring Russia through their time of economic poverty however was preventing industrialisation because it was not producing sufficient grain to make enough money through exportation. During 1913 12 million tonnes of grain was produced, whereas in the years of the NEP the most produced was 3 million, this meant exports were only at 33% and imports at 38%, this was destroying the economy. The fact that most Bolsheviks saw the movement away from the capitalist ideas of the NEP as positive combined with the added threat of invasion (relations with France, Poland, Britain and Japanese had deteriorated) proved Stalin’s plan of industrialisation very popular. Therefore Stalin’s sensible and practical approach to focus on the security of the USSR before attempting permanent revolution showed him as a better candidate that Trotsky to act in the USSR’s best interests and gained him the support which enabled him to succeed.

Trotsky’s main policy was to encourage a permanent revolution, in which it was the USSR’s role to spread communism to other countries, he also wanted to continue with the NEP, both these factors therefore contributed to his unpopularity within the party. Trotsky believed that the USSR needed to bring communism into other countries because Russia was ‘incapable of holding her own against conservative Europe’, because her working class was too small and economy too underdeveloped. However influenced by Stalin most Bolsheviks saw him as an enemy to the state because he was promoting interference with other countries when Russia was at threat from invasion. Trotsky did not succeed over Stalin because he was unwilling to compromise and appeared to make unintelligent political decisions that would put Russia at stake.

Stalin during his political uprising sided with both the left and the right side of the Bolshevik party at different times, this political manoeuvring enabled him to wipe out his opponents including Trotsky. Initially Stalin sided with the centre of the party, Zinoniev and Kamenev, however when he suggested ‘Socialism in One Country’ and also supported the NEP he created an alliance with the right side (Bukharin etc) causing Zinoniev and Kamenev to rebel in 1925. It was luck which caused them in 1926 to join with Trotsky against Stalin and encourage mass demonstrations in Moscow, this enabled Stalin to expel all three of his main rivals for factionalism and remove Trotsky from the running for leadership. However in 1928 Stalin turned against the NEP and attacked the right wing of the party, Bukharin stated, “He changes his theories according to whom he needs to get rid of next.” This may seen cruel however it was Stalin’s political manoeuvring which finally enabled him, even if by luck to remove Trotsky as a threat, and allow Stalin to become leader himself.

In conclusion Stalin emerged as the USSR’s leader in 1929 opposed to Trotsky because of a combination of factors, some pre-planned and some lucky. For example it was due to luck that he was able to initially appear at Lenin’s funeral as his loyal disciple and therefore gain respect and trust, however it was after years of hard work that he was able to use his political positions (such as general secretary) to infiltrate his supporters into key positions. Trotsky however brought about much of his own downfall by being diffident to the extent he allowed Stalin to build up a huge support base vital to his success whereby he made no attempt to make alliances or gain support.If looking back at the soviet records and asking many people who lived during Joseph Stalins time they saw him as a huge success as it was under joseph stalin that the ussr achieved political stability and economic growth of nearly 15% a year.The policies of collectivisation is also the reason why most soviet people got there bread and butter from.