Russia and the Soviet Union

To what extent did the Bolsheviks successfully consolidate power by 1924?

Introduction:

• The Bolsheviks consolidated power through centralised control, repression, and adaptability.

• Despite facing civil war and opposition, they maintained rule by 1924 — though not without compromising key ideological aims.

Body Paragraph 1: Suppression of opposition

• Banned rival parties; Constituent Assembly dissolved in 1918.

• Cheka (secret police) used to crush opposition (Red Terror).

• Quote: “Sometimes – history needs a push.” – Lenin. Lenin justifying violent revolution and repression during the early years of Bolshevik rule. This Demonstrates that Lenin believed force was necessary to implement socialism and consolidate power.

• Orlando Figes (historian) “The Bolsheviks succeeded not through popular support but through ruthless determination.” Figes critiques how the Bolsheviks used violence and the Cheka to silence dissent.

Body Paragraph 2: War Communism and Civil War

• War Communism implemented: grain requisitioning, nationalisation, rationing.

• Secured Bolshevik victory in Civil War (1918–1921) vs. Whites and Greens.

• Red Army led by Trotsky — effective military organisation.

Body Paragraph 3: NEP and ideological compromise

• 1921 NEP replaced War Communism to revive economy.

• Lenin acknowledged partial return to capitalism.

• Maintained political control but sacrificed revolutionary ideals.

Conclusion:

• Bolsheviks consolidated power through force, strategic retreat, and pragmatic policy shifts — but with significant ideological compromises.

Assess the importance of leading Bolshevik figures in the power struggle between Stalin and Trotsky

Introduction:

• The struggle was influenced by political skill, manipulation of roles, and public perception.

• Stalin’s consolidation of power was due to strategy and alliances, while Trotsky’s weaknesses contributed to his failure.

Body Paragraph 1: Stalin’s manipulation of Party structure

• Used role as General Secretary to control Party appointments.

• Aligned with Zinoviev and Kamenev to sideline Trotsky.

• Historian: Robert Service – “Stalin outmanoeuvred his rivals through political cunning.”

Body Paragraph 2: Trotsky’s flaws and isolation

• Arrogant, failed to build alliances, missed Lenin’s funeral.

• Attacked NEP while Party still supported it.

• Seen as too intellectual and idealistic.

Body Paragraph 3: Stalin’s exploitation of Lenin’s death

• Downplayed Lenin’s Testament, promoted “Leninism”.

• Advocated “Socialism in One Country” – more popular than Trotsky’s “Permanent Revolution”.

• Quote: Lenin’s Testament warned Stalin was “too rude.” Shows Lenin’s mistrust of Stalin, which Trotsky failed to use effectively due to political misjudgment. It’s key evidence for how Stalin's rise was opposed but still succeeded.

Conclusion:

• Stalin’s cunning and control of the Party machine, combined with Trotsky’s missteps, made Stalin’s rise to power inevitable.

To what extent did Stalin transform the Soviet Union politically and economically?

Introduction:

• Stalin radically reshaped the USSR through Five-Year Plans, collectivisation, and purges.

• Though industrial and political goals were achieved, human cost was immense.

Body Paragraph 1: Economic transformation – industrialisation

• Five-Year Plans from 1928 aimed to rapidly industrialise.

• Focused on coal, steel, machinery.

• Stalin: “We must make good this distance in ten years.” Explains Stalin’s urgency for economic reform — used to justify harsh policies and sacrifice.

• Fitzpatrick: “Chaotic, brutal, but transformative.” Acknowledges both the human cost and success of Soviet economic transformation.

Body Paragraph 2: Economic transformation – collectivisation

• Forced peasants into collective farms (kolkhozes).

• Dekulakisation led to famine (esp. Ukraine, 1932–33).

• Millions died; production dropped initially.

Body Paragraph 3: Political transformation – purges and terror

• Great Terror (1936–1938): show trials, NKVD repression.

• Targets included old Bolsheviks (e.g., Bukharin).

• Robert Conquest: Stalin turned Party into “a tool of personal dictatorship.” Shows how Stalin transformed the political system from collective leadership to authoritarian rule, especially through the purges.

Conclusion:

• Stalin’s transformation modernised the USSR but relied on authoritarianism and mass repression — success came at the cost of millions of lives.

Evaluate Soviet foreign policy under Stalin (1920s–1945)

Introduction:

• Stalin’s foreign policy shifted from revolutionary ideals to pragmatic alliances.

• Aimed at securing the USSR and expanding influence, especially after WWII.

Body Paragraph 1: 1930s diplomacy and Nazi-Soviet Pact

• USSR joined League of Nations (1934).

• Nazi-Soviet Pact (1939) shocked world; allowed invasion of Poland.

• Molotov: “Fascism is a matter of taste.” Highlights Soviet pragmatism — ideology was abandoned when it suited Soviet interests, showing Stalin prioritised security and survival.

• Geoffrey Roberts: Stalin acted for “security, not ideology.” Supports the argument that Stalin’s foreign policy was based on protecting the USSR, not spreading communism, especially during the Cold War’s origins.

Body Paragraph 2: WWII and wartime alliances

• USSR joined Allies after German invasion in 1941 (Operation Barbarossa).

• Tehran, Yalta, and Potsdam conferences shaped post-war world.

• USSR emerged as a superpower, gained Eastern European influence.

Body Paragraph 3: Post-war expansion and Cold War seeds

• USSR established satellite states in Eastern Europe (e.g. Poland, Hungary).

• Justified as buffer zones for security.

• Increased tensions with the West – foundations of Cold War.

Conclusion:

• Stalin’s foreign policy was marked by opportunism and self-interest, maintaining security and extending Soviet power globally.