History (Russia) iAlevels

1917-1924 govt

What were the bolshevik’s aims pre-revolution?

-To overthrow the middle/upper classes due to them exploiting workers + peasants

-To replace tsarism with socialism that would eventually develop into communism, giving people freedom over their lives

-To improve living and working conditions, establishing a dictatorship of the proletariat.

Tsar’s role pre-revolution

-He ruled as an autocrat, yet he failed at addressing the political discontent and economic struggles of Russia due to wanting to remain an absolute ruler. This caused him to be increasingly challenged by the widespread dissatisfaction (people thought russia was a backward country)

The role of ww1

-Russia had a bad economy that worsened after the war, as the govt. invested already scarce resources in it. eg: poverty, famine, loss of confidence in govt…

-one of the triggers for the 1917 Feb revolution (it provoked strikes, mutinies, revolt)

-Tsar was directly blamed for the ww1 failures, opposition to him grew exponentially.

Geographic/economic problems pre-revolution

-hasrh climate, long distances and limited infrastructre made communication bad, making population control and decision making hard for the govt.

-Besides, 85% of population were peasants in a rapidly industrializing country (Backward economy). There was also a problem regarding severe social inequality.

1905 Revolution’s effects

-Showed workers were willing to strike/fight. change was wanted. while they got brutally repressed, the problems and political dissatisfaction of 1905 remained in 1917.

-The October Manifesto made opposition lose trust in middle classes, as they had ‘betrayed’ the revolution.

How did the bolsheviks get into power? (1917)

-After the Feb 1917 revolution, in the Oct 1917 revolution they went against the provisional govt. The bolsheviks were a minority party with limited support, so they had to use promises (decrees of 1917), extreme violence and propaganda.

-They also took advantage of the civil war and political unrest to take power.

Bolshevik goals post-revolution

-Totally anti-capitalist

-wanted to get rid of inequality

-wanted a representative govt. in favor of the people.

how the bolsheviks destroyed political parties

-Deemed them ‘criminals’ and arrested some of them (eg 5000 mensheviks in 1 night)

-Used centralized ideas and force to control the people

-dissolved tne constituent assembly after they recieved only 175 seats (SRs won 410) removing mediums of opposition and the right to vote other right wing/other moderate parties.

-Rejected coalitions and limited press (censhorhsip, porpaganda).

Effects of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (1918)

-Lenin sacrificed his popularity (internally) and russian resources (externally) to pull out the war as it was sapping on resources + focus. he wanted to focus on communist expansion and development (would only happen if he united russia)

-The treaty however angered and humiliated conservatives, partly triggering the civil war

Effect of the Civil war

--Bolshevik success due to being highly organized/coordinated. This was a result of Lenin’s policies + trotsky.

-over 1917-1921, peasant and overall support grew thanks to the decrees. peasants would have a shot at survival/subsistance

-war communism introduced, it was a strategy as it favored you depending on your social class/job. (Power balance)

How was the All-Russian congress of soviets set up?

1. sovnarkom (composed of 20 people with lots of power)

2. central executive committee (‘influenced’ some policies)

3. All-Russian congress (lots of people, limited power)

4. They were all bolsheviks, the congress elected the central executive so there was a sense of democracy, but it was fake because there was no real debates/discussions and the appartus was abused during the civil war, leading to a corruption of power (especially the sovnarkom)

how was the communist/bolshevik party organized?

They were the ones who carried out decision making rather than the apparatus.

1. Politburo (7-10 members including the ‘best’ communists. eg. lenin, trotsky, stalin)

2. central committee (30-40 members who ‘influenced’ policies)

3. All party congress (lots of people who carried out (rigged) elections).

4. There was a fake sense of democracy, transparency and representation.

5. Many bolsehviks were sad that there’d been a loss of representation and an increase in direct implementation, and the reality was that it was a more ‘bourgeoise’ govt. rather than communist.

How did lenin consolidate the bolshevik state?

-he focused on centralizing power and having a tight control on the state.

-Due to the limited support fot the bolsheviks, he used force.

-Lastlty, he embraced trade unions and while they shared the same ideology, lenin sidelined them as he was fearful of opposition and he did not want the trade unions becoming too powerful.

What was Stalin’s character + how was he described in the early 1920s?

He wasnt a popular successor

he wasnt charismatic, charming, likeable or eloquent. Actually, he was rough, provincial and Georgian, whc¡ich gave him a disadvantage within the party.

he was dismissed as a mediocre bureaucrat, ‘the grey blur’ as Sukhanov had nicknamed him.

How did Stalin rise into power? (initially)

1) Lenin appointed Stalin general secretariat in 1922. An administrative role which gave him access to over 26,000 personal files. This meant that you were always watched and there was paperwork that could be used against you

2) Lenin Enrollment. Stalin processed around 500,000 peasants into the party and even promoted them. This made peasants loyal to Stalin, increasing his popularity. Stalin essentially created a web of loyalty. (Besides, its important to note peasants were poorly educated, politically naive and easily influenced).

3) Stalin built his power unnoticed while other bolsheviks undermined him and called him ‘Comrade Card-Index’ or ‘grey blur’. Forgettable and plain.

Trotsky and Stalin’s rivalry (1920s-1924) and how Stalin isolated Trotsky

Lenin favored a collective leadership to suceed him. trotsky and stalin were both main contendors for this, yet they couldnt work together. Trotsky wanted true communism and he wanted it to spread globally. He was also not a team player, arrogant and he didn’t follow others. Stalin on the other hand was industrious, kept grudges, he favored more power of an individual and had a weaker ideology. Besides, Trotsky had called Stalin primitive and publicly humiliated him, so stalin had a vendetta against trostky.

When Lenin suffered his stroke, a triumvate (stalin, zinoviev + kamenev) was formed. they were an anti-trostky block. Stalin had a wide support base thanks to the loyalty network while Trotsky had limited support and was an ‘outsider’ to the rank. so he was isolated pretty quickly.

What were lenin’s concerns/testaments and why were they not read at the party congress

1) He wanted to address the soveriegnty of smaller nations (could be from georgia and be from the USSR too)

2) Apparatus of state + party had to be more transparent and accountable. wanted more people in higher levels

3) Leadership— didnt want stalin as a leader. he expressed his concerns about him, but since stalin was observing him closely and knew what the concerns were, he didnt make them public.

This is why the testaments were not read at the party congress despite it being Lenin’s dying wish. Trotsky didnt fight this as he knew his position in the central committee was too weak. After Lenin’s death, the truimvate labelled themselves as ‘leninist’ and trotsky as ‘anti-leninist’. the decision to embalm lenin’s body was so they’d gain more support

Stalin’s opponents in the politburo in 1924

Trotsky: left opposition, considered the obvious succesor but he was arrogant and didnt do team work. few attempts to organize his base of support as he saw inter-party squabbles as beneath him.

Zinoviev: left opposition. party secretary in leningrad, skilled orator + worked closely with lenin but he was inneficent in practical matters.

Kamenev: left opposition. party secretary in moscow, but he lacked principle.

Bukharin: right opposition. described by lenin as “the golden boy”. young, intellgent but lacked political experience.

Tomsky: right opposition/leading figure in trade unions. his influence declined with that of the trade unions.

Rykov: right opposition, he succeeded lenin as chair of the sovnarkom but he was outspoken and a drunk.

why and how did Stalin deal with the left opposition? (1926)

the left opposition wanteed communist global dominance and a permanent revolution. Stalin didnt want that so in 1926 they were accused of forming factions, expelled from the politburo, demoted, then expelled from the party.

In 1928, kamenev and zinoviev renounced on their views and got readmitted (but power had shifted to stalin as it was stalin who agreed). trotsky didnt, so he was exiled to alma-ata and later exiled from the USSR.

why and how did Stalin deal with the right opposition (1927-1928)

the right opposition stuck to lenin’s policies and aims, including the NEP. Stalin wanted to launch a five-year plan while the right, in fear of peasants opposing collectivisation + food production droppping wanted to stick to the NEP.

This blocked stalin’s idea of socialism in one country + it showed they werent supportive of stalin

To deal with this, Stalin: Issued ‘the foundations of leninism’ to remove the nep. it was easy to read for the lenin enrollment politically naive members. he undermined bukharin’s position by stressing bukharin’s disagreements with lenin in the early 1920s, he accused bukharin of trotskyism due to his criticism of the growth of buraucracy, supporters of the rights in trade unions or the moscow party branch were removed on stalin’s orders, stalin highlighted the NEP’s inability to prevent food shortages in cities and he approved grain requistioning which just showed the NEPs problems. he also accused the right of forming factions because of a secret meeting, so the right were now limited to work within official channels. lastly stalin could win any vote (eg central committee in april 1926) because of his web of loyalty (people owed their jobs to him)

ultimately, in april 1926, bukharin was forced to admit errors of political judgment. the right opposition were removed from their posts (except rykov, who was head of state until 1930)

it shows how stalin represented the growing class of party bureacrats who wished to mantain the priviledge of their position.

what were stalin’s instruments of terror?

-his role as party secretariat, since he collected info on party members and could use it against them

-Secret police, which evolved to NKVD by 1934. terror was bureaucratic

-Public humiliation + the 1921 ban on factions

-Nomenklatura

how were the early purges (1928) and Chistka like?

he expelled members non-violently by conficating party membership cards.

The Chistka (1932-35) was still non-violent, but by 1935, 22% of the party had been removed from their posts mostly because of opposing the five year plan, drunkness, passivity + bribery. sent a message to the remaining members. it also sped up implementation of economic policy now that there were less people opposing it.

what was the 1928 economic upheavel/paranoia?

in 1928, forcing collectivisation created immense social chaos, widespread famine + industrial bottlenevks across the USSR.

Rather than acknowledging this or taking accountability for it, Stalin attributed failures to sabotage. this is a turning point for terror as surveillance culture is embedded.

what was the opposition to stalin like in the early 1930s? (+ how it lead to more violent purges)

1) In 1932, Ryutin issued a document to the central committe that was highly critical of Stalin, calling him a dictator and calling for his removal from power

2) Brutality to implement collectivisation was criticised heavily due to the unrest it caused, especially in Ukrine/ the Caucasus.

3) Party officials were critical of unrealistic targets set by the five year plan.

Purges became more violent because Stalin began setting quotas of the % of party members that had to be purged. Goes to show Stalin’ paranoia.

what happened in the 17th party congress? (congress of victors, 1934)

criticism of stalin increased, shows dissatisfaction with stalinis rigid regime.

Kirov delivered a speech against stalin and recieved a standing ovation. Kirov was a potential rival to stalin’s rule. (Kirov recieved 3 negative votes while stalin recieved 300)

Out of 1,996 delegates that attended the party congress, 1,108 would be executed by 1939.

the murder of kirov and its consequences

1 dec 1934, kirov was murdered in leningrad by nikolayov, but itgs rumored it was based on Stalin’s orders. it gave stalin the opportunity to dismantle all institutional restraints

Decree of 1st Dec: Stalin suspended the defence counsel, removed rights of appeal and ordered immediate executions for terrorist crimes. This led to a loss of accountability, it gave stalin more power, it removed his mian rival (kirov) and allowed stalin to become lawfully unlawful, as he could now create conspiracy claims that suited his agenda and get rid of opposition.

“The murder of kirov was the catalyst for the purging of large sections of he party”

what were show trials?

waves of arrests, almost treated like a theatrical show

Trial of the sixteen

Happened in Aug 1936 + targeted leaders of the left (Zinoviev, kamenev)

Accused of working for trotsky. NKVD pressured them to confess to crimes they didnt commit and they were executed.

Trial of the seventeen

Happened in 1937, targetted Radek and Pyatakov

They ‘admitted’ to sabotaging machinery/five-year plan was well as colluding with Nazis and an imperialist japan (treason) so they got executed. their real ‘crime’ was opposing the five year plan.

Trial of the Twenty-One

Happened in 1938, targetted leaders of the right (Bukharin, Rykov)

Bukharin criticised stalin through ‘notes of an economist’, so he got accused of wanting to restore capitalism and of working with trotsky. They got executed.

Purge of the military and the NKVD (secret police)

The military was purged in June 1937, where 35,000 red army officials were purged and 14/16 commanders killed.

The purge of the NVKD happened around 1939. Yagoda was replaced by Yezhov ‘the bloody dw@rf’. He killed over 3,000 of his own personnel, then to explain the excessive purges he got used as a scapegoat and executed in 1936.

The constitution of 1936

Drafted by Bukharin. Had links to lenin and the proletariat, and it claimed to be most democratic (fraud)

1) Democratic façade: Guaranteed universal suffrage, free speech, freedom of assembly, employment + civil rights. Everyone could now vote: rights had restrictions, democracy was imposed from above/ limited by leadership + only communist party could run for elections.

2) Supreme soviet: Elected bicameral parliament that barely did anything (Aided transparency)

3) Article 126 explicitly confirms the communist party is the leading core of all organizations.

the wording of the constitution was directed at foreign governments as well as citizens. it aimed to convince western countries that the USSR was democratic so they were seen as ‘allies’ against nazi germany.

Stalin’s power 1941-45

On June 1941 the german invasion forced an overhaul in governance.

GKO (State defense committe) was formed. It was a small emergency cabinet holding absolute executive command.

Stavka introduced- consisted of a military high command where stalin integrated political aims directly with generals like Zhukov.

Premier role- stalin assumed formal state leadership as chairman of snorvakom. he prioritized state over party— led to a high propaganda machine + reinforced the cult of personality.

what was High Stalinism? 1945-53

Peak of personal dictatorship. STalin deliberately weakened institutions to prevent any rival power centres. His health and leadership began declining, so he had to rely on political scheming to divide powers, weaken rivals + minimize their position.

New members joined the politburo (Beria, Malenkov, Zhdanov). Stalin was weaker so he couldnt just purge them.

He introduced new purges such as ‘the Mingrealian Affairs’ (1951) where he executed Beria’s allies for being MIngrelian (beria was mingrelian too) and ‘The Doctors Plot’ (1953) which was a stepping stone to remove Jews and Beria.

Limits Stalin faced in high stalinism 1945-53

1) Sluggish bureaucrayc- there was a vast geography and incompetent, lazy officials

2) Rivals existed which he couldnt just purge

3) Communication improved, purges were harder to keep secret as they were too brutal

4) the second five year plan had targets that were considered too high, so stalin had to lower them.

Lenin vs Stalin’s rule

1) There were trends under Stalin that contributed to the growth of stalin’s power (growth of bureaucracy, failure of political institutions + use of terror)

2) Stalinism is not an inevitable consequence of leninism- stalin moves away from a dictatorship of the proletariat to a personal dictatorship.

3) stalin was both a product of the situation inherited by lenin and a force for using the opportunities presented to him in order to strengthen the system for his own advantage.

School of thought (intentionalist, revisionist)

Intentionalist school- Argues the terror was a planned, top-down programme orchestated by stalin to consolidate autocratic personal rule and eliminate political rivals. proof of this →Stalin’s paranoia, vindicitivness, obsession with rival powers, show trials + NVKD obeyed stalin and executed kremlin orders.

Revisionist school- Argues terror was shaped substantially from below by administrative confusion, bureaucratic frction and local self-preservation. proof of this →soviet structure (weak central control over remote provinces) allowed mass violence to gain uncontrollable momentum from below; local initiative- NVKD/local bosses inflated execution quotas under order 00447 to prove loyalty; social pressure cretaed widespread domestic paranoia.

what happened after stalin’s death?

The politburo (renamed presidium in 1952) members formed a collective leadership. A triumvate composed of Beria, Malenkov and Khrushchev.

Beria initially seemed to have a developing leading role, but he was the secret police’s leader. Beria was quick to reduce the use of terror (On 27 march 1953, an amnesty was issued, which released 1 million political prisoners). The doctor’s plot was also denounced false, releasing imprisoned doctors. Though this could’ve been part of Beria’s strategy, considering stalin’s downfall was due to the overuse of terror.

Ultimately, Malenkov + Khrushchev feared the man in control of the apparatus of Terror. In june 1953, beria was arrested, accused of being a british spy and executed through ‘socialist legality’.

How did Khrushchev rise to power 1953-56

In sept 1953, Khrushchev became First secretary of the communist party (General secretary) and used the position to place his allies in the presidium

the central committe was given more authority over govt. and party structures. almost half of those elected in 1952 were removed and most new members were supporters of khrushchev.

By 1956, Khrushchev had outmanouvred his opposition.

The secret speech of 1956

in the 1956 Twentieth party congress, Khrushchev gave a 4 hour speech against stalin. Party members were shocked to hear Khrushchev acccuse stalin of developing a cult of personality, acting as a tyrant, using unnecesary terror + economic mistakes.

these criticisms glossed over the fact the politburo contained party members including khrushchev who’d risen through ranks by implementing stalin’s policy.

de-stalinisation (1956)

krushchev believed the svoiet system had to be rejuventaed by a return to the legality of leninism, so reforms were focused on stalin, not the USSR.

1) Regular meetings of the presidium + central committe

2) Party/govt. officials no longer faced prison for failing to meet targets

3) Moves made to decentralize decision-making by giving more power to organizations at local level.

4) secret police brought firmly under party control. They lost control of labour camps, whose economic resources had bolstered the power of the organization

5) 2 million political prisoners released from 1953-1960. though process was slow (only 4% of those who applied went back to civilian life by 1955)

Fear didnt disappear completely. heavy punishments remained for corruption / criticism outside established boundaries + the population was aware the secret police had ever more sophisticated methods of surveillance.

The crisis of 1957

from de-stalinization, powers were to be transferred from central ministers to regional council, which threatened to reduce ower of party leaders

in 1957, an ‘anti-party group’ led by malenkov and molotov, persuaded the presidium to ask for khrushchev’s resignation. khrushchev demanded the issue go to the central committee (as they’d been the ones to appoint him, only them could dismiss him). the central committee were khrushchev’s supporters, so they rejected the move.

Similar to Stalin, Khrushchev supporters, so they rejected the move.

similar to stalin, khrushchev used his position as ‘general secretary’ to secure his power. Though Khrushchev’s rivals were not executed or arrested. (Molotov→ambassador to mongolia. Malenkov →in charge of electricity)

in march 1958, Khrushchev’s power was enhanced as he became prime minister as well as first secretary. Unlike stalin, khrushchev’s power was subject to the authority of the central committee, and debate inside the party was common.

Khrushchev’s reforms of the party (pushing de-stalinization)

after the 1961 twenty-second party congress, he:

1) removed stalin’s body from lenin’s mausoleum in the red square

2) major purge of local party secretaries

3) in 1962, the party was divided into agricultural + industrial departments. this reduced the power of party officials

4) intorduced a limit to the length party officials could serve in-post to three years. Threatened the power + priviledge of party officials, making them resentful

the downfall of khrushchev, 1964

In 1964, the central committee dismissed Khrushchev due to:

1) his economic mistakes/failure in agricultural policies followed by a bad harvest in 1963.

2) his humilating back-down during the cuban missile of 1962.

3) his erratic and unpredictable behaviour. he was a ‘loose cannon’. eg, in 1960, he caused a stir when he banged his shoe on a desk repeatedly at a debate in the UN.

4) his reforms had made the buraucrats in the party uneasy. Removing krushchev was an attempt to preserve their power

However, the fact that khrushchev could be sacked and retired was a sign of his impact on the party and perhaps his biggest success. as he later remarked, ‘stalin would’ve had them shot’.

Brezhnev’s rise to power (1964)

Brezhnev replaced Khrushchev. Seen as a ‘safe pair of hands’. this was a sign of the party reasserting itself over the leadership.

Brezhnev was part of a triumvate. To consolidate his power, he focused on keeping his colleagues trust and sideline them. Podgorny was given the ceremonial post of Head of State, and Shelepin was put to task foreign affairs.

Brezhnev was at best mediocre if not talentless, but he had an affable personality which allowed him to avoid causing conflict. he was an ‘organization’ man, he placated competent party leadersand gave the politburo a sense of unity.

Brezhnev’s reforms

he reversed aspects of de-stalinization that had upset the party (called ‘hare-brained’ schemes and abolished)

1) Division of the party into agricultural and industrial sections was dropped

2) limits on tenure of office were removed

3) guiding principles were to be collective leadership and ‘trust in cadres’. it meant party officials could have long, unbroken tenures in their jobs; this made party membership go from 6.9 million (1953) to 17 million (1980)

4) No more ‘subjectivism’. decisions had to be made by consulting the party. Brezhnev used his position to ensure the politburo members got the ‘right’ info (helped smooth divisons) and he retained Kosygin, a potential rival, as prime minister.

5) Soviet constitution of 1977 enshrined the rights of citizens to criticise incompetent + ineffective party secretaries- there was still no genuine election due to ‘mature socialism’

The reforms brought an end to the most radical elements of de-stalinization. stalin wasn’t taboo, but Brezhnev ignored the stalin question in the name of stability.

Twenty-Third party congress

ocurred in 1966, nicknamed the ‘Congress of silence’ due to its cautious + conservative approach. the only changes were to rename presidium → politburo and to rename first secretary → general secretary.

symbolizes the imminent political stagnation

Brezhnev’s personal power + personality

Brezhnev awarded himself with medals for dubious achievments (eg lenin peace prize, lenin prize for literature)

He also enjoyed a luxurious life featuring a taste for hunting and collecting western limousines.

Despite symbols of power, brezhnev exercised less personal power than stalin or khrushchev. He preferred to trust party comrades to get on with their jobs. the resulting stability made brezhnev a popular leader but it was also led to stagnation.

growing political stagnation

by 1980, party structure that had developed under stalin were so entrenched that the system was difficult to change even when there was will to do so.

under brezhnev, party leadership developed into an oligarchy (small elite who governed in their own interests) where the general secretary was the most powerful oligarch. brezhnev had used this position to promote his group of cronies called the ‘Dnepropetrovsk’. other oligarchs were kosygin, suslov + shelepin.

‘the brezhnev system was a coalition of politburo oligarchs. what united them was the preservation of the status quo’

changes in promotions under brezhnev + their consequences

before the 1970s, promotions involved moving to another part of the USSR.

Under brezhnev, promotions were made from within the ranks of local party membership after serving time in a junior position. They now didn’t experience and spread new ideas, so this severly limited innovation and change within the system, adding to the political stagnation.

it also allowed corruption to go unnoticed, specially in remote parts of the USSR. Things like ‘the cotton affair’ resulted in millions of roubles being claimed for non-existing cotton.

Nepotism was also rife as party officials ensured jobs were given to family members.

Brezhnev’s final years

by early 1980s, USSR was ‘grinding to a halt’. soviet leadership was becoming a ‘gerontocracy’, as rule was placed in the hands of an increasingly aged group of geriatrics.

membership of the central committee reflected on this. By 1976, 79% of members were retained in office, the rest had died of old age. By 1984, 7/11 members of the politburo were over 70 years old and meetings lasted less than 40 mins.

Brezhnev’s final years were marked by an increasing loss of control, symbolized by the lack of control of his family ( His daughter Galina had an affair with Borris ‘the gypsy’, who was accused of smuggling diamonds).

Andropov and his legacy

He was head of the KGB. After Brezhnev’s death in 1982, he was chosen as succesor in the politburo. he recognized the need for reform despite being raised in the stalin era. His main concern was party corruption but his attempts to deal with it were hampered by his lack of charm and his illness. After mid-1983, he was reliant on a kidney dialisis machine. he died feb 1984.

An important result of his leadership was he promoted a younger generation of party members who saw reform as essential (eg Gorbachev, who Andropov recommended as successor). The politburo, in an act of self-preservation, elected bureaucrat Cherneko as General secretary, who was sick with emphysema. Cherneko was a brezhnev man who made no changes in his hsort leadership. he died in march 1985.