Russia - Unit 1

Following a revolution, it is usually reasonable to assume that the players of the revolution would have sizeable control.

However, following the October revolution it is not an exaggeration to the Bolsheviks had very little control

What are some examples of this?

What did politicians of the time think about Bolshevik chances of survival?

The Bolsheviks had little to no control over the countryside; holding a couple of industrial cities such as Petrograd.

The Bolsheviks had to take over the state bank by force, which took 10 days.

The head of the Russian Army, Dukhonin, refused to stop fighting WW1.

Menzhinsky, minister for finance, got a sofa with a piece of paper saying ‘commissariat of finance’ for his office!

Tseretli gave the Bolsheviks 3 weeks

Lunarcharsky “I could be thrown in prison at any moment”

4 times more factories were taken over by workers than by the government

In the very short term, the Bolsheviks aimed to whip up support from the peasantry and proletariat.

What did Lenin provide the peasants and proletariat?

Land Decree

Workers Decrees - promise of benefits, sick pay, welfare system, max 8 hour days, right to elect committees of workers and get rid of managers

Of course these benefits disappear after the breakout of the civil war.

But the promise is enough for many; when the other option is back to Tsarist Russia with the whites.

Lenin refused to a coalition with other socialist parties; likely because he feared it would lead to him losing influence.

This position ensured Lenin and the Bolsheviks held all the power but as a minority this could quickly disappear.

What events particularly led to growing opposition to Lenin and the eventual civil war that followed?

How did the Bolsheviks win the civil war?

What were key strengths in favour of the Bolsheviks?

What were the key weaknesses of the whites?

Treaty of Brest Litovsk

Closure of and refusal to recognise the constituent assembly

The Bolsheviks won the civil war due to several factors?

Nationalisation and centralisation - inc grain requisitioning: Essential to keep the urban workers fed, nationalisation allowed specific focus on munitions production - a war economy - a common plan of attack -see WW1 economy in warfare. Harsh discipline was instilled; often being compared to being in a miliary camp; and strikes were outlawed.

This was necessary but caused unpopularity… especially the three years of war communism post civil war.

Workers rights?

Peasants no freedom?

Geography: The Bolsheviks had control of much less area than the Whites meaning they were much less stretched. Despite having much less area, they maintained control of the key industrial cities; giving them access to key factories; essential for munitions production

The significance of Trotsky: Trotsky was an expert organiser. He was innovative enough to use experienced Tsarist officers as commanders; threatening to kill their families if they refused to comply and fight for the Red Army. Discipline was extreme and any deserters faced death if caught. Trotsky was an expert orator and was excellent at motivating the troops throughout the war; travelling famously on a train.

Divisions in the whites: The whites were made up of groups completely opposite on the political spectrum. There were social revolutionaries, Mensheviks and then on the opposite side Kadets, Tsarist sympathisers. They were mistrusting of one another and any alliances failed. Kolchak even had SR’s executed in his area meaning the Whites often arrived in many smaller groups; becoming easily overwhelmed by the unified Bolsheviks.

Propoganda: The Bolsheviks effectively used propoganda to ensure the peasants remained on their side. Tsarist sympathisers were unwilling to promise peasants their land and aimed to restore the nobility. The peasants made up mass of the populous; a massive plus for the Bolsheviks. Similarly, the whites and leaders such as Denekin were unwilling to work with separatists; weakening their strength.

Conscription: Conscription was key to winning the civil war. It boosted Bolshevik numbers by 5 million.

Indiscipline in the ranks: White troops were extremely undisciplined; corruption was rife from top to bottom, meaning foreign aid was misspent such as the 100 million provided by Britain.

How did the Bolsheviks keep control during and after the civil war?

Why did terror become more centralised?

What led the Red Terror and what did the Terror entail?

Why was 1921 a pivotal year in communist history?

Why was Lenin forced to concede and what was adopted due to societal pressure?

How did Lenin keep the party together?

Terror had to become more centralised.

As opposition grew to unpopular Bolshevik policies such as requisitioning and military style discipline in factories, class warfare become less effective. The main problem was other socialist groups, as shown by the constituent assembly, and there was no willingness from the populous to attack them. Attacks were common on Bolsheviks, and Lenin himself was subject to an assassination attempt by Fanny Kaplan

Power therefore had to become centralised to remove political and societal opposition.

The establishment of the Cheka in Dec 1917 began the mass terror led by Felix Dzerzhinsky. It aimed to scare society into submission; showed by the fact 5% of all prisoners were children - it was to send a message. The first Gulag in Solovetsky was also created. The terror led to the deaths of 300,000 and led to the arrests of many more. In the first three months of 1921, 5,000 mensheviks were arrested, and 22 leading members of the SR’s were put on trial. By the end of 1921, opposing political parties ceased to exist.

Terror began to slide into the territory of the rule not the exception. There is no better example than Bim bom, the anti-Bolshevik comedian killed.

However, terror failed in quelling societal unrest. Anger at working conditions, lack of food [ bread ration cut by 1/3] led to the Petrograd strikes of 1921 and the Kronstadt mutiny.

Martial law

Opposition to grain requisitioning led to a force of 50,000 peasants revolting against the Bolsheviks - The Tambov uprising led by Alexander Antonov.

Poison gas used

Lenin was forced to adopt the NEP to appease them. Society still played a role - contrast with Stalin.

Issues over workers rights led to splits in the party. A clear example is the Workers opposition led by Kollontai. This directly led to the ban on factions.

Under Lenin, a 1/3 of the party were purged and the nomenklatura system was set up. It encouraged obedience and lack of self thinking. Lenin began the creation of the “apparatchiks” that Stalin only extended to his benefit.

How did Stalin win the power struggle?

How did Stalin use the legend of Lenin to gain a massive advantage over his rivals?

How did Stalin use his powers as general secretary to win the power struggle?

How did Stalin divide the power struggle up and pounce at the right time?

What were the weaknesses of Trotsky?

Stalin took over the mantle of Leninism to transfer the prestige of Lenin onto himself - He tricked Trotsky into not attending the funeral, was one of the pall bearers at the funeral, and made a speech praising Lenin. These may seem like small events in themselves but their impact was crucial. By placing himself firmly in the role of true Leninist, Stalin could criticise Trotsky as an opponent of Lenin for not attending the funeral, he could also criticise any opponents who didn’t agree with him, as he was Leninist so they must be factionalist, or as soon came to be ‘Trotskyist’. It is important to know that this message would have lost its effectiveness had the politburo read out Lenin’s testament, and if the party wasn’t made up of so many new members. Stalin could easily manipulate new members - Trotsky is a threat, Trotsky has the army, Trotsky does not respect you. Trotsky did not get involved so these messages remained unchallenged.

As general secretary and head of the Rabkrin, Stalin had powers to demote, promote and sack party members. He took personal control of the Lenin enrolment which led to 500,000 members joining the communist party. These 500,000 were loyal to Stalin, as was much of the rest of the membership, many of who wanted to keep positions of power and avoid Stalin’s wrath. Stalin was frequently in contact with the secret police and had thousands of files on party members; adding to the intimidation factor.

This patronage system ensured Stalin consistently won key votes in Congress.

Throughout the power struggle, Stalin was never seen as the main threat. Sukhanov described him as a ‘dull grey blur’ and his role of general secretary was not seen to be very appealing. This meant that Trotsky, as head of the Red Army with a force big enough to take over by force, was attacked much more than Stalin ever was. Zionoviev and Kamenev were willing to allow Stalin to bring in more of his pre approved list of delegates if it meant defeating Trotsky. This willingness only increased after Trotsky published ‘Lessons from October’.

Stalin defeated the local power bases of Zinoviev and Kamenev, Leningrad and Moscow, by forming a partnership with Bukharin and advocating for the continuation of the NEP and a policy of Socialism in One Country. When Kamenev and Zinoviev joined Trotsky it was too late and Stalin and Bukharin had enough support to expel them for factionalism.

With 3 key players out of the game and with the NEP failing to provide continued economic growth, Stalin had enough support from his patronage system, the leftists and the moderates, to advocate for rapid industrialisation and the end to the NEP. Bukharin, Rykov, Tomsky were all removed from the politburo and replaced by Stalinist cronies.

Trotsky was unwilling to get his hands dirty and believed party politics was beneath him. This meant he did not build up a power base like Stalin .He believed, erroneously, that his speeches and beliefs were enough to gain respect and support. He hated what he viewed as begging for support, or winning support through anything but his principles. He would not compromise on his beliefs. He was unwilling to fight dirty like Stalin did until it was too late. He was arrogant, self-absorbed and an intellectual, traits that did little to warm him to the membership, especially the low brow workers brought in by Stalin’s Lenin enrolment.

After winning the power struggle, Stalin became the sole leader of the Soviet Union.

However, there were signs that Stalin was not totally secure in his position.

What happened in 1932 that showed Stalin was less secure than first envisaged?

How did Stalin respond? What prevented Stalin from having them shot?

What happened in 1934 that showed Stalin had a leadership rival?

How did Stalin use the murder of Kirov to begin the purges?

In what trial and what year were the leaders of the left executed?

In what trial and what year were critics of the the five year plans executed?

In what trial were leaders of the right executed?

What examples can we see of Stalin’s paranoia and what caused it?

What were the consequences of the purges?

Where did it leave society?

Where did it leave the communist party?

Did it make the USSR more or less prepared for war?

1932: The Ryutin affair - Ryutin and his allies formed a opposition group - the Union of Marxist Leninists shared a 200 page document across the politburo and the communist party - Stalin and the Crisis of the Proletarian Dictatorship. The document called out Stalin’s authoritarianism and brutality toward peasants. It called for Stalin’s removal, by force if necessary, the return of all of the most prominent members from Lenin’s age such as Trotsky, it called for the slowing down of industrialisation and the end of collectivisation. It was a scathing attack. Equally important was that Stalin could not convince the Politburo to execute Ryutin, although he had enough power to expel him from the party, Kirov and other moderates prevented his execution; showing limits to Stalin’s power. Not a totalitarian yet. Following the Ryutin affair, many of his allies were expelled from the party. Between 1932-1935, 22% of the party were expelled.

After already defying Stalin over the Ryutin affair, Kirov again humiliated Stalin at the congress of Victors. Kirov also advocated for a slowing down of industrialisation, co-operation with the peasantry and a switch in focus to consumer goods. Kirov received applause equal to Stalin at the 1934 Congress of Victors and Kirov received the most amount of votes in the congress; 300 more than Stalin.

Stalin’s position, particularly due to his aggressive economic policies, was looking more precarious by the minute.

Whether ordered by Stalin, the NKVD or just luck, in 1934 Kirov was murdered.

Stalin used the murder of Kirov to fearmonger, using valid threats such as the rise of Hitler to justify a mass purge to remove spies working against the state. From here, the show trials and the peak of the purges begun.

1936: The trial of the 16 - Former allies of Trotsky - left opposition - the execution of Zionviev and Kamenev

1937: The trial of the 17 - Critics of the five year plans executed. Orzhonikidze pleads with Stalin to end the terror. Stalin orders the death of his deputy and orders Orzhonikidze to kill himself and get a state funeral or he will kill him and he will get nothing.

The Trial of the 21 - Lessons from and Economist - Bukharin and his allies are executed.

Paranoia - Nadezha Alliluyeva killed herself.

Paranoia - purges to the red army - legends from Trotsky - Tukhachevksy. Army made up of peasants. Every navy admiral murdered, all eight generals murdered.

murder in the secret police - Yezhovschina - 3,000 of his own men.

He was shot.

70% of the central committee arrested or executed

1100 of the 1900 delegates at the Kirov congress arrested or executed.

less than 10% of total membership was around before 1920.

He needed a membership used to his antics, he needed to have experience over them, he needed no one who remembered the Lenin days, and thought his way was normal.

95% of victims were men between 30-45 and many were important.

How did Stalin maintain personal power after the Great Purge?

How did the Council of Ministers and the GKO give Stalin political advantage? How did Stalin use political bodies such as the Presidium and Council of Ministers against one another?

What change did Stalin make to the Presidium to reduce opposition influence?

Did Stalin continue to use terror?

Can you provide examples?

Following the purges, Stalin maintained dominance over the party.

During WW2, Stalin recognised mass terror would destabilise the war effort. He kept personal power not by fear but by using the systems in place.

For example, in 1941 Stalin became head of the Sovnarkom, now called council ot ministers. This meant he could shift power from party to state and still be at the top. He also formed a third body called the GKO which was responsible for defence during WW2. Again Stalin was head of this body. This meant Stalin could quickly shift between the bodies if he felt fearful one area was becoming too powerful. Stalin also enlarged bodies to further dilute influence. For example the presidium was enlarged from 10 members to 36.

Stalin also apppointed rivals to key positions in party and state to keep them from challenging him. We can see this through Zdhanov who was tasked with supervising Beria’s police force.

However, Stalin did still use his infamois terror tactics, as seen through the Leningrad affair which led to the execution of 1,000 people, the Mingrelian affair which targeted Beria’s allies and also Stalin’s testing of loyalties - Molotov.

Terror and abuse of the system for own gain. Abuse of the structures of the USSR.

When we think of stalinisation we think of mass centralisation, sole leadership, mass terror through the NKVD

How do we define Stalinism? This is a key part of the question? If we can’t define then how can we say something isn’t Stalinism? When I think Stalinism I think we refer to the worst parts - The peak from 1935-1938

How did de-stalinisation occur through the restructuring of the MVD?

what principle did Khrushchev and Malenkov promise to abide by?

How did Khrushchev use his powers as general secretary akin to Stalin?

Does Khrushchev act like Stalin after winning the power struggle?

Does he consolidate his power in a similar way?

How does the way Khrushchev consolidates his power show that some of the Stalinist systems remain?

How does Khrushchev decentralise?

How does the story of the Anti Party group show destalinisation? How does it compare to the Ryutin affair?

Where is de-stalinisation limited?

How is this shown through the Secret Speech?

Through the media?

Through the reactions to protests?

What is Khrushchev’s response? What does he set up?

How does Khrushchev’s final dismissal show the final step of destalinisation ?

No longer used for mass economic projects

Party commission set up to investigate past executions? 4620 rehabilitated, including Bukharin, Zinoviev, Kamenev amongst others

Release of Gulag prisoners = 2 million by 1960

Socialist legality

Removal of opponents, promoting supporters - 1/2 CC committee replaced

Soviet ministries cut from 55 to 25 - Soviet ministries now only have control of 44% of industry compared to 68%.

Fixed terms - 2/3 regional secretaries replaced

16 year fixed terms

Relies on the central committee for support, no one is killed for crossing Khrushchev.

Only spread to those within the party, “Questions of History” ridiculed for revealing the terror

Doctor Zhivago, Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, The Thaw - Ilya Ehrenburg

How did Brezhnev stagnate the Soviet Union?

What are examples of patronage and corruption during the Brezhnev era?

What examples can we see of stagnation within the politburo itself?

In terms of promotions? Retainments?

Average age?

How did Andropov attempt to reform the party?