Did lenin lead to stalin examine

But the Russian working class and its party the Bolshevik Party were, like the economy, scarred by the civil war. It is also necessary to present an alternative, and superior, analysis of the rise of Stalinism and its relationship to Leninism.

Three years later, the United Opposition was formed in Having decisively defeated the Left and United Oppositions in he was now able to turn on Bukharin and the pro-peasant right making himself the unchallenged leader of the Party and dictator of Russia in the process.

Brilliant Political Strategist As masters of Marxian theory, Lenin and Stalin could develop their profound ability as political strategists. Personally I have written quite extensively on these issues in the past [6] and will not go over this ground now, except to say that the existence of many thousands of years of egalitarian foraging societies constitutes an empirical refutation of the idea that hierarchy and class division are inevitable and that socialism is incompatible with human nature.

This was because while hostilities continued the peasantry had to choose between on one side the Bolsheviks and their forced food requisitions which they deeply resented and on the other the White armies who treated them as or more harshly and whose victory, they knew with certainty, meant the return of the landlords and the loss of their principal gain from the revolution, the land.

It also aggravated relations with those political forces, like the SRs, whose social base was the middle peasants. This Northern Expedition became a point of contention over foreign policy by Stalin and Trotsky.

This comrade drew a detailed and extremely harrowing picture of the famine in Petrograd. The idea that an event of world significance such as the Russian Revolution and its historical development over eighty years including the emergence of a major new society — the USSR — can be explained or understood as primarily, or mainly, a consequence of the ideas or actions of one individual or one small organisation, rather than mass social forces i.

Ashley Kannan Certified Educator The study of how Stalin became the successor to Lenin is an examination of power dynamics. Fourthly, in the matter of mass activization, also, highly profitable lessons can be learned by American progressives from the work of Lenin and Stalin. Tony Cliff summarises what happened: The rise of the bureaucracy mirrored the rise of the Stalin faction.

Workers and peasants in the colonies rose against their imperialist oppressors. Lenin and Stalin as Mass Leaders Source: Their estimation of the relationship of classes is unclear; their conception of the class struggle and the growth of fascism and reaction is superficial.

But of course the moment he found himself in charge of the apparatus he became General Secretary in and then a top Party leader from he used his position to promote his supporters and build a machine loyal to himself.

It is a supreme task of the Communist Party to advance this knowledge throughout the broad mass movement. When they attempted to hold debates meetings were cancelled or physically attacked, the leaders were shot at and arrested. Trotsky was his main rival.

In other words the devastation brought by the Civil War and the economic collapse continued to impose itself on Lenin and Bolsheviks even after the War was over. Moreover, as well as direct military intervention, or rather prior to it, there was the pressure of economic competition from the rest of the capitalist world which, as Lenin had repeatedly stressed, remained far stronger and far more productive than the Soviet Union.

The opposition was not simply around the economy but also against the bureaucratisation of the party, which had flourished under NEP. In contrast the peasantry, while it had an important role to play in the revolution as an ally of the proletariat, lacked the capacity to emancipate itself or lead the construction of socialism.

In other words it is not serious history. Our Party is still weak, in theory; our political strategy often leaves much to be desired; our organizational methods need drastic improvement, and in mobilizing the members of our Party for specific struggle, as well as activizing the mass organizations generally, we still display many deficiencies.

That the revolution and the Bolsheviks were fighting for their lives is true in the most literal sense; that they responded with harshness and brutality is hardly surprising. The other Politburo members agreed with Stalin, and supported his nomination of Vyacheslav Molotov.

Stalin did move against them — dismissing the entire leadership of the youth section, the Communist Youth, of the party who were sympathetic to Trotsky — but within a few months the Politburo had agreed the New Course resolution presented by the opposition.

The truth is neither Lenin nor the Bolsheviks as a whole nor anyone else could have gone through those years, defending the Revolution against overwhelming odds and in the most difficult of circumstances, without committing numerous mistakes and even crimes.

They wrote open letters acknowledging their mistakes and were readmitted to the Communist Party in Juneafter a six-month cooling-off period. In one sense the counter-revolutionary civil war began before October with the attempted Kornilov coup of late August and it continued immediately after the insurrection.

Marxists Internet Archive The revolution was to meet them again, at Yaroslavl, on the Don, at Kazan, in the Crimea, in Siberia and in every conspiracy nearer home. We do not want to be beaten. This highly political development, like all other features of Soviet life, has its complicated organizational sides.

Only the complete victory of the workers and peasants over the bourgeois and landowner revolt as expressed in the Cadet-Kaledin movementonly the ruthless military suppression of this revolt of the slave-owners can really safeguard the proletarian-peasant revolution. As industrial prices grew, agricultural prices fell.

The result is now history, a glorious page in the life of the Russian Revolution. Another brilliant example of this supreme ability of Lenin and the Party to mobilize and activize the whole people in struggle was shown in the bitterly fought Civil War.

Stalin felt that proper education would lead to more innovative ideas and ways and means of industrialising Russia. To achieve that goal, the transport system needed improvements in order to import and export goods out of the country.

Examine the Elements of Change and Continuity Within Soviet Russia "Did Lenin Lead to Stalin?" Examine the Elements of Change and Continuity Within Soviet Russia Words Nov 2nd, 6 Pages.

Show More. "Did Lenin Lead to Stalin?" Examine the Elements of Change and Continuity Within Soviet Russia Vladimir Lenin and was one of. The Bolshevik Revolution was the seizure of power by the radical Marxists led by Vladimir Lenin and was one of the pivotal moments of the 20th Century.

Lenin did not lead to Stalin. Stalin smashed Leninism in the USSR. This bureaucratic victory was not inevitable. The isolation of the Russian revolution was not god-given. It came courtesy of the west European reformist leaders who either derailed or drowned in blood (Germany) the revolutions which erupted after Lenin split with these leaders.

Through his upbringing, Lenin was able to develop a strong leadership, political insight and determination allowing the Bolsheviks to be lead into power. Whilst the Bolsheviks were in power, Lenin’s role in dealing with uprisings and anti-communist groups was significant as it allowed the Bolsheviks to remain in power.

Did lenin lead to stalin examine