Preview

“Stalin’s Position as General Secretary Explains His Success in Defeating His Rivals in the Years 1924-1929” How Far Do You Agree with This Statement?

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
779 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
“Stalin’s Position as General Secretary Explains His Success in Defeating His Rivals in the Years 1924-1929” How Far Do You Agree with This Statement?
In this essay I will discuss whether Stalin's position as General Secretary was the most important factor in his seize of power. Stalin's position as General Secretary was very important as it gave him control over the whole party machine. But there were also other factors that proved to be very important. This essay will attempt to assess the relative importance these factors.
Stalin's position as General Secretary proved to be very important in his seize of power for many reasons. One reason for this is that it gave him the ability to control party membership which was extremely beneficial as it meant he could bring people that supported him into the party and also he could kick out those who did not agree with his ideology. Another reason is that it allowed him to undermine his rivals’ power bases meaning he could sway the opinions of others into supporting him over the other competitors in the running for power.
However, there were many other factors that contributed to Stalin's seize of power. One example of this is that the Bolsheviks made many errors, both general and individual.
An example of a general error is the underestimation of Stalin. This was beneficial as it allowed Stalin to make moves without anyone suspecting him of doing anything particularly damaging to their success. Another example is the failure to publish Lenin's testament. This was a mistake as the opinions Lenin voiced about Stalin's inabilities were the last real opportunity to stop Stalin.
There were also individual errors that all the contenders made that benefitted Stalin.
Trotsky made many errors in his attempt to seize power. One example of this is his failure to attend Lenin's funeral as it made him seem disrespectful to the previous leader, and allowed Stalin to give the speech. Another of Trotsky’s mistakes was leaving himself vulnerable to a factionalism charge after the 13th party congress, which was a negative as it left him unable to voice his opinion and

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Better Essays

    Stalin’s policies in the 1930’s were both successful and not so successful for a variety of reasons which will be discussed throughout. In the 1930’s Stalin had to use many different devises in order to keep his dominance in leadership. These changes included Collectivization, Industrialisation in the first and second five year plans. Other policies which are discussed are The role of women, religion, arts and culture and education.…

    • 1634 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    One of the main weaknesses of the left which benefitted Stalin majorly was Trotsky and his constant misjudge when it came to making decisions. Trotsky, being the leader of the left wing was an arrogant man who wasn’t trusted by his fellow party members due to his poor attitude towards the party, his late membership to the party and his control over the red army. Throughout his membership within the party he showed a lack of involvement and destroyed his reputation further when not attending Lenin’s funeral.…

    • 882 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Axis Powers

    • 445 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Stalin used the job of General Secretary to promote people loyal to him, to remove from the party people who were disloyal and to collect information on every party member.…

    • 445 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In 1922, when Vladimir Lenin died, someone needed to step up and the Soviet Union. As he was slowly dying, a power struggle emerged between Leon Trotsky, and Joseph Stalin. Even though Trotsky “had been widely viewed as the heir of Lenin, it was relatively easy for Stalin to combine with the other Bolshevik leaders in order to head off this threat” (Paley 10). In Lenin’s “Final Testament”, Lenin could already see that Stalin was quickly and surreptitiously gaining power. Stalin’s position of General Secretary gave him the ability to appoint people to important positions. Lenin was also reluctant to see Stalin as his successor because he thought that Trotsky could do a much better job. Lenin believed that Trotsky was the best man in the central…

    • 199 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Trotsky however was the complete opposite to Stalin. He was popular, an orator and a talented theorist who stirred loyalty in his troops. His radical ideas made him well-liked with the young and idealistic members of the communist party. Lenin in his testament identified Trotsky as a “the most able in the present communist committee” he also remarked on Trotsky’s “too far reaching self-confidence”…

    • 1502 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The party bureaucracy controlled all major appointments to Party and government posts – during last few years of Stalin, power had resided in Stalin’s person secretariat…

    • 355 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Stalin - History

    • 885 Words
    • 4 Pages

    It was not just his popular policies that saw Stalin replace Lenin as the leader of the USSR. It was also partly due to the mistakes and weaknesses made by the other leading Bolsheviks such as Trotsky. Trotsky was seen as too powerful because he was the leader…

    • 885 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the lead up to Lenin’s death and the years that followed, it would seem Stalin was in a weaker position than several of his opponents, as many doubted his role in the Revolution and, therefore, his role as a leader of the Party. Several factors played a role in allowing Stalin to be victorious, however, comparatively they hold varying significance. Despite the odds appearing to be stacked against him, Stalin’s ruthless personality and devious strategies allowed him to tactfully defeat his opponents, by manipulating his position within the Party, without having any real party appeal or Government powerbase and he ultimately emerged as leader of the Party in 1929, ending the leadership struggle.…

    • 1220 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Another weakness of Stalin’s leadership, thus supporting the argument is that many of the most successful officers were purged under Stalin’s orders. This can mainly be attributed to Stalin’s paranoid personality; he was afraid of competition for leadership from the higher ranked officers and it was because of this he gave out the orders for them to be purged. This would support the argument that victory was in spite of Stalin as the Soviet government would have been much stronger had Stalin not ordered the officers to be purged. this is a particularly important factor contributing to the validity argument as it…

    • 784 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Trotsky was the reason as to how the Bolsheviks gained so much power as he insisted on using ex-tsarist officers to train and control the red army. He used strict discipline in order to help the army and this greatly supported the Bolsheviks and helped them win the civil war. Trotsky also was the reason as to how the civil war was won, because not only did he recruit trained army officers- which was extremely difficult to do due considering most supported the whites- but also because he organized food and weaponry (8) and forced the red army to attack the Kronstadt sailors across melting ice, ruthlessly stooping the result and putting an end to the civil war. In other words, he won the civil war virtually single handed. This was one of the main reasons as to how the Bolsheviks consolidated their power and without the training of the army commanded by Trotsky, they wouldn’t have had the chance to be noticed. Furthermore, without Trotsky’s harsh commands and the declaration of “war is the instrument of policy” the civil war would’ve carried on, destroying the Bolshevik party and everything they had worked…

    • 1843 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Stalin also had a good place in the Communist party because he was the general secretary, which meant that he could employ and fire communist party members. As general secretary Stalin could organise meetings that were convenient to him. He could also disadvantage his opponents during conferences because he was in charge of preparing the agendas, which questions would be debated over and also between whom and in what order.. Stalin was the one who appointed the nomenklatura, who appointed the apparatchiki. Stalin used this to his advantage because he removed the supporters of Trotsky so that he only had supporters of himself. By 1933, there were 3.5 million new members which were…

    • 911 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    In fact, Trotski is quoted saying “We have not organised the revolution to kill”(Spartacus). However, there were too many groups trying to destroy the Bolsheviks. This forced Vladimir Lenin to create the “Extraordinary Commission for the Suppression of the Counter-Revolution” also known as the Cheka; A secret police force. While the creation of this group was Lenin’s idea, Trotsky was put in charge, and repeatedly eliminated numerous enemies of the revolution. This was Trotsky’s first step in winning the civil war. When the “Whites” attacked the Bolsheviks and started the Civil War, Lenin appointed Trotsky as the Commissar for War, and President of the Supreme War Council. Thus, Trotsky single handedly was responsible for the Bolsheviks victory in the Civil War after defeating all enemy threats with terror and fulfilling the head leadership roles he was appointed to. Trotsky was extremely valuable to the Bolsheviks due to the fact that without him, they would have lost the Civil War. Without Trotsky, there would have been no one suitable to fill his numerous positions in which he had to make hard decisions that conflicted with his personal morals and mastermind many of the Bolsheviks victories. In addition, the vicious, blunt leader rebuilt the Russian army with the help of the Red Guards and through a recruiting and training process which proved difficult due to the fact that most officers supported the “Whites”. Trotsky was single handedly responsible for increasing the amount of soldiers from 7,000 in March 1918 to 5 million in Sep 1920(Brown, 1990). Without the essential rassemblement of this army, Trotsky would have not had the fire power to order Red Guards to ruthlessly put down the revolt of the Kronstadt sailors in March of…

    • 1557 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The second reason why Stalin and not Trotsky was able to succeed Lenin was that many communists felt that Stalin was more loyal to the party whilst Trotsky was seen as arrogant. Trotsky had joined the Bolsheviks very late in 1917 and was a member of the Mensheviks, whereas Stalin was there from a very long time. Stalin was the chief mourner at Lenin's funeral. He had told Trotsky the wrong date for Lenin's funeral, and being in the south of Russia, Trotsky believed he couldn't get back for the funeral in time, and so he missed it. Although it was not his fault, it looked to many people that he couldn't be bothered, and he didn't honor Lenin. This made him look bad in front of others. Trotsky also couldn’t be bothered to fit in the group conversations and felt bored. He was once seen reading a novel. So the reason why Stalin became the leader and not Trotsky was because people felt that Stalin was more loyal to the party, while Trotsky was seen as arrogant.…

    • 539 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    One major factor in Stalin coming to power, that wasn’t a Trotsky mistake, is the fact that Stalin held the position of secretary for the Bolshevik party. This gave him, to some extent, control over party business. Stalin could control what was discussed at party meetings as he drew up the agendas. This helped him come to power because it made sure that the party talked about topics which were important for him to be able to take power – it allowed him to ‘lay the foundations’ for his campaign to become leader. As well as being party secretary, Stalin later had control of the party organisation. Stalin could choose which party delegates were sent to the annual party congress, so could pack the congress with his supporters. This meant that he could capitalise fully on the mistakes of his opponents (like Trotsky) and out-vote them on key issues, thus destroying their chances of challenging Stalin for the party leadership. Stalin then had control over party membership so he could expel the more radical elements of the party (students and soldiers) who were likely to support Trotsky – this helped Stalin come to power as it allowed to him to only allow people who were likely to support him into the party.…

    • 1054 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    They teamed up with Stalin, in order to over-throw Trotsky. He was unpopular as he was extremely arrogant. Thus when he missed Lenin’s funeral due to Stalin telling him the wrong date, he became even more hated. In a Marxist fashion, Trotsky travelled the world, informing people of world revolution. This meant Stalin could build a good relationship with Russia, persuading everyone he would carry on the work of Lenin. In December 1924, Stalin spoke of “socialism in one country” Trotsky strongly disagreed and as a result he was accused of Factionalism. In January 1925, the Central Committee removed Trotsky from the War Commissariat. From 1928 onwards Trotsky lived his life in exile before being murdered in…

    • 961 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays