How and why did Stalin become the leader of the USSR?

The background to the leadership struggle

Lenins Decline and Death

August 30, 1918: Assassination attempt on Lennon leaves him with a bullet lodged in his neck April 24, 1922: German doctor removes bullet May 1922: Lennon has a stroke, leaving him partially paralyzed on one side December 1922: Second stroke forces Lenin to withdraw from active politics, although he still commanded from the sidelines March 9, 1923: Third stroke leaves Lenin bedridden and unable to speak January 21, 1924: Lenin dies

Parallels with the French Revolution

In both cases, the monarch was overthrown and a moderate Liberal government put in place. In both cases, the overthrow of the Monarch was largely due to food shortages in the capital. In both cases, the moderate Liberal government failed to solve the food shortage and was overthrown, in turn, buy more radical parties. In both cases, the radical parties used terror and class warfare to secure their position. Marat was assassinated by a woman; and a woman shot Lenin in 1918.

Parallels with the French Revolution

Communist look at the French Revolution as attempted socialist revolution that failed. With the help of the Army, the radical government in Paris was overthrown. Shortly thereafter, the new government was overthrown by a talented general, Napoleon, who proceeded to make himself Emperor

Collective Leadership vs Dictatorship

Power has become increasingly concentrated in Lenins hands during the Civil War. Since his second stroke, the Politburo had been taking many decisions collectively. They saw this as a more consistent with Socialism. They wanted to avoid a situation where a dictator might take over as head happened in the French Revolution. On the other hand, they wanted strong, unified leadership for the party.

The Debate over the NEP

As you can see from the next slide, agricultural production had recovered but had not reached the levels of 1913. Furthermore, because the large farms have been broken up into small subsistence farms, less grain was being put on the market. Furthermore, the NEP was not socialist and had created an unsavory class of capitalists (NEPmen).

The Debate over the NEP

The Left Wing: Trotsky, Kamenev and Zinoviev Policies: End the NEP. Move the peasants onto large, efficient collective farms. You were peasants would be needed. The extra could move to the cities and become workers. Use the surplus grain produced to buy the equipment needed to industrialize Russia quickly through a series of centrally organized plans.

The Debate over the NEP

The Left Wing: Trotsky, Kamenev and Zinoviev Policies: Continue the NEP. Increase the price of grain to encourage the peasants to sell more. Provided machinery and training for the peasants and encourage them to farm collectively on a voluntary basis. Proceed with industrialization slowly.

Permanent Revolution vs Socialism in One Country

Permanent Revolution Trotskys Theory (adapted from Marx) The Russian Revolution would only survive and succeed if: -- They continued revolutionary work to industrialize Russia and reshape attitudes within Russia a long Socialist lines. -- They worked actively to spread the revolution to more countries.

Permanent Revolution vs Socialism in One Country

Socialism in One Country Stalins Theory. The expected spread of socialist revolution to other countries had not happened and it was not likely to happen anytime soon. Russia was a great country and was capable of building socialism without help from the outside. It could then be an example to the rest of the world.

Trotskys Good Points

Persuaded Lenin to postpone the Revolution until the night before the All-Russian Congress of Soviets. In charge of the Military Revolutionary Committee which had planned and run the November revolution. Negotiated the Treaty of Brest Livotsk. Organized and led Red Army during Civil War. Member of the Politburo Commissar for War Very intelligent Excellent speaker and writer.

Trotskys Bad Points

Menshevik until 1917. Arrogant and Aloof Unwilling to make alliances and engage in political infighting (i.e. Twice turned down the post of vice chairman of the Council of Peoples Commissars* when Lenin offered it to him.) *Effectively the VicePresidency. Often ill from 1923 onwards absent from critical moments (i.e. Lenins funeral) Clear front runner made him a target. Definitely left wing, so right wing did not like him. Jewish (not supposed to matter, but may have)

Stalins Good Points

Proletarian background Longtime Bolshevik Willing to make deals and alliances. Excellent administrator Head of Orgbureau and member of Politburo from 1919. From 1922, General Secretary of Communist Party In charge of deciding which party member Woodfield which government posts. Also in charge of membership admissions. Seemed ideologically moderate. Main speaker at Lenins funeral.

Stalins Bad Points

Dismissed from his post during the Civil War, for not following orders from Trotsky. Not known as a great thinker or speaker. Lenins Testament Letter to the Central Committee

Kamenevs Good Points

Longtime member of the Bolshevik party Party Secretary in Moscow Commissar for Foreign Trade Member of the Politburo Well liked Intelligent

Kamenevs Bad Points

Disagreed with Lenin on April Theses and on the October Revolution. Not ruthless enough to lead.

Zinovievs Good Points

Longtime Bolshevik (was with Lenin on the train in April 1917) Party Secretary in Leningrad Chairman of Comintern Member of Politburo from 1919 Good speaker

Zinovievs Bad Points

Opposed Lenin on the October Revolution and wanted a coalition of Socialist parties, rather than single-party rule. Not a great thinker Unpopular seen as vain, incompetent and cowardly

Bukharins Good Points

Longtime Bolshevik, but younger than the other contenders. Intellectual Member of Politburo from 1922 Popular Praised in Lenins Testament as the biggest and most valuable theoretician in the party the favourite of the whole party

Bukharins Bad Points

Opposed Lenin over the Treaty of Brest-Livotsk and was part of the workers opposition in 1921, arguing for independent trade unions. Lacked political cunning