Lenin Consolidate His Power Analysis

1200 Words 5 Pages
Register to read the introduction… This topic of discussion falls into the category of one of the longer-term effects in Lenin’s chief policies enacted by his aims and ideology. War Communism was an emergency programme established by Lenin during the civil war. It was also a method he used to try and consolidate his power and maintain control of the country. War Communism- helped Lenin achieve his aims of controlling Russia and move towards a more socialist state. The industry was nationalised, grain requisitioning from the peasants to be able to fight the civil war, banning of private trade, labour discipline and the Red Terror. All helped Lenin and the Bolsheviks win the Civil War and so securing their power as well as carry out Bolshevik ideology. As War Communism made Lenin able to win the civil war and secure his power, it was therefore very possible to argue that Lenin's rise to power was not complete until after the civil war when he had full control over the country. War Communism was in favour of Lenin being able to consolidate power as the Bolsheviks used terror effectively. There was a six week period known as the Red Terror that saw any remaining aristocracy (most begun to flee the country after February revolution). Monarchists and riches middle class, were arrested, executed, exiled or stripped of their power, estates and privilege. Additionally, in March, the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk signed with the Germans, was …show more content…
An example of this would be that the Bolsheviks were highly disciplined party that was fiercely loyal to Lenin and was also a politically astute man. Lenin was able to adapt Marxism to fit the changing situation, keeping Bolshevik support and popularising the parties polices. Furthermore, another advantage was that radical parties were very popular in Russia before the October Revolution and Lenin was skilfully able to take some of the policies of his rivals and make them appear to both Marxism and distinctly …show more content…
There are two main topics that refute such as my first viewpoint is that the Bolshevik party had no experience of running a country before and they did also not have the support from most of the Russian population. Therefore they were in a weak position and need more support. Lenin could not afford the popular tide of aspirations that had led to the failure of the Tsar as well as the Provisional Government, so he gave the people what they wanted in order to secure support for his reign. For example Lenin gave the Russian people Land reform. This was an aim that gave that gave the peasants the right to take over the estates of the gentry, without compensation to the landlords, and for themselves decide the best way to divide it up. This however, went against Bolshevik ideology and was the start of the "kulak problem" that Stalin was later to be faced with.
Another point in refute to this statement is that Maxim Gorky, a leading Bolshevik party, intellectual, was particularly unhappy with Lenin’s actions. He revealed his despondency of the time, writing “the best Russians had lived for almost a 100 years with the idea of a Constituent Assembly as a political

Related Documents