The Triumph of the Bolsheviks Essay

From the initial seizure of power in 1917 until 1924, the Bolsheviks were confronted with a series of crises that threatened their ability to control and govern in Russia. The response and resolutions to these crises included Initial Reforms, Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, Civil War, Red terror, War Communism and the NEP. Under the leadership of Lenin, the execution of these responses were made possible and the Bolsheviks were able to maintain and expand their power. The Civil War however was the direct consequence of the Bolshevik’s actions as they tried to maintain their grasp on power. The victory in the Civil War was extremely pivotal for the Bolshevik consolidation of power as it brought control and power but more importantly it eliminated

In October 1917, there was enough opposition for Lenin to take power as leader of the Bolsheviks. The Provisional Government provided him with no majority support, with the Bolsheviks winning 24% and the SRs gaining 54% of votes. The Liberal period consisting of keeping workers and peasants happy left them with little power. Decree on land gives noble land to peasantry so that they have legal title to it, did it to stop rebellion and get peasant support in the civil war. 2. War Communism- Summer 1918 (civil war)- more authoritarian. 3. 1921- New Economic freedom for peasantry Economic policy- less authoritarian.

Lenin did just this and immediately got the support he and the Bolsheviks needed at the expense of Kerensky. To undermine the support of the Bolsheviks, Kerensky ordered that elections should take place for a constituent assembly. The elections were to be held in January 1918. Lenin had called for such elections earlier in 1917, so he could not object to this. As Kerensky argued, it was simply an extension of the democratic process denied to the people by the Romanovs. However, all the evidence indicated that the Bolsheviks would have done less well than other groups – including the Mensheviks.

The October 1917 Revolution is undoubtedly a momentous and extremely important event in Russia’s history, one that ousted the centuries-old Tsardom that ruled over the empire, in favour of the radical communist movement in the form of the Bolsheviks, headed by one Vladimir Iliych Lenin. However, did this sudden move from autocracy to a supposedly more progressive democracy actually bring about the modernisation of Russia industrially, agriculturally and culturally, or was it simply a rebranding of a totalitarian state that would continue to oppress the

His objective was not to win mass support, but to create a party capable of seizing power when political circumstances permitted. After the successful October coup in 1917, he was even more determined not to jeopardise the Bolshevik's newly-won power by allowing elections to dictate the pace of revolutionary change. The November election, therefore presented him with a problem; the Bolshevik party had won barely a quarter of the seats. Results of the Constituent Assembly: November 1917 Votes

Bolsheviks' Seizure of Power in 1917 There are many factors that help explain how and why the Bolsheviks managed to seize power in 1917. It was a combination of long and short term causes that together, created a revolution. The political system itself was long overdue for reform, but with a weak Tsar, the economic and social conditions became worse and worse. In 23 years, Nicholas II dropped from the glorious ‘Little Father of Russia’ to prisoners of his own country, hatred and despised by the majority, for the suffering and unhappiness he had helped create.

Lenin defined his movement by the slogan “all power to the soviets” Lenin believed he could make a new revolution in a way the old one happened by starting large street demonstrations. The soviets were giving lenin little support, but lenin believed he could manipulate them for his own purposes. Lenin tried to sieve power for the bolsheviks

Analyzing the Bolshevik State compared to Marxism can be difficult because Marx, Engels and their followers gave relatively little thought to what the state would look like after a socialist revolution. Engels famously wrote, “the state is not ‘abolished,’ it withers away,” which highlights the hazy and unfixed nature of Marx and Engle’s writings on the ultimate, classless society they envisioned. Further, what they did write is subject to the differing interpretations by numerous socialist parties all claiming to be Marxist. As discussed earlier, Lenin claimed he simply reshaped Marxism to fit the conditions of Russia. Others argue his interpretation was not true Marxism at all. However, the basic principles of a socialist state in the eyes of Marx’s are outlined in the Communist Manifesto as follows:

After making many promises to the peasants and delivering some, Lenin and the Bolsheviks came to the seat of power after the Civil War.

As mentioned previously, Lenin won the civil war in 1918. This was crucial for the Bolsheviks to secure their power over Russia. However this did come with a price as well. Lenin essentially came to power through a coup d’état so it was only natural for there to be political opposition, ranging from monarchists to even foreign nations, collectively named the whites. However a

tried to create a western style society. Nevertheless, this government led by Alexander Kerensky lasted for only seven months, by which at the end Lenin and the communist Bolsheviks seized power over Russia. When the peasants claimed land from the government the government refused which made the Bolsheviks extremely mad making them riot against the government. The Provisional Government lost to the

SOLDIERS AND PEASANTS! PEACE! BREAD! LAND!”. He writes that later that evening, government buildings and several institutions were under the Bolsheviks’ authority and the next day Lenin officially announced the downfall of the Provisional Government along with the arrestment of the leading actors - the Petrograd Soviet celebrated the victory. The absence of their political opponents’ press weakened the opposition’s presence in the public and facilitated the victory in other parts of Russia. According to Reed, the Bolsheviks were able to take control of Moscow within three weeks and expended it soon after to Kiev. Strategically keeping the rivalry out of political activities continued throughout the history of the Soviet regime and was an essential part of other communist movements.

The instability grew as the moderate politicians proved increasingly unable to meet the rising expectations of the laboring masses. The Provisional Government declared an end to tsarist repression and established full civil liberties. It also promised early democratic elections, which would decide the

The Russian Revolution of 1917 set the country on a course that few other countries took in the 20th century. The shift from the direction of a democratic, parliamentary-style government to a one party communist rule was a drastic change that many did not and could not predict. Looking back on this key moment in Russian history, many historians ask the question ‘why did the political power in Russia shift to the Bolsheviks’? Since the revolution in 1905 Russia was becoming progressively more democratic, distributing power throughout the political sphere. This came to an abrupt halt when Vladimir Lenin was put into power by the Bolshevik takeover of the Provisional Government. Many authors have had different takes on this event. Two particularly interesting ones were Arthur Mendel and John D. Basil. Their pieces On Interpreting the Fate of Imperial Russia and Russia and the Bolshevik Revolution give various perspectives on the Russian Revolution and attempt to answer the question of the power shift. This key point in Russia’s history sets the tone for the next 100 years. Russia became a superpower, an enemy of the United States, started multiple wars directly and indirectly, and started using an economic system used by various countries around the world. Today we still see the effects of the 1917 Revolution. Looking at both Mendel’s and Basil’s attempt to answer why the power shifted to the Bolsheviks. Since both historian 's account of the events is different they cannot

Ten years in exile had not swayed Lenin?s determination to create and direct a powerful revolution. Lenin returned to Russia from exclusion in February 1917, believing that the time was ripe to seize power. The Russian economy was in ruin after the army was nearly defeated and the people exhausted as a result of the First World War. The country was in an unstable state, suitable for a revolution (Levinthal 119). Around October 20, Lenin, in disguise and at considerable personal risk, slipped into Petrograd and attended a secret meeting of the Bolshevik Central Committee held on the evening of October 23. Not until after a heated 10-hour debate did he finally win a majority in favour of preparing an armed takeover. Now steps to enlist the support of soldiers and sailors and to train the Red Guards, the Bolshevik-led workers' militia, for an armed takeover proceeded openly under the guise of self-defense of the Petrograd Soviet. Even at great personal risk, Lenin was adamant in spurring a successful revolution.