Why was Stalin able to defeat his political rivals so easily in the years 1924-29? (June 2013)
The question is focused on the reasons why Stalin was able to defeat his political rivals so easily in the years 1924‐29.
Answers may refer to Stalin’s changing political alliances, linked to his views on the future economic development of the country. He sided with the Right in support of NEP, essentially as a ploy directed against Trotsky. Once Trotsky had been discredited as a candidate for the leadership Stalin went on to abandon NEP in favour of a programme of rapid industrialisation. This policy reflected the views of most within the Communist party who regarded NEP as a partial surrender to capitalism, the Nepmen and the kulaks.
Equally important were different views on the future development of the country. Trotsky’s idea of Permanent Revolution had little support among ordinary citizens wearied by two decades of war and revolution. Stalin’s promotion of Socialism In One Country seemed less threatening and appealed to the patriotism of the Soviet people. Stalin also attached himself to Lenin through the Leninist cult. He spoke at Lenin’s funeral, and his lectures on the Foundations Of Leninism made him appear as the true heir to Lenin.
Answers may also refer to the personalities of the principal contenders. Trotsky was seen as aloof from everyday politics, and neither he nor Bukharin had built up a secure a power base within the party; while Kamenev and Zinoviev did not appear to possess the driving ambition required to succeed Lenin. The suppression of Lenin’s Testament, which suggested replacing Stalin, and the ban on factions in 1921, both worked in Stalin’s favour.
Stalin as position as General Secretary meant that he was able to promote his own supporters into positions of influence, while the Lenin enrollment meant that many ordinary party members felt they owed Stalin a debt of gratitude.
Level 5: answers will have a secure focus on the question, will consider a number of reasons for Stalin’s victory, and will support the analysis with a range of accurate factual material in some depth.
Level 4: answers will address the question, supporting the analysis with accurate and mostly relevant material. Selection of material may lack balance, and may focus largely on Stalin’s manoeuvres.
Level 3: answers will attempt some analysis, though supporting material is likely to be descriptive and lacking in both depth and relevance in places, and there may be some inaccuracies.
Level 2: answers will offer a few simple statements supported by limited though broadly accurate material in places.
Level 1: answers will consist of a few simple statements only.
Answers may refer to Stalin’s changing political alliances, linked to his views on the future economic development of the country. He sided with the Right in support of NEP, essentially as a ploy directed against Trotsky. Once Trotsky had been discredited as a candidate for the leadership Stalin went on to abandon NEP in favour of a programme of rapid industrialisation. This policy reflected the views of most within the Communist party who regarded NEP as a partial surrender to capitalism, the Nepmen and the kulaks.
Equally important were different views on the future development of the country. Trotsky’s idea of Permanent Revolution had little support among ordinary citizens wearied by two decades of war and revolution. Stalin’s promotion of Socialism In One Country seemed less threatening and appealed to the patriotism of the Soviet people. Stalin also attached himself to Lenin through the Leninist cult. He spoke at Lenin’s funeral, and his lectures on the Foundations Of Leninism made him appear as the true heir to Lenin.
Answers may also refer to the personalities of the principal contenders. Trotsky was seen as aloof from everyday politics, and neither he nor Bukharin had built up a secure a power base within the party; while Kamenev and Zinoviev did not appear to possess the driving ambition required to succeed Lenin. The suppression of Lenin’s Testament, which suggested replacing Stalin, and the ban on factions in 1921, both worked in Stalin’s favour.
Stalin as position as General Secretary meant that he was able to promote his own supporters into positions of influence, while the Lenin enrollment meant that many ordinary party members felt they owed Stalin a debt of gratitude.
Level 5: answers will have a secure focus on the question, will consider a number of reasons for Stalin’s victory, and will support the analysis with a range of accurate factual material in some depth.
Level 4: answers will address the question, supporting the analysis with accurate and mostly relevant material. Selection of material may lack balance, and may focus largely on Stalin’s manoeuvres.
Level 3: answers will attempt some analysis, though supporting material is likely to be descriptive and lacking in both depth and relevance in places, and there may be some inaccuracies.
Level 2: answers will offer a few simple statements supported by limited though broadly accurate material in places.
Level 1: answers will consist of a few simple statements only.