USSR

The Leadership Contest, 1924-29

1. The candidates
Trotsky -- When Lenin died the most obvious candidate to take over leadership of the Communists was
Trotsky. He was brilliant, talented and had an outstanding track record as leader of the Red Army.
Kamenev and Zinoviev -- Both leading Bolsheviks, Kamanev and Zinoviev believed in spreading revolution.
Both were unhappy about the New Economic Policy (NEP).
Bukharin -- A moderate who wanted to build up the new Russia slowly, Bukharin favoured keeping the NEP
in the short term.
Stalin --- Stalin expressed no strong views he was a hardworking administrator and few expected him to
win the leadership contest.

Why was Stalin able to win the leadership contest?

2. Stalin succeeded
The leadership contest was eventually won by Stalin, although it took him five years to become completely
established as Lenins successor. Stalin was able to defeat his rivals for a number of reasons.

Do photos always tell the truth? Were they really that close as depicted in this photo?
3. Trotskys arrogance (Lack of alliances/Unpopularity in the Politburo)
Narrow support base -- The rise of Stalin was mainly due to the weakness of Trotsky. Trotsky made himself
unpopular. Unlike Stalin Trotsky drew his support from a very narrow support base which was the Youths,
students and the Red Army. The support of the army gave Trotsky a great deal of power. Most party
members considered Trotsky to be arrogant and a threat. Furthermore, Trotsky had already come to the
conclusion that he would be succeeding Lenin and so did not build his support within the ranks of the party.
The troika alliance between Kamanev, Zinoviev and Stalin aimed to remove Trotsky from power by
discrediting him.
Criticisms -- He was also outspoken and had argued with Lenin on several topics such as on Lenins New
Economic Policy (NEP) and the increasing control of the Party by the Politburo and Central Executive
Committee. These criticisms challenged the organization and policies of the party and were seen as acts of
disloyalty to Lenin and the Partys decisions.

World Revolution -- Moreover Trotsky was very committed to the idea of world revolution and this did not
go well with his fellow party members as they did not relish the idea of more fighting. In comparison many
felt that Stalins idea of socialism in country was more practical and called for the strengthening of the
Soviet Union first before spreading revolution to other countries. Stalin had the support of the other party
members on this and it seemed as if Trotsky was moving away from the Partys decisions and ideas.
Trotskys credibility within the Party was thus affected.
Underestimation of Stalin -- Lastly, his arrogance caused him to be too trusting of Stalin and
underestimating the threat Stalin posed. Around Lenins death, Trotsky fell very ill and did not organize his
own supporters. He was tricked about the date of Lenin funeral and missing it thus giving Stalin the
opportunity to be the chief mourner. The testament was not to be made public as Lenin had criticized all of
the Party members. Some Party members felt that Trotsky was a greater threat due to his powerful
personality and close connection to the army and decided to ignore Lenins warning on Stalin. Trotsky also
chose to remain silent on Lenins criticism of Stalin reflected in Lenins testament. He was thus not able to
deal with party politics as the other Party members began to exclude him from their decision-making and
undermine his position within the party,
Implications:
Trotsky, being the most likely successor of the Communist Party failed to help himself. He underestimated
Stalin which led to his complacency in thinking that he had no rivals and did not need to expand his support
base and form alliances. Hence, Trotsky lost all his political advantages and provided an opportunity for
Stalin to be viewed as a possible successor and eventually allowed him to win the contest.
4. Stalin manipulations
Stalins important jobs/Role of General-Secretary/Party organisation:
He had taken on many important jobs (editor of the party newspaper Pravda, Commissar for Nationalities,
Secretary-General of the Party). This gave him an important power base he had many supporters in the
ranks of the party (who owed their positions to him). He was able to replace the allies of his opponents,
especially Trotsky with his own allies. Stalin also gained control of the Cheka, later renamed as the Peoples
Commissariat for Internal affairs (NKVD). As a result, Trotskys support base shrunk considerably.
Implications:
Since Stalin had control over the Partys organization, he was able to gain support in the party and discredit
Trotskys reputation and ideas. Eventually, Stalin was able to get the party to agree to Trotskys resignation as
the head of the Red Army in 1925 and later, to expel Trotsky from the party in 1927. Having removed his
greatest threat, it was easy for Stalin to rise to power.
Stalins cunningness:
- Another reason for the rise of Stalin could be his unscrupulous nature. Stalin by nature was very
scheming and cunning. Apart from the frequent visits Stalin made to Lenin, Stalin cleverly made it seem
like he had been close to Lenin. This gave his fellow party members as well as the general public, the
impression that Lenin favored and trusted Stalin.
- After Lenin died, Stalin organized Lenins funeral, making it a grand affair. Stalin also tricked his rival
Trotsky into missing Lenins funeral by giving him the wrong date. Because of the wrong date Trotsky
could not attend and many party members were angry with Trotsky for failing to appear at Lenins
funeral.
- Stalin gave the funeral speech and established himself as the chief mourner, showing himself to be
deeply sorrowful over the loss of Lenin. Lenin had not wanted Stalin to be his successor and had stated
that in his will. However Stalin managed to prevent the will from being read out and thus Stalin was a
contender for the leadership post.

Implications:
- Many were angry with Trotsky for missing Lenins funeral and thought he was disrespectful and did not
deserve to take over. Whereas many Russians felt that Stalin had the support of Lenin and as the chief
mourner was loyal and more responsible.
- As a result, it was easy to think that Stalin as the chief mourner would be the next successor of Lenin.
With all these underhanded tactics, Stalin was not just able to survive as a candidate but also able to
outshine others to emerge as the eventual leader of USSR.
Stalins alliances/Political ruthlessness/Exploitation of ideological divides:
- Another reason for the rise of Stalin was because of his alliances/political ruthlessness/exploitation of
ideological divides. Members of the Communist Party were divided among the moderates and the
radicals.
- The moderates followed Lenins leadership and ideology closely, while the radicals challenged the
system. The other four candidates disagreed with each other on important issues, such as
industrialization and the NEP. They all underestimated Stalin who played up Trotsky as a threat and a
radical who criticized and challenged Party organization and policies.
- This resulted in an alliance with the moderates against Trotsky, agreeing to hide Lenins will which
chose Trotsky over Stalin, banishing Trotsky out of the party and Russia. Later, Stalin would break the
troika alliance and use socialism in one country to dismiss Zinoviev and Kamenev (The leftists) who
wanted world revolution and to abolish Lenins New Economic Policy (NEP).
- Stalin claimed that they were plotting with Trotsky to overthrow the government. Finally, Stalin switched
over to win the support of the radicals by arguing that NEP was un-communist to get rid of the Bukharin
and Rykov who were moderates.
Implications:
The ideological divides within the party and the underestimation of Stalin allowed Stalin to ruthlessly play one
against the other, making new alliances and then eliminating his competition one by one while strengthening
his position. Therefore, Stalin was able to win the leadership contest.
By 1929, Stalin had defeated his opponents and was the dictator of the USSR.

What does this source tell you about Stalin?

Was Stalin rise to power in Russia in the 1920s inevitable?

Agree Inevitable
- He had important jobs - editor of the party newspaper Pravda, Commissar for Nationalities, SecretaryGeneral of the Party - gave him an important power base
- Stalin took advantage of the Lenin Enrolment to increase his support within the party. He also appeared
as the chief mourner at Lenins funeral while tricking Trotsky into missing it.

Trotsky made himself unpopular. His ideas for spreading world revolution alarmed moderate
Communists. He was also arrogant and offended many party members. Trotsky also had a small
support base: the students, youth and the Red Army.
He continued to play off Bukharin, Zinoviev and Kamenev against each other by allying with one and
then another, while he strengthened his own position. Once they helped him to eliminate Trotsky, Stalin
found new allies to remove them as well.
Stalin gained complete power because he advocated Socialism in One Country to focus on much
needed development in Russia instead of trying to sponsoring International Revolution under Lenin and
Trotsky. This move won the support of many in the Communist Party that allowed Stalin to further
strengthen his own position, build his alliances and gain complete power.

Implications: With huge support in the party, disunity among the top candidates and underestimation by
Trotsky, Stalin had the main advantage and was able to eliminate his opponents and hence his rise was
inevitable.
Disagree - Not inevitable
-

Trostky was preferred as he was Lenins choice, he was always deemed as more capable than Stalin
Lenin had mentioned in his will that Trotsky was capable whereas Stalin should be removed from
power,
Trostky also had control of the army
Leading Bolsheviks, Kamanev, Bukharin and Zinoviev were more outstanding than Stalin
Stalin was not involved in the Revolution at all

Implications: Given his mediocrity, it was really hard and not inevitable for him to come into power.
The historical questions on this issue are clear:
- What methods did Stalin use to defeat his opponents?
- Was Stalin really just an eminent mediocrity as Trotsky called him?
- Was Stalins victory due to the incompetence of his opponents?

Industrialisation and Collectivisation

A USSR poster produced in the 1930s titled: We Will Turn the Five-Year Plan into a Four-Year Plan
Why was this poster produced?

Stalin believed that the USSR was under threat from non-Communist states. He also believed that the only
way to make the country secure was for it to become a modern, industrial country. His aim was to force the
USSR to make 50 years progress in ten years. There were two key aspects of Stalins plans:
- the need to expand heavy industry (Five-Year Plans)
- the need to improve food production (Collectivisation)
- Note that collectivisation is PART OF the Five Year Plan
1. The Five-Year Plans
Stalin seemed to have several clear reasons for industrializing the USSR. These were:
- security
- to create a showpiece of success for the outside world
- to carry out his idea of socialism in one country.
In order to achieve his aims, he came up with two Five-Year Plans for the development of the USSR. The
Five-Year Plans were incredibly ambitious targets for industrial production that had to be achieved in five
years.
Although few targets were met, the industries that failed to meet their targets still made huge advances.
2. Reasons for Five-Year Plans
Economic catching up with the West
- Stalin wanted a USSR that was powerful. To do this he had to modernize the USSRs economy
by a programme of rapid industrialization. This means developing industry to such an extent
from a country which mainly depends on agriculture or farming is changed into one which
mostly depends on industry.
- Besides, he felt that USSR was at least 50 years behind the advanced countries. He aimed to
catch up with and surpassed them within ten years.
- Agriculturally, he wanted to modernize farming so that it would be more efficient in producing
enough food to support an expanding urban workforce. In addition, he hoped that surpluses in
the agricultural sector could be sold overseas and the money used for investment in industry, for
instance, to buy industrial machinery for the factories.
Implications:
Through the Five-Year plan, it was hoped that rapid industrialization could help USSR recover from the effects
of the civil war and regain the confidence of the workers and peasants whom the regime badly needed. This
would also allow him to prove to the West that communism could produce a successful economic system that
could compete with the democratic countries.
Military to strengthen USSR defence in face of a hostile world/Russian Civil War
Stalin felt it was necessary to catch up with the West because USSR was threatened by the West and
surrounding countries such as Iran, Romania, Finland and Poland, which hated communism. To survive an
attack from the West, the USSR had to rapidly expand its heavy industries: coal, iron, steel and power. This
would allow the USSR to expand and strengthen its military. In addition, being excluded from the League also
made it more difficult for USSR as it was the only communist country in the world.
The Russian Civil War - The Russian Civil War in 1917-1921 was a reason for Stalins Five-year Plans in 1928
because it made Stalin believe he had to strengthen the USSRs defence. In the Russian Civil War, the
western power sent troops and military aid to the supporters of the Tsar and the Provisional Government (the
Whites) to help them topple the Bolshevik government formed after October 1917. The west associated
Bolshevism as anarchy and communism as dictatorship. Thus they supported the White generals to overthrow
the Reds to bring Russia back into WWI against Germany.
Implications:
- To ensure its survival as a socialist country amidst all the hostilities, it was only sensible for
Stalin to build up an industry that was self-sufficient and the output could also be channeled to
beef up its army so that Russia could defend itself from any possible threats.

Stalin felt that the West is suspicious and distrusting of communism and wants to try all means
to destabilise the USSR. Therefore in order to defend the USSR against such intervention and
attacks from the West, it was necessary to rapidly expand its heavy industries through a series
of Five-year Plans.
By expanding the countrys heavy industries, the USSR can ensure self-sufficiency and
strengthen its military to ensure its survival as a socialist country. In this way, the USSR can
defend itself from any possible threats just like the one they experienced in the Russian Civil
War.

Social - To increase support for the government, establish his dictatorship and get rid of the rich
peasants
- Stalin also introduced the Five-year Plans to establish his dictatorship over the USSR because
a mass industrialisation programme will put everyone to work allowing him to control the people
effectively.
- The Five-year Plans required all urban workers to be grouped into work units supervised by
party commissars. The target output required workers to slave hard to meet the quotas. This
system of close monitoring and supervision allowed Stalin to impose his control over the
workers.
- In countryside, peasants placed in work communes had to deliver harvest according to targets
and report at tractor stations which also served to monitor the cooperatives. Such close
supervision also helped to eliminate any remaining opposition to the Communists such as the
kulaks who were against collectivisation. This also allowed him to build a communist country
according to his vision.
- Rapid industrialization would also allow Stalin to obtain support for the government because the
masses were the Communists greatest supporters. Secondly, it would eliminate any remaining
opposition to the Communists; in particular get rid of rich peasants, the kulaks.
Implications:
By introducing the Five-year Plans of industrialisation and collectivization, this eliminated any opposition and
set up strict controls over the Russians. This in return allowed Stalin to establish himself as an authoritarian
leader and ensured he remain unchallenged as leader.
The above factors clearly show why Stalin had embarked a programme of industrialization. Although all the
points highlighted above are valid, yet the most important reasons would be to face the perceived threat Stalin
was expecting from the West. Right from the time he took over as the leader of Russia, Stalin was paranoid
about the intentions of the West and how they were waiting to destroy the communist state of Russia. Thus
while industrialization gave him an opportunity to create a modern Russia, it would also help him to beef up his
military which would deter a western invasion.
Perhaps some of you might think
The biggest reason for the introduction of the Five-Year plan had to be economic. This was because by
building up its economy, it would not only ensure it had the support of its people; it would also allow Russia to
strengthen itself militarily so as to guard against any potential threats.
How were workers made to work so hard?
- For a better society many inspired by the great task of transforming Russia
- Propaganda cinema, radio, posters
- Awards honours, compete against one another better housing, cash prizes
- Wages incentives skilled workers paid more
- Punishments labour discipline, absenteeism was punished by fines
Historians and contemporaries have argued long and hard about the following points:
- What were Stalins true aims in the Five-Year Plans?
- How successful were the plans?
- What was the cost of these plans for the people of the USSR?

How successful was the Five-Year Plans? OR Did USSR recover under the plan?
The effects of the Five-Year Plans
Historians disagree about the aims and the effects of the Five-Year Plans. One thing on which all historians do
agree is that the USSR was transformed.
Yes, a success / recovered:
-

The main aim was achieved by 1940, the USSR was in the first division of industrial powers,
along with Britain, Germany and the USA.
Vast projects such as the Belomor Canal, the Dreiper Dam, and the metalworks at
Magnitogorsk were completed with amazing speed.
Huge towns and factories were built from nothing, deep inside the USSR to protect them from
invasion.
Foreign technicians were brought in and enormous investment was put into education and
training to produce skilled workers.
The use of propaganda such as Stakhanov helped the Russians believe that it was possible not
only to achieve but also exceed the targets especially since there were rewards like money and
food to be attained for achieving the targets.
By the mid-1930s there were definite signs of improved living standards (for example,
education, welfare, housing).
Under the Plan, the Soviet workforce transformed from an illiterate, unskilled and undisciplined
to an educated and trained one. A new elite emerged teachers, scientists, engineers and
factory managers were paid higher wages than ordinary workers.

Implications: With clear targets, workers knew what they needed to achieve and the entire Soviet economy
gave first priority to industrialization, to the extent that industrial output such as in iron, coal and oil increased
dramatically. Rapid industrialization under the Five Year Plan helped USSR recover from the effects of the civil
war and regain the confidence of the workers and peasants whom the regime badly needed. Through the Five
Year Plan, USSR were able to catch up with the West because when the country was in war with Germany it
was able to hold on its own and defeated Germany in 1945.
No, a failure / did not recover
- Despite apparent successes, the central planning was not very efficient. In some industries
there was overproduction, in others underproduction, so that factories were kept idle for weeks,
waiting for essential parts.
- Yet the drive was always to fulfill the targets at any cost. Some of the goods produced were
almost unusable because they had been turned out so quickly by untrained workers.
- Mistakes were made: machines were unwittingly wrecked by unskilled workers, who were
mostly peasants.
- Workers were blamed and people feared being punished and trialed, hence lots of cover up.
Output figures were inflated so that industries could not be accused of failing to fulfill their
targets. Workers were intimidated so that they would work harder.
- Great pressure was put on workers to meet targets and to be Stakhanovites. Stakhanov was a
miner who managed to produce over 100 tons of coal in one shift, and was held up as a model
to inspire all workers.
- The cost was high. Safety standards came second to meeting targets, discipline was harsh and
many workers ended up in labour camps (gulags). All investment went into heavy industries
there were few consumer goods (clothes, luxuries).
- The drive for Five Year Plan accompanied by collectivisation also led to millions of death due to
starvation.
Implications: Many of the results were exaggerated mostly due to over-ambitious targets and people still
lived in poverty. There were hardly any consumable goods and even if there was recovery, it was not

evenly felt and spread throughout USSR. Hence, it was too premature to say that USSR recover under the
Five Year Plan.
Conclusion: Although Stalins series of Five-Year Plans targets were not met, all Soviet industries made
remarkable advances and, by 1940, the USSR was the worlds second-largest industrial power behind the
USA.

Farming: the need for collectivization

Stalin had made clear his ambitions to transform the USSR. The Five-Year Plans could work only if Soviet
agriculture could raise its production massively. There were two main reasons for doing this.
- To feed the growing population of industrial workers.
- To export any surpluses to raise cash for investment in industry.

Is this photo staged (since they were not looking at the camera)? Is this an accurate
representation of collectivization? What message was he trying to convey to his
audience?
Why did the Communists support collectivization?
Reasons for collectivization:
1. Agriculture was still very backward. Most farms were small, because of the way land had been shared
out after the Revolution. Old traditional methods strip farming with wooden ploughs were still used.
Collectives made it easier to introduce modern machinery, especially tractors, and new methods of
farming, which would produce more food.
Implications: More efficient mechanized agriculture would require fewer peasants to work the land and
release the labour needed for the growing industries so that USSR would have a strong industrial
economy.
2. An efficient agricultural sector was also necessary to raise money needed for Stalins rapid
industrialization. A way had to be found to increase the USSRs agricultural output so the surplus could
be sold overseas and the money used for investment in industry, for instance, to buy industrial
machinery for the factories.
Implications: Since industrialization took priority over agriculture, it was understood that agriculture
sector had to be reorganized for the benefit of industry.

3. Collectivisation was the socialist way to farm the land. How could USSR build a socialist state when
peasants owned their own land and sold their produce on the private markets? Collectivisation would
replace capitalist attitudes with socialist attitudes of cooperation and sharing. This would also allow him
to remove the class of prosperous peasants (kulaks) which NEP had encouraged because, Stalin
claimed, they were standing in the way of progress. The real reason was probably political: Stalin saw
the kulaks as the enemy of communism.
Implications: A truly Socialist society was a classless one. The rapid industrialization would transform
USSR into a Communist or Socialist country.
How collectivization worked?
Most farms were smallholdings tended by peasant families. These holdings could never be efficient enough
for Stalins plans so he introduced the policy of collectivization.
- Peasants effectively had to give up their land and join other families on very large farms.
- These new farms were supplied by the state with seed, tools, tractors and other machinery.
- Most of the produce went to the Government.
The real opponents of collectivization were the kulaks. Kulaks were peasants who had become prosperous
under the NEP and they made up a large and important part of the population of the countryside. Most
refused to co-operate with the new policy, because they did not want to give up their land.
3. The effects of collectivization
The effects of collectivization were very mixed, but this policy certainly had less claim to success than the
Five-Year Plans. This is what happened.
- By 1941, almost all land in the USSR was collectivized.
- A huge propaganda campaign was launched to convince peasants to modernize.
- Kulaks were murdered or put in labour camps many killed their own animals or burnt their
crops rather than let the Government have them.
- Much of the countryside was devastated by struggles between Stalins agents and the kulaks.
- Although collectivization was achieved, food production fell dramatically. In the Ukraine, there
was famine in the early 1930s and at the same time food was being exported.
The long-term result of this struggle was that the peasants were battered into submission and never
again seriously threatened the Communist regime.
How were the peasants affected by collectivization?
- There was fierce resistance to collectivization. Peasants refused to hand over their animals,
preferring to slaughter them and eat or sell the meat.
- They burnt crops, tools and houses rather hand them over to the state.
- There were riots and armed resistance.
- There was so much disruption caused to agriculture that there were severe food shortages.
When, added to this, there was a disastrous harvest in 1932, the result was famine of
unimaginable severity in the years 1932-33.
- Yet the state never admitted that a famine was taking place and did not ask for, or get,
international aid.
- Indeed food was still being exported from USSR to other countries.
- At least thirteen million peasants, and possibly even more, died as a result of collectivization.
- But Stalin had succeeded in breaking the peasants and obtaining the grain he needed for
industrialization. (only success for USSR)
The key issue surrounding collectivization is: How successful was it?
Aims: 1. Feed growing population (yes, but industrialised cities, famine too); 2. Improve agriculture
(no, disruption); 3. Socialism (yes but at heavy cost of human lives)

Did collectivisation benefit USSR?

One characteristic of Communism is its reliance on officially produced and disseminated lies. As a result of the famine Stalin fabricated in the
Soviet Union, six million died of hunger, and tens of thousands of children were targets of this disaster. This photograph documents the
"standard of living" deemed acceptable for Russian children in Stalin's era. But propaganda posters depicted Stalin as a kind, concerned leader
receiving gifts of flowers from happy children.

Yes Collectivisation was beneficial for the Soviet Union.

-

As most farms in the USSR were small strips of land it was impossible to introduce mechanised
farming. The only solution was to join all these lands into larger plots or fields and then
introduced mechanised farming.
It was believed that such an approach of consolidating the farms would lead to higher yield and
so more revenue for the state. By 1940, almost all farms were collectivised. Collective farms
had begun to use tractors and they followed new farming methods. The farmers worked hard
and were able to increase the production figures.
These figures also were used as examples in radio and newspaper articles. Collectivisation
aimed to increase the amount of crops produced by the farms.

Life on the collective farms was not all bad. For example, there were schools and hospitals on
some collectives for the workers.

As collectivisation made use of improved farming methods through technology, the output also
increased dramatically. The excess grain that was produced was sold to buy machinery and
equipment that was vital for industrialisation.

10

Thus collectivisation was beneficial for the USSR as it aided in its industrialisation. Besides that
less people were needed to work in the farms as mechanised farming was introduced. This in
turn ensured that more people were deployed in the town side to work in factories and
industries.
Most importantly, the aim of producing enough food to feed the towns and the Red Army was
achieved.

Implications: Ultimately this resulted in the Soviet Union being industrialised at a faster pace and so
collectivisation was indeed beneficial to the Soviet Union.
No Collectivisation was not beneficial for the Soviet Union
-

Many farmers who were small land holders refused to agree to this method. They did not want
to part from their land and saw the effects of collectivisation during the Russian Civil War. There
was a lot of famine and increased food shortage. So peasants were reluctant to collectivise the
farms.
Stalin then adopted forced collectivisation whereby communist officials forced the peasants to
hand over their crops. This led to the peasants being angry and they assassinated the officials
who came to take away their crops.
The NKVD or the secret police often forced farmers to sign documents agreeing to collectivise
the farms. These officials would then take over the fields, livestock, farming tools of the farmers.
Any farmer who resisted was shot or sent to labour camps. Thousands of peasants were either
killed or sent to labour camps.
Furthermore collectivisation brought famine to the Soviet Union. From 1932 to 1933, between
six and ten million peasants died. Also farmers would rather burn their crops than to give it to
the officials.
Stalin also ordered the slaughtering of 17 million horses so that the farmers would be forced to
use tractors. However the number of tractors were not enough to replace the killed horses. As a
result there was a severe famine.
Ukraine which was the bread baskets severely struck by famine. It was estimated that almost 10
million families were killed in the famine. In that aspect collectivisation was unnecessary.

Implications: Thus from the above account we deduce that collectivisation was not beneficial as it brought
hardship and misery for the USSR. It led to the upraising of peasants against authority and was responsible for
the assassination of thousands of officials. Furthermore it also resulted in massive famine and the slaughter of
millions of livestock which in turn worsened the famine. It also led to the creation of Gulags where the peasants
who opposed collectivisation were sent away. Thus as collectivisation brought more misery and deaths, it was
not beneficial to the Soviet Union.
Conclusion
Collectivisation in the final analysis did not really bring many benefits for Russia. Many officials were
assassinated and the people also were also facing a lot of misery. Most farmers who were against the
collectivisation were sent to gulags camp. The expected outcome of collectivisation also was not realised.
Instead of bringing in an increase in food production, it brought about famine and millions of farmers were
killed. Thus we can conclude that collectivisation was not a success and was only minimally beneficial to
Russia particularly Stalin and the communists who had greater control of the countryside as the peasants
never again openly rebelled against communist rule.

11

While Russians were dying of hunger, the Communist Party's barns were crammed full. At left, a church used as a storehouse for grain during
the implementation of collectivization in the 1930s.
Is this photograph useful to our understanding of collectivization?

A mother and child starving to death. Second photo, small children who died from the famine. As a result of Stalin's deliberate famine, four
million Ukrainians died.

Reasons for Stalins dictatorship and impact of Stalins rule

POLITICAL CONTROL/ IMPACT
1. Opposition to Stalin (Use of fear and terror purges)
- Radical policies like Stalins were bound to cause concern. Criticism within the party grew
because of the human cost of Stalins policies. In 1934, Stalins ally Sergei Kirov was murdered.
Stalin saw this as evidence of a conspiracy and began a series of political purges (imprisonment
and execution).
- Historians are fairly sure that Stalin planned Kirovs murder to give him an excuse to purge the
USSR of opponents, whom Stalin saw as traitors to himself and the USSR. From 1934 to 1938,
thousands were arrested, imprisoned, murdered or simply disappeared. They came from all
areas of Soviet life.
- The Communist Party: the number of party members fell from 3.5 million in 1934 to two millions
in 1935. Leading party members such as Zinoviev, Kamenev and Bukharin were tortured and
their families threatened.

12

Then, at show trials, they confessed and were executed. Many less important opponents (and
even supporters who were not enthusiastic enough) were arrested by the secret police and
either executed or sent to labour camps. Stalin was also suspicious of the Red Army because of
Trotskys strong connections with the army.
Stalin needed a army that was loyal to him alone. In 1937, around 25000 army officers
(including the Commander of the Red Army, Marshal Tukhachevsky) were purged. In their
place, mostly younger inexperienced members of the Party were promoted to ensure the loyalty
of the army.

Implications:
Stalins used of Purges was a reason for Stalins dictatorial powers because he intimidated his opponents
and instilled such fear of implication that effectively eliminated all forms of opposition against him. No one
dared to challenge him or speak up against him.
*The effects of the purges were mixed. Stalin was certainly secure. His new secret police (the NKVD) ruled
the population with terror. Over eight million had been killed or sent to labour camps.
However, Stalin had weakened the USSR. Many of those purged had been skilled or educated (for
example, managers, army officers) and so industrial progress slowed down. The army was seriously
weakened and suffered badly against the Germans in 1941 (this was a misdeed or failure of Stalins rule).
2. The constitution
Stalin made himself more secure still in 1936 with the USSRs new constitution. It was known as Stalin
Constitution. At first sight, it appeared more democratic all citizens over the age of 18 were allowed to
vote for members of the Supreme Soviet. However, it had no real power as Stalin still controlled the party
membership and decisions were still made by Stalin and his closest supporters.
Implications:
As the freedom promised by the constitution was not real, it meant all real political power was in the hands
of Stalin who ensured that he had their allegiance, through gratitude for their posts or fear of being purged.
3. Stalins attitude to world revolution
Stalin was far too busy building socialism in one country to be concerned with Trotskys idea of spreading
world revolution. In fact, Stalin was concerned with keeping the USSR secure, and even joined the League
of Nations in 1934.
4. Concern about Fascism
Fascism was a political idea that was totally opposed to Communism. Fascist governments were already in
power in Italy (1924) and Germany (1933). Stalin began to feel very concerned, especially when Germany
and Japan signed the Anti-Comintern Pact in 1936, which placed the USSR between two powerful, hostile
neighbours.
5. The search for security
- Stalins obvious allies were Britain and France, both of whom were concerned about Hitler.
However, Britain and France were just as worried about Stalin.
- The Munich crisis of 1938 convinced Stalin that Britain and France could not be relied upon, so
in 1939 the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact was signed. Both Hitler and Stalin shocked their
followers with the agreement, but each leader was buying time. Stalin kept his side of the
agreement and even helped Hitler with supplies when WWII broke out. However, Hitler turned
on Russia in June 1941 and the Great Patriotic War began.

13

ECONOMIC-SOCIAL CONTROL/ IMPACT

6. State control over economy
-

The launch of the 5-Year Plans was also a reason why Stalin had dictatorial powers in the
Soviet Union because it subjected all citizens in complete involvement and supervision in
industrial and agricultural production.

Stalins 5-Year Plans were a series of highly ambitious program of state-guided crash
industrialization and collectivization of agriculture. In the urban areas, Stalin financed
industrialization by making ordinary Soviet citizens work in labour units or in labour camps under
close supervisions and by ruthless extraction of wealth from the kulaks.

In the countryside, Stalin forced peasants into collectives to increase agricultural output from
large-scale mechanized farming and in so doing brought the peasantry under more direct
political control. The people of the Soviet Union were thus forced into committing themselves to
work for Stalins plans for socialism.

Implications:
The main reason why Stalin had dictatorial powers in the Soviet Union was because he mobilised all the
Soviet people into productive employment and control by the state. Under such a system, they would either
be sold into their roles or too exhausted to resist. This motivation to be loyal to Stalin was then augmented
by his use of propaganda that persuaded people to accept his absolute leadership. Failing which,
opponents would be eliminated through purges to ensure no one lives to challenge his dictatorial powers.
7. Economic successes
- Stalin managed to control USSR because of his achievements in industrializing USSR.
Russia had fared badly in World War 1 and now that it was communist, there were fears that the
non-communist countries would crush it.
- Stalin came out with 5 year plans which gave clear targets on how much each worker was to
achieve and placed the focus on industrial goods, hence sacrificing on the production of
consumer goods.
- He also implemented a reward and punishment system to motivate his workers to give their
best. He was able to generate rapid industrialization for the country, increasing the output of
many industrial goods.
Implication:
All of this ensured that Russias economy was industrialized such that the economy could support the war
effort when WWII erupted and Germany attacked Russia. Unlike WWI, they had enough weapons and
eventually won the war and even emerged as a superpower after WWII, showing the other capitalist
countries that communism could work and make a country powerful as well. Hence, the Russians found
Stalin a capable leader who was able to achieve much for USSR and believed in him. They were proud of
their country and gave Stalin their support. This allowed Stalin to control USSR.
8. Economic-social costs Fall in standard of living/Famine/ Lack of consumer goods
- Under Stalin, all private enterprise was banned. The state became the only legal distributor of
everyday goods. Major social goods such as housing, education, health services and even an
individuals vacation destinations were determined and distributed by state departments.
- Long queues were common because the demand of goods was greater than what the state
controlled industry or distribution channels could supply.
- The drive towards industrialization caused more people to move to the cities where the factories
were located. The increasing population made the shortage of housing a great problem. Many
were forced to live in cramp conditions often without running water or sanitation in overcrowded
cities.

14

In addition, workers were forced to work very hard with little time off in poor conditions. This led
to a steady fall in the standard of living. As farms were owned by the state, the famers could not
keep produce for themselves. During the Great Famine, the state did not distribute its stockpiled
grain, but sold grain overseas to raise funds for more industrial machinery and development.
The famine carried on to 1934 where close to 7 million peasants died of starvation. There was
also a lack of consumer goods since the first two Five-Year Plans focused on agricultural and
industrial targets.

Implications:
Since Stalin had control over the economy and on major social goods, this meant that he had control over
the distribution of these goods. Therefore, as Stalin chose to put industrialization ahead of the welfare of
the people, this resulted in suffering amongst the people, in a fall of standards of livings and starvation.

SOCIAL CONTROL/IMPACT
9. The culture of Stalins USSR/Creating the New Soviet Man
- Stalin launched the Cultural Revolution to attack the intellectuals, the privileged class, religious leaders
and artists to move the Soviet Union towards a more proletarian society with proletarian values. Within this
Cultural Revolution was the creation of the New Soviet Man, the ideal Soviet citizen who was proud of
being part of the modern industry society and was willing to serve the state selflessly and enthusiastically.
- The most visible manifestation of the new proletarian values was the Stakhanovites names after Alexey
Stakhanov. The state upheld the achievements of supposedly ordinary people such as factory workers,
teachers or miners.
Stalins USSR was disciplined and seemingly full of fear. Some real advances in industry were made, but
at a cost. Freedom of speech was denied to Soviet citizens. Education improved basic standards for most
Russians, but it was heavily controlled by the NKVD. Artists, writers, musicians and performers had to
please Stalin with their work or else leave the USSR or face being purged.
The media constantly pressed home the need for loyalty to the party and Stalin. However, Lenins ideal of a
classless society did not seem to match the reality. High-ranking party officials and the military seemed to
enjoy a much higher standard of living than most Soviet citizens.
Implications:
By controlling culture, Stalin controlled the way people thought and lived. It might be a new type of
government from the monarchy, but it was similar in many ways to the old Tsarist system of totalitarian
rule. This mix of propaganda and fear meant that no one dared to rise up against Stalin and created a
culture of discipline, fear and loyalty to Stalins USSR.
** At first, the initial enthusiasm for the Stakhanovites soon gave way to realities. The pressure to perform
up to the states standard, as well as the opposition by those who failed to do so, had a negative
psychological impact on Soviet society. Many became pessimistic.
10. Living in fear/ The gulags (fear and terror)
- Fear became an aspect of life in the Soviet Union. The secret police had informers everywhere
and the slightest indication of anti-Stalin sentiments could warrant an arrest. People knew that
they were being constantly watched and judged by Stalins officials. If they were judged poorly,
it would be more difficult for them to apply for housing, jobs or holidays.
- If they stood out for the wrong reasons or upset officials, they could fall victim to the secret
police and sent to forced labor camps or even killed. This was especially during the Great terror.
Gulags was the name given to the labour camps which were set up in the worst areas of the
USSR such as Siberia.

15

Prisoners were made to work in terrible conditions and as many as 12 million died due to the
cold and harsh treatment. Stalin also used the labour camps to provide labour for unpleasant or
dangerous projects in areas where ordinary workers did not want to go.

Implications:
The setting up of gulag sent fear to the opponents of Stalin, the man of steel. No one was safe from it as
people lived in constant fear. There was a quota that the secret police NKVD had to meet and the gulags
was needed for workers to work in the worst areas. All these arrests and the existence of the gulags
resulted in constant reminders for the Russians of the dangers in speaking up against Stalin and the need
to work hard for Stalin.
11. The cult of personality / propaganda
- Stalin expected love and worship, not just respect and obedience. He made sure everyone
knew about his successes. Huge rallies were held in his honour. Many photographs were
published showing him meeting children and workers. Soviet artists produced paintings showing
Stalin opening factories. All of this gave rise to a new style of art called Soviet Realism.
- Places were renamed after him while he gave himself titles like "Father of Nations," "Brilliant
Genius of Humanity," "Great Architect of Communism," "Gardener of Human Happiness. The
Soviet people were told that he could do no wrong. He was described as a superman, a genius
at everything. He also rewrote Soviet history to accord himself a more significant role in the
Bolshevik Revolution.
Implications:
Media broadcast and films exalted his greatness while statues and monuments, posters and portraits
exaggerated his strength. This use of propaganda pervasively flooded the Soviet people with the idea of
his great leadership so that he appeared imposing enough to command the unquestioned following of the
Soviet Union. Through propaganda, Stalin influenced the minds of the Russian public especially the
younger generation so that they would believe that he was a great leader and continue to support him. This
ensured his political success because it built up his support base. Hence, Stalin was able to control USSR.
12. Education
- Education was the key to ensuring that the whole population became communist and accepted
Stalins dictatorship. Stalin sought to control what people were taught. Teachers and professors
who were considered not to be teaching in the way the Communist Party wanted were arrested.
- Children were taught that Stalin was the Great Leader. Large portions of Soviet history were
rewritten to boost Stalins status and discredit his rivals as disloyal counter-revolutionaries. Even
photographs were edited to remove unwanted people.
- Children aged 10-15 were encouraged to join the Young Pioneers. Teenagers were encouraged
to join the Komosol which took them on outdoor activities and indoctrinated them to be loyal to
Stalin and to the Communist party. These young people were sent out on political campaigns or
on collective farms and industries.
- Many of the Komosol were promoted to prominent Party posts as he purged his opposition.
Education became stricter because Stalin wanted schools to produce useful citizens. He
insisted on uniforms, tests and examinations and prescribed the subjects and information that
children should learn. Technical subjects that would help meet national industrialization targets.
- The growing literacy rate only served to further the influence of the Communist party.
Implications:
With the control of education, Stalin ensured that the students were indoctrinated at a young age to revere
him and be a good Communist so that they would think that opposing him would be betraying the course of
communism.

16

*** Communist prized education as the greatest advancement of the Soviet Union, increasing literacy from
40% to 94% for the males and providing free compulsory education.
13. Impact on women
The Soviet Constitution guaranteed equal rights to women. Russia legalized abortion and divorce so
women could have more control over their own lives. Stalin industrialization efforts encouraged women
to enter the workforce and become productive members of the economy. State-run childcare centres
were built to enable women to work in factories. In 1936, abortion was again made illegal to protect
motherhood and childhood.
As a result, Soviet women had some rights but also were expected to fulfill both the role of worker and
housewife.
14. Impact on various social groups
The various minority republics of the former Russian empire lost their autonomy with the creation of the
Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was in effect a one-party state with power in the hands of Stalin.
Although the minority republics were allowed to use their own languages and were governed by their
own governments, they were all appointed and controlled by Moscow. The same effects that Soviet
Russia felt under Stalins policies were also felt in these minority republics. Many members of
nationalist groups who advocated autonomy were amongst those targeted in the Great Terror.
15. Impact on Religion
Stalin continued the attack on religion started after the Bolshevik Revolution.
- Christian leaders were imprisoned and churches closed down.
- Muslim mosques and schools were closed and pilgrimages to Mecca banned.
- This persecution eased between 1941 and 1945 as Stalin tried to keep the support of all
religions and nationalities in the USSR during the struggle against Nazi Germany. He allowed
religious worship and teaching again and restored the Church to its former position. Some
churches were reopened and some bishops restored to office.
Implications: Stalin was not very successful in this campaign.

How successful was Stalins leadership of the Soviet Union?

Stalins leadership was successful in that he industrialised the country through his Fiveyear Plans that laid the infrastructure for development by concentrating on heavy
industries.
The main aim was achieved by 1940, the USSR was in the first division of industrial
powers, along with Britain, Germany and the USA. Vast projects such as the Belomor
Canal, the Dreiper Dam, and the metalworks at Magnitogorsk were completed with
amazing speed.
Huge towns and factories were built from nothing, deep inside the USSR to protect them
from invasion. By the mid-1930s there were definite signs of improved living standards (for
example, education, welfare, housing).
He collectivized farms and this allowed industrialization to proceed at a faster pace and
eliminated inequalities brought about by kulaks.

Implications: This transformed the USSR from backward agrarian society into a superpower by the
end of WWII after it was able to withhold attacks from Hitler.

Stalins leadership was not so successful in that he eliminated party members and caused
suffering to ordinary Russians in his quest for power. Stalin undertook purges that
eliminated Party leaders like Kamenez & Zinoviev, Bakharin and other Red Army
commanders suspected of being disloyal to him. In his purges, the Cheka (Secret Police)
sent Russians to gulags and summary executions.

17

This weakened the defence and leadership structure of USSR particularly in the beginning
of the war years. Economically, the results of the 5 Year Plans were exaggerated and
people still lived in poverty. There were hardly any consumable goods and even if there
was recovery, it was not evenly felt and spread throughout USSR.
Collectivisation was also not beneficial as it brought hardship and misery for the USSR. It
led to the uprising of peasants against authority and resulted in famine and the slaughter of
millions of livestock which in turn brought about famine.
It also led to the creation of Gulags where the peasants who opposed collectivisation were
sent away.

Implications: His rule was not a success as it brought about millions of death and suffering
amongst his people. For people to live in those years of fear and pain, Stalin as a leader had not
met the needs of the people and it would be unfair to argue that he had succeeded.
Conclusion
Stalins leadership was successful in taking Russia out of poverty but was not when his power
hungry craze brought suffering to others.
Posters and Cartoons about Stalins Russia

Soviet Cartoon (1927) - Kamenev, Trotsky and Zinoviev all depicted as members of a family, to show their alleged
closeness.

18

A French cartoon "Visit the Pyramids of the USSR"

Soviet Propaganda about the Five Year Plans, showing different types of workers working together to achieve greatness
for the state. These images often have people facing the right, as though they are travelling forward, subtly moving the
country out of its very backward past.

19

The success of the Five Year Plan can be seen to be crushing the Capitalists below. This Soviet Propaganda would
suggest that the workers of the Communist world are more efficient that their Western counterparts.

20