How did the Bolsheviks establish a one-party

State between 1917 and 1924?

LO: To analyse the first decrees and investigate the

establishment of control.

Who was
more
influential?

Read the
document Lenin
vs. Trotsky
before making
your decision.
The October Revolution

The Bolsheviks seized power in October using a well-planned and well-

executed uprising. The Provisional Government, which had been set up
after the fall of the Tsar, was forced from power. At the time the
Bolsheviks were still a small party of about 300,000 members, but in order
to justify Bolshevik rule as representing the interests of the workers, the
revolution was portrayed by the Bolsheviks as a mass uprising of the
workers. Propaganda presented the event as a heroic storming of the
Winter Palace in Petrograd with mass support.

The reality was different. The only troops left guarding the palace by this
time were the Women’s Death Battalion, who opened the gates to let the
Bolsheviks in. The nature of the Revolution determined much of what the
Bolsheviks did next. They had seized power with a very limited base of
support. Force would be required to ensure the Bolsheviks, a minority
party, held on to power.
In 1917 Russia was provided with a chance to explore the
possibilities of democracy. The Bolsheviks claimed a
desire to set up a democratic system that would rule on
behalf of the people, for the people, but by 1921 it was
clear that in reality they had established a one-party
state where all other political groups were banned.

Given the opposition they faced, it was perhaps no

surprise that the Bolsheviks felt impelled to secure their
hold over power in this way. Communist rule under the
Bolsheviks was to be authoritarian, highly centralised and
supplemented by heavy use of terror.
The creation of a one-party state and the party congress
of 1921. Theme 1: Communist government in the USSR,
1917-85

The Bolsheviks faced enormous difficulties in attempting to secure their hold on power.
These difficulties stemmed from the fact that, although the Party had grown in support
since the beginning of 1917, the Bolsheviks remained a relatively small group. Although
the Bolsheviks claimed to represent the interests of the proletariat and peasants, they
did not have enough support to lead a popular revolution; they had seized power by
force. It was no surprise that the Bolsheviks faced opposition to their rule from a range
of groups, including the following:

• Other left-wing groups who were denied a share of power by the Bolsheviks, such as
the Social Revolutionaries (SRs) and the Mensheviks, who were fellow Marxists.
• Groups on the right (such as Tsarist supporters) and liberal groups who often
represented the interests of the middle class and who now feared the Bolsheviks would
take away their businesses and deny them political freedoms. The ideology of Marxism,
with its emphasis on giving power and control to the proletariat, represented a challenge
to the rich and privileged within Russia. The old social order seemed to be under attack.
• Nationalist groups within the Russian Empire, such as Ukrainians, Poles and Finns, who
saw the collapse of the Tsarist regime as a chance to assert their independence.

It was these groups that the Bolsheviks had to overcome in

order to establish a one-party state.
 Degrees of Decrees!
The First Decrees of Sovnarkom
YOUR TASK:
• Examine the decrees issued in
November and December 1917.
• Identify whether each group
would support (tick) or oppose
(cross) the decrees.
Analysis
• Did Lenin follow through on his
April Theses?
• In what ways was Lenin ruling
like the Tsar?
• How far was Lenin following
the ideas of Karl Marx?
Extend our knowledge…
The Social Revolutionaries (SRs)
A group committed to democratic socialism who believed in the right of groups to
govern themselves, for example peasant organizations. They gained support from
sections of the peasantry and often stirred up peasant discontent. They were
one of several groups who continued the Russian revolutionary tradition of
populism, targeting their ideas at the peasantry, by far the largest social group
in Russia at the time. The Social Revolutionaries won the elections to the
Constituent Assembly but were weakened by divisions into right- and left-wing
groupings. SRs were implicated in an assassination attempt on Lenin on 20 August
1918 by Fanya Kaplan. This led to a wave of arrests of SR members.
The Mensheviks
A communist group, more moderate than the Bolsheviks. They had split from the
Bolsheviks in 1903 over differences of policy. The Mensheviks were prepared to
work with the bourgeoisie in order to bring about gradual reform. They had a
larger membership than the Bolsheviks in 1917, but they had been weakened by
their co-operation with the Provisional Government. They demanded a role in the
new Bolshevik government in the form of a coalition, which Lenin refused. Their
opposition to Bolshevik rule was weakened by divisions among their leadership.
Rival factions led by Fyodor Dan and Yuli Martov did not reunite until May 1918.
BySeptember1920, Martov had left Russia for Germany. Dan was arrested in
1921 and sent into exile.
Extend your knowledge…
Whites
Those opposed to the Bolsheviks during
the civil war of 1918–20. The Whites were
largely conservative groups within Russia
who did not want the old social order
changed. The leaders of the Whites were
generals and military leaders from the
Tsar’s armed forces.

Reds
The Bolsheviks and their supporters. The
Bolshevik forces were known as the Red Army.
Bolshevik support was made up of the
industrial workers and many peasants who saw
the Bolsheviks as the best guarantors of their
gains from the Revolution.
How did the Bolsheviks deal with the other left-
wing groups?
Other left-wing groups shared many of the socialist aims of
the Bolsheviks. As a result, groups such as the SRs and
Mensheviks hoped that they would be given a share in the new
government. Lenin made it clear that there would be no sharing
of power. Calls for a socialist coalition from the SRs and
Mensheviks, even from some leading Bolsheviks such as Lev
Kamenev, were swiftly and firmly rejected by Lenin. Leon
Trotsky, Lenin’s closest associate, had pointed out to the SRs
and Mensheviks: ‘You have played out your role. Go where you
belong: to the dustbin of history.’ Yet, for practical reasons,
some left-wing SRs did join the Bolshevik government in the
beginning. Even this small measure of co-operation did not last
long.
How did the Bolsheviks deal with the other left-
wing groups?
The SRs and the Mensheviks hoped that the calling of a parliament,
the Constituent Assembly, in January 1918 would be a chance to
regain the initiative. The Assembly was to be democratically elected
and this played to the strengths of the SRs, who were able to
mobilise their support amongst the peasantry.

The results were not in the Bolsheviks’ favour. They gained 175 seats
in the Assembly with over 9million votes, but the SRs emerged as
the largest single party with 410 seats and 21million votes. To use
the Assembly as a national parliament would clearly pose a threat to
continued Bolshevik rule. Lenin therefore dissolved the Assembly
after only one meeting and condemned it as an instrument of the
bourgeoisie. In place of the Assembly, Lenin used the All-Russian
Congress of Soviets as an instrument of popular support. It was, of
course, a body where the Bolsheviks had more influence. Not only
had Lenin ignored the calls for a socialist coalition, but he had also
ensured that there was to be no real forum for opposition.
Why was the Constituent Assembly dissolved?
Elections were held for Russia’s new parliament, the Constituent Assembly in November
1917. They were the first free elections in Russian history.
What were the results?
What do the results
suggest about the political
situation in Russia at the
beginning of 1918?
The destruction of other political
parties Theme 1: Communist government in the USSR,
1917-85

• The removal of the vote from ‘bourgeois classes’, such as employers and
priests, stripped the opposition parties of a possible reservoir of support.
• The Mensheviks and SRs found it difficult to publish their newspapers
due to restrictions imposed by the Bolsheviks.
• The left-wing SRs, who had been given a role within the Bolshevik
government in 1917 and 1918, lost all influence when they walked out of the
government in March 1918 in protest at the Bolshevik decision to pull out
of the First World War.
• In March 1918, the Bolshevik Party renamed itself the Communist Party
and, by 1921, all other parties were effectively banned.
• In April 1921, Lenin declared: ‘The place for the Mensheviks and the SRs
is in prison.’ During the first three months of 1921, 5,000 Mensheviks were
arrested. There were further waves of arrests of SR and Menshevik
supporters later in 1921 and 1922, but by this stage they had ceased to
exist as organised parties.
The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, 1918
Theme 1: Communist government in the USSR,
1917-85
The initial opposition to the Bolsheviks came
largely from the other socialist groups. This was
because the conservatives had been so shocked
by the events of October 1917 that the
implications of the revolution took some time to
sink in. The demoralised conservatives were to
find a cause of renewed outrage when Lenin put
a quick end to Russian involvement in the First
World War. Peace was concluded through the
Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (1918).
The treaty took Russia out of the war at a great
cost. Russia lost control over the Baltic States
of Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia, Finland, Ukraine
and parts of the Caucasus region. It was a
national humiliation for the conservatives,
especially for military officers who had served in
the Tsar’s army: a humiliation that could not be
tolerated. The only way to restore Russia’s pride,
and with it the reputation of the armed forces,
was to overthrow the Bolshevik regime and
reject the Treaty.
The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, 1918
Theme 1: Communist government in the USSR,
1917-85

The Treaty also provided a necessary spur to those who wished

to fight against the Bolsheviks, known as the Whites , because it
offered the promise of foreign help. The Allied powers of
Britain, France, the USA and Japan were anxious to keep Russia
in the First World War and were willing to provide arms, money
and troops to those who would ensure Russia rejoined the fight.

So why did Lenin sign the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk if it increased

opposition and the likelihood of civil war? He was aware that a
key factor in bringing about the collapse of the Tsarist regime
and the Provisional Government was the pressure of fighting the
First World War. It sapped the energy and resources of the
government, with little chance of military success. Lenin realised
that if his new government was to consolidate its hold over Russia
and deal with its internal enemies, it needed to pull out of the
war to concentrate on the job at hand.
 Treaty of
Brest-Litovsk
Key Terms
• Lost 1 million km2 land
• 50 million people
• 7% of arable land
• 74% of iron & coal
• Ukraine (grain)
• Payments (3 billion roubles =
$45million)
• Adjusted for inflation - $1.1
billion
What impact did this
have in Russia?
 How did the events of the RCW unfold?
TASK 2:
• Watch the video clip that highlights the changing front lines of the
Russian Civil War.
• How would you describe the conflict?
• What do you notice about the Whites?
• What was the role of the Central Powers?
• What do you notice about the Reds?
• What was the role of the Allied Powers and Czechoslovakia?
The Russian civil war, 1918–20
Given the ideology espoused by the Bolsheviks it was perhaps no surprise that they faced
severe opposition from the more conservative elements within Russia. Yet the groups that
supported the so-called Whites against the forces of the Bolshevik Reds encompassed rather
more than just the conservatives. The Treaty also provided a necessary spur to those who
wished to fight against the Bolsheviks, known as the Whites , because it offered the promise
of foreign help. The Allied powers of Britain, France, the USA and Japan were anxious to keep
Russia in the First World War and were willing to provide arms, money and troops to those
who would ensure Russia rejoined the fight.

This ‘White’ opposition included a range of political groups. There were those who wished to
see the return of the Tsar; liberals, including supporters of the Provisional Government;
military leaders unhappy with Russia pulling out of the First World War; national minorities
seeking independence from Russia; and members of the Menshevik and SR parties who had
been denied an involvement in the government. The Czech Legion, part of the Austro-
Hungarian Army stranded in Russia as prisoners of war, rebelled against the Reds. The Whites
also received aid from the Allies in the FirstWorld War.

Although initial opposition from the conservatives in Russia was limited, the Bolsheviks were
attacked by the forces of General Krasnov at Pulkovo Heights near Petrograd immediately
after the October Revolution. The Reds won this first encounter, but it was merely the
prelude to the civil war. After the signing of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, opposition to the
Bolsheviks mounted, resulting in a series of military campaigns. It was not until the end of
1920 that the Bolsheviks had defeated the Whites and secured communist rule over the
country.
How did the Bolsheviks win the civil war?

At the beginning of the civil war, the situation looked bleak for the
Bolsheviks. The area directly under Bolshevik control was limited to a
central core based on Moscow, stretching to Petrograd in the north-
west. They were surrounded on all sides by White forces. Nonetheless,
it was the Bolsheviks who emerged victorious. This victory was largely
achieved due to the better organization of the Reds, in military,
economic and political terms.

In contrast, the Whites were an amalgam of different groups united

only by their desire to get rid of the Bolsheviks. These divisions were
reflected in the military strategy of the Whites. Co-operation was
limited and was not helped by the long front on which the Whites
fought. The Whites did receive help from Russia's former Allies in the
First World War but, through corruption and inefficiency, they failed
to put this to good effect.
How did the Bolsheviks win the civil war?

By the end of 1920, all of the White strongholds had been defeated and Bolshevik rule
had been extended across the country. The Bolsheviks’ military strategy had been more
coherent than that of the Whites and a lot of the credit for this must go to the invaluable
work of Leon Trotsky. Trotsky, who became Commissar for War in early 1918, turned the
Red Army into an effective fighting machine. The army was formed from the Red Guard
units and pro-Bolshevik elements of the old Tsarist armed forces. Conscription was
introduced to swell the number of soldiers to over 5 million by the end of the war.
The Bolsheviks had also been able to extend government direction over the economy to
ensure resources were organised and deployed effectively through the imposition of
policies known as War Communism. Large-scale nationalisation of industry ensured
adequate supplies for the Red Army (if not for civilians) and food supplies were
requisitioned from the peasants. This latter policy was deeply unpopular with the peasants,
but it did provide enough food to keep the Red Army going. In this respect, the
experience of the civil war had encouraged the Bolsheviks to adopt a highly authoritarian
and centrally controlled system.
Nevertheless, it was not just better organisation that resulted in the Bolshevik victory.
There was also a degree of active support for what the Bolsheviks stood for, especially
from the workers who saw the Bolsheviks as the best guarantors of their gains from the
Revolution. The peasants did not like all aspects of Bolshevik rule, but the Land Decree of
1917 had guaranteed a distribution of land in their favour. Thus, the Bolsheviks did not
neglect the political dimension of the war. Their victory dealt a serious blow to any
realistic chance of enemies within Russia, threatening the new Bolshevik government.
Reasons why the Reds
won
The white armies were
spread out over Russia –
they were no co-ordinated
or united attacks on the
reds.
Trotsky was a very skilful The generals all wanted
leader motivating the troops power were jealous of each
and organizing them into a other so there was no
disciplined force.
single leader in charge.
 
The whites did not have one
unifying aim – all wanted
different things from the
civil war – religious groups
wanted religious changes
and Tsarists wanted Tsar
back in power.
Red had harsh
discipline. The Cheka
was used to terrorise
white supporters.
  Reasons why the Whites lost  
Whites failure to unite –
Reds had amazing
Deniken, Wrangle,
Bolsheviks were united in propaganda showing
Kolchak and Yudencih
their Communist revolution. Whites as controlled from
were fighting in very
  abroad.
different parts of the
country.
Reds (Bolsheviks) The white terror – the
controlled the industrial White army killed over
areas, Moscow and St 100,000 Jews and many
Petersburg and the other civilians which made
railways – so could many people support the
distribute guns and Communists in fear of the
supplies to their troops. White army. Kolchak was
  especially ruthless.
War Communism banned
The reds centred their
private trade, seized large
attacks in small areas, The Whites returned land
factories and took grain
making communication to the landowners which
from the peasants to feed
easier & united attacks angered the peasants.
the army and people in the
brought victory.  
towns.
 
The Tsar and his family
People thought the Whites
were executed so the
were being controlled by
whites had no one to take  
the foreign powers – Brits,
over power.
USA, France and Japan.
TASK 3:
• Read the consequences below.
• Label them to show whether they reflect a POLITICAL,
ECONOMIC or SOCIAL impact.
∙ It had a disastrous effect on the Russian people who were already
starving and destitute after 4 years of WW1.
∙ Many civilians were killed by both the Red and White terror – there
were 21 million deaths between 1914 – 1921.
∙ The fighting seriously effected agriculture and industry – which led
to starvation. Only 50% of the land was being farmed due to the war
and steel production was down to 5%.
∙ Starvation, dirt, poor hygiene led to disease - which led to death as
there were very few doctors.
∙ In 1921 there was a serious famine – 5 million deaths. People were
living on 30 grams of bread a day. People fled to the countryside to
find food – leaving more factories with no workers.
∙ The fact that the Reds (communists) had only just won always left
the Communists fearful of foreign countries wanting to return to
Russia to take over. This suspicious led to years of mistrust.
The key results of the civil war Theme 1: Communist government in the USSR,
1917-85

Russia’s civil war, together with the devastation and division caused by
the First World War, had a long-term impact on Russia and the Bolshevik
state that had been established in its wake.
• The Bolshevik state had become highly centralised due to the demands
of the civil war. Fighting a war required quick decision-making and
direction of resources by the government. Power was now firmly in the
hands of the governmen t(Sovnarkom ) and party leadership (politburo)
based in Moscow.
• The civil war had resulted in the Bolsheviks making extensive use of
terror against their political opponents. This set the tone for the
development of the Party after the civil war.
• The supporters of the Bolsheviks had been through a formative
experience that must have affected them deeply. This experience
seemed to reinforce militaristic values in the population. Those who
fought in the war were a generation who did not buckle under pressure
and who did not think twice about using force and terror. These
results were to be highly influential in moulding the system of
government established by the Bolsheviks.
The Tenth Party Congress, 1921
Theme 1: Communist government in the USSR,
1917-85

By the time the Bolsheviks held their Tenth Party Congress

in March 1921, the civil war was all but won and attention
could be focused on dealing with divisions within the
Bolshevik Party. The civil war had seen a huge growth in
party membership, from 300,000 at the end of 1917 to over
730,000 by 1921. This posed a threat to party stability. To
ensure conformity within the Party, a firm line was taken
against dissent. The ban on the formation of factions within
the Party was put forward by Lenin at the Congress of 1921.

This measure, known as ‘On Party Unity’, was an attempt to

impose the view of the leadership on the Party. The penalty
for those breaking this rule was expulsion from the Party.
Despite victory in the civil war, this political tightening of
the power of the Party leadership came at a time of
continuing Bolshevik anxiety over their hold over Russia. In
1921, the Bolsheviks had faced the Kronstadt Mutiny , a
revolt by sailors previously loyal to the Bolsheviks, and a
major peasant uprising known as the Tambov Rising . Clearly
the Bolsheviks could not take their position for granted.
Extend our knowledge… Theme 1: Communist government in the USSR,
1917-85

Kronstadt Mutiny (1921)

The mutiny of sailors stationed at the Kronstadt naval base against
the imposition of orders on the local soviet from the Bolshevik
government. The slogan of the mutineers was ‘Soviets without
Bolsheviks’. The mutiny was brutally crushed by the Red Army, but
the affair was a severe shock to the regime because the sailors had
previously been strong supporters of the Bolshevik Revolution.

Tambov Rising (1920–21)

A peasant uprising in the Tambov region of central Russia that was
sparked off by the arrival of Bolshevik units to requisition grain for
use in the cities and the army. The uprising was largely spontaneous
at first, but the peasants were able to build on their strength by
forming a Green Army and establishing control over a large area. It
took over 50,000 Bolshevik troops to put down the revolt.
Task 4: Knowledge check Theme 1: Communist government in the USSR,
1917-85

1. Make a list of the methods

used by the Bolsheviks to deal
with other political groups
between 1917 and 1921.

2 Which of these methods do you

think was the most important?
Explain your answer.

3 Explain how the civil war

influenced the nature of
Bolshevik government established
by 1921.
The nature of government under Lenin

The machinery of government administration had fallen into

chaos before the Bolsheviks came to power. Lenin needed to
put in place a state administration that better suited his
own revolutionary purposes. Governing a country the size of
Russia would require a clear line of authority whereby
decisions could be made and imposed on the country
effectively and quickly.

Organisations that genuinely represented the proletariat,

such as the soviets, trade unions and factory committees ,
were brought under Bolshevik control and then side-lined. A
system was devised based on representative bodies that in
theory stemmed from the All-Russian Congress of Soviets
and was headed by the Sovnarkom .
The nature of government under Lenin

• The Sovnarkom was the Council of People’s Commissars and took the
role of a cabinet of top government ministers who were, in theory,
responsible for making key decisions and giving government orders. Its
members, about
Below this20 in total,were
structure were electedand
provincial by city
the soviets
Centralmade
Executive
Committee.up It
of was a small group
representatives fromthat could
local make
soviets. quick
These decisions and it
bodies
met on aconducted
daily basis
theduring the civilof
administration war.
government at local level.
This system of government apparatus was, in principle, very
democratic, but the reality was different.
• The Central Executive Committee was a larger group elected by the
Congress of Soviets.
During Its situation
the chaotic task wasoftothe
oversee the
civil war, work
the of the
Bolsheviks
government and its
used their administration.
control over positions in the Sovnarkom to issue
orders that were merely rubber-stamped by the Congress
of Soviets and therefore imposed on the country.
• The All-Russian Congress of Soviets was the supreme law-making
body of the state. All laws issued by the Sovnarkom had to be
approved by the Congress. It was, in theory, a highly representative
body made up of members elected by local soviets, all those citizens
engaged in ‘useful work’.
Party control over the state
By the early 1920s, it was clear that the real power had shifted from this
apparatus of state towards the Party itself. The Party apparatus mirrored
that of the state.
• The Politburo was a group of seven to nine leading members of the Bolshevik Party, who
were chosen by the Party’s Central Committee to make the key decisions affecting policy. It
took over from the larger Central Committee, which quickly proved to be unmanageable when
making important decisions. The Politburo met daily under Lenin and became more important
than the Sovnarkom . Besides Lenin, leading members included Grigory Zinonviev, Lev
Kamenev, Leon Trotsky and Josef Stalin.
• The Central Committee was a group of 30–40 members chosen by the Party Congress to
represent its members. The Central Committee was supposed to make key decisions on policy
but, after 1919, power was increasingly delegated to the Politburo.
• The Party Congress was a body made up of representatives of local Party branches. It
discussed the general programme of the Party and there were fierce debates at the Ninth
and Tenth Party Congresses of 1920 and 1921. The ban on factions under the ruling On Party
Unity, which was passed in 1921, stifle debate, and the role of the Congress in influencing
policy subsequently declined. It met yearly under Lenin from 1917 and this pattern continued
until 1926.
• Below the level of Congress were local Party branches, each headed by a Party secretary.
These secretaries could be very powerful, especially those who headed branches in key cities
or provinces. Kamenev was head of the Party in Petrograd and Zinoviev in Moscow; both had
significant power bases that allowed them to play an important part in the struggle to succeed
Lenin.
Party control over the state
Thus, the Party organisations mirrored those of the state. Yet it was the
Party structure that controlled decision-making, whilst the state became
little more than an organisation of administrators. The decline of the state
was indicated by the increasing infrequency of meetings of the Congress of
Soviets, Central Executive Committee and the Sovnarkom .

When leading Bolsheviks were members of both the Politburo and the
Sovnarkom , it was the latter that they sent their deputies to. Another
sign of the relative power of state and Party was the decision in 1919 to
make the secret police directly responsible to the Politburo rather than
the Sovnarkom.
Democratic Centralism
The Bolsheviks claimed their government was based on the principle of
Democratic Centralism.
Soviets were used as bodies that represented the workers at local level.
Their wishes could be expressed through a structure of representative
organisations that would take their concerns to decision-making bodies at
the higher levels of government. Decisions could then be made in the
interests of ‘the people’ and passed down to regional and local level for
implementation.
This principle was used by the Bolsheviks, and most other communist
regimes, as evidence of their highly democratic nature. The reality was
different. The soviets had been undermined as soon as the Bolsheviks took
power. The system of ruling by decree meant that they were not involved
in decision-making. Although the soviets continued to exist they were
dominated by the Bolsheviks, who ensured that they were no longer
responsive to pressure from the workers they were supposed to represent.
Local soviets were used as part of local government, but they were firmly
in the hands of local Party bosses who gave the orders. This system turned
representative bodies into rubberstamping bodies that merely carried out
orders given by the centre.
The growing centralisation of power

If the apparatus of state was now in the hands of the Party, it was also
true that the Party was quickly placed in the hands of the Party leadership.
Power became centralised in the hands of the Politburo. The Party
leadership ensured rigid central control was exercised over the Party’s
structure and its own members.
When the Bolsheviks seized power, the party organisation was chaotic, but
the leadership was to extend its control. Local branches of the Party were
brought firmly under the control of the organisations at the centre of the
Party. To aid decision-making during the civil war, power was transferred
upwards towards the Politburo. This ensured rapid responses to constantly
changing circumstances. After the civil war, this system became
entrenched as those with power were reluctant to give it up.
The personal power of Lenin
Lenin’s official positions in government were as Chair of the Sovnarkom and as one
of the Politburo members. Lenin preferred a collective leadership whereby issues
were discussed before decisions could be made. In 1919, he dismissed all
suggestions of a personal dictatorship as ‘utter nonsense’.
Despite this, there is no doubt that Lenin was able to exercise considerable
influence by weight of his own personal authority. Many Bolsheviks looked up to
Lenin and saw him as a source of inspiration, expecting him to provide strong
leadership. When the Party was faced with difficult decisions that produced
heated debates, Lenin could bring the Party into line by making threats to resign
from his Party position. He did this over the decision to sign the Treaty of Brest-
Litovsk in 1918 and the adoption of the New Economic Policy (NEP) in 1921.
Yet, from 1922 onwards, Lenin’s power to exert influence over Party and
government was limited by severe illness. He suffered a series of strokes and his
health deteriorated. After his third stroke, in March 1923, Lenin lost the capacity
to speak except in monosyllables such as ‘ vot vot ’ (here, here) and he remained
incapacitated for the last year of his life. Lenin’s colleagues were already jockeying
for position in preparation for the struggle to succeed him. Power had been
centralised in the Party structure rather than in the personal authority of Lenin.
Several key developments were to reinforce this centralisation of power.
The growth of party bureaucracy and the
nomenklatura system
What was to aid Communist Party control was the growth of a vast party
bureaucracy . By 1921, the Bolshevik Party, now renamed the Communist
Party, was much bigger than it had been in 1917. In the absence of virtually
all other political forces, many had joined the Party to improve their
career prospects in the new regime, but they were not necessarily
committed communists.
To ensure the development of a more committed communist bureaucracy,
the Party developed the nomenklatura system . This involved drawing up
lists of approved party employees suitable for certain jobs from which
appointments could be made. This was a system that encouraged loyalty to
the Party leaders. To not be loyal was to lose your place on the list and,
with it, your chances of promotion.
It was an effective tool of centralisation administered by the General
Secretary. By 1924, the membership of the Communist Party had reached
about one million and this entailed a large organisation peopled by
administrators who were beginning to form a class in itself with its own
values and attitudes. These attitudes tended to be self-serving rather
than aimed at benefiting the industrial proletariat.
The Soviet Constitution of 1924
By 1922, the position of the Bolsheviks was strong enough to extend the control of
the Party over the outlying regions of the old Russian Empire. The tactics used by
the Bolsheviks were to send in Red Army forces whilst encouraging local Bolsheviks
to stage unrest by organising mass demonstrations and street violence. The
Constitution, which was finally established in 1924, was an important step in the
centralisation of power in the Soviet state.
The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics ( USSR ) was in theory a federal state, but
in practice it tightened the authority of the Communist Party based in Moscow. The
Party bodies in the various republics, such as Ukraine, were firmly under the
control of the central Party structure. The Soviet constitution confirmed the
power of the Communist Party in the state but did give some representation to
Party members from each of the republics. The name ‘Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics’ also emphasised the fact that this was formally a federal system. There
was no use of ‘Russia’ in the name of the new state.
However, the Russians had the advantage of sheer numbers over the national
minorities. Russia made up 90 percent of the land-area and 72percent of the
population of the new state. In addition, nearly three-quarters of the Communist
Party were Russian.
The use of terror
The hold of the Bolshevik leaders over the Party was reinforced by the use of
terror. Bolshevik terror was implemented by the Cheka, which was headed by Felix
Dzerzhinsky. It was a Party committee formed in December 1917 to deal with
counter-revolution, sabotage and speculation, and it was soon operating outside the
law. Yet it also dealt with enemies within the Party and played a key role in
establishing central control over the Party apparatus. The Cheka was based in the
Lubyanka building in Moscow. It was here that arrests were planned and prisoners
were tortured. It also carried out executions of suspects without using official
courts.

Left-wing opponents had been arrested in August 1918 after an assassination

attempt on Lenin. Waves of further arrests occurred in 1921 and 1922, known as
the Red Terror. Between 1917 and 1923, the Cheka was responsible for the
executions of up to 200,000 people. The secret police grew enormously, from
40,000 in December 1918 to 250,000 by 1921. In 1922, after the civil war, the
Cheka was replaced by the OGPU . Terror became more bureaucratic and discreet.
It also became more inward-looking. Attention was turned to groups within the
Party and large numbers were purged. There was a purge, known as a Chistka
(cleansing), in 1918 and another during the early 1920s. Under Lenin, about one-
third of the Party were purged.
The use of terror
Intimidation and purges were needed to maintain discipline and order in a
rapidly expanding Party. Therefore, intimidation was directed at elements
within the Party, such as adventurers, drunkards and hooligans. The
Bolsheviks were a minority group and, as such, fear and intimidation were
essential mechanisms for maintaining their hold on power, especially in the
circumstances of the civil war.
The fact that the use of terror continued after the civil war indicates a
lack of confidence by Bolsheviks in their hold on power. One victim was
Bim-Bom, a clown in the Moscow circus. His act included anti-Bolshevik
jokes but he was hardly a serious threat. At the end of his life, Lenin
seems to have developed an obsession over the use of terror. He showed a
particular interest in the execution of priests. This seems to indicate that
Lenin was developing his own personal agenda for the use of terror.
Degree of centralisation
Although Lenin had been able to exert considerable control over Party and state,
and develop a highly centralised system, there were limits. In a country the size of
Russia, central control did not always extend to remote areas. Government was
often chaotic and this provided opportunities for a local mafia of Bolsheviks and
black marketeers to defy Party orders from Moscow. It would also be wrong to
assume that all debate within the Party was stifled.
Both Kamenev and Zinoviev had opposed Lenin’s decision to launch the Revolution in
1917. There was a fi erce debate within the Party over whether to accept the
Treaty of Brest-Litovsk in1918. The introduction of the New Economic Policy in
1921 led to the formation of right- and left-wing factions within the Party.
The role of the trade unions was to be a source of much debate within the Party. A
Workers’ Opposition group, led by Alexander Shliapnikov and Alexandra Kollontai,
favoured a greater role for the trade unions and this was discussed at the Ninth
and Tenth Party Congresses of 1920 and 1921. Lenin took action to crush this group
but it did not prevent other groups, such as Workers’ Truth, emerging. In 1922,
Joseph Stalin was appointed General Secretary of the Party. Part of his role was to
keep an eye on potential opposition in the Party.
Degree of centralisation
Although Lenin had been able to exert considerable control over Party and state,
and develop a highly centralised system, there were limits. In a country the size of
Russia, central control did not always extend to remote areas. Government was
often chaotic and this provided opportunities for a local mafia of Bolsheviks and
black marketeers to defy Party orders from Moscow. It would also be wrong to
assume that all debate within the Party was stifled.
• Both Kamenev and Zinoviev had opposed Lenin’s decision to launch the Revolution
in 1917.
• There was a fierce debate within the Party over whether to accept the Treaty of
Brest-Litovsk in1918.
• The introduction of the New Economic Policy in 1921 led to the formation of
right- and left-wing factions within the Party.
• The role of the trade unions was to be a source of much debate within the Party.
A Workers’ Opposition group, led by Alexander Shliapnikov and Alexandra
Kollontai, favoured a greater role for the trade unions and this was discussed at
the Ninth and Tenth Party Congresses of 1920 and 1921. Lenin took action to
crush this group but it did not prevent other groups, such as Workers’ Truth,
emerging.
In 1922, Joseph Stalin was appointed General Secretary of the Party. Part of his
role was to keep an eye on potential opposition in the Party.
Conclusion
By 1924, the leadership of the Communist Party had dealt successfully with all
opposition outside its ranks as well as crushing any signifi cant dissent within its
structure. This was achieved so effectively that the Party was able to expand
enormously without sacrifi cing unity or the conformity of its members. Now the
Party was in a position where it could act as the state and govern the country
unhindered. Lenin had written about the need for a Dictatorship of the Proletariat
to guide the masses to communism, but the dictatorship established was also a
response to circumstances. The growth in the power and size of the Party was in
many cases a product of the civil war; authoritarianism and terror had seemed
necessary to ensure survival.
The Bolshevik seizure of power in 1917 underlined the importance of the idea of
the Party as a vanguard of the Revolution, but the exercise of power raised issues
over interpreting the idea of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. The Bolsheviks
claimed that all of their actions – seizing the means of production, using violence
and terror, establishing a centralised, authoritarian regime – were in the interests
of the proletariat, but it became clear that the Revolution was in danger of
becoming a dictatorship of the Communist Party. By the mid-1920s many Bolshevik
supporters had become disillusioned at the lack of real gains for the proletariat
whilst the state, far from withering away, became a vast bureaucracy that seemed
to be running the country for its own benefit.
Knowledge check
Theme 1: Communist government in the USSR,
1917-85

Lenin’ control over the Party

1) Explain how the following were used to
centralise power in the Communist Party:
a. the nomenklatura system
b. the Soviet Constitution, 1922
c. the use of terror.
2) Which of these methods of
centralisation do you think was the most
important? Justify your answer.
3) How much power did Lenin have over
the Communist Party?
4) What gave Lenin power over the
Communist Party?