opposition: The nature of government

Question 1

overview of opposition from political parties throughout the course

Answer 1

Prior to 1905 political parties were illegal under the Autocratic Tsarist system. Where they did emerge, they tended to be one of two groups: either radical revolutionaries, often using tactics such as terrorism; or pressure groups calling for reforms. Between 1905-1917 they were legalised and tolerated, to an extent, but they were also marginalised when genuine opposition was expressed. During the Provisional Government political parties worked in coalition as part of the Progressive Bloc. After 1921 only one Party was legal: the CPSU. The others had been repressed brutally in the Civil War. However, ‘internal party opposition’ continued in the Communist era.

Question 2

political party opp. to A2

Answer 2

populists

Question 3

who were the populists

Answer 3

Populists were people [usually in the intelligentsia] who claimed to represent the interests of the ordinary people. Their leading proponents, Herzen, Lavrov, and Chernyshevsky all assumed that the Russian masses were eager to overthrow their Tsarist oppressors.

Question 4

motivations of the populists

Answer 4

They assumed that a form of rural/agrarian socialism was their preferred style of government. The populists believed the Mir, the unique peasant commune which organised village life in a collectivist manner predisposed the Russian peasantry to socialism. They thought the commune would provide the route to a ‘good’ society without the evils of capitalism and industrialisation.

The start of significant populist opposition can be dated back to Alexander II’s reforms. Groups generally felt ‘let down’ by the limited nature of reforms, most notably the unwillingness to reform the Tsarist system.

Ironically, the reforms themselves actually helped the populists. Due to the reduction in censorship revolutionaries were able to publish more radical texts. Chernyshevsky was able to publish, In 1863, a novel what is to be done? The novel followed the story of a young student who lived an ascetic lifestyle, practiced body-building, and prepared for the coming revolution. The book inspired many, including Lenin.

Similarly, the greater freedoms universities were granted meant that the populist movement was extremely popular amongst students.

Question 5

methods of the populists

Answer 5

* 1874- ‘going to the narod’ [people] movement. Lavrov’s teachings inspired approximately 4,000 university students and lecturers [the intelligentsia] to disperse to the Russian countryside with the aim of educating and encouraging the peasants to join a revolution. The intelligentsia’s message was not well received by the peasants. By 1877 around 1,000 revolutionaries had been reported to state officials by the peasants and arrested.
* 1876 – formation of Land and Liberty. Land and Liberty brought the Narodnik movement under a centralised ‘party’. Land and Liberty formed ‘cells’ in towns and cities.** It’s declared aim was to inspire revolution and the establishment of agrarian socialism. **
* In 1879 the populist movement split into two camps primarily over the issue of tactics:

1. Firstly there was the ‘peaceful’ group known as Black Repartition which sought to continue the Narodnik mission of* educating and encouraging* the peasants.
2. Secondly, there was a more violent populist wing known as the People’s Will. The People’s Will believed the peasants belief in a divinely-ordained Tsar could only be broken by illustrating that it was wrong. Hence, they *believed by assassinating the Tsar, the peasants would be inspired to achieve a revolution. *

Question 6

effectivenesss of the populists

Answer 6

Overall the populist movement had a significant impact on the reign of Alexander II, most significantly with his** assassination in 1881**.

Yet, the populist movement failed in their broader aim of inspiring a revolution. The ‘to the narod’ movement failed catastrophically and undermined their message of being ‘for the people’. Furthermore, their actions stopped the reforming nature of Tsarism and returned Tsarism to repression.** During Alexander III’s reign the People’s Will was repressed effectively. The *Statute of State Security allowed the Okhrana to arrest people arbitrarily, and those associated with the People’s Will were targeted. There were **10,000 arrests in 1881*. After 1881 the group effectively died along with those who were hanged for assassinating Alexander II. **
Perhaps their most significant issues was their divisions: political parties or movements are rarely effective when they are divided over their aims and methods – this is something Lenin certainly recognised.

Geoffrey Hosking, the author of A History of the Soviet Union (1985), wrote that ultimately the efforts of the People Will ended in failure: “In 1881 it actually succeeded in assassinating the Emperor Alexander II. But setting up a different regime, or even putting effective pressure on Alexander’s successor - that proved beyond their capacities. Their achievement pyrrhic victory: all it produced was more determined repression.”

Question 7

political party opp to N2

Answer 7

SD’s
SR’s

Question 8

who were the SR’s

Answer 8

The Socialist Revolutionaries were, in terms of their methods and broad beliefs, a revived Populist movement. They formed the party illegally in 1901. Their organisation and was very loose by comparison with the Bolsheviks, and they were not such sticklers for doctrinal purity. Their movement was so broad, in fact, that it is hard to characterise except in terms of one generally accepted belief: the peasants would be the deliverers of revolution, rather than the workers. They believed in agrarian socialism – the notion that land should be redistributed to the peasantry.

Question 9

the 2 branches to the SR’s

Answer 9

1. black partition
2. people’s will

Question 9

what was the terroristic section of the SR’s

Answer 9

the SR combat organisation

Question 10

how successful were the SR combat organisation +exampkles

Answer 10

was** remarkably successful,** and provided the movement with publicity. In the first years of the twentieth century, it was responsible for a large number of assassinations them high-profile: Plehve, the Interior Minister (1904), and Grand Duke Sergei (1905), the tsar’s uncle, were among the victims. They assassinated a **remarkable 2,000 government officials between 1901-1905. **

Question 11

successfullness of the SR’s

election

Answer 11

the SRs achieved enough support by 1917 to gain in that year the majority of votes in a national election. The way they achieved this popular support was by supporting peasants and helping them achieve their goals. It was with SR leadership that peasants began targeting landlords in about 1905.

Question 13

The impact of the SRs on developments

Answer 13

is surprisingly small, given the level of popular support they eventually achieved. Being focused on peasants, whose interests are naturally associated with the country rather than the all-important urban centres, their role in shaping revolutions was always doomed to be relatively small. In and about 1905, their biggest contribution, if it can be called that, was to assassinate leading members of the establishment. Occasionally this did have an impact on developments. **The assassination of the unpopular Plehve in 1904, for example, gave the Liberals an opportunity to press their agenda, with some success. **

Question 14

overall effectiveness of the SR’s

Answer 14

There is no doubt that the SRs caused the authorities very serious trouble, but this in itself doesn’t mean they were particularly promising as revolutionaries. The terrorist branch had to be treated as a powerful threat, and much of the Okhrana’s energies were absorbed in trying to infiltrate the movement and predict its actions

Question 15

who were the SD’s

Answer 15

The Social Democrats formed in 1898 by Plekhanov, inspired by Marxism. Their cause was to encourage the growing working class to become class conscious – ie. Aware of their exploitation under the capitalist system – and in the long term to inspire revolution. Yet, this aim extraordinarily challenging. Few working men had the time and inclination to master Marxist theory, and there was a wide cultural gap between them and their instructors.

Question 16

divisions in SD’s

Answer 16

. By 1903 it was split in two camps: Bolsheviks and Mensheviks

Question 17

mensheviks view

Answer 17

Martov advocated economism - the view that Marx had been wrong about the future course of human development. Instead of fighting for a proletarian revolution, the movement should fight to improve workers’ conditions, support the liberals’ attempts to achieve a constitution, and eventually strive to use constitutional developments to bring about socialism

Question 18

bolshevik view [lenin]

Answer 18

by the early 1900s, Lenin had developed a vision for the movement which was different enough from classic Marxism that it would later be given a distinct name: Marxism-Leninism (sometimes also called Bolshevism). He set out this vision in his 1902 book, What Is To Be Done? He argued in favour ‘system change’ rather than minor reforms and believed a revolution to be the only way of achieving this. With that in mind, the party needed to be composed of professional dedicated revolutionaries –** the vanguard. **

Question 19

what is the vanguard

Answer 19

professional dedicated revolutionaries

Question 20

overalll successfullness of marxist movement under tsars

Answer 20

With these internal disagreements, the Russian Marxist movement was utterly ineffective in the Tsarist period. They had no major influence on the Dumas, no influence in either 1905 or the February 1917 revolution. Indeed, the state’s repression of them had been successful. The party had been infiltrated by Okhrana double-agents and Lenin was in exile. Furthermore, they had failed to convince the masses.** SD membership actually decreased from 20,000 in Ukraine in 1906 to just 200 in 1912**. In Moscow it decreased from 7500 to 40 over the same period.

Question 21

who were the liberals

Answer 21

The Liberals were not a very cohesive group, but they can be defined as groups and people who sought to reform the Tsarist system peacefully by encouraging the Tsar to rule in a manner more similar to Western countries. They were known as ‘Westernisers’. Although classic Liberalism involves commitments to principles such as the right to property, freedom of speech, civic freedoms, democracy etc., Russian Liberals of the tsarist period were** only really united in their commitment to non-violence** and a general sense that tsarism needed at least to be restrained by the advice of respectable sections of society.

Question 22

origination of the liberals

Answer 22

Liberal opposition initially originated in the Zemstva [the local government]. The Zemstva called for** political reform **in 1895, but Nicholas rejected this in his ‘senseless dreams’ speech. The speech expressed Nicholas’ “firm and unflinching” devotion to the “principle of autocracy” in a manner similar to his father’s Manifesto of Unshakable Autocracy in 1881. Frustrated by the lack of progress liberals form the ‘Union of Liberation’ 1904 (an illegal union publishing newspapers). It called for the **replacement of Tsarism with a constitutional monarchy. **

Question 23

division of the liberals during 1905 revolution

Answer 23

the Kadets and the Octobrists.

Question 24

sucessfullness of the liberals

Answer 24

The liberals did **gain a significant concession** from the Tsar:** the October Manifesto**. The introduction of a national Parliament in the Duma and the legalisation of political parties *marked a significant liberal reform*. Yet they** failed to fundamentally change Tsarism**. Furthermore, within the **Dumas the parties had minimal impact**. After voicing their opposition to the Fundamental Laws,*** many leading Kadets were barred from the Dumas*** – clear evidence of failure even though they were now elected representatives. However, it is worthwhile noting that the **liberals would later make up the key members of the Provisional Government. **

Question 25

summary pf political party to the Tsars

Answer 25

*** **Opposition was divided between reformers / revolutionaries as well as moderates / radicals within the movements. *** **Opposition was ineffective in that it failed to achieve its aims. *** **Alexander III’s repression was effective in removing political parties. *** **Nicholas II’s introduction of the Duma ‘contained’ opposition and generally made parties less violent *** **The secret police were effective in their repression of these groups.

Question 26

who was the political party opp to the PG

Answer 26

bolsheviks

Question 27

why did bolsheviks dominate opposition to the PG

Answer 27

* The ‘Progressive Bloc’ which made up the Provisional Government was a broad coalition of Kadets, Octobrists, Progressists, SRs, Mensheviks, Trudoviks. **The Bolsheviks were the only real opposition from the left. ** * The Bolsheviks were the **most vocal critics **of the Provisional Government. The Provisional government was relatively moderate, pursuing policies which** did not really represent ‘revolutionary’ change one might expect after regime change**. For instance they made no attempt to redistribute land or end the War. The **Bolsheviks campaigned for Bread, peace, and land’ and ‘all power to the Soviets’** – proposals in opposition to Provisional Government policies. * **Lenin’s April Theses** condemned the Provisional Government for being ‘bourgeois’.

Question 28

3 strengsth of the bolsheviks against the PG

Answer 28

1. Firstly, The Bolsheviks had grown enormously. In **1914** membership was approximately **10,000** nationally. By October **1917** it had reached **250,000**. As a result, the October revolution was made possible. Support had been gained by Lenin’s genuinely popular policy proposals. 2. Furthermore, the Bolsheviks **gained control of the Petrograd Garrison in October 1917**. By October 20th the Petrograd Garrison had **pledged allegiance to Trotsky’s Military Revolutionary Committee** – the precursor to the Red Army. With this the Bolsheviks had approximately **150,000 soldiers under their control. ** 3. Secondly, unlike any other party before this stage, the **Bolsheviks were highly centralised and under the control of an able politician: Lenin**. Lenin managed to convince a reluctant party to pursue an insurrection in a ten-hour meeting on the 10th of October. In the meeting the Bolshevik Party’s Central Committee are convinced by Lenin that an insurrection was desirable, but internal resistance continued. The vote was ten in favour and two opposed. Zinoviev & Kamenev still thought the course of actions was too risky. Nevertheless, **Lenin had convinced his party of the need for a further revolution an, under the principle of democratic centralism, they followed his orders. **

Question 29

two types of opposition to the communists

Answer 29

1. internal 2. external

Question 30

most significant opposition under the commi

Answer 30

internal. external could only operate prior to 1921.

Question 31

who was external opp to commi

Answer 31

the white's

Question 32

who were the whites

Answer 32

was the white armies in the Civil War, 1918-21. They were composed of a variety of individuals from a variety of backgrounds and political leanings. In their midst they had former tsarist, military commanders, and also other political parties. Their primary motivation for opposing Communism was their ideological stance. They were **predominantly Anti-Bolshevik**. Yet, they *presented no clear alternative to Communism and had no clear leadership structure*. This can primarily be explained by the fact that the ‘**whites’ were a coalition of pro-monarchists, socialists, republicans, capitalists, and peasants. **

Question 33

3 reasons the whites emerged

Answer 33

* **The October Revolution, 1917** and the establishment of a One-Party Dictatorship. * **Lenin’s dissolution of the Constituent Assembly in January 1918**. Lenin *refused to acknowledge the legitimacy of the constituent assembly where the SRs won 40% of the vote*. The parties who sat here – SRs, Mensheviks, Kadets, etc became part of the Whites. * **Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.** The peace with Germany which sparked the Civil War was a costly one for Russia:* Lenin had effectively dismantled the Russian Empire and given up most of Russia’s land.* Those involved in the army and the Provisional Government were opposed to this settlement.

Question 34

effectiveness of the whites

Answer 34

In terms of their effectiveness, they had **little real impact**. To the Communists, the Whites were counter-revolutionaries harking back to a pre-Revolutionary past. There could be no room for negotiation or compromise and so a bloody Civil War and repression. **The Communist Red Army effectively crushed the ‘Whites’ in the Civil War**. The Red Army was effectively organised by Trotsky who was able to re-introduce conscription effectively. In ***October 1918 the Red Army had over 450,000 men, the Whites never had more than 250,000***, despite having support from a number of foreign countries, including Britain. Crucially, too, t**he whites were divided militarily, geographically, and politically**. Unlike the Reds, the whites had **no coherent leadership** and were effectively an alliance of geographically distinct former Tsarist armies. This severely limited their opportunity for success.

Question 35

hwo did lenin removed external opp

Answer 35

instituted a ruthless policy of ‘Red Terror’ in order to reinforce communist authority and eradicate opposition. Red Terror was carried out by the Cheka, Lenin’s secret police. In essence Red Terror was a policy of mass repression in order to rule by fear

Question 36

what was involved in the red terror

Answer 36

*** Mass execution**. Between **500,000-1,000,000** executions for bourgeois activity (for instance, withholding grain, selling private goods, involvement in non-communist parties, working as merchants, having aristocratic titles, refusing to give up land, refusing communist orders, etc). *** Gulags.** Suspicious people arrested and put in gulags (forced labour camps) *** Torture.** Gruesome stories of the use of torture. For instance, in Kharkov there are stories of the Cheka putting victim’s hands in boiling water until the skin peeled off. In Kiev, victims were tied down whilst heated cages of rats were placed around their body. Once the rats cages became hot they would begin to eat their way through the victim’s body. * Cheka expansion.** By 1921 the Cheka employed 143,000 people. **

Question 37

divisions under lenin | internal opp

Answer 37

*** ‘Left communists’** who regarded the *Treaty of Brest-Litovsk* [i.e. peace with Germany] as a *threat to party purity*. They sought to promote international proletariat revolution across Europe. *** ‘Worker’s opposition’** who believed *workers were not receiving just rewards for their involvement in the revolution*. Sought trade union freedoms and more autonomy for the workers.

Question 38

methods of internal opp under lenin

Answer 38

Internal opponents **used legitimate means to call for change**. They held debates within the party’s framework. For instance**, Trotsky opposed the Brest-Litovsk Treaty** and the central committee supported him 9 to 7 (only for Lenin to over-ride their vote). **Worker’s opposition called for change in the Tenth Party Congress in 1921**.

Question 39

effectiveness of internal opp under lenin

Answer 39

opposition was **not effective**. The party was too tightly controlled by the elites around Lenin for a significant shift in party policies. Furthermore, the **Politburo’s ‘ban on factions’, 1921 meant that once the party’s elite had made a decision there would be no room for debate or compromise**. Also, the **party purged around 200,000 party members** who were deemed ideologically impure (‘radishes’) in 1922.

Question 40

what are the phases under the power struggle

Answer 40

1924-25: the defeat of trotsky 1926-27: defeat of left opposition 1928-29: defeat of right opposition

Question 41

when was the defeat of trotksy | stages of the power struggle

Answer 41

1924-25

Question 42

when was the defeat of left opposition | stages of the power struggle

Answer 42

1926-1927

Question 43

when was the defeat of right opposition | stages of the power struggle

Answer 43

1928-29

Question 44

events of 'the defeat of trotsky'

Answer 44

**January. **Lenin dies. Stalin gives Trotsky the incorrect date of the funeral, leaving Stalin to feature heavily in photographs and give the funeral oration.The Troika develops – an alliance between Zinoviev, Kamenev, and Stalin. Its purpose was to combat the rise of Trotsky, whom they all disliked. **November. **Trotsky proposes democratisation and criticises the bureaucratisation of the party. His motion is defeated by the Triumvirate bloc in the Central Committee. Trotsky is unable to appeal against the votes due to the ‘Ban on Factions’. **January 1925.** Trotsky publishes ‘Lessons of October’ criticising Zinoviev and Kamenev for their opposition to Lenin on a number of occasions. Zinoviev and Kamenev had, for instance, opposed the October Revolution in 1917 and Trotsky is keen to remind people that he was in favour of it and played a crucial role. Stalin, however, is not mentioned, playing to his advantage. **December.** Trotsky is removed from his position as Commissar of War by the Politburo which is dominated by the Troika. **December**. 14th Party Congress. Zinoviev and Kamenev opposed the NEP and advocated large scale industrialisation. Stalin announced doctrine of Socialism in One Country – the Triumvirate split as Kamenev and Zinoviev disagreed with Stalin’s proposal. They turn towards Trotsky’s idea of Permanent Revolution. Bukharin backed Stalin after Stalin outlines support for the NEP. Kamenev and Zinoviev were defeated by Stalin and Bukharin over the NEP and Socialism in One Country.

Question 45

events of 'the defeat of left opposition'

Answer 45

1926 -- Zinoviev and Kamenev join Trotsky to form the left-wing ‘United Opposition’ to Stalin. They attempt to organise mass opposition and promote demonstrations in Moscow. **December:** 15th Party Congress. Stalin accuses Zinoviev, Kamenev, and Trotsky of ‘factionalism’ and** prevents open opposition to his policies using the Ban on Factions Decree**. Zinoviev is removed from the Politburo, Kamenev is removed from the Central Committee, and both Zinoviev and Trotsky are banned from the Party. The ‘United Opposition’ collapses.

Question 46

event of 'the defeat of right opposition'

Answer 46

**1928:** Stalin rejects the NEP, turning against Bukharin. Stalin announces a new left-leaning economic policy which includes grain requisitioning and collectivisation, marking a deviation from the NEP. **1929:** **February.** Trotsky deported to Constantinople. **April**. Bukharin removed as editor of Pravda. **November.** Stalin accuses Bukharin, Rykov and Tomsky of being ‘Right Deviationists’. Bukharin, Tomsky, and Rykov removed from the Politburo. **December.** Stalin celebrated 50th birthday as the undisputed leader of the Soviet Union.

Question 47

why did stalin defeat internal opp in the power struggle

Answer 47

* Stalin was **ideologically pragmatic**, willing to change platform – e.g. on the NEP he started against, then campaigned for it, then went against it * Stalin used **the Ban on Factions Decree to remove opposition ** * Internal opposition was divided between the ‘left’ – Zinoviev, Kamenev – and ‘right’ – Bukharin, Rykov, Tomsky.

Question 48

internal opp under stalin

Answer 48

In the early 1930s, while Stalin was clearly in-power he did not have control over some aspects of the party such as the Central Committee. **The power struggle illustrated the party’s divisions on ideological terms and also highlighted that many were concerned by the individual of Stalin. ** Extent to which opposition existed within the party in the early-to-mid 1930s is questionable, and so understanding their motivations is difficult. While opposition was evident during the Power Struggle, **the Ban on Factions limited to opportunities for party members to directly criticise Stalin or his policie**s. Indeed, during the Purges and Great Terror it is very likely that Stalin exaggerated the extent of real opposition in order to gain complete supremacy over the party or to identify ‘scapegoats’ for failed policies. However, it is without question that internal opposition did exist during the early 1930s

Question 49

examples of internall opp under stalin

Answer 49

*** ‘Old Bolsheviks’**. Long standing party members *questioned both Stalin’s leadership and policies*. In **1932 ‘old Bolsheviks’ met under the co-ordination of Smirnov at which they debated the removal of Stalin**. Also in 1932, Ryutin (a member of the ‘Right’ of the party) denounced Stalin’s policies (collectivisation) and personality on the grounds that he was the "the gravedigger of the Revolution" and "the evil genius of the Party and the revolution". The document – Ryutin Platform - called for the removal of Stalin by force * **Trotsky** in exile *wrote the book **Revolution Betrayed** in **1936***. In the book he described the Stalinist system as abandoning the principles of 1917 as a result of the bureaucratisation he had introduced. Trotsky claimed this was creating a new class conflict between the masses [peasants/workers] and the Party [bureaucrats]. Trotsky believes a new revolution was now ‘inevitable’. * John Arch Getty in The Road to Terror [1999] argued that Trotsky was in contact with middle-ranking CPSU members in the early 1930s and argues there was some credibility to the notion of a Trotsky/Zinoviev plot to oust Stalin.

Question 50

effectiveness of internal opp under stalin

Answer 50

Regardless of the extent of internal opposition, it **was thoroughly ineffective**.Stalin’s purges eradicated outward opposition to his rule. **A large number of high-profile Communists were arrested** under such charges including Kamenev, Zinoviev, and Bukharin. These individuals were then forced to **undergo Show Trials** where, after considerable torture the accused person would ‘admit’ their crimes to the public and then be executed. **The Show Trials were important because they had ‘legal’ confessions which ‘proved’ the victims’ guilt.** Furthermore, they did actually convince a lot of people that not only were there plotters everywhere, but that these dangerous people were being dealt with by Stalin, thus saving the USSR and justifying his actions. **Approximately 1 million people were killed between 1936-38**. **After the Great Purge, those bureaucrats Stalin had appointed to conduct it were themselves purged.** 1939 Yezhov, the former head of the NKVD who had been responsible for most of the events above, was now the target of a Stalinist purge himself and accused an ‘enemy of the people’. **After torture and ‘admitting’ his guilt, Yezhov was executed along with around 20,000 of his NKVD comrades**. At the 1934 17th Party Congress,** 80% of the delegates had joined the Bolsheviks before 1920; at the 1939 18th Party Congress, only 20% of the delegates had joined before 1920** – the party had become thoroughly Stalinist. That meant that Stalin had transformed the composition of the party through the Purges. Therefore, during the 1930s internal opposition had very minimal effectiveness.

Question 51

divisions under khrushchev

Answer 51

1. liberal reformers 2. stalin loyalists

Question 52

who were liberal reformers | divisions under khrushchev

Answer 52

1. khrushchev 2. bulganin 3. mikoyan

Question 53

who were stalin loyalists | divisions under khrushchev

Answer 53

1. molotov 2. malenkov 3. kaganovich

Question 54

when did they divisions occur | divisions under khrushchev

Answer 54

**These splits in the party came through after the Secret Speech in January 1956**. While Khrushchev had significant support for his de-Stalinisation agenda, Stalinists in the party attempted to remove Stalin from power.

Question 55

what did the stalin loyalist do and how were they dealt with | under khrushchev

Answer 55

In **1957** Stalinists (who became known as the anti-party group for their opposition to Khrushchev’s pro-party policies) *attempted to remove Khrushchev from power.* T**hey voted for his removal in the Presidium whilst he was on a state visit to Finland**. However, **Khrushchev asked for a second vote in the Central Committee and Khrushchev won**. The anti-party group was **expelled** and Khrushchev’s supporters (including Marshall Zhukov) were promoted.

Question 56

other opposition under khrushchev

Answer 56

In October **1964** a **party coup removed Khrushchev from power whilst on holiday in the Georgia**. Khrushchev was on holiday in Georgia when he received an urgent call to return to Moscow. Upon his return, **Khrushchev was forced by Brezhnev and his allies to sign a letter of resignation.** Brezhnev was formerly a Khrushchev loyalist and had himself been promoted by Khrushchev.

Question 57

why was opposition successful in 1964 and not 1957

Answer 57

- **‘Hardliners’ felt that Khrushchev was weakening the Soviet Union by moving away from Stalin’s more hard-line approach**. There was a sense of decline beginning to set in and hard-liners blamed this on Khrushchev’s reforms, feeling he had gone ‘too far’. However, this alone was not enough – **in 1957 he still had the support of the party elite in spite of the attempted coup. ** - However, these divisions were not new – they had existed since at least the Secret Speech. The difference between 1957 and 1964 was that in the former date,** Khrushchev had genuine popular support from the party and this sustained his leadership. By 1964 disillusionment with Khrushchev’s rule and his policies meant that few were sad to see him go.**

Question 58

overall summary of internal opposition to commi

Answer 58

* Factions were ever-present during all Communist periods of rule. * Internal opposition was** most effective in opposing Khrushchev,** largely due to his unwillingness to conduct mass purges as part of de-Stalinisation * **Stalin** and **Lenin** were willing to use **purges to remove internal opposition to the Communists**. Stalin’s purges were more violent and extensive than Lenin’s, however.

Question 59

opposition to tsars was most effective:

Answer 59

*** People’s Will assassinating Alexander II in 1881**. Yet, this was a ‘pyrrhic victory’ representing ***only a partial achievement of their aims***. They did not inspire a revolution after the assassination and were repressed brutally by Alexander III after. *** The Socialist Revolutionaries were effective in their assassinations of various officials before 1905**. a large number of them high-profile: Plehve, the Interior Minister (1904), and Grand Duke Sergei (1905), the tsar’s uncle, were among the victims. They assassinated a remarkable 2,000 government officials between 1901-1905. Also, **SRs won a majority in the 1918 election to the Consituent assembly**. * **Liberals** achieved a major concession in the 1905 **revolution of establishing the Duma and legal political opposition in the form of a legalisation of political parties. **

Question 60

opposition to tsars was least effective:

Answer 60

* The **‘going to the people movement’ in 1870s **– peasants report intellectuals to the police. * **Marxist SDs were infiltrated by the Okhrana.** Lenin was exiled. They had no role in 1917. * The People’s Will were destroyed during Alexander III’s reign. **The Statue of State Security led to 10,000 arrests. **

Question 61

opposition to commi was least effective:

Answer 61

*** External opposition performed poorly.** *The Whites in the Civil War were defeated by the Reds*. After 1921 there were no other political parties operating in Russia. * Internal Opposition to Lenin was repressed. His **‘Ban on Factions’ in 1921** prevented opposition to policies such as the NEP.** The Raddish purge of 1922 kicked 200,000 people out of the party. ** * Internal opposition to Stalin. **The Purges and Terror in the 1930s wiped out opposition** from within the party to Stalin. * Anti-Party group **failed to topple Khrushchev in 1957**

Question 62

opposition to commi was most effective:

Answer 62

* Internal opposition against Khrushchev. Brezhnev and the Stalinist Hardliners **succeeded in overthrowing Khrushchev in 1964. ** (however, this opposition was limited because it was internal – they agreed with the party and were communists).

Question 63

most successful opposition across the whole period?

Answer 63

bolsheviks against PG

Question 64

chnages in opposition

Answer 64

* Shift from external to internal opposition in 1921 * Aims – o Populists, 1870s-1921 o Liberals – 1890s-1921 o Marxists – 1898-1964 * Bolsheviks most effective in opposing the Provisional Government

Question 65

continuites in opposition

Answer 65

* Most failed to achieve their aims * External opposition banned, 1855-1905 , 1921-1954 * The most repressive rulers combated opposition effectively. E.g. Alexander III, Stalin, Lenin * Divided opposition groups failed

Question 66

role of peasants in opposition

Answer 66

* Many peasants were apathetic / ignorant towards political change but cared deeply about issues relating to their village such as land ownership, food, and pay. * Peasants often acted independently of political parties * They tended to be unorganised and dispersed when acting in opposition, this limited their effectiveness

Question 67

reason for peasnt unrest

Answer 67

1. Land distribution [the belief they were entitled to the land they worked]. In particular they felt Emancipation failed to provide them with land and Collectivisation also took their land away from them. 2. Access to food [the belief they were deserving of the food they produced]. State requisitioning by both Tsars and Communists caused discontent.

Question 68

nature of opposition of revolts pre-1855 | peasants

Answer 68

Russian leaders **feared peasant opposition** since the large scale Pugachev Revolt of 1773-75 calling for the end of serfdom. More recently, **since 1800 there had been 1,467** officially recorded serf revolts

Question 69

effectiveness of revolts pre-1855 | peasants

Answer 69

Alexander II famously stated in 1856 that Emancipation should come from ‘above’ not ‘from below’. In these words, the Tsar appeared to indicate that without Emancipation peasants would rise up and overthrow the entire social and political system themselves. In this sense Emancipation of the Serfs was partly inspired by the need to appease peasants and represents an achievement of peasant opposition.

Question 70

nature of opposition: emanicipation, 1861 | peasants

Answer 70

Emancipation launched a wave of revolts due to unhappiness with the terms of Emancipation. In particular, peasants were unhappy with having to pay redemption payments to their former owners.

Question 71

effectiveness of revolts due to emancipation | peasants

Answer 71

**Limited** – revolts were crushed by the army. One revolt involved 10,000 peasants, and approximately 200 peasants were killed. **Land Captains were introduced by Alexander III to control the peasants in the 1890s**. By **1900** there were **2,000 land captains** tasked with managing the peasants and maintaining order. Yet, between 1900-1907 the peasants resorted to land appropriation, theft, and incendiary, usually against noble landowners.

Question 72

nature of opposition of black earth region revolts 1906-7 | peasants

Answer 72

Revolts continued in the countryside in the form of peasant vigilantism

Question 73

effectiveness of black earth region revolts 1906-7 | peasants

Answer 73

Stolypin dealt with them through a combination of repression and reform. Repression involved: Stolypin’s neckties –martial law and executions of peasants. Over 2,000 people were killed in these acts. Yet, the peasants did gain concessions through Stolypin’s reforms which involved the abolishment of redemption payments and expansion of private land

Question 74

nature of opposition of events in ww1 | peasants

Answer 74

Peasant unrest due to high food prices and lack of land reform. Land seizures – 1917.

Question 75

effectiveness of opposition to events in ww1 | peasants

Answer 75

During the Provisional Government’s time, peasants seized land in 1917 from landowners. This represented a revolution in the countryside and significant shifts in land ownership. However, this was only temporary as after the October Revolution Lenin would nationalise land.

Question 76

nature of opposition to civil war | peasants

Answer 76

Peasants** sometimes fought for the Red, sometimes for the Whites**, and sometimes for their own interests as ‘greens’. War Communism involving grain requisitioning caused *peasant opposition* – in particular **the large Tambov and Volga revolts of 1920.**

Question 77

when was the civil war in russia

Answer 77

1918-1921

Question 78

efeectiveness of opposition to civil war | peasants

Answer 78

Lenin initially used repression to deal with the revolts. The Red Army were involved in Grain Requisitioning whilst the Red Terror was used to dissuade ‘bourgeois’ activity such as the withholding of grain. Yet, by 1921 Lenin recognised the need for concessions and so the 1921 New Economic Policy conceded the right of peasants to make profits.

Question 79

nature of opposition to collectivisation | peasants

Answer 79

Much resistance to joining collective farms. Peasants resisted by slaughtering their livestock and refusing to join farms.

Question 80

effectiveness of opposition to collectivasation | peasants

Answer 80

in March 1930 they were partially successful as Stalin gave them the right to ‘opt-out’ of Collectivisation. By June just 24% were collectivised, the rest had gone back home. Yet this was temporary success as the peasants were forced back into Collectives and by World War Two 90% were Collectivised. Harsh repression forced peasants to comply. Stalin’s use of the army was an attempt to force these resistant Kulaks to join collective farms, often brutally. Kulak resisters were placed in three categories: 1. Counter-revolutionaries to be shot [21,000 in 1931], 2. active opponents of the policy to be deported to Gulags [390,000 in 1931], and 3. Collectivisation resisters who were forced into collective farms [400,000 in 1931].

Question 81

peasant opposaition under K

Answer 81

Little peasant opposition during Khrushchev’s reign because he was deeply interested in peasants and sought to improve their standing. Khrushchev’s Virgin Land Campaign, however, had limited success.

Question 82

continuities of peasnt opposaition | causes

Answer 82

* Cause of revolts were consistently issues over land and food. For instance, the peasants were unhappy with the terms of Emancipation, particularly their redemption payments and the issue of ‘cut-offs’. Likewise, peasants resisted Emancipation because they were being forced off their land and forced into Collective farms. * Likewise, peasants resisted grain requisitioning from the Tsars in World War One and from the Bolsheviks in the Civil War.

Question 83

continuities of peasnt opposaition | [repression]

Answer 83

* Alex II used army * Alex III used land captains * Nicholas used ‘Stolypin’s neckties’ * Lenin – Red Army/red terror * Stalin – harsh repression

Question 84

peasant opp was most effective:

Answer 84

*** Alexander II **– *Emancipation was partly a response to concerns about peasant uprisings*. Alexander stated “reform from above to prevent a revolution from below”. *** Nicholas II’s** reign in gaining land reform concessions from Stolypin. In particular they managed to** end the collection of Redemption Payments. ** * During the Provisional Government in 1917 they seized land from nobles * The Tambov and Volga revolts helped to achieve a concession from Lenin in the form of the NEP, 1921. * Temporary success in opposing the initial phase of Collectivisation in 1929-30; but only for 1 year.

Question 85

peasant opp was least effective:

Answer 85

*** Stalin’s brutal enforcement of Collectivisation was harsh but effective in achieving his aims**. Peasant resistance to collectivisation was split into three categories - **1. Counter-revolutionaries to be shot *[21,000 in 1931]*, 2. active opponents of the policy to be deported to Gulags *[390,000 in 1931]*, and 3. Collectivisation resisters who were forced into collective farms *[400,000 in 1931]*.** * Opposition to Alexander II after Emancipation. * Alexander III’s use of land captains means the countryside is contained in the 1880s and 1890s * Few problems in Khrushchev’s reign and stability in the countryside.

Question 86

nature of workers | opposition

Answer 86

* Workers are those employed in urban settings, such as factory workers, or those producing raw minerals, such as miners. * Despite being fewer than peasants for most of the period, they were geographically more concentrated. A general strike by lots of workers had the power to close down cities. * The number of workers grew with Industrialisation which did not really get underway until the 1890s during Witte’s “Great Spurt”.

Question 87

reasons for worker unrest

Answer 87

* Workers were most concerned by poor living conditions. Workers had few formal institutions to express their grievances about low pay, long hours, poor housing or poor conditions. * Worker unrest was often initially motivated by economic problems, but eventually saw political change as a necessary means of changing the economy. The workers were politicised by events such as Bloody Sunday in 1905.

Question 88

nature of opposition of strikes between 1880-1914 | workers

Answer 88

**1885** – Morozov Dye Works saw a strike of 8,000 workers **1905** – nationwide strikes demanding improvements to conditions and pay results in Bloody Sunday **1912** – Lena Goldfields Strike leading to a massacre of 200 people by army **1914** – St. Petersburg strikes.

Question 89

effectiveness of strikes between 1880-1914 | workers

Answer 89

Despite banning strikes, they continued throughout Nicholas II’s reign. **Most were repressed using the army** – e.g. Bloody Sunday and Lena Goldfields. BUT, **1905 concessions including the October Manifesto** (civil liberties + Duma concession) were partly in response to workers’ demands.

Question 90

nature of opp of Putilov Works strike, Feb 1917 | workers

Answer 90

The Putilov strikes started the February Revolution of 1917 which ended Tsarism. The Putilov works were of importance in Russia during World War One, particularly in producing artillery.

Question 91

when was the Putilov Works strike

Answer 91

Feb 1917

Question 92

effectiveness of putilov works strike | workers

Answer 92

Effective in forcing the Tsar to abdicate in February

Question 93

nature of opp of workers opp to the PG | workers

Answer 93

Workers became unhappy with the Provisional Government’s poor management of the economy in 1917. Strikes involving millions paralysed the big cities like Petrograd in September 1917.

Question 94

effectiveness of of workers opp to the PG | workers

Answer 94

The workers contributed to the October Revolution in that they increasingly sided with the Bolsheviks. However, their involvement should not be over-stated in that the Bolshevik part played a larger role.

Question 95

nature of opp of challenges to bolshevil authority [oct 1917-march 1918] | workers

Answer 95

The railwaymen’s union demanded that they control the rail network separate to the Bolsheviks

Question 96

effectiveness of challenges to bolshevil authority [oct 1917-march 1918] | workers

Answer 96

They were temporarily granted the right to do so until March 1918 when the Bolsheviks nationalised control of the rail network.

Question 97

nature of opp to formation of soviets in 1917 | workers

Answer 97

In 1917 worker’s councils [Soviets] formed to represent the worker’s interests. These councils sprung up across Russia during and after the February Revolution.

Question 98

effectiveness of opp to formation of soviets in 1917 | workers

Answer 98

The Soviets were a central part of the workings of the Provisional Government under the ‘dual power’ arrangements during the period March to October 1917. Yet, during/after the October Revolution, they were taken over by the Bolsheviks who claimed to represent the workers [without giving them a choice!]

Question 99

nature of opp to civil war as a turning point for workers | workers

Answer 99

The Civil War was a turning point because it changed the nature of the workers. Many workers died in the fighting and ‘ill-educated, ill disciplined’ and uninterested peasants took their place in the towns. This helps to explain why they were relatively docile in the 1920s and 30s.

Question 100

effectiveness of opp to civil war as a turning point for workers | workers

Answer 100

Workers passively accepted the brutality of Stalin’s Five-year Plans. Pressure on workers hitting their production targets led to a rise in suicide by the 1940s. Stalin’s purges targeted those workers who got ‘too big for their boots’.

Question 101

opposition from workers in ww2

Answer 101

no strikes

Question 102

when was the Novocherhassk strike

Answer 102

1962

Question 103

nature of opp of Novocherhassk strike, 1962 | workers

Answer 103

Workers protested against food shortages and rising food prices.

Question 104

effectiveness of of Novocherhassk strike, 1962 | workers

Answer 104

Authorities shot and killed 20 workers and the ringleaders were executed. Little different to the Tsar’s response to the Lena Goldfields Strike!

Question 105

overall achievements of workers

Answer 105

* Average working day reduced from 11 ½ hours in 1897 to seven hours in 1960s. * Officials inspection and administrations of working conditions established. * A change in the political system promised a dictatorship of the proletariat

Question 106

overall limits to workers achievemnets

Answer 106

* Full worker control of the means of production, distribution, and exchange never occurred. * Living conditions were often below what other countries experienced * Peasants and workers were continually repressed when they called for change.

Question 107

continuities to workers opp

Answer 107

Workers were repressed by both Tsars and Communists when they called for change -> Lena Goldfields, 1912, Novocherhassk Strike, 1962 Full worker control of the means of production, distribution, and exchange never occurred. Living conditions were often below what other countries experienced

Question 108

changes to workers opp

Answer 108

Workers were most effective during: * 1905 Revolution = October Manifesto /Duma reforms * February Revolution = overthrowing Tsarism * Opposition to the Provisional Government in 1917 through strike action and some support for the Bolsheviks * Dual Power represented an achievement of worker organisation through their attempts to control their own destiny. Soviet Order Number 1 shows this best. Workers were least effective during: * Workers were more docile under the Communists era, generally speaking. * Few workers in Alexander II / III’s reign – little occurs. Worker opposition reached its peaks around 1900-1917 Workers achieved more during the Tsarist period – e.g. abdication + 1905 concessions through direct action. While the workers rarely went on strike during the Communist era, they did achieve general improvements in their conditions towards the end of the periods. Khrushchev, in particular, was keen to support workers with improvements in living standards. Hence, we see reductions in the working day and improvements to pay and holiday during this period. These changes were more the result of sympathetic Communist ideology than the result of worker opposition, but they represented improvements for workers nonetheless.