Theme- Opposition Flashcards
opposition from political parties, tsar prior 1905
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
opposition from political parties, between 1905-1917
Between 1905-1917 they were legalised and tolerated, to an extent, but they were also marginalised when genuine opposition was expressed.
opposition from political parties, provisional government
During the Provisional Government political parties worked in coalition as part of the Progressive Bloc
opposition from political parties after 1921
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.
alexander II, populists (narodniks. narod = people)
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.
populists motivations (alexander II)
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.
populists methods
1874 going to the narod (alexander II)
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.
populists methods
1876 formation of 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.
populist methods 1879 ‘peaceful group’
known as Black Repartition which sought to continue the Narodnik mission of educating and encouraging the peasants.
populist methods 1879 ‘peoples will’
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.
effectiveness of the populists opposition group
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.
nicholus II opposition
Radical groups re-emerge early on in Nicholas’ reign. By this stage the revolutionary groups have split into two ideological factions: the Populist Socialist Revolutionaries [SRs] and the Marxist Social Democrats
SR’s (Nicholas II)
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.
two branches to the sr movement under Nicholas III
There were two basic branches to the movement, which reflected the split within the Populist movement during the 1870s. One branch was peaceful in its methods, the other terroristic (compare the groups, ‘Black Partition’ and ‘People’s Will’, from the 1870s above). The terroristic section [the SR combat organisation] 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 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.
Despite this setback, 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.
the impacts of the sr’s on developments in russia
s 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.
SD’s (social democrats/ Nicholas II)
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.
SD’s being divided over its tactics
By 1903 it was split in two camps: Bolsheviks and Mensheviks. Julius 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. Hard-line Marxists, such as Lenin, resisted Economism strongly and effectively.
On the other hand, 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.
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.
the liberals
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.
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.
Out of these organisational developments grew two leading political parties in the midst of the 1905 Revolution. Namely, the Kadets and the Octobrists.
liberals, 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.
summary of political party opposition to the tsar
*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.
the bolsheviks came to dominate opposition to the provisional government. ‘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 came to dominate opposition to the Provisional Government policies
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.
The Bolsheviks came to dominate opposition to the Provisional Government Lenin’s April Theses
condemned the Provisional Government for being ‘bourgeois’.
the bolshevik strengths to build up the October revolution, growth
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.
the bolshevik strengths to build up the October revolution gaining control of the petrograd garrison
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.
the Bolshevik strengths to build up the October revolution Bolshevik were highly centralised
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
external party opposition 1918-1921
white armies
. 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.
why did the white army emerge
· 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.
the white armys effectiveness
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, the 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.
the red terror involved;
· 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.
Red Terror significantly limited the effectiveness of outright opposition.
internal opposition within the communist party: what are ‘factions’
These factions agreed with the project of Communism, but differed on the means and methods of achieving it.
internal opposition within the communist party ‘factions’ during lenins rule
· ‘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.
how internal oppositions used to legitimise change (factions)
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.
how effective was the factions internal opposition during lenins period
y, internal 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.
power struggle 1924-28
january 1924
lenin dies
the defest of trotsky
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.
power struggle
november 1924
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’.
the ban on factions
the defest of trotsky
power struggle
january 1925
lessons of october
the defest of trotsky
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.
