Michael Bensley
Table of Contents:
Introduction: p.3
I. War Communism: p.10
II. Lenin's Final Years: p.23
III. Interregnum: p.38
IV. Socialism in One Country as Theory: p.61
V. Socialism in One Country in Context: p.74
Conclusion: p.96
Bibliography: p.104
INTRODUCTION (EXCERPT)
Bolshevik policy, upon seizure of power, had
associated itself with the concept of internationalism.
The principle was that the revolution should only
begin in Russia and that the western nations would,
in consequence, revolt as well. The economic aid
that western Europe was expected to donate to
their Russian partners was crucial. This was
especially true for Trotsky who, in his original capacity,
could not imagine any other course of action
other than his 'permanent revolution,' as first set out in
Results and Prospects (1906).5
In the
years which followed the First World War, the western nations
mainly stabilised. In consequence, the regime had
to abandon expectations of further insurrection
the question of whether a country could attempt to reach socialism alone.
The Russian situation,
primarily the backwardness of her industrial development, was another
pertinent issue to be
considered. Leon Trotsky, in an article in Pravda of May 1922 compared the
Soviet Union to a 'besieged fortress,' stating that during such a time of
political and economic isolation from the rest of the world, it was necessary
for the state to ensure unity at any cost.7
The political structures which
developed had ensured the dominance of the Bolsheviks as the only legitimate
party. A level of naivety existed intheir actions, as well as authoritarian
tendencies. Early policies such as 'War Communism' had been carried out in a
callous manner, with scant regard for the human cost. 'The descent into chaos'
which ensued, the excesses and trespasses into human life, had introduced a
framework which could be described as a 'Partocracy'.8
In 1921 the New Economic Policy was introduced. Whether this was a retreat
on the same lines as
the Brest-Livotsk treaty of 1918, (which withdrew the Bolsheviks from the
war against the Central
Powers), or more a pragmatic manoeuvre, is a question which shall be
explored. However, in Lenin's
last years of control, the party would go on to solidify its monopoly of
power. With such events as
the Social Revolutionary trials of 1922, the state had completed its path
towards authoritarianism. It
has been argued that the manner in which events which brought this on. The
idea being that Lenin had to operate in a difficult climate and had to enforce the
one-party state as a temporary measure to ensure the survival of the regime.
This would ultimately lead us to the conclusion that such concepts as 'Workers'
Democracy' reflected his original intentions, if the situation had not dictated
otherwise.9
Of course, historians who take ideology
as a primary factor in the way that the early Soviet Republic developed, have
commented on the economic 'retreat' of introducing NEP being countered with
political tightening.10
This would explain why Lenin had
dealt with his political opponents in this time in such a brutal fashion.
With Lenin's departure from leadership, due to a series of strokes, the
disunity of the leadership had
begun to unravel. As will be discussed in the course of this dissertation,
Stalin had been able to
secure a large number of positions in the state apparatus. His domination
of the bureaucracy
became a crucial factor. Through such organs as the Secretariat he had been
able to manipulate the
Party Congresses, so that the overwhelming majority of voting delegates came
in line with the
leadership, regardless of where the party cells placed their allegiance.
This had been of enormous
importance in the conflict with Trotsky's opposition.11
When Trotsky introduced the 'New Course' (1923), a criticism of the
inflated bureaucracy and the
excesses which had formed as a result of this, a debate began which would
see Stalin enter the field
of theory himself, with such works as The Foundations of Leninism (1924).
With Lenin's death, Stalin
was able to interpret freely many of the former master's ideas and twist
them in such a way that he
could use them to back up any attack. In the fight against 'Trotskyism',
the idea of 'socialism in one
country' came about. Initially, the idea of economic development within
isolated circumstances was
conceptualised by Nikolai Bukharin, but it would later be mentioned in a
pamphlet by Stalin, The
October Revolution and the Tactics of the Russian Communists (1924).12
To ascertain how it was that Stalin was able to take a few lines of Lenin's
previous works and
transform them in such a way as to develop his own body of ideas is crucial
in understanding the
discourse of events in the 1920s. The course of this work will therefore
examine both the context in
which 'socialism of one country' was conceived, and its relative value in
practice. It is easy to
espouse the view that his theory was 'a mere smoke-screen for a clash of
personal ambitions.'13 As
Isaac Deutscher, in his political biography Stalin reminds us, 'No doubt
the personal rivalries were a
strong element in it. But the historian who reduced the whole matter to
that would commit a
blatant mistake.'14 Indeed, as much as it could be argued that the whole
matter was simply to attack
Trotsky's 'permanent revolution' as a counter-thesis of sorts, it had other
properties.
Of course, Bukharin's view of building socialism in Russia alone was far
more geared towards slow
and considered development. By utilising NEP, the state could take a path
towards socialism which
would not have the disastrous outcomes which had become associated with
'War Communism'.15 It
will strike the reader that, for all the caution that Stalin would decree
in the mid-1920s, he ultimately
embarked on the 'revolution from above' and the 'great break.' The main
reasons why this had
occurred is the topic for the last chapter of this dissertation. Suffice it
is to say, the impact of varying
political and socio-economic crises, which occurred from 1926 onwards, had
a fundamental effect on
the regime and upon those who ruled it.
No comments:
Post a Comment