Lenin and the Bolsheviks in a struggle to withhold power implemented the new economic policy. Massive peasant revolts all over Russia threatened Bolshevik power. Peasants were striking against Russias’ economy and conditions, however particularly about war communism, i. e. , the forcible requisition of food and produce in order to keep the red army and cities supplied. The NEP saw the recovery of the Russian economy and the increase in produce from farmers.
It was a time of relevant cultural freedom. Lenin realized that the radical approach to communism was unsuited to conditions existing at the time and put the survival of his regime at risk. With the Kronstadt or “red sailors” rebelling about war communism and the Bolsheviks’ un-democratic rule. The Kronstadt revolt was brutally put down by Trotsky (then War Commissar) and Tukhachevsky (a successful Russian general), who led troops over the frozen sea to the island base.
The government condemned the revolt as a “White Gaudiest Plot.” This was propaganda, since no “White Guard” officers were involved. With the victory of the civil war, combined with this revolt Lenin was forced to realize that it was not only peasant revolts he had to worry about. Thus the threat to Bolshevik power convinced him of the need to delay his goals and rebuild the Russian economy. The Tenth Party Congress of the Russian Communist Party (Bolshevik) met in March 1921 to hear Lenin argue for a new course in Soviet policy.
The Essay on Assess The Reasons For Bolshevik Success In The Russian Civil War 1918 1920
Bolshevik victory in the Russian Civil War of 1918 -1920 would not have been certain without the strong, determined and intelligent leadership provided by Trotsky and Lenin. The fact that the Bolsheviks were led by two individuals, who combined had tremendous political, social and military skills had a direct result on the outcome of the war. There were other significant contributing factors that ...
The NEP was discussed and an agreement reached. The NEP was a mixture of socialism and capitalism. The state kept control of “the heights,” i. e. , of heavy industry, banking, and transport, but allowed a free internal market. Therefore, it allowed some scope to private enterprise, i.
e. private shops, restaurants, and small-scale manufacture, as well as the leasing of some larger enterprises to private entrepreneurs. It also allowed the peasants to work their farms. However, they were to do so within the old communal system, and use only family labor. Forced requisitioning was abolished and peasants paid taxes instead. Peasants could once again sell their surplus crops in the market place for a profit.
The state remained the owner of the land. The introduction of the New Economic Policy impacted significantly in a number of ways. Positively, by 1925 the Russian economy revived and food production went up to the level it had been before World War One. Riots and demonstrations ceased and Bolshevik power gained total control once again. Negatively, some Bolshevik followers felt it was a step backwards to the old capitalist system. Criticism was heard within the Bolshevik regime towards their leader.
Revival of a new form of the bourgeoisie was seen, named Nepmen and Kulaks. Nepmen, were new the entrepreneurs, they were really middlemen, who made a very good living by finding and selling what was most needed. Thus, they also supplied state owned industry with parts and raw material. They could be seen everywhere spending their money in first class restaurants and shops. Kulaks (‘first’ in Russian) were the name given to the landlords of Russia. The Kulaks gained considerable profit in Russia and were considered to be the revival of the bourgeoisie and provided much criticism to Lenins’ retreat to the NEP Many Bolshevik party members felt that the NEP was a betrayal of communist principles.
To them, the NEP was a retreat from the goals of the revolution and they looked with disapproval at the rise of Kulaks and Nepmen. Lenin tried to emphasize that he had not abandoned communist ideology, rather that he had “postponed their goals for the survival of the Bolshevik regime.” Lenin understood the importance of the long-term view, the need for the revolution to survive, and was willing to compromise on short-term goals to ensure its success, often in the face of criticism. Hence the terms of Brest-Litovsk and the NEP were acceptable to him because they headed off the threats towards revolution, in one instance, by the German army, and in the other by rebellious masses. Lenin and the Bolsheviks introduced the NEP in their struggle to hold power, their previous tactics of terror and violence were beginning to fail.
The Term Paper on Criticism Philosophy
Not too many people can listen none defensively, or none antagonistically, to criticism. And very few of those who listen admit it when they see that they are wrong. The thing is, we think that admission of guilt, or of being wrong, or that we have made a mistake, is a sign of weakness. Yet true failure is repeatedly refusing to see your faults. Learning to listen to criticism is a life skill that ...
Peasants were striking, and the army was becoming a concern in security for Lenin. The Russian people were sick of the standard of living and the abusive war communism policy. The NEP saw the end of strikes, a revived economy, and the comradeship between the red army and the Bolshevik regime return at the price of criticism against Lenin. Lenins’s hort-term compromise was regarded as a necessary means to protect the long-term goals and ideologies of Bolshevism and the revolution. Accordingly, the NEP had a positive impact on the Russian economy and her peoples’ welfare at the cost of the Bolsheviks postponement of a communist society. By Monty O’Brien.
