Leadership Traits of Lenin
Introduction
Since the dawn
of man, leaders have been important factors in the success of societies. That
is why for centuries philosophers, political scientists and many other scholars
have come up with thousands of different theories on leadership. The dictionary
definition of leadership is “the position or function of a leader, a person who
guides or directs a group”. This definition shows us the most basic principles
of a leader: guidance and directorship. However it does not show the background
of how leaders come into existence. That is why people have not been relieved
by a sole dictionary definition of leadership throughout time. An inclusive
definition of leadership is given by Arthur G. Jagos. He states that leaders
develop through a never ending process of self-study, education, training, and
experience (Jago, 315). First of all this definition indicates that good
leaders are made rather than born. Therefore, with the help of willpower any
person has the chance of becoming a successful leader. And secondly, leaders
have to go through everlasting development stages. The leadership definition
Arthur G. Jago gives is really important for this papers’ subject, in the sense
that Lenin fits perfectly to the given qualities. He received high-education
and was a law graduate. During his 30 years long career, he wrote hundreds of
books and pamphlets, as well as thousands of articles and letters (Haney, 63).
He did not stop with the educational process and actively participated in
strikes and many other revolutionary activities, which helped him gain the
experience he needed for 1917 Revolution. The experience he gained helped him
develop rational courage and calculated risk-taking, which is I think rare
attributes to see in a leader. With the mentioned developments of his superior leadership
qualities he managed to come into prominence in front of his revolutionist colleagues
and became the leader of Soviet Russia. This paper will argue that Lenin
despite some controversies is one of the most influential and successful leaders
human history has ever seen.
His Early
Life
To understand why Lenin was a successful leader we have to look closely in his early life. Lenin was born in 10 April 1870 at Simbirsk. He had a relatively happy childhood (Deutscher, 17). In 1874, his father was elevated to the status of Chinovnik, which means that his father became a hereditary noble (Haney, 23). From here, it can be seen that Lenin could have lived a peaceful and prosperous life if he was loyal to the Tsarist government, but he chose the hard road and eventually succeeded. During his high school years he observed the persecutions of Chuvash and Tatars and read the banned books of Pisarev, Dobroliubov and Chernishevski (Lefebvre, 101). However, until his brothers’ unexpected death, he was not a revolutionist. He was just growing consciousness in social problems. In March 1887, his brother was caught and executed by the police for plotting assassination against Tsar Alexander III (Haney, 25).
No one in Lenins’ family knew he was head of a terrorist organization (26). This tragedy affected Lenin so deeply that in various sources he is quoted to say “I will make them pay for this, I swear.” After this incident, he became more ambitious. He finished high school with first place and entered the Kazan Law Faculty in August 1887. In just few months he organized the students to protest against the new “University Regulation” and was arrested. During arrest, he gave a brilliant hint about his determination attribute that was yet to come more in his later life. The police officer asked him “Young man, why are you rebelling? After all, there is a wall in front of you.” He replied with despise “The wall is tottering, if you push it will fall.” (Lefebvre, 102). Here it can be seen that he was determined to overcome the odds and overthrow the Tsar in such a young age. Later, he was sent to exile for a short time to Kokushino and was only allowed to return back to Kazan in October 1888 (103). He was expelled from law faculty and only was accepted to the faculty in 1890 as an external student (Haney, 30). He finished the four years course in 12 months and graduated as the best (30). From this occurrence, it can be understood that he was a hardworking man and was very ambitious. Even if the odds were against him, he managed to read all 4 years readings in 1 year, graduated as the best from the faculty and continued his studies on Marxism. In January 1892, he became a lawyer in Samara and was known as the lawyer of weak, poor and peasants. Ironically, his first case was about a man who was accused of cursing “God, Virgin Mary and Trinity” (Lefebvre 104). However, after two years he decided that being a lawyer only prevented him from pursuing his personal goals, which shows that he had clear goals in life. He realized that he was a lawyer only because his mother wanted him to be so (Haney, 31). Because the poor woman was afraid that his son, Lenin, would take the same road his brother took and would be executed. But, Lenin insisted on and went to St. Petersburg where he started his real “revolutionary” career (31).
From his early life we can make some inferences about his personality such as having conservative personal principles which charted out his later leadership career. He had a serene childhood where he was cared and loved. His father was conscious of the social problems and tried to help the poor. All of his siblings were deeply affected by their father and became revolutionaries in their later lives. Lenin’s peaceful family life also helped him develop his ideas on family and its’ moral values. Before and after the revolution he strictly opposed revolutionists who advocated “free love” (Lefebvre, 484). The advocates metaphorically regarded sexual acts as “drinking water when thirsty” (485). He accused these revolutionists as being bourgeois. He also opposed complete abstain from sexual life. His own idea on family and sexual life was that “sexual acts happened between two people and from there a third is born. Therefore, both of them have a duty towards society (486).” It can be seen that his views on morality and family life formed when he was young. From his ideas on family, it can be understood that he was relatively conservative and was against revolutionists who fell prey to bourgeois impudence and was also against whom supported a life of a priest.
Another important inference from his early life that would shape his later revolutionary life is that his family belonged to the nobility. Therefore, they were economically and socially comfortable and Lenin found time to observe the Tsarist government and its’ political implications over society. He saw the persecutions and crimes of the secret police. He observed how intellectual life was censored. He became conscious of the working classes conditions in Russia. All of these with the mixture of Marx and Engels work he read during university and exile resulted in him having revolutionary tendencies. This part of Lenin’s life has been used by his opposition throughout 20th century as a mean to “degrade” his worth in the eyes of his supporters, as they claimed that Lenin’s relatively easy life contradicted with his communist ideas. It is true that Lenin did not come from a working class family and lived an easier life than the ones he stood up for. However, this does not prohibit him from being a Marxist as the most important Marxist theoreticians came from well-endowed families. Friedrich Engels was son of an entrepreneur and Marx came from a wealthy family as well. They never became part of the proletariat, but they were the leaders of the proletariat in organizing and revolutionizing them. Their well-endowment helped them have time to theorize the revolution and create concrete paths and goals for the proletariat to follow, because workers, at that time, survived by the skin of their teeth and did not have time to organize a revolution.
To understand why Lenin was a successful leader we have to look closely in his early life. Lenin was born in 10 April 1870 at Simbirsk. He had a relatively happy childhood (Deutscher, 17). In 1874, his father was elevated to the status of Chinovnik, which means that his father became a hereditary noble (Haney, 23). From here, it can be seen that Lenin could have lived a peaceful and prosperous life if he was loyal to the Tsarist government, but he chose the hard road and eventually succeeded. During his high school years he observed the persecutions of Chuvash and Tatars and read the banned books of Pisarev, Dobroliubov and Chernishevski (Lefebvre, 101). However, until his brothers’ unexpected death, he was not a revolutionist. He was just growing consciousness in social problems. In March 1887, his brother was caught and executed by the police for plotting assassination against Tsar Alexander III (Haney, 25).
No one in Lenins’ family knew he was head of a terrorist organization (26). This tragedy affected Lenin so deeply that in various sources he is quoted to say “I will make them pay for this, I swear.” After this incident, he became more ambitious. He finished high school with first place and entered the Kazan Law Faculty in August 1887. In just few months he organized the students to protest against the new “University Regulation” and was arrested. During arrest, he gave a brilliant hint about his determination attribute that was yet to come more in his later life. The police officer asked him “Young man, why are you rebelling? After all, there is a wall in front of you.” He replied with despise “The wall is tottering, if you push it will fall.” (Lefebvre, 102). Here it can be seen that he was determined to overcome the odds and overthrow the Tsar in such a young age. Later, he was sent to exile for a short time to Kokushino and was only allowed to return back to Kazan in October 1888 (103). He was expelled from law faculty and only was accepted to the faculty in 1890 as an external student (Haney, 30). He finished the four years course in 12 months and graduated as the best (30). From this occurrence, it can be understood that he was a hardworking man and was very ambitious. Even if the odds were against him, he managed to read all 4 years readings in 1 year, graduated as the best from the faculty and continued his studies on Marxism. In January 1892, he became a lawyer in Samara and was known as the lawyer of weak, poor and peasants. Ironically, his first case was about a man who was accused of cursing “God, Virgin Mary and Trinity” (Lefebvre 104). However, after two years he decided that being a lawyer only prevented him from pursuing his personal goals, which shows that he had clear goals in life. He realized that he was a lawyer only because his mother wanted him to be so (Haney, 31). Because the poor woman was afraid that his son, Lenin, would take the same road his brother took and would be executed. But, Lenin insisted on and went to St. Petersburg where he started his real “revolutionary” career (31).
From his early life we can make some inferences about his personality such as having conservative personal principles which charted out his later leadership career. He had a serene childhood where he was cared and loved. His father was conscious of the social problems and tried to help the poor. All of his siblings were deeply affected by their father and became revolutionaries in their later lives. Lenin’s peaceful family life also helped him develop his ideas on family and its’ moral values. Before and after the revolution he strictly opposed revolutionists who advocated “free love” (Lefebvre, 484). The advocates metaphorically regarded sexual acts as “drinking water when thirsty” (485). He accused these revolutionists as being bourgeois. He also opposed complete abstain from sexual life. His own idea on family and sexual life was that “sexual acts happened between two people and from there a third is born. Therefore, both of them have a duty towards society (486).” It can be seen that his views on morality and family life formed when he was young. From his ideas on family, it can be understood that he was relatively conservative and was against revolutionists who fell prey to bourgeois impudence and was also against whom supported a life of a priest.
Another important inference from his early life that would shape his later revolutionary life is that his family belonged to the nobility. Therefore, they were economically and socially comfortable and Lenin found time to observe the Tsarist government and its’ political implications over society. He saw the persecutions and crimes of the secret police. He observed how intellectual life was censored. He became conscious of the working classes conditions in Russia. All of these with the mixture of Marx and Engels work he read during university and exile resulted in him having revolutionary tendencies. This part of Lenin’s life has been used by his opposition throughout 20th century as a mean to “degrade” his worth in the eyes of his supporters, as they claimed that Lenin’s relatively easy life contradicted with his communist ideas. It is true that Lenin did not come from a working class family and lived an easier life than the ones he stood up for. However, this does not prohibit him from being a Marxist as the most important Marxist theoreticians came from well-endowed families. Friedrich Engels was son of an entrepreneur and Marx came from a wealthy family as well. They never became part of the proletariat, but they were the leaders of the proletariat in organizing and revolutionizing them. Their well-endowment helped them have time to theorize the revolution and create concrete paths and goals for the proletariat to follow, because workers, at that time, survived by the skin of their teeth and did not have time to organize a revolution.
A
Revolutionist is Born
Lenin had courage, persuasion, determination, ambition and great observing skills that made him a great leader. Starting with 1890 Lenin’s whole life started to revolve around revolution. After his departure to St. Petersburg, Lenin immediately searched ways to be involved in revolutionary activities. As he had done throughout all his life, he started his work there by observing the situation. Lenin never rushed for action. His famous quote “Without revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary movement.” demonstrates this aspect of his perfectly. Before taking a stance he always searched for every bit of information and then when he came to a conclusion, he never backed down. Therefore he started his work in St. Petersburg by visiting the poorest districts of the city in disguise and talking with them about their conditions (Haney, 33). He realized that there were some Marxist groups that worked for the cause, but they did not collaborate with each other and were unaware of the needs of the working class (Lefebvre, 105). One night he went to an illegal meeting of the populists. The populists, unlike Marxism, believed that the only revolutionary group was farmers and peasantry. They tried to raise awareness of these classes, but the peasants and farmers were extremely conservative and idolized the Tsar and did not respond to the populists’ provocations (Haney, 26). Lenin, because he knew of this failure, disagreed with them and believed that only conscious group that could revolutionize is the proletariat. Even though, the proletariat would find their allies in the ranks of the farmers, the farmers would never succeed by their selves and need the loadstar of the proletariat (Lefebvre, 106). Therefore, Lenin believed that socialism had to be implemented from above by a revolutionary group who took its’ power from proletariat and this group would use its’ power to carry out socialist reforms throughout whole country.[1] In 1917, this would be the political structure of the Bolshevik Party. In an illegal meeting he gave a speech on his ideas to the populists and literally converted most of them to Marxism. Going to a meeting that is held by people who are contrary to his believes and then converting them to his own cause with a brilliant speech shows that Lenin was very persuasive and courageous.
Lenin had courage, persuasion, determination, ambition and great observing skills that made him a great leader. Starting with 1890 Lenin’s whole life started to revolve around revolution. After his departure to St. Petersburg, Lenin immediately searched ways to be involved in revolutionary activities. As he had done throughout all his life, he started his work there by observing the situation. Lenin never rushed for action. His famous quote “Without revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary movement.” demonstrates this aspect of his perfectly. Before taking a stance he always searched for every bit of information and then when he came to a conclusion, he never backed down. Therefore he started his work in St. Petersburg by visiting the poorest districts of the city in disguise and talking with them about their conditions (Haney, 33). He realized that there were some Marxist groups that worked for the cause, but they did not collaborate with each other and were unaware of the needs of the working class (Lefebvre, 105). One night he went to an illegal meeting of the populists. The populists, unlike Marxism, believed that the only revolutionary group was farmers and peasantry. They tried to raise awareness of these classes, but the peasants and farmers were extremely conservative and idolized the Tsar and did not respond to the populists’ provocations (Haney, 26). Lenin, because he knew of this failure, disagreed with them and believed that only conscious group that could revolutionize is the proletariat. Even though, the proletariat would find their allies in the ranks of the farmers, the farmers would never succeed by their selves and need the loadstar of the proletariat (Lefebvre, 106). Therefore, Lenin believed that socialism had to be implemented from above by a revolutionary group who took its’ power from proletariat and this group would use its’ power to carry out socialist reforms throughout whole country.[1] In 1917, this would be the political structure of the Bolshevik Party. In an illegal meeting he gave a speech on his ideas to the populists and literally converted most of them to Marxism. Going to a meeting that is held by people who are contrary to his believes and then converting them to his own cause with a brilliant speech shows that Lenin was very persuasive and courageous.
The
Dark Sides of a Revolutionist
Despite all the positive attributes, Lenin had some deficiencies in his character as well, such as lust for power and intolerance to criticism, which resulted in him having despotic tendencies. A good example occurred in 1903, when there was a major conflict about the political structure of the RSDWP (Russian Social Democrat Workers Party). Lenin believed that to overthrow the Tsarist government a highly centralized party that is only open to professional revolutionists was needed. The opposition wanted the party to be open to anyone who supported its’ program (Haney, 41). In the voting stage, Lenin was behind by five votes, but he set a trap for Martov, the leader of the opposition. He proposed that “The Workers Cause” newspaper, which Lenin participated actively be repealed and “Iskra”, which is the newspaper of the RSDWP, be the sole representative of social democrats (41). Martov thinking his position in the party would be reinforced quickly fell for this trap and voted in favor of Lenin. Members that were supporting Martovs’ cause regarding the political structure of the party felt betrayed and abandoned the congress. Lenin quickly formed his own bloc, the Bolshevik (majority) and named the rest as Menshevik (minority). He radicalized the party and created a highly disciplined skeleton cadre which was objectively essential to overthrow the Tsar. The lust for power and intolerance to criticism haunted Lenin throughout his life. Most of his life, Lenin believed that he was the only one who knew how the revolution can be achieved. Therefore, he was not open to any kind of criticism. The highly centralized party hierarchy he formed represented this perfectly. As a result, Lenin faced heavy criticism from Marxists that lived in the same era as he did, such as Plekhanov and Rosa Luxemburg as well as from future generations (Pipes, 95). It is expected from leaders to be open to different ideas, but Lenin just like most other “ideological” leaders of the past was of dogmatic nature. Even though the party he created had inner democratic tools; the final word was always his. Also, this despotic attitude he posed might have been because of his higher intelligence than his counterparts. His high intelligence might have deluded him to think that others were not suitable for leadership and he was superior to them in terms of leading. These causes mentioned might be the answer to his despotic tendencies, but nonetheless, he managed to create a party that became one of the worlds’ biggest political organization after the 1917 Revolution. Therefore, the end justified the means.
Despite all the positive attributes, Lenin had some deficiencies in his character as well, such as lust for power and intolerance to criticism, which resulted in him having despotic tendencies. A good example occurred in 1903, when there was a major conflict about the political structure of the RSDWP (Russian Social Democrat Workers Party). Lenin believed that to overthrow the Tsarist government a highly centralized party that is only open to professional revolutionists was needed. The opposition wanted the party to be open to anyone who supported its’ program (Haney, 41). In the voting stage, Lenin was behind by five votes, but he set a trap for Martov, the leader of the opposition. He proposed that “The Workers Cause” newspaper, which Lenin participated actively be repealed and “Iskra”, which is the newspaper of the RSDWP, be the sole representative of social democrats (41). Martov thinking his position in the party would be reinforced quickly fell for this trap and voted in favor of Lenin. Members that were supporting Martovs’ cause regarding the political structure of the party felt betrayed and abandoned the congress. Lenin quickly formed his own bloc, the Bolshevik (majority) and named the rest as Menshevik (minority). He radicalized the party and created a highly disciplined skeleton cadre which was objectively essential to overthrow the Tsar. The lust for power and intolerance to criticism haunted Lenin throughout his life. Most of his life, Lenin believed that he was the only one who knew how the revolution can be achieved. Therefore, he was not open to any kind of criticism. The highly centralized party hierarchy he formed represented this perfectly. As a result, Lenin faced heavy criticism from Marxists that lived in the same era as he did, such as Plekhanov and Rosa Luxemburg as well as from future generations (Pipes, 95). It is expected from leaders to be open to different ideas, but Lenin just like most other “ideological” leaders of the past was of dogmatic nature. Even though the party he created had inner democratic tools; the final word was always his. Also, this despotic attitude he posed might have been because of his higher intelligence than his counterparts. His high intelligence might have deluded him to think that others were not suitable for leadership and he was superior to them in terms of leading. These causes mentioned might be the answer to his despotic tendencies, but nonetheless, he managed to create a party that became one of the worlds’ biggest political organization after the 1917 Revolution. Therefore, the end justified the means.
Dark
Times of a Revolutionist
The year 1905 was very important in Lenin’s life and it showed that he was determined for his goals. All around Russia people rebelled against the Tsar for various reasons and Lenin fought hard to conduct them into the revolution idea, but the rebellions were gradually suppressed by the government. Even though a constitutional monarchy was formed the revolutionists failed to create a socialist state and most of them became depressed and abandoned their revolutionary ideas. They sought refuge in religion and many other subjects that were totally opposite of their prior thoughts (Lefebvre, 119). However, Lenin was not one of them and he worked even harder for his goal. He heavily criticized his colleagues that abandoned their revolutionary thoughts and insisted that they had learnt valuable lessons for future revolutions. Eventually, the history proved Lenin right and after 1917 Revolution when asked about his thoughts on 1905 Revolution he said “Without 1905 Revolution, we could not have succeeded the 1917 Revolution.”(120). Because of fear of persecution he left Russia in 1907 and until 1917 did not come back to his mother country. He continued directing the revolutionary activities in Russia even though he was in Europe. He spent most of his time reading books, directing the Bolshevik Party and discussing politics with other European revolutionists. Even though he was in exile he never stopped fighting for his cause which also shows he had the determination attribute.
The year 1905 was very important in Lenin’s life and it showed that he was determined for his goals. All around Russia people rebelled against the Tsar for various reasons and Lenin fought hard to conduct them into the revolution idea, but the rebellions were gradually suppressed by the government. Even though a constitutional monarchy was formed the revolutionists failed to create a socialist state and most of them became depressed and abandoned their revolutionary ideas. They sought refuge in religion and many other subjects that were totally opposite of their prior thoughts (Lefebvre, 119). However, Lenin was not one of them and he worked even harder for his goal. He heavily criticized his colleagues that abandoned their revolutionary thoughts and insisted that they had learnt valuable lessons for future revolutions. Eventually, the history proved Lenin right and after 1917 Revolution when asked about his thoughts on 1905 Revolution he said “Without 1905 Revolution, we could not have succeeded the 1917 Revolution.”(120). Because of fear of persecution he left Russia in 1907 and until 1917 did not come back to his mother country. He continued directing the revolutionary activities in Russia even though he was in Europe. He spent most of his time reading books, directing the Bolshevik Party and discussing politics with other European revolutionists. Even though he was in exile he never stopped fighting for his cause which also shows he had the determination attribute.
The Achievement
of His Life Time Goal: Establishment of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat
After the successful 1917 Revolution Lenin got the opportunity to put his ideas into work and show the world how he would lead his country. He was mainly successful in dealing with realism and he tried to render the revolutions sustainable. In February 1917, the Tsar was overthrown and a Provisional Assembly was formed. Most Bolsheviks were in exile during the rebels and Lenin with his cadre returned to the country. However, the Provisional Assembly was not socialist in nature and Lenin declared his April Thesis (134). He claimed that the Assembly is bourgeois and the real government must be formed by Soviets.[2] The Bolsheviks armed the workers and created the Red Army. They overthrew the weak Provisional Assembly and declared the proletariat dictatorship.[3] But, the struggle had just started for Lenin and Bolsheviks. They had to struggle with political opposition which composed of nearly all political fractions ranging from die-hard tsarists to moderate socialists (Haney, 87). Also, the war with Germany was underway and they had to determine the question of withdrawal from war. Moreover, the requirements of a socialist state were to be applied. Very important decisions such as abolishment of land property and nationalization of banking institutes had to be made in weeks’ time (87).
The uprisings against the Bolsheviks gathered speed in 1918 summer and reached climax point in 30 August 1918 with an unsuccessful assassination against Lenin. Shortly after the assassination attempt a massive campaign of repression towards political opposition took place, called Red Terror.[4] This part of Russian history and Lenins’ life has been debated by scholars for nearly a century. In the end of the terror nearly 280,000 people were killed (95). Some scholars have argued that the Red Terror was a forced measurement from working class against the enemies.[5] They back up their claim with the fact that only in Finland nearly 100,000 people were killed because of White Terror in July 1917 (95). The opposite party argues that because Bolsheviks lacked popular support, they had to resort to violence to secure their spot. Also, they point out that Marxism regards people as objects or consumables for the establishment of a communist state.[6] Both of these sides possess valid points; it is true that when it comes down to revolution, Marxism treats people as consumables. On the other hand, Bolsheviks did not directly resort to violence. They were practically forced to defend the revolution. If they did not resort to violence, the Bolsheviks would have been the ones getting killed and the debate would have been about whether White Terror was justifiable or not. Therefore, the pro-Red Terror or anti-Red Terror scholars’ take their arguments from ideological basis rather than humanitarian causes. As a result, it would not be accurate to come to a final conclusion in this essay about a topic that has been debated for nearly a century.
After the successful 1917 Revolution Lenin got the opportunity to put his ideas into work and show the world how he would lead his country. He was mainly successful in dealing with realism and he tried to render the revolutions sustainable. In February 1917, the Tsar was overthrown and a Provisional Assembly was formed. Most Bolsheviks were in exile during the rebels and Lenin with his cadre returned to the country. However, the Provisional Assembly was not socialist in nature and Lenin declared his April Thesis (134). He claimed that the Assembly is bourgeois and the real government must be formed by Soviets.[2] The Bolsheviks armed the workers and created the Red Army. They overthrew the weak Provisional Assembly and declared the proletariat dictatorship.[3] But, the struggle had just started for Lenin and Bolsheviks. They had to struggle with political opposition which composed of nearly all political fractions ranging from die-hard tsarists to moderate socialists (Haney, 87). Also, the war with Germany was underway and they had to determine the question of withdrawal from war. Moreover, the requirements of a socialist state were to be applied. Very important decisions such as abolishment of land property and nationalization of banking institutes had to be made in weeks’ time (87).
The uprisings against the Bolsheviks gathered speed in 1918 summer and reached climax point in 30 August 1918 with an unsuccessful assassination against Lenin. Shortly after the assassination attempt a massive campaign of repression towards political opposition took place, called Red Terror.[4] This part of Russian history and Lenins’ life has been debated by scholars for nearly a century. In the end of the terror nearly 280,000 people were killed (95). Some scholars have argued that the Red Terror was a forced measurement from working class against the enemies.[5] They back up their claim with the fact that only in Finland nearly 100,000 people were killed because of White Terror in July 1917 (95). The opposite party argues that because Bolsheviks lacked popular support, they had to resort to violence to secure their spot. Also, they point out that Marxism regards people as objects or consumables for the establishment of a communist state.[6] Both of these sides possess valid points; it is true that when it comes down to revolution, Marxism treats people as consumables. On the other hand, Bolsheviks did not directly resort to violence. They were practically forced to defend the revolution. If they did not resort to violence, the Bolsheviks would have been the ones getting killed and the debate would have been about whether White Terror was justifiable or not. Therefore, the pro-Red Terror or anti-Red Terror scholars’ take their arguments from ideological basis rather than humanitarian causes. As a result, it would not be accurate to come to a final conclusion in this essay about a topic that has been debated for nearly a century.
Conclusion
The world
has seen many great leaders that transformed their countries for good. But,
Lenin was the first one to revolutionize a country with a scientific ideological
basis (good or bad), leaders before him either reformed their country or revolutionized
without a concrete ideology. He established the first socialist regime in
worlds’ history.[7]
Even though his successors were not as successful as him in carrying his
legacy, the Soviets became one of the worlds’ biggest and strongest country. His
revolution influenced the world immensely. The poor, weak and exploited understood
that they were not bond to be under the yoke of their masters. So, in the 20th
century, throughout the world people rebelled against their masters and the
masters came under the yoke of the people. Because of his huge influence over
the world he has been heavily criticized and praised as well. These both point
of views have valid points. However, I believe that despite some deficiencies
in his character, he was a leader that a nation can raise only once a century.
Works Cited
Deutscher, Isaac. Lenin’s Childhood.
Michigan. Oxford University Press, 1970.
Hands, Gill (Trans. Melis İnan). Marx-Kilit
Fikirler. İstanbul: Optimist Yayınları, 2011.
Haney, John. VLADIMIR ILICH LENIN.
New York-Philadelphia: Chealsea House Publishers,
1988.
Jago, A. G. (1982). Leadership:
Perspectives in theory and research. Management Science, 28(3), 315-336.
Pipes, Richard. The Unknown Lenin: From
Secret Archive. London and New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1998.
Tumarkin, Nina. LENIN LIVES! The Lenin Cult
in Soviet Russia. Cambridge, Massachusetts and
London: Harvard University Press, 1983.
[1] An important Marxist Pyotr
Tkachevs’ ideas influenced Lenin in creating this system.
[2]Soviets are councils that are formed by workers,
soldiers and farmers where they choose their own representitives. During 1917,
they played a large role in running the country. However, when Bolsheviks
solidified their position in 1922, the Bolsheviks took the leading role and
soviets relegated to secondary status.
[3] Dictatorship of proletariat is the inevitable non-democratic state
that is formed after the Revolution. After a classless society is achieved the dictatorship
of proletariat will be abolished.
[4] Red Terror(led by Bolsheviks),
White Terror (led by Anti-Bolshevik)
[5] L.S Gaponenko and A.S. Velidov are some of these historians.
[6] "There is only one way
to shorten and ease the convulsions of the old society and the bloody birth
pangs of the new —revolutionary terror." A quote of Karl Marx
[7] Not taking account the
Paris Commune which took place between March 1871 and May 1871 and is regarded
as the first state establishment formed by the working class.
No comments:
Post a Comment