You are viewing a free preview of this lesson.
Subscribe to unlock all 10 lessons in this course and every other course on LearningBro.
The seven years from the February Revolution to Lenin's death remade Russia and opened the Soviet chapter of this study. The liberal, democratic experiment that followed the fall of the Romanovs collapsed within eight months, and in October 1917 the Bolsheviks seized power in one of the most consequential political events of the twentieth century. Yet taking power proved far easier than holding it. Between 1917 and 1921 the new regime faced civil war, foreign intervention, economic collapse and revolt from within its own base, and its survival forged the institutions and methods — one-party rule, the secret police, centralised economic command, political terror — that would define the Soviet state for decades. The retreat to the New Economic Policy in 1921 and the succession struggle that opened with Lenin's incapacity complete the foundation on which Stalin would build.
For a Paper 3 study built on themes in breadth across 1855–1991, October 1917 is the foundational act of the Soviet half. The central analytical questions are sharp and run the length of the course: was October a popular revolution or a coup? Were the dictatorial methods of these years forced on the Bolsheviks by circumstance, or implicit in their ideology from the start? And how far did the Soviet state, for all its revolutionary rhetoric, reconstruct the centralism and coercion of the tsarist order it destroyed? This lesson traces the failure of dual power, the October seizure, the Civil War and War Communism, the retreat to the NEP, and the unresolved problem of succession — developing the long-sweep argument about the nature of rule, economy and society, and repression and opposition.
By the end of this lesson you will be able to:
This lesson belongs to Edexcel 9HI0 Paper 3, Option 38.1: "The making of modern Russia, 1855–1991", built on themes in breadth across the whole period and aspects in depth studied closely. Within our own teaching sequence it opens the Soviet half of the course and develops the in-depth aspect of revolution and the birth of the new state. We have grouped the seizure of power, the Civil War, War Communism and the NEP into a single lesson so that students grasp the consolidation of Bolshevik rule as one connected process — a regime that took power as a minority and had therefore to build the coercive apparatus that would sustain it.
Because Paper 3 rewards command of change over the long term as well as close analysis of the depth topics, keep asking how the methods improvised in these years shaped the Soviet state down to 1991. (For the precise assessment weightings and question wording, consult the official Edexcel specification and sample assessment materials rather than any paraphrase.)
The February Revolution left a system of dual power (dvoevlastie): the Provisional Government, drawn from the Duma and representing the propertied classes and liberals, possessed formal authority but little popular backing, while the Petrograd Soviet, representing workers and soldiers, commanded genuine popular support and controlled the streets, the railways and the garrison. Order No. 1, issued by the Soviet on 1 March, instructed soldiers to obey the Provisional Government only where its orders did not contradict the Soviet — so that from the outset real coercive power lay with the Soviet while formal responsibility lay with the government. As Sheila Fitzpatrick puts it, dual power was inherently unstable: one body held authority without power, the other power without responsibility.
The Provisional Government's reforms briefly made Russia one of the freest countries in the world — sweeping civil liberties, the abolition of the death penalty, a political amnesty — but freedom did not feed the cities, end the war or give the peasants land. Its three fatal decisions flowed from a defensible logic but steadily eroded its support: it chose to continue the war (out of alliance obligation), it postponed land reform until a Constituent Assembly could decide (out of legal propriety), and it failed to solve the food and economic crisis. Each decision handed the Bolsheviks a winning slogan. The turning point was the Kornilov Affair of August 1917, when the Provisional Government, under Kerensky, armed the Bolsheviks and the Petrograd workers to resist an apparent military coup by General Kornilov; the affair discredited the government with the right, radicalised the workers and soldiers, and left the Bolsheviks — who now held majorities in the Petrograd and Moscow Soviets — armed and ascendant.
By October 1917 Lenin, in hiding in Finland, was bombarding the Central Committee with urgent demands for an immediate armed seizure of power before the Congress of Soviets and the long-delayed Constituent Assembly could provide a rival source of legitimacy. The decision was controversial within the party: Kamenev and Zinoviev opposed an armed rising and even made their opposition public, while Trotsky, as chairman of the Petrograd Soviet and head of its Military Revolutionary Committee (MRC), organised the practical seizure under the cover of defending the Soviet and the revolution against a supposed counter-revolutionary threat — a tactical genius that made the insurrection appear defensive and legitimate to wavering soldiers.
The seizure on 25 October (Old Style) was swift and almost bloodless. Red Guards, revolutionary soldiers and sailors occupied the key strategic points of Petrograd — telegraph exchanges, railway stations, bridges, the State Bank — during the night; the cruiser Aurora fired a blank shot as a signal; and the Winter Palace, defended only by a few hundred cadets, Cossacks and a women's battalion, fell with little real fighting. The famous "storming" is largely a later myth, dramatised by Soviet propaganda and Eisenstein's film. When the moderate Mensheviks and Right SRs walked out of the Second Congress of Soviets in protest, Trotsky consigned them "to the dustbin of history", leaving the Congress to ratify the new Bolshevik-led government, the Sovnarkom. The contrast with February is central: where February was a spontaneous, mass, leaderless upheaval, October was a planned, disciplined, narrowly based seizure executed by a single party with clear leadership — the very contrast at the heart of the debate over whether October was a coup or a popular revolution.
The Bolsheviks moved fast to consolidate. The Decree on Peace called for an immediate armistice; the Decree on Land abolished private landownership and sanctioned the peasants' seizure of the gentry's estates (adopting the SRs' programme to win peasant support); a Decree on Workers' Control gave factory committees supervisory powers; and opposition newspapers began to be closed. The first two decrees were masterstrokes of timing, delivering precisely the demands the Provisional Government had refused. But the decisive early test of the regime's character came with the Constituent Assembly. Elections in November 1917 gave the SRs the largest share (around two-fifths) and the Bolsheviks only about a quarter; when the Assembly met on 5 January 1918 and refused to subordinate itself to the soviets, it was dissolved by Bolshevik forces after a single day. Lenin justified this by claiming the soviets were a "higher" form of democracy than a "bourgeois" parliament. The dissolution of the only freely elected body in Russian history, within ten weeks of the seizure of power, is a critical moment for the debate over whether Bolshevik dictatorship flowed from circumstance or from ideology.
The Civil War (1918–1921) was the most severe test the Bolshevik regime faced and the crucible in which the Soviet system was forged. It was preceded by the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (March 1918), by which Lenin — over bitter opposition from the "Left Communists" around Bukharin and Trotsky's ambiguous "neither war nor peace" formula — made a humiliating peace with Germany, surrendering roughly a third of European Russia's territory and population to extricate the revolution from the war. Orlando Figes characterises Brest-Litovsk as a desperate gamble that only Lenin's iron nerve could have forced through; it was vindicated when Germany itself collapsed in November 1918, but it reveals the ruthless subordination of everything to the survival of the regime that would define Bolshevik rule.
The war pitted the Reds — the Bolsheviks and the Red Army built and led by Trotsky — against the Whites, a fractured coalition of monarchists, liberals, moderate socialists, Cossacks and nationalists who shared only anti-Bolshevism, and against Green peasant bands and limited foreign intervention. The Reds won for structural reasons: they held the populous, industrial heartland around Moscow and Petrograd with interior lines; Trotsky built a disciplined mass army, conscripting former Tsarist officers ("military specialists") under the supervision of political commissars; the Whites were scattered around the periphery, politically divided and tainted by association with the old regime and foreign backers; and, decisively, most peasants — though they hated Bolshevik requisitioning — feared a White victory would restore the landlords, and so reluctantly preferred the Reds.
War Communism was the harsh economic system imposed during the war, combining desperate improvisation with ideological zeal:
| Policy | Detail |
|---|---|
| Grain requisitioning (prodrazvyorstka) | Armed detachments forcibly seized "surplus" grain from the peasants to feed the cities and the Red Army |
| Nationalisation | All large- and then small-scale industry was nationalised under centralised state direction |
| Attempted abolition of money | Hyperinflation and ideological hostility to money led to attempts to replace trade with direct allocation and rationing |
| Labour discipline | Workers were subjected to militarised labour discipline; Trotsky advocated "labour armies" |
| Class-based rationing | Food was distributed by class, favouring workers over the "bourgeoisie" |
Its consequences were catastrophic: industrial output collapsed to a fraction of pre-war levels; hungry workers fled the cities, hollowing out the Bolsheviks' own social base; grain seizures provoked massive peasant risings, above all the Tambov Rebellion (1920–21); and the combination of war, requisitioning and drought produced a famine in the Volga region in 1921 that killed millions, relieved partly by the American Relief Administration. Historians debate whether War Communism was driven primarily by ideology (an attempt to leap straight to a moneyless communist economy) or by pragmatism (a desperate response to the emergency) — a debate that directly anticipates the argument over Stalin's later economic policies.
The Cheka (the All-Russian Extraordinary Commission), established in December 1917 under Felix Dzerzhinsky, was the regime's instrument of political repression and the direct ancestor of the OGPU, NKVD and KGB. The Red Terror was officially proclaimed in September 1918 after the assassination of the Petrograd Cheka chief Uritsky and the wounding of Lenin by Fanny Kaplan; "class enemies" — former nobles, bourgeois, priests, officers and suspected counter-revolutionaries — were arrested, taken as hostages and executed, often without trial. Estimates of those killed vary widely and are genuinely contested, commonly cited in the range of tens of thousands to over a hundred thousand; the deposed Romanov family was shot at Yekaterinburg in July 1918, and the first forced-labour camps for political opponents were established — an institutional seed of the later Gulag. Orlando Figes argues that the Red Terror was not merely a reaction to the White threat but expressed a deep current in Bolshevik ideology — the conviction that whole classes of "enemies" could legitimately be destroyed — though others stress the brutalising context of a civil war in which a "White Terror" also raged. This is the central case study for the "circumstance versus ideology" debate.
By early 1921 the regime faced an existential crisis: economic collapse, famine, the Tambov rising, and — most wounding of all — the Kronstadt Rebellion of March 1921, in which the sailors Trotsky had once called the "pride and glory of the revolution" rose against the regime they had helped install, demanding freely elected soviets, an end to Bolshevik political monopoly and an end to requisitioning. Their slogan, "Soviets without Communists", struck at the regime's very legitimacy. The rising was crushed by Red Army troops storming the base across the frozen Gulf of Finland, but Lenin called Kronstadt "the flash that lit up reality": it proved that War Communism had alienated even the regime's core supporters and that a change of course was unavoidable.
At the Tenth Party Congress (March 1921) — the same congress that crushed Kronstadt and banned factions within the party — Lenin introduced the New Economic Policy (NEP) as a strategic retreat, "one step back in order to take two steps forward". Grain requisitioning was replaced by a tax in kind (peasants could sell their surplus on the open market); small-scale private trade and businesses were legalised (the retailers known as Nepmen); and the currency was stabilised with the gold-backed chervonets — while the state retained the "commanding heights" of large industry, banking, transport and foreign trade. The pairing is significant: economic relaxation went hand in hand with a tightening of political discipline through the ban on factions. The NEP produced a real recovery — agriculture and industry returned to roughly pre-war levels by 1926 and the famine ended — but it also generated the Scissors Crisis of 1923 (industrial prices high, agricultural prices low), persistent urban unemployment, and deep unease among Bolsheviks who saw the enrichment of Nepmen and "kulaks" as a betrayal of socialism. Whether the NEP was a viable long-term road, or an unstable coexistence of plan and market bound to be resolved one way or another, is a critical question that underpins the whole succession struggle.
Subscribe to continue reading
Get full access to this lesson and all 10 lessons in this course.