You are viewing a free preview of this lesson.
Subscribe to unlock all 10 lessons in this course and every other course on LearningBro.
Seizing power in October 1917 was, as Lenin himself acknowledged, the easy part; holding power was the supreme test. Between 1918 and 1921 the Bolsheviks fought for their survival against a bewildering array of enemies — the rival socialist parties whose votes they had ignored, the White armies of former Tsarist generals, the interventionist forces of the Allied powers, peasant insurgents in the countryside, and dissent from within their own revolutionary camp. Out of that desperate struggle they forged the institutions and habits that would define the Soviet state for the rest of its existence: the secret police, one-party rule, censorship, class terror and a centrally commanded economy. This lesson reconstructs the consolidation in granular detail — the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly, the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, the civil war, the Red Terror — and trains the compulsory AO2 source-evaluation skill on the partisan documents through which it is known.
The organising question is the deepest debate of the whole course: were the coercion and dictatorship of these years forced on the Bolsheviks by the extremity of civil war, or did they flow from Bolshevik ideology and Lenin's conception of the dictatorship of the proletariat? The answer bears directly on how we read the later Soviet story, and it is a favourite of Paper 2 essay-setters. The strongest position, as this lesson will argue, refuses the either/or: the emergency licensed and intensified a ruthlessness the ideology had already disposed the party towards.
By the end of this lesson you will be able to:
This lesson belongs to Edexcel 9HI0 Paper 2, Option 2C.2 (Route C depth study): "Russia in revolution, 1894–1924." A depth study rewards close, granular analysis, so command of the precise detail — the Constituent Assembly results and its dissolution, the terms of Brest-Litovsk, the structure of the Red Army, the character of the Red Terror — is the currency of a strong answer. Within our own teaching sequence this lesson is where the nature of the new regime is forged: the legitimacy claims, the party-state, the use of terror and the command economy all take shape here, and every later judgement about Bolshevik rule to 1924 depends on it.
Because this is a depth study, examiners reward detail used to sustain argument. For the exact assessment weightings and question wording, consult the official Edexcel specification and sample assessment materials rather than any paraphrase.
The Bolsheviks moved at once to build an apparatus of rule, fusing revolutionary improvisation with the coercive logic of a party that meant to keep power. The first weeks produced the skeleton of the Soviet state, and its features already point toward the dictatorship to come.
| Institution | Detail |
|---|---|
| Sovnarkom (Council of People's Commissars) | The new government, with Lenin as chairman; it initially included the Left SRs as junior partners, giving the regime a brief coalition face |
| Cheka (December 1917) | The political police, under Felix Dzerzhinsky, tasked with "combating counter-revolution and sabotage"; it could arrest, interrogate and execute without judicial oversight |
| Red Guards | The armed factory workers who served as the regime's first military force before the Red Army was built |
| Soviet structure | Local soviets, initially elected, were progressively brought under the control of the Bolshevik party |
| Press controls | Opposition newspapers were closed within days of the seizure of power, an early signal of the regime's intolerance of a free press |
Key term — Cheka: the All-Russian Extraordinary Commission for Combating Counter-Revolution and Sabotage, the Bolshevik political police established in December 1917 under Dzerzhinsky. It became the instrument of the Red Terror and the direct ancestor of every later Soviet security organ (GPU, OGPU, NKVD, KGB). That the regime created a secret police within weeks of taking power — before any civil war had begun — is a pivotal fact in the "ideology versus circumstance" debate.
The Bolsheviks had denounced the Provisional Government for delaying the Constituent Assembly, and could not simply cancel the elections they had themselves demanded. Held in November 1917, the elections returned a result that was a plain defeat for them.
| Party | Seats (approximate) |
|---|---|
| Socialist Revolutionaries | 370 |
| Bolsheviks | 175 |
| Left SRs | 40 |
| Kadets | 17 |
| Mensheviks | 16 |
| Others | around 90 |
The peasant-based SRs, not the Bolsheviks, held the majority. The Assembly met for a single day in early January 1918; when it refused to ratify Bolshevik decrees and to recognise the supremacy of soviet power, it was dissolved by armed sailors on Lenin's orders. Lenin justified the closure by arguing that the Assembly embodied a mere "bourgeois democracy" inferior to the "soviet democracy" of the workers' councils — a formula that turned an electoral defeat into an ideological virtue.
The dissolution is one of the single most important pieces of evidence in the whole course. There was no civil-war emergency in January 1918 to compel it: the Bolsheviks closed the only freely elected national assembly in Russian history because it threatened their monopoly of power. Orlando Figes has characterised the moment as a decisive turning point — the point at which the Bolsheviks openly chose dictatorship over the democracy they had promised. For the ideological reading of Bolshevik authoritarianism this is the trump card: the choice for one-party rule was made before the war that is so often invoked to explain it.
The Decree on Peace had promised an end to the war, and the Bolsheviks had to redeem it or lose the soldiers and workers who had backed October. But peace on German terms would be humiliating, and the question split the leadership.
| Position | Advocates and argument |
|---|---|
| Accept the German terms | Lenin — the revolution's survival depended on ending the war at any price; Russia had no army left to fight with, and a breathing-space ("peredyshka") must be bought |
| Revolutionary war | Bukharin and the Left Communists — fight on to spread revolution to Germany, even at the risk of the regime |
| "Neither war nor peace" | Trotsky — refuse to sign but also refuse to fight, gambling that Germany would not advance; the strategy collapsed when the German army resumed its advance in February 1918 |
Lenin forced his line through a bitterly divided Central Committee, at one point threatening to resign. The resulting treaty, signed in March 1918, was extraordinarily harsh:
The Left SRs resigned from Sovnarkom in protest, removing the last non-Bolshevik element from the government and taking a further step toward the one-party state. Yet Lenin's gamble was vindicated within months: it rested on the wager that the German Empire would itself soon collapse and the treaty become a dead letter — which is exactly what happened when Germany was defeated in November 1918 and the Soviet government promptly annulled the treaty. Robert Service and others read Brest-Litovsk as the supreme demonstration of Lenin's ruthless pragmatism: his willingness to sacrifice almost anything, including a third of the country, to preserve Bolshevik power. The manner of the decision reinforced the lesson of October — that the party would do what its leader judged necessary, the dissenters notwithstanding.
The civil war was not a neat two-sided contest but a sprawling, many-sided conflict fought across the vast spaces of the former empire.
| Force | Composition | Strengths | Weaknesses |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reds | Bolsheviks; the Red Army created by Trotsky from January 1918 | Held the central core; unified command; a single clear ideology; ruthless discipline | Initially poorly trained and equipped |
| Whites | Monarchists, liberals, moderate socialists, Cossacks and some national minorities | Experienced Tsarist officers; foreign supply | Geographically scattered; no unified command; no common political programme; often brutal toward civilians |
| Greens | Peasant armies, notably Makhno's anarchists in Ukraine | Local knowledge; effective guerrilla tactics | Localised; no national strategy; fought Reds and Whites alike |
| Foreign intervention | British, French, American, Japanese and other contingents | Military capability and supply | Half-hearted; war-weary home populations; unclear and divided objectives |
The creation of the Red Army was one of the most remarkable achievements of the period, and it was overwhelmingly the work of Trotsky as Commissar for War.
The Red victory is a multi-causal problem, and the strongest answers weigh the factors rather than list them.
| Factor | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Geography | The Reds held the central industrial and railway core — Moscow, Petrograd, the main rail network — and so fought on interior lines, shifting troops between fronts faster than the scattered Whites could coordinate |
| Unity | A single command structure and a single ideology, against a White coalition united only by anti-Bolshevism and forever quarrelling over monarchy, republic or military rule |
| White weaknesses | The White generals — Denikin, Kolchak, Yudenich, Wrangel — could not coordinate their offensives and alienated the population through brutality and forced conscription |
| The peasant calculation | Because the Whites were associated with the landlords, the peasantry (who feared a White victory would reverse the 1917 land seizures) preferred the Reds as the lesser evil, for all the hatred bred by requisitioning |
| Foreign intervention failed | Allied forces were small, war-weary and without political support at home; their chief effect was to hand the Reds a propaganda gift |
| War Communism | However brutal, it kept the Red Army fed and supplied when the Whites' logistics failed |
The decisive analytical point is that Red strength and White weakness were two sides of one coin. Holding the interior lines made every other Red advantage tell; the Whites' political failure meant they could never convert their military experience into popular support. None of this made Red victory automatic — in 1919 the regime's survival genuinely hung in the balance as Denikin drove north toward Moscow and Yudenich approached Petrograd — but it explains why, once the immediate crises were survived, the structural advantages proved decisive.
The civil war was fought not only at the front but on the home front, through two closely linked instruments: the emergency economy of War Communism and the class violence of the Red Terror.
War Communism was the set of economic measures the regime adopted to keep the army fed and the war effort going.
| Policy | Detail |
|---|---|
| Grain requisitioning | Armed detachments (prodrazvyorstka) seized grain from the peasants; resistance was met with violence, and peasants responded by growing less |
| Nationalisation | Industry was taken into state hands; by late 1920 even quite small enterprises had been nationalised |
| Abolition of money | Runaway inflation and the collapse of trade led the regime to attempt direct allocation in place of monetary exchange |
| Labour conscription | Workers were directed to where they were needed and their movement restricted; the militarisation of labour was pressed hardest by Trotsky |
| Ban on private trade | Private commerce was outlawed, though a vast black market flourished and much of the population survived on it |
| Class rationing | Food was distributed on a class basis — workers and soldiers received more than "former people" (nobles, bourgeoisie, clergy) |
Whether War Communism was ideology or improvisation is itself a debate. The evidence points both ways: the most extreme measures came late (mass nationalisation peaked in 1920) and the whole policy was reversed the moment the emergency passed, which argues a strong pragmatic core — yet the readiness to abolish money and the market, and the enthusiasm of Bolsheviks such as Bukharin who celebrated War Communism as communism itself, show the ideology was never far beneath the surface. The most defensible verdict is that the regime used the emergency as an opportunity to enact policies it already found congenial.
The Red Terror was the political counterpart of War Communism. It was formally proclaimed and sharply escalated after the near-fatal shooting of Lenin by the SR Fanny Kaplan in late August 1918 and the murder of the Petrograd Cheka chief Uritsky, but its logic was in place from the founding of the Cheka.
| Feature | Detail |
|---|---|
| Cheka executions | Estimates for the civil-war years range widely, from around 100,000 to 200,000; precise figures are unknowable and should be given as a range |
| Hostage-taking | "Bourgeois" hostages were seized and shot in reprisal for anti-Bolshevik acts |
| Class-based persecution | Former nobles, the bourgeoisie, clergy and "kulaks" were targeted as class enemies rather than for anything they had done |
| Concentration camps | Established from 1918 for political opponents — an early ancestor of the later camp system |
| The Romanovs | The former Tsar and his family were shot at Yekaterinburg in July 1918, as White forces approached |
Subscribe to continue reading
Get full access to this lesson and all 10 lessons in this course.