Communism

Lenin was the acting leader as soon as the Bolsheviks established a government in November, 1917. However, the Bolsheviks still felt accountable to their followers and thus negotiated with other parties, peasants and workers. Lenin's government was very unstable from 1917-1920 during the Russian Civil War. So when you ask how Lenin consolidated (meaning, strengthen to the point of no opposition) his power in 1917, the answer is that Lenin did NOT consolidate his power in 1917.

After he was shot by an opponent, and after feeling helpless to keep power (during the civil war) after the demanding terms of 1918's Treaty of Brest-Litovsk Lenin started ordering dissidents executed and banned all political power.

Lenin's power can be said to have been fully consolidated anytime between August of 1920 and throughout 1921. Lenin was only able to "enjoy" absolute authority, however, for little more than a year. After a stroke in May of 1922, Lenin was crippled and partially retired. After making a brief comeback in late 1922 and early 1923, it was clear that Lenin was already being overshadowed by influential party members such as General Secretary Joseph Stalin, Politburo Chairman Lev Kamenev, and Comintern Chairman Grigory Zinoviev. A few months into 1923, Lenin's fourth and final stroke left him paralyzed and mute. For the rest of 1923 until his death in January of 1924, Lenin was nothing more than the official Chairman of the Russian Communist Party, leader of the Bolsheviks. In the last year of Lenin's life, Joseph Stalin (having been party secretary April, 1922) began to emerge as the most powerful person in the party. Although Stalin would not be undisputed dictator of the Soviet Union until at least 1927, party members who followed Lenin's belief that Stalin should be removed as General Secretary were powerless to stop his rise to power. Leon Trotsky's denouncement, and attempted removal, of Stalin in 1923 led to Trotsky becoming one of the most unpopular party members.

Opinion

Karl Marx has both directly and indirectly been a tremendous burden on my economy and on the world economy as a whole. This is very important because of the wide respect given to this man and his "economic strategies". Karl Marx is taught and discussed to great extent in history and political science classes but only a foot note in business classes, which should tell you something about his theories. Labor unions and their choke hold on the marketplace drives the price of goods up so that everybody must pay more so labor can make more. This is how Marx directly affects my economy. He indirectly effects mine and all economy by asserting that unskilled labor has more value than the creative force that made the job for labor available. This turning of the tables has led to much idealism and wishful thinking by communists and socialists alike who justify their own plunder by pointing to the plunder of others, they demand a structure that creates legal plunder whereby economy has equality. There is equality under the law only if un-equality of life is respected. There can be no economic equality because not all of us are equal outside of the law. Communism doesn't make us equal it only wishes we were.

Opposite Opinion I don't think the above comment is necessarily wrong. I would simply rephrase/recontext the views expressed. Prior to Marx England, Europe, and America where in the process of industrialization. Technology and society was changing at possibly the fastest rate in world history. Wealth was being generated in a fashion that only benefited Capitalist and not governments or people. Marx recognized the amazing prosperity Capitalism generated, but also noticed that it was equally able to isolate that wealth into as few hands as possible. Marx's greatest question was whether only wealth should earn profit or whether the worker also deserves some of the profit/prosperity. Thanks to the ideas of Marx and other (socialist/communist) we have: Public Education ( I would argue the biggest achievement). I think we should also look at the hard earned success of the labor movement in achieving at least early on, needed reform without which we would not recognize our society. A 50 then 45 the 40 hour work week. OSHA, despite its modern draw backs did make the work place a much safer place to work. Retirement plans and Social Security. Medicare and Medicaid.

Objective comment Without commenting on the polemical opinions above, it's safe to say that Marx' theories single-handedly transformed the social, political, and economic landscape of the modern world, simply by generating an awareness of the brutalities that unfettered capitalism can inflict on the general population. There are few nations in the world today that do not implement a vast array of protections for laborers, consumers, the elderly, the sick and the indigent, and other vulnerable groups. Just to cite one of the least contentious examples, Social Security in the US is an idea that derives directly from Marxist concerns. In early industrialism, those who were deemed to old to work were simply dismissed by employers, leaving them destitute. if they were unlucky enough not to have family who could support them, they would be forced to rely on charity or handouts, or they would meet a lingering end through through the ills inherent in poverty. Further, the civil rights movements of the 60's and 70's were heavily informed by Marxist ideals about the inhumane elements of capitalism. even many of the government policies that we think of as part of the fabric of capitalist society are Marxist in origin: minimum wage laws, the 40 hour limitation on the work week, even corporate bailouts to protect the jobs of workers. without Marx, we would live in a world where the majority of the population lived with no safety net, little leisure time away from their desperate efforts to gain or keep employment, and precious few personal rights.

Opinion

Marx was one of many political philosophers that put forth their own ideas on socialism. In England as example the Fabian Socialists were not Marxists. The idea that without socialists the entire world would be under the thumbs of a few and people would have few rights is simply not true.

Marxism as we all know is dead. His scientific view of history and how it would develop was based on false assumptions. As an example, Marx believed that when labor unions became strong, it would fit into his views of what would happen next. Let's stop here and realize that Marx and his rich industrialist friend, Engels did not "invent" labor unions. Next Marx predicted that in advanced industrial nations such as Germany and England, the workers would cause a bloody revolution against the capitalist government. We pause again. No worker led rebellion happened in any industrialized nation. Another of Marx's predictions that failed.

Russia was not an advanced capitalistic nation, it was almost a feudal one led not by capitalists but by a Monarchy. The real revolution in 1917 was led by Mensheviks. These were not Bolsheviks i.e. Lenin.

The Bolsheviks were also not Marxists. If they were then a key component of Marx was that only in advanced capitalistic nations could a natural revolution be led by the workers to overthrow the capitalist regime. There was no such regime.

The social benefits of Bismarck were far ahead of anything that Lenin would provide. What Lenin provided was death and imprisonment to anyone opposing the Bolsheviks. The only reason Lenin even got back to Russia was based on a deal with the Germans. Lenin promised them he would end the war for Russia if he took power and he did so.

Under the guise of Marxism, untold damage was done to the Russian people. Millions of people died in a 20 year period.

No socialist movement believed that Marx was the answer to the world. Marx had no influence on the false Marxists. Social benefits began long before Marx and developed in a way Marx had never dreamed of.

Marxism has been a failed doctrine since it was first created.

Historians have debated this question for some time. The consensus for many years after the revolution emphasized the tightly-knit organization of the Bolsheviks. According to this interpretation, the Bolsheviks managed to topple the Russian provisional government with relatively little support from the Russian people as a whole. Lenin, in short, was the leader of a cadre of revolutionaries who, unified in purpose, were able to overcome his opponents, a mixture of royalists, moderate socialists, and republicans who lacked the same will and cohesion that characterized the Bolshevik movement. While not discounting the importance of these factors, modern historians tend to emphasize he degree to which Bolshevik ideology and popular appeals resonated with the Russian people. The Bolsheviks were especially popular in St. Petersburg, where the people gradually became convinced that only they could be trusted to bring the disastrous war to an end. This interpretation also places great importance on the dire conditions that confronted the Russian people in 1917. Bread and fuel shortages, exacerbated by the war itself, made them willing to embrace Bolshevik reforms. In fact, the Bolshevik program of "peace, land, and bread" was in many ways a response to the demands of the Russian people, especially soldiers and sailors and their families in Petrograd. In short, the success of the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917 can be attributed to, among other factors, their organization, the conditions faced by the Russian people, and the inability of the provisional government to deal with these conditions.

Good question, but unfortunately it is also a great example of trying to explain the Russian Revolution with a bumper sticker answer. The standard answer will be that WWI created the conditions which the Bolsheviks took advantage of to stage the November Revolution. The standard answer will also talk of the effectiveness of Lenin's message of "Land, Peace, and Bread" in winning over the peasants and working class to the Bolshevik side. Unfortunately, the answer to your question is not that simple. To fully understand why there was a revolution in Russia in 1917, and actually there were two revolutions, you must look at Russian History going back to the time of Ivan the Terrible. You have to look at historically how the Czars ruled and how they treated the majority of the Russian people. Closer to 1917 you need to look at the effects of the Russo-Japanese War, the failed 1905 revolution, the unpopularity of Peter II's wife (who was German), the effects of rapid industrialization in Russia, the fact that many nobles wanted Peter the II gone, not to end WWI but to actually fight it more effectively. The Bolsheviks successfully made a revolution and seized power at the end of October 1917. This revolution was not just chance; it was planned from the beginning, with several factors contributing to the success of the revolution. It was these contributions made it possible for the Bolsheviks to seize power.

• The Provisional government was the unfortunate authority that was "in control" at the time of the Bolshevik revolution. This aided the Bolsheviks to success, as they were already very unpopular.

• One of the most important things that happened for the Bolsheviks was when they defended the Provisional government from Kornilov's revolt.

• When the Kornilov forces tried to attack the Provisional government the Bolsheviks resisted the attack, defending the unpopular Provisional government. Through the whole of the Kornilov attack, they knew that by defending the Provisional government they would make themselves, the Bolsheviks, more popular.

• The Bolshevik party also had two other factors which made them so successful. They had support in the right places. Although they didn't have the support of the whole country most of the country's population was illiterate. This made most of the peasants, who were the ones the revolution was partly for, unable to understand what was happening, whether it was good for them or not, as they couldn't understand what was going on.It didn't matter though as the Bolshevik party had their support in the right places, where it was significant. Over half the army supported the Bolshevik cause, and with the army, nothing could stop them.

• Kronstadt, the main Russian naval base also joined the Bolshevik cause.

• The major industrial centres in Russia also joined the Bolshevik cause.

• The last major factor which made the revolution possible, were the heart of the Bolsheviks Lenin and Trotsky.

• Trotsky was also another influential leader, who led along side Lenin.