How significant were the personalities of the contenders to succeed Lenin in accounting for Stalin’s defeat of his opponents in the years 1924-29?

How significant were the personalities of the contenders to succeed Lenin in accounting for Stalin’s defeat of his opponents in the years 1924-29?

In the years before Lenin’s death and the years that followed. Stalin was seen to be in the weaker position than the seven other opponents, this being because he was doubted in his role in the revolution and therefore as his role of the leader of the party. I believe that the personalities of the contenders was significant in the power struggle but it was also several main factors that played a role in allowing Stalin to become victorious these being his ruthless personality and devious strategies which allowed him to tactfully defeat the others he saw as opponents. He accomplished this by manipulating his powerbase and ultimately emerging as the leader of the party in the year 1929, which thereby ended the struggle for leadership.

It was the personalities of each contender which played a role in establishing their position and reputation within the party and ultimately would either strengthen or weaken their chances of becoming the leader. Trotsky was seen as a vital member of the party, having the strongest revolutionary record of all opponents, this being with his leadership of the red army which had allowed the communists the seize power during the October revolution helping to enhance his reputation and leader of savnorkarm. Although he was labelled a traitor when he sided with the Mensheviks in 1903 and was noted in Lenin’s testament as being ‘arrogant’ as well as managing to gain enemies within the party as he was seen to have more of a westernised ideas than the others in the party.
Similarly Kamenev also allowed his unfavorable personality to ruin his appeal within the party this being because he was seen as very cautious and opposed the April theses, the October revolution and the creation of all communist- government and done no noticeable part in the civil war. There was also the fact that Lenin didn’t write anything about him in his testament which shows more than if he did, showing he didn’t see him as a contender. Kamenev was disloyal in the months of 1917, and didn’t have a big party appeal with his little personal ambition and the fact he was an uninspiring public speaker. But he was deputy of the sopucome and led the government during Lenin’s illness.
Bukharin did have a reasonable backing behind him with the fact he was a leading light in the Moscow communist party during the year 1917 and was also the editor of the party’s most important magazine/ newspapers and had influence over the education. Lenin also spoke fondly of Bukharin in his testament referring to him as ‘golden boy’ of the communist party and the favorite within the party. Although his views weren’t ideologically sound and got no votes for the pullet beauro.
Zinoviev was seen to be not very involved in any revolutions and during the civil war stayed in luxury hotels as well as opposing the October war, although Lenin’s and Zinoviev’s friendship was evident as they went into hiding together in mid-1917, but in Lenin’s testament he stated that he thought of him as disloyal to the party and to go into other groups of politics. Zinoviev was seen as the least appealing within the group because although he was a good speaker with a crowd but he was vain and wrongly ambitious. Zinoviev was head of comingterm and for spreading Marxist views as well as being the head of Petrograd and Moscow branches of government, so he had the support over the largest cities.
Kirov was seen as the biggest threat to Stalin in during the congress of victors because he topped the poll rather than Stalin as Kirov received 1,225 votes compared to Stalin 927 votes. This also followed the fact that an old group of Bolsheviks approached Kirov following the vote and tried to persuade him to stand for general secretary, and although Kirov refused Stalin found out about the plan and for Stalin these events showed evidence that he had to purge the party because they could no longer be trusted. Because of this Stalin and the party lied about the votes to keep Stalin on top and in position as well as the fact he felt unable to trust anyone within the communist party anymore and therefor acted to remove those he saw as a potential threat. And although Stalin was now the unchallenged leader of soviet Russia he believed he still had many enemies and the recent history of Trotsky, Zinoviev, and Bukharin who all held leading positions in the party falling from power made him anxious because he felt he could suffer the same fate.
Whereas Stalin during and after the years of the October revolution was made the committee member who was carrying out order rather than taking the initiative. He refused to accept Trotsky’s during the civil war which his presence in 1921 secured him a position at the highest level of government. Lenin before the October revolution came to rely on Stalin’s administration ability and loyalty as prior to the illness Stalin always backed Lenin on controversial issues but than once Lenin was ill Stalin began to oppose him. In Lenin’s testament he expressed concern that Stalin ‘concentrated an enormous amount of power in his hand and did not always use it wisely’. He also demanded that the other senior members of the party think about a way of removing Stalin and finding someone more tolerant, more loyal, more polite and more considerate to the comrades and less capricious to take his place. Stalin managed to stop the testament coming out by convening the central committee that it would be bad for them so they didn’t publish it to the public.
Stalin also had the power to advance the careers of those within the communist party machine and was prepared to appeal to the national pride of those he sort to lead and appeared to be the voice of calm moderation. He was responsible for the various branches of the party bureaucracy and for interpreting positions was considered mundane by senior which he could use to make himself leader. Stalin could also manipulate his position as head of soviet government to gain great loyalty from those who was responsible for ensuring that the government workers who wanted to keep their jobs. Stalin was seen as safer than the other opponents because they were more radical then him.
In conclusion it was of Stalin’s ruthless personality and devious tactics such as telling Trotsky the wrong date of Lenin’s funeral and having Bukharin set up meetings which he then pronounced as secret, which allowed him to tactfully defeat the others that he saw as opponents. He done this by manipulating his powerbase and ultimately emerging as the leader of the party in the year 1929. The personalities just added to the power struggle which ended when Stalin become leader of the party 1929.