The Rise of Stalin, 1917-29

In his book Stalin's Russia (1993), Chris Ward comments:

“No single factor can explain Stalin's rise to power.  What one is dealing with are not mutually exclusive explanations but overlapping hypotheses which cannot be easily be prioritized.”

He identifies six hypotheses suggested by historians as to why Stalin rose to power:

1. The ‘heroic’ (traditional) explanation’: Stalin as an evil genius, 'playing' the different factions. 

2. Trotsky seriously underestimated Stalin’s qualities, attributing to him only “a blending of grit, shrewdness and craftiness”.

3. Stalin was a master at administirovani: when it came to a showdown Trotsky or Bukharin might win the argument but Stalin invariably won the vote – “a triumph, not of reason, but of organisation” (EH Carr).

4. Party historical: Stalin portrayed himself as Lenin’s heir.

5. Ideological: Stalin portrayed himself as balancing between extremes if the NEP and ‘War Communism’.

6. Socio-cultural: the Lenin enrolment of 1924 and the civil war had created a malleable Party membership and bureaucratic culture which allowed the Party Secretary to gather power and influence.