important to find the immediate catalysts that tear the apples from the branch. Despite the conception of history that the Russian Revolution was caused by prevalent social and economic forces, it was truly effected by the state of anarchy in the Russian government and the ruthless opportunism and ideology of the Bolshevik Party enabling them to seize the reigns of power.

A revolution- coming of full circle- in modern history it has meant an upheaval of society, vast and violent changes in the structure of a nation incited by the people. It must be understood, the Russian Revolution was not a classical revolution. Upon occurrence, it was widely considered both by the instigators and the passive observers to be a coup d’état, or forceful seizure or overthrow of state and not a Revolution. The question is in history, did the Bolsheviks come to power on a wave of popular support, or like thieves in the night, did they steal it (Pipes Three 3)? Despite common belief, the Bolsheviks did not have the support of the masses. In Russia at the time, as previously mentioned, were numerous parties vying for power, moderate and radical. According to Harrison Salisbury, “ ...Lenin and Trotsky, neither had ever claimed, as far as I can tell from their voluminous writings, that they had the support of the masses. Trotsky once wrote, 25,000 to 30,000 people took part in the events of October in Petrograd; this in a city of 2 million people” (Salisbury 80). It is important to establish, that by no means did the Bolsheviks have any considerable support and their ascendancy to power was due to greater ruthlessness and organization. The following is a quotation from one of Lenin’s writings, dating July 1917: “ In times of revolution it is not enough to ascertain the ‘will of the majority’. No – one must be stronger at the decisive moment, in the decisive place, and win. Beginning with the medieval ‘peasant war’ in Germany... until 1905, we see countless instances of how the better organized, more conscious, better-armed minority imposed its will on the majority, and conquered it” (Pipes Three 49). These words summarize the political philosophy of Vladimir Lenin, head of the Bolshevik party. It is remarkable from a self- styled Marxist revolutionary, to have such contempt from the masses. Notably, it illustrates Lenin’s ruthlessness in that he would do very likely anything he could to seize power and that he was fully prepared to do so. He treated politics as something greater, warfare! Lenin’s policy was unique out of all of the heads of other parties in that he believed facilitating the masses would not be enough, you must subvert and conquer them. Lenin realized the fact that the masses were not revolutionary by nature, but they had to be coerced for his party to get any reasonable support. Here some other observations of his on the subject, “No single class in history has ever attained mastery unless it has produced political leaders... capable of organizing the movement and leading it... It is necessary to prepare men that devot

Some topics in this essay:
Pipes Concise, Russian Revolution, Harrison Salisbury’s, Soviets April, Vladimir Lenin, October Petrograd, Russia Russia’s, Petrograd German, , Bolshevik Party, pipes concise, russian revolution, political structure, bolshevik party, seize power, provisional government, 1917 russia, late stages war, stages war, night steal, vying power, thieves night steal, parties vying power, political structure russia,