answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

Really, it depends on what you consider a "good leader" to be. If you believe that unifying the people of the country makes you a better leader, then yes, he was a good leader in that respect. He was a change from the unpopular Tsarist regime (and the interim government - aka the Provisional Government). He was once described as being a man of iron will and inflexible ambition (The Times, 1924). However, his communist ideas causes Civil War - so in that case, no, he was not a good leader.

So really it depends what you consider to be a good leader. Unified people or good policy. For example, David Cameron may not be popular for raising the cap on tuition fees, but when Britain recovers from the recession, we'll be glad of his austerity measures.

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar
More answers
User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago

It's simple really he wanted a new Russia a clean Russia and for the most part he did but then Stalin screwed it up with Stalinism.in reality the Soviet Union was not communist for that long

This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: Why was Vladimir Lenin a good leader?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp