Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays

Book Description

No figure among the western Marxist theoreticians has loomed larger in the postwar period than Louis Althusser. A rebel against the Catholic tradition in which he was raised, Althusser studied philosophy and later joined both the faculty of the Ecole normal superieure and the French Communist Party in 1948. Viewed as a "structuralist Marxist," Althusser was as much admired for his independence of intellect as he was for his rigorous defense of Marx. The latter was best illustrated in For Marx (1965), and Reading Capital (1968). These works, along with Lenin and Philosophy (1971) had an enormous influence on the New Left of the 1960s and continues to influence modern Marxist scholarship.

This classic work, which to date has sold more than 30,000 copies, covers the range of Louis Althusser's interests and contributions in philosophy, economics, psychology, aesthetics, and political science.

Marx, in Althusser's view, was subject in his earlier writings to the ruling ideology of his day. Thus for Althusser, the interpretation of Marx involves a repudiation of all efforts to draw from Marx's early writings a view of Marx as a "humanist" and "historicist."

Lenin and Philosophy also contains Althusser's essay on Lenin's study of Hegel; a major essay on the state, "Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses," "Freud and Lacan: A letter on Art in Reply to André Daspre," and "Cremonini, Painter of the Abstract." The book opens with a 1968 interview in which Althusser discusses his personal, political, and intellectual history.

Customer Reviews:

One of the best!.......2002-04-30

This is an excellent text if you are interested in having your reality turned on its head. I have used this reference in almost every paper I have written since beginning my path down the winding road of critical theory. I recommend it to anyone who thinks about why we think the way we do, anyone interested in hegemony, and anyone who thinks something is wrong with our world but s/he feels s/he just can't put a finger on what it is. This is a foundational text for anyone studying literary theory or philosophy. It contains the famous I.S.A. essay, a must read for anyone who functions metacognitively!

Essential Works of Lenin: "What Is to Be Done?" and Other Writings

Average customer rating:

Dense, but a Good Introduction
Best Collection of Lenin's Writings & Thoughts,Both Logical and Illogical
This is not casual armchair reading.
Lenin at his best
You can't always get what you want!

Essential Works of Lenin: "What Is to Be Done?" and Other Writings
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
Manufacturer: Dover Publications
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Popular Economics | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

Russia | History | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Social Sciences | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Look Inside History Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books

Look Inside Nonfiction Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0486253333

Book Description

Four most significant works, also including "The Development of Capitalism in Russia," "Imperialism, the Highest State of Capitalism," and "The State and Revolution."

Customer Reviews:

Dense, but a Good Introduction.......2007-08-11

The Essential Works of Lenin does provide a remarkably concise introduction to Lenin's thought. It will not be easy for the novice reader, so a perusal of The Communist Manifesto, or other introductory writings will be important to get a firm grasp on Lenin's Marxist views. The final 90 page chapter "The State and Revolution" may be the most accessible and intelligible of Lenin's views; much of the earlier portions of this 364 page book deal with Lenin's critique of other socialists who have deviated from true Marxism (this is the most difficult part to read, because it assumes a knowledge of his historical context). The book then, is a good one, but introductory exposure to Marxist thought will help. It does provide a valuable, concise biography of Lenin in the introduction.
That aside, let us turn to a critique of Lenin's thought. Lenin was a very intelligent critic of capitalism, with many penetrating insights into the function and abuses of a capitalist economy. It is not that Marxism was based on a complete illusion, but that it was based on a partially-true, compelling illusion that perhaps makes it so seductive, and so dangerous. I dissent, for example, in thinking that only the "dictatorship of the proletariat" can supplant the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, and that somehow a freer, fuller democracy will result from a worker-managed society in which the state will subsequently "wither away." History demonstrated that instead of withering away, the Communists party only solidified its tyranny over the masses, and substituted one dictatorship for another. That Lenin or Marx possessed a real historical "science" of political-economy I think has been disproved. While claiming not to be a utopian, it is difficult to see how some of Lenin's claims are anything but - in terms of the transformation of human beings by the abolition of class antagonisms. People remain people, inherently biased, often selfish, not concurring, and striving to realize two very difficult things: a society with the greatest possible freedom and equality for all.
Do not be mistaken, however. Just because Lenin (as Marx) made serious errors in their theory, does not excuse the student of ethics, politics, or religion from treating these writings of Lenin with the serious academic study they deserve. Lenin may have been wrong about much, but right about a great deal too. Understanding his thought will be important for any student of history and politics.
That said, this book does very little to comment on religion. Famous for their antipathy towards religion, choose another book if you are interested in their ideas about religion. This book does do very well on Lenin's political-economic theory. Lenin also draws quite considerably on Engels, considering him and Marx to be the only true interpreters (beside himself) of the doctrine.
A final note - the book also does not mention Adam Smith - it is just assumed that capitalist theory is wrong, and Lenin spends much of its time battling the "false" or "opportunist" Marxists (Bernstein, Kautsky, the anarchists). See Marx or perhaps another volume on Lenin for a more direct confrontation of Smith and classical economists.

Best Collection of Lenin's Writings & Thoughts,Both Logical and Illogical.......2007-05-19

This is probably the best book on the personal writings and political blueprints of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin.The main problem that Leninism ran into, was that an oligarchy of the communists can became as insenitive and remote from the laboring masses, as a czarist monarchy had been before. Lenin felt the peasants did not have the savvy intellectual prowess to keep the socialist-labour movement going forward.And also that the peasants would be prone towards nostalgia for the czar and his church beliefs.Regicide did little to stop the peasants human need for a spiritual superman figure and Joesf Stalin fit the bill.Many remaining WW2 Soviet veterans carry a picture of 'Uncle Joe' with them.The world war and later the cold war,gave stalwart leaders a reason to justify a 'closed-market system'. Yet this lead to another problem with Leninism.The idea of laboring for the sake of labor,regardless of real economic-market/social value.In America,Richard Nixon tried 'fixed-prices and price-caps' on some large domestic products,which only lead to a worsening of the economy with even higher inflation rates. Ronald Reagan also had the strange idea of 'Supply-side economics',which was correctly lampooned by George Bush Sr. as 'VooDoo Economics'.The faulty idea that a large supply produced would induce a large demand for the product.For example, if the government produced a hefty supply of 'reusable solar-powered flashlights(with modest capacitance)',would there then be a hefty demand for them in the dark fall-winter months and also in the light spring-summer months?If disposable batteries became scarce,because of strict local/state/federal environmental laws imposed,then demand for 'solar-powered flashlights'would increase to meet market-demand. The need and value of the product is driven by market-demand.-Lenin ,who was an admirer and distorter of the scientific ideas of Charles Darwin,did not understand that people are fickle humans .Whose tastes and values are subject to ready change.Regardless,of what laws and penalities the bureaucrats impose upon them.-Interesting book concerning socialist economic theory.

This is not casual armchair reading........2007-03-15

Beware! This is not a Lenin quote book, which is what I was hoping to get. Nor is it a comprehensive selection of selected and essential passages, which would have been better. It is, however, a small book containing four of Lenin's key essays. So although you get the complete essays, the overall selection is too small. His views on life, duty, religion being a drug addiction, the vanguard, and so forth are not here. Lenin, who was prodigiously prolific on the level of Voltaire, deserves better. Consequently, this small sample does not do him justice.

The four essays are "Development of Capitalism in Russia" "What is to be done?" "The State and Revolution," and "Imperialism, the highest stage of Capitalism." I found this last one fascinating, considering the critique by Thomas Sowell in "The Quest for Cosmic Justice," page 121ff.

The essays are both technical and polemic, and therefore boring. So if you are neither economist nor historian, much less a wannabe Che Guevara, then you may want to pass on this book. This is not casual armchair reading.

Lenin at his best.......2006-06-30

This book, along with "The Revolution Betrayed" by Trotsky is the best repudiation yet of the Big Lie of the 20th Century that Stalinism equals Socialism. Stalin was one of socialism's great ENEMIES of the 20th century and proved it time and time again (first with the liquidation of 90% of all the original Bolshevik revolutionaries -- Imagine someone claming to uphold the ideas of the American Revolution and killing off Jefferson, Madison, Washington, Adams, etc. Then with opposing the revolution in country after country, Spain, China, Indonesia, Italy, Greece, etc. Orwell's Homage to Catalonia is another good testament to this)

Anyway back to Lenin: His writings helped transformed Marxism into a truly international philosophy, one that urged the liberation of ALL people all over the world, not just the ones in the 'advanced' capitalist nation. Lenin brought political involvement into the mix as being MANDATORY for any revolutionary; previously many socialists had been content with simply 'waiting' for the right moment to make a revolution. Lenin made it clear that this was unacceptable and direct, constant political involvement and education was essential for any legitimate social revolution.

As to the last reviewer: I am sorry, but your attempt at "humor" (or more precisely, lack thereof) did not impress me. It was moronic to say the least and if I wanted a bunch of lame "one-liners" by a wannabe cyber-comedian I merely have to type in the words: "conservative intelligence.

In any event, it is very telling that pitiful attempts at humor are the only "response" the reactionaries can give to this giant of a revolutionary figure. Lenin is well worth your time.

You can't always get what you want!.......2006-04-21

And way back in the bad old days before the Bolshevik Revolution, you couldn't even get what you needed. Or more to the point: if you weren't the Czar or Czarina, or any of his or her umpteen-bazillion inbred buck-toothed relatives, and weren't hooked up with royal favorites (did someone say Rasputin?)---well, just put to bed any thoughts of getting shoelaces for your galoshes.

Or for that matter, galoshes. Or anything, really. I mean, let's think of it this way: around 1916, there were *bread* shortages in Moscow. Think about that for a minute: bread shortages. People were rioting for a loaf of crummy, dimply, worm-eaten Russian bread.

There were long lines for everything; total tyranny and oppression; you couldn't say anything against the Czar, or you would get exiled to Siberia.

So along came Lenin, who broke a few eggs and made an omelette, and---voila!---Russia went all revolutionary. End result:

1) There were long lines, and shortages. No shoelaces, no galoshes.

2) Total friggin' tyranny, *again*. You couldn't say anything against the Secretary General of the Glorious Politburo, or you would get exiled to Russia.

3) At least somebody had the decency to do away with Rasputin.

Any way you stack it, though, Comrade Vladimir was onto something big: at the very least, he was way ahead of his time with the shaved head and goatee thing, you gotta admit it. If Lenin were alive today, he would give Moby a run for his money. And then, at the least, he would take the money and re-distribute it to the People.

The real genius of Lenin is that he was the ultimate in niche marketing. Go figure: around about the 19th century, a bunch of smelly, constantly drunk, terminally unemployed guys, headed up by Hegel, Marx, and Engels, wrote reams---huge filing cabinets full of stuff---on how nasty and horrible society was. How unfair, how inhumane, how increasingly terrible and blood-hungry the Cavern-Mawed Beast of the Industrial Revolution had become.

And back then, they really did have a point: 'strikes' broken up by firebombs and gunfire, a 'living wage' paid out in company scrip, which you could spend in the company store for a book of matches, and of course, no dimply, lumpy, worm-eaten bread. Oh, and children getting snatched into the grinding gears of stinking, dirty, smoke-belching factories.

Problem was, nobody cared what these guys thought. They were smelly, and hairy, and had bad teeth, and were probably crazy.

And that might have been the end of that, had it not been for the spike-helmeted Prussian militarists to the west in Germany. Germany was, at the time, in really deep sh*t: enmired in a two-front war of sheer, bloody attrition, the Kaiser needed something that would take the Czar out of the war.

So the German invented Lenin! And because every shiny new product needs a major rollout, they booked him on a train and sent him East!

So drink deeply of our buddy Vladimir Ilyitch, and see what he had that you don't---and frankly, what Karl Marx, with his bushy ugly beard and nasty temper, did not: he was a marketer, baby! He was in SALES! Lenin's chief accomplishment is not his writing (Lenin's writing make cereal box contents read like Hemingway) it was the way he hooked it all up, got the message to the masses, spread the virus!

Let's face it: without "What is to be Done", a night-train to Moscow set up by German agents, and cuddly-bald Lenin, the Czar and his fat, pampered descendants would still be kicking it large in St. Petersburg and yachting off Yalta.

Lenin proved that you don't have to have David Hasselhoff hair to rock the world! And best of all the story of Lenin---never mind "What is to be Done", which talks a good game about the Labor Theory of Value and a Classless Society in which everybody goes in at 10, leaves at 12 for 'noonsies', and takes the rest of the week off---is pure crapola---best of all, Lenin was a custom-designed Capitalist roll-out, a total marketing triumph! Hundreds of millions of Soviet Comrades can't be wrong!

Workers of the World, unite! And grow a goatee, too: you never know, you might get to run a glorious Peoples' Republic too, someday---and get some bread, shoelaces, and galoshes.

JSG

Lenin's Tomb: The Last Days of the Soviet Empire

Average customer rating:

Winner of the Pulitzer Prize. A Classic on the Unraveling of USSR
Shallow and sensationalist, but thorough
Great Book
IT'S A KNOCKOUT !!
Remnick's master work

Lenin's Tomb: The Last Days of the Soviet Empire
David Remnick
Manufacturer: Vintage
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Japan | Asia | History | Subjects | Books

General | Europe | History | Subjects | Books

Eastern Europe | Europe | History | Subjects | Books

Russia | History | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Look Inside History Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books

Look Inside Nonfiction Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0679751254
Release Date: 1994-04-26

Amazon.com

"...the most eloquent chronicle of the Soviet empire's demise." --Washington Post Book World

"...an extraordinary confluence of observation, hard work, knowledge, and reflection; a better book by a journalist on the withdrawing roar of the Soviet Union is hard to imagine." --The New York Times Book Review

Book Description

In the tradition of John Reed's classic Ten Days That Shook the World, this bestselling account of the collapse of the Soviet Union combines the global vision of the best historical scholarship with the immediacy of eyewitness journalism. "A moving illumination . . . Remnick is the witness for us all."--Wall Street Journal.

Customer Reviews:

Winner of the Pulitzer Prize. A Classic on the Unraveling of USSR.......2007-01-01

David Remnick writes in his book, "Once the regime eased up enough to permit a full-scale examination of the Soviet past, radical change was inevitable. Once the System showed itself for what it was and had been, it was doomed."

Gorbachev's perestroika and glasnost reforms opened Pandora's Box of freedom. Once the people experiences freedoms, they wanted more. Without a tyrant in control anymore, like Gorbachev's predecessors, nothing could hold the Soviet Empire together anymore.

I highly recommend this book. I also recommend "The Cold War: A New History" by John Lewis Gaddis," "Reagan and Gorbachev: How the Cold War Ended" by Jack Matlock (Reagan's top advisor and ambassador to USSR), "America, Russia, and the Cold War, 1945-2002" by Walter LaFeber and "The Cold War: The United States and the Soviet Union, 1917-1991" by Ronald Powaski. Also read Ronald Reagan's autobiography "An American Life." Reagan himself debunks the false claim that he destroyed the USSR. In fact, he and Gorbachev became friends and peacefully ended the cold war a few years before Gorbachev fell from power. Reagan wrote that he was concerned that his friend Gorbachev might be harmed by Soviet hardliners in a coup. He turned out to be right.

A coup was staged, but it failed. That's when the unraveling accelerated.

Shallow and sensationalist, but thorough.......2006-06-07

David Remnick's "Lenin's Tomb" is a book about the journalist's experiences just before and during the collapse of the USSR at the end of the 1980s. Using a chronological overview, Remnick describes what the Soviet Union was like under the reign of Gorbachov (or "Gorbachev" in US spelling) and his views on the various leaders, journalists, KGB officers, bureaucrats, dissidents and so on.

Because Remnick goes almost entirely by interviews for his information, the book gives a very thorough biographical view of the times, but there is very little information on the general state of the country, economic and social causes for the collapse, and so on. Remnick's tone and style are very much like those of a tabloid investigative journalist, describing people and events mostly by way of the author's opinions and what the people he interviews look and act like. This has the benefit of giving one the impression of re-living the interactions with the famous of those years, but is far too shallow for any explanatory purpose.

Additionally, Remnick has too obvious favorites among the people involved. Gorbachov is generally shown more negatively than often in the West, but that fits the overall negative appraisal given to him in Russia. But people like Yeltsin and Solzhenitsyn are praised endlessly and can practically do no wrong, even though there are serious issues with both. Sakharov in particular is elevated literally to the level of a modern saint by Remnick: he is never mentioned without describing his "saintliness", "superior morality", and so on. Now in many of the cases Remnick's qualifications of his interviewees seem deserved, but it does get annoying after a while. Better to let readers decide whom they like than to pre-ordain all this.

Overall, the book is mostly useful as a collection of interviews of important people at the end of the 1980s, and as such it is very balanced in the kind of people interviewed. It fails entirely as anything more though, and should not be used as a serious explanatory book on the hows and whys of the USSR's collapse. And that is somewhat disappointing.

Great Book.......2006-04-16

Just a quick note, I really enjoyed this book. I was an adult when the Soviet Union fell, but I was very ignorant of what was really going on. Remnick's incisive portraits of the people on both sides of the fall of Communism bring the era to life.

IT'S A KNOCKOUT !!.......2005-10-03

Mr. Remnick has given us a masterwork. He seamlessly meshes intimate portraits of Soviet citizens within the larger landscape of the last days of the Soviet Empire. He has a rare ability to blend the micro and the macro in a soul-stirring narrative. This is a profound work that is filled with compelling stories. Lenin's Tomb is so superb that even those who avoid "history books" will relish it. Could not more highly recommend this book. The scads of glowing reviews below are all well deserved.

Remnick's master work.......2004-09-17

David Remnick's "King of the World" is one of my favorite books, and it encouraged me to take on this meaty Pulitzer Prize winner. Remnick was on the ground as The Washington Post's Moscow bureau chief, and in this work he strings together all of his exhaustive reporting for a compelling account of the collapse of the Soviet Empire.

If you're running a mock U.N. at your school, I'd rate "Lenin's Tomb" as mandatory reading.

Average customer rating:

Book Review
Nice continuation from previous books
Almost flawless.
A Book No Historian Can Be Without
Fatally Flawed

Russia Under The Bolshevik Regime
Richard Pipes
Manufacturer: Knopf
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Japan | Asia | History | Subjects | Books

Russia | History | Subjects | Books

Eastern Europe | Europe | History | Subjects | Books

Russia | Europe | History | Subjects | Books

Look Inside History Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0394502426
Release Date: 1994-03-15

Customer Reviews:

Book Review.......2007-07-29

Pipes gives an extremely detailed account of the early stages of Soviet Russia. The book is classic Pipes, who provides a wealth of knowledge but at times gives the reader more information that is probably desired. In my opinion, Pipes concentrated too much on the Civil War but that is the time period of the book. Despite that the book is still extremely informative and for the most part entertaining for true history readers.

Nice continuation from previous books .......2007-07-21

This was a nice finale to Pipes' trilogy on the Russian Revolution. Among this book's most interesting chapters was the chapter dealing with the Russian Civil War. Here, he takes the readers through the "White" movement, which though commanding a considerable amount of resources (including a measure of foreign support) was totally unsuccessful in trying to dislodge the Bolsheviks (who, by Lenin's own admission, were a tiny fringe group). Pipes goes to lengths to discuss how the Whites were poorly organized in terms of administration. Moreover, he points to their ridiculous insistence on restoring a unitary state within Russia. This alienated anti-Bolshevik elements among Russia's "national minorities." He also looks at often-repeated accusations that the Whites were a heavily anti-Semitic movement. While conceding that the Whites definitely had more than a few anti-Semites in high places, he argues that many of the pogroms that were conducted against Jews at this time were carried out by vigilante groups only loosely associated with the Whites (i.e., certain Cossack groups). Another interesting chapter deals with the connection between Communism and "Fascism." Here, Pipes goes far toward debunking the cherished myth that these 2 ideologies were polar opposites. Rather, he argues, Fascists (especially Hitler) borrowed many of their organizational strategies from the Bolsheviks, and had a similar view of a "revolutionary totalitarian state"). Finally, Pipes continues a running argument that Bolshevik (and Stalinist) totalitarianism had very deep roots in Russian soil, something that is critical toward understanding the development of the Soviet Union.

Almost flawless........2003-02-22

This is an extraordinary book. It is an extremely important companion to Conquest's "The Great Terror", for it sets the table. And what a feast it is. Many of the people reading this will have grown up like I did in a cold war household. In those days, in Canada anyway, I actually had friends who ardently espoused communism. Who extolled Lenin and even Stalin. Who saw the western democracies as weak, rotten to the core and on their last legs. We all knew people like that.

It was the western media, more than anything else that we had to thank for that. It was dominated by leftists, many of them (as hard as this is the believe) actually in the pay of, or beholden to, Russia. Those who weren't were hopelessly and wilfully blind. For me, one of the greatest mysteries of the 20th Century was how so many people came to be so thoroughly duped by a murderous gang of thugs who had hijacked the Russian people and sought to take over the world. How was it possible? Pipes tells this story.

And he pulls no punches. He comes from the Thucydidean school of history. He is absolutely unafraid to pass judgement. The first part of the book covers the Russian Civil war from 1918 - 1920. This strange, complex struggle still has yet to have a book length study devoted to it. But Pipes provides the reader with more than enough.

Like Conquest, Pipes is at pains to point out that there was nothing at all organic about the Russian Revolution. It was more of a coup d'etat, stage managed by a tiny cadre of Bolsheviks who had the army on their side. The workers and the peasants, and this is CRUCIAL for our understanding of what happened, had literally NOTHING to do with it.

Once Lenin and his gang were in control (and I use the term "gang" advisedly because they behaved and operated very like a criminal gang), they turned their attention to the rest of the world. They actually believed that their "revolution" was to be followed by a world revolution - which they would supervise. Pipes chapter entitled "Communism for Export" will have you shaking your head in disbelief.

The Russians knew they couldn't control what was written about them unless they controlled WHO did the writing. They did this by refusing the major press agencies access to Russia until Moscow had approved the journalist. The Sunday Times famously stood up to this bullying for decades. Not the New York Times. They sent a pre-approved journalist by the name of Walter Duranty. Ironically, Duranty was an out spoken anti-Communist. But he quickly realised that if he wrote what the Russians wanted, he would have access to inside information - with that would come influence and fame. Better yet for Duranty, he very early on identified Stalin as Lenin's likely successor (at a time which this was not at ALL obvious). He began to eulogise Stalin. He praised collectivisation, denied the Ukrainian famine - and resorted to lie upon lie upon lie. Such was the credulity of the western public and press that he was rewarded for his infamy with the Pulitzer Prize.

He was not alone. Muggeridge reports that all the correspondents voluntarily took their wire stories to the censors to be censored. John Reed, virtually canonised by the movie Reds (a movie which is in and of itself largely a shocking lie), was nothing more than a fellow-traveller blind to every excess of the Bolsheviks. The portrait of him in these pages will have your blood boiling. Randolph Hearst in a signed editorial in 1918 described Lenin's regime as the "truest democracy in Europe."

The point needs to be made bluntly. All of these journalists and fellow travellers have blood on their hands. Had the world stood up to first Lenin and later Stalin, millions, COUNTLESS millions could have been saved.

I have so little room to extol this book. I can only hope that my enthusiasm will in some way prove infectious and draw you to read it. I have focused on one aspect of this book. There is so much more. For example. Pipes makes persuasive case that Communism, Fascism and National Socialism have common roots. That Russian communism was eerily similar to Tsarism (only the Tsarists were more compassionate!)

Very importantly, Lenin comes in for the thrashing that he has so richly deserved all these long years. This zealot has escaped scrutiny for decades - largely because what came after him was so nightmarish. People for some reason like to think of Lenin as a benign philosopher - idealistic and pure - whose dreams were shattered by the evil that was to follow. Nothing, and I mean NOTHING could be farther from the truth. He was a murderer, a mass murderer, just like Stalin. The only difference was one of scale. The fact was that Lenin hated democracy - stamped it out - built a totalitarian dictatorship - and paved the way for one of the greatest monsters of all time. And it is small solace to know that Lenin and his gang of thugs reaped what they sowed. That years later Stalin would literally exterminate them with their own weapons.

Read this Book. It is one of the most important books about the 20th Century you will ever read - and it is filled with lessons that we must take to heart. We CAN learn from history. History teaches us to see patterns - it helps us to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past.

A Book No Historian Can Be Without.......2001-09-20

This is definitely one book that sheds light on the early years of Lenin's regime. This book covers many different aspects of the early regime, from the trials of the civil war to the regime's early attempts to spread communism across the western world. Other aspects included the early education programs of the regime and the government bureaucracy that grew like wildfire. The main time frame of this book is from just after the revolution to about the time of Lenin's death, although many topics extend into the 1930s. One can also pick out the topics that were obvious problems in the early 1920s, yet were still present upon the regime's demise in 1991.

Richard Pipes does an excellent job of providing the reader with a comprehensive view of the early regime - few topics go untouched. More importantly, this book is based on a large amount of factual, documented information, some of which has been made available by the recently opened archives in Russia.

This is one of the most authoritative books I have read about the Soviet Union. In the words of the person who recommended it to me - "You'll understand nothing about the Soviet Union if you haven't read this book."

Fatally Flawed.......2001-04-27

The second volume of Richard Pipes' history of the Russian Revolution shares many of the flaws as the first volume: a refusal to contemplate much recent scholarship, a correspondingly shallow sociological framework, and a complete lack of sympathy not merely for the Bolsheviks, but for the Russians as a whole. Only when they serve as victims of the Bolsheviks does Pipes profess any sympathy. Pipes devotes a whole chapter to Lenin's vicious persecution of religion. Yet one cannot forget Pipes' own comment in Russia Under the Old Regime that Russian Orthodoxy was the most sycophantic and callous of the Christian churches.

In discussing this book's weaknesses, three come to mind most strongly. The first is Pipes' explanation of the Civil War. According to Pipes although the Bolsheviks had virtually no popularity they were able to maintain control of Russia because they were fortunately centered in the heartlands of Russia's industrial might. With this centre under control they were able to conquer the rest of what would become the Soviet Union, which they did with appalling cruelty. Indeed, Pipes goes on to sneer at the Bolsheviks for taking so long and at Trotsky's skill as a military commander. But this is clearly flawed. After all, Mao Tse-Tung, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro and no doubt many others had been heavily outnumbered and outgunned. Yet they still managed to triumph and win. The Whites were never able to create their own Yenan. Despite mass poverty, famine and economic collapse within the Red zone, they were never able to create a real war economy in their own areas and appeal to the rest of the country. The simple fact was that the Whites were too autocratic and dictatorial to mobilize the popular support they needed to win. Reading Jon Smele's monograph on the fate of Admiral Kolchak brings out their own cruelty and incompetence. Likewise Geoffrey Swain has lucidly argued that the anti-Bolshevik cause suffered a fatal defeat when the populist SRs were betrayed by the quasi-monarchist whites. I'm also not pleased at Pipes' treatment of atrocities. Pipes of course agrees that they were responsible for most of the pogroms committed against Jews. But one should point out that they could be quite vicious against Gentiles as well. And as one might expect from a Commentary contributor Pipes tries to show Woodrow Wilson as unduly soft-hearted and sympathetic towards the Reds. One should read David Foglesong's book on American intervention to find out what really happened.

Second, as a Polish refugee from the Nazi-Soviet pact, Pipes want to show as much as possible the identity of the two dictatorships, and how Leninism was the key inspiration of later totalitarian regimes. The key flaw in Pipes's approach is his tendentious and partial use of the literature. He relies on conservative scholars like Renzo De Felice, Ernest Nolte and James Gregor to help argue, among other things, that Mussolini was in many ways a socialist. By contrast Adrian Lyttleton's seminal work on the Fascist dictatorship and Denis Mack Smith's portrayal of Mussolini's breathtaking opportunism go by completely unmentioned. In order to emphasize Hitler's radicalism he often cites Herman Rauschning's "memoirs," yet recent scholars find him unreliable and inaccurate. Ian Kershaw's recent biography of Hitler does not cite him at all, and in turn Pipes ignores Kershaw's invaluable The Nazi Dictatorship. Pipes also relies heavily on David Schoenbaum's Hitler's Social Revolution, yet he makes no mention of the many scholars who have heavily qualified Schoenbaum's argument that there was one. Finally, Pipes quotes Domenico Settimbrini's suggestion that if Russia had been neutral in 1914, Lenin would have been as "interventionist" and militarist as Mussolini was in successfully agitating against Italian neutrality. In response one should point out that if Russia had been neutral in 1914, there would not have been a world war and there would have been no war for Lenin to intervene in. Second, if Lenin had supported intervention he would no doubt have been treated by Pipes with much more indulgence.

Finally, I can't help but object to Pipes's counter-revolutionary sententiousness. How else can one explain such fatuous statements that in Marxism, "social antagonism was for the first time accorded moral legitimacy: hatred...was made into a virtue." This incidentally occurs in a chapter where Pipes, while ostentatiously asserting the identity of right and left "extremism," cites against the Jacobins Pierre Gaxotte, anti-semite, member of Action Francaise, and Vichy's official historian of the French Revolution. And really one must object to Pipes quote of Karl Popper on the final page: "Everyone has the right to sacrifice himself for a cause he deems deserving. No one has the right to sacrifice others or to encite others to sacrifice themselves for an ideal." Is it too much to point out that Pipes and Popper cannot believe this? For a start it would forbid conscription, while "encitement" is an inseparable part of democratic debate. And from El Salvador to Palestine to Vietnam there has no been end of sacrifices the men of Commentary and Encounter have demanded from desperately poor and miserable people. Pipes' reputation reflects less on his skill as a historian than on the lock step mentality of conservative journals, and the unwillingness of the New Yorker and the New York Review of Books to challenge them. One should really turn instead to Catherine Merridale's recent work on Russian mourning and upcoming work by Lars Lih.

Average customer rating:

Another great installment

Fascinating Tales of an Obscure Piece of the Planet.

Carries the story on from The Great Game--but not as well

A Gripping Tale of the Last Stages of the Great Game!

Absolutely brilliant

Setting the East Ablaze: Lenins Dream of an Empire in Asia
Peter Hopkirk
Manufacturer: Kodansha International
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Asia | History | Subjects | Books
Japan | Asia | History | Subjects | Books
Central Asia | Asia | History | Subjects | Books
General | Europe | History | Subjects | Books
General | England | Europe | History | Subjects | Books
Russia | Europe | History | Subjects | Books
Russia | History | Subjects | Books
General | World | History | Subjects | Books
Marxism | Political Doctrines | Political Science | Social Sciences | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

Like Hidden Fire: The Plot to Bring Down the British Empire

The Great Game: The Struggle for Empire in Central Asia (Kodansha Globe)

Trespassers on the Roof of the World: The Secret Exploration of Tibet (Kodansha Globe)

Foreign Devils on the Silk Road: The Search for the Lost Cities and Treasures of Chinese Central Asia

The New Great Game: Blood and Oil in Central Asia

ASIN: 1568361025

Amazon.com

Amid the sand and rock of Central Asia, Russia and England spent much of the 19th century playing what historians have come to call the Great Game: the struggle for control over transcontinental routes from Europe to the Far East. When the Bolsheviks came to power in 1917, Lenin continued to press Russian--now Soviet--claims to faraway, fabled places such as Samarkand and Hotan. The intrigues of his agents and their British counterparts, swashbucklers all, could come from a modern spy novel, and they make for fascinating reading in Peter Hopkirk's vivid account.

Book Description

A DANGEROUS NEW TWIST IN THE GREAT GAME

In this gripping narrative Peter Hopkirk tells how Lenin and his revolutionary comrades tried, in the period between the two world wars, to set the East ablaze with their heady new gospel of Marxism. Their dream was to "liberate" the whole of Asia, and their starting point was British India, the
richest of all imperial possessions.

The bloody struggle that ensued, the full story of which has never been told, marked a dramatic new twist in the Great Game. Among the players were British Indian intelligence officers and the armed revolutionaries of the Communist International. There were also Muslim visionaries and Chinese
warlords-as well as a White Russian baron who roasted his Bolshevik captives alive.

Pieced together from secret archives, intelligence reports, and the long-forgotten memoirs of the players involved, here is an extraordinary tale of intrigue and treachery. Like Hopkirk's bestselling The Great Game, its theme is ominously topical in view of the violent events that still grip this
turbulent region-from the Caucasus to Afghanistan-where the Great Game never really ended.

Customer Reviews:

Another great installment.......2006-12-15

Peter Hopkirk's third installment of the Great game is as masterful as the first two. Lenin's drive to take over the central Asian territories and hold the oil there inspires a true terror of what the great game had evolved into. From continuing intrigued in Afghanistan to the development of Iran as a major actor in the region come directly from this time period. The great game is one of the most interesting events in history and no one tells it better than Hopkirk. You will not believe that this book is true by the time you are done. It is utterly amazing what people will do for their countries when they are called upon to serve. The adventures of the great game should be read by everyone.

Fascinating Tales of an Obscure Piece of the Planet. .......2006-07-27

Hopkirk hooked me with his "Great Game" book, which brimmed with fascinating characters in the competition between England and Russia in Central Asia. This book is equally well-done and its players are, if anything, even more fascinating than the earlier work. You couldn't make people like this up if you were writing a novel. The way they succumbed to avarice or power and swam with or against the tide of history in a most bloody fashion is spellbinding. Hopkirk is that rare author who brings important history to us in a most palatable fashion. A great read.

Carries the story on from The Great Game--but not as well.......2002-12-29

Hopkirk is a mater story teller. Anyone who cares about how Afghanistan and the surrounding countries ended up the way they did must read The Great Game--Hopkirk's gripping description of the battle between Russia and England for control of Central Asia--a hint: they both lost.

This volume picks up the story with the Russian Revolution. Again, Hopkirk does an excellent job of out lining the players, the global politics, and how it all impacted on this traditional "crossroads of the world". Here, the focus is on Lenin, and Russia's (successful) attempt to claim/re-claim Central asia as its own.

My criticisim is that the story is not nearly as gripping as a story as was the Great Game. There are superb vignettes, but the overall narrative is simply not as good.

However, if you want to know why Russia was willing to dvote a decade (1980 to 1990) to its war in Afghanistan, which set the stage for the Taliban and Al Queda, then I know of no better book.

A Gripping Tale of the Last Stages of the Great Game!.......2002-07-28

This is an instant classic! But some of you may be wondering: what's so great about an obscure conflict in an obscure land?
For a start there's the psychopathic White Russian general, Ungern-Sternberg, the "Mad Baron", who believes himself to be the reincarnation of Genghis Khan, and who dreams of conquering Russia at the head of a Mongol army. There's Enver Pasha, the former Ottoman Minister of War recruited by the Bolsheviks, but soon betraying them in pursuit of his dream - a new Turkish empire in Central Asia. For Britain the greatest threat comes from the new Russia of Lenin and Trotsky, once more playing hard at the Great Game, eager to undermine Britain by striking at India. There are Chinese Warlords, defeated White Russian armies, Muslim rebels, bandits, an ambitious Afghan king, secret agents, Tibetan bandits, and always the possibility of a British expedition.
At the geographical centre of all this is the Chinese province of Sinkiang - a land surrounded on 3 sides by soaring mountain ranges, at its heart the world's most inhospitable desert, littered with lost cities. Between mountains and desert lies a ring of walled towns where travellers cross with a single step from an arid expanse of sand and gravel into a world of trickling streams and shady groves. Along the ancient Silk Road between the towns trudge trade caravans of camels, donkeys, huge-wheeled carts and the occasional motor car or lorry. In the towns among the narrow streets, crumbling buildings, and bustling markets Indian traders watch, sending reports back to British India...
Well, there it is, and as I have said before, you must get this book! The gripping narrative just makes you unable to put the book down until you have finished, and then it forces you to read it again! Get this book quickly!

Absolutely brilliant.......2001-10-17

One of the best books I have read in years. Possibly better than Hopkirk's original 'The Great Game'. While this is the tale of about espionage and sabotage behind enemy lines in Central Asia, it reads like an adventure novel.

The action centres around immediate aftermath of the Russian revolution, just when the new soviet state was most intent on exporting revolution to the rest of the world. Hopkirk is at his best when he introduces Russia's nemesis in Central Asia - a certain Colonel Frederick Bailey, 'Great Game' hero and butterfly collector. Totally bonkers, in a truly British way. It's so exciting that you can scarcely believe that it's true - apparently it is.

Bailey, a british agent from the Raj, is sent to Central Asia to foil Soviet attempts to expand their empire south. Along the way he evades hit squads, execution chambers and even manages to circulate amongst the enemy by joining their own secret service and working as a double agent. About half way through, Bailey evenually gets back to India and drops out of sight - much to the frustration of the Soviets, but not before one final shoot out at the border post.

Hopkirk then sets off on another romp from Moscow to the Pacific Ocean, detailing the struggle between the Whites, the Reds and their respective supporters in the international community. This time there are multiple players -: the Soviet Comintern, Indian Communists, Turkish Nationalists, White Russians, British agents fighting for the Whites and some very, very cruel members of God's creation. Everything swirls around in a vast game where everyone is out to grab what they can from the dismembered Russian empire.

Customer Reviews:

Offers great early insight into recent Russian developments.......1999-10-11

In the tradition of Lewin, Jowitt and Lane Von Laue offers insight where others have failed

Lenin's Legacy: A Concise History and Guide to Soviet Collectibles

Average customer rating:

Beautiful book, but a bit disappointing for collectors
commie collectibles for comrades and capitalists!

Lenin's Legacy: A Concise History and Guide to Soviet Collectibles
Martin J. Goodman
Manufacturer: Schiffer Publishing
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Japan | Asia | History | Subjects | Books

Russia | History | Subjects | Books

General | Antiques & Collectibles | Home & Garden | Subjects | Books

Reference | Antiques & Collectibles | Home & Garden | Subjects | Books

General | Reference | Subjects | Books

General | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
ASIN: 0764310194

Book Description

Lenin's Legacy** is a comprehensive, illustrated reference combining a concise history of the Soviet Union with a study of its "symbolism," which until now has largely been hidden from the West. With over 900 superb color photographs, the book shows nearly 2,000 items including pins and badges, orders and medals, busts and statues, table medallions and wall plaques, banners and flags, paintings and coins, and many others. This is the first book to show such a wide variety of artifacts from the Soviet Union, and explains the symbolism attached to the items in detailed text and captions. Subjects covered include political, communist party, Aeroflot, Soviet space programs, party congresses, Lenin, Soviet military forces, and others. This book is designed not only for the collector of Soviet artifacts, but also the historian, showing many symbols and their relationship to Soviet history. Prices are included as an aid to collectors.

Customer Reviews:

Beautiful book, but a bit disappointing for collectors.......2003-01-19

This book has a lot of beautiful photos of Soviet memorabilia. The captions provide some useful information about the objects, though the valuations seem rather high (at least for the items I am familiar with). However, the text hardly mentions the artifacts and instead presents a straight-forward history of the Party, armed forces, Komsomol, etc. That's fine, but why would you buy this book to read about Soviet history, when there are so many other options available? If you have the [$$$] it might be worth buying for the pictures, but it is not useful as a reference guide.

commie collectibles for comrades and capitalists!.......2000-11-12

Here is a high-quality "coffee-table" sized book loaded with rare Russian memorabilia. Every glossy page contains luscious full-color (but mostly red, of course!) photos of Soviet-era collectibles dating from the Revolution through the Great Patriotic War, Five-Year Plans, and Cold War, up until the collapse of the Union. The text accompanying the illustrations is fascinating, regardless of whether one might consider it historical or propagandic. Communists and Capitalists will find "Lenin's Legacy" fascinating and inspiring. It is a superb reference source for the quality, value, and availability of medals and orders, posters, flags, clothing, buttons and pins, paintings, busts and sculptures, and many other items of interest to collectors.

Wilson's War: How Woodrow Wilson's Great Blunder Led to Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, and World War II

Average customer rating:

Heavy-Handed Editorializing?
Fascinating Read, Ultimately Unsatisfying
Weak historical scholarship
Don't Follow Leaders
An Effective Essay, Ineffective History

Wilson's War: How Woodrow Wilson's Great Blunder Led to Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, and World War II
Jim Powell
Manufacturer: Crown Forum
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Look Inside History Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 1400082366
Release Date: 2005-03-29

Book Description

The fateful blunder that radically altered the course of the twentieth century—and led to some of the most murderous dictators in history

President Woodrow Wilson famously rallied the United States to enter World War I by saying the nation had a duty to make “the world safe for democracy.” But as historian Jim Powell demonstrates in this shocking reappraisal, Wilson actually made a horrible blunder by committing the United States to fight. Far from making the world safe for democracy, America’s entry into the war opened the door to murderous tyrants and Communist rulers. No other president has had a hand—however unintentional—in so much destruction. That’s why, Powell declares, “Wilson surely ranks as the worst president in American history.”

Wilson’s War reveals the horrifying consequences of our twenty-eighth president’s fateful decision to enter the fray in Europe. It led to millions of additional casualties in a war that had ground to a stalemate. And even more disturbing were the long-term consequences—consequences that played out well after Wilson’s death. Powell convincingly demonstrates that America’s armed forces enabled the Allies to win a decisive victory they would not otherwise have won—thus enabling them to impose the draconian surrender terms on Germany that paved the way for Adolf Hitler’s rise to power.

Powell also shows how Wilson’s naiveté and poor strategy allowed the Bolsheviks to seize power in Russia. Given a boost by Woodrow Wilson, Lenin embarked on a reign of terror that continued under Joseph Stalin. The result of Wilson’s blunder was seventy years of Soviet Communism, during which time the Communist government murdered some sixty million people.

Just as Powell’s FDR’s Folly exploded the myths about Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal, Wilson’s War destroys the conventional image of Woodrow Wilson as a great “progressive” who showed how the United States can do good by intervening in the affairs of other nations. Jim Powell delivers a stunning reminder that we should focus less on a president’s high-minded ideals and good intentions than on the consequences of his actions.

A selection of the Conservative Book Club and American Compass

Customer Reviews:

Heavy-Handed Editorializing?.......2007-06-18

Jeez, could the editorial review at least pretend to suppress their bias towards pro-British interpretation of the history?

Fascinating Read, Ultimately Unsatisfying.......2007-05-09

This book sets out the revise the record on Woodrow Wilson and his policies. Wilson brought America into WWI, resulting in a victory for the British/French coalition over that of Germany/Austria. This victory, after years of horrible bloodshed, became a punishing peace for the German people, no more responsible for the war than anyone else involved in it. Powell very accurately and ably describes how this lead to Hitler, Stalin, WWII, and ultimately our troubles in Iraq. Unfortunately, more of the book is spent addressing the results of Wilson's blundering rather than the cause. That, in my opinion, really dragged the book down. It was a good overview of the first half of the 20th century as it descended into chaos, but I didn't get a good view of, as the title of the book states, Wilson's War. Based on the title, I would have expected something more along the lines of Flemings "Illusion of Victory" followed by the second half of this book. Lastly, as other reviewers have pointed out, the book does seem to be written expressly to lead to the largely isolationist conclusion of the author. There's nothing wrong with that in general, but it doesn't feel quite correct in a book that purports to be history and not polemic.

Weak historical scholarship.......2007-01-05

Having read many of the books cited by the author, I began to question the authors credentials and scholarship. What primary sources were used? It's more of a barroom argument put down in writing than a serious historical thesis. Emotionally biased phrases such as, "Wilson was an arrogant and bitter man" without delving into the causes for this arrogance and bitterness leave me flat. The intended audience for this book appears to be high school students, as it provides a general survey of modern, Western history without much detail. While I actually agree with much of the author's main points, there are much better books on the subject. They are all listed in Powell's bibliography.

Don't Follow Leaders.......2006-11-27

This book is not the ultimate work of historical scholarship about World War I, but it is an informative and well thought out look at one of the worst presidents in American history and another nail in the coffin of the cult of leadership (see also titles like "Lincoln Unmasked" and "Bully Boy", "The New Dealers War" and "The Bush Betrayal"). This is a welcome contribution to the new wave of popular historical interpretations that are attempting to give balance to a field long dominated by tax-funded, left wing academics who miss no chance to support, justify and glory in expansions of State power without regard to loss of life or econimic cost.

And don't be mislead when post-modernist, welfare statists, like the folks at Publisher's Weekly use the word "isolationist" to describe anything you're thinking of reading. It's mearly a naked attempt to smear any philosophy that would impose limits on the size and scope of government. Non-interventionism is not isolationism!

An Effective Essay, Ineffective History.......2006-02-13

Jim Powell's book would have made an excellent op-ed piece in the Sunday New York Times or essay in The Weekly Standard, but it is not a strong work of sustained historical research and analysis. His central argument that American entry into World War I (not merely the Treaty of Versailles) paved the way for the rise of Hitler, the triumph of Lenin and Stalin, and the coming of World War II is compelling. Many historians have written about the tragic consequences of the failed peace and about Wilson's naïve belief that he could control the machinations and jealousies of the European powers, but Powell makes the more provocative case that the world would have been better off had the U.S. allowed World War I to end in a stalemate.

What is disappointing about this book (and about the lavish praise it has received in other reviews) is the shallowness of its research and its disdain for historical context. Primary sources are almost entirely absent from the endnotes. Incredibly, this book devoted to an indictment of Wilson for "his" war does not even mention Theodore Roosevelt, Leonard Wood, or any of the apostles of preparedness to whom Wilson was reacting politically. Powell did not consult the important books of N. Gordon Levin, Jr., or Lawrence Gelfand that lay out in great detail the ideological origins and objectives of Wilson's Fourteen Points. Readers of this book unfortunately will come away with insufficient understanding of how and why Woodrow Wilson formulated the foreign policy that Powell finds so historically destructive.

Readers may also come away thinking that Jim Powell has blown the cover off of the Wilson mythology - a mythology constructed and nurtured by historians Thomas A. Bailey and Arthur Link. Like other recent works of "revisionism" (such as Thomas DiLorenzo's The Real Lincoln), Powell creates a straw-man "conventional view" of his subject and fails to give adequate credit to previous generations of revisionist historians. The job of challenging Wilson's historical image as progressive idealist was already accomplished decades ago, ironically, by historians from the opposite ideological pole. The "New Left" historians of the 1960s indicted Wilson's interventionism because they believed it planted the seeds of America's involvement in Vietnam, Central America, and other conflicts of the Cold War era.

Powell seems more interested in demonstrating the efficacy of his four principles that should guide the making of U.S. foreign policy and the managing of political economy than he is in writing sound history. The libertarian ideology of the Cato Institute (where he is a senior fellow) is apparent on virtually every page. The information he imparts sometimes seems oddly chosen as historical evidence, but makes sense as building blocks for the ideological edifice he constructs. This kind of writing makes for an effective essay, but does little to enlighten us about the making of U.S. foreign policy.

Average customer rating:

Selected Works V.I. Lenin *3 VOLUMES*
V.I. Lenin
Manufacturer: Progress Publishers
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
ASIN: B000J0TVOW

The State and Revolution (Twentieth Century Classics)

Average customer rating:

Brilliant Marxist theory
Correcting an oversight ....
Revolutionary Classic
A Great Place to Start
Correct analysis, but one fatal flaw...

The State and Revolution (Twentieth Century Classics)
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
Manufacturer: Penguin Classics
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Popular Economics | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

Eastern | Europe | History | Subjects | Books

Revolutionary | Historical Study | History | Subjects | Books

General | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Russian | Foreign Language Nonfiction | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

History | Russian | Foreign Language Books | Specialty Stores | Books

Nonfiction | Russian | Foreign Language Books | Specialty Stores | Books

All Russian Books | Russian | Foreign Language Books | Specialty Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 014018435X

Book Description

State and Revolution was written by Lenin during August-September, 1917, while he was living in hiding in Helsingfors. It was not published, however, until 1918. According to the draft of the original plan made by Lenin, the work was to contain not only a theoretical analysis of the theory of the state by Marx and Engels, but also a consideration of the "the experience of the Russian Revolutions of 1905 and 1917" from the point of view of this theory. But the October Revolution and the necessity to devote every effort to the immediate practical work interfered with the conclusion of the work begun.

Download Description

No, democracy is n o t identical with the subordination of the minority to the majority. Democracy is a state which recogizes the subordination of the minority to the majority, i.e., an organization for the systematic use of violence by one class against the other, by one section of the population against another.

Customer Reviews:

Brilliant Marxist theory.......2007-08-12

Lenin's State and Revolution is the most crucial analysis of the Marxian theory of the state and its relation to class struggle. Lenin was a revolutionary determined to reveal the provisional government's capitulation to the forces of imperialism and to revivify the revolutionary edge of Marxism that "socialists" had attempted to obscure. Lenin writes
"According to Marx, the state is an organ of class domination, an organ of oppression of one class by another; its aim is the creation of "order" which legalizes and perpetuates this oppression by moderating the collisions between classes."
In Lenin's view, the aim of the revolutionary proletariat is to overthrow the state, and in turn, use it to redistribute the wealth and seize control over the means of production. The state will subsequently "wither" in time. State and Revolution is a powerful testament to the dictatorship of the proletariat, as well as an excellent critique of the anarchists and social-democrats.

Correcting an oversight ...........2004-12-24

V. I. Lenin wrote this book in 1917, while he was hiding from the Russian government. Lenin pointed out that "The question of the relation of the state to the social revolution, and of the social revolution to the state, like the question of revolution generally, was given very little attention by the leading theoreticians and publicists of the Second International (1889-1914)". He wanted to correct that oversight, and that is probably the main reason why he wrote this book.

"The State and revolution" is a very short book, well structured and not difficult to read at all. Initially this pamphlet was going to have seven chapters, but Lenin didn't conclude the seventh, due to the outbreak of the Russian revolution. In the postscript to the first edition he explains that, saying that due to the reasons already explained the conclusion of the seventh chapters would have to be put off for quite a long time, but that all the same "It is more pleasant and useful to go through the `experience of revolution' than to write about it".

The main idea in "The State and revolution" is that the State is a product of the irreconcilability of class antagonisms, and an instrument for the exploitation of the oppressed class (a "special coercive force" that rules through violence). The State of the bourgeoisie will disappear, but only through a revolution that will take the people to the dictatorship of the proletariat. The proletariat (the working class) will become then the ruling class, "capable of crushing the inevitable and desperate resistance of the bourgeoisie, and of organizing all the working and exploited people for the new economic system. The proletariat needs state power, a centralized organization of force, an organization of violence, both to crush the resistance of the exploiters and to lead the enormous mass of the population -the peasants, the petty bourgeoisie, and semi-proletarians- in the work of organizing a socialist economy."

The dictatorship of the proletariat will be only a first stage in the path to Communism ("Then the door will be thrown wide open for the transition from the first phase of communist society to its higher phase, and with it to the complete withering away of the state"). According to Lenin, the necessity of systematically imbuing the masses with the idea of the necessity of violent revolution lies at the root of the entire theory of Marx and Engels. All throughout this book, Lenin cites and examines Marx and Engels' writings, in order to explain and support his own point of view.

The importance of Marxism for nowadays world has diminished enormously, but I advice you to read this book nonetheless. It is certainly not a grueling task, and it will allow you to understand better some notions that many Marxist leaders believed with all their hearts. Ideas drive men, and men make history. "The State and revolution" will help you to get acquainted with some of those ideas, and that is not a small feat.

Belen Alcat

Revolutionary Classic.......2004-12-14

I believe this is the best, concise revolutionary analysis of the role of the State ever written.
I find it very annoying that here in the US, while many students may cursorily read the Communist Manifesto in school, I have never once met ANYONE in my life who has read the basic works of Lenin except for avowed Marxists (and only a minority of these)....and being a Communist myself, I have asked several students, and often looked through university bookstores to see if any poli-sci or history professors would break the "no Lenin allowed" rule.
Consequently, there are many people on the "left" who pretend to understand Marx and/or Marxism, but still make the exact same errors to which Lenin here responded over 80 years ago.
For example, someone just this week argued to me than Lenin was "not a real Marxist" (!!!) because he "introduced" the notion of "dictatorship of the proletariat", which was "alien" to Marx (hint: read Chapter 4 of Marx's Critique of the Gotha Programme for just one of many passages which prove this notion
totally false). State and Revolution gives many more examples of extensive quotes from Marx & Engels. One of the greates merits of S&R is that it restores the revolutionary essence to Marx, which was obscured and watered-down by the Social Democrat reformists of the 2nd International led by Karl Kautsky. Incidentally, the concept of the "dictatorship of the proletariat" has been much distorted by capitalist demagogues and anti-communist "leftists" into something completely alien to its original meaning.
To all "Left academics" and others, don't assume (or pretend) you know anything about Marx or Lenin if you've never read them...If you have to be an academic "armchair radical", at least try to get the basic facts right instead of misrepresenting what they stood for...There's no shame in not having read Lenin (join the vast majority), but it's disgusting to just pass off what you've heard about Lenin from "bourgie" intellectuals as the truth (when the truth is those intellectuals never read Lenin either most likely).
There are not a few pseudo-Marxist fakers in academia, who do more damage to popular revolutionary understanding (in the name of Marxism) than do the outright enemies of socialism. NO WONDER these "Left" anti-communist professors don't assign a book like State and Revolution, they're still trying to pass off the same lies and distortions about revolutionary Marxism that Lenin and other genuine revolutionaries tear to shreds in works like S&R.
I dedicate State and Revolution to all the "Marxian" fakers who still try to paint Marx as a mere liberal humanist reformer, and strip him of his revolutionary essence.

A Great Place to Start.......2004-10-12

Considered a classic by most, "The State and Revolution" is a work of decisive importance to communist thought. The Marxist's conception of the state is expressed clearly and concisely by Vladimir Lenin, who consistently reinforces himself with the words of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.

"The state arises" Lenin explains, "where, when and insofar as class antagonisms objectively cannot be reconciled. And, conversely, the existence of the state proves that class antagonisms are irreconcilable."

If you are unfamiliar with the elementary concepts of Marxism, you may not be ready to read this book. It isn't a particularly difficult read, but the author assumes that you have a general understanding of Marxism. This was one of the first books that I read when I began to study communism, however, and I remember enjoying it thoroughly. It was easier for me to understand than "The Communist Manifesto".

If you haven't read "The State and Revolution" and enjoy learning about Marxism, then I highly recommend purchasing it, but I suggest that you familiarize yourself with the fundamental principles of Marxist thought beforehand.

Correct analysis, but one fatal flaw..........2004-07-30

"The State and Revolution" was written in the hopes of outlining what is to be done after the proletariat seeks power (in comformity with Marxian thought).

Lenin offers some of his insights, but this is mostly taken from both Marx and Engels own analysis of the situation. What Lenin does, which is valuable, is heavy elaboration, clear and concise. Those not familiar with communist theory will find the book very long and tedious, and most parts will be read with little understanding. Those that have a basic grasp, however, will find it enjoyable.

Despite often brilliant insights, the Leninist paradigm suffers one major, unmistakable, and fatal flaw: the method of leadership, while supposedly to be a "temporary" stage for transition from socialism to communism cannot ever be "temporary" as bourgeois relations of authority and the people vs. the state are not only retained, but developed. It is actually the "Vanguard party," not the workers or the people, that assumes control. While the intentions of the party are good, this is not good enough: the party is an established minority elite that hopes to reflect the people's interests but operates on strict and authoritarian tendencies. Subsequent works by Lenin prove that he believed that only a dictatorship of the party during civil unrest could ever hope to achieve "true communism." This is flawed reasoning, and is the reasoning of every bourgeois revolution that preceded the Bolshevik Revolution; events such as the French revolution, led by an elite vanguard, sought to replace an old ruling class. Under communism, however, the old ruling class should not be "replaced" by another ruling class with "similar" property and authority relations. Rather, all classes are to be abolished along with the STATE itself!

The answer to a successful revolution lies in the hands of the people, not a group of "professional revolutionaries." It is no wonder that every single communist revolution has been led by a vanguard, and thus has degenerated into tyranny, and laid the foundations for the restoration of capitalism. "Objective conditions" such as "civil war" and "worlwide hostility to communism" is NO excuse for refusing to give the power to the WORKERS and instead concentrating it into the hands of an ELITE OLIGARCHY!

Books:

Books Index

Books Home

Recommended Books