Leninism

[Monty Cantsin]

i just wonted to know, what a book/s i could read to better understand Leninism? i


ps it would be better if it was just one book summing it all up.

[SonofRage]

Here's an overview:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leninism

[The Feral Underclass]

Look in the Che-Lives Dictionary (http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=8&t=21255) there maybe a book there. 'State and Revolution' was written by Lenin. It maybe a little hard going, but it sums it up pretty well I think.

[Saint-Just]

What Is To Be Done? is the classic Lenin work. But The State and Revolution is easier to read and just as interesting. However, you would not fully understand Leninism unless you read both, but you can certainly get a very clear idee from The State and Revolution.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Chairman [email protected] 24 2004, 10:24 AM
What Is To Be Done? is the classic Lenin work. But The State and Revolution is easier to read and just as interesting. However, you would not fully understand Leninism unless you read both, but you can certainly get a very clear idea from The State and Revolution.
That's a pretty misleading response, CM. State and Revolution is the least "Leninist" of all of Lenin's works...I would think you would be aware of that.

Works like What Is To Be Done?, One Step Forward; Two Steps Back, and Left-Wing Communism--An Infantile Disorder are much more representative of the totality of his views.

Personally, I question the honesty of his views as expressed in State and Revolution...I think you could make a good case that it was written more as a "public relations" pamphlet than as a serious summary of his real views. Certainly his policies after October 1917 bore no relationship to the views expressed in S&R.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[Solace]

Personally, I question the honesty of his views as expressed in State and Revolution...I think you could make a good case that it was written more as a "public relations" pamphlet than as a serious summary of his real views. Certainly his policies after October 1917 bore no relationship to the views expressed in S&R.

Damn straight! You took the words out of my mouth.

[crazy comie]

that was becuse of the situation at the time not becuse of his belifs.

[Saint-Just]

Originally posted by redstar2000+Jan 25 2004, 12:10 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (redstar2000 @ Jan 25 2004, 12:10 AM)
Chairman [email protected] 24 2004, 10:24 AM
What Is To Be Done? is the classic Lenin work. But The State and Revolution is easier to read and just as interesting. However, you would not fully understand Leninism unless you read both, but you can certainly get a very clear idea from The State and Revolution.
That&#39;s a pretty misleading response, CM. State and Revolution is the least "Leninist" of all of Lenin&#39;s works...I would think you would be aware of that.

Works like What Is To Be Done?, One Step Forward; Two Steps Back, and Left-Wing Communism--An Infantile Disorder are much more representative of the totality of his views.

Personally, I question the honesty of his views as expressed in State and Revolution...I think you could make a good case that it was written more as a "public relations" pamphlet than as a serious summary of his real views. Certainly his policies after October 1917 bore no relationship to the views expressed in S&R.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas [/b]
I agree that the analysis of Communism in The State and Revolution could be seen as least Leninist and questionable as to its honesty. However, there is much of it that is very important, such as the relation of dictatorship to democracy. And, as you suggested a good piece to recommend to those who are not familiar with Leninism.

What Is To Be Done is certainly the most important. However, I and Huzington/Anti-Fascist/Ixabert have both agreed that The State and Revolution is a good read for anyone.

[The Feral Underclass]

that&#39;s interesting. It was state and revolution that turned me away from authotarianism.

[SonofRage]

Originally posted by The Anarchist [email protected] 26 2004, 10:52 AM
that&#39;s interesting. It was state and revolution that turned me away from authotarianism.
I think it&#39;s pretty interesting how different people react differently do it. I&#39;ve spoken to some who reacted as you have, and others who had the opposite reaction.

[Saint-Just]

I recommended The State and Revolution since it is a good introduction to Leninism. It turned The Anarchist Tension away from Leninism, but I should imagine he would have disliked What Is To Be Done? far more, although it is a better work. Perhaps What Is To Be Done? would be a better book to read first since it is a better in defining Leninism.

The first Leninist work I read was writing by Mao Zedong.

[Monty Cantsin]

i&#39;ve stared reading The State and Revolution the other day and im half way through chapter 3. very interesting so far. His given me reassurance in armed revolution but as for now he hasn’t convinced me that the state should wither away.

"The proletariat seizes from state power and turns the means of production into state property to begin with. But thereby it abolishes itself as the proletariat, abolishes all class distinctions and class antagonisms, and abolishes also the state as state"

why go any further then that? so for now im calling myself a anti-reformist Socialist.

[crazy comie]

He wan&#39;ts to abolish the state becose it is only capable of oppresion.l