Best Introduction To Leninism?

[Colfax]

I've read key texts by Lenin but am interested in now exploring secondary sources. What do you take to be the key introductions to/overviews of Leninism?

[Sasha]

Living my live part 2 by Emma Goldman, her experiences traveling Leninist Russia (on request of the Bolsheviks and starting out as an critical but enthusiastic supporter of the Bolsheviks) is all you ever need to read on the subject. It doesn't matter what the theory is, its the praxis that follows from it that counts, and leninism was a betrayal of the revolution from the start and got only worse after that.

[Fourth Internationalist]

I'm not sure what is better than the man himself. Perhaps works by other Bolsheviks would be good, too? Other people like Stalin (eww) and Trotksy have their own interpretation of Leninism, and many groups have their own view of what the proper Leninist line is in the modern day. You can always feel free to read about the different Leninist tendencies, too, as they will all give information about what Leninism is (to them, at least). No introduction to Leninism doesn't really have a bias, from what I've read. But I'd say if you've read his key works, you don't need to rely so much on other's interpretation of its proper continuation, unless you are looking for that.

Edit: You can also read what the anarchists, like mentioned above, have to say about Bolshevism. They're fun to read. :lol:

Edit again: Be wary of the below text; it is very biased and misleading, in my opinion.

[bropasaran]

Some chapters and essays:


H.3.3 Is Leninism "socialism from below"? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secH3.html#sech33)


-

H.5.1 Why are vanguard parties anti-socialist? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secH5.html#sech51)
H.5.2 Have vanguardist assumptions been validated? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secH5.html#sech52)
H.5.3 Why does vanguardism imply party power? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secH5.html#sech53)
H.5.4 Did Lenin abandon vanguardism? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secH5.html#sech54)
H.5.5 What is "democratic centralism"? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secH5.html#sech55)
H.5.6 Why do anarchists oppose "democratic centralism"? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secH5.html#sech56)
H.5.7 Is the way revolutionaries organise important? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secH5.html#sech57)
H.5.8 Are vanguard parties effective? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secH5.html#sech58)
H.5.9 What are vanguard parties effective at? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secH5.html#sech59)
H.5.10 Why does "democratic centralism" produce "bureaucratic centralism"? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secH5.html#sech510)
H.5.11 Can you provide an example of the negative nature of vanguard parties? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secH5.html#sech511)
H.5.12 Surely the Russian Revolution proves that vanguard parties work? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secH5.html#sech512)


-


H.6 Why did the Russian Revolution fail? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secH6.html)

H.6.1 Can objective factors explain the failure of the Russian Revolution? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secH6.html#sech61)
H.6.2 Did Bolshevik ideology influence the outcome of the Russian Revolution? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secH6.html#sech62)
H.6.3 Were the Russian workers "declassed" and "atomised"? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secH6.html#sech63)
-


8. Are Leninists in favour of democracy? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/append31.html#app8)


-


How did Bolshevik ideology contribute to the failure of the Revolution? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/append44.html)

1 How did the Marxist historical materialism affect Bolshevism? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/append44.html#app1)
2 Why did the Marxist theory of the state undermine working class power? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/append44.html#app2)
3 How did Engels' essay "On Authority" affect the revolution? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/append44.html#app3)
4 What was the Bolshevik vision of democracy? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/append44.html#app4)
5 What was the effect of the Bolshevik vision of "socialism"? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/append44.html#app5)
6 How did Bolshevik preference for nationalisation affect the revolution? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/append44.html#app6)
7 How did Bolshevik preference for centralism affect the revolution? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/append44.html#app7)
8 How did the aim for party power undermine the revolution? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/append44.html#app8) -


-


Were any of the Bolshevik oppositions a real alternative? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/append45.html)

1 Were the "Left Communists" of 1918 an alternative? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/append45.html#app1)
2 What were the limitations of the "Workers' Opposition" of 1920? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/append45.html#app2)
3 What about Trotsky's "Left Opposition" in the 1920s? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/append45.html#app3)
4 What do these oppositions tell us about the essence of Leninism? (http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/append45.html#app4)


Go through these and that's pretty much what you need to know about Leninism.


.

[Dire Helix]

Reconstructing Lenin: An Intellectual Biography by Tamas Krausz:
http://www.amazon.com/Reconstructing-Lenin-An-Intellectual-Biography/dp/1583674500

Lenin by Lars T. Lih:
http://www.amazon.com/Lenin-Reaktion-Books-Critical-Lives/dp/1861897936

[Sinister Intents]

Well, I would say read State and Revolution to help out getting into it, but that's because I have a physical copy of that book, definitely everything else everyone has stated.

[reb]

Leninism doesn't have much to do with Lenin beyond using his corpse as a prop for Stalinist regimes. Leninism was the ideology that was used to justify the counter-revolutionary nature of the USSR. What it does is take all of the life out of Lenin and turn him into a dogma. What this means is that they will use writings by Lenin from all periods of his life to justify everything that Stalin did without providing any context. So you get them cherry picking quotes about Trotsky, telling you that What is to be Done is relevant, creating this whole idea of a state socialism from Lenin's use of the phrase "semi-state", they won't mention that many major works of Marx weren't available to Lenin, Lenin's paraphrasing and praising of Kautsky and the SPD, and so on. It places Lenin in a historical vacuum so to speak. Leninists aren't going to tell you this though because of their general level of immaturity.

[Os Cangaceiros]

The Foundations of Leninism by JV Stalin

[Remus Bleys]

I guess it depends on what exactly one's definition of Leninism is. Leninism can be seen as taking random out of context Lenin quotes and using it to justify the ussr, then I guess you'd want to read some Stalin on the matter. If Leninism is the belief that stalin was counter revolutionary but that the ussr was in some way "progressive" (in regards of "from capitalism to socialism") then I would think that you should read trotsky. If Leninism is the theory and action of the Bolsheviks, then early Bukharin and earlyish Trotsky are important to read in regards to Lenin (Bukharin strongly influenced Lenin's theory of Imperialism). All these definitions are inadequate, some being more correct then others (indeed, the ICP split Il Partito defines Stalinism as a double negation of Leninism).
Leninism isn't synonymous with everything Lenin wrote either - indeed RIM's official position (not that I agree with RIM but I do think they are correct in this case) is that Infantile Disorder was a missapplication of Leninism in regards to the European countries. If RIM is correct then it follows that Luxemburg and Gorter are Leninists.
Bordiga said that if Leninism was the continuation of Marxism from Marx to Engels to Lenin (even bukharin, early trotsky and some Luxemburg) then he is a Leninist. The historical invariance of Marxism has this to say "It is a historical school we are dealing with, not the ’Opera Omnia’ of one particular individual."
So to you I recommend reading Lenin's polemics, early trotsky, some bukharin and Luxemburg and others who had an influence on lenin (marx, engels, kautsky, plenkhov (sorry for the misspelling)) and finally some Bordiga.

[Brutus]

Read gorter's open letter to lenin for the reply to "infantile disorder...". And Remy, it's Plekhanov.

[Thirsty Crow]

In my opinion, and definite and specific political current within the workers' movement that can be called Leninism reasonably needs to be examined in relation to the revolutionary process centering on two points: the February and the October revolution, and the subsequent aftermath and results of the attempts at building proletarian power in Russia.

Go straight to the horse's mouth. Lenin's April Theses, State and Revolution, and Left Wing Communism are documents I find relevant here (as this is a request for a sort of an introduction, I'll restrict myself to these), and you can also check out Stalin's Foundations of Leninism for a specific take on what has by then been solidified into a tradition (likewise, Trotsky's views can be also examined here but I'm sure Trotskyists here are more than able to suggest reading material).

As for the "pre-history" of Leninism, you can check out What is to be Done and Trotsky's Results and Prospects (the latter can help you in understanding both the connecting thread between 1905 mass strikes and soviet formation and 1917, which is also quite relevant for Leninism).

I think that's enough for now.

[Q]

Lenin Rediscovered: "What is to be done?" in context gives you the whole picture of Lenin the orthodox Marxist. The book is broadly available in book stores. If you can't pay that, Lars Lih, the author, wrote a whole lot more on the subject. The following three articles in particular might be helpful:

VI Lenin and the influence of Kautsky (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/783/vi-lenin-and-the-influence-of-kautsky)
Lenin, Kautsky, and 1914 (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/784/lenin-kautsky-and-1914)
The four wagers of Lenin in 1917 (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/785/the-four-wagers-of-lenin-in-1917)

And Lih wrote more for this publication. You can find it all here (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/authors/lars-t-lih).

[Brutus]

Lenin Rediscovered: "What is to be done?" in context gives you the whole picture of Lenin the orthodox Marxist. The book is broadly available in book stores. If you can't pay that, Lars Lih, the author, wrote a whole lot more on the subject. The following three articles in particular might be helpful:

VI Lenin and the influence of Kautsky (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/783/vi-lenin-and-the-influence-of-kautsky)
Lenin, Kautsky, and 1914 (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/784/lenin-kautsky-and-1914)
The four wagers of Lenin in 1917 (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/785/the-four-wagers-of-lenin-in-1917)

And Lih wrote more for this publication. You can find it all here (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/authors/lars-t-lih).

I want to add this article (http://www.cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/838/scotching-the-myths) by Lih which deals with myths surrounding What is to be Done?

[Brotto Rühle]

Gilles Dauve's The "Renegade" Kautsky and his Disciple Lenin. (https://libcom.org/library/renegade-kautsky-disciple-lenin-dauve)

[ComradeOm]

I've read key texts by Lenin but am interested in now exploring secondary sources. What do you take to be the key introductions to/overviews of Leninism?Lenin's a strange one in that he's been massively influential* for a very short burst of creativity. His key texts (most obviously State and Revolution and Imperialism)* were written in a brief flurry during WWI when the collapse of the Second International forced Lenin to re-examine his theories. The earlier works (with the semi-exception of the Development of Capitalism in Russia) are more polemical, written in the service of intra-party feuding**, and his post-Revolution publishings were pragmatic in the extreme, containing almost no theoretical content of note.

(That said, his last works, particularly Better Fewer, But Better are often criminally overlooked. They're important analyses of the deficiencies of the Soviet state.)

So if you've read the key works then you're pretty okay for pre-Revolution Lenin. James White's Lenin: The Practice and Theory of Revolution provides a solid overview of Lenin's political evolution. I disagree with White in places but it's a good one-volume summary of the context of the writings. After that, I'd focus on actual works of history for the post-Revolution period; see my sig for some books on this.

But the important thing is that you've read and understood the key texts from that amazing creative period just before the Revolution. That's what defines Leninism from what came before and after.


-----

*And they are key. To the point that basic Marxist conceptions such as the nature of the state or imperialism are still essentially 'Leninist'. Even if it's a debt that not everyone wants to acknowledge.

**It's not massively relevant but Grossman has this great tale of Lenin in his exile days:

"The author of one memoir about Lenin recalls going for a Sunday walk with him in the Swiss mountains. Out of breath after a steep climb, they reached the summit and sat down on a rock. The young woman thought that Vladimir Ilyich's intent gaze was taking in every smallest detail of the beautiful alpine landscape. She felt moved and excited, thinking of the poetry that was flooding his soul. All of a sudden he sighed and said, 'Those Mensheviks - they're really fouling things up for us!'"