Lenin: Despot or Benefactor?

[RevolverNo9]

Views on Lenin everyone. Don't disregard the perceptiveness and pertinence of his analysis of contemporary capitalism (or maybe you disagree) but as a leader was he so wrapt up in his arrogance that he became a ruthless, authoritarian and dictatoiral leader, with a disreagrd for the human? Or was he a man with a great vision who's questionanle acts were all the result of dangerous pressures? What's your opinion? And aswell how did Trotsky differ in his be;liefs and principals on achieving revolutinoary society? Thanks.

[Roses in the Hospital]

as a leader was he so wrapt up in his arrogance that he became a ruthless, authoritarian and dictatoiral leader

Lenin wasn't a dictator in the sense Stalin was. He needed votes from the politburo like anyone else. He was of course arogant, but then he did have a lot of talet as a politician, theorist and leader. The tradgedy is we never got a chance to see how his methods would have played out before they were perverted by Stalin. Maybe his more ruthless policies could have been justified, perhaps not. The most important thing is not to be taken in by the Stalin created Lenin cult: He was a man like anyone else. We should avoid seeing anyone in purely black and white. Everyone has their faults, and everyone has their redeeming features...

[Subversive Pessimist]

He was of course arogant


Could you elaborate?

[AC-Socialist]

If someone knows themselves to be right, and tirelessly campaigns for their point of view, then isn't it inevitable that they will be percieved as arrogant?

[redstar2000]

This would seem to be a thread that's more about historical personalities than it is about theory.

So, let's move it to the History Forum.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[leftist resistance]

Im reading Lenin:Life and legacy,and,Trotsky both by dmitri Volkogonov and translated by Harold Shukman.
As Alexander's school friend,V.V Vodovozov recalled,it was impossible to be a close friend of Vladimir,'whom he thought was rude in argument,excessively self-confident and self-important,and puffed up by being thought a genius within the family and an infallible authority outside it'.
Lenin was also responsible for introducing the harsh measures that would later be adopted by Stalin.

Trotsky claimed to be a Leninist so his principals may be quite the same as Lenin.
He believed in a global revolution(yet to read in more in depth)

[RedAnarchist]

Lenin was a genius, and unfortunately he knew this.

He is sort of like Diet Stalin - similar but not the same.

[Roses in the Hospital]

Could you elaborate?

Admitadely I can't think of a precise example (though I'm sure someone can) The biography I read of him (Robert Service's) gave the impression of a man who, if not in himself arrogant, did often display characteristics which could be seen as arrogance (single mindedness, dogmatism and political ruthlessness etc.) The way he treat his political and ideological opponents could serve as an example. Though as AC-Socialist says a lot of this could be accounted for simply because he knew he was right (I can understand that feeling!)

[komon]

ha! lenin.......not in books but in deeds.if he has soms.behalve arrivist and opportunism
like stalin .......betrayers

[leftist resistance]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2004, 09:18 PM
ha! lenin.......not in books but in deeds.if he has soms.behalve arrivist and opportunism
like stalin .......betrayers
I dun understand comrade :huh:

[LSD]

Lenin was a fierce crusader for auithoritarian communism, in this aim he succeeded astoundingly.

Now, I believe that Lenin probably genuinely believed that this form of government would be best for everyon, but I think he also believed that it would be best for him. Lenin was arrogant, but that's an attribute that often goes hand in hand with those who manage to overthrow governments. It takes a certain degree of self-assuredness to launch such a campaign.

But, I think beyond questions of his character and motivations, we have to look at what he promotted, because even if he was entirely well-meaning, the ideology he followed was ultimately at fault. No matter how "good a man" one is, if one is labouring for a harmful cause, one will produce harmful results.

I don't know if Lenin was "a man with a great vision", but I do know that what he fought for was a dangeorus perversion of communism, one which proved itself to be just as dangerous as any bourgeoisie capitalism.