5 Answers

  1. Indeed, most of Lenin's works are not the most fascinating reading, plus they were created at a certain historical moment and pursued very specific goals. Therefore, in order to understand them, it is necessary, for example, to understand a fairly broad context of the socio-economic and political realities of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. You can put on the place of Sharikov who received the book and as a result came up with the idea: “And then they write, they write… Congress, some Germans…” For example, to understand the essence of ” Materialism and empirio-criticism. Critical notes on a reactionary philosophy ” необходимо it is necessary to know about Bogdanov and the struggle within the Bolshevik party. And to understand “One step forward, two steps back. Crisis in our Party ” understand the situation around the 2nd Congress of the RSDLP and Martov's position.
    Therefore, if you do not seek to become a professional researcher of the Russian revolution, Bolshevism or Lenin's creative legacy, I would recommend that you read from his works a rather small, not interesting work “The State and the Revolution” in which Lenin reflects on how a socialist state should be organized and many of his ideas are still relevant.
    Otherwise, I would rather recommend Danilkin's work “Pontokrator of solar motes” where he quite clearly retells the main thoughts of Lenin putting them in a broad context and it is not for nothing that this book has received a lot of awards.

  2. The legacy of any major and / or interesting thinker should be approached carefully. In order not to drown, it is better to follow those who have already taken the trouble to somehow figure it out. I would recommend reading, for example, Payne's ” Lenin. Life and Death” and gets acquainted with those key works that he mentions. Agree or disagree with the biographer's interpretation, etc.There are not many of these works – 5-10. They are available on the Internet or in special” selected ” works of Lenin. A complete collection is a matter for specialists, and I would not recommend starting it until the interest turns into withdrawal, and the author becomes a regular in your dreams.

  3. Only in the trash. Not philosophy, not even Marxism, but absolute Bolshevism. Reborn in Maoism, polpotovschinu. – Against Plekhanov, against the RSDLP. Suppuration in itself. – Like Mussolini's national fascism in the degree of despotism, but with an eye to world domination (see coat of arms of the USSR), which provoked Hitler. – Darkness.

  4. Even after reading his works, you will not understand anything if you do not have a political and economic base, and the main structure of the mat.parts. To read Lenin and to study and evaluate Marxism-Leninism in a separate state from classical Marxism-is like tearing out a chapter from a novel and giving a value judgment on the entire work.

    But nevertheless, if you are pragmatic about getting information, then of course you should get acquainted, because based on your question, I can already see the lack of understanding of the role and abilities of Ilyich as a theorist. You can agree with Lenin, you can disagree, but to deny his intellectual power is stupid.

    In any case, I can assure you that it is watered.your orientation will definitely change after reading his works. And in which direction, depends on what moods and level of conservatism of views you approach the study of his works. I advise you to do this with a pencil and a notebook, because the amount of information is enormous. Good luck with your research and unbiased evaluation.

  5. Lenin is an example of fitting reality to a very specific task-the organization of a revolution. He did not create anything interesting, necessary and significant for civilization. Unless you consider the more than dubious honor of justifying violence, cruelty and unscrupulousness.

Leave a Reply