Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by lukewhitestone
Lenin the Dictator by Victor Sebestyen
5.0
As someone fascinated by all things related to the Russian revolution and world war I, one of the biggest gaps of my understanding of this time period was, well, Vladimir Lenin. Was he actually evil? Or was there a possibility he was a well-intentioned socialist who mistakenly created an evil state? To what degree was he responsible? And how did he get put in this place to begin with?
Sebestyen answers all of these questions and much more, filling out my understanding of Vladimir Lenin in a supremely readable and clear manner, maintaining the narrative and the story without injecting any superfluous literary flourishes. This is a straight ahead biography of the man, following his whole life, from birth, to the formative deaths of his father and brother, his radicalization, his exile, his personal life and how it affected his work, his adeptness as a political tactician, all the way through his rise to power as dictator, his death and legacy.
The subject matter is enthralling on its own, but I was particularly impressed with the author's skill and clarity in relaying the information. Very well done.
I feel like I came away with satisfying answers to my questions going in. Was he actually evil? Essentially yes, and not only did he hate the bourgeoisie with a passion, but he did little to improve the lives of the working class and peasantry (in fact, he undoubtedly made their lives worse). Was this a case of well intentioned socialism gone awry? No. Lenin essentially invented his own brand of Marxism (now referred to as Marxism-Leninism) which conveniently allowed for a party to take power on behalf of the proletariat, and rule over them like some sort of "benevolent" dictator. And of course he saw himself as the dictator. He was very much responsible for the terrible state he created.
I sort of see him as a case of a master tactician who came to power and lost his purpose for attaining power early on. Whether it was because of necessary consequence of communism or his own distinct lack of care for actually achieving the ideals of communism, he failed to create the utopian state he and his followers wanted. He was blinded by the game he was playing and hatred for his enemies (even/especially those close to him such as the Mensheviks), and possibly worst of all he left Stalin in power, all but sealing in 70 years of suffering for many millions of people.
And those are just the big picture takeaways. There are many pointed details revealed in this biography that I will look back to in the future. The details of the coup, his relationships with Nadya and Inessa Armand, his style as an orator, his dealing with the Romanovs, to name a scant few.
Overall excellent, highly recommended. 5 stars.
Sebestyen answers all of these questions and much more, filling out my understanding of Vladimir Lenin in a supremely readable and clear manner, maintaining the narrative and the story without injecting any superfluous literary flourishes. This is a straight ahead biography of the man, following his whole life, from birth, to the formative deaths of his father and brother, his radicalization, his exile, his personal life and how it affected his work, his adeptness as a political tactician, all the way through his rise to power as dictator, his death and legacy.
The subject matter is enthralling on its own, but I was particularly impressed with the author's skill and clarity in relaying the information. Very well done.
I feel like I came away with satisfying answers to my questions going in. Was he actually evil? Essentially yes, and not only did he hate the bourgeoisie with a passion, but he did little to improve the lives of the working class and peasantry (in fact, he undoubtedly made their lives worse). Was this a case of well intentioned socialism gone awry? No. Lenin essentially invented his own brand of Marxism (now referred to as Marxism-Leninism) which conveniently allowed for a party to take power on behalf of the proletariat, and rule over them like some sort of "benevolent" dictator. And of course he saw himself as the dictator. He was very much responsible for the terrible state he created.
I sort of see him as a case of a master tactician who came to power and lost his purpose for attaining power early on. Whether it was because of necessary consequence of communism or his own distinct lack of care for actually achieving the ideals of communism, he failed to create the utopian state he and his followers wanted. He was blinded by the game he was playing and hatred for his enemies (even/especially those close to him such as the Mensheviks), and possibly worst of all he left Stalin in power, all but sealing in 70 years of suffering for many millions of people.
And those are just the big picture takeaways. There are many pointed details revealed in this biography that I will look back to in the future. The details of the coup, his relationships with Nadya and Inessa Armand, his style as an orator, his dealing with the Romanovs, to name a scant few.
Overall excellent, highly recommended. 5 stars.