Leninism Under Lenin has 47 ratings and 8 reviews. Paul said: Narrates the terrain of Leninist politics in a refreshingly undogmatic fashion. Liebman is. Marcel Liebman was a historian of socialism and of communism. Reviews “ From Leninism Under Lenin there emerges a living and eminently. Leninism Under Lenin  is a serious and useful work. By dismantling these myths Liebman renders a service to the cause of historical truth, and, Marcel Liebman, Leninisme sous Lenine, 2 vols., Paris, Seuil,
|Genre:||Health and Food|
|Published (Last):||27 April 2006|
|PDF File Size:||17.88 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||5.19 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
What, at bottom, was the mistake made by the Bolshevik leaders in ? Dialectics here as employed by Liebman is simplified into something akin to a lnein ethic or rationality. It was thanks to these successes that the Bolshevik workers were able to play a decisive part in the factories so early as the revolution of February No trivia or quizzes yet.
But it is lieman thing to say that Lenin and Trotsky erred in and another to claim that, by taking these exceptional measures which were largely inevitable, and the consequences of which were at that time unpredictablethey caused the entire subsequent series of events.
Liebman does an admirable job of documenting the rise and activity of Lenin and the Bolsheviks. Kristofer Dubbels rated it it was amazing Jul 24, Why were these revolutions not successful? The bulk of them can then join the vanguard party.
Or could it be that 4 the delay in the coming of proletarian revolutions in the West is indeed due to subjective causes, meaning, very largely, the delay in the application of Leninismthrough the degeneration of the Communist International?
This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. From tohe was mzrcel of the weekly journal La Gauche Lnein Left and in founded the journal Mai May which existed until I t was in this spirit that the Communist International was established. At that time the Party appears as a synthesis in which we see, merged and interacting, features from the original Bolshevism — with its discipline, will to coherence, tendency to centralism, concern for efficiency — and the characteristics that accompany great popular movements, defying all organisation from without, instructions from the top, and even the forecasts of the most revolutionary of strategists.
Leninism Under Lenin by Marcel Liebman
Two fundamentally different answers to this question have been offered. It requires a previous implantation of the cadres of the vanguard party among the leninizm To be complete, and to be fair to Lenin, it should be added: An historian of socialism and of communism, he published a number of well known books, notably on the Russian Revolution, Leninism and the history of the labour movement in Belgium. Or else we are not convinced that the situation is revolutionary, in which case there is no sense in our just talking about a war against war.
Return to Book Page. A correct intervention by this subjective factor could have altered the course of leninsm.
Liebman and Leninism
The number of wage-earners actually increased by 50 per cent between andand could have been made to increase even more rapidly. That a revolutionary working-class party cannot attain a high level of effectiveness in a period when the revolution is on the ebb and the masses are passive is almost self-evident. It’s a must read for anyone. Provocatively uses the phrase “de-Bolshevize” to describe the process by which Lenin’s party was transformed under the influence of the great mass movement of But its immediate acuteness was exaggerated: Or as one party militant said in reference to the woman’s demonstration which kicked off the February Revolution: At other times their interest in the class struggle as a whole national and international may greatly expand and develop.
On the one hand, by deepening his study of imperialism, Lenin came to the conclusion that, in the setting of a world market which had reached the stage of monopoly capitalism, Russian capitalism was doomed to remain under the domination of international finance-capital, and therefore could not but continue to be cramped, maimed and underdeveloped, with a state power that was reactionary and barbarous. They have had to follow the leadership either of the proletariat, or the capitalists — there is no middle way open to them.
A strong analysis of the Bolshevik party through, over, and under Lenin from the initial pre days until Lenin’s death. It was not inevitable that this numerical increase should be accompanied by persistent unemployment.
The tragedy of the Bolshevik Party was that only a minority of its leaders and cadres appreciated the acuteness of the danger at the beginning of the s. Helen Jeffries rated it it was ok Jan 29, I am firmly convinced that Lenin had already modified his views by the end ofand certainly saw things differently in Cbsd library rated it it was mrcel Dec 28, Liebman asks this question: He tries to explainas well, and in so doing he comes up against the entanglement of history with theory, as is inevitable for anyone who aims to deal with Lenln and Leninism from the Marxist standpoint.
Nevertheless, by bringing in this social factor only half-way through his second volume Liebman sets it, so to speak, in the margin of his analysis, instead of setting it squarely in the centre thereof. Liebman’s thesis is rather underwhelming and is not quite as organically connected to his presentation of Leninism’s developments, reducing Lenin’s significance essentially to the dialectical intensity achieved by his practice.
Liebman would not reject this definition.