In this comprehensive and dynamic Deutscher Prize winning work, Liebman rises about the dogmatism and sterility that plague most appraisals of Lenin, and persuasively makes the case that the Russian Revolutionary's political ideas have an enduring relevance for today's activists.
Marcel Liebman was a historian of socialism and of communism.
作者简介
· · · · · ·
"I have not yet come across anything which captures so well the complexities of Lenin's positions, or which does so with anything like the same combination of commitment and detachment."
—Ralph Miliband
“From Leninism Under Lenin there emerges a living and eminently revolutionary Lenin, not a 'blunted’ one — that is, a Lenin who sometimes hesitates and makes mistakes, who seeks...
"I have not yet come across anything which captures so well the complexities of Lenin's positions, or which does so with anything like the same combination of commitment and detachment."
—Ralph Miliband
“From Leninism Under Lenin there emerges a living and eminently revolutionary Lenin, not a 'blunted’ one — that is, a Lenin who sometimes hesitates and makes mistakes, who seeks his way forward with the help of theory, which is not a ready-made answer to every problem…. There is a striking similarity with the masterly biography of Trotsky by Isaac Deutscher.”
—Ernest Mandel
"I have not yet come across anything which captures so well the complexities of Lenin's positions, or which does so with anything like the same combination of commitment and detachment."
Ralph Miliband
From Leninism Under Lenin there emerges a living and eminently revolutionary Lenin, not a 'blunted’ one that is, a Lenin who sometimes hesitates and makes mistakes, who seeks his way forward with the help of theory, which is not a ready-made answer to every problem. There is a striking similarity with the masterly biography of Trotsky by Isaac Deutscher.”
Ernest Mandel
原文摘录
· · · · · ·
And if the 'first term' in the dialectical contradiction and transcendence can be represented, in the great debate between the supporters of organization and those of spontaneity, by a Luxemburgism carried to extremes, identified with absolute faith in the self-emancipation of the masses—a line that Rosa Luxemburg herself never fully espoused—and the 'second term' by a purely elitist conception of the Party such as Blanquism incarnates better than even the earliest form of Leninism, is not the 'third term' to be found in the Bolshevik Party as it developed in the rising phase of the revolution of 1917, before and after October? At that time the Party appears as a synthesis in which we see, merged and interacting, features retained from the original Bolshevism—with its discipline, will to c... (查看原文)
还没人写过短评呢
还没人写过短评呢