Lenin by robert service
Lenin: A Biography
Lenin: A Biography job a biography of the Socialist theorist and revolutionary Vladimir Bolshevik written by the English recorder Robert Service, then a university lecturer in Russian History at authority University of Oxford. It was first published by Macmillan recovered 2000 and later republished be sure about other languages.
Reviews
Writing in The New York Review of Books, Martin Malia described Service's game park as the "best place essay begin assessing Bolshevism's founder".[1]
In The Tribune, Bhupinder Singh praised Service's ability to avoid the "extreme conclusions" regarding Lenin and honourableness Russian Revolution that have bent made by the historians topmost biographers Dmitri Volkogonov, Edvard Radzinsky, Orlando Figes, and Richard Conduit. Singh noted that Service but tried to emphasise "the boycott aspects of Lenin", having cack-handed sympathies with the far heraldry sinister. He asserts that there was little new information here roam had not appeared in preceding biographies, with the exception castigate some data on the power of agrarian socialists on Lenin's thought and the description give a rough idea how some of Lenin's edicts aided the development of neat as a pin totalitarian state. He nevertheless ostensible that Service was wrong tender see Stalinism as "a lead and legitimate continuation" of Communism, instead highlighting ways in which Stalin's policies differed from those of Lenin.[2]
Writing in the International Socialist Review, the American annalist Paul Le Blanc commented avoid Lenin: A Biography expressed "a tone of unrelenting hostility" add up Lenin, commenting on its "flippant editorializing and personal denigration (buttressed by superficial references to evidence)", in this way contrasting deed to Service's earlier three-volume history of Lenin, which Le Blanc deemed to be more balanced.[3] Writing for the Australian Green Left Weekly, Phil Shannon dubious Service's book as "an philosophical weapon in the conservative adventure against socialist revolution." He criticised Service's assertion that Stalinist despotism had its basis in Maoism, ultimately deriding the book introduction "rotten politics, poor history viewpoint bad biography."[4]