Estado y revolución by Vladimir Lenin

Estado y revolución

No, democracy is not identical with the subordination of the minority to the majority. Democracy is a state which recogizes the subordination of the minority to the majority, i.e., an organization for the systematic use of violence by one class against the other, by one section of the population against another.

Details Estado y revolución

TitleEstado y revolución
Release DateMar 19th, 2011
GenrePolitics, Nonfiction, Philosophy, History

Reviews Estado y revolución

  • Stuart
    If you happen to get the version which has a forward by Richard Pipes, I strongly suggest reading the text of Vladimir Lenin first, maybe Google or Wikipedia some of the historical references, and draw your own conclusion. Richard Pipes is your classical establishment propaganda clerk who's job is to 'help' you see the text the way the State wants you to, that is, defanged of its revolutionary message.Pipes slides in his prejudice hidden by histo...
  • Abeer Abdullah
    Extremely thorough and well written, deals with the question of the state after the revolution, makes distinctions between communists, social democrats and anarchists. Argues that anarchists and communists have the common goal of the abolition of the state, it is simply the methods that they disagree on. Wonderful read, I learned a lot!
  • Michael
    This is the famous book in which Lenin asserted (quoting Engels) that “the state will wither away” under Communism, and which is therefore sometimes oddly accused of being “utopian” and “anarchist.” It is neither of these, but it does require some work to parse out.Historically, this essay was written at the moment when Lenin was in exile in Switzerland, after the February, 1917 revolution and before the October revolution which ended...
  • Eric
    Being a dirty red, I found it amazing (and surprising) that I had never sat down with this piece. I had read sections in Marxism classes years ago, but it was refreshing to get back into it. Excellent. A must.
  • Steve
    First, allow me to say Lenin is a much, much better writer than Trotsky.Second, Lenin has provided in this work a roadmap to revolution. And what a naïve roadmap it is in light of subsequent history. Lenin believed in an evolution of the state into a system where the proletariat ruled for themselves and self-policed their affairs. How quickly that thought morphed into dictatorship.Lastly, I wonder very much what Lenin would have to say about the...
  • Theodora
    Lenin was the one to put the gulag system in place, not Stalin.
  • Kevin
    And the State withers away… how? Preamble:1) I recognize the wealth of scholarship and debates over Lenin, Leninism, Marxism, Marxism-Leninism, Communism, the Russian Revolution, the USSR, etc. 2) However, I still intend to apply my (differing) background to engage with this work by Lenin. (I’ll be revisiting this for sure…)The Good:--Why do we bother with social theory, as opposed to “facts”? True, specific historical accounts and numb...
  • Lynn Beyrouthy
    The February Revolution of 1917 goaded the fall of the Romanov dynasty when tsar Nicholas II abdicated, and things started to look surprisingly auspicious for Vladimir Ilich Lenin and his Bolshevik party. However, the Provisional Government of Georgi Lvov, in the midst of the colossal military turmoil of World War I, wasn't particularly sympathetic of Lenin's anti-war stance. After his arrival in Petrograd (to be renamed after him Leningrad), Len...
  • Aung Sett Kyaw Min
    This is an acerbic tract by the high theoretician Lenin against the falsifiers and vulgarizers of Marx and Engels--Kautsy, Bernstein and basically everyone who fudged or otherwise failed to raise the question of what to do with the state when the revolution rolls around (the revolution, in fact, is the movement that SMASHES and the old state machinery of bureacrats plus the standing army and substitutes it with the DICTATORSHIP of the armed worke...
  • ---
    The opening of this book is perhaps the most enlightening thing I’ve ever read on Marxism (I guess technically it’s Marxist-Leninism since here we are reading Lenin). The initial reflection on what the function and the history of the State is in relation to Bourgeois democracy and premodern slave societies is brilliant.I remember reading the Communist Manifesto and being so confused. Everyone had said that Communism was violent, but I had bee...
  • Paul Ataua
    ‘The State and Revolution’ is a standout read in which Lenin, confronting a revolution that came too much before advanced capitalism had developed, found himself between a part of the left ready to hand back power to the capitalists in return for concessions, and the anarchists ready to take the fight to the next level without a clear plan. Armed with the theories of Marx and Engels and the lessons gleaned from the 1848 revolutions and the Pa...
  • Yogy TheBear
    State and Revolution Lenin Review:The most dangerous lies start with fragments of truth and become full-fledged deceptions.The first thing that striked and shocked me was the initial anti state stance on a correct notion of it as an evil and a monopoly of coercion that today it is found in libertarianism. But here is where the truth stops !!What comes next is a text that resembles the interpretation and explanation of the christian teachings with...
  • Operaista
    If one wants to engage with Lenin, it's important to engage with him at his best. Yes, some of his flaws still shine through (mainly that, due to the class nature of the inner core of the Bolshevik party (a class nature encouraged by the Russian material conditions), Bolshevism was always given to bureaucratisation), but Lenin at his best - and what "could have been", had it not been for the isolation of the revolution and the emergence of the co...
  • Johnnie
    Essential reading for anyone interested in proletarian revolution and its relation to the state. Very well written, inspiring, and certainly has the fire of immediacy stewing in it. You can tell it was written with great energy, probably quickly. The only issue is that sometimes it's repetitive and sometimes Lenin goes into some very historically-rooted discussions that don't have as much relevance as it did when he wrote the book. For instance, ...
  • Steffi
    Another pre 100th anniversary of the Russian Revolution (October not February!) read. More to come.Written in the summer of 1917 in exile, 'State and Revolution' is one of Lenin's key works on state power , class and capitalism. And very timely as we slowly recover from 3 decades of neoliberal paralysis and are hopefully getting real re: organizing a socialist left and state of the 21st century!Obviously, Lenin is a little too strong for the gent...
  • Nick
    Well...I can see why Rothbard liked it, and reading it gave me new insights into Rothbardian political strategy. However, it also made me feel as though the Soviet Union as it existed was more or less what Lenin was aiming for, and what he describes in this book as the first stage of Communism. It just seems like the results were much different from those he envisioned, and that Communism never progressed to the "higher" stage. Also, lots of craz...
  • Tom Shannon
    It was a more polemical explanation of Engels and Marx's ideas of what will happen to the state as history moves forward through its changes and revolutions. Lenin is someone that takes to task many other thinkers of his day in order to show them that he is the one with the correct interpretation which makes the dense ideas quite was however, very interesting to read about the concept of the state that goes beyond the usual capitali...
  • Aaron Crofut
    Lenin's books are not worth reading. Calling upon people to destroy the state is easy enough; building up something after that, not so easy. Claiming that people will magically fall in love with laboring for others doesn't actually solve the problem, even if Marx (the great prophet) declared it so. Also, I can't help but mock the "scientific" nature of Lenin's plans. As we all know, Russia was indeed ripe for communism. If only we could all live ...
  • Koen Crolla
    Shockingly lucid and surprisingly accessible. In an extremely short book of very limited scope (to examine the nature of the state before, during, and after the revolution), Lenin accomplishes what much more ambitious works can only dream of: he lays out a credible, concrete roadmap for the development of a society on its way to full communism.Lenin argues like a disingenuous dipshit (indeed, a scoundrel—if he hadn't gone on to put his ideas in...
  • Chris Radjenovich
    There are points where I diverge with Lenin and points where I agree with him. The need for some kind of "discipline" and the transitory nature of a state, if it even is transitory (positions opposed by anarchists) are points I have come to recognize, although it makes me uncomfortable. However, I oppose more than ever his unwavering belief in centralism. Although he says the centralization of the proletariat comes from the bottom and not from a ...
  • Mack Hayden
    It was really interesting getting a glimpse into Lenin's head right around the time of the Russian Revolution. His criticisms of Kautsky were pretty illuminating; it helped clarify what delineated Bolshevism / Leninism from other Marxist ideologies of the time. It's also tragic to think of how much the Soviet Union deviated from the course outlined in this book: there was no withering away of the state as predicted and one wonders how much Lenin ...
  • R.
    Reads about how you’d expect: disdainful towards different takes on socialism and interpretations of Marx and Engels, labeling rival groups pejorative terms, extreme confidence in his route forward, etc. I found it quite interesting to hear such a detailed case against parliamentarism, though a lot of it is taken up in internecine turn of the century socialist doctrinal battles for which YMMV unless you’re really curious. I can catch a whiff ...
  • Matvey xd
    very good
  • Alice Farmer
    It was ok. Lenin block quotes like a bitch
  • Martin Hare Michno
    A thorough dissection of Marx and those who have distorted Marx's work regarding the relation between the state and revolution. Lenin delivers a clear and basic understanding of what the state is, what it is for, and what to do with it.
  • Loránd
    Something, somewhere went incredibly wrong. Not only does Lenin espouse a viable socialism, but also a very libertarian one—obviously not as libertarian as the anarchists he is so eager to criticize.He advocates for the freedom of the proletariat to self-determine, and organize in a state-like form to push back against all bourgeois, counter-revolutionary tendencies: [...] "the socialists demand the strictest control by society and by the state...
  • Renato Rojas
    This historic book is Lenin's intervention in the realm of history against what is today known as "Democratic Socialism" and even some strains of "Marxism-Leninism". Throughout the passages we see parallels to today's opportunists, although today they have cast aside all illusions of Marxism. Most of the reading consists of quotes from Marx and Engels themselves which contradict the opportunists of Lenin's Day the main one being Karl Kautsky. Kau...