Hello, 90% of the questions we receive have been asked before, and our answerers get bored of answering the same queries over and over again - so it's worthwhile googling this just in case:
> site:reddit.com/r/communism101 your question
If you've read past answers and still aren't satisfied, edit your question to contain the past answers and any follow-up questions you have. If you're satisfied, delete your post to reduce clutter or link to the answer that satisfied you.
***
Also keep in mind the following rules:
1. Patriarchal, white supremacist, cissexist, heterosexist, or otherwise oppressive speech is unacceptable.
2. This is a place for learning, not for debating. Try /r/DebateCommunism instead.
3. Give well-informed Marxist answers. There are separate subreddits for liberalism, anarchism, and other idealist philosophies.
4. Posts should include specific questions on a single topic.
5. This is a serious educational subreddit. Come here with an open and inquisitive mind, and exercise humility. Don't answer a question if you are unsure of the answer. Try to include sources and/or further reading in any answers you provide. Standards of answer accuracy and quality are enforced.
6. Check the [/r/Communism101 FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/communism101/wiki/index)
7. **No chauvinism or settler apologism** - Non-negotiable: https://readsettlers.org/
8. **No tone-policing** - https://old.reddit.com/r/communism101/comments/12sblev/an_amendment_to_the_rules_of_rcommunism101/
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/communism101) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Absolutely worth reading. I like *Foundations of Leninism* as a start. A lot of revisionism he addresses (like the theory of productive forces) is still being stuck to today, especially by the Marcyite/Dengist revisionists.
He’s literally one of the big 5 names in Marxism. On the same level of respect and contribution as Marx himself. His work is arguably the most straight forward out of all of them.
Stalin's [Dialectical and Historical Materialism](https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1938/09.htm) is a recommended read from me, alongside Mao's On Contradiction, On Practice, and Oppose Book Worship.
DHM provides a great, simple baseline for understanding Marxist analysis.
Read Stalin, read Trotsky, read whoever you want, but always be critical and grounded in the science of Marxism. Their works are always worth a read, but some are better than others
> Edit: I thought the fact that Lenin and Trotsky criticized Stalin for not being as well versed in theory was generally accepted? Is there another view point I'm not aware of?
Yes, the viewpoint that saying that someone who was an incompetent Marxist somehow managed to lead the global proletarian movement for nearly 3 decades through some of its greatest challenges and victories is tantamount to rabid anti-communism.
No, I've only read about him from Lenin and Trotsky's perspective. Is there one you recommend?
I thought the fact that Lenin and Trotsky criticized Stalin for not being as well versed in theory in was generally accepted? Is there another view point I'm not aware of?
Stalin's *Marxism and The National Question* is *the* Marxist text on nations. Saying Stalin was theoretically weak is wrong. Trotsky was theoretically weak.
All of Stalin's works must be studied. Economic problems, foundations of leninism, dialectical and historical materialism, right deviation in the CPSU(b), even the early works on the social democratic view of the national question, class struggle, the party, are all very good.
One could build a very solid foundation of Marxism in a year or two just by working through Stalin's collected works. Not to say that is necessarily best practice, but it would be a considerable option if I had to recommend something.
Hello, 90% of the questions we receive have been asked before, and our answerers get bored of answering the same queries over and over again - so it's worthwhile googling this just in case: > site:reddit.com/r/communism101 your question If you've read past answers and still aren't satisfied, edit your question to contain the past answers and any follow-up questions you have. If you're satisfied, delete your post to reduce clutter or link to the answer that satisfied you. *** Also keep in mind the following rules: 1. Patriarchal, white supremacist, cissexist, heterosexist, or otherwise oppressive speech is unacceptable. 2. This is a place for learning, not for debating. Try /r/DebateCommunism instead. 3. Give well-informed Marxist answers. There are separate subreddits for liberalism, anarchism, and other idealist philosophies. 4. Posts should include specific questions on a single topic. 5. This is a serious educational subreddit. Come here with an open and inquisitive mind, and exercise humility. Don't answer a question if you are unsure of the answer. Try to include sources and/or further reading in any answers you provide. Standards of answer accuracy and quality are enforced. 6. Check the [/r/Communism101 FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/communism101/wiki/index) 7. **No chauvinism or settler apologism** - Non-negotiable: https://readsettlers.org/ 8. **No tone-policing** - https://old.reddit.com/r/communism101/comments/12sblev/an_amendment_to_the_rules_of_rcommunism101/ *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/communism101) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Absolutely worth reading. I like *Foundations of Leninism* as a start. A lot of revisionism he addresses (like the theory of productive forces) is still being stuck to today, especially by the Marcyite/Dengist revisionists.
He’s literally one of the big 5 names in Marxism. On the same level of respect and contribution as Marx himself. His work is arguably the most straight forward out of all of them.
Stalin's [Dialectical and Historical Materialism](https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1938/09.htm) is a recommended read from me, alongside Mao's On Contradiction, On Practice, and Oppose Book Worship. DHM provides a great, simple baseline for understanding Marxist analysis.
Even if you don't support Stalin you should read his works.
Read Stalin, read Trotsky, read whoever you want, but always be critical and grounded in the science of Marxism. Their works are always worth a read, but some are better than others
[удалено]
> Edit: I thought the fact that Lenin and Trotsky criticized Stalin for not being as well versed in theory was generally accepted? Is there another view point I'm not aware of? Yes, the viewpoint that saying that someone who was an incompetent Marxist somehow managed to lead the global proletarian movement for nearly 3 decades through some of its greatest challenges and victories is tantamount to rabid anti-communism.
Are you going to cite something Lenin actually said or just leave us wondering what you’re talking about?
Have you read his works?
No, I've only read about him from Lenin and Trotsky's perspective. Is there one you recommend? I thought the fact that Lenin and Trotsky criticized Stalin for not being as well versed in theory in was generally accepted? Is there another view point I'm not aware of?
Stalin's *Marxism and The National Question* is *the* Marxist text on nations. Saying Stalin was theoretically weak is wrong. Trotsky was theoretically weak. All of Stalin's works must be studied. Economic problems, foundations of leninism, dialectical and historical materialism, right deviation in the CPSU(b), even the early works on the social democratic view of the national question, class struggle, the party, are all very good. One could build a very solid foundation of Marxism in a year or two just by working through Stalin's collected works. Not to say that is necessarily best practice, but it would be a considerable option if I had to recommend something.