What do you think?
Rate this book
From Lenin to Stalin
Eyewitness account of the rise of Stalinism.
216 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1937
8 people are currently reading
322 people want to read
About the author
Victor Serge
101 books227 followersVictor Lvovich Kibalchich (В.Л. Кибальчич) was born in exile in 1890 and died in exile in 1947. He is better known as Victor Serge, a Russian revolutionary and Francophone writer. Originally an anarchist, he joined the Bolsheviks five months after arriving in Petrograd in January 1919, and later worked for the newly founded Comintern as a journalist, editor and translator. He was openly critical of the Soviet regime, but remained loyal to the ideals of socialism until his death.
After time spent in France, Belgium, Russia and Spain, Serge was forced to live out the rest of his life in Mexico, with no country he could call home. Serge's health had been badly damaged by his periods of imprisonment in France and Russia, but he continued to write until he died of heart attack, in Mexico city on 17 November 1947. Having no nationality, no Mexican cemetery could legally take his body, so he was buried as a 'Spanish Republican.'
After time spent in France, Belgium, Russia and Spain, Serge was forced to live out the rest of his life in Mexico, with no country he could call home. Serge's health had been badly damaged by his periods of imprisonment in France and Russia, but he continued to write until he died of heart attack, in Mexico city on 17 November 1947. Having no nationality, no Mexican cemetery could legally take his body, so he was buried as a 'Spanish Republican.'
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
August 30, 2020
This edition, from the excellent Pathfinder house, contains Victor Serge’s analysis of how Stalin captured and perverted the Soviet state following the death of Lenin in 1924, and a set of short essays on aspects of Soviet life in the 1930s, such as the condition of women and Stalinist interference in science and education.
You may disagree with Serge’s take on Lenin (essentially a good bloke, doing his best in difficult circumstances) and his belief that if the Left Oppositionists had managed to repel Stalin the history of the revolution – and the world – would have been very different. Maybe. It’s hard to tell now, but Serge was writing in the 1930s, during the Stalinist terror, when many reasonable people were looking back to the revolution’s early years and asking, “Where did it all go wrong?” From the vantage point of the 21st century we could say the whole thing was doomed from the start and if Lenin had lived longer, or Trotsky had replaced him, we would still have had gulags, the KGB and economic paralysis. Serge argues that Stalin liquidated many decent men and women who might have made a more honest and more competent attempt to build a true workers’ state.
Serge does not explicitly compare Stalin to the old tsars but I’ve often thought that the Soviet Union was a continuation of Tsarist Russia under a thick layer of bureaucracy and pseudo-communism. Serge certainly implies that Stalin is not a communist and instead presided over the development of a new aristocracy of senior party officials, much as the old autocratic tsars relied on the nobility to enforce their rule. There is a strong argument that you can draw a straight line from Ivan the Terrible to Vladimir Putin, via Stalin. That kind of analysis is very comforting for us socialists because we can say, hand on heart, that we still haven’t seen a truly communist state on this planet and socialism was always doomed in Russia because it’s a country besotted by autocracy and the cult of the strong, dictatorial leader.
Whatever your own political views, Serge is still worth reading for his honesty and integrity. These are the qualities that give his writing such power. He was a lifelong socialist – a democratic socialist – but he was clear-eyed enough to see that a successful socialist revolution would have to be very different from the Russian version.
You may disagree with Serge’s take on Lenin (essentially a good bloke, doing his best in difficult circumstances) and his belief that if the Left Oppositionists had managed to repel Stalin the history of the revolution – and the world – would have been very different. Maybe. It’s hard to tell now, but Serge was writing in the 1930s, during the Stalinist terror, when many reasonable people were looking back to the revolution’s early years and asking, “Where did it all go wrong?” From the vantage point of the 21st century we could say the whole thing was doomed from the start and if Lenin had lived longer, or Trotsky had replaced him, we would still have had gulags, the KGB and economic paralysis. Serge argues that Stalin liquidated many decent men and women who might have made a more honest and more competent attempt to build a true workers’ state.
Serge does not explicitly compare Stalin to the old tsars but I’ve often thought that the Soviet Union was a continuation of Tsarist Russia under a thick layer of bureaucracy and pseudo-communism. Serge certainly implies that Stalin is not a communist and instead presided over the development of a new aristocracy of senior party officials, much as the old autocratic tsars relied on the nobility to enforce their rule. There is a strong argument that you can draw a straight line from Ivan the Terrible to Vladimir Putin, via Stalin. That kind of analysis is very comforting for us socialists because we can say, hand on heart, that we still haven’t seen a truly communist state on this planet and socialism was always doomed in Russia because it’s a country besotted by autocracy and the cult of the strong, dictatorial leader.
Whatever your own political views, Serge is still worth reading for his honesty and integrity. These are the qualities that give his writing such power. He was a lifelong socialist – a democratic socialist – but he was clear-eyed enough to see that a successful socialist revolution would have to be very different from the Russian version.
Read
February 7, 2017Serge wants to convince us in this work that Russia went from Leninism, which is good socialism and true revolutionary marxism (for the authors point of view); to Stalinism that the author correctly identifies as fascism of the beaurocracy. He wants to convince us that the russian revolution was stolen by Stalin. I do not agree with him ! I will firstly speak about the author and the book and then about some politics and ideologies.
Serge is one of those few marxist (former anarhist) who is actually relevant and important to read. This book despite my ideological disagreements (as in all of his books when he dose politics) was a wonderful book full of spirit.
At one point as he describes Stalin's purges it felt like he was a marxist Solzhenitsyn writing another Gulag Archipelago, a version in which he focuses more on the suffering, purge and killing of the men who fought in the civil war and who brought the communists to power, the old communists. Serge himself declares himself a marxist, but I really doubt he is truly a marxist, despite ... Not only he kept his soul and retained a very strong moral code, but he also has remarkable insight into economics that I did not expect from a marxist. In my opinion he was a marxist more out of historical context and the limited set of ideas he got exposed to.
And now on the ideological side of the debate. Basically we see here three forms of revolutionary marxism that people claim are diffrent and appear in Serge's description of events: Marxism-Leninism, Trotskyism and Stalinism. Serge belives that the first 2 are the same and that the last is a false, the main thesis of his book. I say all 3 are the same form of revolutionary marxism first developed by Lenin ! Thus, there is not a transition from Leninism to Stalinism (two different systems) but the initial system born from the russian revolution of October remains the same and unravels itself to the naive idealists who Serge is a prime representative. Serge and Trotsky failed to see that the logical conclusion of Leninism is the Stalinism state. Trotsky claimed that Stalin's revolution in one country and stopping of world revolution was not marxism leninism... but lenin spoke also about this and Stalin's actions are in accord with Lenin's thoughts. The way the state evolved into a highly centralized totalitarian form was inevitable if they also wanted to stop what they call opportunistic capitalism and to efficiently mold society into socialism.
In the end Serge is a tragic person... A good person on the wrong side of history... He is relevant and should be read, analyzed and where needed criticized with objectivity.
Serge is one of those few marxist (former anarhist) who is actually relevant and important to read. This book despite my ideological disagreements (as in all of his books when he dose politics) was a wonderful book full of spirit.
At one point as he describes Stalin's purges it felt like he was a marxist Solzhenitsyn writing another Gulag Archipelago, a version in which he focuses more on the suffering, purge and killing of the men who fought in the civil war and who brought the communists to power, the old communists. Serge himself declares himself a marxist, but I really doubt he is truly a marxist, despite ... Not only he kept his soul and retained a very strong moral code, but he also has remarkable insight into economics that I did not expect from a marxist. In my opinion he was a marxist more out of historical context and the limited set of ideas he got exposed to.
And now on the ideological side of the debate. Basically we see here three forms of revolutionary marxism that people claim are diffrent and appear in Serge's description of events: Marxism-Leninism, Trotskyism and Stalinism. Serge belives that the first 2 are the same and that the last is a false, the main thesis of his book. I say all 3 are the same form of revolutionary marxism first developed by Lenin ! Thus, there is not a transition from Leninism to Stalinism (two different systems) but the initial system born from the russian revolution of October remains the same and unravels itself to the naive idealists who Serge is a prime representative. Serge and Trotsky failed to see that the logical conclusion of Leninism is the Stalinism state. Trotsky claimed that Stalin's revolution in one country and stopping of world revolution was not marxism leninism... but lenin spoke also about this and Stalin's actions are in accord with Lenin's thoughts. The way the state evolved into a highly centralized totalitarian form was inevitable if they also wanted to stop what they call opportunistic capitalism and to efficiently mold society into socialism.
In the end Serge is a tragic person... A good person on the wrong side of history... He is relevant and should be read, analyzed and where needed criticized with objectivity.
June 14, 2022
Victor Serge is one of the great anti-Stalinist writers of the twentieth century, a man who paid a heavy price for his opposition to totalitarianism. One hesitates to criticise him for that very reason. And in this short book, he has a good excuse for getting some things wrong – the book was written as events were unfolding. He mentions some people being arrested in the Soviet Union, but isn’t aware that they were killed – or perhaps they were killed later. Though he’s aware of the terrible injustice suffered by the Old Bolsheviks, who were slaughtered by Stalin, he barely mentions the genocide of the Ukrainians, in which millions died. Maybe he didn’t know. He knows that the POUM is facing savage repression at the hands of the Spanish Stalinists and their NKVD handlers, but doesn’t yet know the fate of their leader, Nin, who was tortured and murdered. Serge’s ability to analyse and explain is hindered, not helped, by his unswerving loyalty to the dead Lenin and the still-living Trotsky, men who in his view seem to bear little connection to the horrors of the Soviet system. A well written and passionate book, but it will do little to enlighten readers today who have access to better histories, including Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago.
April 13, 2025
Πρόκειται για μία σύντομη εκδοχή του βιβλίου του "Η μοίρα μιας επανάστασης", το οποίο διαδραματίζεται στα έτη 1917-1936 και επικεντρώνεται κυρίως από την εποχή που ανέλαβε ο Στάλιν έως και την ημερομηνία συγγραφής του, τον Δεκέμβριο του 1936. Ελαφρύ ανάγνωσμα, μόλις 185 σελίδων, με ιστορική και πολιτική σημασία, καθώς τα γράφει άνθρωπος που τα έζησε εκ των έσω.
Ο συγγραφέας βρίσκεται στην εξορία όταν το γράφει, έχοντας γλυτώσει από χειρότερη μοίρα που είχαν πολλοί συναγωνιστές του, δείχνοντας έναν ιδεαλιστή αριστερό οπαδό του Λένιν και του Τρότσκι, ο οποίος συνειδητοποιεί πόσο λάθος πήγε τελικά η επανάσταση κι οι ιδέες που είχαν για το μέλλον του κόσμου.
Φυσικά αφού η συγγραφή του βιβλίου σταματά τον Δεκέμβριο του 1936, δεν είναι δυνατόν να δούμε πως θα διαμορφώθηκε η γνώμη του ύστερα από την ήττα των αριστερών στην Ισπανία και το ξέσπασμα του Β' ΠΠ, εκτιμώ όμως, σύμφωνα με το πνεύμα των όσων γράφει, πως απλά θα προσέθετε επιπλέον απογοήτευση στα γραφόμενά του.
Ο συγγραφέας βρίσκεται στην εξορία όταν το γράφει, έχοντας γλυτώσει από χειρότερη μοίρα που είχαν πολλοί συναγωνιστές του, δείχνοντας έναν ιδεαλιστή αριστερό οπαδό του Λένιν και του Τρότσκι, ο οποίος συνειδητοποιεί πόσο λάθος πήγε τελικά η επανάσταση κι οι ιδέες που είχαν για το μέλλον του κόσμου.
Φυσικά αφού η συγγραφή του βιβλίου σταματά τον Δεκέμβριο του 1936, δεν είναι δυνατόν να δούμε πως θα διαμορφώθηκε η γνώμη του ύστερα από την ήττα των αριστερών στην Ισπανία και το ξέσπασμα του Β' ΠΠ, εκτιμώ όμως, σύμφωνα με το πνεύμα των όσων γράφει, πως απλά θα προσέθετε επιπλέον απογοήτευση στα γραφόμενά του.
January 2, 2022
Very concise comparison of Lenin and Stalin, as well the state of the Bolshevik party and ussr during the leadership two figures.
Written in 1937, before the extent of Stalin's repression of communists in the ussr was revealed. Even still, it makes it clear just how much Stalin represented real degeneration of the russian revolution, if not an expression of outright counter revolution - to the point that Right wing Russian emigres and even Italian fascists were singing the praises of Stalin for his repression and murder of communists in the ussr.
Written in 1937, before the extent of Stalin's repression of communists in the ussr was revealed. Even still, it makes it clear just how much Stalin represented real degeneration of the russian revolution, if not an expression of outright counter revolution - to the point that Right wing Russian emigres and even Italian fascists were singing the praises of Stalin for his repression and murder of communists in the ussr.
September 23, 2018
"Non è vero, non è assolutamente vero che il fine giustifichi i mezzi. La giustizia non è fatta di iniquità, il mondo e gli uomini non si trasformano con le catene, con gli altoparlanti che urlano falsità e con bassi settori di intellettuali pagati per riempire di bugie le teste della gente. Ogni fine richiede i propri mezzi e ciascun fine si raggiunge con i mezzi ad esso congeniali. Sebbene la rivoluzione socialista possa, in tempo di crisi, essere costretta a fare uso delle vecchie armi lasciate dalla società borghese, essa deve poi trovare le proprie armi, e può andare avanti solo migliorando le condizioni materiali e morali delle masse. Più benessere personale, più libertà, meno menzogne, più dignità, più rispetto dell'umanità. Un socialismo che si avvii su binari completamente diversi apre la strada a una specie di controrivoluzione, si discredita e rischia il suicidio."
August 2, 2023
There are great figures in the history of Soviet Russia (and by “great” I mean popular) and great journalists on the history of Soviet Russia. David Remnick isn’t one of them. Victor Serge maybe is one. I’ve read a lot on Soviet Russia and particularly the Lenin/Stalin years, but never Victor Serge. He’s important enough that people still speak of him, and even the New York Times covers his books but what about his reporting on the early years of Soviet Russia?
From Lenin to Stalin is a somewhat fragmented book where Serge details how the early Bolsheviks, led by Lenin and Trotsky were trying to bring about global socialism and how that changed under Stalin. It bares mentioning also that this book was first released in 1937 when it wasn’t yet accepted that Soviet Russia was far from the utopian society it claimed to be (and yes, I’m saying “utopian” because I know that will piss off Marxists). Nowadays it’s generally accepted that Soviet Russia under Stalin had nothing to do with socialism and everything to do with brutal totalitarianism (not be confused with “gentle” totalitarianism, of course).
It's always interesting (almost fun) to read a first-hand account from an insider about the inner workings of the party and Serge definitely has a lot to detail. From Lenin to Stalin is a short book and Serge wastes no time giving his account on how society was functioning during the Lenin and Trotsky years and how quickly the bureaucratic system overwhelmed the party and how the new members of the party became more focused on their careers and easy living than moving socialism forward (whether in Russia or globally). All of this was manufactured by Stalin, he claims. Serge knows a lot of the old Bolsheviks personally and checks them off one by one as they turn on the true leaders of the revolution (Trotsky and the Opposition) in support of Stalin, how they succumbed to the party machine, and where they ended up (all the way up to Zinoviev and Kamenev). Serge loves using the expression “blew his brains out” which is repulsive to say the least. All of this is interesting, especially considering this wasn’t common knowledge at the time.
What’s not so great is that Serge is clearly a Trotsky fanatic and refuses to throw any dirt his way. As if everything was going so well when he was in power. He disturbingly describes the early years of the Soviet Union as the “Great Years.” This was when war communism, the civil war, and all the brutality it brought was in full effect. He also speaks of Lenin and Trotsky as leaders to be venerated and needed to lead the dumb masses. Of course Lenin pushed the NEP, which restored capitalism partially (which Trotsky and Serge opposed but didn’t mind the effects it brought the country), and the valiant Trotsky didn’t mind being pushed in the background for 10 years while his party stepped all over him all for the sake of the great party. What it comes down to was that Lenin created a party consisting mostly of spineless yes-men and overgrown children who had no idea what to do when he died. It’s clear that Trotsky was the likely successor, but petty jealousy from other leaders wasn’t going to let that happen. So much for the virtue and integrity of these communists. The easiest explanation here is that Lenin set things up for a Stalin if the party was to remain in power.
Yes, that the brutality and persecution was scaled up greatly by Stalin and he was skilled at vanquishing his enemies and the details Serge provides are horrifying. From Lenin to Stalin is full of interesting and useful information and is an important document to anyone interested in this era of Soviet history. Just remember you’re reading an account by Trotsky’s fanboy.
From Lenin to Stalin is a somewhat fragmented book where Serge details how the early Bolsheviks, led by Lenin and Trotsky were trying to bring about global socialism and how that changed under Stalin. It bares mentioning also that this book was first released in 1937 when it wasn’t yet accepted that Soviet Russia was far from the utopian society it claimed to be (and yes, I’m saying “utopian” because I know that will piss off Marxists). Nowadays it’s generally accepted that Soviet Russia under Stalin had nothing to do with socialism and everything to do with brutal totalitarianism (not be confused with “gentle” totalitarianism, of course).
It's always interesting (almost fun) to read a first-hand account from an insider about the inner workings of the party and Serge definitely has a lot to detail. From Lenin to Stalin is a short book and Serge wastes no time giving his account on how society was functioning during the Lenin and Trotsky years and how quickly the bureaucratic system overwhelmed the party and how the new members of the party became more focused on their careers and easy living than moving socialism forward (whether in Russia or globally). All of this was manufactured by Stalin, he claims. Serge knows a lot of the old Bolsheviks personally and checks them off one by one as they turn on the true leaders of the revolution (Trotsky and the Opposition) in support of Stalin, how they succumbed to the party machine, and where they ended up (all the way up to Zinoviev and Kamenev). Serge loves using the expression “blew his brains out” which is repulsive to say the least. All of this is interesting, especially considering this wasn’t common knowledge at the time.
What’s not so great is that Serge is clearly a Trotsky fanatic and refuses to throw any dirt his way. As if everything was going so well when he was in power. He disturbingly describes the early years of the Soviet Union as the “Great Years.” This was when war communism, the civil war, and all the brutality it brought was in full effect. He also speaks of Lenin and Trotsky as leaders to be venerated and needed to lead the dumb masses. Of course Lenin pushed the NEP, which restored capitalism partially (which Trotsky and Serge opposed but didn’t mind the effects it brought the country), and the valiant Trotsky didn’t mind being pushed in the background for 10 years while his party stepped all over him all for the sake of the great party. What it comes down to was that Lenin created a party consisting mostly of spineless yes-men and overgrown children who had no idea what to do when he died. It’s clear that Trotsky was the likely successor, but petty jealousy from other leaders wasn’t going to let that happen. So much for the virtue and integrity of these communists. The easiest explanation here is that Lenin set things up for a Stalin if the party was to remain in power.
Yes, that the brutality and persecution was scaled up greatly by Stalin and he was skilled at vanquishing his enemies and the details Serge provides are horrifying. From Lenin to Stalin is full of interesting and useful information and is an important document to anyone interested in this era of Soviet history. Just remember you’re reading an account by Trotsky’s fanboy.
June 5, 2021
It is not the most analytical book on the Stalinist counter-revolution in Russia, but it is a gripping firsthand account with many primary sources. Serge is a poetic writer and as an anarchist who came to support Bolshevism after witnessing the revolution, he brings an insightful perspective. It is heartbreaking but so crucial to read more about this in understanding how we got to the world we live in today.
July 13, 2025
Ένα ακόμα βιβλίο για τη σταλινική τρομοκρατία και την εξόντωση ουσιαστικά όλων των ηγετικών μορφών της Οκτωβριανής επανάστασης, κάπως περιληπτικό, υπό το πρίσμα βέβαια πάντα κάποιου που θεωρεί πως η Οκτωβριανή επανάσταση τα έκανε όλα σωστά και απλά ο Στάλιν την κατέστρεψε, παρότι είτε με Στάλιν είτε χωρίς η κατάληξη της θα ήταν ενα ανελεύθερο καταπιεστικό αστυνομικό καθεστώς.
April 27, 2023
I really admire Victor Serge's work and this is another memorable piece. Since he was there he gives an unvarnished, realistic, and truthful account of what happened and why. If you enjoy Russian history this is a must read.
May 22, 2023
A first-hand witness to the Russian Revolution and its betrayal by Stalin. Poignant, and frustrating, in the sense that one wonders what the Soviet Union could have been if not for the machinations of Stalin and his ilk.
January 5, 2023
I hate to be biased but the book tries pitifully to gain your sympathy just to denounce in the end Stalin's "crimes".
Ideology at its finest.
Ideology at its finest.
January 22, 2021
A first-hand account of Russia's Bolshevik revolution of 1917 and it's aftermath. The world's first successful Marxist revolution took power from the rich and gave it to the working class. But in less than ten years the government was taken over by a ruthless, paranoid manipulator, who squashed all of the revolutionaries and created a massive toadying bureaucracy.
Denouncing as "counterrevolutionary" everyone he percieved as a threat to his power, the "great leader" squashed dissent by forcing false confessions, show trials and imprisonment for his percieved enemies, and was responsible for lots of executions. You want names? Serge provides plenty, with dates and places too. And perhaps it should go without saying, but democracy and socialism were also squashed.
How bad did it get? Pretty f*cking bad, it turns out. The only word for this turn of events is tragic.
Denouncing as "counterrevolutionary" everyone he percieved as a threat to his power, the "great leader" squashed dissent by forcing false confessions, show trials and imprisonment for his percieved enemies, and was responsible for lots of executions. You want names? Serge provides plenty, with dates and places too. And perhaps it should go without saying, but democracy and socialism were also squashed.
How bad did it get? Pretty f*cking bad, it turns out. The only word for this turn of events is tragic.
November 2, 2025
Brief, easy to read book of the huge difference between the early Soviet Union under Lenin and the evolution of Stalinist totalitarianism. Serge had started as an anarchist but was won to the Russian Revolution while a first-hand witness to the revolution. This volume also contains some short works by Serge. For another account by someone from a similar background, see Lenin's Moscow.
For a more thorough analysis, read Lenin's Final Fight, and Trotsky's The Revolution Betrayed: What Is the Soviet Union and Where Is It Going?, and The Stalin School of Falsification, and many other works.
For a more thorough analysis, read Lenin's Final Fight, and Trotsky's The Revolution Betrayed: What Is the Soviet Union and Where Is It Going?, and The Stalin School of Falsification, and many other works.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews