What do you think?
Rate this book
Stalin: a political biography
Firmly established as the standard Stalin biography, Deutscher's volume clearly demonstrates the forces that shaped this leader and the political scene of his time.
648 pages, Paperback
Published January 1, 1966
38 people are currently reading
1027 people want to read
About the author
Isaac Deutscher
51 books144 followersIsaac Deutscher was a Polish-born Jewish Marxist writer, journalist and political activist who moved to the United Kingdom at the outbreak of World War II. He is best known as a biographer of Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin and as a commentator on Soviet affairs. His three-volume biography of Trotsky, in particular, was highly influential among the British New Left.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 44 reviews
April 25, 2020
I found parts of the book somewhat challenging, especially as my knowledge of Russian history and the timeline of the revolution are rather limited. Deutscher seems to assume that his readers are relatively well-versed in the essential points, which is probably valid at the time of his authoring.
I found the later parts of the book more enjoyable, as I am better acquainted with the overall context of WWII and later 20th Century history. Here, the author provides rich details about Stalin and Soviet-era psychology that filled in some of the gaps in my knowledge. We get to better understand Stalin's fears and strategy in dealing with his western allies, given the context of the fragile Soviet state, which he had stabilized (albeit with brutish force) as a major power of the 20th Century. I imagine this would have been the case too, for the earlier chapters on Stalin's youth and rapid rise through the lower ranks of the Bolsheviks up to a leadership role in the October Revolution, if I had had a more foundational knowledge of that context.
All in all, this is a book where you need to take your time and carefully read the nuanced details of what Isaac Deutscher is explaining, as he has much insight to offer, having lived through those times in proximity to many of the key players. However, I would not recommend it for a novice of the history of the Russian revolution like me.
I found the later parts of the book more enjoyable, as I am better acquainted with the overall context of WWII and later 20th Century history. Here, the author provides rich details about Stalin and Soviet-era psychology that filled in some of the gaps in my knowledge. We get to better understand Stalin's fears and strategy in dealing with his western allies, given the context of the fragile Soviet state, which he had stabilized (albeit with brutish force) as a major power of the 20th Century. I imagine this would have been the case too, for the earlier chapters on Stalin's youth and rapid rise through the lower ranks of the Bolsheviks up to a leadership role in the October Revolution, if I had had a more foundational knowledge of that context.
All in all, this is a book where you need to take your time and carefully read the nuanced details of what Isaac Deutscher is explaining, as he has much insight to offer, having lived through those times in proximity to many of the key players. However, I would not recommend it for a novice of the history of the Russian revolution like me.
June 24, 2022
An exhaustive look into the political biography of Stalin. Obviously pre-1956, so the true horror is lacking. Still pretty good, and many other works on Stalin have used it as a source.
April 1, 2008
UPDATE: finished:
Stalin's career, and this biography, cover an intense perid of Russian history from the last decades of the Tsars through revolution, civil war, World War, to the first decades of the nuclear age. It's an epic, brutal, at times heroic, and almost always tragic tale. Stalin seems to have moved across -and shaped - this vast world-historical stage driven more by calculations of immediate political expediency and the whisperings of his inner demons than by any grand design. There is a lot to reflect on in such a story, and one strength of this biography is that it leaves room for those reflections, without beating the reader over the head with an ideological (or psychological) agenda.
UPDATE halfway:
Stalin's political behaviour makes sense when viewed in the context of his life. An intelligent child born to an abusive drunkard Father, his earliest life lessons must have been not to trust anyone, to keep his true thoughts hidden, to observe other people keenly, to bide his time and always protect himself against danger. His experiences in the Seminary and as a revolutionary can only have reinforced and rewarded those survival instincts and skills. His early life reads like a recipe for creating a Cunning Murderous Pyschopath.
The danger, from the perspective of political history, is that we tend to write-off his career with those last three words, as if they prove there is nothing more to be learned from his story. In death, as in life, Stalin continues to be underestimated as a politician.
Aside from the story of the man himself, of course, his biography is also a story of the rise and development of Bolshevism, the Russian revolution, and the Soviet State.
A key lesson (informed by Joanthon Schell) I'm drawing from that second story is that while at certain times non-violent revolution (regime overthrow) is easy, social change following a revolution is nearly always hard, and is very often bloody.
Most of the time, then, activists might more usefully focus their energy on the slow work of social change than on hopeless charges at the overt ramparts of regime power.
EARLY THOUHGTS:
It's fascinating to read (from the perspective of Stalin's involvement) about the Bolshevik revolution and realise just how contingent it was, how easily history could have been very different.
Stalin's career, and this biography, cover an intense perid of Russian history from the last decades of the Tsars through revolution, civil war, World War, to the first decades of the nuclear age. It's an epic, brutal, at times heroic, and almost always tragic tale. Stalin seems to have moved across -and shaped - this vast world-historical stage driven more by calculations of immediate political expediency and the whisperings of his inner demons than by any grand design. There is a lot to reflect on in such a story, and one strength of this biography is that it leaves room for those reflections, without beating the reader over the head with an ideological (or psychological) agenda.
UPDATE halfway:
Stalin's political behaviour makes sense when viewed in the context of his life. An intelligent child born to an abusive drunkard Father, his earliest life lessons must have been not to trust anyone, to keep his true thoughts hidden, to observe other people keenly, to bide his time and always protect himself against danger. His experiences in the Seminary and as a revolutionary can only have reinforced and rewarded those survival instincts and skills. His early life reads like a recipe for creating a Cunning Murderous Pyschopath.
The danger, from the perspective of political history, is that we tend to write-off his career with those last three words, as if they prove there is nothing more to be learned from his story. In death, as in life, Stalin continues to be underestimated as a politician.
Aside from the story of the man himself, of course, his biography is also a story of the rise and development of Bolshevism, the Russian revolution, and the Soviet State.
A key lesson (informed by Joanthon Schell) I'm drawing from that second story is that while at certain times non-violent revolution (regime overthrow) is easy, social change following a revolution is nearly always hard, and is very often bloody.
Most of the time, then, activists might more usefully focus their energy on the slow work of social change than on hopeless charges at the overt ramparts of regime power.
EARLY THOUHGTS:
It's fascinating to read (from the perspective of Stalin's involvement) about the Bolshevik revolution and realise just how contingent it was, how easily history could have been very different.
September 27, 2022
This is a masterpiece of biography. Stalin's life is laid bare in a systematic and thorough fashion, and through reading you come to a full appreciation of how he changed (and in some ways didn't change) his ways of thinking and operating over the course of his life.
Like all good biographies, the book also provides excellent coverage of the history of the Russian Empire and then the USSR during Stalin's lifetime. It covers this not only in terms of the political sphere, but also cultural, economic and diplomatic arenas.
Of particular value I found were the earliest chapters, detailing Stalin's life before 1917. The book makes clear the ways in which Stalin was a rather atypical character amongst the more well known revolutionary figures, whilst explaining where later soviet propogandists would alter the facts of Stalin's early life in order to give a rather different impression than that laid down in history.
I can see why this book generated so much controversy on initial publication. It is very much not an apology for Stalin or Stalinism, and it is clear throughout how horrific the outcomes of Stalin's policies were (we must also remember that Deutscher was part of the opposition to Stalin). But neither does it paint Stalin as a pantomime villain who is innately evil. Perfectly illustrated is that Stalin, in ruling as he did, dug the grave of the system he created.
The lasting theme I will take from reading this book is the tragedy of the fate of the October Revolution, and of those who partook in it.
Like all good biographies, the book also provides excellent coverage of the history of the Russian Empire and then the USSR during Stalin's lifetime. It covers this not only in terms of the political sphere, but also cultural, economic and diplomatic arenas.
Of particular value I found were the earliest chapters, detailing Stalin's life before 1917. The book makes clear the ways in which Stalin was a rather atypical character amongst the more well known revolutionary figures, whilst explaining where later soviet propogandists would alter the facts of Stalin's early life in order to give a rather different impression than that laid down in history.
I can see why this book generated so much controversy on initial publication. It is very much not an apology for Stalin or Stalinism, and it is clear throughout how horrific the outcomes of Stalin's policies were (we must also remember that Deutscher was part of the opposition to Stalin). But neither does it paint Stalin as a pantomime villain who is innately evil. Perfectly illustrated is that Stalin, in ruling as he did, dug the grave of the system he created.
The lasting theme I will take from reading this book is the tragedy of the fate of the October Revolution, and of those who partook in it.
Read
July 31, 2011The author, Isaac Deutscher, was a devout Trotskyist, which makes the objectivity with which he approaches this most difficult of subjects all the more remarkable. The Stalin he paints is a frightened, self-loathing, miserable man- possessing incomprehensible capacties for ruthlessness, but also remarkable energy and an ability to devote himself entiely to the problem at hand. (He never would have gotten far without that ability to focus on immediate problems, Deutscher suggests, because he consistantly displayed a short-sightedness that created unnecessary crises.)
Unlike the standard, western "he was SO evil!" acounts, Deutshcer allows that Stalin was an indespensable leader in the struggle against Hitler, and the spread of Soviet influence into easter Europe is presented by Deutscher not as the result of thirst for empire but a desperate need to buffet Russia against a West (either in the form of the Axis or the "Allies") that terrified it.
None of this should obscure the fact that the chapters on the purges read like a horror novel, the realization that a seemingly humble, ideologically devoted man was in fact meglamaniacally waiting for the moment when he could deface an entire generation, an entire episode of history, with His Face.
The days immediately following Stalin's death sound like they call out to be dramatized by Beckett, or filmed by Bela Tarr.
Unlike the standard, western "he was SO evil!" acounts, Deutshcer allows that Stalin was an indespensable leader in the struggle against Hitler, and the spread of Soviet influence into easter Europe is presented by Deutscher not as the result of thirst for empire but a desperate need to buffet Russia against a West (either in the form of the Axis or the "Allies") that terrified it.
None of this should obscure the fact that the chapters on the purges read like a horror novel, the realization that a seemingly humble, ideologically devoted man was in fact meglamaniacally waiting for the moment when he could deface an entire generation, an entire episode of history, with His Face.
The days immediately following Stalin's death sound like they call out to be dramatized by Beckett, or filmed by Bela Tarr.
May 26, 2021
Stalin is different from every single historical figure that preceded him. None deserves so much excoriation as he does. None deserves so much recognition as much as he does. A leader who presided over so much killings in a couple of decades was as much responsible for the advancement of a backward, Asiatic village-like country into a industrial superpower that gave the traditional superpowers a run for their money. What Russia achieved within a couple of decades industrially and economically took close a century or more for other capitalist, advanced nations to achieve. And the challenges Russia faced were even more complex and insuperable. From 1905 till 1917, it suffered the pangs of labour of a society that was pregnant with revolution. From 1917 till 1922, Communist Russia suffered from post-natal complications in the form of civil war that tore the country across. Post 1922 till 1941 was the phase where Russia determinedly overtook the industrial West starting from nothing but desperation and fatigue. Millions of Russians built the socialist edifice from scratch sacrificing blood, sweat and tears. 1941 brought with it a marauder who was bent on destroying whatever Russia had constructed so assiduously and succeeded in doing it. When the whole world was fast writing Communist Russia's obituary, she bounced back and smothered Germany without much external help. When the Nazi marauders were eliminated in 1945, Russia was back to square one- to the level of deindustrialization and poverty that existed in the early 1920s. She collected all her broken pieces and within a decade she was back to where she belonged rightfully- among the industrial superpowers even to the extent of breathing down the neck of the United States of America.
If one individual was behind all these achievements and deserved the topmost honour among many others, it was Josef Viktor Stalin and none else. But what Isaac Deutscher has written doesn't sound like a hagiography. It doesn't have the pretensions of an epic story of a nation led by an illustrious ruler who led by example and inspiration. Stalin is presented more often as a prisoner of circumstances but someone who had the guts and faculties to acquit himself admirably. He did whatever he thought was right at a particular circumstance and whatever followed only validated his judgement. His drive to industrialize USSR was scoffed at initially but he was proven right when Hitler invaded the empire. Russia's industrial capacity single-handedly came to her rescue and despite sustaining enormous losses, she managed to strangle her invader only because she had a massive industrial infrastructure to lean on.
Stalin's ruthlessness on his rivals as well as his fellow travellers can also be understood only through the sweep of the circumstances of the revolution and not certainly by magnifying into the workings of an evil brain. Stalin was evil no doubt and suspicious for a good part of his rule but the force of circumstances could not leave him at peace to behave otherwise. He did what an astute ruler would do in his place not willing to consider what a man of scruple would have done. He gave 'survival' among all other priorities the foremost place and what he did then can be justified only to that extent. Does he deserve a place in hell for whatever he did to his comrades and opponents? Yes. But does he also deserve a place of respect and reverence in the minds of the subsequent generations? Yes, once again.
If one individual was behind all these achievements and deserved the topmost honour among many others, it was Josef Viktor Stalin and none else. But what Isaac Deutscher has written doesn't sound like a hagiography. It doesn't have the pretensions of an epic story of a nation led by an illustrious ruler who led by example and inspiration. Stalin is presented more often as a prisoner of circumstances but someone who had the guts and faculties to acquit himself admirably. He did whatever he thought was right at a particular circumstance and whatever followed only validated his judgement. His drive to industrialize USSR was scoffed at initially but he was proven right when Hitler invaded the empire. Russia's industrial capacity single-handedly came to her rescue and despite sustaining enormous losses, she managed to strangle her invader only because she had a massive industrial infrastructure to lean on.
Stalin's ruthlessness on his rivals as well as his fellow travellers can also be understood only through the sweep of the circumstances of the revolution and not certainly by magnifying into the workings of an evil brain. Stalin was evil no doubt and suspicious for a good part of his rule but the force of circumstances could not leave him at peace to behave otherwise. He did what an astute ruler would do in his place not willing to consider what a man of scruple would have done. He gave 'survival' among all other priorities the foremost place and what he did then can be justified only to that extent. Does he deserve a place in hell for whatever he did to his comrades and opponents? Yes. But does he also deserve a place of respect and reverence in the minds of the subsequent generations? Yes, once again.
December 9, 2025
I spent two months reading this book cover to cover. Isaac Deutscher first published this book in 1948, shortly after the end of the Second World War, in the middle of the Berlin Blockade, as the Soviet Union responded to the introduction of the Deutsche Mark in the western sectors of occupied Germany and Berlin. It was later revised following Stalin's death in 1953, with an additional post-script describing Stalin's political undoings in the last few years of his life, which paved the way for de-Stalinization by his successors.
This is also the second book from the series Political Leaders of the Twentieth Century that I happened to read after Ho Chi Minh. I find it interesting, seeing the perspectives of Isaac Deutscher, writing from the POV of someone who experienced the tumultuous period of the 20th century and had a chance to interview Stalin's archrival, Trotsky, himself. While this book failed to condemn Stalin's Great Purges and countless cruel treatments of his political rivals, Isaac Deutscher describes Stalin's mindset and political cunning in a detached style of a scientist describing chemical reactions.
This is also the second book from the series Political Leaders of the Twentieth Century that I happened to read after Ho Chi Minh. I find it interesting, seeing the perspectives of Isaac Deutscher, writing from the POV of someone who experienced the tumultuous period of the 20th century and had a chance to interview Stalin's archrival, Trotsky, himself. While this book failed to condemn Stalin's Great Purges and countless cruel treatments of his political rivals, Isaac Deutscher describes Stalin's mindset and political cunning in a detached style of a scientist describing chemical reactions.
January 9, 2022
Rounded down from 4.5. I'll need to do a proper review once I've finished making notes, but suffice to say for the moment that Deutscher's biog of Stalin really is a classic and a must-read for the student of Soviet history. Tons of formulations that I consider to be totally wrong, and Deutscher makes little effort to hide his basic eurocentric bias (and in so doing brings to light one of most important dynamics of 20th century politics: the eastward shift of Marxism and the complex reaction to that process in the West). Nonetheless the author brings the history to life with his detailed knowledge and insight.
December 30, 2025
This is when you just hate Goodreads. This is mixed up with a Robert Service book and now that I am no longer a librarian (GR managed a cull a few months back) I cannot edit the record. Grrr
July 5, 2011
If at any point you want to get to the why of the following topics:
Communism
World War Two
20th Century History
Russia/Soviet Union
you have to read this book.
Stalin for good or for bad was a colossus of the 20th Century. Deutsher writes this essentially political biography, with what I think is the insight of a former believer but without the bitterness or rancour that is often the case. It is by far the best biography of Stalin.
Communism
World War Two
20th Century History
Russia/Soviet Union
you have to read this book.
Stalin for good or for bad was a colossus of the 20th Century. Deutsher writes this essentially political biography, with what I think is the insight of a former believer but without the bitterness or rancour that is often the case. It is by far the best biography of Stalin.
August 13, 2011
The sub-title makes it clear that this book is not about Stalin, the man. This makes it quite dry. And its vintage (the bulk of it written in 1948) means that there is much that has come to light subsequently of which it is unaware. On the other hand, Deutscher has an almost journalistic familiarity with the events that younger historians cannot tap into. I found it hard-going but worth reading.
January 23, 2010
Isaac Deutscher is one of my favorite historians, and his trilogy on the life of Trotsky is an incredible set of books. This biography of Stalin did less for me, though it is still insightful.
September 6, 2022
Incredibly readable, rich and thorough overview of Stalin's political life. Some conclusions may be outdated now but otherwise a very good read.
February 15, 2025
I’ve decided to leave my old, somewhat juvenile review up in conjunction with my current thoughts. I’m not a Trotskyist, but I’m also not much of a Stalinist; I think I was unfair all those years ago, and too quick to disregard Deutscher’s analysis (which I find eminently readable) as surface level Trotskyist pablum. On second read, I have a much more favorable opinion of this. The subscript is “a political biography”, and that’s exactly what Deutscher delivers. Thankfully we are spared any sort of psycho-moral babble about supposed evil in Stalin’s heart (as most anti-communists would have you believe), or other standard fare from a biography of an important historical figure. Deutscher is not overly apologetic, to be sure- you can’t cover the 1930’s without talking about the purges, after all. The impression I get this time is that Stalin was a brutal man in a brutal position. How much the position influenced the man or vice versa is less clear- but for all his faults, I think when we look at what the USSR accomplished at that time, and what they tried to achieve in later years, it is astounding. The lives of those pre-1917, and post, are so fundamentally different it boggles my mind. It’s also something we can learn from, and use moving forward into the future. I’d certainly rather live in a world that had the Soviet Union, even with Stalin, than one without.
******************************************************
Fairly even handed for a Trotskyist, though Deutscher sometimes embarrassingly shows his hand when describing Trotsky and his writings during the '30's. I also think he tends to read too much of the life of Bonaparte and Robespierre into the life and choices of Stalin. Overall, pretty good book
******************************************************
Fairly even handed for a Trotskyist, though Deutscher sometimes embarrassingly shows his hand when describing Trotsky and his writings during the '30's. I also think he tends to read too much of the life of Bonaparte and Robespierre into the life and choices of Stalin. Overall, pretty good book
May 26, 2016
I'm on a mini roll, so as long as i've been discussing Isaac Deutscher's trilogy on Trotsky, i might as well wade in on Stalin.
i read it in college, in a course about political trials, and was hooked on everything Soviet and Russian. next up was War and Peace and i never looked back.
the Russian Revolution is detailed as brilliantly in this history as in any other. Stalin's life and career truly validate the phrase, 'you can't make this stuff up'. i won't repeat what other reviewers have said, but simply remark: READ IT.
one question that haunted me after i finished the book was, 'what would had happened had 1) Lenin lived a great deal longer and 2) what if Trotsky had read Lenin's will at the Party Congress and denounced (and bounced) Joe? would he have matched Stalin's achievement in WWII, holding Hitler at bay, given his brilliant execution for the Reds during the Civil War?
i read it in college, in a course about political trials, and was hooked on everything Soviet and Russian. next up was War and Peace and i never looked back.
the Russian Revolution is detailed as brilliantly in this history as in any other. Stalin's life and career truly validate the phrase, 'you can't make this stuff up'. i won't repeat what other reviewers have said, but simply remark: READ IT.
one question that haunted me after i finished the book was, 'what would had happened had 1) Lenin lived a great deal longer and 2) what if Trotsky had read Lenin's will at the Party Congress and denounced (and bounced) Joe? would he have matched Stalin's achievement in WWII, holding Hitler at bay, given his brilliant execution for the Reds during the Civil War?
October 22, 2016
At university I studied Quantum Chemistry but was friends with a lot of people studying Philosophy, Politics and Economics (PPE) and often was mistaken for being either someone studying PPE or Theology LOL
This book was part of my wider reading on history and politics that I did when I was an undergraduate and it earned me the nickname of "Stalin" amongst a few of the people in the year below me - I think it was because I read it in the Junior Common Room and in the bar at college - it was for one term the "book in my bag".
Deutscher possibly because he didn't like Stalin does a good deal of research on him and the early Soviet Union. It is not a hatchet-job in the way it could have been but it was not a hagiography. It is how I like my political biographies.
This book was part of my wider reading on history and politics that I did when I was an undergraduate and it earned me the nickname of "Stalin" amongst a few of the people in the year below me - I think it was because I read it in the Junior Common Room and in the bar at college - it was for one term the "book in my bag".
Deutscher possibly because he didn't like Stalin does a good deal of research on him and the early Soviet Union. It is not a hatchet-job in the way it could have been but it was not a hagiography. It is how I like my political biographies.
January 5, 2023
Great book for a history of the era. Deutscher goes beyond the standard, lazy, cold-war tropes that explain all the events in the USSR in this era by way of Stalin's personal megalomania and evil and looks at the material conditions underpinning every development.
Outside of maybe a couple of lapses (impressively few given its 650 page length), Deutscher has given us a principled analysis that gives credit where credit's due while not sparing anyone, Stalin, Trotsky, or anybody else, from rightful criticism.
This lack of bias is especially impressive given that Deutscher was a Trotskyist who wrote a three-part biography of Trotsky.
A profoundly well-researched work, I'd recommend it to anyone looking for a principled materialist history and critique of the USSR under Stalin.
Outside of maybe a couple of lapses (impressively few given its 650 page length), Deutscher has given us a principled analysis that gives credit where credit's due while not sparing anyone, Stalin, Trotsky, or anybody else, from rightful criticism.
This lack of bias is especially impressive given that Deutscher was a Trotskyist who wrote a three-part biography of Trotsky.
A profoundly well-researched work, I'd recommend it to anyone looking for a principled materialist history and critique of the USSR under Stalin.
August 19, 2020
The best Stalin biography. It's a wonderful assessment as the author is a Marxist looking at the protagonist through a neutral lens from the Left. While Isaac Deutscher is known to have written the famous Prophet trilogy on Trotsky, make no mistake : the latter is criticized here for his idealist tendencies, bias in his views of Stalin as well as tendency not to anticipate Koba's next moves and potential. The work is utterly addictive and just as well written as The Prophet. One can get a clear understanding of Joseph Djugashvili's character against the backdrop of unique historical events and their material basis. Utterly thorough, great Marxist work from one of the best political writers ever.
May 28, 2011
On the advice of a good friend, I picked this book up whilst living in Inchon, Korea in 1996. I wasn't really sure it would be worth the read, but what I really wanted to know was how the man got to be so powerful. It was a good read, and fifteen years later, I still recall passages from this book. I wouldn't say that it's a thrilling read, but anyone interested in Twentieth Century history will enjoy it.
I wish that American high schools did a better job covering the 20th century but since we hit WW2 and then cherry pick everything since, books like this have helped me to fill in the holes of why things today are the way they are.
I wish that American high schools did a better job covering the 20th century but since we hit WW2 and then cherry pick everything since, books like this have helped me to fill in the holes of why things today are the way they are.
October 20, 2011
amazingly clear-sighted despite being written in '49. kept thinking about how hard it would be to write a biography of a man who had so much influence and impact yet didn't seem to tell a soul what he was really thinking -- so here you get his maneuverings in detail, but also a sense that he's not there at all. i won't blame deutscher for this though. SO MUCH INTRIGUE, so many tears.
June 4, 2018
From a biographer widely-known as an admirer of Trotsky, a bio of Stalin that's at times downright flattering. Final chapter -- added after Stalin's death -- is much more critical. Excellent detail on the political twists and turns not only of Stalin but of the Bolsheviks in general. Surprisingly breezy read.
March 25, 2019
As this is a propaganda biography and not an independent work , everything must be taken with a bucketful of salt and pepper. This book is a great insight into how the soviet government wanted to project Stalin as a leader , while reading the book I get a feel that the way it has been written it is intended towards people outside the USSR.
September 30, 2023
It took me more like 5 years to finish this book. I’m so glad I started it, and I’m so glad I finished it! I would love to see it condensed and made more palatable for today’s readers, but I’m better for having read it. It’s necessary for all leftists to understand the complexities of Stalin and Stalinist Russia, and Deutscher’s book is an important text for such learning.
January 4, 2019
This could have been a turgid mess, but Deutscher keeps it interesting and relevant. A good book for anyone interested in Russian history.
April 2, 2013
A bit dry in parts, but very detailed and informative.
May 8, 2016
A classic, and still one of the better biographies available, despite its age.
May 13, 2019
Excellent biography of Stalin, highly recommend.
July 6, 2019
Really good - one of the two books I used for my Russian history coursework that focused on Stalin's industrialisation efforts.
August 14, 2020
I think his treatment of Trotsky is superior but this is a wonderful biography of stalin without discernable slant for or against.
March 16, 2024
Odlična knjiga o jako slojevitoj ličnosti. Ovo je "must-read" za svakog ko želi da bude neko i nešto u diplomatiji.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 44 reviews