What do you think?
Rate this book
The Collected Works Of J.V. Stalin: Volume 1
This edition of the English translation of J. V. Stalin's Works has been reproduced faithfully from the text of the English-based on the Russian edition-prepared by the Marx-Engels-Lenin Institute of the Central Committee, C.P.S.U.
Iskra Books, the imprint of the Center for Communist Studies, has chosen to publish the full series of the Collected Works due to an academic scarcity of the materials, an increasing inaccessibility of used copies of the original Foreign Languages Publishing House editions of the 1950s, and a growing scholarly and practical interest in the writings and ideas of one of the Twentieth Century's most impactful socialist heads of state. Stalin's Works are both pedagogically accessible and theoretically important, and deserve to be studied not only as world-historical and practical applications of the development of Marxist-Leninist political theory, but-especially in an era where the rise of hegemonic imperialism and the decay of capitalism lead to an increasing global fascism-also as political-theoretical texts in their own right; as the core theoretical works underpinning extant socialist state governance, policy, legislation, and practice.
Iskra Books, the imprint of the Center for Communist Studies, has chosen to publish the full series of the Collected Works due to an academic scarcity of the materials, an increasing inaccessibility of used copies of the original Foreign Languages Publishing House editions of the 1950s, and a growing scholarly and practical interest in the writings and ideas of one of the Twentieth Century's most impactful socialist heads of state. Stalin's Works are both pedagogically accessible and theoretically important, and deserve to be studied not only as world-historical and practical applications of the development of Marxist-Leninist political theory, but-especially in an era where the rise of hegemonic imperialism and the decay of capitalism lead to an increasing global fascism-also as political-theoretical texts in their own right; as the core theoretical works underpinning extant socialist state governance, policy, legislation, and practice.
340 pages, Hardcover
Published April 15, 2022
About the author
Joseph Stalin
596 books457 followersJoseph Stalin, originally Ioseb Besarionis dze Jughashvili, was a Soviet revolutionary, politician and statesman who became the leader of the Soviet Union from 1924 until his death in 1953. He held power as General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (1922–1952) and Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Soviet Union (1941–1953).
Initially governing the country as part of a collective leadership, he consolidated power to become an informal dictator by the 1930s. Ideologically adhering to the Leninist interpretation of Marxism, he formalised these ideas as Marxism–Leninism, while his own policies are called Stalinism.
Initially governing the country as part of a collective leadership, he consolidated power to become an informal dictator by the 1930s. Ideologically adhering to the Leninist interpretation of Marxism, he formalised these ideas as Marxism–Leninism, while his own policies are called Stalinism.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
July 8, 2022
Such an important work for understanding who Stalin really was and what he really thought. In particular “Anarchism or Socialism?” Is an incredibly powerful synopsis of Marxist philosophy and politics and a systematic dismantling of the Anarchist “position” on Communism, which should be required reading for all. Can’t wait for volume 2 to be published!
Read
February 1, 2024resent-day society is extremely complex! It is a motley patchwork of classes and groups — the big, middle and petty bourgeoisie; the big, middle and petty feudal landlords; journeymen, unskilled labourers and skilled factory workers; the higher, middle and lower clergy; the higher, middle and minor bureaucracy; a heterogeneous intelligentsia, and other groups of a similar kind. Such is the motley picture our society presents!
But it is also obvious that the further society develops the more clearly two main trends stand out in this complexity, and the more sharply this complex society divides up into two opposite camps — the capitalist camp and the proletarian camp. The January economic strikes (1905) clearly showed that Russia is indeed divided into two camps. The November strikes in St. Petersburg (1905) and the June-July strikes all over Russia (1906), brought the leaders of the two camps into collision and thereby fully exposed the present-day class antagonisms. Since then the capitalist camp has been wide awake. In that camp feverish and ceaseless preparation is going on; local associations of capitalists are beingformed, the local associations combine to form regional associations and the regional associations combine in all-Russian associations; funds and newspapers are being started, and all-Russian congresses and conferences of capitalists are being convened. . . .
Thus, the capitalists are organising in a separate class with the object of curbing the proletariat.
On the other hand, the proletarian camp is wide awake too. Here, too, feverish preparations for the impending struggle are being made. In spite of persecution by the reaction, here, too, local trade unions are being formed, the local unions combine to form regional unions, trade union funds are being started, the trade union press is growing, and all-Russian congresses and conferences of workers' unions are being held. . . .
It is evident that the proletarians are also organising in a separate class with the object of curbing exploitation.
But it is also obvious that the further society develops the more clearly two main trends stand out in this complexity, and the more sharply this complex society divides up into two opposite camps — the capitalist camp and the proletarian camp. The January economic strikes (1905) clearly showed that Russia is indeed divided into two camps. The November strikes in St. Petersburg (1905) and the June-July strikes all over Russia (1906), brought the leaders of the two camps into collision and thereby fully exposed the present-day class antagonisms. Since then the capitalist camp has been wide awake. In that camp feverish and ceaseless preparation is going on; local associations of capitalists are beingformed, the local associations combine to form regional associations and the regional associations combine in all-Russian associations; funds and newspapers are being started, and all-Russian congresses and conferences of capitalists are being convened. . . .
Thus, the capitalists are organising in a separate class with the object of curbing the proletariat.
On the other hand, the proletarian camp is wide awake too. Here, too, feverish preparations for the impending struggle are being made. In spite of persecution by the reaction, here, too, local trade unions are being formed, the local unions combine to form regional unions, trade union funds are being started, the trade union press is growing, and all-Russian congresses and conferences of workers' unions are being held. . . .
It is evident that the proletarians are also organising in a separate class with the object of curbing exploitation.
May 26, 2023
The first volume of works Stalin wrote as a young revolutionary. Much of it was written when he was in his '20s, and early years of revolutionary struggle in Russia get touched on in depth. I particularly liked the section on Socialism vs. Anarchism, probably the only section I'd say is really essential to a Marxist-Leninist. But the rest was still worth it.
April 18, 2026
This is a brilliant collection of articles by Stalin from when he was a young revolutionary. He tackles several different subjects within Marxist theory and strategy, of course in the context of the Bolsheviks seeking to galvanise the proletariat in their historical task of overthrowing the Tsar.
One of the myths challenged by Stalin is the classic critique of the Bolsheviks’ strategy, in which they are accused of wanting to introduce socialist consciousness into the proletariat from above, with no participation in this process from the working class themselves. The Menshevik accusation was that Lenin, Stalin and other Bolsheviks thought it was only possible for intellectuals to introduce socialist ideology into the working class. Stalin defiantly responds: “How is it you cannot understand that in our opinion, the opinion of the Bolsheviks, socialist consciousness is introduced into the working-class movement by Social-Democracy, and not only by Social-Democratic intellectuals? Why do you think that the Social-Democratic Party consists exclusively of intellectuals? Do you not know that there are many more advanced workers than intellectuals in the ranks of Social-Democracy? Cannot Social-Democratic workers introduce socialist consciousness into the working-class movement?” He goes on to quote from Lenin directly, who said, in opposition to the smear attacks of opponents who claimed he wanted the party to be dominated by intellectuals: "The committees should contain... as far as possible, all the principal leaders of the working-class movement from among the workers themselves", which Stalin explains as an arrangement in which “the voices of the advanced workers must predominate not only in all other organisations, but also in the committees.”
Participation in the Duma (a phony parliament set up by the Tsar in response to the 1905 revolution, to mislead and keep at bay the workers, peasants and liberal bourgeoise) is another point of controversy between the Bolsheviks and other parties. Stalin exposes this “mongrel parliament” as “a parliament of the enemies of the people”, which will only drain and demoralise the revolutionary spirit of the proletariat, tricking them into seeing “salvation in ballot papers and not in action by the people.” Writing in 1906, Stalin put forth the Bolshevik position as follows: “Clearly, the only correct path is active boycott, by means of which we shall isolate reaction from the people, organise the wrecking of the Duma, and thereby cut the ground completely from under the feet of this mongrel parliament.”
Also explained in this volume is the Bolsheviks’ approach to the agrarian question, and how best to forge an alliance between the proletariat and the revolutionary sections of the peasantry. Some of the parties opposed to the Bolsheviks proposed nationalisation of the land or municipalisation. When confronting how one of these parties, the Socialist-Revolutionaries, opposed the Bolshevik policy of the peasantry confiscating the land directly from the landlords and dividing it amongst themselves, Stalin comments “for we know perfectly well that they [the Socialist-Revolutionaries] do not look at the question from the standpoint of dialectics; they refuse to understand that everything has its time and place, that something which may be reactionary tomorrow may be revolutionary today.” He continues: “It goes without saying that the division of the land would be reactionary if it were directed against the development of capitalism; but if it is directed against the remnants of serfdom, it is self-evident that the division of the land is a revolutionary measure which Social-Democracy must support.” Stalin and the Bolsheviks considered the agrarian question via the dialectical view of social development and the trend of economic advancement.
This is just a taste of some of the areas covered in this volume. More is explored and explained in Stalin’s characteristically accessible, easy-to-understand writing style.
This collection would be a great start for anyone new to the Russian Revolution and who wanted to understand the Bolshevik approach to the challenges of the time, and how they applied Marxist theory to the conditions they operated in. Of course, because it is one of the collected works of the “evil” Stalin, long demonised by the imperialist regimes in the West, someone new to this subject would be unlikely to pick up this book as an intro. However, it’s also a good book for any socialists who are simply interested in Stalin’s thought and wants to look beyond the anti-communist caricatures, and see for themselves what the man believed in.
I look forward to reading volume 2.
One of the myths challenged by Stalin is the classic critique of the Bolsheviks’ strategy, in which they are accused of wanting to introduce socialist consciousness into the proletariat from above, with no participation in this process from the working class themselves. The Menshevik accusation was that Lenin, Stalin and other Bolsheviks thought it was only possible for intellectuals to introduce socialist ideology into the working class. Stalin defiantly responds: “How is it you cannot understand that in our opinion, the opinion of the Bolsheviks, socialist consciousness is introduced into the working-class movement by Social-Democracy, and not only by Social-Democratic intellectuals? Why do you think that the Social-Democratic Party consists exclusively of intellectuals? Do you not know that there are many more advanced workers than intellectuals in the ranks of Social-Democracy? Cannot Social-Democratic workers introduce socialist consciousness into the working-class movement?” He goes on to quote from Lenin directly, who said, in opposition to the smear attacks of opponents who claimed he wanted the party to be dominated by intellectuals: "The committees should contain... as far as possible, all the principal leaders of the working-class movement from among the workers themselves", which Stalin explains as an arrangement in which “the voices of the advanced workers must predominate not only in all other organisations, but also in the committees.”
Participation in the Duma (a phony parliament set up by the Tsar in response to the 1905 revolution, to mislead and keep at bay the workers, peasants and liberal bourgeoise) is another point of controversy between the Bolsheviks and other parties. Stalin exposes this “mongrel parliament” as “a parliament of the enemies of the people”, which will only drain and demoralise the revolutionary spirit of the proletariat, tricking them into seeing “salvation in ballot papers and not in action by the people.” Writing in 1906, Stalin put forth the Bolshevik position as follows: “Clearly, the only correct path is active boycott, by means of which we shall isolate reaction from the people, organise the wrecking of the Duma, and thereby cut the ground completely from under the feet of this mongrel parliament.”
Also explained in this volume is the Bolsheviks’ approach to the agrarian question, and how best to forge an alliance between the proletariat and the revolutionary sections of the peasantry. Some of the parties opposed to the Bolsheviks proposed nationalisation of the land or municipalisation. When confronting how one of these parties, the Socialist-Revolutionaries, opposed the Bolshevik policy of the peasantry confiscating the land directly from the landlords and dividing it amongst themselves, Stalin comments “for we know perfectly well that they [the Socialist-Revolutionaries] do not look at the question from the standpoint of dialectics; they refuse to understand that everything has its time and place, that something which may be reactionary tomorrow may be revolutionary today.” He continues: “It goes without saying that the division of the land would be reactionary if it were directed against the development of capitalism; but if it is directed against the remnants of serfdom, it is self-evident that the division of the land is a revolutionary measure which Social-Democracy must support.” Stalin and the Bolsheviks considered the agrarian question via the dialectical view of social development and the trend of economic advancement.
This is just a taste of some of the areas covered in this volume. More is explored and explained in Stalin’s characteristically accessible, easy-to-understand writing style.
This collection would be a great start for anyone new to the Russian Revolution and who wanted to understand the Bolshevik approach to the challenges of the time, and how they applied Marxist theory to the conditions they operated in. Of course, because it is one of the collected works of the “evil” Stalin, long demonised by the imperialist regimes in the West, someone new to this subject would be unlikely to pick up this book as an intro. However, it’s also a good book for any socialists who are simply interested in Stalin’s thought and wants to look beyond the anti-communist caricatures, and see for themselves what the man believed in.
I look forward to reading volume 2.
October 27, 2025
First time reading Stalin. Glad he’s as sarcastic or even more so than Lenin.
Contextualizes the political decisions and formations the party faced in and around 1905 and the criticism and shortcomings of the Duma and basically full court pressing for revolution against the reactionary elements of the government at the Tsar’s bidding.
The march of Bloody Sunday and its milquetoast, liberal reform proposals from the beneficent veneer of the “father tsar” were met by savage force. Can’t help but draw comparisons to the No Kings protests.
Contextualizes the political decisions and formations the party faced in and around 1905 and the criticism and shortcomings of the Duma and basically full court pressing for revolution against the reactionary elements of the government at the Tsar’s bidding.
The march of Bloody Sunday and its milquetoast, liberal reform proposals from the beneficent veneer of the “father tsar” were met by savage force. Can’t help but draw comparisons to the No Kings protests.
May 4, 2024
great book, love this guy.
laughed out loud at some of the way he describes the anarchists.
amazing stuff.
laughed out loud at some of the way he describes the anarchists.
amazing stuff.
September 5, 2024
Anarchism or socialism might be the best article I've ever read
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews