Book Reviews on Sa Smith Russian in Revolution an Empire in Crisis

• Home
• My Books

Open up Preview

See a Trouble?

Nosotros'd love your aid. Let us know what's incorrect with this preview of Russia in Revolution by S.A. Smith.

Thank you for telling us about the problem.

Friend Reviews

To meet what your friends idea of this book, please sign up.

Customs Reviews

 · 183 ratings  · 25 reviews

First your review of Russia in Revolution: An Empire in Crunch, 1890 to 1928

Jan 19, 2018 Justin Evans rated it actually liked it

Very informative. Besides as dry every bit chalk that has been put in a dehumidifier, in a room that is being heated by electrical coils, in a business firm in the dryest, saltiest desert on the planet.

But very informative, and likewise, frankly, refreshing in its willingness to encounter that Lenin et al., weren't, you know, EVIL SATANIC MONSTERS COMING TO EAT YOUR CHILDREN, but might actually have been formed by the historical moment they lived in, as well as being moderately evil monsters, but no more or less evil than

Very informative. Also as dry as chalk that has been put in a dehumidifier, in a room that is beingness heated past electrical coils, in a house in the dryest, saltiest desert on the planet.

But very informative, and also, frankly, refreshing in its willingness to come across that Lenin et al., weren't, you lot know, EVIL SATANIC MONSTERS COMING TO Eat YOUR CHILDREN, but might really take been formed by the historical moment they lived in, also as beingness moderately evil monsters, simply no more or less evil than those they were fighting against in the starting time world war, or the ceremonious war, and so on. For that lone, Smith's book can be recommended.

Only dear god is this dry.

...more

Sovyet tarihine dair bir başka liberal çalışma. Yazarın arzusu, devrime "hakkaniyetli" bir bakış sunma görüntüsü altında, bizlere "bu hata bir daha tekrarlanmamalı" düşüncesini aşılamak.

Satırlarına iyice sinmiş bakışından anlaşıldığı üzere, yazar Sovyet devrimini insanlık tarihinin gelişme çizgisinden bir sapma olarak görüyor. Tabii bu ekolün sloganı hiç değişmez: Çok iyi, çok insani niyetlerle başladı ama sonuç felaket oldu (s. 556). Totaliter, otoriter, artık buraya liberalizmin bütün anahtar

Sovyet tarihine dair bir başka liberal çalışma. Yazarın arzusu, devrime "hakkaniyetli" bir bakış sunma görüntüsü altında, bizlere "bu hata bir daha tekrarlanmamalı" düşüncesini aşılamak.

Satırlarına iyice sinmiş bakışından anlaşıldığı üzere, yazar Sovyet devrimini insanlık tarihinin gelişme çizgisinden bir sapma olarak görüyor. Tabii bu ekolün sloganı hiç değişmez: Çok iyi, çok insani niyetlerle başladı ama sonuç felaket oldu (s. 556). Totaliter, otoriter, artık buraya liberalizmin bütün anahtar kavramlarını yapıştırın. Araya da Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti övgüsünü yapıştırdık mı tamamdır:

"Bu bakımdan Çin komünistlerinin kendi ülkelerini öncü bir ekonomik ve siyasi dünya gücü haline getirme sicili, büyük ölçüde model aldıkları (Sovyet) rejimden daha etkileyicidir... Nihayetinde Çin komünistleri kapitalizmi taklit ederek, yatırım ve ihracata dayalı bir sistem benimseyerek ve kamu mülklerini özelleştirip, özel sektörü destekleyerek tarihsel olarak eşi görülmemiş bir ekonomik büyümeye ulaştılar."

Bu kadar. Yazarın 40 yılı kapsayan Rusya/Sovyetler Birliği tarihinden çıkarabildiği ders bu.

Yazarın benimsediği anlatım taktiği de buna paralel. Kautsky'den Trotsky'ye, Bukharin'den Deng Xiaoping'e kadar herkes aslında iyi niyetli, doğru düşünen insanlar. Bir tek yanlış yapanlar, totaliter yumruklarıyla demokrasiyi ezen, tek parti diktatörlüğünün yolunu açan Lenin ve Stalin. Öf.

Bu yazarlar kendilerinden sıkılmıyor mu yahu?

...more

The Russian Revolution is an essential and seminal historical event that is crucial to understand in thinking well-nigh the twentieth century. A nifty historian (and admirer of the revolution) Eric Hobsbawm wrote that "if the ideas of the French revolution accept, every bit is now evident, outlasted Bolshevism, the practical consequences of 1917 were far greater and more lasting than those of 1789". Certainly the events in Russia were an important component in the massive disruption of the nineteenth century The Russian Revolution is an essential and seminal historical event that is crucial to empathize in thinking about the twentieth century. A bully historian (and admirer of the revolution) Eric Hobsbawm wrote that "if the ideas of the French revolution have, as is now evident, outlasted Bolshevism, the practical consequences of 1917 were far greater and more lasting than those of 1789". Certainly the events in Russia were an important component in the massive disruption of the nineteenth century world during the years of the Great State of war. On a narrower scope than world history, they at to the lowest degree form the end of the Romanov dynasty, although it is possible to argue that Eric Hobsbawm'due south proclamation of a massive change is overstated, and that Lenin became a "Red Tsar" with much continuity from the Russian Empire.
It has been surprising thus far in 2017 how trivial pop commemoration of the revolution has been seen in the form of documentaries and public soapbox. Possibly this will come later on in the year, every bit of form the Russian Revolution had two phases, that in February (on the old Russian calendar) which saw the abdication of the Tsar, and that in Oct which brought the Bolsheviks to power. There has at least been a tide of history books on aspects of the period - The Romanovs: 1613-1918 by Simon Sebag Montefiore (the full back story of the Russian autocratic dynasty), Rasputin: Faith, Ability, and the Twilight of the Romanovs past Douglas Smith (a biography of the legendary figure who lay behind much discontent with the quondam regime), The Last of the Tsars: Nicholas II and the Russian Revolution by Robert Service (an exam of Nicholas in the terminal year of his life) and the reissue of Orlando Figes famous A People'southward Tragedy: The Russian Revolution: 1891-1924. South A Smith is an Oxford University Professor with an interest in modern Russian and Chinese history, and in comparative Communist history. Russia in Revolution: An Empire in Crisis, 1890 to 1928 is his contribution to the examination of the revolution. Smith has called to take a broader, contextual view of 1917. Instead of focussing chronologically on the events of 1917 his periodisation stretches from the tardily nineteenth century through to the eve of Stalin's collectivisation. His brush is broad in other respects equally well. Rather than focussing on the political elite, he has chosen an analytical approach looking at society, culture and economic science as a whole. The benefits of this approach are a broad understanding of the enormous changes in Russia, the causes and immediate results of the Revolution and its consequence on guild. Smith provides a steady balanced tone which assesses the various historiographical interpretations and attempts to steer a moderate form. While the book may non provide the rich prose and deep examination of the events of the Revolution itself establish in some books, it does provide the serious reader with a solid broad agreement of this pivotal period.
Some cardinal questions are addressed - was the Revolution inevitable? What caused the Revolution? Was Bolshevism inevitable or could Russia have given birth to a liberal democracy? How did the Bolsheviks manage to maintain ability against such significant opposition? Was it a real revolution, or was there more continuity?
In his conclusion, Smith assesses that he "has tried to offer an assay that links human agency and the power of ideas to the deeper structuring forces of geopolitics, empire, economy, and civilisation." This is an analysis that looks more than to statistics, large societal changes and forces than to the personalities and decisions of individuals, and the ability of events. This balance is difficult to achieve. It is important to look at society every bit a whole, and this book probably serves equally a corrective to some of my biographical reading (such as Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives) which might overinflate the importance of the machinations of the Comintern, and the politicking of the Bolshevik elite. Smith de-emphasizes events as well. The course of the events of the Revolution simply occupy 1 out of seven chapters. There can be no dubiousness however that personalities were still critical. Lenin's insight of the importance of stopping the war, and his confidence to throw out the Provisional Government in a coup were absolutely central. Smith could accept spent a flake more time on Lenin, simply equally with most things he steers a careful grade, and does pay some listen to his importance.
His view of the Revolution is summarised as that "the collapse of the tsarist regime in February 1917 was ultimately rooted in a systemic crunch brought about by economic and social modernization, a crisis that was massively exacerbated by the Beginning Globe War". The October coup didn't overturn a budding liberal democracy - "the Provisional Government had expired even earlier the Bolsheviks finished information technology off." It had failed to recognise the key causes of the Revolution in the first place, leaving much of the old aristocracy in place and more chiefly failing to appreciate how crucial "peace and staff of life" were, a error the Bolsheviks did not make thanks to Lenin.
The brutality of the Civil War is astonishing, and the antisemitism cruel. Smith describes how "the civil state of war inspired a massacre of Jews on a ghastly, historically unprecedented scale, with the loss of between 50,000 and 200,000 lives. Some other 200,000 Jews were injured and thousands of women were raped." Already in this menstruation information technology was the ground forces, rather than the proletariat which was pushing forward the revolution. Although the hated Tsarist hole-and-corner police were abolished, the Bolshevik's chop-chop instituted the brutal Cheka. Smith analyses the way that to ensure the survival of the government Lenin from the outset used authoritarian techniques. "Past March 1919, Lenin could declare that soviet rule was rule for the proletariat rather than by it."
The years of NEP (New Economic Policy) post-obit the Civil War are dealt with extensively, especially the economics and social affect. This is a fascinating menstruum, one with abiding conflict betwixt the reintroduction of market mechanisms and the desire to intervene. Smith assesses that "NEP society tin can by no stretch of the imagination be described as 'liberal' yet it was more than pluralistic than the brutally conformist society that was to be inaugurated in 1928 with Stalin's 'Bully Break'."
This book may disappoint those who wish to read a narrative history, peculiarly one focusing on the revolutionary events of 1917 itself. However as a well written, balanced and up to date interpretation of the changes which transformed Russia from an agrarian autocracy to a Utopian dictatorship on the verge of shock modernisation Steve Smith does an excellent job. ...more than

I recently watched a documentary, and office of it explained the rise and fall of the Soviet Matrimony. This books is not for beginners or people who want a light read. There is a lot of information and the format of the text is not the easiest to follow, particularly when the reader has to refer dorsum to a fact or date.

May 09, 2017 Paul rated it really liked it

Professor Smith'south book on the Russian revolution, released to coincide with the hundredth anniversary of the events of 1917 covers the years 1890 until 1928, but its main focus is the years 1917 to 1924, with Lenin's death. His main reasoning for including the before years is to argue that the revolution happened due to the rottenness of the Tsarist land, despite some improvements in the area of agrarian reform prior to the Great War. The inclusion of the years after 1924 are to show a link be Professor Smith'south book on the Russian revolution, released to coincide with the hundredth anniversary of the events of 1917 covers the years 1890 until 1928, but its primary focus is the years 1917 to 1924, with Lenin'south decease. His primary reasoning for including the earlier years is to argue that the revolution happened due to the rottenness of the Tsarist state, despite some improvements in the area of agrarian reform prior to the Keen War. The inclusion of the years after 1924 are to show a link between Lenin and Stalin in policy (except views on the globe revolution), just a speeding upward of modernisation under Stalin.

The book itself is packed with facts most life and gild in the immediate mail service-revolutionary catamenia, which having heard the author give a lecture at the British Library yesterday I can attest Professor Smith can quote from memory, that make it interesting to read, although at times heavy going.

...more

Dec thirteen, 2019 Greg rated it it was amazing

Due south.A. Smith helpfully treats "the Russian Revolution" in the larger context of growing unrest within regal Russia from the late 19th century through the upheavals of 1905, the First World War, the abolition of the monarchy and the coming to ability of the Soviets in 1917, and the tremendous, horrific, and exciting experiments and hopes of the Soviets until the time that Stalin consolidated power in 1928.

This book does ii things that may help contemporary readers better understand the Soviet Rev

S.A. Smith helpfully treats "the Russian Revolution" in the larger context of growing unrest inside imperial Russia from the tardily 19th century through the upheavals of 1905, the Offset World War, the abolitionism of the monarchy and the coming to power of the Soviets in 1917, and the tremendous, horrific, and exciting experiments and hopes of the Soviets until the fourth dimension that Stalin consolidated ability in 1928.

This book does two things that may help contemporary readers improve understand the Soviet Revolution:

1) It was an outcome — and by no means the but possible outcome — of a process that reflected rising unrest among intellectuals, progressives, international socialists, workers, peasants, and Marxists that flowed steadily from events of the late 19th century.

In other words, Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, and the others did not suddenly announced from an otherwise placid society. The bug facing the Russian empire were no sudden developments, either. For over a century, Czars alternated between existence relatively moderate and progressive men, often even reformers, and those who were repressive and fearful of modify.

Russia's greatest dilemma was a event of its entrenched and intertwined backward agriculture, its most insignificant manufacturing and industrial capacity, its relatively small numbers of restive intellectuals and urban dwellers, and an inability to solve the problem of growing hunger for more freedom and reform when trying to control the reform process and limit it to an orderly process.

Even the most progressive Czars and their ministers were caught betwixt the proverbial rock and a hard place: without attempting reforms they knew to exist necessary — such every bit liberating the peasants from serfdom and encouraging more liberty of expression and experimentation — no real progress could be made, and yet, when attempting to initiate these very needed reforms they faced immediate and substantial resistance from those who had the most to lose: powerful landlords and those dependent upon the Czarist system. Compounding their difficulties, modest reforms unleashed uncontrollable expectations for even greater reforms among some elements of the populace.

Tragically, amongst the reactions to the reforming Czars of the terminal half of the 19th century were a number of agitator groups who believed that only by destroying much of the existing system could whatsoever genuine reforms take a take a chance to succeed. In those grim years these diverse groups pulled off a number of assassinations of key authorities figures, sadly including the final reforming Czar. That assassination created the near inevitable snap-back to increased authoritarianism, and led to the final Czar of the Empire who was both committed to the monarchic system and sadly intellectually and emotionally unequipped to handle the challenges the showtime decades of the 20th century would nowadays him.

2) Americans, in detail, I suspect, if they think of the Soviet Revolution of 1917 at all, are likely to think that it was doomed from the first to produce the kind of potent-man rule Stalin initiated. Thanks to Smith's book, however, which spends a great bargain of space exploring the mail service 1917 years, we learn anew that a) this was truly a revolutionary moment in which many things were possible, and b) that many of the Soviets were the kind of reformers who wanted to create weather of greater equality, dignity, respect, and without warfare and violence.

We read, with horror, of the terrible irony that afterwards several years of indelible the savage warfare of World War I — and all of its homo and other costs to Russian soldiers and the Russian people — very soon after the Soviets were successful in gaining power they now constitute themselves engaged in a long and barbarous civil war, in which conservative elements within Russian federation — including many of her generals and soldiers — joined with strange troops (including Americans) in attempts to end Soviet rule and restore a more than bourgeois order to Russia.

Smith makes it very articulate that it was this costly period of fourth dimension that a) caused many progressive efforts of the revolutionaries to fall by the wayside in order to deal with the necessity of winning the civil war, and b) prepared the groundwork — in society as a whole and within the Bolshevik party — for Stalin to slowly build the kind of personal loyalty that he skillfully used over time to isolate and choice off his primary rivals.

Stalin was Not inevitable! Moreover, had the Soviets been granted a few years of peace following the terminate of World State of war Two information technology is probable that more moderate elements may have succeeded in establishing a truly more than egalitarian and peaceful country.

I highly recommend this well-written and thoroughly engaging book!

...more than

Jul 20, 2017 Elgin rated it did not like it

A mile wide and an inch deep. Its been a long long fourth dimension since I had so much problem getting through a book. I am very interested in the Russian Revolution and accept read several related histories, so was very excited to meet this new study. Withal for a good part of the book I felt like I was wading through a data dump. It seems that with several new sources available in the onetime Soviet Marriage, the author at present had detailed enrollment numbers for several parties, soviets, and other organization in A mile wide and an inch deep. Its been a long long time since I had and then much problem getting through a volume. I am very interested in the Russian Revolution and have read several related histories, and then was very excited to see this new study. All the same for a skillful function of the volume I felt like I was wading through a information dump. It seems that with several new sources bachelor in the former Soviet Matrimony, the author now had detailed enrollment numbers for several parties, soviets, and other organization in several districts and towns. And we got it ALL. There was very picayune fourth dimension spent an analysis, background, and interactions betwixt the people who were the primary vehicles of the revolutionary motion.

I would much rather have seen a i or ii folio data table giving the membership numbers, product numbers, etc. for various entities and then an in-depth, lengthy analysis of a few of them. As it was, most of the text seemed to be superficial quoting of statistics with very little documentation of reasons behind the numbers and forces that led to changes in the numbers.

...more

Jan 11, 2021 Al Raven rated information technology actually liked it

Very reliable and highly-informative (it's basically *simply* data/the facts) overview of the first three decades of 20th Russia/USSR/etc (plus end of 19th)

Covers about everything one would demand to know on this period

Very reliable and highly-informative (it's basically *only* information/the facts) overview of the commencement three decades of 20th Russia/USSR/etc (plus finish of 19th)

Covers about everything i would demand to know on this period

...more

Cipher revolutionary here (pun intended), but an excellent overview of the current state of the scholarly literature on the causes of and years immediately following the Bolshevik Revolution.

May eleven, 2021 sube rated information technology really liked it

This is probably *the* overview work for the Russian Revolution I've read, so far. It gives a adept overview of all the different elements in all the stages of Russian and Soviet history, while never losing focus of the central thread. Nonetheless, it'd have been meliorate if in that location was a wider discussion of the period of Stalin, and not generally stopping at the NEP (across a small sub-affiliate on the Stalinist "revolution from above" betwixt 1928 to 1931). Nonetheless, would be my get-to intro on the top This is probably *the* overview work for the Russian Revolution I've read, so far. It gives a good overview of all the different elements in all the stages of Russian and Soviet history, while never losing focus of the cardinal thread. However, it'd accept been better if at that place was a wider discussion of the period of Stalin, and non generally stopping at the NEP (across a small sub-chapter on the Stalinist "revolution from in a higher place" between 1928 to 1931). Nonetheless, would exist my go-to intro on the topic of the Russian Revolution, e'er - generally - off-white to the Bolsheviks, despite coming from an bookish historian (even if i'd non share many criticisms, in the way he offers them, but this is another discussion). ...more than

Whether it is my inability to catch onto the writer's style, I could non, for the life of me, comprehend this book. Data went in, nothing was retained. It was an countless barrage of information that marched before my optics without a glimmer of recognition. It became endlessly monotonous. I would go back and read sections, whole capacity again and once again. Even this did not help. it just built a ten foot wall of frustration. The volume is very scientific in its approach laying out all the facts, Whether information technology is my inability to catch onto the author's style, I could not, for the life of me, comprehend this book. Information went in, nothing was retained. It was an countless avalanche of information that marched earlier my eyes without a glimmer of recognition. It became endlessly monotonous. I would go back and read sections, whole chapters once again and again. Fifty-fifty this did not help. information technology just built a ten foot wall of frustration. The book is very scientific in its approach laying out all the facts, numbers, statistics. His analytics were dry and circumspect. And this is where I believe he may lose the states. Information technology'due south one big telephone volume he has provided. For me it read similar a telephone book. Sure you want facts—a chronicle and annotate on causation—of a history book, only besides want some story telling and that requires art and this is what this book lacks—some bones campfire storytelling. ...more than

I simply completed reading this volume regarding the Russian Revolution. Overall, I found the booke very informative and every bit new to the topic, I actually enjoy it equally it provides a wide knowledge regarding the events prior to Revolution, what actually collection to the Revolution in the first identify as well as how the regime affected the guild in terms of economy, politics and culture after the formation of the Soviet Union.

Withal, I had some serious problem following the book in many parts. First and for

I just completed reading this book regarding the Russian Revolution. Overall, I constitute the booke very informative and as new to the topic, I really enjoy it as it provides a broad knowledge regarding the events prior to Revolution, what actually collection to the Revolution in the showtime place too as how the government affected the social club in terms of economy, politics and culture after the formation of the Soviet Union.

However, I had some serious trouble following the book in many parts. First and foremost, there are so many names and organizations during the period that the book is covering that, as a new to the topic, I had some trouble remembering on what exactly did everybody did and how they affected the upshot of the revolution. Therefore, I feel that the book is actually defective a small-scale index regarding the roles of each person and organisation to the revolution.

Adding to this, I as well institute actually disturbing the fact that the author includes a lot of statistical data . In some cases, I would prefer that these data exist included in a table or a graph and avert detailing all these data in the text. That mode I believe that it would exist easier for the reader to follow it and understand what the data really represent.

Finally, the author also included a lot of cross-reference throughout the text. For instance, in the last chapter of the Society and Culture, the author mentions at the start of the chapter the role of Proletkul't in the cultural shaping of the Soviet order, without explaining what exactly was its part. Then he spends the whole chapter cantankerous-referencing this term without giving any detail, only to wait till the end of the chapter to get a view of what was its role in the club. This is merely an case equally the writer repeats this behaviour throughout the book.

Despite all these, I would still recommend the book for anyone trying to get a broad of Russia during this period.

...more

It's perhaps telling that I was recommended this by a Russian historian I consider vaguely Bolshevik-sympathetic, as an culling to Orlando Figes or Richard Pipes's extremely anti-Lenin histories, and yet I ended the book with vastly more contempt for the Bolsheviks and their projection than I entered with.

"Their revolution wrought calamity on a scale commensurate with the transformation in the human condition that they sought to attain," Smith writes in the conclusion, and he has the stats and

It's perhaps telling that I was recommended this by a Russian historian I consider vaguely Bolshevik-sympathetic, as an alternative to Orlando Figes or Richard Pipes's extremely anti-Lenin histories, and yet I ended the book with vastly more contempt for the Bolsheviks and their project than I entered with.

"Their revolution wrought calamity on a calibration commensurate with the transformation in the human status that they sought to achieve," Smith writes in the conclusion, and he has the stats and the qualitative portraits to dorsum that up. 1 case: he cites data that in Petrograd, wages in 1916 were only 70-75 percentage of their 1913 level. The tsarist autocracy had been using mass aggrandizement and reduced worker wages to fund the war endeavor.

By 1920, later on ii years of Bolshevik dominion and under the war communist organisation prioritizing the tearing seizure of food for the army, real wages in Petrograd were only 9.6 percent of their 1913 level, or peradventure 38 percent if 1 included food rations and other in-kind benefits. The Revolution effectively doubled the harm to workers that the tsar's war of choice had inflicted.

And Smith makes a decent case that the ceremonious state of war was a war of selection on the Bolsheviks' part too, and that a real coalition government of Bolsheviks, Mensheviks, and SRs could have proved durable and prevented a real White movement (which had to rely on SR supporters) from taking off. It was certainly a war of pick in that Lenin chose deliberately to effect a insurrection in October 1917.

Never doubt in the ability of a massive attempted overhaul of a complex social club to get horribly wrong, and never abandon hope in the possibility of modest incremental policy changes to improve human life. They're amid the few things that ever have.

...more than

Mar 09, 2021 Daniel rated it really liked it

As a somewhat-new labour organizer I felt that it was pretty of import to dig into the Russian Revolution, an inspiring moment in the history of pro-labour, anti-backer work, and where so much of the language of organizing comes from. More than that, I needed to understand why it failed. Smith lays information technology out non-linearly, which absolutely was confusing for me at times, but acknowledges that history is an interconnected web of events and ideologies, non a straight line. In the process he does a As a somewhat-new labour organizer I felt that it was pretty important to dig into the Russian Revolution, an inspiring moment in the history of pro-labour, anti-capitalist work, and where so much of the language of organizing comes from. More than that, I needed to understand why it failed. Smith lays it out non-linearly, which admittedly was disruptive for me at times, only acknowledges that history is an interconnected web of events and ideologies, not a straight line. In the process he does a very practiced job of exploring all the different elements that lead to the Bolsheviks' rise and fall, and how various parts of Russian social club felt well-nigh what went downwards. I don't know if I left the book with any real conclusions other than "damn, with hindsight it would've been hard for the revolution to succeed even if the Bolsheviks made every correct choice", but I can also see why some historians specialize in this specific catamenia - the author of this book included. It'south a dense moment in history whose events can accept a lot of interpretations. Smith tends to take a somewhat "objective" opinion, which basically means that I wouldn't give this book to a centrist, just I'grand leaving it with a much improve understanding of this moment in history, even if my own feelings on it aren't fully worked out withal. I volition probably read another book most this at some indicate. ...more than

Jun 23, 2021 Cool_guy rated it it was astonishing

Steps beyond the Petrograd Soviet to show how the revolution was shaped and limited by the structuring forces of Russian history. Of import to note that the Bolsheviks won considering they briefly transformed into a mass move, albeit one channeled by the tight bailiwick of the political party, and that that movement had broad and expansive ideas of the potential of the revolution to democratize every aspect of regular people's lives. The failure of the revolution to spread to Germany and across, followed Steps beyond the Saint petersburg Soviet to show how the revolution was shaped and limited by the structuring forces of Russian history. Important to note that the Bolsheviks won because they briefly transformed into a mass movement, albeit one channeled by the tight discipline of the party, and that that movement had broad and expansive ideas of the potential of the revolution to democratize every aspect of regular people'due south lives. The failure of the revolution to spread to Frg and across, followed by the morass of the civil state of war, destroyed those possibilities. While the Bolsheviks prosecuted the war with barbarous violence, and Lenin crafted a political structure which was vulnerable to dictatorship, Smith argues that this was not a decisive break with Tsarist rule. By 1928, the yr the book ends, some form of "socialism in ane country" was inevitable, although information technology is unlikely that Bukharin or Trotsky would've pursued state building with the aforementioned bloodlust equally Stalin. ...more than

December 31, 2020 Mark Reynolds rated information technology actually liked information technology

Intervention: considering the social dimensions of the revolution across a wide swath of the former tsarist empire. Smith attempts to understand the long revolutionary story, from the revolution of 1905 through the early Leninist menstruum, through the lenses of not merely class struggle but also of nationalism. Setting aside the Marxist idealism, Smith demonstrates that revolutions are made by ordinary people, rather than revolutionaries themselves. He holds that peasants were the key players i Intervention: considering the social dimensions of the revolution beyond a broad swath of the former tsarist empire. Smith attempts to empathise the long revolutionary story, from the revolution of 1905 through the early Leninist flow, through the lenses of not just class struggle only likewise of nationalism. Setting aside the Marxist idealism, Smith demonstrates that revolutions are made by ordinary people, rather than revolutionaries themselves. He holds that peasants were the central players in this story, that they were both the master agents and victims of the revolutionary process. (5) Despite doing a chip of groundwork laying out his argument and intervention, Smith is primarily focused on reaching popular audiences with this book, and the prose is largely accessible and descriptive. Consider this amidst the most useful entry points into the field of twentieth-century Russian social history.

Would be interested to read more about the role of the Allied powers in supporting the White forces during the Ceremonious War, as that was treated by Smith as a point of some interest just little consequence.

...more

This is one of a number of excellent books on the Russian Revolution that saw the calorie-free in 2017, in the Centenary year of that momentous result. Covering in slightly less than 400 pages (excluding notes and index) the period from the 1890s until the onset of the first quinquennial plan in 1928, this book is a very readable panoramic of the events, describing non only the political, economic, and war machine ones, just also dealing with the artistic, cultural, an societal issues. It seems to me as a p This is i of a number of excellent books on the Russian Revolution that saw the light in 2017, in the Centenary yr of that momentous event. Covering in slightly less than 400 pages (excluding notes and index) the period from the 1890s until the onset of the first quinquennial plan in 1928, this volume is a very readable panoramic of the events, describing not only the political, economic, and war machine ones, but likewise dealing with the artistic, cultural, an societal issues. It seems to me as a perfect introduction to a broad overview of the Russian Revolution, with just the right residuum betwixt the detailing of events and the interpretative bent necessary for the reader to empathize the large picture. ...more than

Feb xv, 2020 Henry rated it liked it

This is a comprehensive history of one of the more than tumultuous periods in whatever country'due south history. Sometimes it reads similar a college text, and there's a lot head-spinning with respect to dates, flitting back to ten years prior, then bouncing to ii years alee. The book does often get bogged down in minutiae of production goals, demography and the like, merely it's worth being patient with it all. In the cease, you're left with the feeling that the Russian Revolution was --and had to be-- uniquely "Russ This is a comprehensive history of one of the more tumultuous periods in any country's history. Sometimes it reads similar a college text, and in that location's a lot head-spinning with respect to dates, flitting back to ten years prior, and so billowy to ii years ahead. The book does often go bogged down in minutiae of production goals, census and the like, but it'south worth being patient with it all. In the cease, you're left with the feeling that the Russian Revolution was --and had to be-- uniquely "Russian" as much as it was an event in Communist history. ...more

Apr 19, 2020 Kate rated information technology information technology was ok

I wanted to like a lot virtually this book, like its focus on minority and non-European groups in revolutionary Russia, an ofttimes overlooked area of study. However...the writing is extremely dry, making the book itself dense and hard to get through. I struggled staying focused on it, and the Russian Revolution(s) is i of my niche involvement areas. Unfortunate.

Incredibly dense. If you'd like to know all of the socio-economic and political details that led upwardly to Russian Revolution, study this book. "Study" considering it's textbook you should learn and review, rather than read. It does a very good job at that and if y'all learned the whole thing, you'd know more virtually the Russian Revolution than merely about anybody. But don't expect a light-reading story. Incredibly dense. If you'd like to know all of the socio-economic and political details that led upwardly to Russian Revolution, study this volume. "Study" considering information technology's textbook you should acquire and review, rather than read. It does a very good task at that and if you lot learned the whole thing, you'd know more than about the Russian Revolution than just well-nigh anybody. Just don't expect a light-reading story. ...more

Apr 01, 2018 Fred R rated it liked it

This was suggested somewhere as the most consummate, serious history of the revolution bachelor, and I suppose it is that. This may have meant more than detail than I actually wanted. Smith, who appears to accept left sympathies, is obviously making heroic efforts to be as objective as possible, but (as a die-hard reactionary) I still found this a little weak on things like the Kornilov affair.

Jun 23, 2020 Andrew Steimer rated it actually liked information technology

Covering the Russian Revolution in under 500 pages is no mean feat. This book provides a great overview of the highlights, many of the underlying causes, and the furnishings of the revolution on Russian club and politics. This is a great introductory text.

January 17, 2020 randy rated information technology it was ok

i found this somewhat boring. he gives out a lot of statistics and names a lot of different groups of people and there leaders. trying to proceed track of all this tin can be disruptive. you could just read the first affiliate and the concluding ii.

Jul 21, 2021 Lewis rated it actually liked information technology

The revolutionary era has been covered in more depth elsewhere, but the two long chapters on the NEP period are very informative.

Merely exist warned there's a lot of technical information in here.

Steve (South. A.) Smith is a Senior Research Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford, and a Professor in the History Kinesthesia of Oxford University. He was formerly Professor of Comparative History at the European Academy Constitute, Florence, and Professor of History at the University of Essex. He is a historian of modern Russia and China, who works on the interface of social and political history and, thousand Steve (Southward. A.) Smith is a Senior Inquiry Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford, and a Professor in the History Faculty of Oxford University. He was formerly Professor of Comparative History at the European University Institute, Florence, and Professor of History at the University of Essex. He is a historian of modern Russia and China, who works on the interface of social and political history and, more recently, of comparative Communism. He has published books on Russian history – including the prize-winning Russia in Revolution: An Empire in Crisis (Oxford, 2017) – and two books on Chinese history, plus Revolution and the People in Russian federation and China: A Comparative History (Cambridge, 2008). He edited the Oxford Handbook of the History of Communism (Oxford, 2014) and was a co-editor of the Cambridge History of Communism (Cambridge, 2017). He is currently working on a comparative report of the efforts of the Soviet state in the 1920s and 1930s and the Chinese country in the 1950s and 1960s to eliminate pop faith. He is a onetime editor of Past and Present and a Vice-President of the Past and Present Society. He is too a Fellow of the British University. ...more

News & Interviews

If you lot're seeking an fantabulous audiobook, you cannot go incorrect with an award-winning recording. Luckily for us, each yr the Audie Awards pick...

"Joseph Conrad once wrote that 'information technology is the peculiarity of Russian natures that withal sharply engaged in the drama of activeness, they are still turning their ear to the murmur of abstract ideas'.106" — 2 likes

"The plummet of the tsarist regime in February 1917 was ultimately rooted in a systemic crisis brought about by economic and social modernization, a crisis that was massively exacerbated by the First Globe War.1" — 1 likes

More quotes…

Welcome back. But a moment while we sign you in to your Goodreads account.

schultztrainge.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/30235607-russia-in-revolution

Share this post