Yuri Felshtinsky

Two stars only. Hard to take the arguments seriously, even if the conclusions are correct (which I doubt). There are several main theses:

1) The pre-1917 Bolsheviks were financed through criminal activity
2) Brest-Litovsk was Lenin's personal plan to remain as head of the International (by ensuring the Liebknecht/Luxemburg revolution in Germany would never come to pass).
3) The assassination of Mirbach was the work of Dzerzhinski to thwart the aims of Brest-Litovsk and was used as a pretext for the elimination of the Left SRs
4) Dzerzhinski and Sverdlov tried to eliminate Lenin in the Fanny Kaplan incident
5) The Bolsheviks murdered Liebknecht and Luxemburg
6) Stalin and Dzerzhinsky poisoned Lenin after his stroke

All this would be more credible if the sources quoted were closer to the incidents. Felshtinsky has relied heavily on the Hoover Institution archives of the Mensheviks - hardly the most unbiased source. Of course, he has access to Russian works that I am unable to read, but there is very little from outside the public domain that was sourced from inside the USSR. Much is emigré material, often written some 20 or more years after the fact. As a result, the arguments often read "we can only conclude that..." or "it would appear that...". Some very dubious opinions are given as fact, e.g., Alexander Parvus (Gelfand) is described without qualification as "a German government agent" - an unproven assumption, as far as I am aware. The evidence presented in the Moscow Trials is also presented as being true.

Some of Felshtinsky's arguments also make little sense - for example, why would Stalin protract Lenin's illness for so long if he had complete control over him as is suggested here? It would have been in the Stalinist cabal's interest to dispose of Lenin at the first possible opportunity.

In addition, the book has been badly proofed - there are several stupid errors that annoy the reader.

I am currently writing a book in which Dzerzhinsky is responsible for Lenin's death - but this is intended as an alternative history novel - a work of fiction. I feel that Felshtinsky's book is likewise fiction, but presented as history. However useful it may be as a history of the SRs and Left SRs, I cannot take it seriously as a history of the Bolsheviks.… (més)