Talk:Vladimir Lenin

Blatant minimizing

"According to historian Petrovsky-Shtern, it is likely that Lenin was unaware of his mother's half-Jewish ancestry, which was only discovered by his sister Anna after his death"

Is this a joke? This doesn't belong in the early life section. It is simply put there to minimize any relation to ((them)). 220.76.183.4 (talk) 08:10, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

No, it isn't a joke. As is fairly well-known, his sister was actually quite enthusiastic when she discovered that Lenin had a Jewish grandfather, and suggested to Stalin and others in the Soviet leadership that it be publicized to combat anti-Semitism. Said leadership evidently disagreed. --Ismail (talk) 11:51, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Born to a upper middle-class family in Simbirsk

His father had hereditary Nobility with a rank equivalent to rear Admiral this makes Lenin a noble not from an upper middle class family. Even his fathers Wikipedia page cites his fathers position & links to the rank of hierarchy in the russian empire. 7Prefix7 (talk) 23:47, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Contradictory statement

"In these early days of the new regime, Lenin avoided talking in Marxist and socialist terms so as not to alienate Russia's population, and instead spoke about having a country controlled by the workers." This seems like a contradictory statement, since a country controlled by the workers is a clearly Marxist concept. PatGallacher (talk) 18:27, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Edit request, February 2022

Please change

He also issued a requisitioning order for disincentivised peasants to produce more grain than they could personally consume, and as a result production slumped.

to

The requisitions disincentivised peasants from producing more grain than they could personally consume, and thus production slumped.

The latter was the text that was originally in the article, but it was changed in an edit in December ([1]) that claimed to be "fixing an incomplete sentence". But the original form of the text meant the same as "The act of requisitioning disincentivised peasants…", and the sentence was not incomplete. 2601:601:1A00:6C80:C8DB:33DB:69BD:F28 (talk) 03:03, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Lenin did not "recommend Trotsky" for General Secretary in his Testament

There are a lot of issues with how Lenin's Testament is summarized. Currently it reads:

"During December 1922 and January 1923, Lenin dictated "Lenin's Testament", in which he discussed the personal qualities of his comrades, particularly Trotsky and Stalin.[395] He recommended that Stalin be removed from the position of General Secretary of the Communist Party, deeming him ill-suited for the position.[396] Instead he recommended Trotsky for the job, describing him as "the most capable man in the present Central Committee".

Well, it's true the Testament was written during Dec 1922-Jan 1923, that Lenin recommending removing Stalin from General Secretary, and that he did describe Trotsky as "the most capable man in the present Central Committee" . But the rest of the above ranges from editorial to plain false.

The most blatant error here is stating that Lenin "recommended Trotsky for the job." That does not happen anywhere in the document. I'm assuming the misconception occurred because Lenin does, at points, heap praise on Trotsky, but nowhere does Lenin suggest that means Trotsky should become General Secretary, or promoted in any way for that matter. In fact, the document reveals that the reason Lenin writes about Trotsky is because he believes the conflict between Trotsky and Stalin threatens to split the Central Committee.

Before discussing any personal qualities Lenin states:

"I have in mind stability as a guarantee against a split in the immediate future, and I intend to deal here with a few ideas concerning personal qualities. I think that from this standpoint the prime factors in the question of stability are such members of the C.C. as Stalin and Trotsky. I think relations between them make up the greater part of the danger of a split, which could be avoided, and this purpose, in my opinion, would be served, among other things, by increasing the number of C.C. members to 50 or 100. "

Nowhere in the Testament does Lenin state that Trotsky should be General Secretary. On Trotsky, Lenin stated: "Comrade Trotsky, on the other hand, as his struggle against the C.C. on the question of the People's Commissariat of Communications has already proved, is distinguished not only by outstanding ability. He is personally perhaps the most capable man in the present C.C., but he has displayed excessive self-assurance and shown excessive preoccupation with the purely administrative side of the work."

Lenin states multiple times in the Testament that its primary goal is to guard against a split (not name a successor). Personal qualities are mentioned only to describe why he believes the C.C. is in danger of such a split. The remedy for which, he states repeatedly, is not in choosing the perfect General Secretary but in expanding the Committee.

A more apt summary of the document might go something like:

"During December 1922 and January 1923, Lenin dictated "Lenin's Testament", in which he warned about fears of a split in the Central Committee due to rising tensions between Stalin and Trotsky. Lenin advocated for increasing the number of Central Committee members "to 50 or 100", as he believed this would prevent such a split. Lenin also recommended Stalin be removed from the post of Secretary General, stating that appointing a successor who was 'more tolerant, more loyal, more polite, and more considerate to the comrades' would also be important to prevent a split. Lenin did not propose a specific successor." — Preceding unsigned comment added by VioletWriting (talk • contribs) 20:02, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes. It should be noted that at that time General Secretary was not the key role.--Jack Upland (talk) 04:57, 20 February 2022 (UTC)