Soviet point of view, reflected time and again; yet very interesting...
936100
The book is a worthy read, overall. With that said, the reader must proceed with the caveat that the Soviet viewpoint clouds the contents and events herein. For example, the industrialists are shown to have too big a role and relationship with Hitler. When in fact, they were only a means to help Hitler to an end. While one can certainly understand the focus being on the Eastfront war, the Soviet NKVD officers who edited the book do belittle the Western Front time and again.

On the plus side, the book covers last days in the Berlin Bunker in detail. It is the only one to have the full statement's of each of Hitler's most personal aides, Linge* and Gunsche which other books (even ones based on Soviet materials) do not. For example, "Hitler's Death: Russia's Last Great Secret from the Files of the KGB" is only made up of the incomplete early SMERSH (Military Counter-Espionage Dept.) investigation of Hitler's death. "The Hitler Book" was put together from the full dossier of the subsequent secret investigation (Operation Myth) by the Soviet NKVD (later known as the MVD, the forerunner of the KGB). A dossier received by Stalin on Dec. 30, 1949.

The end part of the book and "Editor's Afterward" go into detail as to the different investigations that took place by the different Soviet offices [mainly, SMERSH and the NKVD], contradictions they found and the fact they would not share information, etc. Further, SMERSH would not allow the NKVD to conduct a second autopsy on the remains to check for signs of cyanide and glass from the capsule. In the end, one does come away with the position that Hitler shot himself in the temple. And as the authors state, the official Soviet status and death of Hitler changed over time to suit the political whims of Moscow.

*Footnote: As of late summer 2009, the memoirs of Heinz Linge have been re-published under the title: "With Hitler to the End: The Memoir of Hitler's Valet". So one can now read that book for Linge's full account, as well.
2356034
After reading this book, I was startled to realize how many countries were grateful that the Soviet Union quelled their rebellions and brought socialism to their country. Kruschev leaves little room for dissent from those liberated. Even though it is a biased account, I think it is really worth reading. The book is well put together and read's more like a story than an account of a world leader. The stories are interesting and the views expressed forced me to think.

Kruschev believes in socialism with all his heart and alternatively that capitalism is evil. That millions were murdered under socialism and many more starved, sometimes even reverting to horrific measures, seems not to bother him. Their are similarities though if you look at it closely.

Perhaps its small, but it was not the purges or the encounters with world leaders that caused me to think the most but this simple fact. Kruschev mentions, to the leader (ruler?) of Egypt that much of their produce comes from large, state run farms where farmers are backbone (read pawns). When I read that, I thought that sounds awfully similar to our current situation. Huge corporations control many farms either through ownership or by contract and the farmers become pawns to them. Sate owned or corporation owned, its not really in the hands of the people. In this regard at least, it would seem that socialism and capitalism share some similarities.

Also, let me mention that the footnotes throughout the foot rebut Kruschev when he gets out of hand and are very useful in deciphering the political attitudes surrounding the USSR and Kruschev as a man. Worth a read. The beginning is rather slow but by the middle of the book or so I was digging for it in my backpack whenever I had a spare second.
3441779
I was visiting/studying in the Soviet Union during the short-lived re-Stalinization of the USSR under Breznhev and the dreary haunting memories came vividly back when reading this book.  For over 75 years a great nation of people suffered under a history of lies, requiring intimidation, fear, terror , murder and inhumanity to maintain the "glorious promise" of communism.  We can see how bold small steps to fill in the blanks of their history led to an opportunity of freedom.  Why read this book now that the USSR is history?  Because humans have a short memory of why risky behavior is dangerous as the USA dances close to the same flames.... many politicians are enamored with the flickering false promises of communism/socialism but unconcerned about the outcome of burning down this country's structure.  Don't believe me?  Read the book objectively and see how we are "progressing" toward the same false future if we not very very careful.  We should learn from others' mistakes, not learn by making the same ones again.
906656
The author combines a view of contemporary history and a strong sense of the psychology of cold war leaders and their countryman.  As a survivor of that war for most of my life, I found myself thinking, "Yes,that is what it was like." and "That is why what happened happened."  Zubock is a great historian; he made me examine my own behavior through those five decades until the collapse of the Soviet Union.
629415
This is such an unusual book that combines a diary kept by a Russian teen-ager in Nazi-occupied Kremenets (now Ukraine) and his memoirs as a young Red Army soldier as the Russians swept across Poland and into Germany to defeat the Thousand-Year Reich.  It was fascinating to read his daily entries of the terrible evil that surrounded him, his family, and his townspeople during the occupation.  His insight was amazing as he related his feelings of right and wrong as these events played out around him, including not only the Nazi terror but the short-sighted Ukrainian nationalists who sowed such turmoil, murder, and destruction among their non-Ukrainian neighbors. It was chilling to read his eye-witness accounts of the destruction of the Kremenets Jewish community.  It was so refreshing and interesting to read about his experiences in the Red Army, his promotion as a translator due to his knowledge of German and other languages, then to follow him through life into retirement.  It's wonderful that this book has been made available to a large English-speaking audience.

The editor's notes were helpful to people who are not knowledgeable about the history of World War II on the Eastern front.  I only noted one editor error:  Katyn was never located within pre-war Polish borders, and it is not now located in Byelorussia (Belarus); Katyn has always been located on Russian territory.  Two of the World War II maps at the end of the book were incorrect.  Lvov was never located in the General Government area set up by the Nazis; it was located in the Soviet zone between 1939-1941; thus, the boundaries shown are incorrect.

The translation from Russian to English was excellent for the most part.  Future editions would profit from having a native English-speaking copy editor review it, as some phrasing was awkward and some incorrect prepositions were used throughout.

So few books exist from the perspective of this author.  It ads so much to the history of the events on the Eastern Front from the eyes of a Russian who lived and experienced it.  Thank you to the author for sharing his diary with a world audience.
82928
I loved reading the comparisons between the USSR and the USA coming from a man who lived in both.

I only wish it was longer.
3595799
With the fall of the Soviet Union, Andrew Nagorski leverages his journalistic skills and professional network in Russia to research a broad range of civilian, government and military sources.  The resulting product is a very captivating book from balanced sources - a hallmark of a professional journalist and perhaps not the same product that would have resulted from a traditionaly trained historian.  The book is hard to put down, and once finished, hard to forget.

The very low value both the Nazis and the Soviets placed on human life, even their own people, is stunning and in stark contrast to the preciousness of human life in the U.S.  While very interesting from a military perspective, the book goes much deeper (intentional or not) than that and describes what is a nadir in the recent history of mankind.  Once our common enemy was defeated, its easy to understand why the spread of communism was so feared and why the US would go on to great lengths to stop the spread of communism throughout the world.

I would be very interested to see some Russian reviews of this book.  Hopefully it is made available.
955001
Set during the period of the so-called "Moscow Trials" during the late Thirties, DARKNESS AT NOON dramatizes the imprisonment, condemnation and ultimate death of Rubashov, a one-time supporter of the Russian Revolution who has now been accused of treason.  The outcome is perhaps inevitable - as an enemy of the state, Rubashov has little or no defense to mount against the charges; nor does he have the will to resist the persistent questioning of his interrogator Gletkin.

First published in the US in 1941, but written between 1938 and 1940, Arthur Koestler's novel lifts the lid on life under the Stalinist regime.  in terms of foreign policy the Soviets were driven by expediency, at first forging a non-aggression pact with the Nazis and subsequently joining the Allied cause once Hitler had decided to invade in 1941.  That part of the story is well-known; what is perhaps less well-known (apart from Soviet historians) is the systematic way in which Stalin had rooted out what he perceived as his internal enemies in the years leading up to World War II.  DARKNESS AT NOON tells that story.  The ideology of communism is trotted out on every occasion, both as a stick to beat the so-called "accused" as well as a means by which the accused try to defend themselves.  As the narrative unfolds, we realize that there is no real consensus as to what it actually signifies; what matters more is the unspoken language beneath the rhetoric, as embodied in Rubashov's conversations with his fellow-prisoners conducted through tapping on the walls connecting their respective cells.  This type of interpersonal language is seldom employed in the public sphere, as it would be politically inexpedient to do so.  It is only when Rubashov is committed to Death Row that he understands its significance.

Koestler also prompts readers to reflect on the role of history in determining human life.  In the Communist Manifesto it is often interpreted from a determinist perspective; social change is inevitable, and the people must understand this fact if they decide to embrace the workers' cause.  Yet Rubashov discovers through bitter experience that this is nothing more than propaganda, designed to summon up support for an increasingly tyrannical regime.  True history comes from an understanding of how humans have contributed to it through deeds as well as words; basing their actions on such outmoded principles as honor and decency.  Neither of these principles matter much in the Stalinist regime that dedicates itself to the survival of the fittest (as well as those who can make the most noise).

In the end Rubsahov discovers some kind of inner peace through accepting his fate.  He allows sentiment to influence his judgement, something that he would never have done in the days when he considered himself a noble servant of the Republic.  He realizes the vagueness of history insofar as its interpretation depends very much on individuals, not on propaganda disseminated by the State.

Koestler's novel is very much a product of its time, but its comments on dictatorships and the malign influence of despotism resonate as much as they did when the book first appeared more than seventy years ago.
821864
This is a most interesting tome, examining the conflict from a different perspective and breaking some of the usual and long held views on the exact nature of the Nazi--Soviet pact. The author posits that the Soviets in facilitated the outbreak of the war in September 1939 as much as the Nazis did. In addition, Soviet methods of political and social control in the territories they forcibly occupied prior to the launch of Barbarossa were just as bad as the Nazis. The Soviet judges could not go down this path at the Nuremberg Trials so the issue was not aired.  The author cites many Soviet documents, clamped shut for decades, and now available for scholars to peruse to make his case.  A good read.
1039935
Outstanding and Fascinating history. Some very good, though provoking, comments on am overview of how the Gulags system affected soviet economy and society. Not the least of which points out how the Gulag may very well be affecting the break up of the former USSR and it's neighbors. This is a very good read, I would suggest it to anyone with an interest in the history of the USSR. Probably college level, or someone familiar with an overview of the history of Stalin and those who followed him. This would make a great introduction for anyone who might be interested in some of the more in depth histories of specific camps and/or individuals.
1126438
What an amazing book.. Not just a life of Stalin but even more so, a history of Russia in that era. He summarizes whatever was going on in Russia at that time in every chapter, and it's a great review of Russian (and related world) history.
Kotkin is intelligent, opinionated and VERY well informed; and willing to challenge assumptions with evidence and rational argument . I think he pretty much nails the fact that above all else, Stalin was a true Leninist. His excesses and paranoia were his own, but his project (to which he dedicated his life and his considerable talent and drive) was Leninism taken to its logical conclusions..
This book ends in 1928, so the worst is yet to come. But while the crimes grew to stratospheric heights in the years after 1928, there were enough signs already (from 1917 to 1928) that to make the new man, an awful lot of old men (and women and children) would have to shuffle off this mortal coil. Not a job for the faint of heart and comrade Stalin lived up to his name. And was admired and appreciated for that by many in the party and state (a party and state that probably would not have survived without succumbing to capitalism if it was not for him).
The book is already VERY long, but i wish he had put in a little more about the everyday life of the great general secretary as he went about the titanic job of making the Leninist revolution work. And unlike "Red Flag" (another fantastic book, necessarily less detailed because it is a history of communism as a whole), Kotkin does not try to pick a few cultural snapshots to illustrate each new twist and turn in the history of the movement. Some more of those would have been nice. But as a political biography, this is an awesome achievement.
A must read book...
329290
There could not be a better illustration of the range and depth of this great 19th century Russian writer's thoughts, passions and preoccupations. Dostoevsky brings his own unique perspective (and a multiplicity of other perspectives) to a huge variety of contemporary social, political, psychological and spiritual issues. He doesn't appear to restrict himself in either topic or genre and the book has a distinctly free-form feel about it. This is partly because it was written and self-published over a period of nearly a decade, but it is also, according to Mikhail Bakhtin, a conscious artistic expository method.

Dostoevsky does not hold back when expressing his opinions, and at times there might appear to be a rather hazy line between the unabashed genius/prophet seeking to rouse and inspire his compatriots, and the fanatic who can't see beyond his own fixed ideas, which is a bit of a paradox for those who admire the depth of humanity found in his fiction.

Nestled among the commentary, polemics, portraits, dialogues, autobiographical pieces etc, are a number of fictional gems, such as the short story 'Bobok'.

It is difficult reading, but anyone with the patience and desire to understand Dostoevsky will find it edifying and rewarding.
2803455
The famous dissident writer Vladimir Voinovich wrote this book a couple of years before the downfall of the Sovient Union. So, in how far this satire about life in the communist "Moscow Republic" of 2042 is still relevant?
I would not exclude the alarming possibility that Russia might still evolve in something like the nightmare of "Moscow 2042".
In this book the Russian author Kartsev, living in M&uuml;nchen in 1982, makes a time travel to the Moscow of 2042. After the "Great August Revolution" the new leader "Genialissimus" has changed the Soviet Union ... up to a certain point. After Lenins dream of a world revolution and Stalins experiment of 'Socialism within one country', Genialissimus has decided to build "Communism within one city", Moscow. The ideology has changed somewhat, into a hotchpotch of marxism-leninism and Russian orthodoxy (Genialissimus himself is also patriarch!) The decay, from which the Soviet Union suffered, has gone further and further. The rest of the Soviet Union, where people barely survive, has been separated by a Berlin type of wall from the "paradise" of Moscow, where communism has been (sort of) realised. Within the wall everyone gets everything "according to his needs". Only their needs are not decided by themselves, but by the wise Genialissimus. And of course, most people have "ordinary needs", but a chosen few have "extraordinary needs". For the first class, life is dismall even within the priviliged "Moscow Republic". At last, the situation gets so desperate, that people throw themselves in the arms of a "liberator", a fellow dissident writer and (kind of) friend of Kartsev, the extreme Slavophile Sim Karnavalov(probably inspired by Solzjenytsin), who enters Moscow on a white horse and proclaims himself Tsar Serafim the First. Now a new kind of nightmare starts...
This novel is a masterpiece of satire, almost as funny as "The life of Iwan Chonkin" and "The pretender to the trone" of the same author. In my opinion, Voinovich is entiteld to the next Nobel prize for literature.
3600102
To generate an outsider's persepctive of 1940s Stalinist Russia, is a rare gift indeed. Considering the dangerous pretensions of the Soviet government, most "guests" would never leave the country dead or alive. Robert Emmens is this outsider. Emmens is writing about events he witnessed first-hand. As Emmens writes, he highlights a consistent theme: the Soviets will do anything to shield the crimes, corruption, and abuses of communism. What ensues is a dangerous masqerade designed to prevent the abuses, weaknesses, and failures of communism from global circulation via the 'guests' observations.  Forced to take an emergency landing in Vladivostok (Russian Far East) after bombing Japanese factories in the Doolittle Raid, Emmens and his crew are unwilling "Guests of the Kremiln". "Papa Joe" and his underlings must put on a great show to impress, scare, and convince the Americans of Soviet power. Understandably, Emmens and his flight crew are bewildered at their treatment, after all aren't the U.S.S.R. and U.S. allies agiants the Germans, Italians, and Japanese? The treatment of the "guests" is civil, but condescending and distrustful. The "guests" quickly see through the smoke and mirrors and are rightly concerned that the Soviets genuinely don't know what to do with them. The "guests" are certain their chances of getting home are slimmer with every passing day.  It is interesting to note that the Soviets are so concerned about the "guests" knowledge of Soviet Russia they take great pains to keep the men away from the approaching German army.  It raises the question: Why are the Soviets doing so much to keep these guys away from the front lines? Is it because if the Germans got a hold of the "guests" they would use their story to fuel their fascist propaganda machine against communism. Or, would the "guests" expose to the world the glaring glut of Soviet leadership and embarressing defeats of the Red Army? It is a wonder Stalin did not have them executed during those periods German advances. Robert Emmens writes with an earnestness that only a participant (and survivor) can detail; to this point, the book reads as an expanded diary; Emmens later said he burned the actual journal (his biggest regret). The book's style is simple and effective storytelling with Emmens recalling observations, atmosphere, and experiences the "Guests" went through during their stay in the Soviet Union. Guests of the Kremlin concludes with an eerie Cold War moral: that only we, the free peoples of the world, must stop the abuses of communism before it spreads to destroy free thought and decay more lives.
970461
I reread this book after decades of having first picked it up and I think that I got a little more of it than at first because since that time I learned more of Stalinism from reading Solshenitzin and Robert Conquest (and if you haven't read those books, do so!).

A lot of rubbish has been written about the Spanish Civil War, almost all of it by leftists who have caricatured it: that it was a noble struggle of the Spanish people who tried to throw off the yokes of oppression and establish a decent life, but their idealism was stifled by Fascism, Mussolini, Hitler and the reactionary Catholic Church, yada, yada, yada. The other side, though it is seldom heard, is likewise a caricature.

Homage to Catalonia shows that it was a highly complex, fluctuating, maelstrom. Written in the first person from someone who repeatedly---and refreshingly---warns the reader that his perspective was limited, and possibly biased, Orwell served as a volunteer in the Republican side on the Aragon/Catalonia front in the static, filthy, trenches (he did so, motivated by the leftist propaganda in England). At that time, each of the political parties, all of them leftists, had their own militia and he ended up in the POUM militia; it was being deliberately starved of arms by the Stalinists who were preparing to exterminate all of the members. Orwell ended up being shot at the front and on returning to the home front, he quickly learned that the Stalinists had began to portray the POUM as a Fascist entity, and/or a Trotskyite entity and thousands of arrests were being made and the POUM headquarters occupied; many of his friends and his comrade in arms who had been fighting the Fascists were arrested and shot as being Fascists. Ultimately, he escaped, thanks to the help of the British consul.

Once in Britain, he was incensed at the printed lies that the leftist press put out explaining the pogrom of the POUM. He deals at length on this and this alone is worth reading when you think about our modern main stream media (which repeatedly claims to be impartial and professional).

Throughout, Orwell has an affinity for the Spanish people, although he predicts that no matter how the civil war ends, it will turn out to be a disaster for the people. His sympathies are strictly on the side of the working class.

Incidentally, there was a very strong Anarchist movement within Spain which likewise had its own flag and militia and which Orwell credits with having saved the Republic in the beginning of the struggle. It was responsible for the destruction of the churches and the massacre of priests (Spain was one of three countries with a very strong Anarchist presence, the others being pre-Soviet Russia and pre-Fascist Italy). I wish that he had dwelt a little more on them.
2332094
A great look at the mind set of the USSR. Good read. Make you think that if we do not learn from History, we will relive it.
3363394
Interesting point of view, but still a good read.