I started his Stalin book hoping it would be a biography, but it felt like more of a historiography. It was talking about Trosky's criticism of Stalin and Kruschev's de-Stalinization and I wasn't really into it. Not that it seemed like bad history but it wasn't interesting or compelling from what I read.

[–] starkillerfish@hexbear.net 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It’s not a biography in any shape or form, that wasn’t Losurdos goal. He specifically criticises how Stalin is portrayed in media and history.

[–] Chronicon@hexbear.net 15 points 1 month ago

yeah I mean its in the sub-title. History and Critique of a Black Legend

[–] WideningGyro@hexbear.net 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It was talking about Trosky's criticism of Stalin and Kruschev's de-Stalinization and I wasn't really into it

I'm not sure I understand why you'd be interested in a book about Stalin but not those things. They are essential for understanding why the picture of Stalin among the western left is so skewed today.

[–] GoodGuyWithACat@hexbear.net 4 points 1 month ago

I misunderstood the premise of the book. I thought it would be more biographical than historiographical.