Andrain, Charles F. (1994). Comparative Political Systems: Policy Performance and Social Change. Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe. pp. 140. ISBN978-1563242809. «The communist party-states collapsed because they no longer fulfilled the essence of a Leninist model: a strong commitment to Marxist-Leninist ideology, rule by the vanguard communist party, and the operation of a centrally planned state socialist economy. Before the mid-1980s, the communist party controlled the military, police, mass media, and state enterprises. Government coercive agencies employed physical sanctions against political dissidents who denounced Marxism-Leninism.»
Williams, Raymond (1983). «Socialism». Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society, revised edition. Oxford University Press. p. 289. ISBN978-0-19-520469-8. «The decisive distinction between socialist and communist, as in one sense these terms are now ordinarily used, came with the renaming, in 1918, of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party (Bolsheviks) as the All-Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks). From that time on, a distinction of socialist from communist, often with supporting definitions such as social democrat or democratic socialist, became widely current, although it is significant that all communist parties, in line with earlier usage, continued to describe themselves as socialist and dedicated to socialism.»
Ellman, Michael (2007). «The Rise and Fall of Socialist Planning». En Estrin, Saul; Kołodko, Grzegorz W.; Uvalić, Milica, eds. Transition and Beyond: Essays in Honour of Mario Nuti. New York City: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 22. ISBN978-0-230-54697-4. «In the USSR in the late 1980s the system was normally referred to as the 'administrative-command' economy. What was fundamental to this system was not the plan but the role of administrative hierarchies at all levels of decision making; the absence of control over decision making by the population [...].»
Sarah Davies; James Harris (8 de septiembre de 2005). «Joseph Stalin: Power and Ideas». Stalin: A New History. Cambridge University Press. p. 3. ISBN978-1-139-44663-1. «Academic Sovietology, a child of the early Cold War, was dominated by the 'totalitarian model' of Soviet politics. Until the 1960s it was almost impossible to advance any other interpretation, in the USA at least.»
Sarah Davies; James Harris (8 de septiembre de 2005). «Joseph Stalin: Power and Ideas». Stalin: A New History. Cambridge University Press. pp. 3–4. ISBN978-1-139-44663-1. «In 1953, Carl Friedrich characterised totalitarian systems in terms of five points: an official ideology, control of weapons and of media, use of terror, and a single mass party, 'usually under a single leader'. There was of course an assumption that the leader was critical to the workings of totalitarianism: at the apex of a monolithic, centralised, and hierarchical system, it was he who issued the orders which were fulfilled unquestioningly by his subordinates.»
Ball, Terence; Dagger, Richard [1999] (2019). "Communism" (revised ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 10 June 2020 – via Britannica.com.
brockport.edu
digitalcommons.brockport.edu
Sawicky, Nicholas D. (20 de diciembre de 2013). The Holodomor: Genocide and National Identity (Education and Human Development Master's Theses). The College at Brockport: State University of New York. Consultado el 6 de octubre de 2020 – via Digital Commons. «Scholars also disagree over what role the Soviet Union played in the tragedy. Some scholars point to Stalin as the mastermind behind the famine, due to his hatred of Ukrainians (Hosking, 1987). Others assert that Stalin did not actively cause the famine, but he knew about it and did nothing to stop it (Moore, 2012). Still other scholars argue that the famine was just an effect of the Soviet Union's push for rapid industrialization and a by-product of that was the destruction of the peasant way of life (Fischer, 1935). The final school of thought argues that the Holodomor was caused by factors beyond the control of the Soviet Union and Stalin took measures to reduce the effects of the famine on the Ukrainian people (Davies & Wheatcroft, 2006).»
Sawicky, Nicholas D. (20 de diciembre de 2013). The Holodomor: Genocide and National Identity (Education and Human Development Master's Theses). The College at Brockport: State University of New York. Consultado el 6 de octubre de 2020 – via Digital Commons. «Scholars also disagree over what role the Soviet Union played in the tragedy. Some scholars point to Stalin as the mastermind behind the famine, due to his hatred of Ukrainians (Hosking, 1987). Others assert that Stalin did not actively cause the famine, but knew about it and did nothing to stop it (Moore, 2012). Still other scholars argue that the famine was just an effect of the Soviet Union's push for rapid industrialization and a by-product of that was the destruction of the peasant way of life (Fischer, 1935). The final school of thought argues that the Holodomor was caused by factors beyond the control of the Soviet Union and Stalin took measures to reduce the effects of the famine on the Ukrainian people (Davies & Wheatcroft, 2006).»
Dando, William A. (June 1966). «A Map of the Election to the Russian Constituent Assembly of 1917». Slavic Review25 (2): 314-319. ISSN0037-6779. JSTOR2492782. doi:10.2307/2492782. «Out of a total vote of approximately 42 million and a total of 703 elected deputies, the primarily agrarian Social Revolutionary Party, plus nationalistic narodnik, or populist, parties, amassed the largest popular vote (well in excess of 50 percent) and elected the greatest number of deputies (approximately 60 percent) of all the parties involved. The Bolsheviks, who had usurped power in the name of the soviets three weeks prior to the election, amassed only 24 percent of the popular vote and elected only 24 percent of the deputies. The party of Lenin had not received the mandate of the people to govern them.»
Dando, William A. (June 1966). «A Map of the Election to the Russian Constituent Assembly of 1917». Slavic Review25 (2): 314-319. ISSN0037-6779. JSTOR2492782. doi:10.2307/2492782. «The political significance of the election to the Russian Constituent Assembly is difficult to as by a large segment of the Russian people ascertain since the Assembly was partly by a large segment of the Russian people as not being really necessary to fulfill their desires in this era of revolutionary development. [...] On January 5, 1918, the deputies to the Constituent Assembly met in Petrograd; on January 6 the Central Executive Committee of the Congress of Soviets, dominated by Lenin, issued the Draft Decree on the Dissolution of the Constituent Assembly. The Constituent Assembly, the dream of Russian political reformers for many years, was swept aside as a 'deceptive form of bourgeois-democratic parliamentarism.'».
Franks, Benjamin (May 2012). «Between Anarchism and Marxism: The Beginnings and Ends of the Schism». Journal of Political Ideologies17 (2): 202-227. ISSN1356-9317. doi:10.1080/13569317.2012.676867.
Sheila, Fitzpatrick (2007). «Revisionism in Soviet History». History and Theory46 (4): 77-91. ISSN1468-2303. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2303.2007.00429.x. «[...] the Western scholars who in the 1990s and 2000s were most active in scouring the new archives for data on Soviet repression were revisionists (always 'archive rats') such as Arch Getty and Lynne Viola.»
McFarland, Sam; Ageyev, Vladimir; Abalakina-Paap, Marina (1992). «Authoritarianism in the former Soviet Union». Journal of Personality and Social Psychology63 (6): 1004-1010. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.6.1004.
Dando, William A. (June 1966). «A Map of the Election to the Russian Constituent Assembly of 1917». Slavic Review25 (2): 314-319. ISSN0037-6779. JSTOR2492782. doi:10.2307/2492782. «Out of a total vote of approximately 42 million and a total of 703 elected deputies, the primarily agrarian Social Revolutionary Party, plus nationalistic narodnik, or populist, parties, amassed the largest popular vote (well in excess of 50 percent) and elected the greatest number of deputies (approximately 60 percent) of all the parties involved. The Bolsheviks, who had usurped power in the name of the soviets three weeks prior to the election, amassed only 24 percent of the popular vote and elected only 24 percent of the deputies. The party of Lenin had not received the mandate of the people to govern them.»
Dando, William A. (June 1966). «A Map of the Election to the Russian Constituent Assembly of 1917». Slavic Review25 (2): 314-319. ISSN0037-6779. JSTOR2492782. doi:10.2307/2492782. «The political significance of the election to the Russian Constituent Assembly is difficult to as by a large segment of the Russian people ascertain since the Assembly was partly by a large segment of the Russian people as not being really necessary to fulfill their desires in this era of revolutionary development. [...] On January 5, 1918, the deputies to the Constituent Assembly met in Petrograd; on January 6 the Central Executive Committee of the Congress of Soviets, dominated by Lenin, issued the Draft Decree on the Dissolution of the Constituent Assembly. The Constituent Assembly, the dream of Russian political reformers for many years, was swept aside as a 'deceptive form of bourgeois-democratic parliamentarism.'».
Franks, Benjamin (May 2012). «Between Anarchism and Marxism: The Beginnings and Ends of the Schism». Journal of Political Ideologies17 (2): 202-227. ISSN1356-9317. doi:10.1080/13569317.2012.676867.
Sheila, Fitzpatrick (2007). «Revisionism in Soviet History». History and Theory46 (4): 77-91. ISSN1468-2303. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2303.2007.00429.x. «[...] the Western scholars who in the 1990s and 2000s were most active in scouring the new archives for data on Soviet repression were revisionists (always 'archive rats') such as Arch Getty and Lynne Viola.»
jasperbecker.com
Becker, Jasper (24 de septiembre de 2010). «Systematic genocide». The Spectator. Consultado el 6 de octubre de 2020.
jstor.org
Dando, William A. (June 1966). «A Map of the Election to the Russian Constituent Assembly of 1917». Slavic Review25 (2): 314-319. ISSN0037-6779. JSTOR2492782. doi:10.2307/2492782. «Out of a total vote of approximately 42 million and a total of 703 elected deputies, the primarily agrarian Social Revolutionary Party, plus nationalistic narodnik, or populist, parties, amassed the largest popular vote (well in excess of 50 percent) and elected the greatest number of deputies (approximately 60 percent) of all the parties involved. The Bolsheviks, who had usurped power in the name of the soviets three weeks prior to the election, amassed only 24 percent of the popular vote and elected only 24 percent of the deputies. The party of Lenin had not received the mandate of the people to govern them.»
Dando, William A. (June 1966). «A Map of the Election to the Russian Constituent Assembly of 1917». Slavic Review25 (2): 314-319. ISSN0037-6779. JSTOR2492782. doi:10.2307/2492782. «The political significance of the election to the Russian Constituent Assembly is difficult to as by a large segment of the Russian people ascertain since the Assembly was partly by a large segment of the Russian people as not being really necessary to fulfill their desires in this era of revolutionary development. [...] On January 5, 1918, the deputies to the Constituent Assembly met in Petrograd; on January 6 the Central Executive Committee of the Congress of Soviets, dominated by Lenin, issued the Draft Decree on the Dissolution of the Constituent Assembly. The Constituent Assembly, the dream of Russian political reformers for many years, was swept aside as a 'deceptive form of bourgeois-democratic parliamentarism.'».
Strong, Anna Louise. «The Stalin Era». Prison Censorship. Archivado desde el original el 10 de noviembre de 2016. Consultado el 10 de noviembre de 2016.
Taaffe, Peter (1995). The Rise of Militant. "Preface". "Trotsky and the Collapse of Stalinism". Bertrams. "The Soviet bureaucracy and Western capitalism rested on mutually antagonistic social systems". ISBN978-0906582473.
Voline (1995). «Red Fascism». Itinéraire (Paris) (13). Consultado el 6 de octubre de 2020 – via The Anarchist Library. First published in the July 1934 edition of Ce qu'il faut dire (Brussels).
Milne, Seumas (16 February 2006). "Communism may be dead, but clearly not dead enough". The Guardian. Retrieved 18 April 2020. "The dominant account gives no sense of how communist regimes renewed themselves after 1956 or why western leaders feared they might overtake the capitalist world well into the 1960s. For all its brutalities and failures, communism in the Soviet Union, eastern Europe and elsewhere delivered rapid industrialisation, mass education, job security and huge advances in social and gender equality."
Strong, Anna Louise. «The Stalin Era». Prison Censorship. Archivado desde el original el 10 de noviembre de 2016. Consultado el 10 de noviembre de 2016.
Hollander, Paul (1998). Political Pilgrims: Western Intellectuals in Search of the Good Society (4th edición). New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers. ISBN1-56000-954-3. OCLC36470253.
