Lenin knew Stalin couldn't take the union to sustainability

Are you referring to something more substantial than the supposed Will?

I often use Stalin's purges as evidence that things were terrible. He purged so many people and was still surrounded by revisionists.

I mean, considering we know that Yagoda was part of an opposition bloc, how implausible is it that the guy who replaced him also was some kind of conspiracist? I've never heard of the Yezhochina doing anything good, and it was quite unlike what happened before and after it. Granted, I think Stalin acted with wild negligence, but the hard pivot in policy lining up precisely with there being a new dude overseeing it from an office that was just infiltrated, then pivoting back with his death? Especially since it didn't seem to really answer the revisionism problem?

Idk, the very same testimony implicitly denies that Yezhov was part of their intelligence network, but how many conspiracies were there under Stalin? This sort of thing is very difficult for me to parse. Did Stalin just decide to turn over a new leaf, but accomplish that by framing someone as being another enemy of the state? Was Yezhov really just a fall guy when the former supposed fall guy really was a compradore? Was Yezhov just a personally fucked up and incompetent guy with no (further) conspiracy involved that Stalin and co just let have power he seriously shouldn't have? (along with the aforementioned negligence)

idk, I guess maybe it was the last one

This is really off-topic, but it's an issue that really bugs me. In any case, I guess my original point is that I don't think the Yezhovshchina was really purging all that many revisionists except by incident of killing huge swaths of people. I doubt the veracity of the will, but this certainly makes the case Stalin wasn't really the best leader for "sustainability," at least.

Wait a second, doesn't Trotsky work as a great example of someone well-educated in Marxism who chose to be some bullshit compradore instead, even if he only had mixed success at it?

Anyway, I've seen people argue that the PRC was set down the wrong path by the conciliatory foreign policy of late Mao -- which mirrors Khrushchev's -- and persists in some form to this day. I don't know enough to talk about something like that, and maybe they were just ultras who even dislike Mao.