“Stalin proved himself to be an outstanding Marxist-Leninist with clear principles, with great courage and cool-headedness, and the maturity and foresight of a Marxist Revolutionary”
Iosif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili.
The Steel One.
Savior of the masses and in turn, quite possibly history’s biggest Martyr. He furthered Marxism-Leninism, Stood in solidarity with the proletariat, defended democracy, was kind-hearted and humanitarian, believed in the process of criticism and self criticism, and despite the outside forces, always stood with strength.
I don’t mean to speak in a way as to show idolatry, that’s not my intent but it’s the reality. When he died, it seemed as if the world stood still and the Proletarian world movement came together. Well unfortunately, it was the fuel to the fire of the ever-so-destructive Big 3 of revisionism; Tito, Khrushchev, and Mikoyan.
Josip Broz Tito, Revisionist from Yugoslavia. Recipient of US and British aid and undoubted capitalist who, with demands to Khrushchev to abandon the Stalinist (and remaining loyal Leninist) line of the party, as well as revisions to the (Clearly very fair) Information Bureau Decisions in 1948-1949, which condemned the Yugoslavia leadership for their anti-marxist line and revisionism.
Next was Anastas Ivanovich Mikoyan who was part of the old guard, was apart of the counter-revolution of Stalin, huckster, Anti-Albanian Bureaucrat, Khrushchevs’ right hand man.
“…when I am gone you will sell the Soviet Union”
Last, and certainly not least was the man who sold the Soviet Union, Consolidated power from Stalin, Deconstructed the building of socialism, lead the Cult of personality on Stalin, Abandoned the world proletariat movement, repaired relations with Imperialist backed Yugoslavia.
Together these 3 are why Marxism-Leninism has struggled in a prolonged epoch of the Proletarian struggle. “We are no longer for the world proletarian revolution, want to collaborate closely with you, we need you and you must understand that we are changing colour, and making a major change of direction.” from the words of Nikita Khrushchev. This was when the Soviet Union was sold. It was a long con that lead to docile mindedness, Capitalism returning, and saw the demonization of the Savior of the Masses. It was abandonment of the socialist camp for the capitalist camp. This proves what Lenin said;
“There are 2 worlds in the world: the old –capitalism which has come to a dead end and will never back down and the new growing world which is yet very weak but which will become stronger and big because it is invincible”
When The big 3 changed the Soviet Union with revisionist practices, it directly concluded that Stalin was the enemy of the communist movement and with Khrushchev starting the personality cult (Alia starting it with hoxha) as well as bureaucratic practice and other such things. It was just to make Stalin a martyr. A real Marxist-Leninist would understand and accredit Stalin for quite a bit including the 3 main contributions:
The theory of socialism in one country. The theory of socialism in one country states that socialism can be achieved in one country and then spread throughout surrounding ones. In other words, shall one country build a stable, and strong socialist base, it can then provide aid to other socialist revolutionaries and countries attempting socialism for themselves. Historically this meant that the Soviet Union was the leader of the international proletarian force. However, it is important to note that nowhere did Stalin reject internationalism. The theory, or Marxism-Leninism does not reject internationalism as well. It simply states that socialism can happen in one country and from there can expand eventually on a more international level.
Stalin also developed the Two Stage Theory, which states that underdeveloped countries must first undergo a capitalistic development route before achieving socialism. This is to say that society must follow a specific order of stages in order to achieve socialism. Marx originally formulated the stages of society as being primitive communist to slave society to feudalistic society to capitalist society to socialist society and then in the final epoch of history communist society in which the means of production are public, the state has withered away, private property has been abolished, and social classes cease to exist. Stalin was therefore expanding on Marx and Engels theories of history and historical materialism. In countries that lack conditions for capitalism and socialism, the proletariat must become educated, and industry is necessary to properly develop.
Aggravation of class struggle under socialism is another important contribution to Marxist theory Stalin developed. Although some credit the basic idea of this to Mao, it was Stalin who originally put forward the idea. Stalin argued that forms of class struggle potentially arise even in the socialist stage of development and must be dealt with via necessary repression; not totalitarianism, but recognizing the detrimental counter-revolutionary forces that exist and attempting to route them out of power. 
Now, given that Stalinism (as is Hoxhaism) is just used in reaction to degrade it (rejected by both), I will speak on both. I find it utterly Repulsive at the trend to revisionism to spite Stalin and Hoxha as well as the supporters (whom are deemed “Tankies”) and that’s just how it goes. It just seems as if we go with sentiment over facts now. Take Bureaucracy, as established by Hoxha and Stalin, It grew in the party due to (As all Marxists, especially Marxist-Leninists should be against) Laziness, lack of connection with the Proletariat which both Hoxha and Stalin fought against relentlessly, and capitalist practice which should be eliminated quickly. As Stalin Said about Bureaucracy:
“A second shortcoming. It consists in introducing administrative methods in the Party, in replacing the method of persuasion, which is of decisive importance for the Party, by the method of administration. This shortcoming is a danger no less serious than the first one. Why? Because it creates the danger of our Party organisations, which are independently acting organisations, being converted into mere bureaucratic institutions.”
Not to mention, it counters the fact that Stalin did everything for the people and included them in everything. Criticism was a huge part of the culture in Soviet Russia and was used by Stalin himself. Stalin continued his criticism of party leaders by discussing another familiar topic: the “verification of fulfillment of decisions.”… Stalin stated, “There is still another kind of verification, the check-up from below, in which the masses, the subordinates, verify the leaders, pointing out their mistakes, and showing the way to correct them. This kind of verification is one of the most effective methods of checking up on people.” Stalin stated, “Some comrades say that it is not advisable to speak openly of one’s mistakes, since the open admission of one’s mistakes may be construed by our enemies as weakness and may be used by them. This is rubbish, comrades, downright rubbish. The open recognition of our mistakes and their honest rectification can, on the contrary, only strengthen our party, raise its authority in the eyes of the workers, peasants, and working intellectuals… And this is the main thing. As long as we have the workers, peasants, and working intellectuals with us, all the rest will settle itself.” 
This is troubling as the Anti-Stalin people start losing their foundation of credibility against him, but let’s go a little further into his criticism. Class struggle. Class struggle was something Stalin was accused of abandoning or turning his back on (Though that is reserved for Khrushchev and all other enemies of Marxism-Leninism) but this was simply untrue. Stalin was very for the class struggle as is said here;
“Some comrades have grasped the fact of the destruction of the classes, the creation of a classless society, as the argument of the thesis of the weakening of the class struggle theory is a counter. These people can not have anything in common with our Party. They are renegades and hypocrites who must be expelled from the Party. Not achieve the elimination of classes with the weakening of the class struggle, but its amplification to the final annihilation of all other kinds of agony, and organizing to defend the country against capitalist encirclement is not to be annihilated.” 
So with that being said, through the faults that he had committed, Stalin needs to be recognized as a flame of Marxism-Leninism and be seen for what he accomplished and the way he lead through good humanity and a strong will. Let’s assess these accomplishments:
The adventure led from the illiteracy to literacy, from the NEP to socialism, from archaic agriculture to collective cultivation, from a rural society to a predominately urban community, from general ignorance of the machine to social mastery of modern technology.
Between the poverty stricken year of 1924, when Lenin died, and the relatively abundant year of 1940, the cultivated area of USSR expanded by 74 percent; grain crops increased 11 percent; coal production was multiplied by 10; steel output by 18; engineering and metal industries by 150; total national income by 10; industrial output by 24; annual capital investment by 57. During the First Five-year Plan, 51 billion rubles were invested; during the Second, 114; and during the Third, 192. Factory and office workers grew from 7.3 million to 30.8 million and school and college students from 7.9 million to 36.6 million. From 1913 to 1940, oil production increased from nine to 35 million tons; coal from 29 to 164; pig iron from 4 to 15; steel from 4 to 18; machine tools from 1,000 to 48,000 units, tractors from 0 to over 500,000; harvestor combines from 0 to 153,500; electrical power output from two billion kWh to 50 billion; and the value of industrial output from 11 billion rubles to more than 100 billion by 1938. If the estimated volume of total industrial production in 1913 be taken as 100, the corresponding indices for 1938 are 93.2 for France; 113.3 for England, 120 United States; 131.6 for Germany, and 908.8 for the Soviet Union. 
1928-29 is compared with that of 1937-38, i.e., towards the end of the second and the beginning of the third five-year plan. In the course of that decade the output of electricity per annum rose from 6 to 40 billion kwh, of coal from 30 to 133 million tons, of oil from 11 to 32 million tons, of steel from 4 to 18 million tons, of motor cars from 1,400 to 211,000. The value of the annual output of machine-tools rose from 3 billion to 33 billion rubles (in ‘stable prices’). (In 1941 the total output of the Soviet machine-building industry was 50 times higher than in 1913). Between 1928 and 1937 the number of workers and employees rose from 11.5 million to 27 million. Before the revolution the number of doctors was 20,000; it was 105,000 in 1937. The number of hospital beds rose from 175,000 to 618,000. In 1914, 8 million people attended schools of all grades; in 1928, 12 million; in 1938, 31.5 million. In 1913, 112,000 people studied at university colleges; in 1939, 620,000. Before the revolution public libraries possessed 640 books for 10,000 inhabitants; in 1939, 8610. 
So, given all this, what can we conclude? Stalin was not a terrible totalitarian murderer, he wasn’t a cult of personality, he wasn’t bureaucratic and he indeed gave his all for the Proletarian and should be upheld as such. As Marxist-Leninists we have to take this and Comrade Hoxha’s success and dedication to Marxism-Leninism and reject revisionist ideals with an iron character.
-Written by Tanner Staricka, edited by Aaron Benjamin.
Deutscher, Isaac. Stalin; A Political Biography. New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1967, p. 340 
Schuman, Frederick L. Soviet Politics. New York: A.A. Knopf, 1946, p. 212 
Comrade Stalin’s Collected Works, Volume II, page 546. 
Getty, A. Origins of the Great Purges. Cambridge, N. Y.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1985, p. 146 
[credits: https://theredstarvanguard.wordpress.com/?s=stalinism+&submit=Search%5D