>Lenin's collectivisation resulted in the forced starvation and murder of millions of people.
Lenin didn't collectivize agriculture. Do you mean War Communism? If so, that was a policy forced on the Bolsheviks by the Civil War and the imperialist intervention and blockade. Thanks to that policy it became possible to just barely feed the cities. However, famine occurred in rural areas due to the aforementioned conflict and blockade. That wasn't the fault of the Bolsheviks, it was the fault of the counter-revolution.
>Lenin's Cheka resulted in the murder of countless values of people.
The second book I linked to addresses this: "The total figures of executions, published in 1921, were as follows. In the first half of 1918 [before the Red Terror] they were 22, in the second half some 6,300, and for the three years 1918-20 (for all Russia) 12,733. When it is remembered that in Rostov alone about 25,000 workers were shot by the Whites upon occupying the city, not to speak of many other towns, the Red terror will fall into rather more just perspective."
Furthermore, before the Red Terror was formally instituted workers were spontaneously capturing people on the street and killing them. The Red Terror actually gave direction to the executions.
>Also, is it really necsesary for me to read such obscure and dated books? Why can't I read the modern biography of Lenin by Robert Conquest?
Conquest's biography was written in 1972, which isn't much more "modern" than one written in 1947. I'd advise against reading Conquest (in the sense of "read this first before anything else") because he was a lame historian who fudged sources and was bad at numbers.
In any case, I don't see how such books are dated. More recent books can bring out new details, but whether an old book's analyses and conclusions are fundamentally sound or not does not depend on the date they were written.
You also specifically asked for "works of revisionist history," and that's what I've given you.