Chambered Word

I was talking to Nic Rossi a few weeks ago and he told me how Left Communists advocated a centralised vanguard party

Still, I believe that only the working class can represent itself. The kind of "party" that I advocate is one that is purely an educating party; with no authority before or after the revolution and with no hierarchy, either.

As for the Hungarian hatred, it's pretty fucking stupid and isolated to just my school (there's only 280 in my school, though). What's more annoying is how immature it is. Whenever the possibility comes up, I'll get bagged because I'm Hungarian. It's not a hatred as such, and it's completely stupid and immature but it makes me wanna tear people's throats out.

I feel that no individual or organisation can "represent" or act on behalf of the working class. And that there needs to be direct democracy as opposed to parliamentary or representative democracy where you vote in leaders who you hope will act in your interests. The workers can only represent themselves and under socialism, the working class itself must rule. The only way in which the Bourgeoisie rules today is by owning private property and getting elected into office by use of a system where it is individuals and minorities that rule - and the only way these individuals and minorities can rule is by being rich. If we abolish private property but not representative democracy, why would we settle for second best?

There's not much in the way of political activity in my area. There was some "Marxism 2010" thing at Melbourne University organised by the student union there and Socialist Alternative but it ended on Sunday and I didn't go to it. Otherwise, that's all the leftist activity in my area.

Fuckstick? Do you mean Jacobinist (who's alright, IMO) or Fred Hampton (the massive ageist prick)?

So Lewis. How's shit since we last talked?

And did she or he say it would?

A quick look at the History forum will show that the Moscow Trials are a topic of constant debate. The OP beleived they had a document that could contribute to the debate. If you think the document is insignificant, criticse the document and show how it does not show the Moscow trials to be false.
If the OP posted it in the Politics forum and claimed "this shows you Trotskyites will never lead the revolution", then sure, Jimmie Higgins response would be valid. But the OP didnt, the OP posted in the history forum where it belongs.
A few months ago Anarchists and MLs were debating about the positioning of a machine gun in some building in the Spanish Civil War. Why was there no similar response to that? Workers dont give a fuck about Spain in the 1930s either.

What point? On a history forum on a communist site, obscure parts of communist history will be talked about. Most of the stuff we talk about on here is of zero use to other workers.