l'Enfermé

OH! My aim? I don't even know, it just says "Fetching Name..." and won't load. I originally named it 666

I'm so confused right now

h8 u

Sometimes my head can spin on the distinctions between class independence, mere regime changes, revolutionary periods, and the revolutionary gambit. However, it can be argued that the context in which Marx declared what he said was different from the 1909 context. Marx declared that just after the dissolution of the IWMA, perhaps in partial disillusionment. Kautsky declared what he said during a revolutionary period.

What's the neon trend about?

Think about it critically, comrade: one moment Marx pulls off an 1872, another moment he pulls off a "No revolution can be made by a party, but By a Nation" remark (1875), and yet another moment he declares "That this collective appropriation can arise only from the revolutionary action of the productive class – or proletariat - organized in a distinct political party" (1880).

It's inconsistent. Also, pay attention to a subtle difference between his 1880 remark and his 1872 remark: 1880 is about "revolutionary action," while 1872 is about becoming a class for itself. I'd take his IWMA remarks to be more authoritative on the party question than any of his remarks before (1848) or after, but by that same token that's why it's primordial and not "institutional."

Your word "rudimental" is suitable, too, but the point in either event is that it took the original Socialist International to take this understanding to the optimal level, which is nothing less than "institutional."

Hahaha never. Funny one though.

Hi, what's up?