Rafiq

I fully concur as well if we are talking "historically". I think for Lenin's time in Russia his tactics were correct to defend the revolution. I do not believe, though, that Lenin's vanguard party idea is relevant to more industrialized western nations. Yet, situations change, and maybe when revolution ignites it would be best for revolutionaries to take up Lenin's idea of the vanguard, but I do not think that is true. What are your thoughts on this?

What do you think about Lenin's idea of the vanguard party?

I have heard that you consider yourself a "orthodox leninist". I think that is interesting, and would like to hear your views on different Marxist theories, ideas, etc.

If I am wrong on categorizing you as a Leninist or something, sorry.

I agree, the Trotskyists tend to romanticize Lenin. Had he lived longer, he would have filled the same role as Stalin in my opinion. The disagreements I have with Lenin tend to be from his last year or two alive, so I can definitely see that the degeneration had certainly begun while he was alive. Thanks for your insights on the matter, and on the subject of the situation in Germany.

I as well have influence from Bordiga, though, like you refrain from calling myself a Left Communist. After all, it was Bordiga who called himself a "Leninist" until his death, not so much a "Left Communist" as many would see it.
And yes, the Bolsheviks attempted to use the German method in Russian situations, DNZ is fully correct in regards to it originating from the SPD. What I am referring to, though, is the failed Spartacust uprising in Germany which, by that time the SPD had no longer been a revolutionary force. The Pre War SPD was near perfect, though, not so much during and after World War One, where the Zimmerwald Left finally drew the line between the revolutionaries and the opportunists. I am not sure, but I think to some extent this is recognized by DNZ, after all, his usage of the term "Pre War SPD" is not deployed for no reason.

Lenin as a theorist was brilliant and contributed a lot to the development of Marxism, though we should never adopt the standard Trotskyist line of "good Lenin" and "Bad Stalin". There were elements of what we call "Stalinism" in Lenin's later years which cannot be excused. Though, over all, this should not over shadow his noble efforts in the construction of Marxist thinking that he had before hand. Lenin was, indeed, not a "Bad Man", just a man who dealt with the situation in Russia in the best possible way he could. In regards to the NEP, I think it represents Russia's inability to surpass the capitalist mode of production, and I do believe it was of necessity. It was not implemented for no reason, it was merely one of the unfortunate effects on behalf of the Bolsheviks in response to the isolation of the revolution.

I consider myself to be primarily influenced by Bordiga, but I dissociate myself from the label "left communist"(and they disassociate themselves from me) as Left Communist is currently dominated by those most influenced by the German-Dutch left. They completely reject the idea that the party should seek the active organization of the proletariat and state power, which in my opinion consigns them to irrelevancy by default.

From my conversations with DNZ, I have heard that the organizational methods and strategies used by the Bolsheviks was actually the successful implementation of the theories pioneered by the Orthodox Marxists of the SPD some time before. I am getting a book, Lenin Rediscovered, which explores the subject in full detail sometime soon, but until I've read that I cannot comment much on the subject. I agree with you that the Bolsheviks deserved our full support during the time of the Civil War.

I don't think Lenin was perfect, but I cannot think of any major errors to criticize him for off the top of my head; neither as a theorist nor as a leading figure of the Revolution.

I'm curious as to what your opinion of the NEP is.

There do exist Left Communists who are consistent on the matter (Notibally the Bordigists) and surprisingly some Dutch-German Left Communists. The problem, of course, is the complete dissociation with the Bolsheviks as early as 1918 for them as a position, and their rejection (during the time) of democratic centrism. The Bolsheviks, throughout the Russian Civil War, arguably deserved the support of every Socialist, and what should have been of great attention to us was Germany, and the struggle of the German Proletariat. The Failure of the German Proletariat, ironically, was their inability to adopt democratic centrism and deploy similar organizational methods of the Bolsheviks (Although the Bolsheviks were using the older German method). And you're correct, with many, their pertains this fallacy that "Power corrupts", whether they are willing to admit it or not, it still runs wild within their ideological unconsciousness.

"I want to ask you a question(which you were never able to respond to): Why do you think the Soviets were done away with, as Left Communist, when the revolution was isolated only after 1919? "

That's a great question, comrade. Though these left communists of the dutch/german sort claim to uphold Lenin, they are in reality irreconcilably opposed to Lenin's actions, despite their claims to the contrary. They cling on to these notions that centralization and party power is bad, yet as you said, of this there is no proof. Though they can often avoid the more obvious idealist fallacies of the anarchists, they still have not escaped the liberal bit of "power corrupts".

They claim that the failure of the revolution was due to its failure to spread, but then say that the Bolsheviks were wrong to take state power. This seems inconsistent. It seems to me that it is primarily the former, and his little(to nothing) to do with the latter.