NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm a Marxist-Leninist but don't agree with the two completely. DHomme, are you for the dictatorship of the proletariat and obliteration of religious freedom too? Because that's really what communism's about, don't you agree (along with your bloody revolution too). -sacasm- Why don't you heed our political heros advice and unite, democracy will show us the people's wishes.

I'm a Marxist-Leninist but don't agree with the two completely. DHomme, are you for the dictatorship of the proletariat and obliteration of religious freedom too? Because that's really what communism's about, don't you agree (along with your bloody revolution too). -sacasm- Why don't you heed our political heros advice and unite, democracy will show us the people's wishes.
Dubcekian? "Communism with a human face"? Gorbachevian?

Argesia, could you please explain the whole Gorbachev situation? Was he just a watered down communist who wasn't radical enough to keep a communist state running, or was he an honest communist who tried to keep the country running until the end and bringing compassion to the Soviet Union?

Argesia, could you please explain the whole Gorbachev situation? Was he just a watered down communist who wasn't radical enough to keep a communist state running, or was he an honest communist who tried to keep the country running until the end and bringing compassion to the Soviet Union?
I don't think that the state structure was anything resembling a Marxist state (Wallernstein made an analysis of it through a Marxist perspective, and showed that it was only remotly related to Marx and had more to do with the Victorian age). Plus, a state is never "communist" per se - I'm sure you know that in communism there is supposed to be no more state (but you could've meant "with communist ideals").
I believe he was an honest Socialist of some sort, very adverse to hard-liners and Stalinist-Brezhnevites (not that I am the one to have a monopoly on interpretations). The opposition he faced from within the Party was from people who were more nationalist than communist - as it is shown today, given that hardline communists are allied to nationalsts and even pro-czarists (there is even - get this - a Nazi Leninist party, the National-Bolsheviks).
His main goal was to ensure democracy and to keep the federal structure - in fact, to produce it and give real power to the republics and the people. He warned against the danger of the USSR's disappearence - and was rejected by the above-mentioned, by the nationalist movements in the Baltics and Moldova, and by local Party officials who had as their only purpose power (like the leaders of today in the "-stan" ex-republics, who have been in power since the 70's and have had no problem switching to a different system while remaining dictatorial and corrupt).

Edit: I should mention I am a Socialist (Kautskian or Fabianist, if you will), and by no means a Leninist or even a Marxist.

Yeah, Gorbachev said it was a complete suprise when the whites suddenly re-emerged and took over from the reds.

I don't like Gorbachev, I think he should answer for his crimes after the revolution, but I don't think he meant it to finish that way.

I voted for you.

Yay for the trots...where do I sign up?

Nice to see we have some support. Feel free to declare your membership to the whole world, and ill list you on the first post

Nice to see we have some support. Feel free to declare your membership to the whole world, and ill list you on the first post

I hereby declare myself a RTP supporter, a trot, (yeah, you all knew didn't you), so posting this to my region...go the trots...p.s did anyone else find leon hot in his younger days

David

Now that I'm in the trots and we look like having maybe 2 seats tops, I want to one main policy we should lobby for against the neo-cons but they will prolly form a right-bloc anyway


POLICY MOTION:

BAN VENDING MACHINES -

(A) THEY CUT WORKERS OUT OF THE SUPPLY CHAIN
(B) THEY RESULT IN THE SAME IF NOT HIGHER EXPENSE TO THE CONSUMER
(C) THEY ENCOURAGE WASTE
(D) THE PROFITS ARE RARELY IF EVER USED TO SUBSIDISE AREAS WHERE THERE ARE LOSSES AS THEY ARE ROUTINELY CUT AND WORKERS SACKED(
(E) THEY USE ELECTRICITY TO DISPENSE PRODUCTS THAT DO NOT NEED ELECTRICITY SUCH AS CHIPS, PRETZELS, LOLLIES

-GRAYSHNESS-

Yet another bloodthirsty manifesto from yet another fascist... Anyone not ashamed to call himself "Trotskyist" is a subhuman who has no place in a civilized society. He should be shunned rather than debated with. In the list of greatest monsters of all time that genocidal bastard Trotsky is right between Hitler and Himmler. So calling oneself a "Trotskyist" is roughly equivalent to calling oneself a "Hitlerite".

Which current do you guys view yourselves in?

I'm more of a Morenist (Nahuel Moreno), even though I'm european (Portuguese), but I read a lot of stuff by Mandel (and Trotsky, of course).

What's the above guy high on?

---
No War But Class War!
Long Live The Revolution!

Vlad

Revolutionary Trotskyist Party is an oxymoron. Trotsky has achieved NOTHING, while what Stalin achieved lasted almost a century.

Yet another bloodthirsty manifesto from yet another fascist... Anyone not ashamed to call himself "Trotskyist" is a subhuman who has no place in a civilized society. He should be shunned rather than debated with. In the list of greatest monsters of all time that genocidal bastard Trotsky is right between Hitler and Himmler. So calling oneself a "Trotskyist" is roughly equivalent to calling oneself a "Hitlerite".

Yup. Damn right there- revolutionary marxist thinker and dictator who murdered 11 million. so many similarities

Revolutionary Trotskyist Party is an oxymoron. Trotsky has achieved NOTHING, while what Stalin achieved lasted almost a century.

Stalin was scum. simple as.

Which current do you guys view yourselves in?

I'm more of a Morenist (Nahuel Moreno), even though I'm european (Portuguese), but I read a lot of stuff by Mandel (and Trotsky, of course).

What's the above guy high on?

---
No War But Class War!
Long Live The Revolution!

Vlad

Wo. You should lead the party. I just consider myself pretty much an ortho-trot except when it comes for degenerated workers states and religion

I would vote for it in a heart beat, where is the booths?

Sorry about previous posts, wasn't high...as such...more un peu drunk un peu hungover....however whichever lunatic thinks that Leon Trotsky was not diametrically opposed to Stalin should do some fucking research...

I would vote for it in a heart beat, where is the booths?

NS general election thread #2

Stalin was scum. simple as.

Betrayed socialism, as well as any hope of socilaism in the future. We just need a revolution now ;)


Although the constitution he introduced was ironically the most democratic, and the first to gurantee basic human rights and democracy. He was somewhat of a paradox. As well as scum.

Is there any way of joining a party on NS or do I just state my support of you?

2 Seats. :D

Sorry about previous posts, wasn't high...as such...more un peu drunk un peu hungover....however whichever lunatic thinks that Leon Trotsky was not diametrically opposed to Stalin should do some fucking research...
Don't call me a lunatic, especially since if you were to bother actually reading all my posts you will find that I stated my case without relying on bull. Now, I'm being civilized and I've challenged you trots to a debate of the sort you choose to disregard.
If you do read the posts again, you will find DHomme contradicting himself several times. I thought that would stand up on its own, but it seems you only want to misquote and keep on dreaming.
Make sure you get me right and mind your language.

Right, ignoring Argesia for a moment (because Ive got a massive stone-over and cant be dealing with him) we have a situation. There are now two seats for the party to occupy and i need to know who wants to take up the second one.

You must be
-active
-willing to help
-a member (just ask me to put you on the list)

bump.

seriously- second MP needed. TG me or post your intentions up here

bump

cmon, the only person who can prevent reichstag fires is you!

DHomme, I have a sugestion for you (I'm being helpful, actually).
You post that you have two other members: why don't you send them telegrams?

DHomme, I have a sugestion for you (I'm being helpful, actually).
You post that you have two other members: why don't you send them telegrams?

hmmmm. you may be a menshie but thats not a bad idea

I'd be willing to be an MP. However, it must be understood that there are vital aspects of the manifesto that I personally disagree with - particularly free speech and the teaching of religion in schools - which could result in my not properly representing the RTP. If this is considered too great a problem, I will not stand. :)

I'd be willing to be an MP. However, it must be understood that there are vital aspects of the manifesto that I personally disagree with - particularly free speech and the teaching of religion in schools - which could result in my not properly representing the RTP. If this is considered too great a problem, I will not stand. :)

One of the important aspect of the RTP is democratic centralism- if you have issues with the manifesto then we should discuss it and come to a decision. It's our party, not my party.

Perhaps we should make an offsite RTP forum as well? Ill look into it

In that case I'd be happy to be the other Trot MP.

In that case I'd be happy to be the other Trot MP.

Unless somebody else TG's me by 8pm GMT tomorrow then it's you.

Sorry guys I have been on holidays so I wasn't posting. I would have loved to have taken the seat but that can't happen now obviously. However, I do have a problem with our party endorsing someone when we haven't at least caucused to discuss their exact position on these things. Perhaps this could happen

Grayshness

Further I think it somewhat dangerous that Lienor has obviously indicated they only wanted to join the party because their were two seats...oh dear...anyway good luck...what's the procedure for disendorsing people if they prove to be not representative of our constituency

Grayshness

I personally think Lienor should be appointed as a temporary MP.

If they become disactive/ no longer reflective of the party's policies then they should be recalled immediately.

Anyone else have a suggestion?

However, I do have a problem with our party endorsing someone when we haven't at least caucused to discuss their exact position on these things.I realised this might be a problem. Is there a RTP forum or anything?

Further I think it somewhat dangerous that Lienor has obviously indicated they only wanted to join the party because their were two seatsI did actually join the party before becoming aware that there were virtually no members...

If they become disactive/ no longer reflective of the party's policies then they should be recalled immediately.I'm certainly not going to become disactive anytime soon, unless my computer dies. I broadly speaking agree with the manifesto, otherwise I would neither have voted for the RTP nor joined it.

If Grayshness would like to be the MP, that's fine. I offered as I thought it would be interesting, but I realise that it would seem a little odd having somebody as new as me in Parliament.

If I'm appointed a temporary MP, that's fine too. :)

Okay, I'm an MP. Nice.

I seriously think we should start

a) Recruiting more members to the party. 6% of the electorate voted for us, why are there only three members? More people need to get involved in preparation for the next election.

b) Discussing changes to the manifesto. I note, in particular, that Free Speech was originally on the bill, but later brought in due to external pressure. I'd certainly like to see this discussed.

Do we do this here, or get our own forum?

Okay, I'm an MP. Nice.

I seriously think we should start

a) Recruiting more members to the party. 6% of the electorate voted for us, why are there only three members? More people need to get involved in preparation for the next election.

b) Discussing changes to the manifesto. I note, in particular, that Free Speech was originally on the bill, but later brought in due to external pressure. I'd certainly like to see this discussed.

Do we do this here, or get our own forum?

Either here, or we make our own forum

Sign me up, comrade!

Sign me up, comrade!

Will do.

Welcome to the exciting world of trotskyism *sparkle sparkle*

I realise that discussing altering our policies right after a general election might get accusations of not representing those who elected us thrown at us. However, hopefully, if there's anything anybody really disagrees with, it will compel them to actually join the party. There's still about 30 odd people in the electorate who are clearly Trotskyist sympathisers and have yet to join the party...

Let's get kicking. Why free speech? I haven't read all the thread, but presumably there was some sort of backlash against limiting free speech. Anybody see any reason why we should let Nazis run amok and preach hatred against the marginalized minorities in society?

You probably haven't heard of us. Our lack of exposure can be directly related to the "clique culture" that currently runs rampant throughout the forums and the fact that the leaders of pretty much all major parties are members of the clique. Plus they have better graphics. Bastards.

Members:

DHomme
Grayshness
Lienor
Verghastinsel

http://img182.echo.cx/img182/6356/rtp3cg.jpg

TRANSITIONAL PARTY
*We need to make clear that this party is not reformist. We do not think true socialism can be achieved under the current system of democracy which is based on personality rather than skill. This party only exists to gain transitional demands for the workers.
*While other left-wing parties have good intentions, we argue that their attempts to change the system from within can only end in failure as they do not understand the nature of the capitalist state
*The main objective of this party is to form a vanguard for the revolution while simultaneously managing to temporarily alleviate the huge suffering of the working classes.
*Please take this into account as the rest of the manifesto is dealing primarily with our objectives within parliament as opposed to post-revolutionary activities

ECONOMY
*Nationalise all major industries and all those which are essential to the survival of human beings
*The minimum wage is to be raised to the level that the EU has currently deemed acceptable of £7.50 an hour
*Increase taxes on the rich and lower them on the poor
*Hand more power over to the trade unions- allow secondary picketing, bring back closed shops, etc.
*Pensions, money given to asylum seekers and the dole to be increased to a basic standard of living (at the billionaires’ expense)
*Crackdown on corporate criminals and those that try to avoid corporate taxes. If the company/ owners threaten to leave the country, their ban accounts will be frozen.

PUBLIC SERVICES
*Abolish private hospitals and put all healthcare under government control
*Prohibit the private sale of medicine and instead have pharmacies run by the state
*Legalise euthanasia
*Allow abortion up until 20 weeks for any reason. After that period only if the baby poses a physical threat to the mother will abortion be permitted
*Free contraception for all
*The government must abolish private schools and allow anybody to use them
*Religious and gender segregated schooling must end
*Religion/ philosophy must be taught to all children in a non-biased manner
*University education will be made free
*The army will be significantly reduced as we will stop sending troops to kill and die in imperialist wars
*The police must have the powers to stop and search without just cause based on your situation taken away
*Those police who are still unarmed will not be given guns as there are already enough cases of police brutality.

DRUGS
*Cannabis, ecstasy, speed, LSD, magic mushrooms and any “soft drugs” to be legalised and sold by licensed proprietors to over 16’s.
*“Hard drugs” to be legalised and controlled by the state, but they can only be taken in licensed, state-operated centres.
*Rehab to be available, free of cost, to anybody who wants it
*All those in jail for dealing/possessing drugs to be freed

OTHER ISSUES
*Fascist, racist, Neo-Nazi and 'far-right' parties will be allowed. However, should they choose to march or plan political events, they will be offered no assistance from the state in any shape or form.
*Complete freedom of speech allowed to all.
*Outlaw the holding of second homes
*Open all borders and allow complete freedom of movement, in compliance with the UN charter of human rights


The manifesto may not be perfect, but considering I just did that in half an hour I think it’s alright. Anybody have any suggestions just let me know


While you do mean well, this lays the foundation for dictatorship. Especially only letting some people get the Freedom of Speech. And destroying people's rights to religion and religious schooling. And breaking down a nations soveriegnty(sp?). And not letting people have two homes. And unarming the police, despite creating a large number of drug addicts. And ignoring that those drug addicts will still have weapons. In fact, everything about drugs is wrong. Maybe Mary Jane can be legal, but the rest is too far.

Other than that, I like it! :p

^Why it may be desirable to get our own forums. Though on the other hand, that would probably give the electorate less exposure to any changes we may make, which might not be such a great idea.

Let's get kicking. Why free speech? I haven't read all the thread, but presumably there was some sort of backlash against limiting free speech. Anybody see any reason why we should let Nazis run amok and preach hatred against the marginalized minorities in society?

The point is that while fascists have the right to say and think what they feel, any attempt to organise this into a political movement will be crushed straight away as they wont have the pigs to back them up when a group of antifa skinheads come along to stop them.

While you do mean well, this lays the foundation for dictatorship. Especially only letting some people get the Freedom of Speech. And destroying people's rights to religion and religious schooling.
We are not destroying the right to religion, we are just making sure that kids have the right to a non-biased, sevular education. They want to choose a religion that's fine by them, but we will not have state schools drumming it into them.

And breaking down a nations soveriegnty(sp?).
Eurgh. The concept of nation. Needs to be destroyed right away.

And not letting people have two homes.
So we can take homes from the rich so that the poor have somewhere to live.

And unarming the police, despite creating a large number of drug addicts. And ignoring that those drug addicts will still have weapons. In fact, everything about drugs is wrong. Maybe Mary Jane can be legal, but the rest is too far.

I dont feel safe knowing that the police have guns, I feel less safe knowing that they now have a shoot to kill policy. Also, by disarming the police we are fulfilling our goal of a transitional party by making a revolution less likely to be met with resistance and less bloody.
Hard drug addicts need to be given clean drugs in safe conditions. We cannot allow them to be killed off by violence and disease in a growing underworld. It is in everybody's best wishes to legalise drugs as by ensuring there is a cheap source, very few addicts will have to turn to crime to make money for their habits

Hello, my radical friends...:p

I wrote a clarification about Communism and the like, seeing how many people seemingly have a completely wrong idea about it.
I'm not a "communist" in the sense of trying to bring the revolution, but I thought it would be a good idea to make people understand.

Anyways, one important thing's missing: Trotsky.
I assume that at least one of you can give a quick and simple summary of Trotsky's theoretical work in this thread:
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=449405

And if you disagree with it, then feel free to correct me too!:)

The point is that while fascists have the right to say and think what they feel, any attempt to organise this into a political movement will be crushed straight away as they wont have the pigs to back them up when a group of antifa skinheads come along to stop them.This right to free speech still allows ideas to spread. The foundations of any ideology are words. If we take away the right to preach hatred against muslims, gays, jews, etc. we should largely make this hatred extinct in a generation.
My point is, even if they don't immediately form into a political movement, they have the ability to spread their ideas, which means they have the potential to become a political force.

Religion/ philosophy must be taught to all children in a non-biased mannerWe are not destroying the right to religion, we are just making sure that kids have the right to a non-biased, sevular education. They want to choose a religion that's fine by them, but we will not have state schools drumming it into them.Am I to understand that schools will be secular, then? It would be a lot more productive allowing anybody still clinging on the religious notions to look it up in their spare time.

This right to free speech still allows ideas to spread. The foundations of any ideology are words. If we take away the right to preach hatred against muslims, gays, jews, etc. we should largely make this hatred extinct in a generation.
Patently untrue. Racism, a vile form of collectivism as it may be, can not be simply 'bred out' of a populace in this manner. The foundation of ideoloy, furthermore, is not words but thought, and should you decide to enact such a policy as this you will quickly be forced to turn to directing and punishing thought, since that's where words come from.

If society is as conscientious as you think it should be, then it will have no problem shrugging off the small, radical minority of hatemongering simpletons.

My point is, even if they don't immediately form into a political movement, they have the ability to spread their ideas, which means they have the potential to become a political force.
Now this is just paranoia. People who have common interests--be they good ones or bad ones--will find a way to unite and will combat any presence that seeks to hamper their ability to do so. For all the spite you seem to have for religious types, you certainly share the same twisted brand of authoritarianism that you spend so much time condemning.

Racism, a vile form of collectivism as it may be, can not be simply 'bred out' of a populace in this manner.Racism is innate now?

The foundation of ideoloy, furthermore, is not words but thought, and should you decide to enact such a policy as this you will quickly be forced to turn to directing and punishing thought, since that's where words come from.As true as that may be, it is impossible to rally others to a cause using only thought.

If society is as conscientious as you think it should be, then it will have no problem shrugging off the small, radical minority of hatemongering simpletons.Unfortunately, it is still an existant minority, and a part of society.

Now this is just paranoia. People who have common interests--be they good ones or bad ones--will find a way to unite and will combat any presence that seeks to hamper their ability to do so. For all the spite you seem to have for religious types, you certainly share the same twisted brand of authoritarianism that you spend so much time condemning.Twisted authoritarianism? There is a marked difference between forcing people to keep their traps shut if they happen to be racist, and, say, burning old women as witches or preaching hatred of gays.
Even if a far right minority doesn't form into a political movement, their targets have the right to be protected and sleep in peace.

This right to free speech still allows ideas to spread. The foundations of any ideology are words. If we take away the right to preach hatred against muslims, gays, jews, etc. we should largely make this hatred extinct in a generation.

Orwell would love you.

This right to free speech still allows ideas to spread. The foundations of any ideology are words. If we take away the right to preach hatred against muslims, gays, jews, etc. we should largely make this hatred extinct in a generation.
My point is, even if they don't immediately form into a political movement, they have the ability to spread their ideas, which means they have the potential to become a political force.
However, fascists and racists arguments are essentially wafer thin. Get them into a debate and they can usually be destroyed as they essentially only have empty rhetoric in their heads. Most people aren't fooled by fascists arguments. They are, however, impressed by fascist displays of strength and propaganda. Which is why they must be destroyed on a political level instead of being destroyed on a personal level


Am I to understand that schools will be secular, then? It would be a lot more productive allowing anybody still clinging on the religious notions to look it up in their spare time.
I think we should teach religion in a non-biased fashion. And atheism. It's an important issue in the world still and I think people should be prepared with the knowledge to come to a decision for themselves.

However, fascists and racists arguments are essentially wafer thin. Get them into a debate and they can usually be destroyed as they essentially only have empty rhetoric in their heads. Most people aren't fooled by fascists arguments. They are, however, impressed by fascist displays of strength and propaganda. Which is why they must be destroyed on a political level instead of being destroyed on a personal levelThat makes sense. Point conceded.:p Though there's still the matter of potential psychological damage for the targets, this would hopefully be small / largely ignored / have counselling.

That makes sense. Point conceded.:p Though there's still the matter of potential psychological damage for the targets, this would hopefully be small / largely ignored / have counselling.

And could beat the shit of the racist if they just so fancied.

Not that we condone violence ;)

And could beat the shit of the racist if they just so fancied.

Not that we condone violence ;)

I've always wondered why Stalin, et al, could not accept Trotsky's notion that a command economy state could not compete with capitalist nations.

And more, why did they have Trotsky assassinated? Was that all about the power of ideas?

He must have had a persuasive set of ideas to warrant being hunted down like that.

I've always wondered why Stalin, et al, could not accept Trotsky's notion that a command economy state could not compete with capitalist nations.
Bit too busy to go into this fully now but essentially the capitalist nations will remain hostile to the socialist society and attempt to destroy it before its ideas spread to the proleteriate within their own countries.

Stalin on the otherhand was more than happy to trade with the bastards if it meant covering his own ass


And more, why did they have Trotsky assassinated? Was that all about the power of ideas?

He must have had a persuasive set of ideas to warrant being hunted down like that.
Trotsky was assassinated because he wanted the Russians to rise up and overthrow Stalin and his bureaucracy to create a true socialist society. He also pointed out frequently that Stalin was not actually following Marxism-Leninism, but some sort of demented caricature of it. He frequently pointed out holes in Stalin's theories and actions and 'Uncle Joe' basically got sick of it, and worried that he might actually cause a revolution.

i just want to congatulate this party on their election victory in my state bundesstag you are the biggest party with 22 seats i also want you to put forward a nominee for first minister

Bundesstag election results
RTP -22 Seats
DSP- 17 Seats
Conservatives- 14 Seats
SDRP- 14 seats
Green party- 9 seats
PDS- 4 Seats
Reason party- 0 seats
UDCP- 0 seats

Also i would just like to say this is the first time this party was on the ballot in my state so well done

Right. Religion in schools.

People have every right to practice their religion in private, but I see no reason to take up time with lessons in public schools. They're not necessary, and could be used to further key skills like English, which a majority of English children seem to be discarding nowadays, maths or the sciences.

A secular government has no business teaching about religion, however fairly. People do that in their spare time.

Right. Religion in schools.

People have every right to practice their religion in private, but I see no reason to take up time with lessons in public schools. They're not necessary, and could be used to further key skills like English, which a majority of English children seem to be discarding nowadays, maths or the sciences.

A secular government has no business teaching about religion, however fairly. People do that in their spare time.

I can definately see your argument, I just feel that kids will be getting enough brainwashing to join a certain religion and that if you dont do it you wont get to heaven at home. If we can counter that with an objective look at religion within school then perhaps they can come to a more informed decision, or maybe not see it as being the difference between an eternity of pain or pleasure

I think we should put a proposal before parliament. Maybe regarding the powers of trade unions?

What is the party's position on state capitalism and the vanguard party?

I have no problem supporting the bulk of the points,

However All leisure drugs including nicotine alcohol and tobacco (arrrgh what am I going to do) to be rigidly controled by the state, and to be raioned, those that become addicted to be taken into state work camps to work for the fix, (or we could just call it the civil service :D )

But no problem with the main points, is the membership cheaper than the communist party :rolleyes:

What is the party's position on state capitalism and the vanguard party?
Do you mean on where we stand regarding the USSR? Personally I'd class it as a degenerated workers state (being somewhat of an ortho-trot) but the party hasn't got a line on it yet.

I also think it's pretty safe to bet that we approve the use of a vanguard party seeing as its one of the core leninist values.

those that become addicted to be taken into state work camps to work for the fix, (or we could just call it the civil service :D )

Sounds a little stalinist for my liking. Perhaps voluntary free rehab facilities could be much more effective


But no problem with the main points, is the membership cheaper than the communist party :rolleyes:

Depends which communist party...

Sounds a little stalinist for my liking. Perhaps voluntary free rehab facilities could be much more effective



Depends which communist party...

well of course it would be free and voluntary, but then they would have little choice :D

Where are the results of the elections?

Please telegram me 'cause I don't use the forums regularly.

What level of power will the vanguard recieve?

What level of power will the vanguard recieve?

The role of the vanguard party will be to incite, lead and secure the revolution. It is the role of the proleteriate itself to control the socialist state once it has been secured

Ahem...

I'm leaving the RTP and resigning my MPship. Change of beliefs, change of opinions. You'll need to elect a new MP. Good luck and sorry. :)

The role of the vanguard party will be to incite, lead and secure the revolution. It is the role of the proleteriate itself to control the socialist state once it has been secured

With an executive council to "assist" it naturally:rolleyes: