Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Starry Messenger

(32,382 posts)
3. No, I don't think so.
Sun Nov 4, 2012, 03:55 PM
Nov 2012

Especially not at this point in history. Around the time of the Civil War, there was probably that combination since the bourgeois-democratic struggle had been incomplete when the Am. Revolution occurred. It was a capitalist/worker combination struggle.

I take it to mean that the proletarian struggles should not cease even under capitalism. The bourgeois are also struggling to maintain their power--there might be some things that are in tandem, with divisions in different capitalist camps that can be exploited.

There is a tendency that says that struggle isn't useful unless there is a revolution at hand. But Lenin said that people should achieve all things that they can even if it isn't a total change of society, since those things (universal suffrage, etc.) will be things that will need to be put into place even when socialism arises. If you can achieve them under capitalism, why wait?

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Socialist Progressives»Lenin on the Need to Figh...»Reply #3