John Lacny writes:
> Leninists would say flat-out that revolutionary leadership
(a "vanguard") is necessary to advance a struggle, but one
thing that would distinguish thinking Leninists from doctrinaire
ones would be the understanding that vanguards are defined
much more objectively than subjectively -- it's not enough to
be "correct," you also have to have the ability to actually lead
people. Vanguards are drawn from the natural leadership
among the *masses*, and prove themselves as vanguards by
being able to lead masses of people into struggle.
I do not know if it is Leninist or not, but I think it would also be important that the vanguard conceived of itself as the representative of the masses and not their elite leadership telling the masses how to act (Daddy knows best) instead of looking to the masses for guidance.
Brian Dauth Queer Buddhist Resister