Hello lists,
I have a good observation that begs many questions, and you all know alot more on this than I do.
Recently I read a bit of Lars Lih's "Lenin Rediscovered" which was helpful, I didn't manage to finish it, but it was the first real exposure to Lenin and 'leninism' I had. By real, I mean seeking to clarify, not misrepresent.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the take-away is that Lenin's formulation of 'making a revolution happen,' is to set your minimum programme at the very maximum of bourgeois democracy; free speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of the press, full voting rights, etc. If opinion does turn towards this position in a significant way, then by extension the road to a real social revolution becomes possible; perhaps even widely advocated by a large segment of the population that supports the maximum freedom possible under bourgeious forms of government.
^^^^^^^ CB: You might consider that in Lenin's concrete situation there was a monarchy -Czarist absolutism. So, before the revolutions of 1917 ( the bourgeois revolution in February and the socialist revolution in October) Lenin's line was to lead the working class to ally with liberals to overthrow Czarist absolutism. The main public demands were for bourgeois reforms of the monarchy. In the US, we have had bourgeois democracy for 225 years. In our concrete situation, a "Bolshevik" program can include social democratic planks such as full employment, universal health care, reduce the military spending drastically, government control of financial institutions et al.