> But in that case it really does start to become an empirical question,
> implying the need to look to really-existing/have-existed pre-captial and
> non-capitalist formations to determine which relations continue and how they
> change.
Of course. But not only that. It can also mean coming up with new formations in the course of struggle. This seems like a fine revolutionary tradition that the "old" side of the debate doesn't believe in: creating forms specific to the struggle at hand. Instead we hear reflexive invocations about party and state, and vague complaints about organization, and calls for policy changes but not political changes.