User:RD/9k/Tony Cliff (Q49,48)

Main entry

Tony Cliff -> I remember thinking his theory was "interesting" the first time I saw it but being really confused as to what exactly these theories are trying to achieve.

Revolutionaries do not include Tony Cliff / "revolutionaries (a category which does not include Cliff)" [1] -> I should expect this kind of sass in Leninist texts but the needless specificity of this one blindsided me
I mean depending on your definition there are a lot of Communist parties which have hardly done anything, so, speaking really literally you might say this is true. but I think there are also a lot of theorists or organizers (some of them even good at what they do) for which "revolutionaries" isn't quite the right division, and "Communist allies" or some synonym ("fellow travelers" etc) versus non-allies would be a better division of things. the early stages of a Communist revolution take a lot of skill, education, and correct perception to where there are just these select few people that will actually be able to lead it and fulfill that statement that "without revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary movement". like, a lot of the people who are actually going to carry a successful revolution aren't even revolutionaries.

fervent perfidious enemies -> I'm not sure if he ever said anything "ironic", but according to a lot of Trotskyists he kind of was one.
Hiroyoshi Hayashi / Hayashi Hiroyoshi -> the Tony Cliff of Japan. he seemed to me like he might have been trying a little harder but maybe that was just me. either way his theory still did not quite make sense.