Read *What is to be done?" you obnoxious liberal. What exactly are you out there doing anyway? You're a supposed anarchist that wants to make the democratic party turn their backs on the corporate bourgeois benefactors that put them and keep them in power? That's the silliest most feckless thing I've read in a minute. If that were a reasonable route for organizing, why has hijacking a bourgeois electoral party to make it into a revolutionary proletariat one never been a strategy any revolutionary organizer you've read or read of ever made significant progress with? Through what mechanism do you propose even accomplishing that, the power of Jesus Christ compelling them? You've got to be one of the most annoyingly anti materialist goobers I've ever had the displeasure of seeing on this site. At least chuds are worth posting pig poop balls at. You're a liberal cosplaying a revolutionary anarchist and you still can't imagine anything beyond what already exists. For the love of God chatter, join the PSL and develop some goddamn discipline instead of whatever this has been all day.

See, here's the problem with that. Marx's Address to the Communist League clearly is in agreement with my particular political programme. Which, no shit it should, I cribbed it from him.

There are, in particular, two passages that are extremely important to note and apply to the American context.

"The relationship of the revolutionary workers’ party to the petty-bourgeois democrats is this: it cooperates with them against the party which they aim to overthrow; it opposes them wherever they wish to secure their own position."

This is most likely the passage that you are misinterpreting. To cooperate against the party they wish to overthrow does not apply to the national Democratic party because the national Democratic party does not wish to overthrow the Republican party. They wish to consolidate the gains of the Republican party for big capital. They say this repeatedly. To paraphrase, "America needs a strong Republican party." - Nancy Pelosi.

If anything, this address would have us helping the Republicans, as they are the party that is most represented by the American petite-bourgious.This is, of course, a gross misapplication of theory because both parties are inevitably primarily representatives of big capital. We are not in a German 1850's situation where there is a party that wishes to overthrow the Kaiser, and establish a republic, we are in a situation in which the liberal republic has already been established and centralized.

To whit,

"But they themselves must contribute most to their final victory, by informing themselves of their own class interests, by taking up their independent political position as soon as possible, by not allowing themselves to be misled by the hypocritical phrases of the democratic petty bourgeoisie into doubting for one minute the necessity of an independently organized party of the proletariat."

This is the penultimate point of the piece and where we reside, which is pretty damn clear, and exactly what I was advocating for in the previous post. I advise you to actually read what you claim to have read in the historical context that it exists in, in order to not misapply it to our historical political situation.

But you can do whatever you want, it is unlikely that you are actually a member of any party I am a part of.