thank you! for the most part i agree with you: i really see party formation as the first and primary task, because the more i investigate existing parties in the US the more i am disappointed in them. lack of internal party democracy coupled with incorrect theory and incorrect application of theory to material conditions in the US (not recognizing settler-colonialism as the primary internal contradiction, not understanding patriarchy as a set of class relationships in relation to reproductive labor, etc) makes for ossified, non-revolutionary organizations. and, i think studying and using studying as an organization tool is the first and primary task of party formation: how can we learn to build our own party without having thoroughly and collectively learned from all successful attempts at revolutionary party formation?
and yeah, i think not just one but many historic opportunities are on the horizon for the next century or two, because i think it will take multiple acts of spontaneous unrest for the masses to come to the correct conclusion. and these will obviously increase in likelihood the worse material conditions in the core become, whether via increasing multipolarity possibly leading to a world war, or climate change (which as a ticking time bomb is both a gift and a curse), or other means. but i think for success ultimately two things must occur: global north masses' material interests must align with those in the global south more than not, and a truly revolutionary party must be present and organized enough to make the masses aware of this qualitative development the moment it occurs. the former will happen sooner for those more exploited within the core (black, indigenous, latino, but also queer and disabled folk), making a multi-vector class analysis critical for any revolutionary org within the core.