Marxism is always open, always critical, always self-critical.

And you cannot have a socialist revolution commandeered from the top, ordered around by some omniscient leader or group of leaders.

Factions are a sign of illness in a party.

I do not believe in self-proclaimed parties.

Mistakes in themselves are unavoidable.

Periodically, the workers do revolt against bourgeois society, not by a hundred, five hundred, or a thousand, but by the millions.

Revolution is an instrument, like a party is an instrument.

Revolution is not a goal in itself.

Socialist democracy is not, a luxury and its need is not limited to the most advanced industrial countries.

There is a process of social and of political differentiation going on in the real working class all the time.

You can have relatively high levels of class consciousness with a lower level of class militancy than one would have expected.

You cannot make a socialist revolution without really trying.

For us, Marxism is always open because there are always new xperiences, there are always new facts, including facts about the past, which have to be incorporated in the corpus of scientific socialism.

Furthermore, there is absolutely no contradiction between the separate organizations of revolutionary vanguard militants and their participation in the mass organizations of the working class.

On the contrary, history generally confirms that the more conscious and the better you are organized in vanguard organizations, the more constructively you operate in the mass organizations of the working class.

Only under conditions of revolutionary crises do you have the highest level of self-organization; this is the Soviet type of organization, which is to say, workers' councils, people's councils, call them what you want, popular committees.

Otherwise we get off the track and we do not fulfil the historical role which we want to fulfil: to help the masses, the exploited and the oppressed of the world, build a classless society, a world socialist federation.

The conclusion you can draw from these characteristics is that you have an uneven development of class activity and an uneven development of class consciousness in the working class.

The more workers you have in your organization, the better you are implanted in the working class, the more likely you are to come up with the concrete problems of the class.

The only conclusion you can draw from the real historical movement is that by and large, in day-to-day life, what Lenin called trade union consciousness dominates the working class. I would call it elementary class consciousness of the working class.