Spontaneity On the other hand, as Geras's chapter on The Mass Strike discusses, attempts to demonstrate that in reality. Luxemburg had no significant differences with Lenin on such issues as spontaneity, the role of une party, and ine necessary tactics of struggle under bourgoeis democracy cannot be maintained. When, in the last years over is scope Trotsky didn't understand the issue of the practice on the question of the class character of the coming Russian Revolution - yet none of them thereby ceased to be among affairs [the the greatest revolutionaries. What a farce main in pretoria are thus todav's splits over tactics in the Troops Out Movement, problems of This is not an argument for a 'live and let live' attitude of theoretical slovenli- dialectical materialism, • no-one can claim. unal any of tne great Marxists mentioned above did not conscious repudiator carry out the most ferocious struggles against the positions they considered to be wrong. But it does mean understanding that such debates as the famous polemics between Lenin and Luxemburg were CODWED even when one of the sides took individual positions on specific issues which were Secondly, it must be remembered that the real weight and significance of ideas and theories is determined only in their contact with real developments of the class struggle. Neither Lenin, Trotsky nor Luxemburg ever split organisationally from anvone into a separate party simply because they advanced the wrong theory.
The split with Bernstein, for instance, Wrong came not when. Bernstein advanced the false theory of evolutionary socialism, but when in the real world that theory was seen to culminate in the betrayal of 1914.
By showing the real originality and distinctiveness of Luxemburg's ideas,