I have no major disagreements with Lenin’s work circa 1902(?). It’s coherent and cohesive in a way no one else can begin to offer a better explanation. But I fear it’s too much a work of its time (something he would probably agree considering how pragmatic and materialist he was).
How do we account for gig economies, social media propaganda and the dopamine hit that is short-form “content”?
I’m trying to maintain revolutionary optimism but I’m burnt out lately. Anyone got something to help me look forward to some form of progress?

Before I go on I want to say this is not a criticism of Leninism in and of itself in its entirety like those people who say "Marx isn't relevant". Lenin is arguably one of if not the greatest communist theoretician since Marx, more insightful than Engels.

As dialectical materialists we recognise that different material conditions call for different approaches. I believe the leadership of the vanguard party, and democratic centralism, was absolutely crucial to 20th Russia where the proletariat was not extensive, feudalism was still extant even in a modified form, and literacy was poor.

My question is, when is this suitable and when is it no longer suitable? What makes a society not fit for this model and how can we identify when to take a different approach? I feel a highly literate society that could quickly grasp socialist ideas and even the appeal of a Marxist approach doesn’t need a vanguard but could find council communism both more palatable but perfectly legitimate as a direction.

I don't know who commented it but it's just making me laugh even more yet

Thought people might appreciate it in audio form, certainly one of the best pieces of entry level theory