I cannot say this issue excites me or appears very relevant. In fact I don't think we have discussed this for decades. I suppose "petty bourgeois" to be another way to categorise the student movement which arose alongside the workers strikes. The Cohn-Bendit's of this world seemed to have confirmed that description. The main thing was that the period of workers militancy at the beginning of the crisis did not open up a revolutionary situation and by 1976 the whole wave was finished, We in the CWO recognised this (and BC were never that impressed that the money militancy of that period would lead to a rise in class political consciousness) but the ICC did not and hence their perspectives have been distorted ever since. They had the view that the class was really revolutioanry if only it could be "demystified" and that was the task of the day. As a consequence we had all kinds of ideological innovations which all implied that the class struggle was on a rising curve (from the need for a "left in opposition", and warnings of "the machiavellianism of the bourgeoisie" through "the years of truth" and "waves of struggle" of the 1980s, ICC optimism did not falter. The collapse of the USSR and its bloc though did give them the opportunity to reassess (the notions of chaos and decomposition being their way of getting away from all the daft formulations from the past). The reassessment would have been more convincing had it included a repudiation of the perspectives until 1990. There is a continuing tendency today for ICC comments to exaggerate the potential of the Arab spring etc (although we have not polemicised on this as it si only a tendency) which is more or less in tune with their previous over-optimism.