When talking about the revolutionary organisation, certain elements reject the use of the word Party. The term revolutionary organisation seems to be more acceptable to such elements, but this too has a problem, it does not differentiate between a sprinkling of aspiring revolutionaries in a given area or areas and a possible large scale political instrument.

Some doubt that there will be a clear Global Revolutionary Party/Organisation, we will get a multiplicity of groupings and that will not distill down.

And how do we describe the activity of this singular or plural Party/Organisation/s?

Some baulk at the word vanguard.

For others it is not permissible to say the P/O directs/guides/leads the class.

I think the issue is intertwined with the necessity or otherwise of the the Party/Organisation of revolutionaries.

I'll leave it there for the moment and see what the response is. My initial thought is that it is a very important matter, that there is a current which plainly states, No revolutionary Party, No Revolution, but there are those who reject that perspective. Can they coexist in a unitary organisation? I hesitate to give an absolute verdict but I think they can.