First passage:

Lenin recognized this problem in What Is To Be Done? The working class, he asserted, will never develop revolutionary consciousness on their own. His solution to this brick wall of a problem for The Revolution was the creation of a "revolutionary vanguard" to educate and lead the working class to victory over capitalism.

Marx wanted to assume that the revolution would occur "naturally," in the way he thought the Paris Commune of 1871 arose (see The Civil War in France for more on this). But the Paris Commune had a theoretician, one Marx didn't like much: Proudhon. And Lenin, for his part, despaired of "revolutionary consciousness" in Russia in 1902, when "What is to be Done?" was published.

I tend to think of Marxism-Leninism as a sort of Eastern Orthodox Marxism. Cornelius Castoriadis' critique of Marxism-Leninism in "The Pulverization of Marxism-Leninism" stands, but Lenin didn't worry much about being a fraud, which is what Castoriadis said he was (much later of course). His notion was: have a revolution, become a czar, and worry about the details later. His success was, frankly, due to the fact that the actual Russian Czar of the time, Nicholas II, was an inept fool ruling at a time when someone really smart was needed, which is to say, in the middle of a perfect storm, the First World War. Lenin's revolution was, however, prep work for Stalin, who appears in the history books as a fake-Marxist version of Peter the Great. The more things change...

At any rate, it is no surprise that Castoriadis viewed Marxism-Leninism as a fraud, since he ditched the Stalinists during the Greek Civil War after having joined them. It also shouldn't surprise us that the history of attempts at liberation from capitalism is full of false starts. It's far easier to be a capitalist than it is to be a liberator, in an era of expanding capitalism. Perhaps this situation will change in the future.

Second passage:

The shitlibs have long since given up any dream of seizing power, and therefore are not revolutionary at all.

The "shitlibs" appear to be drifting into a vortex of sorts. What causes this drift is an increasing desperation, a desperation to find some meaning in the promotion of political careerists, and Kamala Harris is nothing if not a political careerist. Joe Biden appears to have destroyed any notion that the "shitlibs" stand for anything outside of their financial portfolios. May they all find anti-capitalist therapists in the wake of Harris' defeat.

(I'd have said "error", but that's too polite)

...has always been an inordinate obsession with having the majority.

The Marxist discomfort with the inconvenient truths of evolutionary biology is really starting to reveal itself for the handicap it has always been.

"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."

― Oscar Wilde

The majority would rather take poison than take a stand, and will go along with anything (sickeningly, it even makes evolutionary sense!).

On the other hand....

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world: indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.

— Margaret Mead