But, okay, disppensing with the rather awkward conscription of the the Frankfurt School into this scenario, maybe we can whittle it down to "Have the Soviet Union replace the working class as the center of class struggle with various culturally marginalized groups".
Lenin did in fact emphasize the need for the Revolution to attract groups other than the class-conscious proletariat--including dissatisfied nationalities. But clearly they were not to
replace the working class:
"To imagine that social revolution is
conceivable without revolts by small nations in the colonies and in Europe, without revolutionary outbursts by a section of the petty bourgeoisie
with all its prejudices, without a movement of the politically non-conscious proletarian and semi-proletarian masses against oppression by the landowners, the church, and the monarchy, against national oppression, etc.-to imagine all this is to
repudiate social revolution. So one army lines up in one place and says, “We are for socialism”, and another, somewhere else and says, “We are for imperialism”, and that will he a social revolution! Only those who hold such a ridiculously pedantic view could vilify the Irish rebellion by calling it a “putsch”.
"Whoever expects a “pure” social revolution will
never live to see it. Such a person pays lip-service to revolution without understanding what revolution is.
"The Russian Revolution of 1905 was a bourgeois-democratic revolution. It consisted of a series of battles in which
all the discontented classes, groups and elements of the population participated. Among these there were masses imbued with the crudest
prejudices, with the vaguest and most fantastic aims of struggle; there were small groups which accepted Japanese money, there were speculators and adventurers, etc. But
objectively, the mass movement was breaking the back of tsarism and paving the way for democracy; for this reason the class-conscious workers led it.
"The socialist revolution in Europe
cannot be anything other than an outburst of mass struggle on the part of all and sundry oppressed and discontented elements. Inevitably, sections of tile petty bourgeoisie and of the backward workers will participate in it—without such participation,
mass struggle is
impossible, without it no revolution is possible—and just as inevitably will they bring into the movement their prejudices, their reactionary fantasies, their weaknesses and errors. But
objectively they will attack
capital, and the class-conscious vanguard of the revolution, the advanced proletariat, expressing this objective truth of a variegated and discordant, motley and outwardly fragmented, mass struggle, will he able to unite and direct it, capture power, seize the banks, expropriate the trusts which all hate (though for difficult reasons!), and introduce other dictatorial measures which in their totality will amount to the overthrow of the bourgeoisie and the victory of socialism, which, however, will by no means immediately “purge” itself of petty-bourgeois slag."
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/jul/x01.htm