I was reading Carrillo’s “Eurocommunism and the State” for an article and he did that thing a lot of revisionist do where they go “well everything is revisionism!!! Lenin was a revisionist!!! Marx was a revisionist of himself!!!” Etc. Etc.
But really they are, honestly probably purposefully, obfuscating what revisionism is. For example, he uses the change from war communism to the NEP to post-nep policies as an example of lenin being a revisionist of himself, which…no? That’s not what revisionism is. That’s just applying different policies to material conditions. I mean it gets a little more complicated obviously but I honestly do very much hate it.
To put it simply it is claiming to be a communist while revising core principles. I.e, a social democrat [modern] is not a revisionist because they don’t claim to be marxist in the first place. But social democrats of the 1900s were revisionist because they claimed to follow marxism while promoting “peaceful reform” and such