The author discusses possibilities for a second wave of the world revolution. The first was the attempt of the Bolsheviks, which failed by the Stalinist turn. Today "the only perspective for a global revolution is establishing revolutionary powder-kegs in the »Third World«, which would create horizontal ties among each other – ignoring fundamental imperialist cultural institutions and narratives of the »First World« – leading to subsequent armed struggle and organisation of uprisings, establishing of »liberated zones« and seizing of power in specific countries."

The author speculates on perspectives of a global socialist revolution and searches subjective factors underlying it. Taking for granted the structural crisis of world capitalism, he calls upon classical answers to provide solutions, such as the philosophically most developed Marxism of History and Class Consciousness (1923) – especially focusing on the dilemma whether messianic Marxism is still applicable in today's conditions.

The concept of "transition" has become an ideological category, which serves to erase and conceal all such phenomena of the period called "post-socialist", which reveal the inhumanity of this process in the Balkans and elsewhere. "Being transitory" excuses the anti-democratic practices transitory societies, and increasing exploitation excessively.

Neoliberal economists claim that globalisation triggered growth will improve the quality of environment in the long run. On the other hand, almost all practicing environment protectors say that negative ecological effects far outweigh benefits. Countries exposed to the increasing global competition are routinely forced to loosen their environmental regulations. International specialisation is often damaging to the environment and leads to monocultures in farming. Economic globalisation and the current wasteful mode of production mutually reinforce each other.

The study makes an attempt finding the minimum language, the least common denominator of concepts, which can be used by both antagonist political and social powers as they own on speaking about the heritage of 1956. The author believes that the field with the largest chance for consensus is the attitude towards workers councils – because workers regarded them as their own and they had protected factories and their jobs.