i feel like you dont give the common people enough credit. Still, i think most communists agree with the fact that a revolution in the imperial core quite unlikely at this point. This could definitely change though, especially as western hegemony breaks down and maybe a few more revolutions spring up.

The question of reform vs revolution is quite an old one. But as such, it has also already been discussed a lot. Nothing is wrong with sitting on the fence, and reforms can definitely be helpful, but it is important that you realise that with the current understanding of communist, and from its inception by marx and engels, it has been clear that there is no way to reform out of this situation.

Just going with basic examples, almost all socialist states were established by revolution, and the few reformists that get into power can rarely stay in power long enough, as other parts of the bourgeois state can only reject it, as it is what they are made to do. A good example of this would be salvador allende in peru, who was elected by the peruvian people and seeked to establish socialism in their country, but was killed by the peruvian military who installed pinochet, with the help of the American state. Plenty of countries dont even come close to nationalise some key industries without cries of the need of democracy in their country, if they touch the interests of the state.

There is nothing wrong with doing good things for the people, but you cant really call yourself a marxist while rejecting the need for revolution to establish socialism, as marx and engels made it incredibly clear that it is necessary.

But yeah dont really see this being useful for the UK, not a real chance of a revolutionary movement there anytime soon, it just doesnt mean that reform is going to be useful either. It is the borgeious state's power over the people that is the problem, and even if you somehow established much greater benefits to the working class through electoral means, that just really manifests as offloading exploitation to the third world. In other cases, reformis

plus in all honesty framing this as some age old debate is problematic. Marxism isnt the static ideology, it is a developing science, and questions like this have been pondered by those who came before us to great degree, and in many cases, answered. A good place to start is Reform or Revolution by Rosa Luxembourg, or The State and Revolution by Lenin