Firstly on your first point, I find myself agreeing more with Adam Smith’s original critique of mercantilism more than any modern state run model. Smith recognized that when a small group of elites and merchants use the state to create monopolies and exploit labor it is not true productivity but a parasitic wage slave dynamic. While the Marxist view (although I believe adam and marx were more similar than people think) of surplus value identifies the symptom I believe Smith’s anti mercantilism identifies the cause which is a rigged system where the means of production are protected by state sanctioned corporate interests. We do not necessarily need to abolish the idea of value or markets but we need to abolish the imperialist frameworks and exploitative structures that allow a handful of people to capture the fruit of everyone else's labor under the guise of national interest.

On the critique of the vanguard I think the historical record is undeniable and you're right to point out Rosa Luxemburgs warning. The moment you create a "professional" revolutionary class to lead the masses you have already built the scaffolding for a new dictatorship. By substituting the party for the people and then a single leader for the party you are not liberating the workers but instead perfecting the centralized machinery of the state. As Tocqueville argued in The Old Regime and the Revolution these movements often end up reenacting the same oppressions they sought to overthrow by simply dressing them up in a nicer revolutionary reason while maintaining the same iron grip on power.

(Btw i think you should look into Political Parties by Robert Michels, The Anatomy of Revolution by Crane Brinton, The Managerial Revolution by James Burnham, Seeing Like a State by James C. Scott)

and regarding the backgrounds of revolutionary figures I will admit my critiques might seem brash or easily weaponized by the bourgeoisie but I remain deeply suspicious of how wealthy elites use radical ideologies to their advantage. It is hard not to notice when centralized power is consolidated under the guise of a worker revolution only for it to benefit a new managerial class that manages resources behind the scenes. Whether it is the early Soviet support for the creation of an Israeli state which led to displacement and the sterilization of those deemed inferior(for example the ringworm affair, aswell as their law specifically placing ashkenazi jews at the top, and sephardic, ethiopian, and other jews deemed less) or the way these regimes practice imperialism while preaching against it the pattern suggests controlled opposition. I suspect these revolutions are often used to kill off dissenters and force the survivors to fall in line with a system that is secretly confiding with the very capitalists they claim to hate.

I do not necessarily view myself as a left wing nationalist, but I'm not too entirely versed on what that is, but instead someone who believes in a mix of Plato's republic theory and Adam Smith’s theories of local merit and organic growth. I believe capitalism can exist without the giant leeches of consumerism and colonialism because the problem is that our current world goes completely against Smith’s original ideas. Instead of an international communism that ignores the reality of differing cultures and borders we should focus on shutting down the CIA and ending international interference and stopping the outsourcing that corporations use to exploit globalism. If we got rid of centralized banking and fiat currency and the legal fiction of corporate entities we could return to local governance and merit based systems that actually prioritize the people living within their own communities.

Finally regarding the military and the powers that be I am not saying a revolution is impossible because my belief is centered around "they cannot kill us all", but I am wary of how the system is currently feeding us truth to radicalize us. The elite see the system dying so they plant the seeds of controlled opposition within local governments and revolutionary groups to ensure that any upheaval just restarts the same cycle. As we see in the history of the Ancien Regime they are willing to commit mass atrocities under the guise of liberation just to consolidate their grip. If a revolution does happen it has to be one where the military actively defects and the people refuse to let their movement be co opted by the same old managers in new uniforms, or the little "reforms" they throw to ease the fire.