It's not really true because she very much wasn't closer to the Mensheviks, and she did want a dictatorship of the proletariat, although she did argue for a multi-party state etc.
I dont think she wanted multi party stuff. She was more or less in line with lenin as far as that and free speech stuff after the revolution, he was for somewhat dfferent internal party structure tho in her own party she did have her big auth momments
She did. It was one of her points of disagreement with Lenin:
Without general elections, without unrestricted freedom of press and assembly, without a free struggle of opinion, life dies out in every public institution, becomes a mere semblance of life, in which only the bureaucracy remains as the active element. Public life gradually falls asleep, a few dozen party leaders of inexhaustible energy and boundless experience direct and rule. Among them, in reality only a dozen outstanding heads do the leading and an elite of the working class is invited from time to time to meetings where they are to applaud the speeches of the leaders, and to approve proposed resolutions unanimously – at bottom, then, a clique affair – a dictatorship, to be sure, not the dictatorship of the proletariat but only the dictatorship of a handful of politicians, that is a dictatorship in the bourgeois sense, in the sense of the rule of the Jacobins (the postponement of the Soviet Congress from three-month periods to six-month periods!) Yes, we can go even further: such conditions must inevitably cause a brutalization of public life: attempted assassinations, shooting of hostages, etc.
[...]
Freedom only for the supporters of the government, only for the members of one party – however numerous they may be – is no freedom at all. Freedom is always and exclusively freedom for the one who thinks differently. Not because of any fanatical concept of "justice" but because all that is instructive, wholesome and purifying in political freedom depends on this essential characteristic, and its effectiveness vanishes when "freedom" becomes a special privilege.
[...]
But socialist democracy is not something which begins only in the promised land after the foundations of socialist economy are created; it does not come as some sort of Christmas present for the worthy people who, in the interim, have loyally supported a handful of socialist dictators. Socialist democracy begins simultaneously with the beginnings of the destruction of class rule and of the construction of socialism.
They did not share the same opinions on freedom of speech, free elections etc.
It's not really true because she very much wasn't closer to the Mensheviks, and she did want a dictatorship of the proletariat, although she did argue for a multi-party state etc.
I dont think she wanted multi party stuff. She was more or less in line with lenin as far as that and free speech stuff after the revolution, he was for somewhat dfferent internal party structure tho in her own party she did have her big auth momments
She did. It was one of her points of disagreement with Lenin:
They did not share the same opinions on freedom of speech, free elections etc.
I haven't read Luxembourg yet, but I thought her (and all the SPD) were in line with Kautsky. Is that not correct?
Not at all. Rosa broke off from the SPD. The SPD had the Freikorps kill her.