Possible Problem with Cleavers Analysis of Frankfurt:
Marcuse apparently evolved from the position he held in One dimensional man.
https://marxandphilosophy.org.uk/reviews/8113_the-frankfurt-school-postmodernism-and-the-politics-of-the-pseudo-left-review-by-javier-sethness/
Eric commits the common fallacy of reducing “the Frankfurt School” to One-Dimensional Man. Please reread my words: ‘by the end of the same decade, he had jettisoned such pessimism. In An Essay on Liberation (1969), Marcuse clarifies his belief that the proletariat retains its revolutionary role, amidst the “historical power of the general strike and the factory occupation, of the red flag and the International” (Marcuse 1969, 51-3, 69).’
Cleaver backs up the view of Marcuse as being pessimist on page 56 using Marcuse's later work Counter Revolution and revolt which came out in 1972. One dimensional man came out in 1964 so it does not seem like he evolved.
But in the comment section from above I found this:
I am reading the 1974 Paris Vincennes Lectures. These do indeed show a very different side to Marcuse. “Which are today the social and historical agents of radical change in the United States ? First among the working class… I never said that the working class can be replaced by any other class in the transition from capitalism to socialism.”...In fact the Vincennes Lectures make it seem that class struggle is more than just one current but is THE absolutely essential current (into which the other currents must flow in order to be historically effective). So this is very interesting indeed. It’s very important that these Vincennes Lectures become better known.