in the world; nor must we infer that the less developed capitalism is in any country, the more “revolutionary” will be that country and the nearer to communism. The logical consequence of such a view would be that the complete realisation of socialism would first occur in China, Persia, Turkey, and other countries where practically no proletariat has as yet come into existence. Were this the ease, the teaching of Marx would be completely falsified.
Anyone who reasons thus, is confusing two things: on the one hand, the beginning of the revolution; on the other hand, its character, its degree of thoroughness. The revolution began earlier in Russia owing to the immaturity and weakness of capitalist development in that country. But precisely because of that immaturity and weakness, precisely because Russia is a backward country where the proletariat is in a minority, where there is a large number of petty traders, and so on, it is difficult for us to organise an integral communist economy. In England the revolution will come later. But there the proletariat, after its victory, will organise communism more swiftly. In Britain the proletariat constitutes a very large majority of the population; the workers are accustomed to collective labour; production is highly centralised. That is why the revolution will come later in England, but why, when it comes, it will be more highly developed, more far-reaching than ours.
Many persons have supposed that the ferocious character of our civil war is due to the backwardness of our country, or to some peculiar “Asiatic” traits. The opponents of revolution in western Europe are in the habit of saying that “Asiatic socialism” flourishes in Russia, and that in “civilised” lands a revolutionary change will be effected without atrocities. Obviously this is all nonsense. Where capitalist development is far advanced, the resistance of the bourgeoisie will be more stubborn. The intelligentsia (the professional classes, the technicians, the managing engineers, the army officers, etc.) are more strongly solidarised with capital, and are for that reason