We have seen the symptoms of Bolshevik failure; I come now to the
question of its profounder causes.
Everything that is worst in Russia we found traceable to the collapse
of industry. Why has industry collapsed so utterly? And would it
collapse equally if a Communist revolution were to occur in a Western
country?
Russian industry was never highly developed, and depended always upon
outside aid for much of its plant. The hostility of the world, as
embodied in the blockade, left Russia powerless to replace the
machinery and locomotives worn out during the war. The need of
self-defence compelled the Bolsheviks to send their best workmen to
the front, because they were the most reliable Communists, and the
loss of them rendered their factories even more inefficient than they
were under Kerensky. In this respect, and in the laziness and
incapacity of the Russian workman, the Bolsheviks have had to face
special difficulties which would be less in other countries. On the
other hand, they have had special advantages in the fact that Russia
is self-supporting in the matter of food; no other country could have
endured the collapse of industry so long, and no other Great Power
except the United States could have survived years of blockade.
The hostility of the world was in no way a surprise to those who made
the October revolution; it was in accordance with their general
theory, and its consequences should have been taken into account in
making the revolution.
Pages:
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149