ends to place the
preponderance of force on the side of the constitution, and thus to
promote order and stable government. Other reasons could be found, but
I think these are the chief. In Russia self-government has
disappeared, except within the Communist Party. If it is not to
disappear elsewhere during a Communist revolution, it is very
desirable that there should exist already important industries
competently administered by the workers themselves.

The Bolshevik philosophy is promoted very largely by despair of more
gradual methods. But this despair is a mark of impatience, and is not
really warranted by the facts. It is by no means impossible, in the
near future, to secure self-government in British railways and mines
by constitutional means. This is not the sort of measure which would
bring into operation an American blockade or a civil war or any of the
other catastrophic dangers that are to be feared from a full-fledged
Communist revolution in the present international situation.
Self-government in industry is feasible, and would be a great step
towards Communism. It would both afford many of the advantages of
Communism and also make the transition far easier without a technical
break-down of production.

There is another defect in the methods advocated by the Third
International. The sort of revolution which is recommended is never
practically feasible except in a time of national misfortune; in fact,
defeat in war seems to be an indispensable condition. Consequently, by
this method, Communism will only be inaugurated where the conditions
of life are difficult, where demoralization and disorganization make
success almost impossible, and where men are in a mood of fierce
despair very inimical to industrial construction. If Communism is to
have a fair chance, it must be inaugurated in a prosperous country.
But a prosperous country will not be readily moved by the arguments of
hatred and universal upheaval which are employed by the Third
International. It is necessary, in appealing to a prosperous country,
to lay stress on hope rather than despair, and to show how the
transition can be effected without a calamitous loss of prosperity.
All this requires less violence and subversiveness, more patience and
constructive propaganda, less appeal to the armed might of a
determined minority.

The attitude of uncompromising heroism is attractive, and appeals
especially to the dramatic instinct. But the purpose of the