THE "NEW ORDER"
291
outcome of the previous process of capitalistic competition.
It
is
thus not possible to oppose fascism without opposing capitalism
during all its developmental stages. That not all capitalist nations
reach their fascist "maturity" simultaneously is explained by the
simple fact that their development did not start at the same time
and under identical conditions. There is, however, an apparent
contradiction here; for if fascism must be regarded as the direct
outcome of the previous capitalist development it should appear
first in the oldest and most advanced nations. But this is not the
case. Russia, in which we find the most complete totalitarian sys·
tern was one of the most backward nations, as was Italy which
experienced the first "fascist revolution. " Germany was a com·
paratively new and poor capitalist nation and so were Japan,
Turkey, Mexico.
We may recall here that Marx together with the liberal econ–
omists thought that "the more developed nation only shows to the
less developed the image of its own future.m History has mean–
while shown that the opposite is equally true. Whereas Marx,
from his point of view, was inclined to
"favor the free trade system, because it breaks old national–
ities and carries antagonism of proletariat and bourgeoisie to
the uttermost point and thus hastens the social revolution,
while the protective system is conservative",
2
present-day proponents of "national economy," as opposed to
modern "free-traders," prove that they can "destroy old national–
ities" more effectively even than can the "free play" of capitalistic
forces. They have actually succeeded in carrying the "antagonism
between proletariat and bourgeoisie to the uttermost point." And
as far as hastening the revolution is concerned, both systems have
been able equally to prevent its actual occurrence.
The specific form in which surplus labor was taken from
the producers was similar in both the
laissez faire
and the protec–
tive systems. Similar, also, for all capitalist nations were the
social and economic consequences which stemmed from this ex–
ploitative relationship. Outside of this relationship, however,
there were great variations and gradations in the different national
economies which allowed for
a
ifferent political structures. That
'Capital.
Vol. I;
p.
13.
'Free Trade. An Address Delivered be/ore
the
Democratic Association of Brus&«U.
1848;
p.
43.
