Why? Because the social-revolutionary Menshevist power was an imperialist power, while the future revolutionary power in. China must be an anti-imperialist power. This is the fundamental difference. The MacDonald government was actually a "labor" power but it was at the same time imperialist, for it was based on the maintenance of England's imperialist power, for instance in India and Egypt. As compared with the MacDonald government, the future revolutionary power in China will have the advantage that it will be an anti-imperialist power. What is important is not the bourgeois-democratic character of the Canton government which forms the nucleus of the future pan-Chinese revolutionary power; the most important thing is that this power is an anti-imperialist power and can be nothing else, that every advance of this power is a blow aimed at world-imperialism and is therefore a stroke in favor of the revolutionary world movement. Lenin was right when he said that, if in former times, before the beginning of the epoch of the world revolution, national movements for freedom were part of the general democratic movement, now, after the victory of the Soviet revolution in Russia, and since the beginning of the epoch of world revolution, national movements for freedom are part of the proletarian world revolution.
This peculiarity was not taken into consideration by Comrade Mif.
I believe that the future revolutionary power in China will, in its character, resemble the power which was spoken of in our country in 1905, i. e., a dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry, but with the distinguishing feature that it will be predominantly an anti-imperialist power. It will be a power of transition to a non-capitalist, or, to be more exact, to a socialist development in China.
This is the direction in which the revolution in China is likely to develop. This path of development which the revolution will follow, will be facilitated by three
10
