Date: 1906
Source: ru:LS/v30

Page: 309

STATISTICS and Sociology

the states in question should not be included at all. Of the remaining 12 states,
seven are characterized by a virtually homogeneous national composition: in Italy,
the Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden, and Norway, 99% of each country’s population
belongs to a single national group; in Spain and Denmark, this figure stands at 96%. Next come three states that are almost entirely homogeneous in terms of national composition: France, England, and Germany.
In France, only 1.3% of the population consists of Italians—territories annexed by Napoleon III in blatant violation of the local populace’s will and through outright electoral fraud.
In England, Ireland is the territory that was annexed; its population of roughly 4 million accounts for less than one-tenth of the nation’s total (46.8 million). In Germany, out of a total population of 64.9 million, there exists a nationally alien element—indeed, one that is, in nearly every respect, as thoroughly subjected to national oppression as the Irish are in England. Among these are the Poles (5.47%), the Danes (0.95%), and the Alsatians–Lorrainians (1.87 million)—though among the latter, a certain segment—though the precise extent remains uncertain—undoubtedly gravitates toward Germany not only in terms of language but also in matters of economic interest and cultural affinity. Taken together, roughly 5 million people within Germany belong to nations that are foreign, deprived of full rights, and even subjected to systematic oppression.
Only two small states in Western Europe exhibit a mixed national composition: Switzerland, whose population, slightly under four million, is composed of 69% Germans, 21% French, and 8% Italians—and Belgium (with a population of just under 8 million; approximately 53% are likely Flemish, while around 47% are French-speaking). It is important to note, however, that despite the remarkable diversity of national groups within these states, it would be inaccurate to speak of “national oppression” here. According to the constitutions of both countries, all nations enjoy equal rights; in Switzerland, this principle of equality is, in fact, fully realized. In Belgium, while inequality does exist with regard to the Flemings—even though they constitute the majority of the population—the degree of such inequality is negligible when compared, for example, to the plight endured by the Poles in Germany or the Irish in England, not to mention the patterns typically observed in countries outside the group we are considering. For this reason, among others, the term “nation-state,” which gained particular currency thanks to the opportunistic interventions of Austrian writers K. Renner and O. Bauer in the national question, is accurate only in a very limited sense—namely, if, on the one hand, we do not lose sight of the unique historical position held by most states of this type (a topic we will return to later), and on the other hand, we refrain from allowing this term to obscure the fundamental distinction between genuine national equality and national oppression.*

When we bring together the countries we have examined, we arrive at a group of 12 Western European states with a combined population of 242 million. Of these 242 million, only about 1/3 million—roughly 4%—represent oppressed nations (as is the case in England and Germany). If we sum up all segments of the population across these states that do not belong to the dominant national identity, we find roughly 15 million, or 6%. Overall, then, this group of states is characterized by the following features: they are the most advanced capitalist countries, boasting the highest levels of development—both economically and politically. Their cultural standards are likewise among the highest. From a national standpoint, the majority of these states possess a purely homogeneous—or nearly pure—national composition. National inequality, as a distinct political phenomenon, plays an exceedingly minor role. Before us lies the very “nation-state” type so often invoked, yet in most cases overlooked in light of its historically contingent and transitory nature within the broader trajectory of capitalist development in human history.
But we will discuss this in greater detail in due course.
One might ask: Is this state-type confined to the nations of Western Europe? Clearly not. All the key characteristics of this type—economic (the high and especially rapid pace of capitalist development), political (a representative form of government), cultural, and national—are likewise evident in the leading states of the Americas and Asia: in the United States and in Japan. The latter’s national composition has long been established and is utterly homogeneous; more than 99% of its population is Japanese.
In the United States, only 1/7 of the population is African American (alongside mulattos and Native Americans)—and while it is certainly true that these groups can be classified as oppressed nations, the equality secured by the Civil War of 1861–65 and enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic has, in practice, been increasingly circumscribed in the principal areas of Black residence (in the South) and, in many respects, has grown ever more restricted as the United States transitioned from the progressive, pre-monopolist capitalism of the 1860s–1870s to the reactionary, monopolist capitalism of later decades.