¹ The interesting research note by Marsh, Robert M. and Parish, William L., “Modernization and Communism: A Re-Test of Lipset's Hypotheses,” American Sociological Review, 30 (December, 1965), 934–942 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, establishes that Communist party strength is not inversely related to economic development, as had been suggested by Lipset, Seymour Martin, Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1960).Google Scholar Whereas Marsh and Parish attempt a critical evaluation of existing theoretical propositions, we are attempting to utilize evidence for the purpose of hypothesis testing.

² This interpretation of Communism rests on the analysis of one of the present authors, Kautsky, John H., “An Essay in the Politics of Development,” in Kautsky, (ed.), Political Change in Underdeveloped Countries: Nationalism and Communism (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1962).Google Scholar

³ The concept of social mobilization is developed by Deutsch, Karl W., “Social Mobilization and Political Development,” this Review, 55 (September, 1961), 493–514.Google Scholar

⁴ Data on estimated membership of Communist parties and on Communist party percentage of total votes cast in national elections appear in U. S. Department of State, Bureau of Intelligence and Research, World Strength of the Communist Party Organizations (January 1965). See pp. 1–5 of this report for a discussion of the reliability of the data. It goes without saying that Communist party membership figures are likely, for most parties, to be neither precise nor reliable. The State Department report itself states (p. 4): “The reader is reminded … that although the best usable sources have been consulted, communist membership figures are very difficult to obtain and are not subject to verification.” in deed, in the case of illegal Communist parties and especially of “fronts,” “crypto-Communist” and divided parties, it may even be difficult to define “the” Communist party. We are, nevertheless using the State Department's 1965 estimates as the best membership figures available and feel that, for our purposes, they are adequate. Examination of the 1966 report, which became available only after our analysis was completed, indicates relatively little change in State Department estimates of world Communist party membership. Membership figures for the Communist Party of the United States, which are not given by the State Department, were obtained from The New York Times, June 22, 1966, Section 3, p. 1.

⁵ Banks, Arthus S. and Textor, Robert B., A Cross-Polity Survey (Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press, 1963).Google Scholar

⁶ The contingency coefficient is appropriate for tests of association for nominal and ordinal categories and non-linear relationships.

⁷ Our typology of Communist parties is not dissimilar from that developed by Almond, as expanded by Burks. Almond, Gabriel A., The Appeals of Communism (Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press, 1954)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, distinguished between the sectarian or deviational parties of the advanced Western industrial countries and the mass proletarian parties of France and Italy. Burks, R. V., The Dynamics of Communism in Eastern Europe (Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press, 1961)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, adds a third category of national and anti-Western Communist parties to be found in underdeveloped countries, including those of Eastern Europe.

⁸ Cf. North, Robert C., Kuomintang and Chinese Communist Elites (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1952).Google Scholar

⁹ For evidence, see Kautsky, John H., “Soviet Policy in the Underdeveloped Countries,” in Kautsky, , Communism and the Politics of Development: Persistent Myths and Changing Behavior (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1968), and works cited there.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Agriculture is not necessarily insignificant in these countries, but their peasants—now more accurately described as farmers—are thoroughly integrated into the industrial system with respect both to what they produce and what they consume.

¹¹ On the relationship between labor radicalism and social isolation, see S. M. Lipset, op. cit., pp. 232–236, 248–252.

¹² Skilling, H. Gordon, “Soviet and Communist Politics: A Comparative Approach,” The Journal of Politics, 22 (May, 1960), 300–313 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; an unpublished address by Gabriel A. Almond to the Conference on Soviet and Communist Studies at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, September 10, 1964; Skilling, H. Gordon, “Soviet and American Politics: The Dialectic of Opposites,” Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, 31 (May, 1965), 273–280 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Skilling, H. Gordon, “Interest Groups and Communist Politics,” World Politics, 18 (April, 1966), 435–451 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tucker, Robert C., “On the Comparative Study of Communism,” World Politics, 19 (January, 1967), 242–257 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Meyer, Alfred G., “The Comparative Study of Communist Political Systems,” Slavic Review, 26 (March, 1967), 3–12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; John H. Kautsky, “Communism and the Comparative Study of Development,” ibid., pp. 13–17.

¹³ For example, Seton-Watson, Hugh, “Twentieth Century Revolutions,” The Political Quarterly, 22 (July–September, 1951), 251–265 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and the same author's Neither War Nor Peace (New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1960); Daniels, Robert C., The Nature of Communism (New York: Random House, 1962)Google Scholar; Laue, Theodore von, Why Lenin? Why Stalin? A Reappraisal of the Russian Revolution, 1900–1930 (Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1964).Google Scholar

¹⁴ For an attempt by one of the present authors, see Kautsky, “An Essay in the Politics of Development,” op. cit. and Communism and the Politics of Development. Communist and nationalist single-party systems in underdeveloped countries are, along with Fascist ones, compared as “three species of a single political genus” by Tucker, Robert C., “Towards a Comparative Politics of Movement-Regimes,” this Review, 55 (June, 1961), 281–289.Google Scholar

¹⁵ For example, Kerr, Clark, Dunlap, John T., Harbison, Frederick H. and Myers, Charles, Industrialism and Industrial Man: The Problems of Labor and Management in Economic Growth (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1960).Google Scholar

¹⁶ Especially Inkeles, Alex and Bauer, Raymond A., The Soviet Citizen: Daily Life in a Totalitarian Society (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1959).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁷ Brzezinski, Zbigniew K. and Huntington, Samuel P., Political Power: USA/USSR (New York: Viking Press, 1964).Google Scholar

¹⁸ Source: U. S. Department of State, op. cit.

¹⁹ Calculated from working-age (15–64) population figures obtained from United Nations Statistical Yearbook (New York: United Nations Statistical Office, 1963).

²⁰ The economic development measures are taken from Banks and Textor, op. cit., where explanations of the measures are provided.