8 March 1881 Dear Citizen, A nervous complaint which has periodically affected me for the last ten years has prevented me from answering your letter of 16 February [ which you did the honour of sending me]. I regret that I am unable to give you a concise account for publication [of the problems] of the question which [you kindly] you did me the honour of asking. Two months ago, I already promised a text on the same subject to the St. Petersburg committee. Still, I hope that a few lines will suffice to leave you in no doubt [about the conclusions that have been] about the way in which my so-called theory has been misunderstood. (1) The analysis in Capital therefore provides [ nothing] no reasons that might be used either for or against the vitality of the Russian commune. [My personal opinion concerning the Russian commune, which I have studied for many years in the original sources, is as follows.] [After studying (for many years) the Russian commune in the original sources for.] [In order to have a definitive view on the possible destinies of the Russian commune, one must have more than vague historical analogies. One must study it.] [I have studied it for many.] [I have made a study of it.] [My persona! opinion on the possible fate of the Russian commune.] The special studies I have made of it, including a search for original source-material, have [led me to the conclusion] convinced me that the commune is the natural [starting-point] fulcrum for social regeneration in Russia [for the regeneration of Russian society]. But [the first step must, of course, be to place it in conditions ... ] in order that it might function as such, the harmful influences assailing it on all sides must first be eliminated, and it must then be assured the conditions for spontaneous development.
Marx-Zasulich Correspondence February/March 1881