The Russian population, specifically the peasantry, was always behind their European counterparts. While Europe was already industrialized, the Russian state was extremely behind, trying to modernize (e.g. the abandonment of serfdom in the 1860s). I believe this contradiction fed into a divide between the developing bourgeoisie in Russia and the European bourgeoisie.
Even when the Russian bourgeoisie was developing, it was still behind, with the new class being forced to be subordinate to the autocracy, with all bourgeois revolutions failing in Russia (like the failed liberal coup in the 1820s and the 1840s). As a result, the autocracy and the Tsar were opposed to the development of both the European bourgeoisie, and Russian, from the very start; this is why Russia helped crush the 1848 revolutions.
Anti-Westernism didn’t start with Russian Marxism either, but Russian Marxism fed into it. This is why Leninism rejected its European counterparts (council communism, Luxemburgism, democratic socialism). This even goes to the split between the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks, with what I assume the Mensheviks were seen as Western for their more liberal-type reforms, or western-type marxism.
I think this is why there continues to be a ideological rejection of the West: the previous industrial contradiction caused it.
BUT, I do think after Lenin's industrial reforms, and the modern day, the contradiction between the West and Russia decreased, but as of recent it has evolved into more of a inter-imperial conflict, with Ukraine being the smaller part of a much more larger conflict.
Russia was ahead of much of Europe in industrialization. But you aren't counting Hungary or Spain or wherever as part of Europe are you? Just saying Ruzzia was less industrialized than Britain and Germany…yeah no shit everyone was. Typical anti-Ruzzian white nationalist.