No More Learning

The Historical Background 251
1. From the American Revolution to the
Russian 251
2. From November, 1917, through World
War II 255
3. American Names on Soviet Maps 273
Chapter VIII. Soviet Foreign Policy 282
1. The Basic Principles 282
2. Does Soviet Russia Wage Aggression? 306
3. Incitements to War against the U. S. S. R. 336
Chapter IX. Co-Existence or Co-Destruction? 355
1. The Madness of a Third World War 355
2. Effects of American Foreign Policy 363
3. Recent Soviet Efforts towards World Peace 387
Chapter X. Final Reflections 412
Notes 417
Index 425
CHARTS
Government Structure of the U. S. S. R. 64
Government Structure of a Union Republic 65
xviii
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? PART I
SOVIET DOMESTIC POLICY AND
ACHIEVEMENTS
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? ? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? CHAPTER I ON EVALUATING SOVIET RUSSIA
1. Introductory
In March of 1951 the Union of Soviet Socialist Re-
publics was one-third of a century old. In the never-
ending debate that has gone on about Soviet Russia for
more than three decades, the unbending enemies of the
U. S. S. R. , the uncritical sympathizers, and those who like
myself stand somewhere in the middle all agree on at
least one point: that the subject of discussion is of por-
tentous significance for the present and future of all
men, all nations, all peoples. It may well be, as stated by
Father Edmund A. Walsh, an anti-Soviet writer of long
standing, that the establishment of the Soviet Republic
was the most important political event since the fall of
the Roman Empire. Great revolutions and sweeping
changes in any major country have invariably resulted
in widespread, heated controversy in other lands. And
they have aroused such hostility abroad that usually seri-
ous attempts have been made on the part of foreign gov-
ernments to undermine or overthrow the revolutionary
forces and reverse the course of history. It was so at the
time of the American Revolution of 1776 and the French
Revolution of 1789. We need not be surprised that the
Russian Revolution of 1917 has given rise to similar
reactions.
In the case of the Russian Revolution, however, the
3
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIYILIZATIOH
reactions have been even more violent and far-reaching.
This has been due to the fact that the program of the
Soviets was itself more far-reaching than that associated
with any other political overturn in history. The Soviet
aim was not merely a redistribution of property in the
interests of this class or that, but the total abolition of
private property in the main means of production and
distribution, and the establishment on that basis of a
planned socialist economy and a classless society.
The possibility of the creation of a socialist society in
a huge and populous country, nearly three times the size
of continental United States and containing a vast wealth
of natural resources, aroused ardent hopes and fanatical
fears from one end of the earth to the other. These hopes
and fears were augmented by the fact that Lenin and his
fellow-Communists held world socialism as their ultimate
ideal; that the Soviet Union, stretching over large por-
tions of both Europe and Asia, was admirably located
for extending its international influence; and that radi-
cal working class movements of one sort or another were
already well under way in a number of nations besides
the U. S. S. R. There can be no doubt that whereas the
American and French Revolutions almost exclusively
affected the Western World, the Russian Revolution has
had just as profound an impact upon the East as upon
the West.
Year after year the argument about Soviet Russia con-
tinued, some claiming that the first socialist state in
history was a disastrous failure, others that it was an
overwhelming success. Then came the Second World
War and the Nazi invasion of the U. S. S. R. in 1941.
America and Britain rendered invaluable aid to the
Soviet Union; but its efficient handling of that aid, its
4
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATIHG SOVIET RUSSIA
intrepid resistance to Hitler's attack and its eventual
counter-offensive all the way to Berlin were convincing
proof that here was a nation of remarkable strength,
capacity and morale. The Soviet Republic's defeat of the
Nazis and its contribution to the over-all victory of the
United Nations mightily increased its influence and
power in the world.
Along its western frontier the border states of Poland,
Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Romania became firm
allies of the Soviet Union and have gone far in develop-
ing socialist systems of their own. In the Far East the
Chinese Communists ousted the Nationalist regime of
Chiang Kai-shek, instituted a People's Republic friendly
to the U. S. S. R. and started China along the path to
socialism. In international affairs, with the defeat and
decline of Germany and Japan, the role of Soviet Russia
has greatly increased. Today as the socialist giant of the
world it stands on a par with the capitalist giant, America,
in power and prestige. Upon the relations between the
Soviet Union, leader of the Communist bloc, and the
United States, leader of the anti-Communist bloc, pri-
marily depend whether we shall see an enduring peace
under the aegis of the United Nations or a new global
war even more devastating than the last.
Because, then, of the acknowledged world importance
of Soviet Russia today, a sound understanding of both
its domestic and foreign policies, is a necessity for all
informed and educated persons in this era. There is an
enormous diversity of opinion concerning what is going
on in the Soviet Union and what its intentions are in the
sphere of international relations. Unfortunately igno-
rance and prejudice play an unusually large part in atti-
tudes toward the U. S. S. R. Yet regarding no subject that
5
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATIOH
confronts the minds of men is objectivity more essential.
To be misinformed about the Soviet Union, to mis-
judge its purposes and achievements, can lead foreign
states and peoples to make crucial mistakes in national
policies. Americans in particular, because relations be-
tween the U. S. Government and that of Soviet Russia
have deteriorated to the danger point since the end of
the Second World War, have a responsibility to acquaint
themselves with the facts about the U. S. S. R. Since
American foreign policy so seriously affects the entire
future of the United States and the world, and since at
present that foreign policy is so largely determined by
what Americans think of Russia, it is imperative for us
to seek out the truth about the Soviet Union.
2. Much Reliable Information Is Available
Despite all reports to the contrary, during the thirty-
five years since the Soviet Republic came into existence
there has been ample opportunity for Americans to learn
about what is going on in the U. S. S. R. and to obtain
reliable information about that country and its people.
True enough, there have been difficulties in the way of
getting all the data we should like about the Soviet Union
-- difficulties caused by both the American and Soviet
Governments. Yet on the whole and over the years a
veritable flood of facts has come through from Soviet
Russia on the basis of which foreigners have been able to
make valid judgments concerning the Soviet experiment
in economic, political and social organization. These
facts have appeared in innumerable newspaper dis-
patches, magazine articles and books published in English
in the United States.
While a knowledge of the Russian language is, of
6
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATING SOVIET RUSSIA
course, a valuable asset for the understanding of Soviet
affairs, it is neither a necessary nor a sufficient foundation
for such understanding. The White Russian Emigres
and exiles who were born and brought up in Tsarist
Russia, and who speak the language perfectly, are hardly
to be counted on as impartial observers of the Soviet
scene. There are plenty of Britishers who speak English
with the best Oxford accent whom we should not trust
to give an objective account of political and economic
affairs under a Labor Government. More important
than a knowledge of Russian for the understanding of
the Soviet Union is a basic comprehension of social and
economic problems in the contemporary world, an earn-
est attempt to be objective, and a discriminating choice
of authorities on the U. S. S. R.
Whether we are making a study of Russia or England,
Germany or France or ancient Greece, the principle is
the same. In the nature of the case a large part of the
knowledge of every informed man must be vicarious; he
cannot possibly acquire at first-hand all the facts he
needs for comprehending the past and for functioning
properly in our complex society of the present. In the
realm of international relations the twentieth-century
American would be utterly lost if, in lieu of his own
first-hand observation, he could not depend to a consider-
able degree on vicarious knowledge stemming from the
reports and opinions of others whom he has learned from
tested experience to consider dependable.
In any case sufficient material of an authentic nature
about the Soviet Union has been translated into English
or written in English to enable the average literate person
in America and other English-speaking nations to keep
informed about Soviet life. To assert, in the phrase orig-
7
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATION
inally coined by Joseph Goebbels and later popularized
by Prime Minister Winston Churchill, that the Russians
have erected an "Iron Curtain" to rule out the exchange
of information with the outside world is extremely mis-
leading. Again and again I have read editorials in
American newspapers lambasting the alleged Iron Cur-
tain, while on a different page in the same edition there
is a detailed story on one aspect or another of Soviet
affairs by some American correspondent in Moscow. And
those who spread the Iron Curtain myth most freely at
the same time dispense all kinds of supposed information
about the Soviet Union, such as that from 15 to 20
million people live in slave labor camps there or that
the Red Army is about to march westward through
Europe to the English Channel. So we see clearly that the
Iron Curtain is an anti-Soviet propaganda slogan, turned
on or off as the situation may require.
It was Mr. Churchill, again, who referred to Soviet
policy as "a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enig-
ma," a quotation printed repeatedly throughout the non-
Soviet world and called upon whenever some commen-
tator is too ignorant to understand the Soviets or too
indolent to try. While Soviet policy is sometimes difficult
to comprehend, I deny that it constitutes a riddle or that
life as a whole in Soviet Russia must remain a mystery
to foreigners. In this modern age knowledge is the ac-
cepted method of dissolving mysteries. Portraying the
U. S. S. R. as a mystery is, like the Iron Curtain stereo-
type, a substitute for real thinking and an excuse for
laziness in seeking out the facts.
On the same level is the claim that the Russians, and
especially Joseph Stalin, are inscrutable Orientals whose
devious ways it is impossible for Westerners to fathom.
8
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? ON EVALUATING SOVIET RUSSIA
To consider Russia and the Russians as a mystery, a
riddle or an Oriental enigma gives the anti-Soviet forces
free reign to describe the Soviet Union as they choose
and to make the most exaggerated charges against it. For
if the truth about the U. S. S. R. is really impossible to
obtain, then one statement about that country is as good
as another and the wildest surmises are permissible.
The shallowness and partisanship of those who prop-
agate on every possible occasion Mr. Churchill's quarter-
truth is revealed in their failure to give the context of
the quotation in his speech of October 1, 1939, comment-
ing on the Soviet occupation of Eastern Poland after
Hitler's decisive defeat of the Polish army. The Soviet
occupation, said Churchill, is "the assertion of the power
of Russia. Russia has pursued a cold policy of self-interest.
We could have wished that the Russian armies should
be standing on their present line as the friends and allies
of Poland instead of as invaders. But that the Russian
armies should stand on this line was clearly necessary for
the safety of Russia against the Nazi menace. . . .
"I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is
a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma; but per-
haps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest.
It cannot be in accordance with the interest or the safety
of Russia that Germany should plant itself upon the
shores of the Black Sea, or that it should overrun the
Balkan States and subjugate the Slavonic peoples of south-
eastern Europe. That would be contrary to the historic
life-interests of Russia. "1
So Churchill himself significantly qualified the half-
sentence which is usually quoted all by itself from his
speech. He did not regard the Soviet march into Eastern
Poland as a riddle in the slightest; to him it was a measure
9
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATION
of justifiable self-protection against Hitler. And although
Churchill did not claim prophetic powers for the future,
he strongly suggested an interpretation of Soviet policy
that took it entirely out of the category of mystery.
Soviet "national interest," evaluated always in socialist
terms and with especial reference to self-defense, is indeed
the foundation-stone of Soviet foreign policy, even
though other factors also play a role. Churchill's realistic
analysis in essence contradicts his briefer, more quotable
rhetoric.
Leaving now the question of Winston Churchill's
prose and its misuse to confuse the international situa-
tion, I wish to state that on both the American and
Soviet sides there have all along existed serious barriers
to the exchange of news and cultural materials. I deplore
the present censorship of foreign newspaper correspond-
ents by the Soviet Government and hope that it will be
removed as time goes on. I also deplore the fact that the
Soviet authorities, evidently responding to the fears and
suspicions engendered by the cold war, have extended
the usage of terms like spy and espionage so broadly as to
hamper legitimate reporting and scholarly inquiry.
The cold war has also been responsible, I believe,
for a growing lack of interest on the part of Soviet author-
ities over the past few years in an exchange of students,
teachers, scientists and artists with the United States. A
number of American universities during this period ex-
tended invitations to Soviet scholars to lecture or teach,
but none of them were accepted and in several cases no
acknowledgment was made. American efforts to have the
Red Army Chorus and a Soviet ballet company perform
in the United States came to nothing. At the same time
the Soviet Government, always hesitant to allow within
10
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATIHG SOVIET RUSSIA
its borders foreigners who have expressed hostility to-
wards the new regime, has made it increasingly difficult
for Americans to obtain visas for travel in the U. S. S. R.
On the other hand, the United States Government
and Congress, in thrall to a blinding anti-Soviet psychosis,
have created their own special barriers to cultural
interchange. During the past few years the U. S. De-
partment of State has repeatedly denied passports to
Americans who dissent from government policies. Also
it is not generally realized that Congress passed a law as
far back as 1918 which forbids the entry of known Com-
munists into America from the U. S. S. R. or elsewhere,
except in cases where the State Department is willing to
make a special ruling granting alien applicants a visa.
A good example of how this law works is to be seen
in the handicaps and hindrances that the American
Government placed in the way of the Soviet and other
foreign delegates wishing to attend the Cultural and
Scientific Conference for World Peace held in New York
City during March, 1949. A number of foreign delegates
planning to come to the Conference had their American
visas canceled at the last minute. The noted Soviet com-
poser, Dmitri Shostakovich, and other delegates from the
Soviet Union and Eastern European countries were
scheduled to make a country-wide tour on behalf of Amer-
ican-Soviet understanding and world peace at the close
of the Conference. This tour the U. S. State Department
made impossible by limiting the visas of the delegates to
the New York affair alone and insisting that they return
home without further appearances in America.
Since September, 1950, when Congress passed, over
President Truman's veto, the Internal Security Act
(McCarran Bill), the situation regarding the admission
11
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATIOH
of foreigners, even temporarily, into the United States
has become much worse. This Act excludes from the
United States all persons who are or ever were members
of a Communist or fascist party anywhere, or who ever
belonged to an organization "affiliated" with such a party
or who ever advocated "the economic, international and
governmental doctrines of world communism. " These
inclusive and vague provisions effectively bar out not
only all Communists and ex-Communists from whatever
land, but all citizens of the Soviet Union (except diplo-
mats and other government representatives), as well as
many individuals from non-Communist countries whose
only crime has been to dissent openly from prevailing
orthodoxies or to join an organization whose aim was
world peace.
In a letter printed in The New York Times on Sep-
tember 23, 1951, Dr. Paul Doty, Associate Professor of
Chemistry at Harvard University, described the baneful
effects of the Internal Security Act on the fall meetings
in New York City of the International Congress of Pure
and Applied Chemistry, the International Union of
Chemistry and the American Chemical Society. Wrote
Professor Doty: "The unexpected absence of a consider-
able number of well-known members of the scientific
community cast a shadow over the proceedings. A num-
ber of scheduled papers could not be presented and often
in discussion the expert in a given field was not there
to comment. Those absent were for the most part scien-
tists who had previously visited this country but who on
this occasion were denied visas due to the sweeping and
indiscriminate regulations of the McCarran Act. "2
If the McCarran Act can so cripple conferences in
one of the less controversial natural sciences, one can
12
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATING SOVIET RUSSIA
easily see how much more seriously it affects meetings
on economics, political science or race relations. In fact,
strict enforcement of the Act means that no Soviet expert
in any subject can now come to America and present his
viewpoint to his fellow-scientists. I agree fully with what
President Truman said in his letter of July 7, 1951, to
Nikolai M. Shvernik, Chairman of the Executive Com-
mittee of the Supreme Soviet: "We shall never be able
to remove suspicion and fear as potential causes of war
until communication is permitted to flow, free and open,
across international boundaries. "3 But certainly the
United States, as well as Soviet Russia, is constantly
violating this ideal.
In other words, there are curtains of considerable
thickness originating on both sides. And from 1917 on
a majority of the American people have had a formi-
dable mental block against possible light from the direc-
tion of the Soviet Union. "Never have so many known
so little about so much" was the telling way one observer
a few years ago summed up American understanding of
Soviet Russia.
Illustrative of the American attitude is an incident
related by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in a speech
about foreign policy in 1944. He told how in 1933 a cer-
tain lady, presumably Mrs. Roosevelt, went on a trip
during which she attended the opening of a schoolhouse.
"And she told me," said the President, "that she had
seen there a map of the world with a great big white
space on it. No name, no information, and the teacher
told her that it was blank, with no name, because the
school board wouldn't let her say anything about that
big blank space. Oh, there were only 180,000,000 to
200,000,000 people in it! It was called Soviet Russia, and
13
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATION
there were a lot of children, and they were told that the
teacher was forbidden by the school board even to put
the name of that blank space on the map. "4
Yet even when Americans have made some attempt
to fill in "that big blank space," they have tended to fill
it with misinformation about the Soviet Union gleaned
from hostile sources. The curious notion has taken hold
in the United States that only those who are basically
anti-Soviet are qualified to write and speak objectively
about the U. S. S. R. This is an absurd idea. In learning
about the Civil War we do not depend primarily on
the memoirs of southern slave-owners who favored seces-
sion; nor in evaluating the principles of democracy do
we rely principally on the opinions of the fascists or others
who despise the democratic way. A deep-seated and over-
powering emotion of hate is not conducive to an object-
ive treatment of any country. And it is to be recalled
that the classic study of democracy in the U. S. A. was
made in The American Commonwealth by James Bryce,
who had an attitude of critical sympathy toward Amer-
ican institutions.
Thus an attitude of critical sympathy toward the
Soviet Union does not disqualify anyone as an objective
observer concerning Soviet affairs, so long as he retains
a hearty respect for the facts. Actually, the temptation
that beckons most persistently for American writers on
the U. S. S. R. is to take an unsympathetic attitude toward
that country and to conform to the prevailing hostility
against it. The pressures against that small minority of
Americans who through the years have remained open-
minded toward the Soviet Union, and who have tried to
tell the unpopular truth about it, have been heavy in-
deed, frequently leading to the loss of jobs, friends and
14
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATING SOVIET RUSSIA
standing in the community. Such persons are unconscion-
ably vilified as subversive and un-American. It would
in many ways be much easier and safer for them to stay
silent or go over to the anti-Soviet camp.
One of the worst aspects of the situation is that people
display such anger and intolerance in discussing Soviet
Russia or American-Soviet relations. Temperatures on
both sides in the dispute are likely to rise so high that the
participants are soon screaming at each other and accus-
ing those who differ with them of being utter scoundrels
and inveterate liars. I decry this mode of argument, for
it violates the method of reason and closes the gates to
a rational settlement of the issues involved. I hope I
will not appear self-righteous if I say frankly that while
friends and acquaintances have frequently excommun-
icated me for my position in regard to the Soviet Union,
I have never myself broken with anyone because he dis-
agreed with me about the U. S. S. R. I habitually move in
so many different political circles that keeping cool on
hot issues is for me a necessity of life.
Aside from the personal pressures that affect him, it
is very difficult for the average American to withstand
the terrific barrage of anti-Soviet propaganda that assails
his mind daily in the press and on the radio and televi-
sion. This propaganda makes constant use of what has
aptly been described as "the multiple untruth," an un-
truth which "is composed of so many parts that anyone
wishing to set the record straight will discover that it is
utterly impossible to keep all the elements of the false-
hood in mind at the same time. Anyone making the
attempt may seize upon a few selected statements and
show them to be false, but doing this may leave the im-
pression that only the statements selected are false and
15
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATION
the rest true. An even greater advantage of the 'multiple
untruth' is that statements shown to be false can still be
repeated over and over again with impunity, because no
one will remember which statements have been dis-
proved and which ones haven't. "5
Even when American newspapers print factual news
about the U. S. S. R. , they are prone to twist it against
the Russians in the lead sentences or to headline it in a
provocative or misleading way. Honest reporters have a
difficult time with their editors. Thus, in telling of his
trip to the Far East in 1946, the late Richard E. Lauter-
bach, noted correspondent for Time and Life, wrote this
revealing comment: "It's tough to make page one. . . .
Home-office cables reiterate that U. S. versus Russia stories
make the headlines. It would be super-human of the men
assigned to the Orient if they didn't dig around for a
good Russian-American squabble or an angle that slam-
med the Soviets. "6
Mr. George Seldes, well-known author and editor,
reported in 1949 a similar situation in Yugoslavia, at
that time still allied with the Soviet Union. An assistant
in the Belgrade Bureau of the Associated Press told him:
"We can't write the news straight from Yugoslavia. We
have to wrap it up. " Citing the trial of Mikhailovich,
the former Yugoslav patriot who finally turned traitor,
Mr. Seldes' informant stated: "Not one foreign corres-
pondent at the trial doubted that Mikhailovich was guilty
of treason. In fact, his confession and admissions were
enough to hang him. But we did not report the news that
way. . . . Here at the A. P. the cables arrived daily saying
that the newspapers taking the service were protesting
that we 'favored' the government, that we were not fair
to Mikhailovich, and we were told to change the style of
16
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATIHG SOVIET RUSSIA
our cables. In other words, we were told to slant the news
in favor of Mikhailovich instead of reporting the facts
as they were. . . . So the head of the bureau said, 'Wrap
it up, write it so it gets by the papers which buy the service
and which want crooked news. ' So we wrapped it up. "7
In addition to such pressures on newspaper men as de-
scribed by Mr. Seldes, there are those stemming from the
U. S. State Department. When Mr. Wilfred May, editor
of the Commercial and Financial Chronicle, reported over
the radio in April, 1952, his impressions of the Interna-
tional Economic Conference at Moscow, the announce-
ment was made before his broadcast that it had been
cleared by the State Department. This points up the fact
that American correspondents abroad, depending to a
large extent on U. S. embassies for both valuable social
contacts and news tips, are likely to see to it that what
they write is not offensive to the State Department and its
diplomatic representatives. This consideration has loomed
larger and larger in recent years because of the Passport
Division's tendency to refuse or revoke the passports of
Americans who are critical of U. S. foreign policy. If many
American foreign correspondents become dependable pro-
pagandists for their country's foreign policy, that fits in
well with Secretary of State Dean Acheson's encourage-
ment of what he has described as "total diplomacy.