Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1956-04-23
Dulles VS.. Dulles

Your editorial, line tlnal
and Real Test" brings to at
tention contrasting diagnoses
of the Soviet scene by the
Dulles brothers. The Secre-
tary of State. John Foster
Dulles, while he has modified
somewhat his original reaction
that the Soviet leaders have
been forced to "revamp their
whole creed from A to e." has
pointed to the promise of
humane developments in Rus
STA. But now his brother, Allen
w. Dulles. director of the
Central Intelligence Agency.
in his speech in Los Angeles
the other day, warns against
optimistic conclusion Jump
ing"
Allen w. Dulles is a COM
paratively well-informed man.
Last June, in a speech at
Columbia University, he noted
that the Soviet leaders were
troubled" ''perplexed," and
probably unharmonious." He
foresaw threats to the MarxiSt-
feminist gospel. Too many
people, both pro-Communist
and anti-Communist, have
talked as if this gospel had its
elimination and personiflca-
ton in Joseph Stain. The
gospel has staying power and
could also be used against
Stain and other Communist
tyrants, as was implied in a
letter of mine in The Star of
June II, 1855. Mr.. Dulles. I
felt, did not enter sufficiently
into the minds of the dew
oteeS of the Marxist-Leninist
gospel. That gospel is not only
threatened; it is also threaten
ing because of the utopian
promises of Marxism that it
exclusively makes for a free
and better life" for the masses.
AS Mr.. Dulles says now, we
may hope for 'basic institu-
tional changes" but there is
not much hope for any change
in the foreseeable future in the
Communist doctrine itself.
Those who think there is
anything new, other than the
necessary adjustment to a new
period and new leaders, have
simply forgotten or not known
the past gyrations in Soviet
policy. At least twice we
seriously miscalculated Soviet
behavior because of our in
adequate familiarity with
Communist ways of thinking.
The Nazi-Soviet pact of August
1889, which was the signal for
war, came as a shock to those
ignorant of the origins of the
Communist and Fascist move
ments, who imagined that
these two could not mix. Soviet
behavior after the war again
caught many unawares be-
cause they naively deluded
themselves into believing that
our material aid in the war
against Hitler would impel the
Soviet government to make
peace with Western "bour-
geois" society. These were
avoidable errors of which
those with a knowledge of the
philosophy which guides the
Communists were not guilty.
Must we now repeat such
errors?
The "cult of the individual"
was never part of Communist
theology. Consequently there is
nothing new in condemning it
now. Before 1929 when COM
plete consolidation of power
into Stains hands became APP
parent, collective leadership"
was repeatedly extolled and
emphasis on great personalities
and "miracle-workers" re-
peatedly condemned. Stain
was out to undermine the
reputation of the more color
full Leon Trotsky. Lenin him.
self, in his "last testament"
had turned against Stain and
called for his removal and re-
placement by one less rude
and disloyal. Lenin's will
finally will be carried out when
Stains body is carried out of
the mausoleum now housing
them both. Stains glorifica-
ton put on the emperor no
new doctrinal clothes which
now have to be discarded. No
one had the courage to expose
his doctrinal nakedness while
he was there in the flesh and
Lenin safely mummified.
We can go down the line and
show that in no case has there
been any significant change in
fundamental policy. but only
an increase in subtlety Of APP
plication. any more than when
Lenin announced the New
Economic Policy" which many
hailed as return to cap
italism.
When Stain died, whether
by natural or human agency,
and Tito remained, powerful