There is then imposed upon faculty and students, the need to recognize that Slavic studies cannot merely accept the latest discoveries and statements as a correction of the past, as in other fields, but must include the most careful consideration of whether in the present or the past they have been more grossly falsified. Reportedly new discoveries in the humanistic and cultural fields may be only a dialectic exercise of the organs of the Tsarist or Communist regimes in order to deceive the outside world. For example, the declaration of the validity of “socialist realism” meant a deliberate misinterpretation of the writings of earlier Communist authors, which can be understood only in terms of politics, not literature. Promulgated ideas were accepted only after the publication of the official list of writings as decided by Communist authorities. Similarly, the original philological theories of Marr soon lost what validity they possessed when they were adopted by Marr’s fellow-Georgian, Stalin, as the Soviet system and were imposed for twenty-five years to serve Communist purposes. Even what remained valid suffered when Marr, after his death, was officially discredited and his original ideas went through a second period of wilful perversion. Such instances could be multiplied by the hundreds, even including Sosyura’s poem _Love Ukraine_, which was deemed worthy of a Stalin Prize only to be condemned, a few years later, as anti-Communist and “bourgeois nationalist.” This constant shifting of Soviet truth has involved strange deviations by even distinguished scholars who have tried to combine their sense of scholarship and accuracy with their desire to be admitted to the Soviet Union for further study. It has also increased the American public fear of Communism and has aided the rise of the so-called “anti-Communist hysteria” which has restrained men who, though not Communist themselves, are unwilling to be accused by the Soviets of open hostility.