October 1946 - Vol. 37 - Issue 8 - Criticism in a Russian Paper

Sep 28, 2026

October 1946 issue of a Catholic publication featuring political and religious writing, including “Criticism in a Russian Paper” by Thomas F. Doyle. The central commentary discusses the visibility of Soviet statements, the weakening “iron curtain” of secrecy, and the challenges of reaching Russian people amid authoritarian practices. The issue also includes short stories, articles on housing and Catholic public life, Marianist and Marian news, editorials, and contributor biographies.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryLiterature

FormatPDF

Pages32

Reading Time49 min

AccessFree to download

Criticism in a Russian Paper

Short Story

Articles

Into the Shadows

Features

This Month's Who's Who

Cover Picture

October 1946 Vol.37--No.8 In this issue: Protestants Mnite for World Action By Thomas F.Doyle Will B.FahertyKatherine BurtonH.C.McGinnis # Criticism in a Russian Paper CARCELY a paper in the civil- ized world failed to call at-tention to the fact that several Russiannewspapers actually did—several dayslate,it is true—print the speech againstthe Soviet Foreign Minister and foreignpolicy which Mr.Byrnes dared them toprint,and which Mr.Molotov publiclypromised to have printed.It is signifi-cant that this news was watched for bya worldwhichhonestlywonderedwhether the speech would actually ap-pear or not;for it is this same worldwhich still professes to take Russia'sword that she is a"democracy." Luckily the pretense is wearing thin-ner with every passing hour of public de-bate over the terms and conditions ofpeace.The"iron curtain"of secrecy be-hind which the Communist brand of"democracy"so loves to work,can ex-tend no farther than Communist milita-ry occupation,and it cannot cover thedebates now occurring at Paris and else-where—wherever,in fact,the affairs ofthe United Nations are transacted. Here you have one of the principal ef-fects that those of us hoped for who in-sisted that the post-war world should bebuilt with Soviet participation.It was arisk,but a calculated risk.It was evi-dent to anyone who was not blind—ei-ther naturally or on purpose —that theSoviets were no fit company for self-re-specting nations,that they had all theugly qualities of Nazism and a few extraones of their own.But to say that wasto admit that the third World War wasalready in preparation,awaiting only"The Day"when totalitarianism wouldstrike from Moscow as it had struckfrom Berlin. There was but one alternative—to es-tablish contact somehow with the Rus-sian people who made up the strength ofthe Soviet Government without beingable in any way to influence its policies;and to disillusion that countless army ofuprooted"intellectuals"all over the world who had sold their souls to theCommunistic cause to such an extentthat they no longer were able to think,or even to see the plain evidence of to-talitarian inhumanity in the CommunistDictatorship within Russia and withinthe luckless countries which happenedto be her neighbors. This alternative could be broughtabout only by maintaining contact withthe Soviet Government,by having them“sit in”on the affairs of the world,out-side the"iron curtain"that offered themtheir only security for working theirevil will. It has been some time now since theirbullying tactics in international dealingshave at least put their"friends"on thedefensive,even though they have not yetalways brought them to their senses,sothat the more accessible part of the al-ternative to war is already being real-ized.Can we hope that Mr.Byrnes'suc-cess in forcing Molotov to publish forthe first time a serious criticism of theSoviet Government is a start towardsthe harder and more necessary task一reaching the Russian people? One can still wonder,for instance,how many Russians saw the particularnewspaper editions which the reportersso faithfully reported to a waiting andcurious world.And even if the editionsactually reached farther than the viewof the reporters,it is hard to see how asingle publication of a long speech,with-out headlines or comment,would attractmuch popular attention.At any rate,itis sure as tomorrow's dawn that the So-viet propaganda agencies will inventsome way to make the publication servetheir own purposes. All this is to admit that so far asreaching the Russian people is concerned,we have not yet made a beginning.Butthis magazine has always maintained thatthe great source of power of those whosit in the Kremlin is not within Russia,but in that countless army of fuzzy intel-lectuals who grasp at the party line withsuch desperate devotion in all othercountries of the world.For their contin-ued and increasing discomfiture,by allmeans let the show go on! # SHORT STORY And Judy Was Born.…………….El

FAQs

What is the main focus of “Criticism in a Russian Paper”?

It critiques how Soviet-related speeches are published and argues that secrecy is weakening in public debate while discussing difficulties in reaching Russian people.

Who wrote “Criticism in a Russian Paper”?

Thomas F. Doyle.

What other types of content appear in this issue besides the criticism essay?

It includes a short story, multiple articles, sections such as “Into the Shadows” and “Features,” and a “This Month's Who's Who” contributor list.

Sep 28, 2026

Uploaded by Danger Angel