◆ SpookStack

8 THE TECHNIQUES OF SOVIET PROPAGANDA ee in select a single term which will adequately indentify ite practitioners. For some, the terms “crypto-Communist” or “fellow traveler” are too -..... . strong; for others too mild. In this exposition the less definitive | designation “auxiliary” will be used throughout to designate any person or group following the Communist line, specifying that it does ~ not a priori involve any connotation of moral obloquy, since some = auxiliaries deceive only Gecause they are themselves deceived. = ~~ -- wae METHODS OF RECOGNIZING SOVIET AUXILIARIES re The use by the Communist propaganda apparatus of auxiliaries es ~= diverse as they are inconspicuous emphasizes the importance of the ability to recognize them, despite their variety and concealment. Two distinctive traits betray them: First, the auxiliary invariably and undeviatingly supports each position on international affairs supported by the Soviets, and faithfully follows Moscow in every reversal, twist, - and turn of policy; second, the auxiliary will systematically deni- grate every aspect of Western regimes, while attempting to whi wash the Communists with equal consistency. Fe ae While the party line may shift with bewildering rapidity, a random sampling of the January 1965, position of auxiharies vis-a-vis inter- national political affairs would include: ose or Opposition to any strengthening of Europe, especially a European army. ~*~ Denunciation of the retention of American troops in Hurope. ied Disapprobation of NATO and SEATO. Approval of the U.N. veto power for the Soviets. Favoring abandonment of Berlin and disengagement in Germany. ve Opposition to the Federal German Republic and the “revenge mongers” of - mn. ‘Advocacy of diplomatic recognition, and admission to the U.N., of the Peiping government. Agitation for nuclear test bane and disarmament without control agreements. Condemnation of West European missile bases directed at the U.5.8.R., but not of U.S3.8.R. bases directed at Europe. : Censure of the “feudal and corrupt dictators’ Chiang Kai-ehck, Moise Tshombe, and Antonio Salazar, but praise for the anti-Ameriean dictators Fidel Castro. Ben Bella, and Achmed Sukarng. . Preasure for the surrender of Quemoy and Matsu to Peiping. Opposition to the Franco-British action at Suez, but approval of the anti- Franco-British action at Baghdad. Antagonism to Israel, fellowship with Arab “nationalism”; antagoniam to France, fellowship with the FLN; entagonism to Britain, fellowship with the Mau Mau; and in Moslem Kashmir, antagonism to India. ; Prumotion of summit conferences on any and al! oecasions. Endorsement of “cultural exchanges,” but toleration of U.8.5.R. literary cen- sorship and radio jamming. Denunciation of Western “colonialism” in Asia and Africa, but somplete silence concerning brutal Roviet colonialism in Eastern Europe. . Opposition to internationally controlled free clections on German unification but endorsement of “elections” on Vietnamese unification without internationa: control, Censure of “dollar imperialism” anywhere in the world, but loud praise for “ruble aid” to underdeveloped nations. . Condemnation of American bases in Europe and Asia, but strident defense of Communist parties, which are effectively Soviet bases, in al! countries. Obyiously many independent minds will, whether logically or falla- ciously, arrive at the same position as the Soviets on some individual issues, but it is inconceivable that any but a dominated and disciplined auxiliary will be in syatematic and synchronized agreement with all a) er eee