1. Compare Michael Charlton's book, The Eagle and the Small Birds (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984)Google Scholar, which consists of several BBC interviews with former members of communist governments writers, philosophers, and scholars of international status. In contrast to Toranska's aggressive and of tenabusive style, Charlton's interviews are conducted in a polite and respectful manner, with visible concern foran objective and balanced account of historical events.

2. It is interesting to note that Leszek Kołakowski, a former Marxist philosopher, also emphasizes the theoretical possibility of a different political outcome of the international proletarian revolution. Kołakowskipoints to particular historical circumstances, as does Werfel, that place the first ruling Marxist party within Russia's borders. These unexpected historical events led to the formation of a specific brand of Russian communism (Charlton, The Eagle and the Small Birds, p. 128).

3. Anthony Kruszewski, Z., “Nationalism and Politics: Poland,” in The Politics of Ethnicity in Eastern Europe, ed, Klein, George and Reban, Milan J. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1981), p. 174.Google Scholar

4. According to Peter Zwick, the communist movement developed basically as a reaction against thenineteenth century excesses of nationalist ideologies; Zwick, Peter, National Communism (Boulder, Colo.: Westview, 1983), pp. 11–12.Google Scholar

5. In one analysis, Jan Gross states that “one could not combine loyalty to Polish statehood with an espousal of communist ideology” because of Soviet persecution of the Polish population, the traditional strength of the Polish Catholic Church, and the traditional weakness and insignificance of the Polish Communistparty ( Gross, Jan Tomasz, “In Search of History,” in Poland, Genesis of a Revolution, ed. Brumberg, Abraham [New York: Vintage, 1983], p. 8 Google Scholar).

6. Charlton, The Eagle and the Small Birds, p. 88.

7. Ibid., p. 91.

8. According to Peter Zwick, the Marxist theory of revolution allows for “distinct national units, each guided toward communism by its national proletariat within the context of disparate historical traditions,” inthe first international stage of world communism that precedes total cosmopolitan integration (Zwick, NationalCommunism, p. 20). Roman Szporluk in his review of Zwick's book, questions Zwick's main thesis that the notion of national communism is an implicit and integral part of Marx's conception of internationalism (Roman Szporluk, review of National Communism, Slavic Review 43 (Fall 1984): 488). On the other hand, Alfred G. Meyer argues that both Marx and Engels were internationalists who believed that the coming revolution and socialist society would result in a transnational proletariat. In view of political reality, however, Marx and Engels occasionally took contradictory and inconsistent stands on national issues (Alfred G. Meyer, “Eastern Europe: Marxism and Nationalism” in Politics and Ethnicity in Eastern Europe, ed. Kline and Reban, pp. 8–9).

9. Quoted from Zwick, National Communism, p. 30.

10. See Z. Anthony Kruszewski, “Nationalism and Politics: Poland,” in Politics and Ethnicity in Eastern Europe, ed., Kline and Reban, pp. 148–157.

11. To assign sole responsibility to the Polish Communist government for Poland's satellite status is questionable. Many historical and comparative studies point to the roles of the western allies and the Polish government in exile, and recall Soviet determination to create a buffer zone on its western borders. For example, according to Adam Michnik, a historian well known for his dissident activities in Poland, Polish postwar reality was determined by the international balance of power and there was no real Polish policy that could have saved Poland from her political dependence on the Soviet Union (Adam Michnik, “Ticks and Angels,” in Genesis of a Revolution, ed., Brumberg, pp. 212–218). Zdenek Mlynař's book, Nightfrost in Prague: The End of Human Socialism, trans., Wilson, Paul (New York: Katz, 1980 Google Scholar, seems to confirm Michnik's views. In his reminiscences, Mlynař quotes Brezhnev's frank description of his motives for the 1968 intervention in Czechoslovakia. According to Mlynař, Leonid Brezhnev expressed one simple idea that illustrates the Soviet Realpolitik: “Our soldiers reached the Elbe in the war, and since that time this is ourboundary, the Soviet boundary. The results of the Second World War are untouchable for the USSR and hence will be defended even at the danger of a new war'’ (p. 301). For more recent studies see Charlton, The Eagle and Small Birds; Kacewicz, George V., Great Britain, the Soviet Union and the Polish Government in Exile (1939–1945), Studies in Contemporary History, vol. 3 (The Hague, Boston, and London: MartinusNijhoff, 1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lukas, Richard C., The Strange Allies: The United States and Poland, 1941–1945 (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1978 Google Scholar; Wynva, Tadeusz, La Résistance polonaise et la politique en Europe (Paris: Éditions France Empire, 1983 Google Scholar; Jatta wczoraj i dziś. Wybór publicystyki 1944–1985 (London: Polonia, 1985).

12. In his criticism of Piotr Wierzbicki's satirical article, “A Treatise on Ticks,” directed against collaboratorsof the Communist regime, Adam Michnik challenges the right of an individual to condemn the actions that took place during the Stalinist period in Poland. According to Michnik, it is difficult to find moral measure for the events without considering their historical context (Adam Michnik, “Ticks and Angels, “in Genesis of a Revolution, ed. Brumberg, pp. 212–218).

13. See Jack Bielasiak, “The Party: Permanent Crisis,” in Genesis of a Revolution, ed., Brumberg, pp. 10–25.

14. Bierut's defense of Berman is especially commendable in contrast with the cowardly actions of the president of Czechoslovakia, Klement Gottwald. According to Eugene Loebl's account, Gottwald had positiveevidence of Slansky's innocence but went along with Slansky's trial and execution (Eugene Loebl, MyMind on Trial [New York and London: A Helen and Kurt Wolf Book, 1981], p. 154).

15. Compare a chapter entitled, “The Eclipse of Ideology” in Michael Charlton, Eagle and SmallBirds, pp. 86–134. Kolakowski is quoted on p. 133 of Eagle and Small Birds.

16. Goldstiicker is quoted on ibid., p. 84; Djilas on p. 90.

17. See the analysis of the political crisis in Poland during the time of Toranska's interviews in Mason, David S., “The Polish Party in Crisis, 1980–1982,” Slavic Review 43 (Spring 1984): 30–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18. Five of the seven persons interviewed by Toranska were Jewish.

19. Tadeusz Szafar, “Anti-Semitism: A Trusty Weapon,” in Genesis of a Revolution, ed. Brumberg, pp. 109–122. Compare also the analysis of anti-Semitism as the party's nationalistic policy in Kruszewski, “Nationalism and Politics” in Politics of Ethnicity in Eastern Europe, ed. Kline and Reban, pp. 159–160.

20. Compare Anna Chmielewska, “The Campaign,” in Genesis of a Revolution, ed., Brumberg, pp. 227–236.

21. According to Chmielewska's sociological study, the differentiation between “us” and “them, “and the emphasis on someone's “otherness,” automatically places “them” into the category of “internalenemy.” Furthermore, a person who calls a defined group of people “they” is insufficiently informed, uncertainof being right, but often able to erupt with generalized aggression (ibid., pp. 230–234