As soon as the socialist regimes failed in East-Central Europe, there disappeared from the public sphere the positive, a priori understanding of the offi cial, public discourse of the socialist era. What the author of this article calls “premisunderstanding” has become part of the new anti-communist consensus and ethos. Th is premisunderstanding is rooted not only in an ideological and moral antipathy toward the socialist regime but also in the fact that the regime’s discourse diff ers signifi cantly from other types of discourse, including, not least, liberal discourse. When this kind of premisunderstading is applied to texts originating in the socialist era or to texts or statements that represent this era, the author calls this “reading in the spirit of the post-Velvet-Revolutionary consensus.” In the more extreme forms of this premisunderstanding, the interpreter presumes that the historical actor is lying, is dishonest, or is mistaken. Although this tendency toward premisunderstanding has become weaker in the face of revisionist conceptions in historiography, and in the face of increasing nostalgia throughout society, this ideological barrier to understanding the recent past survives to this day in various forms of anti-communist rhetoric.