The language, the style, and the plot of the farce are typical of Social Realism, in vogue in the USSR at that time. Based on the Bolshevik Revolution, a set of ideas became articles of faith and the leitmotivfor communists around the world. Hence, revolutionary triumph was in the unity of the three "victims" and class "brothers" (the soviet of workers, peasants, and poor soldiers) and that power could only conquer by spilling blood. Moreover, the obsession with summary trials (a reference to the archetype of the final judgment) reveals a desire that masquerades as a thirst for justice. In the Soviet Union, these [beliefs and desires] were acted out through Leninist post-revolutionary purges. However, this did not take place in Mexico, apart from some settling of accounts between caudillos. Given this lack of concrete experience, the Mexican communists could raise their rhetoric to the point of asking for their enemies’ heads, but the reality could hardly be called offensive. This first act of this farce was also illustrated with a print by David Alfaro Siqueiros (1896–1974) showing the trinity of the "good forces," the opposite of the mural rendered by José Clemente Orozco (1883–1949) with the same motif at the Escuela Nacional Preparatoria in 1923. The preference for prints over other graphic modes may be attributable to the influence of the muralist from France, Jean Charlot (1897–1979), on Mexican communist painters. In addition, there was also an incipient trend toward reassessing both the nineteenth-century street gazettes and the pages of illustrated ballads. These forms, which combined prints and text, provided the ordinary people with more or less immediate information about the most interesting or surprising events of the time. In this respect, there is evidence that Charlot discovered José Guadalupe Posada around 1923, but it was not until August 1925 that the Frenchman published his article "Un precursor del movimiento del arte mexicano: el grabador Posadas" (sic) [A precursor of the Mexican art movement: the printmaker, Posadas] in the Revista de revistas. In this journal, Charlot maintained that the quasi-primitive work of Posada showed his native essence; therefore, he represented the most genuine trend in Mexican visual art. Later, this circular interpretation would give rise to the related idea that Posada had been an assiduous critic of the dictatorship of Porfirio Diaz. The combination of the two fictions led communist artists to declare themselves followers of the printmaker.