The aim of this PhD dissertation is to demonstrate and describe how power-­‐knowledge discourses create subjectivities. Specifically, it deals with the relation between the production of knowledge and the production of the Soviet Union as a subject by describing the conditions of emergence of sovietologist discourse in the 1950 s. The term discourse comes from Foucault s study of the power-­knowledge nexus, while the term sovietologist comes from the influence that sovietology, a subfield of political science / international relations that took the USSR as its object of analysis, had over this discourse. Theoretically, my analysis relies on the Foucauldian inspired figuration of power-as-­productive and on the presupposition that discourses are traversed by power. Through a spatial reading of discourse, I propose that the discursive locus where subjectivities are produced is the intertextual space, which is the place where power and knowledge conjoin in discursive formations. Analytically, the opening of sovietologism s intertextual space is achieved through the deployment of critical, genealogical, archaeological and hermeneutical insights. Sovietologism is characterized by a mode of apprehending the Soviet Union s subjectivity in which notions of patterns of culture, the totalitarian State, and social personality play an important role. These were the three most important discourses amongst many others that inhabited the intertextual space of the sovietologist discourse, because they were responsible for delimiting the contours of the USSR s emergent subjectivity. As I intend to demonstrate, the emergence of the Soviet Union as a collective subject with an unchanging nature was intimately related to these discourses. They created the conditions of possibility needed to maintain portrayals of the Soviet Union s subjectivity as inferior, expansionist, and contradictory.