COURAGE

connecting collections

Upon receiving the highest French order of merit for military and civil merits – the National Order of the Legion of Honour (Ordre national de la Légion d'honneur) in 1989, Croatian sociologist Rudi Supek (1913-1993) granted an interview to Radio Zagreb in which he talked about his life and, among other things, about his opposition activities. He was awarded due to his activities as one of the organisers of resistance in the Nazi concentration camp in Buchenwald and due to his contribution to the development of sociology as a science and his cultural work with France. In the interview, he said that five years earlier (1984), he was awarded for his scholarly work, which was, in his opinion, even more important. But that fact was ignored in Yugoslavia at the time. He stated that the authorities did not like him because he insisted on the stance that there is no socialism without democracy. He said that he was a sympathiser and a member of communist parties (CP of Yugoslavia and CP of France) from the mid-1930s to 1948, but that he later did not want to be involved in Stalinist and Comintern-type of parties.
He stated that he returned from France to Yugoslavia because for patriotic reasons, although he had much better conditions to continue his academic career abroad, in France, the USA or Canada. He also spoke about the problems of socialist systems in which there is a negative selection of personnel, stating that the monopoly of a single party promotes careerists and mediocrity. According to Supek, the advancement of society, especially in the economy, requires a free democratic political system. He also talked about his engagement in the environmental movement and his book, which had just been published in its third edition. He said that the crisis of socialism was a result of the fact that socialism had remained wedded to the concept of industrial society. He felt it necessary, globally, to transition to a post-industrial society that would not be based on exploitation of nature and humanity itself, to enter into a new type of socialism.

VHS Cassette No. 77 from the Original Videojournal collection contains a fifty-minute recording of the Czechoslovak student demonstration at Jan Opletal's memorial, which took place on 17 November 1989, and is considered to be the beginning of the Velvet Revolution. The recording shows the rally and speeches at Albertov square, a procession through the streets of Prague and then the procession‘s meeting with members of Pohotovostní pluk [police regiment for a state of emergency] at Národní třída [National Boulevard]. Subsequent violence against the marchers caused a strong negative public response and further protests. The VHS cassette also contains recordings of Wenceslas Square demonstrations on 23 and 24 November of the same year.

When editing the samizdat the editors realised that they were unable to produce a radical change in their minority situation on their own, since this required a democratic turn within the country. This led to the idea of the community of fate: the discrimination they were subjected to would only cease if the ethnic majority also got rid of the suffocating dictatorship. So there was an overlap between the minorities and those democratic, non-politicising Romanian individuals, who, although they did not feel the minority oppression for themselves, were nonetheless suffering from the lack of democracy. The editors were guided by the conception of finding sympathisers to resonate with their dissatisfaction. Therefore the magazine was partly bilingual. Whenever they felt the need, they not only translated into Hungarian certain important writings of their Romanian fellow ideologists, but also published the Romanian versions of these texts. In the person of Doina Cornea – who counted as an example for her attitude, spirit of sacrifice, and criticism of the system – they found a colleague who at the beginning had not even suspected that she was cooperating with them as they had borrowed several of her declarations without her knowledge, primarily from Radio Free Europe, and corresponded with her in the samizdat.

The first step of the Hungarian–Romanian union of efforts was the publication of the leaflet entitled Fraților – Testvérek in the spring of 1988, in which linguist Éva Cs. Gyimesi together with puppeteer, artist, and prose writer Ivan Chelu protested against the potential demolitions of the Transylvanian villages. As a debut of the relationship established with Doina Cornea they first published a real conversation between her and another (unidentified) Romanian intellectual entitled “Találkozás Doina Corneával” (Meeting with Doina Cornea), and then published Cornea’s text entitled “Doina Cornea levele a Szentatyához” (Doina Cornea’s letter to the Holy Father). The views of the editors and those of Cornea had much in common, though the former had certain reservations regarding the way the latter interpreted the contemporary situation. In spite of all this what really mattered was that finally there was a Romanian intellectual with whom they agreed on a number of issues and in certain cases they could confront each other “in a way that was usual among members of the same team when it came to clarifying ideas.” They accepted Cornea’s call for solidarity and unity irrespective of nationality and agreed without reservations upon her encouragement to avoid any form of violence. They were convinced, along with Cornea, that there was an institutional crisis in Romania and that behind this the Securitate was operating everywhere. They were also in agreement that the laws of the country must be abided by and that the same applied to international treaties. However, the editors went further: they believed that this was not enough for the Hungarian minority and that there was a need for basic legal arrangements, which ensured not “socialist” but real democracy, and not only for Hungarians, but also for every Romanian citizen. They agreed with Cornea’s idea of stimulation to action, though they held different views as regards the driving force behind this and what this would mean in practice. They acknowledged that Cornea did not want to be a politician: she was primarily interested in the moral aspect and according to her there was mainly a need for moral renewal, since without that political change was impossible. Nonetheless, the editors wanted to take political action, at least through the medium of the printed word. They doubted that the elimination of the moral recession would lead to the solution of the political crisis. At the same time they accepted the fact that under the given circumstances they all had to serve as witnesses and that this should be followed by action.

Afterwards a dialogue began with Doina Cornea, who by then was a dissident personality known across Europe. The first tone of this dialogue was set by Éva Cs. Gyimesi by means of an open letter, entitled “Nyílt Levél Doina Corneának” (Open letter to Doina Cornea), which was published in both Hungarian and Romanian. The addressee could identify the sender “without a signature” on the basis of the letter’s contents and their shared experiences. In reality this was a one-sided dialogue, in fact the collaborators of the samizdat reflected on several of Doina Cornea’s affirmations, but they did not receive a reply.