1 50 32 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/8c8271043711a370d1b4805931454a70.pdf 6e7755d23ce59000907d2f5a4f0ddd75 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 83 successful. In 873 he defeated Carloman decisively. Carloman asked his father Louis for help to fight the Slovaks. When aid was not forthcoming, Carloman decided to seek a truce with Svatopluk. He signed a pact with Svatopluk at Forsheim in 874 and recognized the independence of the Great Moravian Empire. Svatopluk had reached the pinnacle of his ambitions: he was sole ruler of the Great Moravian Empire, with its crupital at Devin near Bratislava. (Continued) • • • 1856 - DR. SAMUEL CZAMBEL - 1956 P.A. HROBAK T.he year 1956 marks not only the centennial of the dea:th o:f the great Slovak fighter for freedom and democracy, Dr. Louis Sti1r, ,b ut it is a}so the centennial of the birth of the eminent SlovaJk philologist, Samuel Czam:bel. Czambel was born September 1, 1856, in the town of Slovenska Eupca, Zvolen County, 1Slova;kia. The ~tudy of his native Slovak language attracted him early in his life and he devoted much of his adult Hfe to it. He died in Buda.pest, December 18, 1909. In 1887, Czam'bel wrote his Contrioutions to the History of the Slovak Language (''Prispevlky k dejinam jazy.ka slovenskeho") ; he followed this with his Slovak Orthography ("Slovensky praivopis") in 1890; A Manual of the Literary Slovak Language ("Rukovaf spisovnej reci slovenskej") in 1902; The Slovaks and Their Language ("Slovaci a kh rec") in 1903; 8Jlld The Slovak Language and its Place in the Family of Slovanic Languages ("Slo-. venska rec a jej miesto v rodine slovenskych jazykov"), 624 pp., in 1906. Of course, Czambel contributed many other articles on Slovak subjects to Slovak newspapers, periodical reviiews and magazines. Czambel's "Rukovae (Slovak Grammar), revised and modified several times since its first edition by the late Dr. Joseph SkU!ltety, is a ,s tandard work with ,p hilologists, grammarians, and students of Slovak. In his "Slovaoi a ich rec," Czambel promoted the theory that the SlovaJks were every closely related to the Croatians, Slovenes and Serbs �84 SLOVAKIA (Yugoslavs) ; this, of course, was disproved by the studies of ,S kultety and Pastrnek. iin his last work, relating to the Slovak language and other Slovanic languages, Czambel systematically dealt with Slovak dialects, beginning with the eastern. He had intended to• add several volumes to show the relationship between the other Slovamic languages and the Slavak - to the preparation of which he had devoted years of study - but, unfortunately, illhealth and death overtook Czambel ,b efore he could com-. plete the planned monumental philological work. Because Samuel Czam:bel was employed as an official in a Magyar ministry, and because he had written a ibrochure in Magyar (1902) - even though in favor of the Slova!k language - he was accused by some writers of being a Magyarcme. The truth is, however, that those write:rs were more influenced by the fact that Czambel ref1Used to accept the "Czecho-Slo!Vak" theory a!bout the "unity" of the !Slovaks and Czechs than they were by his Magyar brochure. In regard to that Magyar brochure, Dr. Jo8e[)h Skul-i tety, the grand old defender of :Slovruk history, philology and culture, had this to say in the "'Slovenske Pohl'ady" (1923): "We saw no reason why we should write against this iMagyar brochure. Were we supposed to write agairnst its author because he wanted to. have a dean, ,g enuine Slovruk language? Or because he wanted to a.iid it wherever it needed it? That here 'in politics' he goes a bit too far, well, that is his business; Dr. Czambel al,w ays stood out so indiividually that we have no right to concern ourselves a-bout him." Objective observers will not deny that Czamlbel did serve the Slova;k caJUSe; he did not serve -Magyarism or Ma... gyarization as a jobholder in the Ma:gyar ministry, or with his linguistic theory and his patriotic Slovak verses. In spirit Czambel was Sloivak, even thoogh he did study in Vienna and P;r ague·. But a Slovak intellectual could not easily get the kind of work he ,prepared for in Hungary. Czambel's father, as a Justice of the Peace in Sloven.ska tU1pCa, was an acquaintance of Bela Griinwald, who w~ �SLOVAKIA 86 first the Vice-Commissa;r of Zvolen County and then a mem.. ber of the Hungarian Diet. It was Grunwald who placed young Czambel in the press bureau of the Premier at Budin. And Gri.inwald, we know, ,w as for some 25 years the greatest oppressor of the Slovaks in Hungary. We can imagine then what it meant to a young Slo;va!k ;patriot to hawe his protection. Because of that, however, young CZiambel did not become a Magyarone, but devoted himself to the study of his people and their language. In 1890, Czambel was persuaded to write for the "Slo-. venske Pohl'ady" (Slovak Review); of course, holding a job under the Magyars, he could not write under his own name. When he published his book, "Slovaci a ich rec" in 1903, iJ>resenting t'he theory that the Slovaks were a Yu"' goslav tribe, Czambel was severely criticized by the "Na:rodne Noviny" and the "Slovenske Pohl'ady," which proved mm wrong and condemned him. Informed ,p ersons, however, knew t'hat Czambel proposed the Yugoslav theory not because of convictions, lbut rather as a matter of tactics: it was only thus that he could keep his state job. :S amuel Czambel definitely proved that man does ,n ot live by lbreoo alone. Suspected as a Magyarone by some of his own people, and as a Pan-Slarv by the Magyars, Samuel Czambel nevertheless rendered a g,reat service to his people by his literary efforts. His grammar of the Slovak lan-. guage is, still the best, according to Slovak philologists . • • CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA STAROHRAD (THE OLD CASTLE) OF LIPTOV The village of Liptovska Tepla in Slovakia lies east of the ,city of Ruzomlberok. Not far from the village we find the mineral springs called Lucky. Traveling by train from Ruizomberok to Lucky we see the mighty roC'ky cliffs of the Sielinica fortress, which is almost as high as Sitno. On these rocky cliffs can still. be seen the remnants of the on~e mighty Old Castle (Starohroo). It is accessi1b le from the valley of Sestrca; at one time it served as a guard for the highway that led from Liptov to Ora:va. 'In the fourteenth century Starohrad wa:s the proper- � SLOVAKIA 83 successful. In 873 he defeated Carloman decisively. Carloman asked his father Louis for help to fight the Slovaks. When aid was not forthcoming, Carloman decided to seek a truce with Svatopluk. He signed a pact with Svatopluk at Forsheim in 874 and recognized the independence of the Great Moravian Empire. Svatopluk had reached the pinnacle of his ambitions: he was sole ruler of the Great Moravian Empire, with its crupital at Devin near Bratislava. (Continued) • • • 1856 - DR. SAMUEL CZAMBEL - 1956 P.A. HROBAK T.he year 1956 marks not only the centennial of the dea:th o:f the great Slovak fighter for freedom and democracy, Dr. Louis Sti1r, ,b ut it is a}so the centennial of the birth of the eminent SlovaJk philologist, Samuel Czam:bel. Czambel was born September 1, 1856, in the town of Slovenska Eupca, Zvolen County, 1Slova;kia. The ~tudy of his native Slovak language attracted him early in his life and he devoted much of his adult Hfe to it. He died in Buda.pest, December 18, 1909. In 1887, Czam'bel wrote his Contrioutions to the History of the Slovak Language (''Prispevlky k dejinam jazy.ka slovenskeho") ; he followed this with his Slovak Orthography ("Slovensky praivopis") in 1890; A Manual of the Literary Slovak Language ("Rukovaf spisovnej reci slovenskej") in 1902; The Slovaks and Their Language ("Slovaci a kh rec") in 1903; 8Jlld The Slovak Language and its Place in the Family of Slovanic Languages ("Slo-. venska rec a jej miesto v rodine slovenskych jazykov"), 624 pp., in 1906. Of course, Czambel contributed many other articles on Slovak subjects to Slovak newspapers, periodical reviiews and magazines. Czambel's "Rukovae (Slovak Grammar), revised and modified several times since its first edition by the late Dr. Joseph SkU!ltety, is a ,s tandard work with ,p hilologists, grammarians, and students of Slovak. In his "Slovaoi a ich rec," Czambel promoted the theory that the SlovaJks were every closely related to the Croatians, Slovenes and Serbs �84 SLOVAKIA (Yugoslavs) ; this, of course, was disproved by the studies of ,S kultety and Pastrnek. iin his last work, relating to the Slovak language and other Slovanic languages, Czambel systematically dealt with Slovak dialects, beginning with the eastern. He had intended to• add several volumes to show the relationship between the other Slovamic languages and the Slavak - to the preparation of which he had devoted years of study - but, unfortunately, illhealth and death overtook Czambel ,b efore he could com-. plete the planned monumental philological work. Because Samuel Czam:bel was employed as an official in a Magyar ministry, and because he had written a ibrochure in Magyar (1902) - even though in favor of the Slova!k language - he was accused by some writers of being a Magyarcme. The truth is, however, that those write:rs were more influenced by the fact that Czambel ref1Used to accept the "Czecho-Slo!Vak" theory a!bout the "unity" of the !Slovaks and Czechs than they were by his Magyar brochure. In regard to that Magyar brochure, Dr. Jo8e[)h Skul-i tety, the grand old defender of :Slovruk history, philology and culture, had this to say in the "'Slovenske Pohl'ady" (1923): "We saw no reason why we should write against this iMagyar brochure. Were we supposed to write agairnst its author because he wanted to. have a dean, ,g enuine Slovruk language? Or because he wanted to a.iid it wherever it needed it? That here 'in politics' he goes a bit too far, well, that is his business; Dr. Czambel al,w ays stood out so indiividually that we have no right to concern ourselves a-bout him." Objective observers will not deny that Czamlbel did serve the Slova;k caJUSe; he did not serve -Magyarism or Ma... gyarization as a jobholder in the Ma:gyar ministry, or with his linguistic theory and his patriotic Slovak verses. In spirit Czambel was Sloivak, even thoogh he did study in Vienna and P;r ague·. But a Slovak intellectual could not easily get the kind of work he ,prepared for in Hungary. Czambel's father, as a Justice of the Peace in Sloven.ska tU1pCa, was an acquaintance of Bela Griinwald, who w~ �SLOVAKIA 86 first the Vice-Commissa;r of Zvolen County and then a mem.. ber of the Hungarian Diet. It was Grunwald who placed young Czambel in the press bureau of the Premier at Budin. And Gri.inwald, we know, ,w as for some 25 years the greatest oppressor of the Slovaks in Hungary. We can imagine then what it meant to a young Slo;va!k ;patriot to hawe his protection. Because of that, however, young CZiambel did not become a Magyarone, but devoted himself to the study of his people and their language. In 1890, Czambel was persuaded to write for the "Slo-. venske Pohl'ady" (Slovak Review); of course, holding a job under the Magyars, he could not write under his own name. When he published his book, "Slovaci a ich rec" in 1903, iJ>resenting t'he theory that the Slovaks were a Yu"' goslav tribe, Czambel was severely criticized by the "Na:rodne Noviny" and the "Slovenske Pohl'ady," which proved mm wrong and condemned him. Informed ,p ersons, however, knew t'hat Czambel proposed the Yugoslav theory not because of convictions, lbut rather as a matter of tactics: it was only thus that he could keep his state job. :S amuel Czambel definitely proved that man does ,n ot live by lbreoo alone. Suspected as a Magyarone by some of his own people, and as a Pan-Slarv by the Magyars, Samuel Czambel nevertheless rendered a g,reat service to his people by his literary efforts. His grammar of the Slovak lan-. guage is, still the best, according to Slovak philologists . • • CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA STAROHRAD (THE OLD CASTLE) OF LIPTOV The village of Liptovska Tepla in Slovakia lies east of the ,city of Ruzomlberok. Not far from the village we find the mineral springs called Lucky. Traveling by train from Ruizomberok to Lucky we see the mighty roC'ky cliffs of the Sielinica fortress, which is almost as high as Sitno. On these rocky cliffs can still. be seen the remnants of the on~e mighty Old Castle (Starohroo). It is accessi1b le from the valley of Sestrca; at one time it served as a guard for the highway that led from Liptov to Ora:va. 'In the fourteenth century Starohrad wa:s the proper- � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 83 successful. In 873 he defeated Carloman decisively. Carloman asked his father Louis for help to fight the Slovaks. When aid was not forthcoming, Carloman decided to seek a truce with Svatopluk. He signed a pact with Svatopluk at Forsheim in 874 and recognized the independence of the Great Moravian Empire. Svatopluk had reached the pinnacle of his ambitions: he was sole ruler of the Great Moravian Empire, with its crupital at Devin near Bratislava. (Continued) • • • 1856 - DR. SAMUEL CZAMBEL - 1956 P.A. HROBAK T.he year 1956 marks not only the centennial of the dea:th o:f the great Slovak fighter for freedom and democracy, Dr. Louis Sti1r, ,b ut it is a}so the centennial of the birth of the eminent SlovaJk philologist, Samuel Czam:bel. Czambel was born September 1, 1856, in the town of Slovenska Eupca, Zvolen County, 1Slova;kia. The ~tudy of his native Slovak language attracted him early in his life and he devoted much of his adult Hfe to it. He died in Buda.pest, December 18, 1909. In 1887, Czam'bel wrote his Contrioutions to the History of the Slovak Language (''Prispevlky k dejinam jazy.ka slovenskeho") ; he followed this with his Slovak Orthography ("Slovensky praivopis") in 1890; A Manual of the Literary Slovak Language ("Rukovaf spisovnej reci slovenskej") in 1902; The Slovaks and Their Language ("Slovaci a kh rec") in 1903; 8Jlld The Slovak Language and its Place in the Family of Slovanic Languages ("Slo-. venska rec a jej miesto v rodine slovenskych jazykov"), 624 pp., in 1906. Of course, Czambel contributed many other articles on Slovak subjects to Slovak newspapers, periodical reviiews and magazines. Czambel's "Rukovae (Slovak Grammar), revised and modified several times since its first edition by the late Dr. Joseph SkU!ltety, is a ,s tandard work with ,p hilologists, grammarians, and students of Slovak. In his "Slovaoi a ich rec," Czambel promoted the theory that the SlovaJks were every closely related to the Croatians, Slovenes and Serbs 84 SLOVAKIA (Yugoslavs) ; this, of course, was disproved by the studies of ,S kultety and Pastrnek. iin his last work, relating to the Slovak language and other Slovanic languages, Czambel systematically dealt with Slovak dialects, beginning with the eastern. He had intended to• add several volumes to show the relationship between the other Slovamic languages and the Slavak - to the preparation of which he had devoted years of study - but, unfortunately, illhealth and death overtook Czambel ,b efore he could com-. plete the planned monumental philological work. Because Samuel Czam:bel was employed as an official in a Magyar ministry, and because he had written a ibrochure in Magyar (1902) - even though in favor of the Slova!k language - he was accused by some writers of being a Magyarcme. The truth is, however, that those write:rs were more influenced by the fact that Czambel ref1Used to accept the "Czecho-Slo!Vak" theory a!bout the "unity" of the !Slovaks and Czechs than they were by his Magyar brochure. In regard to that Magyar brochure, Dr. Jo8e[)h Skul-i tety, the grand old defender of :Slovruk history, philology and culture, had this to say in the "'Slovenske Pohl'ady" (1923): "We saw no reason why we should write against this iMagyar brochure. Were we supposed to write agairnst its author because he wanted to. have a dean, ,g enuine Slovruk language? Or because he wanted to a.iid it wherever it needed it? That here 'in politics' he goes a bit too far, well, that is his business; Dr. Czambel al,w ays stood out so indiividually that we have no right to concern ourselves a-bout him." Objective observers will not deny that Czamlbel did serve the Slova;k caJUSe; he did not serve -Magyarism or Ma... gyarization as a jobholder in the Ma:gyar ministry, or with his linguistic theory and his patriotic Slovak verses. In spirit Czambel was Sloivak, even thoogh he did study in Vienna and P;r ague·. But a Slovak intellectual could not easily get the kind of work he ,prepared for in Hungary. Czambel's father, as a Justice of the Peace in Sloven.ska tU1pCa, was an acquaintance of Bela Griinwald, who w~ SLOVAKIA 86 first the Vice-Commissa;r of Zvolen County and then a mem.. ber of the Hungarian Diet. It was Grunwald who placed young Czambel in the press bureau of the Premier at Budin. And Gri.inwald, we know, ,w as for some 25 years the greatest oppressor of the Slovaks in Hungary. We can imagine then what it meant to a young Slo;va!k ;patriot to hawe his protection. Because of that, however, young CZiambel did not become a Magyarone, but devoted himself to the study of his people and their language. In 1890, Czambel was persuaded to write for the "Slo-. venske Pohl'ady" (Slovak Review); of course, holding a job under the Magyars, he could not write under his own name. When he published his book, "Slovaci a ich rec" in 1903, iJ>resenting t'he theory that the Slovaks were a Yu"' goslav tribe, Czambel was severely criticized by the "Na:rodne Noviny" and the "Slovenske Pohl'ady," which proved mm wrong and condemned him. Informed ,p ersons, however, knew t'hat Czambel proposed the Yugoslav theory not because of convictions, lbut rather as a matter of tactics: it was only thus that he could keep his state job. :S amuel Czambel definitely proved that man does ,n ot live by lbreoo alone. Suspected as a Magyarone by some of his own people, and as a Pan-Slarv by the Magyars, Samuel Czambel nevertheless rendered a g,reat service to his people by his literary efforts. His grammar of the Slovak lan-. guage is, still the best, according to Slovak philologists . • • CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA STAROHRAD (THE OLD CASTLE) OF LIPTOV The village of Liptovska Tepla in Slovakia lies east of the ,city of Ruzomlberok. Not far from the village we find the mineral springs called Lucky. Traveling by train from Ruizomberok to Lucky we see the mighty roC'ky cliffs of the Sielinica fortress, which is almost as high as Sitno. On these rocky cliffs can still. be seen the remnants of the on~e mighty Old Castle (Starohroo). It is accessi1b le from the valley of Sestrca; at one time it served as a guard for the highway that led from Liptov to Ora:va. 'In the fourteenth century Starohrad wa:s the proper-  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1856 - Dr. Samuel Czambel - 1956 Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 83-85 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hrobak, Philip Anthony, 1904-1964 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource September-December 1956 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/cd5345e65b3dd7f70ba04784e4ecdb09.pdf 9f38a4a5b5622a77e42eb2c7289252de PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 17 A CLOSE-UP VIEW OF RADIO FREE EUROPE By Jiri Brada ( From January, February, and March, 1956, issues of "FACTS FORUM," Dallas, Texas) Radio Free Europe, a netwoPk of stations which has been set up in westeim Europe for the purpose of sending anti-Communist broadcasts to the peoples on the other side of the Iron Curtain, is a division of Free Europe Committee, Inc. The latter, a private organization, was founded in 1949 by a group of American citizens, among whom the Hon. Herbert H. Lehman, U. S. Senator from New York, played a prominent role. In 1950, the Free :illurope Committee started its annual fund-raising drive under t'he name of Crusade for Freedom. Most of us, at one time or another, have bee111 exposed to the propaganda of thi,s powerful orgacization, via newspapers, radio, television, freedom cars, and freedom trains, and most of us have read and heard a'bout FEC's muchpublicized freedom balloons. The Free Europe Committee claims that millions of its funds have been contributed by more than twenty-five million American citizens. Many more millions of dollars, though, have 1been donated by corporations, including some of the large foundations. Henry Ford II, whose Ford Foundation through the yeairs has been a heavy contributor, is nationa:l chairman of the Crusade for Freedom. As such he is the ,successor of General Lucius D. Clay. Other ,prominent sponsors of the project include David Sarnoff, Edward R. Murrow, Harold E . Stassen, Walter S. Gifford, Samuel Unger, Geo:rge Barasch, C. B. Tibbets, and Joseph J. Fliesser. Headquarters of the Crusaide is 29 West 157th Street, New York City. C. D. Jackson, in crucial years one of President Ei~ senho.w er's "paiace guard," headed the Free, Europe Committee for a cosiderable length of time. Wh~tney H. Shepardson is its current president. Joseph C. Grew, former U. S. Ambassador to Japan, is Chairman of the Board of the F,r ee Europe Committee. Arthur W. Page is Chairman of the Executive Committee. �18 SLOVAKIA Vice presidents include W. J. C. Eagan, Levering Tyson, Samuel S. Wa.J.ikeT, JT., and :Bernard Yarrow. Jo'hn C. Tra.phagen serves as treasurer, Theodore C. Augustine as secretary and assistant itireasurer, and J. Clay.ton Miller as assistant secretary. On March 15, 1955, Helfuert H. Lang was replaced as Director of Radio Free Europe by W. J. C. Eagan. 'Dhe Board of Directors, besides several of the abo.venamed, is composed of A. A. Berle, David K. :ID. Bruce, Jr. , Frederick R. Dolbeare, Julius Fleischmann, H. B. Miller, Irving S. Olds, George U. 1S huster, Charles M. Spofford, and H. Gregory Thomas. Among additiona:l sponsors of the Free EUTope Comm1ttee we find such nationally known figures as Clarence L. Adcock, Raymond Pace Alexander, Laird Bell, Francis Biddle, Rolbert Woods Bliss, Robert F. Bradford, !Hairry A. Bullis, Cecile B. De Mille, Frank R. Denton, William J. Donovan, Mark 1F . iIDthridge, James A. Farley, Virginia C. Gildersleeve, Charles R.. Hook, Palmer Hoyt, Paul Kesten, Henry ,R, Luce, Joseph V. McKee, Web Maddox, H. B. Miller, tSamuel E. Morison, F.rederiok Osborn, John W. Sibley, Sp)'l'os Skouras, Chairles P. 'Daft, DeWitt Wallace, W. W. Waymac:k, Walter H. Wheeler, Jr., Charles E. Wilson, Mrs. Quincy Wright, and Darryl Zanuck. The 1952 list of national sponsors also featured Jaimes B. Carey, .A:J.ilen W . Dulles, William Green, and Matthew Woll. Besides a sprinkL ing of men who uphold America's tradiitions of limited govVeTrunent and the free market economy, there is :the usual contingent of ancient and ubiquitous New Dealers. Headquarters of ,t he Free Emope Committee is a few stone's throws from <bhrut of the Crusade for Freedom, at 110 West 57th Street, New Yo.rk City. The political and ideological influence of the Free Europe Committee spans continents. No organization in the world exerts more power over the refugees from eastern Europe. lt practicaft:ly maintains a monopoly on placing refugee students in American colleges. It controls the University College at 'S trassbourg, F.rance. Besides the periodical, News from Behind the Iron Curtains, :the Free Europe Commi,t tee has published num- �SLOVAKIA 19 erous booklets and pamphlets Olll communism in eastern Europe. Radio 1Free IDurope, whioh is lo·cated at the Committee's headquarters, 110 West 57th ,S treet, is thus but one, though no doU!bt the most important, department of the Free Em:-ope Committee. While officially a dilVision of a private o,r gani,z ation, Radio Free Em·ope does of course not devise amy arbitrairy policy of its own. It has been conceived as a private a:rnn of the American government's foreign policy and as such reflects the res,pective competence or confusion of Washington. The princ1pal editorial offices of Radio F1ree Europe, while taking their cues from New Yor.k and Washington, are located in Euro.pe, especia!lly in western Germany. European headquarters is at English Gardens (Englisoher Garten) 1, Munich 23, Germany. Riahard J. Condon is European diirector. The largest :broadcasting stations of Radio Free Europe aire located outside of Munich and Frankfurt on the Main. Their principal programs are broadcast in the various languages oif Communist-dominaited peoples, suoh as Czech, Slovaik, Hungarian, Roumanian, Bulgarian, Albanian, and Polish. Influence of Soviet Postwar Policy In order to grasp the policy of these programs, it ~ well worth recalling the Soviet postwar policy in the satellite nations of eastern Europe. For the sa;ke of appearance and eXipediency, no outright Communist governments were set up by the USSR immediately upon the end of World War fil. •I nstead, there arose the so-calied governments of "national fronts" or "people's fronts" or "popular :fironts." Moscow's commissars saw to it that no parities of the real center nor, of course, any of the ,right wing m01Vements were admitted to these fronts; lbut even the non-Communist left wing parties, such as those of the Socialists or Social Democrats, were from the outset largely ied by puppets of the Soviet Union, many of whom had up to then lived in comparative obscurity. Within the course of a few months or years respective- �20 SLOVAKIA ly, these non-.Communisit leftist parties were forged into total tools of the globa.'l Communist conspiracy. Freedom of eleotion, assembly and press weire abolished; trade and industry were nationalized; non-·conformis:ts, by means of the "people's courts," were crushed, and "national committees," virz. soviets, soon dictated and .strangled all !branches of ,public and private iife. 'Dho.ughtful readers may wonder why so many of the Socialist-minded colla,borators were in due time permitted by the Co.m munist authorities to leave their countries. They cannot help being amazed to iearn that it is maiinly these collectivi.stic refugees from the sateilli,te nations whom Radio Free Europe has entrusted with program-.c ontroHing positions. There ,Marxians and sta,tists were 'ballyhooed as "victims" of rS oviet 1persecution, while practically all those who had escaped from the Communists when the Russian armies swept over their countries, i.e., those who at all times had ste·a dfa:stly opposed the Communist menace, were systematicallv excluded from Radi·o Free Europe. Is it possible that a good many of these Socialist twin brothers of the C ommunists were not prevented from reaching our side of the Iron Curtain because on the basis of their ,Marxist past they were likely to confuse and adultcra,te the crusade of the free world? Is it possi,b le that some of them even promised merely to pose as foes of communism, and therefore in r eality continued their collabora-· tion with the Communists, in the guise of foes? At any rate, quite a few of these recent allies, of the Communists are now earning considerable fees firom the funds of the Crusade for Freedom, in payment of their ineffectual and phony ;psychological warfare. Former Red Confederates in Top Jobs The real champions of political and economic freedom , the real opponents of state intervention, the real adversaries o.f materialism, atheism and tyranny were either rejected or ffa-ed by <Radio Free Europe, and are now sitting on the side lines. The men of the Kremlin should indeed be pleased with this curious policy of Radio• 'Free Europe. To be sure, RF1E's •b osses offer us a re ady-made excuse �SLOVAKIA 21 for employing so many former Soviet collruborators in top positions. No one, they aver, is more thoroughly aware of Communist deviousness than 8Jre those who have experienced Communist tactics in practice. However-and this is the crux of the matter-not one of these former confe• derates of the Communists !has come forth !With any .protest against his former ooHa;boration, and none of the former Communists on Rooio Free Europe has come forth with any protest against his former communism. They shun the role of the ,r epentant sinner. They all of a sudden ,p ose as experts of :the democrntic way, a;s pioneers of individual, personal freedom. The Whittaker Chamtbers type is excluded. By no means have aH of these men mere:ly posed ais anti-Communists while in ever so many instances they could not help going soft on the Communist -line. A giroot many, being Socialists, have been so blind with regard to -limited governmental and the free mar,ket economy, and still are such loyal believeil'S in the benefits of Socialist inter,vention, planning and control, that they consistently devise policies which ,p lay into the hands of the Communists by appeasing them. The Polish, Ozechoslo1va;k and Hungarian broadcasting stations of IRadio Free Europe, which equal the power of t he German station in ,M unich, i. e., 50,000 watts, run pro. grams for 20 hours a day. Nume!l'ous short wave stations send broadcasts in the various idioms of eastern Europe t hree or four houirs daily. It is claimed that 29 RF:Ei statjons are now functioning. The Czechoslovak station near Munich is as strong as that of Munich or that of the American Forces network, in that city. In operation since May 1, 1951, it covers political commentaries; daily commentaries; the international situat ion (transmitted from New York offices); programs for workers, peasants, women, young ,people, and children; economics; history; music; entertainment, etc. , and news every hour on the hour. Source Material Far Left of Center The over-all ideology of these prog1rams is largely determined by former members of the Czechoslovak National �22 SLOVcAKIIA Front, i.e., one-time Co,. nrpu:ni.3t colla,borator.s. From time to time, these men ireceive written instructions of specific subjects :from the New Yovk offices where left..,wingers set the tone Dr. Mar.tin Kvetko and Dr. Julius First, :known and prominent former pro-Oommunists, instruct alll editors at regular meetings. Carefully selected boo.ks on communism, clippings from such American publications ·a s The New York Times, The New York Hierald T.rilbune, T.iine, Life, ~tc., items from the press of AmerJcan la;bor unions, material from Communist paipers on bo:th sides of the Curtain, and monitored terts of the Czechoslova;k Communist radio represent the source materiaJl f.rom which the script writers draw. Theire are also special "intelligence" reports. Straight conservative papers and magazines are ta;boo at Radio Free Em:rope. Script writera know how to toe the line. They know that they might as welJ -look for another job if they dare use_materiail or ideas from the Ohicago Triibune or such of Oll!I' magazines :as American !Mercury, American Legion Maga•zine, Ohristian Economics, HUiIIlan Events, National Review and National Repulblic. To summarize - iRJmE progtrams are shl!,POO- according to the dM"ectives of (a) :the American bosses and (b) the hired leftist National Fronters from eastern Europe. The ran!k and file Socialist or o:therwise• leftist editors are either unintelligent or servile or both, and grind out their chores in accordance with their o.rders. AoturuNy, tRill1E policies vary only in degree, !but not in sulbstance,. :f.rom other psychological warfare .s tations of the free world. These inolude Radio Free Asia, strution RIAS in Berlin, Radio Llberation - a private Amer.ican station which broadcasts to IPOOPles inside the USSR - and of course the Voice of America. None of them ,t akes a consistent stand againsit the iphilosophy of g01Vernment intervention a;nd government control, none of them - except for occasional and half-ilieaTted Hp servJce- champions freedom of enterprise. No wonder that so far our psychological warfare has failed. In order to document for American readers WlhaA: sort of ideas aTe being tTansmitted to the fron Curtain world �SLOVAKIA 23 iby their expensive ly staffed freed.om stations, I have for some years gathered from RFE Czec'hoslov.alk programs a substantia :l coNection of radio scTipbs and tape recording s, from which I sha;ll quote in the followh]-g. If any Sllogan may be offered to character ize the genera:! tenor of all too many programs , let us quote whait a well-know n American a·p ologist for the Soviet causes has said in the process of the Far Eastern debacle: "Let them fall, ;b ut do not let it appear that we pushed them." Propagation of Socialism May 1, 1953, 3 :15 ip. m . : "The Socialist youth of the whole world sends its greetings to the youth of Czechoslovakia. We assuTe you that we s hall reach the aim ... the day, when we will be alble to join you in democrac y in the fig,ht for socialism , social justice and freed.om. " At the end of the program the International was played. (The International is the rallying song of world communi sm.) May 3, 1953, 1,2 :15 p. m.: Ferdinan d Peroutka , chief of R~'s Czechoslova!k desk in New York, a weH-known Soci'alist rund one-•t ime .prominen t member of the pro-Comu munist National •ffiront, in his "Sunday Comment s of Ferdinand Peroutka ": "Eisenho wer's program, on .t:he other hand, even though America's factories have not been nati01I1ali2:ed, stands for the concept of world socialism . TheTe is no better way to desoribe it. This is sociaJism . . . The aim of 1:Jhe program outlined by tile President of the United States is to socialize -life." 1 May 1, 1954, 2 :'50 p. m.: "Today, on May 1st, we convey our g,reetings to aN those who are dedicated to the faith in democrat ic socialism ." (To Commun ist-domin ated countries May 1st is synonym ous with America' s July 4th, and the term "Democra tic Socialism " is a Commun ist term used in May Day speeches to descTilbe Commun ist ideology. ) May 4, 1954, 2:10 p. m.: "Program for WorkeTs: "Leon Jouhaux - a g,reat man, descende d from a famNy in which revoltitio nism has been a tradition . His father partidpaJ ted in the revo.1t of the Paris Commun e . . . a born revolution ary ... " GANS.ER LIBRARY MILLERS VILLE STATE COLLEGE �24 SLOV!AKIA May 5, 1954, 2:10 p. m.: "Leon Jouhaux - a great revolutionary, a great rre:fo1rmeT ... " March 23, 1'955, 12:40 p. m. Program, "We Call the Communist Party": "The present order (in eastern Europe) r:ierely serves to continue the dictatorship . . . this jungle which falsely is fabeiled as legitimaJte socia.lism." March 23, 2:20 p. m. Dr. Jan Hajek, on program, "Living Science - Discussion with Young People," said : "Socia1ism has 1become adult. Socialist thinkers are no longer irresponsible radicals. The fundamenta!l problem of modern socialism is man's relation to the state. "The modern socialist rejects both extremes - laissez faire and state control. He is aware of his duties as well as his rigihts. "The citizens of the Socialist society must be conscious of their heritage, aind proud of it." Along this line, the Czechoslova:k editors and broadca;sters crurefully avoid repudiating the measures of socializaJtion and communrzation wbich their own National Front had irnstituted in tJhe postwar years, and often go so far a;s to appro;ve of similar Communist measures in satellite Europe. Thus, on October 28, 1952, at 11 :'50 a. m., the broadcaster of "We Cali t he Communist Party," exclaimed: "Seven years ago, .the decrees of the P,r esident of the Republic ibrought forth the nationalization of industry. In this way Czechoslovakia set out on her way of democraJtic independence.'' So.oialist Policies Defended T.hese ipsychological warriors of the RFE thus still don't realize tha,t it was a crime to cooperate with the Communists, or if they do, :they don't admit it. There is never any hint that the 1Socialist po'licies of the National Front as such have iJ.ed to disaster, no inkling that socialism, because it infringes upon the rights of the individual, leads to communism. Therefo,re, these so-called freedom ,broadcasters ne;ver ,p oint out that the misery of the :p eople in eastern Europe -largely deri;ves from Socialist meddling with the affairs of :the people ; they blame it all on \Soviet exploitation, armaments, emphasis on heavy industry, and that sort of thing. �SLOVAKIA 25 Yes, ,t hey have mentioned the "forced Communist eco-• nomy." What they mean by it may be seen from "Lnternationa1 Commentary from New York," in its :broadca,st April 18, 1953, at 6 :05 p. m. The broadcaster explained that "this mearus in Czechoslovakia bhe return of the fo,r mer export policy, ,t he return to the production of quality arrticies. To put an end to this over-emphasis, on heavy industry must be the goal of our new democratic way." · That is all. No, reference to libeTation from the Socialist bureauaracy, from Socialist oppression. Just a shift from armaments to quality ,p roducts. Nothing more. Feroinamd Peroutka, in his broadca;st of 'Sunday, April 27, 1952, at 12 :15 p. m., declared: "The Communists lie when they tell you that we want to ;restore caipitalism, that we intend to ,r eturn to the proprietors the property which has been ta1ken from them some time ago . . . I repeat: the program ,o f the Czechoslova•k exiles is not capitalism and the return to 1938. Nor do we wish to hand baok the mines and foundries to their former owners. All we care for is thaJt the Communist government, which means dependence on Russia, disappears." It might be argued that an occasional ,p rogram of this sort migiht have its place in the o.ver-all setup 1because, after all, there still are oM 'Socialists in Czechoslovalkia who have no use for the Communists. Yet isn't it strange that while there are programs for workeirs, peaJSants and Communists, there are none £or businessmen? Sometimes they talk about free competition, but often it is but the competitiion of collectively owned factories amongst themselves. The terminology of their broadcasts is af the Socialist variety, including the trite ranting against "Capitalists" and "reactionaries". I now shail ,proceed to offer documentary evidence to show that Radio •F ree Europe also aids, and sometimes even propagates, Titoism and communism, and frequently extols Communist leaders. Milos Vanek, one-.time big wheel in the Commun1st party of Czechoslovakia, and now chief of the economics department of RFE's Czechoslovak desk, said on November 21. 1952. at 11.30 a. m.: "Marx. Engels. Trotsky-for them 1 �26 SLOVAKIA Marxism was the ,s ubstitute for the Western revoilution of human rights." The co:mmentaJtor of "Weekly Survey of the Ame:rican Press," on April 12, 1953, art; 8 :30 a. m., said: "The New York Herald Trilbune is of the opinion that the trial of Mindszenty, the HungM'ian cardin.a;l, as wehl as the trial of Slansky and similar crimes in other Communist countries, ought to ,be remembered ... " Possibly, if not proba,bly, tt was one of the numerous left-wingers on the staff of the Tribune who plamed this cOITU!pting little seed of associating the fearless anti-Comm'l.llllist cairdinal with that old Marxian wheel'horse and Kremlin errand iboy, Slans.ky..Salzmann, who stood as solidly for the Leninist-iStalinist program as any Communist who happened to get purged in some intra..party feud. Sure enough, if the Tribune man did not give a ring to his pal at the CzechosloV'aik desk in New York's RFE heaidquarters, the latter did not fail to picik up that choke tidlbit. After all, any "opinion" of the stai:d and ·p resumably coruserva,tive New Yo11k Herald 'Dribune is safe quoting. Who is there 1bra;zen enough to accuse the o}d Tribune of being sUJbversi,v e? And thus, by association with a ,primate and mal1tyr of the Roman Catholic Church, a Communist li0kspittle is being groomed for respectaJbility. And this in the name of fighting the totalitarian enemy, by an organization which is financed by American donations, a;nd which is sponsored ,b y well--Omown Americams. Again and again, ,R JFE's psychological warriors do not attack Marxism-eommunism as such but what, with tears of regret, they c01I1de:mn is its "degeneracy." Consequently, the listener-unless he be quite alert--is mduced to fancy that communilsm, with which so many RFE bigwigs: once cooperated, would not be so bad if only it had not "degenerated." RFE Attacks Russian Imperialism but not Communism Fid<filing that tune, RJF])'s "Europe without the Iron Curtain," on March 2, 1952, at 3:45 .p. m., complained a/bout the "degeneration of the old Communist ideaJls." Commenting on the arrest of the Kremlin-serving boss- �SLOVAKIA 27 es Sling, Olementis and 'Slansky, RFE's "Comments on Events of the Day," on February 13, 1952, at 7 :30 p. m., waxed somewihat melanc'hoiic: "They consciously closed their eyes, dreaming about the Communist security of the future . . . they dreamed . . . what was to remain of the ide·a ls once the dream had come to Ml end?... A cynical disdain for Communist ideals ... " K•rurol Bel:aJk-lBerger, the left wing Socialist, in RFE's "Round Table Discussion," on April 12, 1953, at 3 :05 p. m., nostalgically referred to the "millions of idealists and men of good wilJ" who had lbelieved in communism and merely deplored the "methods" that had "failed." Regretfully he mused that "the whole aippeal of communism has evaporated ... " 'I'.he policy of collaboration with the Communists was quite distinotly expressed by the old Socialist comrade, Ferdinand Peroutka, in his '~Sunday Oomments" of April 27, 1952, at 12 :15 p. m., when he answered the attack of the Communist dM'ly, !Rude Pravo, on exil.es such a,s he. '"It a<ecuses us of wor,king for the restoration of capitalism, along with the return of the western powers," stated Peroutka. "All we wish to say in reply to these accusations is this: "There has been a Socialist government in England for six yeam. This government would hardly have forced you, the Czech and Slovak people, to accept capitalism. Today we have a Conservatiive government in EngJand. Yet it has not abolished any of the Labor government's Socialist measures, and it would not do anything of the sort in CzechoslovaJkia. "As to America-she supports T1to. Now even though Tito acc~ts America's /bountiful assistance with open hands, t he United States government has not demanded the denationalization of a single Yugoslav factory. Yes, Tiito never ceased to be a Communist. America says: 'Let everyone do as he pleases.' America says: 'Go ahead and be a Communist if that's what you want. All we ask is that you stop supporting Russian imperialism.' America has no 1ntention �28 SLOVAKIA to force runyone, including Czechoslovaikia, to return to capitalism." iDr. Miloslav Kohak, another widely known one-time. Communist collaborator of the National Front who saved his skin in the nick of time and landed a fat job as cllief (until his replacement recently) of RJFE's "Political Comments on the Siituation at Hlome," on November 25, 1952, at 10:45 a. m., had this to say ,a bout Arthur London: "From ,b eg.inning to end, the indictment against London is preposterous. It is the whoie International Brigade of the Civil War irn Spain which is 'being attacked in his person-another proof of the reactionary attitude now prevailing in the Soviet Uni:on. She no longer wants the support of men who. believe in ideals, ibut only of those who believe in bayonets." On May 8, 1954, at 5 :45 .p. m., in "Stories Written ey Life," a young Communist inmate of a slave labor camp was quoted as follows: "Your Christian concept comes close to the 01riginal Leninist ideology . . . We must wm•k toge-· ther, faithful to the ideas which Lenin has taught us." Dr. Jaros}aiv Stransky, Socialist and an oJd Oommunist collaborator of the Nationa1 Front, said in "Taik with Home," on March 1, 1952, at 9 :30 p. m.: "Denunciation should not play amy .part in ,p olitics . . . Arny honest Communist will join the rest of us in condemning denunciation." Probably the old collaborator still believes that it is possible for Communists to ibe honest. Consequently he had no trouble :i n slipping that one in. The trouble with Radio Free Europe, though, is quite another matter. Squandering miHions of American dollars for the alleged ,purpose of fighting communi:sm, it hires old Communist collaborators who rant about "honest" Communists. "We Call the Communist Party," of February 22, 1952, at 11.45 a. m., went all out in praise of Communist cultural achievements. "Czech Communist literature ha;s brought forth works of outstanding value," RFE's psychological warrior declared. "We enjoy reading Communist authors as much as any others." A curious way of inducing an anti-Communist attitude, to say the least. �29 SLOVAKIA 'Dhe Socialist 'Franta Klatil, in "Political Comments on the Situation at Home," on April 21, 1953, at 11]_ :45 a. m., mused that "Tito has more character ithan his one-time aL lies in Prague . . . iHe secured this independence, and quite thoroug,hly at that." It is quite a common rprocedure foir Radio Free Europe to quote Tito and Red Yugoslavia's press as authorities in both moral and political matters. Holiday trips to Tito's Yugoslavia have ,b ecome a cherished habit o,f RFE's editors. Programs Glorify Revolutionary Workers Another variety of the collectivist ideology which pre~ vails among RFE eclitora is the frequent praise of those enemies o,f the Kremlin who have not been able to toe the party line but 'have otherwise been valuable fighters in the class struggle against the so-called exploiters. Thus, the RFE .script, "We CaU the Communist Party," which was broadcast to Ozechoslov,a kia on March 29, 1955, at 12 :40 p. m., in its glorification of title revolutionary workers of Kronstadt sounds as if it had been wr.itten by the old Lithu~ ani3JI14m.e:rican anarchist Alexander Benkman. "'I1he workers of Kronstadt," it says in that script, "fought so that the soviets may be elected freely and democratically, that their just demands be fulfilled - demands which ,w ere entirely in the spirit of the Oct01ber Revolution. They fought for democrati:c soviets ... " True enough, this broadcas-t; was addressed to Communits, and it might seem reasona,;ble to some to appeal to -Communists in the spirit of genuine communism; but is it likely that hardened trans--Ourtain Communi sts of 1955 believe in appeals in behalf of communi~m when they M"e uttered by those who are hired by Americans? Yet, incredtble though it may appear, that is the line which RFE commentators adopted a:S fate as 1955. Let us choose another example of this folly by quoting Dr. JaroS'la.v tStransky, former minister of the National Front, in his "Commentary on the Political Situation" of April 2, 1955, 9 :50 a. m. In this gem of an "anti-Communist" ,b roa.d~ast, the Communist collaborator of b.ut a few yea.rs ago sang the praise of the "Spartacus Bund," the 1 �30 SLOVAKIA militant group which, following World War I, broke away from Germany's left wing 'Socirulists in order to usher in the Communist ·r evolution. Stransky really waxed lyr-ical over Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg, the .two most prominent and violent ieaders: of early German communism. "The modern 1Spartacus movement," pontificated Stransky in behalf of iRFE's version of freedom, "Karl Liebknecht and !Rosa Luxemburg . . . they were pacifists, the foes of imperi:aiism and militarism . . . they were beaten to death iby the mob . . . theN" articles, their speeches, their lettevs were inspired by a vision of order and beauty for the modem world . . . in every sentence which that undersized, unga.irny Jewess, Luxemburg, wrote, there was humaneness and poesy ... " We are not arguing a:bout the lofty intentions of these two world famous pioneers of the Communist revolution, misguided and unbalanced though they were. We are here questioning the wisdom of Ameri'CMlS who, in the name of the freedom for which Washington and Lincoln lirved and died, hN'e a notorious one-time Communist collaJborator who stiH offers hymns to the cause of the Communist revolution. That Stransky shmdd express such revolutionary feeL ings is obvious; that well-meaning Americans should sponhor such project does ,p rovide food for thought. National Fronts Vaunted In line with this farcically suicidal policy these RFE psychological wrurriors natua-ally still vaunt the very Nationa'l Front which paved the way for the total subjugation of the Czech and 'Slovak people •b y the Communists. These strange refugee policy-maJkers, script-writers and editors still live in that dreary world in which fatal short-~ghtedness delivered their people into. the hands of the ,Krem!lin. Thus, on October 28, 1952, at 10 :05 a. m., these socaned heralds of freedom told the home folks ibeihind the Cua-tain: "There wiH once more ,b e a time when Benes will arise ... " On OctOlber '2/l, 1953, at 4 :35 p. m., they aippealed to "those who remember the pre..,F~bruary (i.e.,. 1945-48) democra~y ... " On January 11, 1953, at 1:1:30 a. m., the Je:ftist ,S ociaiist Belak-iBerger, "in Comments on the Events �SLOVAKIA 31 of the Day," exclaimed: "The real Nationa;l Front (i.e., peaceful ,Socialist-Communist collaborators) today lives in the hearts of the Ozechs and SlovaJks." As if there had not been mass murders all over Czeohoslova;kia ,throughout the existence of the National Front, RFE's "Time, Men, Events" of OctOlbeT 18, 1952, at 10 :15 a. m., told the good ipeople behind the Curtain that "the conditions of 194!5 adually orig.iinated in the will and the wish of ,the majority of the people." New Yovk "Comments of the International Situation," on April 12, 1952, decried the "Communist treason" of February, 1948, 1b y which the last collruborators of the National Front were ex;pelled ,b y the K!remlin's agents. "The Communists," this broadcast said, "seized ,p ower by means of the militia and the police ... Before this time (i.e., before February, 1948, d!uTi'Il!g the entire time of the National Front) the democratic politicians had pro.v ed their .g ood will to cooperate (with the Communi:sts ... However) the democratic politioians (the National Front men and today the RFE men) ·· were removed ... " This is of course true, as all of us know. Yet what sort of democrats are Commumst collaborators who tacitly consent or act1vely connive at the suppressiion and murder of political non-conformists? These Nationa,l ·F ronters, now employed by IRFE, did not discoiver the criminality of their Communist a:IHes when moderates and conservatives were systematical!ly murdered. Only when tihe Communists put the finishing touches on the enslavement of .the Ozec'hoslova!k people by exterminating their own co,Uaborators did these curious freedom fighters b,elatedly decide that the Krem1in's henchmen were afiter all poor champions of liberty. Yet whom do the American ,b osses ·o f Radio F.ree Europe select for speaking to the enslaved people of Ozecho"' slovalkia? Not those \WlO from the beginning refused to compromise with the Communist tyrants. They have preferred to choos:e such National Fronters as Dr. iPetr Zenkl, Dr. Joseph Lettrich, Vaclav Majer, Dr. Ivo Duchacclc, and Dr. Ja,roslav Stransky. The latter has ,b een offered as a weeklv feature attraction. �32 SLOVAKIA Like Alger Hiss, who stiU maintains that Yalta was "a good thing," but that the bad Communists unfortunately broke their ,pledges, these N8Jtiona:l Fronters claim that their colla:borator with the CommunLsbs---the so-called Kosice Program-would have been "a good thing" if only the Communists had not .proved to be treacherous. Instead of at last a:dmitting that the Kosice Program was criminal folly from the outset, they still refer to it as an "ideal." In 1955, when the Communists in Czechoslovakia celebrated the 10th anniversary of the Kosice Program, RFE's "Head and Tail," in a broadcast of April 5, at 8 :15 a. m., declared: "Communist propaganda appeals to democracy, i.e., to the ideals which the Communists have betrayed." On April 7, 1955, at 12 :40 p. m., RFE's "We Call the Communist Party" still praised the Kosice government program, "according to which the Czechoslovalk peo.ple were to elect their representatives in free and secret elections." This whitewashing of the Kosice Program is a deliberate falsehood because only four left wing parties then were handed out licenses by the Communist masters while all anti-Communist parties were declared illegal. The Kersten Committee of the U. S. !House of Representatives ha:s put this sham psychological warfare of RFE in the proper light, by Report No. 8, of December 31, 1954. "Especially the proclamation of the Kosice P.rogram, of April 5, :1,94'5," the Report states on pruge 17, "opened the door for an unobstructed drive on the part of the Communists to seize full power in the country." Policy of Appeasement Let the readers draw their conclusions as they see fit. There is no better way to expose the intrinsic bankruptcy of Radio Free Europe's policy. It is not the fight against communism which these psychological war.rio,rs carry on; they stand for 8Jppeasment amd reconciEation. Thus, of ail ,peo.ple, Konni Zilliacus, the led:t wing Brit~ ish Laborite who has for years been a faithfuil contributor to publi-cations of the Communist ,party, was invited by Radio F.ree Europe to address the Czechosloivak peo,ple. This is what Zilliacus, in broken Czech, beamed over the �SLOVAKIA 33 air waves to the trams-Curtain sJ.a,ves, on April 17, 1953, at 12:40 p. m.: "You would enormously encourage and strengit,hen those in the West who-, for the sake of reconciliatio~, woU!ld l.ike to meet the .Soviet Uni:on and the people's democracies half -w ay if you were to rehabi'liltate those of the Prague trial wiho are ,s till in prison, and clear the memory of those who died or were killed ... " Zilliacurs here did not refer to, any anti-Communist victims. He spoke of .such Communists as the Secretary General of the Ozechoslo.vaik Communist Party, Slansky-Salzmann, who had been subjected to one of -qie interminruble purge triaJs and put to death by his coreligionist, Stefan Rais, then Communist Minister of Justice. No,t am.ti-Communists, but the arch-Communist Sbnsky-Saizmann and his confederates were to be "rehrubilitated" for the sake of " reconciliation" with the Communists. That is the sort of psycho1ogical warfare RJFE has been propagating. In similar vein, ,Milos Vanek, old champion of Red causes, said on Apri,l 12, 1953, at 3 :05 p. m.: " ... as long as the Soviet Union faiis to prove by deeds that she is in earnest in her alleged desire to put an end to the cold war and the hot war, she cannot expect that we may diminish our efforts to liberate all the oppressed peo,ples." One weeik later, on the same "Round Table Discussion" program, again at 3 :05 p. m., Vanek said: "First let the Communists mruke ,p eace with their own people. They ought to resort to peaceful means in their :internal policy, too." We might as weJtl asrk wolves to stop devouring lambs, and hyenas to turn into doves of peace. It is nothing less than RFE's zi1uacus and Vanek expect. It is therefore no exaggeration to state that Radio F,r ee Europe has consistently ad<kessed its broadcasts not to anti-Commu:nists, but to, Communists, Ti,to:i.sts, semi-Communists and pro-Communist Socialists b,e hind the Iron Curtain. This fatal policy has spread apathy among what is left of genuine anti-Communists ,b eyond the Curtain. This is not ,t he inspiring fi.g,ht for freedom; it is the deadly appeasement of the Communist tyranny. Inasmuch as Radio Free Europe is controlled and staffed by socialists, pro-Comm1mists, World Federa:lirsts �SLOVAKIA 34. and other assorted internationalists, we should not be surprised ,t o learn that ineffective and harmful progz,ams, and even broadcasts amounting to, srubotage, have character.i~d its specific ,policies. Particu!larly noteworthy features comprise: 1. The reipetition of lbanalities-"truth- telling." 2. The "People's iProgra.m.." 3. Attacks on petty Communists and prote.ction of Communist bosses. 4. tDefonse of American pro-Communist errors. 5. Broadcasts amounting to saJbotage. 6. The spreading of recognizable and destructive lies. 7. Failure ,t o propagate Gemnan-Czech and GermanPolish reconci'li ation. 8. Occasional advice to, follow Communist suggestions. 9. I.;eininist inoitement to premature revolts. 10. Propa:gation of decadent literature and music. 11. Propagation of internationalism and racial merger. 12. Praise for the New Dea:lera, and criticism of con-· servative Americans. 1 Repetition of Banalities F'or many a year, a disproportionate amount of broadcast time, be it out of ineptness or aotually malicious intent, has ibeen alloted by Radio. Free Europe to the never-ending reiteration of banrulities. We might identify this curious practice as RF1E's special little game of "telling the truth." it goes somewhat ,l ike this: - the Communists call Americans imper.iaJlists; Ame~ rioans are not imperiaUsts. - the Com.mu.rusts claim that they want peace; Communists don't waJILt ,p eace. - the Communists claim that the American economy is !bad; the America1I1. economy is good. Of what avail is the production of sue'h trivialitie.s? Can there be any doubt that the endless repetition of such trite assertions Sipreads boredom and turns away potential listeners? If at least RJFE}'s broadcastevs made a sustained effort to explain why Americans are not imperialists, and why their economy excels that of the collectivists, listeners �SLOVAKIA 35 might be inspired to do, some constructive thinking. The natm-e of RFE's script writers a:nd editors, of course, forbids any such sensilble procedure; for collectivists cannot be expected .to expose the impotence of collectivism. 1In a certain way, RIFE prides itself on beiing "specific" in the stale little game of ".teilling the truth." As an example, the reporter of a broadcast delivered on May 3rd, 1953, ait 8:45 a. m., stated: "In Hungary .t here are obvious supply defficiencies ... Canned food has gone ,b ad ... There is a laok of suga1:> in Bulgaria ... Poland suffers from a shmtage of fish ... " This sort of news, of coll!I'se, is no news behind the Iron Curtain. If t:he economic fai,l,ure of the Soviet re-alm were expl,a ined as the inevitable result of state intervention, listene~ might find it proper to heed such programs. Another part of the quaint little truth-telling game consists of reporting concrete conditions and haippenings from t'he world of the slaive labor camps. Inasmuch as there cannot ,b e any suggestion. regarding the termination of these horrors, the effect of these reports is exactly what the Corrurnmist leaders desire, i. e., to lame the wiU of the people by striking teirror into their hearts. Until May 1, 1954, this sort of aimless and uncoordinated "truth-,teUing" seemed to 1b e RFE's princi,pal task Then--at last-a definite over-all program was announced. Does this mean liberation? Let us look and see. The "Program of the •P eople's Opposi.t ion," proposed on Labor Day, 1954, ait 10 :10 a. m. , and frequently reiterated and referred to, ever since, contained the foUowing ten postulates,: 1. LaJbor unions s'hould belong to their memberis, not the b9sses. The positions of union officials should be elective. 2. There should be less ta1k and more hrurd cash. Hon-est money (sic!) for honest work. 3. The worker should be permitted to choose the type of work he prefers. 4. Overtime should be outlawed. 5. Peasants should be a:llowed to quit the kolkho,z es (i.e. 1 cdllectivies) if they so desire. �36 SLOVAKIA 6. There should be a ceHing on the state's s'hare of agricwltural production. I!'arm oontributioos to the state should be equaliized. 7. The government should wovk for the people, not the politicians. 8. Production should benefit the people, not the state. 9. Emphasis should once more be on the consumer. Small shOil)S, owned and run by little ,people, should be revived, to serve the ,c onsumer. 10. The building industry should be mobiUzed for the benefit of the ,peop'le, instead of the state officials. Some points of this so_,called people's pro,g ram, at first sight, may look impressive. Its cardinal and decisive error derives precisely :firom the inability of its coUectivistic perpetraJtors to recognize the primacy of the enterprise. This program fails to go, to the root of the matter. It does not atfack state control as such. It merely proposes to mitigate and qualify. It is at its core plain socialism. Yet this is the sort of t'hing wihich, in the form of leaflets, is dropped from the trans-Curtain ,s kies by means of the "freedom balloons" which columnists like Drew Pearson have been vaunting for years. This program does not offer any decisive opposition to the tyranny of na;tiona'1ization as such. There is but the indecisive and dU'll suggestion to reform the preSleJilt Communist system, to abolish its excesses, to turn it into some form of Titoism or semi~communism or to return to the socialism of the bankrupt National Front. Instinctively, the Ozechs and Slovaks who hear this socalled ,p eople's program reach for the .lmob and shut it off. They must shrug their shottlders wt the oratorical antics of men .w ho :rant against ta'lking but in their own tum offer little beyond empty talrk. This "Program of the People',s Opposition" is faulty and spurious !because the concept of Rrudio Free Europe is based on a capital error. Radio Free Euro,p e basically main_ tams rthat the threat to the free world comes from Russia as an armed and aggressive power; it obfuscates the fundamental issue of the world~wide Communist conspiracy. In accordance with this leftist line, Radio Free Europe �SLOVAKIA 37 a:bsolutely never refers to, congressional investigations of subversirves in the United States. T.rans-1Curtain listeners M"e completely :unaware of the existence of such men a.IS Jenner, Velde, EaJStland, Walter, Dies, Reece, aJnd Mundt. When the Kerstein committee operated in Munich, in the summer of 1954, RJFE referred to it; but the texts of tes-timonies were edited to suit the over-all ·soft~peda:ling of basic issues. Radio Free Europe acts as if it were set up to preserve the concept of state bureaucracy and iprute:rnali:sm by all avaHa:ble means. Petty Communists Blamed for Party Policy Radio Free Europe acts a:s the quack who peddles curealls for the most nauseating aspects of the Comnmnist di-· sease; iit fails to tackle the roots of communism as such. Thrus it makes much ado about the chicaneries and perversions of petty Communist officiais, but it does not name the real culprits, the wire-,pulilers, the bosses who guide and encourage the brutalities of little village tyrants. Radio ·F ree Europe refers by name to individual Stakhanovites, tractor-drivers, and prison~guards; it disregards the organizers of the hruted Communist drives. lt thus actualily ,protects the pillars of the CommU.111ist society, the calclrlating masterminds who play on the wea;knesses of a confused citizenry and trap therir helpless victims in a net of Comm'll.llist demora1ization and perver,s ion. In "Messia:ges to Those at Home," Radio Free Europe p.hllories the little informers who are known to work for the ,s tate police. A1:most without exception these little fellows are known far and wide as stooges of the Communist masters. Dossiers on these puppets do not add to the knowledge rubout Communist evil-0oers. These dossieI's are largely based on dippings from the press of Communist-controllJ.ed eastern :IDurope. The secret agenrts of the Soviet police, the directors: of the pro.grarrn of terror, are never mentioned. "Messages to Those at Home," on February 29, 1952, at 7 :415 p. m., as an example, said: "Who is the mruster in Nitra? (A tiny Slova!k town-Editor.) Who is the master of whom the Soviet police itself is in fear? It is Sergeant Klike. He is hated, dreaded and mighty. He causes the .pllll- �38 SLOVAKIA ishment of policemen who sometimes haive a hearrt; for the.ix victims.'' Now, who is this monster, Sergeant K1ike? Not any "master" by any means. He is but wellArnoW111 little sergeant of the uniformed poJice ! Again, on June 26, 195,2, at 12 :15 p. m., "Messages to Those at Home" singled out a few Communist women: "Comrades M. PO!korelska, !H. Y anosikova, Kr. Bezakova and M. Dedinlmva," the broadcast addressed itself to these petty Communists, "swine-herds and tractor-drivers, re-· member m time the warnings of today. Tomorrow you may be brought to account for your misdeeds; but tomorrow may be too late for you." "'.Program for Civil and State Servants," on April. 10, 1955, at 8:40 a. m., importantly sounded off: "We call your attention to a dangerous informer. The pensioner Michalek, Kulda Street, Brno, ,persecutes beggars. He chases them from homes and often hands them over to the police. In your own interest, Comrade Michalek, we advise you to stop yoUT dirty work." This sort of broadcasting, declaimed in a lowered, almost comical tone, is suppooed to scare primitive swinehevds and tractor-drivers. The bosses are never named. Radio Flree Europe never criticizes the mistakes or the treason of the past and thus never has to expla;in the real reasons of the Communist successes in the past. In the same way as they conceal systematicaliy a11 real causes of the communization of Czechoslovakia, they conceal also the real causes of Communist advances in other part of the world. Let sleeping dogs lie~that seems to be RFE's guiding inspiration. There is no criticism of Teheran, Yalta, and Potsdam. These conferences, in line with the views of an Alger Hiss, are regavded as joot splendid. If only the bad men of the Kremlin had not betrayed their solemn pledges! "We Teach History," on February 13, 1952, at 6:15 p. m., stated: "The Sov.iet Union broke the Yalta rugreement and betrayed it . . . The ink on the document 'had hardly dried when the Soviet Union made a display of violation and unparalleled cynicism." "Sunday Comments of Ferdinand Peroutka," on April �SLOVAKIA 89 3, 1955, at 12:15 p.m., commented: "When the Yalta ,papers were published, some individuals wanted to reprimand the Democratic leaders foo- lack of cautiousness. But any discussion of some little mistaJkes the Democra;tic leaders may ha'Ve made would merely obscure the ,p rincipal wirong, which has been and remains the systematic deception contrived b,y the Ru€,s ian statesmen. These reaJl,i ties ought to be clear. ly understood by the wor-ld. The Ya!lta conferoo:ce turned into a tragedy, not because of what was agreed upon there, but because the 'Soviet Union failed to honor the agreements." Broadcasts Amounting t.o Sabotage Naturally, if we are decei,v ed regarding om own stu~ pidity, and even betrayal, at Yalta, we are likely to remain unaware of the stupidity and pet.haps even SaJbotage which have characterized a certain type of ~E's refugee programs. Incredible though it may seem, Riadio Free Europe ~against the ,persistent pleas and protests of refugees firom behind the Iron Ourtain - in its Sa,turday programs has offered detailed descriptions of successful flights from the Soviet terror. These ,b roadcasts - have named the locations where the border was passed, and indicated even 1:Jhe person:s who, at the risk of their 'lives, assisted the escapees. There could not have been any better means to alert the Communist police.. The very identities of patriots in eastern Europe were thus disclosed to the Soviet secret police, with the reswlt that any recurrence might be prevented. How self-destructive, at the expense of optimistic American dono,r s, cam. we get? Were the script writevs and editors of these "sensatio:nal" pro,grams really s•o naive that they failed to grasp the sinister consequences of their paradoxical role? Did they reaUy not understand that their disclosures about the specific locations of escape would en~ able the Communist pdlice to plug the last holes in the Coctaj.n? Let us quote from the !broadcast, "I Chose Freedom," of Aprill 25, 1953, 8 :30 a. m. "[ went through Cerna Horka," the refugee interviewee revealed, "walking along the hrigihway. Then I went :ba<ck to tile river bed of Vltaiva, in �40 SLOVAKIA the direction of the Austrian Soviet zone. I approached the Jezuv creek ... across f.rom it there is for:bidden territory. . . . In Frynburg there is a bridge across the riv&, and the road to Vyssi Brod. In St. Thomais there is the headquarters of the ,p atrols. The bridge had ,b een torn doWID.. I made a float from_ an old fence and other wood I gathered. The river is aJbout t_e n meters wide and three meters deep at that spot. (This was said in reply to a question from the broadcaister. - Editor.) I guided the float by means of a pole, and then set foot on the forbidden side. I hid in the bushes anod woods ... On the highway to- St. Thomas I encountered a banbed wire barricade, a,bout three feet high. I found an old laidder in a hut which had been empty ever since the German's left. I broke it in two, put it a;gainst the barricade, climbed, and jumped to the other side. Traversing a distance of a'bout thirty meters, I reached Jezuv creek, which is ·less than a meter wide. I crossed the creek and found myself in the Soviet zone of Austria. "In Austria, I folfowed the highway until I entered a little ho.use below a hill. The Ausitri.ans who occupied this house felt pity for the refugee, and assisted me . They helped me to contact a friend of theirs in Linz who was to get me ,s afely acro,s s a bridge in Linz, on the border of the 1Soviet ·a nd American 2.1ones. That man pro.v ided me with a forged identification card, into which we rubbed some dirt in order to maike the name illeg1ble. I joined a group of girls who passed the sentry at that spot. Nonchalantly, I ,p roduced the forged identity card for the sentry, and without looking back I crossed the bridge. I was in the Western. izone of Austria." Enemy Alerted The Communist enemy couid not have been more brazenly ailerted. Letters of protest against such asinine (if not trea{!herou.s) interviews fl.ooded the expellee press in Munich. Nevertheless, the interviews continued until 1954, by w'hich time a great many of the cracks in the Soviet wall had been revealed to the Russiains, and repaired by them. As late ·as 'May 9, 1954, at 3 :45 p. m ., the "I Chose Freedom" broadcast disclosed the exact details of a flight �SLOVAKIA 41 by express train from Decin, Bohemia, to. Berlin. The in. terviewee described how he had conceailed his presence at the Decin railway stat,ion, how he eluded the attention of the .security agents, aid ,how a "people's po'liceman" at the station in East Berlin 'helped him to escape. As late as Apriil 2, 1955, at 12 :45 p. m., again on the "I Chose Freedom" program, an escapee pictured the detafls of his flight across the above-mentioned bridge in Linz. Can there be any doubt that such interviews. intimidate those behind the Iron Curtain who might be wirlling to cooperate with refugees? Can our friends behind the Iron Curtain maintain erven a shred of confidence in "psyc'hologica1 warriors" who indulge in this sort of give-away? The editor of RFJD's "I Chose Freedom," one Otto Graf, had been editor of the Socialist ,p aper Svet Prace and a well-known CommUJnist collaborator of the National Front. An obscure journalist before War H, he owes hi.s career to his fatal activities in the National Front. Zdenek Fierlinger and Bohumil Lausman, Socialist ministers of the Nationa1l Front, were the pulblishers of Svet Prace, at the time of Graf's editorship. In 1948, on the occasion of the Communist coup in Czechoslovakia, Fierlinger turned out to be a Communist planted in the Sooial Democ.ratic party. Lausman, after his "esca.pe" to the free world, in 1951 worked for a while for Radio Free Europe. Afterward~, he turned out to be a Communist agent and returned to 0zechoslovakia. As editor of the Czechoslovak refugee ,paper, Ce.skoslovenske Noviny, in Ludwigslburg, Gerimany, RFE editor Otto Graf published articles by Lausman. Self-destructive Lies Broadcast It is ha.r d to believe that a man who has ,b een able to function as a newspaper editor is so inept that quite a few of his presumably anti-Communist radio programs in effect equal sabotage of the freedom crusade. That a saboteur of the free world's cause could hardly improve on these refugee programs is evident from their text. An almost equally self-destructive feature of R:ailio Free Europe is the routine broadcasting of transparent lies. �42 SLOVAKIA In a number of pamphlets, including The RFlE Story (p. 14), RFE's psychological warriors proudly admit resorting to lies. Whether lies should be part of our "psycho war" program is 1b oth ethically and practically quite debatable. To brag aJbout one's own lie in print, so that their admission may hie quoted ,b y the enemy, once aga:illl reaches itili.at degree of ingenuousness that in its net results is hardly distinguishaJble fr<Y«..'l saibotage. In addition to all that, many of the fabrications which our RFE brain trusters have th01Ught up are such simon puTe inventions that those for whom they are intended immediately recognize them as such. iFor example, Otto Graf and Vladimir Kucera~Homik, at Christmas, 1954, when maJking programs on the miner's life, made a· report about a great coal mirle catastrophe in Kladno., which a1legdly cost twe:lve lives of miners. This report was invented. We may ibe s,ure that a character like Bohumil Lalli:lman, former chairman of the Ozechoslovak Social Democratic party and afterwards a ,p lain Commrunist agent in Western Germany and Austria, fed RFE such damaging stories, and that some editors believed him. Yet who but one_,time Nation.ail Front colla;borators - RFE's farvorites wou!ld pUJt any trust in LaUSiman anyhow? RFE has made it easy for the Communist to prove RJFE's own mendaoity. Verbatim quotations from RFE's press and radio are all that is :required. T.here is still another lie, even more destructive, which has been produced by the "truth-telling" of Radio Free Europe. It is the number one lie, and concerns the core of the Communist system. There is irrefutable evidence regarding which group is maki:ng communism in the East. This evidence comes from refugees from the East and from various reliable sources. This group is characterized by such · names as Kruglow (or Krugloch), the chief of the Secret Police of the U&SR, Kaganovic, Ehreniburg, Berman, Rakosi_,Rosenkra.Il'Z, etc. In ,aJdd,ition, this group fully and completely constitutes that "invisi'ble government" behind the scenes in �43 SLOVAKIA the East. It is the same group, of course, which also makes the Communist conspiracy in the West. When in 1951 the members of this group (Minister of Justice Stefan Rais, etc.) staged purge tria:ls against other members of .the same group - Slansky-1Sal2'Inann, iReicin, Ka.tiz, etc. - RFE shouted to the world that the entire group was b.eing cruelly persecuted and liquidated in the East. Many samples of suoh programs are availaJble. This greatest and most perverted lie of world communism is !being upheld by RFE even now, and all facts contradfoting it ,a re cut, adjusted or ·s uppressed. Every intellrigent .refugee from the East calils this He the number one .sabotage committed by RFE. An intelligent inv-estigation of FRE as well as of the opinions and the material of the ref.ugees from behind the Iron Curtain would easily bring forth the full truth. 1 Former German Co-Citizens Alienated It is not enough to quote Radio Free Europe to expose its sooia:list and internationalist bias. To point out lost op-, portuni,ties as well as de[iberate omissions permits us to penetrate the confused and hrulf-·hearted mentality of this much~touted and eXipensiive outfit. Perhaps the tbest example of RFE's negativism toward .important objectives of t'he free world is its peculiar attitude towards the Germans. To be sure, on the surface t.he West Ger.man RepubHc and Chance!Hor Adenauer have been officially praised 'b y RFE. Beyond such formalities, IWE has done little to inspire the Czechs and Poles with trust in the Germans. In 1945, the Communists forced the Poles and the C.zec'hs to expel close to fifteen miUion Germans, from their home1and of centUJries. Albout three million of these lost their Hives as they walked through the Iron Ore Mountains, the Sudeten Mountains and the Bohemian Forest or as they were shipped westward in cattle cars which somewhere were left on the traoks. All of the other twelive mililion were r01b1bed of their ,property. Most of them were bea,ten and tortwred. Naturally, the Czechs ,and the Poles fear the venge-· a.nee of their former German co~citizens. Understandrubly, �SLOVAKIA the Communists do, all they can to :keep this fear a1ive among the Poles and the Czechs who are under their domination. It would be the duty of Radio Free Europe to counteract this Communi<st policy by telling the Poles and Czechs a bout the numerous manifestations of good will and the sincere desire for reconciliation on the part of di siplaced Germans living in Western Germany. Radio Free Europe does nothing of the sort. It does not even report the official agreements which expelled Czech statesmen have signed with the German expellees. In summary, R@Es' stand on the highly important expellee prdblem is as foillows: a. It does not even mention the peaceful attitude and program of the German expellees. b. It ridicules exi'led Czechs and Poles who do not hate the Germans. c. It fails ever to refer to the remarkable past achievements of the :G ermans in Czechoslovakia and to examples of German-Czech coopexation. d. It never mentions how the ex,pulsion of the antiCommunist Germans enabled the communization of Czechoslovakia from within. e. It continuaNy harps on the persecutions the Czechs and Poles have suffered under German domination. f. It damns the Germans with faint prai,se, and slyly, in veiled fashion, even incites the Slavs against the Germans. g. By upholding the ex;pulsion of fifteen mililion Germans and defending the Oder-Neisse border, it follows a line of nationality policy which is identical with that of the Communists. 1 Advice to Fellow Communist Suggestions There are many other - apparently often ha:rmless occasions on which RFE's line comcides with what the Communists desire. Why men should be .p aid by Americans to broadcast from expensive stations what our Communist enemies want in the first pl ace is not easy to grasp. Particttlarly ba:ffling examples of American--Soviet co1 �SLOVAKIA 45 incidences ha:ve come from the desk of Milos Vanek, chief · of the Economic Department of the Czechoslovak Desk, RFIE, Munich. Formerly one o.f the most prominent leaders of the 0zech Communist party, Vanek still feels urged to counsel Czechs in harmony with his former confederates. Early in 19'52, Vane'k busied himself forecrusting an immediate inflation, and advising the people to invest their cash in goods, including the expensive products of the Communist gray market. Innumerable programs have carried this message to the Czechs. The broadcast of Ja:nuary 23, 1952, at 6 :45 p. m., admonished the Czechs: "The Communists in Czechoslovakia are about to runloose inflation. Invest all your savings in goods, buy whatever you can, even the e_x1pensive articles on the government market." There was no inflation; but the refugees from the satellite country reported that the Communist government at that time spread exacbly the same rumor of inflation and also adv1sed to spend all savings because it wanted to draw in a:11 "surplus" money without any monetary reform. A year and a half later, when, of a sudden, the new value oif the Czech currency was a:nnounced, neither the Communists in 0zechoslovakia noT Vanek in RIFE had given any wa:rning. When the Communist government asked for shock brigades of voluteers to plant new forests, Vanek enthusia,stically chimed in. "Help to plant new trees," Vanek exhorted the Czechs on the "Economic Program" of May 1, 1953. "The Communist regime," he announced, "will perish, and t'he trees will be for your children." Other programs hawe offered similar a'dvice. •~Prog,ra,m for Women," 0ctob.er 24, 1953, at 1 :45 ,p. m., counseled to sell quality go·ods. to Communist state stores "because the Communist stores are sel'ling the goods to non-Communists, and it is 111ot good to, cheat non-Communists." "Program for Workers," March 23, 1955, 2:10 p. m., suggested that workers as.k foremen for e~tra work becawse it would mean extra money for them -while it would not really help the Communist cause. Along the same line, the old collaiborator, Otto Graf, 1 �46 SLOVAKIA interviewed a fellow by name of Tonda Hornik, who said: "I thus eairned 2,000 crowns extra~it pays not to be lazy." Radio Free Europe, thus, does not urge the satellite slave workers .to relax if not slow down, it spurs them on to work harder - for their Communis t masters. Those in the know were not surprised when "wor.ker" Tonda Hornik, in June, 1955, was exposed as a Communis t agent. One of RFE's editors, Robert Lowkota by name, had gone to the extreme of appealing to the Czech workers not to absent themselves from wor.k; but the protests from refugees who had listened to this monstrosit y w&e so im-,pressive that iRiFE had to back down and, in a broadcast of April 10, 1955, at 12.:45 p. m. ("We Call the Communis t Party"), tried to minimize the importance of Loulkota's aberration. Do these editors who urge the Czech people to fol.Jew suc'h advice have a soft spot in their hearts for the Commwnist~ r are they following the orders of men whose hearts and minds are hard as steel ? On the one hand, Radio Free Europe has urged Czechs to do overtime in factories giving only evasive consolation s, never mentioning how and when liberation could be achieved; on the other, through provocative agitation, it has practically incited them to revolt. Such policy, on the surface, appears contradicto ry. On second thought, we might wonder if all of this confusion is due to ineptness. As long as the Western governmen ts are not prepared to supply .p otential rebels with weapons, no rebellion can succeed. Only people who are unacquaint ed with the nature of communism can hope to overthrow Communis t governments withouit outside assistance. Certainly the present United States governmen t is not inclined to arm potential insurrectio nists. Even if it wanted to, a horde of United Naitions associates would prevent it from going ahead. Why then does Radio Free Europe fail to warn resolutely against revolts at this time? Curiously enough, Lenin favored armed uprisings against his own regime; for nothing exposes more glaringly the staunchest freedom fighters, and nothing offers a more striking opportunity to exterminat e the most stout-heart ed �SLOVAKIA 47 foes of communism. Whatever the reason may be - and it appears most worthwhile to get to the bottom of the situation - Radio Free Europe again and again has played the role of the agent provocateur.Whether or not any sabotage wa:s intended, the policy has actually been of benefit to the Communists. First of all, RFE has pictured the enemy as weak while in reality he is strong. "Life Behind the Iron Curtain," on April 26, 1953, at 8:45 a. m., exclaimed: "There is chaos, uncertainty and fear in the Soviet Union and among its leaders." "Best Article," on April 24, 1953, at 9:05 a. m., stated that "there are rifts within the system," and on April 17 it claimed that "we face the beginning of a dissolution process which affects the entire regime." Few Americans know that the broadcast of RIAS, the American broadcasting station in Berlin, shared in the responsibility for the tragic 1953 rebellion of the Germans in the Soviet zone - a rebellion which led to the arrest and annihila:tion of tens of thousands of our best friends behind the Iron Curtain. Practically no American knows that RFE has sent the same sort of abortive action ,p rograms to the Czechs. On February 8, 1952, at 9:15 p. m., Milos Vanek, on "Economic Program," approvingly spoke of the rise of "armed brigades against their leaders in the Communist party itself." Hopefully he observed that "the signs . . . are already on the horizon." When in Czechoslovakia public demonstrations took place in 1953, Radio Free Europe pictured them in inflammatory scenes. The other programs reflected the same attitudes. On June 21, 1953, at 12 :15 p. m., the perennial "Sunday Comments of Ferdinand Peroutka," referring to the tragic and fatal uprising among the Germans, told the Czechs: "Do you know that tens of thousands of workers there are on the march, shouting 'Ivan, go home? Do you know that everybody there is fed up with the Soviet overlordship, has enough of Soviet exploitation?" �48 SLOVAK IA Again and again, Peroutk a has dicussed prematu re and therefor e suicidal - uprising s in an inflamm atory fashion. For the sake of preservi ng precious friends for a more opportu ne time, we might well have followed the advice of the late Senator Robert A. Taft, who vigorou sly opposed such heedlessness. Propagation of Decadent Literature and Music For the time being, Radio Free Europe might well content itself with building up the morale of those who long for liberatio n from the Commu nist tyrants. There are numerou s straight forward books which take a courage ous stand against any and all undue control by governm ent. These, though, are not the books from which RFE's commentato rs have chosen to quote. No, the cultural fare which they have selected is largely confined to decaden ce in literature, and jazz in the realm of music. The program "Play of the Week" is full of mental confusion and decay. The books which are reviewed and quoted, and which are suppose d to represen t the world of the free, abound in decaden t characte rs, in suicide and perversi on. As to literatur e which is suppose d to represen t eastern Europe, the emphasi s is strongly placed on works of defected collectiv ists, picturin g the horror and the hopeless ness among the satellite nations. The editor of "Book of the Week," on August 3, 1952, at 9:45 a. m., expound ed: "We enable you to become acquain ted with the literatur e which is current in the free world. Take a book by Mannus Ferber, who once was a Commu nist . . . the story in itself is colorless - a tera in the ocean ... there are no ready answers anywhe re .. . " On April 26, 1953, at 9 :45 a. m., "Book of the Week" another typical example - discusse d The Polish present to Giodo: "A mysterio us curse rests on the Jean Mill, by family," the commen tator explaine d. "In vain, Kosta opposes the weight of destiny ... his son-in-la w becomes mentally insane ... his daughte r goes crazy ... the young woman is slowly dying ... the power of fate is the core of the book ... all revolt against it is futile . . . " �SLOVAKIA 49 "Weekly Survey of Culture," of January 4, 1953, at 11 :15 a. m., told of a work of literature that is "full of complexes and inner conflicts . . . " "Film Program," of April 9, 1955, at 2 :20 p. m., reviewed a film directed by Eliza Kazan: " . . . he went to see his mother in the brothel ... he borrowed money from her, even though he despises her, and then he made a good business deal . . . a drama full of instincts, passions, and convulsions, of undertones ... a master work by Kazan ... " This story about a moral and strong father whose wife lives in a brothel was offered by RFE during the Easter holidays. RFE seems to be chockful of split personalities, of people with complexes, of those who are in need of psychiatrists, of people whom we might pity if there were not so little time left and if they were not entrusted with the task of championing our principles of trust in God and our responsibilities as free men. The music offered by RFE, at 10:05 every morning, and at other hours, accords with the confusion, savagery and hopelessness of the literary ,p roducts which these men favor. ,Most of it i:s jruzz in the version of the squieruking dis_ harmonies and noises of primitives, or of complex men who flee from their own souls. The West is rich in music of the highest inspiration. RFE seems not aware of this mighty force in our behalf. The Communist station in Prague does better. The Communists, mindful of national heritage, play Smetana and Dvorak, the great music of the Czech people. They benefit by these magnificent works. But Radio Free Europe broadcasts jazz - alien, uninspiring stuff. Some of the less influential employees on Radio Free Europe have protested against these low and degrading performances. They were told from above to go on producing jazz. Propagation of Internationalism and Racial Merger The general mental and moral climate of Radio Free Europe conveys moods of indecision, wretchedness and vexation. �50 SLOVAKIA Inherentl y most of the ideals which RFE advocates require some sort of super-gov ernment, which means but additional curtailme nt of the liberties which this costly radio network is supposed to champion . On nearly every day, for instance, there is a program which urges the abolition of naturally- grown national culture in favor of the European super-sta te. It is called "Europe Without the Iron Curtain" and it always begins with the slogan: "Europe without the Iron Curtain means the United States of Europe. Yesterda y but Utopia, today the dream of millions, tomorrow reality." The slogan has been formulate d by the widely known internationalis t Karol Belak-Be rger. Paradoxic ally, the Commun ist internatio nalists in the East are smart enough to appeal often to age-old, traditiona l nationalism. Radio Free Europe, which has been presumab ly conceived to fight Commun ist internatio nalism, champion s internatio nalism. "Nearly all Czechs and Slovaks desire the United States of Europe." That is what "The Other Side of the Coin" asserted, on April 5, 1955, at 8 :15 a. m. A free poll or plebiscite among the enslaved Czechs and Slovaks might well disclose a different mood, a different opinion. On June 6, 1952, at 7 :15 p. m., "Europe Without the Iron Curtain" stated: "The world federatio n is a necessity ; but first Europe must be united. The European federatio n is but the beginning ; the United States of the World is the ultimafo aim ... First a European federatio n must be achieved; then we shall be ready for the world federatio n." In accordanc e with this candidly avowed goal, RFE continually disparage s the concept of national sovereign ty, which is dear to the overwhel ming majority of European s. Thus "Commen ts on Events at Home," on April 28, 1953, at 10:45 a. m., slightingl y referred to "the so-called national sovereign ty." "Europe Without the Iron Curtain," on May 5, 1954, at 1:15 p. m., stated: "On the defendan t's .b ank there sits the concept of the national state and its ideological foundation - nationalis m. Frontiers - the straitjack et of the national state - are an anachron ism." �SLOVAKIA 51 The United Nations and UNESCO - a controversial topic among millions of Europeans - are favorites of RFE. "The United Nations gives new hope," said "News," on October 24, 1953, at 1 p. m. "The whole world looks toward the United Nations," said "Who Is Who," on April 22, 1953, at 8:30 a. m. Such statements are daily standard with Radio Free Europe. Ever opposed to nationalism, RFE even objects to national self-determination of the many non-Russian nations inside the Soviet empire. It stands to reason that national self-assertion inside Russia might be a ,p owerful aid to any effort aimed at disintegration of the Soviet Union. Consequently this is opposed by RFE's amazing bleeding hearts. Thus, "Voices of the Western Press," on February 8, 1952, at 8 p. m., quoted: "Russia should not dissolve herself into a number of smaller nations; the nations of the Soviet Union should discontinue their disputes." In its determined opposition to the concept of national heritage, and in harmony with the ideas favored by such American left-wing groups as Americans for Democratic Action, RFE, in programs addressed to the trans-Curtain people, goes so far as to attack the McCarran-Walter Immigration Act. Thus, "Our New York Correspondent Reports," on April 29, 1953, at 10:05 a. m., declared: "The public wants the law to be changed; for the nationality quotas of this law are obsolete . . . The press unanimously demands revision. We hope that the change will be effected." Beyond mere political merger of the nations, Radio Free Europe also campaigns for a merger of races. Thus, for instance, "Europe Without the Iron Curtain," on February 15, 1952, at 6:15 p. m., declared: "Just as Europe, in a way, already represents a nation . . . . there also arises a new nation in the U. S. A. - out of the white, the black, and the yellow races . . . This too will happen in the East of Europe." Along this line, RFE's left-wingers seldom fail to disguise their animosity towards those nations which they regard as particularly nationalistic - against the past Germany, Spain, the Union of South Africa, and the various �52 SLOVAKIA Arab nations. RFE's persistent opposition to the Arab states sometimes reaches comical proportions. An article in itself would be required to document this phase of RFE's internationalism. Praise for New Dealers and Criticism of Conservative Americans In line with its over-all outlook, Radio Free Europe has consistently glorified American New Dealers and has at the same time not refrained from merciless attacks on conservative Americans. In other words, RFE, which should concentrate on psychological warfare against the Communist world con$piracy, has indulged in the hobby of defaming valiant American anti-Communists. No wonder that wideawake Europeans have ever more often asked if RFE is primarily an anti-anti-Communist organization. "Answers to Those at Home," on October 28, 1952, at 10 :05 a. m., proclaimed : "Stevenson was a principal speaker at the celebration for T. G. Masaryk. (Founder and first president of the Czechoslovak republic. - Editor.) Our hope for the future would be rekindled if he were elected President of the United States." On November 4, 1952, at 10:05 a. m., the same program reveled in this choice bit of lyrical effusion: "Adlai Stevenson ... ranks among America's greatest sons, such as Lincoln and F. D. Roosevelt ... He is the very incarnation of America's highest aspirations . . . Within less than a year he rose from obscurity to the pinnacle of American leadership." The record of Radio Free Europe's programs is full of unfavorable remarks about those great Americans who have steadfastly opposed the Communist menace. A flood of vituperation was pou:r;-ed on General Douglas MacArthur upon his dismissal from the Far Eastern scene. His speeches, which have moved the truly anti-Communist refugees from eastern Europe, have been consistently withheld from RFE's programs. It was the same with the great and honorable Senator Robert A. Taft, on the occasion of his campaign for the Republican nomination in 1952. After "Mr. Republican's" �SLOVAKIA 53 defeat at the Chicago Convention, "Our New York Correspondent Reports," on August 7, 1952, at 10:05 a. m., rejoiced: "For Europe it is decisive that the last remainders of isolationism have been removed, and that a sound policy has been carried to victory." Ferdinand Peroutka, in one of his interminable "Sunday Comments," on August 3, 1952, at 12:15 p. m., pontificated: "Taft was the proponent of a policy which can never settle anything, as his adversaries have always pointed out." "Our New York Correspondent Reports," on July 9, 1952, at 8:05 p. m., had this to say: "The opinions of (Herbert) Hoover and (Douglas) MacArthur represent the viewpoint of a minority; these men want to confine themselves to the (exclusive) defense of the American continent. The majority ( of Americans), though, have dimissed this attitude and are conscious of America's global role." "A Program of Novelties," referring to the passing of two famous American journalists Pulitzer and Bert McCormick - on April 3, 1955, at 3 .p. m., called Pulitzer the "son of an Hungarian immigrant, an outstanding American journalist," but criticized Colonel McCormick as a "controversial, reactionary isolationist" who "opposed progress." The Krem'l~n must have been satisfied with that incisive observation. General Impression Created By Radio Free Europe What, then, is the general impression which Radio Free Europe has made, behind the Iron Curtain as well as among the millions of anti-Communists in Western Europe? It is, besides the impression of half-heartedness, indecision, artificiality, and downright clowning. When RFE's broadcasters, directly addressing some poor wretch or some swineherd in some forlorn little hamlet in Slovakia or Bohemia, lower their voices to terrify him, antiCommunist refugees merely laugh. Alas, the farce tastes bitter, because of the lost opportunities, the stupidity, the feeling of treason, and the unsonscionably low moral standard. Next, there is the strong impression of cliche journalism, occupying itseif with superficialities - cars, houses, �54 SLOVAKIA etc. - and largely avoiding verbatim quotations. Instead, they impose their propaganda by means of slogans. Real opinions of the refugees and of the people at home are disregarded by the RFE propaganda. Real anti-Communists are never allowed to get their messages across the Curtain. Real anti-Communists, including the repenting National Fronters, are social outcasts. But the collaborators of the National Front, who even today maintain that the National Front was all right, sit at the big desks and cash their substantial checks, in compensation for their shadow boxing. Then there is the distinct impression of coolness, impersonality and anonymity. Since the well-known anti-Communists of -long standing have been barred from RFEJ, theTe are no names to inspire the listeners. Yes, some men do speak under their own names. These include the left-winger Dr. Joseph Lettrich, the Marxist Vaclav Majer, and such Socialists as Ferdinand Peroutka, Dr. Petr Zenkl and Dr. Jaroslav Stransky. However, these men are known to be weaklings, mere fronts for more powerful personalities. They are recognized to be generally useless; they won't stir the imagination of anyone. As to the known former champions of the Communist causes, trans-Curtain listeners would simply shut off the radio if they knew who was talking to them. Therefore, Milos Vanek now calls himself Pravdomil Basta, and Frantisek Listopad goes by the name of Jan Ctvrtek. Similarly, the leftist Socialist Dr. Miloslav Kohak has become Vitezslav Fram; Otto Graf hides his pro-Communist past under the pseudonym of Franta Tabor, and Karol Belak-Berger has conveniently turned into one Jan Lehota. "Who are these fellows anyhow?" the listeners behind the Curtain must wonder; for they have never heard of them. Naturally, they become suspicious, and their interest sags. Czechs and Slovaks behind the Curtain remember those who never compromised with the Communists. They know that these men are now living in the West - the C:i!echoslovak General of the Army, Lev Prchala, the former Czechoslovak Minister, Dr. Joseph Cerny, and many others, and �SLOVAKIA 55 also some former members of the National Front who in the free West started to denounce it - Dr. Bohdan Chudoba, Dr. Michal Zibrin, or Dr. Helena Kozeluhova, who was expelled in 1946 from the Parliament by the National Front, and the entire younger generation, led by Jiri Havelka, Emil Petrik, etc. The Slovaks have their former Minister, Dr. Ferdinand Durcansky and many others. The listeners behind the Iron Curtain cannot fail to wonder why none of them sends any "messages home" by way of Radio Free Europe. The masterminds of this confusion, whose net results represent sabotage of the anti-Communist fight - are way behind the firing lines in New York City, and in Washington. They, too, shroud themselves in anonymity. 'T he over-all impression, then, is one of cynism and emptiness, artificiality, and insincerity. Who wants to buy apples which are rotten at the core? RFE's Program In conclusion, we must ask: What, then, is the program of Radio Free Europe, or has no program been designed so far? Those behind the Curtain, who have the time to listen at all, would like to know in what way liberation may be achieved, and what specific assistance, beyond mere words, the West might be able to offer. Radio Free Europe has not been able to supply any satisfactory information in respect to this all-important ,problem. Here, however, we cannot help allowing for valid reasons to excuse much of RFE's ineffectualness; for even if RFE were staffed with outright, hard-hitting anti-Communists, it could not ,possibly make any promises which the Western governments, particularly the government of the U. S. A., were not willing to back with power. There is no use in claiming superiority in aircraft or guided missiles if that superiority admittedly does not exist. It is not possible to promise an economic blockade as long as that policy has not been adopted by the American government. Radio Free Europe - or any of the other liberation �56 SLOVAKIA stations - cannot very well offer the severing of diplomati c relations with the Soviet criminals when our own statesmen meet with them at the summit and have lots of smiling pictures :taken for the benefit of the Soviet ieaders. However, if RFE were really (instead of merely in name) an independe nt and private organizat ion, and really staffed with intelligen t and genuine anti-Com munists, it could urge Western governme nts to take stronger steps. Radio Free Europe might demand the creation of military units exclusive ly composed of refugee and e~pellee volunteers. It might demand the ousting of Commun ists from both internatio nal and national organizat ions. It might establish extensive contacts with the undergro und behind the Curtain, instead of causing its discovery and extermin ation by Communi sts. Radio Free Europe might frankly discuss the present difficultie s while at the same time exhorting the Iron Curtain slaves not to lose hope. The trans-Cu rtain ,people who long for liberty might at least be informed about where all of us stand. They should know about a long-rang e .p rogram as well as what can be done at this time. Most importan t of all, Radio Free Europe should become a clear and shining beacon to those who are willing to fight for their liberties. This can only be achieved by throwing out the clowns and confusion ists who want to fight communism with a Socialist "peo1ple',s program. " If Radio Free Europe cannot cleanse itself because it is from top to bottom infested with collectivists, internatio nalists, materialists and decadents , then it would be better to shut it down and replace it with an entirely new organizat ion. Perhaps this great reform cannot be undertak en as long a:s even in the United States the grass roots patriots, who unequivocally believe in God, the Constitut ion and freedom of enterprise , are successfu lly boycotted and ridiculed. Perhaps an effective liberation station can only be establishe d when at last the collectivi st corrupter s of the United States are driven from their entrenche d ,p ositions in America' s public institution s, and her means of communi cation, and her governme nt itself. � SLOVAKIA 17 A CLOSE-UP VIEW OF RADIO FREE EUROPE By Jiri Brada ( From January, February, and March, 1956, issues of "FACTS FORUM," Dallas, Texas) Radio Free Europe, a netwoPk of stations which has been set up in westeim Europe for the purpose of sending anti-Communist broadcasts to the peoples on the other side of the Iron Curtain, is a division of Free Europe Committee, Inc. The latter, a private organization, was founded in 1949 by a group of American citizens, among whom the Hon. Herbert H. Lehman, U. S. Senator from New York, played a prominent role. In 1950, the Free :illurope Committee started its annual fund-raising drive under t'he name of Crusade for Freedom. Most of us, at one time or another, have bee111 exposed to the propaganda of thi,s powerful orgacization, via newspapers, radio, television, freedom cars, and freedom trains, and most of us have read and heard a'bout FEC's muchpublicized freedom balloons. The Free Europe Committee claims that millions of its funds have been contributed by more than twenty-five million American citizens. Many more millions of dollars, though, have 1been donated by corporations, including some of the large foundations. Henry Ford II, whose Ford Foundation through the yeairs has been a heavy contributor, is nationa:l chairman of the Crusade for Freedom. As such he is the ,successor of General Lucius D. Clay. Other ,prominent sponsors of the project include David Sarnoff, Edward R. Murrow, Harold E . Stassen, Walter S. Gifford, Samuel Unger, Geo:rge Barasch, C. B. Tibbets, and Joseph J. Fliesser. Headquarters of the Crusaide is 29 West 157th Street, New York City. C. D. Jackson, in crucial years one of President Ei~ senho.w er's "paiace guard," headed the Free, Europe Committee for a cosiderable length of time. Wh~tney H. Shepardson is its current president. Joseph C. Grew, former U. S. Ambassador to Japan, is Chairman of the Board of the F,r ee Europe Committee. Arthur W. Page is Chairman of the Executive Committee. �18 SLOVAKIA Vice presidents include W. J. C. Eagan, Levering Tyson, Samuel S. Wa.J.ikeT, JT., and :Bernard Yarrow. Jo'hn C. Tra.phagen serves as treasurer, Theodore C. Augustine as secretary and assistant itireasurer, and J. Clay.ton Miller as assistant secretary. On March 15, 1955, Helfuert H. Lang was replaced as Director of Radio Free Europe by W. J. C. Eagan. 'Dhe Board of Directors, besides several of the abo.venamed, is composed of A. A. Berle, David K. :ID. Bruce, Jr. , Frederick R. Dolbeare, Julius Fleischmann, H. B. Miller, Irving S. Olds, George U. 1S huster, Charles M. Spofford, and H. Gregory Thomas. Among additiona:l sponsors of the Free EUTope Comm1ttee we find such nationally known figures as Clarence L. Adcock, Raymond Pace Alexander, Laird Bell, Francis Biddle, Rolbert Woods Bliss, Robert F. Bradford, !Hairry A. Bullis, Cecile B. De Mille, Frank R. Denton, William J. Donovan, Mark 1F . iIDthridge, James A. Farley, Virginia C. Gildersleeve, Charles R.. Hook, Palmer Hoyt, Paul Kesten, Henry ,R, Luce, Joseph V. McKee, Web Maddox, H. B. Miller, tSamuel E. Morison, F.rederiok Osborn, John W. Sibley, Sp)'l'os Skouras, Chairles P. 'Daft, DeWitt Wallace, W. W. Waymac:k, Walter H. Wheeler, Jr., Charles E. Wilson, Mrs. Quincy Wright, and Darryl Zanuck. The 1952 list of national sponsors also featured Jaimes B. Carey, .A:J.ilen W . Dulles, William Green, and Matthew Woll. Besides a sprinkL ing of men who uphold America's tradiitions of limited govVeTrunent and the free market economy, there is :the usual contingent of ancient and ubiquitous New Dealers. Headquarters of ,t he Free Emope Committee is a few stone's throws from <bhrut of the Crusade for Freedom, at 110 West 57th Street, New Yo.rk City. The political and ideological influence of the Free Europe Committee spans continents. No organization in the world exerts more power over the refugees from eastern Europe. lt practicaft:ly maintains a monopoly on placing refugee students in American colleges. It controls the University College at 'S trassbourg, F.rance. Besides the periodical, News from Behind the Iron Curtains, :the Free Europe Commi,t tee has published num- �SLOVAKIA 19 erous booklets and pamphlets Olll communism in eastern Europe. Radio 1Free IDurope, whioh is lo·cated at the Committee's headquarters, 110 West 57th ,S treet, is thus but one, though no doU!bt the most important, department of the Free Em:-ope Committee. While officially a dilVision of a private o,r gani,z ation, Radio Free Em·ope does of course not devise amy arbitrairy policy of its own. It has been conceived as a private a:rnn of the American government's foreign policy and as such reflects the res,pective competence or confusion of Washington. The princ1pal editorial offices of Radio F1ree Europe, while taking their cues from New Yor.k and Washington, are located in Euro.pe, especia!lly in western Germany. European headquarters is at English Gardens (Englisoher Garten) 1, Munich 23, Germany. Riahard J. Condon is European diirector. The largest :broadcasting stations of Radio Free Europe aire located outside of Munich and Frankfurt on the Main. Their principal programs are broadcast in the various languages oif Communist-dominaited peoples, suoh as Czech, Slovaik, Hungarian, Roumanian, Bulgarian, Albanian, and Polish. Influence of Soviet Postwar Policy In order to grasp the policy of these programs, it ~ well worth recalling the Soviet postwar policy in the satellite nations of eastern Europe. For the sa;ke of appearance and eXipediency, no outright Communist governments were set up by the USSR immediately upon the end of World War fil. •I nstead, there arose the so-calied governments of "national fronts" or "people's fronts" or "popular :fironts." Moscow's commissars saw to it that no parities of the real center nor, of course, any of the ,right wing m01Vements were admitted to these fronts; lbut even the non-Communist left wing parties, such as those of the Socialists or Social Democrats, were from the outset largely ied by puppets of the Soviet Union, many of whom had up to then lived in comparative obscurity. Within the course of a few months or years respective- �20 SLOVAKIA ly, these non-.Communisit leftist parties were forged into total tools of the globa.'l Communist conspiracy. Freedom of eleotion, assembly and press weire abolished; trade and industry were nationalized; non-·conformis:ts, by means of the "people's courts," were crushed, and "national committees," virz. soviets, soon dictated and .strangled all !branches of ,public and private iife. 'Dho.ughtful readers may wonder why so many of the Socialist-minded colla,borators were in due time permitted by the Co.m munist authorities to leave their countries. They cannot help being amazed to iearn that it is maiinly these collectivi.stic refugees from the sateilli,te nations whom Radio Free Europe has entrusted with program-.c ontroHing positions. There ,Marxians and sta,tists were 'ballyhooed as "victims" of rS oviet 1persecution, while practically all those who had escaped from the Communists when the Russian armies swept over their countries, i.e., those who at all times had ste·a dfa:stly opposed the Communist menace, were systematicallv excluded from Radi·o Free Europe. Is it possible that a good many of these Socialist twin brothers of the C ommunists were not prevented from reaching our side of the Iron Curtain because on the basis of their ,Marxist past they were likely to confuse and adultcra,te the crusade of the free world? Is it possi,b le that some of them even promised merely to pose as foes of communism, and therefore in r eality continued their collabora-· tion with the Communists, in the guise of foes? At any rate, quite a few of these recent allies, of the Communists are now earning considerable fees firom the funds of the Crusade for Freedom, in payment of their ineffectual and phony ;psychological warfare. Former Red Confederates in Top Jobs The real champions of political and economic freedom , the real opponents of state intervention, the real adversaries o.f materialism, atheism and tyranny were either rejected or ffa-ed by <Radio Free Europe, and are now sitting on the side lines. The men of the Kremlin should indeed be pleased with this curious policy of Radio• 'Free Europe. To be sure, RF1E's •b osses offer us a re ady-made excuse �SLOVAKIA 21 for employing so many former Soviet collruborators in top positions. No one, they aver, is more thoroughly aware of Communist deviousness than 8Jre those who have experienced Communist tactics in practice. However-and this is the crux of the matter-not one of these former confe• derates of the Communists !has come forth !With any .protest against his former ooHa;boration, and none of the former Communists on Rooio Free Europe has come forth with any protest against his former communism. They shun the role of the ,r epentant sinner. They all of a sudden ,p ose as experts of :the democrntic way, a;s pioneers of individual, personal freedom. The Whittaker Chamtbers type is excluded. By no means have aH of these men mere:ly posed ais anti-Communists while in ever so many instances they could not help going soft on the Communist -line. A giroot many, being Socialists, have been so blind with regard to -limited governmental and the free mar,ket economy, and still are such loyal believeil'S in the benefits of Socialist inter,vention, planning and control, that they consistently devise policies which ,p lay into the hands of the Communists by appeasing them. The Polish, Ozechoslo1va;k and Hungarian broadcasting stations of IRadio Free Europe, which equal the power of t he German station in ,M unich, i. e., 50,000 watts, run pro. grams for 20 hours a day. Nume!l'ous short wave stations send broadcasts in the various idioms of eastern Europe t hree or four houirs daily. It is claimed that 29 RF:Ei statjons are now functioning. The Czechoslovak station near Munich is as strong as that of Munich or that of the American Forces network, in that city. In operation since May 1, 1951, it covers political commentaries; daily commentaries; the international situat ion (transmitted from New York offices); programs for workers, peasants, women, young ,people, and children; economics; history; music; entertainment, etc. , and news every hour on the hour. Source Material Far Left of Center The over-all ideology of these prog1rams is largely determined by former members of the Czechoslovak National �22 SLOVcAKIIA Front, i.e., one-time Co,. nrpu:ni.3t colla,borator.s. From time to time, these men ireceive written instructions of specific subjects :from the New Yovk offices where left..,wingers set the tone Dr. Mar.tin Kvetko and Dr. Julius First, :known and prominent former pro-Oommunists, instruct alll editors at regular meetings. Carefully selected boo.ks on communism, clippings from such American publications ·a s The New York Times, The New York Hierald T.rilbune, T.iine, Life, ~tc., items from the press of AmerJcan la;bor unions, material from Communist paipers on bo:th sides of the Curtain, and monitored terts of the Czechoslova;k Communist radio represent the source materiaJl f.rom which the script writers draw. Theire are also special "intelligence" reports. Straight conservative papers and magazines are ta;boo at Radio Free Em:rope. Script writera know how to toe the line. They know that they might as welJ -look for another job if they dare use_materiail or ideas from the Ohicago Triibune or such of Oll!I' magazines :as American !Mercury, American Legion Maga•zine, Ohristian Economics, HUiIIlan Events, National Review and National Repulblic. To summarize - iRJmE progtrams are shl!,POO- according to the dM"ectives of (a) :the American bosses and (b) the hired leftist National Fronters from eastern Europe. The ran!k and file Socialist or o:therwise• leftist editors are either unintelligent or servile or both, and grind out their chores in accordance with their o.rders. AoturuNy, tRill1E policies vary only in degree, !but not in sulbstance,. :f.rom other psychological warfare .s tations of the free world. These inolude Radio Free Asia, strution RIAS in Berlin, Radio Llberation - a private Amer.ican station which broadcasts to IPOOPles inside the USSR - and of course the Voice of America. None of them ,t akes a consistent stand againsit the iphilosophy of g01Vernment intervention a;nd government control, none of them - except for occasional and half-ilieaTted Hp servJce- champions freedom of enterprise. No wonder that so far our psychological warfare has failed. In order to document for American readers WlhaA: sort of ideas aTe being tTansmitted to the fron Curtain world �SLOVAKIA 23 iby their expensive ly staffed freed.om stations, I have for some years gathered from RFE Czec'hoslov.alk programs a substantia :l coNection of radio scTipbs and tape recording s, from which I sha;ll quote in the followh]-g. If any Sllogan may be offered to character ize the genera:! tenor of all too many programs , let us quote whait a well-know n American a·p ologist for the Soviet causes has said in the process of the Far Eastern debacle: "Let them fall, ;b ut do not let it appear that we pushed them." Propagation of Socialism May 1, 1953, 3 :15 ip. m . : "The Socialist youth of the whole world sends its greetings to the youth of Czechoslovakia. We assuTe you that we s hall reach the aim ... the day, when we will be alble to join you in democrac y in the fig,ht for socialism , social justice and freed.om. " At the end of the program the International was played. (The International is the rallying song of world communi sm.) May 3, 1953, 1,2 :15 p. m.: Ferdinan d Peroutka , chief of R~'s Czechoslova!k desk in New York, a weH-known Soci'alist rund one-•t ime .prominen t member of the pro-Comu munist National •ffiront, in his "Sunday Comment s of Ferdinand Peroutka ": "Eisenho wer's program, on .t:he other hand, even though America's factories have not been nati01I1ali2:ed, stands for the concept of world socialism . TheTe is no better way to desoribe it. This is sociaJism . . . The aim of 1:Jhe program outlined by tile President of the United States is to socialize -life." 1 May 1, 1954, 2 :'50 p. m.: "Today, on May 1st, we convey our g,reetings to aN those who are dedicated to the faith in democrat ic socialism ." (To Commun ist-domin ated countries May 1st is synonym ous with America' s July 4th, and the term "Democra tic Socialism " is a Commun ist term used in May Day speeches to descTilbe Commun ist ideology. ) May 4, 1954, 2:10 p. m.: "Program for WorkeTs: "Leon Jouhaux - a g,reat man, descende d from a famNy in which revoltitio nism has been a tradition . His father partidpaJ ted in the revo.1t of the Paris Commun e . . . a born revolution ary ... " GANS.ER LIBRARY MILLERS VILLE STATE COLLEGE �24 SLOV!AKIA May 5, 1954, 2:10 p. m.: "Leon Jouhaux - a great revolutionary, a great rre:fo1rmeT ... " March 23, 1'955, 12:40 p. m. Program, "We Call the Communist Party": "The present order (in eastern Europe) r:ierely serves to continue the dictatorship . . . this jungle which falsely is fabeiled as legitimaJte socia.lism." March 23, 2:20 p. m. Dr. Jan Hajek, on program, "Living Science - Discussion with Young People," said : "Socia1ism has 1become adult. Socialist thinkers are no longer irresponsible radicals. The fundamenta!l problem of modern socialism is man's relation to the state. "The modern socialist rejects both extremes - laissez faire and state control. He is aware of his duties as well as his rigihts. "The citizens of the Socialist society must be conscious of their heritage, aind proud of it." Along this line, the Czechoslova:k editors and broadca;sters crurefully avoid repudiating the measures of socializaJtion and communrzation wbich their own National Front had irnstituted in tJhe postwar years, and often go so far a;s to appro;ve of similar Communist measures in satellite Europe. Thus, on October 28, 1952, at 11 :'50 a. m., the broadcaster of "We Cali t he Communist Party," exclaimed: "Seven years ago, .the decrees of the P,r esident of the Republic ibrought forth the nationalization of industry. In this way Czechoslovakia set out on her way of democraJtic independence.'' So.oialist Policies Defended T.hese ipsychological warriors of the RFE thus still don't realize tha,t it was a crime to cooperate with the Communists, or if they do, :they don't admit it. There is never any hint that the 1Socialist po'licies of the National Front as such have iJ.ed to disaster, no inkling that socialism, because it infringes upon the rights of the individual, leads to communism. Therefo,re, these so-called freedom ,broadcasters ne;ver ,p oint out that the misery of the :p eople in eastern Europe -largely deri;ves from Socialist meddling with the affairs of :the people ; they blame it all on \Soviet exploitation, armaments, emphasis on heavy industry, and that sort of thing. �SLOVAKIA 25 Yes, ,t hey have mentioned the "forced Communist eco-• nomy." What they mean by it may be seen from "Lnternationa1 Commentary from New York," in its :broadca,st April 18, 1953, at 6 :05 p. m. The broadcaster explained that "this mearus in Czechoslovakia bhe return of the fo,r mer export policy, ,t he return to the production of quality arrticies. To put an end to this over-emphasis, on heavy industry must be the goal of our new democratic way." · That is all. No, reference to libeTation from the Socialist bureauaracy, from Socialist oppression. Just a shift from armaments to quality ,p roducts. Nothing more. Feroinamd Peroutka, in his broadca;st of 'Sunday, April 27, 1952, at 12 :15 p. m., declared: "The Communists lie when they tell you that we want to ;restore caipitalism, that we intend to ,r eturn to the proprietors the property which has been ta1ken from them some time ago . . . I repeat: the program ,o f the Czechoslova•k exiles is not capitalism and the return to 1938. Nor do we wish to hand baok the mines and foundries to their former owners. All we care for is thaJt the Communist government, which means dependence on Russia, disappears." It might be argued that an occasional ,p rogram of this sort migiht have its place in the o.ver-all setup 1because, after all, there still are oM 'Socialists in Czechoslovalkia who have no use for the Communists. Yet isn't it strange that while there are programs for workeirs, peaJSants and Communists, there are none £or businessmen? Sometimes they talk about free competition, but often it is but the competitiion of collectively owned factories amongst themselves. The terminology of their broadcasts is af the Socialist variety, including the trite ranting against "Capitalists" and "reactionaries". I now shail ,proceed to offer documentary evidence to show that Radio •F ree Europe also aids, and sometimes even propagates, Titoism and communism, and frequently extols Communist leaders. Milos Vanek, one-.time big wheel in the Commun1st party of Czechoslovakia, and now chief of the economics department of RFE's Czechoslovak desk, said on November 21. 1952. at 11.30 a. m.: "Marx. Engels. Trotsky-for them 1 �26 SLOVAKIA Marxism was the ,s ubstitute for the Western revoilution of human rights." The co:mmentaJtor of "Weekly Survey of the Ame:rican Press," on April 12, 1953, art; 8 :30 a. m., said: "The New York Herald Trilbune is of the opinion that the trial of Mindszenty, the HungM'ian cardin.a;l, as wehl as the trial of Slansky and similar crimes in other Communist countries, ought to ,be remembered ... " Possibly, if not proba,bly, tt was one of the numerous left-wingers on the staff of the Tribune who plamed this cOITU!pting little seed of associating the fearless anti-Comm'l.llllist cairdinal with that old Marxian wheel'horse and Kremlin errand iboy, Slans.ky..Salzmann, who stood as solidly for the Leninist-iStalinist program as any Communist who happened to get purged in some intra..party feud. Sure enough, if the Tribune man did not give a ring to his pal at the CzechosloV'aik desk in New York's RFE heaidquarters, the latter did not fail to picik up that choke tidlbit. After all, any "opinion" of the stai:d and ·p resumably coruserva,tive New Yo11k Herald 'Dribune is safe quoting. Who is there 1bra;zen enough to accuse the o}d Tribune of being sUJbversi,v e? And thus, by association with a ,primate and mal1tyr of the Roman Catholic Church, a Communist li0kspittle is being groomed for respectaJbility. And this in the name of fighting the totalitarian enemy, by an organization which is financed by American donations, a;nd which is sponsored ,b y well--Omown Americams. Again and again, ,R JFE's psychological warriors do not attack Marxism-eommunism as such but what, with tears of regret, they c01I1de:mn is its "degeneracy." Consequently, the listener-unless he be quite alert--is mduced to fancy that communilsm, with which so many RFE bigwigs: once cooperated, would not be so bad if only it had not "degenerated." RFE Attacks Russian Imperialism but not Communism Fid<filing that tune, RJF])'s "Europe without the Iron Curtain," on March 2, 1952, at 3:45 .p. m., complained a/bout the "degeneration of the old Communist ideaJls." Commenting on the arrest of the Kremlin-serving boss- �SLOVAKIA 27 es Sling, Olementis and 'Slansky, RFE's "Comments on Events of the Day," on February 13, 1952, at 7 :30 p. m., waxed somewihat melanc'hoiic: "They consciously closed their eyes, dreaming about the Communist security of the future . . . they dreamed . . . what was to remain of the ide·a ls once the dream had come to Ml end?... A cynical disdain for Communist ideals ... " K•rurol Bel:aJk-lBerger, the left wing Socialist, in RFE's "Round Table Discussion," on April 12, 1953, at 3 :05 p. m., nostalgically referred to the "millions of idealists and men of good wilJ" who had lbelieved in communism and merely deplored the "methods" that had "failed." Regretfully he mused that "the whole aippeal of communism has evaporated ... " 'I'.he policy of collaboration with the Communists was quite distinotly expressed by the old Socialist comrade, Ferdinand Peroutka, in his '~Sunday Oomments" of April 27, 1952, at 12 :15 p. m., when he answered the attack of the Communist dM'ly, !Rude Pravo, on exil.es such a,s he. '"It a<ecuses us of wor,king for the restoration of capitalism, along with the return of the western powers," stated Peroutka. "All we wish to say in reply to these accusations is this: "There has been a Socialist government in England for six yeam. This government would hardly have forced you, the Czech and Slovak people, to accept capitalism. Today we have a Conservatiive government in EngJand. Yet it has not abolished any of the Labor government's Socialist measures, and it would not do anything of the sort in CzechoslovaJkia. "As to America-she supports T1to. Now even though Tito acc~ts America's /bountiful assistance with open hands, t he United States government has not demanded the denationalization of a single Yugoslav factory. Yes, Tiito never ceased to be a Communist. America says: 'Let everyone do as he pleases.' America says: 'Go ahead and be a Communist if that's what you want. All we ask is that you stop supporting Russian imperialism.' America has no 1ntention �28 SLOVAKIA to force runyone, including Czechoslovaikia, to return to capitalism." iDr. Miloslav Kohak, another widely known one-time. Communist collaborator of the National Front who saved his skin in the nick of time and landed a fat job as cllief (until his replacement recently) of RJFE's "Political Comments on the Siituation at Hlome," on November 25, 1952, at 10:45 a. m., had this to say ,a bout Arthur London: "From ,b eg.inning to end, the indictment against London is preposterous. It is the whoie International Brigade of the Civil War irn Spain which is 'being attacked in his person-another proof of the reactionary attitude now prevailing in the Soviet Uni:on. She no longer wants the support of men who. believe in ideals, ibut only of those who believe in bayonets." On May 8, 1954, at 5 :45 .p. m., in "Stories Written ey Life," a young Communist inmate of a slave labor camp was quoted as follows: "Your Christian concept comes close to the 01riginal Leninist ideology . . . We must wm•k toge-· ther, faithful to the ideas which Lenin has taught us." Dr. Jaros}aiv Stransky, Socialist and an oJd Oommunist collaborator of the Nationa1 Front, said in "Taik with Home," on March 1, 1952, at 9 :30 p. m.: "Denunciation should not play amy .part in ,p olitics . . . Arny honest Communist will join the rest of us in condemning denunciation." Probably the old collaborator still believes that it is possible for Communists to ibe honest. Consequently he had no trouble :i n slipping that one in. The trouble with Radio Free Europe, though, is quite another matter. Squandering miHions of American dollars for the alleged ,purpose of fighting communi:sm, it hires old Communist collaborators who rant about "honest" Communists. "We Call the Communist Party," of February 22, 1952, at 11.45 a. m., went all out in praise of Communist cultural achievements. "Czech Communist literature ha;s brought forth works of outstanding value," RFE's psychological warrior declared. "We enjoy reading Communist authors as much as any others." A curious way of inducing an anti-Communist attitude, to say the least. �29 SLOVAKIA 'Dhe Socialist 'Franta Klatil, in "Political Comments on the Situation at Home," on April 21, 1953, at 11]_ :45 a. m., mused that "Tito has more character ithan his one-time aL lies in Prague . . . iHe secured this independence, and quite thoroug,hly at that." It is quite a common rprocedure foir Radio Free Europe to quote Tito and Red Yugoslavia's press as authorities in both moral and political matters. Holiday trips to Tito's Yugoslavia have ,b ecome a cherished habit o,f RFE's editors. Programs Glorify Revolutionary Workers Another variety of the collectivist ideology which pre~ vails among RFE eclitora is the frequent praise of those enemies o,f the Kremlin who have not been able to toe the party line but 'have otherwise been valuable fighters in the class struggle against the so-called exploiters. Thus, the RFE .script, "We CaU the Communist Party," which was broadcast to Ozechoslov,a kia on March 29, 1955, at 12 :40 p. m., in its glorification of title revolutionary workers of Kronstadt sounds as if it had been wr.itten by the old Lithu~ ani3JI14m.e:rican anarchist Alexander Benkman. "'I1he workers of Kronstadt," it says in that script, "fought so that the soviets may be elected freely and democratically, that their just demands be fulfilled - demands which ,w ere entirely in the spirit of the Oct01ber Revolution. They fought for democrati:c soviets ... " True enough, this broadcas-t; was addressed to Communits, and it might seem reasona,;ble to some to appeal to -Communists in the spirit of genuine communism; but is it likely that hardened trans--Ourtain Communi sts of 1955 believe in appeals in behalf of communi~m when they M"e uttered by those who are hired by Americans? Yet, incredtble though it may appear, that is the line which RFE commentators adopted a:S fate as 1955. Let us choose another example of this folly by quoting Dr. JaroS'la.v tStransky, former minister of the National Front, in his "Commentary on the Political Situation" of April 2, 1955, 9 :50 a. m. In this gem of an "anti-Communist" ,b roa.d~ast, the Communist collaborator of b.ut a few yea.rs ago sang the praise of the "Spartacus Bund," the 1 �30 SLOVAKIA militant group which, following World War I, broke away from Germany's left wing 'Socirulists in order to usher in the Communist ·r evolution. Stransky really waxed lyr-ical over Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg, the .two most prominent and violent ieaders: of early German communism. "The modern 1Spartacus movement," pontificated Stransky in behalf of iRFE's version of freedom, "Karl Liebknecht and !Rosa Luxemburg . . . they were pacifists, the foes of imperi:aiism and militarism . . . they were beaten to death iby the mob . . . theN" articles, their speeches, their lettevs were inspired by a vision of order and beauty for the modem world . . . in every sentence which that undersized, unga.irny Jewess, Luxemburg, wrote, there was humaneness and poesy ... " We are not arguing a:bout the lofty intentions of these two world famous pioneers of the Communist revolution, misguided and unbalanced though they were. We are here questioning the wisdom of Ameri'CMlS who, in the name of the freedom for which Washington and Lincoln lirved and died, hN'e a notorious one-time Communist collaJborator who stiH offers hymns to the cause of the Communist revolution. That Stransky shmdd express such revolutionary feeL ings is obvious; that well-meaning Americans should sponhor such project does ,p rovide food for thought. National Fronts Vaunted In line with this farcically suicidal policy these RFE psychological wrurriors natua-ally still vaunt the very Nationa'l Front which paved the way for the total subjugation of the Czech and 'Slovak people •b y the Communists. These strange refugee policy-maJkers, script-writers and editors still live in that dreary world in which fatal short-~ghtedness delivered their people into. the hands of the ,Krem!lin. Thus, on October 28, 1952, at 10 :05 a. m., these socaned heralds of freedom told the home folks ibeihind the Cua-tain: "There wiH once more ,b e a time when Benes will arise ... " On OctOlber '2/l, 1953, at 4 :35 p. m., they aippealed to "those who remember the pre..,F~bruary (i.e.,. 1945-48) democra~y ... " On January 11, 1953, at 1:1:30 a. m., the Je:ftist ,S ociaiist Belak-iBerger, "in Comments on the Events �SLOVAKIA 31 of the Day," exclaimed: "The real Nationa;l Front (i.e., peaceful ,Socialist-Communist collaborators) today lives in the hearts of the Ozechs and SlovaJks." As if there had not been mass murders all over Czeohoslova;kia ,throughout the existence of the National Front, RFE's "Time, Men, Events" of OctOlbeT 18, 1952, at 10 :15 a. m., told the good ipeople behind the Curtain that "the conditions of 194!5 adually orig.iinated in the will and the wish of ,the majority of the people." New Yovk "Comments of the International Situation," on April 12, 1952, decried the "Communist treason" of February, 1948, 1b y which the last collruborators of the National Front were ex;pelled ,b y the K!remlin's agents. "The Communists," this broadcast said, "seized ,p ower by means of the militia and the police ... Before this time (i.e., before February, 1948, d!uTi'Il!g the entire time of the National Front) the democratic politicians had pro.v ed their .g ood will to cooperate (with the Communi:sts ... However) the democratic politioians (the National Front men and today the RFE men) ·· were removed ... " This is of course true, as all of us know. Yet what sort of democrats are Commumst collaborators who tacitly consent or act1vely connive at the suppressiion and murder of political non-conformists? These Nationa,l ·F ronters, now employed by IRFE, did not discoiver the criminality of their Communist a:IHes when moderates and conservatives were systematical!ly murdered. Only when tihe Communists put the finishing touches on the enslavement of .the Ozec'hoslova!k people by exterminating their own co,Uaborators did these curious freedom fighters b,elatedly decide that the Krem1in's henchmen were afiter all poor champions of liberty. Yet whom do the American ,b osses ·o f Radio F.ree Europe select for speaking to the enslaved people of Ozecho"' slovalkia? Not those \WlO from the beginning refused to compromise with the Communist tyrants. They have preferred to choos:e such National Fronters as Dr. iPetr Zenkl, Dr. Joseph Lettrich, Vaclav Majer, Dr. Ivo Duchacclc, and Dr. Ja,roslav Stransky. The latter has ,b een offered as a weeklv feature attraction. �32 SLOVAKIA Like Alger Hiss, who stiU maintains that Yalta was "a good thing," but that the bad Communists unfortunately broke their ,pledges, these N8Jtiona:l Fronters claim that their colla:borator with the CommunLsbs---the so-called Kosice Program-would have been "a good thing" if only the Communists had not .proved to be treacherous. Instead of at last a:dmitting that the Kosice Program was criminal folly from the outset, they still refer to it as an "ideal." In 1955, when the Communists in Czechoslovakia celebrated the 10th anniversary of the Kosice Program, RFE's "Head and Tail," in a broadcast of April 5, at 8 :15 a. m., declared: "Communist propaganda appeals to democracy, i.e., to the ideals which the Communists have betrayed." On April 7, 1955, at 12 :40 p. m., RFE's "We Call the Communist Party" still praised the Kosice government program, "according to which the Czechoslovalk peo.ple were to elect their representatives in free and secret elections." This whitewashing of the Kosice Program is a deliberate falsehood because only four left wing parties then were handed out licenses by the Communist masters while all anti-Communist parties were declared illegal. The Kersten Committee of the U. S. !House of Representatives ha:s put this sham psychological warfare of RFE in the proper light, by Report No. 8, of December 31, 1954. "Especially the proclamation of the Kosice P.rogram, of April 5, :1,94'5," the Report states on pruge 17, "opened the door for an unobstructed drive on the part of the Communists to seize full power in the country." Policy of Appeasement Let the readers draw their conclusions as they see fit. There is no better way to expose the intrinsic bankruptcy of Radio Free Europe's policy. It is not the fight against communism which these psychological war.rio,rs carry on; they stand for 8Jppeasment amd reconciEation. Thus, of ail ,peo.ple, Konni Zilliacus, the led:t wing Brit~ ish Laborite who has for years been a faithfuil contributor to publi-cations of the Communist ,party, was invited by Radio F.ree Europe to address the Czechosloivak peo,ple. This is what Zilliacus, in broken Czech, beamed over the �SLOVAKIA 33 air waves to the trams-Curtain sJ.a,ves, on April 17, 1953, at 12:40 p. m.: "You would enormously encourage and strengit,hen those in the West who-, for the sake of reconciliatio~, woU!ld l.ike to meet the .Soviet Uni:on and the people's democracies half -w ay if you were to rehabi'liltate those of the Prague trial wiho are ,s till in prison, and clear the memory of those who died or were killed ... " Zilliacurs here did not refer to, any anti-Communist victims. He spoke of .such Communists as the Secretary General of the Ozechoslo.vaik Communist Party, Slansky-Salzmann, who had been subjected to one of -qie interminruble purge triaJs and put to death by his coreligionist, Stefan Rais, then Communist Minister of Justice. No,t am.ti-Communists, but the arch-Communist Sbnsky-Saizmann and his confederates were to be "rehrubilitated" for the sake of " reconciliation" with the Communists. That is the sort of psycho1ogical warfare RJFE has been propagating. In similar vein, ,Milos Vanek, old champion of Red causes, said on Apri,l 12, 1953, at 3 :05 p. m.: " ... as long as the Soviet Union faiis to prove by deeds that she is in earnest in her alleged desire to put an end to the cold war and the hot war, she cannot expect that we may diminish our efforts to liberate all the oppressed peo,ples." One weeik later, on the same "Round Table Discussion" program, again at 3 :05 p. m., Vanek said: "First let the Communists mruke ,p eace with their own people. They ought to resort to peaceful means in their :internal policy, too." We might as weJtl asrk wolves to stop devouring lambs, and hyenas to turn into doves of peace. It is nothing less than RFE's zi1uacus and Vanek expect. It is therefore no exaggeration to state that Radio F,r ee Europe has consistently ad<kessed its broadcasts not to anti-Commu:nists, but to, Communists, Ti,to:i.sts, semi-Communists and pro-Communist Socialists b,e hind the Iron Curtain. This fatal policy has spread apathy among what is left of genuine anti-Communists ,b eyond the Curtain. This is not ,t he inspiring fi.g,ht for freedom; it is the deadly appeasement of the Communist tyranny. Inasmuch as Radio Free Europe is controlled and staffed by socialists, pro-Comm1mists, World Federa:lirsts �SLOVAKIA 34. and other assorted internationalists, we should not be surprised ,t o learn that ineffective and harmful progz,ams, and even broadcasts amounting to, srubotage, have character.i~d its specific ,policies. Particu!larly noteworthy features comprise: 1. The reipetition of lbanalities-"truth- telling." 2. The "People's iProgra.m.." 3. Attacks on petty Communists and prote.ction of Communist bosses. 4. tDefonse of American pro-Communist errors. 5. Broadcasts amounting to saJbotage. 6. The spreading of recognizable and destructive lies. 7. Failure ,t o propagate Gemnan-Czech and GermanPolish reconci'li ation. 8. Occasional advice to, follow Communist suggestions. 9. I.;eininist inoitement to premature revolts. 10. Propa:gation of decadent literature and music. 11. Propagation of internationalism and racial merger. 12. Praise for the New Dea:lera, and criticism of con-· servative Americans. 1 Repetition of Banalities F'or many a year, a disproportionate amount of broadcast time, be it out of ineptness or aotually malicious intent, has ibeen alloted by Radio. Free Europe to the never-ending reiteration of banrulities. We might identify this curious practice as RF1E's special little game of "telling the truth." it goes somewhat ,l ike this: - the Communists call Americans imper.iaJlists; Ame~ rioans are not imperiaUsts. - the Com.mu.rusts claim that they want peace; Communists don't waJILt ,p eace. - the Communists claim that the American economy is !bad; the America1I1. economy is good. Of what avail is the production of sue'h trivialitie.s? Can there be any doubt that the endless repetition of such trite assertions Sipreads boredom and turns away potential listeners? If at least RJFE}'s broadcastevs made a sustained effort to explain why Americans are not imperialists, and why their economy excels that of the collectivists, listeners �SLOVAKIA 35 might be inspired to do, some constructive thinking. The natm-e of RFE's script writers a:nd editors, of course, forbids any such sensilble procedure; for collectivists cannot be expected .to expose the impotence of collectivism. 1In a certain way, RIFE prides itself on beiing "specific" in the stale little game of ".teilling the truth." As an example, the reporter of a broadcast delivered on May 3rd, 1953, ait 8:45 a. m., stated: "In Hungary .t here are obvious supply defficiencies ... Canned food has gone ,b ad ... There is a laok of suga1:> in Bulgaria ... Poland suffers from a shmtage of fish ... " This sort of news, of coll!I'se, is no news behind the Iron Curtain. If t:he economic fai,l,ure of the Soviet re-alm were expl,a ined as the inevitable result of state intervention, listene~ might find it proper to heed such programs. Another part of the quaint little truth-telling game consists of reporting concrete conditions and haippenings from t'he world of the slaive labor camps. Inasmuch as there cannot ,b e any suggestion. regarding the termination of these horrors, the effect of these reports is exactly what the Corrurnmist leaders desire, i. e., to lame the wiU of the people by striking teirror into their hearts. Until May 1, 1954, this sort of aimless and uncoordinated "truth-,teUing" seemed to 1b e RFE's princi,pal task Then--at last-a definite over-all program was announced. Does this mean liberation? Let us look and see. The "Program of the •P eople's Opposi.t ion," proposed on Labor Day, 1954, ait 10 :10 a. m. , and frequently reiterated and referred to, ever since, contained the foUowing ten postulates,: 1. LaJbor unions s'hould belong to their memberis, not the b9sses. The positions of union officials should be elective. 2. There should be less ta1k and more hrurd cash. Hon-est money (sic!) for honest work. 3. The worker should be permitted to choose the type of work he prefers. 4. Overtime should be outlawed. 5. Peasants should be a:llowed to quit the kolkho,z es (i.e. 1 cdllectivies) if they so desire. �36 SLOVAKIA 6. There should be a ceHing on the state's s'hare of agricwltural production. I!'arm oontributioos to the state should be equaliized. 7. The government should wovk for the people, not the politicians. 8. Production should benefit the people, not the state. 9. Emphasis should once more be on the consumer. Small shOil)S, owned and run by little ,people, should be revived, to serve the ,c onsumer. 10. The building industry should be mobiUzed for the benefit of the ,peop'le, instead of the state officials. Some points of this so_,called people's pro,g ram, at first sight, may look impressive. Its cardinal and decisive error derives precisely :firom the inability of its coUectivistic perpetraJtors to recognize the primacy of the enterprise. This program fails to go, to the root of the matter. It does not atfack state control as such. It merely proposes to mitigate and qualify. It is at its core plain socialism. Yet this is the sort of t'hing wihich, in the form of leaflets, is dropped from the trans-Curtain ,s kies by means of the "freedom balloons" which columnists like Drew Pearson have been vaunting for years. This program does not offer any decisive opposition to the tyranny of na;tiona'1ization as such. There is but the indecisive and dU'll suggestion to reform the preSleJilt Communist system, to abolish its excesses, to turn it into some form of Titoism or semi~communism or to return to the socialism of the bankrupt National Front. Instinctively, the Ozechs and Slovaks who hear this socalled ,p eople's program reach for the .lmob and shut it off. They must shrug their shottlders wt the oratorical antics of men .w ho :rant against ta'lking but in their own tum offer little beyond empty talrk. This "Program of the People',s Opposition" is faulty and spurious !because the concept of Rrudio Free Europe is based on a capital error. Radio Free Euro,p e basically main_ tams rthat the threat to the free world comes from Russia as an armed and aggressive power; it obfuscates the fundamental issue of the world~wide Communist conspiracy. In accordance with this leftist line, Radio Free Europe �SLOVAKIA 37 a:bsolutely never refers to, congressional investigations of subversirves in the United States. T.rans-1Curtain listeners M"e completely :unaware of the existence of such men a.IS Jenner, Velde, EaJStland, Walter, Dies, Reece, aJnd Mundt. When the Kerstein committee operated in Munich, in the summer of 1954, RJFE referred to it; but the texts of tes-timonies were edited to suit the over-all ·soft~peda:ling of basic issues. Radio Free Europe acts as if it were set up to preserve the concept of state bureaucracy and iprute:rnali:sm by all avaHa:ble means. Petty Communists Blamed for Party Policy Radio Free Europe acts a:s the quack who peddles curealls for the most nauseating aspects of the Comnmnist di-· sease; iit fails to tackle the roots of communism as such. Thrus it makes much ado about the chicaneries and perversions of petty Communist officiais, but it does not name the real culprits, the wire-,pulilers, the bosses who guide and encourage the brutalities of little village tyrants. Radio ·F ree Europe refers by name to individual Stakhanovites, tractor-drivers, and prison~guards; it disregards the organizers of the hruted Communist drives. lt thus actualily ,protects the pillars of the CommU.111ist society, the calclrlating masterminds who play on the wea;knesses of a confused citizenry and trap therir helpless victims in a net of Comm'll.llist demora1ization and perver,s ion. In "Messia:ges to Those at Home," Radio Free Europe p.hllories the little informers who are known to work for the ,s tate police. A1:most without exception these little fellows are known far and wide as stooges of the Communist masters. Dossiers on these puppets do not add to the knowledge rubout Communist evil-0oers. These dossieI's are largely based on dippings from the press of Communist-controllJ.ed eastern :IDurope. The secret agenrts of the Soviet police, the directors: of the pro.grarrn of terror, are never mentioned. "Messages to Those at Home," on February 29, 1952, at 7 :415 p. m., as an example, said: "Who is the mruster in Nitra? (A tiny Slova!k town-Editor.) Who is the master of whom the Soviet police itself is in fear? It is Sergeant Klike. He is hated, dreaded and mighty. He causes the .pllll- �38 SLOVAKIA ishment of policemen who sometimes haive a hearrt; for the.ix victims.'' Now, who is this monster, Sergeant K1ike? Not any "master" by any means. He is but wellArnoW111 little sergeant of the uniformed poJice ! Again, on June 26, 195,2, at 12 :15 p. m., "Messages to Those at Home" singled out a few Communist women: "Comrades M. PO!korelska, !H. Y anosikova, Kr. Bezakova and M. Dedinlmva," the broadcast addressed itself to these petty Communists, "swine-herds and tractor-drivers, re-· member m time the warnings of today. Tomorrow you may be brought to account for your misdeeds; but tomorrow may be too late for you." "'.Program for Civil and State Servants," on April. 10, 1955, at 8:40 a. m., importantly sounded off: "We call your attention to a dangerous informer. The pensioner Michalek, Kulda Street, Brno, ,persecutes beggars. He chases them from homes and often hands them over to the police. In your own interest, Comrade Michalek, we advise you to stop yoUT dirty work." This sort of broadcasting, declaimed in a lowered, almost comical tone, is suppooed to scare primitive swinehevds and tractor-drivers. The bosses are never named. Radio Flree Europe never criticizes the mistakes or the treason of the past and thus never has to expla;in the real reasons of the Communist successes in the past. In the same way as they conceal systematicaliy a11 real causes of the communization of Czechoslovakia, they conceal also the real causes of Communist advances in other part of the world. Let sleeping dogs lie~that seems to be RFE's guiding inspiration. There is no criticism of Teheran, Yalta, and Potsdam. These conferences, in line with the views of an Alger Hiss, are regavded as joot splendid. If only the bad men of the Kremlin had not betrayed their solemn pledges! "We Teach History," on February 13, 1952, at 6:15 p. m., stated: "The Sov.iet Union broke the Yalta rugreement and betrayed it . . . The ink on the document 'had hardly dried when the Soviet Union made a display of violation and unparalleled cynicism." "Sunday Comments of Ferdinand Peroutka," on April �SLOVAKIA 89 3, 1955, at 12:15 p.m., commented: "When the Yalta ,papers were published, some individuals wanted to reprimand the Democratic leaders foo- lack of cautiousness. But any discussion of some little mistaJkes the Democra;tic leaders may ha'Ve made would merely obscure the ,p rincipal wirong, which has been and remains the systematic deception contrived b,y the Ru€,s ian statesmen. These reaJl,i ties ought to be clear. ly understood by the wor-ld. The Ya!lta conferoo:ce turned into a tragedy, not because of what was agreed upon there, but because the 'Soviet Union failed to honor the agreements." Broadcasts Amounting t.o Sabotage Naturally, if we are decei,v ed regarding om own stu~ pidity, and even betrayal, at Yalta, we are likely to remain unaware of the stupidity and pet.haps even SaJbotage which have characterized a certain type of ~E's refugee programs. Incredible though it may seem, Riadio Free Europe ~against the ,persistent pleas and protests of refugees firom behind the Iron Ourtain - in its Sa,turday programs has offered detailed descriptions of successful flights from the Soviet terror. These ,b roadcasts - have named the locations where the border was passed, and indicated even 1:Jhe person:s who, at the risk of their 'lives, assisted the escapees. There could not have been any better means to alert the Communist police.. The very identities of patriots in eastern Europe were thus disclosed to the Soviet secret police, with the reswlt that any recurrence might be prevented. How self-destructive, at the expense of optimistic American dono,r s, cam. we get? Were the script writevs and editors of these "sensatio:nal" pro,grams really s•o naive that they failed to grasp the sinister consequences of their paradoxical role? Did they reaUy not understand that their disclosures about the specific locations of escape would en~ able the Communist pdlice to plug the last holes in the Coctaj.n? Let us quote from the !broadcast, "I Chose Freedom," of Aprill 25, 1953, 8 :30 a. m. "[ went through Cerna Horka," the refugee interviewee revealed, "walking along the hrigihway. Then I went :ba<ck to tile river bed of Vltaiva, in �40 SLOVAKIA the direction of the Austrian Soviet zone. I approached the Jezuv creek ... across f.rom it there is for:bidden territory. . . . In Frynburg there is a bridge across the riv&, and the road to Vyssi Brod. In St. Thomais there is the headquarters of the ,p atrols. The bridge had ,b een torn doWID.. I made a float from_ an old fence and other wood I gathered. The river is aJbout t_e n meters wide and three meters deep at that spot. (This was said in reply to a question from the broadcaister. - Editor.) I guided the float by means of a pole, and then set foot on the forbidden side. I hid in the bushes anod woods ... On the highway to- St. Thomas I encountered a banbed wire barricade, a,bout three feet high. I found an old laidder in a hut which had been empty ever since the German's left. I broke it in two, put it a;gainst the barricade, climbed, and jumped to the other side. Traversing a distance of a'bout thirty meters, I reached Jezuv creek, which is ·less than a meter wide. I crossed the creek and found myself in the Soviet zone of Austria. "In Austria, I folfowed the highway until I entered a little ho.use below a hill. The Ausitri.ans who occupied this house felt pity for the refugee, and assisted me . They helped me to contact a friend of theirs in Linz who was to get me ,s afely acro,s s a bridge in Linz, on the border of the 1Soviet ·a nd American 2.1ones. That man pro.v ided me with a forged identification card, into which we rubbed some dirt in order to maike the name illeg1ble. I joined a group of girls who passed the sentry at that spot. Nonchalantly, I ,p roduced the forged identity card for the sentry, and without looking back I crossed the bridge. I was in the Western. izone of Austria." Enemy Alerted The Communist enemy couid not have been more brazenly ailerted. Letters of protest against such asinine (if not trea{!herou.s) interviews fl.ooded the expellee press in Munich. Nevertheless, the interviews continued until 1954, by w'hich time a great many of the cracks in the Soviet wall had been revealed to the Russiains, and repaired by them. As late ·as 'May 9, 1954, at 3 :45 p. m ., the "I Chose Freedom" broadcast disclosed the exact details of a flight �SLOVAKIA 41 by express train from Decin, Bohemia, to. Berlin. The in. terviewee described how he had conceailed his presence at the Decin railway stat,ion, how he eluded the attention of the .security agents, aid ,how a "people's po'liceman" at the station in East Berlin 'helped him to escape. As late as Apriil 2, 1955, at 12 :45 p. m., again on the "I Chose Freedom" program, an escapee pictured the detafls of his flight across the above-mentioned bridge in Linz. Can there be any doubt that such interviews. intimidate those behind the Iron Curtain who might be wirlling to cooperate with refugees? Can our friends behind the Iron Curtain maintain erven a shred of confidence in "psyc'hologica1 warriors" who indulge in this sort of give-away? The editor of RFJD's "I Chose Freedom," one Otto Graf, had been editor of the Socialist ,p aper Svet Prace and a well-known CommUJnist collaborator of the National Front. An obscure journalist before War H, he owes hi.s career to his fatal activities in the National Front. Zdenek Fierlinger and Bohumil Lausman, Socialist ministers of the Nationa1l Front, were the pulblishers of Svet Prace, at the time of Graf's editorship. In 1948, on the occasion of the Communist coup in Czechoslovakia, Fierlinger turned out to be a Communist planted in the Sooial Democ.ratic party. Lausman, after his "esca.pe" to the free world, in 1951 worked for a while for Radio Free Europe. Afterward~, he turned out to be a Communist agent and returned to 0zechoslovakia. As editor of the Czechoslovak refugee ,paper, Ce.skoslovenske Noviny, in Ludwigslburg, Gerimany, RFE editor Otto Graf published articles by Lausman. Self-destructive Lies Broadcast It is ha.r d to believe that a man who has ,b een able to function as a newspaper editor is so inept that quite a few of his presumably anti-Communist radio programs in effect equal sabotage of the freedom crusade. That a saboteur of the free world's cause could hardly improve on these refugee programs is evident from their text. An almost equally self-destructive feature of R:ailio Free Europe is the routine broadcasting of transparent lies. �42 SLOVAKIA In a number of pamphlets, including The RFlE Story (p. 14), RFE's psychological warriors proudly admit resorting to lies. Whether lies should be part of our "psycho war" program is 1b oth ethically and practically quite debatable. To brag aJbout one's own lie in print, so that their admission may hie quoted ,b y the enemy, once aga:illl reaches itili.at degree of ingenuousness that in its net results is hardly distinguishaJble fr<Y«..'l saibotage. In addition to all that, many of the fabrications which our RFE brain trusters have th01Ught up are such simon puTe inventions that those for whom they are intended immediately recognize them as such. iFor example, Otto Graf and Vladimir Kucera~Homik, at Christmas, 1954, when maJking programs on the miner's life, made a· report about a great coal mirle catastrophe in Kladno., which a1legdly cost twe:lve lives of miners. This report was invented. We may ibe s,ure that a character like Bohumil Lalli:lman, former chairman of the Ozechoslovak Social Democratic party and afterwards a ,p lain Commrunist agent in Western Germany and Austria, fed RFE such damaging stories, and that some editors believed him. Yet who but one_,time Nation.ail Front colla;borators - RFE's farvorites wou!ld pUJt any trust in LaUSiman anyhow? RFE has made it easy for the Communist to prove RJFE's own mendaoity. Verbatim quotations from RFE's press and radio are all that is :required. T.here is still another lie, even more destructive, which has been produced by the "truth-telling" of Radio Free Europe. It is the number one lie, and concerns the core of the Communist system. There is irrefutable evidence regarding which group is maki:ng communism in the East. This evidence comes from refugees from the East and from various reliable sources. This group is characterized by such · names as Kruglow (or Krugloch), the chief of the Secret Police of the U&SR, Kaganovic, Ehreniburg, Berman, Rakosi_,Rosenkra.Il'Z, etc. In ,aJdd,ition, this group fully and completely constitutes that "invisi'ble government" behind the scenes in �43 SLOVAKIA the East. It is the same group, of course, which also makes the Communist conspiracy in the West. When in 1951 the members of this group (Minister of Justice Stefan Rais, etc.) staged purge tria:ls against other members of .the same group - Slansky-1Sal2'Inann, iReicin, Ka.tiz, etc. - RFE shouted to the world that the entire group was b.eing cruelly persecuted and liquidated in the East. Many samples of suoh programs are availaJble. This greatest and most perverted lie of world communism is !being upheld by RFE even now, and all facts contradfoting it ,a re cut, adjusted or ·s uppressed. Every intellrigent .refugee from the East calils this He the number one .sabotage committed by RFE. An intelligent inv-estigation of FRE as well as of the opinions and the material of the ref.ugees from behind the Iron Curtain would easily bring forth the full truth. 1 Former German Co-Citizens Alienated It is not enough to quote Radio Free Europe to expose its sooia:list and internationalist bias. To point out lost op-, portuni,ties as well as de[iberate omissions permits us to penetrate the confused and hrulf-·hearted mentality of this much~touted and eXipensiive outfit. Perhaps the tbest example of RFE's negativism toward .important objectives of t'he free world is its peculiar attitude towards the Germans. To be sure, on the surface t.he West Ger.man RepubHc and Chance!Hor Adenauer have been officially praised 'b y RFE. Beyond such formalities, IWE has done little to inspire the Czechs and Poles with trust in the Germans. In 1945, the Communists forced the Poles and the C.zec'hs to expel close to fifteen miUion Germans, from their home1and of centUJries. Albout three million of these lost their Hives as they walked through the Iron Ore Mountains, the Sudeten Mountains and the Bohemian Forest or as they were shipped westward in cattle cars which somewhere were left on the traoks. All of the other twelive mililion were r01b1bed of their ,property. Most of them were bea,ten and tortwred. Naturally, the Czechs ,and the Poles fear the venge-· a.nee of their former German co~citizens. Understandrubly, �SLOVAKIA the Communists do, all they can to :keep this fear a1ive among the Poles and the Czechs who are under their domination. It would be the duty of Radio Free Europe to counteract this Communi<st policy by telling the Poles and Czechs a bout the numerous manifestations of good will and the sincere desire for reconciliation on the part of di siplaced Germans living in Western Germany. Radio Free Europe does nothing of the sort. It does not even report the official agreements which expelled Czech statesmen have signed with the German expellees. In summary, R@Es' stand on the highly important expellee prdblem is as foillows: a. It does not even mention the peaceful attitude and program of the German expellees. b. It ridicules exi'led Czechs and Poles who do not hate the Germans. c. It fails ever to refer to the remarkable past achievements of the :G ermans in Czechoslovakia and to examples of German-Czech coopexation. d. It never mentions how the ex,pulsion of the antiCommunist Germans enabled the communization of Czechoslovakia from within. e. It continuaNy harps on the persecutions the Czechs and Poles have suffered under German domination. f. It damns the Germans with faint prai,se, and slyly, in veiled fashion, even incites the Slavs against the Germans. g. By upholding the ex;pulsion of fifteen mililion Germans and defending the Oder-Neisse border, it follows a line of nationality policy which is identical with that of the Communists. 1 Advice to Fellow Communist Suggestions There are many other - apparently often ha:rmless occasions on which RFE's line comcides with what the Communists desire. Why men should be .p aid by Americans to broadcast from expensive stations what our Communist enemies want in the first pl ace is not easy to grasp. Particttlarly ba:ffling examples of American--Soviet co1 �SLOVAKIA 45 incidences ha:ve come from the desk of Milos Vanek, chief · of the Economic Department of the Czechoslovak Desk, RFIE, Munich. Formerly one o.f the most prominent leaders of the 0zech Communist party, Vanek still feels urged to counsel Czechs in harmony with his former confederates. Early in 19'52, Vane'k busied himself forecrusting an immediate inflation, and advising the people to invest their cash in goods, including the expensive products of the Communist gray market. Innumerable programs have carried this message to the Czechs. The broadcast of Ja:nuary 23, 1952, at 6 :45 p. m., admonished the Czechs: "The Communists in Czechoslovakia are about to runloose inflation. Invest all your savings in goods, buy whatever you can, even the e_x1pensive articles on the government market." There was no inflation; but the refugees from the satellite country reported that the Communist government at that time spread exacbly the same rumor of inflation and also adv1sed to spend all savings because it wanted to draw in a:11 "surplus" money without any monetary reform. A year and a half later, when, of a sudden, the new value oif the Czech currency was a:nnounced, neither the Communists in 0zechoslovakia noT Vanek in RIFE had given any wa:rning. When the Communist government asked for shock brigades of voluteers to plant new forests, Vanek enthusia,stically chimed in. "Help to plant new trees," Vanek exhorted the Czechs on the "Economic Program" of May 1, 1953. "The Communist regime," he announced, "will perish, and t'he trees will be for your children." Other programs hawe offered similar a'dvice. •~Prog,ra,m for Women," 0ctob.er 24, 1953, at 1 :45 ,p. m., counseled to sell quality go·ods. to Communist state stores "because the Communist stores are sel'ling the goods to non-Communists, and it is 111ot good to, cheat non-Communists." "Program for Workers," March 23, 1955, 2:10 p. m., suggested that workers as.k foremen for e~tra work becawse it would mean extra money for them -while it would not really help the Communist cause. Along the same line, the old collaiborator, Otto Graf, 1 �46 SLOVAKIA interviewed a fellow by name of Tonda Hornik, who said: "I thus eairned 2,000 crowns extra~it pays not to be lazy." Radio Free Europe, thus, does not urge the satellite slave workers .to relax if not slow down, it spurs them on to work harder - for their Communis t masters. Those in the know were not surprised when "wor.ker" Tonda Hornik, in June, 1955, was exposed as a Communis t agent. One of RFE's editors, Robert Lowkota by name, had gone to the extreme of appealing to the Czech workers not to absent themselves from wor.k; but the protests from refugees who had listened to this monstrosit y w&e so im-,pressive that iRiFE had to back down and, in a broadcast of April 10, 1955, at 12.:45 p. m. ("We Call the Communis t Party"), tried to minimize the importance of Loulkota's aberration. Do these editors who urge the Czech people to fol.Jew suc'h advice have a soft spot in their hearts for the Commwnist~ r are they following the orders of men whose hearts and minds are hard as steel ? On the one hand, Radio Free Europe has urged Czechs to do overtime in factories giving only evasive consolation s, never mentioning how and when liberation could be achieved; on the other, through provocative agitation, it has practically incited them to revolt. Such policy, on the surface, appears contradicto ry. On second thought, we might wonder if all of this confusion is due to ineptness. As long as the Western governmen ts are not prepared to supply .p otential rebels with weapons, no rebellion can succeed. Only people who are unacquaint ed with the nature of communism can hope to overthrow Communis t governments withouit outside assistance. Certainly the present United States governmen t is not inclined to arm potential insurrectio nists. Even if it wanted to, a horde of United Naitions associates would prevent it from going ahead. Why then does Radio Free Europe fail to warn resolutely against revolts at this time? Curiously enough, Lenin favored armed uprisings against his own regime; for nothing exposes more glaringly the staunchest freedom fighters, and nothing offers a more striking opportunity to exterminat e the most stout-heart ed �SLOVAKIA 47 foes of communism. Whatever the reason may be - and it appears most worthwhile to get to the bottom of the situation - Radio Free Europe again and again has played the role of the agent provocateur.Whether or not any sabotage wa:s intended, the policy has actually been of benefit to the Communists. First of all, RFE has pictured the enemy as weak while in reality he is strong. "Life Behind the Iron Curtain," on April 26, 1953, at 8:45 a. m., exclaimed: "There is chaos, uncertainty and fear in the Soviet Union and among its leaders." "Best Article," on April 24, 1953, at 9:05 a. m., stated that "there are rifts within the system," and on April 17 it claimed that "we face the beginning of a dissolution process which affects the entire regime." Few Americans know that the broadcast of RIAS, the American broadcasting station in Berlin, shared in the responsibility for the tragic 1953 rebellion of the Germans in the Soviet zone - a rebellion which led to the arrest and annihila:tion of tens of thousands of our best friends behind the Iron Curtain. Practically no American knows that RFE has sent the same sort of abortive action ,p rograms to the Czechs. On February 8, 1952, at 9:15 p. m., Milos Vanek, on "Economic Program," approvingly spoke of the rise of "armed brigades against their leaders in the Communist party itself." Hopefully he observed that "the signs . . . are already on the horizon." When in Czechoslovakia public demonstrations took place in 1953, Radio Free Europe pictured them in inflammatory scenes. The other programs reflected the same attitudes. On June 21, 1953, at 12 :15 p. m., the perennial "Sunday Comments of Ferdinand Peroutka," referring to the tragic and fatal uprising among the Germans, told the Czechs: "Do you know that tens of thousands of workers there are on the march, shouting 'Ivan, go home? Do you know that everybody there is fed up with the Soviet overlordship, has enough of Soviet exploitation?" �48 SLOVAK IA Again and again, Peroutk a has dicussed prematu re and therefor e suicidal - uprising s in an inflamm atory fashion. For the sake of preservi ng precious friends for a more opportu ne time, we might well have followed the advice of the late Senator Robert A. Taft, who vigorou sly opposed such heedlessness. Propagation of Decadent Literature and Music For the time being, Radio Free Europe might well content itself with building up the morale of those who long for liberatio n from the Commu nist tyrants. There are numerou s straight forward books which take a courage ous stand against any and all undue control by governm ent. These, though, are not the books from which RFE's commentato rs have chosen to quote. No, the cultural fare which they have selected is largely confined to decaden ce in literature, and jazz in the realm of music. The program "Play of the Week" is full of mental confusion and decay. The books which are reviewed and quoted, and which are suppose d to represen t the world of the free, abound in decaden t characte rs, in suicide and perversi on. As to literatur e which is suppose d to represen t eastern Europe, the emphasi s is strongly placed on works of defected collectiv ists, picturin g the horror and the hopeless ness among the satellite nations. The editor of "Book of the Week," on August 3, 1952, at 9:45 a. m., expound ed: "We enable you to become acquain ted with the literatur e which is current in the free world. Take a book by Mannus Ferber, who once was a Commu nist . . . the story in itself is colorless - a tera in the ocean ... there are no ready answers anywhe re .. . " On April 26, 1953, at 9 :45 a. m., "Book of the Week" another typical example - discusse d The Polish present to Giodo: "A mysterio us curse rests on the Jean Mill, by family," the commen tator explaine d. "In vain, Kosta opposes the weight of destiny ... his son-in-la w becomes mentally insane ... his daughte r goes crazy ... the young woman is slowly dying ... the power of fate is the core of the book ... all revolt against it is futile . . . " �SLOVAKIA 49 "Weekly Survey of Culture," of January 4, 1953, at 11 :15 a. m., told of a work of literature that is "full of complexes and inner conflicts . . . " "Film Program," of April 9, 1955, at 2 :20 p. m., reviewed a film directed by Eliza Kazan: " . . . he went to see his mother in the brothel ... he borrowed money from her, even though he despises her, and then he made a good business deal . . . a drama full of instincts, passions, and convulsions, of undertones ... a master work by Kazan ... " This story about a moral and strong father whose wife lives in a brothel was offered by RFE during the Easter holidays. RFE seems to be chockful of split personalities, of people with complexes, of those who are in need of psychiatrists, of people whom we might pity if there were not so little time left and if they were not entrusted with the task of championing our principles of trust in God and our responsibilities as free men. The music offered by RFE, at 10:05 every morning, and at other hours, accords with the confusion, savagery and hopelessness of the literary ,p roducts which these men favor. ,Most of it i:s jruzz in the version of the squieruking dis_ harmonies and noises of primitives, or of complex men who flee from their own souls. The West is rich in music of the highest inspiration. RFE seems not aware of this mighty force in our behalf. The Communist station in Prague does better. The Communists, mindful of national heritage, play Smetana and Dvorak, the great music of the Czech people. They benefit by these magnificent works. But Radio Free Europe broadcasts jazz - alien, uninspiring stuff. Some of the less influential employees on Radio Free Europe have protested against these low and degrading performances. They were told from above to go on producing jazz. Propagation of Internationalism and Racial Merger The general mental and moral climate of Radio Free Europe conveys moods of indecision, wretchedness and vexation. �50 SLOVAKIA Inherentl y most of the ideals which RFE advocates require some sort of super-gov ernment, which means but additional curtailme nt of the liberties which this costly radio network is supposed to champion . On nearly every day, for instance, there is a program which urges the abolition of naturally- grown national culture in favor of the European super-sta te. It is called "Europe Without the Iron Curtain" and it always begins with the slogan: "Europe without the Iron Curtain means the United States of Europe. Yesterda y but Utopia, today the dream of millions, tomorrow reality." The slogan has been formulate d by the widely known internationalis t Karol Belak-Be rger. Paradoxic ally, the Commun ist internatio nalists in the East are smart enough to appeal often to age-old, traditiona l nationalism. Radio Free Europe, which has been presumab ly conceived to fight Commun ist internatio nalism, champion s internatio nalism. "Nearly all Czechs and Slovaks desire the United States of Europe." That is what "The Other Side of the Coin" asserted, on April 5, 1955, at 8 :15 a. m. A free poll or plebiscite among the enslaved Czechs and Slovaks might well disclose a different mood, a different opinion. On June 6, 1952, at 7 :15 p. m., "Europe Without the Iron Curtain" stated: "The world federatio n is a necessity ; but first Europe must be united. The European federatio n is but the beginning ; the United States of the World is the ultimafo aim ... First a European federatio n must be achieved; then we shall be ready for the world federatio n." In accordanc e with this candidly avowed goal, RFE continually disparage s the concept of national sovereign ty, which is dear to the overwhel ming majority of European s. Thus "Commen ts on Events at Home," on April 28, 1953, at 10:45 a. m., slightingl y referred to "the so-called national sovereign ty." "Europe Without the Iron Curtain," on May 5, 1954, at 1:15 p. m., stated: "On the defendan t's .b ank there sits the concept of the national state and its ideological foundation - nationalis m. Frontiers - the straitjack et of the national state - are an anachron ism." �SLOVAKIA 51 The United Nations and UNESCO - a controversial topic among millions of Europeans - are favorites of RFE. "The United Nations gives new hope," said "News," on October 24, 1953, at 1 p. m. "The whole world looks toward the United Nations," said "Who Is Who," on April 22, 1953, at 8:30 a. m. Such statements are daily standard with Radio Free Europe. Ever opposed to nationalism, RFE even objects to national self-determination of the many non-Russian nations inside the Soviet empire. It stands to reason that national self-assertion inside Russia might be a ,p owerful aid to any effort aimed at disintegration of the Soviet Union. Consequently this is opposed by RFE's amazing bleeding hearts. Thus, "Voices of the Western Press," on February 8, 1952, at 8 p. m., quoted: "Russia should not dissolve herself into a number of smaller nations; the nations of the Soviet Union should discontinue their disputes." In its determined opposition to the concept of national heritage, and in harmony with the ideas favored by such American left-wing groups as Americans for Democratic Action, RFE, in programs addressed to the trans-Curtain people, goes so far as to attack the McCarran-Walter Immigration Act. Thus, "Our New York Correspondent Reports," on April 29, 1953, at 10:05 a. m., declared: "The public wants the law to be changed; for the nationality quotas of this law are obsolete . . . The press unanimously demands revision. We hope that the change will be effected." Beyond mere political merger of the nations, Radio Free Europe also campaigns for a merger of races. Thus, for instance, "Europe Without the Iron Curtain," on February 15, 1952, at 6:15 p. m., declared: "Just as Europe, in a way, already represents a nation . . . . there also arises a new nation in the U. S. A. - out of the white, the black, and the yellow races . . . This too will happen in the East of Europe." Along this line, RFE's left-wingers seldom fail to disguise their animosity towards those nations which they regard as particularly nationalistic - against the past Germany, Spain, the Union of South Africa, and the various �52 SLOVAKIA Arab nations. RFE's persistent opposition to the Arab states sometimes reaches comical proportions. An article in itself would be required to document this phase of RFE's internationalism. Praise for New Dealers and Criticism of Conservative Americans In line with its over-all outlook, Radio Free Europe has consistently glorified American New Dealers and has at the same time not refrained from merciless attacks on conservative Americans. In other words, RFE, which should concentrate on psychological warfare against the Communist world con$piracy, has indulged in the hobby of defaming valiant American anti-Communists. No wonder that wideawake Europeans have ever more often asked if RFE is primarily an anti-anti-Communist organization. "Answers to Those at Home," on October 28, 1952, at 10 :05 a. m., proclaimed : "Stevenson was a principal speaker at the celebration for T. G. Masaryk. (Founder and first president of the Czechoslovak republic. - Editor.) Our hope for the future would be rekindled if he were elected President of the United States." On November 4, 1952, at 10:05 a. m., the same program reveled in this choice bit of lyrical effusion: "Adlai Stevenson ... ranks among America's greatest sons, such as Lincoln and F. D. Roosevelt ... He is the very incarnation of America's highest aspirations . . . Within less than a year he rose from obscurity to the pinnacle of American leadership." The record of Radio Free Europe's programs is full of unfavorable remarks about those great Americans who have steadfastly opposed the Communist menace. A flood of vituperation was pou:r;-ed on General Douglas MacArthur upon his dismissal from the Far Eastern scene. His speeches, which have moved the truly anti-Communist refugees from eastern Europe, have been consistently withheld from RFE's programs. It was the same with the great and honorable Senator Robert A. Taft, on the occasion of his campaign for the Republican nomination in 1952. After "Mr. Republican's" �SLOVAKIA 53 defeat at the Chicago Convention, "Our New York Correspondent Reports," on August 7, 1952, at 10:05 a. m., rejoiced: "For Europe it is decisive that the last remainders of isolationism have been removed, and that a sound policy has been carried to victory." Ferdinand Peroutka, in one of his interminable "Sunday Comments," on August 3, 1952, at 12:15 p. m., pontificated: "Taft was the proponent of a policy which can never settle anything, as his adversaries have always pointed out." "Our New York Correspondent Reports," on July 9, 1952, at 8:05 p. m., had this to say: "The opinions of (Herbert) Hoover and (Douglas) MacArthur represent the viewpoint of a minority; these men want to confine themselves to the (exclusive) defense of the American continent. The majority ( of Americans), though, have dimissed this attitude and are conscious of America's global role." "A Program of Novelties," referring to the passing of two famous American journalists Pulitzer and Bert McCormick - on April 3, 1955, at 3 .p. m., called Pulitzer the "son of an Hungarian immigrant, an outstanding American journalist," but criticized Colonel McCormick as a "controversial, reactionary isolationist" who "opposed progress." The Krem'l~n must have been satisfied with that incisive observation. General Impression Created By Radio Free Europe What, then, is the general impression which Radio Free Europe has made, behind the Iron Curtain as well as among the millions of anti-Communists in Western Europe? It is, besides the impression of half-heartedness, indecision, artificiality, and downright clowning. When RFE's broadcasters, directly addressing some poor wretch or some swineherd in some forlorn little hamlet in Slovakia or Bohemia, lower their voices to terrify him, antiCommunist refugees merely laugh. Alas, the farce tastes bitter, because of the lost opportunities, the stupidity, the feeling of treason, and the unsonscionably low moral standard. Next, there is the strong impression of cliche journalism, occupying itseif with superficialities - cars, houses, �54 SLOVAKIA etc. - and largely avoiding verbatim quotations. Instead, they impose their propaganda by means of slogans. Real opinions of the refugees and of the people at home are disregarded by the RFE propaganda. Real anti-Communists are never allowed to get their messages across the Curtain. Real anti-Communists, including the repenting National Fronters, are social outcasts. But the collaborators of the National Front, who even today maintain that the National Front was all right, sit at the big desks and cash their substantial checks, in compensation for their shadow boxing. Then there is the distinct impression of coolness, impersonality and anonymity. Since the well-known anti-Communists of -long standing have been barred from RFEJ, theTe are no names to inspire the listeners. Yes, some men do speak under their own names. These include the left-winger Dr. Joseph Lettrich, the Marxist Vaclav Majer, and such Socialists as Ferdinand Peroutka, Dr. Petr Zenkl and Dr. Jaroslav Stransky. However, these men are known to be weaklings, mere fronts for more powerful personalities. They are recognized to be generally useless; they won't stir the imagination of anyone. As to the known former champions of the Communist causes, trans-Curtain listeners would simply shut off the radio if they knew who was talking to them. Therefore, Milos Vanek now calls himself Pravdomil Basta, and Frantisek Listopad goes by the name of Jan Ctvrtek. Similarly, the leftist Socialist Dr. Miloslav Kohak has become Vitezslav Fram; Otto Graf hides his pro-Communist past under the pseudonym of Franta Tabor, and Karol Belak-Berger has conveniently turned into one Jan Lehota. "Who are these fellows anyhow?" the listeners behind the Curtain must wonder; for they have never heard of them. Naturally, they become suspicious, and their interest sags. Czechs and Slovaks behind the Curtain remember those who never compromised with the Communists. They know that these men are now living in the West - the C:i!echoslovak General of the Army, Lev Prchala, the former Czechoslovak Minister, Dr. Joseph Cerny, and many others, and �SLOVAKIA 55 also some former members of the National Front who in the free West started to denounce it - Dr. Bohdan Chudoba, Dr. Michal Zibrin, or Dr. Helena Kozeluhova, who was expelled in 1946 from the Parliament by the National Front, and the entire younger generation, led by Jiri Havelka, Emil Petrik, etc. The Slovaks have their former Minister, Dr. Ferdinand Durcansky and many others. The listeners behind the Iron Curtain cannot fail to wonder why none of them sends any "messages home" by way of Radio Free Europe. The masterminds of this confusion, whose net results represent sabotage of the anti-Communist fight - are way behind the firing lines in New York City, and in Washington. They, too, shroud themselves in anonymity. 'T he over-all impression, then, is one of cynism and emptiness, artificiality, and insincerity. Who wants to buy apples which are rotten at the core? RFE's Program In conclusion, we must ask: What, then, is the program of Radio Free Europe, or has no program been designed so far? Those behind the Curtain, who have the time to listen at all, would like to know in what way liberation may be achieved, and what specific assistance, beyond mere words, the West might be able to offer. Radio Free Europe has not been able to supply any satisfactory information in respect to this all-important ,problem. Here, however, we cannot help allowing for valid reasons to excuse much of RFE's ineffectualness; for even if RFE were staffed with outright, hard-hitting anti-Communists, it could not ,possibly make any promises which the Western governments, particularly the government of the U. S. A., were not willing to back with power. There is no use in claiming superiority in aircraft or guided missiles if that superiority admittedly does not exist. It is not possible to promise an economic blockade as long as that policy has not been adopted by the American government. Radio Free Europe - or any of the other liberation �56 SLOVAKIA stations - cannot very well offer the severing of diplomati c relations with the Soviet criminals when our own statesmen meet with them at the summit and have lots of smiling pictures :taken for the benefit of the Soviet ieaders. However, if RFE were really (instead of merely in name) an independe nt and private organizat ion, and really staffed with intelligen t and genuine anti-Com munists, it could urge Western governme nts to take stronger steps. Radio Free Europe might demand the creation of military units exclusive ly composed of refugee and e~pellee volunteers. It might demand the ousting of Commun ists from both internatio nal and national organizat ions. It might establish extensive contacts with the undergro und behind the Curtain, instead of causing its discovery and extermin ation by Communi sts. Radio Free Europe might frankly discuss the present difficultie s while at the same time exhorting the Iron Curtain slaves not to lose hope. The trans-Cu rtain ,people who long for liberty might at least be informed about where all of us stand. They should know about a long-rang e .p rogram as well as what can be done at this time. Most importan t of all, Radio Free Europe should become a clear and shining beacon to those who are willing to fight for their liberties. This can only be achieved by throwing out the clowns and confusion ists who want to fight communism with a Socialist "peo1ple',s program. " If Radio Free Europe cannot cleanse itself because it is from top to bottom infested with collectivists, internatio nalists, materialists and decadents , then it would be better to shut it down and replace it with an entirely new organizat ion. Perhaps this great reform cannot be undertak en as long a:s even in the United States the grass roots patriots, who unequivocally believe in God, the Constitut ion and freedom of enterprise , are successfu lly boycotted and ridiculed. Perhaps an effective liberation station can only be establishe d when at last the collectivi st corrupter s of the United States are driven from their entrenche d ,p ositions in America' s public institution s, and her means of communi cation, and her governme nt itself. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 17 A CLOSE-UP VIEW OF RADIO FREE EUROPE By Jiri Brada ( From January, February, and March, 1956, issues of "FACTS FORUM," Dallas, Texas) Radio Free Europe, a netwoPk of stations which has been set up in westeim Europe for the purpose of sending anti-Communist broadcasts to the peoples on the other side of the Iron Curtain, is a division of Free Europe Committee, Inc. The latter, a private organization, was founded in 1949 by a group of American citizens, among whom the Hon. Herbert H. Lehman, U. S. Senator from New York, played a prominent role. In 1950, the Free :illurope Committee started its annual fund-raising drive under t'he name of Crusade for Freedom. Most of us, at one time or another, have bee111 exposed to the propaganda of thi,s powerful orgacization, via newspapers, radio, television, freedom cars, and freedom trains, and most of us have read and heard a'bout FEC's muchpublicized freedom balloons. The Free Europe Committee claims that millions of its funds have been contributed by more than twenty-five million American citizens. Many more millions of dollars, though, have 1been donated by corporations, including some of the large foundations. Henry Ford II, whose Ford Foundation through the yeairs has been a heavy contributor, is nationa:l chairman of the Crusade for Freedom. As such he is the ,successor of General Lucius D. Clay. Other ,prominent sponsors of the project include David Sarnoff, Edward R. Murrow, Harold E . Stassen, Walter S. Gifford, Samuel Unger, Geo:rge Barasch, C. B. Tibbets, and Joseph J. Fliesser. Headquarters of the Crusaide is 29 West 157th Street, New York City. C. D. Jackson, in crucial years one of President Ei~ senho.w er's "paiace guard," headed the Free, Europe Committee for a cosiderable length of time. Wh~tney H. Shepardson is its current president. Joseph C. Grew, former U. S. Ambassador to Japan, is Chairman of the Board of the F,r ee Europe Committee. Arthur W. Page is Chairman of the Executive Committee. 18 SLOVAKIA Vice presidents include W. J. C. Eagan, Levering Tyson, Samuel S. Wa.J.ikeT, JT., and :Bernard Yarrow. Jo'hn C. Tra.phagen serves as treasurer, Theodore C. Augustine as secretary and assistant itireasurer, and J. Clay.ton Miller as assistant secretary. On March 15, 1955, Helfuert H. Lang was replaced as Director of Radio Free Europe by W. J. C. Eagan. 'Dhe Board of Directors, besides several of the abo.venamed, is composed of A. A. Berle, David K. :ID. Bruce, Jr. , Frederick R. Dolbeare, Julius Fleischmann, H. B. Miller, Irving S. Olds, George U. 1S huster, Charles M. Spofford, and H. Gregory Thomas. Among additiona:l sponsors of the Free EUTope Comm1ttee we find such nationally known figures as Clarence L. Adcock, Raymond Pace Alexander, Laird Bell, Francis Biddle, Rolbert Woods Bliss, Robert F. Bradford, !Hairry A. Bullis, Cecile B. De Mille, Frank R. Denton, William J. Donovan, Mark 1F . iIDthridge, James A. Farley, Virginia C. Gildersleeve, Charles R.. Hook, Palmer Hoyt, Paul Kesten, Henry ,R, Luce, Joseph V. McKee, Web Maddox, H. B. Miller, tSamuel E. Morison, F.rederiok Osborn, John W. Sibley, Sp)'l'os Skouras, Chairles P. 'Daft, DeWitt Wallace, W. W. Waymac:k, Walter H. Wheeler, Jr., Charles E. Wilson, Mrs. Quincy Wright, and Darryl Zanuck. The 1952 list of national sponsors also featured Jaimes B. Carey, .A:J.ilen W . Dulles, William Green, and Matthew Woll. Besides a sprinkL ing of men who uphold America's tradiitions of limited govVeTrunent and the free market economy, there is :the usual contingent of ancient and ubiquitous New Dealers. Headquarters of ,t he Free Emope Committee is a few stone's throws from <bhrut of the Crusade for Freedom, at 110 West 57th Street, New Yo.rk City. The political and ideological influence of the Free Europe Committee spans continents. No organization in the world exerts more power over the refugees from eastern Europe. lt practicaft:ly maintains a monopoly on placing refugee students in American colleges. It controls the University College at 'S trassbourg, F.rance. Besides the periodical, News from Behind the Iron Curtains, :the Free Europe Commi,t tee has published num- SLOVAKIA 19 erous booklets and pamphlets Olll communism in eastern Europe. Radio 1Free IDurope, whioh is lo·cated at the Committee's headquarters, 110 West 57th ,S treet, is thus but one, though no doU!bt the most important, department of the Free Em:-ope Committee. While officially a dilVision of a private o,r gani,z ation, Radio Free Em·ope does of course not devise amy arbitrairy policy of its own. It has been conceived as a private a:rnn of the American government's foreign policy and as such reflects the res,pective competence or confusion of Washington. The princ1pal editorial offices of Radio F1ree Europe, while taking their cues from New Yor.k and Washington, are located in Euro.pe, especia!lly in western Germany. European headquarters is at English Gardens (Englisoher Garten) 1, Munich 23, Germany. Riahard J. Condon is European diirector. The largest :broadcasting stations of Radio Free Europe aire located outside of Munich and Frankfurt on the Main. Their principal programs are broadcast in the various languages oif Communist-dominaited peoples, suoh as Czech, Slovaik, Hungarian, Roumanian, Bulgarian, Albanian, and Polish. Influence of Soviet Postwar Policy In order to grasp the policy of these programs, it ~ well worth recalling the Soviet postwar policy in the satellite nations of eastern Europe. For the sa;ke of appearance and eXipediency, no outright Communist governments were set up by the USSR immediately upon the end of World War fil. •I nstead, there arose the so-calied governments of "national fronts" or "people's fronts" or "popular :fironts." Moscow's commissars saw to it that no parities of the real center nor, of course, any of the ,right wing m01Vements were admitted to these fronts; lbut even the non-Communist left wing parties, such as those of the Socialists or Social Democrats, were from the outset largely ied by puppets of the Soviet Union, many of whom had up to then lived in comparative obscurity. Within the course of a few months or years respective- 20 SLOVAKIA ly, these non-.Communisit leftist parties were forged into total tools of the globa.'l Communist conspiracy. Freedom of eleotion, assembly and press weire abolished; trade and industry were nationalized; non-·conformis:ts, by means of the "people's courts," were crushed, and "national committees," virz. soviets, soon dictated and .strangled all !branches of ,public and private iife. 'Dho.ughtful readers may wonder why so many of the Socialist-minded colla,borators were in due time permitted by the Co.m munist authorities to leave their countries. They cannot help being amazed to iearn that it is maiinly these collectivi.stic refugees from the sateilli,te nations whom Radio Free Europe has entrusted with program-.c ontroHing positions. There ,Marxians and sta,tists were 'ballyhooed as "victims" of rS oviet 1persecution, while practically all those who had escaped from the Communists when the Russian armies swept over their countries, i.e., those who at all times had ste·a dfa:stly opposed the Communist menace, were systematicallv excluded from Radi·o Free Europe. Is it possible that a good many of these Socialist twin brothers of the C ommunists were not prevented from reaching our side of the Iron Curtain because on the basis of their ,Marxist past they were likely to confuse and adultcra,te the crusade of the free world? Is it possi,b le that some of them even promised merely to pose as foes of communism, and therefore in r eality continued their collabora-· tion with the Communists, in the guise of foes? At any rate, quite a few of these recent allies, of the Communists are now earning considerable fees firom the funds of the Crusade for Freedom, in payment of their ineffectual and phony ;psychological warfare. Former Red Confederates in Top Jobs The real champions of political and economic freedom , the real opponents of state intervention, the real adversaries o.f materialism, atheism and tyranny were either rejected or ffa-ed by <Radio Free Europe, and are now sitting on the side lines. The men of the Kremlin should indeed be pleased with this curious policy of Radio• 'Free Europe. To be sure, RF1E's •b osses offer us a re ady-made excuse SLOVAKIA 21 for employing so many former Soviet collruborators in top positions. No one, they aver, is more thoroughly aware of Communist deviousness than 8Jre those who have experienced Communist tactics in practice. However-and this is the crux of the matter-not one of these former confe• derates of the Communists !has come forth !With any .protest against his former ooHa;boration, and none of the former Communists on Rooio Free Europe has come forth with any protest against his former communism. They shun the role of the ,r epentant sinner. They all of a sudden ,p ose as experts of :the democrntic way, a;s pioneers of individual, personal freedom. The Whittaker Chamtbers type is excluded. By no means have aH of these men mere:ly posed ais anti-Communists while in ever so many instances they could not help going soft on the Communist -line. A giroot many, being Socialists, have been so blind with regard to -limited governmental and the free mar,ket economy, and still are such loyal believeil'S in the benefits of Socialist inter,vention, planning and control, that they consistently devise policies which ,p lay into the hands of the Communists by appeasing them. The Polish, Ozechoslo1va;k and Hungarian broadcasting stations of IRadio Free Europe, which equal the power of t he German station in ,M unich, i. e., 50,000 watts, run pro. grams for 20 hours a day. Nume!l'ous short wave stations send broadcasts in the various idioms of eastern Europe t hree or four houirs daily. It is claimed that 29 RF:Ei statjons are now functioning. The Czechoslovak station near Munich is as strong as that of Munich or that of the American Forces network, in that city. In operation since May 1, 1951, it covers political commentaries; daily commentaries; the international situat ion (transmitted from New York offices); programs for workers, peasants, women, young ,people, and children; economics; history; music; entertainment, etc. , and news every hour on the hour. Source Material Far Left of Center The over-all ideology of these prog1rams is largely determined by former members of the Czechoslovak National 22 SLOVcAKIIA Front, i.e., one-time Co,. nrpu:ni.3t colla,borator.s. From time to time, these men ireceive written instructions of specific subjects :from the New Yovk offices where left..,wingers set the tone Dr. Mar.tin Kvetko and Dr. Julius First, :known and prominent former pro-Oommunists, instruct alll editors at regular meetings. Carefully selected boo.ks on communism, clippings from such American publications ·a s The New York Times, The New York Hierald T.rilbune, T.iine, Life, ~tc., items from the press of AmerJcan la;bor unions, material from Communist paipers on bo:th sides of the Curtain, and monitored terts of the Czechoslova;k Communist radio represent the source materiaJl f.rom which the script writers draw. Theire are also special "intelligence" reports. Straight conservative papers and magazines are ta;boo at Radio Free Em:rope. Script writera know how to toe the line. They know that they might as welJ -look for another job if they dare use_materiail or ideas from the Ohicago Triibune or such of Oll!I' magazines :as American !Mercury, American Legion Maga•zine, Ohristian Economics, HUiIIlan Events, National Review and National Repulblic. To summarize - iRJmE progtrams are shl!,POO- according to the dM"ectives of (a) :the American bosses and (b) the hired leftist National Fronters from eastern Europe. The ran!k and file Socialist or o:therwise• leftist editors are either unintelligent or servile or both, and grind out their chores in accordance with their o.rders. AoturuNy, tRill1E policies vary only in degree, !but not in sulbstance,. :f.rom other psychological warfare .s tations of the free world. These inolude Radio Free Asia, strution RIAS in Berlin, Radio Llberation - a private Amer.ican station which broadcasts to IPOOPles inside the USSR - and of course the Voice of America. None of them ,t akes a consistent stand againsit the iphilosophy of g01Vernment intervention a;nd government control, none of them - except for occasional and half-ilieaTted Hp servJce- champions freedom of enterprise. No wonder that so far our psychological warfare has failed. In order to document for American readers WlhaA: sort of ideas aTe being tTansmitted to the fron Curtain world SLOVAKIA 23 iby their expensive ly staffed freed.om stations, I have for some years gathered from RFE Czec'hoslov.alk programs a substantia :l coNection of radio scTipbs and tape recording s, from which I sha;ll quote in the followh]-g. If any Sllogan may be offered to character ize the genera:! tenor of all too many programs , let us quote whait a well-know n American a·p ologist for the Soviet causes has said in the process of the Far Eastern debacle: "Let them fall, ;b ut do not let it appear that we pushed them." Propagation of Socialism May 1, 1953, 3 :15 ip. m . : "The Socialist youth of the whole world sends its greetings to the youth of Czechoslovakia. We assuTe you that we s hall reach the aim ... the day, when we will be alble to join you in democrac y in the fig,ht for socialism , social justice and freed.om. " At the end of the program the International was played. (The International is the rallying song of world communi sm.) May 3, 1953, 1,2 :15 p. m.: Ferdinan d Peroutka , chief of R~'s Czechoslova!k desk in New York, a weH-known Soci'alist rund one-•t ime .prominen t member of the pro-Comu munist National •ffiront, in his "Sunday Comment s of Ferdinand Peroutka ": "Eisenho wer's program, on .t:he other hand, even though America's factories have not been nati01I1ali2:ed, stands for the concept of world socialism . TheTe is no better way to desoribe it. This is sociaJism . . . The aim of 1:Jhe program outlined by tile President of the United States is to socialize -life." 1 May 1, 1954, 2 :'50 p. m.: "Today, on May 1st, we convey our g,reetings to aN those who are dedicated to the faith in democrat ic socialism ." (To Commun ist-domin ated countries May 1st is synonym ous with America' s July 4th, and the term "Democra tic Socialism " is a Commun ist term used in May Day speeches to descTilbe Commun ist ideology. ) May 4, 1954, 2:10 p. m.: "Program for WorkeTs: "Leon Jouhaux - a g,reat man, descende d from a famNy in which revoltitio nism has been a tradition . His father partidpaJ ted in the revo.1t of the Paris Commun e . . . a born revolution ary ... " GANS.ER LIBRARY MILLERS VILLE STATE COLLEGE 24 SLOV!AKIA May 5, 1954, 2:10 p. m.: "Leon Jouhaux - a great revolutionary, a great rre:fo1rmeT ... " March 23, 1'955, 12:40 p. m. Program, "We Call the Communist Party": "The present order (in eastern Europe) r:ierely serves to continue the dictatorship . . . this jungle which falsely is fabeiled as legitimaJte socia.lism." March 23, 2:20 p. m. Dr. Jan Hajek, on program, "Living Science - Discussion with Young People," said : "Socia1ism has 1become adult. Socialist thinkers are no longer irresponsible radicals. The fundamenta!l problem of modern socialism is man's relation to the state. "The modern socialist rejects both extremes - laissez faire and state control. He is aware of his duties as well as his rigihts. "The citizens of the Socialist society must be conscious of their heritage, aind proud of it." Along this line, the Czechoslova:k editors and broadca;sters crurefully avoid repudiating the measures of socializaJtion and communrzation wbich their own National Front had irnstituted in tJhe postwar years, and often go so far a;s to appro;ve of similar Communist measures in satellite Europe. Thus, on October 28, 1952, at 11 :'50 a. m., the broadcaster of "We Cali t he Communist Party," exclaimed: "Seven years ago, .the decrees of the P,r esident of the Republic ibrought forth the nationalization of industry. In this way Czechoslovakia set out on her way of democraJtic independence.'' So.oialist Policies Defended T.hese ipsychological warriors of the RFE thus still don't realize tha,t it was a crime to cooperate with the Communists, or if they do, :they don't admit it. There is never any hint that the 1Socialist po'licies of the National Front as such have iJ.ed to disaster, no inkling that socialism, because it infringes upon the rights of the individual, leads to communism. Therefo,re, these so-called freedom ,broadcasters ne;ver ,p oint out that the misery of the :p eople in eastern Europe -largely deri;ves from Socialist meddling with the affairs of :the people ; they blame it all on \Soviet exploitation, armaments, emphasis on heavy industry, and that sort of thing. SLOVAKIA 25 Yes, ,t hey have mentioned the "forced Communist eco-• nomy." What they mean by it may be seen from "Lnternationa1 Commentary from New York," in its :broadca,st April 18, 1953, at 6 :05 p. m. The broadcaster explained that "this mearus in Czechoslovakia bhe return of the fo,r mer export policy, ,t he return to the production of quality arrticies. To put an end to this over-emphasis, on heavy industry must be the goal of our new democratic way." · That is all. No, reference to libeTation from the Socialist bureauaracy, from Socialist oppression. Just a shift from armaments to quality ,p roducts. Nothing more. Feroinamd Peroutka, in his broadca;st of 'Sunday, April 27, 1952, at 12 :15 p. m., declared: "The Communists lie when they tell you that we want to ;restore caipitalism, that we intend to ,r eturn to the proprietors the property which has been ta1ken from them some time ago . . . I repeat: the program ,o f the Czechoslova•k exiles is not capitalism and the return to 1938. Nor do we wish to hand baok the mines and foundries to their former owners. All we care for is thaJt the Communist government, which means dependence on Russia, disappears." It might be argued that an occasional ,p rogram of this sort migiht have its place in the o.ver-all setup 1because, after all, there still are oM 'Socialists in Czechoslovalkia who have no use for the Communists. Yet isn't it strange that while there are programs for workeirs, peaJSants and Communists, there are none £or businessmen? Sometimes they talk about free competition, but often it is but the competitiion of collectively owned factories amongst themselves. The terminology of their broadcasts is af the Socialist variety, including the trite ranting against "Capitalists" and "reactionaries". I now shail ,proceed to offer documentary evidence to show that Radio •F ree Europe also aids, and sometimes even propagates, Titoism and communism, and frequently extols Communist leaders. Milos Vanek, one-.time big wheel in the Commun1st party of Czechoslovakia, and now chief of the economics department of RFE's Czechoslovak desk, said on November 21. 1952. at 11.30 a. m.: "Marx. Engels. Trotsky-for them 1 26 SLOVAKIA Marxism was the ,s ubstitute for the Western revoilution of human rights." The co:mmentaJtor of "Weekly Survey of the Ame:rican Press," on April 12, 1953, art; 8 :30 a. m., said: "The New York Herald Trilbune is of the opinion that the trial of Mindszenty, the HungM'ian cardin.a;l, as wehl as the trial of Slansky and similar crimes in other Communist countries, ought to ,be remembered ... " Possibly, if not proba,bly, tt was one of the numerous left-wingers on the staff of the Tribune who plamed this cOITU!pting little seed of associating the fearless anti-Comm'l.llllist cairdinal with that old Marxian wheel'horse and Kremlin errand iboy, Slans.ky..Salzmann, who stood as solidly for the Leninist-iStalinist program as any Communist who happened to get purged in some intra..party feud. Sure enough, if the Tribune man did not give a ring to his pal at the CzechosloV'aik desk in New York's RFE heaidquarters, the latter did not fail to picik up that choke tidlbit. After all, any "opinion" of the stai:d and ·p resumably coruserva,tive New Yo11k Herald 'Dribune is safe quoting. Who is there 1bra;zen enough to accuse the o}d Tribune of being sUJbversi,v e? And thus, by association with a ,primate and mal1tyr of the Roman Catholic Church, a Communist li0kspittle is being groomed for respectaJbility. And this in the name of fighting the totalitarian enemy, by an organization which is financed by American donations, a;nd which is sponsored ,b y well--Omown Americams. Again and again, ,R JFE's psychological warriors do not attack Marxism-eommunism as such but what, with tears of regret, they c01I1de:mn is its "degeneracy." Consequently, the listener-unless he be quite alert--is mduced to fancy that communilsm, with which so many RFE bigwigs: once cooperated, would not be so bad if only it had not "degenerated." RFE Attacks Russian Imperialism but not Communism Fid<filing that tune, RJF])'s "Europe without the Iron Curtain," on March 2, 1952, at 3:45 .p. m., complained a/bout the "degeneration of the old Communist ideaJls." Commenting on the arrest of the Kremlin-serving boss- SLOVAKIA 27 es Sling, Olementis and 'Slansky, RFE's "Comments on Events of the Day," on February 13, 1952, at 7 :30 p. m., waxed somewihat melanc'hoiic: "They consciously closed their eyes, dreaming about the Communist security of the future . . . they dreamed . . . what was to remain of the ide·a ls once the dream had come to Ml end?... A cynical disdain for Communist ideals ... " K•rurol Bel:aJk-lBerger, the left wing Socialist, in RFE's "Round Table Discussion," on April 12, 1953, at 3 :05 p. m., nostalgically referred to the "millions of idealists and men of good wilJ" who had lbelieved in communism and merely deplored the "methods" that had "failed." Regretfully he mused that "the whole aippeal of communism has evaporated ... " 'I'.he policy of collaboration with the Communists was quite distinotly expressed by the old Socialist comrade, Ferdinand Peroutka, in his '~Sunday Oomments" of April 27, 1952, at 12 :15 p. m., when he answered the attack of the Communist dM'ly, !Rude Pravo, on exil.es such a,s he. '"It a<ecuses us of wor,king for the restoration of capitalism, along with the return of the western powers," stated Peroutka. "All we wish to say in reply to these accusations is this: "There has been a Socialist government in England for six yeam. This government would hardly have forced you, the Czech and Slovak people, to accept capitalism. Today we have a Conservatiive government in EngJand. Yet it has not abolished any of the Labor government's Socialist measures, and it would not do anything of the sort in CzechoslovaJkia. "As to America-she supports T1to. Now even though Tito acc~ts America's /bountiful assistance with open hands, t he United States government has not demanded the denationalization of a single Yugoslav factory. Yes, Tiito never ceased to be a Communist. America says: 'Let everyone do as he pleases.' America says: 'Go ahead and be a Communist if that's what you want. All we ask is that you stop supporting Russian imperialism.' America has no 1ntention 28 SLOVAKIA to force runyone, including Czechoslovaikia, to return to capitalism." iDr. Miloslav Kohak, another widely known one-time. Communist collaborator of the National Front who saved his skin in the nick of time and landed a fat job as cllief (until his replacement recently) of RJFE's "Political Comments on the Siituation at Hlome," on November 25, 1952, at 10:45 a. m., had this to say ,a bout Arthur London: "From ,b eg.inning to end, the indictment against London is preposterous. It is the whoie International Brigade of the Civil War irn Spain which is 'being attacked in his person-another proof of the reactionary attitude now prevailing in the Soviet Uni:on. She no longer wants the support of men who. believe in ideals, ibut only of those who believe in bayonets." On May 8, 1954, at 5 :45 .p. m., in "Stories Written ey Life," a young Communist inmate of a slave labor camp was quoted as follows: "Your Christian concept comes close to the 01riginal Leninist ideology . . . We must wm•k toge-· ther, faithful to the ideas which Lenin has taught us." Dr. Jaros}aiv Stransky, Socialist and an oJd Oommunist collaborator of the Nationa1 Front, said in "Taik with Home," on March 1, 1952, at 9 :30 p. m.: "Denunciation should not play amy .part in ,p olitics . . . Arny honest Communist will join the rest of us in condemning denunciation." Probably the old collaborator still believes that it is possible for Communists to ibe honest. Consequently he had no trouble :i n slipping that one in. The trouble with Radio Free Europe, though, is quite another matter. Squandering miHions of American dollars for the alleged ,purpose of fighting communi:sm, it hires old Communist collaborators who rant about "honest" Communists. "We Call the Communist Party," of February 22, 1952, at 11.45 a. m., went all out in praise of Communist cultural achievements. "Czech Communist literature ha;s brought forth works of outstanding value," RFE's psychological warrior declared. "We enjoy reading Communist authors as much as any others." A curious way of inducing an anti-Communist attitude, to say the least. 29 SLOVAKIA 'Dhe Socialist 'Franta Klatil, in "Political Comments on the Situation at Home," on April 21, 1953, at 11]_ :45 a. m., mused that "Tito has more character ithan his one-time aL lies in Prague . . . iHe secured this independence, and quite thoroug,hly at that." It is quite a common rprocedure foir Radio Free Europe to quote Tito and Red Yugoslavia's press as authorities in both moral and political matters. Holiday trips to Tito's Yugoslavia have ,b ecome a cherished habit o,f RFE's editors. Programs Glorify Revolutionary Workers Another variety of the collectivist ideology which pre~ vails among RFE eclitora is the frequent praise of those enemies o,f the Kremlin who have not been able to toe the party line but 'have otherwise been valuable fighters in the class struggle against the so-called exploiters. Thus, the RFE .script, "We CaU the Communist Party," which was broadcast to Ozechoslov,a kia on March 29, 1955, at 12 :40 p. m., in its glorification of title revolutionary workers of Kronstadt sounds as if it had been wr.itten by the old Lithu~ ani3JI14m.e:rican anarchist Alexander Benkman. "'I1he workers of Kronstadt," it says in that script, "fought so that the soviets may be elected freely and democratically, that their just demands be fulfilled - demands which ,w ere entirely in the spirit of the Oct01ber Revolution. They fought for democrati:c soviets ... " True enough, this broadcas-t; was addressed to Communits, and it might seem reasona,;ble to some to appeal to -Communists in the spirit of genuine communism; but is it likely that hardened trans--Ourtain Communi sts of 1955 believe in appeals in behalf of communi~m when they M"e uttered by those who are hired by Americans? Yet, incredtble though it may appear, that is the line which RFE commentators adopted a:S fate as 1955. Let us choose another example of this folly by quoting Dr. JaroS'la.v tStransky, former minister of the National Front, in his "Commentary on the Political Situation" of April 2, 1955, 9 :50 a. m. In this gem of an "anti-Communist" ,b roa.d~ast, the Communist collaborator of b.ut a few yea.rs ago sang the praise of the "Spartacus Bund," the 1 30 SLOVAKIA militant group which, following World War I, broke away from Germany's left wing 'Socirulists in order to usher in the Communist ·r evolution. Stransky really waxed lyr-ical over Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg, the .two most prominent and violent ieaders: of early German communism. "The modern 1Spartacus movement," pontificated Stransky in behalf of iRFE's version of freedom, "Karl Liebknecht and !Rosa Luxemburg . . . they were pacifists, the foes of imperi:aiism and militarism . . . they were beaten to death iby the mob . . . theN" articles, their speeches, their lettevs were inspired by a vision of order and beauty for the modem world . . . in every sentence which that undersized, unga.irny Jewess, Luxemburg, wrote, there was humaneness and poesy ... " We are not arguing a:bout the lofty intentions of these two world famous pioneers of the Communist revolution, misguided and unbalanced though they were. We are here questioning the wisdom of Ameri'CMlS who, in the name of the freedom for which Washington and Lincoln lirved and died, hN'e a notorious one-time Communist collaJborator who stiH offers hymns to the cause of the Communist revolution. That Stransky shmdd express such revolutionary feeL ings is obvious; that well-meaning Americans should sponhor such project does ,p rovide food for thought. National Fronts Vaunted In line with this farcically suicidal policy these RFE psychological wrurriors natua-ally still vaunt the very Nationa'l Front which paved the way for the total subjugation of the Czech and 'Slovak people •b y the Communists. These strange refugee policy-maJkers, script-writers and editors still live in that dreary world in which fatal short-~ghtedness delivered their people into. the hands of the ,Krem!lin. Thus, on October 28, 1952, at 10 :05 a. m., these socaned heralds of freedom told the home folks ibeihind the Cua-tain: "There wiH once more ,b e a time when Benes will arise ... " On OctOlber '2/l, 1953, at 4 :35 p. m., they aippealed to "those who remember the pre..,F~bruary (i.e.,. 1945-48) democra~y ... " On January 11, 1953, at 1:1:30 a. m., the Je:ftist ,S ociaiist Belak-iBerger, "in Comments on the Events SLOVAKIA 31 of the Day," exclaimed: "The real Nationa;l Front (i.e., peaceful ,Socialist-Communist collaborators) today lives in the hearts of the Ozechs and SlovaJks." As if there had not been mass murders all over Czeohoslova;kia ,throughout the existence of the National Front, RFE's "Time, Men, Events" of OctOlbeT 18, 1952, at 10 :15 a. m., told the good ipeople behind the Curtain that "the conditions of 194!5 adually orig.iinated in the will and the wish of ,the majority of the people." New Yovk "Comments of the International Situation," on April 12, 1952, decried the "Communist treason" of February, 1948, 1b y which the last collruborators of the National Front were ex;pelled ,b y the K!remlin's agents. "The Communists," this broadcast said, "seized ,p ower by means of the militia and the police ... Before this time (i.e., before February, 1948, d!uTi'Il!g the entire time of the National Front) the democratic politicians had pro.v ed their .g ood will to cooperate (with the Communi:sts ... However) the democratic politioians (the National Front men and today the RFE men) ·· were removed ... " This is of course true, as all of us know. Yet what sort of democrats are Commumst collaborators who tacitly consent or act1vely connive at the suppressiion and murder of political non-conformists? These Nationa,l ·F ronters, now employed by IRFE, did not discoiver the criminality of their Communist a:IHes when moderates and conservatives were systematical!ly murdered. Only when tihe Communists put the finishing touches on the enslavement of .the Ozec'hoslova!k people by exterminating their own co,Uaborators did these curious freedom fighters b,elatedly decide that the Krem1in's henchmen were afiter all poor champions of liberty. Yet whom do the American ,b osses ·o f Radio F.ree Europe select for speaking to the enslaved people of Ozecho"' slovalkia? Not those \WlO from the beginning refused to compromise with the Communist tyrants. They have preferred to choos:e such National Fronters as Dr. iPetr Zenkl, Dr. Joseph Lettrich, Vaclav Majer, Dr. Ivo Duchacclc, and Dr. Ja,roslav Stransky. The latter has ,b een offered as a weeklv feature attraction. 32 SLOVAKIA Like Alger Hiss, who stiU maintains that Yalta was "a good thing," but that the bad Communists unfortunately broke their ,pledges, these N8Jtiona:l Fronters claim that their colla:borator with the CommunLsbs---the so-called Kosice Program-would have been "a good thing" if only the Communists had not .proved to be treacherous. Instead of at last a:dmitting that the Kosice Program was criminal folly from the outset, they still refer to it as an "ideal." In 1955, when the Communists in Czechoslovakia celebrated the 10th anniversary of the Kosice Program, RFE's "Head and Tail," in a broadcast of April 5, at 8 :15 a. m., declared: "Communist propaganda appeals to democracy, i.e., to the ideals which the Communists have betrayed." On April 7, 1955, at 12 :40 p. m., RFE's "We Call the Communist Party" still praised the Kosice government program, "according to which the Czechoslovalk peo.ple were to elect their representatives in free and secret elections." This whitewashing of the Kosice Program is a deliberate falsehood because only four left wing parties then were handed out licenses by the Communist masters while all anti-Communist parties were declared illegal. The Kersten Committee of the U. S. !House of Representatives ha:s put this sham psychological warfare of RFE in the proper light, by Report No. 8, of December 31, 1954. "Especially the proclamation of the Kosice P.rogram, of April 5, :1,94'5," the Report states on pruge 17, "opened the door for an unobstructed drive on the part of the Communists to seize full power in the country." Policy of Appeasement Let the readers draw their conclusions as they see fit. There is no better way to expose the intrinsic bankruptcy of Radio Free Europe's policy. It is not the fight against communism which these psychological war.rio,rs carry on; they stand for 8Jppeasment amd reconciEation. Thus, of ail ,peo.ple, Konni Zilliacus, the led:t wing Brit~ ish Laborite who has for years been a faithfuil contributor to publi-cations of the Communist ,party, was invited by Radio F.ree Europe to address the Czechosloivak peo,ple. This is what Zilliacus, in broken Czech, beamed over the SLOVAKIA 33 air waves to the trams-Curtain sJ.a,ves, on April 17, 1953, at 12:40 p. m.: "You would enormously encourage and strengit,hen those in the West who-, for the sake of reconciliatio~, woU!ld l.ike to meet the .Soviet Uni:on and the people's democracies half -w ay if you were to rehabi'liltate those of the Prague trial wiho are ,s till in prison, and clear the memory of those who died or were killed ... " Zilliacurs here did not refer to, any anti-Communist victims. He spoke of .such Communists as the Secretary General of the Ozechoslo.vaik Communist Party, Slansky-Salzmann, who had been subjected to one of -qie interminruble purge triaJs and put to death by his coreligionist, Stefan Rais, then Communist Minister of Justice. No,t am.ti-Communists, but the arch-Communist Sbnsky-Saizmann and his confederates were to be "rehrubilitated" for the sake of " reconciliation" with the Communists. That is the sort of psycho1ogical warfare RJFE has been propagating. In similar vein, ,Milos Vanek, old champion of Red causes, said on Apri,l 12, 1953, at 3 :05 p. m.: " ... as long as the Soviet Union faiis to prove by deeds that she is in earnest in her alleged desire to put an end to the cold war and the hot war, she cannot expect that we may diminish our efforts to liberate all the oppressed peo,ples." One weeik later, on the same "Round Table Discussion" program, again at 3 :05 p. m., Vanek said: "First let the Communists mruke ,p eace with their own people. They ought to resort to peaceful means in their :internal policy, too." We might as weJtl asrk wolves to stop devouring lambs, and hyenas to turn into doves of peace. It is nothing less than RFE's zi1uacus and Vanek expect. It is therefore no exaggeration to state that Radio F,r ee Europe has consistently ad<kessed its broadcasts not to anti-Commu:nists, but to, Communists, Ti,to:i.sts, semi-Communists and pro-Communist Socialists b,e hind the Iron Curtain. This fatal policy has spread apathy among what is left of genuine anti-Communists ,b eyond the Curtain. This is not ,t he inspiring fi.g,ht for freedom; it is the deadly appeasement of the Communist tyranny. Inasmuch as Radio Free Europe is controlled and staffed by socialists, pro-Comm1mists, World Federa:lirsts SLOVAKIA 34. and other assorted internationalists, we should not be surprised ,t o learn that ineffective and harmful progz,ams, and even broadcasts amounting to, srubotage, have character.i~d its specific ,policies. Particu!larly noteworthy features comprise: 1. The reipetition of lbanalities-"truth- telling." 2. The "People's iProgra.m.." 3. Attacks on petty Communists and prote.ction of Communist bosses. 4. tDefonse of American pro-Communist errors. 5. Broadcasts amounting to saJbotage. 6. The spreading of recognizable and destructive lies. 7. Failure ,t o propagate Gemnan-Czech and GermanPolish reconci'li ation. 8. Occasional advice to, follow Communist suggestions. 9. I.;eininist inoitement to premature revolts. 10. Propa:gation of decadent literature and music. 11. Propagation of internationalism and racial merger. 12. Praise for the New Dea:lera, and criticism of con-· servative Americans. 1 Repetition of Banalities F'or many a year, a disproportionate amount of broadcast time, be it out of ineptness or aotually malicious intent, has ibeen alloted by Radio. Free Europe to the never-ending reiteration of banrulities. We might identify this curious practice as RF1E's special little game of "telling the truth." it goes somewhat ,l ike this: - the Communists call Americans imper.iaJlists; Ame~ rioans are not imperiaUsts. - the Com.mu.rusts claim that they want peace; Communists don't waJILt ,p eace. - the Communists claim that the American economy is !bad; the America1I1. economy is good. Of what avail is the production of sue'h trivialitie.s? Can there be any doubt that the endless repetition of such trite assertions Sipreads boredom and turns away potential listeners? If at least RJFE}'s broadcastevs made a sustained effort to explain why Americans are not imperialists, and why their economy excels that of the collectivists, listeners SLOVAKIA 35 might be inspired to do, some constructive thinking. The natm-e of RFE's script writers a:nd editors, of course, forbids any such sensilble procedure; for collectivists cannot be expected .to expose the impotence of collectivism. 1In a certain way, RIFE prides itself on beiing "specific" in the stale little game of ".teilling the truth." As an example, the reporter of a broadcast delivered on May 3rd, 1953, ait 8:45 a. m., stated: "In Hungary .t here are obvious supply defficiencies ... Canned food has gone ,b ad ... There is a laok of suga1:> in Bulgaria ... Poland suffers from a shmtage of fish ... " This sort of news, of coll!I'se, is no news behind the Iron Curtain. If t:he economic fai,l,ure of the Soviet re-alm were expl,a ined as the inevitable result of state intervention, listene~ might find it proper to heed such programs. Another part of the quaint little truth-telling game consists of reporting concrete conditions and haippenings from t'he world of the slaive labor camps. Inasmuch as there cannot ,b e any suggestion. regarding the termination of these horrors, the effect of these reports is exactly what the Corrurnmist leaders desire, i. e., to lame the wiU of the people by striking teirror into their hearts. Until May 1, 1954, this sort of aimless and uncoordinated "truth-,teUing" seemed to 1b e RFE's princi,pal task Then--at last-a definite over-all program was announced. Does this mean liberation? Let us look and see. The "Program of the •P eople's Opposi.t ion," proposed on Labor Day, 1954, ait 10 :10 a. m. , and frequently reiterated and referred to, ever since, contained the foUowing ten postulates,: 1. LaJbor unions s'hould belong to their memberis, not the b9sses. The positions of union officials should be elective. 2. There should be less ta1k and more hrurd cash. Hon-est money (sic!) for honest work. 3. The worker should be permitted to choose the type of work he prefers. 4. Overtime should be outlawed. 5. Peasants should be a:llowed to quit the kolkho,z es (i.e. 1 cdllectivies) if they so desire. 36 SLOVAKIA 6. There should be a ceHing on the state's s'hare of agricwltural production. I!'arm oontributioos to the state should be equaliized. 7. The government should wovk for the people, not the politicians. 8. Production should benefit the people, not the state. 9. Emphasis should once more be on the consumer. Small shOil)S, owned and run by little ,people, should be revived, to serve the ,c onsumer. 10. The building industry should be mobiUzed for the benefit of the ,peop'le, instead of the state officials. Some points of this so_,called people's pro,g ram, at first sight, may look impressive. Its cardinal and decisive error derives precisely :firom the inability of its coUectivistic perpetraJtors to recognize the primacy of the enterprise. This program fails to go, to the root of the matter. It does not atfack state control as such. It merely proposes to mitigate and qualify. It is at its core plain socialism. Yet this is the sort of t'hing wihich, in the form of leaflets, is dropped from the trans-Curtain ,s kies by means of the "freedom balloons" which columnists like Drew Pearson have been vaunting for years. This program does not offer any decisive opposition to the tyranny of na;tiona'1ization as such. There is but the indecisive and dU'll suggestion to reform the preSleJilt Communist system, to abolish its excesses, to turn it into some form of Titoism or semi~communism or to return to the socialism of the bankrupt National Front. Instinctively, the Ozechs and Slovaks who hear this socalled ,p eople's program reach for the .lmob and shut it off. They must shrug their shottlders wt the oratorical antics of men .w ho :rant against ta'lking but in their own tum offer little beyond empty talrk. This "Program of the People',s Opposition" is faulty and spurious !because the concept of Rrudio Free Europe is based on a capital error. Radio Free Euro,p e basically main_ tams rthat the threat to the free world comes from Russia as an armed and aggressive power; it obfuscates the fundamental issue of the world~wide Communist conspiracy. In accordance with this leftist line, Radio Free Europe SLOVAKIA 37 a:bsolutely never refers to, congressional investigations of subversirves in the United States. T.rans-1Curtain listeners M"e completely :unaware of the existence of such men a.IS Jenner, Velde, EaJStland, Walter, Dies, Reece, aJnd Mundt. When the Kerstein committee operated in Munich, in the summer of 1954, RJFE referred to it; but the texts of tes-timonies were edited to suit the over-all ·soft~peda:ling of basic issues. Radio Free Europe acts as if it were set up to preserve the concept of state bureaucracy and iprute:rnali:sm by all avaHa:ble means. Petty Communists Blamed for Party Policy Radio Free Europe acts a:s the quack who peddles curealls for the most nauseating aspects of the Comnmnist di-· sease; iit fails to tackle the roots of communism as such. Thrus it makes much ado about the chicaneries and perversions of petty Communist officiais, but it does not name the real culprits, the wire-,pulilers, the bosses who guide and encourage the brutalities of little village tyrants. Radio ·F ree Europe refers by name to individual Stakhanovites, tractor-drivers, and prison~guards; it disregards the organizers of the hruted Communist drives. lt thus actualily ,protects the pillars of the CommU.111ist society, the calclrlating masterminds who play on the wea;knesses of a confused citizenry and trap therir helpless victims in a net of Comm'll.llist demora1ization and perver,s ion. In "Messia:ges to Those at Home," Radio Free Europe p.hllories the little informers who are known to work for the ,s tate police. A1:most without exception these little fellows are known far and wide as stooges of the Communist masters. Dossiers on these puppets do not add to the knowledge rubout Communist evil-0oers. These dossieI's are largely based on dippings from the press of Communist-controllJ.ed eastern :IDurope. The secret agenrts of the Soviet police, the directors: of the pro.grarrn of terror, are never mentioned. "Messages to Those at Home," on February 29, 1952, at 7 :415 p. m., as an example, said: "Who is the mruster in Nitra? (A tiny Slova!k town-Editor.) Who is the master of whom the Soviet police itself is in fear? It is Sergeant Klike. He is hated, dreaded and mighty. He causes the .pllll- 38 SLOVAKIA ishment of policemen who sometimes haive a hearrt; for the.ix victims.'' Now, who is this monster, Sergeant K1ike? Not any "master" by any means. He is but wellArnoW111 little sergeant of the uniformed poJice ! Again, on June 26, 195,2, at 12 :15 p. m., "Messages to Those at Home" singled out a few Communist women: "Comrades M. PO!korelska, !H. Y anosikova, Kr. Bezakova and M. Dedinlmva," the broadcast addressed itself to these petty Communists, "swine-herds and tractor-drivers, re-· member m time the warnings of today. Tomorrow you may be brought to account for your misdeeds; but tomorrow may be too late for you." "'.Program for Civil and State Servants," on April. 10, 1955, at 8:40 a. m., importantly sounded off: "We call your attention to a dangerous informer. The pensioner Michalek, Kulda Street, Brno, ,persecutes beggars. He chases them from homes and often hands them over to the police. In your own interest, Comrade Michalek, we advise you to stop yoUT dirty work." This sort of broadcasting, declaimed in a lowered, almost comical tone, is suppooed to scare primitive swinehevds and tractor-drivers. The bosses are never named. Radio Flree Europe never criticizes the mistakes or the treason of the past and thus never has to expla;in the real reasons of the Communist successes in the past. In the same way as they conceal systematicaliy a11 real causes of the communization of Czechoslovakia, they conceal also the real causes of Communist advances in other part of the world. Let sleeping dogs lie~that seems to be RFE's guiding inspiration. There is no criticism of Teheran, Yalta, and Potsdam. These conferences, in line with the views of an Alger Hiss, are regavded as joot splendid. If only the bad men of the Kremlin had not betrayed their solemn pledges! "We Teach History," on February 13, 1952, at 6:15 p. m., stated: "The Sov.iet Union broke the Yalta rugreement and betrayed it . . . The ink on the document 'had hardly dried when the Soviet Union made a display of violation and unparalleled cynicism." "Sunday Comments of Ferdinand Peroutka," on April SLOVAKIA 89 3, 1955, at 12:15 p.m., commented: "When the Yalta ,papers were published, some individuals wanted to reprimand the Democratic leaders foo- lack of cautiousness. But any discussion of some little mistaJkes the Democra;tic leaders may ha'Ve made would merely obscure the ,p rincipal wirong, which has been and remains the systematic deception contrived b,y the Ru€,s ian statesmen. These reaJl,i ties ought to be clear. ly understood by the wor-ld. The Ya!lta conferoo:ce turned into a tragedy, not because of what was agreed upon there, but because the 'Soviet Union failed to honor the agreements." Broadcasts Amounting t.o Sabotage Naturally, if we are decei,v ed regarding om own stu~ pidity, and even betrayal, at Yalta, we are likely to remain unaware of the stupidity and pet.haps even SaJbotage which have characterized a certain type of ~E's refugee programs. Incredible though it may seem, Riadio Free Europe ~against the ,persistent pleas and protests of refugees firom behind the Iron Ourtain - in its Sa,turday programs has offered detailed descriptions of successful flights from the Soviet terror. These ,b roadcasts - have named the locations where the border was passed, and indicated even 1:Jhe person:s who, at the risk of their 'lives, assisted the escapees. There could not have been any better means to alert the Communist police.. The very identities of patriots in eastern Europe were thus disclosed to the Soviet secret police, with the reswlt that any recurrence might be prevented. How self-destructive, at the expense of optimistic American dono,r s, cam. we get? Were the script writevs and editors of these "sensatio:nal" pro,grams really s•o naive that they failed to grasp the sinister consequences of their paradoxical role? Did they reaUy not understand that their disclosures about the specific locations of escape would en~ able the Communist pdlice to plug the last holes in the Coctaj.n? Let us quote from the !broadcast, "I Chose Freedom," of Aprill 25, 1953, 8 :30 a. m. "[ went through Cerna Horka," the refugee interviewee revealed, "walking along the hrigihway. Then I went :ba<ck to tile river bed of Vltaiva, in 40 SLOVAKIA the direction of the Austrian Soviet zone. I approached the Jezuv creek ... across f.rom it there is for:bidden territory. . . . In Frynburg there is a bridge across the riv&, and the road to Vyssi Brod. In St. Thomais there is the headquarters of the ,p atrols. The bridge had ,b een torn doWID.. I made a float from_ an old fence and other wood I gathered. The river is aJbout t_e n meters wide and three meters deep at that spot. (This was said in reply to a question from the broadcaister. - Editor.) I guided the float by means of a pole, and then set foot on the forbidden side. I hid in the bushes anod woods ... On the highway to- St. Thomas I encountered a banbed wire barricade, a,bout three feet high. I found an old laidder in a hut which had been empty ever since the German's left. I broke it in two, put it a;gainst the barricade, climbed, and jumped to the other side. Traversing a distance of a'bout thirty meters, I reached Jezuv creek, which is ·less than a meter wide. I crossed the creek and found myself in the Soviet zone of Austria. "In Austria, I folfowed the highway until I entered a little ho.use below a hill. The Ausitri.ans who occupied this house felt pity for the refugee, and assisted me . They helped me to contact a friend of theirs in Linz who was to get me ,s afely acro,s s a bridge in Linz, on the border of the 1Soviet ·a nd American 2.1ones. That man pro.v ided me with a forged identification card, into which we rubbed some dirt in order to maike the name illeg1ble. I joined a group of girls who passed the sentry at that spot. Nonchalantly, I ,p roduced the forged identity card for the sentry, and without looking back I crossed the bridge. I was in the Western. izone of Austria." Enemy Alerted The Communist enemy couid not have been more brazenly ailerted. Letters of protest against such asinine (if not trea{!herou.s) interviews fl.ooded the expellee press in Munich. Nevertheless, the interviews continued until 1954, by w'hich time a great many of the cracks in the Soviet wall had been revealed to the Russiains, and repaired by them. As late ·as 'May 9, 1954, at 3 :45 p. m ., the "I Chose Freedom" broadcast disclosed the exact details of a flight SLOVAKIA 41 by express train from Decin, Bohemia, to. Berlin. The in. terviewee described how he had conceailed his presence at the Decin railway stat,ion, how he eluded the attention of the .security agents, aid ,how a "people's po'liceman" at the station in East Berlin 'helped him to escape. As late as Apriil 2, 1955, at 12 :45 p. m., again on the "I Chose Freedom" program, an escapee pictured the detafls of his flight across the above-mentioned bridge in Linz. Can there be any doubt that such interviews. intimidate those behind the Iron Curtain who might be wirlling to cooperate with refugees? Can our friends behind the Iron Curtain maintain erven a shred of confidence in "psyc'hologica1 warriors" who indulge in this sort of give-away? The editor of RFJD's "I Chose Freedom," one Otto Graf, had been editor of the Socialist ,p aper Svet Prace and a well-known CommUJnist collaborator of the National Front. An obscure journalist before War H, he owes hi.s career to his fatal activities in the National Front. Zdenek Fierlinger and Bohumil Lausman, Socialist ministers of the Nationa1l Front, were the pulblishers of Svet Prace, at the time of Graf's editorship. In 1948, on the occasion of the Communist coup in Czechoslovakia, Fierlinger turned out to be a Communist planted in the Sooial Democ.ratic party. Lausman, after his "esca.pe" to the free world, in 1951 worked for a while for Radio Free Europe. Afterward~, he turned out to be a Communist agent and returned to 0zechoslovakia. As editor of the Czechoslovak refugee ,paper, Ce.skoslovenske Noviny, in Ludwigslburg, Gerimany, RFE editor Otto Graf published articles by Lausman. Self-destructive Lies Broadcast It is ha.r d to believe that a man who has ,b een able to function as a newspaper editor is so inept that quite a few of his presumably anti-Communist radio programs in effect equal sabotage of the freedom crusade. That a saboteur of the free world's cause could hardly improve on these refugee programs is evident from their text. An almost equally self-destructive feature of R:ailio Free Europe is the routine broadcasting of transparent lies. 42 SLOVAKIA In a number of pamphlets, including The RFlE Story (p. 14), RFE's psychological warriors proudly admit resorting to lies. Whether lies should be part of our "psycho war" program is 1b oth ethically and practically quite debatable. To brag aJbout one's own lie in print, so that their admission may hie quoted ,b y the enemy, once aga:illl reaches itili.at degree of ingenuousness that in its net results is hardly distinguishaJble fr<Y«..'l saibotage. In addition to all that, many of the fabrications which our RFE brain trusters have th01Ught up are such simon puTe inventions that those for whom they are intended immediately recognize them as such. iFor example, Otto Graf and Vladimir Kucera~Homik, at Christmas, 1954, when maJking programs on the miner's life, made a· report about a great coal mirle catastrophe in Kladno., which a1legdly cost twe:lve lives of miners. This report was invented. We may ibe s,ure that a character like Bohumil Lalli:lman, former chairman of the Ozechoslovak Social Democratic party and afterwards a ,p lain Commrunist agent in Western Germany and Austria, fed RFE such damaging stories, and that some editors believed him. Yet who but one_,time Nation.ail Front colla;borators - RFE's farvorites wou!ld pUJt any trust in LaUSiman anyhow? RFE has made it easy for the Communist to prove RJFE's own mendaoity. Verbatim quotations from RFE's press and radio are all that is :required. T.here is still another lie, even more destructive, which has been produced by the "truth-telling" of Radio Free Europe. It is the number one lie, and concerns the core of the Communist system. There is irrefutable evidence regarding which group is maki:ng communism in the East. This evidence comes from refugees from the East and from various reliable sources. This group is characterized by such · names as Kruglow (or Krugloch), the chief of the Secret Police of the U&SR, Kaganovic, Ehreniburg, Berman, Rakosi_,Rosenkra.Il'Z, etc. In ,aJdd,ition, this group fully and completely constitutes that "invisi'ble government" behind the scenes in 43 SLOVAKIA the East. It is the same group, of course, which also makes the Communist conspiracy in the West. When in 1951 the members of this group (Minister of Justice Stefan Rais, etc.) staged purge tria:ls against other members of .the same group - Slansky-1Sal2'Inann, iReicin, Ka.tiz, etc. - RFE shouted to the world that the entire group was b.eing cruelly persecuted and liquidated in the East. Many samples of suoh programs are availaJble. This greatest and most perverted lie of world communism is !being upheld by RFE even now, and all facts contradfoting it ,a re cut, adjusted or ·s uppressed. Every intellrigent .refugee from the East calils this He the number one .sabotage committed by RFE. An intelligent inv-estigation of FRE as well as of the opinions and the material of the ref.ugees from behind the Iron Curtain would easily bring forth the full truth. 1 Former German Co-Citizens Alienated It is not enough to quote Radio Free Europe to expose its sooia:list and internationalist bias. To point out lost op-, portuni,ties as well as de[iberate omissions permits us to penetrate the confused and hrulf-·hearted mentality of this much~touted and eXipensiive outfit. Perhaps the tbest example of RFE's negativism toward .important objectives of t'he free world is its peculiar attitude towards the Germans. To be sure, on the surface t.he West Ger.man RepubHc and Chance!Hor Adenauer have been officially praised 'b y RFE. Beyond such formalities, IWE has done little to inspire the Czechs and Poles with trust in the Germans. In 1945, the Communists forced the Poles and the C.zec'hs to expel close to fifteen miUion Germans, from their home1and of centUJries. Albout three million of these lost their Hives as they walked through the Iron Ore Mountains, the Sudeten Mountains and the Bohemian Forest or as they were shipped westward in cattle cars which somewhere were left on the traoks. All of the other twelive mililion were r01b1bed of their ,property. Most of them were bea,ten and tortwred. Naturally, the Czechs ,and the Poles fear the venge-· a.nee of their former German co~citizens. Understandrubly, SLOVAKIA the Communists do, all they can to :keep this fear a1ive among the Poles and the Czechs who are under their domination. It would be the duty of Radio Free Europe to counteract this Communi<st policy by telling the Poles and Czechs a bout the numerous manifestations of good will and the sincere desire for reconciliation on the part of di siplaced Germans living in Western Germany. Radio Free Europe does nothing of the sort. It does not even report the official agreements which expelled Czech statesmen have signed with the German expellees. In summary, R@Es' stand on the highly important expellee prdblem is as foillows: a. It does not even mention the peaceful attitude and program of the German expellees. b. It ridicules exi'led Czechs and Poles who do not hate the Germans. c. It fails ever to refer to the remarkable past achievements of the :G ermans in Czechoslovakia and to examples of German-Czech coopexation. d. It never mentions how the ex,pulsion of the antiCommunist Germans enabled the communization of Czechoslovakia from within. e. It continuaNy harps on the persecutions the Czechs and Poles have suffered under German domination. f. It damns the Germans with faint prai,se, and slyly, in veiled fashion, even incites the Slavs against the Germans. g. By upholding the ex;pulsion of fifteen mililion Germans and defending the Oder-Neisse border, it follows a line of nationality policy which is identical with that of the Communists. 1 Advice to Fellow Communist Suggestions There are many other - apparently often ha:rmless occasions on which RFE's line comcides with what the Communists desire. Why men should be .p aid by Americans to broadcast from expensive stations what our Communist enemies want in the first pl ace is not easy to grasp. Particttlarly ba:ffling examples of American--Soviet co1 SLOVAKIA 45 incidences ha:ve come from the desk of Milos Vanek, chief · of the Economic Department of the Czechoslovak Desk, RFIE, Munich. Formerly one o.f the most prominent leaders of the 0zech Communist party, Vanek still feels urged to counsel Czechs in harmony with his former confederates. Early in 19'52, Vane'k busied himself forecrusting an immediate inflation, and advising the people to invest their cash in goods, including the expensive products of the Communist gray market. Innumerable programs have carried this message to the Czechs. The broadcast of Ja:nuary 23, 1952, at 6 :45 p. m., admonished the Czechs: "The Communists in Czechoslovakia are about to runloose inflation. Invest all your savings in goods, buy whatever you can, even the e_x1pensive articles on the government market." There was no inflation; but the refugees from the satellite country reported that the Communist government at that time spread exacbly the same rumor of inflation and also adv1sed to spend all savings because it wanted to draw in a:11 "surplus" money without any monetary reform. A year and a half later, when, of a sudden, the new value oif the Czech currency was a:nnounced, neither the Communists in 0zechoslovakia noT Vanek in RIFE had given any wa:rning. When the Communist government asked for shock brigades of voluteers to plant new forests, Vanek enthusia,stically chimed in. "Help to plant new trees," Vanek exhorted the Czechs on the "Economic Program" of May 1, 1953. "The Communist regime," he announced, "will perish, and t'he trees will be for your children." Other programs hawe offered similar a'dvice. •~Prog,ra,m for Women," 0ctob.er 24, 1953, at 1 :45 ,p. m., counseled to sell quality go·ods. to Communist state stores "because the Communist stores are sel'ling the goods to non-Communists, and it is 111ot good to, cheat non-Communists." "Program for Workers," March 23, 1955, 2:10 p. m., suggested that workers as.k foremen for e~tra work becawse it would mean extra money for them -while it would not really help the Communist cause. Along the same line, the old collaiborator, Otto Graf, 1 46 SLOVAKIA interviewed a fellow by name of Tonda Hornik, who said: "I thus eairned 2,000 crowns extra~it pays not to be lazy." Radio Free Europe, thus, does not urge the satellite slave workers .to relax if not slow down, it spurs them on to work harder - for their Communis t masters. Those in the know were not surprised when "wor.ker" Tonda Hornik, in June, 1955, was exposed as a Communis t agent. One of RFE's editors, Robert Lowkota by name, had gone to the extreme of appealing to the Czech workers not to absent themselves from wor.k; but the protests from refugees who had listened to this monstrosit y w&e so im-,pressive that iRiFE had to back down and, in a broadcast of April 10, 1955, at 12.:45 p. m. ("We Call the Communis t Party"), tried to minimize the importance of Loulkota's aberration. Do these editors who urge the Czech people to fol.Jew suc'h advice have a soft spot in their hearts for the Commwnist~ r are they following the orders of men whose hearts and minds are hard as steel ? On the one hand, Radio Free Europe has urged Czechs to do overtime in factories giving only evasive consolation s, never mentioning how and when liberation could be achieved; on the other, through provocative agitation, it has practically incited them to revolt. Such policy, on the surface, appears contradicto ry. On second thought, we might wonder if all of this confusion is due to ineptness. As long as the Western governmen ts are not prepared to supply .p otential rebels with weapons, no rebellion can succeed. Only people who are unacquaint ed with the nature of communism can hope to overthrow Communis t governments withouit outside assistance. Certainly the present United States governmen t is not inclined to arm potential insurrectio nists. Even if it wanted to, a horde of United Naitions associates would prevent it from going ahead. Why then does Radio Free Europe fail to warn resolutely against revolts at this time? Curiously enough, Lenin favored armed uprisings against his own regime; for nothing exposes more glaringly the staunchest freedom fighters, and nothing offers a more striking opportunity to exterminat e the most stout-heart ed SLOVAKIA 47 foes of communism. Whatever the reason may be - and it appears most worthwhile to get to the bottom of the situation - Radio Free Europe again and again has played the role of the agent provocateur.Whether or not any sabotage wa:s intended, the policy has actually been of benefit to the Communists. First of all, RFE has pictured the enemy as weak while in reality he is strong. "Life Behind the Iron Curtain," on April 26, 1953, at 8:45 a. m., exclaimed: "There is chaos, uncertainty and fear in the Soviet Union and among its leaders." "Best Article," on April 24, 1953, at 9:05 a. m., stated that "there are rifts within the system," and on April 17 it claimed that "we face the beginning of a dissolution process which affects the entire regime." Few Americans know that the broadcast of RIAS, the American broadcasting station in Berlin, shared in the responsibility for the tragic 1953 rebellion of the Germans in the Soviet zone - a rebellion which led to the arrest and annihila:tion of tens of thousands of our best friends behind the Iron Curtain. Practically no American knows that RFE has sent the same sort of abortive action ,p rograms to the Czechs. On February 8, 1952, at 9:15 p. m., Milos Vanek, on "Economic Program," approvingly spoke of the rise of "armed brigades against their leaders in the Communist party itself." Hopefully he observed that "the signs . . . are already on the horizon." When in Czechoslovakia public demonstrations took place in 1953, Radio Free Europe pictured them in inflammatory scenes. The other programs reflected the same attitudes. On June 21, 1953, at 12 :15 p. m., the perennial "Sunday Comments of Ferdinand Peroutka," referring to the tragic and fatal uprising among the Germans, told the Czechs: "Do you know that tens of thousands of workers there are on the march, shouting 'Ivan, go home? Do you know that everybody there is fed up with the Soviet overlordship, has enough of Soviet exploitation?" 48 SLOVAK IA Again and again, Peroutk a has dicussed prematu re and therefor e suicidal - uprising s in an inflamm atory fashion. For the sake of preservi ng precious friends for a more opportu ne time, we might well have followed the advice of the late Senator Robert A. Taft, who vigorou sly opposed such heedlessness. Propagation of Decadent Literature and Music For the time being, Radio Free Europe might well content itself with building up the morale of those who long for liberatio n from the Commu nist tyrants. There are numerou s straight forward books which take a courage ous stand against any and all undue control by governm ent. These, though, are not the books from which RFE's commentato rs have chosen to quote. No, the cultural fare which they have selected is largely confined to decaden ce in literature, and jazz in the realm of music. The program "Play of the Week" is full of mental confusion and decay. The books which are reviewed and quoted, and which are suppose d to represen t the world of the free, abound in decaden t characte rs, in suicide and perversi on. As to literatur e which is suppose d to represen t eastern Europe, the emphasi s is strongly placed on works of defected collectiv ists, picturin g the horror and the hopeless ness among the satellite nations. The editor of "Book of the Week," on August 3, 1952, at 9:45 a. m., expound ed: "We enable you to become acquain ted with the literatur e which is current in the free world. Take a book by Mannus Ferber, who once was a Commu nist . . . the story in itself is colorless - a tera in the ocean ... there are no ready answers anywhe re .. . " On April 26, 1953, at 9 :45 a. m., "Book of the Week" another typical example - discusse d The Polish present to Giodo: "A mysterio us curse rests on the Jean Mill, by family," the commen tator explaine d. "In vain, Kosta opposes the weight of destiny ... his son-in-la w becomes mentally insane ... his daughte r goes crazy ... the young woman is slowly dying ... the power of fate is the core of the book ... all revolt against it is futile . . . " SLOVAKIA 49 "Weekly Survey of Culture," of January 4, 1953, at 11 :15 a. m., told of a work of literature that is "full of complexes and inner conflicts . . . " "Film Program," of April 9, 1955, at 2 :20 p. m., reviewed a film directed by Eliza Kazan: " . . . he went to see his mother in the brothel ... he borrowed money from her, even though he despises her, and then he made a good business deal . . . a drama full of instincts, passions, and convulsions, of undertones ... a master work by Kazan ... " This story about a moral and strong father whose wife lives in a brothel was offered by RFE during the Easter holidays. RFE seems to be chockful of split personalities, of people with complexes, of those who are in need of psychiatrists, of people whom we might pity if there were not so little time left and if they were not entrusted with the task of championing our principles of trust in God and our responsibilities as free men. The music offered by RFE, at 10:05 every morning, and at other hours, accords with the confusion, savagery and hopelessness of the literary ,p roducts which these men favor. ,Most of it i:s jruzz in the version of the squieruking dis_ harmonies and noises of primitives, or of complex men who flee from their own souls. The West is rich in music of the highest inspiration. RFE seems not aware of this mighty force in our behalf. The Communist station in Prague does better. The Communists, mindful of national heritage, play Smetana and Dvorak, the great music of the Czech people. They benefit by these magnificent works. But Radio Free Europe broadcasts jazz - alien, uninspiring stuff. Some of the less influential employees on Radio Free Europe have protested against these low and degrading performances. They were told from above to go on producing jazz. Propagation of Internationalism and Racial Merger The general mental and moral climate of Radio Free Europe conveys moods of indecision, wretchedness and vexation. 50 SLOVAKIA Inherentl y most of the ideals which RFE advocates require some sort of super-gov ernment, which means but additional curtailme nt of the liberties which this costly radio network is supposed to champion . On nearly every day, for instance, there is a program which urges the abolition of naturally- grown national culture in favor of the European super-sta te. It is called "Europe Without the Iron Curtain" and it always begins with the slogan: "Europe without the Iron Curtain means the United States of Europe. Yesterda y but Utopia, today the dream of millions, tomorrow reality." The slogan has been formulate d by the widely known internationalis t Karol Belak-Be rger. Paradoxic ally, the Commun ist internatio nalists in the East are smart enough to appeal often to age-old, traditiona l nationalism. Radio Free Europe, which has been presumab ly conceived to fight Commun ist internatio nalism, champion s internatio nalism. "Nearly all Czechs and Slovaks desire the United States of Europe." That is what "The Other Side of the Coin" asserted, on April 5, 1955, at 8 :15 a. m. A free poll or plebiscite among the enslaved Czechs and Slovaks might well disclose a different mood, a different opinion. On June 6, 1952, at 7 :15 p. m., "Europe Without the Iron Curtain" stated: "The world federatio n is a necessity ; but first Europe must be united. The European federatio n is but the beginning ; the United States of the World is the ultimafo aim ... First a European federatio n must be achieved; then we shall be ready for the world federatio n." In accordanc e with this candidly avowed goal, RFE continually disparage s the concept of national sovereign ty, which is dear to the overwhel ming majority of European s. Thus "Commen ts on Events at Home," on April 28, 1953, at 10:45 a. m., slightingl y referred to "the so-called national sovereign ty." "Europe Without the Iron Curtain," on May 5, 1954, at 1:15 p. m., stated: "On the defendan t's .b ank there sits the concept of the national state and its ideological foundation - nationalis m. Frontiers - the straitjack et of the national state - are an anachron ism." SLOVAKIA 51 The United Nations and UNESCO - a controversial topic among millions of Europeans - are favorites of RFE. "The United Nations gives new hope," said "News," on October 24, 1953, at 1 p. m. "The whole world looks toward the United Nations," said "Who Is Who," on April 22, 1953, at 8:30 a. m. Such statements are daily standard with Radio Free Europe. Ever opposed to nationalism, RFE even objects to national self-determination of the many non-Russian nations inside the Soviet empire. It stands to reason that national self-assertion inside Russia might be a ,p owerful aid to any effort aimed at disintegration of the Soviet Union. Consequently this is opposed by RFE's amazing bleeding hearts. Thus, "Voices of the Western Press," on February 8, 1952, at 8 p. m., quoted: "Russia should not dissolve herself into a number of smaller nations; the nations of the Soviet Union should discontinue their disputes." In its determined opposition to the concept of national heritage, and in harmony with the ideas favored by such American left-wing groups as Americans for Democratic Action, RFE, in programs addressed to the trans-Curtain people, goes so far as to attack the McCarran-Walter Immigration Act. Thus, "Our New York Correspondent Reports," on April 29, 1953, at 10:05 a. m., declared: "The public wants the law to be changed; for the nationality quotas of this law are obsolete . . . The press unanimously demands revision. We hope that the change will be effected." Beyond mere political merger of the nations, Radio Free Europe also campaigns for a merger of races. Thus, for instance, "Europe Without the Iron Curtain," on February 15, 1952, at 6:15 p. m., declared: "Just as Europe, in a way, already represents a nation . . . . there also arises a new nation in the U. S. A. - out of the white, the black, and the yellow races . . . This too will happen in the East of Europe." Along this line, RFE's left-wingers seldom fail to disguise their animosity towards those nations which they regard as particularly nationalistic - against the past Germany, Spain, the Union of South Africa, and the various 52 SLOVAKIA Arab nations. RFE's persistent opposition to the Arab states sometimes reaches comical proportions. An article in itself would be required to document this phase of RFE's internationalism. Praise for New Dealers and Criticism of Conservative Americans In line with its over-all outlook, Radio Free Europe has consistently glorified American New Dealers and has at the same time not refrained from merciless attacks on conservative Americans. In other words, RFE, which should concentrate on psychological warfare against the Communist world con$piracy, has indulged in the hobby of defaming valiant American anti-Communists. No wonder that wideawake Europeans have ever more often asked if RFE is primarily an anti-anti-Communist organization. "Answers to Those at Home," on October 28, 1952, at 10 :05 a. m., proclaimed : "Stevenson was a principal speaker at the celebration for T. G. Masaryk. (Founder and first president of the Czechoslovak republic. - Editor.) Our hope for the future would be rekindled if he were elected President of the United States." On November 4, 1952, at 10:05 a. m., the same program reveled in this choice bit of lyrical effusion: "Adlai Stevenson ... ranks among America's greatest sons, such as Lincoln and F. D. Roosevelt ... He is the very incarnation of America's highest aspirations . . . Within less than a year he rose from obscurity to the pinnacle of American leadership." The record of Radio Free Europe's programs is full of unfavorable remarks about those great Americans who have steadfastly opposed the Communist menace. A flood of vituperation was pou:r;-ed on General Douglas MacArthur upon his dismissal from the Far Eastern scene. His speeches, which have moved the truly anti-Communist refugees from eastern Europe, have been consistently withheld from RFE's programs. It was the same with the great and honorable Senator Robert A. Taft, on the occasion of his campaign for the Republican nomination in 1952. After "Mr. Republican's" SLOVAKIA 53 defeat at the Chicago Convention, "Our New York Correspondent Reports," on August 7, 1952, at 10:05 a. m., rejoiced: "For Europe it is decisive that the last remainders of isolationism have been removed, and that a sound policy has been carried to victory." Ferdinand Peroutka, in one of his interminable "Sunday Comments," on August 3, 1952, at 12:15 p. m., pontificated: "Taft was the proponent of a policy which can never settle anything, as his adversaries have always pointed out." "Our New York Correspondent Reports," on July 9, 1952, at 8:05 p. m., had this to say: "The opinions of (Herbert) Hoover and (Douglas) MacArthur represent the viewpoint of a minority; these men want to confine themselves to the (exclusive) defense of the American continent. The majority ( of Americans), though, have dimissed this attitude and are conscious of America's global role." "A Program of Novelties," referring to the passing of two famous American journalists Pulitzer and Bert McCormick - on April 3, 1955, at 3 .p. m., called Pulitzer the "son of an Hungarian immigrant, an outstanding American journalist," but criticized Colonel McCormick as a "controversial, reactionary isolationist" who "opposed progress." The Krem'l~n must have been satisfied with that incisive observation. General Impression Created By Radio Free Europe What, then, is the general impression which Radio Free Europe has made, behind the Iron Curtain as well as among the millions of anti-Communists in Western Europe? It is, besides the impression of half-heartedness, indecision, artificiality, and downright clowning. When RFE's broadcasters, directly addressing some poor wretch or some swineherd in some forlorn little hamlet in Slovakia or Bohemia, lower their voices to terrify him, antiCommunist refugees merely laugh. Alas, the farce tastes bitter, because of the lost opportunities, the stupidity, the feeling of treason, and the unsonscionably low moral standard. Next, there is the strong impression of cliche journalism, occupying itseif with superficialities - cars, houses, 54 SLOVAKIA etc. - and largely avoiding verbatim quotations. Instead, they impose their propaganda by means of slogans. Real opinions of the refugees and of the people at home are disregarded by the RFE propaganda. Real anti-Communists are never allowed to get their messages across the Curtain. Real anti-Communists, including the repenting National Fronters, are social outcasts. But the collaborators of the National Front, who even today maintain that the National Front was all right, sit at the big desks and cash their substantial checks, in compensation for their shadow boxing. Then there is the distinct impression of coolness, impersonality and anonymity. Since the well-known anti-Communists of -long standing have been barred from RFEJ, theTe are no names to inspire the listeners. Yes, some men do speak under their own names. These include the left-winger Dr. Joseph Lettrich, the Marxist Vaclav Majer, and such Socialists as Ferdinand Peroutka, Dr. Petr Zenkl and Dr. Jaroslav Stransky. However, these men are known to be weaklings, mere fronts for more powerful personalities. They are recognized to be generally useless; they won't stir the imagination of anyone. As to the known former champions of the Communist causes, trans-Curtain listeners would simply shut off the radio if they knew who was talking to them. Therefore, Milos Vanek now calls himself Pravdomil Basta, and Frantisek Listopad goes by the name of Jan Ctvrtek. Similarly, the leftist Socialist Dr. Miloslav Kohak has become Vitezslav Fram; Otto Graf hides his pro-Communist past under the pseudonym of Franta Tabor, and Karol Belak-Berger has conveniently turned into one Jan Lehota. "Who are these fellows anyhow?" the listeners behind the Curtain must wonder; for they have never heard of them. Naturally, they become suspicious, and their interest sags. Czechs and Slovaks behind the Curtain remember those who never compromised with the Communists. They know that these men are now living in the West - the C:i!echoslovak General of the Army, Lev Prchala, the former Czechoslovak Minister, Dr. Joseph Cerny, and many others, and SLOVAKIA 55 also some former members of the National Front who in the free West started to denounce it - Dr. Bohdan Chudoba, Dr. Michal Zibrin, or Dr. Helena Kozeluhova, who was expelled in 1946 from the Parliament by the National Front, and the entire younger generation, led by Jiri Havelka, Emil Petrik, etc. The Slovaks have their former Minister, Dr. Ferdinand Durcansky and many others. The listeners behind the Iron Curtain cannot fail to wonder why none of them sends any "messages home" by way of Radio Free Europe. The masterminds of this confusion, whose net results represent sabotage of the anti-Communist fight - are way behind the firing lines in New York City, and in Washington. They, too, shroud themselves in anonymity. 'T he over-all impression, then, is one of cynism and emptiness, artificiality, and insincerity. Who wants to buy apples which are rotten at the core? RFE's Program In conclusion, we must ask: What, then, is the program of Radio Free Europe, or has no program been designed so far? Those behind the Curtain, who have the time to listen at all, would like to know in what way liberation may be achieved, and what specific assistance, beyond mere words, the West might be able to offer. Radio Free Europe has not been able to supply any satisfactory information in respect to this all-important ,problem. Here, however, we cannot help allowing for valid reasons to excuse much of RFE's ineffectualness; for even if RFE were staffed with outright, hard-hitting anti-Communists, it could not ,possibly make any promises which the Western governments, particularly the government of the U. S. A., were not willing to back with power. There is no use in claiming superiority in aircraft or guided missiles if that superiority admittedly does not exist. It is not possible to promise an economic blockade as long as that policy has not been adopted by the American government. Radio Free Europe - or any of the other liberation 56 SLOVAKIA stations - cannot very well offer the severing of diplomati c relations with the Soviet criminals when our own statesmen meet with them at the summit and have lots of smiling pictures :taken for the benefit of the Soviet ieaders. However, if RFE were really (instead of merely in name) an independe nt and private organizat ion, and really staffed with intelligen t and genuine anti-Com munists, it could urge Western governme nts to take stronger steps. Radio Free Europe might demand the creation of military units exclusive ly composed of refugee and e~pellee volunteers. It might demand the ousting of Commun ists from both internatio nal and national organizat ions. It might establish extensive contacts with the undergro und behind the Curtain, instead of causing its discovery and extermin ation by Communi sts. Radio Free Europe might frankly discuss the present difficultie s while at the same time exhorting the Iron Curtain slaves not to lose hope. The trans-Cu rtain ,people who long for liberty might at least be informed about where all of us stand. They should know about a long-rang e .p rogram as well as what can be done at this time. Most importan t of all, Radio Free Europe should become a clear and shining beacon to those who are willing to fight for their liberties. This can only be achieved by throwing out the clowns and confusion ists who want to fight communism with a Socialist "peo1ple',s program. " If Radio Free Europe cannot cleanse itself because it is from top to bottom infested with collectivists, internatio nalists, materialists and decadents , then it would be better to shut it down and replace it with an entirely new organizat ion. Perhaps this great reform cannot be undertak en as long a:s even in the United States the grass roots patriots, who unequivocally believe in God, the Constitut ion and freedom of enterprise , are successfu lly boycotted and ridiculed. Perhaps an effective liberation station can only be establishe d when at last the collectivi st corrupter s of the United States are driven from their entrenche d ,p ositions in America' s public institution s, and her means of communi cation, and her governme nt itself.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource A Close-Up View of Radio Free Europe Description An account of the resource Jiri Brada Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 1 (18), March 1956 pp. 17-56 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Brada, Jiri Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1956 name https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/77dd8aa556e9ce42e98b2048de70cd19.pdf 38a8f726cc0e8cced33fb70c732381a7 PDF Text Text Officers of the Slovak League of America (Organized 1907 in Cleveland, Oh io • Franc es L. Mizenko Honorary President 3756 Lee IJload C leveland 28, Ohio Dr. Pet er P . Hletko 1943 W. 48th Street Chicago 9, Illinois Stephen J. Tkach 173 N . Main Street Wilkes-Bar re, Pa. President A. Philip Hrobak P. 0 . I..:ox 150, Middletown , Pa. Andrew J. Hamrock 61 Woodlan<! Avenu e Camp bell , Ohio Vice-Presid ent Jacob Kocis ADVISORY COUNCIL Vlichael J . Vargovich 1547 -- 167th Street Hammond, Ind . National President First Catholic Slovak Union Vice-Presid ent J ulia Krajcovic :-te le n Kocan 1648 W. 18th St., Chicago 8, Ill. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Unio n Recording Secretary Francis Hrusovsky Frank Bobus 2900 East Boulevard Cleveland 4, Ohio National President Slovak Catholic Sokol Secretary-T re asurer Mi l an St ephen J . Tkach V. Blazek National President Penna. Slovak U nion 4922 S. L eclaire Avenue Chicago 38, Ill. EXECUTIV E COMMITT EE Gabriela E . Vavrek National President Ladies Pennsylvan ia Slovak Union Paul P. Jamriska 810 Montooth Street Pittsburgh 10, Pa. John Rozboril Joseph Prusa 205 Madison St., Passaic, N. J . National President Slo vak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAP ERS (Affiliated with the Slovak League of America) JEDNOTA SLOVEN SKA OBRANA ZENSKA JEDNOTA Middl etown, Pa. Scranton, Pa. Cl eveland, Ohio BRATSTVO SLOVENSK E NOVINY ZORNltKA Chica.go, m. Wilkes-Bar re, P a. Clevela nd, Ohi o KATOLiCK Y SOKOL SVORNOS T OSADNE HLASY Passaic:, N. J . Whitaker, Pa. Chicago, Ill. SLOVAK V AMERIKE Whiting, Ind. �SLOVAKIA: the ruins of the STARA I'.iUBOVNA above the Poprad Valley. GANSt::R LIBRARY . MILLERSVILLE STATE COLLEGE MILLERSVILLE, PA 17551 � Officers of the Slovak League of America (Organized 1907 in Cleveland, Oh io • Franc es L. Mizenko Honorary President 3756 Lee IJload C leveland 28, Ohio Dr. Pet er P . Hletko 1943 W. 48th Street Chicago 9, Illinois Stephen J. Tkach 173 N . Main Street Wilkes-Bar re, Pa. President A. Philip Hrobak P. 0 . I..:ox 150, Middletown , Pa. Andrew J. Hamrock 61 Woodlan<! Avenu e Camp bell , Ohio Vice-Presid ent Jacob Kocis ADVISORY COUNCIL Vlichael J . Vargovich 1547 -- 167th Street Hammond, Ind . National President First Catholic Slovak Union Vice-Presid ent J ulia Krajcovic :-te le n Kocan 1648 W. 18th St., Chicago 8, Ill. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Unio n Recording Secretary Francis Hrusovsky Frank Bobus 2900 East Boulevard Cleveland 4, Ohio National President Slovak Catholic Sokol Secretary-T re asurer Mi l an St ephen J . Tkach V. Blazek National President Penna. Slovak U nion 4922 S. L eclaire Avenue Chicago 38, Ill. EXECUTIV E COMMITT EE Gabriela E . Vavrek National President Ladies Pennsylvan ia Slovak Union Paul P. Jamriska 810 Montooth Street Pittsburgh 10, Pa. John Rozboril Joseph Prusa 205 Madison St., Passaic, N. J . National President Slo vak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAP ERS (Affiliated with the Slovak League of America) JEDNOTA SLOVEN SKA OBRANA ZENSKA JEDNOTA Middl etown, Pa. Scranton, Pa. Cl eveland, Ohio BRATSTVO SLOVENSK E NOVINY ZORNltKA Chica.go, m. Wilkes-Bar re, P a. Clevela nd, Ohi o KATOLiCK Y SOKOL SVORNOS T OSADNE HLASY Passaic:, N. J . Whitaker, Pa. Chicago, Ill. SLOVAK V AMERIKE Whiting, Ind. �SLOVAKIA: the ruins of the STARA I'.iUBOVNA above the Poprad Valley. GANSt::R LIBRARY . MILLERSVILLE STATE COLLEGE MILLERSVILLE, PA 17551 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Officers of the Slovak League of America (Organized 1907 in Cleveland, Oh io • Franc es L. Mizenko Honorary President 3756 Lee IJload C leveland 28, Ohio Dr. Pet er P . Hletko 1943 W. 48th Street Chicago 9, Illinois Stephen J. Tkach 173 N . Main Street Wilkes-Bar re, Pa. President A. Philip Hrobak P. 0 . I..:ox 150, Middletown , Pa. Andrew J. Hamrock 61 Woodlan<! Avenu e Camp bell , Ohio Vice-Presid ent Jacob Kocis ADVISORY COUNCIL Vlichael J . Vargovich 1547 -- 167th Street Hammond, Ind . National President First Catholic Slovak Union Vice-Presid ent J ulia Krajcovic :-te le n Kocan 1648 W. 18th St., Chicago 8, Ill. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Unio n Recording Secretary Francis Hrusovsky Frank Bobus 2900 East Boulevard Cleveland 4, Ohio National President Slovak Catholic Sokol Secretary-T re asurer Mi l an St ephen J . Tkach V. Blazek National President Penna. Slovak U nion 4922 S. L eclaire Avenue Chicago 38, Ill. EXECUTIV E COMMITT EE Gabriela E . Vavrek National President Ladies Pennsylvan ia Slovak Union Paul P. Jamriska 810 Montooth Street Pittsburgh 10, Pa. John Rozboril Joseph Prusa 205 Madison St., Passaic, N. J . National President Slo vak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAP ERS (Affiliated with the Slovak League of America) JEDNOTA SLOVEN SKA OBRANA ZENSKA JEDNOTA Middl etown, Pa. Scranton, Pa. Cl eveland, Ohio BRATSTVO SLOVENSK E NOVINY ZORNltKA Chica.go, m. Wilkes-Bar re, P a. Clevela nd, Ohi o KATOLiCK Y SOKOL SVORNOS T OSADNE HLASY Passaic:, N. J . Whitaker, Pa. Chicago, Ill. SLOVAK V AMERIKE Whiting, Ind. SLOVAKIA: the ruins of the STARA I'.iUBOVNA above the Poprad Valley. GANSt::R LIBRARY . MILLERSVILLE STATE COLLEGE MILLERSVILLE, PA 17551  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Back Matter, Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 1 (18) Description An account of the resource includes photo of ruins of Stará Ľubovňa above the Poprad Valley Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1956 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/43a5e633737a1609f4967bb5245a3162.pdf 7d2207eb8924135491f8a0d50f062174 PDF Text Text Officers of the Slovak League of America (Organized 1907 in Cleveland, Ohio • Hono r ary President Franc es L. Mizenko 3756 Lee !Road Cleveland 28, Ohio Dr. Peter P. Hletko 1943 W. -ISth Street Chicago ~. Illinois IStephen President A . Hroba k Ph i l i p P. 0. Box 150, Middletown, Pa. Andrew J . Hamrock 61 Wood-land Avenue Campbell , Ohio Vice-President Jacob Kocis ADVISORY COUNCIL Mic hael J. Vargovi c h 15n -- 167th Street Hammond, Ind. National President First Catholic S lornk Cnion Vice-President Julia K rajcovlc Hel en Kocan 1648 W. 18th St., Chicago 8, 111. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Union Recording Secreta.ry Fra nc is J . Tkach 173 N. Main Street \ Vilkes-Barre, Pa. H rusovsky 2900 East Boulevard Cleveland 4, Ohio Pau l Fallat , ational President Slovak Catholic Sokol Secretary-Treasurer Stephen J. Tkach Milan V . Blazek National President Penna. S lovak Uni on 4922 S. Leclaire Avenue Chicago 38, Ill . EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Cath erine Paul P. Jamriska 810 Montooth Street Pitts burgh 10, Pa. Volosin N ati onaJ President Ladies Pennsylvania Slovak Uni on John Rozbor i l Joseph Prusa 205 Madison St., Passaic, N. J . Nati onal President Slovak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAPERS ( Aff il iated with th e Slovak League of America ) JEDNOTA SLOVENSKA OBRANA ZENSKA JEDNOTA :\fiddletown, Pa. Scranton, Pa. Cleveland, Ohio BRATSTVO SLOVENSKE NOVINY ZORNICKA Cleveland, Ohio Chicago, Ill. K ATOLiCKY SOKOL SVORNOST OSADNE HLASY Passaic, N . J . Whitaker, Pa. Chicago, Ill . Wi lkes-Barre, Pa. SLOVAK V AMERIK E Whiting, Ind. �1856 - 1956 LOUIS STUR: Father of Modern Slovak Nationalism GANSER LIBRAR"Y ·~!~~~~~X!·~~~ ~1:ATE__f9!-1EG£ � Officers of the Slovak League of America (Organized 1907 in Cleveland, Ohio • Hono r ary President Franc es L. Mizenko 3756 Lee !Road Cleveland 28, Ohio Dr. Peter P. Hletko 1943 W. -ISth Street Chicago ~. Illinois IStephen President A . Hroba k Ph i l i p P. 0. Box 150, Middletown, Pa. Andrew J . Hamrock 61 Wood-land Avenue Campbell , Ohio Vice-President Jacob Kocis ADVISORY COUNCIL Mic hael J. Vargovi c h 15n -- 167th Street Hammond, Ind. National President First Catholic S lornk Cnion Vice-President Julia K rajcovlc Hel en Kocan 1648 W. 18th St., Chicago 8, 111. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Union Recording Secreta.ry Fra nc is J . Tkach 173 N. Main Street \ Vilkes-Barre, Pa. H rusovsky 2900 East Boulevard Cleveland 4, Ohio Pau l Fallat , ational President Slovak Catholic Sokol Secretary-Treasurer Stephen J. Tkach Milan V . Blazek National President Penna. S lovak Uni on 4922 S. Leclaire Avenue Chicago 38, Ill . EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Cath erine Paul P. Jamriska 810 Montooth Street Pitts burgh 10, Pa. Volosin N ati onaJ President Ladies Pennsylvania Slovak Uni on John Rozbor i l Joseph Prusa 205 Madison St., Passaic, N. J . Nati onal President Slovak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAPERS ( Aff il iated with th e Slovak League of America ) JEDNOTA SLOVENSKA OBRANA ZENSKA JEDNOTA :\fiddletown, Pa. Scranton, Pa. Cleveland, Ohio BRATSTVO SLOVENSKE NOVINY ZORNICKA Cleveland, Ohio Chicago, Ill. K ATOLiCKY SOKOL SVORNOST OSADNE HLASY Passaic, N . J . Whitaker, Pa. Chicago, Ill . Wi lkes-Barre, Pa. SLOVAK V AMERIK E Whiting, Ind. �1856 - 1956 LOUIS STUR: Father of Modern Slovak Nationalism GANSER LIBRAR"Y ·~!~~~~~X!·~~~ ~1:ATE__f9!-1EG£ � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Officers of the Slovak League of America (Organized 1907 in Cleveland, Ohio • Hono r ary President Franc es L. Mizenko 3756 Lee !Road Cleveland 28, Ohio Dr. Peter P. Hletko 1943 W. -ISth Street Chicago ~. Illinois IStephen President A . Hroba k Ph i l i p P. 0. Box 150, Middletown, Pa. Andrew J . Hamrock 61 Wood-land Avenue Campbell , Ohio Vice-President Jacob Kocis ADVISORY COUNCIL Mic hael J. Vargovi c h 15n -- 167th Street Hammond, Ind. National President First Catholic S lornk Cnion Vice-President Julia K rajcovlc Hel en Kocan 1648 W. 18th St., Chicago 8, 111. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Union Recording Secreta.ry Fra nc is J . Tkach 173 N. Main Street \ Vilkes-Barre, Pa. H rusovsky 2900 East Boulevard Cleveland 4, Ohio Pau l Fallat , ational President Slovak Catholic Sokol Secretary-Treasurer Stephen J. Tkach Milan V . Blazek National President Penna. S lovak Uni on 4922 S. Leclaire Avenue Chicago 38, Ill . EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Cath erine Paul P. Jamriska 810 Montooth Street Pitts burgh 10, Pa. Volosin N ati onaJ President Ladies Pennsylvania Slovak Uni on John Rozbor i l Joseph Prusa 205 Madison St., Passaic, N. J . Nati onal President Slovak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAPERS ( Aff il iated with th e Slovak League of America ) JEDNOTA SLOVENSKA OBRANA ZENSKA JEDNOTA :\fiddletown, Pa. Scranton, Pa. Cleveland, Ohio BRATSTVO SLOVENSKE NOVINY ZORNICKA Cleveland, Ohio Chicago, Ill. K ATOLiCKY SOKOL SVORNOST OSADNE HLASY Passaic, N . J . Whitaker, Pa. Chicago, Ill . Wi lkes-Barre, Pa. SLOVAK V AMERIK E Whiting, Ind. 1856 - 1956 LOUIS STUR: Father of Modern Slovak Nationalism GANSER LIBRAR"Y ·~!~~~~~X!·~~~ ~1:ATE__f9!-1EG£  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Back Matter, Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 2 (19) Description An account of the resource includes drawing of Louis Štúr Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1956 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/24e8fa8553d5868a5dbd5d6161ae2ee5.pdf 87c33b9236be42a4365e2bb736ebe2da PDF Text Text Officers of the Slovak League of America 1 (Orwanized 1907 in Cleveland, Oh:io • Honorary President Frances L. Mizenko 37 56 Lee R oad Cleveland 28, Ohio Dr. Peter P. H letko 1!143 W. 48th Street Chica.go 9, lllinois Stephen J . Tkach 173 N. Main Street Wilkes-Barre, Pa. President Philip A. Hrobak P . 0 . Box 150, Middletown, Pa. Andrew J. Hamrock 61 Woodland Avenue Camp bell, Ohio Vice-President Jacob Koci& ADVISORY COUNCIL Michael J. Vargovich 1547 -- 167th Street Hammond, Ind. National President First Catholic Slovak Union Vice-President Julia Krajcovic Helen Kocan 1648 W . 18th St., Chicago 8, Ill. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Union Recording Secretary Constantine Culen 2900 East Boulevard Clevaland 4, Ohio Paul Fallat National President Slovak Catholic Sokol Secreta.ry-Treasurer Stephen J. Tkach Milan V. Blazek National President Penna. Slovak Union 4922 S. Leclaire Avenue Chicago 38, Ill. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Anna Sotak ational President Ladies Pennsylvania Slovak Union Paul P. Jamriska 810 Montooth Street Pittsburgh 10, Pa. John Rozboril Joseph Prusa 205 Madison St., Passaic, N. J . ational President Slovak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAPERS ( Affiliated with the Slovak League of America) JEDNOTA SLOVENSKA OBRANA ZENSKA JEDNOTA Middletown, Pa. Scranton, Pa. Cleveland, Ohio BRATSTVO SLOVENSKE NOVINY ZORNICKA Cleveland, Ohio Chicago, Ill. KATOLiCKY SOKOL SVORNOST Pa.ssaic, N . J. Whitaker, Pa. OSADNE HLASY Chicago, Ill. Wilkes-Barre, Pa.. SLOVAK V AMERIKE Whiting, Ind. �GAN'S.ER LIBRARY MILLERSVILLE STATE COLLEGE MfLLERSVILLE, PA. 17551 � Officers of the Slovak League of America 1 (Orwanized 1907 in Cleveland, Oh:io • Honorary President Frances L. Mizenko 37 56 Lee R oad Cleveland 28, Ohio Dr. Peter P. H letko 1!143 W. 48th Street Chica.go 9, lllinois Stephen J . Tkach 173 N. Main Street Wilkes-Barre, Pa. President Philip A. Hrobak P . 0 . Box 150, Middletown, Pa. Andrew J. Hamrock 61 Woodland Avenue Camp bell, Ohio Vice-President Jacob Koci& ADVISORY COUNCIL Michael J. Vargovich 1547 -- 167th Street Hammond, Ind. National President First Catholic Slovak Union Vice-President Julia Krajcovic Helen Kocan 1648 W . 18th St., Chicago 8, Ill. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Union Recording Secretary Constantine Culen 2900 East Boulevard Clevaland 4, Ohio Paul Fallat National President Slovak Catholic Sokol Secreta.ry-Treasurer Stephen J. Tkach Milan V. Blazek National President Penna. Slovak Union 4922 S. Leclaire Avenue Chicago 38, Ill. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Anna Sotak ational President Ladies Pennsylvania Slovak Union Paul P. Jamriska 810 Montooth Street Pittsburgh 10, Pa. John Rozboril Joseph Prusa 205 Madison St., Passaic, N. J . ational President Slovak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAPERS ( Affiliated with the Slovak League of America) JEDNOTA SLOVENSKA OBRANA ZENSKA JEDNOTA Middletown, Pa. Scranton, Pa. Cleveland, Ohio BRATSTVO SLOVENSKE NOVINY ZORNICKA Cleveland, Ohio Chicago, Ill. KATOLiCKY SOKOL SVORNOST Pa.ssaic, N . J. Whitaker, Pa. OSADNE HLASY Chicago, Ill. Wilkes-Barre, Pa.. SLOVAK V AMERIKE Whiting, Ind. �GAN'S.ER LIBRARY MILLERSVILLE STATE COLLEGE MfLLERSVILLE, PA. 17551 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Officers of the Slovak League of America 1 (Orwanized 1907 in Cleveland, Oh:io • Honorary President Frances L. Mizenko 37 56 Lee R oad Cleveland 28, Ohio Dr. Peter P. H letko 1!143 W. 48th Street Chica.go 9, lllinois Stephen J . Tkach 173 N. Main Street Wilkes-Barre, Pa. President Philip A. Hrobak P . 0 . Box 150, Middletown, Pa. Andrew J. Hamrock 61 Woodland Avenue Camp bell, Ohio Vice-President Jacob Koci& ADVISORY COUNCIL Michael J. Vargovich 1547 -- 167th Street Hammond, Ind. National President First Catholic Slovak Union Vice-President Julia Krajcovic Helen Kocan 1648 W . 18th St., Chicago 8, Ill. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Union Recording Secretary Constantine Culen 2900 East Boulevard Clevaland 4, Ohio Paul Fallat National President Slovak Catholic Sokol Secreta.ry-Treasurer Stephen J. Tkach Milan V. Blazek National President Penna. Slovak Union 4922 S. Leclaire Avenue Chicago 38, Ill. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Anna Sotak ational President Ladies Pennsylvania Slovak Union Paul P. Jamriska 810 Montooth Street Pittsburgh 10, Pa. John Rozboril Joseph Prusa 205 Madison St., Passaic, N. J . ational President Slovak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAPERS ( Affiliated with the Slovak League of America) JEDNOTA SLOVENSKA OBRANA ZENSKA JEDNOTA Middletown, Pa. Scranton, Pa. Cleveland, Ohio BRATSTVO SLOVENSKE NOVINY ZORNICKA Cleveland, Ohio Chicago, Ill. KATOLiCKY SOKOL SVORNOST Pa.ssaic, N . J. Whitaker, Pa. OSADNE HLASY Chicago, Ill. Wilkes-Barre, Pa.. SLOVAK V AMERIKE Whiting, Ind. GAN'S.ER LIBRARY MILLERSVILLE STATE COLLEGE MfLLERSVILLE, PA. 17551  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Back Matter, Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21) Description An account of the resource includes photo of ruins of Spiš Castle Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource September-December 1956 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/1b62d65dd649731e1634db4030fb37a9.pdf 9982b85f8258a9e4ad33b42d361d5457 PDF Text Text 40 SLOVAKIA BENES AND THE COMMUNIZATION OF CZECHO-SWVAKIA John B. Fox The foreign policy of our country, from the Monroe Doctrine till the late nineteen-forties, was aimed at the greatest .possi1ble isolation. This was e specially true, because of the principles laid down in the mentioned Monroe Doctrine, as far as the Eastern hemisphere was concerned. Thus, afteir World War U, the call to leadership of the democratic world found us. in many respects unprepared. Suddenly we •l earned that our knowledge of the rest of the world, especially Europe, was quite limited. We set about with known American assiduousness to tackle the .great tasik thrust upon us. Realizing that in order to present real leadership we must know our allies, we commenced to accumulate information about the various nations, sea rching eJVery aspect of their national lives . In pursuing this, our leaders solicited the aid of exiled politicians and also that of the various n8Jti-onal organizations in this country. Though we have made tremendous progress in the above undertaking, in many instances, especially as far as some small nations are concerned, we have hardly started the job. To state a case where our Administration, mostly due to complexity of the situation, has hardly obtained a true picture, we mention Czecho-Slovakia. The foreign policy of Czecho-Slovakia from 1918-1948 was molded by Eduard Benes and his political aide s. During those thirty yea-rs !Benes was a virtual dictator a s far as the foreign affairs of his countr,y were concerned. In addition to that, he did more than any other politician outside the USSR to make the SOIViet Union acceptable to the West and gain admission to the League of Nations. Benes is now deceased, ibut his disciples, many of whom are in this country, carry ·on in his work. They are acting as consultants to our Administration, exercising influence on Radio Free Europe, Voice of America, Congress, etc . 1 �SLOVAKIA il It seems worth-.while, therefore, to examine Benes's political relationship to the USSR. In doing so, we will not repeat Sir Winston Churchill's condemning opinion of Benes, stated in one of his present books, but will quote from a neat little boo'k published by the Czech-American National Alliance in 1944 entitled, "Eduard Benes in His Own Words." Therein friends of Mr. Benes did us a favor in selecting f,vom the mass of his speeches and publications statements expressing his stand on major political issues in chronoilogical order from 1914~1944. The following, then, are quotes from "Eduard Benes in His Own Words" pertaining to the USSR, giving the date when they were made: 1917: Our revolutionary action welcomed the Russian Revolution openly and sincerely . . . 1918: The Allies tried to use our soldiers in Russia for intervention, •but .this was o,pposed . . . H-.'.O: We refute t'he assertion that if decisive steps had been taken in time against the Bolsheviks, they could have been de.;;tl"'Oyed. In connection with Russia it was our (i.e., Czecho-SJovak) government, almost the only one in the whole of Europe, that understood the situation and foresaw corroctly the evolution of events .... .AIS to Russia, we must and shall help her, so far as it is in our powe r . . . . 1921: Our position on Russian problems, which we often det'ended with difficulty, but which our government executed, is today generally and fully ,accepted. The Allies and the whole European public opinion turned away from the idea of intervention in Russia. Our Republic has been following this policy honestly and consistently for more than three years and is therefore now in a strong moral position. 1922: In the future . . . it will be a struggle for a federalistic, democratic Russia. We believe in the future of this Russia. Our relations to the Russian .peo,ple are proved by our tra,dition and our whole policy. The Czecho-Slov,ak government feels sati'sfaction in having followed for five years a policy in Russian affairs that was fully justified even in the struggle for that policy in Geneva. We shall continue on this course ,also in the future without change. 1923: Our affection for and interest in Russia must be preserved and deepened. Without Russia, European politics and European peace are not imaginable; we have therefore tried, so far as -possible, to open the doors for the mutual contact of Russia and Europe. This Russia simply b:y its existence will be a. rea.l safeguard to our national independence. I have faith in this future democratic Russia and therefore do not worry about our fate. �42 SLOVAKIA 1924: The natural conclusion of this evolution is ,a defini.te de jure ,r ecognition of Russia by all states and the establishme1tt of normal relations with the Soviet Union . . . . 1925: Perhaps 1t will not be long before we shall achieve a second Locarno when the Whole of Europe comes to an understanding with Russia. This will be for the good and well-bein,g of Russia as well as of Europe. . . . 1926: Our policy toward Russia was always guided, by the b elief that we should be p.repared for the moment when Russia would take up her position in Europe . . . . 1933: . . . also the policy of Soviet Russia has displayed certain symptoms of changed orientation. Russia bas sihown great understanding of the needs of peace, having concluded pacts of non-ag. gression with her neighbors, Poland and the Little Entente. 1934: The return of Russia to European politics ,vm facilitate the creation of r eal equilibrium ,a mong the powers in Europe. The policy of rapprochement between ours elves and Soviet Russia is proceeding along normal lines. . . . 1935: Efforts for the strengthening of peace for the good of all the countries of Europe lay at the bottom of the cooperation between Russia .and Czecho-Slovakia. 1937: Soviet Russia is devoting herself more to her internal affairs. A great deficiency in the political systems of Europe after the last war was that that Soviet Un.ion had not been invited ,t o cooperate in its foundation and direction, but only in 1934, when it was already late, became involved in its c ollective defense. 1938: Russia remains faithful to us to the very last; I know that . . . . 1939: If -Soviet Russia were again excluded from the organization of Europe the new collaboration of the o,rganized ,political uni.ts would again lose their equilibrium. This would also inevitably lead to attempts to isoiate Soviet Europe from European influences. Geographically and politically European Russia belongs to Europe. This is an inescapable fact . . . . 1942: Russia is fighting not only for herself, but for all of us. And none of us can contemplate another two decades in which Soviet Russi.a would be isolated from the affairs of Europe. Immediaitely after .t he assault on the Soviet Union by Germany, we ente,red into official negotiations for the resumption of our old friendly and allied relations w.ith the Soviet Union, as they existed before Munich. These negotiations were proceeding without any difficulties and in the .spirit of our former friendship. On July 18, 1941, a treaty of alliance was signed, which contained a full recognition of us, without any reservations. [ wish to state objectively that our relations with the Soviet Union are really friendly and loyal; there is today between us the same rela;tion,s hip of alliance as was before Munich, ·a nd it is our conv.i-ction and wish this remain so after the war. II am certain the collaboration of Europe with the Soviet Union will again make for ,t he -cooperation of the Union with Europe, tJhat confidence and friendship will result and develop, that there will be an equil!b,rium of forces . . . . �SLOVAKIA 43 In Czec-ho-Slovakia, we had for twenty years worked for collabo1-a,tion between the West and the East of Europe . . . . The 1United. Nations are determined today to ,c reate a new system of collective security in Europe s oon after the war . . . I suppor,t the conception of Anglo-American-Soviet collaboration. 1943: For my ·part I have a,n ,a;biding confidence in the Russians . They will fulfill scrupulously .t he Teheran decisions so as to safeguard future ipeace. Between the Soviet ,U nion and Czec,ho-Slovakia all fundamental and important questions relating .to their mutual relations have •b een settled. 'Ilhis fact has great political significance for the future . . . . -Much o,f what is now being appreciated about the Soviet Union, I saw during my fkst V\isit to Moscow in 1935; for this reason, I have trusted the Soviet Union in the present war. Certain modifications in the Soviet Union that have recently surprised the rest of the world are natural consequences, partly of the war ,a nd partly of the changes associated •w ith its world position (the a bolition of the Internation,al, the new attitude ,towards religion, intensified Soviet :patriotic feeling and the r ecent changes in the Soviet Constitution to the. ,adv,a n.tage of the F ederated Republics) . . I see in it the natumJ attitude of a successful evolution of the victorious revolution, that !has to be polHically stabiUzed and that is simply progresssing in accordance with its own laws. Hence, from 1922 on I strove for a rapprochement between Europe and the Soviets . . . . 1944: Lt seemed to me that if full unders.tandin,g were reached between ourselves and t'he Soviets, and if there were also complete and mutual trust among us, it would be possi ble to point to this very achievement as an example, even in ithe United States, and that the Allies, particularly the greater powers, would thereby be fundamentally drawn closer together. Thus Mr. Benes and his ipolitical co-workers preached to the world for thirty years. It is evident that this was not just a spell of fleeting enthusiasm for the seemingly humanitarian element in Soviet propaganda, but rather the life: wo.rk of po-liticians who, for some reason or other, are still recognized in some circles. Mr. Benes and hrs government-in-exile were granted asylum in England during World War ll. In 1945 Benes went to Moscow for instructions before returning to Cze. cho ..Stlorvakia. ,I n violation of the principles of the United Nations Declaration, somewhere in the shuffle, Ruthenia, which had b,een part of Czecho~Slovakia between the wars, was lost, apparently offered up as a token of good will to the iKremlin chieif. Certainly Benes made other major concessions a:bout which few were informed, so that he might retmn as "president" to Czecho-Slovakia. It is our contention thait Czecho-Slovakia after World �44 SLOVAKIA Wair JiI could hardly be considered a free agent. The entire police power throughout the country was in Communist hands from the very beginning. Still Mr. B enes decided to play his hand till the end. IH e, as "president," shortly after the "liberation," nationalized the greater part of Czecho..,Slovruk indust:r,y by mere presidential decree, thus paralyzing the oountry's, economy. And none of Stalin's agents did a better joib of eliminating all anti-Communists and anti-Socialistic elements from politics than did Benes. Afiter Benes and his co-wovkers had achieved their long-sought goal, the entrance of the Soviets into the Eurnpean political arena, they could not possibly be of any further sel'IVice to the Communists. Thus, when the latter took ()IVer complete control of Czecho-:S lovakia in February, 19·48, Benes was demoted from the presidency and Jan Masaryk, his foreign minister in despair killed himself by jumping from a window. Dorothy Thompson, on the margin of the Ozecho--Slovak disaster, in a magazine article summed up the situation with the comment that "such is the fate of collaborators " Today the co-wonkers of the same Benes, with a ounningness approaching that of a Talleyrand, are still presen ting themselves to our Administrntion as representatives of the Ozech and Slovak peoples. One can imagine how the Czechs and Sfovaks behind the 'Iron Curtaiin feel, when they hear the same ;voices which over a period of thirty years advocated the 'Soviet cause, now being broadcast over the waves of the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe: the same politicians who contributed to the en_ slaivement oif their country! Today the whole democratic world is suffering from what Mr. Benes ·and his collaborato!'.s advocated and helped bring about. And the oppressed and persecuted Czechr:; and Sloivaks might turn to Shakespeare and utter with Mark Anthony: "the evil that men do lives after them. " • • • (JUTche.k $3.00; SWVAK FOR BEGINNERS" (Books I~) $1.50 (the set); "Hirobak's English-Sl01VaJk Dictionary" $4.00; "SLOVAK I...ESSONS" (IHrobak) $3.50. REOOMMENDED BOOKS: "The Slovaks" � 40 SLOVAKIA BENES AND THE COMMUNIZATION OF CZECHO-SWVAKIA John B. Fox The foreign policy of our country, from the Monroe Doctrine till the late nineteen-forties, was aimed at the greatest .possi1ble isolation. This was e specially true, because of the principles laid down in the mentioned Monroe Doctrine, as far as the Eastern hemisphere was concerned. Thus, afteir World War U, the call to leadership of the democratic world found us. in many respects unprepared. Suddenly we •l earned that our knowledge of the rest of the world, especially Europe, was quite limited. We set about with known American assiduousness to tackle the .great tasik thrust upon us. Realizing that in order to present real leadership we must know our allies, we commenced to accumulate information about the various nations, sea rching eJVery aspect of their national lives . In pursuing this, our leaders solicited the aid of exiled politicians and also that of the various n8Jti-onal organizations in this country. Though we have made tremendous progress in the above undertaking, in many instances, especially as far as some small nations are concerned, we have hardly started the job. To state a case where our Administration, mostly due to complexity of the situation, has hardly obtained a true picture, we mention Czecho-Slovakia. The foreign policy of Czecho-Slovakia from 1918-1948 was molded by Eduard Benes and his political aide s. During those thirty yea-rs !Benes was a virtual dictator a s far as the foreign affairs of his countr,y were concerned. In addition to that, he did more than any other politician outside the USSR to make the SOIViet Union acceptable to the West and gain admission to the League of Nations. Benes is now deceased, ibut his disciples, many of whom are in this country, carry ·on in his work. They are acting as consultants to our Administration, exercising influence on Radio Free Europe, Voice of America, Congress, etc . 1 �SLOVAKIA il It seems worth-.while, therefore, to examine Benes's political relationship to the USSR. In doing so, we will not repeat Sir Winston Churchill's condemning opinion of Benes, stated in one of his present books, but will quote from a neat little boo'k published by the Czech-American National Alliance in 1944 entitled, "Eduard Benes in His Own Words." Therein friends of Mr. Benes did us a favor in selecting f,vom the mass of his speeches and publications statements expressing his stand on major political issues in chronoilogical order from 1914~1944. The following, then, are quotes from "Eduard Benes in His Own Words" pertaining to the USSR, giving the date when they were made: 1917: Our revolutionary action welcomed the Russian Revolution openly and sincerely . . . 1918: The Allies tried to use our soldiers in Russia for intervention, •but .this was o,pposed . . . H-.'.O: We refute t'he assertion that if decisive steps had been taken in time against the Bolsheviks, they could have been de.;;tl"'Oyed. In connection with Russia it was our (i.e., Czecho-SJovak) government, almost the only one in the whole of Europe, that understood the situation and foresaw corroctly the evolution of events .... .AIS to Russia, we must and shall help her, so far as it is in our powe r . . . . 1921: Our position on Russian problems, which we often det'ended with difficulty, but which our government executed, is today generally and fully ,accepted. The Allies and the whole European public opinion turned away from the idea of intervention in Russia. Our Republic has been following this policy honestly and consistently for more than three years and is therefore now in a strong moral position. 1922: In the future . . . it will be a struggle for a federalistic, democratic Russia. We believe in the future of this Russia. Our relations to the Russian .peo,ple are proved by our tra,dition and our whole policy. The Czecho-Slov,ak government feels sati'sfaction in having followed for five years a policy in Russian affairs that was fully justified even in the struggle for that policy in Geneva. We shall continue on this course ,also in the future without change. 1923: Our affection for and interest in Russia must be preserved and deepened. Without Russia, European politics and European peace are not imaginable; we have therefore tried, so far as -possible, to open the doors for the mutual contact of Russia and Europe. This Russia simply b:y its existence will be a. rea.l safeguard to our national independence. I have faith in this future democratic Russia and therefore do not worry about our fate. �42 SLOVAKIA 1924: The natural conclusion of this evolution is ,a defini.te de jure ,r ecognition of Russia by all states and the establishme1tt of normal relations with the Soviet Union . . . . 1925: Perhaps 1t will not be long before we shall achieve a second Locarno when the Whole of Europe comes to an understanding with Russia. This will be for the good and well-bein,g of Russia as well as of Europe. . . . 1926: Our policy toward Russia was always guided, by the b elief that we should be p.repared for the moment when Russia would take up her position in Europe . . . . 1933: . . . also the policy of Soviet Russia has displayed certain symptoms of changed orientation. Russia bas sihown great understanding of the needs of peace, having concluded pacts of non-ag. gression with her neighbors, Poland and the Little Entente. 1934: The return of Russia to European politics ,vm facilitate the creation of r eal equilibrium ,a mong the powers in Europe. The policy of rapprochement between ours elves and Soviet Russia is proceeding along normal lines. . . . 1935: Efforts for the strengthening of peace for the good of all the countries of Europe lay at the bottom of the cooperation between Russia .and Czecho-Slovakia. 1937: Soviet Russia is devoting herself more to her internal affairs. A great deficiency in the political systems of Europe after the last war was that that Soviet Un.ion had not been invited ,t o cooperate in its foundation and direction, but only in 1934, when it was already late, became involved in its c ollective defense. 1938: Russia remains faithful to us to the very last; I know that . . . . 1939: If -Soviet Russia were again excluded from the organization of Europe the new collaboration of the o,rganized ,political uni.ts would again lose their equilibrium. This would also inevitably lead to attempts to isoiate Soviet Europe from European influences. Geographically and politically European Russia belongs to Europe. This is an inescapable fact . . . . 1942: Russia is fighting not only for herself, but for all of us. And none of us can contemplate another two decades in which Soviet Russi.a would be isolated from the affairs of Europe. Immediaitely after .t he assault on the Soviet Union by Germany, we ente,red into official negotiations for the resumption of our old friendly and allied relations w.ith the Soviet Union, as they existed before Munich. These negotiations were proceeding without any difficulties and in the .spirit of our former friendship. On July 18, 1941, a treaty of alliance was signed, which contained a full recognition of us, without any reservations. [ wish to state objectively that our relations with the Soviet Union are really friendly and loyal; there is today between us the same rela;tion,s hip of alliance as was before Munich, ·a nd it is our conv.i-ction and wish this remain so after the war. II am certain the collaboration of Europe with the Soviet Union will again make for ,t he -cooperation of the Union with Europe, tJhat confidence and friendship will result and develop, that there will be an equil!b,rium of forces . . . . �SLOVAKIA 43 In Czec-ho-Slovakia, we had for twenty years worked for collabo1-a,tion between the West and the East of Europe . . . . The 1United. Nations are determined today to ,c reate a new system of collective security in Europe s oon after the war . . . I suppor,t the conception of Anglo-American-Soviet collaboration. 1943: For my ·part I have a,n ,a;biding confidence in the Russians . They will fulfill scrupulously .t he Teheran decisions so as to safeguard future ipeace. Between the Soviet ,U nion and Czec,ho-Slovakia all fundamental and important questions relating .to their mutual relations have •b een settled. 'Ilhis fact has great political significance for the future . . . . -Much o,f what is now being appreciated about the Soviet Union, I saw during my fkst V\isit to Moscow in 1935; for this reason, I have trusted the Soviet Union in the present war. Certain modifications in the Soviet Union that have recently surprised the rest of the world are natural consequences, partly of the war ,a nd partly of the changes associated •w ith its world position (the a bolition of the Internation,al, the new attitude ,towards religion, intensified Soviet :patriotic feeling and the r ecent changes in the Soviet Constitution to the. ,adv,a n.tage of the F ederated Republics) . . I see in it the natumJ attitude of a successful evolution of the victorious revolution, that !has to be polHically stabiUzed and that is simply progresssing in accordance with its own laws. Hence, from 1922 on I strove for a rapprochement between Europe and the Soviets . . . . 1944: Lt seemed to me that if full unders.tandin,g were reached between ourselves and t'he Soviets, and if there were also complete and mutual trust among us, it would be possi ble to point to this very achievement as an example, even in ithe United States, and that the Allies, particularly the greater powers, would thereby be fundamentally drawn closer together. Thus Mr. Benes and his ipolitical co-workers preached to the world for thirty years. It is evident that this was not just a spell of fleeting enthusiasm for the seemingly humanitarian element in Soviet propaganda, but rather the life: wo.rk of po-liticians who, for some reason or other, are still recognized in some circles. Mr. Benes and hrs government-in-exile were granted asylum in England during World War ll. In 1945 Benes went to Moscow for instructions before returning to Cze. cho ..Stlorvakia. ,I n violation of the principles of the United Nations Declaration, somewhere in the shuffle, Ruthenia, which had b,een part of Czecho~Slovakia between the wars, was lost, apparently offered up as a token of good will to the iKremlin chieif. Certainly Benes made other major concessions a:bout which few were informed, so that he might retmn as "president" to Czecho-Slovakia. It is our contention thait Czecho-Slovakia after World �44 SLOVAKIA Wair JiI could hardly be considered a free agent. The entire police power throughout the country was in Communist hands from the very beginning. Still Mr. B enes decided to play his hand till the end. IH e, as "president," shortly after the "liberation," nationalized the greater part of Czecho..,Slovruk indust:r,y by mere presidential decree, thus paralyzing the oountry's, economy. And none of Stalin's agents did a better joib of eliminating all anti-Communists and anti-Socialistic elements from politics than did Benes. Afiter Benes and his co-wovkers had achieved their long-sought goal, the entrance of the Soviets into the Eurnpean political arena, they could not possibly be of any further sel'IVice to the Communists. Thus, when the latter took ()IVer complete control of Czecho-:S lovakia in February, 19·48, Benes was demoted from the presidency and Jan Masaryk, his foreign minister in despair killed himself by jumping from a window. Dorothy Thompson, on the margin of the Ozecho--Slovak disaster, in a magazine article summed up the situation with the comment that "such is the fate of collaborators " Today the co-wonkers of the same Benes, with a ounningness approaching that of a Talleyrand, are still presen ting themselves to our Administrntion as representatives of the Ozech and Slovak peoples. One can imagine how the Czechs and Sfovaks behind the 'Iron Curtaiin feel, when they hear the same ;voices which over a period of thirty years advocated the 'Soviet cause, now being broadcast over the waves of the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe: the same politicians who contributed to the en_ slaivement oif their country! Today the whole democratic world is suffering from what Mr. Benes ·and his collaborato!'.s advocated and helped bring about. And the oppressed and persecuted Czechr:; and Sloivaks might turn to Shakespeare and utter with Mark Anthony: "the evil that men do lives after them. " • • • (JUTche.k $3.00; SWVAK FOR BEGINNERS" (Books I~) $1.50 (the set); "Hirobak's English-Sl01VaJk Dictionary" $4.00; "SLOVAK I...ESSONS" (IHrobak) $3.50. REOOMMENDED BOOKS: "The Slovaks" � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 40 SLOVAKIA BENES AND THE COMMUNIZATION OF CZECHO-SWVAKIA John B. Fox The foreign policy of our country, from the Monroe Doctrine till the late nineteen-forties, was aimed at the greatest .possi1ble isolation. This was e specially true, because of the principles laid down in the mentioned Monroe Doctrine, as far as the Eastern hemisphere was concerned. Thus, afteir World War U, the call to leadership of the democratic world found us. in many respects unprepared. Suddenly we •l earned that our knowledge of the rest of the world, especially Europe, was quite limited. We set about with known American assiduousness to tackle the .great tasik thrust upon us. Realizing that in order to present real leadership we must know our allies, we commenced to accumulate information about the various nations, sea rching eJVery aspect of their national lives . In pursuing this, our leaders solicited the aid of exiled politicians and also that of the various n8Jti-onal organizations in this country. Though we have made tremendous progress in the above undertaking, in many instances, especially as far as some small nations are concerned, we have hardly started the job. To state a case where our Administration, mostly due to complexity of the situation, has hardly obtained a true picture, we mention Czecho-Slovakia. The foreign policy of Czecho-Slovakia from 1918-1948 was molded by Eduard Benes and his political aide s. During those thirty yea-rs !Benes was a virtual dictator a s far as the foreign affairs of his countr,y were concerned. In addition to that, he did more than any other politician outside the USSR to make the SOIViet Union acceptable to the West and gain admission to the League of Nations. Benes is now deceased, ibut his disciples, many of whom are in this country, carry ·on in his work. They are acting as consultants to our Administration, exercising influence on Radio Free Europe, Voice of America, Congress, etc . 1 SLOVAKIA il It seems worth-.while, therefore, to examine Benes's political relationship to the USSR. In doing so, we will not repeat Sir Winston Churchill's condemning opinion of Benes, stated in one of his present books, but will quote from a neat little boo'k published by the Czech-American National Alliance in 1944 entitled, "Eduard Benes in His Own Words." Therein friends of Mr. Benes did us a favor in selecting f,vom the mass of his speeches and publications statements expressing his stand on major political issues in chronoilogical order from 1914~1944. The following, then, are quotes from "Eduard Benes in His Own Words" pertaining to the USSR, giving the date when they were made: 1917: Our revolutionary action welcomed the Russian Revolution openly and sincerely . . . 1918: The Allies tried to use our soldiers in Russia for intervention, •but .this was o,pposed . . . H-.'.O: We refute t'he assertion that if decisive steps had been taken in time against the Bolsheviks, they could have been de.;;tl"'Oyed. In connection with Russia it was our (i.e., Czecho-SJovak) government, almost the only one in the whole of Europe, that understood the situation and foresaw corroctly the evolution of events .... .AIS to Russia, we must and shall help her, so far as it is in our powe r . . . . 1921: Our position on Russian problems, which we often det'ended with difficulty, but which our government executed, is today generally and fully ,accepted. The Allies and the whole European public opinion turned away from the idea of intervention in Russia. Our Republic has been following this policy honestly and consistently for more than three years and is therefore now in a strong moral position. 1922: In the future . . . it will be a struggle for a federalistic, democratic Russia. We believe in the future of this Russia. Our relations to the Russian .peo,ple are proved by our tra,dition and our whole policy. The Czecho-Slov,ak government feels sati'sfaction in having followed for five years a policy in Russian affairs that was fully justified even in the struggle for that policy in Geneva. We shall continue on this course ,also in the future without change. 1923: Our affection for and interest in Russia must be preserved and deepened. Without Russia, European politics and European peace are not imaginable; we have therefore tried, so far as -possible, to open the doors for the mutual contact of Russia and Europe. This Russia simply b:y its existence will be a. rea.l safeguard to our national independence. I have faith in this future democratic Russia and therefore do not worry about our fate. 42 SLOVAKIA 1924: The natural conclusion of this evolution is ,a defini.te de jure ,r ecognition of Russia by all states and the establishme1tt of normal relations with the Soviet Union . . . . 1925: Perhaps 1t will not be long before we shall achieve a second Locarno when the Whole of Europe comes to an understanding with Russia. This will be for the good and well-bein,g of Russia as well as of Europe. . . . 1926: Our policy toward Russia was always guided, by the b elief that we should be p.repared for the moment when Russia would take up her position in Europe . . . . 1933: . . . also the policy of Soviet Russia has displayed certain symptoms of changed orientation. Russia bas sihown great understanding of the needs of peace, having concluded pacts of non-ag. gression with her neighbors, Poland and the Little Entente. 1934: The return of Russia to European politics ,vm facilitate the creation of r eal equilibrium ,a mong the powers in Europe. The policy of rapprochement between ours elves and Soviet Russia is proceeding along normal lines. . . . 1935: Efforts for the strengthening of peace for the good of all the countries of Europe lay at the bottom of the cooperation between Russia .and Czecho-Slovakia. 1937: Soviet Russia is devoting herself more to her internal affairs. A great deficiency in the political systems of Europe after the last war was that that Soviet Un.ion had not been invited ,t o cooperate in its foundation and direction, but only in 1934, when it was already late, became involved in its c ollective defense. 1938: Russia remains faithful to us to the very last; I know that . . . . 1939: If -Soviet Russia were again excluded from the organization of Europe the new collaboration of the o,rganized ,political uni.ts would again lose their equilibrium. This would also inevitably lead to attempts to isoiate Soviet Europe from European influences. Geographically and politically European Russia belongs to Europe. This is an inescapable fact . . . . 1942: Russia is fighting not only for herself, but for all of us. And none of us can contemplate another two decades in which Soviet Russi.a would be isolated from the affairs of Europe. Immediaitely after .t he assault on the Soviet Union by Germany, we ente,red into official negotiations for the resumption of our old friendly and allied relations w.ith the Soviet Union, as they existed before Munich. These negotiations were proceeding without any difficulties and in the .spirit of our former friendship. On July 18, 1941, a treaty of alliance was signed, which contained a full recognition of us, without any reservations. [ wish to state objectively that our relations with the Soviet Union are really friendly and loyal; there is today between us the same rela;tion,s hip of alliance as was before Munich, ·a nd it is our conv.i-ction and wish this remain so after the war. II am certain the collaboration of Europe with the Soviet Union will again make for ,t he -cooperation of the Union with Europe, tJhat confidence and friendship will result and develop, that there will be an equil!b,rium of forces . . . . SLOVAKIA 43 In Czec-ho-Slovakia, we had for twenty years worked for collabo1-a,tion between the West and the East of Europe . . . . The 1United. Nations are determined today to ,c reate a new system of collective security in Europe s oon after the war . . . I suppor,t the conception of Anglo-American-Soviet collaboration. 1943: For my ·part I have a,n ,a;biding confidence in the Russians . They will fulfill scrupulously .t he Teheran decisions so as to safeguard future ipeace. Between the Soviet ,U nion and Czec,ho-Slovakia all fundamental and important questions relating .to their mutual relations have •b een settled. 'Ilhis fact has great political significance for the future . . . . -Much o,f what is now being appreciated about the Soviet Union, I saw during my fkst V\isit to Moscow in 1935; for this reason, I have trusted the Soviet Union in the present war. Certain modifications in the Soviet Union that have recently surprised the rest of the world are natural consequences, partly of the war ,a nd partly of the changes associated •w ith its world position (the a bolition of the Internation,al, the new attitude ,towards religion, intensified Soviet :patriotic feeling and the r ecent changes in the Soviet Constitution to the. ,adv,a n.tage of the F ederated Republics) . . I see in it the natumJ attitude of a successful evolution of the victorious revolution, that !has to be polHically stabiUzed and that is simply progresssing in accordance with its own laws. Hence, from 1922 on I strove for a rapprochement between Europe and the Soviets . . . . 1944: Lt seemed to me that if full unders.tandin,g were reached between ourselves and t'he Soviets, and if there were also complete and mutual trust among us, it would be possi ble to point to this very achievement as an example, even in ithe United States, and that the Allies, particularly the greater powers, would thereby be fundamentally drawn closer together. Thus Mr. Benes and his ipolitical co-workers preached to the world for thirty years. It is evident that this was not just a spell of fleeting enthusiasm for the seemingly humanitarian element in Soviet propaganda, but rather the life: wo.rk of po-liticians who, for some reason or other, are still recognized in some circles. Mr. Benes and hrs government-in-exile were granted asylum in England during World War ll. In 1945 Benes went to Moscow for instructions before returning to Cze. cho ..Stlorvakia. ,I n violation of the principles of the United Nations Declaration, somewhere in the shuffle, Ruthenia, which had b,een part of Czecho~Slovakia between the wars, was lost, apparently offered up as a token of good will to the iKremlin chieif. Certainly Benes made other major concessions a:bout which few were informed, so that he might retmn as "president" to Czecho-Slovakia. It is our contention thait Czecho-Slovakia after World 44 SLOVAKIA Wair JiI could hardly be considered a free agent. The entire police power throughout the country was in Communist hands from the very beginning. Still Mr. B enes decided to play his hand till the end. IH e, as "president," shortly after the "liberation," nationalized the greater part of Czecho..,Slovruk indust:r,y by mere presidential decree, thus paralyzing the oountry's, economy. And none of Stalin's agents did a better joib of eliminating all anti-Communists and anti-Socialistic elements from politics than did Benes. Afiter Benes and his co-wovkers had achieved their long-sought goal, the entrance of the Soviets into the Eurnpean political arena, they could not possibly be of any further sel'IVice to the Communists. Thus, when the latter took ()IVer complete control of Czecho-:S lovakia in February, 19·48, Benes was demoted from the presidency and Jan Masaryk, his foreign minister in despair killed himself by jumping from a window. Dorothy Thompson, on the margin of the Ozecho--Slovak disaster, in a magazine article summed up the situation with the comment that "such is the fate of collaborators " Today the co-wonkers of the same Benes, with a ounningness approaching that of a Talleyrand, are still presen ting themselves to our Administrntion as representatives of the Ozech and Slovak peoples. One can imagine how the Czechs and Sfovaks behind the 'Iron Curtaiin feel, when they hear the same ;voices which over a period of thirty years advocated the 'Soviet cause, now being broadcast over the waves of the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe: the same politicians who contributed to the en_ slaivement oif their country! Today the whole democratic world is suffering from what Mr. Benes ·and his collaborato!'.s advocated and helped bring about. And the oppressed and persecuted Czechr:; and Sloivaks might turn to Shakespeare and utter with Mark Anthony: "the evil that men do lives after them. " • • • (JUTche.k $3.00; SWVAK FOR BEGINNERS" (Books I~) $1.50 (the set); "Hirobak's English-Sl01VaJk Dictionary" $4.00; "SLOVAK I...ESSONS" (IHrobak) $3.50. REOOMMENDED BOOKS: "The Slovaks"  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Beneš and the Communization of Czecho-Slovakia Description An account of the resource John B. Fox Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 40-44 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Fox, John B. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource September-December 1956 name https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/9843ecdca4096265cc4fb2022a13eb49.pdf 42ff8cdfb2154da3f2bfedd6c328972b PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 86 first the Vice-Commissa;r of Zvolen County and then a mem.. ber of the Hungarian Diet. It was Grunwald who placed young Czambel in the press bureau of the Premier at Budin. And Gri.inwald, we know, ,w as for some 25 years the greatest oppressor of the Slovaks in Hungary. We can imagine then what it meant to a young Slo;va!k ;patriot to hawe his protection. Because of that, however, young CZiambel did not become a Magyarone, but devoted himself to the study of his people and their language. In 1890, Czambel was persuaded to write for the "Slo-. venske Pohl'ady" (Slovak Review); of course, holding a job under the Magyars, he could not write under his own name. When he published his book, "Slovaci a ich rec" in 1903, iJ>resenting t'he theory that the Slovaks were a Yu"' goslav tribe, Czambel was severely criticized by the "Na:rodne Noviny" and the "Slovenske Pohl'ady," which proved mm wrong and condemned him. Informed ,p ersons, however, knew t'hat Czambel proposed the Yugoslav theory not because of convictions, lbut rather as a matter of tactics: it was only thus that he could keep his state job. :S amuel Czambel definitely proved that man does ,n ot live by lbreoo alone. Suspected as a Magyarone by some of his own people, and as a Pan-Slarv by the Magyars, Samuel Czambel nevertheless rendered a g,reat service to his people by his literary efforts. His grammar of the Slovak lan-. guage is, still the best, according to Slovak philologists . • • CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA STAROHRAD (THE OLD CASTLE) OF LIPTOV The village of Liptovska Tepla in Slovakia lies east of the ,city of Ruzomlberok. Not far from the village we find the mineral springs called Lucky. Traveling by train from Ruizomberok to Lucky we see the mighty roC'ky cliffs of the Sielinica fortress, which is almost as high as Sitno. On these rocky cliffs can still. be seen the remnants of the on~e mighty Old Castle (Starohroo). It is accessi1b le from the valley of Sestrca; at one time it served as a guard for the highway that led from Liptov to Ora:va. 'In the fourteenth century Starohrad wa:s the proper- �86 SLOVAKIA ty of Done; in the fifteenth it belonged to Pankrac of Lip-. :tovsky Svaty Miku:las and then to Peter KiomO'.rovsky. The county administratorrs resided there. In 1433 Starohrad W<3JS taken by the Czech Hussites who came from Bohemia to ra.vage and plunder Slovaikia. King Mathias took the castle from Komorovsky and had it completely destroyed in 1474. Little remains of the ruins today, but Starohrad lives on in many legends. The 'brook called Sestrca separates the fortress of Sielnica, with its historical Starohrad, from the mighty cliff of 2ipov; with the .passage of years it cut a narrow but deep valley. People say that when King Mathias besieged Starohrad, his army encamped Oiil 2ipov, cannonaded :Starohrad with such foTce that the walls giwe in. One of the cannon balls, the story goes, flew all the way to Sielnica, and since that time the inhab,itants of Sielnica claim the entire cliff as, their property, even though they a.re separated from it by three communit>ie~. People of the community of St. Ann also have pre~ served a legend 8Jbout Starohrad. They say that Starohrad was at one time besieged by unknown enemies, who were as numerous as flies, so that one could not even see a blade of grass on the slope beneath the castle.. Try as they might, however, they could not ta;ke the castle. That is, at least, not until love ,prompted treason. People say that the daughter of Starohrad's owner fell in love with one of the lrnights of the besieging army and one .night threw him the keys to the main gate. And that is the way the enemy was able to get in:to fue courtyard of the castle. The Joni of the castie, however, as is always the C8Jse in such legends, was ,prepared for su~h an eventuality. He and hi!S family escruped through an underground passage. It was only after they were '3afe from the enemy that the lord learned that the castle was betrayed by his own daughter. Thereupon he flew into a great rage and cursed her. And a father's curse is never without effect. The unfor... tunate girl wandered about the ruins of Starohrad for seven years, longingly awaiting her liberation. The people of the vicinity, however, would have nothing to do with her and ke;pt their distance from her. Well, ,i t so happened that �SLOVAKIA 87 a certain shepherd finally did get UJP enough courage to talk to, the cursed girl. She begged him to help her and liberate her from the infinite sufferings. The shepheTd promised that he would come to the same spot the very next day and when she ap,peairs in :the form of a pig, he would snatch the golden 1keys from her snout. She ,i n turn ;promised him to reveal the spot on rS'tarohrad where her father had concealed a great treasure when he was attacked by the enemy, which would be his ~eward. 'l'he $hepherd did as he had promised. He came to the spot, but when a pig did maJke its aippearance, fear overcame him and he began to shake all over. The pig was so ugly that he .took to flight. The pig, however, ran after him. ln terror the shepherd shouted: "Would to God that you wouid vanish!" Right then and there the apparition sto[Pped and said "Now you did it; you cursed me even more." And with that the girl did ,v anish, leaving not a single trace behind herself. • • • WHO SAID IT? "Let me be allowed to point to the example given by Dr. H. Ripka ... It was no accident that he was entrusted with the leadership of our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, that he was entrusted with the care of our foreign press and radio, that he was entrusted to negotiate an agreement of our alliamce with the Soviet Union, that he was the head of practically ail negotiation s by which the foundation was placed for the greatest success of our national revolution, the transfer of Germans from our lands. And neither was it an accident, but it emanated from the stand of our brethren, that it was a National Socialist who was unanimous ly elected as president of the State Council of our parliament abroad, that a National Socialist was the Chairman of the British-Cze choslovak Friendship Society, that a National Socialist was the Chairman of the Society to cultivate cultural and economical contacts with the USSR." - (J. Firt, a Benes Czech, in the SVOBODN E SLOVO, 3-2-47). � SLOVAKIA 86 first the Vice-Commissa;r of Zvolen County and then a mem.. ber of the Hungarian Diet. It was Grunwald who placed young Czambel in the press bureau of the Premier at Budin. And Gri.inwald, we know, ,w as for some 25 years the greatest oppressor of the Slovaks in Hungary. We can imagine then what it meant to a young Slo;va!k ;patriot to hawe his protection. Because of that, however, young CZiambel did not become a Magyarone, but devoted himself to the study of his people and their language. In 1890, Czambel was persuaded to write for the "Slo-. venske Pohl'ady" (Slovak Review); of course, holding a job under the Magyars, he could not write under his own name. When he published his book, "Slovaci a ich rec" in 1903, iJ>resenting t'he theory that the Slovaks were a Yu"' goslav tribe, Czambel was severely criticized by the "Na:rodne Noviny" and the "Slovenske Pohl'ady," which proved mm wrong and condemned him. Informed ,p ersons, however, knew t'hat Czambel proposed the Yugoslav theory not because of convictions, lbut rather as a matter of tactics: it was only thus that he could keep his state job. :S amuel Czambel definitely proved that man does ,n ot live by lbreoo alone. Suspected as a Magyarone by some of his own people, and as a Pan-Slarv by the Magyars, Samuel Czambel nevertheless rendered a g,reat service to his people by his literary efforts. His grammar of the Slovak lan-. guage is, still the best, according to Slovak philologists . • • CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA STAROHRAD (THE OLD CASTLE) OF LIPTOV The village of Liptovska Tepla in Slovakia lies east of the ,city of Ruzomlberok. Not far from the village we find the mineral springs called Lucky. Traveling by train from Ruizomberok to Lucky we see the mighty roC'ky cliffs of the Sielinica fortress, which is almost as high as Sitno. On these rocky cliffs can still. be seen the remnants of the on~e mighty Old Castle (Starohroo). It is accessi1b le from the valley of Sestrca; at one time it served as a guard for the highway that led from Liptov to Ora:va. 'In the fourteenth century Starohrad wa:s the proper- �86 SLOVAKIA ty of Done; in the fifteenth it belonged to Pankrac of Lip-. :tovsky Svaty Miku:las and then to Peter KiomO'.rovsky. The county administratorrs resided there. In 1433 Starohrad W<3JS taken by the Czech Hussites who came from Bohemia to ra.vage and plunder Slovaikia. King Mathias took the castle from Komorovsky and had it completely destroyed in 1474. Little remains of the ruins today, but Starohrad lives on in many legends. The 'brook called Sestrca separates the fortress of Sielnica, with its historical Starohrad, from the mighty cliff of 2ipov; with the .passage of years it cut a narrow but deep valley. People say that when King Mathias besieged Starohrad, his army encamped Oiil 2ipov, cannonaded :Starohrad with such foTce that the walls giwe in. One of the cannon balls, the story goes, flew all the way to Sielnica, and since that time the inhab,itants of Sielnica claim the entire cliff as, their property, even though they a.re separated from it by three communit>ie~. People of the community of St. Ann also have pre~ served a legend 8Jbout Starohrad. They say that Starohrad was at one time besieged by unknown enemies, who were as numerous as flies, so that one could not even see a blade of grass on the slope beneath the castle.. Try as they might, however, they could not ta;ke the castle. That is, at least, not until love ,prompted treason. People say that the daughter of Starohrad's owner fell in love with one of the lrnights of the besieging army and one .night threw him the keys to the main gate. And that is the way the enemy was able to get in:to fue courtyard of the castle. The Joni of the castie, however, as is always the C8Jse in such legends, was ,prepared for su~h an eventuality. He and hi!S family escruped through an underground passage. It was only after they were '3afe from the enemy that the lord learned that the castle was betrayed by his own daughter. Thereupon he flew into a great rage and cursed her. And a father's curse is never without effect. The unfor... tunate girl wandered about the ruins of Starohrad for seven years, longingly awaiting her liberation. The people of the vicinity, however, would have nothing to do with her and ke;pt their distance from her. Well, ,i t so happened that �SLOVAKIA 87 a certain shepherd finally did get UJP enough courage to talk to, the cursed girl. She begged him to help her and liberate her from the infinite sufferings. The shepheTd promised that he would come to the same spot the very next day and when she ap,peairs in :the form of a pig, he would snatch the golden 1keys from her snout. She ,i n turn ;promised him to reveal the spot on rS'tarohrad where her father had concealed a great treasure when he was attacked by the enemy, which would be his ~eward. 'l'he $hepherd did as he had promised. He came to the spot, but when a pig did maJke its aippearance, fear overcame him and he began to shake all over. The pig was so ugly that he .took to flight. The pig, however, ran after him. ln terror the shepherd shouted: "Would to God that you wouid vanish!" Right then and there the apparition sto[Pped and said "Now you did it; you cursed me even more." And with that the girl did ,v anish, leaving not a single trace behind herself. • • • WHO SAID IT? "Let me be allowed to point to the example given by Dr. H. Ripka ... It was no accident that he was entrusted with the leadership of our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, that he was entrusted with the care of our foreign press and radio, that he was entrusted to negotiate an agreement of our alliamce with the Soviet Union, that he was the head of practically ail negotiation s by which the foundation was placed for the greatest success of our national revolution, the transfer of Germans from our lands. And neither was it an accident, but it emanated from the stand of our brethren, that it was a National Socialist who was unanimous ly elected as president of the State Council of our parliament abroad, that a National Socialist was the Chairman of the British-Cze choslovak Friendship Society, that a National Socialist was the Chairman of the Society to cultivate cultural and economical contacts with the USSR." - (J. Firt, a Benes Czech, in the SVOBODN E SLOVO, 3-2-47). � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 86 first the Vice-Commissa;r of Zvolen County and then a mem.. ber of the Hungarian Diet. It was Grunwald who placed young Czambel in the press bureau of the Premier at Budin. And Gri.inwald, we know, ,w as for some 25 years the greatest oppressor of the Slovaks in Hungary. We can imagine then what it meant to a young Slo;va!k ;patriot to hawe his protection. Because of that, however, young CZiambel did not become a Magyarone, but devoted himself to the study of his people and their language. In 1890, Czambel was persuaded to write for the "Slo-. venske Pohl'ady" (Slovak Review); of course, holding a job under the Magyars, he could not write under his own name. When he published his book, "Slovaci a ich rec" in 1903, iJ>resenting t'he theory that the Slovaks were a Yu"' goslav tribe, Czambel was severely criticized by the "Na:rodne Noviny" and the "Slovenske Pohl'ady," which proved mm wrong and condemned him. Informed ,p ersons, however, knew t'hat Czambel proposed the Yugoslav theory not because of convictions, lbut rather as a matter of tactics: it was only thus that he could keep his state job. :S amuel Czambel definitely proved that man does ,n ot live by lbreoo alone. Suspected as a Magyarone by some of his own people, and as a Pan-Slarv by the Magyars, Samuel Czambel nevertheless rendered a g,reat service to his people by his literary efforts. His grammar of the Slovak lan-. guage is, still the best, according to Slovak philologists . • • CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA STAROHRAD (THE OLD CASTLE) OF LIPTOV The village of Liptovska Tepla in Slovakia lies east of the ,city of Ruzomlberok. Not far from the village we find the mineral springs called Lucky. Traveling by train from Ruizomberok to Lucky we see the mighty roC'ky cliffs of the Sielinica fortress, which is almost as high as Sitno. On these rocky cliffs can still. be seen the remnants of the on~e mighty Old Castle (Starohroo). It is accessi1b le from the valley of Sestrca; at one time it served as a guard for the highway that led from Liptov to Ora:va. 'In the fourteenth century Starohrad wa:s the proper- 86 SLOVAKIA ty of Done; in the fifteenth it belonged to Pankrac of Lip-. :tovsky Svaty Miku:las and then to Peter KiomO'.rovsky. The county administratorrs resided there. In 1433 Starohrad W<3JS taken by the Czech Hussites who came from Bohemia to ra.vage and plunder Slovaikia. King Mathias took the castle from Komorovsky and had it completely destroyed in 1474. Little remains of the ruins today, but Starohrad lives on in many legends. The 'brook called Sestrca separates the fortress of Sielnica, with its historical Starohrad, from the mighty cliff of 2ipov; with the .passage of years it cut a narrow but deep valley. People say that when King Mathias besieged Starohrad, his army encamped Oiil 2ipov, cannonaded :Starohrad with such foTce that the walls giwe in. One of the cannon balls, the story goes, flew all the way to Sielnica, and since that time the inhab,itants of Sielnica claim the entire cliff as, their property, even though they a.re separated from it by three communit>ie~. People of the community of St. Ann also have pre~ served a legend 8Jbout Starohrad. They say that Starohrad was at one time besieged by unknown enemies, who were as numerous as flies, so that one could not even see a blade of grass on the slope beneath the castle.. Try as they might, however, they could not ta;ke the castle. That is, at least, not until love ,prompted treason. People say that the daughter of Starohrad's owner fell in love with one of the lrnights of the besieging army and one .night threw him the keys to the main gate. And that is the way the enemy was able to get in:to fue courtyard of the castle. The Joni of the castie, however, as is always the C8Jse in such legends, was ,prepared for su~h an eventuality. He and hi!S family escruped through an underground passage. It was only after they were '3afe from the enemy that the lord learned that the castle was betrayed by his own daughter. Thereupon he flew into a great rage and cursed her. And a father's curse is never without effect. The unfor... tunate girl wandered about the ruins of Starohrad for seven years, longingly awaiting her liberation. The people of the vicinity, however, would have nothing to do with her and ke;pt their distance from her. Well, ,i t so happened that SLOVAKIA 87 a certain shepherd finally did get UJP enough courage to talk to, the cursed girl. She begged him to help her and liberate her from the infinite sufferings. The shepheTd promised that he would come to the same spot the very next day and when she ap,peairs in :the form of a pig, he would snatch the golden 1keys from her snout. She ,i n turn ;promised him to reveal the spot on rS'tarohrad where her father had concealed a great treasure when he was attacked by the enemy, which would be his ~eward. 'l'he $hepherd did as he had promised. He came to the spot, but when a pig did maJke its aippearance, fear overcame him and he began to shake all over. The pig was so ugly that he .took to flight. The pig, however, ran after him. ln terror the shepherd shouted: "Would to God that you wouid vanish!" Right then and there the apparition sto[Pped and said "Now you did it; you cursed me even more." And with that the girl did ,v anish, leaving not a single trace behind herself. • • • WHO SAID IT? "Let me be allowed to point to the example given by Dr. H. Ripka ... It was no accident that he was entrusted with the leadership of our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, that he was entrusted with the care of our foreign press and radio, that he was entrusted to negotiate an agreement of our alliamce with the Soviet Union, that he was the head of practically ail negotiation s by which the foundation was placed for the greatest success of our national revolution, the transfer of Germans from our lands. And neither was it an accident, but it emanated from the stand of our brethren, that it was a National Socialist who was unanimous ly elected as president of the State Council of our parliament abroad, that a National Socialist was the Chairman of the British-Cze choslovak Friendship Society, that a National Socialist was the Chairman of the Society to cultivate cultural and economical contacts with the USSR." - (J. Firt, a Benes Czech, in the SVOBODN E SLOVO, 3-2-47).  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Castles of Slovakia: Starohrad (The Old Castle) of Liptov Description An account of the resource Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 85-87 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource September-December 1956 castles https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/cef86da1a0d7c8a36ab6624b98270c26.pdf 1785f6ce0f453000629c9c52c95c445b PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 25 CZECHO-SLOVAKIA OR CZECHOSLOVAKIA? P.A. Hrobak The ancestors of the Slovak people settled in the Danuibe territory during the fourth and sixth centuries and have occwpied that territory eiver since. Boundaries changed some with the centuries, buit the Slovaks held on to their present land ever since they became a part of the Hungarian kingdom at the beginning of the 11th century. The Slovaks settled on both •s ides of the Morrava and Danube rivers; the ancestors of the Ozec'hs settled in the land of the Boii (Bohemia). The liand of the Slova:ks formed the heart of the Great Mora;vian Empire of the ninth century. The Slovaks already had 'built their first Christian church at Nitra in 830 - the first church in the entire territory of the western Slovanic peaples. The Magyara came into the Danube Valley long after the Slovaks. TheTe was no Czecho-:Slo,v akia, no Czecho-Slovak political formation of any kind, until 1918, when the Hi~bsburg Empire collaipsed. There was a Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia - geneiralily referred to by non-Czech historians as the "Bohemian Crown Lands," and by the Czechs as "Czech Crown Lands" and the land of the Slovaks, which n0in-!Slovak historians refe,rred to as "Upper Hungary" or "Northern Hungary," while Slovaks called their land "Slovensko" (Slovrukia). The Slovaks did not have a common history, religious and national traditions, culture, and economy, with the Czechs until after 1918; b,ut even after that date the Slovaks did not ado-pt the culture and national traditions of t he Czechs, but adhered to their own. It is significant that the Catholic Church in Slovakia - the SloivaJk dioceses was not under the jurisdiction of the ordinaries ,o f Bohemia and Moravia, but under the jUTisdiction of Rome and was directly responsible thereto. In America the Czechs refer to their chuvches as CZEJCHi churches, while the Slovaks call theirs SUOIVI.AJK churches. In short: the Czechs never were, are not, and do not want to be Slovaks - and the Slovaks never were, are not, �SLOVAKIA and do not want to be Czechs. The Slovaks developed under entirely different circumstances than .the Czechs; the latter were dominated for centuries ,by the Germans and Austria, the former by the Magyars of Hungary. Both are members of the Slovanic (Slav) family of nations, but each is a distinct ethnic entiity, just as are the Po~·es, Ukrainians, Croatians, Slovenians, Serbians, Bulgarians and Russians. The treaty by which Czecho-1Slovakia came into being out o.f the rubble and ashes of the Ha:bsburg Empire recognized the fact that the Czechs and Slovaks had agreed to form a joint political sita1:e, as political equals and as two distinct ethnic entities and, hence, the form used for the name in the treaty creating the new state wais not the solid word "Czechoslovakia," buit the hyphenated form "Czecho-Slovakia." The Ozechs and the Slovaks were supposed to enjoy equal rights, privileges, and responsibilities in their joint state. T . G. •Masaryik told the Slovaks not to worry a:bout being majorized by the more numerous Czec<hs: the Slovaks would manage their own household, whHe the Czechs would be masters in their land; the new staJte would be a federation like Switzerland or the United States. Because the Slovruks of America did not trust Masarylk, they asked him to put it in writing; he did on May 30, 1918, at Pittsburgh, .Pennsylvania, when he, drrafted and signed the Pittsburgh Agreement. Without it Czecho-S:Jova,kia never would have been born. This agreement is reproduced here as docu:menba.ry proof that "Czecho-Slovak (ia)" was spelled with a hyiphen. However, once T. G. Masaryk, Dr. Edward Benes, and their socialistic political entourage took over the government of the new State in Prague, the tendency developed to drop the hyphen and use the solid form. It soon became obvious to the 'Slovaks tha-t "Czechoslov;rukia" was becoming synonymous with "Czech": domestic and foreign policy, culture, and economy, traditions and history, even though referred to as "Czechoslovak," were strictly Czech. promoted by The "Czechoslovak National Church" the embarto and expense Czechs in government at the rassment of the overwhelming m'ajority of the Czech Ca- �SLOVAKIA 27 itr,ko•~louttt!ikofflohobo, 1na1,rtnti o Pittsbur9hu.1}tt.,bntt )O. tnrijn. t9J8. ".Prrbsttu,ittliR GfootuaklJ,~ uuskQ ,h organi1adfuo ~poj. ~tato,h. ~loutttskej i!Ifg~. ~!skiho 3Tarobniho ~bvufttliR n ~uii1u irsk~tth1&ntolf~90. porC1kC1t1,1li ta pntonmosti pm'sc~u ec~lto-Slovcns.lt.:J Gf!,{,·.uR,,,,~. pr,,f.~U.,;,w~1lt.1, 6 t~:;11..,-:;lot .:n$luj ,,t,i1lw ,, ,, p,•$,wl,\n!1.:b pr,•9~m1N•~(d, pw.i,w,•d, ~, uf.,1i.:1li 1hl tM;l~•'••t•t'\11: ''Sd,MltLi.:m.: 1,diti.:hy1m:•,;,-.m, ,, . . . ..., t1ioiluil1,·i . f.•l ,, S1,,•i.:ui11 €.:.-11-•v ., $IN1,Ht,•t• l' $,~\\h'$t,,h,,•1111t.,t.. 1 e.:i-lt11.:h i.-,,,(,, SIN•.:nt-h,t. ,,.,.,ch 1 ~ "Sl,w.:tH,h,• ht~II m,lt f.t'':\tl t•lMtmf .,~minish,,t(vu,tv~j ,,,.:m ,, £-t•••it :;ti~tt. . ·. st..•t•;n1i \ \h\ . "· Al•.:,·. .:N~n,•m ?nt•• t.: "" bu~.: tfr,,~,,~m j,,1~lt,•U1 V ;lt.:-k t• t1r,,,,, ., "'" • 1 • "'E'.-s.l,,•-$l.:-t•,:ti-:,k\/~Mt h,~.. w~•ubli~.:-u. jch,•~4'nftituci4' ~u,\.: ,,c,n,•1',·,,tidhi. • · "'9r,,L\\1\~,, ..·i.,, ~1,.•luprlcc e,.·b.:-t• ,, Sl-,t1,,lwu t•c Sp.•j .. St.~t,•,·h l•m'.: p:•~t, p,•tr,l,y ,, m,,,i,wcj ~,,.fih,.,cie,pri $p.,lc':fo"\U ~1.•r,•1umrnC pt·chll-c,i., ,, upr,wcn,{. "u)",, ..,,.... h,E tltt•\\lC\ 11\l\•l "J•Wi,,~c,1.{fo1+1\.,.,1 •• \ ll\'\thch" ~tau p,•n~ch,fo,,,,tr~.., ••H•••~•• ~.mym €tt11..9.:-m .., Sl.,v,Ht..•m ., icb ---======= pr,f1.•.:-pl,1tn:1m lH·c,\$t,witd..•m." 1 1 ====~--- �28 SLOVAKIA tholic poipulation of Czecho-Slova kia - was strictly a Czech enteriprise. The Slovaks resisted the tendency and protested against it many times, but to no avail. In time the Czechs were able to influence historians, lexicographer s, writers, university professors, editors, and government ,printing offices to drop the hyphen from the name of the joint political state of the Slovaks and Czechs and write it as a solid word: "Czechoslovakia." Many of these very people use the words Slovak, Czech, Slovakian, Slovakia, etc., properly respecting the ,spelling of these proper names and their derivati<ves, but make a common noun out of Slovak (ia) when using it in the compound form "Czechoslovak (ia)" ! Frank H. Vizetelly, the eminent lexicographer , noting the trend, had this to say a!bout it in 1934: "It was not without surprise that I found the form 'Czechoslovakia' - originally written with a capital 'C,' to represent three ele- m ents of the ,p eople under one name, and a capital 'S' to represent another element - printed in the U. S. Geographic Board's report as a solid word. How can these things be in the fact of the formal • proclamation of the independence of the new republic issued from Prague, Nov. 14, 1918, and the treaty of peace between the allied and ~sociated powers and the enemy, signed June 28, 1919, to say nothing of the treaty of peace with Austria, which was signed Sept. 10, 1919? In these documents, which are surely 'legal authority for the spelling of the name,' the form 'Czecho-Slovakia ' was used. It ·would be interesting to hear why the memb ers of the J3oard anrl the press of the U. S. A. pretty generally decided to supl)'res.s th e capital letter in 'Slovakia'? Why make fish of one and flesh of another? "It would be interesting to hear officially on these points, for it is well known that in Czecho-Slovakia the Czechs hold office in the cabinet, whil e the Slovaks are left in the cold, yet the Slovaks are the toilers of the nation. If the war was fought 'to vindica'te the principle that small nationalities are not to be crushed in defiance of international good faith by the arbitrary will of a stronger and overmasterly power,' have we not there evidence of the survival of this spirit in the way the Czechs are suppressing the Slovaks?" (1) ''In this connection," said professor Alois R. Nykl, a Ozech, "a careful perusal of historical material contained in The New Europe and in The New York Times Curreut History between 1917 and 1922 should render signal service. lt has become too wide-spread a ipractice of late to dismiss important facts from consideration, and to regard �SLOVAKIA 29 yesterday as having been completely wirped. out today .... The term 'Czecho lovak,' a.s far as I know, was first used in Russia, as the title of a journal published in Kiev a year before Masaryk's first public appearance at Geneva, on July 6, 1915 (John Hus Day)." (2) When writing, T. G. MasaTyk himself often used the hyphenated form tin 1917. In his essay "Bohemia and the European Crisis," published in The New Europe, January 25, 1917, we find: 'Bohemia is a part of Austria-Hungary, but, nevertheless, the Czecho-Slovaks are working and even fighting for and with the Allies" (p. 33) ... "In this vast struggle the place of the Czecho-Slovaks can only be on the side of the Slavs and of the Western nations" (p . 46); and on p. 64, we find an excellent mrup showing "the racial distribution of the Czechs and Slovaks." In the issue of February 22, 1917, of the same journal, Masaryk wrote about "The Future Status of Bohemia"; there we find: "One of the nations to be liberated is the Czecho-Slovak" (p. 161) ; on the following ,page, the note to President Wilson proipo-ses the liberation of "the Czechs and the Slovaks" (des Tcheques et des Slovaques), whereas the English translation has it "Czecho-Slovaks~• ! Furthermore, and not without significance, Masaryk said on pg. 162: "The Slovaks are a ,part of the Czech nation. . . It will depend, for instance, how close the union is as to whether the name 'Czechoslovak, Czecho-Slovak,' or 'Czech and Slovak' will be decided upon. There is no doubt that the union of the two branches will grow." The old dream of Czech imperialists: that one day the Czechs would substantially increase the numbers of their nation by "absorbing" the Slovaks one way or another. Irt probably did not occur to them at the time that the Slovruks might have something to say and do about the matter: twenty years of Czecho-Slovalkia later, the SlovaJks were less absol'bab'le than ever! Telling us how the Sloivaks feel a:bout the hyphen and the fiction of a united "Creoho;:;lo'V'aik" nrution, Professor Nykl says: "T.be term 'Czechoslovak, Czechos lovakia' creates in the vast majority of Slovaks (roduverni Slovaci - patrioti c Slovaks) an in- �30 SLOVAKIA tensive antagonism, such as would ,be created in other people by terms like: Swedonorwegia, 1Hispanoportugalia, Amerocanadia, Austrohungaria . . . . For that reason, I entertain doubts a,s to Slovaks being willing to drop the hyphen. If they decide willingly, without violence, to cooperate with the Czechs in 'Czecho-Slovakia' as stated in the Pittsburgh P.act - it would seem wise not to quarrel over a small detail in spelling. In their homeland they had had sufficient experience wit'h 'Czechoslovakia,' then six months in 'CzechoSlovakia,' a.nd finally in a 'Slovakia' trimmed by the csonka Magy,ars. "If they really think that they can do better a,s an independent unit, after their pa,st experience, Jet us leave them alone and be friends just .the same, instead of eternally bickering and fighting. Elurope, after all, is not a land of African or o.ther native tribes, which have to be kept down 'for their own good,' accordi,n,g to the theories of Lebensraum phiJosophers of all shades and persuasions. Great Britain seems to be getting along passably with Eire. The vast majority of the Germans in Czechoslovakia will not call themselves Czechoslovaks, but Germans of Czechoslovak citizenship, and similarly the Magyars and orthodpx Jews. Nor will there ever exist a Czechoslovak or a Czecho-Slovak ~anguage, but only the CZ.ECH language and the SLOVAK language." (3) What do we find in dictionaries, encyclopedias, and reference wonks in regard to the hyphen, and the Czechs and Slovaks? Let me cite just a few examples: 1. The Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th :BJdition, 1911, has the word "CZECH" (Vol. Vfil, p. 722; and "SWV.AJKS" (VoJ. XXV, p. 244). Of coUTse, there was no Czecho-Slovakia prior to October, 1918, so we cannot e ~ t to find it in books published before that time. 2. Webst.er's Secondary-School Dictionary - abridged from Webster's International Dictionary 1913, ,published by the Amerioan Book Company, G. and C. Merriman Co., Springfield, Mass., has: "Czech - an individual of the most westerly brainch of the Slavs, chiefly inhrubiting Bohemia and Moravia. Also the language of the Czechs; Bohemian." . . . "Slovak one of a Slavic ipeople of northwestern Hungary; also their la;nguage." 3 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Supplement I, Vol. XVII, 192!2, has "Slovakia. See Jugoslavia" (ip. 694). Slovakia, we learn, was then a part of "Jugos~aviia" (p. 425), but at thP same time also a part of "Czechoslovakia" (,p. 245) ! 4. The Standard Reference Work, for the Home, School, and Library, 1924, by the (Minneapolis and Chicago) Standard, Education Society, gives us: "Czecho-Slovakia, a republic composed of the former Austrian states of Bohemia, �SLOVAKIA 31 Moravia, .part of Silesia, and the district of Hungary known as Slovakia" . . . "Bohemia, formerly a province of the Aus. tria.n ffirnpire , today a portion of the new Czecho-Slovak republic" . . . "Slovaks, a portion of the Shwic race, living in former northern Hungary and adjacent parts of Moravia, now inc'luded in Czecho-Slovakia. They are related to the :Poles, Bohemians, and Morarvians. " 5. Webster's Universal Dictionary of the English Language, 1936. by The World 'Syndicate Publishing Company, has : "Czecho--Slovak." 6. The New Universities Webster Dictionary, 1938, by The World Syndicate Publishing Company, dose not include "Ozecho-Slovaikia" or "Ozechoslovakia" at all, but has "Slovak - one of the Slavic people of northwestern Hungary and part of Moravia; the la;nguage of the Slovaiks" . . . "Czech - a member of the most westerly branches of the Sl'lwonic family , including Bohemians, Mor-avians, and Slovaiks." 7. Webster's Elementary Dictionary - a dictionary for boys and girls - 1941, by the American Book Company, G. and C. Meririman Co. , Springfield, Mass., confuses youngsters thus~y : "Czech - a member of one of the two branches of the Slavic race in Czechoslo¥akia" . . . ''Slovak - one of t he people Hving in Slovakia, a province of Cuchoslovakia; also the language spoken by these people" . . . "Czechoslovakia - a republic in central Europe." 8. The Winston Universal Reference Library, 1942 by The John C. Winston Co., Philadelphia, Pa., gives both the hyphenated and the unhyphenated forms, as well as: "Czech - 1. a member of the most westerly 'brrunch of the Slavonic family, which includes Bohemians, Moravians and Slovaks; 2. their language : also called Czechish; 3. a citizen of Czechoslovakia" . . . "Slovak - one of the race of Sla<vs living dn Central Europe, closely a:kin to the Czechs of Bohemia ; 2. the la,nguage of these people." 9. The American College Dictfonary, 1953, by Random House, New Y:oirk, has "Slovak, Slovakia," but _gwes both "Czecho-Slovakia" and "Czechoslovakia." 10. Information Please Almanac, 1954, by Dan Golenpaul Associates, The Macmillan Company, New York, carried a brief Czech story on "Czechoslovakia" and men- �32 SLOVAKIA tioned Slovakia, excluding the laitter from its index, though it did include Serbia and Slaverua. 11. The World Almanac and Book of Facts, 1956, by the New Yoir,k World-Telegram and The Sun, gives a short version of "Czechoslovakia," in which it mentions "Slovakia," excluding it, however, from its index, though it does include Croatia, Serbia and Sloveni·a the component parts of Yugoslavia; "noted Czechs" are listed but not Slovaks. 12. The 1956 Catholic Almanac - Catholic Facts at Your Fingertiips, by St. Anthony's Guild, Paterson, N. J., gives us a listing of four Slovak Catholic benevolent societies and two Czech Catholic organizations, carries some six iitems on the Ohurch in "Czechoolovakia," 'but makes absolutely no distinction between Slovak,s and Czechs. 13. A Catholic Dictionary the Catholic Encyclopaedic Dictionary - 1949, edited by Donald Attwater, The Macmillan Company, New Yo:rk, tells, us about "The ChU'rch in Czechoslovakia": " T.his state now consists of Bohemia, Moravia an d Slovakia, w'hose inhabitants are Czechs and Slovaks, with minorities of Ger• m an and Hu ngarian origin, a bout 14 million in all; 80 percent are OatlhoUcs, but both Protestantism ·and secul arism are strong. After the s'tate was form ed in 1918, there was a nationalist schism among the Czechs. "Th ere .are two ecclesiastical provinces, Prague and Olomouc, with four suffragan oio ceses and five others immediately subject to the Holy See, and a Byzantine-rite dio cese of Ruthenians." Though Attwater does not tell us where the underscored "five others" are, we know that the reference is to the dioceses in Slovakia. 14. Example Sheets from Sections of Proposed N. C. W. C. News Service Style Book, Section X - Special, 1956: "Czechoslovakia - X. 29 - without a hyphen. Buit do not say Czech in a story or head when you mean Czechoslovak." When I received the a!bO'Ve, I wrote to Mr. Frank Hall, NCWC News Service Director, on May 24, 1956, telling him it was wrong to write Czecho-Slovakia without a hyphen, citing some of the .aJbove informaition to back my argument. 'Mr. Hall, rupparently knows ,that there ·a re Slova;ks and Czechs, that there is a Czech ilanguage and a Slovak �SLOVAKIA 33 language, that the Slovaks are not Czechs, and vice~versa, but still insists on "Czechoslovakia" as a solid word. In his reply (June 8, 1956), Mr. Hall said among other things: " As for the u se of the hyphen: The Diplomatic List of the U. S. State Department, the Political Handbook of the World, the Congressional Directory, the Associated Press, the United Press, the I. N. S., the yearbook 'Information Please' write it Czechoslovakian . I don't know of any other standard guide that does it any other way." Mr. Hall like many others, obviously did not inquire how the "standard guides" he referred to came to write "Czechoslovakia" as a solid word. Taking the stand that "everybody is doing it" can hardly be accepted as justification. If it is right, according to standard guides and authoritative sources, to write Austria~Hungary, AngloAmerican, American~British, Anglo-,S axon, Sino-Japanese, Anglo-Norman, Anglo-iindian, Franco--American, Anglo_ Irish, Spanish-American, German-American, Indo~European, etc . - all with a hyiphen - then it certainly must also be right to write Czecho-Slovakia with a hyphen! To the Slovaks omitting the hyphen means the _denial of thei_r national existence and subordination and subservL ence to the Czechs. The Slova;ks insisted and still insist on the hyiphen whenever the joint political state, which they agre€d to establish under certain conditions, is referred to. They insist more on that than they do on the continued ex_ 1stence of the political monstrosity which Czecho-Slovakia, under the guidance of T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, turned out to be. T oday, Slorvaks everywhere cr1 out resolutely: NO MORE CZECHO-SLOVAKIA ! That, of course, would defiruitely solve the question of the hyphen. America helped to liberate the Slovaks from the Magyars and was in a great measure respon.sib.le for the creation of Czecho-Slovakia in 1918. America stands for the freedom and independence of all nations, whether large or small. How then can any responsible American insist that Slovaks must forever be dominated by the Czechs? The Chicago Tribune, May 8, 1934. (2) The Slavonic and East European Review (American Serie s, III, 4), Vol. XXII, No. 61, December 1944. (3) Ibidem. (1) � SLOVAKIA 25 CZECHO-SLOVAKIA OR CZECHOSLOVAKIA? P.A. Hrobak The ancestors of the Slovak people settled in the Danuibe territory during the fourth and sixth centuries and have occwpied that territory eiver since. Boundaries changed some with the centuries, buit the Slovaks held on to their present land ever since they became a part of the Hungarian kingdom at the beginning of the 11th century. The Slovaks settled on both •s ides of the Morrava and Danube rivers; the ancestors of the Ozec'hs settled in the land of the Boii (Bohemia). The liand of the Slova:ks formed the heart of the Great Mora;vian Empire of the ninth century. The Slovaks already had 'built their first Christian church at Nitra in 830 - the first church in the entire territory of the western Slovanic peaples. The Magyara came into the Danube Valley long after the Slovaks. TheTe was no Czecho-:Slo,v akia, no Czecho-Slovak political formation of any kind, until 1918, when the Hi~bsburg Empire collaipsed. There was a Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia - geneiralily referred to by non-Czech historians as the "Bohemian Crown Lands," and by the Czechs as "Czech Crown Lands" and the land of the Slovaks, which n0in-!Slovak historians refe,rred to as "Upper Hungary" or "Northern Hungary," while Slovaks called their land "Slovensko" (Slovrukia). The Slovaks did not have a common history, religious and national traditions, culture, and economy, with the Czechs until after 1918; b,ut even after that date the Slovaks did not ado-pt the culture and national traditions of t he Czechs, but adhered to their own. It is significant that the Catholic Church in Slovakia - the SloivaJk dioceses was not under the jurisdiction of the ordinaries ,o f Bohemia and Moravia, but under the jUTisdiction of Rome and was directly responsible thereto. In America the Czechs refer to their chuvches as CZEJCHi churches, while the Slovaks call theirs SUOIVI.AJK churches. In short: the Czechs never were, are not, and do not want to be Slovaks - and the Slovaks never were, are not, �SLOVAKIA and do not want to be Czechs. The Slovaks developed under entirely different circumstances than .the Czechs; the latter were dominated for centuries ,by the Germans and Austria, the former by the Magyars of Hungary. Both are members of the Slovanic (Slav) family of nations, but each is a distinct ethnic entiity, just as are the Po~·es, Ukrainians, Croatians, Slovenians, Serbians, Bulgarians and Russians. The treaty by which Czecho-1Slovakia came into being out o.f the rubble and ashes of the Ha:bsburg Empire recognized the fact that the Czechs and Slovaks had agreed to form a joint political sita1:e, as political equals and as two distinct ethnic entities and, hence, the form used for the name in the treaty creating the new state wais not the solid word "Czechoslovakia," buit the hyphenated form "Czecho-Slovakia." The Ozechs and the Slovaks were supposed to enjoy equal rights, privileges, and responsibilities in their joint state. T . G. •Masaryik told the Slovaks not to worry a:bout being majorized by the more numerous Czec<hs: the Slovaks would manage their own household, whHe the Czechs would be masters in their land; the new staJte would be a federation like Switzerland or the United States. Because the Slovruks of America did not trust Masarylk, they asked him to put it in writing; he did on May 30, 1918, at Pittsburgh, .Pennsylvania, when he, drrafted and signed the Pittsburgh Agreement. Without it Czecho-S:Jova,kia never would have been born. This agreement is reproduced here as docu:menba.ry proof that "Czecho-Slovak (ia)" was spelled with a hyiphen. However, once T. G. Masaryk, Dr. Edward Benes, and their socialistic political entourage took over the government of the new State in Prague, the tendency developed to drop the hyphen and use the solid form. It soon became obvious to the 'Slovaks tha-t "Czechoslov;rukia" was becoming synonymous with "Czech": domestic and foreign policy, culture, and economy, traditions and history, even though referred to as "Czechoslovak," were strictly Czech. promoted by The "Czechoslovak National Church" the embarto and expense Czechs in government at the rassment of the overwhelming m'ajority of the Czech Ca- �SLOVAKIA 27 itr,ko•~louttt!ikofflohobo, 1na1,rtnti o Pittsbur9hu.1}tt.,bntt )O. tnrijn. t9J8. ".Prrbsttu,ittliR GfootuaklJ,~ uuskQ ,h organi1adfuo ~poj. ~tato,h. ~loutttskej i!Ifg~. ~!skiho 3Tarobniho ~bvufttliR n ~uii1u irsk~tth1&ntolf~90. porC1kC1t1,1li ta pntonmosti pm'sc~u ec~lto-Slovcns.lt.:J Gf!,{,·.uR,,,,~. pr,,f.~U.,;,w~1lt.1, 6 t~:;11..,-:;lot .:n$luj ,,t,i1lw ,, ,, p,•$,wl,\n!1.:b pr,•9~m1N•~(d, pw.i,w,•d, ~, uf.,1i.:1li 1hl tM;l~•'••t•t'\11: ''Sd,MltLi.:m.: 1,diti.:hy1m:•,;,-.m, ,, . . . ..., t1ioiluil1,·i . f.•l ,, S1,,•i.:ui11 €.:.-11-•v ., $IN1,Ht,•t• l' $,~\\h'$t,,h,,•1111t.,t.. 1 e.:i-lt11.:h i.-,,,(,, SIN•.:nt-h,t. ,,.,.,ch 1 ~ "Sl,w.:tH,h,• ht~II m,lt f.t'':\tl t•lMtmf .,~minish,,t(vu,tv~j ,,,.:m ,, £-t•••it :;ti~tt. . ·. st..•t•;n1i \ \h\ . "· Al•.:,·. .:N~n,•m ?nt•• t.: "" bu~.: tfr,,~,,~m j,,1~lt,•U1 V ;lt.:-k t• t1r,,,,, ., "'" • 1 • "'E'.-s.l,,•-$l.:-t•,:ti-:,k\/~Mt h,~.. w~•ubli~.:-u. jch,•~4'nftituci4' ~u,\.: ,,c,n,•1',·,,tidhi. • · "'9r,,L\\1\~,, ..·i.,, ~1,.•luprlcc e,.·b.:-t• ,, Sl-,t1,,lwu t•c Sp.•j .. St.~t,•,·h l•m'.: p:•~t, p,•tr,l,y ,, m,,,i,wcj ~,,.fih,.,cie,pri $p.,lc':fo"\U ~1.•r,•1umrnC pt·chll-c,i., ,, upr,wcn,{. "u)",, ..,,.... h,E tltt•\\lC\ 11\l\•l "J•Wi,,~c,1.{fo1+1\.,.,1 •• \ ll\'\thch" ~tau p,•n~ch,fo,,,,tr~.., ••H•••~•• ~.mym €tt11..9.:-m .., Sl.,v,Ht..•m ., icb ---======= pr,f1.•.:-pl,1tn:1m lH·c,\$t,witd..•m." 1 1 ====~--- �28 SLOVAKIA tholic poipulation of Czecho-Slova kia - was strictly a Czech enteriprise. The Slovaks resisted the tendency and protested against it many times, but to no avail. In time the Czechs were able to influence historians, lexicographer s, writers, university professors, editors, and government ,printing offices to drop the hyphen from the name of the joint political state of the Slovaks and Czechs and write it as a solid word: "Czechoslovakia." Many of these very people use the words Slovak, Czech, Slovakian, Slovakia, etc., properly respecting the ,spelling of these proper names and their derivati<ves, but make a common noun out of Slovak (ia) when using it in the compound form "Czechoslovak (ia)" ! Frank H. Vizetelly, the eminent lexicographer , noting the trend, had this to say a!bout it in 1934: "It was not without surprise that I found the form 'Czechoslovakia' - originally written with a capital 'C,' to represent three ele- m ents of the ,p eople under one name, and a capital 'S' to represent another element - printed in the U. S. Geographic Board's report as a solid word. How can these things be in the fact of the formal • proclamation of the independence of the new republic issued from Prague, Nov. 14, 1918, and the treaty of peace between the allied and ~sociated powers and the enemy, signed June 28, 1919, to say nothing of the treaty of peace with Austria, which was signed Sept. 10, 1919? In these documents, which are surely 'legal authority for the spelling of the name,' the form 'Czecho-Slovakia ' was used. It ·would be interesting to hear why the memb ers of the J3oard anrl the press of the U. S. A. pretty generally decided to supl)'res.s th e capital letter in 'Slovakia'? Why make fish of one and flesh of another? "It would be interesting to hear officially on these points, for it is well known that in Czecho-Slovakia the Czechs hold office in the cabinet, whil e the Slovaks are left in the cold, yet the Slovaks are the toilers of the nation. If the war was fought 'to vindica'te the principle that small nationalities are not to be crushed in defiance of international good faith by the arbitrary will of a stronger and overmasterly power,' have we not there evidence of the survival of this spirit in the way the Czechs are suppressing the Slovaks?" (1) ''In this connection," said professor Alois R. Nykl, a Ozech, "a careful perusal of historical material contained in The New Europe and in The New York Times Curreut History between 1917 and 1922 should render signal service. lt has become too wide-spread a ipractice of late to dismiss important facts from consideration, and to regard �SLOVAKIA 29 yesterday as having been completely wirped. out today .... The term 'Czecho lovak,' a.s far as I know, was first used in Russia, as the title of a journal published in Kiev a year before Masaryk's first public appearance at Geneva, on July 6, 1915 (John Hus Day)." (2) When writing, T. G. MasaTyk himself often used the hyphenated form tin 1917. In his essay "Bohemia and the European Crisis," published in The New Europe, January 25, 1917, we find: 'Bohemia is a part of Austria-Hungary, but, nevertheless, the Czecho-Slovaks are working and even fighting for and with the Allies" (p. 33) ... "In this vast struggle the place of the Czecho-Slovaks can only be on the side of the Slavs and of the Western nations" (p . 46); and on p. 64, we find an excellent mrup showing "the racial distribution of the Czechs and Slovaks." In the issue of February 22, 1917, of the same journal, Masaryk wrote about "The Future Status of Bohemia"; there we find: "One of the nations to be liberated is the Czecho-Slovak" (p. 161) ; on the following ,page, the note to President Wilson proipo-ses the liberation of "the Czechs and the Slovaks" (des Tcheques et des Slovaques), whereas the English translation has it "Czecho-Slovaks~• ! Furthermore, and not without significance, Masaryk said on pg. 162: "The Slovaks are a ,part of the Czech nation. . . It will depend, for instance, how close the union is as to whether the name 'Czechoslovak, Czecho-Slovak,' or 'Czech and Slovak' will be decided upon. There is no doubt that the union of the two branches will grow." The old dream of Czech imperialists: that one day the Czechs would substantially increase the numbers of their nation by "absorbing" the Slovaks one way or another. Irt probably did not occur to them at the time that the Slovruks might have something to say and do about the matter: twenty years of Czecho-Slovalkia later, the SlovaJks were less absol'bab'le than ever! Telling us how the Sloivaks feel a:bout the hyphen and the fiction of a united "Creoho;:;lo'V'aik" nrution, Professor Nykl says: "T.be term 'Czechoslovak, Czechos lovakia' creates in the vast majority of Slovaks (roduverni Slovaci - patrioti c Slovaks) an in- �30 SLOVAKIA tensive antagonism, such as would ,be created in other people by terms like: Swedonorwegia, 1Hispanoportugalia, Amerocanadia, Austrohungaria . . . . For that reason, I entertain doubts a,s to Slovaks being willing to drop the hyphen. If they decide willingly, without violence, to cooperate with the Czechs in 'Czecho-Slovakia' as stated in the Pittsburgh P.act - it would seem wise not to quarrel over a small detail in spelling. In their homeland they had had sufficient experience wit'h 'Czechoslovakia,' then six months in 'CzechoSlovakia,' a.nd finally in a 'Slovakia' trimmed by the csonka Magy,ars. "If they really think that they can do better a,s an independent unit, after their pa,st experience, Jet us leave them alone and be friends just .the same, instead of eternally bickering and fighting. Elurope, after all, is not a land of African or o.ther native tribes, which have to be kept down 'for their own good,' accordi,n,g to the theories of Lebensraum phiJosophers of all shades and persuasions. Great Britain seems to be getting along passably with Eire. The vast majority of the Germans in Czechoslovakia will not call themselves Czechoslovaks, but Germans of Czechoslovak citizenship, and similarly the Magyars and orthodpx Jews. Nor will there ever exist a Czechoslovak or a Czecho-Slovak ~anguage, but only the CZ.ECH language and the SLOVAK language." (3) What do we find in dictionaries, encyclopedias, and reference wonks in regard to the hyphen, and the Czechs and Slovaks? Let me cite just a few examples: 1. The Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th :BJdition, 1911, has the word "CZECH" (Vol. Vfil, p. 722; and "SWV.AJKS" (VoJ. XXV, p. 244). Of coUTse, there was no Czecho-Slovakia prior to October, 1918, so we cannot e ~ t to find it in books published before that time. 2. Webst.er's Secondary-School Dictionary - abridged from Webster's International Dictionary 1913, ,published by the Amerioan Book Company, G. and C. Merriman Co., Springfield, Mass., has: "Czech - an individual of the most westerly brainch of the Slavs, chiefly inhrubiting Bohemia and Moravia. Also the language of the Czechs; Bohemian." . . . "Slovak one of a Slavic ipeople of northwestern Hungary; also their la;nguage." 3 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Supplement I, Vol. XVII, 192!2, has "Slovakia. See Jugoslavia" (ip. 694). Slovakia, we learn, was then a part of "Jugos~aviia" (p. 425), but at thP same time also a part of "Czechoslovakia" (,p. 245) ! 4. The Standard Reference Work, for the Home, School, and Library, 1924, by the (Minneapolis and Chicago) Standard, Education Society, gives us: "Czecho-Slovakia, a republic composed of the former Austrian states of Bohemia, �SLOVAKIA 31 Moravia, .part of Silesia, and the district of Hungary known as Slovakia" . . . "Bohemia, formerly a province of the Aus. tria.n ffirnpire , today a portion of the new Czecho-Slovak republic" . . . "Slovaks, a portion of the Shwic race, living in former northern Hungary and adjacent parts of Moravia, now inc'luded in Czecho-Slovakia. They are related to the :Poles, Bohemians, and Morarvians. " 5. Webster's Universal Dictionary of the English Language, 1936. by The World 'Syndicate Publishing Company, has : "Czecho--Slovak." 6. The New Universities Webster Dictionary, 1938, by The World Syndicate Publishing Company, dose not include "Ozecho-Slovaikia" or "Ozechoslovakia" at all, but has "Slovak - one of the Slavic people of northwestern Hungary and part of Moravia; the la;nguage of the Slovaiks" . . . "Czech - a member of the most westerly branches of the Sl'lwonic family , including Bohemians, Mor-avians, and Slovaiks." 7. Webster's Elementary Dictionary - a dictionary for boys and girls - 1941, by the American Book Company, G. and C. Meririman Co. , Springfield, Mass., confuses youngsters thus~y : "Czech - a member of one of the two branches of the Slavic race in Czechoslo¥akia" . . . ''Slovak - one of t he people Hving in Slovakia, a province of Cuchoslovakia; also the language spoken by these people" . . . "Czechoslovakia - a republic in central Europe." 8. The Winston Universal Reference Library, 1942 by The John C. Winston Co., Philadelphia, Pa., gives both the hyphenated and the unhyphenated forms, as well as: "Czech - 1. a member of the most westerly 'brrunch of the Slavonic family, which includes Bohemians, Moravians and Slovaks; 2. their language : also called Czechish; 3. a citizen of Czechoslovakia" . . . "Slovak - one of the race of Sla<vs living dn Central Europe, closely a:kin to the Czechs of Bohemia ; 2. the la,nguage of these people." 9. The American College Dictfonary, 1953, by Random House, New Y:oirk, has "Slovak, Slovakia," but _gwes both "Czecho-Slovakia" and "Czechoslovakia." 10. Information Please Almanac, 1954, by Dan Golenpaul Associates, The Macmillan Company, New York, carried a brief Czech story on "Czechoslovakia" and men- �32 SLOVAKIA tioned Slovakia, excluding the laitter from its index, though it did include Serbia and Slaverua. 11. The World Almanac and Book of Facts, 1956, by the New Yoir,k World-Telegram and The Sun, gives a short version of "Czechoslovakia," in which it mentions "Slovakia," excluding it, however, from its index, though it does include Croatia, Serbia and Sloveni·a the component parts of Yugoslavia; "noted Czechs" are listed but not Slovaks. 12. The 1956 Catholic Almanac - Catholic Facts at Your Fingertiips, by St. Anthony's Guild, Paterson, N. J., gives us a listing of four Slovak Catholic benevolent societies and two Czech Catholic organizations, carries some six iitems on the Ohurch in "Czechoolovakia," 'but makes absolutely no distinction between Slovak,s and Czechs. 13. A Catholic Dictionary the Catholic Encyclopaedic Dictionary - 1949, edited by Donald Attwater, The Macmillan Company, New Yo:rk, tells, us about "The ChU'rch in Czechoslovakia": " T.his state now consists of Bohemia, Moravia an d Slovakia, w'hose inhabitants are Czechs and Slovaks, with minorities of Ger• m an and Hu ngarian origin, a bout 14 million in all; 80 percent are OatlhoUcs, but both Protestantism ·and secul arism are strong. After the s'tate was form ed in 1918, there was a nationalist schism among the Czechs. "Th ere .are two ecclesiastical provinces, Prague and Olomouc, with four suffragan oio ceses and five others immediately subject to the Holy See, and a Byzantine-rite dio cese of Ruthenians." Though Attwater does not tell us where the underscored "five others" are, we know that the reference is to the dioceses in Slovakia. 14. Example Sheets from Sections of Proposed N. C. W. C. News Service Style Book, Section X - Special, 1956: "Czechoslovakia - X. 29 - without a hyphen. Buit do not say Czech in a story or head when you mean Czechoslovak." When I received the a!bO'Ve, I wrote to Mr. Frank Hall, NCWC News Service Director, on May 24, 1956, telling him it was wrong to write Czecho-Slovakia without a hyphen, citing some of the .aJbove informaition to back my argument. 'Mr. Hall, rupparently knows ,that there ·a re Slova;ks and Czechs, that there is a Czech ilanguage and a Slovak �SLOVAKIA 33 language, that the Slovaks are not Czechs, and vice~versa, but still insists on "Czechoslovakia" as a solid word. In his reply (June 8, 1956), Mr. Hall said among other things: " As for the u se of the hyphen: The Diplomatic List of the U. S. State Department, the Political Handbook of the World, the Congressional Directory, the Associated Press, the United Press, the I. N. S., the yearbook 'Information Please' write it Czechoslovakian . I don't know of any other standard guide that does it any other way." Mr. Hall like many others, obviously did not inquire how the "standard guides" he referred to came to write "Czechoslovakia" as a solid word. Taking the stand that "everybody is doing it" can hardly be accepted as justification. If it is right, according to standard guides and authoritative sources, to write Austria~Hungary, AngloAmerican, American~British, Anglo-,S axon, Sino-Japanese, Anglo-Norman, Anglo-iindian, Franco--American, Anglo_ Irish, Spanish-American, German-American, Indo~European, etc . - all with a hyiphen - then it certainly must also be right to write Czecho-Slovakia with a hyphen! To the Slovaks omitting the hyphen means the _denial of thei_r national existence and subordination and subservL ence to the Czechs. The Slova;ks insisted and still insist on the hyiphen whenever the joint political state, which they agre€d to establish under certain conditions, is referred to. They insist more on that than they do on the continued ex_ 1stence of the political monstrosity which Czecho-Slovakia, under the guidance of T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, turned out to be. T oday, Slorvaks everywhere cr1 out resolutely: NO MORE CZECHO-SLOVAKIA ! That, of course, would defiruitely solve the question of the hyphen. America helped to liberate the Slovaks from the Magyars and was in a great measure respon.sib.le for the creation of Czecho-Slovakia in 1918. America stands for the freedom and independence of all nations, whether large or small. How then can any responsible American insist that Slovaks must forever be dominated by the Czechs? The Chicago Tribune, May 8, 1934. (2) The Slavonic and East European Review (American Serie s, III, 4), Vol. XXII, No. 61, December 1944. (3) Ibidem. (1) � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 25 CZECHO-SLOVAKIA OR CZECHOSLOVAKIA? P.A. Hrobak The ancestors of the Slovak people settled in the Danuibe territory during the fourth and sixth centuries and have occwpied that territory eiver since. Boundaries changed some with the centuries, buit the Slovaks held on to their present land ever since they became a part of the Hungarian kingdom at the beginning of the 11th century. The Slovaks settled on both •s ides of the Morrava and Danube rivers; the ancestors of the Ozec'hs settled in the land of the Boii (Bohemia). The liand of the Slova:ks formed the heart of the Great Mora;vian Empire of the ninth century. The Slovaks already had 'built their first Christian church at Nitra in 830 - the first church in the entire territory of the western Slovanic peaples. The Magyara came into the Danube Valley long after the Slovaks. TheTe was no Czecho-:Slo,v akia, no Czecho-Slovak political formation of any kind, until 1918, when the Hi~bsburg Empire collaipsed. There was a Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia - geneiralily referred to by non-Czech historians as the "Bohemian Crown Lands," and by the Czechs as "Czech Crown Lands" and the land of the Slovaks, which n0in-!Slovak historians refe,rred to as "Upper Hungary" or "Northern Hungary," while Slovaks called their land "Slovensko" (Slovrukia). The Slovaks did not have a common history, religious and national traditions, culture, and economy, with the Czechs until after 1918; b,ut even after that date the Slovaks did not ado-pt the culture and national traditions of t he Czechs, but adhered to their own. It is significant that the Catholic Church in Slovakia - the SloivaJk dioceses was not under the jurisdiction of the ordinaries ,o f Bohemia and Moravia, but under the jUTisdiction of Rome and was directly responsible thereto. In America the Czechs refer to their chuvches as CZEJCHi churches, while the Slovaks call theirs SUOIVI.AJK churches. In short: the Czechs never were, are not, and do not want to be Slovaks - and the Slovaks never were, are not, SLOVAKIA and do not want to be Czechs. The Slovaks developed under entirely different circumstances than .the Czechs; the latter were dominated for centuries ,by the Germans and Austria, the former by the Magyars of Hungary. Both are members of the Slovanic (Slav) family of nations, but each is a distinct ethnic entiity, just as are the Po~·es, Ukrainians, Croatians, Slovenians, Serbians, Bulgarians and Russians. The treaty by which Czecho-1Slovakia came into being out o.f the rubble and ashes of the Ha:bsburg Empire recognized the fact that the Czechs and Slovaks had agreed to form a joint political sita1:e, as political equals and as two distinct ethnic entities and, hence, the form used for the name in the treaty creating the new state wais not the solid word "Czechoslovakia," buit the hyphenated form "Czecho-Slovakia." The Ozechs and the Slovaks were supposed to enjoy equal rights, privileges, and responsibilities in their joint state. T . G. •Masaryik told the Slovaks not to worry a:bout being majorized by the more numerous Czec<hs: the Slovaks would manage their own household, whHe the Czechs would be masters in their land; the new staJte would be a federation like Switzerland or the United States. Because the Slovruks of America did not trust Masarylk, they asked him to put it in writing; he did on May 30, 1918, at Pittsburgh, .Pennsylvania, when he, drrafted and signed the Pittsburgh Agreement. Without it Czecho-S:Jova,kia never would have been born. This agreement is reproduced here as docu:menba.ry proof that "Czecho-Slovak (ia)" was spelled with a hyiphen. However, once T. G. Masaryk, Dr. Edward Benes, and their socialistic political entourage took over the government of the new State in Prague, the tendency developed to drop the hyphen and use the solid form. It soon became obvious to the 'Slovaks tha-t "Czechoslov;rukia" was becoming synonymous with "Czech": domestic and foreign policy, culture, and economy, traditions and history, even though referred to as "Czechoslovak," were strictly Czech. promoted by The "Czechoslovak National Church" the embarto and expense Czechs in government at the rassment of the overwhelming m'ajority of the Czech Ca- SLOVAKIA 27 itr,ko•~louttt!ikofflohobo, 1na1,rtnti o Pittsbur9hu.1}tt.,bntt )O. tnrijn. t9J8. ".Prrbsttu,ittliR GfootuaklJ,~ uuskQ ,h organi1adfuo ~poj. ~tato,h. ~loutttskej i!Ifg~. ~!skiho 3Tarobniho ~bvufttliR n ~uii1u irsk~tth1&ntolf~90. porC1kC1t1,1li ta pntonmosti pm'sc~u ec~lto-Slovcns.lt.:J Gf!,{,·.uR,,,,~. pr,,f.~U.,;,w~1lt.1, 6 t~:;11..,-:;lot .:n$luj ,,t,i1lw ,, ,, p,•$,wl,\n!1.:b pr,•9~m1N•~(d, pw.i,w,•d, ~, uf.,1i.:1li 1hl tM;l~•'••t•t'\11: ''Sd,MltLi.:m.: 1,diti.:hy1m:•,;,-.m, ,, . . . ..., t1ioiluil1,·i . f.•l ,, S1,,•i.:ui11 €.:.-11-•v ., $IN1,Ht,•t• l' $,~\\h'$t,,h,,•1111t.,t.. 1 e.:i-lt11.:h i.-,,,(,, SIN•.:nt-h,t. ,,.,.,ch 1 ~ "Sl,w.:tH,h,• ht~II m,lt f.t'':\tl t•lMtmf .,~minish,,t(vu,tv~j ,,,.:m ,, £-t•••it :;ti~tt. . ·. st..•t•;n1i \ \h\ . "· Al•.:,·. .:N~n,•m ?nt•• t.: "" bu~.: tfr,,~,,~m j,,1~lt,•U1 V ;lt.:-k t• t1r,,,,, ., "'" • 1 • "'E'.-s.l,,•-$l.:-t•,:ti-:,k\/~Mt h,~.. w~•ubli~.:-u. jch,•~4'nftituci4' ~u,\.: ,,c,n,•1',·,,tidhi. • · "'9r,,L\\1\~,, ..·i.,, ~1,.•luprlcc e,.·b.:-t• ,, Sl-,t1,,lwu t•c Sp.•j .. St.~t,•,·h l•m'.: p:•~t, p,•tr,l,y ,, m,,,i,wcj ~,,.fih,.,cie,pri $p.,lc':fo"\U ~1.•r,•1umrnC pt·chll-c,i., ,, upr,wcn,{. "u)",, ..,,.... h,E tltt•\\lC\ 11\l\•l "J•Wi,,~c,1.{fo1+1\.,.,1 •• \ ll\'\thch" ~tau p,•n~ch,fo,,,,tr~.., ••H•••~•• ~.mym €tt11..9.:-m .., Sl.,v,Ht..•m ., icb ---======= pr,f1.•.:-pl,1tn:1m lH·c,\$t,witd..•m." 1 1 ====~--- 28 SLOVAKIA tholic poipulation of Czecho-Slova kia - was strictly a Czech enteriprise. The Slovaks resisted the tendency and protested against it many times, but to no avail. In time the Czechs were able to influence historians, lexicographer s, writers, university professors, editors, and government ,printing offices to drop the hyphen from the name of the joint political state of the Slovaks and Czechs and write it as a solid word: "Czechoslovakia." Many of these very people use the words Slovak, Czech, Slovakian, Slovakia, etc., properly respecting the ,spelling of these proper names and their derivati<ves, but make a common noun out of Slovak (ia) when using it in the compound form "Czechoslovak (ia)" ! Frank H. Vizetelly, the eminent lexicographer , noting the trend, had this to say a!bout it in 1934: "It was not without surprise that I found the form 'Czechoslovakia' - originally written with a capital 'C,' to represent three ele- m ents of the ,p eople under one name, and a capital 'S' to represent another element - printed in the U. S. Geographic Board's report as a solid word. How can these things be in the fact of the formal • proclamation of the independence of the new republic issued from Prague, Nov. 14, 1918, and the treaty of peace between the allied and ~sociated powers and the enemy, signed June 28, 1919, to say nothing of the treaty of peace with Austria, which was signed Sept. 10, 1919? In these documents, which are surely 'legal authority for the spelling of the name,' the form 'Czecho-Slovakia ' was used. It ·would be interesting to hear why the memb ers of the J3oard anrl the press of the U. S. A. pretty generally decided to supl)'res.s th e capital letter in 'Slovakia'? Why make fish of one and flesh of another? "It would be interesting to hear officially on these points, for it is well known that in Czecho-Slovakia the Czechs hold office in the cabinet, whil e the Slovaks are left in the cold, yet the Slovaks are the toilers of the nation. If the war was fought 'to vindica'te the principle that small nationalities are not to be crushed in defiance of international good faith by the arbitrary will of a stronger and overmasterly power,' have we not there evidence of the survival of this spirit in the way the Czechs are suppressing the Slovaks?" (1) ''In this connection," said professor Alois R. Nykl, a Ozech, "a careful perusal of historical material contained in The New Europe and in The New York Times Curreut History between 1917 and 1922 should render signal service. lt has become too wide-spread a ipractice of late to dismiss important facts from consideration, and to regard SLOVAKIA 29 yesterday as having been completely wirped. out today .... The term 'Czecho lovak,' a.s far as I know, was first used in Russia, as the title of a journal published in Kiev a year before Masaryk's first public appearance at Geneva, on July 6, 1915 (John Hus Day)." (2) When writing, T. G. MasaTyk himself often used the hyphenated form tin 1917. In his essay "Bohemia and the European Crisis," published in The New Europe, January 25, 1917, we find: 'Bohemia is a part of Austria-Hungary, but, nevertheless, the Czecho-Slovaks are working and even fighting for and with the Allies" (p. 33) ... "In this vast struggle the place of the Czecho-Slovaks can only be on the side of the Slavs and of the Western nations" (p . 46); and on p. 64, we find an excellent mrup showing "the racial distribution of the Czechs and Slovaks." In the issue of February 22, 1917, of the same journal, Masaryk wrote about "The Future Status of Bohemia"; there we find: "One of the nations to be liberated is the Czecho-Slovak" (p. 161) ; on the following ,page, the note to President Wilson proipo-ses the liberation of "the Czechs and the Slovaks" (des Tcheques et des Slovaques), whereas the English translation has it "Czecho-Slovaks~• ! Furthermore, and not without significance, Masaryk said on pg. 162: "The Slovaks are a ,part of the Czech nation. . . It will depend, for instance, how close the union is as to whether the name 'Czechoslovak, Czecho-Slovak,' or 'Czech and Slovak' will be decided upon. There is no doubt that the union of the two branches will grow." The old dream of Czech imperialists: that one day the Czechs would substantially increase the numbers of their nation by "absorbing" the Slovaks one way or another. Irt probably did not occur to them at the time that the Slovruks might have something to say and do about the matter: twenty years of Czecho-Slovalkia later, the SlovaJks were less absol'bab'le than ever! Telling us how the Sloivaks feel a:bout the hyphen and the fiction of a united "Creoho;:;lo'V'aik" nrution, Professor Nykl says: "T.be term 'Czechoslovak, Czechos lovakia' creates in the vast majority of Slovaks (roduverni Slovaci - patrioti c Slovaks) an in- 30 SLOVAKIA tensive antagonism, such as would ,be created in other people by terms like: Swedonorwegia, 1Hispanoportugalia, Amerocanadia, Austrohungaria . . . . For that reason, I entertain doubts a,s to Slovaks being willing to drop the hyphen. If they decide willingly, without violence, to cooperate with the Czechs in 'Czecho-Slovakia' as stated in the Pittsburgh P.act - it would seem wise not to quarrel over a small detail in spelling. In their homeland they had had sufficient experience wit'h 'Czechoslovakia,' then six months in 'CzechoSlovakia,' a.nd finally in a 'Slovakia' trimmed by the csonka Magy,ars. "If they really think that they can do better a,s an independent unit, after their pa,st experience, Jet us leave them alone and be friends just .the same, instead of eternally bickering and fighting. Elurope, after all, is not a land of African or o.ther native tribes, which have to be kept down 'for their own good,' accordi,n,g to the theories of Lebensraum phiJosophers of all shades and persuasions. Great Britain seems to be getting along passably with Eire. The vast majority of the Germans in Czechoslovakia will not call themselves Czechoslovaks, but Germans of Czechoslovak citizenship, and similarly the Magyars and orthodpx Jews. Nor will there ever exist a Czechoslovak or a Czecho-Slovak ~anguage, but only the CZ.ECH language and the SLOVAK language." (3) What do we find in dictionaries, encyclopedias, and reference wonks in regard to the hyphen, and the Czechs and Slovaks? Let me cite just a few examples: 1. The Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th :BJdition, 1911, has the word "CZECH" (Vol. Vfil, p. 722; and "SWV.AJKS" (VoJ. XXV, p. 244). Of coUTse, there was no Czecho-Slovakia prior to October, 1918, so we cannot e ~ t to find it in books published before that time. 2. Webst.er's Secondary-School Dictionary - abridged from Webster's International Dictionary 1913, ,published by the Amerioan Book Company, G. and C. Merriman Co., Springfield, Mass., has: "Czech - an individual of the most westerly brainch of the Slavs, chiefly inhrubiting Bohemia and Moravia. Also the language of the Czechs; Bohemian." . . . "Slovak one of a Slavic ipeople of northwestern Hungary; also their la;nguage." 3 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Supplement I, Vol. XVII, 192!2, has "Slovakia. See Jugoslavia" (ip. 694). Slovakia, we learn, was then a part of "Jugos~aviia" (p. 425), but at thP same time also a part of "Czechoslovakia" (,p. 245) ! 4. The Standard Reference Work, for the Home, School, and Library, 1924, by the (Minneapolis and Chicago) Standard, Education Society, gives us: "Czecho-Slovakia, a republic composed of the former Austrian states of Bohemia, SLOVAKIA 31 Moravia, .part of Silesia, and the district of Hungary known as Slovakia" . . . "Bohemia, formerly a province of the Aus. tria.n ffirnpire , today a portion of the new Czecho-Slovak republic" . . . "Slovaks, a portion of the Shwic race, living in former northern Hungary and adjacent parts of Moravia, now inc'luded in Czecho-Slovakia. They are related to the :Poles, Bohemians, and Morarvians. " 5. Webster's Universal Dictionary of the English Language, 1936. by The World 'Syndicate Publishing Company, has : "Czecho--Slovak." 6. The New Universities Webster Dictionary, 1938, by The World Syndicate Publishing Company, dose not include "Ozecho-Slovaikia" or "Ozechoslovakia" at all, but has "Slovak - one of the Slavic people of northwestern Hungary and part of Moravia; the la;nguage of the Slovaiks" . . . "Czech - a member of the most westerly branches of the Sl'lwonic family , including Bohemians, Mor-avians, and Slovaiks." 7. Webster's Elementary Dictionary - a dictionary for boys and girls - 1941, by the American Book Company, G. and C. Meririman Co. , Springfield, Mass., confuses youngsters thus~y : "Czech - a member of one of the two branches of the Slavic race in Czechoslo¥akia" . . . ''Slovak - one of t he people Hving in Slovakia, a province of Cuchoslovakia; also the language spoken by these people" . . . "Czechoslovakia - a republic in central Europe." 8. The Winston Universal Reference Library, 1942 by The John C. Winston Co., Philadelphia, Pa., gives both the hyphenated and the unhyphenated forms, as well as: "Czech - 1. a member of the most westerly 'brrunch of the Slavonic family, which includes Bohemians, Moravians and Slovaks; 2. their language : also called Czechish; 3. a citizen of Czechoslovakia" . . . "Slovak - one of the race of Sla<vs living dn Central Europe, closely a:kin to the Czechs of Bohemia ; 2. the la,nguage of these people." 9. The American College Dictfonary, 1953, by Random House, New Y:oirk, has "Slovak, Slovakia," but _gwes both "Czecho-Slovakia" and "Czechoslovakia." 10. Information Please Almanac, 1954, by Dan Golenpaul Associates, The Macmillan Company, New York, carried a brief Czech story on "Czechoslovakia" and men- 32 SLOVAKIA tioned Slovakia, excluding the laitter from its index, though it did include Serbia and Slaverua. 11. The World Almanac and Book of Facts, 1956, by the New Yoir,k World-Telegram and The Sun, gives a short version of "Czechoslovakia," in which it mentions "Slovakia," excluding it, however, from its index, though it does include Croatia, Serbia and Sloveni·a the component parts of Yugoslavia; "noted Czechs" are listed but not Slovaks. 12. The 1956 Catholic Almanac - Catholic Facts at Your Fingertiips, by St. Anthony's Guild, Paterson, N. J., gives us a listing of four Slovak Catholic benevolent societies and two Czech Catholic organizations, carries some six iitems on the Ohurch in "Czechoolovakia," 'but makes absolutely no distinction between Slovak,s and Czechs. 13. A Catholic Dictionary the Catholic Encyclopaedic Dictionary - 1949, edited by Donald Attwater, The Macmillan Company, New Yo:rk, tells, us about "The ChU'rch in Czechoslovakia": " T.his state now consists of Bohemia, Moravia an d Slovakia, w'hose inhabitants are Czechs and Slovaks, with minorities of Ger• m an and Hu ngarian origin, a bout 14 million in all; 80 percent are OatlhoUcs, but both Protestantism ·and secul arism are strong. After the s'tate was form ed in 1918, there was a nationalist schism among the Czechs. "Th ere .are two ecclesiastical provinces, Prague and Olomouc, with four suffragan oio ceses and five others immediately subject to the Holy See, and a Byzantine-rite dio cese of Ruthenians." Though Attwater does not tell us where the underscored "five others" are, we know that the reference is to the dioceses in Slovakia. 14. Example Sheets from Sections of Proposed N. C. W. C. News Service Style Book, Section X - Special, 1956: "Czechoslovakia - X. 29 - without a hyphen. Buit do not say Czech in a story or head when you mean Czechoslovak." When I received the a!bO'Ve, I wrote to Mr. Frank Hall, NCWC News Service Director, on May 24, 1956, telling him it was wrong to write Czecho-Slovakia without a hyphen, citing some of the .aJbove informaition to back my argument. 'Mr. Hall, rupparently knows ,that there ·a re Slova;ks and Czechs, that there is a Czech ilanguage and a Slovak SLOVAKIA 33 language, that the Slovaks are not Czechs, and vice~versa, but still insists on "Czechoslovakia" as a solid word. In his reply (June 8, 1956), Mr. Hall said among other things: " As for the u se of the hyphen: The Diplomatic List of the U. S. State Department, the Political Handbook of the World, the Congressional Directory, the Associated Press, the United Press, the I. N. S., the yearbook 'Information Please' write it Czechoslovakian . I don't know of any other standard guide that does it any other way." Mr. Hall like many others, obviously did not inquire how the "standard guides" he referred to came to write "Czechoslovakia" as a solid word. Taking the stand that "everybody is doing it" can hardly be accepted as justification. If it is right, according to standard guides and authoritative sources, to write Austria~Hungary, AngloAmerican, American~British, Anglo-,S axon, Sino-Japanese, Anglo-Norman, Anglo-iindian, Franco--American, Anglo_ Irish, Spanish-American, German-American, Indo~European, etc . - all with a hyiphen - then it certainly must also be right to write Czecho-Slovakia with a hyphen! To the Slovaks omitting the hyphen means the _denial of thei_r national existence and subordination and subservL ence to the Czechs. The Slova;ks insisted and still insist on the hyiphen whenever the joint political state, which they agre€d to establish under certain conditions, is referred to. They insist more on that than they do on the continued ex_ 1stence of the political monstrosity which Czecho-Slovakia, under the guidance of T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, turned out to be. T oday, Slorvaks everywhere cr1 out resolutely: NO MORE CZECHO-SLOVAKIA ! That, of course, would defiruitely solve the question of the hyphen. America helped to liberate the Slovaks from the Magyars and was in a great measure respon.sib.le for the creation of Czecho-Slovakia in 1918. America stands for the freedom and independence of all nations, whether large or small. How then can any responsible American insist that Slovaks must forever be dominated by the Czechs? The Chicago Tribune, May 8, 1934. (2) The Slavonic and East European Review (American Serie s, III, 4), Vol. XXII, No. 61, December 1944. (3) Ibidem. (1)  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Czecho-Slovakia or Czechoslovakia? Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 25-33 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hrobak, Philip Anthony, 1904-1964 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource September-December 1956 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/cb3d02877fc492ac399c428eb97fa522.pdf e6f1497d28c7ae6d8ec2f6bb05784f1a PDF Text Text 5 SLOVAKIA Slovak letters, as well as American Slovak history, were definitely enriched by Dr. Hrusovsky's book surveying the growth and ex;pansion of Slovak religious orders in the United States. This book incidentally develops a great deal of the cultural 'history of American citizens of Slovak descent. Besides these book length productions, Dr. Hruso:vsky has to his credit hundreds of articles and numeTous addresses delivered on various occasions. Reflecting on some of these merits of Dr. 'Hrusovsky, we find that our sentiments, too, correspond v\ith the ex.pression of one of the prominent American leaders in Slovak cultral life who said with deepest sincerity that we "will miss his wise guidance, his great capacity for wo,r k, and his lmfaltering hope of a better world on the morrow." Afl true Slovaks on both sides of the Iron Curtain bear with pain the loss of Dr. IHruso,vsky. Our one comfort and consolation stems from the belief that national leaders of Dr. Hrusovs:k y's moral stature and defenders of a nation's rights and li'berties share the prerogative of great soldiers who never die . Thus, indeed, will Dr. Hrusovsky continue to live, partaking of an immorality among us, his courage, his vision, his selflessness seTVing as an undying example for coming generations of Slo:vaks, inspiring them tq win fOT their country that freedom, that independent and recognized state for which Hrusovsky wo!"ked literally to his last breath . 1 • • • DR. FRANCIS HRUSOVSKY - THE MAN Constantine Culen Franc.is Hrufovsky was eminently an historian. He could have distinguished himself by a career at the University of Bratislava even under the tuteJage of the Czech professor Chaloupecky. The ,professor was aware that this yo'll'Ilg collegian's views were radical,l y oppooed to his own outlook, nevertheless entertained high esteem for him. It was something which Hirusovsky merited 'because of his consistent gravity, his critical acumen, and his broad knowledge. But �6 SLOVAKIA on completing his university training, Hruswsky decided on a different course of life. There happened to be a vaicancy for the head.mastership at the Catholic Slovalk high school or gymna:zium at Klastor pod Znievom and Hrusovsky chose to apply for the post. It was not considered an enviable position by reason of the fact that the institution was burdened with financiaJ difficulties amd very often the first of the month found the administration really straitened ~bout meeting the payroll. Moreover, the school faced an expansion prog~am which complicated financial matters to an even greater degree. Nevertheless, Hrusovsky did not decide on the assured se_ curity and prestige of a university chair in pr,e ference to this position which was less rewarding in material ivalues. He became the school's director and made of it the intellectual center which Bishop Stefan Moyses, its founder, had hoped it would once become. This particular gymnazium was the only institution which ,b ore upon its facade the inscription "SLOVIDNSKE GYMNAZl/lJ.M (,SI.JOV!AK GYiMiNAZIUM); all other similar schools were inscribed as "OZE}()HO-SLOiVA1K." It is not dear just how this detail escaped the notice of the civic authorities at the time, but the point is that Dr. HTusovsky was singularly proud of such a distinctive designation of his school. And it was, in reality, the only genuine SLOV A1K gymna·zium, not merely in name, but also in spirit and in purpose. It was my privilege to go there often. And each visit proved to me a more refreshing experience. Perhaps there had never yet been as demanding a headmaster as was Hrusovsky, but certainly there never yet was one who had been so universally loved and respected "Pan direk:to:r" -that was his title; it was a designation or an ruppellation by which we understood without question and immediately that the reference was to Dr. Hrusorvsky and to him alone. The greatest penalty meted out to an unhappy offender was to hear from pan direktor no word rubout the transgression. Once I happened to be in his school office with hin1 when a student approached with an explanation and apology. �SLOVAKIA 7 "Did I say anything to you?" said pan direktor to the offender in a tone of voice which betrayed no wiarmth. "Well, that's just it, pan direktor; thia t's the point. You said not a wo,r d," the student complained. Even here, in immigration, his former students often soug,h t out their pan direktor. The confidently referred to him for counsel and always ·p arted from him strengthened and imbued with resolution. Hrusorvsiky never recommended inconsiderate or rash and merely contentious conflict, he did encourage vigorous effort and endorsed even justified force that was deliberate and purposeful. Hrusorvsky was one of the most highly regarded members of the Parliament of the Slovak Republic (193'8--1945). We happened to, serive together ,o n various committees. I learned that he looked even upon current problems with the dis1p osition of a serious historian, and it was especially in our committee sessions that a comparison of the past with the present helped to resolve our difficulties and to ease our tasks. He was not given to frequent expression in Parliament but when he did speak, he delivered a speech that left a lasting impression. Although 'he was a,ble to, speak without prolonged ,p reparation, he always took pains to :p repare his par. liamentary addresses with care. Every sentence, every word was selected for a specific purpo,s e and a particula:r significance. These addresses are of such merit that one day they will be e!ID!bodied in handbooks of ;public speaking as classic creations. The thought-ieontent, as well as the delivery and all that was connected with these addresses, was thoroughly studied and weighed, tI believe that I derogate from no one's merits of fame when I judge thaJt Hrusovsky was one of. the best speakers of the Slovaik nation within the past century. Frequently HI'us01Vslky was also the speaker of the day in villages and towns celebrating this or that occasion. Very many people must recall these celebrations with a deep sense of appreciation of his talents. One of the interests of Dr. Hrusovsky's s,pooial .p redilec-, tion was the Slov,a,k Institute of Arts and -Sciences (1M atica �8 SLOVAKIA slovenska). As chairman of various science departments and as secretary of the history depa:rtment of the Slovak Institute of Arts and Sciences, he contributed a great deal to the organization of scientific pursuits and undertrukings in Slovakia. He was a real responsibility; he had accomplished much; but he still had a great deal of work .planned. Even the very last evening of his life he discussed several longstanding iprojects which he hoped to realize some future day that would grant a happy return to his native land. Recently a certain Slovak political leader who was en. gaiged in conversation with Dr. Hrusovsky remarked that at this ,p oint it was quite beyond him even to imagine a return to his former calling, a!bsor'bed as, he had become with national politics. Dr. Hrusovsky observed, "With me it is quite the contrary. What I can most r,e adily imagine and what would give me the greatest satisfaction right at this moment would be to return to the teaching field at the gymnazilliill." It was most natural and logical that on the death of Ka,rol Sidor, Hrusovsky should succeed to the presidency of the Slovak National Council AJbroad. Never at home, and much less in exile, did he aspire to p'U'blic office. 'In response to the insistence of his friends and colleagues, however, he finally yielded to, this extent that he agreed to undertake whatever responsibilities the membe'I'.s of the SNCA should decide to entrust to him. He conceived of this office as a service to the nation. Two days ,before his, death we were occupied in discussion until midnight. When he became engrossed in the subject of Slovakia, his eyes shone bdlliantly. He said that evening, and he repeated it with emphasis several times, that when our nation attains its freedom and independence, not one of us may presume .pretensions to a privileged position at home. Our only duty, here in a new land which affords us liberty and the opportunity to live unshackled by the terror which dominates aJl life at home, is to devote ourseilves tq work for our naJtion . This is one of the most important convictions which each one of us must g~asp. Anyone who would arrogate to himself special advantages or favors at home in re- �SLOVAKIA 9 turn for his labor in exile is not welcome in our midst. On the other hand, he continued, qualified aind deserving indi,v iduals will be fully appreciated at home in due time; they will be in demand, and there need be no apprehensions that any worthy indi1vidurul will receive less than his due. •I t behooves us all to re reasonable, non-extremist, and to do our utmost in beha[f of the Slovak cause under extraterritorial circumstances. This is the spirit in which Dr. Hrusorvsky dedicated himself to his nation throughout his whole life. This article would be incomplete were I to omit recollections from Rome in the years 1945-1947. Those were trying times. We lived in constant danger of ,b eing overtaken and apprehended and committed. to our foes. Terrific pressure was .b eing put on iltalian officialdom, but Italian autho. rities, sympathetic to our case because of ~arol Sidor, with., stood and resisted this .pressure successfully. Rome captured: Hlrusovsky's heart. Day after day he frequented the Vatican library and devcoted himself particular1y to the study of the olosest relationships between .t he V aitican and Sl01Vrukia. !His finished wo11k on this sUJbject has already been published. When it was not a jaunt to the library that he planned, we went out togethm-, tramping the streets of Rome, touring its boulevards and ma,rket ;plaices, and visiting its shrines and churches. Hrnsovsky ha,d so intimate a knowledge of ancient Roman villages and country sites that when he began to re.late what happened in this or that locality, or how a ,plaice had distinguished itself, his listener lost ali cootact with time and became wholly unaware that planes roared in the Slky, that trolleys jangled in the streets, that cars meed by. Lost in the spell of Hrusovsky's words, one relirved the glory of ancient days. Before one's eyes the Roman Emp:i!re caime. to life again. Hrusovsky had a rare genius for creating this kind of atmosphere: It was this type of historica1 ,p resentation that also held the key to his eminent success as a classroom lecturer. Just as in Rome he made Roman history live before our eyes, so did he regale his students in ,Slo'Va:kia with Slovak history. �SLOVAKIA Just as Jan Holly over a hundred years ago captivated and instructed the followers of Stur, so did Hrusovsky inspire and educate his high school students at the gymnazium. lt was in this manner, too, that he held audiences spellbound when he delivered occasional addresses at the various celebrations in Slovak villages and towns. ThaJt was his ,life; that was his life's work: to conjure an authentic image of the true greatness and the true glory of the distant past, t.o bridge the gay between the presBnt and the past, and then to forecast and build a more prosperous Slovak future. There is a very large number of Hrusovsky's addresses and articles in which he developed the subject of Slovak statehood. There have been many opponents to Slovaikia's aspirations to statehood, ,b ut not one of them has been able to foil or to refute the iron logic of Hrusovsky's aJI1guments in its favor. In the ,p ast, the works of the most popular Slovak writers were putblished in editions running to several hundred copies. Never yet, however, did any Slovak booik win such ready ·a nd such widespread populairity as did Hlru_ sovsky's "Slovenske Dejiny" (Slovak History). It was the first complete survey of our Slovruk historicaJ record. Pre-. pared as it was ,b y Dr. Hrnsovsky, the first Slovak historian of learning and of note, it presented to the Slovak nation a continuous reel of a:bsoirbing scenes from its past. We were all ag,reeaJbly surprised when edition upon edition of his work was exhausted so that by 1945 when Hrusovsky was leaving Slova:kia, over one hundred thousand copies of this 'book were in the hands of the Slovak people. 'Dhis volume of Hrusovsky's history found its way even into homes where formerly hardly another book haid been brought besides the prayer book and an infrequent almanac or annual. Hrusovsky's book was written in a style which had been so often recommended to us by Karol Sidor, who repeatedly reminded us to write clearly, simply, so that even unschooled ;parents in remote hamlets would haive no difficulty in following and understanding what we wrote. That was its styllistic merit. In content, this history is �SLOVAKIA ll prepared. with so scholarl:y an approach - with restraint, with fairmindedness, with an oibjective outlook - that it ser.ves as a substantial refreshment for both the educated classes and for the less privileged. With this volume, which the new regime proscribed in 194'5, Hrusavsky turned in Slovak national life so deep and so broad a furrow that no foreign usurpers can sue. ceed. in leveling it eiven in the course of years of effort. Even today reports from home reveal that this is the book which is still the most widely read Slovak work and the most frequently sought book in the black ma.T!kets where, alas, an enonnous number of Slovaik writings are listed. In the early part of 1945 it was rll!ffiOTed that Communist par tisans caiptured and executed Hrusovsky. Thank God that this was a false rumor. The partisans were defeated; they retreated. and Hlrl.l'sovsky returned home. His first visit took him to Bresto vany to see 'his mother. It is understanda]ble that she embraced him warmly and held him close to her heart. Shortly after the e,raltation of their meeting, however., she ·b ravely reminded. him: "For a great cause, it is a worthy thing eiven to die, my son -- and Slovak statehood is a great cause." Dr. Hrus ovsky often repeated these w<>irds, commenting: "Our peasant mothers embody much of the heroism of ancient Rome's noble matrons." And now the noble heart of •F rancis Hrusovsky has stilled its ibeating. He departed., mourned by a company of outstanding quinquagenarians who had worked with him toward a common goal in ,puiblic life: Sidor, Cernak, Janci. All were oa.lled by the Angel of Death at an age when a public servant usually attains the peak and the full de. velopment of his strength and activity. National leaders though they were, their hearts, so devoted to theiT nation, could not withstand the strain orf the hour; they were overworked and exhausted. The burden of the yoke overtaxed their physical limitations, and their spark of life was crushed by it. � 5 SLOVAKIA Slovak letters, as well as American Slovak history, were definitely enriched by Dr. Hrusovsky's book surveying the growth and ex;pansion of Slovak religious orders in the United States. This book incidentally develops a great deal of the cultural 'history of American citizens of Slovak descent. Besides these book length productions, Dr. Hruso:vsky has to his credit hundreds of articles and numeTous addresses delivered on various occasions. Reflecting on some of these merits of Dr. 'Hrusovsky, we find that our sentiments, too, correspond v\ith the ex.pression of one of the prominent American leaders in Slovak cultral life who said with deepest sincerity that we "will miss his wise guidance, his great capacity for wo,r k, and his lmfaltering hope of a better world on the morrow." Afl true Slovaks on both sides of the Iron Curtain bear with pain the loss of Dr. IHruso,vsky. Our one comfort and consolation stems from the belief that national leaders of Dr. Hrusovs:k y's moral stature and defenders of a nation's rights and li'berties share the prerogative of great soldiers who never die . Thus, indeed, will Dr. Hrusovsky continue to live, partaking of an immorality among us, his courage, his vision, his selflessness seTVing as an undying example for coming generations of Slo:vaks, inspiring them tq win fOT their country that freedom, that independent and recognized state for which Hrusovsky wo!"ked literally to his last breath . 1 • • • DR. FRANCIS HRUSOVSKY - THE MAN Constantine Culen Franc.is Hrufovsky was eminently an historian. He could have distinguished himself by a career at the University of Bratislava even under the tuteJage of the Czech professor Chaloupecky. The ,professor was aware that this yo'll'Ilg collegian's views were radical,l y oppooed to his own outlook, nevertheless entertained high esteem for him. It was something which Hirusovsky merited 'because of his consistent gravity, his critical acumen, and his broad knowledge. But �6 SLOVAKIA on completing his university training, Hruswsky decided on a different course of life. There happened to be a vaicancy for the head.mastership at the Catholic Slovalk high school or gymna:zium at Klastor pod Znievom and Hrusovsky chose to apply for the post. It was not considered an enviable position by reason of the fact that the institution was burdened with financiaJ difficulties amd very often the first of the month found the administration really straitened ~bout meeting the payroll. Moreover, the school faced an expansion prog~am which complicated financial matters to an even greater degree. Nevertheless, Hrusovsky did not decide on the assured se_ curity and prestige of a university chair in pr,e ference to this position which was less rewarding in material ivalues. He became the school's director and made of it the intellectual center which Bishop Stefan Moyses, its founder, had hoped it would once become. This particular gymnazium was the only institution which ,b ore upon its facade the inscription "SLOVIDNSKE GYMNAZl/lJ.M (,SI.JOV!AK GYiMiNAZIUM); all other similar schools were inscribed as "OZE}()HO-SLOiVA1K." It is not dear just how this detail escaped the notice of the civic authorities at the time, but the point is that Dr. HTusovsky was singularly proud of such a distinctive designation of his school. And it was, in reality, the only genuine SLOV A1K gymna·zium, not merely in name, but also in spirit and in purpose. It was my privilege to go there often. And each visit proved to me a more refreshing experience. Perhaps there had never yet been as demanding a headmaster as was Hrusovsky, but certainly there never yet was one who had been so universally loved and respected "Pan direk:to:r" -that was his title; it was a designation or an ruppellation by which we understood without question and immediately that the reference was to Dr. Hrusorvsky and to him alone. The greatest penalty meted out to an unhappy offender was to hear from pan direktor no word rubout the transgression. Once I happened to be in his school office with hin1 when a student approached with an explanation and apology. �SLOVAKIA 7 "Did I say anything to you?" said pan direktor to the offender in a tone of voice which betrayed no wiarmth. "Well, that's just it, pan direktor; thia t's the point. You said not a wo,r d," the student complained. Even here, in immigration, his former students often soug,h t out their pan direktor. The confidently referred to him for counsel and always ·p arted from him strengthened and imbued with resolution. Hrusorvsiky never recommended inconsiderate or rash and merely contentious conflict, he did encourage vigorous effort and endorsed even justified force that was deliberate and purposeful. Hrusorvsky was one of the most highly regarded members of the Parliament of the Slovak Republic (193'8--1945). We happened to, serive together ,o n various committees. I learned that he looked even upon current problems with the dis1p osition of a serious historian, and it was especially in our committee sessions that a comparison of the past with the present helped to resolve our difficulties and to ease our tasks. He was not given to frequent expression in Parliament but when he did speak, he delivered a speech that left a lasting impression. Although 'he was a,ble to, speak without prolonged ,p reparation, he always took pains to :p repare his par. liamentary addresses with care. Every sentence, every word was selected for a specific purpo,s e and a particula:r significance. These addresses are of such merit that one day they will be e!ID!bodied in handbooks of ;public speaking as classic creations. The thought-ieontent, as well as the delivery and all that was connected with these addresses, was thoroughly studied and weighed, tI believe that I derogate from no one's merits of fame when I judge thaJt Hrusovsky was one of. the best speakers of the Slovaik nation within the past century. Frequently HI'us01Vslky was also the speaker of the day in villages and towns celebrating this or that occasion. Very many people must recall these celebrations with a deep sense of appreciation of his talents. One of the interests of Dr. Hrusovsky's s,pooial .p redilec-, tion was the Slov,a,k Institute of Arts and -Sciences (1M atica �8 SLOVAKIA slovenska). As chairman of various science departments and as secretary of the history depa:rtment of the Slovak Institute of Arts and Sciences, he contributed a great deal to the organization of scientific pursuits and undertrukings in Slovakia. He was a real responsibility; he had accomplished much; but he still had a great deal of work .planned. Even the very last evening of his life he discussed several longstanding iprojects which he hoped to realize some future day that would grant a happy return to his native land. Recently a certain Slovak political leader who was en. gaiged in conversation with Dr. Hrusovsky remarked that at this ,p oint it was quite beyond him even to imagine a return to his former calling, a!bsor'bed as, he had become with national politics. Dr. Hrusovsky observed, "With me it is quite the contrary. What I can most r,e adily imagine and what would give me the greatest satisfaction right at this moment would be to return to the teaching field at the gymnazilliill." It was most natural and logical that on the death of Ka,rol Sidor, Hrusovsky should succeed to the presidency of the Slovak National Council AJbroad. Never at home, and much less in exile, did he aspire to p'U'blic office. 'In response to the insistence of his friends and colleagues, however, he finally yielded to, this extent that he agreed to undertake whatever responsibilities the membe'I'.s of the SNCA should decide to entrust to him. He conceived of this office as a service to the nation. Two days ,before his, death we were occupied in discussion until midnight. When he became engrossed in the subject of Slovakia, his eyes shone bdlliantly. He said that evening, and he repeated it with emphasis several times, that when our nation attains its freedom and independence, not one of us may presume .pretensions to a privileged position at home. Our only duty, here in a new land which affords us liberty and the opportunity to live unshackled by the terror which dominates aJl life at home, is to devote ourseilves tq work for our naJtion . This is one of the most important convictions which each one of us must g~asp. Anyone who would arrogate to himself special advantages or favors at home in re- �SLOVAKIA 9 turn for his labor in exile is not welcome in our midst. On the other hand, he continued, qualified aind deserving indi,v iduals will be fully appreciated at home in due time; they will be in demand, and there need be no apprehensions that any worthy indi1vidurul will receive less than his due. •I t behooves us all to re reasonable, non-extremist, and to do our utmost in beha[f of the Slovak cause under extraterritorial circumstances. This is the spirit in which Dr. Hrusorvsky dedicated himself to his nation throughout his whole life. This article would be incomplete were I to omit recollections from Rome in the years 1945-1947. Those were trying times. We lived in constant danger of ,b eing overtaken and apprehended and committed. to our foes. Terrific pressure was .b eing put on iltalian officialdom, but Italian autho. rities, sympathetic to our case because of ~arol Sidor, with., stood and resisted this .pressure successfully. Rome captured: Hlrusovsky's heart. Day after day he frequented the Vatican library and devcoted himself particular1y to the study of the olosest relationships between .t he V aitican and Sl01Vrukia. !His finished wo11k on this sUJbject has already been published. When it was not a jaunt to the library that he planned, we went out togethm-, tramping the streets of Rome, touring its boulevards and ma,rket ;plaices, and visiting its shrines and churches. Hrnsovsky ha,d so intimate a knowledge of ancient Roman villages and country sites that when he began to re.late what happened in this or that locality, or how a ,plaice had distinguished itself, his listener lost ali cootact with time and became wholly unaware that planes roared in the Slky, that trolleys jangled in the streets, that cars meed by. Lost in the spell of Hrusovsky's words, one relirved the glory of ancient days. Before one's eyes the Roman Emp:i!re caime. to life again. Hrusovsky had a rare genius for creating this kind of atmosphere: It was this type of historica1 ,p resentation that also held the key to his eminent success as a classroom lecturer. Just as in Rome he made Roman history live before our eyes, so did he regale his students in ,Slo'Va:kia with Slovak history. �SLOVAKIA Just as Jan Holly over a hundred years ago captivated and instructed the followers of Stur, so did Hrusovsky inspire and educate his high school students at the gymnazium. lt was in this manner, too, that he held audiences spellbound when he delivered occasional addresses at the various celebrations in Slovak villages and towns. ThaJt was his ,life; that was his life's work: to conjure an authentic image of the true greatness and the true glory of the distant past, t.o bridge the gay between the presBnt and the past, and then to forecast and build a more prosperous Slovak future. There is a very large number of Hrusovsky's addresses and articles in which he developed the subject of Slovak statehood. There have been many opponents to Slovaikia's aspirations to statehood, ,b ut not one of them has been able to foil or to refute the iron logic of Hrusovsky's aJI1guments in its favor. In the ,p ast, the works of the most popular Slovak writers were putblished in editions running to several hundred copies. Never yet, however, did any Slovak booik win such ready ·a nd such widespread populairity as did Hlru_ sovsky's "Slovenske Dejiny" (Slovak History). It was the first complete survey of our Slovruk historicaJ record. Pre-. pared as it was ,b y Dr. Hrnsovsky, the first Slovak historian of learning and of note, it presented to the Slovak nation a continuous reel of a:bsoirbing scenes from its past. We were all ag,reeaJbly surprised when edition upon edition of his work was exhausted so that by 1945 when Hrusovsky was leaving Slova:kia, over one hundred thousand copies of this 'book were in the hands of the Slovak people. 'Dhis volume of Hrusovsky's history found its way even into homes where formerly hardly another book haid been brought besides the prayer book and an infrequent almanac or annual. Hrusovsky's book was written in a style which had been so often recommended to us by Karol Sidor, who repeatedly reminded us to write clearly, simply, so that even unschooled ;parents in remote hamlets would haive no difficulty in following and understanding what we wrote. That was its styllistic merit. In content, this history is �SLOVAKIA ll prepared. with so scholarl:y an approach - with restraint, with fairmindedness, with an oibjective outlook - that it ser.ves as a substantial refreshment for both the educated classes and for the less privileged. With this volume, which the new regime proscribed in 194'5, Hrusavsky turned in Slovak national life so deep and so broad a furrow that no foreign usurpers can sue. ceed. in leveling it eiven in the course of years of effort. Even today reports from home reveal that this is the book which is still the most widely read Slovak work and the most frequently sought book in the black ma.T!kets where, alas, an enonnous number of Slovaik writings are listed. In the early part of 1945 it was rll!ffiOTed that Communist par tisans caiptured and executed Hrusovsky. Thank God that this was a false rumor. The partisans were defeated; they retreated. and Hlrl.l'sovsky returned home. His first visit took him to Bresto vany to see 'his mother. It is understanda]ble that she embraced him warmly and held him close to her heart. Shortly after the e,raltation of their meeting, however., she ·b ravely reminded. him: "For a great cause, it is a worthy thing eiven to die, my son -- and Slovak statehood is a great cause." Dr. Hrus ovsky often repeated these w<>irds, commenting: "Our peasant mothers embody much of the heroism of ancient Rome's noble matrons." And now the noble heart of •F rancis Hrusovsky has stilled its ibeating. He departed., mourned by a company of outstanding quinquagenarians who had worked with him toward a common goal in ,puiblic life: Sidor, Cernak, Janci. All were oa.lled by the Angel of Death at an age when a public servant usually attains the peak and the full de. velopment of his strength and activity. National leaders though they were, their hearts, so devoted to theiT nation, could not withstand the strain orf the hour; they were overworked and exhausted. The burden of the yoke overtaxed their physical limitations, and their spark of life was crushed by it. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 5 SLOVAKIA Slovak letters, as well as American Slovak history, were definitely enriched by Dr. Hrusovsky's book surveying the growth and ex;pansion of Slovak religious orders in the United States. This book incidentally develops a great deal of the cultural 'history of American citizens of Slovak descent. Besides these book length productions, Dr. Hruso:vsky has to his credit hundreds of articles and numeTous addresses delivered on various occasions. Reflecting on some of these merits of Dr. 'Hrusovsky, we find that our sentiments, too, correspond v\ith the ex.pression of one of the prominent American leaders in Slovak cultral life who said with deepest sincerity that we "will miss his wise guidance, his great capacity for wo,r k, and his lmfaltering hope of a better world on the morrow." Afl true Slovaks on both sides of the Iron Curtain bear with pain the loss of Dr. IHruso,vsky. Our one comfort and consolation stems from the belief that national leaders of Dr. Hrusovs:k y's moral stature and defenders of a nation's rights and li'berties share the prerogative of great soldiers who never die . Thus, indeed, will Dr. Hrusovsky continue to live, partaking of an immorality among us, his courage, his vision, his selflessness seTVing as an undying example for coming generations of Slo:vaks, inspiring them tq win fOT their country that freedom, that independent and recognized state for which Hrusovsky wo!"ked literally to his last breath . 1 • • • DR. FRANCIS HRUSOVSKY - THE MAN Constantine Culen Franc.is Hrufovsky was eminently an historian. He could have distinguished himself by a career at the University of Bratislava even under the tuteJage of the Czech professor Chaloupecky. The ,professor was aware that this yo'll'Ilg collegian's views were radical,l y oppooed to his own outlook, nevertheless entertained high esteem for him. It was something which Hirusovsky merited 'because of his consistent gravity, his critical acumen, and his broad knowledge. But 6 SLOVAKIA on completing his university training, Hruswsky decided on a different course of life. There happened to be a vaicancy for the head.mastership at the Catholic Slovalk high school or gymna:zium at Klastor pod Znievom and Hrusovsky chose to apply for the post. It was not considered an enviable position by reason of the fact that the institution was burdened with financiaJ difficulties amd very often the first of the month found the administration really straitened ~bout meeting the payroll. Moreover, the school faced an expansion prog~am which complicated financial matters to an even greater degree. Nevertheless, Hrusovsky did not decide on the assured se_ curity and prestige of a university chair in pr,e ference to this position which was less rewarding in material ivalues. He became the school's director and made of it the intellectual center which Bishop Stefan Moyses, its founder, had hoped it would once become. This particular gymnazium was the only institution which ,b ore upon its facade the inscription "SLOVIDNSKE GYMNAZl/lJ.M (,SI.JOV!AK GYiMiNAZIUM); all other similar schools were inscribed as "OZE}()HO-SLOiVA1K." It is not dear just how this detail escaped the notice of the civic authorities at the time, but the point is that Dr. HTusovsky was singularly proud of such a distinctive designation of his school. And it was, in reality, the only genuine SLOV A1K gymna·zium, not merely in name, but also in spirit and in purpose. It was my privilege to go there often. And each visit proved to me a more refreshing experience. Perhaps there had never yet been as demanding a headmaster as was Hrusovsky, but certainly there never yet was one who had been so universally loved and respected "Pan direk:to:r" -that was his title; it was a designation or an ruppellation by which we understood without question and immediately that the reference was to Dr. Hrusorvsky and to him alone. The greatest penalty meted out to an unhappy offender was to hear from pan direktor no word rubout the transgression. Once I happened to be in his school office with hin1 when a student approached with an explanation and apology. SLOVAKIA 7 "Did I say anything to you?" said pan direktor to the offender in a tone of voice which betrayed no wiarmth. "Well, that's just it, pan direktor; thia t's the point. You said not a wo,r d," the student complained. Even here, in immigration, his former students often soug,h t out their pan direktor. The confidently referred to him for counsel and always ·p arted from him strengthened and imbued with resolution. Hrusorvsiky never recommended inconsiderate or rash and merely contentious conflict, he did encourage vigorous effort and endorsed even justified force that was deliberate and purposeful. Hrusorvsky was one of the most highly regarded members of the Parliament of the Slovak Republic (193'8--1945). We happened to, serive together ,o n various committees. I learned that he looked even upon current problems with the dis1p osition of a serious historian, and it was especially in our committee sessions that a comparison of the past with the present helped to resolve our difficulties and to ease our tasks. He was not given to frequent expression in Parliament but when he did speak, he delivered a speech that left a lasting impression. Although 'he was a,ble to, speak without prolonged ,p reparation, he always took pains to :p repare his par. liamentary addresses with care. Every sentence, every word was selected for a specific purpo,s e and a particula:r significance. These addresses are of such merit that one day they will be e!ID!bodied in handbooks of ;public speaking as classic creations. The thought-ieontent, as well as the delivery and all that was connected with these addresses, was thoroughly studied and weighed, tI believe that I derogate from no one's merits of fame when I judge thaJt Hrusovsky was one of. the best speakers of the Slovaik nation within the past century. Frequently HI'us01Vslky was also the speaker of the day in villages and towns celebrating this or that occasion. Very many people must recall these celebrations with a deep sense of appreciation of his talents. One of the interests of Dr. Hrusovsky's s,pooial .p redilec-, tion was the Slov,a,k Institute of Arts and -Sciences (1M atica 8 SLOVAKIA slovenska). As chairman of various science departments and as secretary of the history depa:rtment of the Slovak Institute of Arts and Sciences, he contributed a great deal to the organization of scientific pursuits and undertrukings in Slovakia. He was a real responsibility; he had accomplished much; but he still had a great deal of work .planned. Even the very last evening of his life he discussed several longstanding iprojects which he hoped to realize some future day that would grant a happy return to his native land. Recently a certain Slovak political leader who was en. gaiged in conversation with Dr. Hrusovsky remarked that at this ,p oint it was quite beyond him even to imagine a return to his former calling, a!bsor'bed as, he had become with national politics. Dr. Hrusovsky observed, "With me it is quite the contrary. What I can most r,e adily imagine and what would give me the greatest satisfaction right at this moment would be to return to the teaching field at the gymnazilliill." It was most natural and logical that on the death of Ka,rol Sidor, Hrusovsky should succeed to the presidency of the Slovak National Council AJbroad. Never at home, and much less in exile, did he aspire to p'U'blic office. 'In response to the insistence of his friends and colleagues, however, he finally yielded to, this extent that he agreed to undertake whatever responsibilities the membe'I'.s of the SNCA should decide to entrust to him. He conceived of this office as a service to the nation. Two days ,before his, death we were occupied in discussion until midnight. When he became engrossed in the subject of Slovakia, his eyes shone bdlliantly. He said that evening, and he repeated it with emphasis several times, that when our nation attains its freedom and independence, not one of us may presume .pretensions to a privileged position at home. Our only duty, here in a new land which affords us liberty and the opportunity to live unshackled by the terror which dominates aJl life at home, is to devote ourseilves tq work for our naJtion . This is one of the most important convictions which each one of us must g~asp. Anyone who would arrogate to himself special advantages or favors at home in re- SLOVAKIA 9 turn for his labor in exile is not welcome in our midst. On the other hand, he continued, qualified aind deserving indi,v iduals will be fully appreciated at home in due time; they will be in demand, and there need be no apprehensions that any worthy indi1vidurul will receive less than his due. •I t behooves us all to re reasonable, non-extremist, and to do our utmost in beha[f of the Slovak cause under extraterritorial circumstances. This is the spirit in which Dr. Hrusorvsky dedicated himself to his nation throughout his whole life. This article would be incomplete were I to omit recollections from Rome in the years 1945-1947. Those were trying times. We lived in constant danger of ,b eing overtaken and apprehended and committed. to our foes. Terrific pressure was .b eing put on iltalian officialdom, but Italian autho. rities, sympathetic to our case because of ~arol Sidor, with., stood and resisted this .pressure successfully. Rome captured: Hlrusovsky's heart. Day after day he frequented the Vatican library and devcoted himself particular1y to the study of the olosest relationships between .t he V aitican and Sl01Vrukia. !His finished wo11k on this sUJbject has already been published. When it was not a jaunt to the library that he planned, we went out togethm-, tramping the streets of Rome, touring its boulevards and ma,rket ;plaices, and visiting its shrines and churches. Hrnsovsky ha,d so intimate a knowledge of ancient Roman villages and country sites that when he began to re.late what happened in this or that locality, or how a ,plaice had distinguished itself, his listener lost ali cootact with time and became wholly unaware that planes roared in the Slky, that trolleys jangled in the streets, that cars meed by. Lost in the spell of Hrusovsky's words, one relirved the glory of ancient days. Before one's eyes the Roman Emp:i!re caime. to life again. Hrusovsky had a rare genius for creating this kind of atmosphere: It was this type of historica1 ,p resentation that also held the key to his eminent success as a classroom lecturer. Just as in Rome he made Roman history live before our eyes, so did he regale his students in ,Slo'Va:kia with Slovak history. SLOVAKIA Just as Jan Holly over a hundred years ago captivated and instructed the followers of Stur, so did Hrusovsky inspire and educate his high school students at the gymnazium. lt was in this manner, too, that he held audiences spellbound when he delivered occasional addresses at the various celebrations in Slovak villages and towns. ThaJt was his ,life; that was his life's work: to conjure an authentic image of the true greatness and the true glory of the distant past, t.o bridge the gay between the presBnt and the past, and then to forecast and build a more prosperous Slovak future. There is a very large number of Hrusovsky's addresses and articles in which he developed the subject of Slovak statehood. There have been many opponents to Slovaikia's aspirations to statehood, ,b ut not one of them has been able to foil or to refute the iron logic of Hrusovsky's aJI1guments in its favor. In the ,p ast, the works of the most popular Slovak writers were putblished in editions running to several hundred copies. Never yet, however, did any Slovak booik win such ready ·a nd such widespread populairity as did Hlru_ sovsky's "Slovenske Dejiny" (Slovak History). It was the first complete survey of our Slovruk historicaJ record. Pre-. pared as it was ,b y Dr. Hrnsovsky, the first Slovak historian of learning and of note, it presented to the Slovak nation a continuous reel of a:bsoirbing scenes from its past. We were all ag,reeaJbly surprised when edition upon edition of his work was exhausted so that by 1945 when Hrusovsky was leaving Slova:kia, over one hundred thousand copies of this 'book were in the hands of the Slovak people. 'Dhis volume of Hrusovsky's history found its way even into homes where formerly hardly another book haid been brought besides the prayer book and an infrequent almanac or annual. Hrusovsky's book was written in a style which had been so often recommended to us by Karol Sidor, who repeatedly reminded us to write clearly, simply, so that even unschooled ;parents in remote hamlets would haive no difficulty in following and understanding what we wrote. That was its styllistic merit. In content, this history is SLOVAKIA ll prepared. with so scholarl:y an approach - with restraint, with fairmindedness, with an oibjective outlook - that it ser.ves as a substantial refreshment for both the educated classes and for the less privileged. With this volume, which the new regime proscribed in 194'5, Hrusavsky turned in Slovak national life so deep and so broad a furrow that no foreign usurpers can sue. ceed. in leveling it eiven in the course of years of effort. Even today reports from home reveal that this is the book which is still the most widely read Slovak work and the most frequently sought book in the black ma.T!kets where, alas, an enonnous number of Slovaik writings are listed. In the early part of 1945 it was rll!ffiOTed that Communist par tisans caiptured and executed Hrusovsky. Thank God that this was a false rumor. The partisans were defeated; they retreated. and Hlrl.l'sovsky returned home. His first visit took him to Bresto vany to see 'his mother. It is understanda]ble that she embraced him warmly and held him close to her heart. Shortly after the e,raltation of their meeting, however., she ·b ravely reminded. him: "For a great cause, it is a worthy thing eiven to die, my son -- and Slovak statehood is a great cause." Dr. Hrus ovsky often repeated these w<>irds, commenting: "Our peasant mothers embody much of the heroism of ancient Rome's noble matrons." And now the noble heart of •F rancis Hrusovsky has stilled its ibeating. He departed., mourned by a company of outstanding quinquagenarians who had worked with him toward a common goal in ,puiblic life: Sidor, Cernak, Janci. All were oa.lled by the Angel of Death at an age when a public servant usually attains the peak and the full de. velopment of his strength and activity. National leaders though they were, their hearts, so devoted to theiT nation, could not withstand the strain orf the hour; they were overworked and exhausted. The burden of the yoke overtaxed their physical limitations, and their spark of life was crushed by it.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Dr. Francis Hrušovský - The Man Description An account of the resource Constantine Čulen Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 5-11 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Čulen, Konštantín, 1904-1964 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource September-December 1956 SNK https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/864a2938c5418c427330e8baa3ace748.pdf 409a5a98741444fa357d39c956137f93 PDF Text Text 12 SLOVAKIA DR. HRUSOVSKY'S LAST COLUMN (,P repared and sent to press by Dr. Hrusovsky the day before he died; it appeared in the Cleveland weekly SLOVAK NEWS dated the day of his funeral, September 13.) A number of our Slovak compatriot s recently under~ took a trip from America to 'Slova,kia. They had waited a long time for an opportunity to visit with their parents who had often written their sons and daughters in America that they yearned for the comfort of at least one more visit together. Naturally, once they undertook the long voyage, the visitors hoped also to meet their other relatives and friends and to extend their travels to other parts of S1ovakia. Travel agencies dispatched all that was necessary and our Slovak friends set out from America within a few weeks or a few months. They left with the fond hope that they would spend at least a short stay beneath their family roof, that beloved home they had to leave a long time ago, and they looked forward to being in· the circle of their dearest ones who expected them with open arms. lncidentally too, they were anxious to see for themselves in just what kind of circumstan ces their kin now live in Slovakia. ~he Czecho-Slovaik Communis t ,b oards which expedited these trips of our Slovak countryme n from the United States to Slovakia certainly did not do, it in order to affocd American Slovaks an opportunit y to visit with their closest relatives. They did it ·b ecause they covet American dollars which are very welcome even in Communist ic countries and they hoped to per.suade visitors from America that the Slovak peop1e feel satisfied and happy under the current Red regime. A Slovak lady fr,O!Ill Cleveland made one of these trips to Slorva!kia. On arriving in Prague, she wrote a letter to her husband in America, describing how the American Slovruk visitors were welcomed at the station with a .playing band and with flowers. The elated husband ma;de a full report to the editorial office of the .Communis tic paper �SLOVAKIA 13 "l'.,udove Noviny" of Chicago, which in turn relayed to its readers the message that the Communists extend to Slo. vak visitoo-s from America a signal welcome with music and bouquets. The entire affair merely hides a ruse of the crafty Communists, an artifice which might mislead superficially-minded persons w'ho return to their enslaved homeland. The implication is that the casual visitor to America is not pomipousily welcomed; he is not showered with flowers; he is not greeted with melody and song. But he comes into a free country; it is his privilege to move about at will anywhere firom New York to San Francisco, to con. verse with whomever he wishes. He is at full liberty to fo:mn his own convictions about the life of free citirens living in a democracy, and he bases his conclusions and opinions on personal contacts, on firsthand impressions, and on unrestricted study. The Communists are iprepared to delude visitors from the first moment of their arrival at a railroad, station or airport. They pay them a stirring march and send a coached committee of children to present flowers. They are meticulously solicitous about their guests; they take pains to point out whaitever featurns will redound to their advantage or credit and they proceed along a studied plan to create a favora1ble impression and to lead their visitors to conclude that the American press is circulating untrue reports about Communist-controlled countries . The Communists have made punctilious arrangements for the visits of our countrymen from America and their schedules orf entertainment are nothing but a studied scheme of propaganda. One who is not sufficiently shrewd and discerning, who has not the faculty to see things with his own eyes as they really are and to formulate his own judgments with a nicety of discretion becomes the gulhble victim of this Communistic propaganda program and accepts without question all this artificial ~litter. But there are and have been visitOTs to Slovrukia who have no need of anyone's reception with floral tokens and music, who have no disposition to learn what the Com- �14 SLOVAKIA munists themselves wish to tell them. Accustomed to life in a free and democratic land, they look for this liiberty and democracy in Slovakia. They draw comparisons between the life of a laborer in America and the lot of a worker in Slovakia. They hear what the Slo,va,k pea;sants ha:ve to tell them, the sad e~periences of men who have been despoiled of their property. They see for themselVFis how jaded Slovak women have become. They cannot fail to observe that the people are scantily clothed. They learn that it is extremely hard to ma;ke a living on the meager earnings that are realized, and at every step their convictions are confirmed that under Communistic domination there is no contentment, no prosperity, no paradise, none of those advantages and blessings which Communistic propa,ganda repeatedly and volubly advertises. If guests from America are given the occasion to speak with their relatives in ,priivate, removed from the hearing of witnesses or spies, they are informed not only of the abject servitude imposed upon Slovakia, not only of her resistance to Communism, but also of the vital hope which sustains the Slovaiks in the ho,p e that liberty and independence will yet be granted to the country. Who has eyes to _see will not be blinded by flowers. Who has ears to hear will not be deafened by CO!mIDunistic music. And he who has a rational mind for thinking will not become confused by Communist propaganda. Many SlO'V'aks who retU1I1I1 from Slovakia bring us reports which only cor.firm the fact that today S1ovakia enjoys neither freedom nor democracy, because under Red rule only terror and misery and iviolence prevail. The Slova!k people never accepted Communism; they will never become reconciled with it, and they only await the opportunity to throw off the despised yoke. And when they throw off this yoke, they will likewise throw off Czech doonination, and Slovakia will again be an independent republic. 1 • • 'Il.HE SLOVAKS by Peter P. Yurchak, should be in every pUiblic library, in every college ·a nd university, in the home of every American of Slovak descent. Get your copy NOW. Paper bound copy - $2.00; in cloth $3.00. � 12 SLOVAKIA DR. HRUSOVSKY'S LAST COLUMN (,P repared and sent to press by Dr. Hrusovsky the day before he died; it appeared in the Cleveland weekly SLOVAK NEWS dated the day of his funeral, September 13.) A number of our Slovak compatriot s recently under~ took a trip from America to 'Slova,kia. They had waited a long time for an opportunity to visit with their parents who had often written their sons and daughters in America that they yearned for the comfort of at least one more visit together. Naturally, once they undertook the long voyage, the visitors hoped also to meet their other relatives and friends and to extend their travels to other parts of S1ovakia. Travel agencies dispatched all that was necessary and our Slovak friends set out from America within a few weeks or a few months. They left with the fond hope that they would spend at least a short stay beneath their family roof, that beloved home they had to leave a long time ago, and they looked forward to being in· the circle of their dearest ones who expected them with open arms. lncidentally too, they were anxious to see for themselves in just what kind of circumstan ces their kin now live in Slovakia. ~he Czecho-Slovaik Communis t ,b oards which expedited these trips of our Slovak countryme n from the United States to Slovakia certainly did not do, it in order to affocd American Slovaks an opportunit y to visit with their closest relatives. They did it ·b ecause they covet American dollars which are very welcome even in Communist ic countries and they hoped to per.suade visitors from America that the Slovak peop1e feel satisfied and happy under the current Red regime. A Slovak lady fr,O!Ill Cleveland made one of these trips to Slorva!kia. On arriving in Prague, she wrote a letter to her husband in America, describing how the American Slovruk visitors were welcomed at the station with a .playing band and with flowers. The elated husband ma;de a full report to the editorial office of the .Communis tic paper �SLOVAKIA 13 "l'.,udove Noviny" of Chicago, which in turn relayed to its readers the message that the Communists extend to Slo. vak visitoo-s from America a signal welcome with music and bouquets. The entire affair merely hides a ruse of the crafty Communists, an artifice which might mislead superficially-minded persons w'ho return to their enslaved homeland. The implication is that the casual visitor to America is not pomipousily welcomed; he is not showered with flowers; he is not greeted with melody and song. But he comes into a free country; it is his privilege to move about at will anywhere firom New York to San Francisco, to con. verse with whomever he wishes. He is at full liberty to fo:mn his own convictions about the life of free citirens living in a democracy, and he bases his conclusions and opinions on personal contacts, on firsthand impressions, and on unrestricted study. The Communists are iprepared to delude visitors from the first moment of their arrival at a railroad, station or airport. They pay them a stirring march and send a coached committee of children to present flowers. They are meticulously solicitous about their guests; they take pains to point out whaitever featurns will redound to their advantage or credit and they proceed along a studied plan to create a favora1ble impression and to lead their visitors to conclude that the American press is circulating untrue reports about Communist-controlled countries . The Communists have made punctilious arrangements for the visits of our countrymen from America and their schedules orf entertainment are nothing but a studied scheme of propaganda. One who is not sufficiently shrewd and discerning, who has not the faculty to see things with his own eyes as they really are and to formulate his own judgments with a nicety of discretion becomes the gulhble victim of this Communistic propaganda program and accepts without question all this artificial ~litter. But there are and have been visitOTs to Slovrukia who have no need of anyone's reception with floral tokens and music, who have no disposition to learn what the Com- �14 SLOVAKIA munists themselves wish to tell them. Accustomed to life in a free and democratic land, they look for this liiberty and democracy in Slovakia. They draw comparisons between the life of a laborer in America and the lot of a worker in Slovakia. They hear what the Slo,va,k pea;sants ha:ve to tell them, the sad e~periences of men who have been despoiled of their property. They see for themselVFis how jaded Slovak women have become. They cannot fail to observe that the people are scantily clothed. They learn that it is extremely hard to ma;ke a living on the meager earnings that are realized, and at every step their convictions are confirmed that under Communistic domination there is no contentment, no prosperity, no paradise, none of those advantages and blessings which Communistic propa,ganda repeatedly and volubly advertises. If guests from America are given the occasion to speak with their relatives in ,priivate, removed from the hearing of witnesses or spies, they are informed not only of the abject servitude imposed upon Slovakia, not only of her resistance to Communism, but also of the vital hope which sustains the Slovaiks in the ho,p e that liberty and independence will yet be granted to the country. Who has eyes to _see will not be blinded by flowers. Who has ears to hear will not be deafened by CO!mIDunistic music. And he who has a rational mind for thinking will not become confused by Communist propaganda. Many SlO'V'aks who retU1I1I1 from Slovakia bring us reports which only cor.firm the fact that today S1ovakia enjoys neither freedom nor democracy, because under Red rule only terror and misery and iviolence prevail. The Slova!k people never accepted Communism; they will never become reconciled with it, and they only await the opportunity to throw off the despised yoke. And when they throw off this yoke, they will likewise throw off Czech doonination, and Slovakia will again be an independent republic. 1 • • 'Il.HE SLOVAKS by Peter P. Yurchak, should be in every pUiblic library, in every college ·a nd university, in the home of every American of Slovak descent. Get your copy NOW. Paper bound copy - $2.00; in cloth $3.00. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 12 SLOVAKIA DR. HRUSOVSKY'S LAST COLUMN (,P repared and sent to press by Dr. Hrusovsky the day before he died; it appeared in the Cleveland weekly SLOVAK NEWS dated the day of his funeral, September 13.) A number of our Slovak compatriot s recently under~ took a trip from America to 'Slova,kia. They had waited a long time for an opportunity to visit with their parents who had often written their sons and daughters in America that they yearned for the comfort of at least one more visit together. Naturally, once they undertook the long voyage, the visitors hoped also to meet their other relatives and friends and to extend their travels to other parts of S1ovakia. Travel agencies dispatched all that was necessary and our Slovak friends set out from America within a few weeks or a few months. They left with the fond hope that they would spend at least a short stay beneath their family roof, that beloved home they had to leave a long time ago, and they looked forward to being in· the circle of their dearest ones who expected them with open arms. lncidentally too, they were anxious to see for themselves in just what kind of circumstan ces their kin now live in Slovakia. ~he Czecho-Slovaik Communis t ,b oards which expedited these trips of our Slovak countryme n from the United States to Slovakia certainly did not do, it in order to affocd American Slovaks an opportunit y to visit with their closest relatives. They did it ·b ecause they covet American dollars which are very welcome even in Communist ic countries and they hoped to per.suade visitors from America that the Slovak peop1e feel satisfied and happy under the current Red regime. A Slovak lady fr,O!Ill Cleveland made one of these trips to Slorva!kia. On arriving in Prague, she wrote a letter to her husband in America, describing how the American Slovruk visitors were welcomed at the station with a .playing band and with flowers. The elated husband ma;de a full report to the editorial office of the .Communis tic paper SLOVAKIA 13 "l'.,udove Noviny" of Chicago, which in turn relayed to its readers the message that the Communists extend to Slo. vak visitoo-s from America a signal welcome with music and bouquets. The entire affair merely hides a ruse of the crafty Communists, an artifice which might mislead superficially-minded persons w'ho return to their enslaved homeland. The implication is that the casual visitor to America is not pomipousily welcomed; he is not showered with flowers; he is not greeted with melody and song. But he comes into a free country; it is his privilege to move about at will anywhere firom New York to San Francisco, to con. verse with whomever he wishes. He is at full liberty to fo:mn his own convictions about the life of free citirens living in a democracy, and he bases his conclusions and opinions on personal contacts, on firsthand impressions, and on unrestricted study. The Communists are iprepared to delude visitors from the first moment of their arrival at a railroad, station or airport. They pay them a stirring march and send a coached committee of children to present flowers. They are meticulously solicitous about their guests; they take pains to point out whaitever featurns will redound to their advantage or credit and they proceed along a studied plan to create a favora1ble impression and to lead their visitors to conclude that the American press is circulating untrue reports about Communist-controlled countries . The Communists have made punctilious arrangements for the visits of our countrymen from America and their schedules orf entertainment are nothing but a studied scheme of propaganda. One who is not sufficiently shrewd and discerning, who has not the faculty to see things with his own eyes as they really are and to formulate his own judgments with a nicety of discretion becomes the gulhble victim of this Communistic propaganda program and accepts without question all this artificial ~litter. But there are and have been visitOTs to Slovrukia who have no need of anyone's reception with floral tokens and music, who have no disposition to learn what the Com- 14 SLOVAKIA munists themselves wish to tell them. Accustomed to life in a free and democratic land, they look for this liiberty and democracy in Slovakia. They draw comparisons between the life of a laborer in America and the lot of a worker in Slovakia. They hear what the Slo,va,k pea;sants ha:ve to tell them, the sad e~periences of men who have been despoiled of their property. They see for themselVFis how jaded Slovak women have become. They cannot fail to observe that the people are scantily clothed. They learn that it is extremely hard to ma;ke a living on the meager earnings that are realized, and at every step their convictions are confirmed that under Communistic domination there is no contentment, no prosperity, no paradise, none of those advantages and blessings which Communistic propa,ganda repeatedly and volubly advertises. If guests from America are given the occasion to speak with their relatives in ,priivate, removed from the hearing of witnesses or spies, they are informed not only of the abject servitude imposed upon Slovakia, not only of her resistance to Communism, but also of the vital hope which sustains the Slovaiks in the ho,p e that liberty and independence will yet be granted to the country. Who has eyes to _see will not be blinded by flowers. Who has ears to hear will not be deafened by CO!mIDunistic music. And he who has a rational mind for thinking will not become confused by Communist propaganda. Many SlO'V'aks who retU1I1I1 from Slovakia bring us reports which only cor.firm the fact that today S1ovakia enjoys neither freedom nor democracy, because under Red rule only terror and misery and iviolence prevail. The Slova!k people never accepted Communism; they will never become reconciled with it, and they only await the opportunity to throw off the despised yoke. And when they throw off this yoke, they will likewise throw off Czech doonination, and Slovakia will again be an independent republic. 1 • • 'Il.HE SLOVAKS by Peter P. Yurchak, should be in every pUiblic library, in every college ·a nd university, in the home of every American of Slovak descent. Get your copy NOW. Paper bound copy - $2.00; in cloth $3.00.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Dr. Hrušovský's Last Column Description An account of the resource Dr. Francis Hrušovský Prepared and sent to press by Dr. Hrušovský the day before he died; it appeared in the Cleveland weekly SLOVAK NEWS dated the day of his funeral, September 13. Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 12-14 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hrušovský, František, 1903-1956 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource September-December 1956 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/435d5e0a1885ef6b9a7b8e06b05bd14d.pdf c5c748f9d85af7e64d5dbc4d33532fa6 PDF Text Text 52 SLOVAKIA ENSLAVERS OF THE CZECH NATION: HOW BENES "GOT" STRiBRNf (From the September 23, 1955, issue of "BOHEMIA," Czech monthl,y published by the Czech Democratic Federalists in Munich, Germany.) BY: SIRIUS Flrequently we fail to notice the flow of hi story. What to some of us is iapparently self-evident, that is fo.r many veiled by a cu:rtain of forgetfulness 'rund to the younger generation is something unknown. Forgetfulness and ignorance have created many Je,g ends, which have fatefully extended into the politic~ development of our natiOlll and have placed in ,power forces which had to coMapse again and again, ,b ecause they betrayed everything upon which the state was built .and that which formed its ideological substa:nce. Perhwps dt is ,t imely to remind the Czech public about the tirings we had witnessed, so that it might be able to form its own judgment and to create its own view. When the press reported the death of George Stribrny in the Ilava prison last summer (1955), the news shodked only those who knew him and witnessed his struggles. Not all these struggles were wa,ged "cleverly," ibut they were waged to the end which 'Stribmy ,guessed and supposed more than he reasonably knew: for the consolidation of democracy agai:ns,t aJl'bitrary power and violence. George Strib.rny was one of the "men of October 28th." This designation was no:t simply ,a n empty phvase. The Czecho-Slavak Republic did not come into existence just oult of nothing from the minds of statesmen; in the beginning its existence was doubtfuJ; aJD.d when T. G. Masaryk went out of Austria-Hung ary to attempt to Liberate the Czech nation from aibsolutism, he wanted only to gain respect for the constitutional rights o.f his nation, which aliready were guaranteed by the so-.caJled "October Rescript," in which the emperor solemnly :promised rto have ,h imself crowned as Czech king in /Prague. While aJbroad Masaryk had no other ooorception in the beginning. In a memorandum to the British foreign office, dated in April of 1915, T. G. Masaryk wrote: 1 �SLOVAKIA 53 "We intended to make Bohemia a monarchist State; a Czech Republic is wanted only by a few radicals ••• Either the Allied Powers will give us one of their Princes, or there will be a personal union between Bohemia and Serbia ••• A Russian dynasty would be in every way popular ••. Russia's wishes and plans will have to be of decisive influence ••• " The idea of ,a Czecho~Slovak State ripened only gradually; the republican concept won out only under the influence of American Czec'llis and Slova!ks.. In the Pit,tsburgh Agreement, concluded by T. G. ,M asaryk with the American Slovaks on May '30, 1918, we read: "The Czecho-.Slovak StaJte shall be a Republic ... " This a,greement guaTanteed the Slovaks equal rights with the Czech nation, tha,t is, their own state government and assembly. Afl later attempts to explain this a;greement as only a private agreement, wihich did not bind in l aw, only sharpened the tensions between the Czechs and Slovaros and led to coil!Sequeinces which are stiH fresh in our minds. 1 Stribrny a Member of the "Committee of Five" During the period that .Masaryk traveled abroad, lectured and organlized the legions, Stffbo:ny was mi active member of the Vienna parliament where he represented the Czech National !Socialist Party, which formerly was called the Czech Nationa;l Labor Parity. This party came into being ais 3Jil opposi,tiO!Il paJrty to the inoceasing :influence of international social democracy, and its founder was the journalist Vaclav Klofac, a convinced anti-militarist. Later he became the fi~st Minister ,o f [Defense in the first Cre<!hoS1o:va;k government of iDr. Chades Kramaf. Klofac and Stfibrny were the two lea,ding personalities of the movement of na;tional workers. During the first World WaT the Czech anarchists joined with them, led by Dr. iBohumil Vrbensky, a dentist, who was named Min:ister of Supplies !in the first Czceho-Slo:va:k government. When Kiofac wa;s jailed by the Austrian authorities soon after the outbreak of the war and later conrvicted, Stfibmy became the leading personality of the Czech National Socialists and represented ,t hem on the "Committee of Five",the other members being: Dr. Alois Rasin (Czech National Democrat), Arrtonirn Svehla (Agrarian), DT. Francis Sou- �54 SLOVAKIA ikup (Soeial Democrat), who was later replaced by deputy Haibrman, :and a depresentative of the Czech People's Party whkh had separated from the conservative wing represented by the perfodicai •~CEoH"; the latter became a member of the committee laiter. Benes Arrives on the Scene A plaque on ,t he House of Deputies in the city of Prague told one (•I do inot know if it is still there) that the Committee of ,F ive, Jin Stribrny among them, had a session in tlris house on October 28, 1918, to proclaim the first la:w of the Czecho-.Slovak Republic, the proclamatioo. of the existence af the new State. This act really was :revolutionary. Even though Czecho-Slovakia was recognized. by the Allied Governments, it was not certain when the practical transfer of power would take place. The seizure of power, which :these men managed, surprised even the Czech ,political delegaitfon which at that moment was in session in the Beau iRivage Hotel in Geneva, where it had gOille with ,t he permission of the Austrian government to ma'ke oontacts with the Czech politicians rub.road, among whom was a new personality, a young docent of sociology at the Prague University, ,D r. Edtwa:rd (Benes. Dr. !Benes was a very ambitious and energetic man. Originally a member of the Social Democratic iPa:rty, like his brother, he became a correspondent for the social-democratic daily •~BRAVIO UIDU" (The People's Right) tn Paris, where his lire waJS anything but pleaSia'D!t. IHe learned French, English much fater, ibut he could never speak it correctly. Benes was attracted ,b y Masaryk's person:ality. Masaryk at that ti.me was iintroducing in the Charles University methods of English p:nactical thought, which are often mistakenly reg,arded rus same kind of independent philosophical system. iMasaryk was quite well known because of his appearrunces before the public, ,b ut he was not too well liked. His ireailism rather shocked Ith.an inspired Czech 111.ationaliism in-Austria-Hunga ry. A reflection of the valiant stand of 'Z ola in France was the participation of Masaryk in the Hilsner murder case, in which he proved the fals1ty of the so'-'Called "Mrunuscripts," but :it evoked �SLOVAKIA 55 a wave of hostility agaJinst him. When deputy Sviil:a sued Alllyz, it.he editor of t:he N.ARODNE DISTY, !because he ac.. cused Sviha of !being an informer for the Austrian police, Masaryk took sides with Anyz and so turned the Czech N atio:rraJ Socialists against himself. Antagonism 'between Masaryk and the N ationai Socialist Party had existed fo~ some time. :Since Benes always sfu'essed 3,nd underil!ined the intention and :aims of his master, it was expected th:a,t !lie would soon get into an a;rgument with ithe National Socialists. 'Dhe fight was a strange one, indeed. When it became clear that the Social Democrats would not place [)r. Benes on ,t he baJlOlt as their candidaite, and since Dr. Benes could not count OIIl being a candidate on the -ballot of the National Democrats, because of his opposition to ,t hem, there rernamed little '1.ef.t for him to do butt try to get on the !ballot as a candidate of the Czech NatiOIIlal 1Socialists. At that time it was still thought that a minister must be a deputy and that it was necessary to uphold the rules of parliamb.'lltary democracy. The National Socialist Party, which Benes wanted to 'balilot him, however, was over:whelmingily a .p arty of the workers and not intellectuals. But danger threatened Benes from another quarter. At t hat time Dr. iKramar was quite a power and naJtional hero. Benes !mnew that. But he also was determined to wreck the prur.ty of Kramar and, if need be, Kramar himself. He set himself to the taslk. The group associated with Dr. Jaro,. slav Stransky, a yoU1I1g deputy of the National Democratic Party, quit the party ,t o, join the so-called "Labor Party" which rwas in a transitiOIIlal stage; it ,w as through this party that the g,roup ent&ed the Czech National Socialist Party. The first attack within the party was made against Stflbrny, directed behind the scenes ,b y !Benes. [t ended with the expulsion ,oif Stribrny from the party. 1 Stfibrny Organizes the "Castle" Opposition Stribmy was hurt, but 111ort helpless. He knew his enemy very well.. In Prague, on Jungman iS treet, he began to build up his own publishing enterprises; his "Vecemi list" (Eveni1nig News) soon ibecame a feared boulevard newspaper. �56 SLOVAKIA Stribrny consolidated practically the entire "am.ti-Castle" opposition. 1Many persons who did not like Benes's methods were aHowed space in his paper, among them: J. S. Machar, fo:mner intimate of T. G. Masaryk, the writer Francis Zavfola, whom Dr. Benes never forgave for criticizing him in the novel "For.tinbras," Arnost Dvorak, author of the co.. medy "Matej 'Poctivy (Honest Matt), and many others. Wlhat did the opposition hold . against the ambitious, vainglorious Benes? IJ:t would take seve,r al pages just to enumerate all reproaches, complaints and charges, but sub.struintially all were concerned with one matter: Benes's dictatorial methods, which he developed throughout his life as ·a confirmed socialist. Dr. Benes came to parliament from the outside; he did not bother attending meetings, did not seek favor of the voters, and thought that his foreign activity was fin itself so great that he should be trusted without question in ·all things. If any one doubted the correotness of his views or of his politics and dared to express an opposite view, Benes considered that as a sign of enmity. Benes had no wide support among the voters; if the system of "binding ballots of candidates" did not exist, Benes never would have become a deputy of pa'I'liament. Benes was conscious of his unpopularity with the voters and his lack of ipoilitical ba:ckg,r ound, and .t his he coil'.Sidoced as his greatest personal defioiency. Naturally, this meant, if he wanted to stay in power - 3Jlld he certainly did Benes would have to find other methods of disposing of his political opponents. Of course, we know he not only found them, but also used them quite effectively. Whi~e Benes studied in Dijon one name attracted his attention: Fouche. The methods applied by th.is man, Na,. poleon's police director, !impressed the youthful, ambitious Benes. He reC"alled them later when he decided to become a power in Czech politics. He knew that a person could be destroyed ,pol1ticailly by malicious smeair and vilification; and he also learned• how the criminal courts aided Fouche, who bought witnesses who were wiHing to testify to anything for pay. Dr. Benes, who tested' this method when he rem()IVed Jirak, sectional ,chief o,f the !M:inistry of Trade, �SLOVAKIA 57 thought he was strong enough to try it against Stribrny. At that itime Dr. K,a,reil Larry in the Ministry oif Justice was Benes's righit hand. ·L awyer Drobny, who complained of a meagre law practice, !became an all-powerful perso.., nalii.ty in the Ministry of Justice and Bene.s's willing servant. It was not easy to fabric-a te a ca:se against Stribrny; Benes knew he had to be very cautions. Stribrny was a publisher and was ba,cked by a small burt very ·a ctive political party; Dr. Charles iPergler, American-born Czech and outspoken adversary of Benes's policies, rulso joined •t he opposition headed by Stribmy. Dr. Lany worked haTd and long to come up with something against Stfibmy and ,so to please Benes. Finally, he cooked up something which Be111es thought would finish Stribrny: Larry said Stribrny had perjured ihimseJf during one of his trials. A great number of witnesses was rounded up to testify as l.<I1Slbructed by 'Larry; the trial got under way ·a nd the press featured it. Everything seemed to be running smoothly for Lany until a certain detective was called upon to testify; that detective sruid thait he saw Stribrny with the accused Sichrovsky in the Hotel de Saxe in Prague; he mentioned the point from which he saw them; it was from not rtoo, great a di,s tance, but a corner came into the picture. O.vdinary people cannot see a-r ound a corner, but the detective Lany produced as a witness was blessed, it •seems, with airOU!Ild-the-corner-sighrt. The court at thart time could not 1b e influenced; it did not believe thaJt the detective could see aToun.d corners. So the court threw out the case against Strib,rny. 1 Benes was :fm-ious, but he was by no means through with 1Stfibrny. '.I1lwough the staJte pmcUI1ator he made application for -a wrirt of error, which was gra111ted; the request rto ihave the trial tramsferred to another city "to re.., move the influence of the iPrague street" was also granted - Jihlava was ,given the honor. The second .part of the drarrna dragged on .in Ji'hlava · a nd caused no end of worry to Stribrny. Benes, however, had nothing to lose, except possibly a: ,b it of face. When the trial ended, Stribmy won out -again. �58 SLOVAKIA In the meantime, time marched on. Benes was kept busy with the cOI11sequences of his polides MJ.d ideological constructions. Afraid of 1osing his influence, he still thoug,ht that the [Habsburgs were 's till dangerous, so he oreated the Little Entente (Yugoslavia, Rumamfa ·a nd Czecho-!Slova'kia:) , wh!ich f,1opped when faced with rthe first crisis. Autocrat that he was, Benes ,a lways waited nntil he was forced to negotirution or to 0.!g.reement. No matter :how we judge the event,s of that time, one thing stands: out quite clear and certain: Benes failed to ;recognize two problems whicli were of vital .importance to the Repuiblic - the German p:mblem and the Slovak problem. He thought both would be solved by silence and proCTaJStination. Because he was a man who iregaroed discussion ·a s a personal atta0k, there never were any objective discussions about the vital proiblerns orf the country. Truthfully speaking, it must be said that Benes did not even have the desired understanding for those two problems. He was a man who gloried in moving in foreign circles; he saiw his strength on the diplomatic parquets among his a,oquaintances, club, colleagues, wd hi-red journ.ailists. Problems of internal politics neveir reaJ.Iy interested Benes. Una:ble to tolerate criticism, he contriived the laiw "for the protection of the (Republic," which was enthusiastically endorsed by the other "coalition" parties, becall!Se it put a perfect muzZJle io n the mouths o.f the opposition. Benes paid lip service to democracy, but sinned against it gravely. P&haps inexperience, a ilaclr of honest courage to give in when wrong, affiliaiting politics too much with person:al advantages run:d gains, commerc.iali·z ing politics at the ~nse of the ideal interests of ,t he nation - all this .became the hot/bed of dictatorial whims which culminated in whait Benes began rto do in 1945, when without even consuWng the nation he pu:bli,s:hed -and enforC"ed his famous- "decrees." He had become a dictator, something he had always striven for. To Benes it did not matter that he served the forces which ilater rwere to orvercome him, ibeca:use rthey were more powerful, experienced .and tactically more mature. The Czech nation tolerated dictatorship. Wea:kened by the war, �SLOVAKIA 69 confused and befuddled by the political situation which was not presented in its :tirue colors, and led by ·a personality who thought he had won the war, the nation hum!bly sue.. cumbed to serious breaches and limitations of its rights and freedoms. Benes Finally "Gets" Stribrny Just before the war ended, as I recaill, while several of us were discussing the future, one of iBenes's very close friends Temarked: "Things will not be as they were under Masairyk. Benes is a vengeful man and will not forgive any one!" This characterization of Benes hit me hard later, when I learned that Stfibrny was arrested at the Grii.fenberg Baths in Silesia. Every one was convinced that this was a m~staJke. Wha;t could any o.ne have against Stribrny? During the war he was not active politically ·a t all. Benes nevertheless came out against Stribrny because of his pre ...war activity, which did not fall under the notion of "retribution" at all. Stfibrny's journalists, we know, frequently criticized Benes, as did many others. The court could not resolve whether the criticism was proper or not, but omy whether criticism was allowed and whether free criticism comes under the notion of "retribution." The defendant's counsel, a brilliant iPrague lawyer, was convinced that Stribrny could not be convicted. When the trial was over and tha,t lawyer heard the verdiot of life in jail, he wanted to give up his law practice. Stfibrny's son, hearing ,t he verdict, said only one word: "Dad!" and for that he was accused of disturbing public order and later sentenced to 18 months in jail. Jin 1S tribrny probably could have gotten out of the ·n ava prison, if he would have requested amnesty. But he refused to ask Benes for mercy. Stfibrny was not indicted and tried ·e ven by the Oommunists. "The mrun of October 28th," one of the founders of the Republic, apparently did not consider it dignified and proper to ask any one for mercy, for pardon for anything that he did not commit, for pardon because at the moment his antagonist was stronger than he was. �60 SLOVAKIA Let people think what they like a;bout Stribrny. One. thlng .they ml.l!st admit: he was am enthusiastic and stouthearted man. If he did do wrong, he was willing to admit it; often he may have attacked hairder than he should have and let himself be guided ,b y personal bitterness more than by political motive, but he was one orf the few moo who did found the Republic. The founders of states of civilized nations ·a re usualty glorified by monuments and a;rticles in school reade:ra. But Sitribrrny was allowed to die in jail. A shame? !indeed, it was a shame, but it was not Stribrny's shame. Getting rid of opponents. by any and all methods leads in ,p olitics to dictatorship. As soon as "liberaito:ris" cha:nge into enslavers of their nation, it is up to the na,tion to defend its rig,hts.. It cannot stand idly on the sidelines. Tihe ipeople who do that beair the responsibility for the victims of dictatorship. Stribrny was one of the victims. His deeply furrowed countenance will be long remembered iby those who knew him. His high forehead was crowned with a rich set of hair - ,w avy, beautiful lrair. 'Dhe physic,a l personality of Stribrny is slowly disappearing in the chasms of oblivion, ibut hiis hair still waves as if it were a li'Viing torch! • • • WHO SAID IT? "President Benes was always of the opinion, and in his Irutest statemenJts rulways stressed, tiliait ouir pact of a.Hiance with Soviet Russia and ouir friendshiip with other S1 av Ill8.tions must not encrooch on o.ur friendly and cordirul relations with other democratic states. This is .t he natuiral desire, shared by an enormous ma;jority of oor people, and nothing .p revents us from keeping the comidence of the democratic states and stroogthenmg and deepening OUT friendship with ouT great western Allies. Moscow, too, wanlts tio ful~ow thi s line of poliic y. rt will., however, be necessary for certain prejudices of the West with regard to the Soviet Union, which are stiU existing, to be swept away." - Premier Fierlinger of Ozecho-Slorvakia, OW7I Bulletin, June 1, 194'5. 1 1 � 52 SLOVAKIA ENSLAVERS OF THE CZECH NATION: HOW BENES "GOT" STRiBRNf (From the September 23, 1955, issue of "BOHEMIA," Czech monthl,y published by the Czech Democratic Federalists in Munich, Germany.) BY: SIRIUS Flrequently we fail to notice the flow of hi story. What to some of us is iapparently self-evident, that is fo.r many veiled by a cu:rtain of forgetfulness 'rund to the younger generation is something unknown. Forgetfulness and ignorance have created many Je,g ends, which have fatefully extended into the politic~ development of our natiOlll and have placed in ,power forces which had to coMapse again and again, ,b ecause they betrayed everything upon which the state was built .and that which formed its ideological substa:nce. Perhwps dt is ,t imely to remind the Czech public about the tirings we had witnessed, so that it might be able to form its own judgment and to create its own view. When the press reported the death of George Stribrny in the Ilava prison last summer (1955), the news shodked only those who knew him and witnessed his struggles. Not all these struggles were wa,ged "cleverly," ibut they were waged to the end which 'Stribmy ,guessed and supposed more than he reasonably knew: for the consolidation of democracy agai:ns,t aJl'bitrary power and violence. George Strib.rny was one of the "men of October 28th." This designation was no:t simply ,a n empty phvase. The Czecho-Slavak Republic did not come into existence just oult of nothing from the minds of statesmen; in the beginning its existence was doubtfuJ; aJD.d when T. G. Masaryk went out of Austria-Hung ary to attempt to Liberate the Czech nation from aibsolutism, he wanted only to gain respect for the constitutional rights o.f his nation, which aliready were guaranteed by the so-.caJled "October Rescript," in which the emperor solemnly :promised rto have ,h imself crowned as Czech king in /Prague. While aJbroad Masaryk had no other ooorception in the beginning. In a memorandum to the British foreign office, dated in April of 1915, T. G. Masaryk wrote: 1 �SLOVAKIA 53 "We intended to make Bohemia a monarchist State; a Czech Republic is wanted only by a few radicals ••• Either the Allied Powers will give us one of their Princes, or there will be a personal union between Bohemia and Serbia ••• A Russian dynasty would be in every way popular ••. Russia's wishes and plans will have to be of decisive influence ••• " The idea of ,a Czecho~Slovak State ripened only gradually; the republican concept won out only under the influence of American Czec'llis and Slova!ks.. In the Pit,tsburgh Agreement, concluded by T. G. ,M asaryk with the American Slovaks on May '30, 1918, we read: "The Czecho-.Slovak StaJte shall be a Republic ... " This a,greement guaTanteed the Slovaks equal rights with the Czech nation, tha,t is, their own state government and assembly. Afl later attempts to explain this a;greement as only a private agreement, wihich did not bind in l aw, only sharpened the tensions between the Czechs and Slovaros and led to coil!Sequeinces which are stiH fresh in our minds. 1 Stribrny a Member of the "Committee of Five" During the period that .Masaryk traveled abroad, lectured and organlized the legions, Stffbo:ny was mi active member of the Vienna parliament where he represented the Czech National !Socialist Party, which formerly was called the Czech Nationa;l Labor Parity. This party came into being ais 3Jil opposi,tiO!Il paJrty to the inoceasing :influence of international social democracy, and its founder was the journalist Vaclav Klofac, a convinced anti-militarist. Later he became the fi~st Minister ,o f [Defense in the first Cre<!hoS1o:va;k government of iDr. Chades Kramaf. Klofac and Stfibrny were the two lea,ding personalities of the movement of na;tional workers. During the first World WaT the Czech anarchists joined with them, led by Dr. iBohumil Vrbensky, a dentist, who was named Min:ister of Supplies !in the first Czceho-Slo:va:k government. When Kiofac wa;s jailed by the Austrian authorities soon after the outbreak of the war and later conrvicted, Stfibmy became the leading personality of the Czech National Socialists and represented ,t hem on the "Committee of Five",the other members being: Dr. Alois Rasin (Czech National Democrat), Arrtonirn Svehla (Agrarian), DT. Francis Sou- �54 SLOVAKIA ikup (Soeial Democrat), who was later replaced by deputy Haibrman, :and a depresentative of the Czech People's Party whkh had separated from the conservative wing represented by the perfodicai •~CEoH"; the latter became a member of the committee laiter. Benes Arrives on the Scene A plaque on ,t he House of Deputies in the city of Prague told one (•I do inot know if it is still there) that the Committee of ,F ive, Jin Stribrny among them, had a session in tlris house on October 28, 1918, to proclaim the first la:w of the Czecho-.Slovak Republic, the proclamatioo. of the existence af the new State. This act really was :revolutionary. Even though Czecho-Slovakia was recognized. by the Allied Governments, it was not certain when the practical transfer of power would take place. The seizure of power, which :these men managed, surprised even the Czech ,political delegaitfon which at that moment was in session in the Beau iRivage Hotel in Geneva, where it had gOille with ,t he permission of the Austrian government to ma'ke oontacts with the Czech politicians rub.road, among whom was a new personality, a young docent of sociology at the Prague University, ,D r. Edtwa:rd (Benes. Dr. !Benes was a very ambitious and energetic man. Originally a member of the Social Democratic iPa:rty, like his brother, he became a correspondent for the social-democratic daily •~BRAVIO UIDU" (The People's Right) tn Paris, where his lire waJS anything but pleaSia'D!t. IHe learned French, English much fater, ibut he could never speak it correctly. Benes was attracted ,b y Masaryk's person:ality. Masaryk at that ti.me was iintroducing in the Charles University methods of English p:nactical thought, which are often mistakenly reg,arded rus same kind of independent philosophical system. iMasaryk was quite well known because of his appearrunces before the public, ,b ut he was not too well liked. His ireailism rather shocked Ith.an inspired Czech 111.ationaliism in-Austria-Hunga ry. A reflection of the valiant stand of 'Z ola in France was the participation of Masaryk in the Hilsner murder case, in which he proved the fals1ty of the so'-'Called "Mrunuscripts," but :it evoked �SLOVAKIA 55 a wave of hostility agaJinst him. When deputy Sviil:a sued Alllyz, it.he editor of t:he N.ARODNE DISTY, !because he ac.. cused Sviha of !being an informer for the Austrian police, Masaryk took sides with Anyz and so turned the Czech N atio:rraJ Socialists against himself. Antagonism 'between Masaryk and the N ationai Socialist Party had existed fo~ some time. :Since Benes always sfu'essed 3,nd underil!ined the intention and :aims of his master, it was expected th:a,t !lie would soon get into an a;rgument with ithe National Socialists. 'Dhe fight was a strange one, indeed. When it became clear that the Social Democrats would not place [)r. Benes on ,t he baJlOlt as their candidaite, and since Dr. Benes could not count OIIl being a candidate on the -ballot of the National Democrats, because of his opposition to ,t hem, there rernamed little '1.ef.t for him to do butt try to get on the !ballot as a candidate of the Czech NatiOIIlal 1Socialists. At that time it was still thought that a minister must be a deputy and that it was necessary to uphold the rules of parliamb.'lltary democracy. The National Socialist Party, which Benes wanted to 'balilot him, however, was over:whelmingily a .p arty of the workers and not intellectuals. But danger threatened Benes from another quarter. At t hat time Dr. iKramar was quite a power and naJtional hero. Benes !mnew that. But he also was determined to wreck the prur.ty of Kramar and, if need be, Kramar himself. He set himself to the taslk. The group associated with Dr. Jaro,. slav Stransky, a yoU1I1g deputy of the National Democratic Party, quit the party ,t o, join the so-called "Labor Party" which rwas in a transitiOIIlal stage; it ,w as through this party that the g,roup ent&ed the Czech National Socialist Party. The first attack within the party was made against Stflbrny, directed behind the scenes ,b y !Benes. [t ended with the expulsion ,oif Stribrny from the party. 1 Stfibrny Organizes the "Castle" Opposition Stribmy was hurt, but 111ort helpless. He knew his enemy very well.. In Prague, on Jungman iS treet, he began to build up his own publishing enterprises; his "Vecemi list" (Eveni1nig News) soon ibecame a feared boulevard newspaper. �56 SLOVAKIA Stribrny consolidated practically the entire "am.ti-Castle" opposition. 1Many persons who did not like Benes's methods were aHowed space in his paper, among them: J. S. Machar, fo:mner intimate of T. G. Masaryk, the writer Francis Zavfola, whom Dr. Benes never forgave for criticizing him in the novel "For.tinbras," Arnost Dvorak, author of the co.. medy "Matej 'Poctivy (Honest Matt), and many others. Wlhat did the opposition hold . against the ambitious, vainglorious Benes? IJ:t would take seve,r al pages just to enumerate all reproaches, complaints and charges, but sub.struintially all were concerned with one matter: Benes's dictatorial methods, which he developed throughout his life as ·a confirmed socialist. Dr. Benes came to parliament from the outside; he did not bother attending meetings, did not seek favor of the voters, and thought that his foreign activity was fin itself so great that he should be trusted without question in ·all things. If any one doubted the correotness of his views or of his politics and dared to express an opposite view, Benes considered that as a sign of enmity. Benes had no wide support among the voters; if the system of "binding ballots of candidates" did not exist, Benes never would have become a deputy of pa'I'liament. Benes was conscious of his unpopularity with the voters and his lack of ipoilitical ba:ckg,r ound, and .t his he coil'.Sidoced as his greatest personal defioiency. Naturally, this meant, if he wanted to stay in power - 3Jlld he certainly did Benes would have to find other methods of disposing of his political opponents. Of course, we know he not only found them, but also used them quite effectively. Whi~e Benes studied in Dijon one name attracted his attention: Fouche. The methods applied by th.is man, Na,. poleon's police director, !impressed the youthful, ambitious Benes. He reC"alled them later when he decided to become a power in Czech politics. He knew that a person could be destroyed ,pol1ticailly by malicious smeair and vilification; and he also learned• how the criminal courts aided Fouche, who bought witnesses who were wiHing to testify to anything for pay. Dr. Benes, who tested' this method when he rem()IVed Jirak, sectional ,chief o,f the !M:inistry of Trade, �SLOVAKIA 57 thought he was strong enough to try it against Stribrny. At that itime Dr. K,a,reil Larry in the Ministry oif Justice was Benes's righit hand. ·L awyer Drobny, who complained of a meagre law practice, !became an all-powerful perso.., nalii.ty in the Ministry of Justice and Bene.s's willing servant. It was not easy to fabric-a te a ca:se against Stribrny; Benes knew he had to be very cautions. Stribrny was a publisher and was ba,cked by a small burt very ·a ctive political party; Dr. Charles iPergler, American-born Czech and outspoken adversary of Benes's policies, rulso joined •t he opposition headed by Stribmy. Dr. Lany worked haTd and long to come up with something against Stfibmy and ,so to please Benes. Finally, he cooked up something which Be111es thought would finish Stribrny: Larry said Stribrny had perjured ihimseJf during one of his trials. A great number of witnesses was rounded up to testify as l.<I1Slbructed by 'Larry; the trial got under way ·a nd the press featured it. Everything seemed to be running smoothly for Lany until a certain detective was called upon to testify; that detective sruid thait he saw Stribrny with the accused Sichrovsky in the Hotel de Saxe in Prague; he mentioned the point from which he saw them; it was from not rtoo, great a di,s tance, but a corner came into the picture. O.vdinary people cannot see a-r ound a corner, but the detective Lany produced as a witness was blessed, it •seems, with airOU!Ild-the-corner-sighrt. The court at thart time could not 1b e influenced; it did not believe thaJt the detective could see aToun.d corners. So the court threw out the case against Strib,rny. 1 Benes was :fm-ious, but he was by no means through with 1Stfibrny. '.I1lwough the staJte pmcUI1ator he made application for -a wrirt of error, which was gra111ted; the request rto ihave the trial tramsferred to another city "to re.., move the influence of the iPrague street" was also granted - Jihlava was ,given the honor. The second .part of the drarrna dragged on .in Ji'hlava · a nd caused no end of worry to Stribrny. Benes, however, had nothing to lose, except possibly a: ,b it of face. When the trial ended, Stribmy won out -again. �58 SLOVAKIA In the meantime, time marched on. Benes was kept busy with the cOI11sequences of his polides MJ.d ideological constructions. Afraid of 1osing his influence, he still thoug,ht that the [Habsburgs were 's till dangerous, so he oreated the Little Entente (Yugoslavia, Rumamfa ·a nd Czecho-!Slova'kia:) , wh!ich f,1opped when faced with rthe first crisis. Autocrat that he was, Benes ,a lways waited nntil he was forced to negotirution or to 0.!g.reement. No matter :how we judge the event,s of that time, one thing stands: out quite clear and certain: Benes failed to ;recognize two problems whicli were of vital .importance to the Repuiblic - the German p:mblem and the Slovak problem. He thought both would be solved by silence and proCTaJStination. Because he was a man who iregaroed discussion ·a s a personal atta0k, there never were any objective discussions about the vital proiblerns orf the country. Truthfully speaking, it must be said that Benes did not even have the desired understanding for those two problems. He was a man who gloried in moving in foreign circles; he saiw his strength on the diplomatic parquets among his a,oquaintances, club, colleagues, wd hi-red journ.ailists. Problems of internal politics neveir reaJ.Iy interested Benes. Una:ble to tolerate criticism, he contriived the laiw "for the protection of the (Republic," which was enthusiastically endorsed by the other "coalition" parties, becall!Se it put a perfect muzZJle io n the mouths o.f the opposition. Benes paid lip service to democracy, but sinned against it gravely. P&haps inexperience, a ilaclr of honest courage to give in when wrong, affiliaiting politics too much with person:al advantages run:d gains, commerc.iali·z ing politics at the ~nse of the ideal interests of ,t he nation - all this .became the hot/bed of dictatorial whims which culminated in whait Benes began rto do in 1945, when without even consuWng the nation he pu:bli,s:hed -and enforC"ed his famous- "decrees." He had become a dictator, something he had always striven for. To Benes it did not matter that he served the forces which ilater rwere to orvercome him, ibeca:use rthey were more powerful, experienced .and tactically more mature. The Czech nation tolerated dictatorship. Wea:kened by the war, �SLOVAKIA 69 confused and befuddled by the political situation which was not presented in its :tirue colors, and led by ·a personality who thought he had won the war, the nation hum!bly sue.. cumbed to serious breaches and limitations of its rights and freedoms. Benes Finally "Gets" Stribrny Just before the war ended, as I recaill, while several of us were discussing the future, one of iBenes's very close friends Temarked: "Things will not be as they were under Masairyk. Benes is a vengeful man and will not forgive any one!" This characterization of Benes hit me hard later, when I learned that Stfibrny was arrested at the Grii.fenberg Baths in Silesia. Every one was convinced that this was a m~staJke. Wha;t could any o.ne have against Stribrny? During the war he was not active politically ·a t all. Benes nevertheless came out against Stribrny because of his pre ...war activity, which did not fall under the notion of "retribution" at all. Stfibrny's journalists, we know, frequently criticized Benes, as did many others. The court could not resolve whether the criticism was proper or not, but omy whether criticism was allowed and whether free criticism comes under the notion of "retribution." The defendant's counsel, a brilliant iPrague lawyer, was convinced that Stribrny could not be convicted. When the trial was over and tha,t lawyer heard the verdiot of life in jail, he wanted to give up his law practice. Stfibrny's son, hearing ,t he verdict, said only one word: "Dad!" and for that he was accused of disturbing public order and later sentenced to 18 months in jail. Jin 1S tribrny probably could have gotten out of the ·n ava prison, if he would have requested amnesty. But he refused to ask Benes for mercy. Stfibrny was not indicted and tried ·e ven by the Oommunists. "The mrun of October 28th," one of the founders of the Republic, apparently did not consider it dignified and proper to ask any one for mercy, for pardon for anything that he did not commit, for pardon because at the moment his antagonist was stronger than he was. �60 SLOVAKIA Let people think what they like a;bout Stribrny. One. thlng .they ml.l!st admit: he was am enthusiastic and stouthearted man. If he did do wrong, he was willing to admit it; often he may have attacked hairder than he should have and let himself be guided ,b y personal bitterness more than by political motive, but he was one orf the few moo who did found the Republic. The founders of states of civilized nations ·a re usualty glorified by monuments and a;rticles in school reade:ra. But Sitribrrny was allowed to die in jail. A shame? !indeed, it was a shame, but it was not Stribrny's shame. Getting rid of opponents. by any and all methods leads in ,p olitics to dictatorship. As soon as "liberaito:ris" cha:nge into enslavers of their nation, it is up to the na,tion to defend its rig,hts.. It cannot stand idly on the sidelines. Tihe ipeople who do that beair the responsibility for the victims of dictatorship. Stribrny was one of the victims. His deeply furrowed countenance will be long remembered iby those who knew him. His high forehead was crowned with a rich set of hair - ,w avy, beautiful lrair. 'Dhe physic,a l personality of Stribrny is slowly disappearing in the chasms of oblivion, ibut hiis hair still waves as if it were a li'Viing torch! • • • WHO SAID IT? "President Benes was always of the opinion, and in his Irutest statemenJts rulways stressed, tiliait ouir pact of a.Hiance with Soviet Russia and ouir friendshiip with other S1 av Ill8.tions must not encrooch on o.ur friendly and cordirul relations with other democratic states. This is .t he natuiral desire, shared by an enormous ma;jority of oor people, and nothing .p revents us from keeping the comidence of the democratic states and stroogthenmg and deepening OUT friendship with ouT great western Allies. Moscow, too, wanlts tio ful~ow thi s line of poliic y. rt will., however, be necessary for certain prejudices of the West with regard to the Soviet Union, which are stiU existing, to be swept away." - Premier Fierlinger of Ozecho-Slorvakia, OW7I Bulletin, June 1, 194'5. 1 1 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 52 SLOVAKIA ENSLAVERS OF THE CZECH NATION: HOW BENES "GOT" STRiBRNf (From the September 23, 1955, issue of "BOHEMIA," Czech monthl,y published by the Czech Democratic Federalists in Munich, Germany.) BY: SIRIUS Flrequently we fail to notice the flow of hi story. What to some of us is iapparently self-evident, that is fo.r many veiled by a cu:rtain of forgetfulness 'rund to the younger generation is something unknown. Forgetfulness and ignorance have created many Je,g ends, which have fatefully extended into the politic~ development of our natiOlll and have placed in ,power forces which had to coMapse again and again, ,b ecause they betrayed everything upon which the state was built .and that which formed its ideological substa:nce. Perhwps dt is ,t imely to remind the Czech public about the tirings we had witnessed, so that it might be able to form its own judgment and to create its own view. When the press reported the death of George Stribrny in the Ilava prison last summer (1955), the news shodked only those who knew him and witnessed his struggles. Not all these struggles were wa,ged "cleverly," ibut they were waged to the end which 'Stribmy ,guessed and supposed more than he reasonably knew: for the consolidation of democracy agai:ns,t aJl'bitrary power and violence. George Strib.rny was one of the "men of October 28th." This designation was no:t simply ,a n empty phvase. The Czecho-Slavak Republic did not come into existence just oult of nothing from the minds of statesmen; in the beginning its existence was doubtfuJ; aJD.d when T. G. Masaryk went out of Austria-Hung ary to attempt to Liberate the Czech nation from aibsolutism, he wanted only to gain respect for the constitutional rights o.f his nation, which aliready were guaranteed by the so-.caJled "October Rescript," in which the emperor solemnly :promised rto have ,h imself crowned as Czech king in /Prague. While aJbroad Masaryk had no other ooorception in the beginning. In a memorandum to the British foreign office, dated in April of 1915, T. G. Masaryk wrote: 1 SLOVAKIA 53 "We intended to make Bohemia a monarchist State; a Czech Republic is wanted only by a few radicals ••• Either the Allied Powers will give us one of their Princes, or there will be a personal union between Bohemia and Serbia ••• A Russian dynasty would be in every way popular ••. Russia's wishes and plans will have to be of decisive influence ••• " The idea of ,a Czecho~Slovak State ripened only gradually; the republican concept won out only under the influence of American Czec'llis and Slova!ks.. In the Pit,tsburgh Agreement, concluded by T. G. ,M asaryk with the American Slovaks on May '30, 1918, we read: "The Czecho-.Slovak StaJte shall be a Republic ... " This a,greement guaTanteed the Slovaks equal rights with the Czech nation, tha,t is, their own state government and assembly. Afl later attempts to explain this a;greement as only a private agreement, wihich did not bind in l aw, only sharpened the tensions between the Czechs and Slovaros and led to coil!Sequeinces which are stiH fresh in our minds. 1 Stribrny a Member of the "Committee of Five" During the period that .Masaryk traveled abroad, lectured and organlized the legions, Stffbo:ny was mi active member of the Vienna parliament where he represented the Czech National !Socialist Party, which formerly was called the Czech Nationa;l Labor Parity. This party came into being ais 3Jil opposi,tiO!Il paJrty to the inoceasing :influence of international social democracy, and its founder was the journalist Vaclav Klofac, a convinced anti-militarist. Later he became the fi~st Minister ,o f [Defense in the first Cre<!hoS1o:va;k government of iDr. Chades Kramaf. Klofac and Stfibrny were the two lea,ding personalities of the movement of na;tional workers. During the first World WaT the Czech anarchists joined with them, led by Dr. iBohumil Vrbensky, a dentist, who was named Min:ister of Supplies !in the first Czceho-Slo:va:k government. When Kiofac wa;s jailed by the Austrian authorities soon after the outbreak of the war and later conrvicted, Stfibmy became the leading personality of the Czech National Socialists and represented ,t hem on the "Committee of Five",the other members being: Dr. Alois Rasin (Czech National Democrat), Arrtonirn Svehla (Agrarian), DT. Francis Sou- 54 SLOVAKIA ikup (Soeial Democrat), who was later replaced by deputy Haibrman, :and a depresentative of the Czech People's Party whkh had separated from the conservative wing represented by the perfodicai •~CEoH"; the latter became a member of the committee laiter. Benes Arrives on the Scene A plaque on ,t he House of Deputies in the city of Prague told one (•I do inot know if it is still there) that the Committee of ,F ive, Jin Stribrny among them, had a session in tlris house on October 28, 1918, to proclaim the first la:w of the Czecho-.Slovak Republic, the proclamatioo. of the existence af the new State. This act really was :revolutionary. Even though Czecho-Slovakia was recognized. by the Allied Governments, it was not certain when the practical transfer of power would take place. The seizure of power, which :these men managed, surprised even the Czech ,political delegaitfon which at that moment was in session in the Beau iRivage Hotel in Geneva, where it had gOille with ,t he permission of the Austrian government to ma'ke oontacts with the Czech politicians rub.road, among whom was a new personality, a young docent of sociology at the Prague University, ,D r. Edtwa:rd (Benes. Dr. !Benes was a very ambitious and energetic man. Originally a member of the Social Democratic iPa:rty, like his brother, he became a correspondent for the social-democratic daily •~BRAVIO UIDU" (The People's Right) tn Paris, where his lire waJS anything but pleaSia'D!t. IHe learned French, English much fater, ibut he could never speak it correctly. Benes was attracted ,b y Masaryk's person:ality. Masaryk at that ti.me was iintroducing in the Charles University methods of English p:nactical thought, which are often mistakenly reg,arded rus same kind of independent philosophical system. iMasaryk was quite well known because of his appearrunces before the public, ,b ut he was not too well liked. His ireailism rather shocked Ith.an inspired Czech 111.ationaliism in-Austria-Hunga ry. A reflection of the valiant stand of 'Z ola in France was the participation of Masaryk in the Hilsner murder case, in which he proved the fals1ty of the so'-'Called "Mrunuscripts," but :it evoked SLOVAKIA 55 a wave of hostility agaJinst him. When deputy Sviil:a sued Alllyz, it.he editor of t:he N.ARODNE DISTY, !because he ac.. cused Sviha of !being an informer for the Austrian police, Masaryk took sides with Anyz and so turned the Czech N atio:rraJ Socialists against himself. Antagonism 'between Masaryk and the N ationai Socialist Party had existed fo~ some time. :Since Benes always sfu'essed 3,nd underil!ined the intention and :aims of his master, it was expected th:a,t !lie would soon get into an a;rgument with ithe National Socialists. 'Dhe fight was a strange one, indeed. When it became clear that the Social Democrats would not place [)r. Benes on ,t he baJlOlt as their candidaite, and since Dr. Benes could not count OIIl being a candidate on the -ballot of the National Democrats, because of his opposition to ,t hem, there rernamed little '1.ef.t for him to do butt try to get on the !ballot as a candidate of the Czech NatiOIIlal 1Socialists. At that time it was still thought that a minister must be a deputy and that it was necessary to uphold the rules of parliamb.'lltary democracy. The National Socialist Party, which Benes wanted to 'balilot him, however, was over:whelmingily a .p arty of the workers and not intellectuals. But danger threatened Benes from another quarter. At t hat time Dr. iKramar was quite a power and naJtional hero. Benes !mnew that. But he also was determined to wreck the prur.ty of Kramar and, if need be, Kramar himself. He set himself to the taslk. The group associated with Dr. Jaro,. slav Stransky, a yoU1I1g deputy of the National Democratic Party, quit the party ,t o, join the so-called "Labor Party" which rwas in a transitiOIIlal stage; it ,w as through this party that the g,roup ent&ed the Czech National Socialist Party. The first attack within the party was made against Stflbrny, directed behind the scenes ,b y !Benes. [t ended with the expulsion ,oif Stribrny from the party. 1 Stfibrny Organizes the "Castle" Opposition Stribmy was hurt, but 111ort helpless. He knew his enemy very well.. In Prague, on Jungman iS treet, he began to build up his own publishing enterprises; his "Vecemi list" (Eveni1nig News) soon ibecame a feared boulevard newspaper. 56 SLOVAKIA Stribrny consolidated practically the entire "am.ti-Castle" opposition. 1Many persons who did not like Benes's methods were aHowed space in his paper, among them: J. S. Machar, fo:mner intimate of T. G. Masaryk, the writer Francis Zavfola, whom Dr. Benes never forgave for criticizing him in the novel "For.tinbras," Arnost Dvorak, author of the co.. medy "Matej 'Poctivy (Honest Matt), and many others. Wlhat did the opposition hold . against the ambitious, vainglorious Benes? IJ:t would take seve,r al pages just to enumerate all reproaches, complaints and charges, but sub.struintially all were concerned with one matter: Benes's dictatorial methods, which he developed throughout his life as ·a confirmed socialist. Dr. Benes came to parliament from the outside; he did not bother attending meetings, did not seek favor of the voters, and thought that his foreign activity was fin itself so great that he should be trusted without question in ·all things. If any one doubted the correotness of his views or of his politics and dared to express an opposite view, Benes considered that as a sign of enmity. Benes had no wide support among the voters; if the system of "binding ballots of candidates" did not exist, Benes never would have become a deputy of pa'I'liament. Benes was conscious of his unpopularity with the voters and his lack of ipoilitical ba:ckg,r ound, and .t his he coil'.Sidoced as his greatest personal defioiency. Naturally, this meant, if he wanted to stay in power - 3Jlld he certainly did Benes would have to find other methods of disposing of his political opponents. Of course, we know he not only found them, but also used them quite effectively. Whi~e Benes studied in Dijon one name attracted his attention: Fouche. The methods applied by th.is man, Na,. poleon's police director, !impressed the youthful, ambitious Benes. He reC"alled them later when he decided to become a power in Czech politics. He knew that a person could be destroyed ,pol1ticailly by malicious smeair and vilification; and he also learned• how the criminal courts aided Fouche, who bought witnesses who were wiHing to testify to anything for pay. Dr. Benes, who tested' this method when he rem()IVed Jirak, sectional ,chief o,f the !M:inistry of Trade, SLOVAKIA 57 thought he was strong enough to try it against Stribrny. At that itime Dr. K,a,reil Larry in the Ministry oif Justice was Benes's righit hand. ·L awyer Drobny, who complained of a meagre law practice, !became an all-powerful perso.., nalii.ty in the Ministry of Justice and Bene.s's willing servant. It was not easy to fabric-a te a ca:se against Stribrny; Benes knew he had to be very cautions. Stribrny was a publisher and was ba,cked by a small burt very ·a ctive political party; Dr. Charles iPergler, American-born Czech and outspoken adversary of Benes's policies, rulso joined •t he opposition headed by Stribmy. Dr. Lany worked haTd and long to come up with something against Stfibmy and ,so to please Benes. Finally, he cooked up something which Be111es thought would finish Stribrny: Larry said Stribrny had perjured ihimseJf during one of his trials. A great number of witnesses was rounded up to testify as l.<I1Slbructed by 'Larry; the trial got under way ·a nd the press featured it. Everything seemed to be running smoothly for Lany until a certain detective was called upon to testify; that detective sruid thait he saw Stribrny with the accused Sichrovsky in the Hotel de Saxe in Prague; he mentioned the point from which he saw them; it was from not rtoo, great a di,s tance, but a corner came into the picture. O.vdinary people cannot see a-r ound a corner, but the detective Lany produced as a witness was blessed, it •seems, with airOU!Ild-the-corner-sighrt. The court at thart time could not 1b e influenced; it did not believe thaJt the detective could see aToun.d corners. So the court threw out the case against Strib,rny. 1 Benes was :fm-ious, but he was by no means through with 1Stfibrny. '.I1lwough the staJte pmcUI1ator he made application for -a wrirt of error, which was gra111ted; the request rto ihave the trial tramsferred to another city "to re.., move the influence of the iPrague street" was also granted - Jihlava was ,given the honor. The second .part of the drarrna dragged on .in Ji'hlava · a nd caused no end of worry to Stribrny. Benes, however, had nothing to lose, except possibly a: ,b it of face. When the trial ended, Stribmy won out -again. 58 SLOVAKIA In the meantime, time marched on. Benes was kept busy with the cOI11sequences of his polides MJ.d ideological constructions. Afraid of 1osing his influence, he still thoug,ht that the [Habsburgs were 's till dangerous, so he oreated the Little Entente (Yugoslavia, Rumamfa ·a nd Czecho-!Slova'kia:) , wh!ich f,1opped when faced with rthe first crisis. Autocrat that he was, Benes ,a lways waited nntil he was forced to negotirution or to 0.!g.reement. No matter :how we judge the event,s of that time, one thing stands: out quite clear and certain: Benes failed to ;recognize two problems whicli were of vital .importance to the Repuiblic - the German p:mblem and the Slovak problem. He thought both would be solved by silence and proCTaJStination. Because he was a man who iregaroed discussion ·a s a personal atta0k, there never were any objective discussions about the vital proiblerns orf the country. Truthfully speaking, it must be said that Benes did not even have the desired understanding for those two problems. He was a man who gloried in moving in foreign circles; he saiw his strength on the diplomatic parquets among his a,oquaintances, club, colleagues, wd hi-red journ.ailists. Problems of internal politics neveir reaJ.Iy interested Benes. Una:ble to tolerate criticism, he contriived the laiw "for the protection of the (Republic," which was enthusiastically endorsed by the other "coalition" parties, becall!Se it put a perfect muzZJle io n the mouths o.f the opposition. Benes paid lip service to democracy, but sinned against it gravely. P&haps inexperience, a ilaclr of honest courage to give in when wrong, affiliaiting politics too much with person:al advantages run:d gains, commerc.iali·z ing politics at the ~nse of the ideal interests of ,t he nation - all this .became the hot/bed of dictatorial whims which culminated in whait Benes began rto do in 1945, when without even consuWng the nation he pu:bli,s:hed -and enforC"ed his famous- "decrees." He had become a dictator, something he had always striven for. To Benes it did not matter that he served the forces which ilater rwere to orvercome him, ibeca:use rthey were more powerful, experienced .and tactically more mature. The Czech nation tolerated dictatorship. Wea:kened by the war, SLOVAKIA 69 confused and befuddled by the political situation which was not presented in its :tirue colors, and led by ·a personality who thought he had won the war, the nation hum!bly sue.. cumbed to serious breaches and limitations of its rights and freedoms. Benes Finally "Gets" Stribrny Just before the war ended, as I recaill, while several of us were discussing the future, one of iBenes's very close friends Temarked: "Things will not be as they were under Masairyk. Benes is a vengeful man and will not forgive any one!" This characterization of Benes hit me hard later, when I learned that Stfibrny was arrested at the Grii.fenberg Baths in Silesia. Every one was convinced that this was a m~staJke. Wha;t could any o.ne have against Stribrny? During the war he was not active politically ·a t all. Benes nevertheless came out against Stribrny because of his pre ...war activity, which did not fall under the notion of "retribution" at all. Stfibrny's journalists, we know, frequently criticized Benes, as did many others. The court could not resolve whether the criticism was proper or not, but omy whether criticism was allowed and whether free criticism comes under the notion of "retribution." The defendant's counsel, a brilliant iPrague lawyer, was convinced that Stribrny could not be convicted. When the trial was over and tha,t lawyer heard the verdiot of life in jail, he wanted to give up his law practice. Stfibrny's son, hearing ,t he verdict, said only one word: "Dad!" and for that he was accused of disturbing public order and later sentenced to 18 months in jail. Jin 1S tribrny probably could have gotten out of the ·n ava prison, if he would have requested amnesty. But he refused to ask Benes for mercy. Stfibrny was not indicted and tried ·e ven by the Oommunists. "The mrun of October 28th," one of the founders of the Republic, apparently did not consider it dignified and proper to ask any one for mercy, for pardon for anything that he did not commit, for pardon because at the moment his antagonist was stronger than he was. 60 SLOVAKIA Let people think what they like a;bout Stribrny. One. thlng .they ml.l!st admit: he was am enthusiastic and stouthearted man. If he did do wrong, he was willing to admit it; often he may have attacked hairder than he should have and let himself be guided ,b y personal bitterness more than by political motive, but he was one orf the few moo who did found the Republic. The founders of states of civilized nations ·a re usualty glorified by monuments and a;rticles in school reade:ra. But Sitribrrny was allowed to die in jail. A shame? !indeed, it was a shame, but it was not Stribrny's shame. Getting rid of opponents. by any and all methods leads in ,p olitics to dictatorship. As soon as "liberaito:ris" cha:nge into enslavers of their nation, it is up to the na,tion to defend its rig,hts.. It cannot stand idly on the sidelines. Tihe ipeople who do that beair the responsibility for the victims of dictatorship. Stribrny was one of the victims. His deeply furrowed countenance will be long remembered iby those who knew him. His high forehead was crowned with a rich set of hair - ,w avy, beautiful lrair. 'Dhe physic,a l personality of Stribrny is slowly disappearing in the chasms of oblivion, ibut hiis hair still waves as if it were a li'Viing torch! • • • WHO SAID IT? "President Benes was always of the opinion, and in his Irutest statemenJts rulways stressed, tiliait ouir pact of a.Hiance with Soviet Russia and ouir friendshiip with other S1 av Ill8.tions must not encrooch on o.ur friendly and cordirul relations with other democratic states. This is .t he natuiral desire, shared by an enormous ma;jority of oor people, and nothing .p revents us from keeping the comidence of the democratic states and stroogthenmg and deepening OUT friendship with ouT great western Allies. Moscow, too, wanlts tio ful~ow thi s line of poliic y. rt will., however, be necessary for certain prejudices of the West with regard to the Soviet Union, which are stiU existing, to be swept away." - Premier Fierlinger of Ozecho-Slorvakia, OW7I Bulletin, June 1, 194'5. 1 1  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Enslavers of the Czech Nation: How Beneš "Got" Stříbrný Description An account of the resource Sirius Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 2 (19), June 1956 pp. 52-60 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1956 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/fed6a7427845d9eafd3d4e7ad9830efd.pdf de3ae01b6ed6bfffa03e8f8c2fbf95e5 PDF Text Text VOL. VI MARCH, 1956 NO. 1 (18) IN THIS ISSUE: "MEMOIRS OF DR. EDUARD BENES" - R eview Louis Stur Centennial Stur: Father of Modern Slovak N ation a lism Stur's Group in th e Servic e of the P eople Radio Fr ee Europe (Reprint from "FACTS FORUM " ) Kerner's "Czechoslovakia": History or Propaganda? WHO SAID IT : 16 * * * Edited and· compi l ed by PHILIP A. HROBAK S LO VA KIA Box 150 Middletown , Pa . • Published by THE - SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA GANSER LIBRARY M!LLERSV1LLE Si.ATE COLLEGE 'MlLLERSVILLE, PA 17551 �JIRI (GEORGE) BRADA author of the article on RAD IO FRE>E EUROPE, which was publi~h od in the "FACTS FQJRIUM" (Dallas, Texas; $2.00 per annum) and is reprinted in this issue. of the "SLOV,A KIA," was born of CZECH parents in Brno, Moravia (,Czecho-Slovakia), on March 8, 1923. He is a student of psychology and sociology, and is well versed i,n several languages. During the years of the Nazi occupation, Brada worked in a factory and a lso managed to do some studying at the Englis:h Institute in Brno and the University of Rostock. Unlike many other Cz echs of his age, he never joined the Nazi Party, nor any of the organizations which upon the defeat of Nazi Germany, were dec lared to be fascist either by the Allies, or the postwar government of Czecho-Slovakia. After the war, Brada studied history, philosophy and law at the University of Brno. When the Czech Reels se.izecl a ll power in CzechoSlovakia, , in February, 194 , he was expelled from the university by the Czech Communist Action Committee and dec lai,e.cl ineligible for study at any otJher school behind the Iron Curtain. Threatened with iirrest, after he refused to become. an informer for the Czech Communist government, Brada illegally crossed the Czech-Austrian border, October 2, 1948. Since January, 1949, he has been active in several refugee organizations in Germany. From May till July 1951, he was employed by RAD·IO FREE EUROPE, as a reference assistant and librarian. At present he. is ,a journalist in Germany. Brada vigorously opposed -socialism and communism. In his testimony for the Committee on Communist Aggression , I.. S. House of Representatives (Hon. Charles J. Kersten, chairman), of June 28, 1954 , Brada mad,e a number of statements which wa.rrant the attention o[ thoughtful a,ncl a lert Americans . For example, M r . Brada made the serious dharge that "the Amer ican Int ell igence Servi c e (CIC and CIA ) is not interest e d in invest igat ing anyth ing about th e communist system." ' 'The American authorities," Bracla testified, "take as source of information not the opinions of the a,nti-communist refugees but the communist radio and pne.ss -in the East . . . they swallow every communist swi ndle and show to the East clearly tha.t they a lso are eit,he-r unint-elligent enough to be misled or are communist-dominated . . ." "The center of the communist world conspi~·acy," sajcl Brada, concluding his sworn testimony for the Kersten Committee, "seems thus to be situated in the West, in all these radio stations, as the VOICE OF A'MERLOA (,a nd) RAID IO :FlRIDE EUIROPE, the CIA and the CIC, in the western crypto-communist press and radio , in the CR!USADE l•'OR FREEOOM, and F'REE EUROPE, INC."' 'Dhe revelations of Jifi Bracla in the 'FACTS FORUM" are not entirely ne w to !Jhe readers of "SLOVAKIA" and the monthly " SLOVAK NEJWrSLETTER" which are published by the Slovak League of America. TiJley fu ll y support and su bstantiate what has been written in the two per iodicals rubout Radio Free Europe and the Voice of America. Again we urge our readers: ASK YOUR SENATORS AND YOUR REPRESENTATIVES T O DEMAND AN INVESnGATION OF RADIO FREE EUIROBE AND THE VO ICE OF AMEJUCA nY co:--.;. GRESS, ES.PEClA.LLY THEIH ··C~EC'HO, LOVAK" DIVISIO'.\IS 1 Printed in the U. S. A. �SLOV AKIA Published quarterly by the Slovak League of America MARCH, 1956 VOL. VI "HE TRUSTED THE NO. 1 (18) RUS- foreign policy in his country - SIANS" is the title of the r eview may have in at least some measure written {The New York Times Book contributed to the eventual downReview, March 4, 1956) by Mr. fall of Czecho-Slovakia. The book, it is true, is didactic Gordon A. Craig, professor of History at Princeton University, about in tone quite laborious in style, the "MEMOIRS OF DR. EDUARD freq uently repetitious, but it is not BEJNES," which were translated "almost devoid of personal anecfrom the Czech by Godfrey Lias dotes or even personal judgments," (346 p.p.) and published by the as Mr. Craig states. In fact, it is Houghton Mifflin Company of Bos- a record of almost nothing else but Benes's personal judgments (Benes ton. The book sells for $7.50. According to Mr. Craig, Mr. Be- always knew, thought, foresaw, nes and T. G. Masaryk "laid the decided, recommended, etc.). In Mr. Craig's opinion, Dr. Benes fo undations of free "Czecho-Slovakia," but mentions n o thing about may have been the "chief victim the socialistic state they promoted of Munich," but that others were from the outset. Gen. Milan R- i:§te- less "chief" victims is, I believe, fanik, also one of the founders, is questionable. He says that "levity, completely forgotten. At Geneva egotism, unscrupulousness anlll cri(League of Nations), Benes was minal ignorance" are among the "an indefatigable worker for the mildest of the terms used by Benes rights of the lesser nations." Mr. to characterize the ,p olicy of the Craig, it seems, knows nothing Western powers before Munich, but about the fact that Benes denied the same terms may be used, and the existence of the Slovak nation, probably more rightly, to characw it ho u t which Czecho-Slovakia terize Benes and his policies. would never have come into exist- Benes lambasts the Western ence; and if Mr. Craig really did Powers who created and financed a little research, he might !ind it Czecho-Slovakia (which did not difficult to name the " lesser even pay her debt to the United nations" for which Benes fought States), but in contrast, as Mr. so indefatigably. For example, what Craig admits, "is almost comdid he do or say about the "lesser pletely uncritical of Soviet policy nations" which were gobbled up in the same years." Mr. Craig does not attempt to explain this attitude by the Soviet Union ? Munich, we are told, was forced of Dr. Benes; it seems he is comupon Benes; there was nothing he pletely unaware of the fact that could do about it. Ten years later, Benes, too, promoted materialistic however, after Czecho-Slovakia had socialism. The Soviet Union, as soon as regained her freedom, Benes once again was forced to see his country Benes succeeded in getting it into conquered by totalitarianism. Mr. the League of Nations, was, accordCr aig does not consider the :possibi- , ing to Benes, .t he on ly major power lity that the policies of Dr. Benes that sought consistently to mainhimself - who was responsible for tain the princtple of collective �2 SLOVAKIA security and that, until Munich, remained true to its treaty obligations. With Czecho-Slovakia, as well as other countries? And what were these treaty obligations? Mr. Craig preferred not to expand on this subject. Benes did not criticize Soviet policy before Munich and could only ,p raise it after, because his becoming president again depended on Stalin. Nothing else mattered. Benes was obsessed with the idea that he had to revenge himself on all who opposed his socialistic policies in the past and tried to embarrass him. With the help of Stalin and, of course, the other members of the victorious United Nations, Benes got what he wanted. At the expense of the Slovak and Czech nations! The accounts of Benes's wartime discussions with Roosevelt, Eden, Stalin and other Soviet diplomats, and statesmen - printed in notes and in the appendices - are, as Craig describes it, "perhaps the meatiest part of this book." And Benes did rely heavily on the Soviet Union ,a nd believed in it, because he was a part of the policy of the Soviet Union, even though most historians and reviewers of books fail to recognize this fact. Benes boasted that he knew the Russians and the Soviet Union very well; and, of course, he always knew what he was doing and where he was going; he advised Great Britain, the United States, the Soviet Union, France, etc.; no one knew anything better than Benes when it came to politics; he was the little man who always had a plan, always the GREAT "democratic'' statesman, diplomat, politician, and international lawyer! How else could Czecho-Slovakia end than it did? After the Munich debacle and the capitulation to •Hitler, which he. did not even refer to parliament, Benes simply placed the blame for every- thing on the Western Powers, resigned and cowardly fled his country to let others sweat it out; then in 1945 he returned behind Soviet bayonets to ac~use all members of the "protectorate" Czech Government and of the independent State of Slovakia of collaboration with the Nazis and treason. As far as Benes was concerned, he was still "legally" the ,president, CzechoSlovakia never ceased to exist as such, Munich never "legally" happened, the Slovaks had no right to declare their country independent, and international law was only what Benes interpreted it to be. That was the incomparable Benes! The Memoirs of Dr. Eduard Benes, like his other published works, are to all intents and ,purposes meant to justify everything that Dr. Benes did, even if, in fact, it meant rendering a gross disservice to democracy and betraying not only his own people, the Czechs, but even the Slovaks and other nations as well to the men of the Kremlin. With Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini the State was supreme. And so it was with Benes, even though he promoted the ideology of Godless, materialistic socialism in a less crude and violent fashion: the end he sought was the same. His MEMOIRS and various other works prove that, even though less eloquently and forcefully than does the "end of the road" Czecho-.Slovakia reached under his guidance. In his review, Mr. Craig does not mention that the very s am e MEMOIRS OF DR. EDUARD BENES, translated by Godfrey Lias, were first .published in 1954 by George Allen & Unwin Ltd. (London). The readers of the Times ·Book Review may, therefore, even as I did, purchase a book that they already have, a1isuming that it is an additional volume of Dr. Benes's Memoirs. Did Mr. Craig know that? - P.A. H. � VOL. VI MARCH, 1956 NO. 1 (18) IN THIS ISSUE: "MEMOIRS OF DR. EDUARD BENES" - R eview Louis Stur Centennial Stur: Father of Modern Slovak N ation a lism Stur's Group in th e Servic e of the P eople Radio Fr ee Europe (Reprint from "FACTS FORUM " ) Kerner's "Czechoslovakia": History or Propaganda? WHO SAID IT : 16 * * * Edited and· compi l ed by PHILIP A. HROBAK S LO VA KIA Box 150 Middletown , Pa . • Published by THE - SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA GANSER LIBRARY M!LLERSV1LLE Si.ATE COLLEGE 'MlLLERSVILLE, PA 17551 �JIRI (GEORGE) BRADA author of the article on RAD IO FRE>E EUROPE, which was publi~h od in the "FACTS FQJRIUM" (Dallas, Texas; $2.00 per annum) and is reprinted in this issue. of the "SLOV,A KIA," was born of CZECH parents in Brno, Moravia (,Czecho-Slovakia), on March 8, 1923. He is a student of psychology and sociology, and is well versed i,n several languages. During the years of the Nazi occupation, Brada worked in a factory and a lso managed to do some studying at the Englis:h Institute in Brno and the University of Rostock. Unlike many other Cz echs of his age, he never joined the Nazi Party, nor any of the organizations which upon the defeat of Nazi Germany, were dec lared to be fascist either by the Allies, or the postwar government of Czecho-Slovakia. After the war, Brada studied history, philosophy and law at the University of Brno. When the Czech Reels se.izecl a ll power in CzechoSlovakia, , in February, 194 , he was expelled from the university by the Czech Communist Action Committee and dec lai,e.cl ineligible for study at any otJher school behind the Iron Curtain. Threatened with iirrest, after he refused to become. an informer for the Czech Communist government, Brada illegally crossed the Czech-Austrian border, October 2, 1948. Since January, 1949, he has been active in several refugee organizations in Germany. From May till July 1951, he was employed by RAD·IO FREE EUROPE, as a reference assistant and librarian. At present he. is ,a journalist in Germany. Brada vigorously opposed -socialism and communism. In his testimony for the Committee on Communist Aggression , I.. S. House of Representatives (Hon. Charles J. Kersten, chairman), of June 28, 1954 , Brada mad,e a number of statements which wa.rrant the attention o[ thoughtful a,ncl a lert Americans . For example, M r . Brada made the serious dharge that "the Amer ican Int ell igence Servi c e (CIC and CIA ) is not interest e d in invest igat ing anyth ing about th e communist system." ' 'The American authorities," Bracla testified, "take as source of information not the opinions of the a,nti-communist refugees but the communist radio and pne.ss -in the East . . . they swallow every communist swi ndle and show to the East clearly tha.t they a lso are eit,he-r unint-elligent enough to be misled or are communist-dominated . . ." "The center of the communist world conspi~·acy," sajcl Brada, concluding his sworn testimony for the Kersten Committee, "seems thus to be situated in the West, in all these radio stations, as the VOICE OF A'MERLOA (,a nd) RAID IO :FlRIDE EUIROPE, the CIA and the CIC, in the western crypto-communist press and radio , in the CR!USADE l•'OR FREEOOM, and F'REE EUROPE, INC."' 'Dhe revelations of Jifi Bracla in the 'FACTS FORUM" are not entirely ne w to !Jhe readers of "SLOVAKIA" and the monthly " SLOVAK NEJWrSLETTER" which are published by the Slovak League of America. TiJley fu ll y support and su bstantiate what has been written in the two per iodicals rubout Radio Free Europe and the Voice of America. Again we urge our readers: ASK YOUR SENATORS AND YOUR REPRESENTATIVES T O DEMAND AN INVESnGATION OF RADIO FREE EUIROBE AND THE VO ICE OF AMEJUCA nY co:--.;. GRESS, ES.PEClA.LLY THEIH ··C~EC'HO, LOVAK" DIVISIO'.\IS 1 Printed in the U. S. A. �SLOV AKIA Published quarterly by the Slovak League of America MARCH, 1956 VOL. VI "HE TRUSTED THE NO. 1 (18) RUS- foreign policy in his country - SIANS" is the title of the r eview may have in at least some measure written {The New York Times Book contributed to the eventual downReview, March 4, 1956) by Mr. fall of Czecho-Slovakia. The book, it is true, is didactic Gordon A. Craig, professor of History at Princeton University, about in tone quite laborious in style, the "MEMOIRS OF DR. EDUARD freq uently repetitious, but it is not BEJNES," which were translated "almost devoid of personal anecfrom the Czech by Godfrey Lias dotes or even personal judgments," (346 p.p.) and published by the as Mr. Craig states. In fact, it is Houghton Mifflin Company of Bos- a record of almost nothing else but Benes's personal judgments (Benes ton. The book sells for $7.50. According to Mr. Craig, Mr. Be- always knew, thought, foresaw, nes and T. G. Masaryk "laid the decided, recommended, etc.). In Mr. Craig's opinion, Dr. Benes fo undations of free "Czecho-Slovakia," but mentions n o thing about may have been the "chief victim the socialistic state they promoted of Munich," but that others were from the outset. Gen. Milan R- i:§te- less "chief" victims is, I believe, fanik, also one of the founders, is questionable. He says that "levity, completely forgotten. At Geneva egotism, unscrupulousness anlll cri(League of Nations), Benes was minal ignorance" are among the "an indefatigable worker for the mildest of the terms used by Benes rights of the lesser nations." Mr. to characterize the ,p olicy of the Craig, it seems, knows nothing Western powers before Munich, but about the fact that Benes denied the same terms may be used, and the existence of the Slovak nation, probably more rightly, to characw it ho u t which Czecho-Slovakia terize Benes and his policies. would never have come into exist- Benes lambasts the Western ence; and if Mr. Craig really did Powers who created and financed a little research, he might !ind it Czecho-Slovakia (which did not difficult to name the " lesser even pay her debt to the United nations" for which Benes fought States), but in contrast, as Mr. so indefatigably. For example, what Craig admits, "is almost comdid he do or say about the "lesser pletely uncritical of Soviet policy nations" which were gobbled up in the same years." Mr. Craig does not attempt to explain this attitude by the Soviet Union ? Munich, we are told, was forced of Dr. Benes; it seems he is comupon Benes; there was nothing he pletely unaware of the fact that could do about it. Ten years later, Benes, too, promoted materialistic however, after Czecho-Slovakia had socialism. The Soviet Union, as soon as regained her freedom, Benes once again was forced to see his country Benes succeeded in getting it into conquered by totalitarianism. Mr. the League of Nations, was, accordCr aig does not consider the :possibi- , ing to Benes, .t he on ly major power lity that the policies of Dr. Benes that sought consistently to mainhimself - who was responsible for tain the princtple of collective �2 SLOVAKIA security and that, until Munich, remained true to its treaty obligations. With Czecho-Slovakia, as well as other countries? And what were these treaty obligations? Mr. Craig preferred not to expand on this subject. Benes did not criticize Soviet policy before Munich and could only ,p raise it after, because his becoming president again depended on Stalin. Nothing else mattered. Benes was obsessed with the idea that he had to revenge himself on all who opposed his socialistic policies in the past and tried to embarrass him. With the help of Stalin and, of course, the other members of the victorious United Nations, Benes got what he wanted. At the expense of the Slovak and Czech nations! The accounts of Benes's wartime discussions with Roosevelt, Eden, Stalin and other Soviet diplomats, and statesmen - printed in notes and in the appendices - are, as Craig describes it, "perhaps the meatiest part of this book." And Benes did rely heavily on the Soviet Union ,a nd believed in it, because he was a part of the policy of the Soviet Union, even though most historians and reviewers of books fail to recognize this fact. Benes boasted that he knew the Russians and the Soviet Union very well; and, of course, he always knew what he was doing and where he was going; he advised Great Britain, the United States, the Soviet Union, France, etc.; no one knew anything better than Benes when it came to politics; he was the little man who always had a plan, always the GREAT "democratic'' statesman, diplomat, politician, and international lawyer! How else could Czecho-Slovakia end than it did? After the Munich debacle and the capitulation to •Hitler, which he. did not even refer to parliament, Benes simply placed the blame for every- thing on the Western Powers, resigned and cowardly fled his country to let others sweat it out; then in 1945 he returned behind Soviet bayonets to ac~use all members of the "protectorate" Czech Government and of the independent State of Slovakia of collaboration with the Nazis and treason. As far as Benes was concerned, he was still "legally" the ,president, CzechoSlovakia never ceased to exist as such, Munich never "legally" happened, the Slovaks had no right to declare their country independent, and international law was only what Benes interpreted it to be. That was the incomparable Benes! The Memoirs of Dr. Eduard Benes, like his other published works, are to all intents and ,purposes meant to justify everything that Dr. Benes did, even if, in fact, it meant rendering a gross disservice to democracy and betraying not only his own people, the Czechs, but even the Slovaks and other nations as well to the men of the Kremlin. With Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini the State was supreme. And so it was with Benes, even though he promoted the ideology of Godless, materialistic socialism in a less crude and violent fashion: the end he sought was the same. His MEMOIRS and various other works prove that, even though less eloquently and forcefully than does the "end of the road" Czecho-.Slovakia reached under his guidance. In his review, Mr. Craig does not mention that the very s am e MEMOIRS OF DR. EDUARD BENES, translated by Godfrey Lias, were first .published in 1954 by George Allen & Unwin Ltd. (London). The readers of the Times ·Book Review may, therefore, even as I did, purchase a book that they already have, a1isuming that it is an additional volume of Dr. Benes's Memoirs. Did Mr. Craig know that? - P.A. H. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document VOL. VI MARCH, 1956 NO. 1 (18) IN THIS ISSUE: "MEMOIRS OF DR. EDUARD BENES" - R eview Louis Stur Centennial Stur: Father of Modern Slovak N ation a lism Stur's Group in th e Servic e of the P eople Radio Fr ee Europe (Reprint from "FACTS FORUM " ) Kerner's "Czechoslovakia": History or Propaganda? WHO SAID IT : 16 * * * Edited and· compi l ed by PHILIP A. HROBAK S LO VA KIA Box 150 Middletown , Pa . • Published by THE - SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA GANSER LIBRARY M!LLERSV1LLE Si.ATE COLLEGE 'MlLLERSVILLE, PA 17551 JIRI (GEORGE) BRADA author of the article on RAD IO FRE>E EUROPE, which was publi~h od in the "FACTS FQJRIUM" (Dallas, Texas; $2.00 per annum) and is reprinted in this issue. of the "SLOV,A KIA," was born of CZECH parents in Brno, Moravia (,Czecho-Slovakia), on March 8, 1923. He is a student of psychology and sociology, and is well versed i,n several languages. During the years of the Nazi occupation, Brada worked in a factory and a lso managed to do some studying at the Englis:h Institute in Brno and the University of Rostock. Unlike many other Cz echs of his age, he never joined the Nazi Party, nor any of the organizations which upon the defeat of Nazi Germany, were dec lared to be fascist either by the Allies, or the postwar government of Czecho-Slovakia. After the war, Brada studied history, philosophy and law at the University of Brno. When the Czech Reels se.izecl a ll power in CzechoSlovakia, , in February, 194 , he was expelled from the university by the Czech Communist Action Committee and dec lai,e.cl ineligible for study at any otJher school behind the Iron Curtain. Threatened with iirrest, after he refused to become. an informer for the Czech Communist government, Brada illegally crossed the Czech-Austrian border, October 2, 1948. Since January, 1949, he has been active in several refugee organizations in Germany. From May till July 1951, he was employed by RAD·IO FREE EUROPE, as a reference assistant and librarian. At present he. is ,a journalist in Germany. Brada vigorously opposed -socialism and communism. In his testimony for the Committee on Communist Aggression , I.. S. House of Representatives (Hon. Charles J. Kersten, chairman), of June 28, 1954 , Brada mad,e a number of statements which wa.rrant the attention o[ thoughtful a,ncl a lert Americans . For example, M r . Brada made the serious dharge that "the Amer ican Int ell igence Servi c e (CIC and CIA ) is not interest e d in invest igat ing anyth ing about th e communist system." ' 'The American authorities," Bracla testified, "take as source of information not the opinions of the a,nti-communist refugees but the communist radio and pne.ss -in the East . . . they swallow every communist swi ndle and show to the East clearly tha.t they a lso are eit,he-r unint-elligent enough to be misled or are communist-dominated . . ." "The center of the communist world conspi~·acy," sajcl Brada, concluding his sworn testimony for the Kersten Committee, "seems thus to be situated in the West, in all these radio stations, as the VOICE OF A'MERLOA (,a nd) RAID IO :FlRIDE EUIROPE, the CIA and the CIC, in the western crypto-communist press and radio , in the CR!USADE l•'OR FREEOOM, and F'REE EUROPE, INC."' 'Dhe revelations of Jifi Bracla in the 'FACTS FORUM" are not entirely ne w to !Jhe readers of "SLOVAKIA" and the monthly " SLOVAK NEJWrSLETTER" which are published by the Slovak League of America. TiJley fu ll y support and su bstantiate what has been written in the two per iodicals rubout Radio Free Europe and the Voice of America. Again we urge our readers: ASK YOUR SENATORS AND YOUR REPRESENTATIVES T O DEMAND AN INVESnGATION OF RADIO FREE EUIROBE AND THE VO ICE OF AMEJUCA nY co:--.;. GRESS, ES.PEClA.LLY THEIH ··C~EC'HO, LOVAK" DIVISIO'.\IS 1 Printed in the U. S. A. SLOV AKIA Published quarterly by the Slovak League of America MARCH, 1956 VOL. VI "HE TRUSTED THE NO. 1 (18) RUS- foreign policy in his country - SIANS" is the title of the r eview may have in at least some measure written {The New York Times Book contributed to the eventual downReview, March 4, 1956) by Mr. fall of Czecho-Slovakia. The book, it is true, is didactic Gordon A. Craig, professor of History at Princeton University, about in tone quite laborious in style, the "MEMOIRS OF DR. EDUARD freq uently repetitious, but it is not BEJNES," which were translated "almost devoid of personal anecfrom the Czech by Godfrey Lias dotes or even personal judgments," (346 p.p.) and published by the as Mr. Craig states. In fact, it is Houghton Mifflin Company of Bos- a record of almost nothing else but Benes's personal judgments (Benes ton. The book sells for $7.50. According to Mr. Craig, Mr. Be- always knew, thought, foresaw, nes and T. G. Masaryk "laid the decided, recommended, etc.). In Mr. Craig's opinion, Dr. Benes fo undations of free "Czecho-Slovakia," but mentions n o thing about may have been the "chief victim the socialistic state they promoted of Munich," but that others were from the outset. Gen. Milan R- i:§te- less "chief" victims is, I believe, fanik, also one of the founders, is questionable. He says that "levity, completely forgotten. At Geneva egotism, unscrupulousness anlll cri(League of Nations), Benes was minal ignorance" are among the "an indefatigable worker for the mildest of the terms used by Benes rights of the lesser nations." Mr. to characterize the ,p olicy of the Craig, it seems, knows nothing Western powers before Munich, but about the fact that Benes denied the same terms may be used, and the existence of the Slovak nation, probably more rightly, to characw it ho u t which Czecho-Slovakia terize Benes and his policies. would never have come into exist- Benes lambasts the Western ence; and if Mr. Craig really did Powers who created and financed a little research, he might !ind it Czecho-Slovakia (which did not difficult to name the " lesser even pay her debt to the United nations" for which Benes fought States), but in contrast, as Mr. so indefatigably. For example, what Craig admits, "is almost comdid he do or say about the "lesser pletely uncritical of Soviet policy nations" which were gobbled up in the same years." Mr. Craig does not attempt to explain this attitude by the Soviet Union ? Munich, we are told, was forced of Dr. Benes; it seems he is comupon Benes; there was nothing he pletely unaware of the fact that could do about it. Ten years later, Benes, too, promoted materialistic however, after Czecho-Slovakia had socialism. The Soviet Union, as soon as regained her freedom, Benes once again was forced to see his country Benes succeeded in getting it into conquered by totalitarianism. Mr. the League of Nations, was, accordCr aig does not consider the :possibi- , ing to Benes, .t he on ly major power lity that the policies of Dr. Benes that sought consistently to mainhimself - who was responsible for tain the princtple of collective 2 SLOVAKIA security and that, until Munich, remained true to its treaty obligations. With Czecho-Slovakia, as well as other countries? And what were these treaty obligations? Mr. Craig preferred not to expand on this subject. Benes did not criticize Soviet policy before Munich and could only ,p raise it after, because his becoming president again depended on Stalin. Nothing else mattered. Benes was obsessed with the idea that he had to revenge himself on all who opposed his socialistic policies in the past and tried to embarrass him. With the help of Stalin and, of course, the other members of the victorious United Nations, Benes got what he wanted. At the expense of the Slovak and Czech nations! The accounts of Benes's wartime discussions with Roosevelt, Eden, Stalin and other Soviet diplomats, and statesmen - printed in notes and in the appendices - are, as Craig describes it, "perhaps the meatiest part of this book." And Benes did rely heavily on the Soviet Union ,a nd believed in it, because he was a part of the policy of the Soviet Union, even though most historians and reviewers of books fail to recognize this fact. Benes boasted that he knew the Russians and the Soviet Union very well; and, of course, he always knew what he was doing and where he was going; he advised Great Britain, the United States, the Soviet Union, France, etc.; no one knew anything better than Benes when it came to politics; he was the little man who always had a plan, always the GREAT "democratic'' statesman, diplomat, politician, and international lawyer! How else could Czecho-Slovakia end than it did? After the Munich debacle and the capitulation to •Hitler, which he. did not even refer to parliament, Benes simply placed the blame for every- thing on the Western Powers, resigned and cowardly fled his country to let others sweat it out; then in 1945 he returned behind Soviet bayonets to ac~use all members of the "protectorate" Czech Government and of the independent State of Slovakia of collaboration with the Nazis and treason. As far as Benes was concerned, he was still "legally" the ,president, CzechoSlovakia never ceased to exist as such, Munich never "legally" happened, the Slovaks had no right to declare their country independent, and international law was only what Benes interpreted it to be. That was the incomparable Benes! The Memoirs of Dr. Eduard Benes, like his other published works, are to all intents and ,purposes meant to justify everything that Dr. Benes did, even if, in fact, it meant rendering a gross disservice to democracy and betraying not only his own people, the Czechs, but even the Slovaks and other nations as well to the men of the Kremlin. With Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini the State was supreme. And so it was with Benes, even though he promoted the ideology of Godless, materialistic socialism in a less crude and violent fashion: the end he sought was the same. His MEMOIRS and various other works prove that, even though less eloquently and forcefully than does the "end of the road" Czecho-.Slovakia reached under his guidance. In his review, Mr. Craig does not mention that the very s am e MEMOIRS OF DR. EDUARD BENES, translated by Godfrey Lias, were first .published in 1954 by George Allen & Unwin Ltd. (London). The readers of the Times ·Book Review may, therefore, even as I did, purchase a book that they already have, a1isuming that it is an additional volume of Dr. Benes's Memoirs. Did Mr. Craig know that? - P.A. H.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Front Matter, Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 1 (18) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1956 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/1ea81ef7ac20ecc1142e0ee1f3cad84f.pdf 8660dfaae8183109b1e033eeba43f7c6 PDF Text Text VOL. VI JUNE, 1956 NO . 2 ( 19) IN THIS ISSUE: Our Tradition and Louis Stur Th e Politi ca l Messag e of M a't us Ce rn a k Labor and th e Slovak Republi c Israe l and Slovaki a Slovak Lit eratur e Und er th e So vi et Impact Enslav e rs of the Cz ech Nation : How Ben es Got Stribrny Kern er ' s "Czechoslov a ki a": Histo ry o r Propagand a? WHO SAID IT: 51, 60, 64 * * Edit ed a nd co mpil ed by PHILIP A . HROBAK SLO VA KIA Box 150 Middl etown , Pa . • Pub li sh ed by T H E S LOVAK LEA GUE O F A MER ICA GAN SER LlBRARY MI LLERSVl.ltE STATE COLLEGE fy11 LLERSVJL LE, PA 17551 �SLOVAKIA is published periodically by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic fede1·ation of Americans of Slovak descent. 'rhe chief purpo e of SLOVAKIA is to promote a better understanding and appreciation of the Slovak nation and its long struggle f 01' freedom and independence. As Americans, members of the Slovak League of America firmly believe that the Slovak nation, just as all nations, has an inherent and God-given right to freedom and independence. 'rhey are dedicated to the cause of the American way of life, Slovak freedom and world peace and are determined to oppose the plague of Communism and all other totalitarian political systems. Subscription to Slovakia $1.00 per year in the t . S. A. - $2.00 elsewhere. Send subscriptions to: SLOVAKI A Box 150 Middletown, Pa. Printed in the U. S. A. JEDNOTA PRESS Middletown, Pa. �SLOVAKIA Published VOL. VI quarterly by the Slovak JUNE, 1956 STUDENT RIOTS took rp,la,ce in Slovakia, in the cities of Bratislava, Nitra, and Banska Bystrica, on May 12, 1!}56, a ccording to reports emanating from Vienna. S.tudent demon strations against the Prague regime ,also occurred in Prague but on a smaller scale. The police arrested some 60 Slovak students, but jailed only four Czechs. They were a,ccused of presenting ultimatums demanding reduction in Marx-Leninism ,c ourses, shorter military training periods, and a complete restoration of academic freedom. Acting with unusual daring, the Slovak students asked the government to permit considerably more freedom than has existed in Czecho-Slovakla since the Reds took over complete control of the country in 1948. Their requests were submitted in the form of a Tesolution to the Minister of Education, Francis Kahuda, on May 12, when the demonstrations first started, to be repeated on May 1'5 and 20. The students' riots in Czecho-Slovakia appeared to be centered in Slovakia, although Prague has ha.d a taste of it. Parts of the resolution, dealing with student complaints a.bout housing, courses of study, and food, were published, but no publicity was permitted .for the parts which reportedly criticized some aspects of the present political way of life in Czecho-Slova.kia. Officials had previously approved a .series of student meetings in Prague and the Slovak cities as part of the liberalization movement then under way throughout League of America NO. 2 (19) the Soviet sateLlites. They figured that the students would, at most, indulge in criticism in a limited way, and not in the manner they actually did. Some of the points made by the students, but not published, included the following: 1. Political parties should be put on an equal footing, with none specially favored. The people should have the means of controlling members of the National Assembly, including the right to recall elected deputies. 2. Unrestricted freedom to travel independently of the Governm ent Travel Office. 3. A demand for a ge.neral amnesty for political prisoners; making public court records; and punishing those responsible for extorting confessions and using other illegal metheds. 4. A demand for a free press, ra;dio and films to .present information truthfuUy, quickly and independently; no interference with foreign broadcasts; and the importation of new.spapers, magazines, and books from all countries regardless of their political systems. (Slovak newspapers published in America, which advocate a free Slovakia, were banned in Czecho-Slovakia on Oc tober 10, 1946). Slovak students were nermitted for the first time since-1948 to hold their traditional May Parade and Carnival (MAJALES) on May 20; they used the occasion to lampoon the government. A group of gagged a.nd 'blindfolded �2 SLOVAKIA students, representing editors of the newspapers published for the youth, paraded ,g leefully through the streets. Another group in Bratisiava carried a coffin on whioh Wlas inscribed "aca,demic freedom." ,B ut particularly impressive was the ban-d of students in death shrouds carrying the banner "We board in student Dining Halls Paradise" ! They really did look star:ved (,the picture was J-eproduced in several American Slov.ak newspapers from ,a German paper) ! Wihen ;newsmen questioned Premier William i:§iroky on :reports that many students had been arrested, he replied that this was riot so and ,a dded: "The students have the right to openly express their views at a11 times, and we, in turn, have the right to say to them that we agree or di-sagree with them on any particular question." The BratLslava newspapers Pi:aca and Pravda, however, did not share the Premier's tolerant attitude toward recent student demonstrations, con.demning as "dem,agogic" the demands of Slovak students. • • • Czech Communist agents resid· ing in various countries, including our America, are doing their utmo.s t to have eminent Slovak and Czech exiles to return .to their homelands. "All is forgiven; come home; nothi.ng shall haJPpen to you; help us build our new democratic country" - that seems to •b e the theme song of •a ll of them. Some of the professional men an,d intelJectuats have been promised attractive salaries, new homes, freedom to work a·s they se.e -fit in their ,p rofessions, but no Slovak to our knowledge has !4ken the bait thus far. Relatives, friends and acquaintances, it seems have been organized in a Iletter-writing campaign to induce , exiles to return home. The movement, however, has failed to lure the Slovaks to the "people's democracy" establi-shed by Benes ami Gottwald in 1945. • • • STALi N labors for the Ki-emlin even in his box and gladly assumes the blame for all the violenoe, terror and murder perpetrated against innocent populations of the USSR, the satellite EurOII)ean -c ountries, Korea, China, etc. As a result of this "blameit-all-on-Stalin" campaign, every satellite country ha.s exculpated some of its Red leaders, posthumously exonerating even liquidated comrades (iBulgaria, Hungary, Poland), but this is not the case in regal'd to Slova'k 1Reds whose h earts at one time ·b led for Stalin. There has been no vindication for Vladimir Clementis, Slovak Red and former Minister o.f 'Foreign Aff.ai:rs of Czecho-Slovakia, who was executed as a "deviationist"; and no amnesty for Laco Novomesky and Gustav Husak, both of whom •a re still languishing in jail for preferring a Slovak Soviet RepubUc to a Czecho-'Slovak State. Of course, it may be that they shall have to wait till the Czech Reds of Pr,ague start an anti-Gottwald campaign. • • • IN SLOVAKIA: The mention of GOO has been ordered out of aJ.l texts. . . . Taxes in Slovakia today, ·u nder the Czech Reds, are four times higher than they were during the life of the Slovak Republic (19,39-1'945) . . . . Slovakia ,s howed the gr,eatest increase in population of all European countries in 1'955 and. ranked third in this regard among the nations of the world; the increase was 17 per thousand, •a nd the population of Slovakia is now 3,7'30,000. � VOL. VI JUNE, 1956 NO . 2 ( 19) IN THIS ISSUE: Our Tradition and Louis Stur Th e Politi ca l Messag e of M a't us Ce rn a k Labor and th e Slovak Republi c Israe l and Slovaki a Slovak Lit eratur e Und er th e So vi et Impact Enslav e rs of the Cz ech Nation : How Ben es Got Stribrny Kern er ' s "Czechoslov a ki a": Histo ry o r Propagand a? WHO SAID IT: 51, 60, 64 * * Edit ed a nd co mpil ed by PHILIP A . HROBAK SLO VA KIA Box 150 Middl etown , Pa . • Pub li sh ed by T H E S LOVAK LEA GUE O F A MER ICA GAN SER LlBRARY MI LLERSVl.ltE STATE COLLEGE fy11 LLERSVJL LE, PA 17551 �SLOVAKIA is published periodically by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic fede1·ation of Americans of Slovak descent. 'rhe chief purpo e of SLOVAKIA is to promote a better understanding and appreciation of the Slovak nation and its long struggle f 01' freedom and independence. As Americans, members of the Slovak League of America firmly believe that the Slovak nation, just as all nations, has an inherent and God-given right to freedom and independence. 'rhey are dedicated to the cause of the American way of life, Slovak freedom and world peace and are determined to oppose the plague of Communism and all other totalitarian political systems. Subscription to Slovakia $1.00 per year in the t . S. A. - $2.00 elsewhere. Send subscriptions to: SLOVAKI A Box 150 Middletown, Pa. Printed in the U. S. A. JEDNOTA PRESS Middletown, Pa. �SLOVAKIA Published VOL. VI quarterly by the Slovak JUNE, 1956 STUDENT RIOTS took rp,la,ce in Slovakia, in the cities of Bratislava, Nitra, and Banska Bystrica, on May 12, 1!}56, a ccording to reports emanating from Vienna. S.tudent demon strations against the Prague regime ,also occurred in Prague but on a smaller scale. The police arrested some 60 Slovak students, but jailed only four Czechs. They were a,ccused of presenting ultimatums demanding reduction in Marx-Leninism ,c ourses, shorter military training periods, and a complete restoration of academic freedom. Acting with unusual daring, the Slovak students asked the government to permit considerably more freedom than has existed in Czecho-Slovakla since the Reds took over complete control of the country in 1948. Their requests were submitted in the form of a Tesolution to the Minister of Education, Francis Kahuda, on May 12, when the demonstrations first started, to be repeated on May 1'5 and 20. The students' riots in Czecho-Slovakia appeared to be centered in Slovakia, although Prague has ha.d a taste of it. Parts of the resolution, dealing with student complaints a.bout housing, courses of study, and food, were published, but no publicity was permitted .for the parts which reportedly criticized some aspects of the present political way of life in Czecho-Slova.kia. Officials had previously approved a .series of student meetings in Prague and the Slovak cities as part of the liberalization movement then under way throughout League of America NO. 2 (19) the Soviet sateLlites. They figured that the students would, at most, indulge in criticism in a limited way, and not in the manner they actually did. Some of the points made by the students, but not published, included the following: 1. Political parties should be put on an equal footing, with none specially favored. The people should have the means of controlling members of the National Assembly, including the right to recall elected deputies. 2. Unrestricted freedom to travel independently of the Governm ent Travel Office. 3. A demand for a ge.neral amnesty for political prisoners; making public court records; and punishing those responsible for extorting confessions and using other illegal metheds. 4. A demand for a free press, ra;dio and films to .present information truthfuUy, quickly and independently; no interference with foreign broadcasts; and the importation of new.spapers, magazines, and books from all countries regardless of their political systems. (Slovak newspapers published in America, which advocate a free Slovakia, were banned in Czecho-Slovakia on Oc tober 10, 1946). Slovak students were nermitted for the first time since-1948 to hold their traditional May Parade and Carnival (MAJALES) on May 20; they used the occasion to lampoon the government. A group of gagged a.nd 'blindfolded �2 SLOVAKIA students, representing editors of the newspapers published for the youth, paraded ,g leefully through the streets. Another group in Bratisiava carried a coffin on whioh Wlas inscribed "aca,demic freedom." ,B ut particularly impressive was the ban-d of students in death shrouds carrying the banner "We board in student Dining Halls Paradise" ! They really did look star:ved (,the picture was J-eproduced in several American Slov.ak newspapers from ,a German paper) ! Wihen ;newsmen questioned Premier William i:§iroky on :reports that many students had been arrested, he replied that this was riot so and ,a dded: "The students have the right to openly express their views at a11 times, and we, in turn, have the right to say to them that we agree or di-sagree with them on any particular question." The BratLslava newspapers Pi:aca and Pravda, however, did not share the Premier's tolerant attitude toward recent student demonstrations, con.demning as "dem,agogic" the demands of Slovak students. • • • Czech Communist agents resid· ing in various countries, including our America, are doing their utmo.s t to have eminent Slovak and Czech exiles to return .to their homelands. "All is forgiven; come home; nothi.ng shall haJPpen to you; help us build our new democratic country" - that seems to •b e the theme song of •a ll of them. Some of the professional men an,d intelJectuats have been promised attractive salaries, new homes, freedom to work a·s they se.e -fit in their ,p rofessions, but no Slovak to our knowledge has !4ken the bait thus far. Relatives, friends and acquaintances, it seems have been organized in a Iletter-writing campaign to induce , exiles to return home. The movement, however, has failed to lure the Slovaks to the "people's democracy" establi-shed by Benes ami Gottwald in 1945. • • • STALi N labors for the Ki-emlin even in his box and gladly assumes the blame for all the violenoe, terror and murder perpetrated against innocent populations of the USSR, the satellite EurOII)ean -c ountries, Korea, China, etc. As a result of this "blameit-all-on-Stalin" campaign, every satellite country ha.s exculpated some of its Red leaders, posthumously exonerating even liquidated comrades (iBulgaria, Hungary, Poland), but this is not the case in regal'd to Slova'k 1Reds whose h earts at one time ·b led for Stalin. There has been no vindication for Vladimir Clementis, Slovak Red and former Minister o.f 'Foreign Aff.ai:rs of Czecho-Slovakia, who was executed as a "deviationist"; and no amnesty for Laco Novomesky and Gustav Husak, both of whom •a re still languishing in jail for preferring a Slovak Soviet RepubUc to a Czecho-'Slovak State. Of course, it may be that they shall have to wait till the Czech Reds of Pr,ague start an anti-Gottwald campaign. • • • IN SLOVAKIA: The mention of GOO has been ordered out of aJ.l texts. . . . Taxes in Slovakia today, ·u nder the Czech Reds, are four times higher than they were during the life of the Slovak Republic (19,39-1'945) . . . . Slovakia ,s howed the gr,eatest increase in population of all European countries in 1'955 and. ranked third in this regard among the nations of the world; the increase was 17 per thousand, •a nd the population of Slovakia is now 3,7'30,000. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document VOL. VI JUNE, 1956 NO . 2 ( 19) IN THIS ISSUE: Our Tradition and Louis Stur Th e Politi ca l Messag e of M a't us Ce rn a k Labor and th e Slovak Republi c Israe l and Slovaki a Slovak Lit eratur e Und er th e So vi et Impact Enslav e rs of the Cz ech Nation : How Ben es Got Stribrny Kern er ' s "Czechoslov a ki a": Histo ry o r Propagand a? WHO SAID IT: 51, 60, 64 * * Edit ed a nd co mpil ed by PHILIP A . HROBAK SLO VA KIA Box 150 Middl etown , Pa . • Pub li sh ed by T H E S LOVAK LEA GUE O F A MER ICA GAN SER LlBRARY MI LLERSVl.ltE STATE COLLEGE fy11 LLERSVJL LE, PA 17551 SLOVAKIA is published periodically by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic fede1·ation of Americans of Slovak descent. 'rhe chief purpo e of SLOVAKIA is to promote a better understanding and appreciation of the Slovak nation and its long struggle f 01' freedom and independence. As Americans, members of the Slovak League of America firmly believe that the Slovak nation, just as all nations, has an inherent and God-given right to freedom and independence. 'rhey are dedicated to the cause of the American way of life, Slovak freedom and world peace and are determined to oppose the plague of Communism and all other totalitarian political systems. Subscription to Slovakia $1.00 per year in the t . S. A. - $2.00 elsewhere. Send subscriptions to: SLOVAKI A Box 150 Middletown, Pa. Printed in the U. S. A. JEDNOTA PRESS Middletown, Pa. SLOVAKIA Published VOL. VI quarterly by the Slovak JUNE, 1956 STUDENT RIOTS took rp,la,ce in Slovakia, in the cities of Bratislava, Nitra, and Banska Bystrica, on May 12, 1!}56, a ccording to reports emanating from Vienna. S.tudent demon strations against the Prague regime ,also occurred in Prague but on a smaller scale. The police arrested some 60 Slovak students, but jailed only four Czechs. They were a,ccused of presenting ultimatums demanding reduction in Marx-Leninism ,c ourses, shorter military training periods, and a complete restoration of academic freedom. Acting with unusual daring, the Slovak students asked the government to permit considerably more freedom than has existed in Czecho-Slovakla since the Reds took over complete control of the country in 1948. Their requests were submitted in the form of a Tesolution to the Minister of Education, Francis Kahuda, on May 12, when the demonstrations first started, to be repeated on May 1'5 and 20. The students' riots in Czecho-Slovakia appeared to be centered in Slovakia, although Prague has ha.d a taste of it. Parts of the resolution, dealing with student complaints a.bout housing, courses of study, and food, were published, but no publicity was permitted .for the parts which reportedly criticized some aspects of the present political way of life in Czecho-Slova.kia. Officials had previously approved a .series of student meetings in Prague and the Slovak cities as part of the liberalization movement then under way throughout League of America NO. 2 (19) the Soviet sateLlites. They figured that the students would, at most, indulge in criticism in a limited way, and not in the manner they actually did. Some of the points made by the students, but not published, included the following: 1. Political parties should be put on an equal footing, with none specially favored. The people should have the means of controlling members of the National Assembly, including the right to recall elected deputies. 2. Unrestricted freedom to travel independently of the Governm ent Travel Office. 3. A demand for a ge.neral amnesty for political prisoners; making public court records; and punishing those responsible for extorting confessions and using other illegal metheds. 4. A demand for a free press, ra;dio and films to .present information truthfuUy, quickly and independently; no interference with foreign broadcasts; and the importation of new.spapers, magazines, and books from all countries regardless of their political systems. (Slovak newspapers published in America, which advocate a free Slovakia, were banned in Czecho-Slovakia on Oc tober 10, 1946). Slovak students were nermitted for the first time since-1948 to hold their traditional May Parade and Carnival (MAJALES) on May 20; they used the occasion to lampoon the government. A group of gagged a.nd 'blindfolded 2 SLOVAKIA students, representing editors of the newspapers published for the youth, paraded ,g leefully through the streets. Another group in Bratisiava carried a coffin on whioh Wlas inscribed "aca,demic freedom." ,B ut particularly impressive was the ban-d of students in death shrouds carrying the banner "We board in student Dining Halls Paradise" ! They really did look star:ved (,the picture was J-eproduced in several American Slov.ak newspapers from ,a German paper) ! Wihen ;newsmen questioned Premier William i:§iroky on :reports that many students had been arrested, he replied that this was riot so and ,a dded: "The students have the right to openly express their views at a11 times, and we, in turn, have the right to say to them that we agree or di-sagree with them on any particular question." The BratLslava newspapers Pi:aca and Pravda, however, did not share the Premier's tolerant attitude toward recent student demonstrations, con.demning as "dem,agogic" the demands of Slovak students. • • • Czech Communist agents resid· ing in various countries, including our America, are doing their utmo.s t to have eminent Slovak and Czech exiles to return .to their homelands. "All is forgiven; come home; nothi.ng shall haJPpen to you; help us build our new democratic country" - that seems to •b e the theme song of •a ll of them. Some of the professional men an,d intelJectuats have been promised attractive salaries, new homes, freedom to work a·s they se.e -fit in their ,p rofessions, but no Slovak to our knowledge has !4ken the bait thus far. Relatives, friends and acquaintances, it seems have been organized in a Iletter-writing campaign to induce , exiles to return home. The movement, however, has failed to lure the Slovaks to the "people's democracy" establi-shed by Benes ami Gottwald in 1945. • • • STALi N labors for the Ki-emlin even in his box and gladly assumes the blame for all the violenoe, terror and murder perpetrated against innocent populations of the USSR, the satellite EurOII)ean -c ountries, Korea, China, etc. As a result of this "blameit-all-on-Stalin" campaign, every satellite country ha.s exculpated some of its Red leaders, posthumously exonerating even liquidated comrades (iBulgaria, Hungary, Poland), but this is not the case in regal'd to Slova'k 1Reds whose h earts at one time ·b led for Stalin. There has been no vindication for Vladimir Clementis, Slovak Red and former Minister o.f 'Foreign Aff.ai:rs of Czecho-Slovakia, who was executed as a "deviationist"; and no amnesty for Laco Novomesky and Gustav Husak, both of whom •a re still languishing in jail for preferring a Slovak Soviet RepubUc to a Czecho-'Slovak State. Of course, it may be that they shall have to wait till the Czech Reds of Pr,ague start an anti-Gottwald campaign. • • • IN SLOVAKIA: The mention of GOO has been ordered out of aJ.l texts. . . . Taxes in Slovakia today, ·u nder the Czech Reds, are four times higher than they were during the life of the Slovak Republic (19,39-1'945) . . . . Slovakia ,s howed the gr,eatest increase in population of all European countries in 1'955 and. ranked third in this regard among the nations of the world; the increase was 17 per thousand, •a nd the population of Slovakia is now 3,7'30,000.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Front Matter, Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 2 (19) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1956 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/b0b685aef7c07dbb342358e5437d2bff.pdf e3d4df6e966d30fa8948b0060381b473 PDF Text Text VO L. V I SEPTEMBER - DECEMBER , 1956 NO . 3-4 ( 20-21) IN THIS ISSUE: R. I. P . Dr. Fra n c is H rusovsky , Monsignor Jo zef Tiso - Controv ersial Personality - Cz ec h o-S l o vaki a or Czechos lo vakii!l. S t,~r a n d the Slov a k In depe nd e n ce Moveme nt B en es a nd t h e Communization of Czecho-S lo vak i a ~saryk ' ~ D(}-IQ:l9oPaoy aiqs i!ile"alt+a Why Di d Benes Resi gn in 1938? M emora ndum Th e History of S lovak i a 1856 - Dr. Samu e l Cz a mb el - 1956 Castles of S lovak i a : Starohrad ( Th e Old Cast l e) of Li ptov K ern e r 's "Czec h os l ovak i a" ( Cont 'd.): History or Pro paganda? WHO SA ID IT : 24, 39, 54, 58, 62, 87 * * * Edit ed a nd co mpil ed by PHILIP A. HROBAK SLOVAKIA Box 150 Middletown , P a . • Pub I ished by ~~v t1-BkA'Wf E oF AM ER I CA .MlU.£RSV1LLE STATE cqu.EGE ~Ji.SV41.lt, l>A. 17551 �SLOVAK IA is published periodically by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic fedel'ation of Americans of Slovak descent. The chief purpose of SLOVAK .IA is to pl'omote a better understan ding and appreciat ion of the Slovak nation and its long stl'uggle fol' freedom and independe nce. As American s, members of the Slovak League of America firmly believe that the Slovak nation, just as all nations, has an inherent and God-given right to freedom and independe nce. They are dedicated to the cause of the American way of life, Slovak freedom and world peace and are determine d to oppose the plague of Communi sm and all other totalitaria n political systems. Subscript ion to Slovakia $1.00 per year in the U. S. A. - $2.00 elsewhere. Send subscripti ons to: SLOV AKIA Box 150 Middletow n, Pa. Printed in the U. S. A. JEDNOTA PRESS Middletown, Pa. �SLO VAK IA Published VOL. VI quarterly by the Slovak League of America SEPTEMBER-DECEM BER, 1956 NO. 3-4 (2{}-21) SLOVA.KIA AND THE RECENT REBELLIONS Whatever happened and is happening in Poland, Hungary, the Middle East, and other countTies of Europe ,a nd .A!si.a must be blamed on the policies followed by the western democracies, on the so many "wise men" from the West, who knew how to win another war, ,b ut could not win an honorable and just peace. The press has done a little to help the situation; an,d intelligence agencies of our Government did even less to clarify it. We always had and still ·h ave our embassies, employing hundreds of thousands of ,people, in the many countries of Europe and Asia, but still do not know the nations thereof sufficiently well to work with them effectively in the interests of genuine democracy. mhe Poles, we are supposed to 1b elieve, would lbe satisfied with ,G omulka Communism, the Yugoslavs like the "Tito" ,b rand, while the Slovaks go for the Czeoh type of the late Dr. Edward ·B enes. Nothing could be !farther from the truth: .all these nations pray fervently that they might be Hberated .s peedily from the scouTge of godCommunism materialistic less, which was :forced upon them durIng ,a nd iafter World War illl. Much has ,b een said and .w ritten recently about the disturbances in Poland and Hungary, but little or nothing ,about what is going on in Slovakia. But the met is that Slov,akia is not and never will be satisfied with the situation it w,a s forced into after World War II .against the will of her people. The Slovaks proved it on many occasions . .A!nd they did ti again during 1956. The students of Slovakia demonstrated in May; this was followed ,b y Poznan In Poland in June; then Hungary rebelled In October, and iPo1and a:gain was heard from. What was the situation in Slov,ak.ia when open Tebellion broke out in Budapest on October 23? ,several Slovak escapees said that the Czech Red Army immediately sealed the Slovak-iHungarian border to prevent Slovaks from helping the, Magyars; Czeoh "security police" and the Czech Army ocoupied all of Slovakia; all former Slovak deputies, ministers of government, and political leaders were rounded up as "unreliable elements" and shipped to Bohemia and Moravia. Even Gustav Husi!.k, Slovak Red leader, was transferred from a .Slovak jail to o.ne in Czech territory. The Prague Ministry of Defense ousted all Slovak oMicers from Lt. Col. up from .the "CzechoSlovak" Army and replaced Slovak militia In d'actol'ies iby Czech workers' militia. 'The Slovaks -s~pathized with the MagY'ars ,and ·h elped as much as they could under the most difficult ciTcumstances. Thousands of Slovaks and M.agyar.s from Slova- �2 SLOVAKIA while Czech reserves served with the army in Slovakia. A second Slovak escapee wrote: "Twenty-two Soviet divisions came into Hungary many of them through Slovakia. Besides that a special Czech military unit of five divisions operated in the Kosice-Miskovec aTea. . . . Controls a r e v er y Border guards have strict. . . been tripled; they shoot at practically anyone not in uniform." ·R eporters and writers for the world press still do not distinguish between Slovakia and Bohemia, the Slovaks and the Czechs: they write about the "Hung,a,rianCzechoslovak" frontier, when they actually mean the "Hungarian-SloThe Czechs took no ohances vak" frontier; for them the Reo with the Slovaks; they knew that Czech Army becomes the "Czechothe sentiment jn Slovakia was not slovak" Army. The Slovaks, it only strongly anti-Communist and seems, are bound to ,b e involved anti-Soviet, ,b ut also strongly anti- in everything the Czechs do since Czech. As one Slovak escapee, who the birth o.f the political monwitnessed the disturbances in Bra- strosity known as Czecho-Slovakia. tisla'V'a, put it: ",S ince the execuTo keep t!h e record straight, tion of President Tiso, the sentiment in Slovakia was never so ,allow us to remind all uninformed, anti-Soviet, anti-Communist, and misinformed and "slightly" confused writers, and the reading ;pubanti-Czech as it is now." lic that: the Slovaks are not During the M~.gyar revolt Slo- Czechs; Slovakia is not Bohemia; vakia iresembled ,a large military so-called "Czecho-Slovak" policy is camp; the streets of 'Bratislava strictly Czech policy; the Slovaks were •f ull of tanks, all roads -were outlawed Communism in their Re·b locked •b y the Czech Army, and public in 1939, while the Czechs machine-gun nests were planted umler .Benes would not govern with everywihere. Bratislava was the al- out them; the Slovaks were and leged headquarters of 1both the still are anti 0 Soviet, while the Soviet and Magyar ,R eds: the lat- Czechs under M-asaryk and Benes, ter were quartered in Hotel Carl- Gottwald and Zapotocky, were ton, the former in iHotel Devin. and still are :pro-Soviet; the SloBoth hotels were ,h eavily guarded, va:ks sym:pathized with the Hunas were all vublic builoing.s. All I garian "rebels" and helved them Slovak reserves were called into as much as they could under the service, 1but were not allowed to circumstances, while the Czechs serve in Slovakia; ,t hey were /collaborated with the Soviet armies shipped to Moravia ,and Bohemia, to crush the Magyar revolt. kia joined the Hungarian patriota to help shake off the halter of Moscow. Lively demonstrations against the Soviets ,and the Czechs were staged in Bratislava, Surany, Nove ZAmky, Lucenec, Kosice, and other Slovak towns. They destroyed large sections of track to hinder the movement of Red soldiers and supplies through Slovakia; heavy fighting took place near Presov. Demonstrating in Bratislava, October 27, students shouted: "Freedom for Hunga,ry - Freedom for Slovakia - Get out Russi•a ns - Go home Czechs - No more Czecho-Slovakia - ,Down with the Reds," etc. I � VO L. V I SEPTEMBER - DECEMBER , 1956 NO . 3-4 ( 20-21) IN THIS ISSUE: R. I. P . Dr. Fra n c is H rusovsky , Monsignor Jo zef Tiso - Controv ersial Personality - Cz ec h o-S l o vaki a or Czechos lo vakii!l. S t,~r a n d the Slov a k In depe nd e n ce Moveme nt B en es a nd t h e Communization of Czecho-S lo vak i a ~saryk ' ~ D(}-IQ:l9oPaoy aiqs i!ile"alt+a Why Di d Benes Resi gn in 1938? M emora ndum Th e History of S lovak i a 1856 - Dr. Samu e l Cz a mb el - 1956 Castles of S lovak i a : Starohrad ( Th e Old Cast l e) of Li ptov K ern e r 's "Czec h os l ovak i a" ( Cont 'd.): History or Pro paganda? WHO SA ID IT : 24, 39, 54, 58, 62, 87 * * * Edit ed a nd co mpil ed by PHILIP A. HROBAK SLOVAKIA Box 150 Middletown , P a . • Pub I ished by ~~v t1-BkA'Wf E oF AM ER I CA .MlU.£RSV1LLE STATE cqu.EGE ~Ji.SV41.lt, l>A. 17551 �SLOVAK IA is published periodically by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic fedel'ation of Americans of Slovak descent. The chief purpose of SLOVAK .IA is to pl'omote a better understan ding and appreciat ion of the Slovak nation and its long stl'uggle fol' freedom and independe nce. As American s, members of the Slovak League of America firmly believe that the Slovak nation, just as all nations, has an inherent and God-given right to freedom and independe nce. They are dedicated to the cause of the American way of life, Slovak freedom and world peace and are determine d to oppose the plague of Communi sm and all other totalitaria n political systems. Subscript ion to Slovakia $1.00 per year in the U. S. A. - $2.00 elsewhere. Send subscripti ons to: SLOV AKIA Box 150 Middletow n, Pa. Printed in the U. S. A. JEDNOTA PRESS Middletown, Pa. �SLO VAK IA Published VOL. VI quarterly by the Slovak League of America SEPTEMBER-DECEM BER, 1956 NO. 3-4 (2{}-21) SLOVA.KIA AND THE RECENT REBELLIONS Whatever happened and is happening in Poland, Hungary, the Middle East, and other countTies of Europe ,a nd .A!si.a must be blamed on the policies followed by the western democracies, on the so many "wise men" from the West, who knew how to win another war, ,b ut could not win an honorable and just peace. The press has done a little to help the situation; an,d intelligence agencies of our Government did even less to clarify it. We always had and still ·h ave our embassies, employing hundreds of thousands of ,people, in the many countries of Europe and Asia, but still do not know the nations thereof sufficiently well to work with them effectively in the interests of genuine democracy. mhe Poles, we are supposed to 1b elieve, would lbe satisfied with ,G omulka Communism, the Yugoslavs like the "Tito" ,b rand, while the Slovaks go for the Czeoh type of the late Dr. Edward ·B enes. Nothing could be !farther from the truth: .all these nations pray fervently that they might be Hberated .s peedily from the scouTge of godCommunism materialistic less, which was :forced upon them durIng ,a nd iafter World War illl. Much has ,b een said and .w ritten recently about the disturbances in Poland and Hungary, but little or nothing ,about what is going on in Slovakia. But the met is that Slov,akia is not and never will be satisfied with the situation it w,a s forced into after World War II .against the will of her people. The Slovaks proved it on many occasions . .A!nd they did ti again during 1956. The students of Slovakia demonstrated in May; this was followed ,b y Poznan In Poland in June; then Hungary rebelled In October, and iPo1and a:gain was heard from. What was the situation in Slov,ak.ia when open Tebellion broke out in Budapest on October 23? ,several Slovak escapees said that the Czech Red Army immediately sealed the Slovak-iHungarian border to prevent Slovaks from helping the, Magyars; Czeoh "security police" and the Czech Army ocoupied all of Slovakia; all former Slovak deputies, ministers of government, and political leaders were rounded up as "unreliable elements" and shipped to Bohemia and Moravia. Even Gustav Husi!.k, Slovak Red leader, was transferred from a .Slovak jail to o.ne in Czech territory. The Prague Ministry of Defense ousted all Slovak oMicers from Lt. Col. up from .the "CzechoSlovak" Army and replaced Slovak militia In d'actol'ies iby Czech workers' militia. 'The Slovaks -s~pathized with the MagY'ars ,and ·h elped as much as they could under the most difficult ciTcumstances. Thousands of Slovaks and M.agyar.s from Slova- �2 SLOVAKIA while Czech reserves served with the army in Slovakia. A second Slovak escapee wrote: "Twenty-two Soviet divisions came into Hungary many of them through Slovakia. Besides that a special Czech military unit of five divisions operated in the Kosice-Miskovec aTea. . . . Controls a r e v er y Border guards have strict. . . been tripled; they shoot at practically anyone not in uniform." ·R eporters and writers for the world press still do not distinguish between Slovakia and Bohemia, the Slovaks and the Czechs: they write about the "Hung,a,rianCzechoslovak" frontier, when they actually mean the "Hungarian-SloThe Czechs took no ohances vak" frontier; for them the Reo with the Slovaks; they knew that Czech Army becomes the "Czechothe sentiment jn Slovakia was not slovak" Army. The Slovaks, it only strongly anti-Communist and seems, are bound to ,b e involved anti-Soviet, ,b ut also strongly anti- in everything the Czechs do since Czech. As one Slovak escapee, who the birth o.f the political monwitnessed the disturbances in Bra- strosity known as Czecho-Slovakia. tisla'V'a, put it: ",S ince the execuTo keep t!h e record straight, tion of President Tiso, the sentiment in Slovakia was never so ,allow us to remind all uninformed, anti-Soviet, anti-Communist, and misinformed and "slightly" confused writers, and the reading ;pubanti-Czech as it is now." lic that: the Slovaks are not During the M~.gyar revolt Slo- Czechs; Slovakia is not Bohemia; vakia iresembled ,a large military so-called "Czecho-Slovak" policy is camp; the streets of 'Bratislava strictly Czech policy; the Slovaks were •f ull of tanks, all roads -were outlawed Communism in their Re·b locked •b y the Czech Army, and public in 1939, while the Czechs machine-gun nests were planted umler .Benes would not govern with everywihere. Bratislava was the al- out them; the Slovaks were and leged headquarters of 1both the still are anti 0 Soviet, while the Soviet and Magyar ,R eds: the lat- Czechs under M-asaryk and Benes, ter were quartered in Hotel Carl- Gottwald and Zapotocky, were ton, the former in iHotel Devin. and still are :pro-Soviet; the SloBoth hotels were ,h eavily guarded, va:ks sym:pathized with the Hunas were all vublic builoing.s. All I garian "rebels" and helved them Slovak reserves were called into as much as they could under the service, 1but were not allowed to circumstances, while the Czechs serve in Slovakia; ,t hey were /collaborated with the Soviet armies shipped to Moravia ,and Bohemia, to crush the Magyar revolt. kia joined the Hungarian patriota to help shake off the halter of Moscow. Lively demonstrations against the Soviets ,and the Czechs were staged in Bratislava, Surany, Nove ZAmky, Lucenec, Kosice, and other Slovak towns. They destroyed large sections of track to hinder the movement of Red soldiers and supplies through Slovakia; heavy fighting took place near Presov. Demonstrating in Bratislava, October 27, students shouted: "Freedom for Hunga,ry - Freedom for Slovakia - Get out Russi•a ns - Go home Czechs - No more Czecho-Slovakia - ,Down with the Reds," etc. I � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document VO L. V I SEPTEMBER - DECEMBER , 1956 NO . 3-4 ( 20-21) IN THIS ISSUE: R. I. P . Dr. Fra n c is H rusovsky , Monsignor Jo zef Tiso - Controv ersial Personality - Cz ec h o-S l o vaki a or Czechos lo vakii!l. S t,~r a n d the Slov a k In depe nd e n ce Moveme nt B en es a nd t h e Communization of Czecho-S lo vak i a ~saryk ' ~ D(}-IQ:l9oPaoy aiqs i!ile"alt+a Why Di d Benes Resi gn in 1938? M emora ndum Th e History of S lovak i a 1856 - Dr. Samu e l Cz a mb el - 1956 Castles of S lovak i a : Starohrad ( Th e Old Cast l e) of Li ptov K ern e r 's "Czec h os l ovak i a" ( Cont 'd.): History or Pro paganda? WHO SA ID IT : 24, 39, 54, 58, 62, 87 * * * Edit ed a nd co mpil ed by PHILIP A. HROBAK SLOVAKIA Box 150 Middletown , P a . • Pub I ished by ~~v t1-BkA'Wf E oF AM ER I CA .MlU.£RSV1LLE STATE cqu.EGE ~Ji.SV41.lt, l>A. 17551 SLOVAK IA is published periodically by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic fedel'ation of Americans of Slovak descent. The chief purpose of SLOVAK .IA is to pl'omote a better understan ding and appreciat ion of the Slovak nation and its long stl'uggle fol' freedom and independe nce. As American s, members of the Slovak League of America firmly believe that the Slovak nation, just as all nations, has an inherent and God-given right to freedom and independe nce. They are dedicated to the cause of the American way of life, Slovak freedom and world peace and are determine d to oppose the plague of Communi sm and all other totalitaria n political systems. Subscript ion to Slovakia $1.00 per year in the U. S. A. - $2.00 elsewhere. Send subscripti ons to: SLOV AKIA Box 150 Middletow n, Pa. Printed in the U. S. A. JEDNOTA PRESS Middletown, Pa. SLO VAK IA Published VOL. VI quarterly by the Slovak League of America SEPTEMBER-DECEM BER, 1956 NO. 3-4 (2{}-21) SLOVA.KIA AND THE RECENT REBELLIONS Whatever happened and is happening in Poland, Hungary, the Middle East, and other countTies of Europe ,a nd .A!si.a must be blamed on the policies followed by the western democracies, on the so many "wise men" from the West, who knew how to win another war, ,b ut could not win an honorable and just peace. The press has done a little to help the situation; an,d intelligence agencies of our Government did even less to clarify it. We always had and still ·h ave our embassies, employing hundreds of thousands of ,people, in the many countries of Europe and Asia, but still do not know the nations thereof sufficiently well to work with them effectively in the interests of genuine democracy. mhe Poles, we are supposed to 1b elieve, would lbe satisfied with ,G omulka Communism, the Yugoslavs like the "Tito" ,b rand, while the Slovaks go for the Czeoh type of the late Dr. Edward ·B enes. Nothing could be !farther from the truth: .all these nations pray fervently that they might be Hberated .s peedily from the scouTge of godCommunism materialistic less, which was :forced upon them durIng ,a nd iafter World War illl. Much has ,b een said and .w ritten recently about the disturbances in Poland and Hungary, but little or nothing ,about what is going on in Slovakia. But the met is that Slov,akia is not and never will be satisfied with the situation it w,a s forced into after World War II .against the will of her people. The Slovaks proved it on many occasions . .A!nd they did ti again during 1956. The students of Slovakia demonstrated in May; this was followed ,b y Poznan In Poland in June; then Hungary rebelled In October, and iPo1and a:gain was heard from. What was the situation in Slov,ak.ia when open Tebellion broke out in Budapest on October 23? ,several Slovak escapees said that the Czech Red Army immediately sealed the Slovak-iHungarian border to prevent Slovaks from helping the, Magyars; Czeoh "security police" and the Czech Army ocoupied all of Slovakia; all former Slovak deputies, ministers of government, and political leaders were rounded up as "unreliable elements" and shipped to Bohemia and Moravia. Even Gustav Husi!.k, Slovak Red leader, was transferred from a .Slovak jail to o.ne in Czech territory. The Prague Ministry of Defense ousted all Slovak oMicers from Lt. Col. up from .the "CzechoSlovak" Army and replaced Slovak militia In d'actol'ies iby Czech workers' militia. 'The Slovaks -s~pathized with the MagY'ars ,and ·h elped as much as they could under the most difficult ciTcumstances. Thousands of Slovaks and M.agyar.s from Slova- 2 SLOVAKIA while Czech reserves served with the army in Slovakia. A second Slovak escapee wrote: "Twenty-two Soviet divisions came into Hungary many of them through Slovakia. Besides that a special Czech military unit of five divisions operated in the Kosice-Miskovec aTea. . . . Controls a r e v er y Border guards have strict. . . been tripled; they shoot at practically anyone not in uniform." ·R eporters and writers for the world press still do not distinguish between Slovakia and Bohemia, the Slovaks and the Czechs: they write about the "Hung,a,rianCzechoslovak" frontier, when they actually mean the "Hungarian-SloThe Czechs took no ohances vak" frontier; for them the Reo with the Slovaks; they knew that Czech Army becomes the "Czechothe sentiment jn Slovakia was not slovak" Army. The Slovaks, it only strongly anti-Communist and seems, are bound to ,b e involved anti-Soviet, ,b ut also strongly anti- in everything the Czechs do since Czech. As one Slovak escapee, who the birth o.f the political monwitnessed the disturbances in Bra- strosity known as Czecho-Slovakia. tisla'V'a, put it: ",S ince the execuTo keep t!h e record straight, tion of President Tiso, the sentiment in Slovakia was never so ,allow us to remind all uninformed, anti-Soviet, anti-Communist, and misinformed and "slightly" confused writers, and the reading ;pubanti-Czech as it is now." lic that: the Slovaks are not During the M~.gyar revolt Slo- Czechs; Slovakia is not Bohemia; vakia iresembled ,a large military so-called "Czecho-Slovak" policy is camp; the streets of 'Bratislava strictly Czech policy; the Slovaks were •f ull of tanks, all roads -were outlawed Communism in their Re·b locked •b y the Czech Army, and public in 1939, while the Czechs machine-gun nests were planted umler .Benes would not govern with everywihere. Bratislava was the al- out them; the Slovaks were and leged headquarters of 1both the still are anti 0 Soviet, while the Soviet and Magyar ,R eds: the lat- Czechs under M-asaryk and Benes, ter were quartered in Hotel Carl- Gottwald and Zapotocky, were ton, the former in iHotel Devin. and still are :pro-Soviet; the SloBoth hotels were ,h eavily guarded, va:ks sym:pathized with the Hunas were all vublic builoing.s. All I garian "rebels" and helved them Slovak reserves were called into as much as they could under the service, 1but were not allowed to circumstances, while the Czechs serve in Slovakia; ,t hey were /collaborated with the Soviet armies shipped to Moravia ,and Bohemia, to crush the Magyar revolt. kia joined the Hungarian patriota to help shake off the halter of Moscow. Lively demonstrations against the Soviets ,and the Czechs were staged in Bratislava, Surany, Nove ZAmky, Lucenec, Kosice, and other Slovak towns. They destroyed large sections of track to hinder the movement of Red soldiers and supplies through Slovakia; heavy fighting took place near Presov. Demonstrating in Bratislava, October 27, students shouted: "Freedom for Hunga,ry - Freedom for Slovakia - Get out Russi•a ns - Go home Czechs - No more Czecho-Slovakia - ,Down with the Reds," etc. I  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Front Matter, Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource September-December 1956 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/de116eb2b4f18a7d53061b5225491a7a.pdf 9e67b7fcb68c7ce8075d1a92214a5193 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 31 ISRAEL AND SLOVAKIA K. Oulen Israel i,s in the news today. And it has been in the news since it was founded in 1948. Israel is the youngest state of the oldest nation on earth. Israel is in a precarious situaition, being surrounded as it is by enemies who have proclaimed !i.t their aim to force the Israeli into the sea and destroy the State. To do this, however, they need weapons and ammunition. The Skoda wOiiks of Pilsen, Bohemia, has contacted with Egypt to provide materials of war, presumably with the approbation of !Moscow - the same Skoda works which worked SQ efficiently for Hitler during the past war and is now working overtime for the men of the Kremildn, the works that British and U. 1S. bomlbers, it seems, were not allowed to destroy. It is both interesting and sur.prising that the Communists began so willingly to supply weapons against Israel, since it is an admitted fact that no one helped the idea of Communism more than the Jews: they were its creators, its standard-bearers, and its ,propagators throughout the world. It is also interesting to note that it was the Czechs who began to supply werupons of war to the enemies of Israel, even though no one in the whole wide world supported Czech interests more than the Jews. The Jews openly admit ;that their independence is threatened. And they vow that they shall fight to. preserve it. And that is, indeed, a JVery nice and proper thing to do. John Kollar, the Slovak writer, once wrote: Every one who is worthy of freedom knows how to respect the free. dom of others. The Jews renewed their independent state after 2000 years of alien rule, while the Slovaks rid themselves of alien domination after a 1000 years. But it is a fact that, excepting the Czechs, no other nation was against Slovak statehood as were the Jews. In 1939, when minister Mracna intervened in the State Department in Washington for recognition of the Slovak �32 SLOV4KIA Repwblic, officials of the Department to1d hi.Ip. dire<!tly they ha.d no objections to su:ch recognition. We know that the .American am:bassador in Bud~t intervened several times and recommended the recogmtton of the Slovak Republic. Against recognition were certain political circles which were greatlY. influenced by Jewish circles. The latter have been and still are of the opinion that the Slova;ks must be under Czech domination. Before the creation of the political "Czecho-iSlovaJk" moostrooity of T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, the same circles favored the domination of the SfovaJks ,b y the Magyars. In every instant, in the struggle of the Slovaks for freedom, the Jews always supported the oppressors of the Slovaks. Indeed, it wou1d be apropos to learn directly from a Jewish s01Urce by what reckoning the Jews came to the conclusion that they are entitled to a. state while the Slo~ vaks are not. lrf they are not o.f such a mind, why do they oppose Slovruk statehood? If the Jews honestly believe that no one sha1l be able to kill the idea of Jewish statehood, we, on the other hand, assure them that the Slovaks believe the same thing in their c~·- Ali naJtions endeavo,r to attain independence. We believe that the time is coming when natiion wHl cease oppressing nation. The Slovaks firmly believe that they will one day enjoy political independence, their own Slovak Republic, founded on Ohristian, demo.c ratic principles. Is it in the interests of the Jews who lived in Slovakia and would stitl want to live there to persevere to the fast moment on the siide of the enemies of the Slovak people, against Siovak independence ? We cannot believe that it is. Preferring one nation to another is not just. There must be no exceptions. Even the Ozechs must be no exception with their claim that every _mature, self-sustainin g nation which !knows how to manage itself iis entitled to independence. If a nation is not left to itself, how can it be known whether it can manage iitself or nort? Accord.ring to the Czechs, the Slovak peo,p le was not Slllch a nation. During the war, however, the Slorvaks proved con:olu:si.vely that they were a mature and self-sustainin g nation, q_emon_ �SLOVAKIA 33 strating in the Slovak Republic that they were able a.nd capable of managm,g their own affairs even without Czech intervention. Nevertheless, the Je:ws of the whole world are still op-, posed to Slovak independence, not a single Jewish organizamon voicing itself openly for it. They were the lbacikbone of the anti-'Slova!k propaganda of Dr. Edward Benes (Klinger, Benau, Ku:nossy, Ifu!jdu, Weisskopf, Dr. Sarissky, HaasKysucky, Frisch, etc.). The :Slovsaks are of the opinion that the Jewish nation is entitled to state independence, if it so desires. The same goes for every nation in the entire world. And, hence, that holds for their own Slovalk nation. The Jewish 1State would have coliaipsed long .a go without foreign. loans and gifts. The Slova:k State did not owe any~ body anything; it got along nicely without foreign. loan.s and gifts during the most trying years of the war. Conversely, the leaiders of the Slovaik Republic were executed, imprisoned, disfranchii!zed, deported and di~possessed, because it was aJ.leged that others did owe Slovakia quite a bit - the same SlovaJk!i-a that the Ozechs had complaJined about so many years as 'b eing an e~pensive ,ba;llast. The Slovaks never abandoned their territory. Ml neighboring nations, except the Czechs, were for S1ovak independence. Slovakia, twice as large as Israel, had a ma:jo-rity of Slovruk inha:bitants. And yet, the very same Jews, who so enthusiastically and uncompromisingly are fighting fo:r their own independence, fought and are still fighting against Slovak independence. Certainly it must be perfectly clear that if the 1Slova.k.s are not entitled to independence, then certainil.y neither are the Jews. But ff .that were the case, iit would mean that we are stiil living in a period of racism, in which some nations are preferred, while others are oppressed and suppressed. A nation cannot be fighting for its own independence with one hand and striking against the independence of dther nations with the other. The Jews, however, are doing just thiat in the case of the Slovaks. � SLOVAKIA 31 ISRAEL AND SLOVAKIA K. Oulen Israel i,s in the news today. And it has been in the news since it was founded in 1948. Israel is the youngest state of the oldest nation on earth. Israel is in a precarious situaition, being surrounded as it is by enemies who have proclaimed !i.t their aim to force the Israeli into the sea and destroy the State. To do this, however, they need weapons and ammunition. The Skoda wOiiks of Pilsen, Bohemia, has contacted with Egypt to provide materials of war, presumably with the approbation of !Moscow - the same Skoda works which worked SQ efficiently for Hitler during the past war and is now working overtime for the men of the Kremildn, the works that British and U. 1S. bomlbers, it seems, were not allowed to destroy. It is both interesting and sur.prising that the Communists began so willingly to supply weapons against Israel, since it is an admitted fact that no one helped the idea of Communism more than the Jews: they were its creators, its standard-bearers, and its ,propagators throughout the world. It is also interesting to note that it was the Czechs who began to supply werupons of war to the enemies of Israel, even though no one in the whole wide world supported Czech interests more than the Jews. The Jews openly admit ;that their independence is threatened. And they vow that they shall fight to. preserve it. And that is, indeed, a JVery nice and proper thing to do. John Kollar, the Slovak writer, once wrote: Every one who is worthy of freedom knows how to respect the free. dom of others. The Jews renewed their independent state after 2000 years of alien rule, while the Slovaks rid themselves of alien domination after a 1000 years. But it is a fact that, excepting the Czechs, no other nation was against Slovak statehood as were the Jews. In 1939, when minister Mracna intervened in the State Department in Washington for recognition of the Slovak �32 SLOV4KIA Repwblic, officials of the Department to1d hi.Ip. dire<!tly they ha.d no objections to su:ch recognition. We know that the .American am:bassador in Bud~t intervened several times and recommended the recogmtton of the Slovak Republic. Against recognition were certain political circles which were greatlY. influenced by Jewish circles. The latter have been and still are of the opinion that the Slova;ks must be under Czech domination. Before the creation of the political "Czecho-iSlovaJk" moostrooity of T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, the same circles favored the domination of the SfovaJks ,b y the Magyars. In every instant, in the struggle of the Slovaks for freedom, the Jews always supported the oppressors of the Slovaks. Indeed, it wou1d be apropos to learn directly from a Jewish s01Urce by what reckoning the Jews came to the conclusion that they are entitled to a. state while the Slo~ vaks are not. lrf they are not o.f such a mind, why do they oppose Slovruk statehood? If the Jews honestly believe that no one sha1l be able to kill the idea of Jewish statehood, we, on the other hand, assure them that the Slovaks believe the same thing in their c~·- Ali naJtions endeavo,r to attain independence. We believe that the time is coming when natiion wHl cease oppressing nation. The Slovaks firmly believe that they will one day enjoy political independence, their own Slovak Republic, founded on Ohristian, demo.c ratic principles. Is it in the interests of the Jews who lived in Slovakia and would stitl want to live there to persevere to the fast moment on the siide of the enemies of the Slovak people, against Siovak independence ? We cannot believe that it is. Preferring one nation to another is not just. There must be no exceptions. Even the Ozechs must be no exception with their claim that every _mature, self-sustainin g nation which !knows how to manage itself iis entitled to independence. If a nation is not left to itself, how can it be known whether it can manage iitself or nort? Accord.ring to the Czechs, the Slovak peo,p le was not Slllch a nation. During the war, however, the Slorvaks proved con:olu:si.vely that they were a mature and self-sustainin g nation, q_emon_ �SLOVAKIA 33 strating in the Slovak Republic that they were able a.nd capable of managm,g their own affairs even without Czech intervention. Nevertheless, the Je:ws of the whole world are still op-, posed to Slovak independence, not a single Jewish organizamon voicing itself openly for it. They were the lbacikbone of the anti-'Slova!k propaganda of Dr. Edward Benes (Klinger, Benau, Ku:nossy, Ifu!jdu, Weisskopf, Dr. Sarissky, HaasKysucky, Frisch, etc.). The :Slovsaks are of the opinion that the Jewish nation is entitled to state independence, if it so desires. The same goes for every nation in the entire world. And, hence, that holds for their own Slovalk nation. The Jewish 1State would have coliaipsed long .a go without foreign. loans and gifts. The Slova:k State did not owe any~ body anything; it got along nicely without foreign. loan.s and gifts during the most trying years of the war. Conversely, the leaiders of the Slovaik Republic were executed, imprisoned, disfranchii!zed, deported and di~possessed, because it was aJ.leged that others did owe Slovakia quite a bit - the same SlovaJk!i-a that the Ozechs had complaJined about so many years as 'b eing an e~pensive ,ba;llast. The Slovaks never abandoned their territory. Ml neighboring nations, except the Czechs, were for S1ovak independence. Slovakia, twice as large as Israel, had a ma:jo-rity of Slovruk inha:bitants. And yet, the very same Jews, who so enthusiastically and uncompromisingly are fighting fo:r their own independence, fought and are still fighting against Slovak independence. Certainly it must be perfectly clear that if the 1Slova.k.s are not entitled to independence, then certainil.y neither are the Jews. But ff .that were the case, iit would mean that we are stiil living in a period of racism, in which some nations are preferred, while others are oppressed and suppressed. A nation cannot be fighting for its own independence with one hand and striking against the independence of dther nations with the other. The Jews, however, are doing just thiat in the case of the Slovaks. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 31 ISRAEL AND SLOVAKIA K. Oulen Israel i,s in the news today. And it has been in the news since it was founded in 1948. Israel is the youngest state of the oldest nation on earth. Israel is in a precarious situaition, being surrounded as it is by enemies who have proclaimed !i.t their aim to force the Israeli into the sea and destroy the State. To do this, however, they need weapons and ammunition. The Skoda wOiiks of Pilsen, Bohemia, has contacted with Egypt to provide materials of war, presumably with the approbation of !Moscow - the same Skoda works which worked SQ efficiently for Hitler during the past war and is now working overtime for the men of the Kremildn, the works that British and U. 1S. bomlbers, it seems, were not allowed to destroy. It is both interesting and sur.prising that the Communists began so willingly to supply weapons against Israel, since it is an admitted fact that no one helped the idea of Communism more than the Jews: they were its creators, its standard-bearers, and its ,propagators throughout the world. It is also interesting to note that it was the Czechs who began to supply werupons of war to the enemies of Israel, even though no one in the whole wide world supported Czech interests more than the Jews. The Jews openly admit ;that their independence is threatened. And they vow that they shall fight to. preserve it. And that is, indeed, a JVery nice and proper thing to do. John Kollar, the Slovak writer, once wrote: Every one who is worthy of freedom knows how to respect the free. dom of others. The Jews renewed their independent state after 2000 years of alien rule, while the Slovaks rid themselves of alien domination after a 1000 years. But it is a fact that, excepting the Czechs, no other nation was against Slovak statehood as were the Jews. In 1939, when minister Mracna intervened in the State Department in Washington for recognition of the Slovak 32 SLOV4KIA Repwblic, officials of the Department to1d hi.Ip. dire<!tly they ha.d no objections to su:ch recognition. We know that the .American am:bassador in Bud~t intervened several times and recommended the recogmtton of the Slovak Republic. Against recognition were certain political circles which were greatlY. influenced by Jewish circles. The latter have been and still are of the opinion that the Slova;ks must be under Czech domination. Before the creation of the political "Czecho-iSlovaJk" moostrooity of T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes, the same circles favored the domination of the SfovaJks ,b y the Magyars. In every instant, in the struggle of the Slovaks for freedom, the Jews always supported the oppressors of the Slovaks. Indeed, it wou1d be apropos to learn directly from a Jewish s01Urce by what reckoning the Jews came to the conclusion that they are entitled to a. state while the Slo~ vaks are not. lrf they are not o.f such a mind, why do they oppose Slovruk statehood? If the Jews honestly believe that no one sha1l be able to kill the idea of Jewish statehood, we, on the other hand, assure them that the Slovaks believe the same thing in their c~·- Ali naJtions endeavo,r to attain independence. We believe that the time is coming when natiion wHl cease oppressing nation. The Slovaks firmly believe that they will one day enjoy political independence, their own Slovak Republic, founded on Ohristian, demo.c ratic principles. Is it in the interests of the Jews who lived in Slovakia and would stitl want to live there to persevere to the fast moment on the siide of the enemies of the Slovak people, against Siovak independence ? We cannot believe that it is. Preferring one nation to another is not just. There must be no exceptions. Even the Ozechs must be no exception with their claim that every _mature, self-sustainin g nation which !knows how to manage itself iis entitled to independence. If a nation is not left to itself, how can it be known whether it can manage iitself or nort? Accord.ring to the Czechs, the Slovak peo,p le was not Slllch a nation. During the war, however, the Slorvaks proved con:olu:si.vely that they were a mature and self-sustainin g nation, q_emon_ SLOVAKIA 33 strating in the Slovak Republic that they were able a.nd capable of managm,g their own affairs even without Czech intervention. Nevertheless, the Je:ws of the whole world are still op-, posed to Slovak independence, not a single Jewish organizamon voicing itself openly for it. They were the lbacikbone of the anti-'Slova!k propaganda of Dr. Edward Benes (Klinger, Benau, Ku:nossy, Ifu!jdu, Weisskopf, Dr. Sarissky, HaasKysucky, Frisch, etc.). The :Slovsaks are of the opinion that the Jewish nation is entitled to state independence, if it so desires. The same goes for every nation in the entire world. And, hence, that holds for their own Slovalk nation. The Jewish 1State would have coliaipsed long .a go without foreign. loans and gifts. The Slova:k State did not owe any~ body anything; it got along nicely without foreign. loan.s and gifts during the most trying years of the war. Conversely, the leaiders of the Slovaik Republic were executed, imprisoned, disfranchii!zed, deported and di~possessed, because it was aJ.leged that others did owe Slovakia quite a bit - the same SlovaJk!i-a that the Ozechs had complaJined about so many years as 'b eing an e~pensive ,ba;llast. The Slovaks never abandoned their territory. Ml neighboring nations, except the Czechs, were for S1ovak independence. Slovakia, twice as large as Israel, had a ma:jo-rity of Slovruk inha:bitants. And yet, the very same Jews, who so enthusiastically and uncompromisingly are fighting fo:r their own independence, fought and are still fighting against Slovak independence. Certainly it must be perfectly clear that if the 1Slova.k.s are not entitled to independence, then certainil.y neither are the Jews. But ff .that were the case, iit would mean that we are stiil living in a period of racism, in which some nations are preferred, while others are oppressed and suppressed. A nation cannot be fighting for its own independence with one hand and striking against the independence of dther nations with the other. The Jews, however, are doing just thiat in the case of the Slovaks.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Israel and Slovakia Description An account of the resource K. Čulen Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 2 (19), June 1956 pp. 31-33 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Čulen, Konštantín, 1904-1964 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1956 SNK https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/416d502c22fdb8f1fd643e4cd0750ff5.pdf 915bb7081b9dc8a4dceeec10c65bb890 PDF Text Text 18 SLOVAKIA however, is d.n itself an assurance to all Slovaik em:igres that in the eyes of Prague and of international Communism ,i t is no "quan·t ite negligeable," that it is, in fact, so formidable a hindrance to them for the Slovaks to be allied with the democracies that they even ventured such a brutal scandal to register their reaction. To Slovruk 1patriots in exile, mourning the death of their most distinguished representative, Matus Cernak, this realization begets a fresh spur to redoubled activities. Consummate triumph of the Slovaik hope for independence beckons on the trail over which Matus Cernak has forged ahead in honor and in complete unflinching dedication. God grant it! - "BuNetin of the Slovruk National Council Abroad," June, 1956) . • • • LABOR AND THE SWVAK REPUBLIC J. C. Bukovina " Our policy shall not be socialis·tic, but social. We shall not incite J:}eople against our. selves, but we shall train them to be understanding and Wilted . .A:bove all else, work is the foundation of our policy." 'Dr. Joseph Tlso, Oct. 8, 1S38. October 6, 1938, and March 14, 1939, found the S10vruks prepared. The Hlin:ka ·S lovak People's Party, whic:h had fought consistently for twenty years before Munich to secure the national existence of the Slova!k nation, was fully prepared for these two historical milestones - to take over the direction of the fate of the Slovak nation. The fight of the Slovaks for national independence in the pre-Munich Czecho-Slovak State was actually a struggle and a call of the Slovruk nation for social justice. Once the Czechs under T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Exlward Benes had taken over the reigns of state, promises made to the Slovruks in America and elsewhere were soon forgotten, and the Slovalks found themselves again in the position of the exploited. Like the Magyars, the Czechs found little trouble in recruiting Judas Slovaks to promote not the interests of the Slovak nation, but the interests of the Czech nation, �SLOVAKIA 19 which for propaganda .purposes was labeled "Czecho-Slovak" (with or without the hyphen.) Practically every single utterance of the deputies of the ffiinka Slovak !People's Party on the floor of the Prague Parliament directly or indirectly dealt with the social question of the Sloivak people. When the state ·b udgets came up for consideration, Andrew Hlinka and iDr. Joseph Tiso pointed to the injustices suffered by the Slovaiks at the hands of the Prague centralistic government. Pleas and admonitions, warnings and threats, were a voice calling oot in the desert; the government and Czech deputies always played the same record: Slovakia is costing the "historical" Jra.nds plenty, the policy of the Hlin:ka Slovak People's Party is separatistfo, and its representatiives are demagogues, political analphwbets, etc. While the Prague government continued to add iusuJ.t to injury whenever 'S lovaks demanded state's rights, Andrew iHlinlka !Prepared his most trusted workers for the decisive battle. He knew the significance of trade and professional organizations; several of them had joined his party: the Christian-Social T.rade Federation, led by deputies Rudolph Cajovsky and John Moro; the Allian·ce of Slovruk Railr.oadmen, ,u nder the chairmansh1p of deputy Stephen Surovialk; the Alliance of .Slovak Postal W Oiikers under deputy Joseph Drobny; the Regional Catholic Teachers Society, in whicih Senator .An1.hony Ha.ncJko served as chairman of many years; and the Society of Slovak Professors, led by professor Misfile The occupational organizations, wi1:th their Christia.nSociai program drawn from the Papal Encyclicals, prepared themselves to solve economic, cultural, and social prdblems after the Slovak people rid itself of the tutorship of Prague and :a Slovak government would take over in Slovakia. Now, ·a fter the passage of years, we know that they did their work notably well during the life of the Sloivak Republic. The basis of the political struggle of the Slovak nation for national and state independence was indisputably the social question and it was decisive in the placing of the �20 SLOVIA.KIA foundations for renewed .Slovruk statehood. The words spoken by Dr. Joseph Tiso, when he assumed the premiership of the Slovak aiutooomou:s government, October 8, 1938, teH us everything t!hat made the Slovak Republic Christian and democratic. In the •s entences quoted is noted the social policy of the Slovruk Republic which was conscientiously followed not only by Tiso himself, but by the mem'b ers of the SlOIV3!k government, as well. The program of social policy during the life of the Slovak State was not a copy of German National ,Socialism, as enemies of the Slovruk nation liike to point out, but it was the program of Papal Encyclicals, especially the Encyclicals of Pope Leo XNI (Rerum novarum) :and iPope iPius XI (Qua:dragesimo anno). And this social ,policy, even though it was not entirely original because it was ibased on the Paprul Encyclicals, nevertheless can be regarded as something · new in central Europe, if not in all of Eurorpe ; and it was an attempt to get the human society on a new road within the confines of Christian socialism. The Slwalk Government realized the social program ex;pressed iby President Dr. Joseph Tiso by means of a:n economic program which secured wo!I'k fo,r every 1Slova:k at home, work rewarded with adequate wages; it increased its ca:re of tlie family and its health ; it raised the li'Ving and cu1tuiral standard of all str.ata of the nation; it removed class hatreds and, by systematic re-education of the population, tried to attain mutual understanding and harmony. ln former Austria-Hungary and in pre-<Munich Czecho-Slova'kia, the social problem was partly solved by the emi gration of Slovaks into foreign Jands, notably to America and, later, to Canada and Argentina, and by seeking seasonal wor.k in neighboring countries, such as Hungary, Austria, F-rance rurid Germany. Over a quarter of a million Slovaks left their homeland d'll.I'ing the life of the first C.zecho-Slo.vak Repulblic, while almost the same number of Czechs, throug;h the good graces of the centralistic Pra;gue government, found b;rea:d in Slovakia. This was a bitter pill for the Slovwks to swaHow. Slovak political and 1 1 1 �SLOVAKIA 21 ccltura,1 leaders iknew that, if the trend continued, the Slovalks would soon be threatened with complete extinction in their own homeland. One of the first things the autonomous S1ova;k Government did, after taking office, was to asik Prague to recali all Czechs f.rom Slorvakia - wotikers, teachers, professors, and officials - whose places might well be filled with SlovaJks. 1P rague agreed. Nevertheless this subject was brought up in the post-war trials against President Tiso and memlbern of the Slovaik Government before the National Court in Bratislava, particularly in the process against Dr. Vojtech Tulka upon whom the court practically placed the foll blame for the return of Czech immigrants to Bohemia and Moravia. Let the Czechs exp1ain the release of Czech employees in Slavaikia as they will, Sl:ovalks regarded it as the only way out to right the inj1U:stices committed during two whole decades by the Prague gorvernment against the SlavaJk people and the only way to secure a livelihood for tholl!Sands of Slovak workers, farmers, and intellectuals who, because of the unjust social policy and chauvin~stic attitude of the Prague Government, were dependent on alms doled out from unemployment funds. With the departure of Czech employees from Slovakia thousands of positions were made available for Slovaks: in public works, the railways, the army, police department, the trades, and in private enter,prises. The Czechs learned what the S1ova:ks •knew long before: there was more tham enough work in ·SlO'Vakia for all inh'a,bitants who wanted to work. New r.ail lines were laid, new roads constructed, rivers were regufated, fields, meadows and pastures were drained, new faotorie.s, hydrocentrals, schools public buildings, hospitals, sanatoriums, and libraries were built. During six short years relati-vely much more was done in Slovakia than during the twenty-year existence of the first Ozecho--Slova;k Republic - and without the so-called "historical" lands contriJbuting a cent. The wage problem of Slovalk workers constituted a serio:us problem during the first years of the Slovak Repufblic wa,ges paid in Slovakia were much higher th!an those �22 SLOVAKIA paid in Czech lands. In 1939 agricultural worikers, who were the least paid, had their wages increased. The Slovak laborer, unspoiled by the Marx-Leninist theory and loyal to the Christian and national tradition, was not in a hurry to have his wages or salary adjusted: he realized that the government, even though 'Very willing, needed time to solve labor problems; to create a state, seC'llire peace for it with its neighbors, to get the state apparatus going, a:ll this required much time, thought, and ener,gy. The Slova'k Government was aware of the fact that the farmer and the worker were the main pillars of every state; the welfare of the state depended on the satisfaction and welfare of all workers. On February 5, 1940, the Premier of the Slo:va:k Government, Dr. Vojtech Tuka, called a meeting of representatives of all workers in Slovakia to Bratislava to discuss the iProblem of raising the living standard of workers and everything connected with this problem. The Slovak Government did concern itself with the fulfillment of the regulations of the Slo:vak Constitution (par. 79) and the Papal Encyclicals, according to which the exploitation of the socially weak was forbidden and every citizen of Slovakia had a claim to a just wage. F1amily considerations also entered into the problem, and a minimum wage law was put into effect, so that employers could not act arbitrarily with the wovkers and seek cheap lalbor. The result of the meeting with the representatives of the workers was that the Slovak Government issued a law (No. 284/ 1940), on the basis of which there was set up a Centrai Labor Office in Bratislava which was controlled by the Ministry of the Interior. lt was the task of this office to employ all aivailable workers in Slovakia: find out what people could do, ascertain their health status, and gi'Ve them a just wage for the work they were qualified to do. The Central Labor Office also had charge of hiring foreigners, inspecting industry, and providmg safeguards for the iprotection of lahor .and the wonkera. Law No. 283/1940 gave this office the authority to regulate wages and salaries and to determine woriking conditions. The Labor Office really did a wonderlul job for SlO'Vaik labor. It �SLOVAKIA 23 ca.n only be iregretted that, at the end of 1942 '8llld the beginning of 1943, the regulation of wages and salaries was taken over by the Office of Supplies, headed ,b y Dr. Imrich Karvas, now ·a .professor at the Uni'Versity of Bratislava, who was definitely anti-labor. It soon became apparent that Dr. Karvas wanted to incite the Slo'Vak workers ·a gainst the Slovak State and against the 'Slovak Government. As the "only expert and economist," Karvas ·a lways opposed an mcrease in wages for workers, but was O'Verruled by the Slovak Government and President Tiso himself. And this is the irony of fate: the ,g reatest friends of the Slovak wovker either were executed by hanging or are incarcerated in the Leopoldov prison, while the most implaicable enemy of Slovak labor enjoys the trust of the Communist Party. -During the life of the first Czecho-Sloiv~ Republic, Slovruk labor endeavored in vain to have a law passed in favor of workers with families. What Prague could not do for Slovak wor,kers was done by the Slovak State. The law (No. 216/ 1941) pro!Vided additional payments for children of wage-earners in the form of insurance. The socia:l significance of this law was far-reaching. During the first year, after the pass·a ge of this law, 115,000 families of Slovak workers and a total of 260,000 children were given significant aid: 100,000,000 Slovruk crowns ($3,333,000) were paid out. The true aim of the family wage was so that the worker, as the provider for his family, might make enough to live contendedly, satisfy also his cultural desires, and be able to save something for his family. The deciding factor of family wages, however, were the mothers and women of Slovakia, whom the government wanted to take out of the labor ,g roup in the course of time, so that they might be able to return to their original and God-designed mission - to the family - where they could devote their time to the care of their children and their households. It should b.e ,s pecially emphasized that the Slovak Government endea,yored to do away with piece-work altogether, because this type of labor notably exhausts the worker so that in a relatively short period of time he be- �24 SLOVAKIA comes useless for work and a burden not only :f or the state, but also his family. Workers were paid by the hoUT. When the results of the war began to be felt in Slovakia, the Slwwk government ordered that the workers be compensated for .p rice increases: married men at the rate of 1.20 crowns and the single at 0.80 cro,w ns per hour. Besides that, at the end of each calendar year, the workers receirved a special, tax-free payment in the form of a bonus, the iamount was determined first ,b y the Central LaJbor Office, but later by the Office of Supplies. DUTing the fi11st Czecho-Slovruk Republic workers complained most aJbout social insurance, into which every wovker had to pay high dues while sick benefits were low. The Slova;k Government also changed this radically. By an oroer with the power ·o f -law (No. 300/ 1940), District Socia1 Insurance agencies were dissolved ; from J anuary 1, 1941, the Workers Social Insurance Office, with its main office in Bratislava, took care of sicik, invalid, old-age, and accident insurance. Thus, the wo,r kers, their wives, and their families received better medical ,c are the office had seventeen affiliates in Slovakia and built its own hospitals in Bratislava, Ha.ndlova, and Podbrezova. In 1941 it built and opened one of the largest and most modern ~a.natoriums for liung diseases in central Europe ; it is situated in Vysne Hagy and contains 500 beds: 100 for patients with bone tuberc'U'losis and 400 fo,r other TB cases. ~urthermore, the agency managed the Soos Baths, the s 1anatorium for children in Luci'Vlla, and established sanatociums at Sklenne Teplice and at Trencianske Teplice: these were the places where the Workers 1Social Insurance Office sent afflicted workers and their wi<ves and cihildren. The Slovak Government also did something about the aicute hO'USing problem in industrial centers. The action of the government called a "thousand homes for workers families," was COffiiPleted successfully in the targer industrial centers. The Finance Ministry, with special tax relief for owners of irrdustrial enterprises and large farms, arranged to have these homes built within the framework of iirwestment. Thu s, entire colonies of new workers homes �25 SLOVAKIA sprang up within two-.three years, like mmhrooms after a rain, in Duibnica, Pova:zska Bystrica, Zilina, Ruzomiberok, Zbehy, Afruksice, and other industrial centers. The parliament of the Slovak Republic did not forget the recreational needs of the workers, either. On J,u,ly 6, 1944, it passed a law (No. 87 of the Slovruk Code of Law) granting paid vacations to wor,ke,r s. According to this law, every worker who worked at least six months a year was entitled to a paid vacation. The length of the vacation was established by law and depended on the actua1 number of years wonked and not on the performance of the wor,kers, as it does presently under the Communist iPmgue regime. The judiciary in the Slovak Republic was completely independent. '11his had a marked signific ance for the workers in the labor trials. The la:borer had the right, guaranteed by law, to sue his employer for cruuse; he also had the right to sue the State for cause, if he was an employee thereof. The sodal question of the workers was resolved with the cooperation of the representatives of the Slovak W10rkers, organized in the tra:de organizatiooo. First, as if mentioned above, it was the Christian-Social Trrude Federation and, later, the ·F ederation of l'Ildiustry, Tra:des, and Finances. The trade organizations were non~political and their ta.sk was to help the ,government realize its program for raising the living and cultural level of the workers. Under the concept_ of socia1 question, people usually think of the problem or question of the workers who suffered most, especially in the last years ~fore World War II. This is not the correct explanati~in oif social policy, because not only the factory wo•r ker, but also the fa.I1mer, artisans, the teacher, and the office-worker are equal members of the national collectirve. This is something wihich the Communists do not want to reoog,nize 3/nd the reason why they "solve" social questions so speedily. Just how they do th<at is a chapter ,by itself. If, however, the social question is to be solved to the satisfaction of all the adherents of a nation, its solution must include the farmer, the businessman, and the office-worker. Ami the Slovak State did just 1 �2-6 SLOVAKIA that: as far as the social question went, it took care of every category of wonker, state and private office-.wol'lker. •F or Slovalk agriculturists, the most significant day undoubtedly was February 22, 1940 (Washington's birthday) , when the parliament of the Slovak !Republic passed the new Land Reform Act, whereby ali the injustices suffered by the Slovak farmer during the pre~'Munkh Republic were removed. Land reform of the first CzechoSlova:k Republic did not consider the actual needs of Slovak farmers and distributed the land according ta a political key to those in the Czeoho-Slovak political parties who bound themselves to serve Benes and T. G. Masaryk: to promote the •p olicy of the Prag1Ue centralistic government and the interests of the Czech nation. In a conversation a:bout the new Land Reform Act, besides addresses by representatives o:f the Slovak farmers, Dr. Gejza Medricky, Minister of Agriculture, speaking for the Slovak Government, among other things, said: "It is very well known that we do not have too much arable land in Slovakia. In the whole of Slovakia we have 1,618,000 hectares (3,998,078 aicres) of wooded and agricultural land which come untler the new Land Reform Act ; this amounts to 45 percent of all our wooded and agricudtural land. It ,i s ev.ident that the government must be concerned that this land be worked in the best manner possible, that this land provide the food necessary for the people here settled, and that this land serve as a permanent existential foundation for those people who work on it. That is just why the significance of the plan from the economic side is clear to every individual. But no less is the significance of the plan from the political side. 'In the past the Hlinka Slovak People's Party fought against the injustices which emanated from the realization of the old land reform. With today's discussion about this law and with the passage of this plan, the old political demand of the ffiinka Slovak People's Party, that is, the revision of the old Land Reform Act, is being realized." In his speech, Dr. Gejza Medricky pointed to the actuality that 45 percent, that is, almost a half of the land �SLOVAKIA 27 in SlovaJkia was in the hands of foreigners, while Slovak farmers had only a bit more than half of it. The intention of the new Land !Reform Act was to get the land into the hands of Slova,k farmers and such people, whose social condition required it; furthemiOTe, to avoid economic losses with property transfers, to secure the Hveliihood of the population, and to solve the social question which is connected with an agricultural state (",SLOVAK," Feb. 25, 1940). The task of executing the Land Reform Act correctly and speedily wa,s entrusted to the State Land Office, which C8Jllle into being on the basis of a special law, which the S1ovruk Parliament ha,d voted that same day. According to the law, the Land Office had the 3/Uthority to buy the land concerned fo:r the State and then to sell it to Slovak farmers who were interested in it, guaranteeing that they would work it to produce the commodities needed by the population. According to the law, every citizen of the Slovak State had a claim to ~and, if he ,u nderstood farming, whose properties, after the Vienna Aribitration, fell to Hungary and, therefore, were forced by the Magyar government to lose everything and go to Slovakia empty-handed. Flurtihermore, priority .r ights to buy land were granted to graduates of agricultural schools, then to local people or inha:bitants of neighboring communities; and where none such could be found, the land was distributed to citizens of more remote communities of Slovakia. Of course, those interested in the land did not get it for free. The farmer, who applied for land, had to pay 50 percent of the sale .price, after hls application had been approved, and the remainder he could pay of in forty years in the form of rent to the State. The Land Office QOmpensated the owners of land which came under the Act by paying them the S8Jllle _a moont they paid for it, or payment wa,s based on prod1Uctive value. The significance of ia:nd reform for the Slovak farmer, as well as for the whole Slovak nation, was evaluated �28 SLOVAKIA by President Dr. Joseph Tiso on March 10, 1940, in Banovce Nad Bebravou, in this manner: "Gradually we shall harve to learn to forget the expression 'land reform.' Land reform with us is not the rewarding of protected chHdren to catoh the voters. We are concerned so that more he produced agriculturally. We must increase production. We do not want to reward, to ca:tch, voters. No one shall ever again, in any manner whatsoever, buy voters in Slov~ia ! Even in the present situation we are self-sufficient. This, however, must not satisfy us. We also want to export. That is why we wish to increruse our agricultUTal ,prod'Ulction. "The main idea of land reform is: to enruble as many husbandmen as possible to oper.ate independently. In this we shall act sensi,bly. Wherever anything proves itself, there we shall cultivate it. Whatever ,prorves itself, that we shall do. There shwl a!lso be so-called indivisi!ble property, which shall not be parcelled out under any circumstances. Flur:thermore, we must enaJble ,a higher degree of agrioulture ( experimental agrimtlture) . True, even the farmer can experiment, burt this c·a n be done only by ·t he man who has more. Such a farmer then can make experiments, take risks. We need healthy seeds, quality livestock. The small farmer is not trained to produce these. Such farmers are afraid to give their livestock more so that it could put on more weight. The a:gricwtural industry eannot be maintained only lby the sma'li farmer. [rt is the aim of the State to increase agricultural production. Therefore, the greater agricwtural units shall be preser-ved. . . No one shall get land under the sale price, and no, one shall get something for nothing. Nothing is valued that comes easily. So, if you want land, you shall have to pay for it; if you cannot pay the full iprice, the State will he1p you .p ay it in time in the form of rent. . . We want to make it possible for our ,b rethren in other lands to come here and go into ventures. We want to grow in: numbers; our ambition is that we becrone stronger. I do not fear fo;r the future we have the best outlook There still are some insufficiencies, but that �SLOVAKIA 29 is not because a new state has ,b een born, but because there is war around us!" Strict, 1but fatherly words. Only he could speak thus, who loved his people and who throughout his life worked in its interest. Thus it was that the other hallf of Slovak land got into the hands of Slovak farmers and ceaaed to be the object of business exploitation. And, fina11y, even private inrvestors had it good in ,Sl.ov,ak±a. They were not only given the possibility to enterprise, but were practically forced by the government to participate in the building of the State, so that erven their profits might increase. On the social policy of the government depended the reeducation of the population - the policy carried out in the i:\pirit of Christian charity towards ones illeigh:bor, of mutual assistance, cooperation, and understanding. The aim of the reeducation of the 1people waJS to remOIVe the blights of the past which, under the influence of pressure from the East, began to find opportune soil even in Slovalkia, especially among the Lutherans. Special attention was given to the reeducation of employe11S and owners of larger and smaller industrial enterprises; the relationship between employer and employee was exiplained according to the teaching of the social Pope, Leo XIII, who said in the encyclical Rerum Novarum: "Religion teaches the wealthy owner and the employer that their woJ'.lk people a,re not to be accO!Uilted their !bondsmen; that in ervery man they m'USt respect his dignity and worth as a man and as a Christian.; that labor rfor w,a.ges is not a thing to 'b e ashamed of, if we lend ear to right reason an.d to Christian (Philosophy, but is to a man's credit, ena;bling -h im to earn his living in an honoraJble way; and that it is shamefiuil and inhuman to treat men li!ke chattels to make money by, or to loolk upon them merely as so muoh musole or physical strength. A,g am the Chrurch teaches that, in dealing with the workingman, religion and the ,g ood of his so,ul must be kept in mind. Hence the employer is -bound to see that the wo:rker has time for !his religious duties; that he be not exposed to corrupting influ~.AW¥ and that he ibe not led ences and d~A~g~ UII .. J;Q~VILLE. STATE CO~LE.GE �SLOVAKIA 30 away to neglect bis thome and f.amily, or to squander his earnings. Furthermore, the employer must never tax his work people 'beyond their strength, or employ them in work unsuited to their sex or age. His ,g reat and principal duty is to give every one what is just. Doubtless before deciding whether wages are fair, many things have to be considered; ·b ut wealthy owners and all masters of labor should be mindful of this - that to exercise pressure upon the indigent and the destitute for the sa;ke of gain, and to gather one's profit out of the need of another, is condemned by all laws, human and Divine." 1 On the other hand, workingmen were expected to carry out honestly and fairly all equitable agreements freely entered into; never to injure the property of an employer uselessly and maliciously; never to .r esort to violence in defending their own cause and to avoid riots and disorders; and, finally, to have nothing to do with persons who stand in th service of Communism, endeavoring to sow dissention and dissatisfaction among the working ;p eople and ultimately to enslaJVe them. 1 The results of reeducation were demonstrated especially when Dr. Karvas, chairman of the Office of Supplies, adamantly opposed ,a ll warranted increases in wages for workingmen.. At that time the employers stood by the workingmen and thus embarrassed iDr. Karvas: instead of hourly wages, they ,g radually began to introduce piece-work so that the workmen could gain their increases, but not to sap their strength and exploit them. This arrangement was done in agreement with the trade organizations and the workingmen themselrves; Karvas, therefore, could not punrish employers for increasing wages with out his permission. Tthe life of cohabitation of the citizens in the Slovak State resembled the life of a well-ordered family. Slov:rukia was the envy of States with richer traditions and of nations more mmnerous than the Slova;ks. The SlovaJk workingman ,r eally never had it so good, rund prdbaJbly never will mwe it again, until a free and ~ndependent Slovrukia, based on Christian principles, is again established. � 18 SLOVAKIA however, is d.n itself an assurance to all Slovaik em:igres that in the eyes of Prague and of international Communism ,i t is no "quan·t ite negligeable," that it is, in fact, so formidable a hindrance to them for the Slovaks to be allied with the democracies that they even ventured such a brutal scandal to register their reaction. To Slovruk 1patriots in exile, mourning the death of their most distinguished representative, Matus Cernak, this realization begets a fresh spur to redoubled activities. Consummate triumph of the Slovaik hope for independence beckons on the trail over which Matus Cernak has forged ahead in honor and in complete unflinching dedication. God grant it! - "BuNetin of the Slovruk National Council Abroad," June, 1956) . • • • LABOR AND THE SWVAK REPUBLIC J. C. Bukovina " Our policy shall not be socialis·tic, but social. We shall not incite J:}eople against our. selves, but we shall train them to be understanding and Wilted . .A:bove all else, work is the foundation of our policy." 'Dr. Joseph Tlso, Oct. 8, 1S38. October 6, 1938, and March 14, 1939, found the S10vruks prepared. The Hlin:ka ·S lovak People's Party, whic:h had fought consistently for twenty years before Munich to secure the national existence of the Slova!k nation, was fully prepared for these two historical milestones - to take over the direction of the fate of the Slovak nation. The fight of the Slovaks for national independence in the pre-Munich Czecho-Slovak State was actually a struggle and a call of the Slovruk nation for social justice. Once the Czechs under T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Exlward Benes had taken over the reigns of state, promises made to the Slovruks in America and elsewhere were soon forgotten, and the Slovalks found themselves again in the position of the exploited. Like the Magyars, the Czechs found little trouble in recruiting Judas Slovaks to promote not the interests of the Slovak nation, but the interests of the Czech nation, �SLOVAKIA 19 which for propaganda .purposes was labeled "Czecho-Slovak" (with or without the hyphen.) Practically every single utterance of the deputies of the ffiinka Slovak !People's Party on the floor of the Prague Parliament directly or indirectly dealt with the social question of the Sloivak people. When the state ·b udgets came up for consideration, Andrew Hlinka and iDr. Joseph Tiso pointed to the injustices suffered by the Slovaiks at the hands of the Prague centralistic government. Pleas and admonitions, warnings and threats, were a voice calling oot in the desert; the government and Czech deputies always played the same record: Slovakia is costing the "historical" Jra.nds plenty, the policy of the Hlin:ka Slovak People's Party is separatistfo, and its representatiives are demagogues, political analphwbets, etc. While the Prague government continued to add iusuJ.t to injury whenever 'S lovaks demanded state's rights, Andrew iHlinlka !Prepared his most trusted workers for the decisive battle. He knew the significance of trade and professional organizations; several of them had joined his party: the Christian-Social T.rade Federation, led by deputies Rudolph Cajovsky and John Moro; the Allian·ce of Slovruk Railr.oadmen, ,u nder the chairmansh1p of deputy Stephen Surovialk; the Alliance of .Slovak Postal W Oiikers under deputy Joseph Drobny; the Regional Catholic Teachers Society, in whicih Senator .An1.hony Ha.ncJko served as chairman of many years; and the Society of Slovak Professors, led by professor Misfile The occupational organizations, wi1:th their Christia.nSociai program drawn from the Papal Encyclicals, prepared themselves to solve economic, cultural, and social prdblems after the Slovak people rid itself of the tutorship of Prague and :a Slovak government would take over in Slovakia. Now, ·a fter the passage of years, we know that they did their work notably well during the life of the Sloivak Republic. The basis of the political struggle of the Slovak nation for national and state independence was indisputably the social question and it was decisive in the placing of the �20 SLOVIA.KIA foundations for renewed .Slovruk statehood. The words spoken by Dr. Joseph Tiso, when he assumed the premiership of the Slovak aiutooomou:s government, October 8, 1938, teH us everything t!hat made the Slovak Republic Christian and democratic. In the •s entences quoted is noted the social policy of the Slovruk Republic which was conscientiously followed not only by Tiso himself, but by the mem'b ers of the SlOIV3!k government, as well. The program of social policy during the life of the Slovak State was not a copy of German National ,Socialism, as enemies of the Slovruk nation liike to point out, but it was the program of Papal Encyclicals, especially the Encyclicals of Pope Leo XNI (Rerum novarum) :and iPope iPius XI (Qua:dragesimo anno). And this social ,policy, even though it was not entirely original because it was ibased on the Paprul Encyclicals, nevertheless can be regarded as something · new in central Europe, if not in all of Eurorpe ; and it was an attempt to get the human society on a new road within the confines of Christian socialism. The Slwalk Government realized the social program ex;pressed iby President Dr. Joseph Tiso by means of a:n economic program which secured wo!I'k fo,r every 1Slova:k at home, work rewarded with adequate wages; it increased its ca:re of tlie family and its health ; it raised the li'Ving and cu1tuiral standard of all str.ata of the nation; it removed class hatreds and, by systematic re-education of the population, tried to attain mutual understanding and harmony. ln former Austria-Hungary and in pre-<Munich Czecho-Slova'kia, the social problem was partly solved by the emi gration of Slovaks into foreign Jands, notably to America and, later, to Canada and Argentina, and by seeking seasonal wor.k in neighboring countries, such as Hungary, Austria, F-rance rurid Germany. Over a quarter of a million Slovaks left their homeland d'll.I'ing the life of the first C.zecho-Slo.vak Repulblic, while almost the same number of Czechs, throug;h the good graces of the centralistic Pra;gue government, found b;rea:d in Slovakia. This was a bitter pill for the Slovwks to swaHow. Slovak political and 1 1 1 �SLOVAKIA 21 ccltura,1 leaders iknew that, if the trend continued, the Slovalks would soon be threatened with complete extinction in their own homeland. One of the first things the autonomous S1ova;k Government did, after taking office, was to asik Prague to recali all Czechs f.rom Slorvakia - wotikers, teachers, professors, and officials - whose places might well be filled with SlovaJks. 1P rague agreed. Nevertheless this subject was brought up in the post-war trials against President Tiso and memlbern of the Slovaik Government before the National Court in Bratislava, particularly in the process against Dr. Vojtech Tulka upon whom the court practically placed the foll blame for the return of Czech immigrants to Bohemia and Moravia. Let the Czechs exp1ain the release of Czech employees in Slavaikia as they will, Sl:ovalks regarded it as the only way out to right the inj1U:stices committed during two whole decades by the Prague gorvernment against the SlavaJk people and the only way to secure a livelihood for tholl!Sands of Slovak workers, farmers, and intellectuals who, because of the unjust social policy and chauvin~stic attitude of the Prague Government, were dependent on alms doled out from unemployment funds. With the departure of Czech employees from Slovakia thousands of positions were made available for Slovaks: in public works, the railways, the army, police department, the trades, and in private enter,prises. The Czechs learned what the S1ova:ks •knew long before: there was more tham enough work in ·SlO'Vakia for all inh'a,bitants who wanted to work. New r.ail lines were laid, new roads constructed, rivers were regufated, fields, meadows and pastures were drained, new faotorie.s, hydrocentrals, schools public buildings, hospitals, sanatoriums, and libraries were built. During six short years relati-vely much more was done in Slovakia than during the twenty-year existence of the first Ozecho--Slova;k Republic - and without the so-called "historical" lands contriJbuting a cent. The wage problem of Slovalk workers constituted a serio:us problem during the first years of the Slovak Repufblic wa,ges paid in Slovakia were much higher th!an those �22 SLOVAKIA paid in Czech lands. In 1939 agricultural worikers, who were the least paid, had their wages increased. The Slovak laborer, unspoiled by the Marx-Leninist theory and loyal to the Christian and national tradition, was not in a hurry to have his wages or salary adjusted: he realized that the government, even though 'Very willing, needed time to solve labor problems; to create a state, seC'llire peace for it with its neighbors, to get the state apparatus going, a:ll this required much time, thought, and ener,gy. The Slova'k Government was aware of the fact that the farmer and the worker were the main pillars of every state; the welfare of the state depended on the satisfaction and welfare of all workers. On February 5, 1940, the Premier of the Slo:va:k Government, Dr. Vojtech Tuka, called a meeting of representatives of all workers in Slovakia to Bratislava to discuss the iProblem of raising the living standard of workers and everything connected with this problem. The Slovak Government did concern itself with the fulfillment of the regulations of the Slo:vak Constitution (par. 79) and the Papal Encyclicals, according to which the exploitation of the socially weak was forbidden and every citizen of Slovakia had a claim to a just wage. F1amily considerations also entered into the problem, and a minimum wage law was put into effect, so that employers could not act arbitrarily with the wovkers and seek cheap lalbor. The result of the meeting with the representatives of the workers was that the Slovak Government issued a law (No. 284/ 1940), on the basis of which there was set up a Centrai Labor Office in Bratislava which was controlled by the Ministry of the Interior. lt was the task of this office to employ all aivailable workers in Slovakia: find out what people could do, ascertain their health status, and gi'Ve them a just wage for the work they were qualified to do. The Central Labor Office also had charge of hiring foreigners, inspecting industry, and providmg safeguards for the iprotection of lahor .and the wonkera. Law No. 283/1940 gave this office the authority to regulate wages and salaries and to determine woriking conditions. The Labor Office really did a wonderlul job for SlO'Vaik labor. It �SLOVAKIA 23 ca.n only be iregretted that, at the end of 1942 '8llld the beginning of 1943, the regulation of wages and salaries was taken over by the Office of Supplies, headed ,b y Dr. Imrich Karvas, now ·a .professor at the Uni'Versity of Bratislava, who was definitely anti-labor. It soon became apparent that Dr. Karvas wanted to incite the Slo'Vak workers ·a gainst the Slovak State and against the 'Slovak Government. As the "only expert and economist," Karvas ·a lways opposed an mcrease in wages for workers, but was O'Verruled by the Slovak Government and President Tiso himself. And this is the irony of fate: the ,g reatest friends of the Slovak wovker either were executed by hanging or are incarcerated in the Leopoldov prison, while the most implaicable enemy of Slovak labor enjoys the trust of the Communist Party. -During the life of the first Czecho-Sloiv~ Republic, Slovruk labor endeavored in vain to have a law passed in favor of workers with families. What Prague could not do for Slovak wor,kers was done by the Slovak State. The law (No. 216/ 1941) pro!Vided additional payments for children of wage-earners in the form of insurance. The socia:l significance of this law was far-reaching. During the first year, after the pass·a ge of this law, 115,000 families of Slovak workers and a total of 260,000 children were given significant aid: 100,000,000 Slovruk crowns ($3,333,000) were paid out. The true aim of the family wage was so that the worker, as the provider for his family, might make enough to live contendedly, satisfy also his cultural desires, and be able to save something for his family. The deciding factor of family wages, however, were the mothers and women of Slovakia, whom the government wanted to take out of the labor ,g roup in the course of time, so that they might be able to return to their original and God-designed mission - to the family - where they could devote their time to the care of their children and their households. It should b.e ,s pecially emphasized that the Slovak Government endea,yored to do away with piece-work altogether, because this type of labor notably exhausts the worker so that in a relatively short period of time he be- �24 SLOVAKIA comes useless for work and a burden not only :f or the state, but also his family. Workers were paid by the hoUT. When the results of the war began to be felt in Slovakia, the Slwwk government ordered that the workers be compensated for .p rice increases: married men at the rate of 1.20 crowns and the single at 0.80 cro,w ns per hour. Besides that, at the end of each calendar year, the workers receirved a special, tax-free payment in the form of a bonus, the iamount was determined first ,b y the Central LaJbor Office, but later by the Office of Supplies. DUTing the fi11st Czecho-Slovruk Republic workers complained most aJbout social insurance, into which every wovker had to pay high dues while sick benefits were low. The Slova;k Government also changed this radically. By an oroer with the power ·o f -law (No. 300/ 1940), District Socia1 Insurance agencies were dissolved ; from J anuary 1, 1941, the Workers Social Insurance Office, with its main office in Bratislava, took care of sicik, invalid, old-age, and accident insurance. Thus, the wo,r kers, their wives, and their families received better medical ,c are the office had seventeen affiliates in Slovakia and built its own hospitals in Bratislava, Ha.ndlova, and Podbrezova. In 1941 it built and opened one of the largest and most modern ~a.natoriums for liung diseases in central Europe ; it is situated in Vysne Hagy and contains 500 beds: 100 for patients with bone tuberc'U'losis and 400 fo,r other TB cases. ~urthermore, the agency managed the Soos Baths, the s 1anatorium for children in Luci'Vlla, and established sanatociums at Sklenne Teplice and at Trencianske Teplice: these were the places where the Workers 1Social Insurance Office sent afflicted workers and their wi<ves and cihildren. The Slovak Government also did something about the aicute hO'USing problem in industrial centers. The action of the government called a "thousand homes for workers families," was COffiiPleted successfully in the targer industrial centers. The Finance Ministry, with special tax relief for owners of irrdustrial enterprises and large farms, arranged to have these homes built within the framework of iirwestment. Thu s, entire colonies of new workers homes �25 SLOVAKIA sprang up within two-.three years, like mmhrooms after a rain, in Duibnica, Pova:zska Bystrica, Zilina, Ruzomiberok, Zbehy, Afruksice, and other industrial centers. The parliament of the Slovak Republic did not forget the recreational needs of the workers, either. On J,u,ly 6, 1944, it passed a law (No. 87 of the Slovruk Code of Law) granting paid vacations to wor,ke,r s. According to this law, every worker who worked at least six months a year was entitled to a paid vacation. The length of the vacation was established by law and depended on the actua1 number of years wonked and not on the performance of the wor,kers, as it does presently under the Communist iPmgue regime. The judiciary in the Slovak Republic was completely independent. '11his had a marked signific ance for the workers in the labor trials. The la:borer had the right, guaranteed by law, to sue his employer for cruuse; he also had the right to sue the State for cause, if he was an employee thereof. The sodal question of the workers was resolved with the cooperation of the representatives of the Slovak W10rkers, organized in the tra:de organizatiooo. First, as if mentioned above, it was the Christian-Social Trrude Federation and, later, the ·F ederation of l'Ildiustry, Tra:des, and Finances. The trade organizations were non~political and their ta.sk was to help the ,government realize its program for raising the living and cultural level of the workers. Under the concept_ of socia1 question, people usually think of the problem or question of the workers who suffered most, especially in the last years ~fore World War II. This is not the correct explanati~in oif social policy, because not only the factory wo•r ker, but also the fa.I1mer, artisans, the teacher, and the office-worker are equal members of the national collectirve. This is something wihich the Communists do not want to reoog,nize 3/nd the reason why they "solve" social questions so speedily. Just how they do th<at is a chapter ,by itself. If, however, the social question is to be solved to the satisfaction of all the adherents of a nation, its solution must include the farmer, the businessman, and the office-worker. Ami the Slovak State did just 1 �2-6 SLOVAKIA that: as far as the social question went, it took care of every category of wonker, state and private office-.wol'lker. •F or Slovalk agriculturists, the most significant day undoubtedly was February 22, 1940 (Washington's birthday) , when the parliament of the Slovak !Republic passed the new Land Reform Act, whereby ali the injustices suffered by the Slovak farmer during the pre~'Munkh Republic were removed. Land reform of the first CzechoSlova:k Republic did not consider the actual needs of Slovak farmers and distributed the land according ta a political key to those in the Czeoho-Slovak political parties who bound themselves to serve Benes and T. G. Masaryk: to promote the •p olicy of the Prag1Ue centralistic government and the interests of the Czech nation. In a conversation a:bout the new Land Reform Act, besides addresses by representatives o:f the Slovak farmers, Dr. Gejza Medricky, Minister of Agriculture, speaking for the Slovak Government, among other things, said: "It is very well known that we do not have too much arable land in Slovakia. In the whole of Slovakia we have 1,618,000 hectares (3,998,078 aicres) of wooded and agricultural land which come untler the new Land Reform Act ; this amounts to 45 percent of all our wooded and agricudtural land. It ,i s ev.ident that the government must be concerned that this land be worked in the best manner possible, that this land provide the food necessary for the people here settled, and that this land serve as a permanent existential foundation for those people who work on it. That is just why the significance of the plan from the economic side is clear to every individual. But no less is the significance of the plan from the political side. 'In the past the Hlinka Slovak People's Party fought against the injustices which emanated from the realization of the old land reform. With today's discussion about this law and with the passage of this plan, the old political demand of the ffiinka Slovak People's Party, that is, the revision of the old Land Reform Act, is being realized." In his speech, Dr. Gejza Medricky pointed to the actuality that 45 percent, that is, almost a half of the land �SLOVAKIA 27 in SlovaJkia was in the hands of foreigners, while Slovak farmers had only a bit more than half of it. The intention of the new Land !Reform Act was to get the land into the hands of Slova,k farmers and such people, whose social condition required it; furthemiOTe, to avoid economic losses with property transfers, to secure the Hveliihood of the population, and to solve the social question which is connected with an agricultural state (",SLOVAK," Feb. 25, 1940). The task of executing the Land Reform Act correctly and speedily wa,s entrusted to the State Land Office, which C8Jllle into being on the basis of a special law, which the S1ovruk Parliament ha,d voted that same day. According to the law, the Land Office had the 3/Uthority to buy the land concerned fo:r the State and then to sell it to Slovak farmers who were interested in it, guaranteeing that they would work it to produce the commodities needed by the population. According to the law, every citizen of the Slovak State had a claim to ~and, if he ,u nderstood farming, whose properties, after the Vienna Aribitration, fell to Hungary and, therefore, were forced by the Magyar government to lose everything and go to Slovakia empty-handed. Flurtihermore, priority .r ights to buy land were granted to graduates of agricultural schools, then to local people or inha:bitants of neighboring communities; and where none such could be found, the land was distributed to citizens of more remote communities of Slovakia. Of course, those interested in the land did not get it for free. The farmer, who applied for land, had to pay 50 percent of the sale .price, after hls application had been approved, and the remainder he could pay of in forty years in the form of rent to the State. The Land Office QOmpensated the owners of land which came under the Act by paying them the S8Jllle _a moont they paid for it, or payment wa,s based on prod1Uctive value. The significance of ia:nd reform for the Slovak farmer, as well as for the whole Slovak nation, was evaluated �28 SLOVAKIA by President Dr. Joseph Tiso on March 10, 1940, in Banovce Nad Bebravou, in this manner: "Gradually we shall harve to learn to forget the expression 'land reform.' Land reform with us is not the rewarding of protected chHdren to catoh the voters. We are concerned so that more he produced agriculturally. We must increase production. We do not want to reward, to ca:tch, voters. No one shall ever again, in any manner whatsoever, buy voters in Slov~ia ! Even in the present situation we are self-sufficient. This, however, must not satisfy us. We also want to export. That is why we wish to increruse our agricultUTal ,prod'Ulction. "The main idea of land reform is: to enruble as many husbandmen as possible to oper.ate independently. In this we shall act sensi,bly. Wherever anything proves itself, there we shall cultivate it. Whatever ,prorves itself, that we shall do. There shwl a!lso be so-called indivisi!ble property, which shall not be parcelled out under any circumstances. Flur:thermore, we must enaJble ,a higher degree of agrioulture ( experimental agrimtlture) . True, even the farmer can experiment, burt this c·a n be done only by ·t he man who has more. Such a farmer then can make experiments, take risks. We need healthy seeds, quality livestock. The small farmer is not trained to produce these. Such farmers are afraid to give their livestock more so that it could put on more weight. The a:gricwtural industry eannot be maintained only lby the sma'li farmer. [rt is the aim of the State to increase agricultural production. Therefore, the greater agricwtural units shall be preser-ved. . . No one shall get land under the sale price, and no, one shall get something for nothing. Nothing is valued that comes easily. So, if you want land, you shall have to pay for it; if you cannot pay the full iprice, the State will he1p you .p ay it in time in the form of rent. . . We want to make it possible for our ,b rethren in other lands to come here and go into ventures. We want to grow in: numbers; our ambition is that we becrone stronger. I do not fear fo;r the future we have the best outlook There still are some insufficiencies, but that �SLOVAKIA 29 is not because a new state has ,b een born, but because there is war around us!" Strict, 1but fatherly words. Only he could speak thus, who loved his people and who throughout his life worked in its interest. Thus it was that the other hallf of Slovak land got into the hands of Slovak farmers and ceaaed to be the object of business exploitation. And, fina11y, even private inrvestors had it good in ,Sl.ov,ak±a. They were not only given the possibility to enterprise, but were practically forced by the government to participate in the building of the State, so that erven their profits might increase. On the social policy of the government depended the reeducation of the population - the policy carried out in the i:\pirit of Christian charity towards ones illeigh:bor, of mutual assistance, cooperation, and understanding. The aim of the reeducation of the 1people waJS to remOIVe the blights of the past which, under the influence of pressure from the East, began to find opportune soil even in Slovalkia, especially among the Lutherans. Special attention was given to the reeducation of employe11S and owners of larger and smaller industrial enterprises; the relationship between employer and employee was exiplained according to the teaching of the social Pope, Leo XIII, who said in the encyclical Rerum Novarum: "Religion teaches the wealthy owner and the employer that their woJ'.lk people a,re not to be accO!Uilted their !bondsmen; that in ervery man they m'USt respect his dignity and worth as a man and as a Christian.; that labor rfor w,a.ges is not a thing to 'b e ashamed of, if we lend ear to right reason an.d to Christian (Philosophy, but is to a man's credit, ena;bling -h im to earn his living in an honoraJble way; and that it is shamefiuil and inhuman to treat men li!ke chattels to make money by, or to loolk upon them merely as so muoh musole or physical strength. A,g am the Chrurch teaches that, in dealing with the workingman, religion and the ,g ood of his so,ul must be kept in mind. Hence the employer is -bound to see that the wo:rker has time for !his religious duties; that he be not exposed to corrupting influ~.AW¥ and that he ibe not led ences and d~A~g~ UII .. J;Q~VILLE. STATE CO~LE.GE �SLOVAKIA 30 away to neglect bis thome and f.amily, or to squander his earnings. Furthermore, the employer must never tax his work people 'beyond their strength, or employ them in work unsuited to their sex or age. His ,g reat and principal duty is to give every one what is just. Doubtless before deciding whether wages are fair, many things have to be considered; ·b ut wealthy owners and all masters of labor should be mindful of this - that to exercise pressure upon the indigent and the destitute for the sa;ke of gain, and to gather one's profit out of the need of another, is condemned by all laws, human and Divine." 1 On the other hand, workingmen were expected to carry out honestly and fairly all equitable agreements freely entered into; never to injure the property of an employer uselessly and maliciously; never to .r esort to violence in defending their own cause and to avoid riots and disorders; and, finally, to have nothing to do with persons who stand in th service of Communism, endeavoring to sow dissention and dissatisfaction among the working ;p eople and ultimately to enslaJVe them. 1 The results of reeducation were demonstrated especially when Dr. Karvas, chairman of the Office of Supplies, adamantly opposed ,a ll warranted increases in wages for workingmen.. At that time the employers stood by the workingmen and thus embarrassed iDr. Karvas: instead of hourly wages, they ,g radually began to introduce piece-work so that the workmen could gain their increases, but not to sap their strength and exploit them. This arrangement was done in agreement with the trade organizations and the workingmen themselrves; Karvas, therefore, could not punrish employers for increasing wages with out his permission. Tthe life of cohabitation of the citizens in the Slovak State resembled the life of a well-ordered family. Slov:rukia was the envy of States with richer traditions and of nations more mmnerous than the Slova;ks. The SlovaJk workingman ,r eally never had it so good, rund prdbaJbly never will mwe it again, until a free and ~ndependent Slovrukia, based on Christian principles, is again established. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 18 SLOVAKIA however, is d.n itself an assurance to all Slovaik em:igres that in the eyes of Prague and of international Communism ,i t is no "quan·t ite negligeable," that it is, in fact, so formidable a hindrance to them for the Slovaks to be allied with the democracies that they even ventured such a brutal scandal to register their reaction. To Slovruk 1patriots in exile, mourning the death of their most distinguished representative, Matus Cernak, this realization begets a fresh spur to redoubled activities. Consummate triumph of the Slovaik hope for independence beckons on the trail over which Matus Cernak has forged ahead in honor and in complete unflinching dedication. God grant it! - "BuNetin of the Slovruk National Council Abroad," June, 1956) . • • • LABOR AND THE SWVAK REPUBLIC J. C. Bukovina " Our policy shall not be socialis·tic, but social. We shall not incite J:}eople against our. selves, but we shall train them to be understanding and Wilted . .A:bove all else, work is the foundation of our policy." 'Dr. Joseph Tlso, Oct. 8, 1S38. October 6, 1938, and March 14, 1939, found the S10vruks prepared. The Hlin:ka ·S lovak People's Party, whic:h had fought consistently for twenty years before Munich to secure the national existence of the Slova!k nation, was fully prepared for these two historical milestones - to take over the direction of the fate of the Slovak nation. The fight of the Slovaks for national independence in the pre-Munich Czecho-Slovak State was actually a struggle and a call of the Slovruk nation for social justice. Once the Czechs under T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Exlward Benes had taken over the reigns of state, promises made to the Slovruks in America and elsewhere were soon forgotten, and the Slovalks found themselves again in the position of the exploited. Like the Magyars, the Czechs found little trouble in recruiting Judas Slovaks to promote not the interests of the Slovak nation, but the interests of the Czech nation, SLOVAKIA 19 which for propaganda .purposes was labeled "Czecho-Slovak" (with or without the hyphen.) Practically every single utterance of the deputies of the ffiinka Slovak !People's Party on the floor of the Prague Parliament directly or indirectly dealt with the social question of the Sloivak people. When the state ·b udgets came up for consideration, Andrew Hlinka and iDr. Joseph Tiso pointed to the injustices suffered by the Slovaiks at the hands of the Prague centralistic government. Pleas and admonitions, warnings and threats, were a voice calling oot in the desert; the government and Czech deputies always played the same record: Slovakia is costing the "historical" Jra.nds plenty, the policy of the Hlin:ka Slovak People's Party is separatistfo, and its representatiives are demagogues, political analphwbets, etc. While the Prague government continued to add iusuJ.t to injury whenever 'S lovaks demanded state's rights, Andrew iHlinlka !Prepared his most trusted workers for the decisive battle. He knew the significance of trade and professional organizations; several of them had joined his party: the Christian-Social T.rade Federation, led by deputies Rudolph Cajovsky and John Moro; the Allian·ce of Slovruk Railr.oadmen, ,u nder the chairmansh1p of deputy Stephen Surovialk; the Alliance of .Slovak Postal W Oiikers under deputy Joseph Drobny; the Regional Catholic Teachers Society, in whicih Senator .An1.hony Ha.ncJko served as chairman of many years; and the Society of Slovak Professors, led by professor Misfile The occupational organizations, wi1:th their Christia.nSociai program drawn from the Papal Encyclicals, prepared themselves to solve economic, cultural, and social prdblems after the Slovak people rid itself of the tutorship of Prague and :a Slovak government would take over in Slovakia. Now, ·a fter the passage of years, we know that they did their work notably well during the life of the Sloivak Republic. The basis of the political struggle of the Slovak nation for national and state independence was indisputably the social question and it was decisive in the placing of the 20 SLOVIA.KIA foundations for renewed .Slovruk statehood. The words spoken by Dr. Joseph Tiso, when he assumed the premiership of the Slovak aiutooomou:s government, October 8, 1938, teH us everything t!hat made the Slovak Republic Christian and democratic. In the •s entences quoted is noted the social policy of the Slovruk Republic which was conscientiously followed not only by Tiso himself, but by the mem'b ers of the SlOIV3!k government, as well. The program of social policy during the life of the Slovak State was not a copy of German National ,Socialism, as enemies of the Slovruk nation liike to point out, but it was the program of Papal Encyclicals, especially the Encyclicals of Pope Leo XNI (Rerum novarum) :and iPope iPius XI (Qua:dragesimo anno). And this social ,policy, even though it was not entirely original because it was ibased on the Paprul Encyclicals, nevertheless can be regarded as something · new in central Europe, if not in all of Eurorpe ; and it was an attempt to get the human society on a new road within the confines of Christian socialism. The Slwalk Government realized the social program ex;pressed iby President Dr. Joseph Tiso by means of a:n economic program which secured wo!I'k fo,r every 1Slova:k at home, work rewarded with adequate wages; it increased its ca:re of tlie family and its health ; it raised the li'Ving and cu1tuiral standard of all str.ata of the nation; it removed class hatreds and, by systematic re-education of the population, tried to attain mutual understanding and harmony. ln former Austria-Hungary and in pre-<Munich Czecho-Slova'kia, the social problem was partly solved by the emi gration of Slovaks into foreign Jands, notably to America and, later, to Canada and Argentina, and by seeking seasonal wor.k in neighboring countries, such as Hungary, Austria, F-rance rurid Germany. Over a quarter of a million Slovaks left their homeland d'll.I'ing the life of the first C.zecho-Slo.vak Repulblic, while almost the same number of Czechs, throug;h the good graces of the centralistic Pra;gue government, found b;rea:d in Slovakia. This was a bitter pill for the Slovwks to swaHow. Slovak political and 1 1 1 SLOVAKIA 21 ccltura,1 leaders iknew that, if the trend continued, the Slovalks would soon be threatened with complete extinction in their own homeland. One of the first things the autonomous S1ova;k Government did, after taking office, was to asik Prague to recali all Czechs f.rom Slorvakia - wotikers, teachers, professors, and officials - whose places might well be filled with SlovaJks. 1P rague agreed. Nevertheless this subject was brought up in the post-war trials against President Tiso and memlbern of the Slovaik Government before the National Court in Bratislava, particularly in the process against Dr. Vojtech Tulka upon whom the court practically placed the foll blame for the return of Czech immigrants to Bohemia and Moravia. Let the Czechs exp1ain the release of Czech employees in Slavaikia as they will, Sl:ovalks regarded it as the only way out to right the inj1U:stices committed during two whole decades by the Prague gorvernment against the SlavaJk people and the only way to secure a livelihood for tholl!Sands of Slovak workers, farmers, and intellectuals who, because of the unjust social policy and chauvin~stic attitude of the Prague Government, were dependent on alms doled out from unemployment funds. With the departure of Czech employees from Slovakia thousands of positions were made available for Slovaks: in public works, the railways, the army, police department, the trades, and in private enter,prises. The Czechs learned what the S1ova:ks •knew long before: there was more tham enough work in ·SlO'Vakia for all inh'a,bitants who wanted to work. New r.ail lines were laid, new roads constructed, rivers were regufated, fields, meadows and pastures were drained, new faotorie.s, hydrocentrals, schools public buildings, hospitals, sanatoriums, and libraries were built. During six short years relati-vely much more was done in Slovakia than during the twenty-year existence of the first Ozecho--Slova;k Republic - and without the so-called "historical" lands contriJbuting a cent. The wage problem of Slovalk workers constituted a serio:us problem during the first years of the Slovak Repufblic wa,ges paid in Slovakia were much higher th!an those 22 SLOVAKIA paid in Czech lands. In 1939 agricultural worikers, who were the least paid, had their wages increased. The Slovak laborer, unspoiled by the Marx-Leninist theory and loyal to the Christian and national tradition, was not in a hurry to have his wages or salary adjusted: he realized that the government, even though 'Very willing, needed time to solve labor problems; to create a state, seC'llire peace for it with its neighbors, to get the state apparatus going, a:ll this required much time, thought, and ener,gy. The Slova'k Government was aware of the fact that the farmer and the worker were the main pillars of every state; the welfare of the state depended on the satisfaction and welfare of all workers. On February 5, 1940, the Premier of the Slo:va:k Government, Dr. Vojtech Tuka, called a meeting of representatives of all workers in Slovakia to Bratislava to discuss the iProblem of raising the living standard of workers and everything connected with this problem. The Slovak Government did concern itself with the fulfillment of the regulations of the Slo:vak Constitution (par. 79) and the Papal Encyclicals, according to which the exploitation of the socially weak was forbidden and every citizen of Slovakia had a claim to a just wage. F1amily considerations also entered into the problem, and a minimum wage law was put into effect, so that employers could not act arbitrarily with the wovkers and seek cheap lalbor. The result of the meeting with the representatives of the workers was that the Slovak Government issued a law (No. 284/ 1940), on the basis of which there was set up a Centrai Labor Office in Bratislava which was controlled by the Ministry of the Interior. lt was the task of this office to employ all aivailable workers in Slovakia: find out what people could do, ascertain their health status, and gi'Ve them a just wage for the work they were qualified to do. The Central Labor Office also had charge of hiring foreigners, inspecting industry, and providmg safeguards for the iprotection of lahor .and the wonkera. Law No. 283/1940 gave this office the authority to regulate wages and salaries and to determine woriking conditions. The Labor Office really did a wonderlul job for SlO'Vaik labor. It SLOVAKIA 23 ca.n only be iregretted that, at the end of 1942 '8llld the beginning of 1943, the regulation of wages and salaries was taken over by the Office of Supplies, headed ,b y Dr. Imrich Karvas, now ·a .professor at the Uni'Versity of Bratislava, who was definitely anti-labor. It soon became apparent that Dr. Karvas wanted to incite the Slo'Vak workers ·a gainst the Slovak State and against the 'Slovak Government. As the "only expert and economist," Karvas ·a lways opposed an mcrease in wages for workers, but was O'Verruled by the Slovak Government and President Tiso himself. And this is the irony of fate: the ,g reatest friends of the Slovak wovker either were executed by hanging or are incarcerated in the Leopoldov prison, while the most implaicable enemy of Slovak labor enjoys the trust of the Communist Party. -During the life of the first Czecho-Sloiv~ Republic, Slovruk labor endeavored in vain to have a law passed in favor of workers with families. What Prague could not do for Slovak wor,kers was done by the Slovak State. The law (No. 216/ 1941) pro!Vided additional payments for children of wage-earners in the form of insurance. The socia:l significance of this law was far-reaching. During the first year, after the pass·a ge of this law, 115,000 families of Slovak workers and a total of 260,000 children were given significant aid: 100,000,000 Slovruk crowns ($3,333,000) were paid out. The true aim of the family wage was so that the worker, as the provider for his family, might make enough to live contendedly, satisfy also his cultural desires, and be able to save something for his family. The deciding factor of family wages, however, were the mothers and women of Slovakia, whom the government wanted to take out of the labor ,g roup in the course of time, so that they might be able to return to their original and God-designed mission - to the family - where they could devote their time to the care of their children and their households. It should b.e ,s pecially emphasized that the Slovak Government endea,yored to do away with piece-work altogether, because this type of labor notably exhausts the worker so that in a relatively short period of time he be- 24 SLOVAKIA comes useless for work and a burden not only :f or the state, but also his family. Workers were paid by the hoUT. When the results of the war began to be felt in Slovakia, the Slwwk government ordered that the workers be compensated for .p rice increases: married men at the rate of 1.20 crowns and the single at 0.80 cro,w ns per hour. Besides that, at the end of each calendar year, the workers receirved a special, tax-free payment in the form of a bonus, the iamount was determined first ,b y the Central LaJbor Office, but later by the Office of Supplies. DUTing the fi11st Czecho-Slovruk Republic workers complained most aJbout social insurance, into which every wovker had to pay high dues while sick benefits were low. The Slova;k Government also changed this radically. By an oroer with the power ·o f -law (No. 300/ 1940), District Socia1 Insurance agencies were dissolved ; from J anuary 1, 1941, the Workers Social Insurance Office, with its main office in Bratislava, took care of sicik, invalid, old-age, and accident insurance. Thus, the wo,r kers, their wives, and their families received better medical ,c are the office had seventeen affiliates in Slovakia and built its own hospitals in Bratislava, Ha.ndlova, and Podbrezova. In 1941 it built and opened one of the largest and most modern ~a.natoriums for liung diseases in central Europe ; it is situated in Vysne Hagy and contains 500 beds: 100 for patients with bone tuberc'U'losis and 400 fo,r other TB cases. ~urthermore, the agency managed the Soos Baths, the s 1anatorium for children in Luci'Vlla, and established sanatociums at Sklenne Teplice and at Trencianske Teplice: these were the places where the Workers 1Social Insurance Office sent afflicted workers and their wi<ves and cihildren. The Slovak Government also did something about the aicute hO'USing problem in industrial centers. The action of the government called a "thousand homes for workers families," was COffiiPleted successfully in the targer industrial centers. The Finance Ministry, with special tax relief for owners of irrdustrial enterprises and large farms, arranged to have these homes built within the framework of iirwestment. Thu s, entire colonies of new workers homes 25 SLOVAKIA sprang up within two-.three years, like mmhrooms after a rain, in Duibnica, Pova:zska Bystrica, Zilina, Ruzomiberok, Zbehy, Afruksice, and other industrial centers. The parliament of the Slovak Republic did not forget the recreational needs of the workers, either. On J,u,ly 6, 1944, it passed a law (No. 87 of the Slovruk Code of Law) granting paid vacations to wor,ke,r s. According to this law, every worker who worked at least six months a year was entitled to a paid vacation. The length of the vacation was established by law and depended on the actua1 number of years wonked and not on the performance of the wor,kers, as it does presently under the Communist iPmgue regime. The judiciary in the Slovak Republic was completely independent. '11his had a marked signific ance for the workers in the labor trials. The la:borer had the right, guaranteed by law, to sue his employer for cruuse; he also had the right to sue the State for cause, if he was an employee thereof. The sodal question of the workers was resolved with the cooperation of the representatives of the Slovak W10rkers, organized in the tra:de organizatiooo. First, as if mentioned above, it was the Christian-Social Trrude Federation and, later, the ·F ederation of l'Ildiustry, Tra:des, and Finances. The trade organizations were non~political and their ta.sk was to help the ,government realize its program for raising the living and cultural level of the workers. Under the concept_ of socia1 question, people usually think of the problem or question of the workers who suffered most, especially in the last years ~fore World War II. This is not the correct explanati~in oif social policy, because not only the factory wo•r ker, but also the fa.I1mer, artisans, the teacher, and the office-worker are equal members of the national collectirve. This is something wihich the Communists do not want to reoog,nize 3/nd the reason why they "solve" social questions so speedily. Just how they do th<at is a chapter ,by itself. If, however, the social question is to be solved to the satisfaction of all the adherents of a nation, its solution must include the farmer, the businessman, and the office-worker. Ami the Slovak State did just 1 2-6 SLOVAKIA that: as far as the social question went, it took care of every category of wonker, state and private office-.wol'lker. •F or Slovalk agriculturists, the most significant day undoubtedly was February 22, 1940 (Washington's birthday) , when the parliament of the Slovak !Republic passed the new Land Reform Act, whereby ali the injustices suffered by the Slovak farmer during the pre~'Munkh Republic were removed. Land reform of the first CzechoSlova:k Republic did not consider the actual needs of Slovak farmers and distributed the land according ta a political key to those in the Czeoho-Slovak political parties who bound themselves to serve Benes and T. G. Masaryk: to promote the •p olicy of the Prag1Ue centralistic government and the interests of the Czech nation. In a conversation a:bout the new Land Reform Act, besides addresses by representatives o:f the Slovak farmers, Dr. Gejza Medricky, Minister of Agriculture, speaking for the Slovak Government, among other things, said: "It is very well known that we do not have too much arable land in Slovakia. In the whole of Slovakia we have 1,618,000 hectares (3,998,078 aicres) of wooded and agricultural land which come untler the new Land Reform Act ; this amounts to 45 percent of all our wooded and agricudtural land. It ,i s ev.ident that the government must be concerned that this land be worked in the best manner possible, that this land provide the food necessary for the people here settled, and that this land serve as a permanent existential foundation for those people who work on it. That is just why the significance of the plan from the economic side is clear to every individual. But no less is the significance of the plan from the political side. 'In the past the Hlinka Slovak People's Party fought against the injustices which emanated from the realization of the old land reform. With today's discussion about this law and with the passage of this plan, the old political demand of the ffiinka Slovak People's Party, that is, the revision of the old Land Reform Act, is being realized." In his speech, Dr. Gejza Medricky pointed to the actuality that 45 percent, that is, almost a half of the land SLOVAKIA 27 in SlovaJkia was in the hands of foreigners, while Slovak farmers had only a bit more than half of it. The intention of the new Land !Reform Act was to get the land into the hands of Slova,k farmers and such people, whose social condition required it; furthemiOTe, to avoid economic losses with property transfers, to secure the Hveliihood of the population, and to solve the social question which is connected with an agricultural state (",SLOVAK," Feb. 25, 1940). The task of executing the Land Reform Act correctly and speedily wa,s entrusted to the State Land Office, which C8Jllle into being on the basis of a special law, which the S1ovruk Parliament ha,d voted that same day. According to the law, the Land Office had the 3/Uthority to buy the land concerned fo:r the State and then to sell it to Slovak farmers who were interested in it, guaranteeing that they would work it to produce the commodities needed by the population. According to the law, every citizen of the Slovak State had a claim to ~and, if he ,u nderstood farming, whose properties, after the Vienna Aribitration, fell to Hungary and, therefore, were forced by the Magyar government to lose everything and go to Slovakia empty-handed. Flurtihermore, priority .r ights to buy land were granted to graduates of agricultural schools, then to local people or inha:bitants of neighboring communities; and where none such could be found, the land was distributed to citizens of more remote communities of Slovakia. Of course, those interested in the land did not get it for free. The farmer, who applied for land, had to pay 50 percent of the sale .price, after hls application had been approved, and the remainder he could pay of in forty years in the form of rent to the State. The Land Office QOmpensated the owners of land which came under the Act by paying them the S8Jllle _a moont they paid for it, or payment wa,s based on prod1Uctive value. The significance of ia:nd reform for the Slovak farmer, as well as for the whole Slovak nation, was evaluated 28 SLOVAKIA by President Dr. Joseph Tiso on March 10, 1940, in Banovce Nad Bebravou, in this manner: "Gradually we shall harve to learn to forget the expression 'land reform.' Land reform with us is not the rewarding of protected chHdren to catoh the voters. We are concerned so that more he produced agriculturally. We must increase production. We do not want to reward, to ca:tch, voters. No one shall ever again, in any manner whatsoever, buy voters in Slov~ia ! Even in the present situation we are self-sufficient. This, however, must not satisfy us. We also want to export. That is why we wish to increruse our agricultUTal ,prod'Ulction. "The main idea of land reform is: to enruble as many husbandmen as possible to oper.ate independently. In this we shall act sensi,bly. Wherever anything proves itself, there we shall cultivate it. Whatever ,prorves itself, that we shall do. There shwl a!lso be so-called indivisi!ble property, which shall not be parcelled out under any circumstances. Flur:thermore, we must enaJble ,a higher degree of agrioulture ( experimental agrimtlture) . True, even the farmer can experiment, burt this c·a n be done only by ·t he man who has more. Such a farmer then can make experiments, take risks. We need healthy seeds, quality livestock. The small farmer is not trained to produce these. Such farmers are afraid to give their livestock more so that it could put on more weight. The a:gricwtural industry eannot be maintained only lby the sma'li farmer. [rt is the aim of the State to increase agricultural production. Therefore, the greater agricwtural units shall be preser-ved. . . No one shall get land under the sale price, and no, one shall get something for nothing. Nothing is valued that comes easily. So, if you want land, you shall have to pay for it; if you cannot pay the full iprice, the State will he1p you .p ay it in time in the form of rent. . . We want to make it possible for our ,b rethren in other lands to come here and go into ventures. We want to grow in: numbers; our ambition is that we becrone stronger. I do not fear fo;r the future we have the best outlook There still are some insufficiencies, but that SLOVAKIA 29 is not because a new state has ,b een born, but because there is war around us!" Strict, 1but fatherly words. Only he could speak thus, who loved his people and who throughout his life worked in its interest. Thus it was that the other hallf of Slovak land got into the hands of Slovak farmers and ceaaed to be the object of business exploitation. And, fina11y, even private inrvestors had it good in ,Sl.ov,ak±a. They were not only given the possibility to enterprise, but were practically forced by the government to participate in the building of the State, so that erven their profits might increase. On the social policy of the government depended the reeducation of the population - the policy carried out in the i:\pirit of Christian charity towards ones illeigh:bor, of mutual assistance, cooperation, and understanding. The aim of the reeducation of the 1people waJS to remOIVe the blights of the past which, under the influence of pressure from the East, began to find opportune soil even in Slovalkia, especially among the Lutherans. Special attention was given to the reeducation of employe11S and owners of larger and smaller industrial enterprises; the relationship between employer and employee was exiplained according to the teaching of the social Pope, Leo XIII, who said in the encyclical Rerum Novarum: "Religion teaches the wealthy owner and the employer that their woJ'.lk people a,re not to be accO!Uilted their !bondsmen; that in ervery man they m'USt respect his dignity and worth as a man and as a Christian.; that labor rfor w,a.ges is not a thing to 'b e ashamed of, if we lend ear to right reason an.d to Christian (Philosophy, but is to a man's credit, ena;bling -h im to earn his living in an honoraJble way; and that it is shamefiuil and inhuman to treat men li!ke chattels to make money by, or to loolk upon them merely as so muoh musole or physical strength. A,g am the Chrurch teaches that, in dealing with the workingman, religion and the ,g ood of his so,ul must be kept in mind. Hence the employer is -bound to see that the wo:rker has time for !his religious duties; that he be not exposed to corrupting influ~.AW¥ and that he ibe not led ences and d~A~g~ UII .. J;Q~VILLE. STATE CO~LE.GE SLOVAKIA 30 away to neglect bis thome and f.amily, or to squander his earnings. Furthermore, the employer must never tax his work people 'beyond their strength, or employ them in work unsuited to their sex or age. His ,g reat and principal duty is to give every one what is just. Doubtless before deciding whether wages are fair, many things have to be considered; ·b ut wealthy owners and all masters of labor should be mindful of this - that to exercise pressure upon the indigent and the destitute for the sa;ke of gain, and to gather one's profit out of the need of another, is condemned by all laws, human and Divine." 1 On the other hand, workingmen were expected to carry out honestly and fairly all equitable agreements freely entered into; never to injure the property of an employer uselessly and maliciously; never to .r esort to violence in defending their own cause and to avoid riots and disorders; and, finally, to have nothing to do with persons who stand in th service of Communism, endeavoring to sow dissention and dissatisfaction among the working ;p eople and ultimately to enslaJVe them. 1 The results of reeducation were demonstrated especially when Dr. Karvas, chairman of the Office of Supplies, adamantly opposed ,a ll warranted increases in wages for workingmen.. At that time the employers stood by the workingmen and thus embarrassed iDr. Karvas: instead of hourly wages, they ,g radually began to introduce piece-work so that the workmen could gain their increases, but not to sap their strength and exploit them. This arrangement was done in agreement with the trade organizations and the workingmen themselrves; Karvas, therefore, could not punrish employers for increasing wages with out his permission. Tthe life of cohabitation of the citizens in the Slovak State resembled the life of a well-ordered family. Slov:rukia was the envy of States with richer traditions and of nations more mmnerous than the Slova;ks. The SlovaJk workingman ,r eally never had it so good, rund prdbaJbly never will mwe it again, until a free and ~ndependent Slovrukia, based on Christian principles, is again established.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Labor and the Slovak Republic Description An account of the resource J. C. Bukovina Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 2 (19), June 1956 pp. 18-30 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Bukovina, J. C. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1956 name https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/01bc66f2833ce4fac59ede74e25d714b.pdf ec017380c6c507e8d93e1e296800df83 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 3 LOUIS STOR CENTENNIAL Joseph Kirschbaum The yeaT 1956 marks one hundred years since the death oif one ,o f the most eminent Slovak patriots of a11 time, Louis Stoc. It undouibted[y wH'l 'be gratefully commemorated iby Sloivalks everywhere, because Stur and his fol_, lowers came upon the scene of history when the situation of the Slovaks undeir the Magyam in Hungary seemed to be quite hopeless. Stur's electrifying influence is in fact res,pon.si!ble for the birth of modern natiionaJlism of the Slovak nation. When Louis Stur was dying on January 12, 1856, from a gnrnshot wound accideintany inflicted during a hunting e~pedition, he ,probably never thought that the torcih of nationaJl consciousness, which he had taken over fTom the followers of Bernolak and which he inflamed with the burning feeling and greatness of his spirit, woU1ld become a lasting li,ght of 1Slovaik history. Difficult and gloomy were ,t he times in Slovalkia around the year 185·5. Years after national unity was attained on the question of the language of Slovak literature, years after the revolutions of 1848-49, and after years of hopes based on the promises of the Habsburgs and on the revolutionary victories of the natural rights, of enSllaved nations, there came more disappointments, and the enemies of the Slavaik reaiwakening came to life again to continue in their woir'k against the life of the Slovak nation. The Slovaks suffered not onll.y from the Magy~r gentry, but even from some of their own inteillecturalis who did not believe in the viaJbility of their nation and preferred to see it assimilated by others. Great ideas, supported by the natural law, however, canrnot die. They may be tempornri1y suppressed and silenced, hut in the end they are always victorious , Thal is why enemies within and outside the Slova1k nation could not destroy the concept of the individuaUty of the Slovak nation, its language, cultu:re ,a nd its right to an independent life. After the passage of a hundred difficult years, �4 SLOVAKIA even now during the reigp. of Communists in Slova:kia, this idea is very muc'h alive. The victOTy of this idea is today crysfal clear not only .to Slova,k intellectuals, ,b utt even to the Last ordinary person in Slovakia, and to SlovaJks everywhere. In the years foHowing World War I, seveml mistaken Slova:k intellectuals tried to frustrate deveilopment of Slovruk na,tionalism in the same manner that Kollar and Safarik attempted to do in the forties of the last century. The former, however, intellectual li1hl1putians in comparison, were no more siuocessfwl than the latter. The S'1ovak nation, its language, literatme, and its cll!lture outlasted all storms and betrayals. The path, cleared and ,b eaten .by the Catholic intellectuals from the University of Trnava, by Bernolak, Fandli, Holly, and othern, on to which Stur, in the. spirit of uniting the nation, ied a •lso the Protestant part of the intelligentsia and .peOiple, proived! to be the salva,tion of the Slovak nation and a boon to 'its cu!ltmal and social growth. The significance of StUT and his group, however, is not only po:ritical, as some. writers wou1d have us believe. Like the enlightened generation of Bernolruk, so the followePs of Sbur were a generation with a broad leaxning of phHoso•p hy, history, 'linguistics, a;nd literature. Writers, who wouid se,r iously write about the significance of Stur iin our national life during this centennial o,f his death, wm also have to, evaJluate Stu.r's role in Slovak ,philo.so:phy, as waJS already so expertly begun (Dr. Stephen Polrukovic, prof. Cizevskij, and Dr. S. S. Osus:ky); they will have to eV'aluate the work of Stur and his followers in the field of popular education and enlightenment (Dr. Josep'h Pauoo published a valuable wonk in this direction: "Eudovychova u sturovcov") ; also. in the field of 'Slovak literature (as already done by Skultety, Vajansik__y, Kr.emery, Wek, M. Pirut, A . Mra:z, and others); ·a nd in the fie[d of phHoso-phy, as well. Despite Stu.r's comparatively youthful age, his education and activities were admirably ma:ny-s1ded. It i,s not without a certain amount of pride that we say that there are only a few serious works in the indilVidual depa·r tments of Slavistics in which we do not meet with the name of L. Stur in foreign languages and that, except for the books �SLOVAKIA 5 written on the basis of Ozech sources, they are not negative opinions. Therefore, if in anything, besides an ardent love and sacrifice for the nation, the followers of Stur can be a model for our generation, then it is in their thorough preparatiorn. for the role which they had marked out for themselves in Slovak Hfe. They wanted to liberate Sloivak life from smallness and ,i,s olation and, therefore, they themselves first so1Ught a broad European education. They wanted a standard, uniform Slovruk literary language, so they not only encouraged others to write in that language, lbut themselves also wrote expert reflections and grammars rubout Slovruk. Their aim was a grand, beautiful Slovak literature, and they themselves created it in all branches of endeavor. They wanted to rouse the nation to self--consciousness, the,r efore· they studied its past and revealed it to the people who knew little or nothing about it. They wanted to lift up the people from ,poverty and abandonment, so they went among their people, taught and trained it; they se-rved as an example with their own lives - they did what they preached. Because they were people, they did mruke mistrukes, but enemies of the Slovq1k nation are pointing to and magnifying these in vain. Their mistaJkes were the mistaikes of the century in which they Uved, as Ernest Denis so understandingly reflected in his "La Question d' A1Utriche - Les Siovaques" in 19117. Their smallness or greatnes, their reality or romanticism can 'b e measUTed only against the b~ckground of the conditions and of the period in which they lived. We can justly judge them only according to the fruit which the trees planted by them bore., the resullts of their work which brought a new and more beautiful life to the Slovak nation. The fruits of their spiritual labor are lifegiving even today and many of them are the most beautiful which the Slovak nationa1l genius has created. And this is the important thing. Slova:ks in the free world can enrich their lives to a great measure, if they acquaint themselves during this cen~ tennial of Louis Stur with the many-sided a.nd diversified work of Stur and his followers. Wdth regard to the con.di-· �6 SLOVAK1IA tions under which the nation lives at .ho~e under Communism, it is our moral duty to acquaint ourselves with the endeavons of those who a:lready over a hundred years ago .warned us against the plague of Oommunism. With r-egard to the political mission of our geineratiO!Il, it wouild be to our advantage to. study the ideas of Stur, because then we shall learn that the credo and politicaJl legacy of Louis Stur was: "So that we ourselves might be revived and take the place in history which according to our strength and abilities belongs to us, we must once and for all free ourselves from the hated, alien yoke and gain state independence for ourselves: because a nation which is enslaved has lits hands tied, its spirit stifled, and is forever threatened with the danger that sooner or later it will perish." 1 • • • STOR : FATHER OF MODERN SIJOVAK NATIONALISM Marian ~iar In 1948 !Slovaks had an o,pportunity to assess the revolutionary events of a hundred years ago•. ,r t was our duty at that time to recall the legacy of Stur and his folJl.owers and to appraise their ,political program. Unfortunate:ly, due to circumstances !beyond our control, the year 1948 was not ·an opportune time for a ceJebration of such g,reat significance and extent as was the revolution of 11848-49. In 1956, however, during the .centennial of Stur's death, another opportunity presents itself to ponder over the fate, the Jife, the struggle, and the aim of the entire generation of Stur. Stephen Krcmery, eminent historian of Slova,k literature, said that Stu.r's generation .began "a new chapter in the rustle-fbu'Stle of a thousand years." Representatives of the previous generation - Holly, Kollar and Safarik - still lived, Slovak poets still argued aibout rythm and accent, and the nation still looked for consolation in Svatopluk's Great Moravian Empire (iHolly), or to RusS:ia - to that Slav "giant oak," a:s Kollar ca111ed: i t when suddenly new people began to appear and new voices were heard. Kuzmany, from the distant and wide scope of his predecessors, drew attention of the world to the heart � SLOVAKIA 3 LOUIS STOR CENTENNIAL Joseph Kirschbaum The yeaT 1956 marks one hundred years since the death oif one ,o f the most eminent Slovak patriots of a11 time, Louis Stoc. It undouibted[y wH'l 'be gratefully commemorated iby Sloivalks everywhere, because Stur and his fol_, lowers came upon the scene of history when the situation of the Slovaks undeir the Magyam in Hungary seemed to be quite hopeless. Stur's electrifying influence is in fact res,pon.si!ble for the birth of modern natiionaJlism of the Slovak nation. When Louis Stur was dying on January 12, 1856, from a gnrnshot wound accideintany inflicted during a hunting e~pedition, he ,probably never thought that the torcih of nationaJl consciousness, which he had taken over fTom the followers of Bernolak and which he inflamed with the burning feeling and greatness of his spirit, woU1ld become a lasting li,ght of 1Slovaik history. Difficult and gloomy were ,t he times in Slovalkia around the year 185·5. Years after national unity was attained on the question of the language of Slovak literature, years after the revolutions of 1848-49, and after years of hopes based on the promises of the Habsburgs and on the revolutionary victories of the natural rights, of enSllaved nations, there came more disappointments, and the enemies of the Slavaik reaiwakening came to life again to continue in their woir'k against the life of the Slovak nation. The Slovaks suffered not onll.y from the Magy~r gentry, but even from some of their own inteillecturalis who did not believe in the viaJbility of their nation and preferred to see it assimilated by others. Great ideas, supported by the natural law, however, canrnot die. They may be tempornri1y suppressed and silenced, hut in the end they are always victorious , Thal is why enemies within and outside the Slova1k nation could not destroy the concept of the individuaUty of the Slovak nation, its language, cultu:re ,a nd its right to an independent life. After the passage of a hundred difficult years, �4 SLOVAKIA even now during the reigp. of Communists in Slova:kia, this idea is very muc'h alive. The victOTy of this idea is today crysfal clear not only .to Slova,k intellectuals, ,b utt even to the Last ordinary person in Slovakia, and to SlovaJks everywhere. In the years foHowing World War I, seveml mistaken Slova:k intellectuals tried to frustrate deveilopment of Slovruk na,tionalism in the same manner that Kollar and Safarik attempted to do in the forties of the last century. The former, however, intellectual li1hl1putians in comparison, were no more siuocessfwl than the latter. The S'1ovak nation, its language, literatme, and its cll!lture outlasted all storms and betrayals. The path, cleared and ,b eaten .by the Catholic intellectuals from the University of Trnava, by Bernolak, Fandli, Holly, and othern, on to which Stur, in the. spirit of uniting the nation, ied a •lso the Protestant part of the intelligentsia and .peOiple, proived! to be the salva,tion of the Slovak nation and a boon to 'its cu!ltmal and social growth. The significance of StUT and his group, however, is not only po:ritical, as some. writers wou1d have us believe. Like the enlightened generation of Bernolruk, so the followePs of Sbur were a generation with a broad leaxning of phHoso•p hy, history, 'linguistics, a;nd literature. Writers, who wouid se,r iously write about the significance of Stur iin our national life during this centennial o,f his death, wm also have to, evaJluate Stu.r's role in Slovak ,philo.so:phy, as waJS already so expertly begun (Dr. Stephen Polrukovic, prof. Cizevskij, and Dr. S. S. Osus:ky); they will have to eV'aluate the work of Stur and his followers in the field of popular education and enlightenment (Dr. Josep'h Pauoo published a valuable wonk in this direction: "Eudovychova u sturovcov") ; also. in the field of 'Slovak literature (as already done by Skultety, Vajansik__y, Kr.emery, Wek, M. Pirut, A . Mra:z, and others); ·a nd in the fie[d of phHoso-phy, as well. Despite Stu.r's comparatively youthful age, his education and activities were admirably ma:ny-s1ded. It i,s not without a certain amount of pride that we say that there are only a few serious works in the indilVidual depa·r tments of Slavistics in which we do not meet with the name of L. Stur in foreign languages and that, except for the books �SLOVAKIA 5 written on the basis of Ozech sources, they are not negative opinions. Therefore, if in anything, besides an ardent love and sacrifice for the nation, the followers of Stur can be a model for our generation, then it is in their thorough preparatiorn. for the role which they had marked out for themselves in Slovak Hfe. They wanted to liberate Sloivak life from smallness and ,i,s olation and, therefore, they themselves first so1Ught a broad European education. They wanted a standard, uniform Slovruk literary language, so they not only encouraged others to write in that language, lbut themselves also wrote expert reflections and grammars rubout Slovruk. Their aim was a grand, beautiful Slovak literature, and they themselves created it in all branches of endeavor. They wanted to rouse the nation to self--consciousness, the,r efore· they studied its past and revealed it to the people who knew little or nothing about it. They wanted to lift up the people from ,poverty and abandonment, so they went among their people, taught and trained it; they se-rved as an example with their own lives - they did what they preached. Because they were people, they did mruke mistrukes, but enemies of the Slovq1k nation are pointing to and magnifying these in vain. Their mistaJkes were the mistaikes of the century in which they Uved, as Ernest Denis so understandingly reflected in his "La Question d' A1Utriche - Les Siovaques" in 19117. Their smallness or greatnes, their reality or romanticism can 'b e measUTed only against the b~ckground of the conditions and of the period in which they lived. We can justly judge them only according to the fruit which the trees planted by them bore., the resullts of their work which brought a new and more beautiful life to the Slovak nation. The fruits of their spiritual labor are lifegiving even today and many of them are the most beautiful which the Slovak nationa1l genius has created. And this is the important thing. Slova:ks in the free world can enrich their lives to a great measure, if they acquaint themselves during this cen~ tennial of Louis Stur with the many-sided a.nd diversified work of Stur and his followers. Wdth regard to the con.di-· �6 SLOVAK1IA tions under which the nation lives at .ho~e under Communism, it is our moral duty to acquaint ourselves with the endeavons of those who a:lready over a hundred years ago .warned us against the plague of Oommunism. With r-egard to the political mission of our geineratiO!Il, it wouild be to our advantage to. study the ideas of Stur, because then we shall learn that the credo and politicaJl legacy of Louis Stur was: "So that we ourselves might be revived and take the place in history which according to our strength and abilities belongs to us, we must once and for all free ourselves from the hated, alien yoke and gain state independence for ourselves: because a nation which is enslaved has lits hands tied, its spirit stifled, and is forever threatened with the danger that sooner or later it will perish." 1 • • • STOR : FATHER OF MODERN SIJOVAK NATIONALISM Marian ~iar In 1948 !Slovaks had an o,pportunity to assess the revolutionary events of a hundred years ago•. ,r t was our duty at that time to recall the legacy of Stur and his folJl.owers and to appraise their ,political program. Unfortunate:ly, due to circumstances !beyond our control, the year 1948 was not ·an opportune time for a ceJebration of such g,reat significance and extent as was the revolution of 11848-49. In 1956, however, during the .centennial of Stur's death, another opportunity presents itself to ponder over the fate, the Jife, the struggle, and the aim of the entire generation of Stur. Stephen Krcmery, eminent historian of Slova,k literature, said that Stu.r's generation .began "a new chapter in the rustle-fbu'Stle of a thousand years." Representatives of the previous generation - Holly, Kollar and Safarik - still lived, Slovak poets still argued aibout rythm and accent, and the nation still looked for consolation in Svatopluk's Great Moravian Empire (iHolly), or to RusS:ia - to that Slav "giant oak," a:s Kollar ca111ed: i t when suddenly new people began to appear and new voices were heard. Kuzmany, from the distant and wide scope of his predecessors, drew attention of the world to the heart � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 3 LOUIS STOR CENTENNIAL Joseph Kirschbaum The yeaT 1956 marks one hundred years since the death oif one ,o f the most eminent Slovak patriots of a11 time, Louis Stoc. It undouibted[y wH'l 'be gratefully commemorated iby Sloivalks everywhere, because Stur and his fol_, lowers came upon the scene of history when the situation of the Slovaks undeir the Magyam in Hungary seemed to be quite hopeless. Stur's electrifying influence is in fact res,pon.si!ble for the birth of modern natiionaJlism of the Slovak nation. When Louis Stur was dying on January 12, 1856, from a gnrnshot wound accideintany inflicted during a hunting e~pedition, he ,probably never thought that the torcih of nationaJl consciousness, which he had taken over fTom the followers of Bernolak and which he inflamed with the burning feeling and greatness of his spirit, woU1ld become a lasting li,ght of 1Slovaik history. Difficult and gloomy were ,t he times in Slovalkia around the year 185·5. Years after national unity was attained on the question of the language of Slovak literature, years after the revolutions of 1848-49, and after years of hopes based on the promises of the Habsburgs and on the revolutionary victories of the natural rights, of enSllaved nations, there came more disappointments, and the enemies of the Slavaik reaiwakening came to life again to continue in their woir'k against the life of the Slovak nation. The Slovaks suffered not onll.y from the Magy~r gentry, but even from some of their own inteillecturalis who did not believe in the viaJbility of their nation and preferred to see it assimilated by others. Great ideas, supported by the natural law, however, canrnot die. They may be tempornri1y suppressed and silenced, hut in the end they are always victorious , Thal is why enemies within and outside the Slova1k nation could not destroy the concept of the individuaUty of the Slovak nation, its language, cultu:re ,a nd its right to an independent life. After the passage of a hundred difficult years, 4 SLOVAKIA even now during the reigp. of Communists in Slova:kia, this idea is very muc'h alive. The victOTy of this idea is today crysfal clear not only .to Slova,k intellectuals, ,b utt even to the Last ordinary person in Slovakia, and to SlovaJks everywhere. In the years foHowing World War I, seveml mistaken Slova:k intellectuals tried to frustrate deveilopment of Slovruk na,tionalism in the same manner that Kollar and Safarik attempted to do in the forties of the last century. The former, however, intellectual li1hl1putians in comparison, were no more siuocessfwl than the latter. The S'1ovak nation, its language, literatme, and its cll!lture outlasted all storms and betrayals. The path, cleared and ,b eaten .by the Catholic intellectuals from the University of Trnava, by Bernolak, Fandli, Holly, and othern, on to which Stur, in the. spirit of uniting the nation, ied a •lso the Protestant part of the intelligentsia and .peOiple, proived! to be the salva,tion of the Slovak nation and a boon to 'its cu!ltmal and social growth. The significance of StUT and his group, however, is not only po:ritical, as some. writers wou1d have us believe. Like the enlightened generation of Bernolruk, so the followePs of Sbur were a generation with a broad leaxning of phHoso•p hy, history, 'linguistics, a;nd literature. Writers, who wouid se,r iously write about the significance of Stur iin our national life during this centennial o,f his death, wm also have to, evaJluate Stu.r's role in Slovak ,philo.so:phy, as waJS already so expertly begun (Dr. Stephen Polrukovic, prof. Cizevskij, and Dr. S. S. Osus:ky); they will have to eV'aluate the work of Stur and his followers in the field of popular education and enlightenment (Dr. Josep'h Pauoo published a valuable wonk in this direction: "Eudovychova u sturovcov") ; also. in the field of 'Slovak literature (as already done by Skultety, Vajansik__y, Kr.emery, Wek, M. Pirut, A . Mra:z, and others); ·a nd in the fie[d of phHoso-phy, as well. Despite Stu.r's comparatively youthful age, his education and activities were admirably ma:ny-s1ded. It i,s not without a certain amount of pride that we say that there are only a few serious works in the indilVidual depa·r tments of Slavistics in which we do not meet with the name of L. Stur in foreign languages and that, except for the books SLOVAKIA 5 written on the basis of Ozech sources, they are not negative opinions. Therefore, if in anything, besides an ardent love and sacrifice for the nation, the followers of Stur can be a model for our generation, then it is in their thorough preparatiorn. for the role which they had marked out for themselves in Slovak Hfe. They wanted to liberate Sloivak life from smallness and ,i,s olation and, therefore, they themselves first so1Ught a broad European education. They wanted a standard, uniform Slovruk literary language, so they not only encouraged others to write in that language, lbut themselves also wrote expert reflections and grammars rubout Slovruk. Their aim was a grand, beautiful Slovak literature, and they themselves created it in all branches of endeavor. They wanted to rouse the nation to self--consciousness, the,r efore· they studied its past and revealed it to the people who knew little or nothing about it. They wanted to lift up the people from ,poverty and abandonment, so they went among their people, taught and trained it; they se-rved as an example with their own lives - they did what they preached. Because they were people, they did mruke mistrukes, but enemies of the Slovq1k nation are pointing to and magnifying these in vain. Their mistaJkes were the mistaikes of the century in which they Uved, as Ernest Denis so understandingly reflected in his "La Question d' A1Utriche - Les Siovaques" in 19117. Their smallness or greatnes, their reality or romanticism can 'b e measUTed only against the b~ckground of the conditions and of the period in which they lived. We can justly judge them only according to the fruit which the trees planted by them bore., the resullts of their work which brought a new and more beautiful life to the Slovak nation. The fruits of their spiritual labor are lifegiving even today and many of them are the most beautiful which the Slovak nationa1l genius has created. And this is the important thing. Slova:ks in the free world can enrich their lives to a great measure, if they acquaint themselves during this cen~ tennial of Louis Stur with the many-sided a.nd diversified work of Stur and his followers. Wdth regard to the con.di-· 6 SLOVAK1IA tions under which the nation lives at .ho~e under Communism, it is our moral duty to acquaint ourselves with the endeavons of those who a:lready over a hundred years ago .warned us against the plague of Oommunism. With r-egard to the political mission of our geineratiO!Il, it wouild be to our advantage to. study the ideas of Stur, because then we shall learn that the credo and politicaJl legacy of Louis Stur was: "So that we ourselves might be revived and take the place in history which according to our strength and abilities belongs to us, we must once and for all free ourselves from the hated, alien yoke and gain state independence for ourselves: because a nation which is enslaved has lits hands tied, its spirit stifled, and is forever threatened with the danger that sooner or later it will perish." 1 • • • STOR : FATHER OF MODERN SIJOVAK NATIONALISM Marian ~iar In 1948 !Slovaks had an o,pportunity to assess the revolutionary events of a hundred years ago•. ,r t was our duty at that time to recall the legacy of Stur and his folJl.owers and to appraise their ,political program. Unfortunate:ly, due to circumstances !beyond our control, the year 1948 was not ·an opportune time for a ceJebration of such g,reat significance and extent as was the revolution of 11848-49. In 1956, however, during the .centennial of Stur's death, another opportunity presents itself to ponder over the fate, the Jife, the struggle, and the aim of the entire generation of Stur. Stephen Krcmery, eminent historian of Slova,k literature, said that Stu.r's generation .began "a new chapter in the rustle-fbu'Stle of a thousand years." Representatives of the previous generation - Holly, Kollar and Safarik - still lived, Slovak poets still argued aibout rythm and accent, and the nation still looked for consolation in Svatopluk's Great Moravian Empire (iHolly), or to RusS:ia - to that Slav "giant oak," a:s Kollar ca111ed: i t when suddenly new people began to appear and new voices were heard. Kuzmany, from the distant and wide scope of his predecessors, drew attention of the world to the heart  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Louis Štúr Centennial Description An account of the resource Joseph Kirschbaum Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 1 (18), March 1956 pp. 3-6 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Kirschbaum, Jozef M., 1913-2001 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1956 SNK https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/d558bf486130113f31bb768332df1b00.pdf 9eda05cb64a925f0729ab0352dd02569 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA MASARYK'S DEMOCRACY ANH SLOVAKIA Joseph A. Mikus An American newspaperman, desiring to know the details about Czecho-.Slorv<akia, put the following questions to me recently: 1. What does the Pittsburgh Agreement mean to the Slovaks? 2. What might have been the opinion of M. R. Stefa. nik albout the status of Slovakia within the Czecho-Slovak State? 3. Did the Slovak deputies in the Prague Parliament vote for the Constitution of Czecho~Slovaki'a in 1920? 4. Is it true that the autonomist movement never at.., tained a majority among the voters of Slovakia? '5. How strong were the "Magya:rones" in the Slovaik Peop~e's Party? 6. What is the political significance of Catholicism and Protestantism in Slovakia? 7. What is the present Slorvruk pohtical program? 1 Since these questions are asked morn frequently by persons interested in the truth a!bout the Czecho~lovakia of T. G. Masaryik and Dr. Edward Benes, the following article, I hope, will greatly help to, clear up matters in this regard. Before 1918, S~orvakia was an integral part of the Kingdom of Hungary. For almost a hundred years the Slova!ks we,r e for a federative reform of Hungary, accord. ing to the principles of nationalities. Since the Magyars were shortsighted and did not consent to any such refo:rim, the Slovruks decided, during the first World War, with the Czechs on a Czecho-Slovak federation. I.f there is, any lo. gic in the effort of a man who tries to save himself when sinking in a pond, it is rather in hi,s will to preserve his life than in the choice between two ponds that he would prefer to drown in. The SlovaJks, abandoning Hung,ary and ag;reeing to the formation orf a Czecho-SllOv•a k State, were motivated by the idea of preserving and deive1oping their national individuality. The Pittsburgh Agreement - con- �46 SLOVAKIA eluded between the representatives of the Slovak League of America, on the one side, and the Czech National Alliance and the Federation of the Czech Catholics, on the other, and signed on May 30, 1918, by T. G. Masaryk as the representative of the Czecho-Slov,a k National Council - contains precise stipulations in this respect. The Czecho-Slovak problem, .as developed after HH8, arose from the subsequent repudiation ,of the PittS1burgh Agreement 'by Masaryk, as President of Czecho..,Slovakia. Masaryk did this despite the fact _giat this agreement was by far a much more important document in the moderp. history of Czechs and Slovaks ,t han any other one, includ- , ing tlie "Czecho-Sfovak" Oonstltubon of 1920. The Pitts .. burgh Agreement assured moral and political foundations to the prospective state of Czeeho..,Slovakia. Law cannot be considered separately from morals and politics. It is indeed only a formal expression of co-ordination attained by certain social forces toward a higher end. Undoubted .. ly, those forces manifested themselves in the Pittsburgh Agreement. Masaryk denied the "legal" validity of this document, but he could not deny it!he fact of having received about a million dollars from the Sl()JVaJk League of America, which had been given hlm to finance the activity of the CzechoSlovak National Counicil in Barrs. Without this money from Americans of Slovak descent, Masaryk and Benes would have remained somewhere in France as obscure journalists or poor college-iteachers. In any deal none of the two contracting parties has the right arbitrarily to pick up advantages and repudiate o'b'ligatioIIB. Something like that would be doubledealing. To say that the members of the Slovruk League of America were American citizens and, consequently, did not have the right to pledge themselves for Slovakia is not honest. When he signe<l. the Pittsburgh Agreement, Masa.. ryk was a ,political rnfugee acting in contradiction with a pro-Hapsburig declaration of the Union of Czech writers. He himself had no delegation from anybody. But the Slovaks have never said that he was an :impostor. Why should, then, his indirect affirmation 1be accepted that the signa- �SLOVAKIA 47 tories of the Pittsburgh Agreement on behalf of the Slovak League were nothing else than impostors? What might have been the attitude of M. R. Stefanik in regard to the politica;l structure and organization of Czecho-Slovakia? It is ,k nown that Stefanik did not sign the Declaration of Independence of the Czecho-Slovak Nation, as pUlblished on Octoiber 18, 1918, by Benes in Paris ,and T. G. Masaryk in Washingiton. At that time Stefanik was outside Europe. His name was therefore simply written down by Benes who was pre-supposing Stefanik's consent. Stefanik might have even admitted the western legal concept of a Czecho-Slovak nation coo.sis-ting of citizens of various ethnic origins. But there are sources proving that his concept of unity of the Czecho-Slovak State did not imply the political and cultural absoI'ption of the Slovaks by the Czechs. In 1917, on a trip in the United Stafos, Stefanik gave an inte1wiew to the purbli-sher of the magazine "Slovenska mladez" (Slava,k Youth), ·Pittsburgh, Pa. 'l'his interview, ,published in this magazine on November 15, 1917 (No. 7) , reproduced the following passage from Stefanik's sta,tement: "Slovakia has to maintain her cultural and linguistic character. There is no question about that and on this point - as well as on the question of autonomy of Slovakia, Moravia, Silesia and Bohemia - there is a complete agreement." (1) That was in fact a realistic evaluaition of the situation, contrasting the wishful thinking theories of Masaryk and Bein.es, and even of such Sloivaiks as Hodza, Derer and Srobar. In 1918, Woodrow Wilson .pronounced in Congress the following significant words : "Self-determination· is not a mere phrase. It is an imperative principle which statesmen will henceforth ignore at their peril." 1 fflE "Czechoslovak" Constitution of 1920 The last paragraph of the Pittsburgh Agreement says : "Detailed regulations, concerning the establishment of the Czecho-Slovak State, are left to the liberated Czechs and Slovaks and their legal representatives." This places the �48 SLOVAKIA problem of the legal representation orf S'lovakia in the Constituent Assembly of Czecho--Slo,yakia in 1918-1920. This serious problem, h10wever, was, resolved in a very simple way. The :s elf-ruppointed revolutionary government of T. G. Masaryk and E. Benes, after ha'Ving returned to Brague in triumph mrn Paris, appointed a "Revolutionary Oonistitiuent Parliament of CzechoslO'Vakia." In such a parliament the "deputies" for Slovakia formed the so~called Slovaik C'lub which at the beginning of 1920 had 54 members. Who were they? Twelve orf those "Slovak" deputies were Czechs, including Mr. Benes and AJfoe Masaryk, the daughter of the "·P resident~Libe,r ator." And of the remaining 42 ,Slovaks, the.re were only 8 autonomist!s . Of course, it would be difficult to find an objective ikey to these figures. But such was the will of the Praigue Oa;srtle. At the ,same time Stefanik died in a plane crash under mysterious circumstances. 1n fact, he was shot down , from the sky of Bratislava by a Czech anti ..aircraft battery as he was returning home from 'I taly. Andrej HTiinka had been in the Mirov prison since October, 1919, after his courageous but unsuccessful trip ,t o the Peace Oonference in Paris, where he tried to defend Slovaili:ia',s .political rights before the Supreme Council of the Allied and Associated Powers. Slovakia was occupied hy Czech legions and Prague was threatening the Slova:k People's Party with dis,s o,lution. Strong censorship of the press and a rigid police control of the Slovak P eople's Party gatherings were exeircised by the Prague-imposed Czech authorities in Slov,a kia. Under terrific pressure, the six Slovak "autonomist" deputies could do nothing but vote for the Constitution, establishing the new State of the Czechs and Slovaks, but at the same time they delivered a statement in the Parliament reassuring the Slovruk -public that they would not cease in their str.uggle for the complete autonomy of Slovakia. Thus, the "Czechoslorv,a:k" centralistic Constitution is far from being a result of what in An1erica is known as a "due democratic process." It was a victory of narrow Czech nationalism OlVer b,road-minded Slo•v ak federalism . �SLOVAKIA 49 After this triumph, Prague proceeded to the first elections in Czecho-Slovakia ! When one takes into considera. tion the conditions under which those elections were organized in Slovakia, there is no su:ripris-e in the fact that the Slovak People's Party wa:s then placed in minority. The Czechs opened a full sca:le campaign for their various political 1parties, including the Oommunis.Unfilt,rated SodalDemocratic one. By new catchwords, they attempted to disorientate Slovak eleeito:ris. Prague spent a lot of money in this "divide et impera" campaign, controlled the press by a draconian censorship, and Czech .police and soldier:; terrorized the population during the electoral campaign as well as on the day of the elections. In Rumanova, itwo men were killed iby the police during a political gathering. Fearful of the official Czech terrorism and trying to escape a concentrated attack f:mm the side of the Czech "liberal" parties, Dr. Joseph Buday, who during the imprisonment of Hlin'ka had been the policymlliker of the Slovak People's Party, agreed with the Czech People's Party of Msgr . J. Sramek to go into elections with hi:s ipar.ty under the common name of the "Czecho-SlovaJk People's Party." Slovak electors, however, did not understand the meaning of such an electoral coalition and, therefore, the Slovak People's Party got only 12 deputi-es, the So.cial Democrats 23, the Agrarians 12, other smaller parties 10 . In his commentary on the e1ections of April 1920, Dr. Ferdinand Juriga, on June 10, 1920, speaking for the Slovak People's Party, declared in the Prague Parliament: "We do not regard the elections of April 18--20 as a free expression of the Slo•v a;t people. There were involved in them non-Slovaik soldiers, non-Slo,vak officials, and other non-Slovak factors. A terrifying censorship, arbitrary im. prisonment of our people and leaders ,prevent this act from expressing the free will of our popuilation." (2) It is significant to note how Czech "democracy" interpreted the principle of equality of citizens by the Law on Elections. While the Constitution introduced a rigid uni. fied centralistic system for the whole Republic, the number of vot@ANS~sUBRAA\he election of one deputy was MILLERSVILLE STATE COLLEGE �50 SLOVAKIA fixed at 43,840 in the Czech }ands, at 53,384 in Slovakia, and at 78,538 in Suhcarpath ian Ruthenia. iin this way the electoral district of Prague, with around one million population, had 45 deputies in. the first Czecho-Slo vak Parliament, while Subcarpaith ian Rutherua, with a popuilaJtion of 750,000, had only 9. The poltitical terrorism exerted against the SlO'Vak People's Party did not cease after the election:s. On October 10, 1920, while this .p arty held a political gathering in Namestovo , Czech soldiers shot into the assembly and killed two peasants. (3) All this h·a ppened under a Constitutio n which guaranteed, for the consUII11ption of Western scholars, "Czechoslovwk" citizens and all modern human and political rights. That the Slovak People's Party of Hlinka did nevertheless vote for the election of Masaryk as president can mean only one thing: the political leadership of Hlinka's Party held a higher view of the interests of the newly-born Czecho.-!Slovak State than Mr. Edward Benes, the narrowminded Czech nationaJist, whose political views on Central Europe had, up to that time, never ex.tended beyond the frontiers of the former Bohemian Kingdom. Slovakia's Reaction to Prague Centralism: Autonomism The Czech policy, aiming at the disintegrat ion of the Slovalk national individuali ty w1thin the new Repu'blic, awakened the self~preser vation instincts of the Slovaks. In the elections of 1925, the Slovak People's !Party gained 23 deputies. Since that year until the very end of Czecho~Slovakia that ,party remained not only the relatively ~trongest party in Slovakia, but it managed to rally to its program the absolute majority of the Slovak voters. Here, of course, nobody could consider as Slovak voters the members of the Magyar and German minorities, and the members of the Communis t ;party, because for these minorities Czecho·-1Slovakia was a foreign state. While a good part of the Magyar intelligents ia served rather the cause of HU!Ilgarian ir,r edenta and Magyar peasants in Slovakia sO!ld their votes for certain economic advantages to the "Czechoslo vak" Agrarian Party. Neither �SLOVAKIA 51 was it possible to recognize any right of decision about Slovakia's political destinies to the Communists, who, preaching a World Proletarian State, were thereby against any national criterion in politics. Moreover, the Communist Party in Slovakia recruited its voters mostly from among the minority groups: Magyars, Czechs, Jews, etc. Thus, taking into considera.tion the electoral returns of 1925, from 58 deputies corresponding to Slovakia, 17 deputies were discounted as non-Slovaik: 10 Magyars, 1 German and 6 Communists. Out of the remaining 41 deputies, the 22 corresponding to the Slov,a k People's Party is, in fact, a majority. The same can be said about the political structure of Sl01Vakia's 'Population in the elections of 1925 and 19'29. Because of the attractive force the Slovaik People's Party exerted upon the Slova,k population, Prague always sought to vilify this party by different accusations and denigrations. One of frequent accusations was that directed against Andrej Hlinka for having admitted "Magyarones" into the leading positions of the party. Such allegations were mostly connected with the name and activity of Vojtech Tuka. This former professor of International Law at Pees University in Hunga ry had a Hungarian educational background, but his Slova;k origin has never been doubted. When Czech authorities refused Tuka as professor for the "Czechoslavak" Komensky University in Bratislava, in 1920, he became a collaborator of Hlinka and, later, a deputy of the Slovaik People's Party. In 1929, Tuka was accused for high treason and on the basis of false testimonies brought against him b,y witnesses who had been paid by the Czech secret ipolice, he had been sentenced to 15 years in jail. It must not be focgotten, however, that in the decisive years, i e., 1938 and 1939, when M. Horthy, regent of Hungary, did everything possible to get Hitler's consent to occupy Slovakia, Tuka was one of t'he most ardent promoters of a free Slovak State. What connections are there 'between Catholicism and autonomism in Slova:kia? Catholicism is the religion of some 82 percent of t'he entire population; it is the original religion of the country. The first Catholic church was con- �52 SLOVAKIA structed in Slovakia in 833. in Nitra, by Prince Pribiina, i.e., decades earlier than in any other Central European country. in contradistinction to that, Protestantism, which now represents about 14 percent of the population in Slovakia, is a Crech and German ideological importation. It happened that after the White Mountain debacle many Czech P11otestants settled in Slovakia and, even though afrter a certain time they adopted the Slovaik language, they did not rid themselves of the nostalgia for their Czech origin and their Czech cultural ,b ackground. It is not without interest to quote what BohuJS'lav Tablic (1769-1832), a prominent Slovak Pr01testant, wrote about that Czech religious emigration in Slovrukia: "When in 1620. after that fatal battle on White Mountain, it had come to a large emigration among the Czechs for religious reasons, more than thirty thousands of these emigrants, Czechs and Moravians. found refuge in Hitmgary and Poland. They settled in scattered farming groups among the Slovaks in Nitra county in view of being able to return easily from there back tio their native country in order to take care of their derelinquislhed belongings or to visit their friends, or, the storm of persecution once oveT, to be able to simply return home witih their whole furnishings. !However, when .t hey lost the ho,pe of returning back to their fatherland and having in the meantime bought settlements, lands, and pastures, and other lands, they . found security under tlie protection of big landowners in the settlements of Myjava, Vrbo'Ve, Lubina, Stara Tura, etc" C4l This is the historical ex,planation of the "Czechoslovak" orientation of many Slovak Protestants, such as Milan Hodza, Method Bella, Milan Ivanka, Ivan Derer, George Slavik, Stephen Osusky, John P.apanek, Joseph Lettrich, Stephen Kocvara, Martin Krvebko, Fedor Hodfa and Samuel Bellus. It must be stated, however, that not all Slovak Protestants have been or are orientated toward political and cultural "Czechoslovakism." We can mention the name of Louis Stur, Charles Kuzmany, Svetozar Hurban Vajan.sky, �SLOVAKIA 53 Joseph S!kultety, Martin Razus, Emil Stodola, etc., all of them Slovak Pmtestants who h'ave written brilliant pages of Slovak national ,h istory. In reminiscences of the Sl()JVak people they enjo,y the same consideration as any ,g reat Catholic personality. One reality must be partioularly .stressed in this respect: differences between Catholics and Protestants in Slovakia have never been of a dogmaiiical or religious nature. They have their proper explanations in the different origin and cultural background orf the Slov8ik Protestants. The great majority of the Slova:k population thinks, however, that the Protestant minority did not rightly understand their role in their adoptive country. Sometimes they dosely approac,h ed the attitude that may easily be qua:lified as a "double loyalty" and at other times they were openly active like a sort orf Czech cultural, and in the last 50 years even Czech political fifth column in Slovakia. There is a general agreement in the democratic world that the human rights of racial and religious minorities should be ,protected. But it would be far from po1itical wisdom, if a religious minority. against the general political evolution of their adoptive country, tried to politically substitute themselves, for the nation whose hosipi.Jtality they had accepted. One ca:n imagine the reaction of American Protestllints and Jews, if the Catholic minority in the USA had sought to convert America into an Irish, Roman, Italian, Spanish or Polish colony. Conclusion The Slovak proiblem is what it has always been: an effort to get rid of the domination of all smaller or bigger nei,g hbors: Magyars, Czechs, Germans, Russians. Federali'z ation of Europe is necessary, because that is the way to eliminate feudaHsm in international relations and bring about democracy there. The SlovaJks are disposed to sacrifice certain of their rights in favor of a European Federation, such as foreign ,policy, defense, economy, but they are not disposed to sacrifice their fundamental national rights or their individuality in fiavor of a Central Euro1pean foreign nationalism. �54 SLOVAKIA This is in substa:nce the reason why the Slovaks in Slovakia are refusing to recognize the political leadership of ~arel Bacilek, a Czech Communist. This man has been sent to SlO'Vlakia as Acting Secretary General of the Communist Party in order to break the resistance of the population aigainst Prague and Communism. Having hanged Vladimir Clementis and impri,s oned other Slova;k "deviationists," iiike Gustav Husak and Laco Novomesky, etc., Prag,ue took over cont:t1ol of SlovaJkia by a man who had been ·M inister of State Seourity. For the same reason the Slovaks in the free world could never recognize the leadership of some Benes-inspired old Pan-Czech politicians, like Peter Zenkl, Hubert Ripka, and others. But the Slovaks woufd be delighted to collaborate as equals with the Czechs who adopt as their prog_ram the equa:lity of peoples within a Federated Europe. (1) Quoted in "Juhoamericky Slovak," Buenos Aires, May, 1955. (2) K. Sidor: T.he Slovaks on the floor of the Prague Parliament, Bratislav,a, 1943, Vol. 1, 'P- 144. (3) 1bidem: pp. Hi3-165. (4) Quoted in: "Hlasove o potfebe jednoty sp!sovneho jazyka pro Cechy, Moravany, a Slova.ky," Praha, 184-6, p. 102 . • • • WHO SAID IT? "I't is am inconltesitialble fact that from 1946 to 1948 there was no demom-a1ey in Czecho-S1avaJki1a. Aflter February 25, 1948, when t'he Communists were no more in want of the semr:ices of their feJ.il.ow-traveler,s from other NaJtional Front parties, they reruliized wiith the fuH aid of Dr. Benes their famous February "coup d'etat" (Dr. Benes remained president till June 1948). Orre part of the Natioml Front, led by Clemenlt Gotrbw.a:ld, remained in the country, where ilt is strn terrom:ng oUT naJ!Jion. Another part, led by Dr. Zenilcl, went into exiiJ..e, where tt wa'S o r ~ in tlhe sooalled "Council of Flree Ozeohoslova:kia." Both parts are united by the same "governhlent-program of Kiosice." Today Red Prague a:s well a:s the Council olf Free Ozechoslovalcia are sbill folioweTs of tlhia t program." ('.I1he Czech "BOHEMIA," Nov. 1952). � SLOVAKIA MASARYK'S DEMOCRACY ANH SLOVAKIA Joseph A. Mikus An American newspaperman, desiring to know the details about Czecho-.Slorv<akia, put the following questions to me recently: 1. What does the Pittsburgh Agreement mean to the Slovaks? 2. What might have been the opinion of M. R. Stefa. nik albout the status of Slovakia within the Czecho-Slovak State? 3. Did the Slovak deputies in the Prague Parliament vote for the Constitution of Czecho~Slovaki'a in 1920? 4. Is it true that the autonomist movement never at.., tained a majority among the voters of Slovakia? '5. How strong were the "Magya:rones" in the Slovaik Peop~e's Party? 6. What is the political significance of Catholicism and Protestantism in Slovakia? 7. What is the present Slorvruk pohtical program? 1 Since these questions are asked morn frequently by persons interested in the truth a!bout the Czecho~lovakia of T. G. Masaryik and Dr. Edward Benes, the following article, I hope, will greatly help to, clear up matters in this regard. Before 1918, S~orvakia was an integral part of the Kingdom of Hungary. For almost a hundred years the Slova!ks we,r e for a federative reform of Hungary, accord. ing to the principles of nationalities. Since the Magyars were shortsighted and did not consent to any such refo:rim, the Slovruks decided, during the first World War, with the Czechs on a Czecho-Slovak federation. I.f there is, any lo. gic in the effort of a man who tries to save himself when sinking in a pond, it is rather in hi,s will to preserve his life than in the choice between two ponds that he would prefer to drown in. The SlovaJks, abandoning Hung,ary and ag;reeing to the formation orf a Czecho-SllOv•a k State, were motivated by the idea of preserving and deive1oping their national individuality. The Pittsburgh Agreement - con- �46 SLOVAKIA eluded between the representatives of the Slovak League of America, on the one side, and the Czech National Alliance and the Federation of the Czech Catholics, on the other, and signed on May 30, 1918, by T. G. Masaryk as the representative of the Czecho-Slov,a k National Council - contains precise stipulations in this respect. The Czecho-Slovak problem, .as developed after HH8, arose from the subsequent repudiation ,of the PittS1burgh Agreement 'by Masaryk, as President of Czecho..,Slovakia. Masaryk did this despite the fact _giat this agreement was by far a much more important document in the moderp. history of Czechs and Slovaks ,t han any other one, includ- , ing tlie "Czecho-Sfovak" Oonstltubon of 1920. The Pitts .. burgh Agreement assured moral and political foundations to the prospective state of Czeeho..,Slovakia. Law cannot be considered separately from morals and politics. It is indeed only a formal expression of co-ordination attained by certain social forces toward a higher end. Undoubted .. ly, those forces manifested themselves in the Pittsburgh Agreement. Masaryk denied the "legal" validity of this document, but he could not deny it!he fact of having received about a million dollars from the Sl()JVaJk League of America, which had been given hlm to finance the activity of the CzechoSlovak National Counicil in Barrs. Without this money from Americans of Slovak descent, Masaryk and Benes would have remained somewhere in France as obscure journalists or poor college-iteachers. In any deal none of the two contracting parties has the right arbitrarily to pick up advantages and repudiate o'b'ligatioIIB. Something like that would be doubledealing. To say that the members of the Slovruk League of America were American citizens and, consequently, did not have the right to pledge themselves for Slovakia is not honest. When he signe<l. the Pittsburgh Agreement, Masa.. ryk was a ,political rnfugee acting in contradiction with a pro-Hapsburig declaration of the Union of Czech writers. He himself had no delegation from anybody. But the Slovaks have never said that he was an :impostor. Why should, then, his indirect affirmation 1be accepted that the signa- �SLOVAKIA 47 tories of the Pittsburgh Agreement on behalf of the Slovak League were nothing else than impostors? What might have been the attitude of M. R. Stefanik in regard to the politica;l structure and organization of Czecho-Slovakia? It is ,k nown that Stefanik did not sign the Declaration of Independence of the Czecho-Slovak Nation, as pUlblished on Octoiber 18, 1918, by Benes in Paris ,and T. G. Masaryk in Washingiton. At that time Stefanik was outside Europe. His name was therefore simply written down by Benes who was pre-supposing Stefanik's consent. Stefanik might have even admitted the western legal concept of a Czecho-Slovak nation coo.sis-ting of citizens of various ethnic origins. But there are sources proving that his concept of unity of the Czecho-Slovak State did not imply the political and cultural absoI'ption of the Slovaks by the Czechs. In 1917, on a trip in the United Stafos, Stefanik gave an inte1wiew to the purbli-sher of the magazine "Slovenska mladez" (Slava,k Youth), ·Pittsburgh, Pa. 'l'his interview, ,published in this magazine on November 15, 1917 (No. 7) , reproduced the following passage from Stefanik's sta,tement: "Slovakia has to maintain her cultural and linguistic character. There is no question about that and on this point - as well as on the question of autonomy of Slovakia, Moravia, Silesia and Bohemia - there is a complete agreement." (1) That was in fact a realistic evaluaition of the situation, contrasting the wishful thinking theories of Masaryk and Bein.es, and even of such Sloivaiks as Hodza, Derer and Srobar. In 1918, Woodrow Wilson .pronounced in Congress the following significant words : "Self-determination· is not a mere phrase. It is an imperative principle which statesmen will henceforth ignore at their peril." 1 fflE "Czechoslovak" Constitution of 1920 The last paragraph of the Pittsburgh Agreement says : "Detailed regulations, concerning the establishment of the Czecho-Slovak State, are left to the liberated Czechs and Slovaks and their legal representatives." This places the �48 SLOVAKIA problem of the legal representation orf S'lovakia in the Constituent Assembly of Czecho--Slo,yakia in 1918-1920. This serious problem, h10wever, was, resolved in a very simple way. The :s elf-ruppointed revolutionary government of T. G. Masaryk and E. Benes, after ha'Ving returned to Brague in triumph mrn Paris, appointed a "Revolutionary Oonistitiuent Parliament of CzechoslO'Vakia." In such a parliament the "deputies" for Slovakia formed the so~called Slovaik C'lub which at the beginning of 1920 had 54 members. Who were they? Twelve orf those "Slovak" deputies were Czechs, including Mr. Benes and AJfoe Masaryk, the daughter of the "·P resident~Libe,r ator." And of the remaining 42 ,Slovaks, the.re were only 8 autonomist!s . Of course, it would be difficult to find an objective ikey to these figures. But such was the will of the Praigue Oa;srtle. At the ,same time Stefanik died in a plane crash under mysterious circumstances. 1n fact, he was shot down , from the sky of Bratislava by a Czech anti ..aircraft battery as he was returning home from 'I taly. Andrej HTiinka had been in the Mirov prison since October, 1919, after his courageous but unsuccessful trip ,t o the Peace Oonference in Paris, where he tried to defend Slovaili:ia',s .political rights before the Supreme Council of the Allied and Associated Powers. Slovakia was occupied hy Czech legions and Prague was threatening the Slova:k People's Party with dis,s o,lution. Strong censorship of the press and a rigid police control of the Slovak P eople's Party gatherings were exeircised by the Prague-imposed Czech authorities in Slov,a kia. Under terrific pressure, the six Slovak "autonomist" deputies could do nothing but vote for the Constitution, establishing the new State of the Czechs and Slovaks, but at the same time they delivered a statement in the Parliament reassuring the Slovruk -public that they would not cease in their str.uggle for the complete autonomy of Slovakia. Thus, the "Czechoslorv,a:k" centralistic Constitution is far from being a result of what in An1erica is known as a "due democratic process." It was a victory of narrow Czech nationalism OlVer b,road-minded Slo•v ak federalism . �SLOVAKIA 49 After this triumph, Prague proceeded to the first elections in Czecho-Slovakia ! When one takes into considera. tion the conditions under which those elections were organized in Slovakia, there is no su:ripris-e in the fact that the Slovak People's Party wa:s then placed in minority. The Czechs opened a full sca:le campaign for their various political 1parties, including the Oommunis.Unfilt,rated SodalDemocratic one. By new catchwords, they attempted to disorientate Slovak eleeito:ris. Prague spent a lot of money in this "divide et impera" campaign, controlled the press by a draconian censorship, and Czech .police and soldier:; terrorized the population during the electoral campaign as well as on the day of the elections. In Rumanova, itwo men were killed iby the police during a political gathering. Fearful of the official Czech terrorism and trying to escape a concentrated attack f:mm the side of the Czech "liberal" parties, Dr. Joseph Buday, who during the imprisonment of Hlin'ka had been the policymlliker of the Slovak People's Party, agreed with the Czech People's Party of Msgr . J. Sramek to go into elections with hi:s ipar.ty under the common name of the "Czecho-SlovaJk People's Party." Slovak electors, however, did not understand the meaning of such an electoral coalition and, therefore, the Slovak People's Party got only 12 deputi-es, the So.cial Democrats 23, the Agrarians 12, other smaller parties 10 . In his commentary on the e1ections of April 1920, Dr. Ferdinand Juriga, on June 10, 1920, speaking for the Slovak People's Party, declared in the Prague Parliament: "We do not regard the elections of April 18--20 as a free expression of the Slo•v a;t people. There were involved in them non-Slovaik soldiers, non-Slo,vak officials, and other non-Slovak factors. A terrifying censorship, arbitrary im. prisonment of our people and leaders ,prevent this act from expressing the free will of our popuilation." (2) It is significant to note how Czech "democracy" interpreted the principle of equality of citizens by the Law on Elections. While the Constitution introduced a rigid uni. fied centralistic system for the whole Republic, the number of vot@ANS~sUBRAA\he election of one deputy was MILLERSVILLE STATE COLLEGE �50 SLOVAKIA fixed at 43,840 in the Czech }ands, at 53,384 in Slovakia, and at 78,538 in Suhcarpath ian Ruthenia. iin this way the electoral district of Prague, with around one million population, had 45 deputies in. the first Czecho-Slo vak Parliament, while Subcarpaith ian Rutherua, with a popuilaJtion of 750,000, had only 9. The poltitical terrorism exerted against the SlO'Vak People's Party did not cease after the election:s. On October 10, 1920, while this .p arty held a political gathering in Namestovo , Czech soldiers shot into the assembly and killed two peasants. (3) All this h·a ppened under a Constitutio n which guaranteed, for the consUII11ption of Western scholars, "Czechoslovwk" citizens and all modern human and political rights. That the Slovak People's Party of Hlinka did nevertheless vote for the election of Masaryk as president can mean only one thing: the political leadership of Hlinka's Party held a higher view of the interests of the newly-born Czecho.-!Slovak State than Mr. Edward Benes, the narrowminded Czech nationaJist, whose political views on Central Europe had, up to that time, never ex.tended beyond the frontiers of the former Bohemian Kingdom. Slovakia's Reaction to Prague Centralism: Autonomism The Czech policy, aiming at the disintegrat ion of the Slovalk national individuali ty w1thin the new Repu'blic, awakened the self~preser vation instincts of the Slovaks. In the elections of 1925, the Slovak People's !Party gained 23 deputies. Since that year until the very end of Czecho~Slovakia that ,party remained not only the relatively ~trongest party in Slovakia, but it managed to rally to its program the absolute majority of the Slovak voters. Here, of course, nobody could consider as Slovak voters the members of the Magyar and German minorities, and the members of the Communis t ;party, because for these minorities Czecho·-1Slovakia was a foreign state. While a good part of the Magyar intelligents ia served rather the cause of HU!Ilgarian ir,r edenta and Magyar peasants in Slovakia sO!ld their votes for certain economic advantages to the "Czechoslo vak" Agrarian Party. Neither �SLOVAKIA 51 was it possible to recognize any right of decision about Slovakia's political destinies to the Communists, who, preaching a World Proletarian State, were thereby against any national criterion in politics. Moreover, the Communist Party in Slovakia recruited its voters mostly from among the minority groups: Magyars, Czechs, Jews, etc. Thus, taking into considera.tion the electoral returns of 1925, from 58 deputies corresponding to Slovakia, 17 deputies were discounted as non-Slovaik: 10 Magyars, 1 German and 6 Communists. Out of the remaining 41 deputies, the 22 corresponding to the Slov,a k People's Party is, in fact, a majority. The same can be said about the political structure of Sl01Vakia's 'Population in the elections of 1925 and 19'29. Because of the attractive force the Slovaik People's Party exerted upon the Slova,k population, Prague always sought to vilify this party by different accusations and denigrations. One of frequent accusations was that directed against Andrej Hlinka for having admitted "Magyarones" into the leading positions of the party. Such allegations were mostly connected with the name and activity of Vojtech Tuka. This former professor of International Law at Pees University in Hunga ry had a Hungarian educational background, but his Slova;k origin has never been doubted. When Czech authorities refused Tuka as professor for the "Czechoslavak" Komensky University in Bratislava, in 1920, he became a collaborator of Hlinka and, later, a deputy of the Slovaik People's Party. In 1929, Tuka was accused for high treason and on the basis of false testimonies brought against him b,y witnesses who had been paid by the Czech secret ipolice, he had been sentenced to 15 years in jail. It must not be focgotten, however, that in the decisive years, i e., 1938 and 1939, when M. Horthy, regent of Hungary, did everything possible to get Hitler's consent to occupy Slovakia, Tuka was one of t'he most ardent promoters of a free Slovak State. What connections are there 'between Catholicism and autonomism in Slova:kia? Catholicism is the religion of some 82 percent of t'he entire population; it is the original religion of the country. The first Catholic church was con- �52 SLOVAKIA structed in Slovakia in 833. in Nitra, by Prince Pribiina, i.e., decades earlier than in any other Central European country. in contradistinction to that, Protestantism, which now represents about 14 percent of the population in Slovakia, is a Crech and German ideological importation. It happened that after the White Mountain debacle many Czech P11otestants settled in Slovakia and, even though afrter a certain time they adopted the Slovaik language, they did not rid themselves of the nostalgia for their Czech origin and their Czech cultural ,b ackground. It is not without interest to quote what BohuJS'lav Tablic (1769-1832), a prominent Slovak Pr01testant, wrote about that Czech religious emigration in Slovrukia: "When in 1620. after that fatal battle on White Mountain, it had come to a large emigration among the Czechs for religious reasons, more than thirty thousands of these emigrants, Czechs and Moravians. found refuge in Hitmgary and Poland. They settled in scattered farming groups among the Slovaks in Nitra county in view of being able to return easily from there back tio their native country in order to take care of their derelinquislhed belongings or to visit their friends, or, the storm of persecution once oveT, to be able to simply return home witih their whole furnishings. !However, when .t hey lost the ho,pe of returning back to their fatherland and having in the meantime bought settlements, lands, and pastures, and other lands, they . found security under tlie protection of big landowners in the settlements of Myjava, Vrbo'Ve, Lubina, Stara Tura, etc" C4l This is the historical ex,planation of the "Czechoslovak" orientation of many Slovak Protestants, such as Milan Hodza, Method Bella, Milan Ivanka, Ivan Derer, George Slavik, Stephen Osusky, John P.apanek, Joseph Lettrich, Stephen Kocvara, Martin Krvebko, Fedor Hodfa and Samuel Bellus. It must be stated, however, that not all Slovak Protestants have been or are orientated toward political and cultural "Czechoslovakism." We can mention the name of Louis Stur, Charles Kuzmany, Svetozar Hurban Vajan.sky, �SLOVAKIA 53 Joseph S!kultety, Martin Razus, Emil Stodola, etc., all of them Slovak Pmtestants who h'ave written brilliant pages of Slovak national ,h istory. In reminiscences of the Sl()JVak people they enjo,y the same consideration as any ,g reat Catholic personality. One reality must be partioularly .stressed in this respect: differences between Catholics and Protestants in Slovakia have never been of a dogmaiiical or religious nature. They have their proper explanations in the different origin and cultural background orf the Slov8ik Protestants. The great majority of the Slova:k population thinks, however, that the Protestant minority did not rightly understand their role in their adoptive country. Sometimes they dosely approac,h ed the attitude that may easily be qua:lified as a "double loyalty" and at other times they were openly active like a sort orf Czech cultural, and in the last 50 years even Czech political fifth column in Slovakia. There is a general agreement in the democratic world that the human rights of racial and religious minorities should be ,protected. But it would be far from po1itical wisdom, if a religious minority. against the general political evolution of their adoptive country, tried to politically substitute themselves, for the nation whose hosipi.Jtality they had accepted. One ca:n imagine the reaction of American Protestllints and Jews, if the Catholic minority in the USA had sought to convert America into an Irish, Roman, Italian, Spanish or Polish colony. Conclusion The Slovak proiblem is what it has always been: an effort to get rid of the domination of all smaller or bigger nei,g hbors: Magyars, Czechs, Germans, Russians. Federali'z ation of Europe is necessary, because that is the way to eliminate feudaHsm in international relations and bring about democracy there. The SlovaJks are disposed to sacrifice certain of their rights in favor of a European Federation, such as foreign ,policy, defense, economy, but they are not disposed to sacrifice their fundamental national rights or their individuality in fiavor of a Central Euro1pean foreign nationalism. �54 SLOVAKIA This is in substa:nce the reason why the Slovaks in Slovakia are refusing to recognize the political leadership of ~arel Bacilek, a Czech Communist. This man has been sent to SlO'Vlakia as Acting Secretary General of the Communist Party in order to break the resistance of the population aigainst Prague and Communism. Having hanged Vladimir Clementis and impri,s oned other Slova;k "deviationists," iiike Gustav Husak and Laco Novomesky, etc., Prag,ue took over cont:t1ol of SlovaJkia by a man who had been ·M inister of State Seourity. For the same reason the Slovaks in the free world could never recognize the leadership of some Benes-inspired old Pan-Czech politicians, like Peter Zenkl, Hubert Ripka, and others. But the Slovaks woufd be delighted to collaborate as equals with the Czechs who adopt as their prog_ram the equa:lity of peoples within a Federated Europe. (1) Quoted in "Juhoamericky Slovak," Buenos Aires, May, 1955. (2) K. Sidor: T.he Slovaks on the floor of the Prague Parliament, Bratislav,a, 1943, Vol. 1, 'P- 144. (3) 1bidem: pp. Hi3-165. (4) Quoted in: "Hlasove o potfebe jednoty sp!sovneho jazyka pro Cechy, Moravany, a Slova.ky," Praha, 184-6, p. 102 . • • • WHO SAID IT? "I't is am inconltesitialble fact that from 1946 to 1948 there was no demom-a1ey in Czecho-S1avaJki1a. Aflter February 25, 1948, when t'he Communists were no more in want of the semr:ices of their feJ.il.ow-traveler,s from other NaJtional Front parties, they reruliized wiith the fuH aid of Dr. Benes their famous February "coup d'etat" (Dr. Benes remained president till June 1948). Orre part of the Natioml Front, led by Clemenlt Gotrbw.a:ld, remained in the country, where ilt is strn terrom:ng oUT naJ!Jion. Another part, led by Dr. Zenilcl, went into exiiJ..e, where tt wa'S o r ~ in tlhe sooalled "Council of Flree Ozeohoslova:kia." Both parts are united by the same "governhlent-program of Kiosice." Today Red Prague a:s well a:s the Council olf Free Ozechoslovalcia are sbill folioweTs of tlhia t program." ('.I1he Czech "BOHEMIA," Nov. 1952). � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA MASARYK'S DEMOCRACY ANH SLOVAKIA Joseph A. Mikus An American newspaperman, desiring to know the details about Czecho-.Slorv<akia, put the following questions to me recently: 1. What does the Pittsburgh Agreement mean to the Slovaks? 2. What might have been the opinion of M. R. Stefa. nik albout the status of Slovakia within the Czecho-Slovak State? 3. Did the Slovak deputies in the Prague Parliament vote for the Constitution of Czecho~Slovaki'a in 1920? 4. Is it true that the autonomist movement never at.., tained a majority among the voters of Slovakia? '5. How strong were the "Magya:rones" in the Slovaik Peop~e's Party? 6. What is the political significance of Catholicism and Protestantism in Slovakia? 7. What is the present Slorvruk pohtical program? 1 Since these questions are asked morn frequently by persons interested in the truth a!bout the Czecho~lovakia of T. G. Masaryik and Dr. Edward Benes, the following article, I hope, will greatly help to, clear up matters in this regard. Before 1918, S~orvakia was an integral part of the Kingdom of Hungary. For almost a hundred years the Slova!ks we,r e for a federative reform of Hungary, accord. ing to the principles of nationalities. Since the Magyars were shortsighted and did not consent to any such refo:rim, the Slovruks decided, during the first World War, with the Czechs on a Czecho-Slovak federation. I.f there is, any lo. gic in the effort of a man who tries to save himself when sinking in a pond, it is rather in hi,s will to preserve his life than in the choice between two ponds that he would prefer to drown in. The SlovaJks, abandoning Hung,ary and ag;reeing to the formation orf a Czecho-SllOv•a k State, were motivated by the idea of preserving and deive1oping their national individuality. The Pittsburgh Agreement - con- 46 SLOVAKIA eluded between the representatives of the Slovak League of America, on the one side, and the Czech National Alliance and the Federation of the Czech Catholics, on the other, and signed on May 30, 1918, by T. G. Masaryk as the representative of the Czecho-Slov,a k National Council - contains precise stipulations in this respect. The Czecho-Slovak problem, .as developed after HH8, arose from the subsequent repudiation ,of the PittS1burgh Agreement 'by Masaryk, as President of Czecho..,Slovakia. Masaryk did this despite the fact _giat this agreement was by far a much more important document in the moderp. history of Czechs and Slovaks ,t han any other one, includ- , ing tlie "Czecho-Sfovak" Oonstltubon of 1920. The Pitts .. burgh Agreement assured moral and political foundations to the prospective state of Czeeho..,Slovakia. Law cannot be considered separately from morals and politics. It is indeed only a formal expression of co-ordination attained by certain social forces toward a higher end. Undoubted .. ly, those forces manifested themselves in the Pittsburgh Agreement. Masaryk denied the "legal" validity of this document, but he could not deny it!he fact of having received about a million dollars from the Sl()JVaJk League of America, which had been given hlm to finance the activity of the CzechoSlovak National Counicil in Barrs. Without this money from Americans of Slovak descent, Masaryk and Benes would have remained somewhere in France as obscure journalists or poor college-iteachers. In any deal none of the two contracting parties has the right arbitrarily to pick up advantages and repudiate o'b'ligatioIIB. Something like that would be doubledealing. To say that the members of the Slovruk League of America were American citizens and, consequently, did not have the right to pledge themselves for Slovakia is not honest. When he signe<l. the Pittsburgh Agreement, Masa.. ryk was a ,political rnfugee acting in contradiction with a pro-Hapsburig declaration of the Union of Czech writers. He himself had no delegation from anybody. But the Slovaks have never said that he was an :impostor. Why should, then, his indirect affirmation 1be accepted that the signa- SLOVAKIA 47 tories of the Pittsburgh Agreement on behalf of the Slovak League were nothing else than impostors? What might have been the attitude of M. R. Stefanik in regard to the politica;l structure and organization of Czecho-Slovakia? It is ,k nown that Stefanik did not sign the Declaration of Independence of the Czecho-Slovak Nation, as pUlblished on Octoiber 18, 1918, by Benes in Paris ,and T. G. Masaryk in Washingiton. At that time Stefanik was outside Europe. His name was therefore simply written down by Benes who was pre-supposing Stefanik's consent. Stefanik might have even admitted the western legal concept of a Czecho-Slovak nation coo.sis-ting of citizens of various ethnic origins. But there are sources proving that his concept of unity of the Czecho-Slovak State did not imply the political and cultural absoI'ption of the Slovaks by the Czechs. In 1917, on a trip in the United Stafos, Stefanik gave an inte1wiew to the purbli-sher of the magazine "Slovenska mladez" (Slava,k Youth), ·Pittsburgh, Pa. 'l'his interview, ,published in this magazine on November 15, 1917 (No. 7) , reproduced the following passage from Stefanik's sta,tement: "Slovakia has to maintain her cultural and linguistic character. There is no question about that and on this point - as well as on the question of autonomy of Slovakia, Moravia, Silesia and Bohemia - there is a complete agreement." (1) That was in fact a realistic evaluaition of the situation, contrasting the wishful thinking theories of Masaryk and Bein.es, and even of such Sloivaiks as Hodza, Derer and Srobar. In 1918, Woodrow Wilson .pronounced in Congress the following significant words : "Self-determination· is not a mere phrase. It is an imperative principle which statesmen will henceforth ignore at their peril." 1 fflE "Czechoslovak" Constitution of 1920 The last paragraph of the Pittsburgh Agreement says : "Detailed regulations, concerning the establishment of the Czecho-Slovak State, are left to the liberated Czechs and Slovaks and their legal representatives." This places the 48 SLOVAKIA problem of the legal representation orf S'lovakia in the Constituent Assembly of Czecho--Slo,yakia in 1918-1920. This serious problem, h10wever, was, resolved in a very simple way. The :s elf-ruppointed revolutionary government of T. G. Masaryk and E. Benes, after ha'Ving returned to Brague in triumph mrn Paris, appointed a "Revolutionary Oonistitiuent Parliament of CzechoslO'Vakia." In such a parliament the "deputies" for Slovakia formed the so~called Slovaik C'lub which at the beginning of 1920 had 54 members. Who were they? Twelve orf those "Slovak" deputies were Czechs, including Mr. Benes and AJfoe Masaryk, the daughter of the "·P resident~Libe,r ator." And of the remaining 42 ,Slovaks, the.re were only 8 autonomist!s . Of course, it would be difficult to find an objective ikey to these figures. But such was the will of the Praigue Oa;srtle. At the ,same time Stefanik died in a plane crash under mysterious circumstances. 1n fact, he was shot down , from the sky of Bratislava by a Czech anti ..aircraft battery as he was returning home from 'I taly. Andrej HTiinka had been in the Mirov prison since October, 1919, after his courageous but unsuccessful trip ,t o the Peace Oonference in Paris, where he tried to defend Slovaili:ia',s .political rights before the Supreme Council of the Allied and Associated Powers. Slovakia was occupied hy Czech legions and Prague was threatening the Slova:k People's Party with dis,s o,lution. Strong censorship of the press and a rigid police control of the Slovak P eople's Party gatherings were exeircised by the Prague-imposed Czech authorities in Slov,a kia. Under terrific pressure, the six Slovak "autonomist" deputies could do nothing but vote for the Constitution, establishing the new State of the Czechs and Slovaks, but at the same time they delivered a statement in the Parliament reassuring the Slovruk -public that they would not cease in their str.uggle for the complete autonomy of Slovakia. Thus, the "Czechoslorv,a:k" centralistic Constitution is far from being a result of what in An1erica is known as a "due democratic process." It was a victory of narrow Czech nationalism OlVer b,road-minded Slo•v ak federalism . SLOVAKIA 49 After this triumph, Prague proceeded to the first elections in Czecho-Slovakia ! When one takes into considera. tion the conditions under which those elections were organized in Slovakia, there is no su:ripris-e in the fact that the Slovak People's Party wa:s then placed in minority. The Czechs opened a full sca:le campaign for their various political 1parties, including the Oommunis.Unfilt,rated SodalDemocratic one. By new catchwords, they attempted to disorientate Slovak eleeito:ris. Prague spent a lot of money in this "divide et impera" campaign, controlled the press by a draconian censorship, and Czech .police and soldier:; terrorized the population during the electoral campaign as well as on the day of the elections. In Rumanova, itwo men were killed iby the police during a political gathering. Fearful of the official Czech terrorism and trying to escape a concentrated attack f:mm the side of the Czech "liberal" parties, Dr. Joseph Buday, who during the imprisonment of Hlin'ka had been the policymlliker of the Slovak People's Party, agreed with the Czech People's Party of Msgr . J. Sramek to go into elections with hi:s ipar.ty under the common name of the "Czecho-SlovaJk People's Party." Slovak electors, however, did not understand the meaning of such an electoral coalition and, therefore, the Slovak People's Party got only 12 deputi-es, the So.cial Democrats 23, the Agrarians 12, other smaller parties 10 . In his commentary on the e1ections of April 1920, Dr. Ferdinand Juriga, on June 10, 1920, speaking for the Slovak People's Party, declared in the Prague Parliament: "We do not regard the elections of April 18--20 as a free expression of the Slo•v a;t people. There were involved in them non-Slovaik soldiers, non-Slo,vak officials, and other non-Slovak factors. A terrifying censorship, arbitrary im. prisonment of our people and leaders ,prevent this act from expressing the free will of our popuilation." (2) It is significant to note how Czech "democracy" interpreted the principle of equality of citizens by the Law on Elections. While the Constitution introduced a rigid uni. fied centralistic system for the whole Republic, the number of vot@ANS~sUBRAA\he election of one deputy was MILLERSVILLE STATE COLLEGE 50 SLOVAKIA fixed at 43,840 in the Czech }ands, at 53,384 in Slovakia, and at 78,538 in Suhcarpath ian Ruthenia. iin this way the electoral district of Prague, with around one million population, had 45 deputies in. the first Czecho-Slo vak Parliament, while Subcarpaith ian Rutherua, with a popuilaJtion of 750,000, had only 9. The poltitical terrorism exerted against the SlO'Vak People's Party did not cease after the election:s. On October 10, 1920, while this .p arty held a political gathering in Namestovo , Czech soldiers shot into the assembly and killed two peasants. (3) All this h·a ppened under a Constitutio n which guaranteed, for the consUII11ption of Western scholars, "Czechoslovwk" citizens and all modern human and political rights. That the Slovak People's Party of Hlinka did nevertheless vote for the election of Masaryk as president can mean only one thing: the political leadership of Hlinka's Party held a higher view of the interests of the newly-born Czecho.-!Slovak State than Mr. Edward Benes, the narrowminded Czech nationaJist, whose political views on Central Europe had, up to that time, never ex.tended beyond the frontiers of the former Bohemian Kingdom. Slovakia's Reaction to Prague Centralism: Autonomism The Czech policy, aiming at the disintegrat ion of the Slovalk national individuali ty w1thin the new Repu'blic, awakened the self~preser vation instincts of the Slovaks. In the elections of 1925, the Slovak People's !Party gained 23 deputies. Since that year until the very end of Czecho~Slovakia that ,party remained not only the relatively ~trongest party in Slovakia, but it managed to rally to its program the absolute majority of the Slovak voters. Here, of course, nobody could consider as Slovak voters the members of the Magyar and German minorities, and the members of the Communis t ;party, because for these minorities Czecho·-1Slovakia was a foreign state. While a good part of the Magyar intelligents ia served rather the cause of HU!Ilgarian ir,r edenta and Magyar peasants in Slovakia sO!ld their votes for certain economic advantages to the "Czechoslo vak" Agrarian Party. Neither SLOVAKIA 51 was it possible to recognize any right of decision about Slovakia's political destinies to the Communists, who, preaching a World Proletarian State, were thereby against any national criterion in politics. Moreover, the Communist Party in Slovakia recruited its voters mostly from among the minority groups: Magyars, Czechs, Jews, etc. Thus, taking into considera.tion the electoral returns of 1925, from 58 deputies corresponding to Slovakia, 17 deputies were discounted as non-Slovaik: 10 Magyars, 1 German and 6 Communists. Out of the remaining 41 deputies, the 22 corresponding to the Slov,a k People's Party is, in fact, a majority. The same can be said about the political structure of Sl01Vakia's 'Population in the elections of 1925 and 19'29. Because of the attractive force the Slovaik People's Party exerted upon the Slova,k population, Prague always sought to vilify this party by different accusations and denigrations. One of frequent accusations was that directed against Andrej Hlinka for having admitted "Magyarones" into the leading positions of the party. Such allegations were mostly connected with the name and activity of Vojtech Tuka. This former professor of International Law at Pees University in Hunga ry had a Hungarian educational background, but his Slova;k origin has never been doubted. When Czech authorities refused Tuka as professor for the "Czechoslavak" Komensky University in Bratislava, in 1920, he became a collaborator of Hlinka and, later, a deputy of the Slovaik People's Party. In 1929, Tuka was accused for high treason and on the basis of false testimonies brought against him b,y witnesses who had been paid by the Czech secret ipolice, he had been sentenced to 15 years in jail. It must not be focgotten, however, that in the decisive years, i e., 1938 and 1939, when M. Horthy, regent of Hungary, did everything possible to get Hitler's consent to occupy Slovakia, Tuka was one of t'he most ardent promoters of a free Slovak State. What connections are there 'between Catholicism and autonomism in Slova:kia? Catholicism is the religion of some 82 percent of t'he entire population; it is the original religion of the country. The first Catholic church was con- 52 SLOVAKIA structed in Slovakia in 833. in Nitra, by Prince Pribiina, i.e., decades earlier than in any other Central European country. in contradistinction to that, Protestantism, which now represents about 14 percent of the population in Slovakia, is a Crech and German ideological importation. It happened that after the White Mountain debacle many Czech P11otestants settled in Slovakia and, even though afrter a certain time they adopted the Slovaik language, they did not rid themselves of the nostalgia for their Czech origin and their Czech cultural ,b ackground. It is not without interest to quote what BohuJS'lav Tablic (1769-1832), a prominent Slovak Pr01testant, wrote about that Czech religious emigration in Slovrukia: "When in 1620. after that fatal battle on White Mountain, it had come to a large emigration among the Czechs for religious reasons, more than thirty thousands of these emigrants, Czechs and Moravians. found refuge in Hitmgary and Poland. They settled in scattered farming groups among the Slovaks in Nitra county in view of being able to return easily from there back tio their native country in order to take care of their derelinquislhed belongings or to visit their friends, or, the storm of persecution once oveT, to be able to simply return home witih their whole furnishings. !However, when .t hey lost the ho,pe of returning back to their fatherland and having in the meantime bought settlements, lands, and pastures, and other lands, they . found security under tlie protection of big landowners in the settlements of Myjava, Vrbo'Ve, Lubina, Stara Tura, etc" C4l This is the historical ex,planation of the "Czechoslovak" orientation of many Slovak Protestants, such as Milan Hodza, Method Bella, Milan Ivanka, Ivan Derer, George Slavik, Stephen Osusky, John P.apanek, Joseph Lettrich, Stephen Kocvara, Martin Krvebko, Fedor Hodfa and Samuel Bellus. It must be stated, however, that not all Slovak Protestants have been or are orientated toward political and cultural "Czechoslovakism." We can mention the name of Louis Stur, Charles Kuzmany, Svetozar Hurban Vajan.sky, SLOVAKIA 53 Joseph S!kultety, Martin Razus, Emil Stodola, etc., all of them Slovak Pmtestants who h'ave written brilliant pages of Slovak national ,h istory. In reminiscences of the Sl()JVak people they enjo,y the same consideration as any ,g reat Catholic personality. One reality must be partioularly .stressed in this respect: differences between Catholics and Protestants in Slovakia have never been of a dogmaiiical or religious nature. They have their proper explanations in the different origin and cultural background orf the Slov8ik Protestants. The great majority of the Slova:k population thinks, however, that the Protestant minority did not rightly understand their role in their adoptive country. Sometimes they dosely approac,h ed the attitude that may easily be qua:lified as a "double loyalty" and at other times they were openly active like a sort orf Czech cultural, and in the last 50 years even Czech political fifth column in Slovakia. There is a general agreement in the democratic world that the human rights of racial and religious minorities should be ,protected. But it would be far from po1itical wisdom, if a religious minority. against the general political evolution of their adoptive country, tried to politically substitute themselves, for the nation whose hosipi.Jtality they had accepted. One ca:n imagine the reaction of American Protestllints and Jews, if the Catholic minority in the USA had sought to convert America into an Irish, Roman, Italian, Spanish or Polish colony. Conclusion The Slovak proiblem is what it has always been: an effort to get rid of the domination of all smaller or bigger nei,g hbors: Magyars, Czechs, Germans, Russians. Federali'z ation of Europe is necessary, because that is the way to eliminate feudaHsm in international relations and bring about democracy there. The SlovaJks are disposed to sacrifice certain of their rights in favor of a European Federation, such as foreign ,policy, defense, economy, but they are not disposed to sacrifice their fundamental national rights or their individuality in fiavor of a Central Euro1pean foreign nationalism. 54 SLOVAKIA This is in substa:nce the reason why the Slovaks in Slovakia are refusing to recognize the political leadership of ~arel Bacilek, a Czech Communist. This man has been sent to SlO'Vlakia as Acting Secretary General of the Communist Party in order to break the resistance of the population aigainst Prague and Communism. Having hanged Vladimir Clementis and impri,s oned other Slova;k "deviationists," iiike Gustav Husak and Laco Novomesky, etc., Prag,ue took over cont:t1ol of SlovaJkia by a man who had been ·M inister of State Seourity. For the same reason the Slovaks in the free world could never recognize the leadership of some Benes-inspired old Pan-Czech politicians, like Peter Zenkl, Hubert Ripka, and others. But the Slovaks woufd be delighted to collaborate as equals with the Czechs who adopt as their prog_ram the equa:lity of peoples within a Federated Europe. (1) Quoted in "Juhoamericky Slovak," Buenos Aires, May, 1955. (2) K. Sidor: T.he Slovaks on the floor of the Prague Parliament, Bratislav,a, 1943, Vol. 1, 'P- 144. (3) 1bidem: pp. Hi3-165. (4) Quoted in: "Hlasove o potfebe jednoty sp!sovneho jazyka pro Cechy, Moravany, a Slova.ky," Praha, 184-6, p. 102 . • • • WHO SAID IT? "I't is am inconltesitialble fact that from 1946 to 1948 there was no demom-a1ey in Czecho-S1avaJki1a. Aflter February 25, 1948, when t'he Communists were no more in want of the semr:ices of their feJ.il.ow-traveler,s from other NaJtional Front parties, they reruliized wiith the fuH aid of Dr. Benes their famous February "coup d'etat" (Dr. Benes remained president till June 1948). Orre part of the Natioml Front, led by Clemenlt Gotrbw.a:ld, remained in the country, where ilt is strn terrom:ng oUT naJ!Jion. Another part, led by Dr. Zenilcl, went into exiiJ..e, where tt wa'S o r ~ in tlhe sooalled "Council of Flree Ozeohoslova:kia." Both parts are united by the same "governhlent-program of Kiosice." Today Red Prague a:s well a:s the Council olf Free Ozechoslovalcia are sbill folioweTs of tlhia t program." ('.I1he Czech "BOHEMIA," Nov. 1952).  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Masaryk's Democracy and Slovakia Description An account of the resource Joseph A. Mikuš Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 45-54 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Mikuš, Joseph A., 1909-2005 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource September-December 1956 LCNAF+dates https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/9a7adf1953bea91834c5a3604aeb702c.pdf 55c170d2339f65a95a5a3f4dad2edc07 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 55 MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT AND THE CONGRESS OF TID~ UNITED STATES FROM THE PITTSBURGH-JOHNSTOWN, PA. REGIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA, SLOVAK BAND HALL, JOHNSTOWN, PA., NOVEMBER 3, 1956 Assembled in the Slovak Band Hall, in the interest of the welfare and security of our America and the rest of the free world, we solemnly declare that: 1. We rededicate ourselves to the preservation of the basic principles set forth in the American Declaration of Independence and of the basic law of our country, the Constitution of the United States of America. 2. We condemn all forms of tyranny, every form orf totalitarian political system. We recognize the godless philosophy of materialistic communism as the greatest conspiracy against free humanity, as a political system which threatens all of mankind with utter enslavement. Therefore we cannot subscribe to the policy that doing business with the Soviet Union and its satellites is in the best interests of the welfare and security of the United States and the rest of the free world. We commend our Government for its efforts to resist and to resolutely count~ract the aggressive policies of Soviet imperialism with all the spiritual and material forces at our command and heartily endorse all actions of our Government to expose, demobilize, and outlaw the evil forces of brutal godless Communism in our country - the forces that are dedicated to our destruction. 3. We strongly denounce the intervention of the Soviet Union in the internal affairs of Poland and Hungary, as well as other countries of Europe and Asia. We express our deepest sympathy with the peoples of Hungary and Poland and urge our Government to denounce in the strongest terms the massacre of these liberty-loving and liberty-seeking peoples, immediately initiating all steps that may be taken by our Government to end the brutal treatment and repression of the Polish and Hungarian nations. �56 SLOVAKIA 4. We oppose the admission of Red China into the United Nations. We fully endorse the principle that our Government shall refuse to recogmze every form of government and political formation which is imposed on any nation by the force of an alien power and we respectfully request that this policy be followed even in the case of the nation we are descended from, the Slovak nation, which is tyrannized by the Czecho-Comm unist regime of Prague in flagrant violation of the political will of the Slovak people and of the fundamental principles of the Charter of the United Nations and in utter contempt for the basic principle of the American foreign policy of self-determina tion. Once again, we respectfully request the President and the Congress of the United States to re-examine the question of the destruction of the Slovak Republic in 1945, because we are certain that the political will of the Slovak nation was violated. We also respectfully request our President to instruct our delegate to the United Nations to ask for an investigation by the U. N. of the destruction of the Slovak State in 1945, the independence of which was pro_ claimed by the duly elected representative s of the Slovak people on March 14, 1939, and eventually reco,g nized by twenty-seven countries. 5. We deeply resent the fact that our Government is inclined to recognize and favor former Slovak and Czech politicians who are in a large measure responsible for the present terrible plight of the Slovaks and the Czechs. We refer particularly to the politicians who promoted the proSoviet and anti-Slovak policies of the late Dr. Edward Benes - the Czech Socialists and Judas Slovaks, now organized in the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia,·, who collaborated with Moscow and the Communists until 1948 as members of the Communist-do minated National Front Government of the Benes-Gottwa ld coalition. We respectfully request the President and the Congress of the United States to re-examine the so-called "Czechoslovak" policy of our Government, which is still based on the information and actions of Dr. Edward Benes �SLOVAKIA 57 and other Czech Socialists. It is embarrassing to us, as it also should be to our Government, that the members of Benes's pro-Soviet political clique are employed by various departments and agencies of our Government. They have compromised the good name of the United States entirely too long and, therefore, should no longer enjoy our trust and favor. The Slovak League of America, with the organizations affiliated with it, has expressed itself in the past more than once on the subject of U. S. policy in regard to Czecho-Slovakia, and especially in regard to the Slovak nation, but little or nothing has been done to correct the situation. Representing the vast majority of organized Americans of Slovak descent, the Slovak League of America feels that it has the right and the obligation to speak for them in matters of general and particular concern, both domestic and foreign. As loyal Americans, we are not, we trust. overly presumptuous in assuming that we merit at least the same measure of consideration and trust from our Government as the bankrupt, pro-Soviet political entourage of Dr. Edward Benes, which suddenly became "anti-Communist and democratic" after February, 1948. when the Communists, with their collaboration, seized all power in Czecho-Slovakia. 6. We stand opposed to the concept that the power and size of the federal government of the United States should be increased to the detriment of the powers of the individual States of the Union. We, therefore, respectfully request the adoption of the recommendations of the Hoover Commission as speedily as possible. 7. Furthermore, we respectfully request the President and the Congress of the United States to promote legislation to decrease federal taxes, particularly the income tax and withholding tax laws during the next session of Congress, because we belie'Ve this can be done without endangering the welfare and security of our country. 8. Finally, we recommend the President of the United States, Dwight D. Eisenhower, for his stand on the crisis in the Middle East to oppose and condemn all aggressors and violators of others natural rights �58 SLOVAKIA Adopted unanimously this third day of November 1956, by the Conference of the Pittsburgh-Johnstown, Pa. Region of the Slovak League of America, Slovak Band Hall, Johnstown, Pa. For the Conference : PHILIP A. HROBAK. President Slovak League of America. ELIZABETH ANDREJKO, Chairlady of Conference and president of Johnstown Assembly S. L. A. MICHAEL BERES, Chairman Pittsburgh District S. L. A. • • • WHO SAID IT? "Never in his,tory was Russia so mighty, illever were the forces of socia1isrrn so colossally foi,ged together. This is a new historical epoch. N e,v ertheless some pecxple think in a stiClk-in-the-mud fashion. It has not yet been possible to convince everyone cxf the necessity for the orverthrow of crupitalism." - (Ferdinand Peroutka, a Benes Czech, in his book TAK NEBO TAK, 1947, pg. 8). • • • "The gossip that the Democratic Party is not fur cooperation with the Soviet Union is wtroI11g. rt is clear to every Slovak, regardless oif his polftica'1 and religio;us beliefs, that the existence of the Czechoslovak Reipulblic is 100 per cent dependent on the e~stence and the .p ower cxf our strongest Slavic ally. This a1lli.ance cannot be regarded as a matter of onJ.y feeHng graciorus for erverything the Soviet Union has done for us. It is, a matter oif rationa:1 thinking and of our unaJteraJble foreign policy." - (Dr. Joseph Let. trich, Vice-Chairman of the Executive Committee cxf the "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," NOV:E PRUDY, No. 28-29, 1947, pg. 658). • • • "Let us declare war against the fear oif Bolshevism and forbid at the same time, the for.mation of any anti-COlln- (Va;olav Majer, PRAVO mlIDist f:ront whatsoever." LIDU, officirul organ orf the O;ech Sooi!al Demooratic Party, Novemlber 25, 1947) � SLOVAKIA 55 MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT AND THE CONGRESS OF TID~ UNITED STATES FROM THE PITTSBURGH-JOHNSTOWN, PA. REGIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA, SLOVAK BAND HALL, JOHNSTOWN, PA., NOVEMBER 3, 1956 Assembled in the Slovak Band Hall, in the interest of the welfare and security of our America and the rest of the free world, we solemnly declare that: 1. We rededicate ourselves to the preservation of the basic principles set forth in the American Declaration of Independence and of the basic law of our country, the Constitution of the United States of America. 2. We condemn all forms of tyranny, every form orf totalitarian political system. We recognize the godless philosophy of materialistic communism as the greatest conspiracy against free humanity, as a political system which threatens all of mankind with utter enslavement. Therefore we cannot subscribe to the policy that doing business with the Soviet Union and its satellites is in the best interests of the welfare and security of the United States and the rest of the free world. We commend our Government for its efforts to resist and to resolutely count~ract the aggressive policies of Soviet imperialism with all the spiritual and material forces at our command and heartily endorse all actions of our Government to expose, demobilize, and outlaw the evil forces of brutal godless Communism in our country - the forces that are dedicated to our destruction. 3. We strongly denounce the intervention of the Soviet Union in the internal affairs of Poland and Hungary, as well as other countries of Europe and Asia. We express our deepest sympathy with the peoples of Hungary and Poland and urge our Government to denounce in the strongest terms the massacre of these liberty-loving and liberty-seeking peoples, immediately initiating all steps that may be taken by our Government to end the brutal treatment and repression of the Polish and Hungarian nations. �56 SLOVAKIA 4. We oppose the admission of Red China into the United Nations. We fully endorse the principle that our Government shall refuse to recogmze every form of government and political formation which is imposed on any nation by the force of an alien power and we respectfully request that this policy be followed even in the case of the nation we are descended from, the Slovak nation, which is tyrannized by the Czecho-Comm unist regime of Prague in flagrant violation of the political will of the Slovak people and of the fundamental principles of the Charter of the United Nations and in utter contempt for the basic principle of the American foreign policy of self-determina tion. Once again, we respectfully request the President and the Congress of the United States to re-examine the question of the destruction of the Slovak Republic in 1945, because we are certain that the political will of the Slovak nation was violated. We also respectfully request our President to instruct our delegate to the United Nations to ask for an investigation by the U. N. of the destruction of the Slovak State in 1945, the independence of which was pro_ claimed by the duly elected representative s of the Slovak people on March 14, 1939, and eventually reco,g nized by twenty-seven countries. 5. We deeply resent the fact that our Government is inclined to recognize and favor former Slovak and Czech politicians who are in a large measure responsible for the present terrible plight of the Slovaks and the Czechs. We refer particularly to the politicians who promoted the proSoviet and anti-Slovak policies of the late Dr. Edward Benes - the Czech Socialists and Judas Slovaks, now organized in the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia,·, who collaborated with Moscow and the Communists until 1948 as members of the Communist-do minated National Front Government of the Benes-Gottwa ld coalition. We respectfully request the President and the Congress of the United States to re-examine the so-called "Czechoslovak" policy of our Government, which is still based on the information and actions of Dr. Edward Benes �SLOVAKIA 57 and other Czech Socialists. It is embarrassing to us, as it also should be to our Government, that the members of Benes's pro-Soviet political clique are employed by various departments and agencies of our Government. They have compromised the good name of the United States entirely too long and, therefore, should no longer enjoy our trust and favor. The Slovak League of America, with the organizations affiliated with it, has expressed itself in the past more than once on the subject of U. S. policy in regard to Czecho-Slovakia, and especially in regard to the Slovak nation, but little or nothing has been done to correct the situation. Representing the vast majority of organized Americans of Slovak descent, the Slovak League of America feels that it has the right and the obligation to speak for them in matters of general and particular concern, both domestic and foreign. As loyal Americans, we are not, we trust. overly presumptuous in assuming that we merit at least the same measure of consideration and trust from our Government as the bankrupt, pro-Soviet political entourage of Dr. Edward Benes, which suddenly became "anti-Communist and democratic" after February, 1948. when the Communists, with their collaboration, seized all power in Czecho-Slovakia. 6. We stand opposed to the concept that the power and size of the federal government of the United States should be increased to the detriment of the powers of the individual States of the Union. We, therefore, respectfully request the adoption of the recommendations of the Hoover Commission as speedily as possible. 7. Furthermore, we respectfully request the President and the Congress of the United States to promote legislation to decrease federal taxes, particularly the income tax and withholding tax laws during the next session of Congress, because we belie'Ve this can be done without endangering the welfare and security of our country. 8. Finally, we recommend the President of the United States, Dwight D. Eisenhower, for his stand on the crisis in the Middle East to oppose and condemn all aggressors and violators of others natural rights �58 SLOVAKIA Adopted unanimously this third day of November 1956, by the Conference of the Pittsburgh-Johnstown, Pa. Region of the Slovak League of America, Slovak Band Hall, Johnstown, Pa. For the Conference : PHILIP A. HROBAK. President Slovak League of America. ELIZABETH ANDREJKO, Chairlady of Conference and president of Johnstown Assembly S. L. A. MICHAEL BERES, Chairman Pittsburgh District S. L. A. • • • WHO SAID IT? "Never in his,tory was Russia so mighty, illever were the forces of socia1isrrn so colossally foi,ged together. This is a new historical epoch. N e,v ertheless some pecxple think in a stiClk-in-the-mud fashion. It has not yet been possible to convince everyone cxf the necessity for the orverthrow of crupitalism." - (Ferdinand Peroutka, a Benes Czech, in his book TAK NEBO TAK, 1947, pg. 8). • • • "The gossip that the Democratic Party is not fur cooperation with the Soviet Union is wtroI11g. rt is clear to every Slovak, regardless oif his polftica'1 and religio;us beliefs, that the existence of the Czechoslovak Reipulblic is 100 per cent dependent on the e~stence and the .p ower cxf our strongest Slavic ally. This a1lli.ance cannot be regarded as a matter of onJ.y feeHng graciorus for erverything the Soviet Union has done for us. It is, a matter oif rationa:1 thinking and of our unaJteraJble foreign policy." - (Dr. Joseph Let. trich, Vice-Chairman of the Executive Committee cxf the "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," NOV:E PRUDY, No. 28-29, 1947, pg. 658). • • • "Let us declare war against the fear oif Bolshevism and forbid at the same time, the for.mation of any anti-COlln- (Va;olav Majer, PRAVO mlIDist f:ront whatsoever." LIDU, officirul organ orf the O;ech Sooi!al Demooratic Party, Novemlber 25, 1947) � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 55 MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT AND THE CONGRESS OF TID~ UNITED STATES FROM THE PITTSBURGH-JOHNSTOWN, PA. REGIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA, SLOVAK BAND HALL, JOHNSTOWN, PA., NOVEMBER 3, 1956 Assembled in the Slovak Band Hall, in the interest of the welfare and security of our America and the rest of the free world, we solemnly declare that: 1. We rededicate ourselves to the preservation of the basic principles set forth in the American Declaration of Independence and of the basic law of our country, the Constitution of the United States of America. 2. We condemn all forms of tyranny, every form orf totalitarian political system. We recognize the godless philosophy of materialistic communism as the greatest conspiracy against free humanity, as a political system which threatens all of mankind with utter enslavement. Therefore we cannot subscribe to the policy that doing business with the Soviet Union and its satellites is in the best interests of the welfare and security of the United States and the rest of the free world. We commend our Government for its efforts to resist and to resolutely count~ract the aggressive policies of Soviet imperialism with all the spiritual and material forces at our command and heartily endorse all actions of our Government to expose, demobilize, and outlaw the evil forces of brutal godless Communism in our country - the forces that are dedicated to our destruction. 3. We strongly denounce the intervention of the Soviet Union in the internal affairs of Poland and Hungary, as well as other countries of Europe and Asia. We express our deepest sympathy with the peoples of Hungary and Poland and urge our Government to denounce in the strongest terms the massacre of these liberty-loving and liberty-seeking peoples, immediately initiating all steps that may be taken by our Government to end the brutal treatment and repression of the Polish and Hungarian nations. 56 SLOVAKIA 4. We oppose the admission of Red China into the United Nations. We fully endorse the principle that our Government shall refuse to recogmze every form of government and political formation which is imposed on any nation by the force of an alien power and we respectfully request that this policy be followed even in the case of the nation we are descended from, the Slovak nation, which is tyrannized by the Czecho-Comm unist regime of Prague in flagrant violation of the political will of the Slovak people and of the fundamental principles of the Charter of the United Nations and in utter contempt for the basic principle of the American foreign policy of self-determina tion. Once again, we respectfully request the President and the Congress of the United States to re-examine the question of the destruction of the Slovak Republic in 1945, because we are certain that the political will of the Slovak nation was violated. We also respectfully request our President to instruct our delegate to the United Nations to ask for an investigation by the U. N. of the destruction of the Slovak State in 1945, the independence of which was pro_ claimed by the duly elected representative s of the Slovak people on March 14, 1939, and eventually reco,g nized by twenty-seven countries. 5. We deeply resent the fact that our Government is inclined to recognize and favor former Slovak and Czech politicians who are in a large measure responsible for the present terrible plight of the Slovaks and the Czechs. We refer particularly to the politicians who promoted the proSoviet and anti-Slovak policies of the late Dr. Edward Benes - the Czech Socialists and Judas Slovaks, now organized in the so-called "Council of Free Czechoslovakia,·, who collaborated with Moscow and the Communists until 1948 as members of the Communist-do minated National Front Government of the Benes-Gottwa ld coalition. We respectfully request the President and the Congress of the United States to re-examine the so-called "Czechoslovak" policy of our Government, which is still based on the information and actions of Dr. Edward Benes SLOVAKIA 57 and other Czech Socialists. It is embarrassing to us, as it also should be to our Government, that the members of Benes's pro-Soviet political clique are employed by various departments and agencies of our Government. They have compromised the good name of the United States entirely too long and, therefore, should no longer enjoy our trust and favor. The Slovak League of America, with the organizations affiliated with it, has expressed itself in the past more than once on the subject of U. S. policy in regard to Czecho-Slovakia, and especially in regard to the Slovak nation, but little or nothing has been done to correct the situation. Representing the vast majority of organized Americans of Slovak descent, the Slovak League of America feels that it has the right and the obligation to speak for them in matters of general and particular concern, both domestic and foreign. As loyal Americans, we are not, we trust. overly presumptuous in assuming that we merit at least the same measure of consideration and trust from our Government as the bankrupt, pro-Soviet political entourage of Dr. Edward Benes, which suddenly became "anti-Communist and democratic" after February, 1948. when the Communists, with their collaboration, seized all power in Czecho-Slovakia. 6. We stand opposed to the concept that the power and size of the federal government of the United States should be increased to the detriment of the powers of the individual States of the Union. We, therefore, respectfully request the adoption of the recommendations of the Hoover Commission as speedily as possible. 7. Furthermore, we respectfully request the President and the Congress of the United States to promote legislation to decrease federal taxes, particularly the income tax and withholding tax laws during the next session of Congress, because we belie'Ve this can be done without endangering the welfare and security of our country. 8. Finally, we recommend the President of the United States, Dwight D. Eisenhower, for his stand on the crisis in the Middle East to oppose and condemn all aggressors and violators of others natural rights 58 SLOVAKIA Adopted unanimously this third day of November 1956, by the Conference of the Pittsburgh-Johnstown, Pa. Region of the Slovak League of America, Slovak Band Hall, Johnstown, Pa. For the Conference : PHILIP A. HROBAK. President Slovak League of America. ELIZABETH ANDREJKO, Chairlady of Conference and president of Johnstown Assembly S. L. A. MICHAEL BERES, Chairman Pittsburgh District S. L. A. • • • WHO SAID IT? "Never in his,tory was Russia so mighty, illever were the forces of socia1isrrn so colossally foi,ged together. This is a new historical epoch. N e,v ertheless some pecxple think in a stiClk-in-the-mud fashion. It has not yet been possible to convince everyone cxf the necessity for the orverthrow of crupitalism." - (Ferdinand Peroutka, a Benes Czech, in his book TAK NEBO TAK, 1947, pg. 8). • • • "The gossip that the Democratic Party is not fur cooperation with the Soviet Union is wtroI11g. rt is clear to every Slovak, regardless oif his polftica'1 and religio;us beliefs, that the existence of the Czechoslovak Reipulblic is 100 per cent dependent on the e~stence and the .p ower cxf our strongest Slavic ally. This a1lli.ance cannot be regarded as a matter of onJ.y feeHng graciorus for erverything the Soviet Union has done for us. It is, a matter oif rationa:1 thinking and of our unaJteraJble foreign policy." - (Dr. Joseph Let. trich, Vice-Chairman of the Executive Committee cxf the "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," NOV:E PRUDY, No. 28-29, 1947, pg. 658). • • • "Let us declare war against the fear oif Bolshevism and forbid at the same time, the for.mation of any anti-COlln- (Va;olav Majer, PRAVO mlIDist f:ront whatsoever." LIDU, officirul organ orf the O;ech Sooi!al Demooratic Party, Novemlber 25, 1947)  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Memorandum Description An account of the resource Memorandum to the President and the Congress of the United States from the Pittsburgh-Johnstown, Pa. Regional Conference of the Slovak League of America, Slovak Band Hall, Johnstown, Pa., November 3, 1956 Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 55-58 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource September-December 1956 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/49378d5a099dfe61c26faeae31bbfda6.pdf 84f2a8cbb7560e0f3580292b2413ae76 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 15 MONSIGNOR JOZEF TISO - CONTROVERSIAL PERSONALITY By Th. J. Zubek, 0.F.M., S.T.D. The name of Msgr. Jozef Tiso, S.T.D., the executed president of the Slovak Republic, is generally known . .However, his ,p ersonality is not sufficiently recognized and understood in the Western world. The concept of a priest as an active politician and high state functionary is today somewhat unusual in Western Europe, more so in the United States. Too, it is generally ,k nown that the standpoint of the Holy See is against Catholic priests actively engaging in political activity. Moreover, cwtain gr,o ups present Msgr. Tiso as a disrupter of the Czecho..:Slova;k Repuiblic, a traitor, Nazi, Quisling, and a lackey of Adolf Hitler. This i:s done solely for the political motiives of presenting Sl()IVaks, their political aspirations, and their leaders in an unfavorable light. It is not strange, then, that in the Western world the .p ersonality of Msgir. T-iso appem-s Olbscured, incomprehensi'ble, controversial. To reach a true understanding and evaluation of Jozef Tiso, it is necessary to look upon his persona1ity and activities in the environment in which he lived and wo:riked; it is necessary to delve mo'l:'e deeply into the inner man, into his motiva·t ions and ideological ,bac:kground. Slovaik Clergy and Politics The Slovak nation lived for many centuries in the Hungarian Kingdom. The awaikening to national conscious.ness by the nations of Hungary brought a!bout nationalistic struggles among these nations. The national consciousness of the MaJgyars, the leading nation in Hungary, culminated in the idea of a great Magyar state, politically, culturally and lingu~tically hornogenous. The Ma. gyars wished to Magyarize the non~Magyar nations of Hungary, namely, the Slovaks, Roumanians, Croats, and Germans. The first victims of the forced Magyarization were 1 �16 SLOVAKIA the Slovaks. The overwhelming majority of the intelligent.. sia of Slovak origin succumbed to Magyar pressure and followed the official Magyar line, for .this was a prerequisite in the furtherance of one's career. Of the inteMigentsia it was almost exclusively the clerigy who remained loyal to the Slovak nation. The clergy became bearers of the Slovak populace with religious instruction and cultural and social enlightenment. They were Catholic priests and Lutheran minister s. Outstanding among the priests were Anton Bernolak (1762-1813), formulator of the Slovak literary language; Juraj Fandly (17514~1810) , social educator and popular writer on husbandry; Jan Holly (1785--1849), a poet who wrote heroic epics about the Slovaik past; Bishop Stephen Moyses (1797-1869) , founder and first .president of the cultural institute, Matica Sloven.ska; Andrej RadlinSlky (1818.---1879) , founder of St. Adalbert Society, a Catholic publishing house ; Ferdis Juriga (1874- 1953), an excellent orator and political leader,1 and Andrej Hlinka, (1864 -1938), a fiery defender orf Slova:k rights and founder of the Slovak People's Party. Of the Lutheran ministers~patriots there were Michal M. Hodza (1811-1880) and J ozef M. Hurban (1817-1888), writers who ,o rganized and led the armed uprising of thB SlovaJks against the 'Magyars in 1'948; Karol iKuzmany (1806-1866) , poet and ,c o-founder of the Matica Sloven.ska, and Martin Razus (1888-1937), poet and politica1 leader. Upon the basis of solidifying the Slovaks against Magyarization and fighting for their political and social rights, the clergy entered into the politcal life of Hungary. Jozef Tiso in the Parliament at Prague Wllen, in 1918, Slovakia became a part •o f the CzechoSlovak Republic, it appeared at first that more favorable conditions ,w ould prevail for the Slovaks. However, it soon became apparent that the Czechs had much the same conceptions as the !Magyars. The Czechs, too, dreamed of a great Czechoslovak national state, with a politically insignificant minority of Germans and Magyars. The Slovaks were to cede their national individuality and merge with �SLOVAKIA 17 the Czechs to create a new Czechoslovak nationality and to become Czechs eventually. The Slovaks, however, had long ago developed the consciousness of a distinct nationality and had no intention of ceding their national individuality in the interest of the Czechs. The Slovaks also felt the impact of the economic exploitation which the Czechs initiated imrne4iately after 1918 when they practically made Slovakia their colony. It was almost impossible for a ~ovak to enter civil service, since almost all civil positions and important economic functions in SlorvaJkia weTe occupied by the Czechs. Further, the Slorvaks, as a deeply religious Catholic nation (80 %- ), resented the anti-religious acts of the Czechs, which were also provocatively perpetrated in Slovaikia. In the struggle against Ozechization of the Slov,alks and in defense of Slovak rights, the Slovak People's Party, founded and led by Msgr. Andrej Hlinka, took the lead. Hlinka and Juriga, even as they had fought Magyar machinations,, began to fight Czech improprieties in the parliament at Prague, in the 1press, and through political campaigns among the people. The ,p olitical pla;tform of the S10vak People's Party was autonomy for Slovakia as guaran_ teed by the pact between American Slov.aks and the representative of Czecho-Slovakia, Professor Thomas G. Masaryk, in ·P ittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in 1918. 'I'he Slovak People's Party with its program and motto, "·F or God and Nation," aippealed to the feelings of the Slovaik populace, and soon became the most important political party in Slovakia. The autonomistic program was also foUowed by the Slorvak National Party of Martin Razus, a Lutheran minister. From the beginning of Czecho-Slovakia (1918), Jozef Tiso, a young a;nd zeailous priest, spiritual director and professor at the diocesan ·s eminary in Nitra, joined the autonomistic movement of Hlinka's Slovak Peoiple's Party. In 1925, Tiso became a member oif the Czecho--1Slovak par_ liament and then vice-president of the Slo,vaJk People's Party. When the Slorvak People's Party entered the government, he became Minister of Health (1927-1929). Tiso �18 SLOV.A!KIA. evolved soon into the staunchest e~ponent of Slovak autonomistic policies. Tiso as President of the Slovak People's Party Andrej iHlinka died in August of the critical year of 1938. At that time the Slovak People's Party was the most powerful. political group in SlovaJkia. It had in its ranks many young workers of the Slovaik inteHigentsia. None compared to Msgr. Tiso in moral and in political acumen and in expeTience. Commanding great esteem among the Slovaik populace and clergy, Tiso logically became the successor of Msgr. Hilinka in the leadership of the Slovak People's Party. Under the pressuxe of Hitler's driive, following H!Linka's death in 1938, events in CzechC>-iSlovakfa and in Europe moved quickly. That which the Czechs were loathe to grant the Slorvaiks under nonnal oonditions, they were foreed to grant in the enfeebled post-Munich Czecho...Slov-a kia. On October 6, 1938, the Slovaiks gained their political autonomy; they became the masters in Slorvakia. Msgr. 'l"iso, as the president of the Poople',s Party became the premier of the Slovak autonomous government, with the permission of his Bishop and the Vatican. Even :when Slovakia suffered by ceding territory to Hung,ary as a result of the Vienna A11bitration on Novem•b er 2, 1938, the ,Slovaiks were hruppy with the newly-gained autonomy. The Czechs left Slorva!kia; the Slovaiks began to manage their own affairs in the ·b est interests of the nation. It appeared that with the attainment of autonomy the aspirations of the Slovaiks were fulfilled and that the staJbilization of conditions in Slovakia would ·b e enduring. Tiso, President of the Republic Hitler was not satisfied with the dismemberment an.d neutralization of Czecho-Slovakia. When he decided to wa-ge war aigainst Poland, he wanted Ozecho-,SloviaJkia oom,p letcly under his control, particularly the western part (Bdhemia and Moravia) which was heavil'Y industriaJUzed and entirely encircled by the German Reich. On March 13, 1939, !H itler summoned Tiso• to Berlin �SLOVAKIA 19 and confronted him with the German decision regarding Slrovakia : Either secede from the Czechs and proclaim an independent Slorvak State or suffer the oonsequence of partition between Germany and Hungary. On IMa.Tch 14, 1939, Tiso presented the German proposition to the Slovak pavliament for decision. 'Ehe Slovak parliament voted for independence of !Slovakia. Msgr. Tiso became the ,p re. sident of the Slovak Republic.2 Msgr. Tiso and other Slovak political [eaders were somewhat hesitant to proclaim Slovak independence. Said Tiso, in his defense before the National Court in Bratislava (1947) : "Were it not for Hitler's pressure, the Slo:vak parliament would never have proclaimed indeipendence. "3 The MaJgyars amd the Czechs, to justify their claims upon Slo:va,kia, ha,d in the past repeatedly asserted that Siovllikia, for economic reasons, was incapable of independence. Slovak politica:l lea,ders, suddenly confronted with the question of independence for Sl01V,a kia, were aipprehensive of the future. But rather than have their country partitioned and occupied, they logi,cally chose the attempt at independence. And after this decision, they strove for the economic prosperity and cultural development of Slova,kia, permanently to integrate Slovakia into the family of European nations. It can be said that the Slovruk attempt was successful. The wave of naJtional enthusiasm engulfed the coll'Iltry, and Siovaikia's eoonomi:c and cultural standards flourished. The Slovaks. even those who at first were reserved, warmed to the Slorva!k .State and ha,d faith in its chief, Msgr. Jozef Tiso. 4 Even the most bitter enemies of the Slovaks had to acknowledge that the Slova;k Republic was capable of existence. That which Slovakia had proved in the years 1939-1945 is in no small measure ithe result of the political activity of Msgr. Tiso. But it is also the most controversial period of his political career. 1 The Fundamentals and Components of Tiso's Policies Msgr. Tiso's defense plea before the National COU'rt at Bratislava, encompasses many noteworthy ,p ronouncements �20 SLOVAKIA that point out the principles of his political activity. Con. sider but a few characteristic quotations. The key to the evaluation of my activity is my character of the priest with its motivations and regulations, established by Christian teaching for public activity. 5 Tiso as president of the Slovak Republic tried to lead his nation like a solicitous father according to Christian principles,, to which, as a priest, he consecrated his life. Politically I only did that which the well-being and inter est of the Slovak n::.ttion dictated. What I did, I always did according to, the best dictates of my knowledge and conscience, ... always guided by the rules of morality ... I fought evil with all my power, yielding to evil only when a greater evil threatened the nation. G 'In this light, Msgr. Tiso explained his aHeged collaboration with the Nazis. Msgr. Tiso• stated that some collaboration with Germany was at that time a necessity dictated by Slovakia 's geographic position, the develorpment of European events and the law of self..preservation. Slovakia did not have its own foreign policy, but neither did other larger nations in Hitleir-controUed Europe. Tiso pleaded that he was so concerned with the internal consolidation and development of Slovakia that he wa,s unruble to study the problems of international politics, including the war, upon which, because of his position, he could wield no influence. Slovak participation in the war against Russia, with two divisions, was merely symbolic, Tiso explained. 7 According to Msgr. Tiso, his paramount ;po'1icy was t o secure the maximum of internal freedom and independence within the German sphere. Outwardly it was necessary to yield somewhat to German pressure, to keep them apart, thus avoiding armed intervention. For this reason it was necessary to ban the Communist Party (one of the main accusations against Tiso) ; it was necessary to participate in the war against Russia, and it was necessary to institute some elements of a totalitarian regime. All this was done , however, to pull wool over the eyes of the Germans. Inter- �SLOVAKIA 21 nally, pleaded Tiso, Slovrukia was governed democratically - and there was freedom. & In this light -Msgr. Tiso aJ,s,o ex;plained anti-semitic activity in Slovakia. Msgr. 'Di.so stated that the rationalization of the Jewish problem was <based on a percentual partic1pation in the nation's economy. There were aibout 100,000 Jews in Sloivakia, or 4 % of the total .p opulation. Therefore only 4 % of the nation's economy was pe:mnitted to Jews. Jewish ,b usinesses were being aryanized, that is, a non-Jew would buy 51 % of a business, at an officially esta:blished rate, and the former Jewish proprietor would remain as a partrn~r. Later, at the dictate of the Gernnans, Jews were put into con centration camps and e vacuated into Poland under the pretext that land would be ,p rovided for them so that they wou!ld be able to Hve under their own ru:le. Tiso justified his position ·b y saying that he did not know at that time that the evacuated Jews would be exterminated in Polish and German concentration camps.9 A Weak Defense Herein In regard to the Jewish question, Msgr. Giuseppe Burzio, r epresentative of the Holy See in Slovakia, intervened with President Tiso in behalf of the Jews. It was rumored that Msigr. Tiso, 'a s a Catholic priest, should have resigned from the presidency, since he was unable to curtail the antisemitic campaign dictated by the Germans and waged by Slovak extremists unde r the direction of Premier Dr. Vojtech Tuka. Concerning the possibility o.f his resignation, let Tiso speak: I did not resign because I felt a moral obligation to fulfill. the duty that I had undertaken until I had been released from it by lega1ly constituted functionaries ... My action would have been egotistica,l had I left my nation in those difficult times and entered ;pri.., vate life. My action would haive been irresponsible and against the nation had I not truken into private life the moral values that I felt I represented 10 He stated further that had he received an official request from his ecclesiastical authorities, he would ha,ve re. �22 SLOV.i\KIA signed, for then there would have been no- decision to maJke, the responsibility would have been the Church authorities'. It is generally known that even repre sentatiives of the Jews had begged him to remain in office, for it would have been a total catastrophe for the Jews if someone else would have ,b een president oif the Slovak Republic. Tiso managed to insert into- ithe anti.Jewish law a provision to exempt some Jews. He wa:s a:ble to qualify a Jew as indispensa:ble to Slovak economy and thus save him from deportation. About 9,000 such exemptions were made. Despite this, howeveT, the Jewish question was really a weak point of Tiso's policy and of his defense. The End of Msgr. Tiso Msgr. Tiso's trial beg,an at the end of 1946 and lasted until April of 1947. On April 17, 1947, the jury of the Naticmal Court at Bratisla'Va brought forth the verdict of death by hanging, and the sentence was carried out on the following morning. Msgr. Tiso died peacefully, committing himself to God. His body was either destroyed or buried secretly to iprevent the SloIVaks from paying their respects. The standpoint of the Holy See, dissuading priests from participating directly in political actirvity and not identifying the Church with any particular politicail system or party, ,proved itself very much correct during the trial. Ev~ though Msgr. Tiso was tried as a politcian, it was difficult to separate his priesthood from his political function. Through Msg,r. Tiso's trial the Catholic Church of Slovakia was pilloried, ,altho'll!g'h unjustly. From the Church's point of view, it would ha.ve been 'b etter if, during the years of 1939 to 1945, the political life of Slovakia had been headed by a layman rather than a C'lex,gyman. On the other hand, it is certain that Tiso had been unj,u stly condemned. Under German ·control it was imposs1ble oo conduct a 'better policy in the interests of Slovakia than the one Tiso im:Plemented. Outright collaboration with Nazism, whkh Dr. 'Iuka attempted, would have �SLOVAKIA 23 done an immeasurably greater harm to Slovrukia. Msgr. Tiso constantly thwarted TU!ka's attempts. Msgr. Tiso's trial cuhninated. during Lent when Chris... tians are reminded. of the trial and death of Christ. Slovaks openly compared. Tiso's trial with the trial of Ohrist. Tiso, too, in his defense, alluded to this circumstance. The court that sentenced Tiso was dominated by Communists. The president of the court, Dr. Ivan Daxner and the state prosecutors, Dr. Juraj Sujan and Dr. Anton Rasla, were die-hard Communists. Furthermore, it seemed that the first two mentioned were predisposed against Msgr. Tiso, the Catholic priest, on religious grounds. Msgr. Tiso in his testament to the nation, written an hour before his death, rightfully sitated: ". . . I consider myself, in the first place a martyr in the defense of Christianity against Communism."11 "Martyr of Love" Msgr. Tiso was a victim of political revenge. It was expected. that even if he were condemned, he would be granted amnesty ,b y Dr. IDdward Benes, President of the new Czecho-Slo:v akia. Benes refused. "Osservatore Romano," of April 28, 1947, wrote that in the event of Msgr. Tiso's condemnation "political discretion would make it necessary to grant amnesty, even though in self interest ... " to amelfo,r ate the tense situation ·b etween S1-ovaiks and Czechs. "As a martyr of love toward his homeland, Dr. Tiso will live on in the Slovaik Catholic nation," "Osservatore Romano," concluded. Although Dr. Benes had rid himself of Msgr. Tiso, it is certain that Tiso in death is a greater pro'b lem in the relationship between Czechs and Slova:ks than Tiso would have boon in life. Msgr. Tiso lives in the Sl01Vak nation as a hero and martyr. To the SlOIVruks he is a symbol of a crusader for the God.given rights 'Of the Slovak nation. The Slovak Republic, with its six years of successful existence, is an actuality that ca:nnot be eradicated from history. The SlavaJks at home and wbroad. in the absolute majority stand �24 SLOVAKIA behind the ideals for which Msgr. Tiso, .p resident of the "The Homiletic and Slovak R epublic, Lived and died. 1955. Pastoral Review," N 01Vember, 1. Coura,geous member of the Hungarian Parliament (1905-1918). 2. In parall el, Msgr. J an Sram ek, a Czech priest, becam e premier of the Czecho-Slovak governm ent in exile. 3. Dr. J ozef Tiso Abou t Him self, Edited by Dr. J oseph Pauco, Passaic, N. J . 4. As the war-front b egan to app roach Slo vakia, certain grou ps within the country, inspi.red d'rom a broad, provoked an u pri-sin g in August of 1944. T o ga_in the support of the Slovak populace, t h ey spread r umors that Tiso had been imprisoned by the Germ ans and, therefore, it was necessary to fight Ge rmany. 5. Op. cit., p. 121. 6. Op. cit., p. 111. 7. Op. cit., p. 37, 277 . 8. Op. cit., p . 213 ss., 199, 201. 9. Op. ci t., p. 313 ss. 10. Op. cit., p . 21. 11. Op. cit., p. 8. • • • WHO SAID IT? "The relations of today and tomorro,w between Cze,c hoSloivaikia and the Sorviet Union a.re defined in the treaty of Deceim:be.r 1'2, 1943, . . It proclaims the lasting friMdshir, of the two nations, for the future whic h will be, strengthened by widespread economic cooperation af t e r the war. The fu hire general collaJboratiion is defined as that of two ftree alilld independent ,s tates, in whi ch there wrn be no inter1fore111ce (Jan Papane k , Interin the internrul affairs of either.'' York, 19415 ) New Inc., Press, nati-onrul Universities 1 • • • "Norvemlber 7, 1917, is t he day thaJt is ma:riked in history as the beginning of a new era, which sought the guarantee of happiness to mankind by means of a new me1Jhod of equalling differences among people and th.us achi&ving contentment on earth. Today it is- stNa too eaJI'ly from thaJt epochal occasion to judge objootively the consequences of that great deed. One thing, however, is certain: it was the beginndng of an enormous process full of ideas bo:rn of idealism." - (Dr. Joseph Lettrich, V ~ of the Executive Conu:mttee of the "Council of Free OzecboslolV'a:kia," NOW PR.ODY, Novemiber 18, 1946). � SLOVAKIA 15 MONSIGNOR JOZEF TISO - CONTROVERSIAL PERSONALITY By Th. J. Zubek, 0.F.M., S.T.D. The name of Msgr. Jozef Tiso, S.T.D., the executed president of the Slovak Republic, is generally known . .However, his ,p ersonality is not sufficiently recognized and understood in the Western world. The concept of a priest as an active politician and high state functionary is today somewhat unusual in Western Europe, more so in the United States. Too, it is generally ,k nown that the standpoint of the Holy See is against Catholic priests actively engaging in political activity. Moreover, cwtain gr,o ups present Msgr. Tiso as a disrupter of the Czecho..:Slova;k Repuiblic, a traitor, Nazi, Quisling, and a lackey of Adolf Hitler. This i:s done solely for the political motiives of presenting Sl()IVaks, their political aspirations, and their leaders in an unfavorable light. It is not strange, then, that in the Western world the .p ersonality of Msgir. T-iso appem-s Olbscured, incomprehensi'ble, controversial. To reach a true understanding and evaluation of Jozef Tiso, it is necessary to look upon his persona1ity and activities in the environment in which he lived and wo:riked; it is necessary to delve mo'l:'e deeply into the inner man, into his motiva·t ions and ideological ,bac:kground. Slovaik Clergy and Politics The Slovak nation lived for many centuries in the Hungarian Kingdom. The awaikening to national conscious.ness by the nations of Hungary brought a!bout nationalistic struggles among these nations. The national consciousness of the MaJgyars, the leading nation in Hungary, culminated in the idea of a great Magyar state, politically, culturally and lingu~tically hornogenous. The Ma. gyars wished to Magyarize the non~Magyar nations of Hungary, namely, the Slovaks, Roumanians, Croats, and Germans. The first victims of the forced Magyarization were 1 �16 SLOVAKIA the Slovaks. The overwhelming majority of the intelligent.. sia of Slovak origin succumbed to Magyar pressure and followed the official Magyar line, for .this was a prerequisite in the furtherance of one's career. Of the inteMigentsia it was almost exclusively the clerigy who remained loyal to the Slovak nation. The clergy became bearers of the Slovak populace with religious instruction and cultural and social enlightenment. They were Catholic priests and Lutheran minister s. Outstanding among the priests were Anton Bernolak (1762-1813), formulator of the Slovak literary language; Juraj Fandly (17514~1810) , social educator and popular writer on husbandry; Jan Holly (1785--1849), a poet who wrote heroic epics about the Slovaik past; Bishop Stephen Moyses (1797-1869) , founder and first .president of the cultural institute, Matica Sloven.ska; Andrej RadlinSlky (1818.---1879) , founder of St. Adalbert Society, a Catholic publishing house ; Ferdis Juriga (1874- 1953), an excellent orator and political leader,1 and Andrej Hlinka, (1864 -1938), a fiery defender orf Slova:k rights and founder of the Slovak People's Party. Of the Lutheran ministers~patriots there were Michal M. Hodza (1811-1880) and J ozef M. Hurban (1817-1888), writers who ,o rganized and led the armed uprising of thB SlovaJks against the 'Magyars in 1'948; Karol iKuzmany (1806-1866) , poet and ,c o-founder of the Matica Sloven.ska, and Martin Razus (1888-1937), poet and politica1 leader. Upon the basis of solidifying the Slovaks against Magyarization and fighting for their political and social rights, the clergy entered into the politcal life of Hungary. Jozef Tiso in the Parliament at Prague Wllen, in 1918, Slovakia became a part •o f the CzechoSlovak Republic, it appeared at first that more favorable conditions ,w ould prevail for the Slovaks. However, it soon became apparent that the Czechs had much the same conceptions as the !Magyars. The Czechs, too, dreamed of a great Czechoslovak national state, with a politically insignificant minority of Germans and Magyars. The Slovaks were to cede their national individuality and merge with �SLOVAKIA 17 the Czechs to create a new Czechoslovak nationality and to become Czechs eventually. The Slovaks, however, had long ago developed the consciousness of a distinct nationality and had no intention of ceding their national individuality in the interest of the Czechs. The Slovaks also felt the impact of the economic exploitation which the Czechs initiated imrne4iately after 1918 when they practically made Slovakia their colony. It was almost impossible for a ~ovak to enter civil service, since almost all civil positions and important economic functions in SlorvaJkia weTe occupied by the Czechs. Further, the Slorvaks, as a deeply religious Catholic nation (80 %- ), resented the anti-religious acts of the Czechs, which were also provocatively perpetrated in Slovaikia. In the struggle against Ozechization of the Slov,alks and in defense of Slovak rights, the Slovak People's Party, founded and led by Msgr. Andrej Hlinka, took the lead. Hlinka and Juriga, even as they had fought Magyar machinations,, began to fight Czech improprieties in the parliament at Prague, in the 1press, and through political campaigns among the people. The ,p olitical pla;tform of the S10vak People's Party was autonomy for Slovakia as guaran_ teed by the pact between American Slov.aks and the representative of Czecho-Slovakia, Professor Thomas G. Masaryk, in ·P ittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in 1918. 'I'he Slovak People's Party with its program and motto, "·F or God and Nation," aippealed to the feelings of the Slovaik populace, and soon became the most important political party in Slovakia. The autonomistic program was also foUowed by the Slorvak National Party of Martin Razus, a Lutheran minister. From the beginning of Czecho-Slovakia (1918), Jozef Tiso, a young a;nd zeailous priest, spiritual director and professor at the diocesan ·s eminary in Nitra, joined the autonomistic movement of Hlinka's Slovak Peoiple's Party. In 1925, Tiso became a member oif the Czecho--1Slovak par_ liament and then vice-president of the Slo,vaJk People's Party. When the Slorvak People's Party entered the government, he became Minister of Health (1927-1929). Tiso �18 SLOV.A!KIA. evolved soon into the staunchest e~ponent of Slovak autonomistic policies. Tiso as President of the Slovak People's Party Andrej iHlinka died in August of the critical year of 1938. At that time the Slovak People's Party was the most powerful. political group in SlovaJkia. It had in its ranks many young workers of the Slovaik inteHigentsia. None compared to Msgr. Tiso in moral and in political acumen and in expeTience. Commanding great esteem among the Slovaik populace and clergy, Tiso logically became the successor of Msgr. Hilinka in the leadership of the Slovak People's Party. Under the pressuxe of Hitler's driive, following H!Linka's death in 1938, events in CzechC>-iSlovakfa and in Europe moved quickly. That which the Czechs were loathe to grant the Slorvaiks under nonnal oonditions, they were foreed to grant in the enfeebled post-Munich Czecho...Slov-a kia. On October 6, 1938, the Slovaiks gained their political autonomy; they became the masters in Slorvakia. Msgr. 'l"iso, as the president of the Poople',s Party became the premier of the Slovak autonomous government, with the permission of his Bishop and the Vatican. Even :when Slovakia suffered by ceding territory to Hung,ary as a result of the Vienna A11bitration on Novem•b er 2, 1938, the ,Slovaiks were hruppy with the newly-gained autonomy. The Czechs left Slorva!kia; the Slovaiks began to manage their own affairs in the ·b est interests of the nation. It appeared that with the attainment of autonomy the aspirations of the Slovaiks were fulfilled and that the staJbilization of conditions in Slovakia would ·b e enduring. Tiso, President of the Republic Hitler was not satisfied with the dismemberment an.d neutralization of Czecho-Slovakia. When he decided to wa-ge war aigainst Poland, he wanted Ozecho-,SloviaJkia oom,p letcly under his control, particularly the western part (Bdhemia and Moravia) which was heavil'Y industriaJUzed and entirely encircled by the German Reich. On March 13, 1939, !H itler summoned Tiso• to Berlin �SLOVAKIA 19 and confronted him with the German decision regarding Slrovakia : Either secede from the Czechs and proclaim an independent Slorvak State or suffer the oonsequence of partition between Germany and Hungary. On IMa.Tch 14, 1939, Tiso presented the German proposition to the Slovak pavliament for decision. 'Ehe Slovak parliament voted for independence of !Slovakia. Msgr. Tiso became the ,p re. sident of the Slovak Republic.2 Msgr. Tiso and other Slovak political [eaders were somewhat hesitant to proclaim Slovak independence. Said Tiso, in his defense before the National Court in Bratislava (1947) : "Were it not for Hitler's pressure, the Slo:vak parliament would never have proclaimed indeipendence. "3 The MaJgyars amd the Czechs, to justify their claims upon Slo:va,kia, ha,d in the past repeatedly asserted that Siovllikia, for economic reasons, was incapable of independence. Slovak politica:l lea,ders, suddenly confronted with the question of independence for Sl01V,a kia, were aipprehensive of the future. But rather than have their country partitioned and occupied, they logi,cally chose the attempt at independence. And after this decision, they strove for the economic prosperity and cultural development of Slova,kia, permanently to integrate Slovakia into the family of European nations. It can be said that the Slovruk attempt was successful. The wave of naJtional enthusiasm engulfed the coll'Iltry, and Siovaikia's eoonomi:c and cultural standards flourished. The Slovaks. even those who at first were reserved, warmed to the Slorva!k .State and ha,d faith in its chief, Msgr. Jozef Tiso. 4 Even the most bitter enemies of the Slovaks had to acknowledge that the Slova;k Republic was capable of existence. That which Slovakia had proved in the years 1939-1945 is in no small measure ithe result of the political activity of Msgr. Tiso. But it is also the most controversial period of his political career. 1 The Fundamentals and Components of Tiso's Policies Msgr. Tiso's defense plea before the National COU'rt at Bratislava, encompasses many noteworthy ,p ronouncements �20 SLOVAKIA that point out the principles of his political activity. Con. sider but a few characteristic quotations. The key to the evaluation of my activity is my character of the priest with its motivations and regulations, established by Christian teaching for public activity. 5 Tiso as president of the Slovak Republic tried to lead his nation like a solicitous father according to Christian principles,, to which, as a priest, he consecrated his life. Politically I only did that which the well-being and inter est of the Slovak n::.ttion dictated. What I did, I always did according to, the best dictates of my knowledge and conscience, ... always guided by the rules of morality ... I fought evil with all my power, yielding to evil only when a greater evil threatened the nation. G 'In this light, Msgr. Tiso explained his aHeged collaboration with the Nazis. Msgr. Tiso• stated that some collaboration with Germany was at that time a necessity dictated by Slovakia 's geographic position, the develorpment of European events and the law of self..preservation. Slovakia did not have its own foreign policy, but neither did other larger nations in Hitleir-controUed Europe. Tiso pleaded that he was so concerned with the internal consolidation and development of Slovakia that he wa,s unruble to study the problems of international politics, including the war, upon which, because of his position, he could wield no influence. Slovak participation in the war against Russia, with two divisions, was merely symbolic, Tiso explained. 7 According to Msgr. Tiso, his paramount ;po'1icy was t o secure the maximum of internal freedom and independence within the German sphere. Outwardly it was necessary to yield somewhat to German pressure, to keep them apart, thus avoiding armed intervention. For this reason it was necessary to ban the Communist Party (one of the main accusations against Tiso) ; it was necessary to participate in the war against Russia, and it was necessary to institute some elements of a totalitarian regime. All this was done , however, to pull wool over the eyes of the Germans. Inter- �SLOVAKIA 21 nally, pleaded Tiso, Slovrukia was governed democratically - and there was freedom. & In this light -Msgr. Tiso aJ,s,o ex;plained anti-semitic activity in Slovakia. Msgr. 'Di.so stated that the rationalization of the Jewish problem was <based on a percentual partic1pation in the nation's economy. There were aibout 100,000 Jews in Sloivakia, or 4 % of the total .p opulation. Therefore only 4 % of the nation's economy was pe:mnitted to Jews. Jewish ,b usinesses were being aryanized, that is, a non-Jew would buy 51 % of a business, at an officially esta:blished rate, and the former Jewish proprietor would remain as a partrn~r. Later, at the dictate of the Gernnans, Jews were put into con centration camps and e vacuated into Poland under the pretext that land would be ,p rovided for them so that they wou!ld be able to Hve under their own ru:le. Tiso justified his position ·b y saying that he did not know at that time that the evacuated Jews would be exterminated in Polish and German concentration camps.9 A Weak Defense Herein In regard to the Jewish question, Msgr. Giuseppe Burzio, r epresentative of the Holy See in Slovakia, intervened with President Tiso in behalf of the Jews. It was rumored that Msigr. Tiso, 'a s a Catholic priest, should have resigned from the presidency, since he was unable to curtail the antisemitic campaign dictated by the Germans and waged by Slovak extremists unde r the direction of Premier Dr. Vojtech Tuka. Concerning the possibility o.f his resignation, let Tiso speak: I did not resign because I felt a moral obligation to fulfill. the duty that I had undertaken until I had been released from it by lega1ly constituted functionaries ... My action would have been egotistica,l had I left my nation in those difficult times and entered ;pri.., vate life. My action would haive been irresponsible and against the nation had I not truken into private life the moral values that I felt I represented 10 He stated further that had he received an official request from his ecclesiastical authorities, he would ha,ve re. �22 SLOV.i\KIA signed, for then there would have been no- decision to maJke, the responsibility would have been the Church authorities'. It is generally known that even repre sentatiives of the Jews had begged him to remain in office, for it would have been a total catastrophe for the Jews if someone else would have ,b een president oif the Slovak Republic. Tiso managed to insert into- ithe anti.Jewish law a provision to exempt some Jews. He wa:s a:ble to qualify a Jew as indispensa:ble to Slovak economy and thus save him from deportation. About 9,000 such exemptions were made. Despite this, howeveT, the Jewish question was really a weak point of Tiso's policy and of his defense. The End of Msgr. Tiso Msgr. Tiso's trial beg,an at the end of 1946 and lasted until April of 1947. On April 17, 1947, the jury of the Naticmal Court at Bratisla'Va brought forth the verdict of death by hanging, and the sentence was carried out on the following morning. Msgr. Tiso died peacefully, committing himself to God. His body was either destroyed or buried secretly to iprevent the SloIVaks from paying their respects. The standpoint of the Holy See, dissuading priests from participating directly in political actirvity and not identifying the Church with any particular politicail system or party, ,proved itself very much correct during the trial. Ev~ though Msgr. Tiso was tried as a politcian, it was difficult to separate his priesthood from his political function. Through Msg,r. Tiso's trial the Catholic Church of Slovakia was pilloried, ,altho'll!g'h unjustly. From the Church's point of view, it would ha.ve been 'b etter if, during the years of 1939 to 1945, the political life of Slovakia had been headed by a layman rather than a C'lex,gyman. On the other hand, it is certain that Tiso had been unj,u stly condemned. Under German ·control it was imposs1ble oo conduct a 'better policy in the interests of Slovakia than the one Tiso im:Plemented. Outright collaboration with Nazism, whkh Dr. 'Iuka attempted, would have �SLOVAKIA 23 done an immeasurably greater harm to Slovrukia. Msgr. Tiso constantly thwarted TU!ka's attempts. Msgr. Tiso's trial cuhninated. during Lent when Chris... tians are reminded. of the trial and death of Christ. Slovaks openly compared. Tiso's trial with the trial of Ohrist. Tiso, too, in his defense, alluded to this circumstance. The court that sentenced Tiso was dominated by Communists. The president of the court, Dr. Ivan Daxner and the state prosecutors, Dr. Juraj Sujan and Dr. Anton Rasla, were die-hard Communists. Furthermore, it seemed that the first two mentioned were predisposed against Msgr. Tiso, the Catholic priest, on religious grounds. Msgr. Tiso in his testament to the nation, written an hour before his death, rightfully sitated: ". . . I consider myself, in the first place a martyr in the defense of Christianity against Communism."11 "Martyr of Love" Msgr. Tiso was a victim of political revenge. It was expected. that even if he were condemned, he would be granted amnesty ,b y Dr. IDdward Benes, President of the new Czecho-Slo:v akia. Benes refused. "Osservatore Romano," of April 28, 1947, wrote that in the event of Msgr. Tiso's condemnation "political discretion would make it necessary to grant amnesty, even though in self interest ... " to amelfo,r ate the tense situation ·b etween S1-ovaiks and Czechs. "As a martyr of love toward his homeland, Dr. Tiso will live on in the Slovaik Catholic nation," "Osservatore Romano," concluded. Although Dr. Benes had rid himself of Msgr. Tiso, it is certain that Tiso in death is a greater pro'b lem in the relationship between Czechs and Slova:ks than Tiso would have boon in life. Msgr. Tiso lives in the Sl01Vak nation as a hero and martyr. To the SlOIVruks he is a symbol of a crusader for the God.given rights 'Of the Slovak nation. The Slovak Republic, with its six years of successful existence, is an actuality that ca:nnot be eradicated from history. The SlavaJks at home and wbroad. in the absolute majority stand �24 SLOVAKIA behind the ideals for which Msgr. Tiso, .p resident of the "The Homiletic and Slovak R epublic, Lived and died. 1955. Pastoral Review," N 01Vember, 1. Coura,geous member of the Hungarian Parliament (1905-1918). 2. In parall el, Msgr. J an Sram ek, a Czech priest, becam e premier of the Czecho-Slovak governm ent in exile. 3. Dr. J ozef Tiso Abou t Him self, Edited by Dr. J oseph Pauco, Passaic, N. J . 4. As the war-front b egan to app roach Slo vakia, certain grou ps within the country, inspi.red d'rom a broad, provoked an u pri-sin g in August of 1944. T o ga_in the support of the Slovak populace, t h ey spread r umors that Tiso had been imprisoned by the Germ ans and, therefore, it was necessary to fight Ge rmany. 5. Op. cit., p. 121. 6. Op. cit., p. 111. 7. Op. cit., p. 37, 277 . 8. Op. cit., p . 213 ss., 199, 201. 9. Op. ci t., p. 313 ss. 10. Op. cit., p . 21. 11. Op. cit., p. 8. • • • WHO SAID IT? "The relations of today and tomorro,w between Cze,c hoSloivaikia and the Sorviet Union a.re defined in the treaty of Deceim:be.r 1'2, 1943, . . It proclaims the lasting friMdshir, of the two nations, for the future whic h will be, strengthened by widespread economic cooperation af t e r the war. The fu hire general collaJboratiion is defined as that of two ftree alilld independent ,s tates, in whi ch there wrn be no inter1fore111ce (Jan Papane k , Interin the internrul affairs of either.'' York, 19415 ) New Inc., Press, nati-onrul Universities 1 • • • "Norvemlber 7, 1917, is t he day thaJt is ma:riked in history as the beginning of a new era, which sought the guarantee of happiness to mankind by means of a new me1Jhod of equalling differences among people and th.us achi&ving contentment on earth. Today it is- stNa too eaJI'ly from thaJt epochal occasion to judge objootively the consequences of that great deed. One thing, however, is certain: it was the beginndng of an enormous process full of ideas bo:rn of idealism." - (Dr. Joseph Lettrich, V ~ of the Executive Conu:mttee of the "Council of Free OzecboslolV'a:kia," NOW PR.ODY, Novemiber 18, 1946). � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 15 MONSIGNOR JOZEF TISO - CONTROVERSIAL PERSONALITY By Th. J. Zubek, 0.F.M., S.T.D. The name of Msgr. Jozef Tiso, S.T.D., the executed president of the Slovak Republic, is generally known . .However, his ,p ersonality is not sufficiently recognized and understood in the Western world. The concept of a priest as an active politician and high state functionary is today somewhat unusual in Western Europe, more so in the United States. Too, it is generally ,k nown that the standpoint of the Holy See is against Catholic priests actively engaging in political activity. Moreover, cwtain gr,o ups present Msgr. Tiso as a disrupter of the Czecho..:Slova;k Repuiblic, a traitor, Nazi, Quisling, and a lackey of Adolf Hitler. This i:s done solely for the political motiives of presenting Sl()IVaks, their political aspirations, and their leaders in an unfavorable light. It is not strange, then, that in the Western world the .p ersonality of Msgir. T-iso appem-s Olbscured, incomprehensi'ble, controversial. To reach a true understanding and evaluation of Jozef Tiso, it is necessary to look upon his persona1ity and activities in the environment in which he lived and wo:riked; it is necessary to delve mo'l:'e deeply into the inner man, into his motiva·t ions and ideological ,bac:kground. Slovaik Clergy and Politics The Slovak nation lived for many centuries in the Hungarian Kingdom. The awaikening to national conscious.ness by the nations of Hungary brought a!bout nationalistic struggles among these nations. The national consciousness of the MaJgyars, the leading nation in Hungary, culminated in the idea of a great Magyar state, politically, culturally and lingu~tically hornogenous. The Ma. gyars wished to Magyarize the non~Magyar nations of Hungary, namely, the Slovaks, Roumanians, Croats, and Germans. The first victims of the forced Magyarization were 1 16 SLOVAKIA the Slovaks. The overwhelming majority of the intelligent.. sia of Slovak origin succumbed to Magyar pressure and followed the official Magyar line, for .this was a prerequisite in the furtherance of one's career. Of the inteMigentsia it was almost exclusively the clerigy who remained loyal to the Slovak nation. The clergy became bearers of the Slovak populace with religious instruction and cultural and social enlightenment. They were Catholic priests and Lutheran minister s. Outstanding among the priests were Anton Bernolak (1762-1813), formulator of the Slovak literary language; Juraj Fandly (17514~1810) , social educator and popular writer on husbandry; Jan Holly (1785--1849), a poet who wrote heroic epics about the Slovaik past; Bishop Stephen Moyses (1797-1869) , founder and first .president of the cultural institute, Matica Sloven.ska; Andrej RadlinSlky (1818.---1879) , founder of St. Adalbert Society, a Catholic publishing house ; Ferdis Juriga (1874- 1953), an excellent orator and political leader,1 and Andrej Hlinka, (1864 -1938), a fiery defender orf Slova:k rights and founder of the Slovak People's Party. Of the Lutheran ministers~patriots there were Michal M. Hodza (1811-1880) and J ozef M. Hurban (1817-1888), writers who ,o rganized and led the armed uprising of thB SlovaJks against the 'Magyars in 1'948; Karol iKuzmany (1806-1866) , poet and ,c o-founder of the Matica Sloven.ska, and Martin Razus (1888-1937), poet and politica1 leader. Upon the basis of solidifying the Slovaks against Magyarization and fighting for their political and social rights, the clergy entered into the politcal life of Hungary. Jozef Tiso in the Parliament at Prague Wllen, in 1918, Slovakia became a part •o f the CzechoSlovak Republic, it appeared at first that more favorable conditions ,w ould prevail for the Slovaks. However, it soon became apparent that the Czechs had much the same conceptions as the !Magyars. The Czechs, too, dreamed of a great Czechoslovak national state, with a politically insignificant minority of Germans and Magyars. The Slovaks were to cede their national individuality and merge with SLOVAKIA 17 the Czechs to create a new Czechoslovak nationality and to become Czechs eventually. The Slovaks, however, had long ago developed the consciousness of a distinct nationality and had no intention of ceding their national individuality in the interest of the Czechs. The Slovaks also felt the impact of the economic exploitation which the Czechs initiated imrne4iately after 1918 when they practically made Slovakia their colony. It was almost impossible for a ~ovak to enter civil service, since almost all civil positions and important economic functions in SlorvaJkia weTe occupied by the Czechs. Further, the Slorvaks, as a deeply religious Catholic nation (80 %- ), resented the anti-religious acts of the Czechs, which were also provocatively perpetrated in Slovaikia. In the struggle against Ozechization of the Slov,alks and in defense of Slovak rights, the Slovak People's Party, founded and led by Msgr. Andrej Hlinka, took the lead. Hlinka and Juriga, even as they had fought Magyar machinations,, began to fight Czech improprieties in the parliament at Prague, in the 1press, and through political campaigns among the people. The ,p olitical pla;tform of the S10vak People's Party was autonomy for Slovakia as guaran_ teed by the pact between American Slov.aks and the representative of Czecho-Slovakia, Professor Thomas G. Masaryk, in ·P ittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in 1918. 'I'he Slovak People's Party with its program and motto, "·F or God and Nation," aippealed to the feelings of the Slovaik populace, and soon became the most important political party in Slovakia. The autonomistic program was also foUowed by the Slorvak National Party of Martin Razus, a Lutheran minister. From the beginning of Czecho-Slovakia (1918), Jozef Tiso, a young a;nd zeailous priest, spiritual director and professor at the diocesan ·s eminary in Nitra, joined the autonomistic movement of Hlinka's Slovak Peoiple's Party. In 1925, Tiso became a member oif the Czecho--1Slovak par_ liament and then vice-president of the Slo,vaJk People's Party. When the Slorvak People's Party entered the government, he became Minister of Health (1927-1929). Tiso 18 SLOV.A!KIA. evolved soon into the staunchest e~ponent of Slovak autonomistic policies. Tiso as President of the Slovak People's Party Andrej iHlinka died in August of the critical year of 1938. At that time the Slovak People's Party was the most powerful. political group in SlovaJkia. It had in its ranks many young workers of the Slovaik inteHigentsia. None compared to Msgr. Tiso in moral and in political acumen and in expeTience. Commanding great esteem among the Slovaik populace and clergy, Tiso logically became the successor of Msgr. Hilinka in the leadership of the Slovak People's Party. Under the pressuxe of Hitler's driive, following H!Linka's death in 1938, events in CzechC>-iSlovakfa and in Europe moved quickly. That which the Czechs were loathe to grant the Slorvaiks under nonnal oonditions, they were foreed to grant in the enfeebled post-Munich Czecho...Slov-a kia. On October 6, 1938, the Slovaiks gained their political autonomy; they became the masters in Slorvakia. Msgr. 'l"iso, as the president of the Poople',s Party became the premier of the Slovak autonomous government, with the permission of his Bishop and the Vatican. Even :when Slovakia suffered by ceding territory to Hung,ary as a result of the Vienna A11bitration on Novem•b er 2, 1938, the ,Slovaiks were hruppy with the newly-gained autonomy. The Czechs left Slorva!kia; the Slovaiks began to manage their own affairs in the ·b est interests of the nation. It appeared that with the attainment of autonomy the aspirations of the Slovaiks were fulfilled and that the staJbilization of conditions in Slovakia would ·b e enduring. Tiso, President of the Republic Hitler was not satisfied with the dismemberment an.d neutralization of Czecho-Slovakia. When he decided to wa-ge war aigainst Poland, he wanted Ozecho-,SloviaJkia oom,p letcly under his control, particularly the western part (Bdhemia and Moravia) which was heavil'Y industriaJUzed and entirely encircled by the German Reich. On March 13, 1939, !H itler summoned Tiso• to Berlin SLOVAKIA 19 and confronted him with the German decision regarding Slrovakia : Either secede from the Czechs and proclaim an independent Slorvak State or suffer the oonsequence of partition between Germany and Hungary. On IMa.Tch 14, 1939, Tiso presented the German proposition to the Slovak pavliament for decision. 'Ehe Slovak parliament voted for independence of !Slovakia. Msgr. Tiso became the ,p re. sident of the Slovak Republic.2 Msgr. Tiso and other Slovak political [eaders were somewhat hesitant to proclaim Slovak independence. Said Tiso, in his defense before the National Court in Bratislava (1947) : "Were it not for Hitler's pressure, the Slo:vak parliament would never have proclaimed indeipendence. "3 The MaJgyars amd the Czechs, to justify their claims upon Slo:va,kia, ha,d in the past repeatedly asserted that Siovllikia, for economic reasons, was incapable of independence. Slovak politica:l lea,ders, suddenly confronted with the question of independence for Sl01V,a kia, were aipprehensive of the future. But rather than have their country partitioned and occupied, they logi,cally chose the attempt at independence. And after this decision, they strove for the economic prosperity and cultural development of Slova,kia, permanently to integrate Slovakia into the family of European nations. It can be said that the Slovruk attempt was successful. The wave of naJtional enthusiasm engulfed the coll'Iltry, and Siovaikia's eoonomi:c and cultural standards flourished. The Slovaks. even those who at first were reserved, warmed to the Slorva!k .State and ha,d faith in its chief, Msgr. Jozef Tiso. 4 Even the most bitter enemies of the Slovaks had to acknowledge that the Slova;k Republic was capable of existence. That which Slovakia had proved in the years 1939-1945 is in no small measure ithe result of the political activity of Msgr. Tiso. But it is also the most controversial period of his political career. 1 The Fundamentals and Components of Tiso's Policies Msgr. Tiso's defense plea before the National COU'rt at Bratislava, encompasses many noteworthy ,p ronouncements 20 SLOVAKIA that point out the principles of his political activity. Con. sider but a few characteristic quotations. The key to the evaluation of my activity is my character of the priest with its motivations and regulations, established by Christian teaching for public activity. 5 Tiso as president of the Slovak Republic tried to lead his nation like a solicitous father according to Christian principles,, to which, as a priest, he consecrated his life. Politically I only did that which the well-being and inter est of the Slovak n::.ttion dictated. What I did, I always did according to, the best dictates of my knowledge and conscience, ... always guided by the rules of morality ... I fought evil with all my power, yielding to evil only when a greater evil threatened the nation. G 'In this light, Msgr. Tiso explained his aHeged collaboration with the Nazis. Msgr. Tiso• stated that some collaboration with Germany was at that time a necessity dictated by Slovakia 's geographic position, the develorpment of European events and the law of self..preservation. Slovakia did not have its own foreign policy, but neither did other larger nations in Hitleir-controUed Europe. Tiso pleaded that he was so concerned with the internal consolidation and development of Slovakia that he wa,s unruble to study the problems of international politics, including the war, upon which, because of his position, he could wield no influence. Slovak participation in the war against Russia, with two divisions, was merely symbolic, Tiso explained. 7 According to Msgr. Tiso, his paramount ;po'1icy was t o secure the maximum of internal freedom and independence within the German sphere. Outwardly it was necessary to yield somewhat to German pressure, to keep them apart, thus avoiding armed intervention. For this reason it was necessary to ban the Communist Party (one of the main accusations against Tiso) ; it was necessary to participate in the war against Russia, and it was necessary to institute some elements of a totalitarian regime. All this was done , however, to pull wool over the eyes of the Germans. Inter- SLOVAKIA 21 nally, pleaded Tiso, Slovrukia was governed democratically - and there was freedom. & In this light -Msgr. Tiso aJ,s,o ex;plained anti-semitic activity in Slovakia. Msgr. 'Di.so stated that the rationalization of the Jewish problem was <based on a percentual partic1pation in the nation's economy. There were aibout 100,000 Jews in Sloivakia, or 4 % of the total .p opulation. Therefore only 4 % of the nation's economy was pe:mnitted to Jews. Jewish ,b usinesses were being aryanized, that is, a non-Jew would buy 51 % of a business, at an officially esta:blished rate, and the former Jewish proprietor would remain as a partrn~r. Later, at the dictate of the Gernnans, Jews were put into con centration camps and e vacuated into Poland under the pretext that land would be ,p rovided for them so that they wou!ld be able to Hve under their own ru:le. Tiso justified his position ·b y saying that he did not know at that time that the evacuated Jews would be exterminated in Polish and German concentration camps.9 A Weak Defense Herein In regard to the Jewish question, Msgr. Giuseppe Burzio, r epresentative of the Holy See in Slovakia, intervened with President Tiso in behalf of the Jews. It was rumored that Msigr. Tiso, 'a s a Catholic priest, should have resigned from the presidency, since he was unable to curtail the antisemitic campaign dictated by the Germans and waged by Slovak extremists unde r the direction of Premier Dr. Vojtech Tuka. Concerning the possibility o.f his resignation, let Tiso speak: I did not resign because I felt a moral obligation to fulfill. the duty that I had undertaken until I had been released from it by lega1ly constituted functionaries ... My action would have been egotistica,l had I left my nation in those difficult times and entered ;pri.., vate life. My action would haive been irresponsible and against the nation had I not truken into private life the moral values that I felt I represented 10 He stated further that had he received an official request from his ecclesiastical authorities, he would ha,ve re. 22 SLOV.i\KIA signed, for then there would have been no- decision to maJke, the responsibility would have been the Church authorities'. It is generally known that even repre sentatiives of the Jews had begged him to remain in office, for it would have been a total catastrophe for the Jews if someone else would have ,b een president oif the Slovak Republic. Tiso managed to insert into- ithe anti.Jewish law a provision to exempt some Jews. He wa:s a:ble to qualify a Jew as indispensa:ble to Slovak economy and thus save him from deportation. About 9,000 such exemptions were made. Despite this, howeveT, the Jewish question was really a weak point of Tiso's policy and of his defense. The End of Msgr. Tiso Msgr. Tiso's trial beg,an at the end of 1946 and lasted until April of 1947. On April 17, 1947, the jury of the Naticmal Court at Bratisla'Va brought forth the verdict of death by hanging, and the sentence was carried out on the following morning. Msgr. Tiso died peacefully, committing himself to God. His body was either destroyed or buried secretly to iprevent the SloIVaks from paying their respects. The standpoint of the Holy See, dissuading priests from participating directly in political actirvity and not identifying the Church with any particular politicail system or party, ,proved itself very much correct during the trial. Ev~ though Msgr. Tiso was tried as a politcian, it was difficult to separate his priesthood from his political function. Through Msg,r. Tiso's trial the Catholic Church of Slovakia was pilloried, ,altho'll!g'h unjustly. From the Church's point of view, it would ha.ve been 'b etter if, during the years of 1939 to 1945, the political life of Slovakia had been headed by a layman rather than a C'lex,gyman. On the other hand, it is certain that Tiso had been unj,u stly condemned. Under German ·control it was imposs1ble oo conduct a 'better policy in the interests of Slovakia than the one Tiso im:Plemented. Outright collaboration with Nazism, whkh Dr. 'Iuka attempted, would have SLOVAKIA 23 done an immeasurably greater harm to Slovrukia. Msgr. Tiso constantly thwarted TU!ka's attempts. Msgr. Tiso's trial cuhninated. during Lent when Chris... tians are reminded. of the trial and death of Christ. Slovaks openly compared. Tiso's trial with the trial of Ohrist. Tiso, too, in his defense, alluded to this circumstance. The court that sentenced Tiso was dominated by Communists. The president of the court, Dr. Ivan Daxner and the state prosecutors, Dr. Juraj Sujan and Dr. Anton Rasla, were die-hard Communists. Furthermore, it seemed that the first two mentioned were predisposed against Msgr. Tiso, the Catholic priest, on religious grounds. Msgr. Tiso in his testament to the nation, written an hour before his death, rightfully sitated: ". . . I consider myself, in the first place a martyr in the defense of Christianity against Communism."11 "Martyr of Love" Msgr. Tiso was a victim of political revenge. It was expected. that even if he were condemned, he would be granted amnesty ,b y Dr. IDdward Benes, President of the new Czecho-Slo:v akia. Benes refused. "Osservatore Romano," of April 28, 1947, wrote that in the event of Msgr. Tiso's condemnation "political discretion would make it necessary to grant amnesty, even though in self interest ... " to amelfo,r ate the tense situation ·b etween S1-ovaiks and Czechs. "As a martyr of love toward his homeland, Dr. Tiso will live on in the Slovaik Catholic nation," "Osservatore Romano," concluded. Although Dr. Benes had rid himself of Msgr. Tiso, it is certain that Tiso in death is a greater pro'b lem in the relationship between Czechs and Slova:ks than Tiso would have boon in life. Msgr. Tiso lives in the Sl01Vak nation as a hero and martyr. To the SlOIVruks he is a symbol of a crusader for the God.given rights 'Of the Slovak nation. The Slovak Republic, with its six years of successful existence, is an actuality that ca:nnot be eradicated from history. The SlavaJks at home and wbroad. in the absolute majority stand 24 SLOVAKIA behind the ideals for which Msgr. Tiso, .p resident of the "The Homiletic and Slovak R epublic, Lived and died. 1955. Pastoral Review," N 01Vember, 1. Coura,geous member of the Hungarian Parliament (1905-1918). 2. In parall el, Msgr. J an Sram ek, a Czech priest, becam e premier of the Czecho-Slovak governm ent in exile. 3. Dr. J ozef Tiso Abou t Him self, Edited by Dr. J oseph Pauco, Passaic, N. J . 4. As the war-front b egan to app roach Slo vakia, certain grou ps within the country, inspi.red d'rom a broad, provoked an u pri-sin g in August of 1944. T o ga_in the support of the Slovak populace, t h ey spread r umors that Tiso had been imprisoned by the Germ ans and, therefore, it was necessary to fight Ge rmany. 5. Op. cit., p. 121. 6. Op. cit., p. 111. 7. Op. cit., p. 37, 277 . 8. Op. cit., p . 213 ss., 199, 201. 9. Op. ci t., p. 313 ss. 10. Op. cit., p . 21. 11. Op. cit., p. 8. • • • WHO SAID IT? "The relations of today and tomorro,w between Cze,c hoSloivaikia and the Sorviet Union a.re defined in the treaty of Deceim:be.r 1'2, 1943, . . It proclaims the lasting friMdshir, of the two nations, for the future whic h will be, strengthened by widespread economic cooperation af t e r the war. The fu hire general collaJboratiion is defined as that of two ftree alilld independent ,s tates, in whi ch there wrn be no inter1fore111ce (Jan Papane k , Interin the internrul affairs of either.'' York, 19415 ) New Inc., Press, nati-onrul Universities 1 • • • "Norvemlber 7, 1917, is t he day thaJt is ma:riked in history as the beginning of a new era, which sought the guarantee of happiness to mankind by means of a new me1Jhod of equalling differences among people and th.us achi&ving contentment on earth. Today it is- stNa too eaJI'ly from thaJt epochal occasion to judge objootively the consequences of that great deed. One thing, however, is certain: it was the beginndng of an enormous process full of ideas bo:rn of idealism." - (Dr. Joseph Lettrich, V ~ of the Executive Conu:mttee of the "Council of Free OzecboslolV'a:kia," NOW PR.ODY, Novemiber 18, 1946).  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Monsignor Jozef Tiso - Controversial Personality Description An account of the resource Th. J. Zubek, O.F.M., S.T.D. Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 15-24 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Zúbek, Teodorik J., 1914-1988 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource September-December 1956 SNK https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/85484dbd56e950bd9572ff275ec66832.pdf e7dfeab06556ebc829abc9b02f8e7f15 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 3 OUR TRADITION AND WUIS STUR Dr. Henrich Bartek The significance of Louis Stur in the evolution of oUII' national life is so g,rea,t amd far-reaching :bhat it is only slowly that we a.re coming to a dooper understanding ()If this extraordinary perso111Mity, of this genial creator of the modem national Sl,O'V'ak d.deo1ogy. Once you delve into his life's work, yoru become permaIDently fascinated and cannot be freed of its charms, -s o strong is the attraction of Stur even today, a hundred years after his death. The iphilologist, philosopher, ,p edagogue, historian, po~ litician, statesman, writer, journalist, nay even the artist - once they have become acquainted witfu. the entire work and activity of .s tur - moot once ask the question how it was even possible that in the times of the greatest national decadence, at the time that Magyarization of the Slova;ks had really begun, there was found among the abandoned· ,Slovruk people a young m1an who, despite all plots and! difficuUies, built the spkitual fol.l!IldaJtions of the modern life of our nation. How that woo possible, that is a question wJiioh .perha,ps science will be ruble to answer at some time ~n the furtuire. Right now, however, it can only assert that in one generation, measwring genius in the strictest sense, only Ol!le extraordinary persOIIl OT genius appear:s among approximately two million people. There is no doubt that Stur was endowed with extraordinary natural capacity for creative and original conceptions. lit is the ma,rlk of a genius to, create woriks of lasting value which live iJ.ong ages after Ms death. Stur was a ge:nius; am.d not only witJhin the Slovak ifrrumewol1k. So it is only natUTal that we return to him and that even future Slovak generations will find their support in him until a greater .spirit apperurs to show the Slova.ks more and ~tter things tJian did Stur. To date, however, Stuir standg ouit as the greatest Slo:vak of all times. We are mindfuil. of, are eternally gratefuil to, and haive the greatest respect and admir,ation. for Vaja:nsky, �4 SLOVAKIA Hviezdoslav, Hli.nka, Tiso, SkuJJtety, and many, many other outstanding Slovak pe71sonalities, even many unknown peOi)le and martyrs, who saorifiiced everythirn.g for Slova:kdom. !But all of these, consdoooly oir lll!Ile◊nsciously, only continued to work for the reaJization of the spiritual plan of Slovak li!fe whlc:h was ~efit us by Stur in his wor:ks aJild in his pupils. Slovak life was given expression thr-o ugh the Slovaik language. According to 'S tur, it could not be otherwise. But Stur hlmself saw :to it that he became its eminent representati'Ve, an example to hi,s compeers and follo,wililg generations: he gave expression to, the irighteous des.ires and demands of his .Slovak nation and became its greatest and thUJS far unsurpassed model in spkituaJ and puiblic acti'Vity. Nations with '1ong state traditions, in which individual generations could develop without hindrance and without regard to age, ha,d the advantage of the experience of thei:r matuire ipeople and &e creativeness of their young peop1e, who always bxought something new, something better into the world and passed it on .to succeeding generations. The Slovak nabion, however, was not aJS fortunate. Having lost their great Moravian E)mpire at the turn of the tenth century, the Slova,ks were ruled iby foreigrn.ers for over a thousamd years. Without its own state traditions the Slovak nation had to rely almost entirely on compruratively young men, youths between 20~30 years old, for new ideas and new aims. In a word, SlovaJk youth was the ,c reator of a new dawn and future ,g oals, because the difficult iltife of the Slovruks undeir foreigrn. political domination did not allow the elders to build a strong national life. A gla,nce at the Slov:a!k past, from the time of Josephinism to the present, shows us tihis picture of Slovak generations: :Bermolak and his g,roup stirred the nation witlt ,theirr new idea wihen they were between 20-30 yea11s old; Holly, Kollar, and Safarik, who came after Bernolak, in the same yeara,, formed a firm outlook of the world; then StuT's generation also formed its national program �SLOVAKIA 5 in its youthful years and it was no different with the generation of ¥ajans:ky a;nd Hviezdosla;v. FoUowing the latter, iit is easier to talk ab{)ll.lt mdirviduiaJs thian generations. Considea:-, if y!()IU wi11, the yews in which the cihaxacters of Hlinka, Stefanik, Razus, and of other Slovaks, who foUowed Hvieooio:s!av's gen.eratioo, developed, and, behold, you will obser:ve that they, too, were between 20-30 years of age wlhen they began theiir creative life for theirr natrian. A :single idea and a single conviction, however, dom~naJted all Slorva·k generations amd eminent individuals: the !Slov3Jk nation coll'ld secl.ll'e and safeguaTd its nation.al existence best onJy if it gained political independence, only if it were free to ruJ.e its own homeland and develop its nation~ Hfe without foreign interference . .Am.d so it was with <YUT generation, which made itself heard .a:t th•e Slova k Institute (Matica Sloivenska) conclave on 'Ma,y 12, 1932, and then again. immediately after at the congress ~ill Trenciansike TepHce, where unanimously and without •r egard ,t o party considerations and con'Victions it declared itselif for a duialistic soJution of Slovak-Czech relatio111Js. Of cowrse, ouir generation came out with nothing new at that time, but ornly strong,l y reiterated what Bernolak and Stur and the1r followers frlad initiated much earlier. For a hundred years, therefore, not,h ing new, nothing moire rulblime apipea,red tiha;n what Stur had e:,opressed and lived for. So it is only natuiral that we must and shall have to .retuvn to. him, !beca;use it is self-evident that every new, Jet U!S say, great plan of Slova,k life must fiTst pass the aqua ,r egi·a test ,o f Stur's thinking. Even today Stuir still is the criter:ion of the life of our rratiOill; a;nd only those aims wihi-ch are in agreement with Stu.r's conception haive any hope and outlook for rea:lizatiolil. Whatever i•s againsit Stur, i,s also a,gainist the vital interests of OU!r nation. Stuir was not quite thmy years old when 'he b,egain to ,u:nite his people . by advocating a uniform language 1 1 1 �6 SLOVAKl1A for Slova,k literature. His wonk bore muoh ,g aod fruit. StUT's ca1l was answered by Sladkovic, ChaJ.upka, Botto, Kirar, Kalinciak, HUTban, and many others. lt Wll)S as if SlOIVak was resurrected by a magk wand. A.ind even though the central Slovak diail.ect is the most divergent of ail Slovak dialects, nevertheless it ri.s the least contaminated by foreigm influences. The Slovaks, therefore, felt ,tJhat the proper cou:rse had been taken in regaird to their literary language. Even John HoHy, not only the greatest 'Slovak poet of that time but a:}so the greatest ideologist of his nation, gave Stu.r's action his blessing, and, therefore, Stur was joined by the Catholics, representing five-sixths, the absolute majority, cl the SlovaJk nation. W1hat is the literary medium of the Italiams today? Is it not the classical ftalian - the Tuscan dialect of Dante and Petrarch - even though in many particulars it diffurs fa·om the other Italian dialects more than does <'entra1 Slovak from the other SlovaJk dialects? But the Itailian of Tuscany is certainly least contaminated by foreign influences and :most ex;pressive of the Railiam. spirit and, hence, the rest of the lta1.ia.n:s accepted it and stand by it. And so it was with the language of central SlwaJkia. It ,i s the most native of all Slovak dia!lects and therefore directly the most appropriate to express the spiiritua,l life of the Slovaks. ·Situr was clearly aware of the fiact that unity in tJhe liteTa,ry laJI1guage was not the uJtimate goal of hiis nation, but only a medium ,o f further national develoipment - of course, an inevitaible medium, if a higher cuiltu.rral level of the broad masses was to be attained and thereby also a proper support for national equality in Hungary. To rea,ch it:he broad masses of the Slo1Vak people and rouse them nationally, Stur published a newspaper in Slovak, Mter waiting some four years for permissri.on from the Hungariain government to do so. The influence of the paper was great; the Slorvaks gave it theiir full. support, while the MagyarSJ, aware of its influence, saon began scheming to suppress it. ,E lected b,y the royail city of �SLOVAKIA 'J Zvoilen to the Hungarian Diet, Stur insisted that the righteous demands of the Slovak nation for free national development ,b e fulf·illed. Before the revo,lution of 1'848 he demanded the DieJt to free the people fr:om the feudalistic Robot system, 1a;bor rent, so that the culture of the country might increase by the foundation of schoo~s in the naJt;ional tO!Ilgue ; he Tecommended the iindusbriali:zation of the land of the Slovaks and the adoption of laws in the huma,nitarian spirit which would enable the development of the country and! for all the nations inhabiting Hungary and ihe fought for a federalistic system in Hungary, whereby taJlJ. natio.n:s mi:ght work as equals for the common weal of the State. Stur appe,a led to the macgnates to give attention to the development of the State and to maJke it possible in the spirit of the modern devellopment of Eurrope. Stur was not a rebel; he did not advocate the destruction of the Hungarlam State aJS long as there wa:i any hope o;f ;s ettlement with the iMagy.aJrs. In the Hunga;rian Diet, •S tur proved himselif .a,s a farsighted politicran and statesmam; he saw and realized what was happening in the coU!Iltries around Hungary. He warned the Magyars that they ,c ould not forever igno,r e and suppress the inherent rights .of natio.ns,, that they couJd not forever e~ploit the Slov:aiks and otlher nations of H'lllilgatry without expecting them to stri1ke baok with their righteous demands for a f,r ee national life, for the same rights the Magyars were resolved to fight for in the Habsb'lliI"g Empire. Stu.r's admonitions, however, hit upon deruf eairs; the Magyam stUJbbor:n,l y amd ignoramtly refused to give ear to a;ny demands for any kind of settlement with the 1t10n~Ma;gyar rnations of Hungacy. The reS1Ult was the revolution of 1848-49, in which the S!l,o vaks also :prurtiiciipated, wihom S·t w togetlieir wi:th Hlurban ,a nd iHodza led in armed resi,s tance against the revoluti()(Il of .the Ma,g yar aristocrats. That the Ha:bsburgs were ung,ratefiul to the Slooaks, that they rfina:Hy settled wtth the Magyairs at the expense of the non-Magyrur natiOIIlS, does not alter the facts, at all. The set- �8 SLOVAKIA tlement of 1867, referred to as Austro~Hungaria,n but in rea.lity Au:stro-iMagyar, became the ,grave of the 'MOIIlarchy which coll!1d haive 'been a miglhty confederation in Central E}ul"ope. Louis Stur, and not 1:Jhe Slovak and M:agyair chauvilll'ist 1Lorui,s Ko,s ut. was the genuine democrat. Sttir and the SIOivak Language As a student at the Bratislmva lyceum and later as a professor, Stur became convinced that Sloiva:k Lutherans would never ,l earn Czech welil enough to oreate worthy scienltific works iirJ. that liangwage and so much more the less artistic ones. From the standpoint of the present and the future, therefore, it made no sense to persevere in Biblical Czech. 'Dhis 'Practical motive,, ·of course, was not enough forr :S tur and, therefore, he made it his business to learn as well as po,s sible all Siova,nic languages and to study comparative phHology. After a tho,r01Ugh reseaTch of the sy:stem of the S[rovalk language, Stur was convinced that the ,Sloivaik [am,g,uiage was not a dira lect of the Czech, but an indepedent Slovanic language and, by the sarrne token, thait the SlO'Vaks were not a part of the Czech nation but am ii.ndependent and individual people. StuT was thairoug,hly fami,l iar with not O!D.ly the w.ritings of the BernolaJk group, not only with the poetkal compO!sitions of John Ho1ly and the works of Bajza and Fandli, but aiso esipecially with the philological works of Anton iBernola.k. Stu,r , therefore, accepted the phonetic orthography of [Bernolak, which from the philologiral and piracticaJ standpoint best answered the purpose, but foc scientific a1r1d ideological rea:sorns decided to adopt the language of central Slovaikia. If Bernolak was it.he first codifier of literary Sloiv:ruk, who set the rules for speaJk:ing and writing Slova:k correctily, then Stur can rightfwlily be c:alled the fiirst reformer of iliterary Slovak, because he really replaced the S1ovaik of western Slovrukia with that of -c entral Slovakia. In the few years after iit was adopted as the literary medii.um of the Slov:aks, the language of central Sl01Vakia developed more talents tha,n were developed during several hundred years �SLOVAKIA 9 by literary Czech. The poems of Slad'kovic, especia!lly his "Marina," the poetical iprodUICtions orf Botto, Ohailuipka, Kral', and many others, pro·v ed that Stur's presuppositions about the sp:uritm1a,l development through the medium of central Slovalk were fuUy justified. In 1943, a: think il was successful in proving, in my work "I'... Stur a slorvenoina" (L. Stur and the SlorvaJk Language), that in !his time Stur was an extraordinarily good ph.ilofogist, who i.lJltuitively often correctly came upo:n certain individurul char.acteiristics of tJhe Slovalk language, so that even a modern philological analysis of his work will confirm the ,c orrectness of many of ,S tur's linguistic findings, the justification for which science ·i n that period could not prove. Stur, howerver, ga!Ve co.rrect judgments not OIIll.y i.lJl philology, but also ,i:n other scientific disciplines, for exaJmple, in history, statecraflt, etc. Stur and Philosophy It is generally said that Stur had aid.opted Hegel's philoso~hy. The maJtter is presented in such a Hght as irf Stur had blindly adopted Hegel's thinking and simply applied lit to Slovak and Slovank life. Philosoiphioal researches with us Slova!ks are, alas, very murch disliked and, therefore, it is ino wonder that S1ov:a1k phi[osophy is incorrectly evaluated. Prior to the war, Profesor Dmitrij Cyzevski, fo:rmerly of the universd.ties orf Hall amd J.einna ibut presently of CoJrunnbia Uni;veTSity, ;in a conversation with me called my attention to the significance of StUT and his followers for phillosophy in general. According to him Stur's generation had seveiraJl t1hin'kers w'.ho tried to create thek own philosophical system and who, in those times, amQIIllg ahl Slovam.ic nations excelled in originality of thinking in philosophy. Cyz.evski later prorved a part of his statement in his excellent book "Sturo•v a :f.ilozofia ziivota" tStur's .Philosophy of Life), which the Slovak Academy orf Sciences published du.ring the war .a nd wlhich, I say regretfully, I do not have today. Even though Cyzevs:ki's book does not deal fuHy with Stur's philosophy neverthe- �10 SLOVAKIA less it did ,p rove that Stur was not a simple student of Hegel's in iphiilosophy, but that he formed an mdependent philosophical system which in many ways differs f.rom that of Hegel. And thus we could gradually consider the political, social, pedagogical, statecraft, and artistic o,pinions of Stur and come to 1:Jhe conclusion that we hia:ve !before us an extremely wealthy personality, which had drawn from native traditions 13Jild in rbhe spirit ()If Slovak needs had formulated !ideas from varioUiS regions into one whole into the ination13Jl ideology of the Slovak nation. To 1UD:derstand Stur •and his wol'lk thoroughly, we must ma.Ike a proper study of all his activities ·amd literary achievements, so that we imi,g ht be able to define accu<!'ately what is .h l,s own, what is domestic tradition, and what has cOIIIle to us .from 01:Jher,s. If we do not ma,ke t'hat study, then we shall not completely understand this greatest phenomenon of Slovruk life of the nineteenth century. The Slovalks, especially recent political emigrants, will have to ,r eturn to Stur firequoot!ly, since for them in many thin:gs he is an excellent example, especially in polilti'cs. For exia.mple, when we t ruke Stur's views on the life of our nation, when his ideas about independent Slovruk national life are taken as the aqua regia of Slovll!k politics from 1918 to the 'Present, then it •s hall not be dificult to ascertain tJhrut, from the Slovak strundpoint, Hlinka's Slovak People's Party and the Slovak National 1P arty of Razus continued to work for the realization of Stur's program, and that they, an:d not a single SlovaJk affiliate of centralistic parties, were the b~arers of traditional Slorvak ideology. Today in 'S}()(Vruk.ia. a foreign 1regime is peTsecuiting and crushing rull elements of the Bernolak-Stur-lHilinka-Razu s tra·d itions, because it is albove all else concerned with the extermination of the !Slovak traditions which in his time Louis Stur had recreated rund reformed in such a manner .that they remain a pernnanent ,bas.is of our national development. � SLOVAKIA 3 OUR TRADITION AND WUIS STUR Dr. Henrich Bartek The significance of Louis Stur in the evolution of oUII' national life is so g,rea,t amd far-reaching :bhat it is only slowly that we a.re coming to a dooper understanding ()If this extraordinary perso111Mity, of this genial creator of the modem national Sl,O'V'ak d.deo1ogy. Once you delve into his life's work, yoru become permaIDently fascinated and cannot be freed of its charms, -s o strong is the attraction of Stur even today, a hundred years after his death. The iphilologist, philosopher, ,p edagogue, historian, po~ litician, statesman, writer, journalist, nay even the artist - once they have become acquainted witfu. the entire work and activity of .s tur - moot once ask the question how it was even possible that in the times of the greatest national decadence, at the time that Magyarization of the Slova;ks had really begun, there was found among the abandoned· ,Slovruk people a young m1an who, despite all plots and! difficuUies, built the spkitual fol.l!IldaJtions of the modern life of our nation. How that woo possible, that is a question wJiioh .perha,ps science will be ruble to answer at some time ~n the furtuire. Right now, however, it can only assert that in one generation, measwring genius in the strictest sense, only Ol!le extraordinary persOIIl OT genius appear:s among approximately two million people. There is no doubt that Stur was endowed with extraordinary natural capacity for creative and original conceptions. lit is the ma,rlk of a genius to, create woriks of lasting value which live iJ.ong ages after Ms death. Stur was a ge:nius; am.d not only witJhin the Slovak ifrrumewol1k. So it is only natUTal that we return to him and that even future Slovak generations will find their support in him until a greater .spirit apperurs to show the Slova.ks more and ~tter things tJian did Stur. To date, however, Stuir standg ouit as the greatest Slo:vak of all times. We are mindfuil. of, are eternally gratefuil to, and haive the greatest respect and admir,ation. for Vaja:nsky, �4 SLOVAKIA Hviezdoslav, Hli.nka, Tiso, SkuJJtety, and many, many other outstanding Slovak pe71sonalities, even many unknown peOi)le and martyrs, who saorifiiced everythirn.g for Slova:kdom. !But all of these, consdoooly oir lll!Ile◊nsciously, only continued to work for the reaJization of the spiritual plan of Slovak li!fe whlc:h was ~efit us by Stur in his wor:ks aJild in his pupils. Slovak life was given expression thr-o ugh the Slovaik language. According to 'S tur, it could not be otherwise. But Stur hlmself saw :to it that he became its eminent representati'Ve, an example to hi,s compeers and follo,wililg generations: he gave expression to, the irighteous des.ires and demands of his .Slovak nation and became its greatest and thUJS far unsurpassed model in spkituaJ and puiblic acti'Vity. Nations with '1ong state traditions, in which individual generations could develop without hindrance and without regard to age, ha,d the advantage of the experience of thei:r matuire ipeople and &e creativeness of their young peop1e, who always bxought something new, something better into the world and passed it on .to succeeding generations. The Slovak nabion, however, was not aJS fortunate. Having lost their great Moravian E)mpire at the turn of the tenth century, the Slova,ks were ruled iby foreigrn.ers for over a thousamd years. Without its own state traditions the Slovak nation had to rely almost entirely on compruratively young men, youths between 20~30 years old, for new ideas and new aims. In a word, SlovaJk youth was the ,c reator of a new dawn and future ,g oals, because the difficult iltife of the Slovruks undeir foreigrn. political domination did not allow the elders to build a strong national life. A gla,nce at the Slov:a!k past, from the time of Josephinism to the present, shows us tihis picture of Slovak generations: :Bermolak and his g,roup stirred the nation witlt ,theirr new idea wihen they were between 20-30 yea11s old; Holly, Kollar, and Safarik, who came after Bernolak, in the same yeara,, formed a firm outlook of the world; then StuT's generation also formed its national program �SLOVAKIA 5 in its youthful years and it was no different with the generation of ¥ajans:ky a;nd Hviezdosla;v. FoUowing the latter, iit is easier to talk ab{)ll.lt mdirviduiaJs thian generations. Considea:-, if y!()IU wi11, the yews in which the cihaxacters of Hlinka, Stefanik, Razus, and of other Slovaks, who foUowed Hvieooio:s!av's gen.eratioo, developed, and, behold, you will obser:ve that they, too, were between 20-30 years of age wlhen they began theiir creative life for theirr natrian. A :single idea and a single conviction, however, dom~naJted all Slorva·k generations amd eminent individuals: the !Slov3Jk nation coll'ld secl.ll'e and safeguaTd its nation.al existence best onJy if it gained political independence, only if it were free to ruJ.e its own homeland and develop its nation~ Hfe without foreign interference . .Am.d so it was with <YUT generation, which made itself heard .a:t th•e Slova k Institute (Matica Sloivenska) conclave on 'Ma,y 12, 1932, and then again. immediately after at the congress ~ill Trenciansike TepHce, where unanimously and without •r egard ,t o party considerations and con'Victions it declared itselif for a duialistic soJution of Slovak-Czech relatio111Js. Of cowrse, ouir generation came out with nothing new at that time, but ornly strong,l y reiterated what Bernolak and Stur and the1r followers frlad initiated much earlier. For a hundred years, therefore, not,h ing new, nothing moire rulblime apipea,red tiha;n what Stur had e:,opressed and lived for. So it is only natuiral that we must and shall have to .retuvn to. him, !beca;use it is self-evident that every new, Jet U!S say, great plan of Slova,k life must fiTst pass the aqua ,r egi·a test ,o f Stur's thinking. Even today Stuir still is the criter:ion of the life of our rratiOill; a;nd only those aims wihi-ch are in agreement with Stu.r's conception haive any hope and outlook for rea:lizatiolil. Whatever i•s againsit Stur, i,s also a,gainist the vital interests of OU!r nation. Stuir was not quite thmy years old when 'he b,egain to ,u:nite his people . by advocating a uniform language 1 1 1 �6 SLOVAKl1A for Slova,k literature. His wonk bore muoh ,g aod fruit. StUT's ca1l was answered by Sladkovic, ChaJ.upka, Botto, Kirar, Kalinciak, HUTban, and many others. lt Wll)S as if SlOIVak was resurrected by a magk wand. A.ind even though the central Slovak diail.ect is the most divergent of ail Slovak dialects, nevertheless it ri.s the least contaminated by foreigm influences. The Slovaks, therefore, felt ,tJhat the proper cou:rse had been taken in regaird to their literary language. Even John HoHy, not only the greatest 'Slovak poet of that time but a:}so the greatest ideologist of his nation, gave Stu.r's action his blessing, and, therefore, Stur was joined by the Catholics, representing five-sixths, the absolute majority, cl the SlovaJk nation. W1hat is the literary medium of the Italiams today? Is it not the classical ftalian - the Tuscan dialect of Dante and Petrarch - even though in many particulars it diffurs fa·om the other Italian dialects more than does <'entra1 Slovak from the other SlovaJk dialects? But the Itailian of Tuscany is certainly least contaminated by foreign influences and :most ex;pressive of the Railiam. spirit and, hence, the rest of the lta1.ia.n:s accepted it and stand by it. And so it was with the language of central SlwaJkia. It ,i s the most native of all Slovak dia!lects and therefore directly the most appropriate to express the spiiritua,l life of the Slovaks. ·Situr was clearly aware of the fiact that unity in tJhe liteTa,ry laJI1guage was not the uJtimate goal of hiis nation, but only a medium ,o f further national develoipment - of course, an inevitaible medium, if a higher cuiltu.rral level of the broad masses was to be attained and thereby also a proper support for national equality in Hungary. To rea,ch it:he broad masses of the Slo1Vak people and rouse them nationally, Stur published a newspaper in Slovak, Mter waiting some four years for permissri.on from the Hungariain government to do so. The influence of the paper was great; the Slorvaks gave it theiir full. support, while the MagyarSJ, aware of its influence, saon began scheming to suppress it. ,E lected b,y the royail city of �SLOVAKIA 'J Zvoilen to the Hungarian Diet, Stur insisted that the righteous demands of the Slovak nation for free national development ,b e fulf·illed. Before the revo,lution of 1'848 he demanded the DieJt to free the people fr:om the feudalistic Robot system, 1a;bor rent, so that the culture of the country might increase by the foundation of schoo~s in the naJt;ional tO!Ilgue ; he Tecommended the iindusbriali:zation of the land of the Slovaks and the adoption of laws in the huma,nitarian spirit which would enable the development of the country and! for all the nations inhabiting Hungary and ihe fought for a federalistic system in Hungary, whereby taJlJ. natio.n:s mi:ght work as equals for the common weal of the State. Stur appe,a led to the macgnates to give attention to the development of the State and to maJke it possible in the spirit of the modern devellopment of Eurrope. Stur was not a rebel; he did not advocate the destruction of the Hungarlam State aJS long as there wa:i any hope o;f ;s ettlement with the iMagy.aJrs. In the Hunga;rian Diet, •S tur proved himselif .a,s a farsighted politicran and statesmam; he saw and realized what was happening in the coU!Iltries around Hungary. He warned the Magyars that they ,c ould not forever igno,r e and suppress the inherent rights .of natio.ns,, that they couJd not forever e~ploit the Slov:aiks and otlher nations of H'lllilgatry without expecting them to stri1ke baok with their righteous demands for a f,r ee national life, for the same rights the Magyars were resolved to fight for in the Habsb'lliI"g Empire. Stu.r's admonitions, however, hit upon deruf eairs; the Magyam stUJbbor:n,l y amd ignoramtly refused to give ear to a;ny demands for any kind of settlement with the 1t10n~Ma;gyar rnations of Hungacy. The reS1Ult was the revolution of 1848-49, in which the S!l,o vaks also :prurtiiciipated, wihom S·t w togetlieir wi:th Hlurban ,a nd iHodza led in armed resi,s tance against the revoluti()(Il of .the Ma,g yar aristocrats. That the Ha:bsburgs were ung,ratefiul to the Slooaks, that they rfina:Hy settled wtth the Magyairs at the expense of the non-Magyrur natiOIIlS, does not alter the facts, at all. The set- �8 SLOVAKIA tlement of 1867, referred to as Austro~Hungaria,n but in rea.lity Au:stro-iMagyar, became the ,grave of the 'MOIIlarchy which coll!1d haive 'been a miglhty confederation in Central E}ul"ope. Louis Stur, and not 1:Jhe Slovak and M:agyair chauvilll'ist 1Lorui,s Ko,s ut. was the genuine democrat. Sttir and the SIOivak Language As a student at the Bratislmva lyceum and later as a professor, Stur became convinced that Sloiva:k Lutherans would never ,l earn Czech welil enough to oreate worthy scienltific works iirJ. that liangwage and so much more the less artistic ones. From the standpoint of the present and the future, therefore, it made no sense to persevere in Biblical Czech. 'Dhis 'Practical motive,, ·of course, was not enough forr :S tur and, therefore, he made it his business to learn as well as po,s sible all Siova,nic languages and to study comparative phHology. After a tho,r01Ugh reseaTch of the sy:stem of the S[rovalk language, Stur was convinced that the ,Sloivaik [am,g,uiage was not a dira lect of the Czech, but an indepedent Slovanic language and, by the sarrne token, thait the SlO'Vaks were not a part of the Czech nation but am ii.ndependent and individual people. StuT was thairoug,hly fami,l iar with not O!D.ly the w.ritings of the BernolaJk group, not only with the poetkal compO!sitions of John Ho1ly and the works of Bajza and Fandli, but aiso esipecially with the philological works of Anton iBernola.k. Stu,r , therefore, accepted the phonetic orthography of [Bernolak, which from the philologiral and piracticaJ standpoint best answered the purpose, but foc scientific a1r1d ideological rea:sorns decided to adopt the language of central Slovaikia. If Bernolak was it.he first codifier of literary Sloiv:ruk, who set the rules for speaJk:ing and writing Slova:k correctily, then Stur can rightfwlily be c:alled the fiirst reformer of iliterary Slovak, because he really replaced the S1ovaik of western Slovrukia with that of -c entral Slovakia. In the few years after iit was adopted as the literary medii.um of the Slov:aks, the language of central Sl01Vakia developed more talents tha,n were developed during several hundred years �SLOVAKIA 9 by literary Czech. The poems of Slad'kovic, especia!lly his "Marina," the poetical iprodUICtions orf Botto, Ohailuipka, Kral', and many others, pro·v ed that Stur's presuppositions about the sp:uritm1a,l development through the medium of central Slovalk were fuUy justified. In 1943, a: think il was successful in proving, in my work "I'... Stur a slorvenoina" (L. Stur and the SlorvaJk Language), that in !his time Stur was an extraordinarily good ph.ilofogist, who i.lJltuitively often correctly came upo:n certain individurul char.acteiristics of tJhe Slovalk language, so that even a modern philological analysis of his work will confirm the ,c orrectness of many of ,S tur's linguistic findings, the justification for which science ·i n that period could not prove. Stur, howerver, ga!Ve co.rrect judgments not OIIll.y i.lJl philology, but also ,i:n other scientific disciplines, for exaJmple, in history, statecraflt, etc. Stur and Philosophy It is generally said that Stur had aid.opted Hegel's philoso~hy. The maJtter is presented in such a Hght as irf Stur had blindly adopted Hegel's thinking and simply applied lit to Slovak and Slovank life. Philosoiphioal researches with us Slova!ks are, alas, very murch disliked and, therefore, it is ino wonder that S1ov:a1k phi[osophy is incorrectly evaluated. Prior to the war, Profesor Dmitrij Cyzevski, fo:rmerly of the universd.ties orf Hall amd J.einna ibut presently of CoJrunnbia Uni;veTSity, ;in a conversation with me called my attention to the significance of StUT and his followers for phillosophy in general. According to him Stur's generation had seveiraJl t1hin'kers w'.ho tried to create thek own philosophical system and who, in those times, amQIIllg ahl Slovam.ic nations excelled in originality of thinking in philosophy. Cyz.evski later prorved a part of his statement in his excellent book "Sturo•v a :f.ilozofia ziivota" tStur's .Philosophy of Life), which the Slovak Academy orf Sciences published du.ring the war .a nd wlhich, I say regretfully, I do not have today. Even though Cyzevs:ki's book does not deal fuHy with Stur's philosophy neverthe- �10 SLOVAKIA less it did ,p rove that Stur was not a simple student of Hegel's in iphiilosophy, but that he formed an mdependent philosophical system which in many ways differs f.rom that of Hegel. And thus we could gradually consider the political, social, pedagogical, statecraft, and artistic o,pinions of Stur and come to 1:Jhe conclusion that we hia:ve !before us an extremely wealthy personality, which had drawn from native traditions 13Jild in rbhe spirit ()If Slovak needs had formulated !ideas from varioUiS regions into one whole into the ination13Jl ideology of the Slovak nation. To 1UD:derstand Stur •and his wol'lk thoroughly, we must ma.Ike a proper study of all his activities ·amd literary achievements, so that we imi,g ht be able to define accu<!'ately what is .h l,s own, what is domestic tradition, and what has cOIIIle to us .from 01:Jher,s. If we do not ma,ke t'hat study, then we shall not completely understand this greatest phenomenon of Slovruk life of the nineteenth century. The Slovalks, especially recent political emigrants, will have to ,r eturn to Stur firequoot!ly, since for them in many thin:gs he is an excellent example, especially in polilti'cs. For exia.mple, when we t ruke Stur's views on the life of our nation, when his ideas about independent Slovruk national life are taken as the aqua regia of Slovll!k politics from 1918 to the 'Present, then it •s hall not be dificult to ascertain tJhrut, from the Slovak strundpoint, Hlinka's Slovak People's Party and the Slovak National 1P arty of Razus continued to work for the realization of Stur's program, and that they, an:d not a single SlovaJk affiliate of centralistic parties, were the b~arers of traditional Slorvak ideology. Today in 'S}()(Vruk.ia. a foreign 1regime is peTsecuiting and crushing rull elements of the Bernolak-Stur-lHilinka-Razu s tra·d itions, because it is albove all else concerned with the extermination of the !Slovak traditions which in his time Louis Stur had recreated rund reformed in such a manner .that they remain a pernnanent ,bas.is of our national development. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 3 OUR TRADITION AND WUIS STUR Dr. Henrich Bartek The significance of Louis Stur in the evolution of oUII' national life is so g,rea,t amd far-reaching :bhat it is only slowly that we a.re coming to a dooper understanding ()If this extraordinary perso111Mity, of this genial creator of the modem national Sl,O'V'ak d.deo1ogy. Once you delve into his life's work, yoru become permaIDently fascinated and cannot be freed of its charms, -s o strong is the attraction of Stur even today, a hundred years after his death. The iphilologist, philosopher, ,p edagogue, historian, po~ litician, statesman, writer, journalist, nay even the artist - once they have become acquainted witfu. the entire work and activity of .s tur - moot once ask the question how it was even possible that in the times of the greatest national decadence, at the time that Magyarization of the Slova;ks had really begun, there was found among the abandoned· ,Slovruk people a young m1an who, despite all plots and! difficuUies, built the spkitual fol.l!IldaJtions of the modern life of our nation. How that woo possible, that is a question wJiioh .perha,ps science will be ruble to answer at some time ~n the furtuire. Right now, however, it can only assert that in one generation, measwring genius in the strictest sense, only Ol!le extraordinary persOIIl OT genius appear:s among approximately two million people. There is no doubt that Stur was endowed with extraordinary natural capacity for creative and original conceptions. lit is the ma,rlk of a genius to, create woriks of lasting value which live iJ.ong ages after Ms death. Stur was a ge:nius; am.d not only witJhin the Slovak ifrrumewol1k. So it is only natUTal that we return to him and that even future Slovak generations will find their support in him until a greater .spirit apperurs to show the Slova.ks more and ~tter things tJian did Stur. To date, however, Stuir standg ouit as the greatest Slo:vak of all times. We are mindfuil. of, are eternally gratefuil to, and haive the greatest respect and admir,ation. for Vaja:nsky, 4 SLOVAKIA Hviezdoslav, Hli.nka, Tiso, SkuJJtety, and many, many other outstanding Slovak pe71sonalities, even many unknown peOi)le and martyrs, who saorifiiced everythirn.g for Slova:kdom. !But all of these, consdoooly oir lll!Ile◊nsciously, only continued to work for the reaJization of the spiritual plan of Slovak li!fe whlc:h was ~efit us by Stur in his wor:ks aJild in his pupils. Slovak life was given expression thr-o ugh the Slovaik language. According to 'S tur, it could not be otherwise. But Stur hlmself saw :to it that he became its eminent representati'Ve, an example to hi,s compeers and follo,wililg generations: he gave expression to, the irighteous des.ires and demands of his .Slovak nation and became its greatest and thUJS far unsurpassed model in spkituaJ and puiblic acti'Vity. Nations with '1ong state traditions, in which individual generations could develop without hindrance and without regard to age, ha,d the advantage of the experience of thei:r matuire ipeople and &e creativeness of their young peop1e, who always bxought something new, something better into the world and passed it on .to succeeding generations. The Slovak nabion, however, was not aJS fortunate. Having lost their great Moravian E)mpire at the turn of the tenth century, the Slova,ks were ruled iby foreigrn.ers for over a thousamd years. Without its own state traditions the Slovak nation had to rely almost entirely on compruratively young men, youths between 20~30 years old, for new ideas and new aims. In a word, SlovaJk youth was the ,c reator of a new dawn and future ,g oals, because the difficult iltife of the Slovruks undeir foreigrn. political domination did not allow the elders to build a strong national life. A gla,nce at the Slov:a!k past, from the time of Josephinism to the present, shows us tihis picture of Slovak generations: :Bermolak and his g,roup stirred the nation witlt ,theirr new idea wihen they were between 20-30 yea11s old; Holly, Kollar, and Safarik, who came after Bernolak, in the same yeara,, formed a firm outlook of the world; then StuT's generation also formed its national program SLOVAKIA 5 in its youthful years and it was no different with the generation of ¥ajans:ky a;nd Hviezdosla;v. FoUowing the latter, iit is easier to talk ab{)ll.lt mdirviduiaJs thian generations. Considea:-, if y!()IU wi11, the yews in which the cihaxacters of Hlinka, Stefanik, Razus, and of other Slovaks, who foUowed Hvieooio:s!av's gen.eratioo, developed, and, behold, you will obser:ve that they, too, were between 20-30 years of age wlhen they began theiir creative life for theirr natrian. A :single idea and a single conviction, however, dom~naJted all Slorva·k generations amd eminent individuals: the !Slov3Jk nation coll'ld secl.ll'e and safeguaTd its nation.al existence best onJy if it gained political independence, only if it were free to ruJ.e its own homeland and develop its nation~ Hfe without foreign interference . .Am.d so it was with <YUT generation, which made itself heard .a:t th•e Slova k Institute (Matica Sloivenska) conclave on 'Ma,y 12, 1932, and then again. immediately after at the congress ~ill Trenciansike TepHce, where unanimously and without •r egard ,t o party considerations and con'Victions it declared itselif for a duialistic soJution of Slovak-Czech relatio111Js. Of cowrse, ouir generation came out with nothing new at that time, but ornly strong,l y reiterated what Bernolak and Stur and the1r followers frlad initiated much earlier. For a hundred years, therefore, not,h ing new, nothing moire rulblime apipea,red tiha;n what Stur had e:,opressed and lived for. So it is only natuiral that we must and shall have to .retuvn to. him, !beca;use it is self-evident that every new, Jet U!S say, great plan of Slova,k life must fiTst pass the aqua ,r egi·a test ,o f Stur's thinking. Even today Stuir still is the criter:ion of the life of our rratiOill; a;nd only those aims wihi-ch are in agreement with Stu.r's conception haive any hope and outlook for rea:lizatiolil. Whatever i•s againsit Stur, i,s also a,gainist the vital interests of OU!r nation. Stuir was not quite thmy years old when 'he b,egain to ,u:nite his people . by advocating a uniform language 1 1 1 6 SLOVAKl1A for Slova,k literature. His wonk bore muoh ,g aod fruit. StUT's ca1l was answered by Sladkovic, ChaJ.upka, Botto, Kirar, Kalinciak, HUTban, and many others. lt Wll)S as if SlOIVak was resurrected by a magk wand. A.ind even though the central Slovak diail.ect is the most divergent of ail Slovak dialects, nevertheless it ri.s the least contaminated by foreigm influences. The Slovaks, therefore, felt ,tJhat the proper cou:rse had been taken in regaird to their literary language. Even John HoHy, not only the greatest 'Slovak poet of that time but a:}so the greatest ideologist of his nation, gave Stu.r's action his blessing, and, therefore, Stur was joined by the Catholics, representing five-sixths, the absolute majority, cl the SlovaJk nation. W1hat is the literary medium of the Italiams today? Is it not the classical ftalian - the Tuscan dialect of Dante and Petrarch - even though in many particulars it diffurs fa·om the other Italian dialects more than does <'entra1 Slovak from the other SlovaJk dialects? But the Itailian of Tuscany is certainly least contaminated by foreign influences and :most ex;pressive of the Railiam. spirit and, hence, the rest of the lta1.ia.n:s accepted it and stand by it. And so it was with the language of central SlwaJkia. It ,i s the most native of all Slovak dia!lects and therefore directly the most appropriate to express the spiiritua,l life of the Slovaks. ·Situr was clearly aware of the fiact that unity in tJhe liteTa,ry laJI1guage was not the uJtimate goal of hiis nation, but only a medium ,o f further national develoipment - of course, an inevitaible medium, if a higher cuiltu.rral level of the broad masses was to be attained and thereby also a proper support for national equality in Hungary. To rea,ch it:he broad masses of the Slo1Vak people and rouse them nationally, Stur published a newspaper in Slovak, Mter waiting some four years for permissri.on from the Hungariain government to do so. The influence of the paper was great; the Slorvaks gave it theiir full. support, while the MagyarSJ, aware of its influence, saon began scheming to suppress it. ,E lected b,y the royail city of SLOVAKIA 'J Zvoilen to the Hungarian Diet, Stur insisted that the righteous demands of the Slovak nation for free national development ,b e fulf·illed. Before the revo,lution of 1'848 he demanded the DieJt to free the people fr:om the feudalistic Robot system, 1a;bor rent, so that the culture of the country might increase by the foundation of schoo~s in the naJt;ional tO!Ilgue ; he Tecommended the iindusbriali:zation of the land of the Slovaks and the adoption of laws in the huma,nitarian spirit which would enable the development of the country and! for all the nations inhabiting Hungary and ihe fought for a federalistic system in Hungary, whereby taJlJ. natio.n:s mi:ght work as equals for the common weal of the State. Stur appe,a led to the macgnates to give attention to the development of the State and to maJke it possible in the spirit of the modern devellopment of Eurrope. Stur was not a rebel; he did not advocate the destruction of the Hungarlam State aJS long as there wa:i any hope o;f ;s ettlement with the iMagy.aJrs. In the Hunga;rian Diet, •S tur proved himselif .a,s a farsighted politicran and statesmam; he saw and realized what was happening in the coU!Iltries around Hungary. He warned the Magyars that they ,c ould not forever igno,r e and suppress the inherent rights .of natio.ns,, that they couJd not forever e~ploit the Slov:aiks and otlher nations of H'lllilgatry without expecting them to stri1ke baok with their righteous demands for a f,r ee national life, for the same rights the Magyars were resolved to fight for in the Habsb'lliI"g Empire. Stu.r's admonitions, however, hit upon deruf eairs; the Magyam stUJbbor:n,l y amd ignoramtly refused to give ear to a;ny demands for any kind of settlement with the 1t10n~Ma;gyar rnations of Hungacy. The reS1Ult was the revolution of 1848-49, in which the S!l,o vaks also :prurtiiciipated, wihom S·t w togetlieir wi:th Hlurban ,a nd iHodza led in armed resi,s tance against the revoluti()(Il of .the Ma,g yar aristocrats. That the Ha:bsburgs were ung,ratefiul to the Slooaks, that they rfina:Hy settled wtth the Magyairs at the expense of the non-Magyrur natiOIIlS, does not alter the facts, at all. The set- 8 SLOVAKIA tlement of 1867, referred to as Austro~Hungaria,n but in rea.lity Au:stro-iMagyar, became the ,grave of the 'MOIIlarchy which coll!1d haive 'been a miglhty confederation in Central E}ul"ope. Louis Stur, and not 1:Jhe Slovak and M:agyair chauvilll'ist 1Lorui,s Ko,s ut. was the genuine democrat. Sttir and the SIOivak Language As a student at the Bratislmva lyceum and later as a professor, Stur became convinced that Sloiva:k Lutherans would never ,l earn Czech welil enough to oreate worthy scienltific works iirJ. that liangwage and so much more the less artistic ones. From the standpoint of the present and the future, therefore, it made no sense to persevere in Biblical Czech. 'Dhis 'Practical motive,, ·of course, was not enough forr :S tur and, therefore, he made it his business to learn as well as po,s sible all Siova,nic languages and to study comparative phHology. After a tho,r01Ugh reseaTch of the sy:stem of the S[rovalk language, Stur was convinced that the ,Sloivaik [am,g,uiage was not a dira lect of the Czech, but an indepedent Slovanic language and, by the sarrne token, thait the SlO'Vaks were not a part of the Czech nation but am ii.ndependent and individual people. StuT was thairoug,hly fami,l iar with not O!D.ly the w.ritings of the BernolaJk group, not only with the poetkal compO!sitions of John Ho1ly and the works of Bajza and Fandli, but aiso esipecially with the philological works of Anton iBernola.k. Stu,r , therefore, accepted the phonetic orthography of [Bernolak, which from the philologiral and piracticaJ standpoint best answered the purpose, but foc scientific a1r1d ideological rea:sorns decided to adopt the language of central Slovaikia. If Bernolak was it.he first codifier of literary Sloiv:ruk, who set the rules for speaJk:ing and writing Slova:k correctily, then Stur can rightfwlily be c:alled the fiirst reformer of iliterary Slovak, because he really replaced the S1ovaik of western Slovrukia with that of -c entral Slovakia. In the few years after iit was adopted as the literary medii.um of the Slov:aks, the language of central Sl01Vakia developed more talents tha,n were developed during several hundred years SLOVAKIA 9 by literary Czech. The poems of Slad'kovic, especia!lly his "Marina," the poetical iprodUICtions orf Botto, Ohailuipka, Kral', and many others, pro·v ed that Stur's presuppositions about the sp:uritm1a,l development through the medium of central Slovalk were fuUy justified. In 1943, a: think il was successful in proving, in my work "I'... Stur a slorvenoina" (L. Stur and the SlorvaJk Language), that in !his time Stur was an extraordinarily good ph.ilofogist, who i.lJltuitively often correctly came upo:n certain individurul char.acteiristics of tJhe Slovalk language, so that even a modern philological analysis of his work will confirm the ,c orrectness of many of ,S tur's linguistic findings, the justification for which science ·i n that period could not prove. Stur, howerver, ga!Ve co.rrect judgments not OIIll.y i.lJl philology, but also ,i:n other scientific disciplines, for exaJmple, in history, statecraflt, etc. Stur and Philosophy It is generally said that Stur had aid.opted Hegel's philoso~hy. The maJtter is presented in such a Hght as irf Stur had blindly adopted Hegel's thinking and simply applied lit to Slovak and Slovank life. Philosoiphioal researches with us Slova!ks are, alas, very murch disliked and, therefore, it is ino wonder that S1ov:a1k phi[osophy is incorrectly evaluated. Prior to the war, Profesor Dmitrij Cyzevski, fo:rmerly of the universd.ties orf Hall amd J.einna ibut presently of CoJrunnbia Uni;veTSity, ;in a conversation with me called my attention to the significance of StUT and his followers for phillosophy in general. According to him Stur's generation had seveiraJl t1hin'kers w'.ho tried to create thek own philosophical system and who, in those times, amQIIllg ahl Slovam.ic nations excelled in originality of thinking in philosophy. Cyz.evski later prorved a part of his statement in his excellent book "Sturo•v a :f.ilozofia ziivota" tStur's .Philosophy of Life), which the Slovak Academy orf Sciences published du.ring the war .a nd wlhich, I say regretfully, I do not have today. Even though Cyzevs:ki's book does not deal fuHy with Stur's philosophy neverthe- 10 SLOVAKIA less it did ,p rove that Stur was not a simple student of Hegel's in iphiilosophy, but that he formed an mdependent philosophical system which in many ways differs f.rom that of Hegel. And thus we could gradually consider the political, social, pedagogical, statecraft, and artistic o,pinions of Stur and come to 1:Jhe conclusion that we hia:ve !before us an extremely wealthy personality, which had drawn from native traditions 13Jild in rbhe spirit ()If Slovak needs had formulated !ideas from varioUiS regions into one whole into the ination13Jl ideology of the Slovak nation. To 1UD:derstand Stur •and his wol'lk thoroughly, we must ma.Ike a proper study of all his activities ·amd literary achievements, so that we imi,g ht be able to define accu<!'ately what is .h l,s own, what is domestic tradition, and what has cOIIIle to us .from 01:Jher,s. If we do not ma,ke t'hat study, then we shall not completely understand this greatest phenomenon of Slovruk life of the nineteenth century. The Slovalks, especially recent political emigrants, will have to ,r eturn to Stur firequoot!ly, since for them in many thin:gs he is an excellent example, especially in polilti'cs. For exia.mple, when we t ruke Stur's views on the life of our nation, when his ideas about independent Slovruk national life are taken as the aqua regia of Slovll!k politics from 1918 to the 'Present, then it •s hall not be dificult to ascertain tJhrut, from the Slovak strundpoint, Hlinka's Slovak People's Party and the Slovak National 1P arty of Razus continued to work for the realization of Stur's program, and that they, an:d not a single SlovaJk affiliate of centralistic parties, were the b~arers of traditional Slorvak ideology. Today in 'S}()(Vruk.ia. a foreign 1regime is peTsecuiting and crushing rull elements of the Bernolak-Stur-lHilinka-Razu s tra·d itions, because it is albove all else concerned with the extermination of the !Slovak traditions which in his time Louis Stur had recreated rund reformed in such a manner .that they remain a pernnanent ,bas.is of our national development.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our Tradition and Louis Štúr Description An account of the resource Dr. Henrich Bartek Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 2 (19), June 1956 pp. 3-10 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Bartek, Henrich, 1907-1986 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1956 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/b364b7e35f27b4085c4f883773cd6a6e.pdf af4c68dde22286a580943431bf08ff28 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 57 Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK According to Mr. Graham, there was no competition for the presidency after Masaryk resigned "in view of the outstanding character of Dr. Benes" (p. 125). This is not exactly true, 1b ecause the Hlinka Party opposed the election of Benes, as did others, until Benes promised :reforms and tbe fulfillment of the 1P ittsburgh Pact, that is, that within a year of his election Slovakia would become autonomous. This disciple, after his election, reneged on the Pittslburgh Poot, just as his master did. This, m course, added to the "outstanding character" of Dr. Benes. 1 • "Freedom of the press, to the exclusion of the preliminar,y censorship so dreaded under the Austrian regime, was guaranteed. With unusual foresight, not match ed by the political leaders of either Weim ar Germany of Socialist Austria, the framers of the Czechoslovak Constitution made pro,v ision for legal restriction on the rights of the press, of assembly, and of association in time of war or in case of events taking p lace within the State seriously threatening the repub• lican form of govern m ent, the Constitution, or public peace and order." (p. 131). - Unusual foresight, indeed. "Public peace and order" must have been threatened thousands of times, judging from the "white spaces" in Slovak newspapers and books during the regimes of Masaryk and Benes; entire editions of Slova1k newspapers were confiscated many times. We have plenty of proof of that for Mr. Graham and all readers of Kerner's "Ozechoslovaikia." Guarantees of freedoms, liberties and rights on 1paper look nice, but mean nothing if they are not realized. The Masaryk-•Benes Czechs were in control of everything and could, therefore, inter,pret the Constitution as they pleased; under them political opposL tion was inte11preted as "unlawful" and a threat to "public peace and order." According to Mr. Graham: "Reli,gious liberty was of primordial import . . . al} religious confessions were treated as equal before the l aw . . . national, religious ,a,u<l. racial mino rities were promised the same equality accorded to the Czechoslovaks in civil and political matters . . . ,a s1>ecial l angu~ge law, itself of a constitutional character, was issued Feb- �58 SLOVAKIA rua.ry 29, 1920, making the Czechoslovak language the official s tate b ut maldng other languag,es, •when used language of the Republic, < by a minority consisting of at least 20 percent of the inhabitants of any jurisdictional area, coordinately valid for virtually every legal pu!'lp()se . .. the right of children to r,e ceive education in their mother tongue ,w as guaranteed, but instruction in the Czech language could be macte obligatory at any time . .. T-o the moment of .partition it could truly he sa;id by German, Magy,ar, Slovak Ruthene, or Czech, that the very air breathed the freedom of the human spirit, a freedom to which the republic was dedicated by its founders." In short, as far as Mr. Graham was concerned, everything was just albout ,p erfect in the "democracy of Masarylk and Benes." But the historical truth is that it was far from it. The Slovaks were not considered a minority, but they actually were worse off in many instances than any minority. The "Czechoslovak NA'VIONAL Church" - a strictly Czech ente:riprise - was estrublished with the blessing and the support of the Masarylk--Benes regimes. The "Czechoslovak" language did not and does not exist, but it became the official language of the Republic, without Mr. Graham ·knowing it. And worst of all, iMr. Graham presumes to spea!k for ,peoples 3Jbout whom he knows little or nothing. If the nations of Czechoslovakia actually enjoyed freedom and lilberties - "the freedom of the human spirit," as Graham calls it - in the democracy of Masaryk and Benes, why did they not fire even a single shot in its defense? Mr. Grah3JID, like the other contrrbutors to Kerner's "Ozechoslovakia," eulogi1zed Masaryik and Benes and sweated out a grandiloquent cha1pter ba:sed on the fiction of "Ozeohoslovak" unity. No, matter what Graham's intentions or objectives were, there can be no justification for suppressing, denying, or falsifying established historical facts. CHA!P'DER ViI!Ill - "Parties and Politics" - by Malbone W. Graham (vd. previous chapter). The tendency so much in evidence in the previous chapter, contributed by the same author, prevails here. To Dr. Graham, "the political history of the Czechoslovak Republic reveals a pattern of continuity and stability unequaied by any other country in Europe." T. G. Masaryk and Be-< nes were masters of the situation. Foreign policy of the Re- �SLOVAKIA 59 public was "in the exipert hands of Dr. Eduard Benes for two decades, from 1915 to 1935"; •b ut "even in the ,period of his presidency, Dr. Benes continued to dominate morally the entevprise of diplomacy." The contin,uity in leadership, plus the "continuity of principle" - ,w hatever that was, gave to the foreign policies of Cze.cho-Slova:kia, and her domestic .p olitics as well,_ "calmness, balance, and objectivity." Benes was no ordinary man, according to Graham. Only 34 years old in 1918 and without any .practical political eXJperience whatever, Benes dominated the political scene in Czecho-Slova!kia. "Dr. Benes was given an opportunity, seldom vouchsafed by history, to organize foreign policy realistically." Just how "realistically Benes organized it became evident, first in 19'38, and then in 1943. He made enemies of all nei,ghboring countries, while in CzechoSlovakia he failed miserrubly to gain the Slova:ks. Benes was a "revolte" - a socialist, also an atheist long before 1'915. Benes went to study to Prague before he was twelve years old. Edward B. Hitchcocl{, one of the most extravagant eulogists of Benes, tells us ("BENES - The Man and The Statesman" - Hamish Hamilton, London ; 1940): "Late,r•, when he (Benes) stayed for several years in Prague, he developed into a believer in brute materialism, anarchism, socialism. He was against religion. He was opposed to almost every established order in the world of that day .... And even the fundamental question - the existence of God - was for him a serious problem. He always countered with the statement that the existence of God was nothing but wishful thinking, that nobody could prove to him that there is a God." Such a man, Graha,m would have us believe, gave the Ozecho-Slovak domestic ipolitics "calmness, balance, and objectivity." About 72 •p ercent of the Czechs and 82 percent of the Slova;ks were Catholics - and Benes hated the Catholic Church. Mr. Graham apparenty knew nothing of the hack,g round of Benes, who also rated among Freemasons. In Paris, Prague, London and Berlin, the young ,m an from Kozl any always felt at home in the company of socirulists, wrote for their pa;pers, hut Mr. Graham, it seems, knows nothing a,bout that; the same goes for the other .contributors to Kerner's "Czechoslovakia." It seems that 1 �60 SLOV.AKI.A they do not want students of history to know what made Benes tick as he did. 'Dhey are supposed to believe that the man just popped out of nowhere, met T. G. Masaryk, and became the greatest democrat and statesman in Europe . • ".Along with tih~ m aj or <:urrent of s ocial democracy i n Czechoslovakia, tlhere developed ,a subsidiary, r eform ist, non-Marxian socialist party with a defJ ni tely evolutionary pro gram .. . it called itself the Na tional Sociali st P a rty. . . .Accepting a program of evolutionary state socia li sm a nd general collectivism, without stressing th e claims or th e in terests of industrial worke rs, the party was predestined to be disproportionately influential in the determination of policy, because a number of its members were highly placed in the government in the constitution-making period and because foreign affairs were in the hands of Dr. Benes, who affiliated with the party in Parliament." (p. 145). Under Masaryik and Benes, Czecho-Slova:kia was made into a socialistic state. The Ozech National Socialists (Czech Nazis) rmder Benes promoted the godless, materialistic ·p hilosophy of Marx in Ozecho-Slovakia from the very start of the Republic and, hence, the party could not hruve been a "non-,Marxian socialist party," as Mr. Graham claims. The Czechs had no trouble in converting completely to communism in 1948, because Masaryk, Benes and the socialists had prepared them for it. The Slovaks adamantly opposed communism, but could do nothing under the circumstances, -because the Benes political clique made policies. 1 • "Under the organization after 1918 , th e prin cipal party groups, taken from Right to L eft, were ap.proximately as fo llows : The National Democrats •.. The ,P opuli sts .. . The Agrarians ..• The Socialists... The Slovaks" (pp. 140-146). Mr. Graham has very little to say a;bout the SLOV.A,KiS, which means that he knew little or nothing a:bout t hem. The Czechs did, however, run the entire ipoHtical show in Oze0ho-1Slo,v akia. In regard to the Slovaks, Mr. Graham tells us : "In the Revolutionary National Assembly the S'lova.ks initially formed a compact bloc, but shortly began to act with their Czech coDeagues along definite party lines, following in general either a clerical, agrarian, or socialist orientation" (p. 146). Who those Slova:ks were, however, Mr. Graham does not divulge. The fact is that �SLOVAKIA 61 the overwhelming Catholic majority of the Slova,k population had no representation in the Revolutionary National Assembly, the memlbers of which were selected by Masaryk and Benes. It is significant that all the Slovaks appointed were opponents of Slova'k autonomy and proponents of "Czechoslovak" unity; and that the "Slovak bloc" included C:rechs (iBenes, Alice Masaryk, Rotnagl, Kalisek , ZarubaPfeffeJ1IDann) ! Misrepresentation, fraud and deceit were devices of the Benes Czechs, used t o befuddle the outside world. The Slova,ks were dealt with superficially also under the title of "The Populists," where Mr. Graham says : '' As in W eimar, Germ any the Roman Catholic poli ti ca l for ces in Czechoslovak ia underwen t a baptism of dem ocracy and emerged as a Czechoslovak People's Piar,ty and a Slovak P eo ple's Part y, respecti v el y . .. t he Populists deman ded wide au t onom y for t h e local communities. F or twenty years t h e Slovaik P eople's Party, l ed by Father Andrej B linka and for a tim e seco nded by P rofe s so r Bela Tuka, was the principa l foyer of Slo vak particularism and separatism " (p. 142). Strange things, indeed, harppened in Weimar, Germany, and to the "Roman Catholic forces" in Czecho-Slovakia after a "ha,ptism of democracy" ! The Slova:ks emerged as the Slovak P eople's Party, but the Czechs came out as the "Czechoslovak P eople's Party" and, apparently ibefuddled even iMr. Graham. And the country of the Slova;ks, the land inha!bited by them for at least the past 1500 years, became only a "local community"! Again Mr. Graham somehow forgot that Czecho-Slov akia was supposed to be a federation of Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia and Slovaikia. And what was this " particularism and separatism" of Hlinka's party? Nothing else but a struggle for States' Rights for Slovakia within the framework of Cze_ cho-1Slovakia. Why didn't !Mr. Graham say so? The answer is obvious. "Both branches of the P opulist movement," according to Graham, "subscrilbed to the philosophy of Christian socialism as conceived in Austria," that is, "endeavored to bring Christian, i.e., Catholic ideas into effect in legislation and to fight for the preserwation of the influence of the Catholic Church in the schools and in public iJ.ife," says Graham quoting the words o.f one of the apologists of the �62 SLOVAKIA movement. And this, Graham wants us to believe, gaive the Populist 1parties an "anti-soclalist chara,cter." A queer deduction, indeed! The question crops u;p: what is the essential difference between Christian and non--Christian socialism - and which would better serve the interests of a country whose population is for the most part Catholic? • "By the law of April 16, 1919, there was crea ted the Czechoslovak Land OMice ... with •a president ap,pointed by Masaryk and an administrative board ,a ppointed •b y the Revolutionary National Assembly. To this body were given plenary powers for the expropri-ation and realloc ation of land . . . In this way the CZECHOSLOVAK RE·PU.BLIC undid the historic wrongs by which after 1620 the greater part of the CZ•ECH nobility were deprived of their lands and German servitors of the Habsburgs were colonized upon them." {p. 148) . The Land Reform benefitted the Czechs especially the politicians in Prague, their families and friends who never had to worry rubout money afterward. Graham tells us that the estates of the crown and the nobiltity were expropriated "outright and without compensation, whereas in other ca:ses the State offered "appvopriate compensation." Historic "wrongs" were undone by committing more "wrongs"! What lands did the CZECH nobility lose in Slovakia after 1620? Why does Mr. Graham identify the "Czechoslovak Republic" with the Czech nobility? Obviously because to him the Repulblic meant CZffiCHiS. He omits the fact that German nobility lost its lands also. Mr. Graham would have us ,believe that 1620 (White Mountain) was a nationalistic affair, but we know that it was a purely reltgious and dynastic affair. After the Bohemian (not Czech) magnates were defeated, the emperor wrought vengeance upon his enemies both Czech and German - and made Bohemia a hereditary crownland. • Opposite page 1'52 we find a nice picture of Benes, under which we read: "EDUARD BENES--President of the Czechoslovak Republic, 1935-1938, 1940 - " I do not know whether it was placed there tb y •Mr. Kerner or Mr. Graham; most likely it was ,put there by Mr. Kerner. Be that as it may, it is �SLOVAKIA 63 significant that the year 1939 did not figure. The historical fact, however, is that President Benes voluntarily resigned the 1presidency of Ozecho~Slova,kia in 1938, cowardly fled the country, and the Czecho~Sovak !Parliament elected Ha.cha as provided by the Constitution. Why should Kerner, Graham, or any one else for that matter, want us to believe that Benes was still president from "1940-"? The latter, I believe, in oroer to conform to fact, should read: 1940-1948: Moscow Puppet. • In Graham's chapter on "Parties and politics," the Czechs figure most prominently, while the Slovaks are more ignored than the Germans. 1Benes, Kramar, Tusar, Rasin, Masaryk, Cerny, Svehla, Udrzal, Gajda, iMalypetr, Krofta, - AuL CZiIDC!HS - shone 1b rightly on the poli~ tical scene, while SlOIVak Hlinka is mentioned just casually and Slovak Hodza comes on the stage only late in 193'5. At least one thing should be very clear: whatever happened to the Republic was the responsibility of the Masaryk .. Benes Czechs. Czecho-!Slovakia was ruled by coalition governments, 1b ut the ra,dical left-wingers, followers of the materialistic, socialistic philosoiphy of Marx, always predominated. Under the "democratic" system of Masaryk and Benes, the Slovaks were powerless and had practically no influence on policy, foreign or domestic. Neither did the Germans and the Magyars of the Republic. When the "ultraconservative elements" in Malypetr's coalition seceded, he found it necessary, according to Mr. Graham, "to combat legislatively the abuses of the press to which the extremist organs of indigenous Czech fascism and the imported German variety lent themselves." Graha,m continues (,pp. 162-163): "Withou t surrendering fundamental liberties, it was made difficult for factions hostile to ,the democratic order to pursue their activities in the press with impunity. Although applicable to all fact.ions, including Communists, the fascist groups and the German National Socialists were the ,principal ones to feel the brunt of the new legislation ." But the truth is that the Slovaks, who continued to demand "states' rights" (autonomy) within the framework of Ozecho-Slovakia and never were "hostile to the demo- �64 SLOVAKIA cratic order," felt the brunt of the new legislation even more than the communists, fascists and German National Socialists of Czecho-:Slova,kia. Mr. Graham, however, ;pre~ fers to ignore this historical fact, as he also does the actual Czech-Slovak problem, the relations between the Czechs and 1Slovaks, which !b ecame so utterly deteriorated under the Masaryk and Benes regimes. Again the tendency is only too obvious. • The Czecho-,Slovak political pot, fired by the stwpid and highly inflammaJble policies of the Benes Czechs, was coming to a boil. "!Henlein's group openly /began to- espouse the leadership principle, to su'bscr~be to the totalitarian philosophy of Geranan national socialism" (p. 165) something the Czechs did not susped, Graham would have us believe, saying: "This orientation caused genuine apprehension on tlhe p•ar.t of the Czechs, and the accession of Hodza to power was viewed as an open indication to the world of Czech and Slovak solidarity, •a lthough to the end of the •R epublic the ,Slovak Populists under Hlink•a retained their diff.idence and r efused to participate in the coalition, demandjng too high a price by way of autonomy foe Slovakia for even Hodia, himself a Slovaik, to pay." One of the greatest concerns of the Benes Czechs was to have the world believe that all Czechs and all Slovaiks were solidly behind them. The world wanted to be deceived, hence deceived it was. GrahMn would want it to labor under that deception indefinitely, it seems. If it was in Hodza's power, he would have gladly payed the price of autonomy to the Slovaks; the Benes Czechs remained stubbornly against it to the very last, though they were willing to grant Henlein almost anything and everything in 1938 to save their reeHng "Czechoslovak democracy." Hodza, who, was made the scapegoat of the events which preceded the total collapse of the Republic and who despite his better judgment stuck with the Benes Czechs to the bitter end, was later dumped by them. (•More coming) The BEST availaible EiNGLJiSlf-1SLOVAK DICTIONARY? Yes, we have it. Get your copy o.f HROBAK'S ENGLISH~SDOVAK DICTIONARY today! Only $4.00 per copy. � SLOVAKIA 57 Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK According to Mr. Graham, there was no competition for the presidency after Masaryk resigned "in view of the outstanding character of Dr. Benes" (p. 125). This is not exactly true, 1b ecause the Hlinka Party opposed the election of Benes, as did others, until Benes promised :reforms and tbe fulfillment of the 1P ittsburgh Pact, that is, that within a year of his election Slovakia would become autonomous. This disciple, after his election, reneged on the Pittslburgh Poot, just as his master did. This, m course, added to the "outstanding character" of Dr. Benes. 1 • "Freedom of the press, to the exclusion of the preliminar,y censorship so dreaded under the Austrian regime, was guaranteed. With unusual foresight, not match ed by the political leaders of either Weim ar Germany of Socialist Austria, the framers of the Czechoslovak Constitution made pro,v ision for legal restriction on the rights of the press, of assembly, and of association in time of war or in case of events taking p lace within the State seriously threatening the repub• lican form of govern m ent, the Constitution, or public peace and order." (p. 131). - Unusual foresight, indeed. "Public peace and order" must have been threatened thousands of times, judging from the "white spaces" in Slovak newspapers and books during the regimes of Masaryk and Benes; entire editions of Slova1k newspapers were confiscated many times. We have plenty of proof of that for Mr. Graham and all readers of Kerner's "Ozechoslovaikia." Guarantees of freedoms, liberties and rights on 1paper look nice, but mean nothing if they are not realized. The Masaryk-•Benes Czechs were in control of everything and could, therefore, inter,pret the Constitution as they pleased; under them political opposL tion was inte11preted as "unlawful" and a threat to "public peace and order." According to Mr. Graham: "Reli,gious liberty was of primordial import . . . al} religious confessions were treated as equal before the l aw . . . national, religious ,a,u<l. racial mino rities were promised the same equality accorded to the Czechoslovaks in civil and political matters . . . ,a s1>ecial l angu~ge law, itself of a constitutional character, was issued Feb- �58 SLOVAKIA rua.ry 29, 1920, making the Czechoslovak language the official s tate b ut maldng other languag,es, •when used language of the Republic, < by a minority consisting of at least 20 percent of the inhabitants of any jurisdictional area, coordinately valid for virtually every legal pu!'lp()se . .. the right of children to r,e ceive education in their mother tongue ,w as guaranteed, but instruction in the Czech language could be macte obligatory at any time . .. T-o the moment of .partition it could truly he sa;id by German, Magy,ar, Slovak Ruthene, or Czech, that the very air breathed the freedom of the human spirit, a freedom to which the republic was dedicated by its founders." In short, as far as Mr. Graham was concerned, everything was just albout ,p erfect in the "democracy of Masarylk and Benes." But the historical truth is that it was far from it. The Slovaks were not considered a minority, but they actually were worse off in many instances than any minority. The "Czechoslovak NA'VIONAL Church" - a strictly Czech ente:riprise - was estrublished with the blessing and the support of the Masarylk--Benes regimes. The "Czechoslovak" language did not and does not exist, but it became the official language of the Republic, without Mr. Graham ·knowing it. And worst of all, iMr. Graham presumes to spea!k for ,peoples 3Jbout whom he knows little or nothing. If the nations of Czechoslovakia actually enjoyed freedom and lilberties - "the freedom of the human spirit," as Graham calls it - in the democracy of Masaryk and Benes, why did they not fire even a single shot in its defense? Mr. Grah3JID, like the other contrrbutors to Kerner's "Ozechoslovakia," eulogi1zed Masaryik and Benes and sweated out a grandiloquent cha1pter ba:sed on the fiction of "Ozeohoslovak" unity. No, matter what Graham's intentions or objectives were, there can be no justification for suppressing, denying, or falsifying established historical facts. CHA!P'DER ViI!Ill - "Parties and Politics" - by Malbone W. Graham (vd. previous chapter). The tendency so much in evidence in the previous chapter, contributed by the same author, prevails here. To Dr. Graham, "the political history of the Czechoslovak Republic reveals a pattern of continuity and stability unequaied by any other country in Europe." T. G. Masaryk and Be-< nes were masters of the situation. Foreign policy of the Re- �SLOVAKIA 59 public was "in the exipert hands of Dr. Eduard Benes for two decades, from 1915 to 1935"; •b ut "even in the ,period of his presidency, Dr. Benes continued to dominate morally the entevprise of diplomacy." The contin,uity in leadership, plus the "continuity of principle" - ,w hatever that was, gave to the foreign policies of Cze.cho-Slova:kia, and her domestic .p olitics as well,_ "calmness, balance, and objectivity." Benes was no ordinary man, according to Graham. Only 34 years old in 1918 and without any .practical political eXJperience whatever, Benes dominated the political scene in Czecho-Slova!kia. "Dr. Benes was given an opportunity, seldom vouchsafed by history, to organize foreign policy realistically." Just how "realistically Benes organized it became evident, first in 19'38, and then in 1943. He made enemies of all nei,ghboring countries, while in CzechoSlovakia he failed miserrubly to gain the Slova:ks. Benes was a "revolte" - a socialist, also an atheist long before 1'915. Benes went to study to Prague before he was twelve years old. Edward B. Hitchcocl{, one of the most extravagant eulogists of Benes, tells us ("BENES - The Man and The Statesman" - Hamish Hamilton, London ; 1940): "Late,r•, when he (Benes) stayed for several years in Prague, he developed into a believer in brute materialism, anarchism, socialism. He was against religion. He was opposed to almost every established order in the world of that day .... And even the fundamental question - the existence of God - was for him a serious problem. He always countered with the statement that the existence of God was nothing but wishful thinking, that nobody could prove to him that there is a God." Such a man, Graha,m would have us believe, gave the Ozecho-Slovak domestic ipolitics "calmness, balance, and objectivity." About 72 •p ercent of the Czechs and 82 percent of the Slova;ks were Catholics - and Benes hated the Catholic Church. Mr. Graham apparenty knew nothing of the hack,g round of Benes, who also rated among Freemasons. In Paris, Prague, London and Berlin, the young ,m an from Kozl any always felt at home in the company of socirulists, wrote for their pa;pers, hut Mr. Graham, it seems, knows nothing a,bout that; the same goes for the other .contributors to Kerner's "Czechoslovakia." It seems that 1 �60 SLOV.AKI.A they do not want students of history to know what made Benes tick as he did. 'Dhey are supposed to believe that the man just popped out of nowhere, met T. G. Masaryk, and became the greatest democrat and statesman in Europe . • ".Along with tih~ m aj or <:urrent of s ocial democracy i n Czechoslovakia, tlhere developed ,a subsidiary, r eform ist, non-Marxian socialist party with a defJ ni tely evolutionary pro gram .. . it called itself the Na tional Sociali st P a rty. . . .Accepting a program of evolutionary state socia li sm a nd general collectivism, without stressing th e claims or th e in terests of industrial worke rs, the party was predestined to be disproportionately influential in the determination of policy, because a number of its members were highly placed in the government in the constitution-making period and because foreign affairs were in the hands of Dr. Benes, who affiliated with the party in Parliament." (p. 145). Under Masaryik and Benes, Czecho-Slova:kia was made into a socialistic state. The Ozech National Socialists (Czech Nazis) rmder Benes promoted the godless, materialistic ·p hilosophy of Marx in Ozecho-Slovakia from the very start of the Republic and, hence, the party could not hruve been a "non-,Marxian socialist party," as Mr. Graham claims. The Czechs had no trouble in converting completely to communism in 1948, because Masaryk, Benes and the socialists had prepared them for it. The Slovaks adamantly opposed communism, but could do nothing under the circumstances, -because the Benes political clique made policies. 1 • "Under the organization after 1918 , th e prin cipal party groups, taken from Right to L eft, were ap.proximately as fo llows : The National Democrats •.. The ,P opuli sts .. . The Agrarians ..• The Socialists... The Slovaks" (pp. 140-146). Mr. Graham has very little to say a;bout the SLOV.A,KiS, which means that he knew little or nothing a:bout t hem. The Czechs did, however, run the entire ipoHtical show in Oze0ho-1Slo,v akia. In regard to the Slovaks, Mr. Graham tells us : "In the Revolutionary National Assembly the S'lova.ks initially formed a compact bloc, but shortly began to act with their Czech coDeagues along definite party lines, following in general either a clerical, agrarian, or socialist orientation" (p. 146). Who those Slova:ks were, however, Mr. Graham does not divulge. The fact is that �SLOVAKIA 61 the overwhelming Catholic majority of the Slova,k population had no representation in the Revolutionary National Assembly, the memlbers of which were selected by Masaryk and Benes. It is significant that all the Slovaks appointed were opponents of Slova'k autonomy and proponents of "Czechoslovak" unity; and that the "Slovak bloc" included C:rechs (iBenes, Alice Masaryk, Rotnagl, Kalisek , ZarubaPfeffeJ1IDann) ! Misrepresentation, fraud and deceit were devices of the Benes Czechs, used t o befuddle the outside world. The Slova,ks were dealt with superficially also under the title of "The Populists," where Mr. Graham says : '' As in W eimar, Germ any the Roman Catholic poli ti ca l for ces in Czechoslovak ia underwen t a baptism of dem ocracy and emerged as a Czechoslovak People's Piar,ty and a Slovak P eo ple's Part y, respecti v el y . .. t he Populists deman ded wide au t onom y for t h e local communities. F or twenty years t h e Slovaik P eople's Party, l ed by Father Andrej B linka and for a tim e seco nded by P rofe s so r Bela Tuka, was the principa l foyer of Slo vak particularism and separatism " (p. 142). Strange things, indeed, harppened in Weimar, Germany, and to the "Roman Catholic forces" in Czecho-Slovakia after a "ha,ptism of democracy" ! The Slova:ks emerged as the Slovak P eople's Party, but the Czechs came out as the "Czechoslovak P eople's Party" and, apparently ibefuddled even iMr. Graham. And the country of the Slova;ks, the land inha!bited by them for at least the past 1500 years, became only a "local community"! Again Mr. Graham somehow forgot that Czecho-Slov akia was supposed to be a federation of Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia and Slovaikia. And what was this " particularism and separatism" of Hlinka's party? Nothing else but a struggle for States' Rights for Slovakia within the framework of Cze_ cho-1Slovakia. Why didn't !Mr. Graham say so? The answer is obvious. "Both branches of the P opulist movement," according to Graham, "subscrilbed to the philosophy of Christian socialism as conceived in Austria," that is, "endeavored to bring Christian, i.e., Catholic ideas into effect in legislation and to fight for the preserwation of the influence of the Catholic Church in the schools and in public iJ.ife," says Graham quoting the words o.f one of the apologists of the �62 SLOVAKIA movement. And this, Graham wants us to believe, gaive the Populist 1parties an "anti-soclalist chara,cter." A queer deduction, indeed! The question crops u;p: what is the essential difference between Christian and non--Christian socialism - and which would better serve the interests of a country whose population is for the most part Catholic? • "By the law of April 16, 1919, there was crea ted the Czechoslovak Land OMice ... with •a president ap,pointed by Masaryk and an administrative board ,a ppointed •b y the Revolutionary National Assembly. To this body were given plenary powers for the expropri-ation and realloc ation of land . . . In this way the CZECHOSLOVAK RE·PU.BLIC undid the historic wrongs by which after 1620 the greater part of the CZ•ECH nobility were deprived of their lands and German servitors of the Habsburgs were colonized upon them." {p. 148) . The Land Reform benefitted the Czechs especially the politicians in Prague, their families and friends who never had to worry rubout money afterward. Graham tells us that the estates of the crown and the nobiltity were expropriated "outright and without compensation, whereas in other ca:ses the State offered "appvopriate compensation." Historic "wrongs" were undone by committing more "wrongs"! What lands did the CZECH nobility lose in Slovakia after 1620? Why does Mr. Graham identify the "Czechoslovak Republic" with the Czech nobility? Obviously because to him the Repulblic meant CZffiCHiS. He omits the fact that German nobility lost its lands also. Mr. Graham would have us ,believe that 1620 (White Mountain) was a nationalistic affair, but we know that it was a purely reltgious and dynastic affair. After the Bohemian (not Czech) magnates were defeated, the emperor wrought vengeance upon his enemies both Czech and German - and made Bohemia a hereditary crownland. • Opposite page 1'52 we find a nice picture of Benes, under which we read: "EDUARD BENES--President of the Czechoslovak Republic, 1935-1938, 1940 - " I do not know whether it was placed there tb y •Mr. Kerner or Mr. Graham; most likely it was ,put there by Mr. Kerner. Be that as it may, it is �SLOVAKIA 63 significant that the year 1939 did not figure. The historical fact, however, is that President Benes voluntarily resigned the 1presidency of Ozecho~Slova,kia in 1938, cowardly fled the country, and the Czecho~Sovak !Parliament elected Ha.cha as provided by the Constitution. Why should Kerner, Graham, or any one else for that matter, want us to believe that Benes was still president from "1940-"? The latter, I believe, in oroer to conform to fact, should read: 1940-1948: Moscow Puppet. • In Graham's chapter on "Parties and politics," the Czechs figure most prominently, while the Slovaks are more ignored than the Germans. 1Benes, Kramar, Tusar, Rasin, Masaryk, Cerny, Svehla, Udrzal, Gajda, iMalypetr, Krofta, - AuL CZiIDC!HS - shone 1b rightly on the poli~ tical scene, while SlOIVak Hlinka is mentioned just casually and Slovak Hodza comes on the stage only late in 193'5. At least one thing should be very clear: whatever happened to the Republic was the responsibility of the Masaryk .. Benes Czechs. Czecho-!Slovakia was ruled by coalition governments, 1b ut the ra,dical left-wingers, followers of the materialistic, socialistic philosoiphy of Marx, always predominated. Under the "democratic" system of Masaryk and Benes, the Slovaks were powerless and had practically no influence on policy, foreign or domestic. Neither did the Germans and the Magyars of the Republic. When the "ultraconservative elements" in Malypetr's coalition seceded, he found it necessary, according to Mr. Graham, "to combat legislatively the abuses of the press to which the extremist organs of indigenous Czech fascism and the imported German variety lent themselves." Graha,m continues (,pp. 162-163): "Withou t surrendering fundamental liberties, it was made difficult for factions hostile to ,the democratic order to pursue their activities in the press with impunity. Although applicable to all fact.ions, including Communists, the fascist groups and the German National Socialists were the ,principal ones to feel the brunt of the new legislation ." But the truth is that the Slovaks, who continued to demand "states' rights" (autonomy) within the framework of Ozecho-Slovakia and never were "hostile to the demo- �64 SLOVAKIA cratic order," felt the brunt of the new legislation even more than the communists, fascists and German National Socialists of Czecho-:Slova,kia. Mr. Graham, however, ;pre~ fers to ignore this historical fact, as he also does the actual Czech-Slovak problem, the relations between the Czechs and 1Slovaks, which !b ecame so utterly deteriorated under the Masaryk and Benes regimes. Again the tendency is only too obvious. • The Czecho-,Slovak political pot, fired by the stwpid and highly inflammaJble policies of the Benes Czechs, was coming to a boil. "!Henlein's group openly /began to- espouse the leadership principle, to su'bscr~be to the totalitarian philosophy of Geranan national socialism" (p. 165) something the Czechs did not susped, Graham would have us believe, saying: "This orientation caused genuine apprehension on tlhe p•ar.t of the Czechs, and the accession of Hodza to power was viewed as an open indication to the world of Czech and Slovak solidarity, •a lthough to the end of the •R epublic the ,Slovak Populists under Hlink•a retained their diff.idence and r efused to participate in the coalition, demandjng too high a price by way of autonomy foe Slovakia for even Hodia, himself a Slovaik, to pay." One of the greatest concerns of the Benes Czechs was to have the world believe that all Czechs and all Slovaiks were solidly behind them. The world wanted to be deceived, hence deceived it was. GrahMn would want it to labor under that deception indefinitely, it seems. If it was in Hodza's power, he would have gladly payed the price of autonomy to the Slovaks; the Benes Czechs remained stubbornly against it to the very last, though they were willing to grant Henlein almost anything and everything in 1938 to save their reeHng "Czechoslovak democracy." Hodza, who, was made the scapegoat of the events which preceded the total collapse of the Republic and who despite his better judgment stuck with the Benes Czechs to the bitter end, was later dumped by them. (•More coming) The BEST availaible EiNGLJiSlf-1SLOVAK DICTIONARY? Yes, we have it. Get your copy o.f HROBAK'S ENGLISH~SDOVAK DICTIONARY today! Only $4.00 per copy. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 57 Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK According to Mr. Graham, there was no competition for the presidency after Masaryk resigned "in view of the outstanding character of Dr. Benes" (p. 125). This is not exactly true, 1b ecause the Hlinka Party opposed the election of Benes, as did others, until Benes promised :reforms and tbe fulfillment of the 1P ittsburgh Pact, that is, that within a year of his election Slovakia would become autonomous. This disciple, after his election, reneged on the Pittslburgh Poot, just as his master did. This, m course, added to the "outstanding character" of Dr. Benes. 1 • "Freedom of the press, to the exclusion of the preliminar,y censorship so dreaded under the Austrian regime, was guaranteed. With unusual foresight, not match ed by the political leaders of either Weim ar Germany of Socialist Austria, the framers of the Czechoslovak Constitution made pro,v ision for legal restriction on the rights of the press, of assembly, and of association in time of war or in case of events taking p lace within the State seriously threatening the repub• lican form of govern m ent, the Constitution, or public peace and order." (p. 131). - Unusual foresight, indeed. "Public peace and order" must have been threatened thousands of times, judging from the "white spaces" in Slovak newspapers and books during the regimes of Masaryk and Benes; entire editions of Slova1k newspapers were confiscated many times. We have plenty of proof of that for Mr. Graham and all readers of Kerner's "Ozechoslovaikia." Guarantees of freedoms, liberties and rights on 1paper look nice, but mean nothing if they are not realized. The Masaryk-•Benes Czechs were in control of everything and could, therefore, inter,pret the Constitution as they pleased; under them political opposL tion was inte11preted as "unlawful" and a threat to "public peace and order." According to Mr. Graham: "Reli,gious liberty was of primordial import . . . al} religious confessions were treated as equal before the l aw . . . national, religious ,a,u<l. racial mino rities were promised the same equality accorded to the Czechoslovaks in civil and political matters . . . ,a s1>ecial l angu~ge law, itself of a constitutional character, was issued Feb- 58 SLOVAKIA rua.ry 29, 1920, making the Czechoslovak language the official s tate b ut maldng other languag,es, •when used language of the Republic, < by a minority consisting of at least 20 percent of the inhabitants of any jurisdictional area, coordinately valid for virtually every legal pu!'lp()se . .. the right of children to r,e ceive education in their mother tongue ,w as guaranteed, but instruction in the Czech language could be macte obligatory at any time . .. T-o the moment of .partition it could truly he sa;id by German, Magy,ar, Slovak Ruthene, or Czech, that the very air breathed the freedom of the human spirit, a freedom to which the republic was dedicated by its founders." In short, as far as Mr. Graham was concerned, everything was just albout ,p erfect in the "democracy of Masarylk and Benes." But the historical truth is that it was far from it. The Slovaks were not considered a minority, but they actually were worse off in many instances than any minority. The "Czechoslovak NA'VIONAL Church" - a strictly Czech ente:riprise - was estrublished with the blessing and the support of the Masarylk--Benes regimes. The "Czechoslovak" language did not and does not exist, but it became the official language of the Republic, without Mr. Graham ·knowing it. And worst of all, iMr. Graham presumes to spea!k for ,peoples 3Jbout whom he knows little or nothing. If the nations of Czechoslovakia actually enjoyed freedom and lilberties - "the freedom of the human spirit," as Graham calls it - in the democracy of Masaryk and Benes, why did they not fire even a single shot in its defense? Mr. Grah3JID, like the other contrrbutors to Kerner's "Ozechoslovakia," eulogi1zed Masaryik and Benes and sweated out a grandiloquent cha1pter ba:sed on the fiction of "Ozeohoslovak" unity. No, matter what Graham's intentions or objectives were, there can be no justification for suppressing, denying, or falsifying established historical facts. CHA!P'DER ViI!Ill - "Parties and Politics" - by Malbone W. Graham (vd. previous chapter). The tendency so much in evidence in the previous chapter, contributed by the same author, prevails here. To Dr. Graham, "the political history of the Czechoslovak Republic reveals a pattern of continuity and stability unequaied by any other country in Europe." T. G. Masaryk and Be-< nes were masters of the situation. Foreign policy of the Re- SLOVAKIA 59 public was "in the exipert hands of Dr. Eduard Benes for two decades, from 1915 to 1935"; •b ut "even in the ,period of his presidency, Dr. Benes continued to dominate morally the entevprise of diplomacy." The contin,uity in leadership, plus the "continuity of principle" - ,w hatever that was, gave to the foreign policies of Cze.cho-Slova:kia, and her domestic .p olitics as well,_ "calmness, balance, and objectivity." Benes was no ordinary man, according to Graham. Only 34 years old in 1918 and without any .practical political eXJperience whatever, Benes dominated the political scene in Czecho-Slova!kia. "Dr. Benes was given an opportunity, seldom vouchsafed by history, to organize foreign policy realistically." Just how "realistically Benes organized it became evident, first in 19'38, and then in 1943. He made enemies of all nei,ghboring countries, while in CzechoSlovakia he failed miserrubly to gain the Slova:ks. Benes was a "revolte" - a socialist, also an atheist long before 1'915. Benes went to study to Prague before he was twelve years old. Edward B. Hitchcocl{, one of the most extravagant eulogists of Benes, tells us ("BENES - The Man and The Statesman" - Hamish Hamilton, London ; 1940): "Late,r•, when he (Benes) stayed for several years in Prague, he developed into a believer in brute materialism, anarchism, socialism. He was against religion. He was opposed to almost every established order in the world of that day .... And even the fundamental question - the existence of God - was for him a serious problem. He always countered with the statement that the existence of God was nothing but wishful thinking, that nobody could prove to him that there is a God." Such a man, Graha,m would have us believe, gave the Ozecho-Slovak domestic ipolitics "calmness, balance, and objectivity." About 72 •p ercent of the Czechs and 82 percent of the Slova;ks were Catholics - and Benes hated the Catholic Church. Mr. Graham apparenty knew nothing of the hack,g round of Benes, who also rated among Freemasons. In Paris, Prague, London and Berlin, the young ,m an from Kozl any always felt at home in the company of socirulists, wrote for their pa;pers, hut Mr. Graham, it seems, knows nothing a,bout that; the same goes for the other .contributors to Kerner's "Czechoslovakia." It seems that 1 60 SLOV.AKI.A they do not want students of history to know what made Benes tick as he did. 'Dhey are supposed to believe that the man just popped out of nowhere, met T. G. Masaryk, and became the greatest democrat and statesman in Europe . • ".Along with tih~ m aj or <:urrent of s ocial democracy i n Czechoslovakia, tlhere developed ,a subsidiary, r eform ist, non-Marxian socialist party with a defJ ni tely evolutionary pro gram .. . it called itself the Na tional Sociali st P a rty. . . .Accepting a program of evolutionary state socia li sm a nd general collectivism, without stressing th e claims or th e in terests of industrial worke rs, the party was predestined to be disproportionately influential in the determination of policy, because a number of its members were highly placed in the government in the constitution-making period and because foreign affairs were in the hands of Dr. Benes, who affiliated with the party in Parliament." (p. 145). Under Masaryik and Benes, Czecho-Slova:kia was made into a socialistic state. The Ozech National Socialists (Czech Nazis) rmder Benes promoted the godless, materialistic ·p hilosophy of Marx in Ozecho-Slovakia from the very start of the Republic and, hence, the party could not hruve been a "non-,Marxian socialist party," as Mr. Graham claims. The Czechs had no trouble in converting completely to communism in 1948, because Masaryk, Benes and the socialists had prepared them for it. The Slovaks adamantly opposed communism, but could do nothing under the circumstances, -because the Benes political clique made policies. 1 • "Under the organization after 1918 , th e prin cipal party groups, taken from Right to L eft, were ap.proximately as fo llows : The National Democrats •.. The ,P opuli sts .. . The Agrarians ..• The Socialists... The Slovaks" (pp. 140-146). Mr. Graham has very little to say a;bout the SLOV.A,KiS, which means that he knew little or nothing a:bout t hem. The Czechs did, however, run the entire ipoHtical show in Oze0ho-1Slo,v akia. In regard to the Slovaks, Mr. Graham tells us : "In the Revolutionary National Assembly the S'lova.ks initially formed a compact bloc, but shortly began to act with their Czech coDeagues along definite party lines, following in general either a clerical, agrarian, or socialist orientation" (p. 146). Who those Slova:ks were, however, Mr. Graham does not divulge. The fact is that SLOVAKIA 61 the overwhelming Catholic majority of the Slova,k population had no representation in the Revolutionary National Assembly, the memlbers of which were selected by Masaryk and Benes. It is significant that all the Slovaks appointed were opponents of Slova'k autonomy and proponents of "Czechoslovak" unity; and that the "Slovak bloc" included C:rechs (iBenes, Alice Masaryk, Rotnagl, Kalisek , ZarubaPfeffeJ1IDann) ! Misrepresentation, fraud and deceit were devices of the Benes Czechs, used t o befuddle the outside world. The Slova,ks were dealt with superficially also under the title of "The Populists," where Mr. Graham says : '' As in W eimar, Germ any the Roman Catholic poli ti ca l for ces in Czechoslovak ia underwen t a baptism of dem ocracy and emerged as a Czechoslovak People's Piar,ty and a Slovak P eo ple's Part y, respecti v el y . .. t he Populists deman ded wide au t onom y for t h e local communities. F or twenty years t h e Slovaik P eople's Party, l ed by Father Andrej B linka and for a tim e seco nded by P rofe s so r Bela Tuka, was the principa l foyer of Slo vak particularism and separatism " (p. 142). Strange things, indeed, harppened in Weimar, Germany, and to the "Roman Catholic forces" in Czecho-Slovakia after a "ha,ptism of democracy" ! The Slova:ks emerged as the Slovak P eople's Party, but the Czechs came out as the "Czechoslovak P eople's Party" and, apparently ibefuddled even iMr. Graham. And the country of the Slova;ks, the land inha!bited by them for at least the past 1500 years, became only a "local community"! Again Mr. Graham somehow forgot that Czecho-Slov akia was supposed to be a federation of Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia and Slovaikia. And what was this " particularism and separatism" of Hlinka's party? Nothing else but a struggle for States' Rights for Slovakia within the framework of Cze_ cho-1Slovakia. Why didn't !Mr. Graham say so? The answer is obvious. "Both branches of the P opulist movement," according to Graham, "subscrilbed to the philosophy of Christian socialism as conceived in Austria," that is, "endeavored to bring Christian, i.e., Catholic ideas into effect in legislation and to fight for the preserwation of the influence of the Catholic Church in the schools and in public iJ.ife," says Graham quoting the words o.f one of the apologists of the 62 SLOVAKIA movement. And this, Graham wants us to believe, gaive the Populist 1parties an "anti-soclalist chara,cter." A queer deduction, indeed! The question crops u;p: what is the essential difference between Christian and non--Christian socialism - and which would better serve the interests of a country whose population is for the most part Catholic? • "By the law of April 16, 1919, there was crea ted the Czechoslovak Land OMice ... with •a president ap,pointed by Masaryk and an administrative board ,a ppointed •b y the Revolutionary National Assembly. To this body were given plenary powers for the expropri-ation and realloc ation of land . . . In this way the CZECHOSLOVAK RE·PU.BLIC undid the historic wrongs by which after 1620 the greater part of the CZ•ECH nobility were deprived of their lands and German servitors of the Habsburgs were colonized upon them." {p. 148) . The Land Reform benefitted the Czechs especially the politicians in Prague, their families and friends who never had to worry rubout money afterward. Graham tells us that the estates of the crown and the nobiltity were expropriated "outright and without compensation, whereas in other ca:ses the State offered "appvopriate compensation." Historic "wrongs" were undone by committing more "wrongs"! What lands did the CZECH nobility lose in Slovakia after 1620? Why does Mr. Graham identify the "Czechoslovak Republic" with the Czech nobility? Obviously because to him the Repulblic meant CZffiCHiS. He omits the fact that German nobility lost its lands also. Mr. Graham would have us ,believe that 1620 (White Mountain) was a nationalistic affair, but we know that it was a purely reltgious and dynastic affair. After the Bohemian (not Czech) magnates were defeated, the emperor wrought vengeance upon his enemies both Czech and German - and made Bohemia a hereditary crownland. • Opposite page 1'52 we find a nice picture of Benes, under which we read: "EDUARD BENES--President of the Czechoslovak Republic, 1935-1938, 1940 - " I do not know whether it was placed there tb y •Mr. Kerner or Mr. Graham; most likely it was ,put there by Mr. Kerner. Be that as it may, it is SLOVAKIA 63 significant that the year 1939 did not figure. The historical fact, however, is that President Benes voluntarily resigned the 1presidency of Ozecho~Slova,kia in 1938, cowardly fled the country, and the Czecho~Sovak !Parliament elected Ha.cha as provided by the Constitution. Why should Kerner, Graham, or any one else for that matter, want us to believe that Benes was still president from "1940-"? The latter, I believe, in oroer to conform to fact, should read: 1940-1948: Moscow Puppet. • In Graham's chapter on "Parties and politics," the Czechs figure most prominently, while the Slovaks are more ignored than the Germans. 1Benes, Kramar, Tusar, Rasin, Masaryk, Cerny, Svehla, Udrzal, Gajda, iMalypetr, Krofta, - AuL CZiIDC!HS - shone 1b rightly on the poli~ tical scene, while SlOIVak Hlinka is mentioned just casually and Slovak Hodza comes on the stage only late in 193'5. At least one thing should be very clear: whatever happened to the Republic was the responsibility of the Masaryk .. Benes Czechs. Czecho-!Slovakia was ruled by coalition governments, 1b ut the ra,dical left-wingers, followers of the materialistic, socialistic philosoiphy of Marx, always predominated. Under the "democratic" system of Masaryk and Benes, the Slovaks were powerless and had practically no influence on policy, foreign or domestic. Neither did the Germans and the Magyars of the Republic. When the "ultraconservative elements" in Malypetr's coalition seceded, he found it necessary, according to Mr. Graham, "to combat legislatively the abuses of the press to which the extremist organs of indigenous Czech fascism and the imported German variety lent themselves." Graha,m continues (,pp. 162-163): "Withou t surrendering fundamental liberties, it was made difficult for factions hostile to ,the democratic order to pursue their activities in the press with impunity. Although applicable to all fact.ions, including Communists, the fascist groups and the German National Socialists were the ,principal ones to feel the brunt of the new legislation ." But the truth is that the Slovaks, who continued to demand "states' rights" (autonomy) within the framework of Ozecho-Slovakia and never were "hostile to the demo- 64 SLOVAKIA cratic order," felt the brunt of the new legislation even more than the communists, fascists and German National Socialists of Czecho-:Slova,kia. Mr. Graham, however, ;pre~ fers to ignore this historical fact, as he also does the actual Czech-Slovak problem, the relations between the Czechs and 1Slovaks, which !b ecame so utterly deteriorated under the Masaryk and Benes regimes. Again the tendency is only too obvious. • The Czecho-,Slovak political pot, fired by the stwpid and highly inflammaJble policies of the Benes Czechs, was coming to a boil. "!Henlein's group openly /began to- espouse the leadership principle, to su'bscr~be to the totalitarian philosophy of Geranan national socialism" (p. 165) something the Czechs did not susped, Graham would have us believe, saying: "This orientation caused genuine apprehension on tlhe p•ar.t of the Czechs, and the accession of Hodza to power was viewed as an open indication to the world of Czech and Slovak solidarity, •a lthough to the end of the •R epublic the ,Slovak Populists under Hlink•a retained their diff.idence and r efused to participate in the coalition, demandjng too high a price by way of autonomy foe Slovakia for even Hodia, himself a Slovaik, to pay." One of the greatest concerns of the Benes Czechs was to have the world believe that all Czechs and all Slovaiks were solidly behind them. The world wanted to be deceived, hence deceived it was. GrahMn would want it to labor under that deception indefinitely, it seems. If it was in Hodza's power, he would have gladly payed the price of autonomy to the Slovaks; the Benes Czechs remained stubbornly against it to the very last, though they were willing to grant Henlein almost anything and everything in 1938 to save their reeHng "Czechoslovak democracy." Hodza, who, was made the scapegoat of the events which preceded the total collapse of the Republic and who despite his better judgment stuck with the Benes Czechs to the bitter end, was later dumped by them. (•More coming) The BEST availaible EiNGLJiSlf-1SLOVAK DICTIONARY? Yes, we have it. Get your copy o.f HROBAK'S ENGLISH~SDOVAK DICTIONARY today! Only $4.00 per copy.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professor Kerner's "CZECHOSLOVAKIA": History or Propaganda? (3/8) Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 1 (18), March 1956 pp. 57-64 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hrobak, Philip Anthony, 1904-1964 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1956 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="/items/show/176">Vol. 5, No. 4 (17), pp. 55-63</a><br />continues in <a href="/items/show/213">Vol. 6, No. 2 (19), pp. 61-64</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/6645d349c78b98e1ec103b8e9a05333e.pdf bf844954816a2fa8e94ac8d831488d08 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 61 Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A.B1ROB.A.K When the Syrovy government was faced with "the accomplished fact of the Munich Agreement, it had to make the supreme choice": accept Munich, or the death of the Czecho..1Slovak nation. We know what happened. But Mr. Graham says: "The choice ended the possibility of maintaining the regime of democracy and organized multi-1.>arty Hfe w1hich had made Czecho-S1ovakia renowned throughout the world, and occasioned the departure from public life of Pres:ident Benes." equalitarian Is there any doubt in any informed person's mind that Mr. Graham can say the nicest, even though not exactly truthful, things in the nicest way about Dr. Edward Benes and his "equalitarian democracy"? Benes capitulated to Munich without consulting Parliame:rrt, hence acted unconstitutionally, but Mr. Graham would have us !believe that the Symvy government did the capitulating. Munich did "occasion the deiparture of Benes from public life" as Graham puts it - hut we have it from several Czechs, who were members of the Prague Parliament, that it was rather a "forced" departure to esca,pe punishment for Munich, for which they held him responsilble. In a manner typical of Kerner's "Ozecho:slova:kia," Mr. Graham concludes his chapter on ":Parties and Politics" with these words: "Politically, the regime which was born of the lifelong endeavor of Masaryk and Benes to found institutionally the resurgent Czechoslovak nationality passed out of ex<i.stence on October ,5, 1938, betmyed but not defeated . For thos e of us who have survived its passing, the ironic tra,gedy is that its chastisement brought neither peace nor healing to tJhe Danubian and central European world." For those of us who really knew the regime of Masary,k and Benes, and for the Czechs and Slovaks who were mi'Sled by it or suffered under it, let it be said that the world would :be iby far the better for it had the OzechoSlovak business, the political monstrosity that was CzechoSlovaikia, never /been born. We know that Benes resigned �62 SLOVAKIA on October 5, 1938, after he betrayed not only the Slovaks, ,b ut also his own Czech nation to Hitler. We also know that the same Benes five years later betrayed the nations of Czecho-1Slcwakia the second time, this time to Stalin, when he formally sold them out with the OzechSoviet Treaty of December 12, 1943, so that he might return as "president" of Czecho-Slcwa,kia again and smite all those who o.pposed his anti-Christian and pro-'So,v iet policies. To Benes revenge was sweet in 1945. Three years later, before he died, Benes wailed again that he was betrayed, this time not ·b y the Slovaks, Poles, Germans, Magyars, Catholics and all anti..,Marxist socialists, but by Moscow and the Czech communists under Gottwald. No honor among thieves! CHAPTER IX - "Czechoslovakia and Her Minorities" - by Joseph S. Roucek, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Political Science and Sociology, and Chairman, Department of political Science, Hofstra College; member, editorial board, World Affairs Inter,preter; knight, Order of the Star (Rumania), Crown of Jugoslavia; author of The Working of the Minorities System under the League of Nations (Prague, 1928); Contemporary World Politics (1939); etc. The bibliography cited by Roucek tells us at a glance what we might expect; it really is a roster of Czech propagandists. The Slovaks, not considered a "minority," do not even get as much play as the minorities, who caused quite some concern "when Czecho-Slovakia renewed her independent existence as a state in 1918" (p. 171). Of course, Roucek, like other Czech and pro-Czech historians, simply presumes that Czecho-Slovakia, at one time or another, did in fact exist and, hence, in 1918 simply "renewed" her independence. This, however, has no historical basis in fact. It is strictly Czech propaganda. "Czecho-Slovakia accepted without hesitation international responsibility for the protection of minorities as an integral part of the Constitution." Benes, like the Magyars of Hungary, declared that Czecho-Slovakia would grant all rights to her minorities when the question was broached at the Paris Peace Con- �SLOVAKIA 63 ference. What happened in reality is something else. We remember how nice the Hungarian Constitution read, too. Roucek, however, seems to forget exactly how the minorities were treated by Prague; he forgets, too, that the Slovaks, who had joined the Czechs to form a common political state as "equal partners," were just as badly off, if not worse, than the minorities themselves. The statistics given on pp. 174-176 tell us how many Magyars, Germans, Ruthenians, Poles, Jews, Rumanians, etc., there were in Czecho-Slovakia, how many deputies they had in parliament, the number of schools provided for them, but no statistics on the Slovaks and Czechs. Roucek lumps them together so that talk might be made about a "CzechoSlovak majority." This tendency is followed by all Czech propagandists; it is supposed to conceal the fact that the Czechs were in fact the minority people in Czecho-Slovakia, that is, there were more non-Czech people in it. "Contrary to the popular conception, Czecho-Slovakia did not acquire the Sudete Germans from modern Germany. The Slav tribes which settled during the fifth and sixth centuries on the territories, which were to become the foundation of the Czech (Bohemian) State, were separated from their German neighbors by mountain ranges. But they were continually in contact'' (p. 176). It is highly questionable whether Roucek knew what "popular" conception concerning the Sudeten Germans was. If he did, then he should have gone a bit further and told us why it was wrong. To what country did the Sudetenland belong? The Slav tribes that settled there might, in a sense, be considered the foundation of a Czech state, but what is the purpose of the parenthetical "Bohemian"? It is obvious that Roucek wants readers of Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" to believe that the terms "Czech" and "Bohemian" are synonymous. But we know that the Slav tribes (the ancestors of the Czechs) settled on the territory of the Boii, which was known as BOHEMIA at that time and not as any CZECH state. Germans had settled there, too; they did not have to wait for invitations from "Czech" princes or kings, either, as Roucek states. And when a Czech did become ruler of Bohemia, he never could get along without the Germans. "Hence Czechs and Germans lived together for eight centuries in �64 Bohemia . out clearly the latter did pendence" (p. SLOVAKIA But throughout the history of Bohemia one fact stands the Czechs got along with the Germans only so long as not try to become dominant and overthrow Czech inde· 177). What Czech independence, and when? How long were the Czechs really dominant in Bohemia? There certainly are many facts that stand out more clearly than the one mentioned, but they are omitted by Roucek for reasons obvious to informed observer,s. He is simply doing a job for the Czechs, who, he says "learned their lesson from past experiences. After the disastrous Battle of White Moun tain, which brought the Czechs under the dominance of Austria, the German element ul timately reduced the Czechs to a nation of servants and doorkeepers, despised in their own homes by their German masters. The struggle went on with the reawakening of the Czech nation in the nineteenth century" (p. 177 ). By whom were the Czechs dominated before the Battle of White Mountain, if not by Austria and the Germans? Is it not a fact that the Czechs even after their "reawakening " wished to be dominated by Austria (the Habsburgs)? Palacky, the Czech historian who was so greatly admired and followed by Masaryk and Benes, would have invented Austria if she did not exist! The Battle of White Mountain was not a nationalistic, but strictly a religious and dynastic affair. The fact is that the Czechs would still be under Austria, if the Habsburgs would have granted them autonomy (states' rights) within the empire, the only thing they really fought for until Masaryk and Benes messed up everything during World War I. (•More coming) WHO SAID IT? "Deviating :threes shall be jailed. . . Devi•a ting forces are todary er1adicalted or liquidated. Today only the Democrats and Communists, and members of oither political parties (of .the NaJtional Fronlt) bear the respons~bility of detemnli.ning which forces shaJ11 control S10V'akia and in which direction Sl(}IVakia shall go." - (Dr. Joseph Lettrich, ViceChairman of the Executive Committee of the "Co11n.~il of Free Ozoohoslovrukia,." CAS, Bratislava, No. 130, 194.S~. � SLOVAKIA 61 Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A.B1ROB.A.K When the Syrovy government was faced with "the accomplished fact of the Munich Agreement, it had to make the supreme choice": accept Munich, or the death of the Czecho..1Slovak nation. We know what happened. But Mr. Graham says: "The choice ended the possibility of maintaining the regime of democracy and organized multi-1.>arty Hfe w1hich had made Czecho-S1ovakia renowned throughout the world, and occasioned the departure from public life of Pres:ident Benes." equalitarian Is there any doubt in any informed person's mind that Mr. Graham can say the nicest, even though not exactly truthful, things in the nicest way about Dr. Edward Benes and his "equalitarian democracy"? Benes capitulated to Munich without consulting Parliame:rrt, hence acted unconstitutionally, but Mr. Graham would have us !believe that the Symvy government did the capitulating. Munich did "occasion the deiparture of Benes from public life" as Graham puts it - hut we have it from several Czechs, who were members of the Prague Parliament, that it was rather a "forced" departure to esca,pe punishment for Munich, for which they held him responsilble. In a manner typical of Kerner's "Ozecho:slova:kia," Mr. Graham concludes his chapter on ":Parties and Politics" with these words: "Politically, the regime which was born of the lifelong endeavor of Masaryk and Benes to found institutionally the resurgent Czechoslovak nationality passed out of ex<i.stence on October ,5, 1938, betmyed but not defeated . For thos e of us who have survived its passing, the ironic tra,gedy is that its chastisement brought neither peace nor healing to tJhe Danubian and central European world." For those of us who really knew the regime of Masary,k and Benes, and for the Czechs and Slovaks who were mi'Sled by it or suffered under it, let it be said that the world would :be iby far the better for it had the OzechoSlovak business, the political monstrosity that was CzechoSlovaikia, never /been born. We know that Benes resigned �62 SLOVAKIA on October 5, 1938, after he betrayed not only the Slovaks, ,b ut also his own Czech nation to Hitler. We also know that the same Benes five years later betrayed the nations of Czecho-1Slcwakia the second time, this time to Stalin, when he formally sold them out with the OzechSoviet Treaty of December 12, 1943, so that he might return as "president" of Czecho-Slcwa,kia again and smite all those who o.pposed his anti-Christian and pro-'So,v iet policies. To Benes revenge was sweet in 1945. Three years later, before he died, Benes wailed again that he was betrayed, this time not ·b y the Slovaks, Poles, Germans, Magyars, Catholics and all anti..,Marxist socialists, but by Moscow and the Czech communists under Gottwald. No honor among thieves! CHAPTER IX - "Czechoslovakia and Her Minorities" - by Joseph S. Roucek, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Political Science and Sociology, and Chairman, Department of political Science, Hofstra College; member, editorial board, World Affairs Inter,preter; knight, Order of the Star (Rumania), Crown of Jugoslavia; author of The Working of the Minorities System under the League of Nations (Prague, 1928); Contemporary World Politics (1939); etc. The bibliography cited by Roucek tells us at a glance what we might expect; it really is a roster of Czech propagandists. The Slovaks, not considered a "minority," do not even get as much play as the minorities, who caused quite some concern "when Czecho-Slovakia renewed her independent existence as a state in 1918" (p. 171). Of course, Roucek, like other Czech and pro-Czech historians, simply presumes that Czecho-Slovakia, at one time or another, did in fact exist and, hence, in 1918 simply "renewed" her independence. This, however, has no historical basis in fact. It is strictly Czech propaganda. "Czecho-Slovakia accepted without hesitation international responsibility for the protection of minorities as an integral part of the Constitution." Benes, like the Magyars of Hungary, declared that Czecho-Slovakia would grant all rights to her minorities when the question was broached at the Paris Peace Con- �SLOVAKIA 63 ference. What happened in reality is something else. We remember how nice the Hungarian Constitution read, too. Roucek, however, seems to forget exactly how the minorities were treated by Prague; he forgets, too, that the Slovaks, who had joined the Czechs to form a common political state as "equal partners," were just as badly off, if not worse, than the minorities themselves. The statistics given on pp. 174-176 tell us how many Magyars, Germans, Ruthenians, Poles, Jews, Rumanians, etc., there were in Czecho-Slovakia, how many deputies they had in parliament, the number of schools provided for them, but no statistics on the Slovaks and Czechs. Roucek lumps them together so that talk might be made about a "CzechoSlovak majority." This tendency is followed by all Czech propagandists; it is supposed to conceal the fact that the Czechs were in fact the minority people in Czecho-Slovakia, that is, there were more non-Czech people in it. "Contrary to the popular conception, Czecho-Slovakia did not acquire the Sudete Germans from modern Germany. The Slav tribes which settled during the fifth and sixth centuries on the territories, which were to become the foundation of the Czech (Bohemian) State, were separated from their German neighbors by mountain ranges. But they were continually in contact'' (p. 176). It is highly questionable whether Roucek knew what "popular" conception concerning the Sudeten Germans was. If he did, then he should have gone a bit further and told us why it was wrong. To what country did the Sudetenland belong? The Slav tribes that settled there might, in a sense, be considered the foundation of a Czech state, but what is the purpose of the parenthetical "Bohemian"? It is obvious that Roucek wants readers of Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" to believe that the terms "Czech" and "Bohemian" are synonymous. But we know that the Slav tribes (the ancestors of the Czechs) settled on the territory of the Boii, which was known as BOHEMIA at that time and not as any CZECH state. Germans had settled there, too; they did not have to wait for invitations from "Czech" princes or kings, either, as Roucek states. And when a Czech did become ruler of Bohemia, he never could get along without the Germans. "Hence Czechs and Germans lived together for eight centuries in �64 Bohemia . out clearly the latter did pendence" (p. SLOVAKIA But throughout the history of Bohemia one fact stands the Czechs got along with the Germans only so long as not try to become dominant and overthrow Czech inde· 177). What Czech independence, and when? How long were the Czechs really dominant in Bohemia? There certainly are many facts that stand out more clearly than the one mentioned, but they are omitted by Roucek for reasons obvious to informed observer,s. He is simply doing a job for the Czechs, who, he says "learned their lesson from past experiences. After the disastrous Battle of White Moun tain, which brought the Czechs under the dominance of Austria, the German element ul timately reduced the Czechs to a nation of servants and doorkeepers, despised in their own homes by their German masters. The struggle went on with the reawakening of the Czech nation in the nineteenth century" (p. 177 ). By whom were the Czechs dominated before the Battle of White Mountain, if not by Austria and the Germans? Is it not a fact that the Czechs even after their "reawakening " wished to be dominated by Austria (the Habsburgs)? Palacky, the Czech historian who was so greatly admired and followed by Masaryk and Benes, would have invented Austria if she did not exist! The Battle of White Mountain was not a nationalistic, but strictly a religious and dynastic affair. The fact is that the Czechs would still be under Austria, if the Habsburgs would have granted them autonomy (states' rights) within the empire, the only thing they really fought for until Masaryk and Benes messed up everything during World War I. (•More coming) WHO SAID IT? "Deviating :threes shall be jailed. . . Devi•a ting forces are todary er1adicalted or liquidated. Today only the Democrats and Communists, and members of oither political parties (of .the NaJtional Fronlt) bear the respons~bility of detemnli.ning which forces shaJ11 control S10V'akia and in which direction Sl(}IVakia shall go." - (Dr. Joseph Lettrich, ViceChairman of the Executive Committee of the "Co11n.~il of Free Ozoohoslovrukia,." CAS, Bratislava, No. 130, 194.S~. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 61 Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" (Cont'd.) HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A.B1ROB.A.K When the Syrovy government was faced with "the accomplished fact of the Munich Agreement, it had to make the supreme choice": accept Munich, or the death of the Czecho..1Slovak nation. We know what happened. But Mr. Graham says: "The choice ended the possibility of maintaining the regime of democracy and organized multi-1.>arty Hfe w1hich had made Czecho-S1ovakia renowned throughout the world, and occasioned the departure from public life of Pres:ident Benes." equalitarian Is there any doubt in any informed person's mind that Mr. Graham can say the nicest, even though not exactly truthful, things in the nicest way about Dr. Edward Benes and his "equalitarian democracy"? Benes capitulated to Munich without consulting Parliame:rrt, hence acted unconstitutionally, but Mr. Graham would have us !believe that the Symvy government did the capitulating. Munich did "occasion the deiparture of Benes from public life" as Graham puts it - hut we have it from several Czechs, who were members of the Prague Parliament, that it was rather a "forced" departure to esca,pe punishment for Munich, for which they held him responsilble. In a manner typical of Kerner's "Ozecho:slova:kia," Mr. Graham concludes his chapter on ":Parties and Politics" with these words: "Politically, the regime which was born of the lifelong endeavor of Masaryk and Benes to found institutionally the resurgent Czechoslovak nationality passed out of ex<i.stence on October ,5, 1938, betmyed but not defeated . For thos e of us who have survived its passing, the ironic tra,gedy is that its chastisement brought neither peace nor healing to tJhe Danubian and central European world." For those of us who really knew the regime of Masary,k and Benes, and for the Czechs and Slovaks who were mi'Sled by it or suffered under it, let it be said that the world would :be iby far the better for it had the OzechoSlovak business, the political monstrosity that was CzechoSlovaikia, never /been born. We know that Benes resigned 62 SLOVAKIA on October 5, 1938, after he betrayed not only the Slovaks, ,b ut also his own Czech nation to Hitler. We also know that the same Benes five years later betrayed the nations of Czecho-1Slcwakia the second time, this time to Stalin, when he formally sold them out with the OzechSoviet Treaty of December 12, 1943, so that he might return as "president" of Czecho-Slcwa,kia again and smite all those who o.pposed his anti-Christian and pro-'So,v iet policies. To Benes revenge was sweet in 1945. Three years later, before he died, Benes wailed again that he was betrayed, this time not ·b y the Slovaks, Poles, Germans, Magyars, Catholics and all anti..,Marxist socialists, but by Moscow and the Czech communists under Gottwald. No honor among thieves! CHAPTER IX - "Czechoslovakia and Her Minorities" - by Joseph S. Roucek, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Political Science and Sociology, and Chairman, Department of political Science, Hofstra College; member, editorial board, World Affairs Inter,preter; knight, Order of the Star (Rumania), Crown of Jugoslavia; author of The Working of the Minorities System under the League of Nations (Prague, 1928); Contemporary World Politics (1939); etc. The bibliography cited by Roucek tells us at a glance what we might expect; it really is a roster of Czech propagandists. The Slovaks, not considered a "minority," do not even get as much play as the minorities, who caused quite some concern "when Czecho-Slovakia renewed her independent existence as a state in 1918" (p. 171). Of course, Roucek, like other Czech and pro-Czech historians, simply presumes that Czecho-Slovakia, at one time or another, did in fact exist and, hence, in 1918 simply "renewed" her independence. This, however, has no historical basis in fact. It is strictly Czech propaganda. "Czecho-Slovakia accepted without hesitation international responsibility for the protection of minorities as an integral part of the Constitution." Benes, like the Magyars of Hungary, declared that Czecho-Slovakia would grant all rights to her minorities when the question was broached at the Paris Peace Con- SLOVAKIA 63 ference. What happened in reality is something else. We remember how nice the Hungarian Constitution read, too. Roucek, however, seems to forget exactly how the minorities were treated by Prague; he forgets, too, that the Slovaks, who had joined the Czechs to form a common political state as "equal partners," were just as badly off, if not worse, than the minorities themselves. The statistics given on pp. 174-176 tell us how many Magyars, Germans, Ruthenians, Poles, Jews, Rumanians, etc., there were in Czecho-Slovakia, how many deputies they had in parliament, the number of schools provided for them, but no statistics on the Slovaks and Czechs. Roucek lumps them together so that talk might be made about a "CzechoSlovak majority." This tendency is followed by all Czech propagandists; it is supposed to conceal the fact that the Czechs were in fact the minority people in Czecho-Slovakia, that is, there were more non-Czech people in it. "Contrary to the popular conception, Czecho-Slovakia did not acquire the Sudete Germans from modern Germany. The Slav tribes which settled during the fifth and sixth centuries on the territories, which were to become the foundation of the Czech (Bohemian) State, were separated from their German neighbors by mountain ranges. But they were continually in contact'' (p. 176). It is highly questionable whether Roucek knew what "popular" conception concerning the Sudeten Germans was. If he did, then he should have gone a bit further and told us why it was wrong. To what country did the Sudetenland belong? The Slav tribes that settled there might, in a sense, be considered the foundation of a Czech state, but what is the purpose of the parenthetical "Bohemian"? It is obvious that Roucek wants readers of Kerner's "Czechoslovakia" to believe that the terms "Czech" and "Bohemian" are synonymous. But we know that the Slav tribes (the ancestors of the Czechs) settled on the territory of the Boii, which was known as BOHEMIA at that time and not as any CZECH state. Germans had settled there, too; they did not have to wait for invitations from "Czech" princes or kings, either, as Roucek states. And when a Czech did become ruler of Bohemia, he never could get along without the Germans. "Hence Czechs and Germans lived together for eight centuries in 64 Bohemia . out clearly the latter did pendence" (p. SLOVAKIA But throughout the history of Bohemia one fact stands the Czechs got along with the Germans only so long as not try to become dominant and overthrow Czech inde· 177). What Czech independence, and when? How long were the Czechs really dominant in Bohemia? There certainly are many facts that stand out more clearly than the one mentioned, but they are omitted by Roucek for reasons obvious to informed observer,s. He is simply doing a job for the Czechs, who, he says "learned their lesson from past experiences. After the disastrous Battle of White Moun tain, which brought the Czechs under the dominance of Austria, the German element ul timately reduced the Czechs to a nation of servants and doorkeepers, despised in their own homes by their German masters. The struggle went on with the reawakening of the Czech nation in the nineteenth century" (p. 177 ). By whom were the Czechs dominated before the Battle of White Mountain, if not by Austria and the Germans? Is it not a fact that the Czechs even after their "reawakening " wished to be dominated by Austria (the Habsburgs)? Palacky, the Czech historian who was so greatly admired and followed by Masaryk and Benes, would have invented Austria if she did not exist! The Battle of White Mountain was not a nationalistic, but strictly a religious and dynastic affair. The fact is that the Czechs would still be under Austria, if the Habsburgs would have granted them autonomy (states' rights) within the empire, the only thing they really fought for until Masaryk and Benes messed up everything during World War I. (•More coming) WHO SAID IT? "Deviating :threes shall be jailed. . . Devi•a ting forces are todary er1adicalted or liquidated. Today only the Democrats and Communists, and members of oither political parties (of .the NaJtional Fronlt) bear the respons~bility of detemnli.ning which forces shaJ11 control S10V'akia and in which direction Sl(}IVakia shall go." - (Dr. Joseph Lettrich, ViceChairman of the Executive Committee of the "Co11n.~il of Free Ozoohoslovrukia,." CAS, Bratislava, No. 130, 194.S~.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professor Kerner's "CZECHOSLOVAKIA": History or Propaganda? (4/8) Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 2 (19), June 1956 pp. 61-64 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hrobak, Philip Anthony, 1904-1964 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1956 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="/items/show/222">Vol. 6, No. 1 (18), pp. 57-64</a> <br />continues in <a href="/items/show/197">Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), pp. 88-96</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/91b571fed5874142104665abf50bd5f2.pdf 90f8ab1d1e391715a4d6c875d90c1db7 PDF Text Text 88 SLOVAKIA Kerner's "Czechoslov~kia" (Cont'd.) IDSTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK "With the formation of the Czecho,Slovak State, the Germans refused to accept the new situation and to cooperate with the new government at Prague" (p. 177) . But the fact is that even though they were forced to accept the situation, on various occasions the Sudetenlanders showed their willingness to cooperate with Prague, but the Czechs were not disposed to cooperate. "The Germans, reduced from the position of dominance to that of a minority, naturally resented the new setup," Roucek tells us, which is true, but the entire blame for the bad blood between the Czechs and the Germans, could hardly be placed on the latter, as Roucek would have us do. Masaryk and Benes and their followers were responsible for what happened in and to Czecho-Slovakia, because they practically ran the whole show. "But why did the Czechs ask that this hostile element be included in their state? In the memorandum which the Czechs submitted to the Peace Conference, they claimed the historic frontiers of Bohemia. All history showed, they argued, and economic and strategic considerations demanded, that the historic Lands of the Bohemian Crown should remain a single unit. The exclusion of the Sudete areas would have broken the virtually indissoluble geographical and economic ties with central Bohemia. The Germans of Bohemia d6lsired to be united with the new Austrian Republic and not with the Reich. The areas settled by the Germans were never, of themselves, component parts of the German Reich nor were they independent elements in the former Austria• Hungary. So far as these territories were connected constitutionally with the Holy Roman Empire, they were connected solely as part and parcel of the Czech State, consisting of the Lands of the Bohemian Crown, and only as an entity with those Lands." - (p. 178). Roucek's tendency is obvious: the Czechs had a claim, but the Germans did not. Bohemia, we know, was an independent kingdom until 1526; the Germans were no less a part of it than were the Czechs. Roucek, however, tells us that the territories settled by the Germans "were connected solely as part and parcel of the "CZECH" State and not the BOHEMIAN Crown lands. What Benes and Masaryk submitted to the Peace Conference to back their "claims" to the his- �SLOVAKIA 89 toric frontiers of Bohemia is one thing, but the truth is something else. Roucek apparently preferred not to deal with the latter. For his edification, I quote Robert Ingrim, eminent journalist and author, who says that: _ . . before Huss's reformation, Bohemia had been the scene of the most felicitous Czech-German cooperation. Of this, Prague, one of the most magnificent cities in Europe, is still a living witness. It must be added that in those dark times, when people had not yet learned to regard another language as a symptom of inferiority, no one spoke of Czechs or 'G ermans. They were just Bohemians. This explains why no two other races have more similarity than Czechs and Sudeten Germans. There was perpetual intermarriage and it became, in the towns, purely accidental whether a family considered itself German or Czech. The race which profited most by this close community were the Czechs because the Germans had an older and more highly developed culture and could draw from the great receptacle of the Germanies. The Czechs as part and parcel of the Holy Roman Empire became entirely different from Slavic peoples outside." ("After Hitler Stalin?" - 1946 - Bruce Publishing Company, Milwaukee, Wis.; pp. 54-55) . It is significant that Roucek did not include the works of such eminent historians as C. A. Macartney and A. J. P. Taylor, which shed much light on Bohemia and the Habsburg Empire. Macartney, for example, says that Bohemia did "become a member of the German Reich," whereas Roucek claims that "the areas settled by the Germans were never, of themselves, component parts of the German Reich," which is a tricky way of putting it, to say the least. iHow many students and teachers of history, using Kerner's "Czechoslovakia," noticed or paid any attention to Roucek's "of themselves," and if some did, what did they make of it? What real claim did Masaryk and Benes have to the 3,231,688 Germans of Bohemia, the figure mentioned by Roucek (.p. 178)? Furthermore, according to Roucek: "The whole problem of the Sudete Germans was a counter in the game of power politics and a part of the larger problem of Germany in Europe. It was not a debate between the 11,000,000 Czecho-Slovaks and the 75,0'00,000 Germans concerning the treatment of Germans in Czecho-Slovakia, or the frontiers of that Repu'blic, or of the destiny of the national fragments which remained outside the German borders. It was a question of the desire of Germany to establish a new empire" (p. 182). Now this may have been the desire of Hitler after he came to power. But why should Roucek consider the Sudete �90 SLOVAKIA problem only from this angle? The situation in 1938 may have been ~s described, but what the Sudeten Germans themselves had to say about their treatment at the hands of the Czechs from 1918 to 1938 is not at all worth mentioning by Roucek. Furthermore, the debate certainly did not concern "11,000,000 Czecho-Slovaks," as Roucek would have us believe. The Slovaks had nothing to do with it; foreign policy was dominated by Benes and the Czechs. The Slovaks, we know, had their own arguments with the Czechs. The Czechs under Masaryk and Benes were on one side, while the non-Czech nationalities - the majority of the population of Czecho-Slovakia - were on the opposite side. The demands of these non-Czech nations may have been, as Roucek says, "incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy as understood and practiced in Czecho-Slovakia," nevertheless they were not incompatible with natural rights and the fundamental principles of democracy as understood and practiced in genuinely democratic countries. The simple truth is that the Czechs, especially the Masaryk-Bene s Czechs, did not learn the lesson of AustriaHungary. They followed Masaryk and Benes blindly, ruling high and mighty over the non-Czech nations, in the fashion of Stalin and Hitler. " The problem of nationalism played no part In Slovak ia up to the end of the eighteenth cen t ury because the official language of Hungary was Latin" (p. 183) . Following this line of reasoning, then, nationalism played no part in any country, at any time, whenever the official language of a country was any other than that of the inhabitants. Does professor Roucek really believe that? Writing about the period of Joseph II, when "Bohemian politics of the nineteenth century received their first rehearsal," A. J. P. Taylor says in his "The Habsburg Monarchy": Even In Bohemia the Imperial nobility, which had been Imported by the Habsburgs, cloaked their hostility to social reform In a display of Bohemian patriotism , and in the ante-rooms of the >Habsburgi the! descendants of German, ,Scottish, or Spanish adventurers ostentatiously exchanged a few words of CZECH which they had laboriously learnt from their stable-boys" (pp. 19-20). �SLOVAKIA 91 This relates to the time that Roucek writes about (Joseph died in 1790). What then was the official language of Bohemia, or of the Habsburg Empire up to the end of the eighteenth century? "The Slovaks were not considered as a minority by Prague, and certainly not by the Slovaks themselves. This is attested to by the fact that the Czech parties had their adherents in Slovakia, that there was no discrimination against the inclusion of Slovaks in various cabinets, and that Dr. Milan Hodza, a member of the R epublican Party and a Slovak, headed the cabinets from 1935 to 1938" (p. 184). If the Slovaks were not considered "as a minority" by Prague, what were they considered? An equal partner, a colony, a branch of the Czech nation? What does Roucek's "attestation" prove? What were CZECH parties doing in Slovakia? Does not Roucek know that the Slovaks selected by Masaryk and Benes for cabinet or other posts did not represent the will of the vast masses of the Slovak people? We remember that Judas was one of the apostles, too. Masaryk and Benes could hardly make the new-born Republic appear "Czecho-Slovak" without including several Slovaks in their cabinets. But those Slovaks knew that they had to serve the interests of Masaryk and Benes, the interests of the Czechs, if · they wanted to keep their posts. Every one of them repudiated the right of their own nation to freedom and political independence, nay, even autonomy (states' rights). What kind of Slovaks were they, if not "Judas" Slovaks? Dr. Milan Hod.fa was a smart politician; he knew what was best for Milan Hod.fa. He served Masaryk and Benes well for decades, but, in the end, was made the scapegoat of Munich, being discarded by Benes, as were so many other Slovaks and Czechs who got out of line with the policies of Masaryk and Benes. (Pergler, Stfibrny, Beran, Osusky, etc.). "The autonomist tendencies of the Catholic Slovaks found their expression, however, in the Slovak Populist Party of Father Andrej Hlinka, wt-lose policies can be understood best when we recall the demands for states' rights in the United States which culminated in the Civil War" (p. 184) . Roucek, however, omitted to mention that Hlinka was joined in "the autonomist tendencies" by the Lutheran minister and poet, Martin Razus, Slovak patriot and head of �92 SLOVAKIA the Slovak National Party. Biased historians propagate the idea that only the Slovak Catholics fought for autonomy (states' rights) :in Slovakia. What does Mr. Roucek mean when he says that Hlinka's policies "can be underst.ood best when we recall the demands for stat.es' rights in the United Stat.es which culminated in the Civil War"? In the first place, does it make sense to compare the relationship between the individual 48 States to the United States and the relationship of Slovakia to Czecho-Slovakia? Demands by how many states and for what states' rights culminated in the Civil War? Do not the States comprising the United States have their rights defined and secured by the Constitution of the U. S. A.? What states' rights did Slovakia have guaranteed and secured by the Czecho-Slovak Constitution of Masaryk and Benes, which, in fact , even denied the existence of the Slovak nation? Or is it possible that Mr. Roucek wants us to believe that Hlinka's .policies advocated slavery? It is quite obvious that Roucek did not know Hlinka and his policies! "The Czechs and the Slovaks had been separated politically for one thousand years. The former had become very largely industrialized, Influenced by German and Western thought and technical development. The Slovaks, on the contrary, r emained agriculturists and under a Magyar (that is, Eastern) type of culture. The Czechs were nominally Roman Catholics, and those who opposed Roman Catholicism during their national struggle against the Catholic tHabsburgs had earned the reputation in the eyes of devout Slovaks of being irreligious" (pp. 184-185). Roucek and other pro-Czech historians like to dwell on the theme that the Czechs and Slovaks were "separated politically for one thousand years," but somehow always forget to tell when and under what conditions the Czechs and Slovaks were ever united politically or otherwise. They also favor the theme that the Czechs were "largely industrialized," while the Slovaks "remained agriculturists," but never have an explanation for the fact that Slovakia was more industrialized under the Magyars of Hungary than it was under Masaryk and Benes of Czecho-Slovakia. The tendency is only too obvious! The Czechs, it is true, did not fare badly under the Germans (Austria); the Slovaks suffered incomparably greater �SLOVAKIA 93 political and economic oppression under the Magyars of Hungary. The culture of the Slovaks, however, was not "Magyar (that is, Eastern)," as Roucek maintains. The Slovaks evidently knew the Czechs better than Roucek did. Many Czechs were undoubtedly "nominally Roman Catholics," hut many times many mOTe became so-called "progressive" Roman Catholics, having succumbed to the influence of Huss, Palacky, Rieger, Havlicek, Masaryk and Benes. The Slovaks did not consider the Czechs "irreligious" because they fought against the "Catholic Ha:bsburgs," but rather because they repudiated the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and deeply insulted the religious feelings of the Slovak people by destroying religious monuments, removing crucifixes from classrooms, etc., soon after Masaryk and Benes took over the reins of the Czecho-Slova k State. Roucek may not like to admit it, nevertheless the possibility does exist that the Slovaks could have regarded the Czechs as "irreligious" also for denying the existence of the Slovak nation and its inherent and God-given right to freedom and political independence. Or is it possible that Roucek believes that recognition of and respect for the natural rights of nations does not come under the title of religion? "Whereas the standard of literacy among the Czechs was high, the percentage of Slovaks who could read and write was very low In 1919. For that reason, many officials, teachers, and intellectuals from the Czech regions had to be sent to Slovakia in 1918-1919, and many of them antagonized the Slovaks with their well-intentioned, but often too matter-of-fact, methods . . . When, during the eourse of time, Slovaks became available, it was not easy to dismiss the Czechs, many of whom had married and settled down" (p. 185). By what standards or statistics professor Roucek was influenced, I do not know, but I honestly believe that his statement regarding the literacy of the Slovaks in 1919 is highly exaggerated. How low is very low? What were the "well-intentioned, but often too matter-of-fac t, methods" of Czech intellectuals which antagonized the Slovaks? Is it not significant that Roucek has no sympathy for the many Slovaks who, during the course of time, did become available, got married and had children, but could hardly settle down in their own homeland, because the jobs they had been trained for were taken by Czechs? R. W. Seton-Watson , the �94 SLOVAKIA Czech propagandi st, admits much more in his "The New Slovakia" (Fr. Borovy, Prague; 1924) ; I heartily recommend it to Roucek and to all readers of Kerner's "Czechoslo vakia." The fact is that Prague sent about 110,000 Czechs to Slovakia to do jobs which the Slovaks themselves could have done erusily and effectively. Roucek asks "what was the Pittsburgh Agreement ?" and then answers the typical Masaryk-B enes way, using Ivan Derer's (the Judas Slovak) "The Unity of the Czechs and Slovaks" (Prague, 1938) and Benes's "Central European Observer" (Dec. 16, 1938) as his "catechism s"! It is evident that Roucek never even saw a copy of the original, because he dates the Pittsburgh Agreement June 30, 1918, instead of May 30, 1918, the same mistake made by other Czech propagandists, including T. G. Masaryk (Svet.ova Revoluce, p. 262) and professor S. Harrison Thomson of the University of Colorado, author of "Czechoslovakia in European mstory" (Princeton University Press, 1953) and editor of the "Journal of Central European Affairs." Roucek does not produce the full text of the Pittsburgh Agreement , but simply states: "These American Czechs and Slovaks, together with Dr. Masaryk, agreed that Slovakia should 'have her own administrativ e system, her own diet and her own courts, (and that) the Slovak the official language in the schools, In the public affairs generally'. Actually the points in agreement ried out - except the one stipulating the setting up kia." language should be offices and public were virtually carof a diet for Slova- Roucek, however, does not tell the whole story about the Pittsburgh Agreement . By presenting only the Czech side and omitting the Slovak side of it, he proves himself partial and prejudiced. Without the support of the Slovaks, T. G. Masaryk knew that his proposed "Czecho-Sl ovakia" was doomed. There was no way of contacting the Slovaks at home (in Hungary at that time), hence he came to the United States to seek the support of Americans of Slovak descent; also the support of Americans of Czech descent, since the Czechs at home did not react favorably to Masaryk's plan to destroy Austria-Hu ngary and to establish CzechoSlovakia. The weightiest objection to Masaryk's plan was that �SLOVAKIA 95 about six and a half million Czechs would hardly make a .state fit to live, even if they were allowed to swallow three and a half million Germans in order to obtain the historical frontiers of the Bohemian kingdom. To meet this argument, Robert Ing,rirn tells us ("After Hitler Stalin" - ip. 80): "Masaryk invented the fiction that the Czechs and Slovaks were the same, that is Czecho-Slovaks, thus claiming a large part of Hungary for his new state. As this discovery failed to impress the Allies, he enlisted the support of the Americans of Slovakian descent. Disliking the Magyars, who . . . had not given them a fair deal, they favored the idea of separating Slovakia from Hungary. But sufficiently history conscious, they rejected emphatically the theory of the Czecho-Slovak race." Americans of Slovak descent did not put much trust in Masaryk's oral pronouncements and promises. They remembered that the Magyars had made quite a few promises to the Slovaks and never kept them. When Masaryk came to America to gain the support of the citizens of Slovak descent, the latter insisted on a written guaranree that Slovakia would enjoy full autonomy (states' rights) within the proposed Czecho-Slovakian republic. The result was the Pittsburgh Agreement or Convention which Masaryk drafted and signed during a meeting of representatives of Slovak and Czech organizations at Pittsburgh, Pa., May 30, 1918. Masaryk, however, repudiated it soon after he and Benes took over the reins of the Czecho-Slovak State. To refute Slovakia's claim for autonomy, Masaryk wrote in 1925: "It (the Pittsburgh Convention) was concluded in order to appease a small Slovak fraction which was dreaming of God knows what sort of independence for Slovakia ... I signed the agreement unhesitatingly because it was a local agreement of American Czechs and Slovaks between themselves'' (SVETOV.A REVOLUCE, p . 262). To attain a "Czecho-Slovak" majority in the proposed Czecho-Slovak Republic T. G. Masaryk did not hesitate to resort to• falsehood and dishonesty. How else can we explain his preposterous statement that the Pittsburgh Agreement was only a "local agreement of American Czechs and Slovaks between themselves"! What need did .Amerkan Crechs and Slovaks have for such an agreement? And if Masaryk actually did think it was only a "local agreement" between Americans, why did he, a foreigner, even consider drafting and signing it? iHe con- �96 SLOVAKIA eluded the agreement, he says, "in order to appease a small SWVAK fraction which was dreaming of God knows what sort of independence for Slovakia," but the fact is that the Slovaks at that Pittsburgh meeting represented an overwhelming majority of organized Slovaks in America. And what sort of independence for Slovakia could they possibly be dreaming of when Masaryk himself told them that CzechoSlovakia would be modeled after the United States or Switzerland? In 1918, T. G. Masaryk presented the Pittsburgh Convention to President Woodrow Wilson as a solemn treaty between the Slovaks and the Czechs to induce him to grant official recognition to the Czech and Slovak union and its provisional government. Wilson would hardly have been charmed by Masaryk to destroy Austria if Masaryk had described the Pittsburgh convention, in 1918, in the disparaging terms he set in the record in 1925. The "great" Masaryk, who so persistently insisted on the truth in all things, obviously lied to President Wilson and the Slovaks! By saying that "actually the points in agreement were virtually carried out - except the one stipulating the setting up of a diet for Slovakia," professor Roucek admits that he does not know what went on in Czecho-Slovakia and, hence, is hardly qualified to write with authority about that country, and especially the Slovak portion of it. The fact is that the Masaryk and Benes regimes were deaf to the just demand of the Slovaks that the Pittsburgh Convention be honored by the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic and, hence, both were responsible for the consequences. The relations between the Czechs and the Slovaks were actually worse in 1938 than they were in 1918. (More Coming) • • • He1p expose the political monstrosity that was CzechoSlov;aJkia by getting the SLOV'AK NEWSLEITER to as many Americans as possible. Renew youT subscriptions NOW and send one in for a friend . The BEST availaJble mNGLlSH-1SLOVAlK DICTIONARY? Yes, we have it. Get your copy of HROBAICS ENGLISH-.SLOVAK DICTIONARY today! Only $4.00 per copy. � 88 SLOVAKIA Kerner's "Czechoslov~kia" (Cont'd.) IDSTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK "With the formation of the Czecho,Slovak State, the Germans refused to accept the new situation and to cooperate with the new government at Prague" (p. 177) . But the fact is that even though they were forced to accept the situation, on various occasions the Sudetenlanders showed their willingness to cooperate with Prague, but the Czechs were not disposed to cooperate. "The Germans, reduced from the position of dominance to that of a minority, naturally resented the new setup," Roucek tells us, which is true, but the entire blame for the bad blood between the Czechs and the Germans, could hardly be placed on the latter, as Roucek would have us do. Masaryk and Benes and their followers were responsible for what happened in and to Czecho-Slovakia, because they practically ran the whole show. "But why did the Czechs ask that this hostile element be included in their state? In the memorandum which the Czechs submitted to the Peace Conference, they claimed the historic frontiers of Bohemia. All history showed, they argued, and economic and strategic considerations demanded, that the historic Lands of the Bohemian Crown should remain a single unit. The exclusion of the Sudete areas would have broken the virtually indissoluble geographical and economic ties with central Bohemia. The Germans of Bohemia d6lsired to be united with the new Austrian Republic and not with the Reich. The areas settled by the Germans were never, of themselves, component parts of the German Reich nor were they independent elements in the former Austria• Hungary. So far as these territories were connected constitutionally with the Holy Roman Empire, they were connected solely as part and parcel of the Czech State, consisting of the Lands of the Bohemian Crown, and only as an entity with those Lands." - (p. 178). Roucek's tendency is obvious: the Czechs had a claim, but the Germans did not. Bohemia, we know, was an independent kingdom until 1526; the Germans were no less a part of it than were the Czechs. Roucek, however, tells us that the territories settled by the Germans "were connected solely as part and parcel of the "CZECH" State and not the BOHEMIAN Crown lands. What Benes and Masaryk submitted to the Peace Conference to back their "claims" to the his- �SLOVAKIA 89 toric frontiers of Bohemia is one thing, but the truth is something else. Roucek apparently preferred not to deal with the latter. For his edification, I quote Robert Ingrim, eminent journalist and author, who says that: _ . . before Huss's reformation, Bohemia had been the scene of the most felicitous Czech-German cooperation. Of this, Prague, one of the most magnificent cities in Europe, is still a living witness. It must be added that in those dark times, when people had not yet learned to regard another language as a symptom of inferiority, no one spoke of Czechs or 'G ermans. They were just Bohemians. This explains why no two other races have more similarity than Czechs and Sudeten Germans. There was perpetual intermarriage and it became, in the towns, purely accidental whether a family considered itself German or Czech. The race which profited most by this close community were the Czechs because the Germans had an older and more highly developed culture and could draw from the great receptacle of the Germanies. The Czechs as part and parcel of the Holy Roman Empire became entirely different from Slavic peoples outside." ("After Hitler Stalin?" - 1946 - Bruce Publishing Company, Milwaukee, Wis.; pp. 54-55) . It is significant that Roucek did not include the works of such eminent historians as C. A. Macartney and A. J. P. Taylor, which shed much light on Bohemia and the Habsburg Empire. Macartney, for example, says that Bohemia did "become a member of the German Reich," whereas Roucek claims that "the areas settled by the Germans were never, of themselves, component parts of the German Reich," which is a tricky way of putting it, to say the least. iHow many students and teachers of history, using Kerner's "Czechoslovakia," noticed or paid any attention to Roucek's "of themselves," and if some did, what did they make of it? What real claim did Masaryk and Benes have to the 3,231,688 Germans of Bohemia, the figure mentioned by Roucek (.p. 178)? Furthermore, according to Roucek: "The whole problem of the Sudete Germans was a counter in the game of power politics and a part of the larger problem of Germany in Europe. It was not a debate between the 11,000,000 Czecho-Slovaks and the 75,0'00,000 Germans concerning the treatment of Germans in Czecho-Slovakia, or the frontiers of that Repu'blic, or of the destiny of the national fragments which remained outside the German borders. It was a question of the desire of Germany to establish a new empire" (p. 182). Now this may have been the desire of Hitler after he came to power. But why should Roucek consider the Sudete �90 SLOVAKIA problem only from this angle? The situation in 1938 may have been ~s described, but what the Sudeten Germans themselves had to say about their treatment at the hands of the Czechs from 1918 to 1938 is not at all worth mentioning by Roucek. Furthermore, the debate certainly did not concern "11,000,000 Czecho-Slovaks," as Roucek would have us believe. The Slovaks had nothing to do with it; foreign policy was dominated by Benes and the Czechs. The Slovaks, we know, had their own arguments with the Czechs. The Czechs under Masaryk and Benes were on one side, while the non-Czech nationalities - the majority of the population of Czecho-Slovakia - were on the opposite side. The demands of these non-Czech nations may have been, as Roucek says, "incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy as understood and practiced in Czecho-Slovakia," nevertheless they were not incompatible with natural rights and the fundamental principles of democracy as understood and practiced in genuinely democratic countries. The simple truth is that the Czechs, especially the Masaryk-Bene s Czechs, did not learn the lesson of AustriaHungary. They followed Masaryk and Benes blindly, ruling high and mighty over the non-Czech nations, in the fashion of Stalin and Hitler. " The problem of nationalism played no part In Slovak ia up to the end of the eighteenth cen t ury because the official language of Hungary was Latin" (p. 183) . Following this line of reasoning, then, nationalism played no part in any country, at any time, whenever the official language of a country was any other than that of the inhabitants. Does professor Roucek really believe that? Writing about the period of Joseph II, when "Bohemian politics of the nineteenth century received their first rehearsal," A. J. P. Taylor says in his "The Habsburg Monarchy": Even In Bohemia the Imperial nobility, which had been Imported by the Habsburgs, cloaked their hostility to social reform In a display of Bohemian patriotism , and in the ante-rooms of the >Habsburgi the! descendants of German, ,Scottish, or Spanish adventurers ostentatiously exchanged a few words of CZECH which they had laboriously learnt from their stable-boys" (pp. 19-20). �SLOVAKIA 91 This relates to the time that Roucek writes about (Joseph died in 1790). What then was the official language of Bohemia, or of the Habsburg Empire up to the end of the eighteenth century? "The Slovaks were not considered as a minority by Prague, and certainly not by the Slovaks themselves. This is attested to by the fact that the Czech parties had their adherents in Slovakia, that there was no discrimination against the inclusion of Slovaks in various cabinets, and that Dr. Milan Hodza, a member of the R epublican Party and a Slovak, headed the cabinets from 1935 to 1938" (p. 184). If the Slovaks were not considered "as a minority" by Prague, what were they considered? An equal partner, a colony, a branch of the Czech nation? What does Roucek's "attestation" prove? What were CZECH parties doing in Slovakia? Does not Roucek know that the Slovaks selected by Masaryk and Benes for cabinet or other posts did not represent the will of the vast masses of the Slovak people? We remember that Judas was one of the apostles, too. Masaryk and Benes could hardly make the new-born Republic appear "Czecho-Slovak" without including several Slovaks in their cabinets. But those Slovaks knew that they had to serve the interests of Masaryk and Benes, the interests of the Czechs, if · they wanted to keep their posts. Every one of them repudiated the right of their own nation to freedom and political independence, nay, even autonomy (states' rights). What kind of Slovaks were they, if not "Judas" Slovaks? Dr. Milan Hod.fa was a smart politician; he knew what was best for Milan Hod.fa. He served Masaryk and Benes well for decades, but, in the end, was made the scapegoat of Munich, being discarded by Benes, as were so many other Slovaks and Czechs who got out of line with the policies of Masaryk and Benes. (Pergler, Stfibrny, Beran, Osusky, etc.). "The autonomist tendencies of the Catholic Slovaks found their expression, however, in the Slovak Populist Party of Father Andrej Hlinka, wt-lose policies can be understood best when we recall the demands for states' rights in the United States which culminated in the Civil War" (p. 184) . Roucek, however, omitted to mention that Hlinka was joined in "the autonomist tendencies" by the Lutheran minister and poet, Martin Razus, Slovak patriot and head of �92 SLOVAKIA the Slovak National Party. Biased historians propagate the idea that only the Slovak Catholics fought for autonomy (states' rights) :in Slovakia. What does Mr. Roucek mean when he says that Hlinka's policies "can be underst.ood best when we recall the demands for stat.es' rights in the United Stat.es which culminated in the Civil War"? In the first place, does it make sense to compare the relationship between the individual 48 States to the United States and the relationship of Slovakia to Czecho-Slovakia? Demands by how many states and for what states' rights culminated in the Civil War? Do not the States comprising the United States have their rights defined and secured by the Constitution of the U. S. A.? What states' rights did Slovakia have guaranteed and secured by the Czecho-Slovak Constitution of Masaryk and Benes, which, in fact , even denied the existence of the Slovak nation? Or is it possible that Mr. Roucek wants us to believe that Hlinka's .policies advocated slavery? It is quite obvious that Roucek did not know Hlinka and his policies! "The Czechs and the Slovaks had been separated politically for one thousand years. The former had become very largely industrialized, Influenced by German and Western thought and technical development. The Slovaks, on the contrary, r emained agriculturists and under a Magyar (that is, Eastern) type of culture. The Czechs were nominally Roman Catholics, and those who opposed Roman Catholicism during their national struggle against the Catholic tHabsburgs had earned the reputation in the eyes of devout Slovaks of being irreligious" (pp. 184-185). Roucek and other pro-Czech historians like to dwell on the theme that the Czechs and Slovaks were "separated politically for one thousand years," but somehow always forget to tell when and under what conditions the Czechs and Slovaks were ever united politically or otherwise. They also favor the theme that the Czechs were "largely industrialized," while the Slovaks "remained agriculturists," but never have an explanation for the fact that Slovakia was more industrialized under the Magyars of Hungary than it was under Masaryk and Benes of Czecho-Slovakia. The tendency is only too obvious! The Czechs, it is true, did not fare badly under the Germans (Austria); the Slovaks suffered incomparably greater �SLOVAKIA 93 political and economic oppression under the Magyars of Hungary. The culture of the Slovaks, however, was not "Magyar (that is, Eastern)," as Roucek maintains. The Slovaks evidently knew the Czechs better than Roucek did. Many Czechs were undoubtedly "nominally Roman Catholics," hut many times many mOTe became so-called "progressive" Roman Catholics, having succumbed to the influence of Huss, Palacky, Rieger, Havlicek, Masaryk and Benes. The Slovaks did not consider the Czechs "irreligious" because they fought against the "Catholic Ha:bsburgs," but rather because they repudiated the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and deeply insulted the religious feelings of the Slovak people by destroying religious monuments, removing crucifixes from classrooms, etc., soon after Masaryk and Benes took over the reins of the Czecho-Slova k State. Roucek may not like to admit it, nevertheless the possibility does exist that the Slovaks could have regarded the Czechs as "irreligious" also for denying the existence of the Slovak nation and its inherent and God-given right to freedom and political independence. Or is it possible that Roucek believes that recognition of and respect for the natural rights of nations does not come under the title of religion? "Whereas the standard of literacy among the Czechs was high, the percentage of Slovaks who could read and write was very low In 1919. For that reason, many officials, teachers, and intellectuals from the Czech regions had to be sent to Slovakia in 1918-1919, and many of them antagonized the Slovaks with their well-intentioned, but often too matter-of-fact, methods . . . When, during the eourse of time, Slovaks became available, it was not easy to dismiss the Czechs, many of whom had married and settled down" (p. 185). By what standards or statistics professor Roucek was influenced, I do not know, but I honestly believe that his statement regarding the literacy of the Slovaks in 1919 is highly exaggerated. How low is very low? What were the "well-intentioned, but often too matter-of-fac t, methods" of Czech intellectuals which antagonized the Slovaks? Is it not significant that Roucek has no sympathy for the many Slovaks who, during the course of time, did become available, got married and had children, but could hardly settle down in their own homeland, because the jobs they had been trained for were taken by Czechs? R. W. Seton-Watson , the �94 SLOVAKIA Czech propagandi st, admits much more in his "The New Slovakia" (Fr. Borovy, Prague; 1924) ; I heartily recommend it to Roucek and to all readers of Kerner's "Czechoslo vakia." The fact is that Prague sent about 110,000 Czechs to Slovakia to do jobs which the Slovaks themselves could have done erusily and effectively. Roucek asks "what was the Pittsburgh Agreement ?" and then answers the typical Masaryk-B enes way, using Ivan Derer's (the Judas Slovak) "The Unity of the Czechs and Slovaks" (Prague, 1938) and Benes's "Central European Observer" (Dec. 16, 1938) as his "catechism s"! It is evident that Roucek never even saw a copy of the original, because he dates the Pittsburgh Agreement June 30, 1918, instead of May 30, 1918, the same mistake made by other Czech propagandists, including T. G. Masaryk (Svet.ova Revoluce, p. 262) and professor S. Harrison Thomson of the University of Colorado, author of "Czechoslovakia in European mstory" (Princeton University Press, 1953) and editor of the "Journal of Central European Affairs." Roucek does not produce the full text of the Pittsburgh Agreement , but simply states: "These American Czechs and Slovaks, together with Dr. Masaryk, agreed that Slovakia should 'have her own administrativ e system, her own diet and her own courts, (and that) the Slovak the official language in the schools, In the public affairs generally'. Actually the points in agreement ried out - except the one stipulating the setting up kia." language should be offices and public were virtually carof a diet for Slova- Roucek, however, does not tell the whole story about the Pittsburgh Agreement . By presenting only the Czech side and omitting the Slovak side of it, he proves himself partial and prejudiced. Without the support of the Slovaks, T. G. Masaryk knew that his proposed "Czecho-Sl ovakia" was doomed. There was no way of contacting the Slovaks at home (in Hungary at that time), hence he came to the United States to seek the support of Americans of Slovak descent; also the support of Americans of Czech descent, since the Czechs at home did not react favorably to Masaryk's plan to destroy Austria-Hu ngary and to establish CzechoSlovakia. The weightiest objection to Masaryk's plan was that �SLOVAKIA 95 about six and a half million Czechs would hardly make a .state fit to live, even if they were allowed to swallow three and a half million Germans in order to obtain the historical frontiers of the Bohemian kingdom. To meet this argument, Robert Ing,rirn tells us ("After Hitler Stalin" - ip. 80): "Masaryk invented the fiction that the Czechs and Slovaks were the same, that is Czecho-Slovaks, thus claiming a large part of Hungary for his new state. As this discovery failed to impress the Allies, he enlisted the support of the Americans of Slovakian descent. Disliking the Magyars, who . . . had not given them a fair deal, they favored the idea of separating Slovakia from Hungary. But sufficiently history conscious, they rejected emphatically the theory of the Czecho-Slovak race." Americans of Slovak descent did not put much trust in Masaryk's oral pronouncements and promises. They remembered that the Magyars had made quite a few promises to the Slovaks and never kept them. When Masaryk came to America to gain the support of the citizens of Slovak descent, the latter insisted on a written guaranree that Slovakia would enjoy full autonomy (states' rights) within the proposed Czecho-Slovakian republic. The result was the Pittsburgh Agreement or Convention which Masaryk drafted and signed during a meeting of representatives of Slovak and Czech organizations at Pittsburgh, Pa., May 30, 1918. Masaryk, however, repudiated it soon after he and Benes took over the reins of the Czecho-Slovak State. To refute Slovakia's claim for autonomy, Masaryk wrote in 1925: "It (the Pittsburgh Convention) was concluded in order to appease a small Slovak fraction which was dreaming of God knows what sort of independence for Slovakia ... I signed the agreement unhesitatingly because it was a local agreement of American Czechs and Slovaks between themselves'' (SVETOV.A REVOLUCE, p . 262). To attain a "Czecho-Slovak" majority in the proposed Czecho-Slovak Republic T. G. Masaryk did not hesitate to resort to• falsehood and dishonesty. How else can we explain his preposterous statement that the Pittsburgh Agreement was only a "local agreement of American Czechs and Slovaks between themselves"! What need did .Amerkan Crechs and Slovaks have for such an agreement? And if Masaryk actually did think it was only a "local agreement" between Americans, why did he, a foreigner, even consider drafting and signing it? iHe con- �96 SLOVAKIA eluded the agreement, he says, "in order to appease a small SWVAK fraction which was dreaming of God knows what sort of independence for Slovakia," but the fact is that the Slovaks at that Pittsburgh meeting represented an overwhelming majority of organized Slovaks in America. And what sort of independence for Slovakia could they possibly be dreaming of when Masaryk himself told them that CzechoSlovakia would be modeled after the United States or Switzerland? In 1918, T. G. Masaryk presented the Pittsburgh Convention to President Woodrow Wilson as a solemn treaty between the Slovaks and the Czechs to induce him to grant official recognition to the Czech and Slovak union and its provisional government. Wilson would hardly have been charmed by Masaryk to destroy Austria if Masaryk had described the Pittsburgh convention, in 1918, in the disparaging terms he set in the record in 1925. The "great" Masaryk, who so persistently insisted on the truth in all things, obviously lied to President Wilson and the Slovaks! By saying that "actually the points in agreement were virtually carried out - except the one stipulating the setting up of a diet for Slovakia," professor Roucek admits that he does not know what went on in Czecho-Slovakia and, hence, is hardly qualified to write with authority about that country, and especially the Slovak portion of it. The fact is that the Masaryk and Benes regimes were deaf to the just demand of the Slovaks that the Pittsburgh Convention be honored by the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic and, hence, both were responsible for the consequences. The relations between the Czechs and the Slovaks were actually worse in 1938 than they were in 1918. (More Coming) • • • He1p expose the political monstrosity that was CzechoSlov;aJkia by getting the SLOV'AK NEWSLEITER to as many Americans as possible. Renew youT subscriptions NOW and send one in for a friend . The BEST availaJble mNGLlSH-1SLOVAlK DICTIONARY? Yes, we have it. Get your copy of HROBAICS ENGLISH-.SLOVAK DICTIONARY today! Only $4.00 per copy. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 88 SLOVAKIA Kerner's "Czechoslov~kia" (Cont'd.) IDSTORY OR PROPAGANDA? P.A. HROBAK "With the formation of the Czecho,Slovak State, the Germans refused to accept the new situation and to cooperate with the new government at Prague" (p. 177) . But the fact is that even though they were forced to accept the situation, on various occasions the Sudetenlanders showed their willingness to cooperate with Prague, but the Czechs were not disposed to cooperate. "The Germans, reduced from the position of dominance to that of a minority, naturally resented the new setup," Roucek tells us, which is true, but the entire blame for the bad blood between the Czechs and the Germans, could hardly be placed on the latter, as Roucek would have us do. Masaryk and Benes and their followers were responsible for what happened in and to Czecho-Slovakia, because they practically ran the whole show. "But why did the Czechs ask that this hostile element be included in their state? In the memorandum which the Czechs submitted to the Peace Conference, they claimed the historic frontiers of Bohemia. All history showed, they argued, and economic and strategic considerations demanded, that the historic Lands of the Bohemian Crown should remain a single unit. The exclusion of the Sudete areas would have broken the virtually indissoluble geographical and economic ties with central Bohemia. The Germans of Bohemia d6lsired to be united with the new Austrian Republic and not with the Reich. The areas settled by the Germans were never, of themselves, component parts of the German Reich nor were they independent elements in the former Austria• Hungary. So far as these territories were connected constitutionally with the Holy Roman Empire, they were connected solely as part and parcel of the Czech State, consisting of the Lands of the Bohemian Crown, and only as an entity with those Lands." - (p. 178). Roucek's tendency is obvious: the Czechs had a claim, but the Germans did not. Bohemia, we know, was an independent kingdom until 1526; the Germans were no less a part of it than were the Czechs. Roucek, however, tells us that the territories settled by the Germans "were connected solely as part and parcel of the "CZECH" State and not the BOHEMIAN Crown lands. What Benes and Masaryk submitted to the Peace Conference to back their "claims" to the his- SLOVAKIA 89 toric frontiers of Bohemia is one thing, but the truth is something else. Roucek apparently preferred not to deal with the latter. For his edification, I quote Robert Ingrim, eminent journalist and author, who says that: _ . . before Huss's reformation, Bohemia had been the scene of the most felicitous Czech-German cooperation. Of this, Prague, one of the most magnificent cities in Europe, is still a living witness. It must be added that in those dark times, when people had not yet learned to regard another language as a symptom of inferiority, no one spoke of Czechs or 'G ermans. They were just Bohemians. This explains why no two other races have more similarity than Czechs and Sudeten Germans. There was perpetual intermarriage and it became, in the towns, purely accidental whether a family considered itself German or Czech. The race which profited most by this close community were the Czechs because the Germans had an older and more highly developed culture and could draw from the great receptacle of the Germanies. The Czechs as part and parcel of the Holy Roman Empire became entirely different from Slavic peoples outside." ("After Hitler Stalin?" - 1946 - Bruce Publishing Company, Milwaukee, Wis.; pp. 54-55) . It is significant that Roucek did not include the works of such eminent historians as C. A. Macartney and A. J. P. Taylor, which shed much light on Bohemia and the Habsburg Empire. Macartney, for example, says that Bohemia did "become a member of the German Reich," whereas Roucek claims that "the areas settled by the Germans were never, of themselves, component parts of the German Reich," which is a tricky way of putting it, to say the least. iHow many students and teachers of history, using Kerner's "Czechoslovakia," noticed or paid any attention to Roucek's "of themselves," and if some did, what did they make of it? What real claim did Masaryk and Benes have to the 3,231,688 Germans of Bohemia, the figure mentioned by Roucek (.p. 178)? Furthermore, according to Roucek: "The whole problem of the Sudete Germans was a counter in the game of power politics and a part of the larger problem of Germany in Europe. It was not a debate between the 11,000,000 Czecho-Slovaks and the 75,0'00,000 Germans concerning the treatment of Germans in Czecho-Slovakia, or the frontiers of that Repu'blic, or of the destiny of the national fragments which remained outside the German borders. It was a question of the desire of Germany to establish a new empire" (p. 182). Now this may have been the desire of Hitler after he came to power. But why should Roucek consider the Sudete 90 SLOVAKIA problem only from this angle? The situation in 1938 may have been ~s described, but what the Sudeten Germans themselves had to say about their treatment at the hands of the Czechs from 1918 to 1938 is not at all worth mentioning by Roucek. Furthermore, the debate certainly did not concern "11,000,000 Czecho-Slovaks," as Roucek would have us believe. The Slovaks had nothing to do with it; foreign policy was dominated by Benes and the Czechs. The Slovaks, we know, had their own arguments with the Czechs. The Czechs under Masaryk and Benes were on one side, while the non-Czech nationalities - the majority of the population of Czecho-Slovakia - were on the opposite side. The demands of these non-Czech nations may have been, as Roucek says, "incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy as understood and practiced in Czecho-Slovakia," nevertheless they were not incompatible with natural rights and the fundamental principles of democracy as understood and practiced in genuinely democratic countries. The simple truth is that the Czechs, especially the Masaryk-Bene s Czechs, did not learn the lesson of AustriaHungary. They followed Masaryk and Benes blindly, ruling high and mighty over the non-Czech nations, in the fashion of Stalin and Hitler. " The problem of nationalism played no part In Slovak ia up to the end of the eighteenth cen t ury because the official language of Hungary was Latin" (p. 183) . Following this line of reasoning, then, nationalism played no part in any country, at any time, whenever the official language of a country was any other than that of the inhabitants. Does professor Roucek really believe that? Writing about the period of Joseph II, when "Bohemian politics of the nineteenth century received their first rehearsal," A. J. P. Taylor says in his "The Habsburg Monarchy": Even In Bohemia the Imperial nobility, which had been Imported by the Habsburgs, cloaked their hostility to social reform In a display of Bohemian patriotism , and in the ante-rooms of the >Habsburgi the! descendants of German, ,Scottish, or Spanish adventurers ostentatiously exchanged a few words of CZECH which they had laboriously learnt from their stable-boys" (pp. 19-20). SLOVAKIA 91 This relates to the time that Roucek writes about (Joseph died in 1790). What then was the official language of Bohemia, or of the Habsburg Empire up to the end of the eighteenth century? "The Slovaks were not considered as a minority by Prague, and certainly not by the Slovaks themselves. This is attested to by the fact that the Czech parties had their adherents in Slovakia, that there was no discrimination against the inclusion of Slovaks in various cabinets, and that Dr. Milan Hodza, a member of the R epublican Party and a Slovak, headed the cabinets from 1935 to 1938" (p. 184). If the Slovaks were not considered "as a minority" by Prague, what were they considered? An equal partner, a colony, a branch of the Czech nation? What does Roucek's "attestation" prove? What were CZECH parties doing in Slovakia? Does not Roucek know that the Slovaks selected by Masaryk and Benes for cabinet or other posts did not represent the will of the vast masses of the Slovak people? We remember that Judas was one of the apostles, too. Masaryk and Benes could hardly make the new-born Republic appear "Czecho-Slovak" without including several Slovaks in their cabinets. But those Slovaks knew that they had to serve the interests of Masaryk and Benes, the interests of the Czechs, if · they wanted to keep their posts. Every one of them repudiated the right of their own nation to freedom and political independence, nay, even autonomy (states' rights). What kind of Slovaks were they, if not "Judas" Slovaks? Dr. Milan Hod.fa was a smart politician; he knew what was best for Milan Hod.fa. He served Masaryk and Benes well for decades, but, in the end, was made the scapegoat of Munich, being discarded by Benes, as were so many other Slovaks and Czechs who got out of line with the policies of Masaryk and Benes. (Pergler, Stfibrny, Beran, Osusky, etc.). "The autonomist tendencies of the Catholic Slovaks found their expression, however, in the Slovak Populist Party of Father Andrej Hlinka, wt-lose policies can be understood best when we recall the demands for states' rights in the United States which culminated in the Civil War" (p. 184) . Roucek, however, omitted to mention that Hlinka was joined in "the autonomist tendencies" by the Lutheran minister and poet, Martin Razus, Slovak patriot and head of 92 SLOVAKIA the Slovak National Party. Biased historians propagate the idea that only the Slovak Catholics fought for autonomy (states' rights) :in Slovakia. What does Mr. Roucek mean when he says that Hlinka's policies "can be underst.ood best when we recall the demands for stat.es' rights in the United Stat.es which culminated in the Civil War"? In the first place, does it make sense to compare the relationship between the individual 48 States to the United States and the relationship of Slovakia to Czecho-Slovakia? Demands by how many states and for what states' rights culminated in the Civil War? Do not the States comprising the United States have their rights defined and secured by the Constitution of the U. S. A.? What states' rights did Slovakia have guaranteed and secured by the Czecho-Slovak Constitution of Masaryk and Benes, which, in fact , even denied the existence of the Slovak nation? Or is it possible that Mr. Roucek wants us to believe that Hlinka's .policies advocated slavery? It is quite obvious that Roucek did not know Hlinka and his policies! "The Czechs and the Slovaks had been separated politically for one thousand years. The former had become very largely industrialized, Influenced by German and Western thought and technical development. The Slovaks, on the contrary, r emained agriculturists and under a Magyar (that is, Eastern) type of culture. The Czechs were nominally Roman Catholics, and those who opposed Roman Catholicism during their national struggle against the Catholic tHabsburgs had earned the reputation in the eyes of devout Slovaks of being irreligious" (pp. 184-185). Roucek and other pro-Czech historians like to dwell on the theme that the Czechs and Slovaks were "separated politically for one thousand years," but somehow always forget to tell when and under what conditions the Czechs and Slovaks were ever united politically or otherwise. They also favor the theme that the Czechs were "largely industrialized," while the Slovaks "remained agriculturists," but never have an explanation for the fact that Slovakia was more industrialized under the Magyars of Hungary than it was under Masaryk and Benes of Czecho-Slovakia. The tendency is only too obvious! The Czechs, it is true, did not fare badly under the Germans (Austria); the Slovaks suffered incomparably greater SLOVAKIA 93 political and economic oppression under the Magyars of Hungary. The culture of the Slovaks, however, was not "Magyar (that is, Eastern)," as Roucek maintains. The Slovaks evidently knew the Czechs better than Roucek did. Many Czechs were undoubtedly "nominally Roman Catholics," hut many times many mOTe became so-called "progressive" Roman Catholics, having succumbed to the influence of Huss, Palacky, Rieger, Havlicek, Masaryk and Benes. The Slovaks did not consider the Czechs "irreligious" because they fought against the "Catholic Ha:bsburgs," but rather because they repudiated the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and deeply insulted the religious feelings of the Slovak people by destroying religious monuments, removing crucifixes from classrooms, etc., soon after Masaryk and Benes took over the reins of the Czecho-Slova k State. Roucek may not like to admit it, nevertheless the possibility does exist that the Slovaks could have regarded the Czechs as "irreligious" also for denying the existence of the Slovak nation and its inherent and God-given right to freedom and political independence. Or is it possible that Roucek believes that recognition of and respect for the natural rights of nations does not come under the title of religion? "Whereas the standard of literacy among the Czechs was high, the percentage of Slovaks who could read and write was very low In 1919. For that reason, many officials, teachers, and intellectuals from the Czech regions had to be sent to Slovakia in 1918-1919, and many of them antagonized the Slovaks with their well-intentioned, but often too matter-of-fact, methods . . . When, during the eourse of time, Slovaks became available, it was not easy to dismiss the Czechs, many of whom had married and settled down" (p. 185). By what standards or statistics professor Roucek was influenced, I do not know, but I honestly believe that his statement regarding the literacy of the Slovaks in 1919 is highly exaggerated. How low is very low? What were the "well-intentioned, but often too matter-of-fac t, methods" of Czech intellectuals which antagonized the Slovaks? Is it not significant that Roucek has no sympathy for the many Slovaks who, during the course of time, did become available, got married and had children, but could hardly settle down in their own homeland, because the jobs they had been trained for were taken by Czechs? R. W. Seton-Watson , the 94 SLOVAKIA Czech propagandi st, admits much more in his "The New Slovakia" (Fr. Borovy, Prague; 1924) ; I heartily recommend it to Roucek and to all readers of Kerner's "Czechoslo vakia." The fact is that Prague sent about 110,000 Czechs to Slovakia to do jobs which the Slovaks themselves could have done erusily and effectively. Roucek asks "what was the Pittsburgh Agreement ?" and then answers the typical Masaryk-B enes way, using Ivan Derer's (the Judas Slovak) "The Unity of the Czechs and Slovaks" (Prague, 1938) and Benes's "Central European Observer" (Dec. 16, 1938) as his "catechism s"! It is evident that Roucek never even saw a copy of the original, because he dates the Pittsburgh Agreement June 30, 1918, instead of May 30, 1918, the same mistake made by other Czech propagandists, including T. G. Masaryk (Svet.ova Revoluce, p. 262) and professor S. Harrison Thomson of the University of Colorado, author of "Czechoslovakia in European mstory" (Princeton University Press, 1953) and editor of the "Journal of Central European Affairs." Roucek does not produce the full text of the Pittsburgh Agreement , but simply states: "These American Czechs and Slovaks, together with Dr. Masaryk, agreed that Slovakia should 'have her own administrativ e system, her own diet and her own courts, (and that) the Slovak the official language in the schools, In the public affairs generally'. Actually the points in agreement ried out - except the one stipulating the setting up kia." language should be offices and public were virtually carof a diet for Slova- Roucek, however, does not tell the whole story about the Pittsburgh Agreement . By presenting only the Czech side and omitting the Slovak side of it, he proves himself partial and prejudiced. Without the support of the Slovaks, T. G. Masaryk knew that his proposed "Czecho-Sl ovakia" was doomed. There was no way of contacting the Slovaks at home (in Hungary at that time), hence he came to the United States to seek the support of Americans of Slovak descent; also the support of Americans of Czech descent, since the Czechs at home did not react favorably to Masaryk's plan to destroy Austria-Hu ngary and to establish CzechoSlovakia. The weightiest objection to Masaryk's plan was that SLOVAKIA 95 about six and a half million Czechs would hardly make a .state fit to live, even if they were allowed to swallow three and a half million Germans in order to obtain the historical frontiers of the Bohemian kingdom. To meet this argument, Robert Ing,rirn tells us ("After Hitler Stalin" - ip. 80): "Masaryk invented the fiction that the Czechs and Slovaks were the same, that is Czecho-Slovaks, thus claiming a large part of Hungary for his new state. As this discovery failed to impress the Allies, he enlisted the support of the Americans of Slovakian descent. Disliking the Magyars, who . . . had not given them a fair deal, they favored the idea of separating Slovakia from Hungary. But sufficiently history conscious, they rejected emphatically the theory of the Czecho-Slovak race." Americans of Slovak descent did not put much trust in Masaryk's oral pronouncements and promises. They remembered that the Magyars had made quite a few promises to the Slovaks and never kept them. When Masaryk came to America to gain the support of the citizens of Slovak descent, the latter insisted on a written guaranree that Slovakia would enjoy full autonomy (states' rights) within the proposed Czecho-Slovakian republic. The result was the Pittsburgh Agreement or Convention which Masaryk drafted and signed during a meeting of representatives of Slovak and Czech organizations at Pittsburgh, Pa., May 30, 1918. Masaryk, however, repudiated it soon after he and Benes took over the reins of the Czecho-Slovak State. To refute Slovakia's claim for autonomy, Masaryk wrote in 1925: "It (the Pittsburgh Convention) was concluded in order to appease a small Slovak fraction which was dreaming of God knows what sort of independence for Slovakia ... I signed the agreement unhesitatingly because it was a local agreement of American Czechs and Slovaks between themselves'' (SVETOV.A REVOLUCE, p . 262). To attain a "Czecho-Slovak" majority in the proposed Czecho-Slovak Republic T. G. Masaryk did not hesitate to resort to• falsehood and dishonesty. How else can we explain his preposterous statement that the Pittsburgh Agreement was only a "local agreement of American Czechs and Slovaks between themselves"! What need did .Amerkan Crechs and Slovaks have for such an agreement? And if Masaryk actually did think it was only a "local agreement" between Americans, why did he, a foreigner, even consider drafting and signing it? iHe con- 96 SLOVAKIA eluded the agreement, he says, "in order to appease a small SWVAK fraction which was dreaming of God knows what sort of independence for Slovakia," but the fact is that the Slovaks at that Pittsburgh meeting represented an overwhelming majority of organized Slovaks in America. And what sort of independence for Slovakia could they possibly be dreaming of when Masaryk himself told them that CzechoSlovakia would be modeled after the United States or Switzerland? In 1918, T. G. Masaryk presented the Pittsburgh Convention to President Woodrow Wilson as a solemn treaty between the Slovaks and the Czechs to induce him to grant official recognition to the Czech and Slovak union and its provisional government. Wilson would hardly have been charmed by Masaryk to destroy Austria if Masaryk had described the Pittsburgh convention, in 1918, in the disparaging terms he set in the record in 1925. The "great" Masaryk, who so persistently insisted on the truth in all things, obviously lied to President Wilson and the Slovaks! By saying that "actually the points in agreement were virtually carried out - except the one stipulating the setting up of a diet for Slovakia," professor Roucek admits that he does not know what went on in Czecho-Slovakia and, hence, is hardly qualified to write with authority about that country, and especially the Slovak portion of it. The fact is that the Masaryk and Benes regimes were deaf to the just demand of the Slovaks that the Pittsburgh Convention be honored by the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic and, hence, both were responsible for the consequences. The relations between the Czechs and the Slovaks were actually worse in 1938 than they were in 1918. (More Coming) • • • He1p expose the political monstrosity that was CzechoSlov;aJkia by getting the SLOV'AK NEWSLEITER to as many Americans as possible. Renew youT subscriptions NOW and send one in for a friend . The BEST availaJble mNGLlSH-1SLOVAlK DICTIONARY? Yes, we have it. Get your copy of HROBAICS ENGLISH-.SLOVAK DICTIONARY today! Only $4.00 per copy.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professor Kerner's "CZECHOSLOVAKIA": History or Propaganda? (5/8) Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 88-96 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hrobak, Philip Anthony, 1904-1964 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource September-December 1956 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="/items/show/213">Vol. 6, No. 2 (19), pp. 61-64</a><br />continues in <a href="/items/show/251">Vol. 7, No. 1 (22), pp. 59-64</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/d5704acf67c5fc61db78eda773809082.pdf a689fad8f4cd1b234fcf5e1b7d77d83c PDF Text Text ::,lLUVAKlA 3 R. I. P. Dr. Francis Hrusovsky Jos eph Kir schbaum , LL.D., Ph.D. Thousands of Slovaks living on this side of the Iron Curtain were stunned by the unexpected news which broke the night of September 9. It struck them as an incredible report, this word announcing the sudden death of Dr. Frap.cis Hrus01Vsky, president of the Slav,a k National Council Abroad, outstanding patriot, eminent historian and educator, and a man of .s terling moral caliber. Among pro_ minent representatives of a Slovak generation, to which it was given to see their cherished dream of Sl01Viakia's independence and statehood fU'lfiHed only to be ruthlessly destroyed within a few years. Dr. Hrusovsky personified the best traditions and characteristics which distinguish our Slovak intellectuals, men of a class that is being me-rciless[y hol\.lllded to extermination ,by the Communists. The loss of Dr. Hrusovslky is very keenly fe~t both because of what he was per s.e and because of what he meant to the nation. And it is precisely these two reasons that quicken the realization that no blow could have been more grievous in our ranks than this death of Dr. Hrusovsky which so sorely afflicts all our Slov1aik communities in the free world and especially affects alil Slorva;k e:rnigres dedicated to the vindication of IS lavakia's liberation fTom foreign rule. 1 t has be-en our unhappy lot to suffer three irrepara;ble losses within the span of tlrree consecutive years: the passing of Karol Sidor, dilplomat, statesman and key leader of the Sl01Vaik exile movement; the political assassination of Matus Cernak, a most valua;bJe force among Slovak exiles in Germany, and now the death of Dr. Hrusavsiky, Sidor's successor, in the prime of his caireer at the age of 53. One short year ago, when Dr. Hrusovrsky aocepted the chief executive responsibilities of the Slovak National Council Albroad, we rejoiced in being under his capable leaderahip. We confidently fixed all our prospects on him �4 SLOVAKIA as being the individual best qualified to effect a united effort of all Slovak exiled groups engaged in the struggle to attain Slovakia's justified liberation and independence. Mild-mannere d and unassuming as he was, Dr. Hrusovsky commanded the respect of all Slovaks. His personal inclination and preference were not for the tensions amd strategems of a political career but he did not decline wholehearted service to his nation in this difficult post, when it was evident that the need of the hour required it of him. The Cleveland weekly "Slovak News" wrote of him: "In less than a decade in his adopted country he became a beloved figure in Slovak circles everywhere. Everyone who met him was impressed by his personality. Those who knew him learned to admire his schol,a rship, to respect his unwavering devotion to 1principles, and to love him for his boundless charity. Seldom can one expect to meet a man of his moral stature, dignity, idealism, and faith." The ,primary interest of Dr. Hrusovsky's life was teaching, specifically the teaching of history and the pursuit of historical research. His innate love of his people and his instinctive devotion to youth •p rompted him to choose education as his profession. He attained distinction in this field, and it was as, an educator and a historian that he entered the ,p olitical arena. Here he looked upon all his political functions and commitments as a service to his nation's highest interests and, hence, wo·r ked with a sen:se of dedication to public duty. 'Specializing as he did in medieval history, Dr. Hru_ sovsky published several fully documented studies on Great Moravia, t:he first Slovak and Slav state on the Danube. He also prepared a Slovak history text for secondary schools which established a precedent in the Slovak pu:blishing world. In its second edition this book was welcomed with such wide acclaim that it became a national best seller. In the early part of his exile, during his sojourn in Rome and in the United States, Dr. Hrusovsky iprepared a scholarly work on the earliest Slovak rulers and an exhaustive study investigating the relations of the Slovak rulers of Great Moravia with the Holy See. �5 SLOVAKIA Slovak letters, as well as American Slovak history, were definitely enriched by Dr. Hrusovsky's book surveying the growth and ex;pansion of Slovak religious orders in the United States. This book incidentally develops a great deal of the cultural 'history of American citizens of Slovak descent. Besides these book length productions, Dr. Hruso:vsky has to his credit hundreds of articles and numeTous addresses delivered on various occasions. Reflecting on some of these merits of Dr. 'Hrusovsky, we find that our sentiments, too, correspond v\ith the ex.pression of one of the prominent American leaders in Slovak cultral life who said with deepest sincerity that we "will miss his wise guidance, his great capacity for wo,r k, and his lmfaltering hope of a better world on the morrow." Afl true Slovaks on both sides of the Iron Curtain bear with pain the loss of Dr. IHruso,vsky. Our one comfort and consolation stems from the belief that national leaders of Dr. Hrusovs:k y's moral stature and defenders of a nation's rights and li'berties share the prerogative of great soldiers who never die . Thus, indeed, will Dr. Hrusovsky continue to live, partaking of an immorality among us, his courage, his vision, his selflessness seTVing as an undying example for coming generations of Slo:vaks, inspiring them tq win fOT their country that freedom, that independent and recognized state for which Hrusovsky wo!"ked literally to his last breath . 1 • • • DR. FRANCIS HRUSOVSKY - THE MAN Constantine Culen Franc.is Hrufovsky was eminently an historian. He could have distinguished himself by a career at the University of Bratislava even under the tuteJage of the Czech professor Chaloupecky. The ,professor was aware that this yo'll'Ilg collegian's views were radical,l y oppooed to his own outlook, nevertheless entertained high esteem for him. It was something which Hirusovsky merited 'because of his consistent gravity, his critical acumen, and his broad knowledge. But � ::,lLUVAKlA 3 R. I. P. Dr. Francis Hrusovsky Jos eph Kir schbaum , LL.D., Ph.D. Thousands of Slovaks living on this side of the Iron Curtain were stunned by the unexpected news which broke the night of September 9. It struck them as an incredible report, this word announcing the sudden death of Dr. Frap.cis Hrus01Vsky, president of the Slav,a k National Council Abroad, outstanding patriot, eminent historian and educator, and a man of .s terling moral caliber. Among pro_ minent representatives of a Slovak generation, to which it was given to see their cherished dream of Sl01Viakia's independence and statehood fU'lfiHed only to be ruthlessly destroyed within a few years. Dr. Hrusovsky personified the best traditions and characteristics which distinguish our Slovak intellectuals, men of a class that is being me-rciless[y hol\.lllded to extermination ,by the Communists. The loss of Dr. Hrusovslky is very keenly fe~t both because of what he was per s.e and because of what he meant to the nation. And it is precisely these two reasons that quicken the realization that no blow could have been more grievous in our ranks than this death of Dr. Hrusovsky which so sorely afflicts all our Slov1aik communities in the free world and especially affects alil Slorva;k e:rnigres dedicated to the vindication of IS lavakia's liberation fTom foreign rule. 1 t has be-en our unhappy lot to suffer three irrepara;ble losses within the span of tlrree consecutive years: the passing of Karol Sidor, dilplomat, statesman and key leader of the Sl01Vaik exile movement; the political assassination of Matus Cernak, a most valua;bJe force among Slovak exiles in Germany, and now the death of Dr. Hrusavsiky, Sidor's successor, in the prime of his caireer at the age of 53. One short year ago, when Dr. Hrusovrsky aocepted the chief executive responsibilities of the Slovak National Council Albroad, we rejoiced in being under his capable leaderahip. We confidently fixed all our prospects on him �4 SLOVAKIA as being the individual best qualified to effect a united effort of all Slovak exiled groups engaged in the struggle to attain Slovakia's justified liberation and independence. Mild-mannere d and unassuming as he was, Dr. Hrusovsky commanded the respect of all Slovaks. His personal inclination and preference were not for the tensions amd strategems of a political career but he did not decline wholehearted service to his nation in this difficult post, when it was evident that the need of the hour required it of him. The Cleveland weekly "Slovak News" wrote of him: "In less than a decade in his adopted country he became a beloved figure in Slovak circles everywhere. Everyone who met him was impressed by his personality. Those who knew him learned to admire his schol,a rship, to respect his unwavering devotion to 1principles, and to love him for his boundless charity. Seldom can one expect to meet a man of his moral stature, dignity, idealism, and faith." The ,primary interest of Dr. Hrusovsky's life was teaching, specifically the teaching of history and the pursuit of historical research. His innate love of his people and his instinctive devotion to youth •p rompted him to choose education as his profession. He attained distinction in this field, and it was as, an educator and a historian that he entered the ,p olitical arena. Here he looked upon all his political functions and commitments as a service to his nation's highest interests and, hence, wo·r ked with a sen:se of dedication to public duty. 'Specializing as he did in medieval history, Dr. Hru_ sovsky published several fully documented studies on Great Moravia, t:he first Slovak and Slav state on the Danube. He also prepared a Slovak history text for secondary schools which established a precedent in the Slovak pu:blishing world. In its second edition this book was welcomed with such wide acclaim that it became a national best seller. In the early part of his exile, during his sojourn in Rome and in the United States, Dr. Hrusovsky iprepared a scholarly work on the earliest Slovak rulers and an exhaustive study investigating the relations of the Slovak rulers of Great Moravia with the Holy See. �5 SLOVAKIA Slovak letters, as well as American Slovak history, were definitely enriched by Dr. Hrusovsky's book surveying the growth and ex;pansion of Slovak religious orders in the United States. This book incidentally develops a great deal of the cultural 'history of American citizens of Slovak descent. Besides these book length productions, Dr. Hruso:vsky has to his credit hundreds of articles and numeTous addresses delivered on various occasions. Reflecting on some of these merits of Dr. 'Hrusovsky, we find that our sentiments, too, correspond v\ith the ex.pression of one of the prominent American leaders in Slovak cultral life who said with deepest sincerity that we "will miss his wise guidance, his great capacity for wo,r k, and his lmfaltering hope of a better world on the morrow." Afl true Slovaks on both sides of the Iron Curtain bear with pain the loss of Dr. IHruso,vsky. Our one comfort and consolation stems from the belief that national leaders of Dr. Hrusovs:k y's moral stature and defenders of a nation's rights and li'berties share the prerogative of great soldiers who never die . Thus, indeed, will Dr. Hrusovsky continue to live, partaking of an immorality among us, his courage, his vision, his selflessness seTVing as an undying example for coming generations of Slo:vaks, inspiring them tq win fOT their country that freedom, that independent and recognized state for which Hrusovsky wo!"ked literally to his last breath . 1 • • • DR. FRANCIS HRUSOVSKY - THE MAN Constantine Culen Franc.is Hrufovsky was eminently an historian. He could have distinguished himself by a career at the University of Bratislava even under the tuteJage of the Czech professor Chaloupecky. The ,professor was aware that this yo'll'Ilg collegian's views were radical,l y oppooed to his own outlook, nevertheless entertained high esteem for him. It was something which Hirusovsky merited 'because of his consistent gravity, his critical acumen, and his broad knowledge. But � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document ::,lLUVAKlA 3 R. I. P. Dr. Francis Hrusovsky Jos eph Kir schbaum , LL.D., Ph.D. Thousands of Slovaks living on this side of the Iron Curtain were stunned by the unexpected news which broke the night of September 9. It struck them as an incredible report, this word announcing the sudden death of Dr. Frap.cis Hrus01Vsky, president of the Slav,a k National Council Abroad, outstanding patriot, eminent historian and educator, and a man of .s terling moral caliber. Among pro_ minent representatives of a Slovak generation, to which it was given to see their cherished dream of Sl01Viakia's independence and statehood fU'lfiHed only to be ruthlessly destroyed within a few years. Dr. Hrusovsky personified the best traditions and characteristics which distinguish our Slovak intellectuals, men of a class that is being me-rciless[y hol\.lllded to extermination ,by the Communists. The loss of Dr. Hrusovslky is very keenly fe~t both because of what he was per s.e and because of what he meant to the nation. And it is precisely these two reasons that quicken the realization that no blow could have been more grievous in our ranks than this death of Dr. Hrusovsky which so sorely afflicts all our Slov1aik communities in the free world and especially affects alil Slorva;k e:rnigres dedicated to the vindication of IS lavakia's liberation fTom foreign rule. 1 t has be-en our unhappy lot to suffer three irrepara;ble losses within the span of tlrree consecutive years: the passing of Karol Sidor, dilplomat, statesman and key leader of the Sl01Vaik exile movement; the political assassination of Matus Cernak, a most valua;bJe force among Slovak exiles in Germany, and now the death of Dr. Hrusavsiky, Sidor's successor, in the prime of his caireer at the age of 53. One short year ago, when Dr. Hrusovrsky aocepted the chief executive responsibilities of the Slovak National Council Albroad, we rejoiced in being under his capable leaderahip. We confidently fixed all our prospects on him 4 SLOVAKIA as being the individual best qualified to effect a united effort of all Slovak exiled groups engaged in the struggle to attain Slovakia's justified liberation and independence. Mild-mannere d and unassuming as he was, Dr. Hrusovsky commanded the respect of all Slovaks. His personal inclination and preference were not for the tensions amd strategems of a political career but he did not decline wholehearted service to his nation in this difficult post, when it was evident that the need of the hour required it of him. The Cleveland weekly "Slovak News" wrote of him: "In less than a decade in his adopted country he became a beloved figure in Slovak circles everywhere. Everyone who met him was impressed by his personality. Those who knew him learned to admire his schol,a rship, to respect his unwavering devotion to 1principles, and to love him for his boundless charity. Seldom can one expect to meet a man of his moral stature, dignity, idealism, and faith." The ,primary interest of Dr. Hrusovsky's life was teaching, specifically the teaching of history and the pursuit of historical research. His innate love of his people and his instinctive devotion to youth •p rompted him to choose education as his profession. He attained distinction in this field, and it was as, an educator and a historian that he entered the ,p olitical arena. Here he looked upon all his political functions and commitments as a service to his nation's highest interests and, hence, wo·r ked with a sen:se of dedication to public duty. 'Specializing as he did in medieval history, Dr. Hru_ sovsky published several fully documented studies on Great Moravia, t:he first Slovak and Slav state on the Danube. He also prepared a Slovak history text for secondary schools which established a precedent in the Slovak pu:blishing world. In its second edition this book was welcomed with such wide acclaim that it became a national best seller. In the early part of his exile, during his sojourn in Rome and in the United States, Dr. Hrusovsky iprepared a scholarly work on the earliest Slovak rulers and an exhaustive study investigating the relations of the Slovak rulers of Great Moravia with the Holy See. 5 SLOVAKIA Slovak letters, as well as American Slovak history, were definitely enriched by Dr. Hrusovsky's book surveying the growth and ex;pansion of Slovak religious orders in the United States. This book incidentally develops a great deal of the cultural 'history of American citizens of Slovak descent. Besides these book length productions, Dr. Hruso:vsky has to his credit hundreds of articles and numeTous addresses delivered on various occasions. Reflecting on some of these merits of Dr. 'Hrusovsky, we find that our sentiments, too, correspond v\ith the ex.pression of one of the prominent American leaders in Slovak cultral life who said with deepest sincerity that we "will miss his wise guidance, his great capacity for wo,r k, and his lmfaltering hope of a better world on the morrow." Afl true Slovaks on both sides of the Iron Curtain bear with pain the loss of Dr. IHruso,vsky. Our one comfort and consolation stems from the belief that national leaders of Dr. Hrusovs:k y's moral stature and defenders of a nation's rights and li'berties share the prerogative of great soldiers who never die . Thus, indeed, will Dr. Hrusovsky continue to live, partaking of an immorality among us, his courage, his vision, his selflessness seTVing as an undying example for coming generations of Slo:vaks, inspiring them tq win fOT their country that freedom, that independent and recognized state for which Hrusovsky wo!"ked literally to his last breath . 1 • • • DR. FRANCIS HRUSOVSKY - THE MAN Constantine Culen Franc.is Hrufovsky was eminently an historian. He could have distinguished himself by a career at the University of Bratislava even under the tuteJage of the Czech professor Chaloupecky. The ,professor was aware that this yo'll'Ilg collegian's views were radical,l y oppooed to his own outlook, nevertheless entertained high esteem for him. It was something which Hirusovsky merited 'because of his consistent gravity, his critical acumen, and his broad knowledge. But  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource R.I.P. Dr. Francis Hrušovský Description An account of the resource Joseph Kirschbaum, LL.D., Ph.D. Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 3-5 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Kirschbaum, Jozef M., 1913-2001 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource September-December 1956 SNK https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/102faba0788825daf0f7d105d31146ed.pdf b69faeed0c4804b475974a752c97d2bc PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA SLOVAK LITERATUR E UNDER THE SOVIET IMPACT Joseph Kirschbaum, Ph.D., LL.D., Professor at the University of Montreal Department of Slavic Studies A Reprint From "The Slavic and East-Eurooea n Studies." Published by: The Department of Slavic Studies, University of Montreal FOREWORD The Commumst occupation of SlwaJri,a carved deep wounds not only •i nto the sociall and political structure of Slovak life as poliitical occupations and changes used :to do in the past. The totailiitarian character of Communism has the specific quality th!a,t it .affects ail the important sectors of national life, be it !l'eligion or phi!losophy, arts or literature. Due to the peculiar citrCu:rnmnces under wbiich the Slovak people were deprived of national independence and became a defenseless prey of foreign domination, the cultural life of Slo'V18Jkfa suffered. ,p robably the stirongest impact among all Soviet satellites. The reasons are many. First of all the character of SlO'V'ak literature and writers. Slovak culture developed through lbhe ages U'Ilder Western influences. This is true namely m regard to the Slovak literature which originated in the classical dlimate of the Catholic University of Trnava, founded in 1635. (1) With exception of the Gdthlc period, we find •i n Slovak literature all the literary currents from humani.!S!m .t hrough (baroque to classicism, romantic-ism, realism, Catholic "modenie," and surrealism. In fact, the olassicaJl. reminiscences , the era of enlighrtenment and romanticism g,ave birth to SlovaJk poetry and prose. Some of the influences ,ruppeared [ater, or J:asted. longer, or el-se !their form wa:s not pure, but we find ianalogies for this phenomenon in all Slavic literatures. More than m poetic and literacy forms, the Western influences and Western orientrution of the Slovak literature is evident in the contents and in the mission that �SLOVAKIA 35 poetry and prose aimed to accomplish in the Jife of the Slovak people. Slovak poets and novelists beginning with Holly (2) in .t he eigJJ.teenth century, and the group of Eudovit Stur(3) in the nineteenth century to Hviezdoslav(4), Vajansky, Razus, Zarnov, Urban, Bronsky, Beniak, etc., saw tihe reaJI. function of Slovak literrutrure primarNy in equipping !the Sloviak people with the spiritual resources necessary for survival and the fight for freedom. They endeavored rto bring the Slovak ,p eople to an awa:reness of rtheir spiritual •a nd nationrul iindi'Viduality and fought for their politic-al M1d sociral rights. Like .the poetry of Mickiewicz, Krasinski and Slowac·ki, "summoned the Poles prom political enslavement to a spir.ituaJI. life and revealed them completely new pwspecltiives of mor,al responsibility resulting from the. ll'ation's politicaJl situatiO!Il," (5) in the same way tile Slov,aks Jearned through the works of theiir poets and novel-ists to regard the naitional cause as a question of honor and the supreme mo,r al criterion a.round which the. entire spiritual life of the nation was crystallized. Slovak poets and novelists who regarded thei!r mission, as described aibove, could not nourish any illusion about thei1r fate /Under Communist rule. They knew that literatUTe, •as a means of expression of the national soul and ait the same time ,t he most efficient instrument in the intellectual struggle foir ·r eshapiing nation's patterns of thinking, wou\ld be the first cultwal field undergoing substM1tial changes and losses . The Slovak intelligentsia also knew that the Czech politicians returning behind the Red Army in SloV'akia would take revenge o:n a:ll patriotic Slova1ks who claimed the right of seJf-determination for the Slovak people and applied or aidvoca.ted the ·s ame when the occasion ,had am-ived. Jan Thousands of Slovak intelllectuals, therefore, preferred the exile with all its uncertainties •a nd ,miseries to the Czecho-Communist rule. Among the intellectual emigres the write:ra who were the true irepresentatives of Slova!k literature .b etween the WaTS a:nd made ,a name for themselves by their works and outstanding talents have been �36 SLOVAKIA more numerous than it appears in the literary ,p roduction of the ilast ten years in exNe. There was, at the beginning, 111ot only the most popUJl,a;r nO'VelList of ,t he period 1918~1939, Milo Urban, w,hose "Ziivy Bic" (LlNing Whip) was translated into ,s everal European languages, but a:lso .AJildrej Zarnov, whose poetry became an efficacious instrument in the Slovak national struggle and summoned the young Slovalk intelligentsia to fight for justke and freedom. Both were 1ater kidnapped by the Czech Communists in Austria and on!ly Zarnov succeeded in a dramati·c filighit f.rom Slova!lda again and today fights for his ideas ,i n exHe. There are many others who preferred exile to Communist rule and far from Slovakia - in .Arr-gentma, the U. S. A., Canada, Australia, etc., jn deep sorrow and fiery resistance fight for rthe.ir people's freedom. Among them is Joseph C. Hroosky, the most prolific and undoubtedly one of the greatest 1Slovak noveLists, who celebrated just recently, or rather the Slovaks in the free world celebrated his 60th annirversary. The literary work of J. C. Hronsky is of such artistic vrulue and importance for the Slovak 1iterature thait even the literary historian of the Slovak University of today, professoir A. Mraz, was forced to ac'knowledge that many of iHronsky's works "belonged amOID.g the best works of the Slovak post-war literature by thei.T qualities of style and composition." In regard to Hronsky's noive1 '~Pisar Grae" (Clerk Grae), Mraz even writes a'boUJt "hravour of composiUon"; he sees in his first novels "complicated artistic instrumentality" and commends him for "exceptional and privileged interpreting of the common people, as weili as of refined and cultivated souls ,a nd hearts of women." During the war years, in his German book on Slova.!k literature, professor Mraz qualified J. C. Hironsky's novel "Jozef Mak," whlich was also translated into German, as "one of the 1b est works of the Slovruk post~war literature," and the author as the "most prolific Slovak :novelist." Altogether J. C. Hironsky published over 50 volumes of short novels, beasutiful tales for children, novels describing the life of SlorvaJk peasants and worker,s, and mas1 �SLOVAKIA 37 terpieces on the life of the Slovak SIIIl.aN-town intelligentsia (Clerk Grae, The .P rophecy orf Doctor Stan!kovsky) , with all social and ideological problems and struggles of Slovakia's post~war dramatic evolution. Usually regaTded as the heir and follower of Martin Kuikucin's realism in Sloivak literature,. !Hronslky attained new artistic heights and in many ,respects even ,sUTpassed Kulkuoin, who i1s considered even !by the Communist ireg,i.me as a "classic" of SlO!Vak literature. rHronsky's spi riitual world is broad and deep, his sphere of artistic interests is extensive and manifold, his style am.d composition masterly clerur and lingui'Sltica:lly perfect and beaubiful. At the begimning of his literary career, the Siovak peasant in his traditional way of 'life, poverty, patient heroism, and sturdy mental~ty was a favolI'ilte subject of nove!ls. HaNing made his mark with •s hort stories from Slovak village rlife, in which r ealism matched the best worlks of the founder of Slovak literary realism, Martin Kuikucin, Bronsky moved into rthe domain of liteTature for children and youth and, l,a ter, into the domain of social and psyohologicaJl problems of smaHtown people, proceeding firom short stories and tales to more and more complicated and artisticaJlly elaborated forms of novel. Hrrorusky emwged very soon as a towering personality from the group of post-war novelists and writers. His remarkable literary ,w ork constituted a lin'k between the talented Slovak n01Velists .of the previous generation and mode:m Slovak ,},i terature modeled on Western European literary currents. Not an epigon of •a nyone, Hronsky created: :from his own spiritual funds and had a strong appeal prim:arily to the heart of the young generation ,of writers among w'hom his new shade of realas-m had ma!lly followers. Hironsky',s •s ignificance in Slovak cultura:l life was, however, extraordinaJry not only in literatUII'e. Hiis -literary activity was doubled by his achievements in the highest Slovak cultUTal institution "Matica Slove:nska" (The Slovak Lnstiwte) , foll'Ilded in 1863 with the aim t 10 s,pread Slwak cultural valrues and defend Slovak traditions against 1 1 �38 SLOVAKIA Magyair tendencies of assimilation. There was rarely a Slovak writex who successifully combined a highly developed literary talent with such organizational ,ability as it has been in the case of J. C. Bronsky. Acord.mg to many seri'ous cultwrai worik€1I'S (cf. Cullen's ia.nd Hrusovsky's articles in the "S:lovensika Obrana" and the "Kainadsky Slovwk"), J. C. HronSlky has done more usefiU!l work in the few years of his administration of the "Slovak Institute" than any Oille of his predecessors during long periods. Thousands of new books wer edited every year by his merits, new cultwral sections organized, equipped and reorganized, a new farge printery built, and new activities initiaited. an institution of many The "Slovak In.stitute" merits in the fieild of co111Servation of Slorvak traditioI1JS, culture, popular art, tiheater, pwrity of language - ip1ayed an important Tole in Slovak cultura•l life at all times since its foundation in the nineteenth century. Election to leading funcUons in thls institution was considered one of the highest honors in SlovaJkia and it undoubtedly was. J . C. Hronsky was elected and reelected. For the Communist regime such merits have been, however, "crimes" against the "people's democracy and revolution," and J. C. Hrons'ky was arrested before the Red Army accomplished the occupation of Slovakia. After many unsuccessful aittempts, he finally escaped from a prison and fled from 'Slovakia through Austria into Italy, and later found refuge in Argentina, where he lives, deeply convinced that the Slovaks will never give up their fight for freedom and their Christian ,t raditions. We mention HirolilSlky's case in this connection as an example of the Slovak nationail. tragedy. There are many others, who in literature, science, arts, aind in ,t he pO'litical and economic life of Slava,kia, created works of value and have been silenced by the Communist regime, or preferred freedom in exile, as Hronsky did. In the following pages an attempt has been made to present, in a very restricted way, the main features of the Slovak literature under the Communist ,r ule. The author has scrupulously tried to paint �SLOVAKIA 39 the picture objectirvely, and the publishing committee of the review "The Slavic and East-European .Studies" saw to it that the study might remain within the limits of a scientific work. There is on:ly one abjectirve this study ,a ims at: to se:rve the cause of truth and freedom which in Slova1kia as well as in other satelilite countiries have been temporarily stifled. J. K. 1. Cf. Branislav Vars!k: Le Probleme des nationalites a r Universlte de Trnav,a, Bratislava, 193.8. 2. Jan Holly (178·5-1849) most gifted poet and disciple of A. Bernolak, glorified in three po ems Slovakia's greatness of one tllousand years ago, "Svatopluk" (18n), "Cyrilo-Methodiada" (1835), and •·,Slav" (1839). He also translated the main works of Greek and Roman classics into the Slovak l,a nguage and prepared th e Slovak renatssanee. 3. Cf. Hans Kohn: "Pan-Slavlsm, Its History and Ideology," University of Notre Dame Press, 19.53; and Ernest Denis: "Les Slovaques,' Paris, Delgrave, 1917. 4. P. 0. Hviezdoslav (1849-1921) by his own name Pavol Or· szagh, is considered the most talented Slovak poet. His poetry was publls'hed In fifteen large volumes, one of them, "Bloody Sonnets," was translated also Into English. His main works are "Herodes and Herodlas" (drama), the epics "Hajnlkova zena, Ezo a Gabor Vlkolinsky, Agar, Rachel, Kron," etc. He also published four volumes of translation,s from World literatures, Goethe's Faust, Shakes.p,eare's Hamlet and Mid-Summer Night's Dream, the main works of Shiller, Lermont-0v, Slowackl and Madach's "The Tragedy of Man." ,5. C.f. Harvard Slavic Studies, Vol. 2, 19·54, p. 323-4. SLOVAK LITERATURE UNDER THE SOVIET IMPACT Within a decade of the forced inclusion of Slovakia within the Soviet orbit, Slovaik literature weint through most peculiar transformations. If Slovak novelists and poets, generally more conservative and traditional than Polish, Czech or Slovene writers, did not leave the country m- choose silence, they were abruptly compelled to ada;pt their literary c-reeds, forms and subjects .to a new line of "socialist reailis,m" and to run exclusively Eastern orientation. The main characteristics of Slovak literatll!l"e were patriotism, pan-slavism, universalism and a deep religiO'UIS �40 SLOVAKIA spirit. The generation after John Holly, namely John Kolla.T and the group of L. Stur, turned their eyes, as fawiders of nineteenth century painslla:vism, to Russia 'but their literrury works, education and iphllosophy were fundrurnentahly Western. They were educated at German Unive:r,sities and, while KoHar's "Daughter of Slava" was modelled on Dante and Petrarca, L. Stur and his group were under the influence of German romanticism, having foir masters Herder and Hegel (in their phi1osoiphy) .1 It was in poetry only that Mickiewicz, Slowacki, Krasinski am.d Pu<s'hkin. were the:iir ideails. Kol[ar's idea of "S[avic reciprocity" refrruined from any attemipt to mottld the politkal ideology or the religious charaicter of any Slav group. He aimed merely at cuiltural and literary reciprocity, •a nd his philo,s ophy was humanistic." He only is wOlI'thy of liberty who resrpects the :liiberty of 8!11; he who forges the chains of others, is himself a slave; when thou callest for a Slav, there must respond a man," are his famous axioms.2 According to W. Bobek, one of the best foreign scholars on Slovak literature, Slovakia c-a n be reasonably considered as the classical country of the Slavic idea, with several conceptions of panslaV'ism based on the equa[ity of Slaivic peoples. Howevell", an identification of the idea of a Slavic cooperaition with russophilism was raire; it appeared as a result of national depression and despair.3 Such was the case of L. Stur, for whom "P.anslavism in the political sense was a chimera," but who later, according to W. Lednicki, forunulated about 1850 ":the most complete and consistently developed program for the subjugation of Slavs to Russia in his bo01k "SlaV'dom and the World of the Future"4. Stur wrote 'his '.book in a period of "Nationail depression ,arrd despailr," as mentioned by Boibek. (The book was written in German and never appeared in Slova!k). During the last decades of the nirneteenth century arnd the years before and during the first World War, Sfovak literary •amd cultural life was dominated to some extent by Slovak Russophiles like Vajansky and Skn.lltety. However, this was merely an interlude; for after the war, 1 �SLOVAKIA 41 the inf1uence ·o f French, English and even Scandinavian writem which was mani!fest among the younger poe'bs and novelists (I. Kraslro, V. Roy, P. 0 . Hv:iezdoslav, M. Razus), gained ground firmly and without resistance. The RussophiJ.e orientation ,i n Slova:k literature was chiefly dru:e to the political situation following the Austro-Hungarian. compromise •Of H~67, when the Slovaks were left at the mercy of Hungarian effonts of assii:rnilation. As the Slovak poets and novelists saw that the only hope for a Slovak national surrvival was in Russia's power, they gave fU!ll expression to this belief 1n their Hterary woriks. iBut they did not mean to exohange one oppression for a.mother. The Bo1sltevik Revolution and the results of the Firat WorJ,d War changed the picture. The Revo1urbion destroyed the panslavistic and Russophile dreams of Slovruk poets. While f,u!lifilling their hope for emancipation foom HUID:giarian ru'le by oreating the Czecho-Slova'k Republic with the Czechs, jt -left the Slovakis free to choose their cU!ltural orientation. They e1ther turned again to the West or they used their own spiritual and moral tradiitions for creative inspi:ration. The general trend of Slovak liteiratJure in poetry as well as in prose was to broaden its range of interests and to become responsive to European literary curents 5 The main representatives of Slovak literatlrre between the two Wars were uninterested in Soviet Russia, except for a smal[ groUJp of proJetarian o:r left-wing poets and writers under Czech influence. Oruy three or four of them acquiired literary recognition. and even fa.me. The older generation of Slovak poets, headed by P. 0. Hiviezdoslav, V. Roy, Ivan Krasko and Martin Razus, continued to create in the traditional forms or, Ji.ke Hviezdoslav, to use the European literrury forms and currents coriresponding to his great ta:lent and creativeness. In prose, the masters were the realists Kukucin,6 Hronsky, 'l'ajov!Sky, T. Vansova, Timrava and L. 'Podjavorinska. The younger generation looked for new fo:rms: to for·eign literatures. The really successful literary woriks of more tham. ephemera[ value were those which dTew their motives. from Slovak H!fe, their inspiration from rSlorva!k �42 SLOVAKIA national traditions and their art from their own spiritual reserves (Milo Ur.ban, J. C. Hironsky, A. Za.rn.ov, V. Benia:k, J. Smrek, E. IBolesilav Lu!kac, S. 1K rcmery, T. J. Gaspar, J. Hrufovsky). Consciously or unconsciously, they belonged ,t o the West and also to theiir country's social and ideological evolution. Their orientation was contilnenta,l in form, in philosophy and in motivation. A:U the European ourents ·a nd literary scho<Yls, from symbolism and impresiSlionism to Catholiic modernism (especia1ly F!rench) and su:rirealism, characteri'zed Slovak Hterature between the wars. According to Bobek, it equalled Czech literature,7 and acOTdilng to A. ,M raz, it "fought for a place in the context of wor1d 'literatures. " 8 The second World War did not change substantially the orientation of Slov·a k ,lrl,teratme. Being an island where, un,ti} the ·f all of 194.'4, the German ,i mpact was neitheir violent nor apparent, Slovakia experienced a strongly literary and cultll!I'al development. The trend remained Western, nationaliist, conservative and traditional. With the "liberation" of the co'll!ntry, the shock of the Soviet limparet was violent, spreading deep and wide throughout the literairy and cultural life orf 'Slovakia. A short analysis brings to light the foUowing features orf contemporary Slovak literature. Socialist Realism and the Soviet Model A smail:l group of p:wletarian poets, surrealists and left-wing critics or nove'lists, headed by L. Novomesky, who along with J. Rob Ponican, was the only prominent poet in the group before 1945, not only took over liiterary and cultural life while Slova;kia was stiU occupied by the RUSSliam Anny, but :they al:so decided who would be allowed to continue as writer, poet, journalist or scientist and what kind of literature they would be allowed to pubilish. If the writers wished to continue their wol1k, they had to become membern of a Society of writers, organized on the Soviet model. Their main duties were to extirpate the "corrupting" mfluence of Western "bourgeois; and fascist" writers and to follow the line of "g.reat socialiist Soviet �SLOVAKIA 43 literature," inspired 'by the ideaJs brought to reality by Stalinissm. The Slogan was "progress" and the name of the new current was "socialist :realism," though many of the main actors in this "revolutionary reshaping" of the Slovak literature were dmitators of pre-wa,r French sur:realism (R. Fabry, V. R!eisel, M. Mittelman). Soviet litera.tUTe "with its surpassdng wealth of ideas, its burning socialist patriotism, its new humanism," was destined ,t o be the mghest ideal for Slorvak literature. This reshaping of SlOIVak oultural life was purt into praotice not only without regard for traditiOIIl, but al:so wirthout the ,t rue 1representatives of Slwa!k literature hetween the wars, known by .theiT works and thei!r outstanding talent. Neither the ·best novelist of the period 19181939, Milo Urban (!b. 1904) whose Living Whlp9 was translated into serverad EUTopean languages, nor the prominen,t poet Valentin Benia,k (b. 1894), nor Andrej 2arnov (b. 1903) whose poetry by its fiery language and reso'l.l'nding verse became an effective instrument in the Slova:k national struggle and who summoned the young Sloivak intelligentsia to a struggle for justice and freedom, took part in the new trend. They pref.erred to be silent. Zarn:ov, who was under constant threat of arrest and deportation and many times imprisoned, later left his .coun:try to fight for his ideas in exHe. 'l'ido J. Gaspar (ib. 1893) author of splendid short novels and exotic ,t ales, was also ,sidenced in prison. Many others whose names were held up as worthy representati'ves of Slovak lita-aiture before 1945 fled to Argentina, the U. S. A., Canada, Australia and O'bher plaices, with deep sorrow and in a spirit of fiery resistance, preferring exile to Communist rule . Among them is the prolific nO<Velist J. C. Hronsky (b .. 1896) whose works desm-ibed ,in mastedy fas:hion the social tUTmoil and political struggles of the Sdov~ks,10 and talented literary critics and aesthetes as :professor :El 2-atiko-Bor, Stanislav Meciar and Jan Mestancik, tile poets iR. Dillong - prolific and emotional, with hiS' •r apturouis lyricism, - M. Sprinc, K. Strmen, Jan Oka,l, J. Doransiky, J. BesenOVSJky, Marusa JUSikova, J. Zvonar-Tien, Hrtus..Jurina, historians (Hru- �44 SLOVAKIA swsky, Culen, Durcansky), linguists (prof. Bartek), publicists (Dr. P. Pauco, -Dr. S. Pol~kovic, Dr. J. Mi'kus, Dr. J. Cieker, Dr. A. Grebert, Dr. J. GleimMl, prof. Zubek, Nahallka), a dozen university professors and over a hundred highly educated young priests who had prepared for their careers as ,professors 3/nd educators at the universities of Rome, Paris Louvain, Innsbruck, Brussels and elsewhere. To understand the rvast chamge brought aibout by this "reshaping" of Slovak literature, we must remember that the proleta:riam poets, like the surrrealist s, weTe only a sma11 ,g roup alien to the Slovak literary traditi-on and spiritual atmosphere.11 For the most part, they grew up under the :influence of Czech Marxist or Communist intellectuials and writers: (J. Wolker, V. Nezval, J. Fuc:iik, Sekanina). Their movement with its journal Dav, originated in ,P rague. Novomesky, Ponifan, Oka.Ii, Clementis and others broug,ht their revolutionary ideas and [eft-wing orientation .iinto the Slovak puritan literary ·atmosphere as university students in t,h e Czech capital. Ponican declared this proudly during the "Congress of Nationa,l Culture" held in Prague in 1948. At the same time he condemned "Czech oultural imperialism" and the tendency to assimilate which, according to him, was the consistent aim of Prague's bourgeois regimes between the Wa-rs. 12 During the twenties, the group even tried to transplant into Slovakia Communist literacy aesthetics. They made appeals to break from tiraditonal themes and forms, fatvored collectivism rather than individl.l!a:lism, materialism instead of idealism, and often hurt religious feelings by their youth:£ul revolt a,g ainst God ,and' Christian traditions. hl the thirties the ,g roup had direct contact with Moscow (No;vomesky attended the Congress of W!riters in Moscow and Ilja Ehrenburg appeared in Brntisla,va), but .it was still Prague whose Czech Marxist poets and intellectuals (journal Tvorba) ideologkally nourished Slova..11{ proletaxian literature amd prescribed its aesthetics. After 1945 the groUJp, strengthened by sur.realists and young irntellectuals reared during World Warr: II, con1 1 �SLOVAKIA 4-5 tinued their re'V'olt against individualism., .sU'bjectirvism, art fo'I' axit'·s sake, petty-,bO'llrgeois realism and clericalism. Their concept of "socialist realism," based on the philosophy of dia1ectical materialism, the Marx-iLenini.st theory of ,l iterature, a new aipproaioh to "reality" and active prurHcipation in building ·a new Sodalist s·o ciety, was ,t his time imposed by the political power of ,the Comunist party. Im reviews and in the daily press,, the literary critics asked for conformity with Russian literatuTe, condemned all "apolitical" approaches and' proudly declared that the struggJe for socialism. was a struggle for a new and true art. As the Communist Party had unlimited control over ali newspapers, reviews and pubHshing firms and the exdu.sive right to permit or prohibit publircation, traditional Slovak literatme abruptly disappeared. Literary pr,oduction i,s orgainiized by ,t he !Party and its organs, ,literature was planned to obtain rapid spiritual reorientation, i.e., .sovietizatio:n and conformity with 'Russia and mental russification. Under such circumstances, Slovak literature was not only impoverished but ailso became an imitation of Soviet literature rather than an expression of the Slovak soul. Filled with ,s logans aind praise of CmnmUJIHsm and its leadem, exaggerating .social differences and struggling aga:in:st religion and old traditions, "socialist realism" has little in common with artistic values or true .realism. Mental and Spiritual Russification ·To:i addition, there was a steadri1y increasing flood of trrunslations of Soviet books, to sovietize the literary life of Slovaikia not only in form but ailso in spirit. An aina,l ysis of books ipUlblis:hed under the present regim.e13 shows that at the end of 1953 and in the fin.st month of 1954, fonty-one translations of poetry -and ipr-0.se were published in Sloivakia. Twenty-two of tho,s e translations were from Riussian literature, nineteen from aH others. Modoon Soviet writers were represented by sixteen works, the Russian classi,cs by five. Of nineteen translations from �46 SLOVAKIA non~ussian literatures. thirteen works were written by Communists, the o1fuem, apart from a translation of Ovid, are works of Mark Twain, Maupassant, Bendel and others, depicting the morail decadence of Western society. 'Dhe picture is similair in rt.he prodiuotion of ,b ooks for children and youth. Of forty-three books pu:blished in the same period (end of 1953 and beginning of 1954) twentyone works were written by Slov-aJk writers, eighteen by Russians and the iI'est ·b y Czech, Hungartan rund Rumanirun aut!hors. No Western writers were Tepresented. Six Slovak originail works and fourteen translations from RJllssirun were puirely propaganda. 'Sovietization and mental .r us,sification do not appear only in the number of translations from Russian alild Soviet satellite languages. By the exclusion of Western. iiteratures, a SOI1t ()If "cultural iron curtain" is buidt in Slovakia, because SlovaJk writers are absolutely dependent on Soviet ~oiurces, considered by the .r egime as "the most progressive in the world." Under the heading "rMarx-Leniinism' one finds sixtynine publications, twenty-five Slovak originals, thirty-eight translations from IRuSIS'ian, two f.rom German (the works of Marx and IDngels), one from Hungarian rund one from Bu[garian. Though some SlovaJk iintellectuals have m0& tered the Western languages, there is no translatio:n from French, IDnglish or any 0 1ther Western tongue. If we consider that book,s translated from RJussian. a.ire pulblished in :tens of ,t housands and that they are sold at reduced prices, the picture is clea:r: mental ,russification and rovietization is promoted by every avaihvble method. Reforms of the Slovak Language Following the "theory given to Ma'I'Xist philology by J. Stalin in ,his work, Marxism and 'P hilological Questions and the Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR" the new Slovak "working intelligentsia" not only changed the spirit, structure and forms of literature but also reformed the Jangua:ge.14 Some of the changes effected by the Commun1sts, were proposed by Prof. H. Bartek before �SLOVAKIA 47 and during World War II to simplify SloV'ak or-thog.raiphy. An expert on linguistics, Prof. Bartek advocated his reforms on the grownds of scientific research -and the evolution of .the Slovak language, Which is, .according to A . Senn, "more ar-chaic than Czech and Poli$," that is one of the most archaic Slavic languages.15 ColllSequently, not all the ohrunges ,o an ,b e regarded as ,ha:rmf\11 or unnecessary; and Slova;k exiles as well as the Slova!k press in the free world basicrully accepted this reform. Since the eighteenth century, when Anthony Bernolak (176·2 ..J813), lea.med philologist and patriot, wrote a grammar of the Slo_ vak language rund a huge dictionary >in six language.s and gave a set of rules of o.rthography, eliminating the use of Latin in Slovak cuUural and literary life, the 'S:tova;k language has been a field of study foc highly educaited clergymen, Catholic and Protes:tant, and for enthusiastic nationalists. 1 The reform. of 1844, which is mistakenly presented by some Sla:vists as the date of birth of the Slovak literary lrunguage, was brought a:bout by the particiipation of Protestant ministers 8Jlld Cathoilfo priests, though the reform wa:s popuila,r ized hy L. Stfrr.16 Stfu himself acted as a nationaHst leader aiming at the uruon of ,the Slovak people, the greate:r nium1ber of whom ( over 80 % Ca:tholics) have written in Slovak siince the counter-:Refo'I"mation. Oatholrics used as a hasis one of the Western Slovak dialects, whereas the Protestants, who accepted the Lutheran fa.1th from Bohemia (Czech lands) together with an archaic Czooh translation of the Bible, used, apart from German, as their lit,w giical la:ngua,ge, richly adorned wtth Slovaik ex1pressions. Regarding the division as a great misfortune in the face of strong Magyarization, Stur fought for :the unity of a Hterary fanguage and a compromise between the Lutheran and the Catholic adherents of the BemolaJk ·s chool. This resulted in the acceptance of a centra:l dialect as a new Slovaik Hterary language,17 'but preserved much of the beauty of expres~ siOIIl aJD.d idiom of other Slava!k dialects. This ,r eform, and the rioh litemture which developed later, was merely an �48 SLOVAKIA instrll!ffient in the strugg}e for natiorn:ail survival. The SlovaJk intellectuals were co.nrvinced that the very existence of the nation depended upon the preservation of 1t.s language, rund that nationail identity wrus bound up with languaige. As a result, there was ll'Iltil re<:ently a kind of "sanctity of ,l anguage" among the Slovaks. Applying a reform by ,referri.ing lto the rules Jaitl down for Marxist philosophy by J. StaHn cannot but hurt the Slovaks in their most sensitive spot. Revaluation of Literary History 1 Very soon after the Communists took over the direction of c-ulturrul affair,s in Slovakia, af.ter the potential opposition either fled the country or was silenced, Slovak literary history was revaluated. The first revaluation was made a:s early as 1948 when the Slovak Academy of Sciences a.ind Arts, founded d'll!I'ing the S,lova:k Repulblic, edited the History of Slovak Lit.erature.18 The aiuthor, professor AII1d!rej• Mraz, was not a Communi st before the War, and duiring the War he published in Germa!Il another histocy of 'Slovak literature. His new wovk, however, mirrors in some respects the present siltuation in the oultural life of SlovaJkia. Aware that the Easite•r n orientaJtion of SlovaJkia's cultural life had been made a fait accompli by the so-called "Program of Kosice" which clearrly stated the SlaJVic, i.e., R'll!ssian orientation of Slovruk cu1tuire, profesSOT Mraz ada;pted his work to the new situation. He revised his judgment of writers a:nd poets who were jn prisons (T. J. Gaspar) or in exile. Proletariam and smrealist poets on the other hand became moire talented, thek novels and poetry of greaJte,r importJance aJnd artisitk value. On the whole his book was wriitten in the way of ;pre-War literary schools, his iphraseology shows little similavity with the iMa;rxi-stLeninist literary critics of the years following Novomes~ ky's imprisonment and lthe condemnation to the gallows of Clementis, the intellectual leader of the group. The revaluation of Slovalk literary hlstory by Prof. Mraz is more iilnteresting as far as tJhe general approaoh to SlovaJk literature is concerned. 'Dhe Program of Kosice, 1 �SLOVAKIA 49 wihich defined the ideological orientation for the future, puts an end to an <Yld controversy about Slo¥ak national, c'U!ltwral and l~terary indi'V'iduality. Thi1s dooomenJt stated that "the relation between Czechs and Slovaks should be that of separate nations jomed in common interest in a single State."19 The C{)lffiillunist intelleotuails also proudly manifested their desire to see Slovaiks. as an autonomous Soviet Republic rather than a province dominated by Prague. Professor Mraz adapted .the History of Slovak Literature to this "n:atiOIIlalist" atmosphere of the years 1'945-.48, and consequently he included "ex cathed1ra" i,n to the Slo'V'a.k C'Ultmral and H,terary heritage not only the writings of Sts.. Cyiril and ,Methodius and those of their disciples, which had boon consistently, though erroneously, claimed by the Czechs, burt also ,t he Latin works of all scholars and writers who were of ,Slovak origin. He :took an objectiive and favorable rview, considering the circumstances, of the Slovak iliteratme oreated by Catholics in the seventeenth ·a nd eighteenth centturies. The thesis that t!he Slo:vaxs and not the Czechs are the :true heirs of Great !Moravia, that .there existed a clear distinction, diwring the centuries, be,t ween Czechs and Slova'k,s and their languages, and that the 'S lovaks preser:ved a consciousness of their ethnic and cultural individuality a:nd ,t heir continu!ity with the first Sl,ovak kingdom of Great Moravia, were accepted as historical facts by Mraz. He supported his position by quotations and reforences to the works of SlovaJk writers of the se:venteenuh and eighteenth ce:n,turies. Mraz aLso accepted the porint of 'View that the archaic Czech language, which was brought into, Slova,kia by ,t he Czech P ,r otestants "who found shel:ter in Slovakia and even ;p rinted books in Czech for the rpurrpose of smuggling rthooi i:nto iBohemia,"20 was merely a bo~rowed language, and that the Slovalk Protesitants used it for litera,ture and litJwrgy in the same way as the Catholics used Latin. Though ,th:i-s thesis had previously been supported by m8JIIly serious experts iin Slovalk linguistics, literatrnre and histocy, the universlities in pre-,War Czechoslova1kia tried impose a lt!hoory of a common language with the to �SLOVAKIA 50 Czechs until the Stur reform of 1844. "The Slovaik culturra:l and literairy sphere was never blended or identified with the Czech; :it always had i<ts specific needs and :set of rules" says Mraz, ars ,p rofessor of Bratislava university.21 F.rom these premises, Mraz judged favorably the activities of the Jesuit University of Trnava (1635), the Oaitholic writers of the era of Enlightrnent as well. as the generation of 1848, who established modern 1Slovruk natiooalism irn letterisi and in politicail life. Mraz's History of Slovak Literature, probably written -d'UII'ing the Second World War and adapted to the politicail climate of the first post-War years when the Communists shared political power with the Democratic Party, oruly partly ex.pressed the chianged sit:Juaroion by its method and criiteria. The book ri:s basically within the framework of values, terminology aind ccmceipt s esta:blished ea,rlier in .Slovaikia. '.Dhe ""revolutionary revaluation" was undertaiken by the young group orf militamit mamberis of the Comm.UIIlist Party (A. Bakos, R. Rosenbaum, R. Mrlian, J. Hoirvat and others) who made a fam.atical reappraiisa'l of Slovak literature, and "purged" the libraries ·acooroing .to the Party ideology and Marxist-.Leninist theory of literature 22 When even Novomesky was "purged" as a "bourgeois rn.ationalist and deviationist," the new school of "socialist realllism" was established. Consequently, only those booik s and writers serving :the new ,s ocial order are regarded as representati.rve of true literary values. The rest aire irejected as reactionary, deviationist, rightist, and petty-bourgeois.23 As the literature was also integrated into the structure of the new Socialist or Communist order and destined to be suboTdirnated to the 1P arty and its ideology, the poet and novelist, Jiterary critic and scientist must oontribute by their talents amd works to the building of a Socialist society. The model: Soviet Russia. 1 1. Cf. S. ,P . Palickar, Slovaki-a n Culture, Cambridge, 1954; A. MTaz, Die Literatur der •S lov,a ken, Berlin, 1943. 2. P. P . Yurchak, The Slovaks, 1947, pp. 117-57. Also E. Denis, La Question d' Autriche, Les Slovaques, Paris, 1917, p. 164. 3. W. Semkowicz (eel.) Slowacja i Slowacy, Krakow, 1937, p. 262. 4. Feliks Gross (ed.) European Ideologies, New York, 1948, p. 838. �SLOVAKIA 51 5. L. I. Strakhovsky (ed.) Handbook of Slavic Studies, Cambridge, 1949, pp. 495-96. 6. Cf. J. J. Potocek, "Martin Kukucin, PJoneer of Slovak Realism," The Slavonic and East ·E uropean Review, XXII, 7944. 7. Ibidem, p. 2&3. ,8. A. Mraz, Dejiny ,slovenskej literatury, Bra-tislav·a , Academia Scientiarum et Artium, Slovaca, 1948, p. 263. 9. Hand!book of Slavic Studies, p. 505, Mraz, o,p. cit., pp. 17'5-180. 10. Andreas Mraz, Die Literatur der Slowaken, Berlin, Prague, Vjenna, 1943. 11. Cf. KramorH§, "Slovakia and Slova.c Literature," The Catholic Encyclopedia, XVIU, 19·50. 12. Cf. Sjezd Narodni Kultury, Praha, 1948, p. 239. 1'3. CJ'. ·Bi-b liograficky katalog, Slovenska kni'ha, Bratislava, 1'954, V. 1-17; also Slobodne Slovensko, X. 2. 14. H. Bartek, Novy slovensky pravopis, Chicago, 1954, p. 19. 1,5. Handbook of Slavic Studies, P'P- -51·57. 1'6. Cf. Yur,C'hak, op. dt. pp. 90-116; also S. P. Palickar, Slovakian Oulture, Oa.mbrid•g e, 1954, pp. 139-55. 17. Cf. Yurohak, op.. cit. 18. A. Mraz, Dejiny slovenskej literatury, Bratislava, Academia Scientiarum et Artium Slova-ca, 1498. 19. V. Diamond, Czechos\,ovakia Between East and West, London, 1947, p. 6. 20. •Cf. Handbook of SJ.avic Studies, pp. 17 5-80. 21. Ibid., p. 8. 22. Cf. Sjezd Narodni Kultury, pp. 134-41. 23. Cf. K. Rozenbaum, Sovremennaya slovanskaya Uteratura, Slavy•a ne, 19·515, I, 23-2:9, also J . Martak, Introduction to Su.borne dielo Jana Bottu, Bratislava, 1955 . • • • WHO SAID IT? "There is another thing to be said aJbouit the Admini& tration's foreiign policy. It is pUTely negative and defensive. rt attempts to contain communism; but does nothing to answer the question s.o often asllred: me: How would you finally ded:ea t COIIIlmUJl.,i sm? - Most of those satellite countries and peoples were deilitvered into the hands Olf the RULSSian Comml.lind.sit:s by the Y aJt!a Agreement. That American diploanati'c instrument, never submitted to the Senate, sysitematicrulliy violaited iby the RUISSi.ans, defended onliy by those officials of the D€4)8.rtmenit of Staite who rure aJccessories to the crime, must be formally discairded by Congressional resol.iu.tion as a b'a sis for American foreign poiicy." - (Senator Robert A. Taft, NEW YORK TiiMiES, June 2, 1952). � SLOVAKIA SLOVAK LITERATUR E UNDER THE SOVIET IMPACT Joseph Kirschbaum, Ph.D., LL.D., Professor at the University of Montreal Department of Slavic Studies A Reprint From "The Slavic and East-Eurooea n Studies." Published by: The Department of Slavic Studies, University of Montreal FOREWORD The Commumst occupation of SlwaJri,a carved deep wounds not only •i nto the sociall and political structure of Slovak life as poliitical occupations and changes used :to do in the past. The totailiitarian character of Communism has the specific quality th!a,t it .affects ail the important sectors of national life, be it !l'eligion or phi!losophy, arts or literature. Due to the peculiar citrCu:rnmnces under wbiich the Slovak people were deprived of national independence and became a defenseless prey of foreign domination, the cultural life of Slo'V18Jkfa suffered. ,p robably the stirongest impact among all Soviet satellites. The reasons are many. First of all the character of SlO'V'ak literature and writers. Slovak culture developed through lbhe ages U'Ilder Western influences. This is true namely m regard to the Slovak literature which originated in the classical dlimate of the Catholic University of Trnava, founded in 1635. (1) With exception of the Gdthlc period, we find •i n Slovak literature all the literary currents from humani.!S!m .t hrough (baroque to classicism, romantic-ism, realism, Catholic "modenie," and surrealism. In fact, the olassicaJl. reminiscences , the era of enlighrtenment and romanticism g,ave birth to SlovaJk poetry and prose. Some of the influences ,ruppeared [ater, or J:asted. longer, or el-se !their form wa:s not pure, but we find ianalogies for this phenomenon in all Slavic literatures. More than m poetic and literacy forms, the Western influences and Western orientrution of the Slovak literature is evident in the contents and in the mission that �SLOVAKIA 35 poetry and prose aimed to accomplish in the Jife of the Slovak people. Slovak poets and novelists beginning with Holly (2) in .t he eigJJ.teenth century, and the group of Eudovit Stur(3) in the nineteenth century to Hviezdoslav(4), Vajansky, Razus, Zarnov, Urban, Bronsky, Beniak, etc., saw tihe reaJI. function of Slovak literrutrure primarNy in equipping !the Sloviak people with the spiritual resources necessary for survival and the fight for freedom. They endeavored rto bring the Slovak ,p eople to an awa:reness of rtheir spiritual •a nd nationrul iindi'Viduality and fought for their politic-al M1d sociral rights. Like .the poetry of Mickiewicz, Krasinski and Slowac·ki, "summoned the Poles prom political enslavement to a spir.ituaJI. life and revealed them completely new pwspecltiives of mor,al responsibility resulting from the. ll'ation's politicaJl situatiO!Il," (5) in the same way tile Slov,aks Jearned through the works of theiir poets and novel-ists to regard the naitional cause as a question of honor and the supreme mo,r al criterion a.round which the. entire spiritual life of the nation was crystallized. Slovak poets and novelists who regarded thei!r mission, as described aibove, could not nourish any illusion about thei1r fate /Under Communist rule. They knew that literatUTe, •as a means of expression of the national soul and ait the same time ,t he most efficient instrument in the intellectual struggle foir ·r eshapiing nation's patterns of thinking, wou\ld be the first cultwal field undergoing substM1tial changes and losses . The Slovak intelligentsia also knew that the Czech politicians returning behind the Red Army in SloV'akia would take revenge o:n a:ll patriotic Slova1ks who claimed the right of seJf-determination for the Slovak people and applied or aidvoca.ted the ·s ame when the occasion ,had am-ived. Jan Thousands of Slovak intelllectuals, therefore, preferred the exile with all its uncertainties •a nd ,miseries to the Czecho-Communist rule. Among the intellectual emigres the write:ra who were the true irepresentatives of Slova!k literature .b etween the WaTS a:nd made ,a name for themselves by their works and outstanding talents have been �36 SLOVAKIA more numerous than it appears in the literary ,p roduction of the ilast ten years in exNe. There was, at the beginning, 111ot only the most popUJl,a;r nO'VelList of ,t he period 1918~1939, Milo Urban, w,hose "Ziivy Bic" (LlNing Whip) was translated into ,s everal European languages, but a:lso .AJildrej Zarnov, whose poetry became an efficacious instrument in the Slovak national struggle and summoned the young Slovalk intelligentsia to fight for justke and freedom. Both were 1ater kidnapped by the Czech Communists in Austria and on!ly Zarnov succeeded in a dramati·c filighit f.rom Slova!lda again and today fights for his ideas ,i n exHe. There are many others who preferred exile to Communist rule and far from Slovakia - in .Arr-gentma, the U. S. A., Canada, Australia, etc., jn deep sorrow and fiery resistance fight for rthe.ir people's freedom. Among them is Joseph C. Hroosky, the most prolific and undoubtedly one of the greatest 1Slovak noveLists, who celebrated just recently, or rather the Slovaks in the free world celebrated his 60th annirversary. The literary work of J. C. Hronsky is of such artistic vrulue and importance for the Slovak 1iterature thait even the literary historian of the Slovak University of today, professoir A. Mraz, was forced to ac'knowledge that many of iHronsky's works "belonged amOID.g the best works of the Slovak post-war literature by thei.T qualities of style and composition." In regard to Hronsky's noive1 '~Pisar Grae" (Clerk Grae), Mraz even writes a'boUJt "hravour of composiUon"; he sees in his first novels "complicated artistic instrumentality" and commends him for "exceptional and privileged interpreting of the common people, as weili as of refined and cultivated souls ,a nd hearts of women." During the war years, in his German book on Slova.!k literature, professor Mraz qualified J. C. Hironsky's novel "Jozef Mak," whlich was also translated into German, as "one of the 1b est works of the Slovruk post~war literature," and the author as the "most prolific Slovak :novelist." Altogether J. C. Hironsky published over 50 volumes of short novels, beasutiful tales for children, novels describing the life of SlorvaJk peasants and worker,s, and mas1 �SLOVAKIA 37 terpieces on the life of the Slovak SIIIl.aN-town intelligentsia (Clerk Grae, The .P rophecy orf Doctor Stan!kovsky) , with all social and ideological problems and struggles of Slovakia's post~war dramatic evolution. Usually regaTded as the heir and follower of Martin Kuikucin's realism in Sloivak literature,. !Hronslky attained new artistic heights and in many ,respects even ,sUTpassed Kulkuoin, who i1s considered even !by the Communist ireg,i.me as a "classic" of SlO!Vak literature. rHronsky's spi riitual world is broad and deep, his sphere of artistic interests is extensive and manifold, his style am.d composition masterly clerur and lingui'Sltica:lly perfect and beaubiful. At the begimning of his literary career, the Siovak peasant in his traditional way of 'life, poverty, patient heroism, and sturdy mental~ty was a favolI'ilte subject of nove!ls. HaNing made his mark with •s hort stories from Slovak village rlife, in which r ealism matched the best worlks of the founder of Slovak literary realism, Martin Kuikucin, Bronsky moved into rthe domain of liteTature for children and youth and, l,a ter, into the domain of social and psyohologicaJl problems of smaHtown people, proceeding firom short stories and tales to more and more complicated and artisticaJlly elaborated forms of novel. Hrrorusky emwged very soon as a towering personality from the group of post-war novelists and writers. His remarkable literary ,w ork constituted a lin'k between the talented Slovak n01Velists .of the previous generation and mode:m Slovak ,},i terature modeled on Western European literary currents. Not an epigon of •a nyone, Hronsky created: :from his own spiritual funds and had a strong appeal prim:arily to the heart of the young generation ,of writers among w'hom his new shade of realas-m had ma!lly followers. Hironsky',s •s ignificance in Slovak cultura:l life was, however, extraordinaJry not only in literatUII'e. Hiis -literary activity was doubled by his achievements in the highest Slovak cultUTal institution "Matica Slove:nska" (The Slovak Lnstiwte) , foll'Ilded in 1863 with the aim t 10 s,pread Slwak cultural valrues and defend Slovak traditions against 1 1 �38 SLOVAKIA Magyair tendencies of assimilation. There was rarely a Slovak writex who successifully combined a highly developed literary talent with such organizational ,ability as it has been in the case of J. C. Bronsky. Acord.mg to many seri'ous cultwrai worik€1I'S (cf. Cullen's ia.nd Hrusovsky's articles in the "S:lovensika Obrana" and the "Kainadsky Slovwk"), J. C. HronSlky has done more usefiU!l work in the few years of his administration of the "Slovak Institute" than any Oille of his predecessors during long periods. Thousands of new books wer edited every year by his merits, new cultwral sections organized, equipped and reorganized, a new farge printery built, and new activities initiaited. an institution of many The "Slovak In.stitute" merits in the fieild of co111Servation of Slorvak traditioI1JS, culture, popular art, tiheater, pwrity of language - ip1ayed an important Tole in Slovak cultura•l life at all times since its foundation in the nineteenth century. Election to leading funcUons in thls institution was considered one of the highest honors in SlovaJkia and it undoubtedly was. J . C. Hronsky was elected and reelected. For the Communist regime such merits have been, however, "crimes" against the "people's democracy and revolution," and J. C. Hrons'ky was arrested before the Red Army accomplished the occupation of Slovakia. After many unsuccessful aittempts, he finally escaped from a prison and fled from 'Slovakia through Austria into Italy, and later found refuge in Argentina, where he lives, deeply convinced that the Slovaks will never give up their fight for freedom and their Christian ,t raditions. We mention HirolilSlky's case in this connection as an example of the Slovak nationail. tragedy. There are many others, who in literature, science, arts, aind in ,t he pO'litical and economic life of Slava,kia, created works of value and have been silenced by the Communist regime, or preferred freedom in exile, as Hronsky did. In the following pages an attempt has been made to present, in a very restricted way, the main features of the Slovak literature under the Communist ,r ule. The author has scrupulously tried to paint �SLOVAKIA 39 the picture objectirvely, and the publishing committee of the review "The Slavic and East-European .Studies" saw to it that the study might remain within the limits of a scientific work. There is on:ly one abjectirve this study ,a ims at: to se:rve the cause of truth and freedom which in Slova1kia as well as in other satelilite countiries have been temporarily stifled. J. K. 1. Cf. Branislav Vars!k: Le Probleme des nationalites a r Universlte de Trnav,a, Bratislava, 193.8. 2. Jan Holly (178·5-1849) most gifted poet and disciple of A. Bernolak, glorified in three po ems Slovakia's greatness of one tllousand years ago, "Svatopluk" (18n), "Cyrilo-Methodiada" (1835), and •·,Slav" (1839). He also translated the main works of Greek and Roman classics into the Slovak l,a nguage and prepared th e Slovak renatssanee. 3. Cf. Hans Kohn: "Pan-Slavlsm, Its History and Ideology," University of Notre Dame Press, 19.53; and Ernest Denis: "Les Slovaques,' Paris, Delgrave, 1917. 4. P. 0. Hviezdoslav (1849-1921) by his own name Pavol Or· szagh, is considered the most talented Slovak poet. His poetry was publls'hed In fifteen large volumes, one of them, "Bloody Sonnets," was translated also Into English. His main works are "Herodes and Herodlas" (drama), the epics "Hajnlkova zena, Ezo a Gabor Vlkolinsky, Agar, Rachel, Kron," etc. He also published four volumes of translation,s from World literatures, Goethe's Faust, Shakes.p,eare's Hamlet and Mid-Summer Night's Dream, the main works of Shiller, Lermont-0v, Slowackl and Madach's "The Tragedy of Man." ,5. C.f. Harvard Slavic Studies, Vol. 2, 19·54, p. 323-4. SLOVAK LITERATURE UNDER THE SOVIET IMPACT Within a decade of the forced inclusion of Slovakia within the Soviet orbit, Slovaik literature weint through most peculiar transformations. If Slovak novelists and poets, generally more conservative and traditional than Polish, Czech or Slovene writers, did not leave the country m- choose silence, they were abruptly compelled to ada;pt their literary c-reeds, forms and subjects .to a new line of "socialist reailis,m" and to run exclusively Eastern orientation. The main characteristics of Slovak literatll!l"e were patriotism, pan-slavism, universalism and a deep religiO'UIS �40 SLOVAKIA spirit. The generation after John Holly, namely John Kolla.T and the group of L. Stur, turned their eyes, as fawiders of nineteenth century painslla:vism, to Russia 'but their literrury works, education and iphllosophy were fundrurnentahly Western. They were educated at German Unive:r,sities and, while KoHar's "Daughter of Slava" was modelled on Dante and Petrarca, L. Stur and his group were under the influence of German romanticism, having foir masters Herder and Hegel (in their phi1osoiphy) .1 It was in poetry only that Mickiewicz, Slowacki, Krasinski am.d Pu<s'hkin. were the:iir ideails. Kol[ar's idea of "S[avic reciprocity" refrruined from any attemipt to mottld the politkal ideology or the religious charaicter of any Slav group. He aimed merely at cuiltural and literary reciprocity, •a nd his philo,s ophy was humanistic." He only is wOlI'thy of liberty who resrpects the :liiberty of 8!11; he who forges the chains of others, is himself a slave; when thou callest for a Slav, there must respond a man," are his famous axioms.2 According to W. Bobek, one of the best foreign scholars on Slovak literature, Slovakia c-a n be reasonably considered as the classical country of the Slavic idea, with several conceptions of panslaV'ism based on the equa[ity of Slaivic peoples. Howevell", an identification of the idea of a Slavic cooperaition with russophilism was raire; it appeared as a result of national depression and despair.3 Such was the case of L. Stur, for whom "P.anslavism in the political sense was a chimera," but who later, according to W. Lednicki, forunulated about 1850 ":the most complete and consistently developed program for the subjugation of Slavs to Russia in his bo01k "SlaV'dom and the World of the Future"4. Stur wrote 'his '.book in a period of "Nationail depression ,arrd despailr," as mentioned by Boibek. (The book was written in German and never appeared in Slova!k). During the last decades of the nirneteenth century arnd the years before and during the first World War, Sfovak literary •amd cultural life was dominated to some extent by Slovak Russophiles like Vajansky and Skn.lltety. However, this was merely an interlude; for after the war, 1 �SLOVAKIA 41 the inf1uence ·o f French, English and even Scandinavian writem which was mani!fest among the younger poe'bs and novelists (I. Kraslro, V. Roy, P. 0 . Hv:iezdoslav, M. Razus), gained ground firmly and without resistance. The RussophiJ.e orientation ,i n Slova:k literature was chiefly dru:e to the political situation following the Austro-Hungarian. compromise •Of H~67, when the Slovaks were left at the mercy of Hungarian effonts of assii:rnilation. As the Slovak poets and novelists saw that the only hope for a Slovak national surrvival was in Russia's power, they gave fU!ll expression to this belief 1n their Hterary woriks. iBut they did not mean to exohange one oppression for a.mother. The Bo1sltevik Revolution and the results of the Firat WorJ,d War changed the picture. The Revo1urbion destroyed the panslavistic and Russophile dreams of Slovruk poets. While f,u!lifilling their hope for emancipation foom HUID:giarian ru'le by oreating the Czecho-Slova'k Republic with the Czechs, jt -left the Slovakis free to choose their cU!ltural orientation. They e1ther turned again to the West or they used their own spiritual and moral tradiitions for creative inspi:ration. The general trend of Slovak liteiratJure in poetry as well as in prose was to broaden its range of interests and to become responsive to European literary curents 5 The main representatives of Slovak literatlrre between the two Wars were uninterested in Soviet Russia, except for a smal[ groUJp of proJetarian o:r left-wing poets and writers under Czech influence. Oruy three or four of them acquiired literary recognition. and even fa.me. The older generation of Slovak poets, headed by P. 0. Hiviezdoslav, V. Roy, Ivan Krasko and Martin Razus, continued to create in the traditional forms or, Ji.ke Hviezdoslav, to use the European literrury forms and currents coriresponding to his great ta:lent and creativeness. In prose, the masters were the realists Kukucin,6 Hronsky, 'l'ajov!Sky, T. Vansova, Timrava and L. 'Podjavorinska. The younger generation looked for new fo:rms: to for·eign literatures. The really successful literary woriks of more tham. ephemera[ value were those which dTew their motives. from Slovak H!fe, their inspiration from rSlorva!k �42 SLOVAKIA national traditions and their art from their own spiritual reserves (Milo Ur.ban, J. C. Hironsky, A. Za.rn.ov, V. Benia:k, J. Smrek, E. IBolesilav Lu!kac, S. 1K rcmery, T. J. Gaspar, J. Hrufovsky). Consciously or unconsciously, they belonged ,t o the West and also to theiir country's social and ideological evolution. Their orientation was contilnenta,l in form, in philosophy and in motivation. A:U the European ourents ·a nd literary scho<Yls, from symbolism and impresiSlionism to Catholiic modernism (especia1ly F!rench) and su:rirealism, characteri'zed Slovak Hterature between the wars. According to Bobek, it equalled Czech literature,7 and acOTdilng to A. ,M raz, it "fought for a place in the context of wor1d 'literatures. " 8 The second World War did not change substantially the orientation of Slov·a k ,lrl,teratme. Being an island where, un,ti} the ·f all of 194.'4, the German ,i mpact was neitheir violent nor apparent, Slovakia experienced a strongly literary and cultll!I'al development. The trend remained Western, nationaliist, conservative and traditional. With the "liberation" of the co'll!ntry, the shock of the Soviet limparet was violent, spreading deep and wide throughout the literairy and cultural life orf 'Slovakia. A short analysis brings to light the foUowing features orf contemporary Slovak literature. Socialist Realism and the Soviet Model A smail:l group of p:wletarian poets, surrealists and left-wing critics or nove'lists, headed by L. Novomesky, who along with J. Rob Ponican, was the only prominent poet in the group before 1945, not only took over liiterary and cultural life while Slova;kia was stiU occupied by the RUSSliam Anny, but :they al:so decided who would be allowed to continue as writer, poet, journalist or scientist and what kind of literature they would be allowed to pubilish. If the writers wished to continue their wol1k, they had to become membern of a Society of writers, organized on the Soviet model. Their main duties were to extirpate the "corrupting" mfluence of Western "bourgeois; and fascist" writers and to follow the line of "g.reat socialiist Soviet �SLOVAKIA 43 literature," inspired 'by the ideaJs brought to reality by Stalinissm. The Slogan was "progress" and the name of the new current was "socialist :realism," though many of the main actors in this "revolutionary reshaping" of the Slovak literature were dmitators of pre-wa,r French sur:realism (R. Fabry, V. R!eisel, M. Mittelman). Soviet litera.tUTe "with its surpassdng wealth of ideas, its burning socialist patriotism, its new humanism," was destined ,t o be the mghest ideal for Slorvak literature. This reshaping of SlOIVak oultural life was purt into praotice not only without regard for traditiOIIl, but al:so wirthout the ,t rue 1representatives of Slwa!k literature hetween the wars, known by .theiT works and thei!r outstanding talent. Neither the ·best novelist of the period 19181939, Milo Urban (!b. 1904) whose Living Whlp9 was translated into serverad EUTopean languages, nor the prominen,t poet Valentin Benia,k (b. 1894), nor Andrej 2arnov (b. 1903) whose poetry by its fiery language and reso'l.l'nding verse became an effective instrument in the Slova:k national struggle and who summoned the young Sloivak intelligentsia to a struggle for justice and freedom, took part in the new trend. They pref.erred to be silent. Zarn:ov, who was under constant threat of arrest and deportation and many times imprisoned, later left his .coun:try to fight for his ideas in exHe. 'l'ido J. Gaspar (ib. 1893) author of splendid short novels and exotic ,t ales, was also ,sidenced in prison. Many others whose names were held up as worthy representati'ves of Slovak lita-aiture before 1945 fled to Argentina, the U. S. A., Canada, Australia and O'bher plaices, with deep sorrow and in a spirit of fiery resistance, preferring exile to Communist rule . Among them is the prolific nO<Velist J. C. Hronsky (b .. 1896) whose works desm-ibed ,in mastedy fas:hion the social tUTmoil and political struggles of the Sdov~ks,10 and talented literary critics and aesthetes as :professor :El 2-atiko-Bor, Stanislav Meciar and Jan Mestancik, tile poets iR. Dillong - prolific and emotional, with hiS' •r apturouis lyricism, - M. Sprinc, K. Strmen, Jan Oka,l, J. Doransiky, J. BesenOVSJky, Marusa JUSikova, J. Zvonar-Tien, Hrtus..Jurina, historians (Hru- �44 SLOVAKIA swsky, Culen, Durcansky), linguists (prof. Bartek), publicists (Dr. P. Pauco, -Dr. S. Pol~kovic, Dr. J. Mi'kus, Dr. J. Cieker, Dr. A. Grebert, Dr. J. GleimMl, prof. Zubek, Nahallka), a dozen university professors and over a hundred highly educated young priests who had prepared for their careers as ,professors 3/nd educators at the universities of Rome, Paris Louvain, Innsbruck, Brussels and elsewhere. To understand the rvast chamge brought aibout by this "reshaping" of Slovak literature, we must remember that the proleta:riam poets, like the surrrealist s, weTe only a sma11 ,g roup alien to the Slovak literary traditi-on and spiritual atmosphere.11 For the most part, they grew up under the :influence of Czech Marxist or Communist intellectuials and writers: (J. Wolker, V. Nezval, J. Fuc:iik, Sekanina). Their movement with its journal Dav, originated in ,P rague. Novomesky, Ponifan, Oka.Ii, Clementis and others broug,ht their revolutionary ideas and [eft-wing orientation .iinto the Slovak puritan literary ·atmosphere as university students in t,h e Czech capital. Ponican declared this proudly during the "Congress of Nationa,l Culture" held in Prague in 1948. At the same time he condemned "Czech oultural imperialism" and the tendency to assimilate which, according to him, was the consistent aim of Prague's bourgeois regimes between the Wa-rs. 12 During the twenties, the group even tried to transplant into Slovakia Communist literacy aesthetics. They made appeals to break from tiraditonal themes and forms, fatvored collectivism rather than individl.l!a:lism, materialism instead of idealism, and often hurt religious feelings by their youth:£ul revolt a,g ainst God ,and' Christian traditions. hl the thirties the ,g roup had direct contact with Moscow (No;vomesky attended the Congress of W!riters in Moscow and Ilja Ehrenburg appeared in Brntisla,va), but .it was still Prague whose Czech Marxist poets and intellectuals (journal Tvorba) ideologkally nourished Slova..11{ proletaxian literature amd prescribed its aesthetics. After 1945 the groUJp, strengthened by sur.realists and young irntellectuals reared during World Warr: II, con1 1 �SLOVAKIA 4-5 tinued their re'V'olt against individualism., .sU'bjectirvism, art fo'I' axit'·s sake, petty-,bO'llrgeois realism and clericalism. Their concept of "socialist realism," based on the philosophy of dia1ectical materialism, the Marx-iLenini.st theory of ,l iterature, a new aipproaioh to "reality" and active prurHcipation in building ·a new Sodalist s·o ciety, was ,t his time imposed by the political power of ,the Comunist party. Im reviews and in the daily press,, the literary critics asked for conformity with Russian literatuTe, condemned all "apolitical" approaches and' proudly declared that the struggJe for socialism. was a struggle for a new and true art. As the Communist Party had unlimited control over ali newspapers, reviews and pubHshing firms and the exdu.sive right to permit or prohibit publircation, traditional Slovak literatme abruptly disappeared. Literary pr,oduction i,s orgainiized by ,t he !Party and its organs, ,literature was planned to obtain rapid spiritual reorientation, i.e., .sovietizatio:n and conformity with 'Russia and mental russification. Under such circumstances, Slovak literature was not only impoverished but ailso became an imitation of Soviet literature rather than an expression of the Slovak soul. Filled with ,s logans aind praise of CmnmUJIHsm and its leadem, exaggerating .social differences and struggling aga:in:st religion and old traditions, "socialist realism" has little in common with artistic values or true .realism. Mental and Spiritual Russification ·To:i addition, there was a steadri1y increasing flood of trrunslations of Soviet books, to sovietize the literary life of Slovaikia not only in form but ailso in spirit. An aina,l ysis of books ipUlblis:hed under the present regim.e13 shows that at the end of 1953 and in the fin.st month of 1954, fonty-one translations of poetry -and ipr-0.se were published in Sloivakia. Twenty-two of tho,s e translations were from Riussian literature, nineteen from aH others. Modoon Soviet writers were represented by sixteen works, the Russian classi,cs by five. Of nineteen translations from �46 SLOVAKIA non~ussian literatures. thirteen works were written by Communists, the o1fuem, apart from a translation of Ovid, are works of Mark Twain, Maupassant, Bendel and others, depicting the morail decadence of Western society. 'Dhe picture is similair in rt.he prodiuotion of ,b ooks for children and youth. Of forty-three books pu:blished in the same period (end of 1953 and beginning of 1954) twentyone works were written by Slov-aJk writers, eighteen by Russians and the iI'est ·b y Czech, Hungartan rund Rumanirun aut!hors. No Western writers were Tepresented. Six Slovak originail works and fourteen translations from RJllssirun were puirely propaganda. 'Sovietization and mental .r us,sification do not appear only in the number of translations from Russian alild Soviet satellite languages. By the exclusion of Western. iiteratures, a SOI1t ()If "cultural iron curtain" is buidt in Slovakia, because SlovaJk writers are absolutely dependent on Soviet ~oiurces, considered by the .r egime as "the most progressive in the world." Under the heading "rMarx-Leniinism' one finds sixtynine publications, twenty-five Slovak originals, thirty-eight translations from IRuSIS'ian, two f.rom German (the works of Marx and IDngels), one from Hungarian rund one from Bu[garian. Though some SlovaJk iintellectuals have m0& tered the Western languages, there is no translatio:n from French, IDnglish or any 0 1ther Western tongue. If we consider that book,s translated from RJussian. a.ire pulblished in :tens of ,t housands and that they are sold at reduced prices, the picture is clea:r: mental ,russification and rovietization is promoted by every avaihvble method. Reforms of the Slovak Language Following the "theory given to Ma'I'Xist philology by J. Stalin in ,his work, Marxism and 'P hilological Questions and the Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR" the new Slovak "working intelligentsia" not only changed the spirit, structure and forms of literature but also reformed the Jangua:ge.14 Some of the changes effected by the Commun1sts, were proposed by Prof. H. Bartek before �SLOVAKIA 47 and during World War II to simplify SloV'ak or-thog.raiphy. An expert on linguistics, Prof. Bartek advocated his reforms on the grownds of scientific research -and the evolution of .the Slovak language, Which is, .according to A . Senn, "more ar-chaic than Czech and Poli$," that is one of the most archaic Slavic languages.15 ColllSequently, not all the ohrunges ,o an ,b e regarded as ,ha:rmf\11 or unnecessary; and Slova;k exiles as well as the Slova!k press in the free world basicrully accepted this reform. Since the eighteenth century, when Anthony Bernolak (176·2 ..J813), lea.med philologist and patriot, wrote a grammar of the Slo_ vak language rund a huge dictionary >in six language.s and gave a set of rules of o.rthography, eliminating the use of Latin in Slovak cuUural and literary life, the 'S:tova;k language has been a field of study foc highly educaited clergymen, Catholic and Protes:tant, and for enthusiastic nationalists. 1 The reform. of 1844, which is mistakenly presented by some Sla:vists as the date of birth of the Slovak literary lrunguage, was brought a:bout by the particiipation of Protestant ministers 8Jlld Cathoilfo priests, though the reform wa:s popuila,r ized hy L. Stfrr.16 Stfu himself acted as a nationaHst leader aiming at the uruon of ,the Slovak people, the greate:r nium1ber of whom ( over 80 % Ca:tholics) have written in Slovak siince the counter-:Refo'I"mation. Oatholrics used as a hasis one of the Western Slovak dialects, whereas the Protestants, who accepted the Lutheran fa.1th from Bohemia (Czech lands) together with an archaic Czooh translation of the Bible, used, apart from German, as their lit,w giical la:ngua,ge, richly adorned wtth Slovaik ex1pressions. Regarding the division as a great misfortune in the face of strong Magyarization, Stur fought for :the unity of a Hterary fanguage and a compromise between the Lutheran and the Catholic adherents of the BemolaJk ·s chool. This resulted in the acceptance of a centra:l dialect as a new Slovaik Hterary language,17 'but preserved much of the beauty of expres~ siOIIl aJD.d idiom of other Slava!k dialects. This ,r eform, and the rioh litemture which developed later, was merely an �48 SLOVAKIA instrll!ffient in the strugg}e for natiorn:ail survival. The SlovaJk intellectuals were co.nrvinced that the very existence of the nation depended upon the preservation of 1t.s language, rund that nationail identity wrus bound up with languaige. As a result, there was ll'Iltil re<:ently a kind of "sanctity of ,l anguage" among the Slovaks. Applying a reform by ,referri.ing lto the rules Jaitl down for Marxist philosophy by J. StaHn cannot but hurt the Slovaks in their most sensitive spot. Revaluation of Literary History 1 Very soon after the Communists took over the direction of c-ulturrul affair,s in Slovakia, af.ter the potential opposition either fled the country or was silenced, Slovak literary history was revaluated. The first revaluation was made a:s early as 1948 when the Slovak Academy of Sciences a.ind Arts, founded d'll!I'ing the S,lova:k Repulblic, edited the History of Slovak Lit.erature.18 The aiuthor, professor AII1d!rej• Mraz, was not a Communi st before the War, and duiring the War he published in Germa!Il another histocy of 'Slovak literature. His new wovk, however, mirrors in some respects the present siltuation in the oultural life of SlovaJkia. Aware that the Easite•r n orientaJtion of SlovaJkia's cultural life had been made a fait accompli by the so-called "Program of Kosice" which clearrly stated the SlaJVic, i.e., R'll!ssian orientation of Slovruk cu1tuire, profesSOT Mraz ada;pted his work to the new situation. He revised his judgment of writers a:nd poets who were jn prisons (T. J. Gaspar) or in exile. Proletariam and smrealist poets on the other hand became moire talented, thek novels and poetry of greaJte,r importJance aJnd artisitk value. On the whole his book was wriitten in the way of ;pre-War literary schools, his iphraseology shows little similavity with the iMa;rxi-stLeninist literary critics of the years following Novomes~ ky's imprisonment and lthe condemnation to the gallows of Clementis, the intellectual leader of the group. The revaluation of Slovalk literary hlstory by Prof. Mraz is more iilnteresting as far as tJhe general approaoh to SlovaJk literature is concerned. 'Dhe Program of Kosice, 1 �SLOVAKIA 49 wihich defined the ideological orientation for the future, puts an end to an <Yld controversy about Slo¥ak national, c'U!ltwral and l~terary indi'V'iduality. Thi1s dooomenJt stated that "the relation between Czechs and Slovaks should be that of separate nations jomed in common interest in a single State."19 The C{)lffiillunist intelleotuails also proudly manifested their desire to see Slovaiks. as an autonomous Soviet Republic rather than a province dominated by Prague. Professor Mraz adapted .the History of Slovak Literature to this "n:atiOIIlalist" atmosphere of the years 1'945-.48, and consequently he included "ex cathed1ra" i,n to the Slo'V'a.k C'Ultmral and H,terary heritage not only the writings of Sts.. Cyiril and ,Methodius and those of their disciples, which had boon consistently, though erroneously, claimed by the Czechs, burt also ,t he Latin works of all scholars and writers who were of ,Slovak origin. He :took an objectiive and favorable rview, considering the circumstances, of the Slovak iliteratme oreated by Catholics in the seventeenth ·a nd eighteenth centturies. The thesis that t!he Slo:vaxs and not the Czechs are the :true heirs of Great !Moravia, that .there existed a clear distinction, diwring the centuries, be,t ween Czechs and Slova'k,s and their languages, and that the 'S lovaks preser:ved a consciousness of their ethnic and cultural individuality a:nd ,t heir continu!ity with the first Sl,ovak kingdom of Great Moravia, were accepted as historical facts by Mraz. He supported his position by quotations and reforences to the works of SlovaJk writers of the se:venteenuh and eighteenth ce:n,turies. Mraz aLso accepted the porint of 'View that the archaic Czech language, which was brought into, Slova,kia by ,t he Czech P ,r otestants "who found shel:ter in Slovakia and even ;p rinted books in Czech for the rpurrpose of smuggling rthooi i:nto iBohemia,"20 was merely a bo~rowed language, and that the Slovalk Protesitants used it for litera,ture and litJwrgy in the same way as the Catholics used Latin. Though ,th:i-s thesis had previously been supported by m8JIIly serious experts iin Slovalk linguistics, literatrnre and histocy, the universlities in pre-,War Czechoslova1kia tried impose a lt!hoory of a common language with the to �SLOVAKIA 50 Czechs until the Stur reform of 1844. "The Slovaik culturra:l and literairy sphere was never blended or identified with the Czech; :it always had i<ts specific needs and :set of rules" says Mraz, ars ,p rofessor of Bratislava university.21 F.rom these premises, Mraz judged favorably the activities of the Jesuit University of Trnava (1635), the Oaitholic writers of the era of Enlightrnent as well. as the generation of 1848, who established modern 1Slovruk natiooalism irn letterisi and in politicail life. Mraz's History of Slovak Literature, probably written -d'UII'ing the Second World War and adapted to the politicail climate of the first post-War years when the Communists shared political power with the Democratic Party, oruly partly ex.pressed the chianged sit:Juaroion by its method and criiteria. The book ri:s basically within the framework of values, terminology aind ccmceipt s esta:blished ea,rlier in .Slovaikia. '.Dhe ""revolutionary revaluation" was undertaiken by the young group orf militamit mamberis of the Comm.UIIlist Party (A. Bakos, R. Rosenbaum, R. Mrlian, J. Hoirvat and others) who made a fam.atical reappraiisa'l of Slovak literature, and "purged" the libraries ·acooroing .to the Party ideology and Marxist-.Leninist theory of literature 22 When even Novomesky was "purged" as a "bourgeois rn.ationalist and deviationist," the new school of "socialist realllism" was established. Consequently, only those booik s and writers serving :the new ,s ocial order are regarded as representati.rve of true literary values. The rest aire irejected as reactionary, deviationist, rightist, and petty-bourgeois.23 As the literature was also integrated into the structure of the new Socialist or Communist order and destined to be suboTdirnated to the 1P arty and its ideology, the poet and novelist, Jiterary critic and scientist must oontribute by their talents amd works to the building of a Socialist society. The model: Soviet Russia. 1 1. Cf. S. ,P . Palickar, Slovaki-a n Culture, Cambridge, 1954; A. MTaz, Die Literatur der •S lov,a ken, Berlin, 1943. 2. P. P . Yurchak, The Slovaks, 1947, pp. 117-57. Also E. Denis, La Question d' Autriche, Les Slovaques, Paris, 1917, p. 164. 3. W. Semkowicz (eel.) Slowacja i Slowacy, Krakow, 1937, p. 262. 4. Feliks Gross (ed.) European Ideologies, New York, 1948, p. 838. �SLOVAKIA 51 5. L. I. Strakhovsky (ed.) Handbook of Slavic Studies, Cambridge, 1949, pp. 495-96. 6. Cf. J. J. Potocek, "Martin Kukucin, PJoneer of Slovak Realism," The Slavonic and East ·E uropean Review, XXII, 7944. 7. Ibidem, p. 2&3. ,8. A. Mraz, Dejiny ,slovenskej literatury, Bra-tislav·a , Academia Scientiarum et Artium, Slovaca, 1948, p. 263. 9. Hand!book of Slavic Studies, p. 505, Mraz, o,p. cit., pp. 17'5-180. 10. Andreas Mraz, Die Literatur der Slowaken, Berlin, Prague, Vjenna, 1943. 11. Cf. KramorH§, "Slovakia and Slova.c Literature," The Catholic Encyclopedia, XVIU, 19·50. 12. Cf. Sjezd Narodni Kultury, Praha, 1948, p. 239. 1'3. CJ'. ·Bi-b liograficky katalog, Slovenska kni'ha, Bratislava, 1'954, V. 1-17; also Slobodne Slovensko, X. 2. 14. H. Bartek, Novy slovensky pravopis, Chicago, 1954, p. 19. 1,5. Handbook of Slavic Studies, P'P- -51·57. 1'6. Cf. Yur,C'hak, op. dt. pp. 90-116; also S. P. Palickar, Slovakian Oulture, Oa.mbrid•g e, 1954, pp. 139-55. 17. Cf. Yurohak, op.. cit. 18. A. Mraz, Dejiny slovenskej literatury, Bratislava, Academia Scientiarum et Artium Slova-ca, 1498. 19. V. Diamond, Czechos\,ovakia Between East and West, London, 1947, p. 6. 20. •Cf. Handbook of SJ.avic Studies, pp. 17 5-80. 21. Ibid., p. 8. 22. Cf. Sjezd Narodni Kultury, pp. 134-41. 23. Cf. K. Rozenbaum, Sovremennaya slovanskaya Uteratura, Slavy•a ne, 19·515, I, 23-2:9, also J . Martak, Introduction to Su.borne dielo Jana Bottu, Bratislava, 1955 . • • • WHO SAID IT? "There is another thing to be said aJbouit the Admini& tration's foreiign policy. It is pUTely negative and defensive. rt attempts to contain communism; but does nothing to answer the question s.o often asllred: me: How would you finally ded:ea t COIIIlmUJl.,i sm? - Most of those satellite countries and peoples were deilitvered into the hands Olf the RULSSian Comml.lind.sit:s by the Y aJt!a Agreement. That American diploanati'c instrument, never submitted to the Senate, sysitematicrulliy violaited iby the RUISSi.ans, defended onliy by those officials of the D€4)8.rtmenit of Staite who rure aJccessories to the crime, must be formally discairded by Congressional resol.iu.tion as a b'a sis for American foreign poiicy." - (Senator Robert A. Taft, NEW YORK TiiMiES, June 2, 1952). � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA SLOVAK LITERATUR E UNDER THE SOVIET IMPACT Joseph Kirschbaum, Ph.D., LL.D., Professor at the University of Montreal Department of Slavic Studies A Reprint From "The Slavic and East-Eurooea n Studies." Published by: The Department of Slavic Studies, University of Montreal FOREWORD The Commumst occupation of SlwaJri,a carved deep wounds not only •i nto the sociall and political structure of Slovak life as poliitical occupations and changes used :to do in the past. The totailiitarian character of Communism has the specific quality th!a,t it .affects ail the important sectors of national life, be it !l'eligion or phi!losophy, arts or literature. Due to the peculiar citrCu:rnmnces under wbiich the Slovak people were deprived of national independence and became a defenseless prey of foreign domination, the cultural life of Slo'V18Jkfa suffered. ,p robably the stirongest impact among all Soviet satellites. The reasons are many. First of all the character of SlO'V'ak literature and writers. Slovak culture developed through lbhe ages U'Ilder Western influences. This is true namely m regard to the Slovak literature which originated in the classical dlimate of the Catholic University of Trnava, founded in 1635. (1) With exception of the Gdthlc period, we find •i n Slovak literature all the literary currents from humani.!S!m .t hrough (baroque to classicism, romantic-ism, realism, Catholic "modenie," and surrealism. In fact, the olassicaJl. reminiscences , the era of enlighrtenment and romanticism g,ave birth to SlovaJk poetry and prose. Some of the influences ,ruppeared [ater, or J:asted. longer, or el-se !their form wa:s not pure, but we find ianalogies for this phenomenon in all Slavic literatures. More than m poetic and literacy forms, the Western influences and Western orientrution of the Slovak literature is evident in the contents and in the mission that SLOVAKIA 35 poetry and prose aimed to accomplish in the Jife of the Slovak people. Slovak poets and novelists beginning with Holly (2) in .t he eigJJ.teenth century, and the group of Eudovit Stur(3) in the nineteenth century to Hviezdoslav(4), Vajansky, Razus, Zarnov, Urban, Bronsky, Beniak, etc., saw tihe reaJI. function of Slovak literrutrure primarNy in equipping !the Sloviak people with the spiritual resources necessary for survival and the fight for freedom. They endeavored rto bring the Slovak ,p eople to an awa:reness of rtheir spiritual •a nd nationrul iindi'Viduality and fought for their politic-al M1d sociral rights. Like .the poetry of Mickiewicz, Krasinski and Slowac·ki, "summoned the Poles prom political enslavement to a spir.ituaJI. life and revealed them completely new pwspecltiives of mor,al responsibility resulting from the. ll'ation's politicaJl situatiO!Il," (5) in the same way tile Slov,aks Jearned through the works of theiir poets and novel-ists to regard the naitional cause as a question of honor and the supreme mo,r al criterion a.round which the. entire spiritual life of the nation was crystallized. Slovak poets and novelists who regarded thei!r mission, as described aibove, could not nourish any illusion about thei1r fate /Under Communist rule. They knew that literatUTe, •as a means of expression of the national soul and ait the same time ,t he most efficient instrument in the intellectual struggle foir ·r eshapiing nation's patterns of thinking, wou\ld be the first cultwal field undergoing substM1tial changes and losses . The Slovak intelligentsia also knew that the Czech politicians returning behind the Red Army in SloV'akia would take revenge o:n a:ll patriotic Slova1ks who claimed the right of seJf-determination for the Slovak people and applied or aidvoca.ted the ·s ame when the occasion ,had am-ived. Jan Thousands of Slovak intelllectuals, therefore, preferred the exile with all its uncertainties •a nd ,miseries to the Czecho-Communist rule. Among the intellectual emigres the write:ra who were the true irepresentatives of Slova!k literature .b etween the WaTS a:nd made ,a name for themselves by their works and outstanding talents have been 36 SLOVAKIA more numerous than it appears in the literary ,p roduction of the ilast ten years in exNe. There was, at the beginning, 111ot only the most popUJl,a;r nO'VelList of ,t he period 1918~1939, Milo Urban, w,hose "Ziivy Bic" (LlNing Whip) was translated into ,s everal European languages, but a:lso .AJildrej Zarnov, whose poetry became an efficacious instrument in the Slovak national struggle and summoned the young Slovalk intelligentsia to fight for justke and freedom. Both were 1ater kidnapped by the Czech Communists in Austria and on!ly Zarnov succeeded in a dramati·c filighit f.rom Slova!lda again and today fights for his ideas ,i n exHe. There are many others who preferred exile to Communist rule and far from Slovakia - in .Arr-gentma, the U. S. A., Canada, Australia, etc., jn deep sorrow and fiery resistance fight for rthe.ir people's freedom. Among them is Joseph C. Hroosky, the most prolific and undoubtedly one of the greatest 1Slovak noveLists, who celebrated just recently, or rather the Slovaks in the free world celebrated his 60th annirversary. The literary work of J. C. Hronsky is of such artistic vrulue and importance for the Slovak 1iterature thait even the literary historian of the Slovak University of today, professoir A. Mraz, was forced to ac'knowledge that many of iHronsky's works "belonged amOID.g the best works of the Slovak post-war literature by thei.T qualities of style and composition." In regard to Hronsky's noive1 '~Pisar Grae" (Clerk Grae), Mraz even writes a'boUJt "hravour of composiUon"; he sees in his first novels "complicated artistic instrumentality" and commends him for "exceptional and privileged interpreting of the common people, as weili as of refined and cultivated souls ,a nd hearts of women." During the war years, in his German book on Slova.!k literature, professor Mraz qualified J. C. Hironsky's novel "Jozef Mak," whlich was also translated into German, as "one of the 1b est works of the Slovruk post~war literature," and the author as the "most prolific Slovak :novelist." Altogether J. C. Hironsky published over 50 volumes of short novels, beasutiful tales for children, novels describing the life of SlorvaJk peasants and worker,s, and mas1 SLOVAKIA 37 terpieces on the life of the Slovak SIIIl.aN-town intelligentsia (Clerk Grae, The .P rophecy orf Doctor Stan!kovsky) , with all social and ideological problems and struggles of Slovakia's post~war dramatic evolution. Usually regaTded as the heir and follower of Martin Kuikucin's realism in Sloivak literature,. !Hronslky attained new artistic heights and in many ,respects even ,sUTpassed Kulkuoin, who i1s considered even !by the Communist ireg,i.me as a "classic" of SlO!Vak literature. rHronsky's spi riitual world is broad and deep, his sphere of artistic interests is extensive and manifold, his style am.d composition masterly clerur and lingui'Sltica:lly perfect and beaubiful. At the begimning of his literary career, the Siovak peasant in his traditional way of 'life, poverty, patient heroism, and sturdy mental~ty was a favolI'ilte subject of nove!ls. HaNing made his mark with •s hort stories from Slovak village rlife, in which r ealism matched the best worlks of the founder of Slovak literary realism, Martin Kuikucin, Bronsky moved into rthe domain of liteTature for children and youth and, l,a ter, into the domain of social and psyohologicaJl problems of smaHtown people, proceeding firom short stories and tales to more and more complicated and artisticaJlly elaborated forms of novel. Hrrorusky emwged very soon as a towering personality from the group of post-war novelists and writers. His remarkable literary ,w ork constituted a lin'k between the talented Slovak n01Velists .of the previous generation and mode:m Slovak ,},i terature modeled on Western European literary currents. Not an epigon of •a nyone, Hronsky created: :from his own spiritual funds and had a strong appeal prim:arily to the heart of the young generation ,of writers among w'hom his new shade of realas-m had ma!lly followers. Hironsky',s •s ignificance in Slovak cultura:l life was, however, extraordinaJry not only in literatUII'e. Hiis -literary activity was doubled by his achievements in the highest Slovak cultUTal institution "Matica Slove:nska" (The Slovak Lnstiwte) , foll'Ilded in 1863 with the aim t 10 s,pread Slwak cultural valrues and defend Slovak traditions against 1 1 38 SLOVAKIA Magyair tendencies of assimilation. There was rarely a Slovak writex who successifully combined a highly developed literary talent with such organizational ,ability as it has been in the case of J. C. Bronsky. Acord.mg to many seri'ous cultwrai worik€1I'S (cf. Cullen's ia.nd Hrusovsky's articles in the "S:lovensika Obrana" and the "Kainadsky Slovwk"), J. C. HronSlky has done more usefiU!l work in the few years of his administration of the "Slovak Institute" than any Oille of his predecessors during long periods. Thousands of new books wer edited every year by his merits, new cultwral sections organized, equipped and reorganized, a new farge printery built, and new activities initiaited. an institution of many The "Slovak In.stitute" merits in the fieild of co111Servation of Slorvak traditioI1JS, culture, popular art, tiheater, pwrity of language - ip1ayed an important Tole in Slovak cultura•l life at all times since its foundation in the nineteenth century. Election to leading funcUons in thls institution was considered one of the highest honors in SlovaJkia and it undoubtedly was. J . C. Hronsky was elected and reelected. For the Communist regime such merits have been, however, "crimes" against the "people's democracy and revolution," and J. C. Hrons'ky was arrested before the Red Army accomplished the occupation of Slovakia. After many unsuccessful aittempts, he finally escaped from a prison and fled from 'Slovakia through Austria into Italy, and later found refuge in Argentina, where he lives, deeply convinced that the Slovaks will never give up their fight for freedom and their Christian ,t raditions. We mention HirolilSlky's case in this connection as an example of the Slovak nationail. tragedy. There are many others, who in literature, science, arts, aind in ,t he pO'litical and economic life of Slava,kia, created works of value and have been silenced by the Communist regime, or preferred freedom in exile, as Hronsky did. In the following pages an attempt has been made to present, in a very restricted way, the main features of the Slovak literature under the Communist ,r ule. The author has scrupulously tried to paint SLOVAKIA 39 the picture objectirvely, and the publishing committee of the review "The Slavic and East-European .Studies" saw to it that the study might remain within the limits of a scientific work. There is on:ly one abjectirve this study ,a ims at: to se:rve the cause of truth and freedom which in Slova1kia as well as in other satelilite countiries have been temporarily stifled. J. K. 1. Cf. Branislav Vars!k: Le Probleme des nationalites a r Universlte de Trnav,a, Bratislava, 193.8. 2. Jan Holly (178·5-1849) most gifted poet and disciple of A. Bernolak, glorified in three po ems Slovakia's greatness of one tllousand years ago, "Svatopluk" (18n), "Cyrilo-Methodiada" (1835), and •·,Slav" (1839). He also translated the main works of Greek and Roman classics into the Slovak l,a nguage and prepared th e Slovak renatssanee. 3. Cf. Hans Kohn: "Pan-Slavlsm, Its History and Ideology," University of Notre Dame Press, 19.53; and Ernest Denis: "Les Slovaques,' Paris, Delgrave, 1917. 4. P. 0. Hviezdoslav (1849-1921) by his own name Pavol Or· szagh, is considered the most talented Slovak poet. His poetry was publls'hed In fifteen large volumes, one of them, "Bloody Sonnets," was translated also Into English. His main works are "Herodes and Herodlas" (drama), the epics "Hajnlkova zena, Ezo a Gabor Vlkolinsky, Agar, Rachel, Kron," etc. He also published four volumes of translation,s from World literatures, Goethe's Faust, Shakes.p,eare's Hamlet and Mid-Summer Night's Dream, the main works of Shiller, Lermont-0v, Slowackl and Madach's "The Tragedy of Man." ,5. C.f. Harvard Slavic Studies, Vol. 2, 19·54, p. 323-4. SLOVAK LITERATURE UNDER THE SOVIET IMPACT Within a decade of the forced inclusion of Slovakia within the Soviet orbit, Slovaik literature weint through most peculiar transformations. If Slovak novelists and poets, generally more conservative and traditional than Polish, Czech or Slovene writers, did not leave the country m- choose silence, they were abruptly compelled to ada;pt their literary c-reeds, forms and subjects .to a new line of "socialist reailis,m" and to run exclusively Eastern orientation. The main characteristics of Slovak literatll!l"e were patriotism, pan-slavism, universalism and a deep religiO'UIS 40 SLOVAKIA spirit. The generation after John Holly, namely John Kolla.T and the group of L. Stur, turned their eyes, as fawiders of nineteenth century painslla:vism, to Russia 'but their literrury works, education and iphllosophy were fundrurnentahly Western. They were educated at German Unive:r,sities and, while KoHar's "Daughter of Slava" was modelled on Dante and Petrarca, L. Stur and his group were under the influence of German romanticism, having foir masters Herder and Hegel (in their phi1osoiphy) .1 It was in poetry only that Mickiewicz, Slowacki, Krasinski am.d Pu<s'hkin. were the:iir ideails. Kol[ar's idea of "S[avic reciprocity" refrruined from any attemipt to mottld the politkal ideology or the religious charaicter of any Slav group. He aimed merely at cuiltural and literary reciprocity, •a nd his philo,s ophy was humanistic." He only is wOlI'thy of liberty who resrpects the :liiberty of 8!11; he who forges the chains of others, is himself a slave; when thou callest for a Slav, there must respond a man," are his famous axioms.2 According to W. Bobek, one of the best foreign scholars on Slovak literature, Slovakia c-a n be reasonably considered as the classical country of the Slavic idea, with several conceptions of panslaV'ism based on the equa[ity of Slaivic peoples. Howevell", an identification of the idea of a Slavic cooperaition with russophilism was raire; it appeared as a result of national depression and despair.3 Such was the case of L. Stur, for whom "P.anslavism in the political sense was a chimera," but who later, according to W. Lednicki, forunulated about 1850 ":the most complete and consistently developed program for the subjugation of Slavs to Russia in his bo01k "SlaV'dom and the World of the Future"4. Stur wrote 'his '.book in a period of "Nationail depression ,arrd despailr," as mentioned by Boibek. (The book was written in German and never appeared in Slova!k). During the last decades of the nirneteenth century arnd the years before and during the first World War, Sfovak literary •amd cultural life was dominated to some extent by Slovak Russophiles like Vajansky and Skn.lltety. However, this was merely an interlude; for after the war, 1 SLOVAKIA 41 the inf1uence ·o f French, English and even Scandinavian writem which was mani!fest among the younger poe'bs and novelists (I. Kraslro, V. Roy, P. 0 . Hv:iezdoslav, M. Razus), gained ground firmly and without resistance. The RussophiJ.e orientation ,i n Slova:k literature was chiefly dru:e to the political situation following the Austro-Hungarian. compromise •Of H~67, when the Slovaks were left at the mercy of Hungarian effonts of assii:rnilation. As the Slovak poets and novelists saw that the only hope for a Slovak national surrvival was in Russia's power, they gave fU!ll expression to this belief 1n their Hterary woriks. iBut they did not mean to exohange one oppression for a.mother. The Bo1sltevik Revolution and the results of the Firat WorJ,d War changed the picture. The Revo1urbion destroyed the panslavistic and Russophile dreams of Slovruk poets. While f,u!lifilling their hope for emancipation foom HUID:giarian ru'le by oreating the Czecho-Slova'k Republic with the Czechs, jt -left the Slovakis free to choose their cU!ltural orientation. They e1ther turned again to the West or they used their own spiritual and moral tradiitions for creative inspi:ration. The general trend of Slovak liteiratJure in poetry as well as in prose was to broaden its range of interests and to become responsive to European literary curents 5 The main representatives of Slovak literatlrre between the two Wars were uninterested in Soviet Russia, except for a smal[ groUJp of proJetarian o:r left-wing poets and writers under Czech influence. Oruy three or four of them acquiired literary recognition. and even fa.me. The older generation of Slovak poets, headed by P. 0. Hiviezdoslav, V. Roy, Ivan Krasko and Martin Razus, continued to create in the traditional forms or, Ji.ke Hviezdoslav, to use the European literrury forms and currents coriresponding to his great ta:lent and creativeness. In prose, the masters were the realists Kukucin,6 Hronsky, 'l'ajov!Sky, T. Vansova, Timrava and L. 'Podjavorinska. The younger generation looked for new fo:rms: to for·eign literatures. The really successful literary woriks of more tham. ephemera[ value were those which dTew their motives. from Slovak H!fe, their inspiration from rSlorva!k 42 SLOVAKIA national traditions and their art from their own spiritual reserves (Milo Ur.ban, J. C. Hironsky, A. Za.rn.ov, V. Benia:k, J. Smrek, E. IBolesilav Lu!kac, S. 1K rcmery, T. J. Gaspar, J. Hrufovsky). Consciously or unconsciously, they belonged ,t o the West and also to theiir country's social and ideological evolution. Their orientation was contilnenta,l in form, in philosophy and in motivation. A:U the European ourents ·a nd literary scho<Yls, from symbolism and impresiSlionism to Catholiic modernism (especia1ly F!rench) and su:rirealism, characteri'zed Slovak Hterature between the wars. According to Bobek, it equalled Czech literature,7 and acOTdilng to A. ,M raz, it "fought for a place in the context of wor1d 'literatures. " 8 The second World War did not change substantially the orientation of Slov·a k ,lrl,teratme. Being an island where, un,ti} the ·f all of 194.'4, the German ,i mpact was neitheir violent nor apparent, Slovakia experienced a strongly literary and cultll!I'al development. The trend remained Western, nationaliist, conservative and traditional. With the "liberation" of the co'll!ntry, the shock of the Soviet limparet was violent, spreading deep and wide throughout the literairy and cultural life orf 'Slovakia. A short analysis brings to light the foUowing features orf contemporary Slovak literature. Socialist Realism and the Soviet Model A smail:l group of p:wletarian poets, surrealists and left-wing critics or nove'lists, headed by L. Novomesky, who along with J. Rob Ponican, was the only prominent poet in the group before 1945, not only took over liiterary and cultural life while Slova;kia was stiU occupied by the RUSSliam Anny, but :they al:so decided who would be allowed to continue as writer, poet, journalist or scientist and what kind of literature they would be allowed to pubilish. If the writers wished to continue their wol1k, they had to become membern of a Society of writers, organized on the Soviet model. Their main duties were to extirpate the "corrupting" mfluence of Western "bourgeois; and fascist" writers and to follow the line of "g.reat socialiist Soviet SLOVAKIA 43 literature," inspired 'by the ideaJs brought to reality by Stalinissm. The Slogan was "progress" and the name of the new current was "socialist :realism," though many of the main actors in this "revolutionary reshaping" of the Slovak literature were dmitators of pre-wa,r French sur:realism (R. Fabry, V. R!eisel, M. Mittelman). Soviet litera.tUTe "with its surpassdng wealth of ideas, its burning socialist patriotism, its new humanism," was destined ,t o be the mghest ideal for Slorvak literature. This reshaping of SlOIVak oultural life was purt into praotice not only without regard for traditiOIIl, but al:so wirthout the ,t rue 1representatives of Slwa!k literature hetween the wars, known by .theiT works and thei!r outstanding talent. Neither the ·best novelist of the period 19181939, Milo Urban (!b. 1904) whose Living Whlp9 was translated into serverad EUTopean languages, nor the prominen,t poet Valentin Benia,k (b. 1894), nor Andrej 2arnov (b. 1903) whose poetry by its fiery language and reso'l.l'nding verse became an effective instrument in the Slova:k national struggle and who summoned the young Sloivak intelligentsia to a struggle for justice and freedom, took part in the new trend. They pref.erred to be silent. Zarn:ov, who was under constant threat of arrest and deportation and many times imprisoned, later left his .coun:try to fight for his ideas in exHe. 'l'ido J. Gaspar (ib. 1893) author of splendid short novels and exotic ,t ales, was also ,sidenced in prison. Many others whose names were held up as worthy representati'ves of Slovak lita-aiture before 1945 fled to Argentina, the U. S. A., Canada, Australia and O'bher plaices, with deep sorrow and in a spirit of fiery resistance, preferring exile to Communist rule . Among them is the prolific nO<Velist J. C. Hronsky (b .. 1896) whose works desm-ibed ,in mastedy fas:hion the social tUTmoil and political struggles of the Sdov~ks,10 and talented literary critics and aesthetes as :professor :El 2-atiko-Bor, Stanislav Meciar and Jan Mestancik, tile poets iR. Dillong - prolific and emotional, with hiS' •r apturouis lyricism, - M. Sprinc, K. Strmen, Jan Oka,l, J. Doransiky, J. BesenOVSJky, Marusa JUSikova, J. Zvonar-Tien, Hrtus..Jurina, historians (Hru- 44 SLOVAKIA swsky, Culen, Durcansky), linguists (prof. Bartek), publicists (Dr. P. Pauco, -Dr. S. Pol~kovic, Dr. J. Mi'kus, Dr. J. Cieker, Dr. A. Grebert, Dr. J. GleimMl, prof. Zubek, Nahallka), a dozen university professors and over a hundred highly educated young priests who had prepared for their careers as ,professors 3/nd educators at the universities of Rome, Paris Louvain, Innsbruck, Brussels and elsewhere. To understand the rvast chamge brought aibout by this "reshaping" of Slovak literature, we must remember that the proleta:riam poets, like the surrrealist s, weTe only a sma11 ,g roup alien to the Slovak literary traditi-on and spiritual atmosphere.11 For the most part, they grew up under the :influence of Czech Marxist or Communist intellectuials and writers: (J. Wolker, V. Nezval, J. Fuc:iik, Sekanina). Their movement with its journal Dav, originated in ,P rague. Novomesky, Ponifan, Oka.Ii, Clementis and others broug,ht their revolutionary ideas and [eft-wing orientation .iinto the Slovak puritan literary ·atmosphere as university students in t,h e Czech capital. Ponican declared this proudly during the "Congress of Nationa,l Culture" held in Prague in 1948. At the same time he condemned "Czech oultural imperialism" and the tendency to assimilate which, according to him, was the consistent aim of Prague's bourgeois regimes between the Wa-rs. 12 During the twenties, the group even tried to transplant into Slovakia Communist literacy aesthetics. They made appeals to break from tiraditonal themes and forms, fatvored collectivism rather than individl.l!a:lism, materialism instead of idealism, and often hurt religious feelings by their youth:£ul revolt a,g ainst God ,and' Christian traditions. hl the thirties the ,g roup had direct contact with Moscow (No;vomesky attended the Congress of W!riters in Moscow and Ilja Ehrenburg appeared in Brntisla,va), but .it was still Prague whose Czech Marxist poets and intellectuals (journal Tvorba) ideologkally nourished Slova..11{ proletaxian literature amd prescribed its aesthetics. After 1945 the groUJp, strengthened by sur.realists and young irntellectuals reared during World Warr: II, con1 1 SLOVAKIA 4-5 tinued their re'V'olt against individualism., .sU'bjectirvism, art fo'I' axit'·s sake, petty-,bO'llrgeois realism and clericalism. Their concept of "socialist realism," based on the philosophy of dia1ectical materialism, the Marx-iLenini.st theory of ,l iterature, a new aipproaioh to "reality" and active prurHcipation in building ·a new Sodalist s·o ciety, was ,t his time imposed by the political power of ,the Comunist party. Im reviews and in the daily press,, the literary critics asked for conformity with Russian literatuTe, condemned all "apolitical" approaches and' proudly declared that the struggJe for socialism. was a struggle for a new and true art. As the Communist Party had unlimited control over ali newspapers, reviews and pubHshing firms and the exdu.sive right to permit or prohibit publircation, traditional Slovak literatme abruptly disappeared. Literary pr,oduction i,s orgainiized by ,t he !Party and its organs, ,literature was planned to obtain rapid spiritual reorientation, i.e., .sovietizatio:n and conformity with 'Russia and mental russification. Under such circumstances, Slovak literature was not only impoverished but ailso became an imitation of Soviet literature rather than an expression of the Slovak soul. Filled with ,s logans aind praise of CmnmUJIHsm and its leadem, exaggerating .social differences and struggling aga:in:st religion and old traditions, "socialist realism" has little in common with artistic values or true .realism. Mental and Spiritual Russification ·To:i addition, there was a steadri1y increasing flood of trrunslations of Soviet books, to sovietize the literary life of Slovaikia not only in form but ailso in spirit. An aina,l ysis of books ipUlblis:hed under the present regim.e13 shows that at the end of 1953 and in the fin.st month of 1954, fonty-one translations of poetry -and ipr-0.se were published in Sloivakia. Twenty-two of tho,s e translations were from Riussian literature, nineteen from aH others. Modoon Soviet writers were represented by sixteen works, the Russian classi,cs by five. Of nineteen translations from 46 SLOVAKIA non~ussian literatures. thirteen works were written by Communists, the o1fuem, apart from a translation of Ovid, are works of Mark Twain, Maupassant, Bendel and others, depicting the morail decadence of Western society. 'Dhe picture is similair in rt.he prodiuotion of ,b ooks for children and youth. Of forty-three books pu:blished in the same period (end of 1953 and beginning of 1954) twentyone works were written by Slov-aJk writers, eighteen by Russians and the iI'est ·b y Czech, Hungartan rund Rumanirun aut!hors. No Western writers were Tepresented. Six Slovak originail works and fourteen translations from RJllssirun were puirely propaganda. 'Sovietization and mental .r us,sification do not appear only in the number of translations from Russian alild Soviet satellite languages. By the exclusion of Western. iiteratures, a SOI1t ()If "cultural iron curtain" is buidt in Slovakia, because SlovaJk writers are absolutely dependent on Soviet ~oiurces, considered by the .r egime as "the most progressive in the world." Under the heading "rMarx-Leniinism' one finds sixtynine publications, twenty-five Slovak originals, thirty-eight translations from IRuSIS'ian, two f.rom German (the works of Marx and IDngels), one from Hungarian rund one from Bu[garian. Though some SlovaJk iintellectuals have m0& tered the Western languages, there is no translatio:n from French, IDnglish or any 0 1ther Western tongue. If we consider that book,s translated from RJussian. a.ire pulblished in :tens of ,t housands and that they are sold at reduced prices, the picture is clea:r: mental ,russification and rovietization is promoted by every avaihvble method. Reforms of the Slovak Language Following the "theory given to Ma'I'Xist philology by J. Stalin in ,his work, Marxism and 'P hilological Questions and the Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR" the new Slovak "working intelligentsia" not only changed the spirit, structure and forms of literature but also reformed the Jangua:ge.14 Some of the changes effected by the Commun1sts, were proposed by Prof. H. Bartek before SLOVAKIA 47 and during World War II to simplify SloV'ak or-thog.raiphy. An expert on linguistics, Prof. Bartek advocated his reforms on the grownds of scientific research -and the evolution of .the Slovak language, Which is, .according to A . Senn, "more ar-chaic than Czech and Poli$," that is one of the most archaic Slavic languages.15 ColllSequently, not all the ohrunges ,o an ,b e regarded as ,ha:rmf\11 or unnecessary; and Slova;k exiles as well as the Slova!k press in the free world basicrully accepted this reform. Since the eighteenth century, when Anthony Bernolak (176·2 ..J813), lea.med philologist and patriot, wrote a grammar of the Slo_ vak language rund a huge dictionary >in six language.s and gave a set of rules of o.rthography, eliminating the use of Latin in Slovak cuUural and literary life, the 'S:tova;k language has been a field of study foc highly educaited clergymen, Catholic and Protes:tant, and for enthusiastic nationalists. 1 The reform. of 1844, which is mistakenly presented by some Sla:vists as the date of birth of the Slovak literary lrunguage, was brought a:bout by the particiipation of Protestant ministers 8Jlld Cathoilfo priests, though the reform wa:s popuila,r ized hy L. Stfrr.16 Stfu himself acted as a nationaHst leader aiming at the uruon of ,the Slovak people, the greate:r nium1ber of whom ( over 80 % Ca:tholics) have written in Slovak siince the counter-:Refo'I"mation. Oatholrics used as a hasis one of the Western Slovak dialects, whereas the Protestants, who accepted the Lutheran fa.1th from Bohemia (Czech lands) together with an archaic Czooh translation of the Bible, used, apart from German, as their lit,w giical la:ngua,ge, richly adorned wtth Slovaik ex1pressions. Regarding the division as a great misfortune in the face of strong Magyarization, Stur fought for :the unity of a Hterary fanguage and a compromise between the Lutheran and the Catholic adherents of the BemolaJk ·s chool. This resulted in the acceptance of a centra:l dialect as a new Slovaik Hterary language,17 'but preserved much of the beauty of expres~ siOIIl aJD.d idiom of other Slava!k dialects. This ,r eform, and the rioh litemture which developed later, was merely an 48 SLOVAKIA instrll!ffient in the strugg}e for natiorn:ail survival. The SlovaJk intellectuals were co.nrvinced that the very existence of the nation depended upon the preservation of 1t.s language, rund that nationail identity wrus bound up with languaige. As a result, there was ll'Iltil re<:ently a kind of "sanctity of ,l anguage" among the Slovaks. Applying a reform by ,referri.ing lto the rules Jaitl down for Marxist philosophy by J. StaHn cannot but hurt the Slovaks in their most sensitive spot. Revaluation of Literary History 1 Very soon after the Communists took over the direction of c-ulturrul affair,s in Slovakia, af.ter the potential opposition either fled the country or was silenced, Slovak literary history was revaluated. The first revaluation was made a:s early as 1948 when the Slovak Academy of Sciences a.ind Arts, founded d'll!I'ing the S,lova:k Repulblic, edited the History of Slovak Lit.erature.18 The aiuthor, professor AII1d!rej• Mraz, was not a Communi st before the War, and duiring the War he published in Germa!Il another histocy of 'Slovak literature. His new wovk, however, mirrors in some respects the present siltuation in the oultural life of SlovaJkia. Aware that the Easite•r n orientaJtion of SlovaJkia's cultural life had been made a fait accompli by the so-called "Program of Kosice" which clearrly stated the SlaJVic, i.e., R'll!ssian orientation of Slovruk cu1tuire, profesSOT Mraz ada;pted his work to the new situation. He revised his judgment of writers a:nd poets who were jn prisons (T. J. Gaspar) or in exile. Proletariam and smrealist poets on the other hand became moire talented, thek novels and poetry of greaJte,r importJance aJnd artisitk value. On the whole his book was wriitten in the way of ;pre-War literary schools, his iphraseology shows little similavity with the iMa;rxi-stLeninist literary critics of the years following Novomes~ ky's imprisonment and lthe condemnation to the gallows of Clementis, the intellectual leader of the group. The revaluation of Slovalk literary hlstory by Prof. Mraz is more iilnteresting as far as tJhe general approaoh to SlovaJk literature is concerned. 'Dhe Program of Kosice, 1 SLOVAKIA 49 wihich defined the ideological orientation for the future, puts an end to an <Yld controversy about Slo¥ak national, c'U!ltwral and l~terary indi'V'iduality. Thi1s dooomenJt stated that "the relation between Czechs and Slovaks should be that of separate nations jomed in common interest in a single State."19 The C{)lffiillunist intelleotuails also proudly manifested their desire to see Slovaiks. as an autonomous Soviet Republic rather than a province dominated by Prague. Professor Mraz adapted .the History of Slovak Literature to this "n:atiOIIlalist" atmosphere of the years 1'945-.48, and consequently he included "ex cathed1ra" i,n to the Slo'V'a.k C'Ultmral and H,terary heritage not only the writings of Sts.. Cyiril and ,Methodius and those of their disciples, which had boon consistently, though erroneously, claimed by the Czechs, burt also ,t he Latin works of all scholars and writers who were of ,Slovak origin. He :took an objectiive and favorable rview, considering the circumstances, of the Slovak iliteratme oreated by Catholics in the seventeenth ·a nd eighteenth centturies. The thesis that t!he Slo:vaxs and not the Czechs are the :true heirs of Great !Moravia, that .there existed a clear distinction, diwring the centuries, be,t ween Czechs and Slova'k,s and their languages, and that the 'S lovaks preser:ved a consciousness of their ethnic and cultural individuality a:nd ,t heir continu!ity with the first Sl,ovak kingdom of Great Moravia, were accepted as historical facts by Mraz. He supported his position by quotations and reforences to the works of SlovaJk writers of the se:venteenuh and eighteenth ce:n,turies. Mraz aLso accepted the porint of 'View that the archaic Czech language, which was brought into, Slova,kia by ,t he Czech P ,r otestants "who found shel:ter in Slovakia and even ;p rinted books in Czech for the rpurrpose of smuggling rthooi i:nto iBohemia,"20 was merely a bo~rowed language, and that the Slovalk Protesitants used it for litera,ture and litJwrgy in the same way as the Catholics used Latin. Though ,th:i-s thesis had previously been supported by m8JIIly serious experts iin Slovalk linguistics, literatrnre and histocy, the universlities in pre-,War Czechoslova1kia tried impose a lt!hoory of a common language with the to SLOVAKIA 50 Czechs until the Stur reform of 1844. "The Slovaik culturra:l and literairy sphere was never blended or identified with the Czech; :it always had i<ts specific needs and :set of rules" says Mraz, ars ,p rofessor of Bratislava university.21 F.rom these premises, Mraz judged favorably the activities of the Jesuit University of Trnava (1635), the Oaitholic writers of the era of Enlightrnent as well. as the generation of 1848, who established modern 1Slovruk natiooalism irn letterisi and in politicail life. Mraz's History of Slovak Literature, probably written -d'UII'ing the Second World War and adapted to the politicail climate of the first post-War years when the Communists shared political power with the Democratic Party, oruly partly ex.pressed the chianged sit:Juaroion by its method and criiteria. The book ri:s basically within the framework of values, terminology aind ccmceipt s esta:blished ea,rlier in .Slovaikia. '.Dhe ""revolutionary revaluation" was undertaiken by the young group orf militamit mamberis of the Comm.UIIlist Party (A. Bakos, R. Rosenbaum, R. Mrlian, J. Hoirvat and others) who made a fam.atical reappraiisa'l of Slovak literature, and "purged" the libraries ·acooroing .to the Party ideology and Marxist-.Leninist theory of literature 22 When even Novomesky was "purged" as a "bourgeois rn.ationalist and deviationist," the new school of "socialist realllism" was established. Consequently, only those booik s and writers serving :the new ,s ocial order are regarded as representati.rve of true literary values. The rest aire irejected as reactionary, deviationist, rightist, and petty-bourgeois.23 As the literature was also integrated into the structure of the new Socialist or Communist order and destined to be suboTdirnated to the 1P arty and its ideology, the poet and novelist, Jiterary critic and scientist must oontribute by their talents amd works to the building of a Socialist society. The model: Soviet Russia. 1 1. Cf. S. ,P . Palickar, Slovaki-a n Culture, Cambridge, 1954; A. MTaz, Die Literatur der •S lov,a ken, Berlin, 1943. 2. P. P . Yurchak, The Slovaks, 1947, pp. 117-57. Also E. Denis, La Question d' Autriche, Les Slovaques, Paris, 1917, p. 164. 3. W. Semkowicz (eel.) Slowacja i Slowacy, Krakow, 1937, p. 262. 4. Feliks Gross (ed.) European Ideologies, New York, 1948, p. 838. SLOVAKIA 51 5. L. I. Strakhovsky (ed.) Handbook of Slavic Studies, Cambridge, 1949, pp. 495-96. 6. Cf. J. J. Potocek, "Martin Kukucin, PJoneer of Slovak Realism," The Slavonic and East ·E uropean Review, XXII, 7944. 7. Ibidem, p. 2&3. ,8. A. Mraz, Dejiny ,slovenskej literatury, Bra-tislav·a , Academia Scientiarum et Artium, Slovaca, 1948, p. 263. 9. Hand!book of Slavic Studies, p. 505, Mraz, o,p. cit., pp. 17'5-180. 10. Andreas Mraz, Die Literatur der Slowaken, Berlin, Prague, Vjenna, 1943. 11. Cf. KramorH§, "Slovakia and Slova.c Literature," The Catholic Encyclopedia, XVIU, 19·50. 12. Cf. Sjezd Narodni Kultury, Praha, 1948, p. 239. 1'3. CJ'. ·Bi-b liograficky katalog, Slovenska kni'ha, Bratislava, 1'954, V. 1-17; also Slobodne Slovensko, X. 2. 14. H. Bartek, Novy slovensky pravopis, Chicago, 1954, p. 19. 1,5. Handbook of Slavic Studies, P'P- -51·57. 1'6. Cf. Yur,C'hak, op. dt. pp. 90-116; also S. P. Palickar, Slovakian Oulture, Oa.mbrid•g e, 1954, pp. 139-55. 17. Cf. Yurohak, op.. cit. 18. A. Mraz, Dejiny slovenskej literatury, Bratislava, Academia Scientiarum et Artium Slova-ca, 1498. 19. V. Diamond, Czechos\,ovakia Between East and West, London, 1947, p. 6. 20. •Cf. Handbook of SJ.avic Studies, pp. 17 5-80. 21. Ibid., p. 8. 22. Cf. Sjezd Narodni Kultury, pp. 134-41. 23. Cf. K. Rozenbaum, Sovremennaya slovanskaya Uteratura, Slavy•a ne, 19·515, I, 23-2:9, also J . Martak, Introduction to Su.borne dielo Jana Bottu, Bratislava, 1955 . • • • WHO SAID IT? "There is another thing to be said aJbouit the Admini& tration's foreiign policy. It is pUTely negative and defensive. rt attempts to contain communism; but does nothing to answer the question s.o often asllred: me: How would you finally ded:ea t COIIIlmUJl.,i sm? - Most of those satellite countries and peoples were deilitvered into the hands Olf the RULSSian Comml.lind.sit:s by the Y aJt!a Agreement. That American diploanati'c instrument, never submitted to the Senate, sysitematicrulliy violaited iby the RUISSi.ans, defended onliy by those officials of the D€4)8.rtmenit of Staite who rure aJccessories to the crime, must be formally discairded by Congressional resol.iu.tion as a b'a sis for American foreign poiicy." - (Senator Robert A. Taft, NEW YORK TiiMiES, June 2, 1952).  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Slovak Literature Under the Soviet Impact Description An account of the resource Joseph Kirschbaum, Ph.D., LL.D. Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 2 (19), June 1956 pp. 34-51 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Kirschbaum, Jozef M., 1913-2001 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1956 SNK https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/dc25c9bbc01e9f568ce99331ce6c2f36.pdf 8f902d800812ac58bbf18f3f3c29e691 PDF Text Text 34 SLOVAKIA STUR AND THE SLOVAK INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENT P.A. Hrobak John Kollar and John Holly, eminent Slorvak poets, had sung their great songs, when a group of some fifty Slovak youngsters assembled on the ruins of Devin the unmariked ruins which spoke so eloquently of the glorious past of the ancestors of the Slovak nation. The group sang "Devin, mily Devin" (Devin, deair Devin) to the tune of "N1tra, mila Nitra" and had themselves baptized anew : to their Christian names, they added new Slovanic names as a symbol that they were being born to a new life dedicated wholly to the service of their nation. The Slovak students were inspired by Kollar',s sonnets, HoUy's epics, Mickiewicz's Ode to Youth, and by the magnetic personali,t y of Louis Stur. These Slovak young peotple carried the new era of Slovak history on their shoulders. This was the youth of the capital of SlovaJkia, Bratislava. Since the time of Matthew Bel, the Bratislava Lyceum enjoyed great fame as an educational institution and, hence, attracted the youth of Slovakia. At the beginning of the nineteenth century something new was introduced at the Lyceum : an institute o,f the Slovak and Czech languages and literaitures. Kollar was there in 1816 and exerci,s ed great influence on the students. One evening in 1818 two young men walked the road to Devin, discussing national matters quite se. riously. One was Safarik, who late,r wrote the great wocrk "SloivaJnic antiquities," and the other was Palacky, who later became a great Czech historian. Although Kollar and Saifarik left Bratislava, the sparks of their ardor fell among the youthful scholars and smouldered in their minds. Then some OIIle came among them to fan the embers into a flame and to unite them in one service, as he so aptly expressed it: we ha,v e entered the service of the spirit - and therefore we must travel the thorny road of life! That young man was Louis Shir. Stur entered the "service of the spirit" in a natural manner, without extraordinary crises. He was born in Zay-iUhrovec in 1815; his father was a teacher and ardent �SLOVAKIA 36 Slovak; his mother, too, was a loyal Slovak, graced with a quiet, pleasant disposition; and his older brother, Charles, excelled as a writer of Slovak poetry. In short, the home of Stur was truly Slovak. Wlhile in Raab, Stur was greatly influenced by Professor Pee; and in Bratislava (1829) it was his fortune to fall in with congenial SlQlV'ak young men. Stur admired his elders, especially the youthful Chalupka, who had contributed much with their writings to awaken the Slovaks nationally. Stur became the favorite of the eminent Schroer and Palkovic, who recognized in Stur the quahfica!Jions for leadership. Stur's dynMnic personality attracted Slovak youth to the Slovak cause. One evening Stur met a young man on the street; he knew he was from Beckov and two years younger than himself; but he also .knew ,that this young man for some reason avoided Slovruk company. After greeting him, Stur had a talk with him. The young man later admitted that what Stur had said to him on that occasion kept him awake for several nights and made him resolve to, join Stu.r's group. That young man was Joseph M. Hurban, who later became one of the great men of Slovak letters. Stur did not persuade others with any special, expert arguments; he persuaded them with his entire personality. Stur was a dynamo of action; what he asked others to do, he did himself; his entire life was a labor of }()IVe for his people. The Slovaks, his people, needed scholars Who would dig iinto the past to build for the future. Stur knew that the Slovaks were doomed as a nation, unless they were awakened nationally, and thrut without selfless terucher,s this wrus impossible. He set himself to the task of providing them. Julius Botto, Sl()IVa!k historian, said that "Stur trained for the Slo1Vak nation' energetic, selfless men, genllline na_ tional heroes " Stur and his followers prepared the Slovak nation for the difficult times ahead. Indeed, without them the Slovalks might now be a forgotten nation, a nation suppressed and beaten into oblivion by a powerful, foreign and hostile ruler. Stur united the Slovak nation by establishing the central dialect of Slovakia as the lit- �36 SLOVAKIA erary medium and thus made the Slovaks stronger in the face of the enemy. He was a genuine Slovaik patriot and democrat; he fought n:o t only for the rights of his own ,people, but also for the rights of all subjugated nations of Europe. The national life of the Slovruks ,in the past was not only a passive bewailment, a life of hapless "do nothing." lit was filled with positive wor.k, creating higher cultural and 1political values. Slovaks should remember this and ikeep on preaching it in their schools, boo.k s, public assemblies, newspapeirs, and everywhere. Perhaps we need no.thing more than a large portion of national pride. Let us not seek the source of our Slovak national life in foreign gardens when we have it at home, that is what Louis Stur told his people. The Magyars once unveiled a gigantic statue of Louis Kossuth before the Hungarian (Magyar) Parliament with reaI occidental pomposity. The Slovaks who went through a Magyar school, or have any knowledge of Magyar history and literatwre, know the kind of superman Magyar history and lite rature made of our Slo·v ak countryman, the renegade Kossuth. To the Magyars Kossuth is a most brilliant historic ,phenomenon, a man whose equal it would be difficult to find in all Europe, nay, in all the world. Kossuth is depicted as a fighter o.f freedom , as the first man who raised his voice for the liberation of the subjugated. But the fact remains, nevertheless, that Louis Stur, the patriotic Slovalk , did more in this regard than did Kossuth. From the forties of the last century down to our times, Slovak national life lived in the spirit of Louis Stur. Yet it so happened that the merits of this great man of Slovak history were little acknowledged by writers of EUJropean history. Once Stu.r's magnificent characteristics become known, the world wil.l come ' to know the great son that Slovakia gave to mankind. Today, Louis Stu.r's 1personality cannot be hewed into the narrow frameworik of Slorvaikia. His influence and significance was broader. In Bratislava, Stur did not bring only the Slovaks together; among his enthusiastic disciples were also the Croatians and Serbs What did Stur �SLOVAKIA 37 give to mankind? He devoted his entire life for the rights of the subjugated and oppressed. In the memorable iBratislava parliament of 1847, two Slovak countrymen met in a battle of words. Both were inteliligent, educated and f~ery speakers. NevertheLess, there was a great difference between them. One entered the services of Ma:gyarization, while the other remained loyal to his Slovak nation. The first was Kossuth, the sec_ ond Stur. Kossuth represented the County of Pesf, Stur the free royal city of Zvolen. Free royal cities had the right to send their repres€1Iltatives to the Assembly, but these could only speak and not vote. As a delegate of a free royal city, Stur represented the privileged laildowner's class Li the Ass,embly. But eiven this matter did not ma:ke a renegade of him, because he served ideas and ideals and not particular people "We want freedom," Stur said in that Parliament. "But it is saiid that there is plenty of freedom in our homeland; yes, not only ,plenty, but even too much freedom," continued Stur, "but only the landow:ner's .b rand of free. dom, and of the real, human freedom there is very little. If our towns had more freedom, even our people would have never fallen into such thraildom." Kossuth replied to Stur. But, lo and behold, what this Magyar idol and champion of freedom said on that occasion: "That cannot be helped; that is the way the wor1d goes. It is fate that the one who stands lower in the com. munity is suppressed and must bear the burden and taxes; on the other hand, the one who comes along in civic life receives rights and stands in honor. At this time I am opposed to granting towns a vote in our Assembly." It was thus that Kossuth "defended" freedom. Stur, however, would not be silenced. When he came together with Kossuth in December, he said in the Hungarian Assembly: "Recently, when I wa:s present here and mentioned the sorrowful plight of the wretched taxpayers, the worthy deputy from Pesf Oounty, Mr. Kossuth, saw the hand 1 �38 SLOVAKIA of fate in the o,ppression of the people and said that is the way the world goes when the lower class is suppre.s sed and the higher class receives more ri,g hts. I see no ha,nd of fate in the matter, beoouse then the staitus of the oppressed could never be corrected. We demand freedom in the country and to allow urbarial jobs which are not in Hne with freedom. Does such a peirson, who works for others and instead of being rewarded is despised, have a fatherland, will such a ipe~on become attached to his country as he would to his mother? The sacred cause of mankind challenges us so that once we would express the iprinci,ple of the Hberation of people and honestly bring it into being. When this redemption is accomplished, the judicial power of the landowner and the county gentry must cease, because freedom would not be served if a people liberated from the robot would continue to .remai:n under the club of the -lords." Behold the difference between Stur and Kossuth. Of course, some months later even Kossuth took up Stur's cry for the liJberation of al.l the people of Hlungary. But he did this not out of internal conviction, but because circumstamces had forced him to take such a benev:olent ,position. Stur fought for the rights of the subjugated even against the will of those who had sent him .to the Assembly, while Kossuth fought for them only after a revolutionairy wave had inundated Hungary. The fundamental trai,t of Stur's ideals was his love for freedom. If Stur had done nothing else but fought in the iBratislruva Assembly for the rights of the enslaved and subjugated, even then he would have deserved to be p'laced by the Slovak nation amo.ng its most distinguished sons But he meant more than that to the Slovak nation. Stur was not a naive romantic, as he is frequently depicted. No one since his time ha;s yet come wp with a more reaHstic program. Stuir- did not flatter faults and mistrukes; his articles in the "Slovenske N a:rodne Noviny" prove that he fought fearlessly ag,ai,n st the sho>Ttcomi:ngs and delinquencies o.f his people. His leading editorials would be just as actual today as they were in his time. �SLOVAKIA 39 No:t only in the defense of the 1purity of the Slova:k language, but .in defense of the recognition of the inherent rights of the Slovak naition. Stur's "let us not abandon our,selves, Slovak countrymen" is just as timely today as .it was in 184!5. And is it not just as timely .to stress that "higher is the cause of the entire nation, higher is the cause of the whole than that of individual persons and even though individuals harm us, the cause itself does ,n ot do so . But with us thus far it ha..c:; ·b een so that individuals offended iby our people immedL ately abandoned the cause itself. . . " Today ou~ mighty America with her Allies is fighting for the freedom of al,l enslaved and oppressed nations. Th:s freedom mu:st not miss the Slovak nation. The Slovaks even today, rus during the times of Stur, have inherent and Godgiiven rights to complete freedom as do all other nations. To fight for the freedom of all nations, including the Slovak naition, is the obligation not only of the Slovaks and Americans of Slovak descen_t, but also the obligation of all ,l overs of truth and freedom. Indeed, the Slovak,s existed and shall continue to exist, if they only remember Stur's: "Let us not abandon ourselves, Slova1k countrymen!" StUJI"'s schoo-1 of thought built the foundation for the independence movement of Slovakia over a hundred years ago - and the Slovaks are building upon this foundation ever since, and will keep on building until they attain complete freedom from al,l foreign and hostile domination. Just as Stur repudiated a:nd condemned the hegemony of the Magyars and the materialistic ,p hHosophy of Marx and Engels, so the Slovaks today stand solidly agaim,t materi_ alistic Communism and all forms of totalitarianiSim and the hegemony of the Czechs. The sipirit of Stur lives on! • • • WHO SAID IT? "The Dernocrati,c Prunty knows ithat the Sloivak nation can be aSS1Ured of a haippier, more secure and a brighter future oru,y by wo'Iilcing together with the Oommunist Prurty." - (Dr. Joseph Lettrich, Vfce-Ohainman of the Executive Comm,i ttee of the "Council of Free Ozechoslovakia," CA!S, Bratisfa,v;a, F~ary 1, 1946). � 34 SLOVAKIA STUR AND THE SLOVAK INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENT P.A. Hrobak John Kollar and John Holly, eminent Slorvak poets, had sung their great songs, when a group of some fifty Slovak youngsters assembled on the ruins of Devin the unmariked ruins which spoke so eloquently of the glorious past of the ancestors of the Slovak nation. The group sang "Devin, mily Devin" (Devin, deair Devin) to the tune of "N1tra, mila Nitra" and had themselves baptized anew : to their Christian names, they added new Slovanic names as a symbol that they were being born to a new life dedicated wholly to the service of their nation. The Slovak students were inspired by Kollar',s sonnets, HoUy's epics, Mickiewicz's Ode to Youth, and by the magnetic personali,t y of Louis Stur. These Slovak young peotple carried the new era of Slovak history on their shoulders. This was the youth of the capital of SlovaJkia, Bratislava. Since the time of Matthew Bel, the Bratislava Lyceum enjoyed great fame as an educational institution and, hence, attracted the youth of Slovakia. At the beginning of the nineteenth century something new was introduced at the Lyceum : an institute o,f the Slovak and Czech languages and literaitures. Kollar was there in 1816 and exerci,s ed great influence on the students. One evening in 1818 two young men walked the road to Devin, discussing national matters quite se. riously. One was Safarik, who late,r wrote the great wocrk "SloivaJnic antiquities," and the other was Palacky, who later became a great Czech historian. Although Kollar and Saifarik left Bratislava, the sparks of their ardor fell among the youthful scholars and smouldered in their minds. Then some OIIle came among them to fan the embers into a flame and to unite them in one service, as he so aptly expressed it: we ha,v e entered the service of the spirit - and therefore we must travel the thorny road of life! That young man was Louis Shir. Stur entered the "service of the spirit" in a natural manner, without extraordinary crises. He was born in Zay-iUhrovec in 1815; his father was a teacher and ardent �SLOVAKIA 36 Slovak; his mother, too, was a loyal Slovak, graced with a quiet, pleasant disposition; and his older brother, Charles, excelled as a writer of Slovak poetry. In short, the home of Stur was truly Slovak. Wlhile in Raab, Stur was greatly influenced by Professor Pee; and in Bratislava (1829) it was his fortune to fall in with congenial SlQlV'ak young men. Stur admired his elders, especially the youthful Chalupka, who had contributed much with their writings to awaken the Slovaks nationally. Stur became the favorite of the eminent Schroer and Palkovic, who recognized in Stur the quahfica!Jions for leadership. Stur's dynMnic personality attracted Slovak youth to the Slovak cause. One evening Stur met a young man on the street; he knew he was from Beckov and two years younger than himself; but he also .knew ,that this young man for some reason avoided Slovruk company. After greeting him, Stur had a talk with him. The young man later admitted that what Stur had said to him on that occasion kept him awake for several nights and made him resolve to, join Stu.r's group. That young man was Joseph M. Hurban, who later became one of the great men of Slovak letters. Stur did not persuade others with any special, expert arguments; he persuaded them with his entire personality. Stur was a dynamo of action; what he asked others to do, he did himself; his entire life was a labor of }()IVe for his people. The Slovaks, his people, needed scholars Who would dig iinto the past to build for the future. Stur knew that the Slovaks were doomed as a nation, unless they were awakened nationally, and thrut without selfless terucher,s this wrus impossible. He set himself to the task of providing them. Julius Botto, Sl()IVa!k historian, said that "Stur trained for the Slo1Vak nation' energetic, selfless men, genllline na_ tional heroes " Stur and his followers prepared the Slovak nation for the difficult times ahead. Indeed, without them the Slovalks might now be a forgotten nation, a nation suppressed and beaten into oblivion by a powerful, foreign and hostile ruler. Stur united the Slovak nation by establishing the central dialect of Slovakia as the lit- �36 SLOVAKIA erary medium and thus made the Slovaks stronger in the face of the enemy. He was a genuine Slovaik patriot and democrat; he fought n:o t only for the rights of his own ,people, but also for the rights of all subjugated nations of Europe. The national life of the Slovruks ,in the past was not only a passive bewailment, a life of hapless "do nothing." lit was filled with positive wor.k, creating higher cultural and 1political values. Slovaks should remember this and ikeep on preaching it in their schools, boo.k s, public assemblies, newspapeirs, and everywhere. Perhaps we need no.thing more than a large portion of national pride. Let us not seek the source of our Slovak national life in foreign gardens when we have it at home, that is what Louis Stur told his people. The Magyars once unveiled a gigantic statue of Louis Kossuth before the Hungarian (Magyar) Parliament with reaI occidental pomposity. The Slovaks who went through a Magyar school, or have any knowledge of Magyar history and literatwre, know the kind of superman Magyar history and lite rature made of our Slo·v ak countryman, the renegade Kossuth. To the Magyars Kossuth is a most brilliant historic ,phenomenon, a man whose equal it would be difficult to find in all Europe, nay, in all the world. Kossuth is depicted as a fighter o.f freedom , as the first man who raised his voice for the liberation of the subjugated. But the fact remains, nevertheless, that Louis Stur, the patriotic Slovalk , did more in this regard than did Kossuth. From the forties of the last century down to our times, Slovak national life lived in the spirit of Louis Stur. Yet it so happened that the merits of this great man of Slovak history were little acknowledged by writers of EUJropean history. Once Stu.r's magnificent characteristics become known, the world wil.l come ' to know the great son that Slovakia gave to mankind. Today, Louis Stu.r's 1personality cannot be hewed into the narrow frameworik of Slorvaikia. His influence and significance was broader. In Bratislava, Stur did not bring only the Slovaks together; among his enthusiastic disciples were also the Croatians and Serbs What did Stur �SLOVAKIA 37 give to mankind? He devoted his entire life for the rights of the subjugated and oppressed. In the memorable iBratislava parliament of 1847, two Slovak countrymen met in a battle of words. Both were inteliligent, educated and f~ery speakers. NevertheLess, there was a great difference between them. One entered the services of Ma:gyarization, while the other remained loyal to his Slovak nation. The first was Kossuth, the sec_ ond Stur. Kossuth represented the County of Pesf, Stur the free royal city of Zvolen. Free royal cities had the right to send their repres€1Iltatives to the Assembly, but these could only speak and not vote. As a delegate of a free royal city, Stur represented the privileged laildowner's class Li the Ass,embly. But eiven this matter did not ma:ke a renegade of him, because he served ideas and ideals and not particular people "We want freedom," Stur said in that Parliament. "But it is saiid that there is plenty of freedom in our homeland; yes, not only ,plenty, but even too much freedom," continued Stur, "but only the landow:ner's .b rand of free. dom, and of the real, human freedom there is very little. If our towns had more freedom, even our people would have never fallen into such thraildom." Kossuth replied to Stur. But, lo and behold, what this Magyar idol and champion of freedom said on that occasion: "That cannot be helped; that is the way the wor1d goes. It is fate that the one who stands lower in the com. munity is suppressed and must bear the burden and taxes; on the other hand, the one who comes along in civic life receives rights and stands in honor. At this time I am opposed to granting towns a vote in our Assembly." It was thus that Kossuth "defended" freedom. Stur, however, would not be silenced. When he came together with Kossuth in December, he said in the Hungarian Assembly: "Recently, when I wa:s present here and mentioned the sorrowful plight of the wretched taxpayers, the worthy deputy from Pesf Oounty, Mr. Kossuth, saw the hand 1 �38 SLOVAKIA of fate in the o,ppression of the people and said that is the way the world goes when the lower class is suppre.s sed and the higher class receives more ri,g hts. I see no ha,nd of fate in the matter, beoouse then the staitus of the oppressed could never be corrected. We demand freedom in the country and to allow urbarial jobs which are not in Hne with freedom. Does such a peirson, who works for others and instead of being rewarded is despised, have a fatherland, will such a ipe~on become attached to his country as he would to his mother? The sacred cause of mankind challenges us so that once we would express the iprinci,ple of the Hberation of people and honestly bring it into being. When this redemption is accomplished, the judicial power of the landowner and the county gentry must cease, because freedom would not be served if a people liberated from the robot would continue to .remai:n under the club of the -lords." Behold the difference between Stur and Kossuth. Of course, some months later even Kossuth took up Stur's cry for the liJberation of al.l the people of Hlungary. But he did this not out of internal conviction, but because circumstamces had forced him to take such a benev:olent ,position. Stur fought for the rights of the subjugated even against the will of those who had sent him .to the Assembly, while Kossuth fought for them only after a revolutionairy wave had inundated Hungary. The fundamental trai,t of Stur's ideals was his love for freedom. If Stur had done nothing else but fought in the iBratislruva Assembly for the rights of the enslaved and subjugated, even then he would have deserved to be p'laced by the Slovak nation amo.ng its most distinguished sons But he meant more than that to the Slovak nation. Stur was not a naive romantic, as he is frequently depicted. No one since his time ha;s yet come wp with a more reaHstic program. Stuir- did not flatter faults and mistrukes; his articles in the "Slovenske N a:rodne Noviny" prove that he fought fearlessly ag,ai,n st the sho>Ttcomi:ngs and delinquencies o.f his people. His leading editorials would be just as actual today as they were in his time. �SLOVAKIA 39 No:t only in the defense of the 1purity of the Slova:k language, but .in defense of the recognition of the inherent rights of the Slovak naition. Stur's "let us not abandon our,selves, Slovak countrymen" is just as timely today as .it was in 184!5. And is it not just as timely .to stress that "higher is the cause of the entire nation, higher is the cause of the whole than that of individual persons and even though individuals harm us, the cause itself does ,n ot do so . But with us thus far it ha..c:; ·b een so that individuals offended iby our people immedL ately abandoned the cause itself. . . " Today ou~ mighty America with her Allies is fighting for the freedom of al,l enslaved and oppressed nations. Th:s freedom mu:st not miss the Slovak nation. The Slovaks even today, rus during the times of Stur, have inherent and Godgiiven rights to complete freedom as do all other nations. To fight for the freedom of all nations, including the Slovak naition, is the obligation not only of the Slovaks and Americans of Slovak descen_t, but also the obligation of all ,l overs of truth and freedom. Indeed, the Slovak,s existed and shall continue to exist, if they only remember Stur's: "Let us not abandon ourselves, Slova1k countrymen!" StUJI"'s schoo-1 of thought built the foundation for the independence movement of Slovakia over a hundred years ago - and the Slovaks are building upon this foundation ever since, and will keep on building until they attain complete freedom from al,l foreign and hostile domination. Just as Stur repudiated a:nd condemned the hegemony of the Magyars and the materialistic ,p hHosophy of Marx and Engels, so the Slovaks today stand solidly agaim,t materi_ alistic Communism and all forms of totalitarianiSim and the hegemony of the Czechs. The sipirit of Stur lives on! • • • WHO SAID IT? "The Dernocrati,c Prunty knows ithat the Sloivak nation can be aSS1Ured of a haippier, more secure and a brighter future oru,y by wo'Iilcing together with the Oommunist Prurty." - (Dr. Joseph Lettrich, Vfce-Ohainman of the Executive Comm,i ttee of the "Council of Free Ozechoslovakia," CA!S, Bratisfa,v;a, F~ary 1, 1946). � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 34 SLOVAKIA STUR AND THE SLOVAK INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENT P.A. Hrobak John Kollar and John Holly, eminent Slorvak poets, had sung their great songs, when a group of some fifty Slovak youngsters assembled on the ruins of Devin the unmariked ruins which spoke so eloquently of the glorious past of the ancestors of the Slovak nation. The group sang "Devin, mily Devin" (Devin, deair Devin) to the tune of "N1tra, mila Nitra" and had themselves baptized anew : to their Christian names, they added new Slovanic names as a symbol that they were being born to a new life dedicated wholly to the service of their nation. The Slovak students were inspired by Kollar',s sonnets, HoUy's epics, Mickiewicz's Ode to Youth, and by the magnetic personali,t y of Louis Stur. These Slovak young peotple carried the new era of Slovak history on their shoulders. This was the youth of the capital of SlovaJkia, Bratislava. Since the time of Matthew Bel, the Bratislava Lyceum enjoyed great fame as an educational institution and, hence, attracted the youth of Slovakia. At the beginning of the nineteenth century something new was introduced at the Lyceum : an institute o,f the Slovak and Czech languages and literaitures. Kollar was there in 1816 and exerci,s ed great influence on the students. One evening in 1818 two young men walked the road to Devin, discussing national matters quite se. riously. One was Safarik, who late,r wrote the great wocrk "SloivaJnic antiquities," and the other was Palacky, who later became a great Czech historian. Although Kollar and Saifarik left Bratislava, the sparks of their ardor fell among the youthful scholars and smouldered in their minds. Then some OIIle came among them to fan the embers into a flame and to unite them in one service, as he so aptly expressed it: we ha,v e entered the service of the spirit - and therefore we must travel the thorny road of life! That young man was Louis Shir. Stur entered the "service of the spirit" in a natural manner, without extraordinary crises. He was born in Zay-iUhrovec in 1815; his father was a teacher and ardent SLOVAKIA 36 Slovak; his mother, too, was a loyal Slovak, graced with a quiet, pleasant disposition; and his older brother, Charles, excelled as a writer of Slovak poetry. In short, the home of Stur was truly Slovak. Wlhile in Raab, Stur was greatly influenced by Professor Pee; and in Bratislava (1829) it was his fortune to fall in with congenial SlQlV'ak young men. Stur admired his elders, especially the youthful Chalupka, who had contributed much with their writings to awaken the Slovaks nationally. Stur became the favorite of the eminent Schroer and Palkovic, who recognized in Stur the quahfica!Jions for leadership. Stur's dynMnic personality attracted Slovak youth to the Slovak cause. One evening Stur met a young man on the street; he knew he was from Beckov and two years younger than himself; but he also .knew ,that this young man for some reason avoided Slovruk company. After greeting him, Stur had a talk with him. The young man later admitted that what Stur had said to him on that occasion kept him awake for several nights and made him resolve to, join Stu.r's group. That young man was Joseph M. Hurban, who later became one of the great men of Slovak letters. Stur did not persuade others with any special, expert arguments; he persuaded them with his entire personality. Stur was a dynamo of action; what he asked others to do, he did himself; his entire life was a labor of }()IVe for his people. The Slovaks, his people, needed scholars Who would dig iinto the past to build for the future. Stur knew that the Slovaks were doomed as a nation, unless they were awakened nationally, and thrut without selfless terucher,s this wrus impossible. He set himself to the task of providing them. Julius Botto, Sl()IVa!k historian, said that "Stur trained for the Slo1Vak nation' energetic, selfless men, genllline na_ tional heroes " Stur and his followers prepared the Slovak nation for the difficult times ahead. Indeed, without them the Slovalks might now be a forgotten nation, a nation suppressed and beaten into oblivion by a powerful, foreign and hostile ruler. Stur united the Slovak nation by establishing the central dialect of Slovakia as the lit- 36 SLOVAKIA erary medium and thus made the Slovaks stronger in the face of the enemy. He was a genuine Slovaik patriot and democrat; he fought n:o t only for the rights of his own ,people, but also for the rights of all subjugated nations of Europe. The national life of the Slovruks ,in the past was not only a passive bewailment, a life of hapless "do nothing." lit was filled with positive wor.k, creating higher cultural and 1political values. Slovaks should remember this and ikeep on preaching it in their schools, boo.k s, public assemblies, newspapeirs, and everywhere. Perhaps we need no.thing more than a large portion of national pride. Let us not seek the source of our Slovak national life in foreign gardens when we have it at home, that is what Louis Stur told his people. The Magyars once unveiled a gigantic statue of Louis Kossuth before the Hungarian (Magyar) Parliament with reaI occidental pomposity. The Slovaks who went through a Magyar school, or have any knowledge of Magyar history and literatwre, know the kind of superman Magyar history and lite rature made of our Slo·v ak countryman, the renegade Kossuth. To the Magyars Kossuth is a most brilliant historic ,phenomenon, a man whose equal it would be difficult to find in all Europe, nay, in all the world. Kossuth is depicted as a fighter o.f freedom , as the first man who raised his voice for the liberation of the subjugated. But the fact remains, nevertheless, that Louis Stur, the patriotic Slovalk , did more in this regard than did Kossuth. From the forties of the last century down to our times, Slovak national life lived in the spirit of Louis Stur. Yet it so happened that the merits of this great man of Slovak history were little acknowledged by writers of EUJropean history. Once Stu.r's magnificent characteristics become known, the world wil.l come ' to know the great son that Slovakia gave to mankind. Today, Louis Stu.r's 1personality cannot be hewed into the narrow frameworik of Slorvaikia. His influence and significance was broader. In Bratislava, Stur did not bring only the Slovaks together; among his enthusiastic disciples were also the Croatians and Serbs What did Stur SLOVAKIA 37 give to mankind? He devoted his entire life for the rights of the subjugated and oppressed. In the memorable iBratislava parliament of 1847, two Slovak countrymen met in a battle of words. Both were inteliligent, educated and f~ery speakers. NevertheLess, there was a great difference between them. One entered the services of Ma:gyarization, while the other remained loyal to his Slovak nation. The first was Kossuth, the sec_ ond Stur. Kossuth represented the County of Pesf, Stur the free royal city of Zvolen. Free royal cities had the right to send their repres€1Iltatives to the Assembly, but these could only speak and not vote. As a delegate of a free royal city, Stur represented the privileged laildowner's class Li the Ass,embly. But eiven this matter did not ma:ke a renegade of him, because he served ideas and ideals and not particular people "We want freedom," Stur said in that Parliament. "But it is saiid that there is plenty of freedom in our homeland; yes, not only ,plenty, but even too much freedom," continued Stur, "but only the landow:ner's .b rand of free. dom, and of the real, human freedom there is very little. If our towns had more freedom, even our people would have never fallen into such thraildom." Kossuth replied to Stur. But, lo and behold, what this Magyar idol and champion of freedom said on that occasion: "That cannot be helped; that is the way the wor1d goes. It is fate that the one who stands lower in the com. munity is suppressed and must bear the burden and taxes; on the other hand, the one who comes along in civic life receives rights and stands in honor. At this time I am opposed to granting towns a vote in our Assembly." It was thus that Kossuth "defended" freedom. Stur, however, would not be silenced. When he came together with Kossuth in December, he said in the Hungarian Assembly: "Recently, when I wa:s present here and mentioned the sorrowful plight of the wretched taxpayers, the worthy deputy from Pesf Oounty, Mr. Kossuth, saw the hand 1 38 SLOVAKIA of fate in the o,ppression of the people and said that is the way the world goes when the lower class is suppre.s sed and the higher class receives more ri,g hts. I see no ha,nd of fate in the matter, beoouse then the staitus of the oppressed could never be corrected. We demand freedom in the country and to allow urbarial jobs which are not in Hne with freedom. Does such a peirson, who works for others and instead of being rewarded is despised, have a fatherland, will such a ipe~on become attached to his country as he would to his mother? The sacred cause of mankind challenges us so that once we would express the iprinci,ple of the Hberation of people and honestly bring it into being. When this redemption is accomplished, the judicial power of the landowner and the county gentry must cease, because freedom would not be served if a people liberated from the robot would continue to .remai:n under the club of the -lords." Behold the difference between Stur and Kossuth. Of course, some months later even Kossuth took up Stur's cry for the liJberation of al.l the people of Hlungary. But he did this not out of internal conviction, but because circumstamces had forced him to take such a benev:olent ,position. Stur fought for the rights of the subjugated even against the will of those who had sent him .to the Assembly, while Kossuth fought for them only after a revolutionairy wave had inundated Hungary. The fundamental trai,t of Stur's ideals was his love for freedom. If Stur had done nothing else but fought in the iBratislruva Assembly for the rights of the enslaved and subjugated, even then he would have deserved to be p'laced by the Slovak nation amo.ng its most distinguished sons But he meant more than that to the Slovak nation. Stur was not a naive romantic, as he is frequently depicted. No one since his time ha;s yet come wp with a more reaHstic program. Stuir- did not flatter faults and mistrukes; his articles in the "Slovenske N a:rodne Noviny" prove that he fought fearlessly ag,ai,n st the sho>Ttcomi:ngs and delinquencies o.f his people. His leading editorials would be just as actual today as they were in his time. SLOVAKIA 39 No:t only in the defense of the 1purity of the Slova:k language, but .in defense of the recognition of the inherent rights of the Slovak naition. Stur's "let us not abandon our,selves, Slovak countrymen" is just as timely today as .it was in 184!5. And is it not just as timely .to stress that "higher is the cause of the entire nation, higher is the cause of the whole than that of individual persons and even though individuals harm us, the cause itself does ,n ot do so . But with us thus far it ha..c:; ·b een so that individuals offended iby our people immedL ately abandoned the cause itself. . . " Today ou~ mighty America with her Allies is fighting for the freedom of al,l enslaved and oppressed nations. Th:s freedom mu:st not miss the Slovak nation. The Slovaks even today, rus during the times of Stur, have inherent and Godgiiven rights to complete freedom as do all other nations. To fight for the freedom of all nations, including the Slovak naition, is the obligation not only of the Slovaks and Americans of Slovak descen_t, but also the obligation of all ,l overs of truth and freedom. Indeed, the Slovak,s existed and shall continue to exist, if they only remember Stur's: "Let us not abandon ourselves, Slova1k countrymen!" StUJI"'s schoo-1 of thought built the foundation for the independence movement of Slovakia over a hundred years ago - and the Slovaks are building upon this foundation ever since, and will keep on building until they attain complete freedom from al,l foreign and hostile domination. Just as Stur repudiated a:nd condemned the hegemony of the Magyars and the materialistic ,p hHosophy of Marx and Engels, so the Slovaks today stand solidly agaim,t materi_ alistic Communism and all forms of totalitarianiSim and the hegemony of the Czechs. The sipirit of Stur lives on! • • • WHO SAID IT? "The Dernocrati,c Prunty knows ithat the Sloivak nation can be aSS1Ured of a haippier, more secure and a brighter future oru,y by wo'Iilcing together with the Oommunist Prurty." - (Dr. Joseph Lettrich, Vfce-Ohainman of the Executive Comm,i ttee of the "Council of Free Ozechoslovakia," CA!S, Bratisfa,v;a, F~ary 1, 1946).  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Štúr and the Slovak Independence Movement Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 34-39 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hrobak, Philip Anthony, 1904-1964 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource P. A. Hrobak LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/94c1d1026b44c4673ea2f6736dca92f9.pdf d0930017799086d61978cab8dca4a544 PDF Text Text 6 SLOVAK1IA tions under which the nation lives at .ho~e under Communism, it is our moral duty to acquaint ourselves with the endeavons of those who a:lready over a hundred years ago .warned us against the plague of Oommunism. With r-egard to the political mission of our geineratiO!Il, it wouild be to our advantage to. study the ideas of Stur, because then we shall learn that the credo and politicaJl legacy of Louis Stur was: "So that we ourselves might be revived and take the place in history which according to our strength and abilities belongs to us, we must once and for all free ourselves from the hated, alien yoke and gain state independence for ourselves: because a nation which is enslaved has lits hands tied, its spirit stifled, and is forever threatened with the danger that sooner or later it will perish." 1 • • • STOR : FATHER OF MODERN SIJOVAK NATIONALISM Marian ~iar In 1948 !Slovaks had an o,pportunity to assess the revolutionary events of a hundred years ago•. ,r t was our duty at that time to recall the legacy of Stur and his folJl.owers and to appraise their ,political program. Unfortunate:ly, due to circumstances !beyond our control, the year 1948 was not ·an opportune time for a ceJebration of such g,reat significance and extent as was the revolution of 11848-49. In 1956, however, during the .centennial of Stur's death, another opportunity presents itself to ponder over the fate, the Jife, the struggle, and the aim of the entire generation of Stur. Stephen Krcmery, eminent historian of Slova,k literature, said that Stu.r's generation .began "a new chapter in the rustle-fbu'Stle of a thousand years." Representatives of the previous generation - Holly, Kollar and Safarik - still lived, Slovak poets still argued aibout rythm and accent, and the nation still looked for consolation in Svatopluk's Great Moravian Empire (iHolly), or to RusS:ia - to that Slav "giant oak," a:s Kollar ca111ed: i t when suddenly new people began to appear and new voices were heard. Kuzmany, from the distant and wide scope of his predecessors, drew attention of the world to the heart �SLOVAKIA and morality of the .Slovak people. But in all thes.e manifestations there was as yet no revolutionary dynamics, a political program was sadly la0king, and, it seems, only poets dreamed romantically about the better days to come. Hollly and Kollar enlivened Slovak life by 'l ooking back to Slovak history and around themselves; •b ut that was not enough for the period ahead. When Stur and his foliowers came upon the scene they recognized the fact that the cultural process, ,beg,un in Slovakia already with the activity of the JUnilversity of Trnava and formulated and propagated by Bernolak, had to ,be completed and had to serve as a basis for the political ascension of the nation. What was realized by the· merits of Stur, Hur,ban and Hodza in our country in the cultura1 field - the codification of a uniform literary langua,ge - that was on[y the harvest of the products planted by past generations from the time of Balthazar Magin, Hugoiin Gavlovi,c, and others before them. Thanks to. the followers of Stur that they became '3Jware of the pollitical necessity of having an independent Slovak literary language, that they did not philo.: sophize about the maturity of Slovak nationalism but accepted it as something granted which had to be pl-aced on a proper basis and given a :Proper place. Stu•r understood that in hris time the Slovak nationaU process had matured and that Slovakia must appear on the scene of history as an independent political factor. It is in this that Stur's greatest merit lies. The question did not concern any Cze., cho-S:lovak separation, a:bout which those like to talk who do not want to understand natural law in the develqiment of nations. The people of 1Sloivakia never ceased truLkmg in Slovak and "Bible Czech" was always aUien to the Slovaks even though the Slo.va:k iProtestants used it for their reli-gious services, and even if some used it as a medium of Slovak literatuTe. Jaroslav Vlcek himself says in reference to this: "Such a situation of things was impossible; that was the feeling of all the better Slovak spirits . . . Evangelical clergymen wrote in a language that was not spoken anywhere in the world; it was not typical, lacked euphony and regularity." 1 �8 SLOVAKIA No foreign language, not even Czech, could move the SlovaJk people politically; only the Slovak language could do that. iin five short years the J.atter ,perfovmed a miracle; it not only .stirred up life rin the entire na;tio;n, but placed it under the revolutionary banners of Hwrban. In short: Stur was the first to formulate the Slova!k problem, the first one moved to armed r ebellion for the rights of the Slova;k nation, and the first (Sept. 1848) to proclaim the independence of Slovaikia ("We hereby proc}aim ourselves independent of the Mrugyars"). In the history of the 'Slovak nation, no one <lid as much in so short a time as St-t1r, who was only 41 whe:n he died. This was possible an1ly •b ecause the ground for the ascension of the new generation was ripe and properly prepared. Stur approved what already existed in Slovakia; he formulated what the nation felt and demanded. Stiir caUISed quite a sensation with his article "Zaloby a ponosy Slova!kov v Uhorsku" (Accusations and Complaints of the S'lovruks in Hungary), published in Le1pzig in 1843, in which he excoriated the chief inspecto r of the Evangelical Church and Schools in Hungary, Count Zay, for wanting to Magyarize the Slovaks. for political reasons. Count Zay, aware of the political currents in Slova:kia, in ,principle divided the inhabitants of Slovakia into three groUJps: the fir,s.t concerns itse~f harmlessly with the Slovak language; the second yearns to establish a western-Slav kingdom under the crown of Austria; the third has secret contacts with Russia. Whether these groups reaHy grasped the situation of those times or noit is debatable, but it is quite certain .that all ,w ere occupied with one thought: t,o save the 1Slova1ks from Magyarization and t,o secure for the Slovak nation an independent political status within the framewol"k of the Habsburg Empire. "We do not want ,r ights est·aiblished on favor, 'but we demand our rights on the basii,s of rig.ht," Stur declared. And these w,o vds became the foundation of al;J. petitioos and demands which were presented in Vienna and the Hungarian iDiet in Bratislava. From thJs moral and democratic viewpoint also issued aH of Stuir's controversies with Louis Kossuth. Writing in the name of his nation Stur demanded 1 1 �SLOVAKIA 9 ".p eace based on right and mutual understanding," declaring: "In the Pest Hirlap, Kossuth is fighting for equality of rights, but in the Diet he wants to give the orders to investigate and punish those who stand up for their rights ... That is his freedom and liberalism!" Art the Slav Coingress in Prague, 1848, again it was Stur who together with Safari.i1k defined the political direction of the entire Congress. Safarik spoike like a prophet, but Stur was aJlready forming a cilear .p olitical p11ogram. "Our aim should be t,o preserve ourselves! First of all we must serve ourselves, then others. Thus far Austria has existed but we have been perishing. What would the world say to us if we would stand for nothing else but the preservation of Austria? Let us say that we want to stand as independent Slovanic communities under the government of Austria!'' Strur's articles in the "Narodnje Noviny," his manifestations and ,p etitions in the Hungarian Diet, his letters to his friends - all these clearly state a clear political view: Slovakia as an independent crown land under the Habsburg,s; the Slovaks mu:Slt be recognized and respected as an equrul partner of the other nations in the empire. Sholl!ld we wish to ex.press Soo.r's politica:l ,p rogram in terms of the political terminology of today, we would have to say: Stiir was for a program to federalize central Europe. He was the first Slovak who demanded equality with the rest of the nations for his o,wn nation in the Central-EurQpean political constellation. He opposed Pa.Jacky's Austrophi-lism and sharply condemned Kossuth, who demanded the Magyarization of the 1Slovaks in the name of ,t he right of the Hungarian State. Stur inter,preted the Slo,vaik standpoint democratically by res,pecting the rights of others; he said: "Each nation is only one part of humanity and no nation can claim for itself that it alone has comprehended best human evolution and possible perfection. Therefore, no nation has a right to force upon another nation its way of life when that nation wants to move for itself and educate itself as it sees fit ..." The way to Slova:k independeince was supposed to• start �SLOVAKIA from the rebellion of 1848. The w:hole of Europe was once again in motion. After Paris, Vienna, Berlin, Prague and Italy, revolutionary explosions resounded also Hungary. It is not important that this revOilution was squaslhed; nor is it important that Vienna failed to, fll!lfill the promises and eXipectations of the Slo.v aks. For history and for our generation it is only necessary to know that the Slovaks afready one hundred years ago fought to change the po~ litical structure of Centra;l Burope, that they demanded an jndependent status for their nation within the framework of a solid federation ,b uilt on the ,p rinciples of justice and equality. Louis Stur, preeminent leader of the SlovaJk movement for independence apparently was quite ahead of his time. His philosQphica;l views, his democra,tic thinkiing and principles, his social demands, and his admiration for ,t he democratic system in the West call for serious study and interpretation. The controversies between Stur and Kossuth are very interesting from the democratic point of view; they tell us how Stuir and his foHowers interpreted their poJitica!l and social program in comparison to Kossuth, who wanted democracy only for the Magyars at the expense of the other nations of Hungary. ·S tur, a memlber of the Protestant Evangelical Church, was not afraid to accept and complete the wo,11k of ,p receding Cathohlc generations to preserve the heritage of the Slovruk nation. We must recall foir ourselves and for the free worid that the Slovaiks played a serious poilitica:l role in the revolutionary movement in Central Burope in 1'848-49, and that a!lready at thaJt time they clearly formulated a political program which satisfies even t'he demands of the prese1D.t time, so that on it the contempo~ rary Slovak generation can build its own, modern program orf federrulizaJtion. Stur belongs among the greatest of :European revoJ,u_, tli.onaries of his time. The Mrugyars gratefully built Kossuth a monument in free America, and the Cizechs haJVe one of Masaryk in Chicago. If they deserved to be reimembeired, surely Stur, who was a greater apostle of democracy and freedom for all people, should be no less honored in the �11 SLOVAKIA land of the free and the home of the brave. Ame,r icans of Slova)k descent should give this serious thought dwring Stu.r's centennial. The nation which produced Joseph Milan Hurban, Paul Joseph Safariik, John iKollar, John Holly, John Chalupka, Johnny Kral', Andrew Sladlwvic, Jonah Zaborsky, John Palarik, John Ka.lincia!k, Peter Bohu,ii, Joseph Bo:zetech Klemens, and Diony,z Sbur - is not a small nation. The shining light among the Slovaks of the nineteenth century, the formulator of their .p rogram, and the ·interpreter of their desires was Louis Stur - the father of modern Slovak nationalism . • • • STUR'S GROUP IN THE SERVICE OF THE PEOPLE Joseph Pauco Sturr's school exerted every effort to serve the people from which it descended in order to elevate it intellectually and to save it from physical ·a nd spiritual decline. Whatever was attempted in the cultural, economic, and social fields, all closely allied with the efforts in the political field, was dome with these aims in mind. From the beginning of thei.ir public activity, the Stu.rites were aware of the fact that they could elevate the people entrusted to and dependent on them only if they themse,1ves could obta·i n the- authority which wouid give them a mora;l right to reach and lead the Slovak people. Fo,r this they prepared thorough'ly. Their moral iprinciples are connected with perseverance, courage and nobility. The Institute of the Slovak Language and Literature dn Bratislava ailready ha:d thus fomned the yound and fiery souls: without morality, the first prerequisite, no one could get into the Irnstitute. Therefrom emanated the rest of the obligations of the members, such as love for Slovak, perseverance in preparing and presenting lectures, or in performing tas!ks outside the ·I nstitute. Whosoever is moral wdill not ibecome lost; therein was the assurance and safeguard. From this morally strengthened y,outh glowed a fire which overextended the frame,w ork of purely internal work. Gradua'lly the followers of Stur came into contact with the � 6 SLOVAK1IA tions under which the nation lives at .ho~e under Communism, it is our moral duty to acquaint ourselves with the endeavons of those who a:lready over a hundred years ago .warned us against the plague of Oommunism. With r-egard to the political mission of our geineratiO!Il, it wouild be to our advantage to. study the ideas of Stur, because then we shall learn that the credo and politicaJl legacy of Louis Stur was: "So that we ourselves might be revived and take the place in history which according to our strength and abilities belongs to us, we must once and for all free ourselves from the hated, alien yoke and gain state independence for ourselves: because a nation which is enslaved has lits hands tied, its spirit stifled, and is forever threatened with the danger that sooner or later it will perish." 1 • • • STOR : FATHER OF MODERN SIJOVAK NATIONALISM Marian ~iar In 1948 !Slovaks had an o,pportunity to assess the revolutionary events of a hundred years ago•. ,r t was our duty at that time to recall the legacy of Stur and his folJl.owers and to appraise their ,political program. Unfortunate:ly, due to circumstances !beyond our control, the year 1948 was not ·an opportune time for a ceJebration of such g,reat significance and extent as was the revolution of 11848-49. In 1956, however, during the .centennial of Stur's death, another opportunity presents itself to ponder over the fate, the Jife, the struggle, and the aim of the entire generation of Stur. Stephen Krcmery, eminent historian of Slova,k literature, said that Stu.r's generation .began "a new chapter in the rustle-fbu'Stle of a thousand years." Representatives of the previous generation - Holly, Kollar and Safarik - still lived, Slovak poets still argued aibout rythm and accent, and the nation still looked for consolation in Svatopluk's Great Moravian Empire (iHolly), or to RusS:ia - to that Slav "giant oak," a:s Kollar ca111ed: i t when suddenly new people began to appear and new voices were heard. Kuzmany, from the distant and wide scope of his predecessors, drew attention of the world to the heart �SLOVAKIA and morality of the .Slovak people. But in all thes.e manifestations there was as yet no revolutionary dynamics, a political program was sadly la0king, and, it seems, only poets dreamed romantically about the better days to come. Hollly and Kollar enlivened Slovak life by 'l ooking back to Slovak history and around themselves; •b ut that was not enough for the period ahead. When Stur and his foliowers came upon the scene they recognized the fact that the cultural process, ,beg,un in Slovakia already with the activity of the JUnilversity of Trnava and formulated and propagated by Bernolak, had to ,be completed and had to serve as a basis for the political ascension of the nation. What was realized by the· merits of Stur, Hur,ban and Hodza in our country in the cultura1 field - the codification of a uniform literary langua,ge - that was on[y the harvest of the products planted by past generations from the time of Balthazar Magin, Hugoiin Gavlovi,c, and others before them. Thanks to. the followers of Stur that they became '3Jware of the pollitical necessity of having an independent Slovak literary language, that they did not philo.: sophize about the maturity of Slovak nationalism but accepted it as something granted which had to be pl-aced on a proper basis and given a :Proper place. Stu•r understood that in hris time the Slovak nationaU process had matured and that Slovakia must appear on the scene of history as an independent political factor. It is in this that Stur's greatest merit lies. The question did not concern any Cze., cho-S:lovak separation, a:bout which those like to talk who do not want to understand natural law in the develqiment of nations. The people of 1Sloivakia never ceased truLkmg in Slovak and "Bible Czech" was always aUien to the Slovaks even though the Slo.va:k iProtestants used it for their reli-gious services, and even if some used it as a medium of Slovak literatuTe. Jaroslav Vlcek himself says in reference to this: "Such a situation of things was impossible; that was the feeling of all the better Slovak spirits . . . Evangelical clergymen wrote in a language that was not spoken anywhere in the world; it was not typical, lacked euphony and regularity." 1 �8 SLOVAKIA No foreign language, not even Czech, could move the SlovaJk people politically; only the Slovak language could do that. iin five short years the J.atter ,perfovmed a miracle; it not only .stirred up life rin the entire na;tio;n, but placed it under the revolutionary banners of Hwrban. In short: Stur was the first to formulate the Slova!k problem, the first one moved to armed r ebellion for the rights of the Slova;k nation, and the first (Sept. 1848) to proclaim the independence of Slovaikia ("We hereby proc}aim ourselves independent of the Mrugyars"). In the history of the 'Slovak nation, no one <lid as much in so short a time as St-t1r, who was only 41 whe:n he died. This was possible an1ly •b ecause the ground for the ascension of the new generation was ripe and properly prepared. Stur approved what already existed in Slovakia; he formulated what the nation felt and demanded. Stiir caUISed quite a sensation with his article "Zaloby a ponosy Slova!kov v Uhorsku" (Accusations and Complaints of the S'lovruks in Hungary), published in Le1pzig in 1843, in which he excoriated the chief inspecto r of the Evangelical Church and Schools in Hungary, Count Zay, for wanting to Magyarize the Slovaks. for political reasons. Count Zay, aware of the political currents in Slova:kia, in ,principle divided the inhabitants of Slovakia into three groUJps: the fir,s.t concerns itse~f harmlessly with the Slovak language; the second yearns to establish a western-Slav kingdom under the crown of Austria; the third has secret contacts with Russia. Whether these groups reaHy grasped the situation of those times or noit is debatable, but it is quite certain .that all ,w ere occupied with one thought: t,o save the 1Slova1ks from Magyarization and t,o secure for the Slovak nation an independent political status within the framewol"k of the Habsburg Empire. "We do not want ,r ights est·aiblished on favor, 'but we demand our rights on the basii,s of rig.ht," Stur declared. And these w,o vds became the foundation of al;J. petitioos and demands which were presented in Vienna and the Hungarian iDiet in Bratislava. From thJs moral and democratic viewpoint also issued aH of Stuir's controversies with Louis Kossuth. Writing in the name of his nation Stur demanded 1 1 �SLOVAKIA 9 ".p eace based on right and mutual understanding," declaring: "In the Pest Hirlap, Kossuth is fighting for equality of rights, but in the Diet he wants to give the orders to investigate and punish those who stand up for their rights ... That is his freedom and liberalism!" Art the Slav Coingress in Prague, 1848, again it was Stur who together with Safari.i1k defined the political direction of the entire Congress. Safarik spoike like a prophet, but Stur was aJlready forming a cilear .p olitical p11ogram. "Our aim should be t,o preserve ourselves! First of all we must serve ourselves, then others. Thus far Austria has existed but we have been perishing. What would the world say to us if we would stand for nothing else but the preservation of Austria? Let us say that we want to stand as independent Slovanic communities under the government of Austria!'' Strur's articles in the "Narodnje Noviny," his manifestations and ,p etitions in the Hungarian Diet, his letters to his friends - all these clearly state a clear political view: Slovakia as an independent crown land under the Habsburg,s; the Slovaks mu:Slt be recognized and respected as an equrul partner of the other nations in the empire. Sholl!ld we wish to ex.press Soo.r's politica:l ,p rogram in terms of the political terminology of today, we would have to say: Stiir was for a program to federalize central Europe. He was the first Slovak who demanded equality with the rest of the nations for his o,wn nation in the Central-EurQpean political constellation. He opposed Pa.Jacky's Austrophi-lism and sharply condemned Kossuth, who demanded the Magyarization of the 1Slovaks in the name of ,t he right of the Hungarian State. Stur inter,preted the Slo,vaik standpoint democratically by res,pecting the rights of others; he said: "Each nation is only one part of humanity and no nation can claim for itself that it alone has comprehended best human evolution and possible perfection. Therefore, no nation has a right to force upon another nation its way of life when that nation wants to move for itself and educate itself as it sees fit ..." The way to Slova:k independeince was supposed to• start �SLOVAKIA from the rebellion of 1848. The w:hole of Europe was once again in motion. After Paris, Vienna, Berlin, Prague and Italy, revolutionary explosions resounded also Hungary. It is not important that this revOilution was squaslhed; nor is it important that Vienna failed to, fll!lfill the promises and eXipectations of the Slo.v aks. For history and for our generation it is only necessary to know that the Slovaks afready one hundred years ago fought to change the po~ litical structure of Centra;l Burope, that they demanded an jndependent status for their nation within the framework of a solid federation ,b uilt on the ,p rinciples of justice and equality. Louis Stur, preeminent leader of the SlovaJk movement for independence apparently was quite ahead of his time. His philosQphica;l views, his democra,tic thinkiing and principles, his social demands, and his admiration for ,t he democratic system in the West call for serious study and interpretation. The controversies between Stur and Kossuth are very interesting from the democratic point of view; they tell us how Stuir and his foHowers interpreted their poJitica!l and social program in comparison to Kossuth, who wanted democracy only for the Magyars at the expense of the other nations of Hungary. ·S tur, a memlber of the Protestant Evangelical Church, was not afraid to accept and complete the wo,11k of ,p receding Cathohlc generations to preserve the heritage of the Slovruk nation. We must recall foir ourselves and for the free worid that the Slovaiks played a serious poilitica:l role in the revolutionary movement in Central Burope in 1'848-49, and that a!lready at thaJt time they clearly formulated a political program which satisfies even t'he demands of the prese1D.t time, so that on it the contempo~ rary Slovak generation can build its own, modern program orf federrulizaJtion. Stur belongs among the greatest of :European revoJ,u_, tli.onaries of his time. The Mrugyars gratefully built Kossuth a monument in free America, and the Cizechs haJVe one of Masaryk in Chicago. If they deserved to be reimembeired, surely Stur, who was a greater apostle of democracy and freedom for all people, should be no less honored in the �11 SLOVAKIA land of the free and the home of the brave. Ame,r icans of Slova)k descent should give this serious thought dwring Stu.r's centennial. The nation which produced Joseph Milan Hurban, Paul Joseph Safariik, John iKollar, John Holly, John Chalupka, Johnny Kral', Andrew Sladlwvic, Jonah Zaborsky, John Palarik, John Ka.lincia!k, Peter Bohu,ii, Joseph Bo:zetech Klemens, and Diony,z Sbur - is not a small nation. The shining light among the Slovaks of the nineteenth century, the formulator of their .p rogram, and the ·interpreter of their desires was Louis Stur - the father of modern Slovak nationalism . • • • STUR'S GROUP IN THE SERVICE OF THE PEOPLE Joseph Pauco Sturr's school exerted every effort to serve the people from which it descended in order to elevate it intellectually and to save it from physical ·a nd spiritual decline. Whatever was attempted in the cultural, economic, and social fields, all closely allied with the efforts in the political field, was dome with these aims in mind. From the beginning of thei.ir public activity, the Stu.rites were aware of the fact that they could elevate the people entrusted to and dependent on them only if they themse,1ves could obta·i n the- authority which wouid give them a mora;l right to reach and lead the Slovak people. Fo,r this they prepared thorough'ly. Their moral iprinciples are connected with perseverance, courage and nobility. The Institute of the Slovak Language and Literature dn Bratislava ailready ha:d thus fomned the yound and fiery souls: without morality, the first prerequisite, no one could get into the Irnstitute. Therefrom emanated the rest of the obligations of the members, such as love for Slovak, perseverance in preparing and presenting lectures, or in performing tas!ks outside the ·I nstitute. Whosoever is moral wdill not ibecome lost; therein was the assurance and safeguard. From this morally strengthened y,outh glowed a fire which overextended the frame,w ork of purely internal work. Gradua'lly the followers of Stur came into contact with the � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 6 SLOVAK1IA tions under which the nation lives at .ho~e under Communism, it is our moral duty to acquaint ourselves with the endeavons of those who a:lready over a hundred years ago .warned us against the plague of Oommunism. With r-egard to the political mission of our geineratiO!Il, it wouild be to our advantage to. study the ideas of Stur, because then we shall learn that the credo and politicaJl legacy of Louis Stur was: "So that we ourselves might be revived and take the place in history which according to our strength and abilities belongs to us, we must once and for all free ourselves from the hated, alien yoke and gain state independence for ourselves: because a nation which is enslaved has lits hands tied, its spirit stifled, and is forever threatened with the danger that sooner or later it will perish." 1 • • • STOR : FATHER OF MODERN SIJOVAK NATIONALISM Marian ~iar In 1948 !Slovaks had an o,pportunity to assess the revolutionary events of a hundred years ago•. ,r t was our duty at that time to recall the legacy of Stur and his folJl.owers and to appraise their ,political program. Unfortunate:ly, due to circumstances !beyond our control, the year 1948 was not ·an opportune time for a ceJebration of such g,reat significance and extent as was the revolution of 11848-49. In 1956, however, during the .centennial of Stur's death, another opportunity presents itself to ponder over the fate, the Jife, the struggle, and the aim of the entire generation of Stur. Stephen Krcmery, eminent historian of Slova,k literature, said that Stu.r's generation .began "a new chapter in the rustle-fbu'Stle of a thousand years." Representatives of the previous generation - Holly, Kollar and Safarik - still lived, Slovak poets still argued aibout rythm and accent, and the nation still looked for consolation in Svatopluk's Great Moravian Empire (iHolly), or to RusS:ia - to that Slav "giant oak," a:s Kollar ca111ed: i t when suddenly new people began to appear and new voices were heard. Kuzmany, from the distant and wide scope of his predecessors, drew attention of the world to the heart SLOVAKIA and morality of the .Slovak people. But in all thes.e manifestations there was as yet no revolutionary dynamics, a political program was sadly la0king, and, it seems, only poets dreamed romantically about the better days to come. Hollly and Kollar enlivened Slovak life by 'l ooking back to Slovak history and around themselves; •b ut that was not enough for the period ahead. When Stur and his foliowers came upon the scene they recognized the fact that the cultural process, ,beg,un in Slovakia already with the activity of the JUnilversity of Trnava and formulated and propagated by Bernolak, had to ,be completed and had to serve as a basis for the political ascension of the nation. What was realized by the· merits of Stur, Hur,ban and Hodza in our country in the cultura1 field - the codification of a uniform literary langua,ge - that was on[y the harvest of the products planted by past generations from the time of Balthazar Magin, Hugoiin Gavlovi,c, and others before them. Thanks to. the followers of Stur that they became '3Jware of the pollitical necessity of having an independent Slovak literary language, that they did not philo.: sophize about the maturity of Slovak nationalism but accepted it as something granted which had to be pl-aced on a proper basis and given a :Proper place. Stu•r understood that in hris time the Slovak nationaU process had matured and that Slovakia must appear on the scene of history as an independent political factor. It is in this that Stur's greatest merit lies. The question did not concern any Cze., cho-S:lovak separation, a:bout which those like to talk who do not want to understand natural law in the develqiment of nations. The people of 1Sloivakia never ceased truLkmg in Slovak and "Bible Czech" was always aUien to the Slovaks even though the Slo.va:k iProtestants used it for their reli-gious services, and even if some used it as a medium of Slovak literatuTe. Jaroslav Vlcek himself says in reference to this: "Such a situation of things was impossible; that was the feeling of all the better Slovak spirits . . . Evangelical clergymen wrote in a language that was not spoken anywhere in the world; it was not typical, lacked euphony and regularity." 1 8 SLOVAKIA No foreign language, not even Czech, could move the SlovaJk people politically; only the Slovak language could do that. iin five short years the J.atter ,perfovmed a miracle; it not only .stirred up life rin the entire na;tio;n, but placed it under the revolutionary banners of Hwrban. In short: Stur was the first to formulate the Slova!k problem, the first one moved to armed r ebellion for the rights of the Slova;k nation, and the first (Sept. 1848) to proclaim the independence of Slovaikia ("We hereby proc}aim ourselves independent of the Mrugyars"). In the history of the 'Slovak nation, no one <lid as much in so short a time as St-t1r, who was only 41 whe:n he died. This was possible an1ly •b ecause the ground for the ascension of the new generation was ripe and properly prepared. Stur approved what already existed in Slovakia; he formulated what the nation felt and demanded. Stiir caUISed quite a sensation with his article "Zaloby a ponosy Slova!kov v Uhorsku" (Accusations and Complaints of the S'lovruks in Hungary), published in Le1pzig in 1843, in which he excoriated the chief inspecto r of the Evangelical Church and Schools in Hungary, Count Zay, for wanting to Magyarize the Slovaks. for political reasons. Count Zay, aware of the political currents in Slova:kia, in ,principle divided the inhabitants of Slovakia into three groUJps: the fir,s.t concerns itse~f harmlessly with the Slovak language; the second yearns to establish a western-Slav kingdom under the crown of Austria; the third has secret contacts with Russia. Whether these groups reaHy grasped the situation of those times or noit is debatable, but it is quite certain .that all ,w ere occupied with one thought: t,o save the 1Slova1ks from Magyarization and t,o secure for the Slovak nation an independent political status within the framewol"k of the Habsburg Empire. "We do not want ,r ights est·aiblished on favor, 'but we demand our rights on the basii,s of rig.ht," Stur declared. And these w,o vds became the foundation of al;J. petitioos and demands which were presented in Vienna and the Hungarian iDiet in Bratislava. From thJs moral and democratic viewpoint also issued aH of Stuir's controversies with Louis Kossuth. Writing in the name of his nation Stur demanded 1 1 SLOVAKIA 9 ".p eace based on right and mutual understanding," declaring: "In the Pest Hirlap, Kossuth is fighting for equality of rights, but in the Diet he wants to give the orders to investigate and punish those who stand up for their rights ... That is his freedom and liberalism!" Art the Slav Coingress in Prague, 1848, again it was Stur who together with Safari.i1k defined the political direction of the entire Congress. Safarik spoike like a prophet, but Stur was aJlready forming a cilear .p olitical p11ogram. "Our aim should be t,o preserve ourselves! First of all we must serve ourselves, then others. Thus far Austria has existed but we have been perishing. What would the world say to us if we would stand for nothing else but the preservation of Austria? Let us say that we want to stand as independent Slovanic communities under the government of Austria!'' Strur's articles in the "Narodnje Noviny," his manifestations and ,p etitions in the Hungarian Diet, his letters to his friends - all these clearly state a clear political view: Slovakia as an independent crown land under the Habsburg,s; the Slovaks mu:Slt be recognized and respected as an equrul partner of the other nations in the empire. Sholl!ld we wish to ex.press Soo.r's politica:l ,p rogram in terms of the political terminology of today, we would have to say: Stiir was for a program to federalize central Europe. He was the first Slovak who demanded equality with the rest of the nations for his o,wn nation in the Central-EurQpean political constellation. He opposed Pa.Jacky's Austrophi-lism and sharply condemned Kossuth, who demanded the Magyarization of the 1Slovaks in the name of ,t he right of the Hungarian State. Stur inter,preted the Slo,vaik standpoint democratically by res,pecting the rights of others; he said: "Each nation is only one part of humanity and no nation can claim for itself that it alone has comprehended best human evolution and possible perfection. Therefore, no nation has a right to force upon another nation its way of life when that nation wants to move for itself and educate itself as it sees fit ..." The way to Slova:k independeince was supposed to• start SLOVAKIA from the rebellion of 1848. The w:hole of Europe was once again in motion. After Paris, Vienna, Berlin, Prague and Italy, revolutionary explosions resounded also Hungary. It is not important that this revOilution was squaslhed; nor is it important that Vienna failed to, fll!lfill the promises and eXipectations of the Slo.v aks. For history and for our generation it is only necessary to know that the Slovaks afready one hundred years ago fought to change the po~ litical structure of Centra;l Burope, that they demanded an jndependent status for their nation within the framework of a solid federation ,b uilt on the ,p rinciples of justice and equality. Louis Stur, preeminent leader of the SlovaJk movement for independence apparently was quite ahead of his time. His philosQphica;l views, his democra,tic thinkiing and principles, his social demands, and his admiration for ,t he democratic system in the West call for serious study and interpretation. The controversies between Stur and Kossuth are very interesting from the democratic point of view; they tell us how Stuir and his foHowers interpreted their poJitica!l and social program in comparison to Kossuth, who wanted democracy only for the Magyars at the expense of the other nations of Hungary. ·S tur, a memlber of the Protestant Evangelical Church, was not afraid to accept and complete the wo,11k of ,p receding Cathohlc generations to preserve the heritage of the Slovruk nation. We must recall foir ourselves and for the free worid that the Slovaiks played a serious poilitica:l role in the revolutionary movement in Central Burope in 1'848-49, and that a!lready at thaJt time they clearly formulated a political program which satisfies even t'he demands of the prese1D.t time, so that on it the contempo~ rary Slovak generation can build its own, modern program orf federrulizaJtion. Stur belongs among the greatest of :European revoJ,u_, tli.onaries of his time. The Mrugyars gratefully built Kossuth a monument in free America, and the Cizechs haJVe one of Masaryk in Chicago. If they deserved to be reimembeired, surely Stur, who was a greater apostle of democracy and freedom for all people, should be no less honored in the 11 SLOVAKIA land of the free and the home of the brave. Ame,r icans of Slova)k descent should give this serious thought dwring Stu.r's centennial. The nation which produced Joseph Milan Hurban, Paul Joseph Safariik, John iKollar, John Holly, John Chalupka, Johnny Kral', Andrew Sladlwvic, Jonah Zaborsky, John Palarik, John Ka.lincia!k, Peter Bohu,ii, Joseph Bo:zetech Klemens, and Diony,z Sbur - is not a small nation. The shining light among the Slovaks of the nineteenth century, the formulator of their .p rogram, and the ·interpreter of their desires was Louis Stur - the father of modern Slovak nationalism . • • • STUR'S GROUP IN THE SERVICE OF THE PEOPLE Joseph Pauco Sturr's school exerted every effort to serve the people from which it descended in order to elevate it intellectually and to save it from physical ·a nd spiritual decline. Whatever was attempted in the cultural, economic, and social fields, all closely allied with the efforts in the political field, was dome with these aims in mind. From the beginning of thei.ir public activity, the Stu.rites were aware of the fact that they could elevate the people entrusted to and dependent on them only if they themse,1ves could obta·i n the- authority which wouid give them a mora;l right to reach and lead the Slovak people. Fo,r this they prepared thorough'ly. Their moral iprinciples are connected with perseverance, courage and nobility. The Institute of the Slovak Language and Literature dn Bratislava ailready ha:d thus fomned the yound and fiery souls: without morality, the first prerequisite, no one could get into the Irnstitute. Therefrom emanated the rest of the obligations of the members, such as love for Slovak, perseverance in preparing and presenting lectures, or in performing tas!ks outside the ·I nstitute. Whosoever is moral wdill not ibecome lost; therein was the assurance and safeguard. From this morally strengthened y,outh glowed a fire which overextended the frame,w ork of purely internal work. Gradua'lly the followers of Stur came into contact with the  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Štúr: Father of Modern Slovak Nationalism Description An account of the resource Marián Žiar Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 1 (18), March 1956 pp. 6-11 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Žiar, Marian Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1956 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/21906f2f1049cc8658279f2e578b39a1.pdf f38c069687658f8faf29870166a6b8fc PDF Text Text 11 SLOVAKIA land of the free and the home of the brave. Ame,r icans of Slova)k descent should give this serious thought dwring Stu.r's centennial. The nation which produced Joseph Milan Hurban, Paul Joseph Safariik, John iKollar, John Holly, John Chalupka, Johnny Kral', Andrew Sladlwvic, Jonah Zaborsky, John Palarik, John Ka.lincia!k, Peter Bohu,ii, Joseph Bo:zetech Klemens, and Diony,z Sbur - is not a small nation. The shining light among the Slovaks of the nineteenth century, the formulator of their .p rogram, and the ·interpreter of their desires was Louis Stur - the father of modern Slovak nationalism . • • • STUR'S GROUP IN THE SERVICE OF THE PEOPLE Joseph Pauco Sturr's school exerted every effort to serve the people from which it descended in order to elevate it intellectually and to save it from physical ·a nd spiritual decline. Whatever was attempted in the cultural, economic, and social fields, all closely allied with the efforts in the political field, was dome with these aims in mind. From the beginning of thei.ir public activity, the Stu.rites were aware of the fact that they could elevate the people entrusted to and dependent on them only if they themse,1ves could obta·i n the- authority which wouid give them a mora;l right to reach and lead the Slovak people. Fo,r this they prepared thorough'ly. Their moral iprinciples are connected with perseverance, courage and nobility. The Institute of the Slovak Language and Literature dn Bratislava ailready ha:d thus fomned the yound and fiery souls: without morality, the first prerequisite, no one could get into the Irnstitute. Therefrom emanated the rest of the obligations of the members, such as love for Slovak, perseverance in preparing and presenting lectures, or in performing tas!ks outside the ·I nstitute. Whosoever is moral wdill not ibecome lost; therein was the assurance and safeguard. From this morally strengthened y,outh glowed a fire which overextended the frame,w ork of purely internal work. Gradua'lly the followers of Stur came into contact with the �12 SLOVAKIA Slovak pUiblic. The •~Plody" (Fruits), "Jitfonka" (Morning Star), HU!I"ban's "Nitra," Pa1kovic's "Tatranka" (Tatra News), Kuzmany's "Hro:nka" (Hron News), and Fej.erpa~ ta!ky's "Novy i stary vlastenecky ka.!lendar" (The New and the Old Patriotic Almanac)- all these worthy periodicals resuilted from the enthusiasm of clean hearts and the noble characters of Stu,r 's group. These endeavors, as well as the contacts of the youth with the public during vacation, were the next to the last step for the Sturites in thek preparation to devote themselves with all their strength to the needs of the people. They had hardly left their school benches when the in~ terest of their people became one of their desires; all were willing to serve in the capacity they were best fitted for. When they left school the foUowers of Stur returned to their people, lived with them, toiled with them, and b,ore the burdens of the day with them. They kneiw the virtues and shortcomings of the Slovaks. They realized that socia'l and economic ill,s were caused by the ruling Magyars and decided to do sometliing about it. They knew that to save their peo,ple, they had to educate them politicalJy and correct the mistakes of the past (1). After God, the people were nearest and dearest to the Stu.rites. They did not fea:r the peorple, despite the fact that the S1ovaks were referred to in the most derogatory manner. The Magyars said that the Slovaks were stupid, but the Sturites knew that the Slo:va1ks were a simple but very able and capable people. Probably the greatest fatrlt of the Slovaks was that they were very obedient and addicted to certain failings. The latter, however, couJd be removed, and the Stu.rites set themselves to that very task (2). The greater the press,u re of the owosition, the more profound the reaction of the Sturites. Pressure evoked re~ sistance; as one voice there resounded in Slovakia: "Everything for our 1Slovak people" (3). They helped their humiliated and neglected people by a!ll means at their disposal, because they knew that above all else it was necessary to lead the people to the point where it could lriberate itself from the misrakes and symptoms of slavery, and then complete freedom would follow. �SLOVAKIA 13 That meant that the Stu.rites were for the peo,ple with their whole being; they listened patiently to a,11 complaints and proitesrt:s, and sympathized with their misery; and, orf course, were detel'Inined to fight against all injustices ( 4). One of them summarized the wo:rik of the followers of Stur thus'l y: "Stu.r's school became 0111e of the most effective factors in the life of the Sloivruk nratiion" (5). The foliowers of Stur concerned themselves with the welfare of the entire nation. They fought to improve their economy, but they ailso fought with equa1 vigor against alcoholism, indifference, and illiteracy. They lrubored to uplift the spirit and to rouse nation consciousness not only by speaking and writing, but biY their practical work among all classes of their people, visiting even the lowliest to transform their minds and to use their strength so that they might save themselves from ruin (6). And the ,Slova:k people responded wholeheartedly when Stur began to pUJb1ish his "SloiVensikje Narodnje Novini" and the "Orol Tatransky" -which became a ,power that had to :b e rec!koned with, because they found favor with the common peo,ple, the intelligentsia and the gentry (7). Without unity there could be no strength, but there could be no unity without education and mutual understanding. The Stu.rites preached respect for individuals, but in all consideraticms the nation as a whole came first, and the nation's welfare called for sacrifices (8). They pointed to the com-· mon property, the heritage of the Slova:k people - its language, morals, customs and its homeland - w'hich unites the nation as a whole and commands it to go forward toward its goal unitedly. It is in this union that we must seek the rights of individuals, the assurance of freedom, prosperity and spiritual values. Words, written or spoken, help, but without deeds they mean nothing. Work and more persevering work is necessary. The nation must feel that some one is backing it up, · really concerned about its welfare. Sentiment and justice must protect everyone equally. Thus we can elevate the peopie and help it; and only thus can we attain complete national unity. People must be dealt with humanely; this applies to, individuals and entire grouips, as well. �14 SLOVAKIA The Sturites dealt humanly with their nation; they elevated and united it into one moral unit, so that it would not fail in its resolves, but that its nationa.'l feelings, its nobility and aJl its desires would get proper exipression. Material and spiritual servitude hurt equally - both tend to :kill - and, therefore, the united nation must oppose both resolutely (9). The followers of Stur knew why they had to appeal to the mind, the feelin,g s and the character of their nation; aJso w'hy they had to hit those who oppressed it. The Slovaks were threatened with complete annihilation. There was danger that the one and the other side might resort to extremes. The Stu.rites had to 'harden the Slovaks to face realities; they 'lrn.ew that every battle was won by those who were stronger, bctteT .p repared and ha.rdened(lO). Stur and his fo1lowers knew they co.uid gam practica,lly nothing without first uniting their nation. They took their work seriously and were guided by the principle that renegades are punished even by God, because they sin grievously against the rights of their peop:Je (11). Their task was not to con:. vert renegades, but to teach their people to help themselves, to recognize and fight for their God-'given rights. Stur realized the importance of newspa,pers, hence took it uipon himself to establish a 1Sl01Vak newspa,per. He applied for permission to publish a Slovalk newspaper, but his request was not allowed until three yea.TS later, after many trips and letters to Budaipest and Vienna. When the SL0~ VENS1KJE NARODNJID NOV[NI ( S'loivalk National News) and its supplement, the TA'IIB.ANSKY" OiROL (Eagle of the Tatras), finally were issued, the Slovaks received them with great joy and subscribed to them. The papers served their mission well for three years, when they were confiscated by the government, uniting the ,people, teaching and entertaining them, and encouraging them during the most · stirring times in their history. Stur's newspapers served all strata of Slovaks, the intelligentsia, the laiborer, the peasant, the minister of the Gospel, the merchant, and the tradesman. The MagyaTs soon realized what the .papers were doing for the Slova:k people and raised an alarum to have them outlawed. But there can be no, denying the fact 1 �SLOVAKIA 15 that they had fulfilled their mission well. The Slovaks did awaken nationally; without the newspapers Srur and his followers wol.cld not have achieved the success .they did in uniting the Slovaks in so short a time. Stur and his followers were realists. They ,c ame out of the ,peop1'e and worked with the ,p eople to uplift them. They knew their jois am.d sorrows, the difficulties that beset them; the misery and injustices suffered by them. Burt they knew, too, that complaining and ,w hining a;borut the sad lot of the Slovaik,s wouM not he1p to do away with injustice and poverty. So, they encouraged the ,p eople to help themselves by over.coming indolence and ignorance, and becoming ente11prising; to abandon ancient methods in the trades and agriculture and the schools and to iearn the new, more efficient ways of doing things in all fields of endeavor. Stur and his school are responsible for a wealth of literature about the school question, the :necessity of cultivating the native language, the significance of enlightenment, the theatre, reading societies and libraries, Slovaik agric'lrlture and indwstry, money, taxes, animal husbandry, and a host of other subjects. They organized temperance societies and ctdtural and social institutions; and taught in Sunday scho.ols. The movement of Sbur was ,probably the most interesting movement of all time ~n Slovakia. Stur and hIB followers were not idle dreamers, but practical idealists who really had the welfare and security of their Slovak people at heart.. They shall always be remembered by a grateful S'lovwk nation. 1. Compare 'Mi1an Pisut: "Pociatky basnickej i!ikoly Sturov ej" (The !Beginnings of Stur's Poetical Sc'hool), Bratislava, 1938, pp. 116, 251. 2. "Slovenskje Narodiije Novini," Vol . 2, No. 61, p. 244. 3. P . Z. Hosti!llSkY in I/he SiNN, Vol. 4, No. 278, p. 1109. 4. SNN, Vol. 2, No. 84, p. 333, etc. 6. Jan Fr,a ncis,ci: "VJ.a.stny zivotopis" (1My Own Biogr,aphy), Turc. Sv. Martin, 1909, p. 38. · 6. This is upheld also by Dr. Jos•e,ph Miloslav Hurban in his biography of Stur: "Slov,enske Pohfady" (Slov,a;k Views), 1833, p. 74, etc. 7. Daniel Ra1>ant •CaJIIle to t'he same conclusion in his "Dejiny slovenskeho povstainia r. 1848-49" (:Book 1, p.,170), wher-e he states: "Stur',s newspapers were read .in the towns and villages, even in the court• yrurds of the more sensitive -and nationally more preserved. lower �16 8. 9. 10. 11. SLOVAKIA n obility. T·h e voice of tJhis na tion al organ und er S tur was a r eal pow,e r that 'h,a d t o be r eckoned wit'h." C ompare M. P isut, above, p . 181. L . St u r in the articl'e "Na se polozeiij e vo v1asti" (Our Situation in the Homeland), ,Slov. Nar. No'V'mi, Vol. 2, Nos. 117-120, pp. 467-68 ; 471-72; 47 5-7 6; 4W-80. Stur in t h e met, Marnh 10, 1848 : " I oo ,not like to ref ea- to historical r ights, beeause I b>elieve that h e who shows ·s trength also assumes th e right ... ", .SN N, Vol. 3, No . 270, p. 1078. M. P isu t, a bove, p. 188. • • • WHO SAID IT? "Communism not only commits outrageous injustice against wll civil ,s ociety ... , but it also ruin,s all personal initiative, self-determination, endeavor, and enthusiasm; it abso[utely precludes generous, active fraternal charity.... It divides the family, it destroys the household and thus it opens wide the door to every t:w>e of immorality, dissolution, and indulgence. It shatter,s all the bonds of socia.'l living. In place of holy ties, it offers pmfiteering, rioting, and their l:iJke and thus it degrades man to animal ~evel. "Communi1sm, then, has matured to, the same degree as athe:i!sm and defection from Christianity ... In all types of communtsm, whatever their classification may be, the outlook is only toward a dismal life denied any ennob~ing joys. It brings in its wa!ke despotism of the grossest kind. "Let commll!Il1SiII1 1bu:sy itself, making every endeavrnr and every righteous representatiolll it will, protesting that it aims to secure the rights, orf the people, the fact remains that it know:s :nothing wbout humanity. It degrades it deplor1tbly. And !because it cleaves to its tenets wh!Lch are impractical and ll!Ilreaii•za;ble, it ranks among the wildest of offohooits ever conceived by the human brain." - (Louis Stur: SLOVAlNiSTVO A SVET BU!DUC'NIOS'N (:SlaJVdom and the World of the Future) . • • • You can help the righteous cause ·of the Slovak people - their fight against Communism and for their freedom and independence - by sending a contribution t.o the Slovak League of America: Mr. ·Milan V. Blazek, treasurer, 4922 S. Leclaire A venue, Chicago 38, Ill. � 11 SLOVAKIA land of the free and the home of the brave. Ame,r icans of Slova)k descent should give this serious thought dwring Stu.r's centennial. The nation which produced Joseph Milan Hurban, Paul Joseph Safariik, John iKollar, John Holly, John Chalupka, Johnny Kral', Andrew Sladlwvic, Jonah Zaborsky, John Palarik, John Ka.lincia!k, Peter Bohu,ii, Joseph Bo:zetech Klemens, and Diony,z Sbur - is not a small nation. The shining light among the Slovaks of the nineteenth century, the formulator of their .p rogram, and the ·interpreter of their desires was Louis Stur - the father of modern Slovak nationalism . • • • STUR'S GROUP IN THE SERVICE OF THE PEOPLE Joseph Pauco Sturr's school exerted every effort to serve the people from which it descended in order to elevate it intellectually and to save it from physical ·a nd spiritual decline. Whatever was attempted in the cultural, economic, and social fields, all closely allied with the efforts in the political field, was dome with these aims in mind. From the beginning of thei.ir public activity, the Stu.rites were aware of the fact that they could elevate the people entrusted to and dependent on them only if they themse,1ves could obta·i n the- authority which wouid give them a mora;l right to reach and lead the Slovak people. Fo,r this they prepared thorough'ly. Their moral iprinciples are connected with perseverance, courage and nobility. The Institute of the Slovak Language and Literature dn Bratislava ailready ha:d thus fomned the yound and fiery souls: without morality, the first prerequisite, no one could get into the Irnstitute. Therefrom emanated the rest of the obligations of the members, such as love for Slovak, perseverance in preparing and presenting lectures, or in performing tas!ks outside the ·I nstitute. Whosoever is moral wdill not ibecome lost; therein was the assurance and safeguard. From this morally strengthened y,outh glowed a fire which overextended the frame,w ork of purely internal work. Gradua'lly the followers of Stur came into contact with the �12 SLOVAKIA Slovak pUiblic. The •~Plody" (Fruits), "Jitfonka" (Morning Star), HU!I"ban's "Nitra," Pa1kovic's "Tatranka" (Tatra News), Kuzmany's "Hro:nka" (Hron News), and Fej.erpa~ ta!ky's "Novy i stary vlastenecky ka.!lendar" (The New and the Old Patriotic Almanac)- all these worthy periodicals resuilted from the enthusiasm of clean hearts and the noble characters of Stu,r 's group. These endeavors, as well as the contacts of the youth with the public during vacation, were the next to the last step for the Sturites in thek preparation to devote themselves with all their strength to the needs of the people. They had hardly left their school benches when the in~ terest of their people became one of their desires; all were willing to serve in the capacity they were best fitted for. When they left school the foUowers of Stur returned to their people, lived with them, toiled with them, and b,ore the burdens of the day with them. They kneiw the virtues and shortcomings of the Slovaks. They realized that socia'l and economic ill,s were caused by the ruling Magyars and decided to do sometliing about it. They knew that to save their peo,ple, they had to educate them politicalJy and correct the mistakes of the past (1). After God, the people were nearest and dearest to the Stu.rites. They did not fea:r the peorple, despite the fact that the S1ovaks were referred to in the most derogatory manner. The Magyars said that the Slovaks were stupid, but the Sturites knew that the Slo:va1ks were a simple but very able and capable people. Probably the greatest fatrlt of the Slovaks was that they were very obedient and addicted to certain failings. The latter, however, couJd be removed, and the Stu.rites set themselves to that very task (2). The greater the press,u re of the owosition, the more profound the reaction of the Sturites. Pressure evoked re~ sistance; as one voice there resounded in Slovakia: "Everything for our 1Slovak people" (3). They helped their humiliated and neglected people by a!ll means at their disposal, because they knew that above all else it was necessary to lead the people to the point where it could lriberate itself from the misrakes and symptoms of slavery, and then complete freedom would follow. �SLOVAKIA 13 That meant that the Stu.rites were for the peo,ple with their whole being; they listened patiently to a,11 complaints and proitesrt:s, and sympathized with their misery; and, orf course, were detel'Inined to fight against all injustices ( 4). One of them summarized the wo:rik of the followers of Stur thus'l y: "Stu.r's school became 0111e of the most effective factors in the life of the Sloivruk nratiion" (5). The foliowers of Stur concerned themselves with the welfare of the entire nation. They fought to improve their economy, but they ailso fought with equa1 vigor against alcoholism, indifference, and illiteracy. They lrubored to uplift the spirit and to rouse nation consciousness not only by speaking and writing, but biY their practical work among all classes of their people, visiting even the lowliest to transform their minds and to use their strength so that they might save themselves from ruin (6). And the ,Slova:k people responded wholeheartedly when Stur began to pUJb1ish his "SloiVensikje Narodnje Novini" and the "Orol Tatransky" -which became a ,power that had to :b e rec!koned with, because they found favor with the common peo,ple, the intelligentsia and the gentry (7). Without unity there could be no strength, but there could be no unity without education and mutual understanding. The Stu.rites preached respect for individuals, but in all consideraticms the nation as a whole came first, and the nation's welfare called for sacrifices (8). They pointed to the com-· mon property, the heritage of the Slova:k people - its language, morals, customs and its homeland - w'hich unites the nation as a whole and commands it to go forward toward its goal unitedly. It is in this union that we must seek the rights of individuals, the assurance of freedom, prosperity and spiritual values. Words, written or spoken, help, but without deeds they mean nothing. Work and more persevering work is necessary. The nation must feel that some one is backing it up, · really concerned about its welfare. Sentiment and justice must protect everyone equally. Thus we can elevate the peopie and help it; and only thus can we attain complete national unity. People must be dealt with humanely; this applies to, individuals and entire grouips, as well. �14 SLOVAKIA The Sturites dealt humanly with their nation; they elevated and united it into one moral unit, so that it would not fail in its resolves, but that its nationa.'l feelings, its nobility and aJl its desires would get proper exipression. Material and spiritual servitude hurt equally - both tend to :kill - and, therefore, the united nation must oppose both resolutely (9). The followers of Stur knew why they had to appeal to the mind, the feelin,g s and the character of their nation; aJso w'hy they had to hit those who oppressed it. The Slovaks were threatened with complete annihilation. There was danger that the one and the other side might resort to extremes. The Stu.rites had to 'harden the Slovaks to face realities; they 'lrn.ew that every battle was won by those who were stronger, bctteT .p repared and ha.rdened(lO). Stur and his fo1lowers knew they co.uid gam practica,lly nothing without first uniting their nation. They took their work seriously and were guided by the principle that renegades are punished even by God, because they sin grievously against the rights of their peop:Je (11). Their task was not to con:. vert renegades, but to teach their people to help themselves, to recognize and fight for their God-'given rights. Stur realized the importance of newspa,pers, hence took it uipon himself to establish a 1Sl01Vak newspa,per. He applied for permission to publish a Slovalk newspaper, but his request was not allowed until three yea.TS later, after many trips and letters to Budaipest and Vienna. When the SL0~ VENS1KJE NARODNJID NOV[NI ( S'loivalk National News) and its supplement, the TA'IIB.ANSKY" OiROL (Eagle of the Tatras), finally were issued, the Slovaks received them with great joy and subscribed to them. The papers served their mission well for three years, when they were confiscated by the government, uniting the ,people, teaching and entertaining them, and encouraging them during the most · stirring times in their history. Stur's newspapers served all strata of Slovaks, the intelligentsia, the laiborer, the peasant, the minister of the Gospel, the merchant, and the tradesman. The MagyaTs soon realized what the .papers were doing for the Slova:k people and raised an alarum to have them outlawed. But there can be no, denying the fact 1 �SLOVAKIA 15 that they had fulfilled their mission well. The Slovaks did awaken nationally; without the newspapers Srur and his followers wol.cld not have achieved the success .they did in uniting the Slovaks in so short a time. Stur and his followers were realists. They ,c ame out of the ,peop1'e and worked with the ,p eople to uplift them. They knew their jois am.d sorrows, the difficulties that beset them; the misery and injustices suffered by them. Burt they knew, too, that complaining and ,w hining a;borut the sad lot of the Slovaik,s wouM not he1p to do away with injustice and poverty. So, they encouraged the ,p eople to help themselves by over.coming indolence and ignorance, and becoming ente11prising; to abandon ancient methods in the trades and agriculture and the schools and to iearn the new, more efficient ways of doing things in all fields of endeavor. Stur and his school are responsible for a wealth of literature about the school question, the :necessity of cultivating the native language, the significance of enlightenment, the theatre, reading societies and libraries, Slovaik agric'lrlture and indwstry, money, taxes, animal husbandry, and a host of other subjects. They organized temperance societies and ctdtural and social institutions; and taught in Sunday scho.ols. The movement of Sbur was ,probably the most interesting movement of all time ~n Slovakia. Stur and hIB followers were not idle dreamers, but practical idealists who really had the welfare and security of their Slovak people at heart.. They shall always be remembered by a grateful S'lovwk nation. 1. Compare 'Mi1an Pisut: "Pociatky basnickej i!ikoly Sturov ej" (The !Beginnings of Stur's Poetical Sc'hool), Bratislava, 1938, pp. 116, 251. 2. "Slovenskje Narodiije Novini," Vol . 2, No. 61, p. 244. 3. P . Z. Hosti!llSkY in I/he SiNN, Vol. 4, No. 278, p. 1109. 4. SNN, Vol. 2, No. 84, p. 333, etc. 6. Jan Fr,a ncis,ci: "VJ.a.stny zivotopis" (1My Own Biogr,aphy), Turc. Sv. Martin, 1909, p. 38. · 6. This is upheld also by Dr. Jos•e,ph Miloslav Hurban in his biography of Stur: "Slov,enske Pohfady" (Slov,a;k Views), 1833, p. 74, etc. 7. Daniel Ra1>ant •CaJIIle to t'he same conclusion in his "Dejiny slovenskeho povstainia r. 1848-49" (:Book 1, p.,170), wher-e he states: "Stur',s newspapers were read .in the towns and villages, even in the court• yrurds of the more sensitive -and nationally more preserved. lower �16 8. 9. 10. 11. SLOVAKIA n obility. T·h e voice of tJhis na tion al organ und er S tur was a r eal pow,e r that 'h,a d t o be r eckoned wit'h." C ompare M. P isut, above, p . 181. L . St u r in the articl'e "Na se polozeiij e vo v1asti" (Our Situation in the Homeland), ,Slov. Nar. No'V'mi, Vol. 2, Nos. 117-120, pp. 467-68 ; 471-72; 47 5-7 6; 4W-80. Stur in t h e met, Marnh 10, 1848 : " I oo ,not like to ref ea- to historical r ights, beeause I b>elieve that h e who shows ·s trength also assumes th e right ... ", .SN N, Vol. 3, No . 270, p. 1078. M. P isu t, a bove, p. 188. • • • WHO SAID IT? "Communism not only commits outrageous injustice against wll civil ,s ociety ... , but it also ruin,s all personal initiative, self-determination, endeavor, and enthusiasm; it abso[utely precludes generous, active fraternal charity.... It divides the family, it destroys the household and thus it opens wide the door to every t:w>e of immorality, dissolution, and indulgence. It shatter,s all the bonds of socia.'l living. In place of holy ties, it offers pmfiteering, rioting, and their l:iJke and thus it degrades man to animal ~evel. "Communi1sm, then, has matured to, the same degree as athe:i!sm and defection from Christianity ... In all types of communtsm, whatever their classification may be, the outlook is only toward a dismal life denied any ennob~ing joys. It brings in its wa!ke despotism of the grossest kind. "Let commll!Il1SiII1 1bu:sy itself, making every endeavrnr and every righteous representatiolll it will, protesting that it aims to secure the rights, orf the people, the fact remains that it know:s :nothing wbout humanity. It degrades it deplor1tbly. And !because it cleaves to its tenets wh!Lch are impractical and ll!Ilreaii•za;ble, it ranks among the wildest of offohooits ever conceived by the human brain." - (Louis Stur: SLOVAlNiSTVO A SVET BU!DUC'NIOS'N (:SlaJVdom and the World of the Future) . • • • You can help the righteous cause ·of the Slovak people - their fight against Communism and for their freedom and independence - by sending a contribution t.o the Slovak League of America: Mr. ·Milan V. Blazek, treasurer, 4922 S. Leclaire A venue, Chicago 38, Ill. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 11 SLOVAKIA land of the free and the home of the brave. Ame,r icans of Slova)k descent should give this serious thought dwring Stu.r's centennial. The nation which produced Joseph Milan Hurban, Paul Joseph Safariik, John iKollar, John Holly, John Chalupka, Johnny Kral', Andrew Sladlwvic, Jonah Zaborsky, John Palarik, John Ka.lincia!k, Peter Bohu,ii, Joseph Bo:zetech Klemens, and Diony,z Sbur - is not a small nation. The shining light among the Slovaks of the nineteenth century, the formulator of their .p rogram, and the ·interpreter of their desires was Louis Stur - the father of modern Slovak nationalism . • • • STUR'S GROUP IN THE SERVICE OF THE PEOPLE Joseph Pauco Sturr's school exerted every effort to serve the people from which it descended in order to elevate it intellectually and to save it from physical ·a nd spiritual decline. Whatever was attempted in the cultural, economic, and social fields, all closely allied with the efforts in the political field, was dome with these aims in mind. From the beginning of thei.ir public activity, the Stu.rites were aware of the fact that they could elevate the people entrusted to and dependent on them only if they themse,1ves could obta·i n the- authority which wouid give them a mora;l right to reach and lead the Slovak people. Fo,r this they prepared thorough'ly. Their moral iprinciples are connected with perseverance, courage and nobility. The Institute of the Slovak Language and Literature dn Bratislava ailready ha:d thus fomned the yound and fiery souls: without morality, the first prerequisite, no one could get into the Irnstitute. Therefrom emanated the rest of the obligations of the members, such as love for Slovak, perseverance in preparing and presenting lectures, or in performing tas!ks outside the ·I nstitute. Whosoever is moral wdill not ibecome lost; therein was the assurance and safeguard. From this morally strengthened y,outh glowed a fire which overextended the frame,w ork of purely internal work. Gradua'lly the followers of Stur came into contact with the 12 SLOVAKIA Slovak pUiblic. The •~Plody" (Fruits), "Jitfonka" (Morning Star), HU!I"ban's "Nitra," Pa1kovic's "Tatranka" (Tatra News), Kuzmany's "Hro:nka" (Hron News), and Fej.erpa~ ta!ky's "Novy i stary vlastenecky ka.!lendar" (The New and the Old Patriotic Almanac)- all these worthy periodicals resuilted from the enthusiasm of clean hearts and the noble characters of Stu,r 's group. These endeavors, as well as the contacts of the youth with the public during vacation, were the next to the last step for the Sturites in thek preparation to devote themselves with all their strength to the needs of the people. They had hardly left their school benches when the in~ terest of their people became one of their desires; all were willing to serve in the capacity they were best fitted for. When they left school the foUowers of Stur returned to their people, lived with them, toiled with them, and b,ore the burdens of the day with them. They kneiw the virtues and shortcomings of the Slovaks. They realized that socia'l and economic ill,s were caused by the ruling Magyars and decided to do sometliing about it. They knew that to save their peo,ple, they had to educate them politicalJy and correct the mistakes of the past (1). After God, the people were nearest and dearest to the Stu.rites. They did not fea:r the peorple, despite the fact that the S1ovaks were referred to in the most derogatory manner. The Magyars said that the Slovaks were stupid, but the Sturites knew that the Slo:va1ks were a simple but very able and capable people. Probably the greatest fatrlt of the Slovaks was that they were very obedient and addicted to certain failings. The latter, however, couJd be removed, and the Stu.rites set themselves to that very task (2). The greater the press,u re of the owosition, the more profound the reaction of the Sturites. Pressure evoked re~ sistance; as one voice there resounded in Slovakia: "Everything for our 1Slovak people" (3). They helped their humiliated and neglected people by a!ll means at their disposal, because they knew that above all else it was necessary to lead the people to the point where it could lriberate itself from the misrakes and symptoms of slavery, and then complete freedom would follow. SLOVAKIA 13 That meant that the Stu.rites were for the peo,ple with their whole being; they listened patiently to a,11 complaints and proitesrt:s, and sympathized with their misery; and, orf course, were detel'Inined to fight against all injustices ( 4). One of them summarized the wo:rik of the followers of Stur thus'l y: "Stu.r's school became 0111e of the most effective factors in the life of the Sloivruk nratiion" (5). The foliowers of Stur concerned themselves with the welfare of the entire nation. They fought to improve their economy, but they ailso fought with equa1 vigor against alcoholism, indifference, and illiteracy. They lrubored to uplift the spirit and to rouse nation consciousness not only by speaking and writing, but biY their practical work among all classes of their people, visiting even the lowliest to transform their minds and to use their strength so that they might save themselves from ruin (6). And the ,Slova:k people responded wholeheartedly when Stur began to pUJb1ish his "SloiVensikje Narodnje Novini" and the "Orol Tatransky" -which became a ,power that had to :b e rec!koned with, because they found favor with the common peo,ple, the intelligentsia and the gentry (7). Without unity there could be no strength, but there could be no unity without education and mutual understanding. The Stu.rites preached respect for individuals, but in all consideraticms the nation as a whole came first, and the nation's welfare called for sacrifices (8). They pointed to the com-· mon property, the heritage of the Slova:k people - its language, morals, customs and its homeland - w'hich unites the nation as a whole and commands it to go forward toward its goal unitedly. It is in this union that we must seek the rights of individuals, the assurance of freedom, prosperity and spiritual values. Words, written or spoken, help, but without deeds they mean nothing. Work and more persevering work is necessary. The nation must feel that some one is backing it up, · really concerned about its welfare. Sentiment and justice must protect everyone equally. Thus we can elevate the peopie and help it; and only thus can we attain complete national unity. People must be dealt with humanely; this applies to, individuals and entire grouips, as well. 14 SLOVAKIA The Sturites dealt humanly with their nation; they elevated and united it into one moral unit, so that it would not fail in its resolves, but that its nationa.'l feelings, its nobility and aJl its desires would get proper exipression. Material and spiritual servitude hurt equally - both tend to :kill - and, therefore, the united nation must oppose both resolutely (9). The followers of Stur knew why they had to appeal to the mind, the feelin,g s and the character of their nation; aJso w'hy they had to hit those who oppressed it. The Slovaks were threatened with complete annihilation. There was danger that the one and the other side might resort to extremes. The Stu.rites had to 'harden the Slovaks to face realities; they 'lrn.ew that every battle was won by those who were stronger, bctteT .p repared and ha.rdened(lO). Stur and his fo1lowers knew they co.uid gam practica,lly nothing without first uniting their nation. They took their work seriously and were guided by the principle that renegades are punished even by God, because they sin grievously against the rights of their peop:Je (11). Their task was not to con:. vert renegades, but to teach their people to help themselves, to recognize and fight for their God-'given rights. Stur realized the importance of newspa,pers, hence took it uipon himself to establish a 1Sl01Vak newspa,per. He applied for permission to publish a Slovalk newspaper, but his request was not allowed until three yea.TS later, after many trips and letters to Budaipest and Vienna. When the SL0~ VENS1KJE NARODNJID NOV[NI ( S'loivalk National News) and its supplement, the TA'IIB.ANSKY" OiROL (Eagle of the Tatras), finally were issued, the Slovaks received them with great joy and subscribed to them. The papers served their mission well for three years, when they were confiscated by the government, uniting the ,people, teaching and entertaining them, and encouraging them during the most · stirring times in their history. Stur's newspapers served all strata of Slovaks, the intelligentsia, the laiborer, the peasant, the minister of the Gospel, the merchant, and the tradesman. The MagyaTs soon realized what the .papers were doing for the Slova:k people and raised an alarum to have them outlawed. But there can be no, denying the fact 1 SLOVAKIA 15 that they had fulfilled their mission well. The Slovaks did awaken nationally; without the newspapers Srur and his followers wol.cld not have achieved the success .they did in uniting the Slovaks in so short a time. Stur and his followers were realists. They ,c ame out of the ,peop1'e and worked with the ,p eople to uplift them. They knew their jois am.d sorrows, the difficulties that beset them; the misery and injustices suffered by them. Burt they knew, too, that complaining and ,w hining a;borut the sad lot of the Slovaik,s wouM not he1p to do away with injustice and poverty. So, they encouraged the ,p eople to help themselves by over.coming indolence and ignorance, and becoming ente11prising; to abandon ancient methods in the trades and agriculture and the schools and to iearn the new, more efficient ways of doing things in all fields of endeavor. Stur and his school are responsible for a wealth of literature about the school question, the :necessity of cultivating the native language, the significance of enlightenment, the theatre, reading societies and libraries, Slovaik agric'lrlture and indwstry, money, taxes, animal husbandry, and a host of other subjects. They organized temperance societies and ctdtural and social institutions; and taught in Sunday scho.ols. The movement of Sbur was ,probably the most interesting movement of all time ~n Slovakia. Stur and hIB followers were not idle dreamers, but practical idealists who really had the welfare and security of their Slovak people at heart.. They shall always be remembered by a grateful S'lovwk nation. 1. Compare 'Mi1an Pisut: "Pociatky basnickej i!ikoly Sturov ej" (The !Beginnings of Stur's Poetical Sc'hool), Bratislava, 1938, pp. 116, 251. 2. "Slovenskje Narodiije Novini," Vol . 2, No. 61, p. 244. 3. P . Z. Hosti!llSkY in I/he SiNN, Vol. 4, No. 278, p. 1109. 4. SNN, Vol. 2, No. 84, p. 333, etc. 6. Jan Fr,a ncis,ci: "VJ.a.stny zivotopis" (1My Own Biogr,aphy), Turc. Sv. Martin, 1909, p. 38. · 6. This is upheld also by Dr. Jos•e,ph Miloslav Hurban in his biography of Stur: "Slov,enske Pohfady" (Slov,a;k Views), 1833, p. 74, etc. 7. Daniel Ra1>ant •CaJIIle to t'he same conclusion in his "Dejiny slovenskeho povstainia r. 1848-49" (:Book 1, p.,170), wher-e he states: "Stur',s newspapers were read .in the towns and villages, even in the court• yrurds of the more sensitive -and nationally more preserved. lower 16 8. 9. 10. 11. SLOVAKIA n obility. T·h e voice of tJhis na tion al organ und er S tur was a r eal pow,e r that 'h,a d t o be r eckoned wit'h." C ompare M. P isut, above, p . 181. L . St u r in the articl'e "Na se polozeiij e vo v1asti" (Our Situation in the Homeland), ,Slov. Nar. No'V'mi, Vol. 2, Nos. 117-120, pp. 467-68 ; 471-72; 47 5-7 6; 4W-80. Stur in t h e met, Marnh 10, 1848 : " I oo ,not like to ref ea- to historical r ights, beeause I b>elieve that h e who shows ·s trength also assumes th e right ... ", .SN N, Vol. 3, No . 270, p. 1078. M. P isu t, a bove, p. 188. • • • WHO SAID IT? "Communism not only commits outrageous injustice against wll civil ,s ociety ... , but it also ruin,s all personal initiative, self-determination, endeavor, and enthusiasm; it abso[utely precludes generous, active fraternal charity.... It divides the family, it destroys the household and thus it opens wide the door to every t:w>e of immorality, dissolution, and indulgence. It shatter,s all the bonds of socia.'l living. In place of holy ties, it offers pmfiteering, rioting, and their l:iJke and thus it degrades man to animal ~evel. "Communi1sm, then, has matured to, the same degree as athe:i!sm and defection from Christianity ... In all types of communtsm, whatever their classification may be, the outlook is only toward a dismal life denied any ennob~ing joys. It brings in its wa!ke despotism of the grossest kind. "Let commll!Il1SiII1 1bu:sy itself, making every endeavrnr and every righteous representatiolll it will, protesting that it aims to secure the rights, orf the people, the fact remains that it know:s :nothing wbout humanity. It degrades it deplor1tbly. And !because it cleaves to its tenets wh!Lch are impractical and ll!Ilreaii•za;ble, it ranks among the wildest of offohooits ever conceived by the human brain." - (Louis Stur: SLOVAlNiSTVO A SVET BU!DUC'NIOS'N (:SlaJVdom and the World of the Future) . • • • You can help the righteous cause ·of the Slovak people - their fight against Communism and for their freedom and independence - by sending a contribution t.o the Slovak League of America: Mr. ·Milan V. Blazek, treasurer, 4922 S. Leclaire A venue, Chicago 38, Ill.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Štúr's Group in the Service of the People Description An account of the resource Joseph Paučo Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 1 (18), March 1956 pp. 11-16 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Paučo, Jozef, 1914-1975 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1956 SNK https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/ab896c8bdc403e834ef271b0733764e8.pdf 33c5c5f231f8814ee7372b748226db24 PDF Text Text 63 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A . HROBAiK SLOVENSKO - SLOVAKIA - SLOVAKLAND The territory occupied by the Slovak people for the past 1500 years is known as Slovakia. It is situated in the very heart of Europe. Present-day Slovakia has an area of 49,015 square kilometers (approximately 19,000 sq. miles) and a population of 4,000,000. There were times when the borders of Slovakia extended beyond their present limits and times when the land of the Slovaks had no definite borders at all. In ancient times the Slovaks occupied even the western bank of the Morava river and the north bank of the Tisa (Theiss) river. Though the area and the borders of Slovakia changed at various times, its topography - the land and its waterways - did not. Slovakia is bound on the north by the Carpathian Mountains and on the south by the blue Danube and the upper arm of the Tisa river. Into these two streams empty all the rivers of Slovakia that have their origin in the foothills of the King's Plateau (Krafova Hofa) - the natural center of Slovakia: those that run off to the southwest empty into the Danube, while those that course to the southwest pour into the Tisa, forming deep valleys and broad basins between the ,i ndividual mountain :zones that fill out the largest part of the territory of Slovakia. This territory is divided into three parts: 1. western Slovakia which drains into the Danube tributaries; 2. eastern Slovakia that drains into the tributaries of the Tisa; 3. the mountainous country of central Slovakia. The geographical picture of Slovakia is extremely varied, because high mountain ranges alternate with deep valleys which, in places, spread out into basins. Fertile plains stretch out from the foothills of the mountains. Slovakia is situated in the very center of Europe where the north-eastern spurs of the Alps near the central Danube touch upon the mountainous arch of the Carpa- �64 SLOVAKIA thians which is the main watershed of central Europe. From this watershed the streams of central Europe run into several seas. In olden times the course of these streams determined the course of roads along which nations migrated and business and culture flowed. We find Slovakia at the juction of these roads which cross the Caripathian Mountains kom the north and the south. Two roads were especially significant in deciding the fate of Slovakia and the Slovak nation. One coursed along the Danube and connected the western oountTies of Europe with the eastern world. Near the Carpatho-Alpian gate this road intersected with the other important highway which started from the coast of the Adriatic Sea, crossed the Danube, proceeded to the north against the current of the Morava river and went to the coast of the Baltic Sea. Slovakia, according to archeological researches, was well inhabited as early as 5000 B. C., but we do not know the race or the names of the peoples who inhabited the land. Traces of the Neolithic Man, who used stone weapons in hunting the mammoth and the huge cave bear, have been found. The scientific investigator will find much material on the prehistoric period in the museum of Bratislava and Turciansky Svaty Martin. About the year 2000 B.C. begins the Bronze Age with its burial urns, and clay and stone remains, found on the sites of ancient settlements in Slovakland. During the ensuing Iron Age, we find traces of the Illyrians in the west, of the Thracians in the east. The latter came into contact with the Scythians in the valley of the Tisa river. Several nations of various origins and culture lived in Slovakia just before the dawn of the Christian era. According to ancient Greek and Roman writers, the land of the Slovaiks was inhabited by the Gauls and the Celts at that time. In the fourth century B. C., we note traces of the more advanced Gallic culture from the discoveries of golden ornaments and coins, imitations of those issued by Philip III of Macedonia and his son, Alexander the Great. At Bratislava coins of the Roman Republic, dating from the first century B. C., have been found. A Greek map of the Slovak territory, dating back to the third century, �SLOVAKIA 65 shows many Slovanic names for mountains and rivers, The fertile plains of south-eastern Slovakia were occupied by the Boii, a Gallic tri'be, and in the mountainous parts of central Slovakia lived the Kotin (Gothine) tribe which worked the ore of the Iron Mountains. The Osi settled in the neighborhood of the Kotins, while the Korkonti - tribes of southern origin - occupied the northwestern part of Slovakia. In the first half of the last century before Christ the Dacians came to Slovakia from the east and overpowered the Gallic Boii. But in the first quarter of the first century after Christ, the Dacians were forced to migrate to the north into the mountains, because they were iha:rd pressed by the J azygi who had come from the Black Sea to take over the land on the left side of the Danube. During the reign of Tiberius, two Germanic tribes settled in the territory of the Slovaks, the Quadi and the Marcomanni, who frequently raided the Roman proi\Tince of Pannonia on the other side of the Danube. Vannius, the bellicose king of the Quadi, built military fortresses along the V ah river and extended his power to the Turiec a:nd Kysuca rivers. About twenty years after Christ, when a large part of the territory of Slovakia was occupied by the Quadi, the Romans were consolidating their might near the Danube. The Franks and the Romans began to wage war for the control of the territory of Slovakia, a struggle that lasted several centuries. South of the Danube the Romans organized the province of Pannonia, east of which was the province of Dacia. To conquer the whole Danube basin to the Carpathians, the Romans built military strongholds along the south bank of the Danube. Such fortresses were established at Vindobona (Vienna), Carnanthum (Hainburg), Brigetium (Komarno) and at Aquincum (Budapest). To defend and to secure the frontier along the Danube against incursions of barbaric tribes, the Romans sent detachments across the river to established military stations on the northern bank, on the territory of Slovakia. From excacations we know that Ro- �66 SLOVAK.IA man troops were stationed at Devin, Stupava, Bratislava and opposite Komarno at li. The Romans bested the Quadi in battle. Their king Vannius ruled over the territory of Slovakia by the grace of the Roman Emperor. Of course, the Quadi resented this. After Vannius' death the aggressive Quadi challenged the power of the Romans on the Danube and the Roman Emperors had to defend their rule with large armies. Along the Vah river the Roman troops penetrated as far as Trencin. Emperor Marcus Aurelius and his son Commodus defeated the Quadi in 179 A. D. after several bloody skirmishes on Slovak territory, as is commemorate d by inscription on a roc'k at Trencin: "In memory of the IVictory of the Emperor's army that encamped at Laugaricio, 855 soldiers of the II. Legion. Made by Constantine, commander of the II. auxiliary Legion." This army was stationed at Laugaritio, a Roman settlement near Trencin, which has since disappeared. During these skirmishes with the Quadi, probably about 173 A. D., the Roman army in Slovakia found itself threatened by a scarcity of water. In the army that fought against the Germans somewhere along the Hron river, there were several Christians who had come from Asia Minor. These Christian soldiers - the first Christians on Slovak territory - prayed for raiin and their prayers were answered. The Roman army was saved. This incident is immortalized on the Arch of Triumph of Emperor Marcus Aurelius in Rome. The Quadi, 1b eaten repeatedly by the Romans, never ·gwve up trying to drive the Romans out of Slovakia. Emperor Constantine LI defeated them in 258 A.ID. and Emperor Valentian, the last Roman emperor who cowd claim sovereignty over the territory of Slovakia, repeated the pel'for:mance in 3·74. Upon the latter's death in 376, the great Mig;ra~ tion of Nations begain.. Shortly thereafter the Romans ipulled thek gax.risoDJS out of Slo-y;aJk ia and let the Quadi take over. The Quadi, however, were evicted from the territory by the Huns in the first half of the fifth century. The Huns in turn were displaced by the Heruli, who held the territory until about 491 when the Lombards defeated �SLOVAKIA 87 them, occupied their lands and held them until about 526, when they crossed the Danube into Pannonia. Slovrukia, however, did not remain even under the Huns for long. After the disintegration of the Roman Empire, the Germans migrated from Slovakia to the south. The Marcomanni, weakened by the wars with the Romans and forced by the hordes of Attila to join his army, were wiped out in the battle of Cha.Ions (Catalaunian Fields) in 451. There is as yet no definite proof, even though it may be safely assumed, that the Slovaks and related Slovanic tribes came into Slovakia in increasing numbers after the extinction of the Marcomanni. The historian J ordannes, writing in the sixth century, said that all the Hungarian plain was inhabited by Slovanic people (the Slavs). AFTIDR THE ADVENT OF THE SLOVAKS The Slovaks came to their present territory from the East, probably from India. At the time Frankish tribes fought the Roman Legions over the territory of Slovakia, the Slovanic peoples occupied the land that stretched to the north of the Carpathians and to the east of the river Vistula. It was a marshy and unfertile land. In time the growing Slovanic families were forced to emigrate to neighboring territories. The Slovanic peoples who migrated to the west and occupied the territory to the Elbe and Saal rivers are called We,stern Slavs; they are the Poles, the SlOJVaks and! the Czechs; those that occwpied the territory between t'he Elbe and Oder rivers and the country along the coast of the Baltic Sea are known as the Lusatian Serbs (northern Germany) and the Kashubes (near the Baltic Sea); today their numbers are few. The Slovanic peoples, who migrated from their ancient land to the south and occupied the Balkan peninsula, are called the Southern Slavs: the Slovenes, Croatians, Serbs and Bulgarians. A large part of the Slovanic peoples migrated to the east and occupied the plains of eastern Europe. They are the Eastern Slavs: the White Russians, the Little Russians (Ukrainians) and the Great Russians. As the great Slovanic family disintegrated, separate �68 SLOVAKIA Slovanic nations developed with the centuries, each with its dictinct culture, language, customs and traditions. The Slovaks, like other Slovanic peoples, originally were hunters. After a time they took to bee culture and animal husbandry, especially sheep raising. From their neighbors they learned to cultivate the soil. The men folk hunted and herded sheep, while .the women and the slaves did the farm work. The only trades known to them were pottery making and blacksmithing. In business transactions they exchanged products or paid in cloth; money was not known as a means of barter. The Slovaks lived in simple huts made of poles driven into the ground, around which were wound branches and twigs which were then covered with mud. Several families, originating from a common forefather, formed a clan ("rod"). The head of the clan was the oldest member; he was in charge of the common property of the clan. A Slovanic settlement, inhabited by several related families, i.e. a clan, was called a village ("dedina" from "dedo"-grandfather). The village was the common heritage ("dedicstvo") of the whole clan. Several related clans made up a tribe ("kmeii"), the leader of which was the tribal chief, called a priest ("kiiaz") or prince ("knieza). When several such related tribes lived in one territory for a long time a Slovanic state evolved and a Slovanic nation was born. SLOVAK CHARACTERISTICS The Slovanic peoples had many good and bad characteristics. They loved songs and entertainment. Not possessing great wealth, they lived frugally. They were goodhearted and hospitable, but suffered discipline with difficulty. They did not know how to obey, hence there was no harmony among them. They did not seek a battle, but when they had to defend themselves they fought heroically and also knew how to be cruel. All these characterictics of the Slovanic nature can be found in the Slovanic nations even at the ,p resent time. The historian Procopius (562) said that the Slavs were rather tall, hardy, blond-haired people and honesty was one �SlJOVAK.I.A 69 of their marked characteristics. Theophylactus recorded an interesting commentary on the Slavs. He said: "In 590 three men were captured by the Greeks in Thrace; the men carried musical instruments instead of weapons. When Caesar M:auricus asked who they ,w ere, the men answered: 'We are Slavs; we love music; we play the guitar and violin and sing.' Mauricus was overcome by their simplicity. Af.., ter feasting them he had a guard escort them to their lands." The German historian Herder had this to say about the Slavs: "They loved farming; they had herds and implements and a home industry ; with the products of their land and their industry they carried on a useful business. They built cities and in places occupied themselves with mining; they knew how to melt and mold metals. The Slavs prepared salt, made cloth, brewed beer, grafted trees, and lived according to their manner a happy, musical life.'' The Slovaks of old had names for implements, furniture, grains, fruit trees, trades and animals. They had their own words for: plow, iron, cloth, needle, pliers, wheel, wagon, seal, ring, blacksmith, spoon, clothier, butcher, cape, jeweler. As a musical people they had many folk songs. In number and variety of content they are second to those of no other nation. SLOVAK MYTHOLOGY There are very few reliable records of the religion of ancient Slovanic peoples. We know that they believed in a Supreme Being and in immortality. The Slovaks called the Supreme Being "Praboh" :_ the God of all gods. They had a White God - the God of all good, and a Black God - the God of evil and death. Many lesser gods, belonging to both the white and black groups, also existed for the ancient Slovaks and other Slovanic peoples. "ZIVENA" was the godess of life, and "MORENA" the godess of death. Brooks and streams housed nymphs, and fairies inhabited the woods and forests. "LADA" was the godess of beauty, while "URODA" was the godess of the fields and crops. ' ~PfilRUIN" (P.AJROM" ) , the God of thunder, was held in great respect. �70 SLOVAKIA The ancient Slovaks worshipped and invoked their gods in sacred groves. They offered sacrifices of grain and animals to images of wood and stone through their priests. The White Priests (BieJok:iiazi) served and invoked the White Gods. The White Priests were most important men of the tribe; they presided at all councils and trials and their judgments and decisions were final. The Black Priests - the magicians and sorcerers - were believed to possess powers of tmnsforming peraons into animals and inanimate objects. The Slovaks, like most of the other Slovanic peoples of ancient times, cremated or buried their dead. Food, weapons, wine and jewelry were usually placed in the graves of the dead. Ashes of the dead were placed in urns of clay and then buried. Mounds of clay and stone were built over burial places; the greater the mound, the more important the person or persons buried there. Several such mounds were found and excavated in Slovakia (at Skalica, Brezolupy, Boooivce, Kras:iiany near 2ilina and at Cepcin in Turiec). One of the most extensive burial grounds was uncovered at Devinska Nova Ves. Some of the customs and practices of the ancient pagan Slovaks have survived the centuries and are still observed in many quaint villages of Slovakia today. Many of the pagan practices, however, disappeared with the advent of Christianity. As the Slovanic peoples abandoned their ancient lands and began to colonize central and eastern Europe - after the Germanic Heruli and Lombards withdrew from the territory of Slovakia in the sixth ·century and the Slovaks came in - the savage nation of the Avars tore into the Danube basin, overran the whole territory, and pushed deeply into the Frankish kingdom in the west. During the next hundred years the whole region seethed in turmoil. The Avars were wild nomads of Turko-Tartarian origin who rode their horses rough-shod over the countries of their neighbors and subjugated them. They settled in Pannonia, where they built military camps which were protected by huge, circular mounds of earth and stone and wooden fences. The Slovaks withdrew from this territory �SLOVAKIA 71 and settled north of the Danube . Part of the Slovak tribes lived in the mounta ins; they were govern ed by their own princes . The Slovan ic peoples along the Danube had to serve the Avars and were forced to go with them on their rampages into neighb oring territor ies. The A vars looted the Germa n lands in the west and Constan tinoiple (Cari•h rad) and Salonik a in the east. Natura lly, the Slovan ic peoples wanted tQ throw off the yoke of the Aivars and waited for the opportu ne momen t to rebel. That time came in 624, when Samo, a Franki sh mercha nt, succeed ed in uniting the Slovani c peoples and led them in battle agains t the savage A;vars. Sa.mo defeate d the Arv,a xs rund founde d the first SlovaJllic state ,near the central Danube . Encour aged by the victory over the A vars, Samo led the Slovan ic peoples agains t the German ic Franks . Samo again was victorio us; his Slovani c army defeate d the Franks under Dagob ert in a three-d ay battle near the Vogast e castle in 631. Becaus e the Slovak s were settled north of the Danub e and the Slovenians south of it, Samo's empire stretch ed over these territor ies. The Slovani c peoples within these territor ies were called by the commo n name of Sloven es (Slovie ni). The main fortres s of this Slovani c empire was situate d in Slovak ia at the conflue nce of the Morava and Danube rivers. Samo's empire , howeve r, disinte grated soon after his death (658). Wheth er it was the ,k ingdom of the Slova!ks alone is questio nable, but the fact remain s that the territory of Slovak ia formed the core of it. ilfu-edegar's "Chron icles" ;record that a ~trong westem Slovan ic empire existed already in the seventh century , strong enough to, resist the pressu re of the Avars and the rule of Dagob ert. Fredeg ar wrote quite plainly that Samo came along when the Slovam c tribes of the area were successful ly rebellin g aga~t the rule of the A vars. His "Chro.nioles" form the basis of most theorie s in ;regard to the ethnica l composiition of Samo's Empire , its territor ial extent and the site of its princip al city or strongh old. In recent yeara Slova!k, Polish, and Czech scholar s of Slavist ics agreed that Samo's strongh old, the center of his empire , was at De... vin, at ,t he conflue nce of the Morav a and Danll!be rivers. �SLOVAK.IA 72 Professor Oettinger, well-knOIWll historian and archeologis t of Vienna, however, .prefers to Tegard Vienna as the center of Samo's Empire. In his book "Das Warden Wiens" (19M), he tells that he .bases his conclusion especially on the findings resulting from the discovery of the ancient Berghof Castle in Vienna, the remains of which can ibe traced ;to Samo's time. The Ava.rs, a nomadic people, could not build such a g,reat citadel of stone. Presenting a whole series of philological airguments to baclk his theory, professor Oettinger states that tt is self-eviden t that SlovaJks and ,p ossibly other Slwanic peoples lived in the aJrea of Vienna iaJIJ.d far to the west along the Danube territory during Samo's time. While the Slovanic peoples were resisting the A vars heroically, a strong Frankish empire was being built in the west. The power of this empire, whose borders in the eighth century extended from the Pyrenees to the Sumava River, became consolidate d especially during the reign of Charles the Great (Charlemag ne), who ruled from 768 to 814, and united all the Germanic tribes, subjugated the Bavarians and the Saxons in the east, and came into contact with the most westerly tribes of the Slovans. In 799 the armies of Charlemag ne defeated the Arvars, who lateT were aJbso;z1bed by the Slovanic inhabitants of the Danube countries. But the great empire of Charlemag ne, who became Emperor in 800, had another weapon besides its strong army for its aggression s into the neighborin g countries of the east. That weapon was Christianit y, which in the Franldsh empire had spread and become so strong that already during the reign of Charlemag ne the way was prepared for it to reach the Danubian Slovans who were settled along the eastern borders of the Frankish empire. To safegururd the eastern f:rontier of his empiire, Charlemagne placed heavy military garrisons along bordering countries. Such territories were called "Marks" and were managed by so-called "Markgrav es." In a short time it became evident that the military garriso!IlS of such Marks were not only for defense, but also for advance into the neighboring Slovanic countries. Contempor aneously new bishoprics and monasterie s were built along these bordering countries which strengthen ed the Christian faith and 1 �SIJOVAKIA 73 propagated Christian culture. It was thus that Christianity came to the neighboring Slovanic nations. Slovakia already in the very beginning of the ninth century came into immediate contact with the military and cultural might of the Frankish empire. The Slovak nation crossed the threshhold of its national and cultural history. ~RiINCiE PRJ.BINA The Slovanic tribes, which settled on the northern bank of the Danube, on ,b oth sides of the 1Mora,va river, weTe called Moravians. Philologis~, historians, a,nd aroheologists have a.miply demonstrated that whatever had b,een mentioned in old historical documents aibout the MoraJVian.s referred in £act to the ancestors of the Slovaks, the Slovans (ISla<vS) who already in the first half of the ninth century were the inhaJbitants of the territory on both sides of the MoTava river. in anoient d0<:uments we find the name "Slovenica" used interchangeably with ' 1Moravia" and "Magna Moravia" to designate the territory on both sides of the Morava riveT. A document of King Loruis from the year 861 also, calls that area "Slovenica." In western (Latin) sources, the inhabit.., ants of that territory were called ''Moravians" and "the Slarvs of Moravia" (Slavi; Sclavi; Sch1avi; Sc,l a,v i Marahenses; Marehenses; Maravi; Mairavani; Moravi; Maraibi; MarahaJvi; Sclavini; Selavi Margenses) to distinguish them from the Slorvans (Slavs) who had occupied other territories (Behemi; Sclavi Boehemia; Boemie; Beheimi; Boemani ; Boo-. manici; Behemani; Bohemani; Bulgari; Vulgari; ChTobati; BeJochrobati; .Kosari; Czechi; Poloni; ,Russi; etc.). In eastern sources, however, the inhabitants of the same territory were called "Slovenes" ('Slovieni; Sloveni), while their land wa:s rreferred to as "Slovak Land" and "Moravia" (.Slovenska zemlja; Morava). It is significant that af.ter the fall olf Great Moravia, her inhabitants were referred to by their a,ndent name: Slavi; ,Sclavi; Slovieni; Sloveni - older forms of the term Slovak, which began to appear onyl after the fifteenth centUTY. From reliable sources we learn that about the year 830,. there ruled in Slovakia a prince named Pribina, who resided in Nitra. The name Pribina and Nitra are very dear �74 SLOVAKIA to ,t he hearts of all .Slovaks, because Prilbina is the name of the first Slovak ruler ever mentioned by history, and Nitra is the name of the first Slovak castle which became the cradle of Slovak national history. Pribina reigned in Nitra and his principality extended over the territory of the fertile basin of the Nitra river. The sovereignty of the Prince of Nitra was acknowledged by other Slovak principalities that extended along the Hron river country, the banks of the Vah and other Slovak lands. Under the rule of Prince Pribina belonged the Slovaik principalities that lay to the east of the Small Carpathians. The same sources tell us that Archbishop Adalram of Salzburg blessed a church on Pribina's land in Nitra. This consecration is proof that the Christianity spread by the German priests among the Slovaks already had taken firm root. Pribina's church in Nitra is the first Christian church on the territory of the western Slovans. While other Slovanic peoples in the eastern half of Europe still lived far off from western-European Christian culture and wandered in the darkness of paganism, the Slovak nation already in the beginning of the ninth century was counted among the Christian, the cultured nations of Europe. At the time of the consecration of the Nitra church, in 833, Pribina himself was not yet a Christian. But the circumstance that Pribina allowed the Christian faith to be preached to his nation proves that the first Slovak ruler, even though he probably could not grasp the significance of Christian doctrine, nevertheless understood the political and cultural significance of Christianity on the SlovanoGermanic border. Pribina, a wise and prudent ruler, knew that a small nation at this dangerous crossroad could defend itself against its stronger neighbors only when it was equal to them culturally. Not long afterwards, however, cruel calamity befell the ruler of Nitra. Prince Mojmir, who had united the Slovak tribes in the western part of the Slovak territory under his rule and who probably resided at Devin, drove Pribina out of Nitra and occupied his domain. Out of this union of .Mojmirs country with Pribina's, there arose on the north bank of the Danube a state that united all the Slovak �SLOVAKIA 75 tribes. The state, thus established about the year 830, was called Great Moravia (VeFka Morava) or the Great Moravian Empire (Vefkomoravska risa). Pribina, with his son Kocef and a retinue of Slovak magnates, sought refuge in the neighboring Mark to the east, near the Danube. Markgrave Ratbod presented Pribina to King Louis the German. The latter had Pribina in:structed in the Christian faith and baptized in St. Martin's ,c hurch in the city of Treisma (probably the present city of Sankt Polten in Germany). For a time Pribina and his group lived in the court of Markgrave Ratbod, but when the latter refused to aid him against Mojmir, he went to the Bulgars. However, he did not tarry there for long either, because soon after we find him seeking the aid of Ratimar, the Croatian Prince. At that time (about 838), Ratimar was not on good terms with Ratbod, so Pribina had to take refuge with Count Salach of Corutania. The latter succeeded in reconciling Pribina with Ratbod. In exile Pribina convinced himself that he could not regain his lost domain and return to Nitra. He became reconciled with his fate and sought to gain the favor of King Louis the German. The latter entrusted to Pribina the new principality beyond the Danube, the country of Pannonia near Blatno. In 847 he became the independent ruler of this principality and built a formidable citadel there that was called Blatnohrad (Moosburg). After his baptism, Pribina became a zealous Christian and sought to convert all his subjects to Christianity. He invited German missionaries into his domain, built churches, endowed monasteries and often welcomed the archbishop of Salzburg at his court. In his work, Pribina had a zealous helper in the person of his son Kocel'. When Pribina died in 861 under mysterious circumstances, Kocel' inherited his principality. The Slovak nation, immediately with its first appearance on the stage of European history, entered the services of Christian culture. The Slovaks are the oldest nation on the central Danube and they were the first nation in Central Europe to have its own independent state. It is well to note that the Slovak State from its very inception was ,a Christian State. �76 SLOVAKIA CHAPTER TWO 'DHiE GREAT M!ORA~ EJMPI'RE The studies of historians, philologists, and -archeolo~ gists clearly indicate that the Great Moravian Empire was not the empire of the ''Great Moravians," but the land of the ancietn Slov•a k s who had settled on both sides of the 'Morava river. The Great Moravian IDmpire, then, was in reality a Great Slova!k Empire, if we are to call the territory by the name of the peole who had occupied it from the dawn of history. These studies refute the hypothesis of the Czech and non-Czech philologists, ethnogr~phers, and historians, who claim that "Czechs and Slovaks of Bohemia, MMoraviia, and Nor.them Hung•a ry (SlovaJkia) fornied a single group with a common langua,ge." Furthermore, these studies tell us that at first there were two estates or rprinciipalities in that area: the one called "Mol'ova" was around the Morava up to the Vah with its capital city at Devin, while the other called "Nitra" the capital city of which bore the i,;ame name - was around the Nitra river. When Mojmir, the ruler of Moravia, conquered Pribina, the ruler of Nitra, German chronicles 'began to call his empire "Magna Mora'Via," whk'h meant the annexation of the NitJ:ra principality to that of Mor8JVia. We afso leiarn from these studies that the ancestors of the Czechs had settled in the land of the Boii (Boehemi,a; Behemia; Bohemia) just ltbout at the same time that the Slovaks occupied the territory of the Morava river. Moj!mir, Rastislav, and Sviitopllllk built the empire of the Slova!ks, while Hostivit and Borivoj built .the state of the Czechs. The Annales Fra,ncofuldenses tell us that "Sviitoplwk extricated the Czech tribes from Frankish rule by force." Later the Czechs (Slavs of Bohemia) even joined the Germans to wage war agaJnst the Great Moravian EmpiTe. When Mojmir, some time in the year 836, drove Pribina out of Nitra and united the territory inhabited by Slovak trib,es into a larger unit, there arose on the northern bank of the Danube an empire which the Byzantine em1 �SLOVAKIA 77 peror, Constantine Po.rphyrogennetos, in his work "About the Management of a State" (950), calls Great Moravia. Mojmir's empire stretched over the territory of present Slovakia and Moravia and was, after Samo's empire, the second Slovanic state near the Danube on the German-Slovanic border. Just as Samo's Empire, so even the Great Mora'Vlian Empire had its origin at the same historic crossroad, because it was here that the greatest danger threatened the Slovanic peoples and they had to unite in defense of their freedom a,nd independence. While Samo's empire , arose because the Slovans along the Danube wanted to protect themselves against the enemies from the east, Great Moravia was established under pressure of danger from the west. Mojmir, like Pribina, tried to live in peace with the neighboring Germans, because he knew that war with them could only end disastrously for the Slovaks. Mojmir was already a Christian, so the missionary activity of the German priests on the territory of Great Moravia went on nuhampered. We must remember that Great Moravia at that time did not have any definite borders, because the borders of states of the Middle Ages never were defined strictly. The area of Great Moravia changed because the successors of Mojmir did undertake expeditions into neighboring countries, defeated them in battle and annexed them to the empire. Louis the German did not relish the idea of a great, united Slovanic empire as a neighbor. In 846 he unseated Mojmir and replaced him with Rastislav. The latter simu~ lated friendship for Louis, but knew well that the independence of his country was constantly threatened by the Germans. The independence of Great Moravia was threatened not only by German armies, but also by the missionary activity of the German priests, who had begun to look upon the territory as a part of the German empire. In about 860 Rastislav sent a special messenger to Pope Nicholas I in Rome with a request for missionaries who had a command of the Slovanic tongues. The Pope, however, answered he was sorry that he could not help Rastislav, �78 SLOVAKIA because at that time there were no such priests in Rome. After due deliberation with his advisers, Rastislav decided to send a special mission to .Constantinople, to .E mperor Michael ill. Rastislav's request, as presented to the Emperor, read: "Since our people has cast off paganism and follows the Christian law, we do not have such a teacher, who might explain the true Christian Faith to us in our own tongue, so that even other parties, witnessing this, might become like unto us. So send us, Emperor, such a bishop and teacher, because your country is everywhere recognized for its good laws." Just about that time the German empire found strong allies in the Bulgarians, who bordered with Great Moravia at the Tisa river and lived in enmity with the Byzantine emperor. Michael did not have to deliberate long with his counsellors. He wanted Rastislav as an ally against the German-Bulgarian alliance and, hence, decided to aid the ruler of Great Moravia in his quest for missionaries who could speak the language of Rastislav's people. Up to this time the land of the Slovaks was subject to the influence of western culture only. Now it was to make contacts with the Christian culture of the European east. SLOVAK .APOSTLES: CYRIL .AND METHODLUS Em;peror Michael of Constantinople decided to send Constantine (Cyril), the philosopher and linguist, and his brother Methodius, who was versed in the art of government, to preach the Gospel to the people of Rastislav. Constantine had distinguished himself in apostolic work before, at first alone and later with his brother Methodius. As natives of Salonica (Thessalonica) they were suited for the mission: they new the language of Rastislav's people, the forefathers of the Slovaks. The Emperor, having summoned them, told the brothers: "You are from Salonica, and all Salonicans speak pUTe Slovanic." Upon learning that Rastislav's people did not have their own script, the task of inventing one fell to the lot of Constantine. Legend has it that the alphabet worked out by Constantine (Cyril) had been revealed to him by God. It was quite an achievement. Constantine started with Greek �SLOVAKIA 79 characters, but Slovanic sounds of the ninth century varied greatly with the Greek, therefore signs and characters had to be created to designate them. The alphabet that resulted is known as "Cyrillic." After due preparation for their new mission, the brothers Constantine (Cyril) and Methodius set out for the country of Rastislav. They arrived in Rastislav's empire in 863 and began preaching the Word of God in the language of the people. Soon ,a fter the translation of the Scriptl.ll'es and liturgical 1b ooks was completed and present... ed to Rastislav's court at Devin. Naturally the saintly brothers gained many admirers and disciples. These catechists went among their people and aided Constantine and Methodius in their missionary work. Up to the time of the Slovak apostles, only three languages were considered feasible for ecclesiastic life, the Holy Scriptures and the Church liturgy: Hebrew, Latin and Greek. The latter two were used extensively-the Greek in the Byzantine (eastern) Church and Latin in the Roman (western) Church. Due to the efforts of Constantine and Methodius, the language of the Slovaks (early Slovanic) became the third language to be used in Church liturgy. The work of Constantine and Methodius in Rastislav's empire was blessed with success. The saintly brothers united the people of Rastislav spiritually and. also contributed handsomely to the material welfare of the Great Moravian Empire. Their disciples later spread the Gospel to other neighboring Slovanic nations (Czechs, Serbs, Russians) in a language that was for the most part understandable to all Slo-\'anic nations. The German clergy of Salzburg viewed the work of Constantine and Methodius with envy and accused the brothers of introdllJlcing dangerous innovations into the liturgy of the Church. A protest against their activities was lodged in Rome, and the brothers were summoned by Pope Nicholas (858-867) to vindicate themselves. Constantine and Methodius set out for Rome in 867. Their journey led them through Lake Blatno (Balaton), the residence of Prince Kocer, Pribina's son. Kocer received the brothers with great joy and examined their liturgical �80 SLOVAKIA books in the Slovanic script with great interest. Leaving Kocer, Constantine and Methodius passed through Corinthia to Venice on the Adriatic Sea. At Venice they successfully defended their use of the language of Rastislav's people in the liturgy of the Church, while the ecclesiastics there had to concede defeat in the debate. While Constantine and Methodius made their way to Rome, Pope Nicholas died. Four days later his successor, Adriam ]I (867--872), was elected head of the ChuTch. The saintly brothers were given a cordial reception by the Pope, and, after convincing a synod of bishops that they were not guilty of introducing any dangerous innovations into the liturgy of the Church, their activities were accorded Adrian's approval. The Holy Father accepted the liturgical books in ;the Slov,anic language, blessed them on the aUar of the church of St. Mary Major, and celebrated the Divine Liturgy over them himself. The Pope then proceeded to consecrate Constantine and Methodius as bishops. A number of their disciples (Clement, Gorazd, Angelar, Sava and Naum) were ordained to the priesthood by the bishops Formosus and Gaundenrich. Shortly thereafter Constantine became seriously ill and retired to a monastery. There he joined the religious community, taking the name of Cyril. He died February 14, 869, and his earthly remains were buried on the right side of the high altar of the church of St. Clement in Rome. After the death of Saint Cyril, the entire burden of spreading the Gospel and teaching of Christ rested on the shoulders of his brother. Methodius returned as archbishop and papal legate fully authorized to organize the Church in the land of Rastislav. Archbishop Methodius became the head of Slovanic Christendom. Besides receiving the highest ecclesiastical dignity, Methodius carried letters from the Pope for Rastislav of Great Moravia, Svatopluk of Nitra and Kocef of Blatnohrad Castle (Moosburg), the three Slovak princes, which stated that the Pope permitted the use of Slovanic liturgy with the reservation that the epistle and ,gospel always be read in Latin before being read in the vernacular (Slovanic). The archdiocese of Methodius extended over Great Moravia and beyond the Danube over �SLOVAKIA 81 Pannonia, uniting the lands governed by Slovak rulers. But as Methodius was returing to continue his apostolic work among the people of Rastislav, a new ruler was taking over the throne of Great Moravia. KING S,V ATOPDUCK While Methodius was in Rome, the Germans continued to harass Rastislav. In 869 King Louis the German declared war against the neighboring Slovanic peoples and invaded their lands with his armies headed by his three sons. Prince Louis attacked the Lusatian Serbs, Charles went after Rastislav, and Carloman tore into the territory that was ruled by Rastislav's nephew, Svatopluk of Nitra. The German armies plundered and pillaged the Great Moravian Empire. But Rastislav's stronghold, the mighty Devin, proved impregnable and Rastislav's empire retained its independence. The following year, however, Rastislav was betrayed by his own kinsman, his nephew Svatopluk, regent of Nitra. Success in battle had turned Svatopluk's head. The Germans played up to Svatopluk and promised to help him gain the throne of Great Moravia. Svatopluk decided to betray his uncle and vowed loyalty to Carloman. Rastislav, however, learned of the plot and became furious. Having vowed to punish his traitorous nephew, he ordered his men to do away with Svatopluk at a banquet, but their attempt to take and kill him failed. Soon thereafter Rastislav led his army against Svatopluk. In the ensuing battle, Rastislav was defeated. Worse than that, he was captured and handed over to the Germans. Carloman sent Rastislav bound in chains to Bavaria where King Louis the German imprisoned him and had his eyes ,gouged out. Rastislav died later as a prisoner of the Germans. With Rastislav's defeat the Great Moravian Empire passed completely into the hands of the German crown. The Germans also seized Archbishop Methodius, who had returned from Rome, and imprisoned him. The Bavarian bishops, who regarded Methodius as a foreign intruder, made claims to the territories of the Slovanic peoples along the Danube and dealt with Methodius so inhumanely that Svatopluk himself intervened in his behalf. When Carlo- �82 SLOVAKIA man took possession of Rastislav's country and seized his royal treasures, he entrusted the rule of the ravaged country to Svatopluk. Svatopluk soon proved himself a strong ruler. As a soldier he excelled in ruthless courage. The Germans began to distrust him, because they feared he would build an empire so strong as to imperil their country. Louis the German decided to put Svatopluk out of the way. In 871 the Germans succeeded in taking Svatopluk and imprisoned him. Some of his castles were taken over by the German Markgraves. Svatopluk denied the charge of Carloman that he plotted against the German crown, but that did not help him. When the Slovaks learned what had happened to their ruler, they elected Slavomir to take his place and rebelled against the Germans. Slavomir was supported by the whole country. A terrilble war followed. The Germans suffered heaivy losses. Devin proved impregnable to their attacks. In the meantime, the wily Svatopluk was plotting to even matters with the Germans who had tricked him. While in prison he repented his betrayal of Rastislav and vowed to even the score with his German captors. Svatopluk begged Carloman to release him so that he might subdue the Slovaks under Slavomir. Carloman was reluctant at first, but finally gave in to Svatopluk's pleadings. Accompanyin g a large German army, Sviitopluk soon found himself below the mighty fortress of Devin. While the German army encamped quietly below the citadel, Svatopluk set out with a small detachment of men to the castle to persuade Slavomir to surrender without a battle. Once inside the castle, Svatopluk disclosed his plan to Slavomir. Assuming command of the Slovak army, Svatopluk tore out of the courtyard and attacked the Germans with such sa;vagery that only few were able to esc•a;pe alirve. Carloman's army was caught unawares and crushed. Svatopluk knew that the Germans would come after him sooner or later. He looked around for allies. That same year (871), he married the sister of Borivoj, ruler of the Bohemian fand, and formed an alliance with' him. Svatopluk pressed the offensive against the Germans and was quite �SLOVAKIA 83 successful. In 873 he defeated Carloman decisively. Carloman asked his father Louis for help to fight the Slovaks. When aid was not forthcoming, Carloman decided to seek a truce with Svatopluk. He signed a pact with Svatopluk at Forsheim in 874 and recognized the independence of the Great Moravian Empire. Svatopluk had reached the pinnacle of his ambitions: he was sole ruler of the Great Moravian Empire, with its crupital at Devin near Bratislava. (Continued) • • • 1856 - DR. SAMUEL CZAMBEL - 1956 P.A. HROBAK T.he year 1956 marks not only the centennial of the dea:th o:f the great Slovak fighter for freedom and democracy, Dr. Louis Sti1r, ,b ut it is a}so the centennial of the birth of the eminent SlovaJk philologist, Samuel Czam:bel. Czambel was born September 1, 1856, in the town of Slovenska Eupca, Zvolen County, 1Slova;kia. The ~tudy of his native Slovak language attracted him early in his life and he devoted much of his adult Hfe to it. He died in Buda.pest, December 18, 1909. In 1887, Czam'bel wrote his Contrioutions to the History of the Slovak Language (''Prispevlky k dejinam jazy.ka slovenskeho") ; he followed this with his Slovak Orthography ("Slovensky praivopis") in 1890; A Manual of the Literary Slovak Language ("Rukovaf spisovnej reci slovenskej") in 1902; The Slovaks and Their Language ("Slovaci a kh rec") in 1903; 8Jlld The Slovak Language and its Place in the Family of Slovanic Languages ("Slo-. venska rec a jej miesto v rodine slovenskych jazykov"), 624 pp., in 1906. Of course, Czambel contributed many other articles on Slovak subjects to Slovak newspapers, periodical reviiews and magazines. Czambel's "Rukovae (Slovak Grammar), revised and modified several times since its first edition by the late Dr. Joseph SkU!ltety, is a ,s tandard work with ,p hilologists, grammarians, and students of Slovak. In his "Slovaoi a ich rec," Czambel promoted the theory that the SlovaJks were every closely related to the Croatians, Slovenes and Serbs � 63 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A . HROBAiK SLOVENSKO - SLOVAKIA - SLOVAKLAND The territory occupied by the Slovak people for the past 1500 years is known as Slovakia. It is situated in the very heart of Europe. Present-day Slovakia has an area of 49,015 square kilometers (approximately 19,000 sq. miles) and a population of 4,000,000. There were times when the borders of Slovakia extended beyond their present limits and times when the land of the Slovaks had no definite borders at all. In ancient times the Slovaks occupied even the western bank of the Morava river and the north bank of the Tisa (Theiss) river. Though the area and the borders of Slovakia changed at various times, its topography - the land and its waterways - did not. Slovakia is bound on the north by the Carpathian Mountains and on the south by the blue Danube and the upper arm of the Tisa river. Into these two streams empty all the rivers of Slovakia that have their origin in the foothills of the King's Plateau (Krafova Hofa) - the natural center of Slovakia: those that run off to the southwest empty into the Danube, while those that course to the southwest pour into the Tisa, forming deep valleys and broad basins between the ,i ndividual mountain :zones that fill out the largest part of the territory of Slovakia. This territory is divided into three parts: 1. western Slovakia which drains into the Danube tributaries; 2. eastern Slovakia that drains into the tributaries of the Tisa; 3. the mountainous country of central Slovakia. The geographical picture of Slovakia is extremely varied, because high mountain ranges alternate with deep valleys which, in places, spread out into basins. Fertile plains stretch out from the foothills of the mountains. Slovakia is situated in the very center of Europe where the north-eastern spurs of the Alps near the central Danube touch upon the mountainous arch of the Carpa- �64 SLOVAKIA thians which is the main watershed of central Europe. From this watershed the streams of central Europe run into several seas. In olden times the course of these streams determined the course of roads along which nations migrated and business and culture flowed. We find Slovakia at the juction of these roads which cross the Caripathian Mountains kom the north and the south. Two roads were especially significant in deciding the fate of Slovakia and the Slovak nation. One coursed along the Danube and connected the western oountTies of Europe with the eastern world. Near the Carpatho-Alpian gate this road intersected with the other important highway which started from the coast of the Adriatic Sea, crossed the Danube, proceeded to the north against the current of the Morava river and went to the coast of the Baltic Sea. Slovakia, according to archeological researches, was well inhabited as early as 5000 B. C., but we do not know the race or the names of the peoples who inhabited the land. Traces of the Neolithic Man, who used stone weapons in hunting the mammoth and the huge cave bear, have been found. The scientific investigator will find much material on the prehistoric period in the museum of Bratislava and Turciansky Svaty Martin. About the year 2000 B.C. begins the Bronze Age with its burial urns, and clay and stone remains, found on the sites of ancient settlements in Slovakland. During the ensuing Iron Age, we find traces of the Illyrians in the west, of the Thracians in the east. The latter came into contact with the Scythians in the valley of the Tisa river. Several nations of various origins and culture lived in Slovakia just before the dawn of the Christian era. According to ancient Greek and Roman writers, the land of the Slovaiks was inhabited by the Gauls and the Celts at that time. In the fourth century B. C., we note traces of the more advanced Gallic culture from the discoveries of golden ornaments and coins, imitations of those issued by Philip III of Macedonia and his son, Alexander the Great. At Bratislava coins of the Roman Republic, dating from the first century B. C., have been found. A Greek map of the Slovak territory, dating back to the third century, �SLOVAKIA 65 shows many Slovanic names for mountains and rivers, The fertile plains of south-eastern Slovakia were occupied by the Boii, a Gallic tri'be, and in the mountainous parts of central Slovakia lived the Kotin (Gothine) tribe which worked the ore of the Iron Mountains. The Osi settled in the neighborhood of the Kotins, while the Korkonti - tribes of southern origin - occupied the northwestern part of Slovakia. In the first half of the last century before Christ the Dacians came to Slovakia from the east and overpowered the Gallic Boii. But in the first quarter of the first century after Christ, the Dacians were forced to migrate to the north into the mountains, because they were iha:rd pressed by the J azygi who had come from the Black Sea to take over the land on the left side of the Danube. During the reign of Tiberius, two Germanic tribes settled in the territory of the Slovaks, the Quadi and the Marcomanni, who frequently raided the Roman proi\Tince of Pannonia on the other side of the Danube. Vannius, the bellicose king of the Quadi, built military fortresses along the V ah river and extended his power to the Turiec a:nd Kysuca rivers. About twenty years after Christ, when a large part of the territory of Slovakia was occupied by the Quadi, the Romans were consolidating their might near the Danube. The Franks and the Romans began to wage war for the control of the territory of Slovakia, a struggle that lasted several centuries. South of the Danube the Romans organized the province of Pannonia, east of which was the province of Dacia. To conquer the whole Danube basin to the Carpathians, the Romans built military strongholds along the south bank of the Danube. Such fortresses were established at Vindobona (Vienna), Carnanthum (Hainburg), Brigetium (Komarno) and at Aquincum (Budapest). To defend and to secure the frontier along the Danube against incursions of barbaric tribes, the Romans sent detachments across the river to established military stations on the northern bank, on the territory of Slovakia. From excacations we know that Ro- �66 SLOVAK.IA man troops were stationed at Devin, Stupava, Bratislava and opposite Komarno at li. The Romans bested the Quadi in battle. Their king Vannius ruled over the territory of Slovakia by the grace of the Roman Emperor. Of course, the Quadi resented this. After Vannius' death the aggressive Quadi challenged the power of the Romans on the Danube and the Roman Emperors had to defend their rule with large armies. Along the Vah river the Roman troops penetrated as far as Trencin. Emperor Marcus Aurelius and his son Commodus defeated the Quadi in 179 A. D. after several bloody skirmishes on Slovak territory, as is commemorate d by inscription on a roc'k at Trencin: "In memory of the IVictory of the Emperor's army that encamped at Laugaricio, 855 soldiers of the II. Legion. Made by Constantine, commander of the II. auxiliary Legion." This army was stationed at Laugaritio, a Roman settlement near Trencin, which has since disappeared. During these skirmishes with the Quadi, probably about 173 A. D., the Roman army in Slovakia found itself threatened by a scarcity of water. In the army that fought against the Germans somewhere along the Hron river, there were several Christians who had come from Asia Minor. These Christian soldiers - the first Christians on Slovak territory - prayed for raiin and their prayers were answered. The Roman army was saved. This incident is immortalized on the Arch of Triumph of Emperor Marcus Aurelius in Rome. The Quadi, 1b eaten repeatedly by the Romans, never ·gwve up trying to drive the Romans out of Slovakia. Emperor Constantine LI defeated them in 258 A.ID. and Emperor Valentian, the last Roman emperor who cowd claim sovereignty over the territory of Slovakia, repeated the pel'for:mance in 3·74. Upon the latter's death in 376, the great Mig;ra~ tion of Nations begain.. Shortly thereafter the Romans ipulled thek gax.risoDJS out of Slo-y;aJk ia and let the Quadi take over. The Quadi, however, were evicted from the territory by the Huns in the first half of the fifth century. The Huns in turn were displaced by the Heruli, who held the territory until about 491 when the Lombards defeated �SLOVAKIA 87 them, occupied their lands and held them until about 526, when they crossed the Danube into Pannonia. Slovrukia, however, did not remain even under the Huns for long. After the disintegration of the Roman Empire, the Germans migrated from Slovakia to the south. The Marcomanni, weakened by the wars with the Romans and forced by the hordes of Attila to join his army, were wiped out in the battle of Cha.Ions (Catalaunian Fields) in 451. There is as yet no definite proof, even though it may be safely assumed, that the Slovaks and related Slovanic tribes came into Slovakia in increasing numbers after the extinction of the Marcomanni. The historian J ordannes, writing in the sixth century, said that all the Hungarian plain was inhabited by Slovanic people (the Slavs). AFTIDR THE ADVENT OF THE SLOVAKS The Slovaks came to their present territory from the East, probably from India. At the time Frankish tribes fought the Roman Legions over the territory of Slovakia, the Slovanic peoples occupied the land that stretched to the north of the Carpathians and to the east of the river Vistula. It was a marshy and unfertile land. In time the growing Slovanic families were forced to emigrate to neighboring territories. The Slovanic peoples who migrated to the west and occupied the territory to the Elbe and Saal rivers are called We,stern Slavs; they are the Poles, the SlOJVaks and! the Czechs; those that occwpied the territory between t'he Elbe and Oder rivers and the country along the coast of the Baltic Sea are known as the Lusatian Serbs (northern Germany) and the Kashubes (near the Baltic Sea); today their numbers are few. The Slovanic peoples, who migrated from their ancient land to the south and occupied the Balkan peninsula, are called the Southern Slavs: the Slovenes, Croatians, Serbs and Bulgarians. A large part of the Slovanic peoples migrated to the east and occupied the plains of eastern Europe. They are the Eastern Slavs: the White Russians, the Little Russians (Ukrainians) and the Great Russians. As the great Slovanic family disintegrated, separate �68 SLOVAKIA Slovanic nations developed with the centuries, each with its dictinct culture, language, customs and traditions. The Slovaks, like other Slovanic peoples, originally were hunters. After a time they took to bee culture and animal husbandry, especially sheep raising. From their neighbors they learned to cultivate the soil. The men folk hunted and herded sheep, while .the women and the slaves did the farm work. The only trades known to them were pottery making and blacksmithing. In business transactions they exchanged products or paid in cloth; money was not known as a means of barter. The Slovaks lived in simple huts made of poles driven into the ground, around which were wound branches and twigs which were then covered with mud. Several families, originating from a common forefather, formed a clan ("rod"). The head of the clan was the oldest member; he was in charge of the common property of the clan. A Slovanic settlement, inhabited by several related families, i.e. a clan, was called a village ("dedina" from "dedo"-grandfather). The village was the common heritage ("dedicstvo") of the whole clan. Several related clans made up a tribe ("kmeii"), the leader of which was the tribal chief, called a priest ("kiiaz") or prince ("knieza). When several such related tribes lived in one territory for a long time a Slovanic state evolved and a Slovanic nation was born. SLOVAK CHARACTERISTICS The Slovanic peoples had many good and bad characteristics. They loved songs and entertainment. Not possessing great wealth, they lived frugally. They were goodhearted and hospitable, but suffered discipline with difficulty. They did not know how to obey, hence there was no harmony among them. They did not seek a battle, but when they had to defend themselves they fought heroically and also knew how to be cruel. All these characterictics of the Slovanic nature can be found in the Slovanic nations even at the ,p resent time. The historian Procopius (562) said that the Slavs were rather tall, hardy, blond-haired people and honesty was one �SlJOVAK.I.A 69 of their marked characteristics. Theophylactus recorded an interesting commentary on the Slavs. He said: "In 590 three men were captured by the Greeks in Thrace; the men carried musical instruments instead of weapons. When Caesar M:auricus asked who they ,w ere, the men answered: 'We are Slavs; we love music; we play the guitar and violin and sing.' Mauricus was overcome by their simplicity. Af.., ter feasting them he had a guard escort them to their lands." The German historian Herder had this to say about the Slavs: "They loved farming; they had herds and implements and a home industry ; with the products of their land and their industry they carried on a useful business. They built cities and in places occupied themselves with mining; they knew how to melt and mold metals. The Slavs prepared salt, made cloth, brewed beer, grafted trees, and lived according to their manner a happy, musical life.'' The Slovaks of old had names for implements, furniture, grains, fruit trees, trades and animals. They had their own words for: plow, iron, cloth, needle, pliers, wheel, wagon, seal, ring, blacksmith, spoon, clothier, butcher, cape, jeweler. As a musical people they had many folk songs. In number and variety of content they are second to those of no other nation. SLOVAK MYTHOLOGY There are very few reliable records of the religion of ancient Slovanic peoples. We know that they believed in a Supreme Being and in immortality. The Slovaks called the Supreme Being "Praboh" :_ the God of all gods. They had a White God - the God of all good, and a Black God - the God of evil and death. Many lesser gods, belonging to both the white and black groups, also existed for the ancient Slovaks and other Slovanic peoples. "ZIVENA" was the godess of life, and "MORENA" the godess of death. Brooks and streams housed nymphs, and fairies inhabited the woods and forests. "LADA" was the godess of beauty, while "URODA" was the godess of the fields and crops. ' ~PfilRUIN" (P.AJROM" ) , the God of thunder, was held in great respect. �70 SLOVAKIA The ancient Slovaks worshipped and invoked their gods in sacred groves. They offered sacrifices of grain and animals to images of wood and stone through their priests. The White Priests (BieJok:iiazi) served and invoked the White Gods. The White Priests were most important men of the tribe; they presided at all councils and trials and their judgments and decisions were final. The Black Priests - the magicians and sorcerers - were believed to possess powers of tmnsforming peraons into animals and inanimate objects. The Slovaks, like most of the other Slovanic peoples of ancient times, cremated or buried their dead. Food, weapons, wine and jewelry were usually placed in the graves of the dead. Ashes of the dead were placed in urns of clay and then buried. Mounds of clay and stone were built over burial places; the greater the mound, the more important the person or persons buried there. Several such mounds were found and excavated in Slovakia (at Skalica, Brezolupy, Boooivce, Kras:iiany near 2ilina and at Cepcin in Turiec). One of the most extensive burial grounds was uncovered at Devinska Nova Ves. Some of the customs and practices of the ancient pagan Slovaks have survived the centuries and are still observed in many quaint villages of Slovakia today. Many of the pagan practices, however, disappeared with the advent of Christianity. As the Slovanic peoples abandoned their ancient lands and began to colonize central and eastern Europe - after the Germanic Heruli and Lombards withdrew from the territory of Slovakia in the sixth ·century and the Slovaks came in - the savage nation of the Avars tore into the Danube basin, overran the whole territory, and pushed deeply into the Frankish kingdom in the west. During the next hundred years the whole region seethed in turmoil. The Avars were wild nomads of Turko-Tartarian origin who rode their horses rough-shod over the countries of their neighbors and subjugated them. They settled in Pannonia, where they built military camps which were protected by huge, circular mounds of earth and stone and wooden fences. The Slovaks withdrew from this territory �SLOVAKIA 71 and settled north of the Danube . Part of the Slovak tribes lived in the mounta ins; they were govern ed by their own princes . The Slovan ic peoples along the Danube had to serve the Avars and were forced to go with them on their rampages into neighb oring territor ies. The A vars looted the Germa n lands in the west and Constan tinoiple (Cari•h rad) and Salonik a in the east. Natura lly, the Slovan ic peoples wanted tQ throw off the yoke of the Aivars and waited for the opportu ne momen t to rebel. That time came in 624, when Samo, a Franki sh mercha nt, succeed ed in uniting the Slovani c peoples and led them in battle agains t the savage A;vars. Sa.mo defeate d the Arv,a xs rund founde d the first SlovaJllic state ,near the central Danube . Encour aged by the victory over the A vars, Samo led the Slovan ic peoples agains t the German ic Franks . Samo again was victorio us; his Slovani c army defeate d the Franks under Dagob ert in a three-d ay battle near the Vogast e castle in 631. Becaus e the Slovak s were settled north of the Danub e and the Slovenians south of it, Samo's empire stretch ed over these territor ies. The Slovani c peoples within these territor ies were called by the commo n name of Sloven es (Slovie ni). The main fortres s of this Slovani c empire was situate d in Slovak ia at the conflue nce of the Morava and Danube rivers. Samo's empire , howeve r, disinte grated soon after his death (658). Wheth er it was the ,k ingdom of the Slova!ks alone is questio nable, but the fact remain s that the territory of Slovak ia formed the core of it. ilfu-edegar's "Chron icles" ;record that a ~trong westem Slovan ic empire existed already in the seventh century , strong enough to, resist the pressu re of the Avars and the rule of Dagob ert. Fredeg ar wrote quite plainly that Samo came along when the Slovam c tribes of the area were successful ly rebellin g aga~t the rule of the A vars. His "Chro.nioles" form the basis of most theorie s in ;regard to the ethnica l composiition of Samo's Empire , its territor ial extent and the site of its princip al city or strongh old. In recent yeara Slova!k, Polish, and Czech scholar s of Slavist ics agreed that Samo's strongh old, the center of his empire , was at De... vin, at ,t he conflue nce of the Morav a and Danll!be rivers. �SLOVAK.IA 72 Professor Oettinger, well-knOIWll historian and archeologis t of Vienna, however, .prefers to Tegard Vienna as the center of Samo's Empire. In his book "Das Warden Wiens" (19M), he tells that he .bases his conclusion especially on the findings resulting from the discovery of the ancient Berghof Castle in Vienna, the remains of which can ibe traced ;to Samo's time. The Ava.rs, a nomadic people, could not build such a g,reat citadel of stone. Presenting a whole series of philological airguments to baclk his theory, professor Oettinger states that tt is self-eviden t that SlovaJks and ,p ossibly other Slwanic peoples lived in the aJrea of Vienna iaJIJ.d far to the west along the Danube territory during Samo's time. While the Slovanic peoples were resisting the A vars heroically, a strong Frankish empire was being built in the west. The power of this empire, whose borders in the eighth century extended from the Pyrenees to the Sumava River, became consolidate d especially during the reign of Charles the Great (Charlemag ne), who ruled from 768 to 814, and united all the Germanic tribes, subjugated the Bavarians and the Saxons in the east, and came into contact with the most westerly tribes of the Slovans. In 799 the armies of Charlemag ne defeated the Arvars, who lateT were aJbso;z1bed by the Slovanic inhabitants of the Danube countries. But the great empire of Charlemag ne, who became Emperor in 800, had another weapon besides its strong army for its aggression s into the neighborin g countries of the east. That weapon was Christianit y, which in the Franldsh empire had spread and become so strong that already during the reign of Charlemag ne the way was prepared for it to reach the Danubian Slovans who were settled along the eastern borders of the Frankish empire. To safegururd the eastern f:rontier of his empiire, Charlemagne placed heavy military garrisons along bordering countries. Such territories were called "Marks" and were managed by so-called "Markgrav es." In a short time it became evident that the military garriso!IlS of such Marks were not only for defense, but also for advance into the neighboring Slovanic countries. Contempor aneously new bishoprics and monasterie s were built along these bordering countries which strengthen ed the Christian faith and 1 �SIJOVAKIA 73 propagated Christian culture. It was thus that Christianity came to the neighboring Slovanic nations. Slovakia already in the very beginning of the ninth century came into immediate contact with the military and cultural might of the Frankish empire. The Slovak nation crossed the threshhold of its national and cultural history. ~RiINCiE PRJ.BINA The Slovanic tribes, which settled on the northern bank of the Danube, on ,b oth sides of the 1Mora,va river, weTe called Moravians. Philologis~, historians, a,nd aroheologists have a.miply demonstrated that whatever had b,een mentioned in old historical documents aibout the MoraJVian.s referred in £act to the ancestors of the Slovaks, the Slovans (ISla<vS) who already in the first half of the ninth century were the inhaJbitants of the territory on both sides of the MoTava river. in anoient d0<:uments we find the name "Slovenica" used interchangeably with ' 1Moravia" and "Magna Moravia" to designate the territory on both sides of the Morava riveT. A document of King Loruis from the year 861 also, calls that area "Slovenica." In western (Latin) sources, the inhabit.., ants of that territory were called ''Moravians" and "the Slarvs of Moravia" (Slavi; Sclavi; Sch1avi; Sc,l a,v i Marahenses; Marehenses; Maravi; Mairavani; Moravi; Maraibi; MarahaJvi; Sclavini; Selavi Margenses) to distinguish them from the Slorvans (Slavs) who had occupied other territories (Behemi; Sclavi Boehemia; Boemie; Beheimi; Boemani ; Boo-. manici; Behemani; Bohemani; Bulgari; Vulgari; ChTobati; BeJochrobati; .Kosari; Czechi; Poloni; ,Russi; etc.). In eastern sources, however, the inhabitants of the same territory were called "Slovenes" ('Slovieni; Sloveni), while their land wa:s rreferred to as "Slovak Land" and "Moravia" (.Slovenska zemlja; Morava). It is significant that af.ter the fall olf Great Moravia, her inhabitants were referred to by their a,ndent name: Slavi; ,Sclavi; Slovieni; Sloveni - older forms of the term Slovak, which began to appear onyl after the fifteenth centUTY. From reliable sources we learn that about the year 830,. there ruled in Slovakia a prince named Pribina, who resided in Nitra. The name Pribina and Nitra are very dear �74 SLOVAKIA to ,t he hearts of all .Slovaks, because Prilbina is the name of the first Slovak ruler ever mentioned by history, and Nitra is the name of the first Slovak castle which became the cradle of Slovak national history. Pribina reigned in Nitra and his principality extended over the territory of the fertile basin of the Nitra river. The sovereignty of the Prince of Nitra was acknowledged by other Slovak principalities that extended along the Hron river country, the banks of the Vah and other Slovak lands. Under the rule of Prince Pribina belonged the Slovaik principalities that lay to the east of the Small Carpathians. The same sources tell us that Archbishop Adalram of Salzburg blessed a church on Pribina's land in Nitra. This consecration is proof that the Christianity spread by the German priests among the Slovaks already had taken firm root. Pribina's church in Nitra is the first Christian church on the territory of the western Slovans. While other Slovanic peoples in the eastern half of Europe still lived far off from western-European Christian culture and wandered in the darkness of paganism, the Slovak nation already in the beginning of the ninth century was counted among the Christian, the cultured nations of Europe. At the time of the consecration of the Nitra church, in 833, Pribina himself was not yet a Christian. But the circumstance that Pribina allowed the Christian faith to be preached to his nation proves that the first Slovak ruler, even though he probably could not grasp the significance of Christian doctrine, nevertheless understood the political and cultural significance of Christianity on the SlovanoGermanic border. Pribina, a wise and prudent ruler, knew that a small nation at this dangerous crossroad could defend itself against its stronger neighbors only when it was equal to them culturally. Not long afterwards, however, cruel calamity befell the ruler of Nitra. Prince Mojmir, who had united the Slovak tribes in the western part of the Slovak territory under his rule and who probably resided at Devin, drove Pribina out of Nitra and occupied his domain. Out of this union of .Mojmirs country with Pribina's, there arose on the north bank of the Danube a state that united all the Slovak �SLOVAKIA 75 tribes. The state, thus established about the year 830, was called Great Moravia (VeFka Morava) or the Great Moravian Empire (Vefkomoravska risa). Pribina, with his son Kocef and a retinue of Slovak magnates, sought refuge in the neighboring Mark to the east, near the Danube. Markgrave Ratbod presented Pribina to King Louis the German. The latter had Pribina in:structed in the Christian faith and baptized in St. Martin's ,c hurch in the city of Treisma (probably the present city of Sankt Polten in Germany). For a time Pribina and his group lived in the court of Markgrave Ratbod, but when the latter refused to aid him against Mojmir, he went to the Bulgars. However, he did not tarry there for long either, because soon after we find him seeking the aid of Ratimar, the Croatian Prince. At that time (about 838), Ratimar was not on good terms with Ratbod, so Pribina had to take refuge with Count Salach of Corutania. The latter succeeded in reconciling Pribina with Ratbod. In exile Pribina convinced himself that he could not regain his lost domain and return to Nitra. He became reconciled with his fate and sought to gain the favor of King Louis the German. The latter entrusted to Pribina the new principality beyond the Danube, the country of Pannonia near Blatno. In 847 he became the independent ruler of this principality and built a formidable citadel there that was called Blatnohrad (Moosburg). After his baptism, Pribina became a zealous Christian and sought to convert all his subjects to Christianity. He invited German missionaries into his domain, built churches, endowed monasteries and often welcomed the archbishop of Salzburg at his court. In his work, Pribina had a zealous helper in the person of his son Kocel'. When Pribina died in 861 under mysterious circumstances, Kocel' inherited his principality. The Slovak nation, immediately with its first appearance on the stage of European history, entered the services of Christian culture. The Slovaks are the oldest nation on the central Danube and they were the first nation in Central Europe to have its own independent state. It is well to note that the Slovak State from its very inception was ,a Christian State. �76 SLOVAKIA CHAPTER TWO 'DHiE GREAT M!ORA~ EJMPI'RE The studies of historians, philologists, and -archeolo~ gists clearly indicate that the Great Moravian Empire was not the empire of the ''Great Moravians," but the land of the ancietn Slov•a k s who had settled on both sides of the 'Morava river. The Great Moravian IDmpire, then, was in reality a Great Slova!k Empire, if we are to call the territory by the name of the peole who had occupied it from the dawn of history. These studies refute the hypothesis of the Czech and non-Czech philologists, ethnogr~phers, and historians, who claim that "Czechs and Slovaks of Bohemia, MMoraviia, and Nor.them Hung•a ry (SlovaJkia) fornied a single group with a common langua,ge." Furthermore, these studies tell us that at first there were two estates or rprinciipalities in that area: the one called "Mol'ova" was around the Morava up to the Vah with its capital city at Devin, while the other called "Nitra" the capital city of which bore the i,;ame name - was around the Nitra river. When Mojmir, the ruler of Moravia, conquered Pribina, the ruler of Nitra, German chronicles 'began to call his empire "Magna Mora'Via," whk'h meant the annexation of the NitJ:ra principality to that of Mor8JVia. We afso leiarn from these studies that the ancestors of the Czechs had settled in the land of the Boii (Boehemi,a; Behemia; Bohemia) just ltbout at the same time that the Slovaks occupied the territory of the Morava river. Moj!mir, Rastislav, and Sviitopllllk built the empire of the Slova!ks, while Hostivit and Borivoj built .the state of the Czechs. The Annales Fra,ncofuldenses tell us that "Sviitoplwk extricated the Czech tribes from Frankish rule by force." Later the Czechs (Slavs of Bohemia) even joined the Germans to wage war agaJnst the Great Moravian EmpiTe. When Mojmir, some time in the year 836, drove Pribina out of Nitra and united the territory inhabited by Slovak trib,es into a larger unit, there arose on the northern bank of the Danube an empire which the Byzantine em1 �SLOVAKIA 77 peror, Constantine Po.rphyrogennetos, in his work "About the Management of a State" (950), calls Great Moravia. Mojmir's empire stretched over the territory of present Slovakia and Moravia and was, after Samo's empire, the second Slovanic state near the Danube on the German-Slovanic border. Just as Samo's Empire, so even the Great Mora'Vlian Empire had its origin at the same historic crossroad, because it was here that the greatest danger threatened the Slovanic peoples and they had to unite in defense of their freedom a,nd independence. While Samo's empire , arose because the Slovans along the Danube wanted to protect themselves against the enemies from the east, Great Moravia was established under pressure of danger from the west. Mojmir, like Pribina, tried to live in peace with the neighboring Germans, because he knew that war with them could only end disastrously for the Slovaks. Mojmir was already a Christian, so the missionary activity of the German priests on the territory of Great Moravia went on nuhampered. We must remember that Great Moravia at that time did not have any definite borders, because the borders of states of the Middle Ages never were defined strictly. The area of Great Moravia changed because the successors of Mojmir did undertake expeditions into neighboring countries, defeated them in battle and annexed them to the empire. Louis the German did not relish the idea of a great, united Slovanic empire as a neighbor. In 846 he unseated Mojmir and replaced him with Rastislav. The latter simu~ lated friendship for Louis, but knew well that the independence of his country was constantly threatened by the Germans. The independence of Great Moravia was threatened not only by German armies, but also by the missionary activity of the German priests, who had begun to look upon the territory as a part of the German empire. In about 860 Rastislav sent a special messenger to Pope Nicholas I in Rome with a request for missionaries who had a command of the Slovanic tongues. The Pope, however, answered he was sorry that he could not help Rastislav, �78 SLOVAKIA because at that time there were no such priests in Rome. After due deliberation with his advisers, Rastislav decided to send a special mission to .Constantinople, to .E mperor Michael ill. Rastislav's request, as presented to the Emperor, read: "Since our people has cast off paganism and follows the Christian law, we do not have such a teacher, who might explain the true Christian Faith to us in our own tongue, so that even other parties, witnessing this, might become like unto us. So send us, Emperor, such a bishop and teacher, because your country is everywhere recognized for its good laws." Just about that time the German empire found strong allies in the Bulgarians, who bordered with Great Moravia at the Tisa river and lived in enmity with the Byzantine emperor. Michael did not have to deliberate long with his counsellors. He wanted Rastislav as an ally against the German-Bulgarian alliance and, hence, decided to aid the ruler of Great Moravia in his quest for missionaries who could speak the language of Rastislav's people. Up to this time the land of the Slovaks was subject to the influence of western culture only. Now it was to make contacts with the Christian culture of the European east. SLOVAK .APOSTLES: CYRIL .AND METHODLUS Em;peror Michael of Constantinople decided to send Constantine (Cyril), the philosopher and linguist, and his brother Methodius, who was versed in the art of government, to preach the Gospel to the people of Rastislav. Constantine had distinguished himself in apostolic work before, at first alone and later with his brother Methodius. As natives of Salonica (Thessalonica) they were suited for the mission: they new the language of Rastislav's people, the forefathers of the Slovaks. The Emperor, having summoned them, told the brothers: "You are from Salonica, and all Salonicans speak pUTe Slovanic." Upon learning that Rastislav's people did not have their own script, the task of inventing one fell to the lot of Constantine. Legend has it that the alphabet worked out by Constantine (Cyril) had been revealed to him by God. It was quite an achievement. Constantine started with Greek �SLOVAKIA 79 characters, but Slovanic sounds of the ninth century varied greatly with the Greek, therefore signs and characters had to be created to designate them. The alphabet that resulted is known as "Cyrillic." After due preparation for their new mission, the brothers Constantine (Cyril) and Methodius set out for the country of Rastislav. They arrived in Rastislav's empire in 863 and began preaching the Word of God in the language of the people. Soon ,a fter the translation of the Scriptl.ll'es and liturgical 1b ooks was completed and present... ed to Rastislav's court at Devin. Naturally the saintly brothers gained many admirers and disciples. These catechists went among their people and aided Constantine and Methodius in their missionary work. Up to the time of the Slovak apostles, only three languages were considered feasible for ecclesiastic life, the Holy Scriptures and the Church liturgy: Hebrew, Latin and Greek. The latter two were used extensively-the Greek in the Byzantine (eastern) Church and Latin in the Roman (western) Church. Due to the efforts of Constantine and Methodius, the language of the Slovaks (early Slovanic) became the third language to be used in Church liturgy. The work of Constantine and Methodius in Rastislav's empire was blessed with success. The saintly brothers united the people of Rastislav spiritually and. also contributed handsomely to the material welfare of the Great Moravian Empire. Their disciples later spread the Gospel to other neighboring Slovanic nations (Czechs, Serbs, Russians) in a language that was for the most part understandable to all Slo-\'anic nations. The German clergy of Salzburg viewed the work of Constantine and Methodius with envy and accused the brothers of introdllJlcing dangerous innovations into the liturgy of the Church. A protest against their activities was lodged in Rome, and the brothers were summoned by Pope Nicholas (858-867) to vindicate themselves. Constantine and Methodius set out for Rome in 867. Their journey led them through Lake Blatno (Balaton), the residence of Prince Kocer, Pribina's son. Kocer received the brothers with great joy and examined their liturgical �80 SLOVAKIA books in the Slovanic script with great interest. Leaving Kocer, Constantine and Methodius passed through Corinthia to Venice on the Adriatic Sea. At Venice they successfully defended their use of the language of Rastislav's people in the liturgy of the Church, while the ecclesiastics there had to concede defeat in the debate. While Constantine and Methodius made their way to Rome, Pope Nicholas died. Four days later his successor, Adriam ]I (867--872), was elected head of the ChuTch. The saintly brothers were given a cordial reception by the Pope, and, after convincing a synod of bishops that they were not guilty of introducing any dangerous innovations into the liturgy of the Church, their activities were accorded Adrian's approval. The Holy Father accepted the liturgical books in ;the Slov,anic language, blessed them on the aUar of the church of St. Mary Major, and celebrated the Divine Liturgy over them himself. The Pope then proceeded to consecrate Constantine and Methodius as bishops. A number of their disciples (Clement, Gorazd, Angelar, Sava and Naum) were ordained to the priesthood by the bishops Formosus and Gaundenrich. Shortly thereafter Constantine became seriously ill and retired to a monastery. There he joined the religious community, taking the name of Cyril. He died February 14, 869, and his earthly remains were buried on the right side of the high altar of the church of St. Clement in Rome. After the death of Saint Cyril, the entire burden of spreading the Gospel and teaching of Christ rested on the shoulders of his brother. Methodius returned as archbishop and papal legate fully authorized to organize the Church in the land of Rastislav. Archbishop Methodius became the head of Slovanic Christendom. Besides receiving the highest ecclesiastical dignity, Methodius carried letters from the Pope for Rastislav of Great Moravia, Svatopluk of Nitra and Kocef of Blatnohrad Castle (Moosburg), the three Slovak princes, which stated that the Pope permitted the use of Slovanic liturgy with the reservation that the epistle and ,gospel always be read in Latin before being read in the vernacular (Slovanic). The archdiocese of Methodius extended over Great Moravia and beyond the Danube over �SLOVAKIA 81 Pannonia, uniting the lands governed by Slovak rulers. But as Methodius was returing to continue his apostolic work among the people of Rastislav, a new ruler was taking over the throne of Great Moravia. KING S,V ATOPDUCK While Methodius was in Rome, the Germans continued to harass Rastislav. In 869 King Louis the German declared war against the neighboring Slovanic peoples and invaded their lands with his armies headed by his three sons. Prince Louis attacked the Lusatian Serbs, Charles went after Rastislav, and Carloman tore into the territory that was ruled by Rastislav's nephew, Svatopluk of Nitra. The German armies plundered and pillaged the Great Moravian Empire. But Rastislav's stronghold, the mighty Devin, proved impregnable and Rastislav's empire retained its independence. The following year, however, Rastislav was betrayed by his own kinsman, his nephew Svatopluk, regent of Nitra. Success in battle had turned Svatopluk's head. The Germans played up to Svatopluk and promised to help him gain the throne of Great Moravia. Svatopluk decided to betray his uncle and vowed loyalty to Carloman. Rastislav, however, learned of the plot and became furious. Having vowed to punish his traitorous nephew, he ordered his men to do away with Svatopluk at a banquet, but their attempt to take and kill him failed. Soon thereafter Rastislav led his army against Svatopluk. In the ensuing battle, Rastislav was defeated. Worse than that, he was captured and handed over to the Germans. Carloman sent Rastislav bound in chains to Bavaria where King Louis the German imprisoned him and had his eyes ,gouged out. Rastislav died later as a prisoner of the Germans. With Rastislav's defeat the Great Moravian Empire passed completely into the hands of the German crown. The Germans also seized Archbishop Methodius, who had returned from Rome, and imprisoned him. The Bavarian bishops, who regarded Methodius as a foreign intruder, made claims to the territories of the Slovanic peoples along the Danube and dealt with Methodius so inhumanely that Svatopluk himself intervened in his behalf. When Carlo- �82 SLOVAKIA man took possession of Rastislav's country and seized his royal treasures, he entrusted the rule of the ravaged country to Svatopluk. Svatopluk soon proved himself a strong ruler. As a soldier he excelled in ruthless courage. The Germans began to distrust him, because they feared he would build an empire so strong as to imperil their country. Louis the German decided to put Svatopluk out of the way. In 871 the Germans succeeded in taking Svatopluk and imprisoned him. Some of his castles were taken over by the German Markgraves. Svatopluk denied the charge of Carloman that he plotted against the German crown, but that did not help him. When the Slovaks learned what had happened to their ruler, they elected Slavomir to take his place and rebelled against the Germans. Slavomir was supported by the whole country. A terrilble war followed. The Germans suffered heaivy losses. Devin proved impregnable to their attacks. In the meantime, the wily Svatopluk was plotting to even matters with the Germans who had tricked him. While in prison he repented his betrayal of Rastislav and vowed to even the score with his German captors. Svatopluk begged Carloman to release him so that he might subdue the Slovaks under Slavomir. Carloman was reluctant at first, but finally gave in to Svatopluk's pleadings. Accompanyin g a large German army, Sviitopluk soon found himself below the mighty fortress of Devin. While the German army encamped quietly below the citadel, Svatopluk set out with a small detachment of men to the castle to persuade Slavomir to surrender without a battle. Once inside the castle, Svatopluk disclosed his plan to Slavomir. Assuming command of the Slovak army, Svatopluk tore out of the courtyard and attacked the Germans with such sa;vagery that only few were able to esc•a;pe alirve. Carloman's army was caught unawares and crushed. Svatopluk knew that the Germans would come after him sooner or later. He looked around for allies. That same year (871), he married the sister of Borivoj, ruler of the Bohemian fand, and formed an alliance with' him. Svatopluk pressed the offensive against the Germans and was quite �SLOVAKIA 83 successful. In 873 he defeated Carloman decisively. Carloman asked his father Louis for help to fight the Slovaks. When aid was not forthcoming, Carloman decided to seek a truce with Svatopluk. He signed a pact with Svatopluk at Forsheim in 874 and recognized the independence of the Great Moravian Empire. Svatopluk had reached the pinnacle of his ambitions: he was sole ruler of the Great Moravian Empire, with its crupital at Devin near Bratislava. (Continued) • • • 1856 - DR. SAMUEL CZAMBEL - 1956 P.A. HROBAK T.he year 1956 marks not only the centennial of the dea:th o:f the great Slovak fighter for freedom and democracy, Dr. Louis Sti1r, ,b ut it is a}so the centennial of the birth of the eminent SlovaJk philologist, Samuel Czam:bel. Czambel was born September 1, 1856, in the town of Slovenska Eupca, Zvolen County, 1Slova;kia. The ~tudy of his native Slovak language attracted him early in his life and he devoted much of his adult Hfe to it. He died in Buda.pest, December 18, 1909. In 1887, Czam'bel wrote his Contrioutions to the History of the Slovak Language (''Prispevlky k dejinam jazy.ka slovenskeho") ; he followed this with his Slovak Orthography ("Slovensky praivopis") in 1890; A Manual of the Literary Slovak Language ("Rukovaf spisovnej reci slovenskej") in 1902; The Slovaks and Their Language ("Slovaci a kh rec") in 1903; 8Jlld The Slovak Language and its Place in the Family of Slovanic Languages ("Slo-. venska rec a jej miesto v rodine slovenskych jazykov"), 624 pp., in 1906. Of course, Czambel contributed many other articles on Slovak subjects to Slovak newspapers, periodical reviiews and magazines. Czambel's "Rukovae (Slovak Grammar), revised and modified several times since its first edition by the late Dr. Joseph SkU!ltety, is a ,s tandard work with ,p hilologists, grammarians, and students of Slovak. In his "Slovaoi a ich rec," Czambel promoted the theory that the SlovaJks were every closely related to the Croatians, Slovenes and Serbs � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 63 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A . HROBAiK SLOVENSKO - SLOVAKIA - SLOVAKLAND The territory occupied by the Slovak people for the past 1500 years is known as Slovakia. It is situated in the very heart of Europe. Present-day Slovakia has an area of 49,015 square kilometers (approximately 19,000 sq. miles) and a population of 4,000,000. There were times when the borders of Slovakia extended beyond their present limits and times when the land of the Slovaks had no definite borders at all. In ancient times the Slovaks occupied even the western bank of the Morava river and the north bank of the Tisa (Theiss) river. Though the area and the borders of Slovakia changed at various times, its topography - the land and its waterways - did not. Slovakia is bound on the north by the Carpathian Mountains and on the south by the blue Danube and the upper arm of the Tisa river. Into these two streams empty all the rivers of Slovakia that have their origin in the foothills of the King's Plateau (Krafova Hofa) - the natural center of Slovakia: those that run off to the southwest empty into the Danube, while those that course to the southwest pour into the Tisa, forming deep valleys and broad basins between the ,i ndividual mountain :zones that fill out the largest part of the territory of Slovakia. This territory is divided into three parts: 1. western Slovakia which drains into the Danube tributaries; 2. eastern Slovakia that drains into the tributaries of the Tisa; 3. the mountainous country of central Slovakia. The geographical picture of Slovakia is extremely varied, because high mountain ranges alternate with deep valleys which, in places, spread out into basins. Fertile plains stretch out from the foothills of the mountains. Slovakia is situated in the very center of Europe where the north-eastern spurs of the Alps near the central Danube touch upon the mountainous arch of the Carpa- 64 SLOVAKIA thians which is the main watershed of central Europe. From this watershed the streams of central Europe run into several seas. In olden times the course of these streams determined the course of roads along which nations migrated and business and culture flowed. We find Slovakia at the juction of these roads which cross the Caripathian Mountains kom the north and the south. Two roads were especially significant in deciding the fate of Slovakia and the Slovak nation. One coursed along the Danube and connected the western oountTies of Europe with the eastern world. Near the Carpatho-Alpian gate this road intersected with the other important highway which started from the coast of the Adriatic Sea, crossed the Danube, proceeded to the north against the current of the Morava river and went to the coast of the Baltic Sea. Slovakia, according to archeological researches, was well inhabited as early as 5000 B. C., but we do not know the race or the names of the peoples who inhabited the land. Traces of the Neolithic Man, who used stone weapons in hunting the mammoth and the huge cave bear, have been found. The scientific investigator will find much material on the prehistoric period in the museum of Bratislava and Turciansky Svaty Martin. About the year 2000 B.C. begins the Bronze Age with its burial urns, and clay and stone remains, found on the sites of ancient settlements in Slovakland. During the ensuing Iron Age, we find traces of the Illyrians in the west, of the Thracians in the east. The latter came into contact with the Scythians in the valley of the Tisa river. Several nations of various origins and culture lived in Slovakia just before the dawn of the Christian era. According to ancient Greek and Roman writers, the land of the Slovaiks was inhabited by the Gauls and the Celts at that time. In the fourth century B. C., we note traces of the more advanced Gallic culture from the discoveries of golden ornaments and coins, imitations of those issued by Philip III of Macedonia and his son, Alexander the Great. At Bratislava coins of the Roman Republic, dating from the first century B. C., have been found. A Greek map of the Slovak territory, dating back to the third century, SLOVAKIA 65 shows many Slovanic names for mountains and rivers, The fertile plains of south-eastern Slovakia were occupied by the Boii, a Gallic tri'be, and in the mountainous parts of central Slovakia lived the Kotin (Gothine) tribe which worked the ore of the Iron Mountains. The Osi settled in the neighborhood of the Kotins, while the Korkonti - tribes of southern origin - occupied the northwestern part of Slovakia. In the first half of the last century before Christ the Dacians came to Slovakia from the east and overpowered the Gallic Boii. But in the first quarter of the first century after Christ, the Dacians were forced to migrate to the north into the mountains, because they were iha:rd pressed by the J azygi who had come from the Black Sea to take over the land on the left side of the Danube. During the reign of Tiberius, two Germanic tribes settled in the territory of the Slovaks, the Quadi and the Marcomanni, who frequently raided the Roman proi\Tince of Pannonia on the other side of the Danube. Vannius, the bellicose king of the Quadi, built military fortresses along the V ah river and extended his power to the Turiec a:nd Kysuca rivers. About twenty years after Christ, when a large part of the territory of Slovakia was occupied by the Quadi, the Romans were consolidating their might near the Danube. The Franks and the Romans began to wage war for the control of the territory of Slovakia, a struggle that lasted several centuries. South of the Danube the Romans organized the province of Pannonia, east of which was the province of Dacia. To conquer the whole Danube basin to the Carpathians, the Romans built military strongholds along the south bank of the Danube. Such fortresses were established at Vindobona (Vienna), Carnanthum (Hainburg), Brigetium (Komarno) and at Aquincum (Budapest). To defend and to secure the frontier along the Danube against incursions of barbaric tribes, the Romans sent detachments across the river to established military stations on the northern bank, on the territory of Slovakia. From excacations we know that Ro- 66 SLOVAK.IA man troops were stationed at Devin, Stupava, Bratislava and opposite Komarno at li. The Romans bested the Quadi in battle. Their king Vannius ruled over the territory of Slovakia by the grace of the Roman Emperor. Of course, the Quadi resented this. After Vannius' death the aggressive Quadi challenged the power of the Romans on the Danube and the Roman Emperors had to defend their rule with large armies. Along the Vah river the Roman troops penetrated as far as Trencin. Emperor Marcus Aurelius and his son Commodus defeated the Quadi in 179 A. D. after several bloody skirmishes on Slovak territory, as is commemorate d by inscription on a roc'k at Trencin: "In memory of the IVictory of the Emperor's army that encamped at Laugaricio, 855 soldiers of the II. Legion. Made by Constantine, commander of the II. auxiliary Legion." This army was stationed at Laugaritio, a Roman settlement near Trencin, which has since disappeared. During these skirmishes with the Quadi, probably about 173 A. D., the Roman army in Slovakia found itself threatened by a scarcity of water. In the army that fought against the Germans somewhere along the Hron river, there were several Christians who had come from Asia Minor. These Christian soldiers - the first Christians on Slovak territory - prayed for raiin and their prayers were answered. The Roman army was saved. This incident is immortalized on the Arch of Triumph of Emperor Marcus Aurelius in Rome. The Quadi, 1b eaten repeatedly by the Romans, never ·gwve up trying to drive the Romans out of Slovakia. Emperor Constantine LI defeated them in 258 A.ID. and Emperor Valentian, the last Roman emperor who cowd claim sovereignty over the territory of Slovakia, repeated the pel'for:mance in 3·74. Upon the latter's death in 376, the great Mig;ra~ tion of Nations begain.. Shortly thereafter the Romans ipulled thek gax.risoDJS out of Slo-y;aJk ia and let the Quadi take over. The Quadi, however, were evicted from the territory by the Huns in the first half of the fifth century. The Huns in turn were displaced by the Heruli, who held the territory until about 491 when the Lombards defeated SLOVAKIA 87 them, occupied their lands and held them until about 526, when they crossed the Danube into Pannonia. Slovrukia, however, did not remain even under the Huns for long. After the disintegration of the Roman Empire, the Germans migrated from Slovakia to the south. The Marcomanni, weakened by the wars with the Romans and forced by the hordes of Attila to join his army, were wiped out in the battle of Cha.Ions (Catalaunian Fields) in 451. There is as yet no definite proof, even though it may be safely assumed, that the Slovaks and related Slovanic tribes came into Slovakia in increasing numbers after the extinction of the Marcomanni. The historian J ordannes, writing in the sixth century, said that all the Hungarian plain was inhabited by Slovanic people (the Slavs). AFTIDR THE ADVENT OF THE SLOVAKS The Slovaks came to their present territory from the East, probably from India. At the time Frankish tribes fought the Roman Legions over the territory of Slovakia, the Slovanic peoples occupied the land that stretched to the north of the Carpathians and to the east of the river Vistula. It was a marshy and unfertile land. In time the growing Slovanic families were forced to emigrate to neighboring territories. The Slovanic peoples who migrated to the west and occupied the territory to the Elbe and Saal rivers are called We,stern Slavs; they are the Poles, the SlOJVaks and! the Czechs; those that occwpied the territory between t'he Elbe and Oder rivers and the country along the coast of the Baltic Sea are known as the Lusatian Serbs (northern Germany) and the Kashubes (near the Baltic Sea); today their numbers are few. The Slovanic peoples, who migrated from their ancient land to the south and occupied the Balkan peninsula, are called the Southern Slavs: the Slovenes, Croatians, Serbs and Bulgarians. A large part of the Slovanic peoples migrated to the east and occupied the plains of eastern Europe. They are the Eastern Slavs: the White Russians, the Little Russians (Ukrainians) and the Great Russians. As the great Slovanic family disintegrated, separate 68 SLOVAKIA Slovanic nations developed with the centuries, each with its dictinct culture, language, customs and traditions. The Slovaks, like other Slovanic peoples, originally were hunters. After a time they took to bee culture and animal husbandry, especially sheep raising. From their neighbors they learned to cultivate the soil. The men folk hunted and herded sheep, while .the women and the slaves did the farm work. The only trades known to them were pottery making and blacksmithing. In business transactions they exchanged products or paid in cloth; money was not known as a means of barter. The Slovaks lived in simple huts made of poles driven into the ground, around which were wound branches and twigs which were then covered with mud. Several families, originating from a common forefather, formed a clan ("rod"). The head of the clan was the oldest member; he was in charge of the common property of the clan. A Slovanic settlement, inhabited by several related families, i.e. a clan, was called a village ("dedina" from "dedo"-grandfather). The village was the common heritage ("dedicstvo") of the whole clan. Several related clans made up a tribe ("kmeii"), the leader of which was the tribal chief, called a priest ("kiiaz") or prince ("knieza). When several such related tribes lived in one territory for a long time a Slovanic state evolved and a Slovanic nation was born. SLOVAK CHARACTERISTICS The Slovanic peoples had many good and bad characteristics. They loved songs and entertainment. Not possessing great wealth, they lived frugally. They were goodhearted and hospitable, but suffered discipline with difficulty. They did not know how to obey, hence there was no harmony among them. They did not seek a battle, but when they had to defend themselves they fought heroically and also knew how to be cruel. All these characterictics of the Slovanic nature can be found in the Slovanic nations even at the ,p resent time. The historian Procopius (562) said that the Slavs were rather tall, hardy, blond-haired people and honesty was one SlJOVAK.I.A 69 of their marked characteristics. Theophylactus recorded an interesting commentary on the Slavs. He said: "In 590 three men were captured by the Greeks in Thrace; the men carried musical instruments instead of weapons. When Caesar M:auricus asked who they ,w ere, the men answered: 'We are Slavs; we love music; we play the guitar and violin and sing.' Mauricus was overcome by their simplicity. Af.., ter feasting them he had a guard escort them to their lands." The German historian Herder had this to say about the Slavs: "They loved farming; they had herds and implements and a home industry ; with the products of their land and their industry they carried on a useful business. They built cities and in places occupied themselves with mining; they knew how to melt and mold metals. The Slavs prepared salt, made cloth, brewed beer, grafted trees, and lived according to their manner a happy, musical life.'' The Slovaks of old had names for implements, furniture, grains, fruit trees, trades and animals. They had their own words for: plow, iron, cloth, needle, pliers, wheel, wagon, seal, ring, blacksmith, spoon, clothier, butcher, cape, jeweler. As a musical people they had many folk songs. In number and variety of content they are second to those of no other nation. SLOVAK MYTHOLOGY There are very few reliable records of the religion of ancient Slovanic peoples. We know that they believed in a Supreme Being and in immortality. The Slovaks called the Supreme Being "Praboh" :_ the God of all gods. They had a White God - the God of all good, and a Black God - the God of evil and death. Many lesser gods, belonging to both the white and black groups, also existed for the ancient Slovaks and other Slovanic peoples. "ZIVENA" was the godess of life, and "MORENA" the godess of death. Brooks and streams housed nymphs, and fairies inhabited the woods and forests. "LADA" was the godess of beauty, while "URODA" was the godess of the fields and crops. ' ~PfilRUIN" (P.AJROM" ) , the God of thunder, was held in great respect. 70 SLOVAKIA The ancient Slovaks worshipped and invoked their gods in sacred groves. They offered sacrifices of grain and animals to images of wood and stone through their priests. The White Priests (BieJok:iiazi) served and invoked the White Gods. The White Priests were most important men of the tribe; they presided at all councils and trials and their judgments and decisions were final. The Black Priests - the magicians and sorcerers - were believed to possess powers of tmnsforming peraons into animals and inanimate objects. The Slovaks, like most of the other Slovanic peoples of ancient times, cremated or buried their dead. Food, weapons, wine and jewelry were usually placed in the graves of the dead. Ashes of the dead were placed in urns of clay and then buried. Mounds of clay and stone were built over burial places; the greater the mound, the more important the person or persons buried there. Several such mounds were found and excavated in Slovakia (at Skalica, Brezolupy, Boooivce, Kras:iiany near 2ilina and at Cepcin in Turiec). One of the most extensive burial grounds was uncovered at Devinska Nova Ves. Some of the customs and practices of the ancient pagan Slovaks have survived the centuries and are still observed in many quaint villages of Slovakia today. Many of the pagan practices, however, disappeared with the advent of Christianity. As the Slovanic peoples abandoned their ancient lands and began to colonize central and eastern Europe - after the Germanic Heruli and Lombards withdrew from the territory of Slovakia in the sixth ·century and the Slovaks came in - the savage nation of the Avars tore into the Danube basin, overran the whole territory, and pushed deeply into the Frankish kingdom in the west. During the next hundred years the whole region seethed in turmoil. The Avars were wild nomads of Turko-Tartarian origin who rode their horses rough-shod over the countries of their neighbors and subjugated them. They settled in Pannonia, where they built military camps which were protected by huge, circular mounds of earth and stone and wooden fences. The Slovaks withdrew from this territory SLOVAKIA 71 and settled north of the Danube . Part of the Slovak tribes lived in the mounta ins; they were govern ed by their own princes . The Slovan ic peoples along the Danube had to serve the Avars and were forced to go with them on their rampages into neighb oring territor ies. The A vars looted the Germa n lands in the west and Constan tinoiple (Cari•h rad) and Salonik a in the east. Natura lly, the Slovan ic peoples wanted tQ throw off the yoke of the Aivars and waited for the opportu ne momen t to rebel. That time came in 624, when Samo, a Franki sh mercha nt, succeed ed in uniting the Slovani c peoples and led them in battle agains t the savage A;vars. Sa.mo defeate d the Arv,a xs rund founde d the first SlovaJllic state ,near the central Danube . Encour aged by the victory over the A vars, Samo led the Slovan ic peoples agains t the German ic Franks . Samo again was victorio us; his Slovani c army defeate d the Franks under Dagob ert in a three-d ay battle near the Vogast e castle in 631. Becaus e the Slovak s were settled north of the Danub e and the Slovenians south of it, Samo's empire stretch ed over these territor ies. The Slovani c peoples within these territor ies were called by the commo n name of Sloven es (Slovie ni). The main fortres s of this Slovani c empire was situate d in Slovak ia at the conflue nce of the Morava and Danube rivers. Samo's empire , howeve r, disinte grated soon after his death (658). Wheth er it was the ,k ingdom of the Slova!ks alone is questio nable, but the fact remain s that the territory of Slovak ia formed the core of it. ilfu-edegar's "Chron icles" ;record that a ~trong westem Slovan ic empire existed already in the seventh century , strong enough to, resist the pressu re of the Avars and the rule of Dagob ert. Fredeg ar wrote quite plainly that Samo came along when the Slovam c tribes of the area were successful ly rebellin g aga~t the rule of the A vars. His "Chro.nioles" form the basis of most theorie s in ;regard to the ethnica l composiition of Samo's Empire , its territor ial extent and the site of its princip al city or strongh old. In recent yeara Slova!k, Polish, and Czech scholar s of Slavist ics agreed that Samo's strongh old, the center of his empire , was at De... vin, at ,t he conflue nce of the Morav a and Danll!be rivers. SLOVAK.IA 72 Professor Oettinger, well-knOIWll historian and archeologis t of Vienna, however, .prefers to Tegard Vienna as the center of Samo's Empire. In his book "Das Warden Wiens" (19M), he tells that he .bases his conclusion especially on the findings resulting from the discovery of the ancient Berghof Castle in Vienna, the remains of which can ibe traced ;to Samo's time. The Ava.rs, a nomadic people, could not build such a g,reat citadel of stone. Presenting a whole series of philological airguments to baclk his theory, professor Oettinger states that tt is self-eviden t that SlovaJks and ,p ossibly other Slwanic peoples lived in the aJrea of Vienna iaJIJ.d far to the west along the Danube territory during Samo's time. While the Slovanic peoples were resisting the A vars heroically, a strong Frankish empire was being built in the west. The power of this empire, whose borders in the eighth century extended from the Pyrenees to the Sumava River, became consolidate d especially during the reign of Charles the Great (Charlemag ne), who ruled from 768 to 814, and united all the Germanic tribes, subjugated the Bavarians and the Saxons in the east, and came into contact with the most westerly tribes of the Slovans. In 799 the armies of Charlemag ne defeated the Arvars, who lateT were aJbso;z1bed by the Slovanic inhabitants of the Danube countries. But the great empire of Charlemag ne, who became Emperor in 800, had another weapon besides its strong army for its aggression s into the neighborin g countries of the east. That weapon was Christianit y, which in the Franldsh empire had spread and become so strong that already during the reign of Charlemag ne the way was prepared for it to reach the Danubian Slovans who were settled along the eastern borders of the Frankish empire. To safegururd the eastern f:rontier of his empiire, Charlemagne placed heavy military garrisons along bordering countries. Such territories were called "Marks" and were managed by so-called "Markgrav es." In a short time it became evident that the military garriso!IlS of such Marks were not only for defense, but also for advance into the neighboring Slovanic countries. Contempor aneously new bishoprics and monasterie s were built along these bordering countries which strengthen ed the Christian faith and 1 SIJOVAKIA 73 propagated Christian culture. It was thus that Christianity came to the neighboring Slovanic nations. Slovakia already in the very beginning of the ninth century came into immediate contact with the military and cultural might of the Frankish empire. The Slovak nation crossed the threshhold of its national and cultural history. ~RiINCiE PRJ.BINA The Slovanic tribes, which settled on the northern bank of the Danube, on ,b oth sides of the 1Mora,va river, weTe called Moravians. Philologis~, historians, a,nd aroheologists have a.miply demonstrated that whatever had b,een mentioned in old historical documents aibout the MoraJVian.s referred in £act to the ancestors of the Slovaks, the Slovans (ISla<vS) who already in the first half of the ninth century were the inhaJbitants of the territory on both sides of the MoTava river. in anoient d0<:uments we find the name "Slovenica" used interchangeably with ' 1Moravia" and "Magna Moravia" to designate the territory on both sides of the Morava riveT. A document of King Loruis from the year 861 also, calls that area "Slovenica." In western (Latin) sources, the inhabit.., ants of that territory were called ''Moravians" and "the Slarvs of Moravia" (Slavi; Sclavi; Sch1avi; Sc,l a,v i Marahenses; Marehenses; Maravi; Mairavani; Moravi; Maraibi; MarahaJvi; Sclavini; Selavi Margenses) to distinguish them from the Slorvans (Slavs) who had occupied other territories (Behemi; Sclavi Boehemia; Boemie; Beheimi; Boemani ; Boo-. manici; Behemani; Bohemani; Bulgari; Vulgari; ChTobati; BeJochrobati; .Kosari; Czechi; Poloni; ,Russi; etc.). In eastern sources, however, the inhabitants of the same territory were called "Slovenes" ('Slovieni; Sloveni), while their land wa:s rreferred to as "Slovak Land" and "Moravia" (.Slovenska zemlja; Morava). It is significant that af.ter the fall olf Great Moravia, her inhabitants were referred to by their a,ndent name: Slavi; ,Sclavi; Slovieni; Sloveni - older forms of the term Slovak, which began to appear onyl after the fifteenth centUTY. From reliable sources we learn that about the year 830,. there ruled in Slovakia a prince named Pribina, who resided in Nitra. The name Pribina and Nitra are very dear 74 SLOVAKIA to ,t he hearts of all .Slovaks, because Prilbina is the name of the first Slovak ruler ever mentioned by history, and Nitra is the name of the first Slovak castle which became the cradle of Slovak national history. Pribina reigned in Nitra and his principality extended over the territory of the fertile basin of the Nitra river. The sovereignty of the Prince of Nitra was acknowledged by other Slovak principalities that extended along the Hron river country, the banks of the Vah and other Slovak lands. Under the rule of Prince Pribina belonged the Slovaik principalities that lay to the east of the Small Carpathians. The same sources tell us that Archbishop Adalram of Salzburg blessed a church on Pribina's land in Nitra. This consecration is proof that the Christianity spread by the German priests among the Slovaks already had taken firm root. Pribina's church in Nitra is the first Christian church on the territory of the western Slovans. While other Slovanic peoples in the eastern half of Europe still lived far off from western-European Christian culture and wandered in the darkness of paganism, the Slovak nation already in the beginning of the ninth century was counted among the Christian, the cultured nations of Europe. At the time of the consecration of the Nitra church, in 833, Pribina himself was not yet a Christian. But the circumstance that Pribina allowed the Christian faith to be preached to his nation proves that the first Slovak ruler, even though he probably could not grasp the significance of Christian doctrine, nevertheless understood the political and cultural significance of Christianity on the SlovanoGermanic border. Pribina, a wise and prudent ruler, knew that a small nation at this dangerous crossroad could defend itself against its stronger neighbors only when it was equal to them culturally. Not long afterwards, however, cruel calamity befell the ruler of Nitra. Prince Mojmir, who had united the Slovak tribes in the western part of the Slovak territory under his rule and who probably resided at Devin, drove Pribina out of Nitra and occupied his domain. Out of this union of .Mojmirs country with Pribina's, there arose on the north bank of the Danube a state that united all the Slovak SLOVAKIA 75 tribes. The state, thus established about the year 830, was called Great Moravia (VeFka Morava) or the Great Moravian Empire (Vefkomoravska risa). Pribina, with his son Kocef and a retinue of Slovak magnates, sought refuge in the neighboring Mark to the east, near the Danube. Markgrave Ratbod presented Pribina to King Louis the German. The latter had Pribina in:structed in the Christian faith and baptized in St. Martin's ,c hurch in the city of Treisma (probably the present city of Sankt Polten in Germany). For a time Pribina and his group lived in the court of Markgrave Ratbod, but when the latter refused to aid him against Mojmir, he went to the Bulgars. However, he did not tarry there for long either, because soon after we find him seeking the aid of Ratimar, the Croatian Prince. At that time (about 838), Ratimar was not on good terms with Ratbod, so Pribina had to take refuge with Count Salach of Corutania. The latter succeeded in reconciling Pribina with Ratbod. In exile Pribina convinced himself that he could not regain his lost domain and return to Nitra. He became reconciled with his fate and sought to gain the favor of King Louis the German. The latter entrusted to Pribina the new principality beyond the Danube, the country of Pannonia near Blatno. In 847 he became the independent ruler of this principality and built a formidable citadel there that was called Blatnohrad (Moosburg). After his baptism, Pribina became a zealous Christian and sought to convert all his subjects to Christianity. He invited German missionaries into his domain, built churches, endowed monasteries and often welcomed the archbishop of Salzburg at his court. In his work, Pribina had a zealous helper in the person of his son Kocel'. When Pribina died in 861 under mysterious circumstances, Kocel' inherited his principality. The Slovak nation, immediately with its first appearance on the stage of European history, entered the services of Christian culture. The Slovaks are the oldest nation on the central Danube and they were the first nation in Central Europe to have its own independent state. It is well to note that the Slovak State from its very inception was ,a Christian State. 76 SLOVAKIA CHAPTER TWO 'DHiE GREAT M!ORA~ EJMPI'RE The studies of historians, philologists, and -archeolo~ gists clearly indicate that the Great Moravian Empire was not the empire of the ''Great Moravians," but the land of the ancietn Slov•a k s who had settled on both sides of the 'Morava river. The Great Moravian IDmpire, then, was in reality a Great Slova!k Empire, if we are to call the territory by the name of the peole who had occupied it from the dawn of history. These studies refute the hypothesis of the Czech and non-Czech philologists, ethnogr~phers, and historians, who claim that "Czechs and Slovaks of Bohemia, MMoraviia, and Nor.them Hung•a ry (SlovaJkia) fornied a single group with a common langua,ge." Furthermore, these studies tell us that at first there were two estates or rprinciipalities in that area: the one called "Mol'ova" was around the Morava up to the Vah with its capital city at Devin, while the other called "Nitra" the capital city of which bore the i,;ame name - was around the Nitra river. When Mojmir, the ruler of Moravia, conquered Pribina, the ruler of Nitra, German chronicles 'began to call his empire "Magna Mora'Via," whk'h meant the annexation of the NitJ:ra principality to that of Mor8JVia. We afso leiarn from these studies that the ancestors of the Czechs had settled in the land of the Boii (Boehemi,a; Behemia; Bohemia) just ltbout at the same time that the Slovaks occupied the territory of the Morava river. Moj!mir, Rastislav, and Sviitopllllk built the empire of the Slova!ks, while Hostivit and Borivoj built .the state of the Czechs. The Annales Fra,ncofuldenses tell us that "Sviitoplwk extricated the Czech tribes from Frankish rule by force." Later the Czechs (Slavs of Bohemia) even joined the Germans to wage war agaJnst the Great Moravian EmpiTe. When Mojmir, some time in the year 836, drove Pribina out of Nitra and united the territory inhabited by Slovak trib,es into a larger unit, there arose on the northern bank of the Danube an empire which the Byzantine em1 SLOVAKIA 77 peror, Constantine Po.rphyrogennetos, in his work "About the Management of a State" (950), calls Great Moravia. Mojmir's empire stretched over the territory of present Slovakia and Moravia and was, after Samo's empire, the second Slovanic state near the Danube on the German-Slovanic border. Just as Samo's Empire, so even the Great Mora'Vlian Empire had its origin at the same historic crossroad, because it was here that the greatest danger threatened the Slovanic peoples and they had to unite in defense of their freedom a,nd independence. While Samo's empire , arose because the Slovans along the Danube wanted to protect themselves against the enemies from the east, Great Moravia was established under pressure of danger from the west. Mojmir, like Pribina, tried to live in peace with the neighboring Germans, because he knew that war with them could only end disastrously for the Slovaks. Mojmir was already a Christian, so the missionary activity of the German priests on the territory of Great Moravia went on nuhampered. We must remember that Great Moravia at that time did not have any definite borders, because the borders of states of the Middle Ages never were defined strictly. The area of Great Moravia changed because the successors of Mojmir did undertake expeditions into neighboring countries, defeated them in battle and annexed them to the empire. Louis the German did not relish the idea of a great, united Slovanic empire as a neighbor. In 846 he unseated Mojmir and replaced him with Rastislav. The latter simu~ lated friendship for Louis, but knew well that the independence of his country was constantly threatened by the Germans. The independence of Great Moravia was threatened not only by German armies, but also by the missionary activity of the German priests, who had begun to look upon the territory as a part of the German empire. In about 860 Rastislav sent a special messenger to Pope Nicholas I in Rome with a request for missionaries who had a command of the Slovanic tongues. The Pope, however, answered he was sorry that he could not help Rastislav, 78 SLOVAKIA because at that time there were no such priests in Rome. After due deliberation with his advisers, Rastislav decided to send a special mission to .Constantinople, to .E mperor Michael ill. Rastislav's request, as presented to the Emperor, read: "Since our people has cast off paganism and follows the Christian law, we do not have such a teacher, who might explain the true Christian Faith to us in our own tongue, so that even other parties, witnessing this, might become like unto us. So send us, Emperor, such a bishop and teacher, because your country is everywhere recognized for its good laws." Just about that time the German empire found strong allies in the Bulgarians, who bordered with Great Moravia at the Tisa river and lived in enmity with the Byzantine emperor. Michael did not have to deliberate long with his counsellors. He wanted Rastislav as an ally against the German-Bulgarian alliance and, hence, decided to aid the ruler of Great Moravia in his quest for missionaries who could speak the language of Rastislav's people. Up to this time the land of the Slovaks was subject to the influence of western culture only. Now it was to make contacts with the Christian culture of the European east. SLOVAK .APOSTLES: CYRIL .AND METHODLUS Em;peror Michael of Constantinople decided to send Constantine (Cyril), the philosopher and linguist, and his brother Methodius, who was versed in the art of government, to preach the Gospel to the people of Rastislav. Constantine had distinguished himself in apostolic work before, at first alone and later with his brother Methodius. As natives of Salonica (Thessalonica) they were suited for the mission: they new the language of Rastislav's people, the forefathers of the Slovaks. The Emperor, having summoned them, told the brothers: "You are from Salonica, and all Salonicans speak pUTe Slovanic." Upon learning that Rastislav's people did not have their own script, the task of inventing one fell to the lot of Constantine. Legend has it that the alphabet worked out by Constantine (Cyril) had been revealed to him by God. It was quite an achievement. Constantine started with Greek SLOVAKIA 79 characters, but Slovanic sounds of the ninth century varied greatly with the Greek, therefore signs and characters had to be created to designate them. The alphabet that resulted is known as "Cyrillic." After due preparation for their new mission, the brothers Constantine (Cyril) and Methodius set out for the country of Rastislav. They arrived in Rastislav's empire in 863 and began preaching the Word of God in the language of the people. Soon ,a fter the translation of the Scriptl.ll'es and liturgical 1b ooks was completed and present... ed to Rastislav's court at Devin. Naturally the saintly brothers gained many admirers and disciples. These catechists went among their people and aided Constantine and Methodius in their missionary work. Up to the time of the Slovak apostles, only three languages were considered feasible for ecclesiastic life, the Holy Scriptures and the Church liturgy: Hebrew, Latin and Greek. The latter two were used extensively-the Greek in the Byzantine (eastern) Church and Latin in the Roman (western) Church. Due to the efforts of Constantine and Methodius, the language of the Slovaks (early Slovanic) became the third language to be used in Church liturgy. The work of Constantine and Methodius in Rastislav's empire was blessed with success. The saintly brothers united the people of Rastislav spiritually and. also contributed handsomely to the material welfare of the Great Moravian Empire. Their disciples later spread the Gospel to other neighboring Slovanic nations (Czechs, Serbs, Russians) in a language that was for the most part understandable to all Slo-\'anic nations. The German clergy of Salzburg viewed the work of Constantine and Methodius with envy and accused the brothers of introdllJlcing dangerous innovations into the liturgy of the Church. A protest against their activities was lodged in Rome, and the brothers were summoned by Pope Nicholas (858-867) to vindicate themselves. Constantine and Methodius set out for Rome in 867. Their journey led them through Lake Blatno (Balaton), the residence of Prince Kocer, Pribina's son. Kocer received the brothers with great joy and examined their liturgical 80 SLOVAKIA books in the Slovanic script with great interest. Leaving Kocer, Constantine and Methodius passed through Corinthia to Venice on the Adriatic Sea. At Venice they successfully defended their use of the language of Rastislav's people in the liturgy of the Church, while the ecclesiastics there had to concede defeat in the debate. While Constantine and Methodius made their way to Rome, Pope Nicholas died. Four days later his successor, Adriam ]I (867--872), was elected head of the ChuTch. The saintly brothers were given a cordial reception by the Pope, and, after convincing a synod of bishops that they were not guilty of introducing any dangerous innovations into the liturgy of the Church, their activities were accorded Adrian's approval. The Holy Father accepted the liturgical books in ;the Slov,anic language, blessed them on the aUar of the church of St. Mary Major, and celebrated the Divine Liturgy over them himself. The Pope then proceeded to consecrate Constantine and Methodius as bishops. A number of their disciples (Clement, Gorazd, Angelar, Sava and Naum) were ordained to the priesthood by the bishops Formosus and Gaundenrich. Shortly thereafter Constantine became seriously ill and retired to a monastery. There he joined the religious community, taking the name of Cyril. He died February 14, 869, and his earthly remains were buried on the right side of the high altar of the church of St. Clement in Rome. After the death of Saint Cyril, the entire burden of spreading the Gospel and teaching of Christ rested on the shoulders of his brother. Methodius returned as archbishop and papal legate fully authorized to organize the Church in the land of Rastislav. Archbishop Methodius became the head of Slovanic Christendom. Besides receiving the highest ecclesiastical dignity, Methodius carried letters from the Pope for Rastislav of Great Moravia, Svatopluk of Nitra and Kocef of Blatnohrad Castle (Moosburg), the three Slovak princes, which stated that the Pope permitted the use of Slovanic liturgy with the reservation that the epistle and ,gospel always be read in Latin before being read in the vernacular (Slovanic). The archdiocese of Methodius extended over Great Moravia and beyond the Danube over SLOVAKIA 81 Pannonia, uniting the lands governed by Slovak rulers. But as Methodius was returing to continue his apostolic work among the people of Rastislav, a new ruler was taking over the throne of Great Moravia. KING S,V ATOPDUCK While Methodius was in Rome, the Germans continued to harass Rastislav. In 869 King Louis the German declared war against the neighboring Slovanic peoples and invaded their lands with his armies headed by his three sons. Prince Louis attacked the Lusatian Serbs, Charles went after Rastislav, and Carloman tore into the territory that was ruled by Rastislav's nephew, Svatopluk of Nitra. The German armies plundered and pillaged the Great Moravian Empire. But Rastislav's stronghold, the mighty Devin, proved impregnable and Rastislav's empire retained its independence. The following year, however, Rastislav was betrayed by his own kinsman, his nephew Svatopluk, regent of Nitra. Success in battle had turned Svatopluk's head. The Germans played up to Svatopluk and promised to help him gain the throne of Great Moravia. Svatopluk decided to betray his uncle and vowed loyalty to Carloman. Rastislav, however, learned of the plot and became furious. Having vowed to punish his traitorous nephew, he ordered his men to do away with Svatopluk at a banquet, but their attempt to take and kill him failed. Soon thereafter Rastislav led his army against Svatopluk. In the ensuing battle, Rastislav was defeated. Worse than that, he was captured and handed over to the Germans. Carloman sent Rastislav bound in chains to Bavaria where King Louis the German imprisoned him and had his eyes ,gouged out. Rastislav died later as a prisoner of the Germans. With Rastislav's defeat the Great Moravian Empire passed completely into the hands of the German crown. The Germans also seized Archbishop Methodius, who had returned from Rome, and imprisoned him. The Bavarian bishops, who regarded Methodius as a foreign intruder, made claims to the territories of the Slovanic peoples along the Danube and dealt with Methodius so inhumanely that Svatopluk himself intervened in his behalf. When Carlo- 82 SLOVAKIA man took possession of Rastislav's country and seized his royal treasures, he entrusted the rule of the ravaged country to Svatopluk. Svatopluk soon proved himself a strong ruler. As a soldier he excelled in ruthless courage. The Germans began to distrust him, because they feared he would build an empire so strong as to imperil their country. Louis the German decided to put Svatopluk out of the way. In 871 the Germans succeeded in taking Svatopluk and imprisoned him. Some of his castles were taken over by the German Markgraves. Svatopluk denied the charge of Carloman that he plotted against the German crown, but that did not help him. When the Slovaks learned what had happened to their ruler, they elected Slavomir to take his place and rebelled against the Germans. Slavomir was supported by the whole country. A terrilble war followed. The Germans suffered heaivy losses. Devin proved impregnable to their attacks. In the meantime, the wily Svatopluk was plotting to even matters with the Germans who had tricked him. While in prison he repented his betrayal of Rastislav and vowed to even the score with his German captors. Svatopluk begged Carloman to release him so that he might subdue the Slovaks under Slavomir. Carloman was reluctant at first, but finally gave in to Svatopluk's pleadings. Accompanyin g a large German army, Sviitopluk soon found himself below the mighty fortress of Devin. While the German army encamped quietly below the citadel, Svatopluk set out with a small detachment of men to the castle to persuade Slavomir to surrender without a battle. Once inside the castle, Svatopluk disclosed his plan to Slavomir. Assuming command of the Slovak army, Svatopluk tore out of the courtyard and attacked the Germans with such sa;vagery that only few were able to esc•a;pe alirve. Carloman's army was caught unawares and crushed. Svatopluk knew that the Germans would come after him sooner or later. He looked around for allies. That same year (871), he married the sister of Borivoj, ruler of the Bohemian fand, and formed an alliance with' him. Svatopluk pressed the offensive against the Germans and was quite SLOVAKIA 83 successful. In 873 he defeated Carloman decisively. Carloman asked his father Louis for help to fight the Slovaks. When aid was not forthcoming, Carloman decided to seek a truce with Svatopluk. He signed a pact with Svatopluk at Forsheim in 874 and recognized the independence of the Great Moravian Empire. Svatopluk had reached the pinnacle of his ambitions: he was sole ruler of the Great Moravian Empire, with its crupital at Devin near Bratislava. (Continued) • • • 1856 - DR. SAMUEL CZAMBEL - 1956 P.A. HROBAK T.he year 1956 marks not only the centennial of the dea:th o:f the great Slovak fighter for freedom and democracy, Dr. Louis Sti1r, ,b ut it is a}so the centennial of the birth of the eminent SlovaJk philologist, Samuel Czam:bel. Czambel was born September 1, 1856, in the town of Slovenska Eupca, Zvolen County, 1Slova;kia. The ~tudy of his native Slovak language attracted him early in his life and he devoted much of his adult Hfe to it. He died in Buda.pest, December 18, 1909. In 1887, Czam'bel wrote his Contrioutions to the History of the Slovak Language (''Prispevlky k dejinam jazy.ka slovenskeho") ; he followed this with his Slovak Orthography ("Slovensky praivopis") in 1890; A Manual of the Literary Slovak Language ("Rukovaf spisovnej reci slovenskej") in 1902; The Slovaks and Their Language ("Slovaci a kh rec") in 1903; 8Jlld The Slovak Language and its Place in the Family of Slovanic Languages ("Slo-. venska rec a jej miesto v rodine slovenskych jazykov"), 624 pp., in 1906. Of course, Czambel contributed many other articles on Slovak subjects to Slovak newspapers, periodical reviiews and magazines. Czambel's "Rukovae (Slovak Grammar), revised and modified several times since its first edition by the late Dr. Joseph SkU!ltety, is a ,s tandard work with ,p hilologists, grammarians, and students of Slovak. In his "Slovaoi a ich rec," Czambel promoted the theory that the SlovaJks were every closely related to the Croatians, Slovenes and Serbs  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The History of Slovakia (1/9) Description An account of the resource Philip A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 63-83 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hrobak, Philip Anthony, 1904-1964 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource September-December 1956 Relation A related resource continues in <a href="https://slovakia.omeka.net/items/show/252">Vol. 7, No. 1 (22), pp. 53-59</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/5edc284d17758e850b18677db576a170.pdf 0e39061bb4a6fb9513a5ab59437e5fc6 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 11 THE POLITICAL MESSAGE OF MATUS CERNAK By Dr. Joseph Kirschbaum On J'lliy 5, 1955 Matus CernaJk, a .d istinguished Sl01Vaik politician and diplomat, was assassinated in Munich, Germany. Forces rabid in orpposing our effort ,to secure and esfablish an independent Slovakia could have hardly struck a more tell.mg blow than was this dastardly attack, for by it they .removed from :actiive service an esteemed patriot,. this Cernak of whom it may be said that of all n:a. tiona1 movers currently in exile, he most closely approximated what, lt'elatively speaking, we might designate as the position of a 8Jll-accredited legaJte of the Slovak nation to the republic of Western Germany. And to him as such were paid final tributes and honors in death not only by the ch8Jllcello.r of Western Germany himself who expressed deep sympathy cm the occasion of Cerna.k's tragic death. :rn Gemiany Matus Cern.ak signalized himse1f beyond his office as a desewing politidan and drplomat. It was due mostly 'to his lll.Iltiring diligence and interest that two noteworthy pulbl:ications continued to appear after the departure of Dr. Jozef Pauoo; viz., SLOBODNE SLOVENSKO ('Free Slovaikia, founded by Dr. Pauco) and SWWAKi1SCHE KORJRESPO!NiDENe;. Concern for the social well-being of hundreds of .Slorvak re£ugees who arrived in Germany also came to, devolrve upon Cerna.k, and his name is vecy closely associated with the Slorvaik institute in M'll.Il.ich. IDven this meagelt' cwt-and-dry survey of his recent major acltivities yields us the realization that 1lhe foul politioal murder, which so unexpectedly wrested Matus Cerna;k f.rom our midst, is to all the Slwaks in the free world and to the struggle for a democratic independent Sloiva.k.ia a much greater loss and a much more sigmfi.. cant incident than we had ap1Pmised and accounted it in the earliest hours of our grief. After the Cernova masS8Jcre of 1907, the murder of Stefanik m 1919 and of Dr. Jozef Tiso in 1947, this attack of July 5, :1!955, will be re- �12 corded in Slorvaik national annals as a historically 'Vital eivent. The death of fMatws Cemak marks mot merely the passing o.f another exiled SlO'V'3Jk diplomat and ipatriot who dedicated all his mind and heart to the struggle to liberate Slorvaikia from Oom.mJUnism and the Czech yoke. Matus Cerna'k's previ!ous politicial background, his personal character and talents, hi•s uncompromising doggedness and his tireless and successful activities within the territory of one of the most decisive powers affecting the fate of Slova,kia - all this contributed to make Cerna·k indispensalble to the CU"rrent state of our pol,i tical efforts as w~U as a symlbol of posterity. Who Was Matus Oernak? Matus Cerruik was bo,r n on August 28, 1903, in the town of Vieska where his father was a miller. After his preliminary education in iPrievidza, Kezmarok, and Banska Bystrica,. he undertook university studies ,i n 'Brague and subsequently ,in Leipzig, Germany. His courses were orientated toward a professorship. Having attained his diploma, he spent several years in teaching •a t Trnava, and in 19i30 he became a high school instnuctor in Bratislava. Until 1937 Cernwk devoted himself a,lmost exclusirvely to aoademic pursuits and to cultural interests. He was, however, one of the younger element, a member of that youthful and vitally conscious generation of !Slovruks who in the 1932 demonstrations at Trencianske Teplice gave Prague incontrovertible evidence of the fact that the spiritual and political development of Slova,kia will follow native inspiration and bent and wiN not ibe trammeled by constraining directirves from Prague. As a youthful patriot, then, Cernak naturally found himself an active participant in various political demonstrn:tions Slllpporting ·Slorvakia's interests and deserts. It wa.s the temper of the times that shaped his destiny. He made more and more public appearances and spirited pronouncements hut after his patriotic manifesto delivered in the ,Slovak National Theater in 1937, Cernak was overnight not only projected ,i nto popular ac- �SLOVAKIA 13 claim but was also irrevocably committed to bis role as an outstanding leader in the political arena, The keynote of his message on this occasian was "Orurs is that portion of land 'beneath the Tatras and to us rightfully belongs all i1ls yield." This cry and justification came to echo from inrn.1mera:ble speaker's platforms and it blazed its appeal throughout all the press houses of SlovaJkia. Within. a year after this induction into public national life, Matus Cernak, despite his youthful thirty-five years, became a minister in the Prague government. Prague,. long accustomed to an accord of fawning subservience and servility ,o n the part of those to whom she had granted political ministries and various similar offices, ,s oon realized that this Cernak who accepted a ministerial portfolio came as a representative of a new generation. He was not a hireling. He was a public servant who bore the concerns of the Slovak nation deep in his heart, one to be touched neither by bribes nor by intimidatioo. He was upright as well as fearless and his attitude was undisguised. He understood that it served no purpose to temporize with the Czechs; consequently, ne had hardly estaJblished himself in his new office when, mincing no words, he demanded as by a 24-hour ultimatum that Dr. Benes examme the Slova,k problem in the spirit of the Pittsburgh Pact; i.e.,. Cernak sought to activate Slovakia's autonomy as it had been guaranteed by the Czechs when Thomas G. Masaryk signed the Pittsburgh Pact in 1918 and the unreserved ratification of the Parli'ament convened on Noivember 12, 1918 had made the agreement binding both legally and morally. Benes was unwilling to meet Cerna.k's terms. Manfully and honorably, Cer:nak offered his resignation from ministerial duties and his decisive action hastened Slovakia's autonomy and later her complete independence. In the autonomous state of Slovakia (October 6, 1938 - March 13, 1939) Cernak became a prominent and '!)01)ular personality. iHe was named minister of education and after the proclamation of independence, he was appointed the first Slovak envoy to Berlin. �14 SLOVAKIA Be11lin was not only the most significant, it was also the most difficult ambassadorial .p ost. The very existence of the Slovak •r epublic often hUlll.g by a hair there, and the ·Sloviak diplomatic representative had to exercise consummate tact whille at the sarrne time he preserved an inflexible devotion to his country and defended the interests committed to him in sa:cred trust. Matus Ce.milk proved himself in this capacity. He again advanced the welfare of Slovakia with the sarrne degree of ardor and uncomprom~•s ing vigor which had characterized him formerly in Prague, and his mission was successful. So well, in fact, did he acquaint himself of his duties that he won for the SlovaJk caruse the sympathies even of that power that oome after ,t he occurpaition of Germa.ny, a.nd in its eyes, too, he was accepted as a non--ae<!redited envoy of the Slovak nation. Political reprisals meted out a ,prison sentence for Cerna.k, and after serving several years in B:vatislava, he left Slovrukia ,i n 1948. (His country was then degraded by the Communistic and Czech regimes. Cernak in exille dedicated himself to the struggle to secure a new freedom and independence for Slo-v:aki-a, a sacred fight against Communism, a ,c rusade for the triumph of democracy, and liberty. For this reason, the ·b rutal political murder .of Matus Cernak, who had been favored lby fate to assume in this national struggle for liberty rund independence a role granted only to heroes rund to persons of Ulll.COmmom historic statUTe,. has shaken every worthy SlorvaJk and every honorable person in the world. For in that little post office in Munich there feN :at the hands of a cynical muroerer not merely a member of the little Slovak nation rbut a wholiJ.y dedicated defender of the idea of freedom and democracy, and that at the very hour when the representatives of international Communism and of Czech imperialism were sporting the ma:sk of surface smiles and pretending sugiared speeches on peace and coo.p eration and coexistence. If the world's free press agencies, broadcasts and tele- �SLOVAKIA 15 vised reports from Bonn to W aslrington, from Paris to Canada, Australia, Argentina, and all the free world ciroufated reports and commentaries 00: this despica,ble political crime, then it was in tribute to the 'Victim Cerna;k, a promoter of the ideal of freedom and democracy. Only the intervention and meddling of the forces of cowardly appeasement, of colla.:boration with Communism and Czechsown hatred of the Slov,a,ks prevented the .glorification of this sacrifice, Matus Cernak, as a 1price demanded by the true instinct of Communism and of Czech chau'Vinism. Their malice alone precluded the hailing of Matus Cermilk as a martyr to the cause of liberty and democracy, blessings cherished by the -umiversal free world. This honor Matus Cernalk fully deserves. The Slwak nation at home and all loyal Slovaks now exiled a:nd -scattered throrughout the far-d:hmg countries of the free world can appraise this holocaust of Matus Cerna'k in its full historic significance. Why Was Matus Cernak Slain? Matus Cernruk fell because he was the foe of Communism and of Czech efforts to dominate Slov,m a and to usur.p her rights. He was singled orut as one of the most unyielding exponents of the principle of liberty and a democratic way for Slovalkia. For these reasons he beoame mar,ked as a sworn enemy of the dual powers of :international Communism and of Czech aggressiv~ pretensions. Beoaiu:se he had already established a record of several years o.f sru'Ccessful service on the Slovaik political front which has !been in the recent past and whlch will very likely in the near future again be of paramount importance in the 1SlOV'a.:k contest for liberty and independence, not only Communistic Prague hurt also the adherents of there-e~bl-ished Czech hegemony QIVer Slovakia ranked him as the number one man on their list of resistance leaders active in exile to thwart their nefarious designs. He fell ,b ecause of his love for SloWJkia suffering under Czech domination., because of his friendly attitude toward the Gel'Ill.an nation, and b.ecaruse of the fruitf.ul mission he was accomplishing in the Republic oif Western �16 SLOVAKIA Germany where he had all. the p:vospects of continuing an eminently flourishing career. ·· .. Whether the base assassin will be discoivered as an individual or not, it is unmistakably clear to every thinking person just whose henchmen he must have been and in whose employ he accomplished his dastardly, bloody deed. Since 1945 so great ·a number of outstanding Slovak patriots has 1b een killed, deported and deprived of liberty that doUJbt concerning the mastermind of this vicious crime would hardly be in place. Czechs, iboth of the Communist water-mar.k and non-Communist conformers, especially those who in the wake of unsuccessful collaJboration with Communism escaped into the countries of western Euvope live in abnormal foar.s bred by guilt, the spawn of those crimes they per.petrated against the Sudeten and Cavpathian Ge:rnnans. Their panic mounts as they see Germany mow in the ascendency. as one of the influential nations in international 1p olitics. To iboth classes of Czechs it is clear that the existence of the Czecho~Slovalk Republic, the question of Czeoh !b oundar~es and conditions affecting the principles of life for the Czech nation in the future will come to depend in no small measure and in no negligible way on Germany and on this decisive f.actor whether or not :Slovalkia will succeed in winning the support of influential ,powers which will further her endeavor for independence. Matus Cernak with over 15 years of residence _in Germ.any and very desirable contacts and personal acquaintances even among the highest of German dignitaries was undenia;bly instrumental ,i n ,s oouring favor for the idea of SlovaJkia's independence. His peroonal integrity and his indefatiga;ble efforts in behalf of his country, as posthumously a;ppraised ,b y the German press and attested to by hll!lldreds ,of telegrams of condolence, won sympathetic response even in the highest levels of political power in Bonn and presaged ultimate success for the Slova;k cause. It was primarily for this re8JSOn that the foes of the Slovak nation and of the Slovalk effort to attain national independence decided to liquidate Cerna:k. �SLOVAKIA , 17 The Political Message of M. Oernak Cernak was felied in the heat of the national struggle. He died with a conlViotion -Of Slovak truth, confident in the ultimate victory of the :natural ri.ght of the Slo.valk people to enjoy their pro,per national life. He ,c onsummated his own supreme sacr.ifice in the spirit of his motto "To liberty through sacrifice" and he signed his political credo with his own life's blood. It is not clifficll!lt nor willl it be difficult to• ascertain what wolilld have been the final political messaige of Cernak. He wrote it in 1938 in terms of his adamant resist• ance to compromise, his steadfastness and his patriotic ardorr. You can find it recorded in hundreds of his articles and political manifestos, in his life-long political career and in his heroic martyrdom. In the ranks of Slo'Vlak political figures, personages who have gone ,befo:rre us in death, Cernak takes hiis pla:ce as the representative of a new political generation, one which has sought ,a nd which stiill seeks a. solution. of the Slovak problem on a ,b roader European basis within the cadre of modern demo:cratic and Christian powers. For his pdlitical mission dn exile, Matus Cernruk was betteT prepared. than were most .Slovaks, and iby his educational background and his professional experience as well as by his ,personal endo.w,ments -8Jlld characteristics he satisfactorily evidenced a Slovalk sense of ,balance and maturity and fitness :for lirfe. He allso exemplified .Slovakia's innate belonging to Europe and to European traditions. 'Dhe most substantial and eloquent ·proof of his adequacy to fitl the ro[e he chose in the fight for a democratic and independent .Slov:akia is his very assassination, the tragiic ,b omb which the antagoodsts orf a Christian and independent SlwaJki'a sent him. The death of Matus Cerna:k is a painflill and very grievoU1S loss to the Slovak forces woriking •i n exiJe; it is one of the severest blows which the Slo¥~k people could suffer at this time. The manner to which their foes had to resort in order to bring 0Jbout CernaJk's deswuction, �18 SLOVAKIA however, is d.n itself an assurance to all Slovaik em:igres that in the eyes of Prague and of international Communism ,i t is no "quan·t ite negligeable," that it is, in fact, so formidable a hindrance to them for the Slovaks to be allied with the democracies that they even ventured such a brutal scandal to register their reaction. To Slovruk 1patriots in exile, mourning the death of their most distinguished representative, Matus Cernak, this realization begets a fresh spur to redoubled activities. Consummate triumph of the Slovaik hope for independence beckons on the trail over which Matus Cernak has forged ahead in honor and in complete unflinching dedication. God grant it! - "BuNetin of the Slovruk National Council Abroad," June, 1956) . • • • LABOR AND THE SWVAK REPUBLIC J. C. Bukovina " Our policy shall not be socialis·tic, but social. We shall not incite J:}eople against our. selves, but we shall train them to be understanding and Wilted . .A:bove all else, work is the foundation of our policy." 'Dr. Joseph Tlso, Oct. 8, 1S38. October 6, 1938, and March 14, 1939, found the S10vruks prepared. The Hlin:ka ·S lovak People's Party, whic:h had fought consistently for twenty years before Munich to secure the national existence of the Slova!k nation, was fully prepared for these two historical milestones - to take over the direction of the fate of the Slovak nation. The fight of the Slovaks for national independence in the pre-Munich Czecho-Slovak State was actually a struggle and a call of the Slovruk nation for social justice. Once the Czechs under T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Exlward Benes had taken over the reigns of state, promises made to the Slovruks in America and elsewhere were soon forgotten, and the Slovalks found themselves again in the position of the exploited. Like the Magyars, the Czechs found little trouble in recruiting Judas Slovaks to promote not the interests of the Slovak nation, but the interests of the Czech nation, � SLOVAKIA 11 THE POLITICAL MESSAGE OF MATUS CERNAK By Dr. Joseph Kirschbaum On J'lliy 5, 1955 Matus CernaJk, a .d istinguished Sl01Vaik politician and diplomat, was assassinated in Munich, Germany. Forces rabid in orpposing our effort ,to secure and esfablish an independent Slovakia could have hardly struck a more tell.mg blow than was this dastardly attack, for by it they .removed from :actiive service an esteemed patriot,. this Cernak of whom it may be said that of all n:a. tiona1 movers currently in exile, he most closely approximated what, lt'elatively speaking, we might designate as the position of a 8Jll-accredited legaJte of the Slovak nation to the republic of Western Germany. And to him as such were paid final tributes and honors in death not only by the ch8Jllcello.r of Western Germany himself who expressed deep sympathy cm the occasion of Cerna.k's tragic death. :rn Gemiany Matus Cern.ak signalized himse1f beyond his office as a desewing politidan and drplomat. It was due mostly 'to his lll.Iltiring diligence and interest that two noteworthy pulbl:ications continued to appear after the departure of Dr. Jozef Pauoo; viz., SLOBODNE SLOVENSKO ('Free Slovaikia, founded by Dr. Pauco) and SWWAKi1SCHE KORJRESPO!NiDENe;. Concern for the social well-being of hundreds of .Slorvak re£ugees who arrived in Germany also came to, devolrve upon Cerna.k, and his name is vecy closely associated with the Slorvaik institute in M'll.Il.ich. IDven this meagelt' cwt-and-dry survey of his recent major acltivities yields us the realization that 1lhe foul politioal murder, which so unexpectedly wrested Matus Cerna;k f.rom our midst, is to all the Slwaks in the free world and to the struggle for a democratic independent Sloiva.k.ia a much greater loss and a much more sigmfi.. cant incident than we had ap1Pmised and accounted it in the earliest hours of our grief. After the Cernova masS8Jcre of 1907, the murder of Stefanik m 1919 and of Dr. Jozef Tiso in 1947, this attack of July 5, :1!955, will be re- �12 corded in Slorvaik national annals as a historically 'Vital eivent. The death of fMatws Cemak marks mot merely the passing o.f another exiled SlO'V'3Jk diplomat and ipatriot who dedicated all his mind and heart to the struggle to liberate Slorvaikia from Oom.mJUnism and the Czech yoke. Matus Cerna'k's previ!ous politicial background, his personal character and talents, hi•s uncompromising doggedness and his tireless and successful activities within the territory of one of the most decisive powers affecting the fate of Slova,kia - all this contributed to make Cerna·k indispensalble to the CU"rrent state of our pol,i tical efforts as w~U as a symlbol of posterity. Who Was Matus Oernak? Matus Cerruik was bo,r n on August 28, 1903, in the town of Vieska where his father was a miller. After his preliminary education in iPrievidza, Kezmarok, and Banska Bystrica,. he undertook university studies ,i n 'Brague and subsequently ,in Leipzig, Germany. His courses were orientated toward a professorship. Having attained his diploma, he spent several years in teaching •a t Trnava, and in 19i30 he became a high school instnuctor in Bratislava. Until 1937 Cernwk devoted himself a,lmost exclusirvely to aoademic pursuits and to cultural interests. He was, however, one of the younger element, a member of that youthful and vitally conscious generation of !Slovruks who in the 1932 demonstrations at Trencianske Teplice gave Prague incontrovertible evidence of the fact that the spiritual and political development of Slova,kia will follow native inspiration and bent and wiN not ibe trammeled by constraining directirves from Prague. As a youthful patriot, then, Cernak naturally found himself an active participant in various political demonstrn:tions Slllpporting ·Slorvakia's interests and deserts. It wa.s the temper of the times that shaped his destiny. He made more and more public appearances and spirited pronouncements hut after his patriotic manifesto delivered in the ,Slovak National Theater in 1937, Cernak was overnight not only projected ,i nto popular ac- �SLOVAKIA 13 claim but was also irrevocably committed to bis role as an outstanding leader in the political arena, The keynote of his message on this occasian was "Orurs is that portion of land 'beneath the Tatras and to us rightfully belongs all i1ls yield." This cry and justification came to echo from inrn.1mera:ble speaker's platforms and it blazed its appeal throughout all the press houses of SlovaJkia. Within. a year after this induction into public national life, Matus Cernak, despite his youthful thirty-five years, became a minister in the Prague government. Prague,. long accustomed to an accord of fawning subservience and servility ,o n the part of those to whom she had granted political ministries and various similar offices, ,s oon realized that this Cernak who accepted a ministerial portfolio came as a representative of a new generation. He was not a hireling. He was a public servant who bore the concerns of the Slovak nation deep in his heart, one to be touched neither by bribes nor by intimidatioo. He was upright as well as fearless and his attitude was undisguised. He understood that it served no purpose to temporize with the Czechs; consequently, ne had hardly estaJblished himself in his new office when, mincing no words, he demanded as by a 24-hour ultimatum that Dr. Benes examme the Slova,k problem in the spirit of the Pittsburgh Pact; i.e.,. Cernak sought to activate Slovakia's autonomy as it had been guaranteed by the Czechs when Thomas G. Masaryk signed the Pittsburgh Pact in 1918 and the unreserved ratification of the Parli'ament convened on Noivember 12, 1918 had made the agreement binding both legally and morally. Benes was unwilling to meet Cerna.k's terms. Manfully and honorably, Cer:nak offered his resignation from ministerial duties and his decisive action hastened Slovakia's autonomy and later her complete independence. In the autonomous state of Slovakia (October 6, 1938 - March 13, 1939) Cernak became a prominent and '!)01)ular personality. iHe was named minister of education and after the proclamation of independence, he was appointed the first Slovak envoy to Berlin. �14 SLOVAKIA Be11lin was not only the most significant, it was also the most difficult ambassadorial .p ost. The very existence of the Slovak •r epublic often hUlll.g by a hair there, and the ·Sloviak diplomatic representative had to exercise consummate tact whille at the sarrne time he preserved an inflexible devotion to his country and defended the interests committed to him in sa:cred trust. Matus Ce.milk proved himself in this capacity. He again advanced the welfare of Slovakia with the sarrne degree of ardor and uncomprom~•s ing vigor which had characterized him formerly in Prague, and his mission was successful. So well, in fact, did he acquaint himself of his duties that he won for the SlovaJk caruse the sympathies even of that power that oome after ,t he occurpaition of Germa.ny, a.nd in its eyes, too, he was accepted as a non--ae<!redited envoy of the Slovak nation. Political reprisals meted out a ,prison sentence for Cerna.k, and after serving several years in B:vatislava, he left Slovrukia ,i n 1948. (His country was then degraded by the Communistic and Czech regimes. Cernak in exille dedicated himself to the struggle to secure a new freedom and independence for Slo-v:aki-a, a sacred fight against Communism, a ,c rusade for the triumph of democracy, and liberty. For this reason, the ·b rutal political murder .of Matus Cernak, who had been favored lby fate to assume in this national struggle for liberty rund independence a role granted only to heroes rund to persons of Ulll.COmmom historic statUTe,. has shaken every worthy SlorvaJk and every honorable person in the world. For in that little post office in Munich there feN :at the hands of a cynical muroerer not merely a member of the little Slovak nation rbut a wholiJ.y dedicated defender of the idea of freedom and democracy, and that at the very hour when the representatives of international Communism and of Czech imperialism were sporting the ma:sk of surface smiles and pretending sugiared speeches on peace and coo.p eration and coexistence. If the world's free press agencies, broadcasts and tele- �SLOVAKIA 15 vised reports from Bonn to W aslrington, from Paris to Canada, Australia, Argentina, and all the free world ciroufated reports and commentaries 00: this despica,ble political crime, then it was in tribute to the 'Victim Cerna;k, a promoter of the ideal of freedom and democracy. Only the intervention and meddling of the forces of cowardly appeasement, of colla.:boration with Communism and Czechsown hatred of the Slov,a,ks prevented the .glorification of this sacrifice, Matus Cernak, as a 1price demanded by the true instinct of Communism and of Czech chau'Vinism. Their malice alone precluded the hailing of Matus Cermilk as a martyr to the cause of liberty and democracy, blessings cherished by the -umiversal free world. This honor Matus Cernalk fully deserves. The Slwak nation at home and all loyal Slovaks now exiled a:nd -scattered throrughout the far-d:hmg countries of the free world can appraise this holocaust of Matus Cerna'k in its full historic significance. Why Was Matus Cernak Slain? Matus Cernruk fell because he was the foe of Communism and of Czech efforts to dominate Slov,m a and to usur.p her rights. He was singled orut as one of the most unyielding exponents of the principle of liberty and a democratic way for Slovalkia. For these reasons he beoame mar,ked as a sworn enemy of the dual powers of :international Communism and of Czech aggressiv~ pretensions. Beoaiu:se he had already established a record of several years o.f sru'Ccessful service on the Slovaik political front which has !been in the recent past and whlch will very likely in the near future again be of paramount importance in the 1SlOV'a.:k contest for liberty and independence, not only Communistic Prague hurt also the adherents of there-e~bl-ished Czech hegemony QIVer Slovakia ranked him as the number one man on their list of resistance leaders active in exile to thwart their nefarious designs. He fell ,b ecause of his love for SloWJkia suffering under Czech domination., because of his friendly attitude toward the Gel'Ill.an nation, and b.ecaruse of the fruitf.ul mission he was accomplishing in the Republic oif Western �16 SLOVAKIA Germany where he had all. the p:vospects of continuing an eminently flourishing career. ·· .. Whether the base assassin will be discoivered as an individual or not, it is unmistakably clear to every thinking person just whose henchmen he must have been and in whose employ he accomplished his dastardly, bloody deed. Since 1945 so great ·a number of outstanding Slovak patriots has 1b een killed, deported and deprived of liberty that doUJbt concerning the mastermind of this vicious crime would hardly be in place. Czechs, iboth of the Communist water-mar.k and non-Communist conformers, especially those who in the wake of unsuccessful collaJboration with Communism escaped into the countries of western Euvope live in abnormal foar.s bred by guilt, the spawn of those crimes they per.petrated against the Sudeten and Cavpathian Ge:rnnans. Their panic mounts as they see Germany mow in the ascendency. as one of the influential nations in international 1p olitics. To iboth classes of Czechs it is clear that the existence of the Czecho~Slovalk Republic, the question of Czeoh !b oundar~es and conditions affecting the principles of life for the Czech nation in the future will come to depend in no small measure and in no negligible way on Germany and on this decisive f.actor whether or not :Slovalkia will succeed in winning the support of influential ,powers which will further her endeavor for independence. Matus Cernak with over 15 years of residence _in Germ.any and very desirable contacts and personal acquaintances even among the highest of German dignitaries was undenia;bly instrumental ,i n ,s oouring favor for the idea of SlovaJkia's independence. His peroonal integrity and his indefatiga;ble efforts in behalf of his country, as posthumously a;ppraised ,b y the German press and attested to by hll!lldreds ,of telegrams of condolence, won sympathetic response even in the highest levels of political power in Bonn and presaged ultimate success for the Slova;k cause. It was primarily for this re8JSOn that the foes of the Slovak nation and of the Slovalk effort to attain national independence decided to liquidate Cerna:k. �SLOVAKIA , 17 The Political Message of M. Oernak Cernak was felied in the heat of the national struggle. He died with a conlViotion -Of Slovak truth, confident in the ultimate victory of the :natural ri.ght of the Slo.valk people to enjoy their pro,per national life. He ,c onsummated his own supreme sacr.ifice in the spirit of his motto "To liberty through sacrifice" and he signed his political credo with his own life's blood. It is not clifficll!lt nor willl it be difficult to• ascertain what wolilld have been the final political messaige of Cernak. He wrote it in 1938 in terms of his adamant resist• ance to compromise, his steadfastness and his patriotic ardorr. You can find it recorded in hundreds of his articles and political manifestos, in his life-long political career and in his heroic martyrdom. In the ranks of Slo'Vlak political figures, personages who have gone ,befo:rre us in death, Cernak takes hiis pla:ce as the representative of a new political generation, one which has sought ,a nd which stiill seeks a. solution. of the Slovak problem on a ,b roader European basis within the cadre of modern demo:cratic and Christian powers. For his pdlitical mission dn exile, Matus Cernruk was betteT prepared. than were most .Slovaks, and iby his educational background and his professional experience as well as by his ,personal endo.w,ments -8Jlld characteristics he satisfactorily evidenced a Slovalk sense of ,balance and maturity and fitness :for lirfe. He allso exemplified .Slovakia's innate belonging to Europe and to European traditions. 'Dhe most substantial and eloquent ·proof of his adequacy to fitl the ro[e he chose in the fight for a democratic and independent .Slov:akia is his very assassination, the tragiic ,b omb which the antagoodsts orf a Christian and independent SlwaJki'a sent him. The death of Matus Cerna:k is a painflill and very grievoU1S loss to the Slovak forces woriking •i n exiJe; it is one of the severest blows which the Slo¥~k people could suffer at this time. The manner to which their foes had to resort in order to bring 0Jbout CernaJk's deswuction, �18 SLOVAKIA however, is d.n itself an assurance to all Slovaik em:igres that in the eyes of Prague and of international Communism ,i t is no "quan·t ite negligeable," that it is, in fact, so formidable a hindrance to them for the Slovaks to be allied with the democracies that they even ventured such a brutal scandal to register their reaction. To Slovruk 1patriots in exile, mourning the death of their most distinguished representative, Matus Cernak, this realization begets a fresh spur to redoubled activities. Consummate triumph of the Slovaik hope for independence beckons on the trail over which Matus Cernak has forged ahead in honor and in complete unflinching dedication. God grant it! - "BuNetin of the Slovruk National Council Abroad," June, 1956) . • • • LABOR AND THE SWVAK REPUBLIC J. C. Bukovina " Our policy shall not be socialis·tic, but social. We shall not incite J:}eople against our. selves, but we shall train them to be understanding and Wilted . .A:bove all else, work is the foundation of our policy." 'Dr. Joseph Tlso, Oct. 8, 1S38. October 6, 1938, and March 14, 1939, found the S10vruks prepared. The Hlin:ka ·S lovak People's Party, whic:h had fought consistently for twenty years before Munich to secure the national existence of the Slova!k nation, was fully prepared for these two historical milestones - to take over the direction of the fate of the Slovak nation. The fight of the Slovaks for national independence in the pre-Munich Czecho-Slovak State was actually a struggle and a call of the Slovruk nation for social justice. Once the Czechs under T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Exlward Benes had taken over the reigns of state, promises made to the Slovruks in America and elsewhere were soon forgotten, and the Slovalks found themselves again in the position of the exploited. Like the Magyars, the Czechs found little trouble in recruiting Judas Slovaks to promote not the interests of the Slovak nation, but the interests of the Czech nation, � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 11 THE POLITICAL MESSAGE OF MATUS CERNAK By Dr. Joseph Kirschbaum On J'lliy 5, 1955 Matus CernaJk, a .d istinguished Sl01Vaik politician and diplomat, was assassinated in Munich, Germany. Forces rabid in orpposing our effort ,to secure and esfablish an independent Slovakia could have hardly struck a more tell.mg blow than was this dastardly attack, for by it they .removed from :actiive service an esteemed patriot,. this Cernak of whom it may be said that of all n:a. tiona1 movers currently in exile, he most closely approximated what, lt'elatively speaking, we might designate as the position of a 8Jll-accredited legaJte of the Slovak nation to the republic of Western Germany. And to him as such were paid final tributes and honors in death not only by the ch8Jllcello.r of Western Germany himself who expressed deep sympathy cm the occasion of Cerna.k's tragic death. :rn Gemiany Matus Cern.ak signalized himse1f beyond his office as a desewing politidan and drplomat. It was due mostly 'to his lll.Iltiring diligence and interest that two noteworthy pulbl:ications continued to appear after the departure of Dr. Jozef Pauoo; viz., SLOBODNE SLOVENSKO ('Free Slovaikia, founded by Dr. Pauco) and SWWAKi1SCHE KORJRESPO!NiDENe;. Concern for the social well-being of hundreds of .Slorvak re£ugees who arrived in Germany also came to, devolrve upon Cerna.k, and his name is vecy closely associated with the Slorvaik institute in M'll.Il.ich. IDven this meagelt' cwt-and-dry survey of his recent major acltivities yields us the realization that 1lhe foul politioal murder, which so unexpectedly wrested Matus Cerna;k f.rom our midst, is to all the Slwaks in the free world and to the struggle for a democratic independent Sloiva.k.ia a much greater loss and a much more sigmfi.. cant incident than we had ap1Pmised and accounted it in the earliest hours of our grief. After the Cernova masS8Jcre of 1907, the murder of Stefanik m 1919 and of Dr. Jozef Tiso in 1947, this attack of July 5, :1!955, will be re- 12 corded in Slorvaik national annals as a historically 'Vital eivent. The death of fMatws Cemak marks mot merely the passing o.f another exiled SlO'V'3Jk diplomat and ipatriot who dedicated all his mind and heart to the struggle to liberate Slorvaikia from Oom.mJUnism and the Czech yoke. Matus Cerna'k's previ!ous politicial background, his personal character and talents, hi•s uncompromising doggedness and his tireless and successful activities within the territory of one of the most decisive powers affecting the fate of Slova,kia - all this contributed to make Cerna·k indispensalble to the CU"rrent state of our pol,i tical efforts as w~U as a symlbol of posterity. Who Was Matus Oernak? Matus Cerruik was bo,r n on August 28, 1903, in the town of Vieska where his father was a miller. After his preliminary education in iPrievidza, Kezmarok, and Banska Bystrica,. he undertook university studies ,i n 'Brague and subsequently ,in Leipzig, Germany. His courses were orientated toward a professorship. Having attained his diploma, he spent several years in teaching •a t Trnava, and in 19i30 he became a high school instnuctor in Bratislava. Until 1937 Cernwk devoted himself a,lmost exclusirvely to aoademic pursuits and to cultural interests. He was, however, one of the younger element, a member of that youthful and vitally conscious generation of !Slovruks who in the 1932 demonstrations at Trencianske Teplice gave Prague incontrovertible evidence of the fact that the spiritual and political development of Slova,kia will follow native inspiration and bent and wiN not ibe trammeled by constraining directirves from Prague. As a youthful patriot, then, Cernak naturally found himself an active participant in various political demonstrn:tions Slllpporting ·Slorvakia's interests and deserts. It wa.s the temper of the times that shaped his destiny. He made more and more public appearances and spirited pronouncements hut after his patriotic manifesto delivered in the ,Slovak National Theater in 1937, Cernak was overnight not only projected ,i nto popular ac- SLOVAKIA 13 claim but was also irrevocably committed to bis role as an outstanding leader in the political arena, The keynote of his message on this occasian was "Orurs is that portion of land 'beneath the Tatras and to us rightfully belongs all i1ls yield." This cry and justification came to echo from inrn.1mera:ble speaker's platforms and it blazed its appeal throughout all the press houses of SlovaJkia. Within. a year after this induction into public national life, Matus Cernak, despite his youthful thirty-five years, became a minister in the Prague government. Prague,. long accustomed to an accord of fawning subservience and servility ,o n the part of those to whom she had granted political ministries and various similar offices, ,s oon realized that this Cernak who accepted a ministerial portfolio came as a representative of a new generation. He was not a hireling. He was a public servant who bore the concerns of the Slovak nation deep in his heart, one to be touched neither by bribes nor by intimidatioo. He was upright as well as fearless and his attitude was undisguised. He understood that it served no purpose to temporize with the Czechs; consequently, ne had hardly estaJblished himself in his new office when, mincing no words, he demanded as by a 24-hour ultimatum that Dr. Benes examme the Slova,k problem in the spirit of the Pittsburgh Pact; i.e.,. Cernak sought to activate Slovakia's autonomy as it had been guaranteed by the Czechs when Thomas G. Masaryk signed the Pittsburgh Pact in 1918 and the unreserved ratification of the Parli'ament convened on Noivember 12, 1918 had made the agreement binding both legally and morally. Benes was unwilling to meet Cerna.k's terms. Manfully and honorably, Cer:nak offered his resignation from ministerial duties and his decisive action hastened Slovakia's autonomy and later her complete independence. In the autonomous state of Slovakia (October 6, 1938 - March 13, 1939) Cernak became a prominent and '!)01)ular personality. iHe was named minister of education and after the proclamation of independence, he was appointed the first Slovak envoy to Berlin. 14 SLOVAKIA Be11lin was not only the most significant, it was also the most difficult ambassadorial .p ost. The very existence of the Slovak •r epublic often hUlll.g by a hair there, and the ·Sloviak diplomatic representative had to exercise consummate tact whille at the sarrne time he preserved an inflexible devotion to his country and defended the interests committed to him in sa:cred trust. Matus Ce.milk proved himself in this capacity. He again advanced the welfare of Slovakia with the sarrne degree of ardor and uncomprom~•s ing vigor which had characterized him formerly in Prague, and his mission was successful. So well, in fact, did he acquaint himself of his duties that he won for the SlovaJk caruse the sympathies even of that power that oome after ,t he occurpaition of Germa.ny, a.nd in its eyes, too, he was accepted as a non--ae<!redited envoy of the Slovak nation. Political reprisals meted out a ,prison sentence for Cerna.k, and after serving several years in B:vatislava, he left Slovrukia ,i n 1948. (His country was then degraded by the Communistic and Czech regimes. Cernak in exille dedicated himself to the struggle to secure a new freedom and independence for Slo-v:aki-a, a sacred fight against Communism, a ,c rusade for the triumph of democracy, and liberty. For this reason, the ·b rutal political murder .of Matus Cernak, who had been favored lby fate to assume in this national struggle for liberty rund independence a role granted only to heroes rund to persons of Ulll.COmmom historic statUTe,. has shaken every worthy SlorvaJk and every honorable person in the world. For in that little post office in Munich there feN :at the hands of a cynical muroerer not merely a member of the little Slovak nation rbut a wholiJ.y dedicated defender of the idea of freedom and democracy, and that at the very hour when the representatives of international Communism and of Czech imperialism were sporting the ma:sk of surface smiles and pretending sugiared speeches on peace and coo.p eration and coexistence. If the world's free press agencies, broadcasts and tele- SLOVAKIA 15 vised reports from Bonn to W aslrington, from Paris to Canada, Australia, Argentina, and all the free world ciroufated reports and commentaries 00: this despica,ble political crime, then it was in tribute to the 'Victim Cerna;k, a promoter of the ideal of freedom and democracy. Only the intervention and meddling of the forces of cowardly appeasement, of colla.:boration with Communism and Czechsown hatred of the Slov,a,ks prevented the .glorification of this sacrifice, Matus Cernak, as a 1price demanded by the true instinct of Communism and of Czech chau'Vinism. Their malice alone precluded the hailing of Matus Cermilk as a martyr to the cause of liberty and democracy, blessings cherished by the -umiversal free world. This honor Matus Cernalk fully deserves. The Slwak nation at home and all loyal Slovaks now exiled a:nd -scattered throrughout the far-d:hmg countries of the free world can appraise this holocaust of Matus Cerna'k in its full historic significance. Why Was Matus Cernak Slain? Matus Cernruk fell because he was the foe of Communism and of Czech efforts to dominate Slov,m a and to usur.p her rights. He was singled orut as one of the most unyielding exponents of the principle of liberty and a democratic way for Slovalkia. For these reasons he beoame mar,ked as a sworn enemy of the dual powers of :international Communism and of Czech aggressiv~ pretensions. Beoaiu:se he had already established a record of several years o.f sru'Ccessful service on the Slovaik political front which has !been in the recent past and whlch will very likely in the near future again be of paramount importance in the 1SlOV'a.:k contest for liberty and independence, not only Communistic Prague hurt also the adherents of there-e~bl-ished Czech hegemony QIVer Slovakia ranked him as the number one man on their list of resistance leaders active in exile to thwart their nefarious designs. He fell ,b ecause of his love for SloWJkia suffering under Czech domination., because of his friendly attitude toward the Gel'Ill.an nation, and b.ecaruse of the fruitf.ul mission he was accomplishing in the Republic oif Western 16 SLOVAKIA Germany where he had all. the p:vospects of continuing an eminently flourishing career. ·· .. Whether the base assassin will be discoivered as an individual or not, it is unmistakably clear to every thinking person just whose henchmen he must have been and in whose employ he accomplished his dastardly, bloody deed. Since 1945 so great ·a number of outstanding Slovak patriots has 1b een killed, deported and deprived of liberty that doUJbt concerning the mastermind of this vicious crime would hardly be in place. Czechs, iboth of the Communist water-mar.k and non-Communist conformers, especially those who in the wake of unsuccessful collaJboration with Communism escaped into the countries of western Euvope live in abnormal foar.s bred by guilt, the spawn of those crimes they per.petrated against the Sudeten and Cavpathian Ge:rnnans. Their panic mounts as they see Germany mow in the ascendency. as one of the influential nations in international 1p olitics. To iboth classes of Czechs it is clear that the existence of the Czecho~Slovalk Republic, the question of Czeoh !b oundar~es and conditions affecting the principles of life for the Czech nation in the future will come to depend in no small measure and in no negligible way on Germany and on this decisive f.actor whether or not :Slovalkia will succeed in winning the support of influential ,powers which will further her endeavor for independence. Matus Cernak with over 15 years of residence _in Germ.any and very desirable contacts and personal acquaintances even among the highest of German dignitaries was undenia;bly instrumental ,i n ,s oouring favor for the idea of SlovaJkia's independence. His peroonal integrity and his indefatiga;ble efforts in behalf of his country, as posthumously a;ppraised ,b y the German press and attested to by hll!lldreds ,of telegrams of condolence, won sympathetic response even in the highest levels of political power in Bonn and presaged ultimate success for the Slova;k cause. It was primarily for this re8JSOn that the foes of the Slovak nation and of the Slovalk effort to attain national independence decided to liquidate Cerna:k. SLOVAKIA , 17 The Political Message of M. Oernak Cernak was felied in the heat of the national struggle. He died with a conlViotion -Of Slovak truth, confident in the ultimate victory of the :natural ri.ght of the Slo.valk people to enjoy their pro,per national life. He ,c onsummated his own supreme sacr.ifice in the spirit of his motto "To liberty through sacrifice" and he signed his political credo with his own life's blood. It is not clifficll!lt nor willl it be difficult to• ascertain what wolilld have been the final political messaige of Cernak. He wrote it in 1938 in terms of his adamant resist• ance to compromise, his steadfastness and his patriotic ardorr. You can find it recorded in hundreds of his articles and political manifestos, in his life-long political career and in his heroic martyrdom. In the ranks of Slo'Vlak political figures, personages who have gone ,befo:rre us in death, Cernak takes hiis pla:ce as the representative of a new political generation, one which has sought ,a nd which stiill seeks a. solution. of the Slovak problem on a ,b roader European basis within the cadre of modern demo:cratic and Christian powers. For his pdlitical mission dn exile, Matus Cernruk was betteT prepared. than were most .Slovaks, and iby his educational background and his professional experience as well as by his ,personal endo.w,ments -8Jlld characteristics he satisfactorily evidenced a Slovalk sense of ,balance and maturity and fitness :for lirfe. He allso exemplified .Slovakia's innate belonging to Europe and to European traditions. 'Dhe most substantial and eloquent ·proof of his adequacy to fitl the ro[e he chose in the fight for a democratic and independent .Slov:akia is his very assassination, the tragiic ,b omb which the antagoodsts orf a Christian and independent SlwaJki'a sent him. The death of Matus Cerna:k is a painflill and very grievoU1S loss to the Slovak forces woriking •i n exiJe; it is one of the severest blows which the Slo¥~k people could suffer at this time. The manner to which their foes had to resort in order to bring 0Jbout CernaJk's deswuction, 18 SLOVAKIA however, is d.n itself an assurance to all Slovaik em:igres that in the eyes of Prague and of international Communism ,i t is no "quan·t ite negligeable," that it is, in fact, so formidable a hindrance to them for the Slovaks to be allied with the democracies that they even ventured such a brutal scandal to register their reaction. To Slovruk 1patriots in exile, mourning the death of their most distinguished representative, Matus Cernak, this realization begets a fresh spur to redoubled activities. Consummate triumph of the Slovaik hope for independence beckons on the trail over which Matus Cernak has forged ahead in honor and in complete unflinching dedication. God grant it! - "BuNetin of the Slovruk National Council Abroad," June, 1956) . • • • LABOR AND THE SWVAK REPUBLIC J. C. Bukovina " Our policy shall not be socialis·tic, but social. We shall not incite J:}eople against our. selves, but we shall train them to be understanding and Wilted . .A:bove all else, work is the foundation of our policy." 'Dr. Joseph Tlso, Oct. 8, 1S38. October 6, 1938, and March 14, 1939, found the S10vruks prepared. The Hlin:ka ·S lovak People's Party, whic:h had fought consistently for twenty years before Munich to secure the national existence of the Slova!k nation, was fully prepared for these two historical milestones - to take over the direction of the fate of the Slovak nation. The fight of the Slovaks for national independence in the pre-Munich Czecho-Slovak State was actually a struggle and a call of the Slovruk nation for social justice. Once the Czechs under T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Exlward Benes had taken over the reigns of state, promises made to the Slovruks in America and elsewhere were soon forgotten, and the Slovalks found themselves again in the position of the exploited. Like the Magyars, the Czechs found little trouble in recruiting Judas Slovaks to promote not the interests of the Slovak nation, but the interests of the Czech nation,  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Political Message of Matúš Černák Description An account of the resource Dr. Joseph Kirschbaum Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 2 (19), June 1956 pp. 11-18 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Kirschbaum, Jozef M., 1913-2001 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1956 SNK https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/3380d34be5fcf938a0d1f7129710a52d.pdf 2f234003418e579f04ecd8bd5ce32a42 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 59 WHY DID BENES RESIGN IN 1938? P. A. Hrobak This quest.ion still. puzzles many people. Benes hlmself, both in his letter to the government and in !his speech to the people in paTting, 1lol'd Why he had Tesigned, but he told it in such a way :that it is not fully clear to the average person. To say it simply a:nd briefJy: Benes resigned beca1USe the policy of which he himself had been the chief exponent and representative for twenty years had proved faulty; it went bankrupt and he could, therefore, no longer remain at the head Ol:f the State. He himself told it in !this manner: "I 'had played so great a role in this deve1opment of events that I had to contemplate seTiously what my duty should be under ,c hanged ciircumstances. . . . I came into office under entirely different circumstances; and iI must reckon this adtuality. Circumstances have changed so completely, that I feel my remaining in office might create an obstacle in the new ci;z-cumstances with which our State is now coping . . . This is mainly so, as it concerns the international situation with a view towards :t:Jhe speedy (In a building up of cooperation with om neighbors" letter to Premier GeneTal Syirovy). "I have reached my decision of my own free will and in accordance with my person:al conviction after conswltation with <politi~al and constibuitional circles and with a number of other leading persons. . . In these ciiroomstances I think it is advisable that the new developments and the new European coliaboration should not be disturbed from our side through the faot that the personal position of its leading 1representative rupparently 0onstitutes an obstacle to tihls development. I was elected to my present position at a time s:ubstamJtially different from 1Jhe pres(,Farewell Broadcast, Oct. 5, 1938: MEMOIRS, ent." 1954, pp. 292-293). What these words of Benes actwail.ly meant wiU, perhaps, be best e.xiplained by a few quotations from Czech periodicals of 1938: �60 SLOVAKIA "Orf necessity our. :uuture pr0igram ,c ontains good re'lations with Ge:ranany - a program which we could have adopted long ago, iif ilt were not for the 'oavalierislh' Western Poweir,s which threatened to brook off theiir allialil.ce with us m suiCh an event" - Stanislav Yester, "Lidove Noviny, Oct. 5). '~Venlkov" called fOT lnew, friendlly conltacits with ,n eighbodng states, and a;sked for "awaJkening from dreams into reality .a nd the acceptance of a program which will be ours." "We do not know what wihl come next in :@urope. We do know, however, that nea,r us iis a power with which our state 0annot a,1low itself to come irnto dispute. Long enough already have we played for othern the role of a genda;rme who keeps Genmany in check: when the crucial moment came, we fownd ourseLves deseTted - alone. . . Well, good. If the woTild is to be governed not by j,u stice, bwt by force, the:n our place is with those who harve the greater strength and are more d ecisive. N ot!hing else remains for us. We <look for unity with Germany . .. And let us become, liike Bulgaria and Yugoslavia, one of G€rmamy's }a,rge 1proviiders and buyers, amd let uis refuse to enter into a ,c ombination of any kind, in which we would become part .o f an anti-Genm~ front. We are now thinking onily of O'lN'.selves and 'let UIS be loyal only to ourselves" -- ("Lidove Noviny," Oct. 5). "We have aJ.ready 'had more than enaugh ·orf t'he wailing sympathy of the western states 'towaJrdsi that courageous little n:a tion.' . . . We call beyond our bo,rdecrs: Put am end to your unwelcome manifestations oif sympathy towards Czecho-Slovakia. We are finally realizing what om standing in Cenrtrrul Emrope is, and we shaU guide OIUTselves 1acoordingly, whether you J[ke it or not. Ouir nation hears its defeat and hum..hliation not onily with pain, but wi11h great pride. We had /been betting on t'he wrong horse, a,nd we know how to take the necessaJry consequences.'' - ("Lidove Listy," OcJt. '5 ). We see that one after the other they admit to the fault of Czecho-Slovakia's twenty-year foreign policy. But �SLOVAKIA 61 who wa,s i,t that determined the trend of :Czecho-Slavakia's foreign policy for :twenty yearn? Of coUJrse, it rwa;s Benes! It was Benes who made Czecho~SlovaJkia whoHy dependent upon the ,l ove of France and, England, and it was Benes who did not permit Czecho-Slova:kia to attempt to make friends with Germany, as Bulga~ia and Yiugo,s[avia had done. It wa:s Bernes who made of CzecJho-Slov,aJkia a French gendarme to stand guard over Germany; and it was Benes who did not know how to ,rouse himself frrom a d<re3Jlll. and open his eyes to the reality that France and England did not know how to derul with Germany. It was Benes who ohstiinately held Czecho-Slovaikia in that runti-German front. Jt was IBenes who !bet on the wrong horse. And finally, it was Benes who paid no heed to the warnings coming frolffi the Slovak awtonomisrt ,camp (P.opul1ists and Nati,onalists), but also from Czech soUTces (Kramaf and otJhers) : that tJhe fore~gn po1ky of Czecho-Slovwkia was dangerous. and against her interests . Under such circumstances, when his h1wndering foreign poHcy contribulted in no smal,l measure to what had happened, Benes co'lllld do nothing else but resign. Of course, his apologists may say that Benes meant well, that he did not wish the State ill, but he was too trusting, since he depended upon the alliance with France; and, perh1a ps, he was not foresi,g hted enough, 1siince he did not see long ago,, in s,pite orf numerous and repeated warnings, which way the European wind was blowing. People noticed it in Yugoslavia, they noticed it in Bulgaria, they noticed it in Ro:umamia and they noticed it a lso in P.Oiland - aJnd they went with the wind. Benes did not notice it; he went ,a gainst the wind. And when he did begin to notice that things were going bad, he committed the cardinal error of not turning ,a bout quickly, hut against the wiind even more and cond uded a military pact with Soviet Rlu!ssia! 'J.1hat was the red cloth ,b efore the al,r e~dy hl'ritated dictators, Hitleir and iMus,s,o1ini. And ffingland, Whffil it came to deciding for or against war, was fiHed with fear that, if there should be a war, Central �62 SLOVAKIA EUTope would be O'Ver-run by Stalin's red army, which nobody, perhaps, omtld ever drive Ol,!t of it. When Benes departed, there left with him twenty years of faulty Czecho-Slovak foreign poticy. As we see from qu'Otations above, it has already been admitted also by those who approved of his policy and supported it. And with Benes there rulso departed twenty years of faulty internall policy, for let us not forget that Benes was one of the most leadmg exiponents of "Czechoslovruk" national unity and 1:he greatest opponent of Slovak autonomy. The Czechs also noticed thi,s fault of internal policy, lbut did not profit by it am.y more than T. G. Masaryk and Benes did by the ,l esson of Austr10-<Hl\l!Ilgary. Perhaps it was too late to do anything about the malignant cancer which had been planted in the political life of Czecho-Slova.kia, which, liike Austro-Hungary, ihad ,b ecome a prison to non-Czech nations. T. G. ,M.asarylk and Dr. Edward Benes had founded Ozecho~Slovakia on a [ie, bwlt it on more lies and inequities, but still Joudly proclaimed on every occasion that the "truth prevaiJs" ! Well, truth did prevail, despite the hypocrisy of the Czech founders of the Repuiblic. Benes resigned the presidency a.nd fled the country during its f,i rst great crisis, because he was a coward. He did wrong 13.iild he knew it. H1s people knew it, too. He capitulated to Hlitler, ,a ccepting .Muruch without even consuJlting the iparliament of CzeC'ho-Slovrukia. Ha:d he not :fled, who knows butt that iBenes might have been tried for treason and hung in 1938 by his own people? • • • WHO SAID IT? "New Ozecho..Slovakia will be a Slav state which, while having good relations with the great western democracies, will politically, economically, militarily and ou1turn1ly lean without any resel"Vations on the victorious ibuliwruik olf Slav peoples, the USSR, and cooperate with the Sl8JV and democratic states of Poland and the Yugoslav federation of states." - Laco Novomesky, d~puty-chairman of the Slovaik National Council.,. headed by Dr. Joseph Lettrich, OWI Bll!lletin, May 26, 1945. � SLOVAKIA 59 WHY DID BENES RESIGN IN 1938? P. A. Hrobak This quest.ion still. puzzles many people. Benes hlmself, both in his letter to the government and in !his speech to the people in paTting, 1lol'd Why he had Tesigned, but he told it in such a way :that it is not fully clear to the average person. To say it simply a:nd briefJy: Benes resigned beca1USe the policy of which he himself had been the chief exponent and representative for twenty years had proved faulty; it went bankrupt and he could, therefore, no longer remain at the head Ol:f the State. He himself told it in !this manner: "I 'had played so great a role in this deve1opment of events that I had to contemplate seTiously what my duty should be under ,c hanged ciircumstances. . . . I came into office under entirely different circumstances; and iI must reckon this adtuality. Circumstances have changed so completely, that I feel my remaining in office might create an obstacle in the new ci;z-cumstances with which our State is now coping . . . This is mainly so, as it concerns the international situation with a view towards :t:Jhe speedy (In a building up of cooperation with om neighbors" letter to Premier GeneTal Syirovy). "I have reached my decision of my own free will and in accordance with my person:al conviction after conswltation with <politi~al and constibuitional circles and with a number of other leading persons. . . In these ciiroomstances I think it is advisable that the new developments and the new European coliaboration should not be disturbed from our side through the faot that the personal position of its leading 1representative rupparently 0onstitutes an obstacle to tihls development. I was elected to my present position at a time s:ubstamJtially different from 1Jhe pres(,Farewell Broadcast, Oct. 5, 1938: MEMOIRS, ent." 1954, pp. 292-293). What these words of Benes actwail.ly meant wiU, perhaps, be best e.xiplained by a few quotations from Czech periodicals of 1938: �60 SLOVAKIA "Orf necessity our. :uuture pr0igram ,c ontains good re'lations with Ge:ranany - a program which we could have adopted long ago, iif ilt were not for the 'oavalierislh' Western Poweir,s which threatened to brook off theiir allialil.ce with us m suiCh an event" - Stanislav Yester, "Lidove Noviny, Oct. 5). '~Venlkov" called fOT lnew, friendlly conltacits with ,n eighbodng states, and a;sked for "awaJkening from dreams into reality .a nd the acceptance of a program which will be ours." "We do not know what wihl come next in :@urope. We do know, however, that nea,r us iis a power with which our state 0annot a,1low itself to come irnto dispute. Long enough already have we played for othern the role of a genda;rme who keeps Genmany in check: when the crucial moment came, we fownd ourseLves deseTted - alone. . . Well, good. If the woTild is to be governed not by j,u stice, bwt by force, the:n our place is with those who harve the greater strength and are more d ecisive. N ot!hing else remains for us. We <look for unity with Germany . .. And let us become, liike Bulgaria and Yugoslavia, one of G€rmamy's }a,rge 1proviiders and buyers, amd let uis refuse to enter into a ,c ombination of any kind, in which we would become part .o f an anti-Genm~ front. We are now thinking onily of O'lN'.selves and 'let UIS be loyal only to ourselves" -- ("Lidove Noviny," Oct. 5). "We have aJ.ready 'had more than enaugh ·orf t'he wailing sympathy of the western states 'towaJrdsi that courageous little n:a tion.' . . . We call beyond our bo,rdecrs: Put am end to your unwelcome manifestations oif sympathy towards Czecho-Slovakia. We are finally realizing what om standing in Cenrtrrul Emrope is, and we shaU guide OIUTselves 1acoordingly, whether you J[ke it or not. Ouir nation hears its defeat and hum..hliation not onily with pain, but wi11h great pride. We had /been betting on t'he wrong horse, a,nd we know how to take the necessaJry consequences.'' - ("Lidove Listy," OcJt. '5 ). We see that one after the other they admit to the fault of Czecho-Slovakia's twenty-year foreign policy. But �SLOVAKIA 61 who wa,s i,t that determined the trend of :Czecho-Slavakia's foreign policy for :twenty yearn? Of coUJrse, it rwa;s Benes! It was Benes who made Czecho~SlovaJkia whoHy dependent upon the ,l ove of France and, England, and it was Benes who did not permit Czecho-Slova:kia to attempt to make friends with Germany, as Bulga~ia and Yiugo,s[avia had done. It wa:s Bernes who made of CzecJho-Slov,aJkia a French gendarme to stand guard over Germany; and it was Benes who did not know how to ,rouse himself frrom a d<re3Jlll. and open his eyes to the reality that France and England did not know how to derul with Germany. It was Benes who ohstiinately held Czecho-Slovaikia in that runti-German front. Jt was IBenes who !bet on the wrong horse. And finally, it was Benes who paid no heed to the warnings coming frolffi the Slovak awtonomisrt ,camp (P.opul1ists and Nati,onalists), but also from Czech soUTces (Kramaf and otJhers) : that tJhe fore~gn po1ky of Czecho-Slovwkia was dangerous. and against her interests . Under such circumstances, when his h1wndering foreign poHcy contribulted in no smal,l measure to what had happened, Benes co'lllld do nothing else but resign. Of course, his apologists may say that Benes meant well, that he did not wish the State ill, but he was too trusting, since he depended upon the alliance with France; and, perh1a ps, he was not foresi,g hted enough, 1siince he did not see long ago,, in s,pite orf numerous and repeated warnings, which way the European wind was blowing. People noticed it in Yugoslavia, they noticed it in Bulgaria, they noticed it in Ro:umamia and they noticed it a lso in P.Oiland - aJnd they went with the wind. Benes did not notice it; he went ,a gainst the wind. And when he did begin to notice that things were going bad, he committed the cardinal error of not turning ,a bout quickly, hut against the wiind even more and cond uded a military pact with Soviet Rlu!ssia! 'J.1hat was the red cloth ,b efore the al,r e~dy hl'ritated dictators, Hitleir and iMus,s,o1ini. And ffingland, Whffil it came to deciding for or against war, was fiHed with fear that, if there should be a war, Central �62 SLOVAKIA EUTope would be O'Ver-run by Stalin's red army, which nobody, perhaps, omtld ever drive Ol,!t of it. When Benes departed, there left with him twenty years of faulty Czecho-Slovak foreign poticy. As we see from qu'Otations above, it has already been admitted also by those who approved of his policy and supported it. And with Benes there rulso departed twenty years of faulty internall policy, for let us not forget that Benes was one of the most leadmg exiponents of "Czechoslovruk" national unity and 1:he greatest opponent of Slovak autonomy. The Czechs also noticed thi,s fault of internal policy, lbut did not profit by it am.y more than T. G. Masaryk and Benes did by the ,l esson of Austr10-<Hl\l!Ilgary. Perhaps it was too late to do anything about the malignant cancer which had been planted in the political life of Czecho-Slova.kia, which, liike Austro-Hungary, ihad ,b ecome a prison to non-Czech nations. T. G. ,M.asarylk and Dr. Edward Benes had founded Ozecho~Slovakia on a [ie, bwlt it on more lies and inequities, but still Joudly proclaimed on every occasion that the "truth prevaiJs" ! Well, truth did prevail, despite the hypocrisy of the Czech founders of the Repuiblic. Benes resigned the presidency a.nd fled the country during its f,i rst great crisis, because he was a coward. He did wrong 13.iild he knew it. H1s people knew it, too. He capitulated to Hlitler, ,a ccepting .Muruch without even consuJlting the iparliament of CzeC'ho-Slovrukia. Ha:d he not :fled, who knows butt that iBenes might have been tried for treason and hung in 1938 by his own people? • • • WHO SAID IT? "New Ozecho..Slovakia will be a Slav state which, while having good relations with the great western democracies, will politically, economically, militarily and ou1turn1ly lean without any resel"Vations on the victorious ibuliwruik olf Slav peoples, the USSR, and cooperate with the Sl8JV and democratic states of Poland and the Yugoslav federation of states." - Laco Novomesky, d~puty-chairman of the Slovaik National Council.,. headed by Dr. Joseph Lettrich, OWI Bll!lletin, May 26, 1945. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1956, Vol. 6 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 18), March 1956.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 19), June 1956.</li> <li>Issue 3-4 (No. 20-21), September-December 1956.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 59 WHY DID BENES RESIGN IN 1938? P. A. Hrobak This quest.ion still. puzzles many people. Benes hlmself, both in his letter to the government and in !his speech to the people in paTting, 1lol'd Why he had Tesigned, but he told it in such a way :that it is not fully clear to the average person. To say it simply a:nd briefJy: Benes resigned beca1USe the policy of which he himself had been the chief exponent and representative for twenty years had proved faulty; it went bankrupt and he could, therefore, no longer remain at the head Ol:f the State. He himself told it in !this manner: "I 'had played so great a role in this deve1opment of events that I had to contemplate seTiously what my duty should be under ,c hanged ciircumstances. . . . I came into office under entirely different circumstances; and iI must reckon this adtuality. Circumstances have changed so completely, that I feel my remaining in office might create an obstacle in the new ci;z-cumstances with which our State is now coping . . . This is mainly so, as it concerns the international situation with a view towards :t:Jhe speedy (In a building up of cooperation with om neighbors" letter to Premier GeneTal Syirovy). "I have reached my decision of my own free will and in accordance with my person:al conviction after conswltation with <politi~al and constibuitional circles and with a number of other leading persons. . . In these ciiroomstances I think it is advisable that the new developments and the new European coliaboration should not be disturbed from our side through the faot that the personal position of its leading 1representative rupparently 0onstitutes an obstacle to tihls development. I was elected to my present position at a time s:ubstamJtially different from 1Jhe pres(,Farewell Broadcast, Oct. 5, 1938: MEMOIRS, ent." 1954, pp. 292-293). What these words of Benes actwail.ly meant wiU, perhaps, be best e.xiplained by a few quotations from Czech periodicals of 1938: 60 SLOVAKIA "Orf necessity our. :uuture pr0igram ,c ontains good re'lations with Ge:ranany - a program which we could have adopted long ago, iif ilt were not for the 'oavalierislh' Western Poweir,s which threatened to brook off theiir allialil.ce with us m suiCh an event" - Stanislav Yester, "Lidove Noviny, Oct. 5). '~Venlkov" called fOT lnew, friendlly conltacits with ,n eighbodng states, and a;sked for "awaJkening from dreams into reality .a nd the acceptance of a program which will be ours." "We do not know what wihl come next in :@urope. We do know, however, that nea,r us iis a power with which our state 0annot a,1low itself to come irnto dispute. Long enough already have we played for othern the role of a genda;rme who keeps Genmany in check: when the crucial moment came, we fownd ourseLves deseTted - alone. . . Well, good. If the woTild is to be governed not by j,u stice, bwt by force, the:n our place is with those who harve the greater strength and are more d ecisive. N ot!hing else remains for us. We <look for unity with Germany . .. And let us become, liike Bulgaria and Yugoslavia, one of G€rmamy's }a,rge 1proviiders and buyers, amd let uis refuse to enter into a ,c ombination of any kind, in which we would become part .o f an anti-Genm~ front. We are now thinking onily of O'lN'.selves and 'let UIS be loyal only to ourselves" -- ("Lidove Noviny," Oct. 5). "We have aJ.ready 'had more than enaugh ·orf t'he wailing sympathy of the western states 'towaJrdsi that courageous little n:a tion.' . . . We call beyond our bo,rdecrs: Put am end to your unwelcome manifestations oif sympathy towards Czecho-Slovakia. We are finally realizing what om standing in Cenrtrrul Emrope is, and we shaU guide OIUTselves 1acoordingly, whether you J[ke it or not. Ouir nation hears its defeat and hum..hliation not onily with pain, but wi11h great pride. We had /been betting on t'he wrong horse, a,nd we know how to take the necessaJry consequences.'' - ("Lidove Listy," OcJt. '5 ). We see that one after the other they admit to the fault of Czecho-Slovakia's twenty-year foreign policy. But SLOVAKIA 61 who wa,s i,t that determined the trend of :Czecho-Slavakia's foreign policy for :twenty yearn? Of coUJrse, it rwa;s Benes! It was Benes who made Czecho~SlovaJkia whoHy dependent upon the ,l ove of France and, England, and it was Benes who did not permit Czecho-Slova:kia to attempt to make friends with Germany, as Bulga~ia and Yiugo,s[avia had done. It wa:s Bernes who made of CzecJho-Slov,aJkia a French gendarme to stand guard over Germany; and it was Benes who did not know how to ,rouse himself frrom a d<re3Jlll. and open his eyes to the reality that France and England did not know how to derul with Germany. It was Benes who ohstiinately held Czecho-Slovaikia in that runti-German front. Jt was IBenes who !bet on the wrong horse. And finally, it was Benes who paid no heed to the warnings coming frolffi the Slovak awtonomisrt ,camp (P.opul1ists and Nati,onalists), but also from Czech soUTces (Kramaf and otJhers) : that tJhe fore~gn po1ky of Czecho-Slovwkia was dangerous. and against her interests . Under such circumstances, when his h1wndering foreign poHcy contribulted in no smal,l measure to what had happened, Benes co'lllld do nothing else but resign. Of course, his apologists may say that Benes meant well, that he did not wish the State ill, but he was too trusting, since he depended upon the alliance with France; and, perh1a ps, he was not foresi,g hted enough, 1siince he did not see long ago,, in s,pite orf numerous and repeated warnings, which way the European wind was blowing. People noticed it in Yugoslavia, they noticed it in Bulgaria, they noticed it in Ro:umamia and they noticed it a lso in P.Oiland - aJnd they went with the wind. Benes did not notice it; he went ,a gainst the wind. And when he did begin to notice that things were going bad, he committed the cardinal error of not turning ,a bout quickly, hut against the wiind even more and cond uded a military pact with Soviet Rlu!ssia! 'J.1hat was the red cloth ,b efore the al,r e~dy hl'ritated dictators, Hitleir and iMus,s,o1ini. And ffingland, Whffil it came to deciding for or against war, was fiHed with fear that, if there should be a war, Central 62 SLOVAKIA EUTope would be O'Ver-run by Stalin's red army, which nobody, perhaps, omtld ever drive Ol,!t of it. When Benes departed, there left with him twenty years of faulty Czecho-Slovak foreign poticy. As we see from qu'Otations above, it has already been admitted also by those who approved of his policy and supported it. And with Benes there rulso departed twenty years of faulty internall policy, for let us not forget that Benes was one of the most leadmg exiponents of "Czechoslovruk" national unity and 1:he greatest opponent of Slovak autonomy. The Czechs also noticed thi,s fault of internal policy, lbut did not profit by it am.y more than T. G. Masaryk and Benes did by the ,l esson of Austr10-<Hl\l!Ilgary. Perhaps it was too late to do anything about the malignant cancer which had been planted in the political life of Czecho-Slova.kia, which, liike Austro-Hungary, ihad ,b ecome a prison to non-Czech nations. T. G. ,M.asarylk and Dr. Edward Benes had founded Ozecho~Slovakia on a [ie, bwlt it on more lies and inequities, but still Joudly proclaimed on every occasion that the "truth prevaiJs" ! Well, truth did prevail, despite the hypocrisy of the Czech founders of the Repuiblic. Benes resigned the presidency a.nd fled the country during its f,i rst great crisis, because he was a coward. He did wrong 13.iild he knew it. H1s people knew it, too. He capitulated to Hlitler, ,a ccepting .Muruch without even consuJlting the iparliament of CzeC'ho-Slovrukia. Ha:d he not :fled, who knows butt that iBenes might have been tried for treason and hung in 1938 by his own people? • • • WHO SAID IT? "New Ozecho..Slovakia will be a Slav state which, while having good relations with the great western democracies, will politically, economically, militarily and ou1turn1ly lean without any resel"Vations on the victorious ibuliwruik olf Slav peoples, the USSR, and cooperate with the Sl8JV and democratic states of Poland and the Yugoslav federation of states." - Laco Novomesky, d~puty-chairman of the Slovaik National Council.,. headed by Dr. Joseph Lettrich, OWI Bll!lletin, May 26, 1945.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Why Did Beneš Resign in 1938? Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 6, No. 3-4 (20-21), September-December 1956 pp. 59-62 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hrobak, Philip Anthony, 1904-1964 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource September-December 1956 LCNAF