Selected text
I had a good reputation and standing among the editorial staff. It can't be said that there had been any direct anti-Semitic conflicts. What happened was that many Jews were expelled from the Party and fired from work. The origin wasn't directly with the paper; it was within the scope of the overall politics of the Communist Party in those days.
But a problem nevertheless cropped up. It was an interview. Usually, when they summoned someone for an interview, it happened that they announced to him: '... Dear ... based on the decision of the District Committee of the Communist Party, you are expelled from the Communist Party, and also from your employment.' With me the interview lasted seven hours. It wasn't that easy to expel someone who had been a member of the party since the pre-war years, a partisan commander and active party member. I also had quite prominent political functions. I was a member of the Presidium of the Central Committee of the Union of Cultural Employees, I was a member of the Presidium of the Czechoslovak Peace Movement... As a journalist I was also involved in various activities. My guess is that they didn't want to get rid of me completely, only to cancel my party membership.
However, the chairman of the organization and of that interview committee began to rail against my colleagues who had emigrated in those days. While at the same time, he had prior to this confided to me that if he were younger, he would have taken his wife and two children and left the country. It was he who during that interview began to abuse my colleagues and especially one, Peter Hirsch. Peter was, among other things, also a journalist at Kulturni Zivot [Cultural Life]. He was very clever, and by the way had been a very courageous partisan, who had even by himself destroyed a German tank. He began to really rail against him. I couldn't stand it any more, and said to that chairman, 'Palo! It was tougher for Peter to leave than for you to stay here!' And that was the final straw. They expelled me from the Party and also from work. Then I was unemployed for I think three or four months. In the end a lady who was the director of the Health Education Institute took me under her wing, and I worked there until 1976, and then went into retirement.
During my retirement, I at one time, I think it was in 1986, was earning some extra money as a sales clerk in a kiosk. It belonged to the Postal News Service. I sold newspapers. After about three months they summoned me to the head office, that I've got a shortfall of 7,000. My God, how can I be short, when I didn't do anything wrong?! So my wife told me to quickly go to the bank, withdraw seven thousand, give it to them and be done with it. When I wanted to do this, they then suddenly told me that they apologize, but that I've got a surplus and not a shortfall. Despite this I ended there.
Then I had one friend at the Slovak Union of Manufacturing Cooperatives, where they needed a gatekeeper, so I went to work as a gatekeeper until the year 1989. [Editor's note: This association of manufacturing and other cooperatives was created in 1953. Currently (2005) it includes 143 member co-ops with a total number of almost 12,000 employees. Its main focus is consultancy, procedural and informational assistance for its member co-ops in economical, legislative and legal areas, in financing, with issues regarding taxes, payroll, accounting and statistics.] I was the kind of gatekeeper where when the director needed a speech, he sent someone to the gate in my place, and I went up to the head office. There they made me coffee and I wrote speeches for the director. On the occasion of the Velvet Revolution [28] he read a speech by me. During that time the invited me to come and work at the Slovak Union of Anti-Fascist Fighters [29]. At the Slovak Union I at first worked as the manager of the politico- organizational department, then I worked as the manager of the Secretariat, the union secretary, up to the moment when I didn't agree with the stance of General Husak, the union chairman. The two of us had differing opinions regarding the activities of this union. Then I worked for only two more years for the Simecka Foundation [30], where I worked in the archive on the restoration of a large quantity of documents to do with the Holocaust.
Life after 1989 continued for me, and progressed in a very interesting fashion. One didn't need to have a lot of political savvy to see that the totalitarian system, and the regime that existed here, couldn't hold on. It had no future. You can't have democracy in a society when the party, which proclaims itself to be the leading force in society, is itself not democratic. When the decision about who is going to be the director of a factory isn't made by professional officials, but the Secretary of the Communist Party. For the second time I saw that the totalitarian system was floundering between contradictions. Different were the political proclamations and different the practice that they implemented. I was among the first who even before November 1989 held the opinion that the regime was untenable. That doesn't mean that I was against socialism. No, not that. But against the practical application of that regime.
Recently my friend Vlado Czech and I were reading together a document from November of 1989, which I could sign again today. This document was also my creation, where I very critically evaluated the practices of the totalitarian system, and basically sketched out our notions of how society should further develop, especially concerning the application of democracy, solidarity and so on. Vlado Czech and I were the main people involved in the fact that the then leadership of the Slovak Union of Anti-Fascist Fighters was forced to resign. A new leadership was formed on new democratic principles.
My friend Vlado Czech then became the chairman of the City Committee of the Union of Anti-Fascist Fighters in Bratislava, and I became the head of the politico-organizational department of the Central Committee of the Anti- Fascist Fighters. At that time I was taking care of practically all documents of a political nature. At the next congress of the Union of Anti- Fascist Fighters I was elected as the General Secretary of the union, which was basically the second function after the chairman. And I can tell you, that in this function I gained a relatively large amount of support and popularity, and still to this day, functionaries reminisce that when I - I'm not saying it to brag or anything - but to this day they reminisce that in those days the union was a lot more active. It was the time from 1992 to 1996. After that I refused to run again, because there were disagreements between the chairman, General Husak and me.
As a former high-ranking military functionary, he instituted a 'military regime.' I, on the other hand, promoted democratic principles in this respect. What's more, I also had a different opinion as far as the future of the Union of Anti-Fascist Fighters was concerned. I promoted the idea that the union transform itself into one sociopolitical movement, and the chairman was for the union remaining a special-interest group. In this respect we differed. He had more support within the older leadership, and I saw that I won't be able to push through my opinion on the future of the union, and so I left. But the passage of time has shown that my opinion on this future of the union was justified. The union is now in the situation, that in a few years, when this generation is gone, its existence will be threatened.
But a problem nevertheless cropped up. It was an interview. Usually, when they summoned someone for an interview, it happened that they announced to him: '... Dear ... based on the decision of the District Committee of the Communist Party, you are expelled from the Communist Party, and also from your employment.' With me the interview lasted seven hours. It wasn't that easy to expel someone who had been a member of the party since the pre-war years, a partisan commander and active party member. I also had quite prominent political functions. I was a member of the Presidium of the Central Committee of the Union of Cultural Employees, I was a member of the Presidium of the Czechoslovak Peace Movement... As a journalist I was also involved in various activities. My guess is that they didn't want to get rid of me completely, only to cancel my party membership.
However, the chairman of the organization and of that interview committee began to rail against my colleagues who had emigrated in those days. While at the same time, he had prior to this confided to me that if he were younger, he would have taken his wife and two children and left the country. It was he who during that interview began to abuse my colleagues and especially one, Peter Hirsch. Peter was, among other things, also a journalist at Kulturni Zivot [Cultural Life]. He was very clever, and by the way had been a very courageous partisan, who had even by himself destroyed a German tank. He began to really rail against him. I couldn't stand it any more, and said to that chairman, 'Palo! It was tougher for Peter to leave than for you to stay here!' And that was the final straw. They expelled me from the Party and also from work. Then I was unemployed for I think three or four months. In the end a lady who was the director of the Health Education Institute took me under her wing, and I worked there until 1976, and then went into retirement.
During my retirement, I at one time, I think it was in 1986, was earning some extra money as a sales clerk in a kiosk. It belonged to the Postal News Service. I sold newspapers. After about three months they summoned me to the head office, that I've got a shortfall of 7,000. My God, how can I be short, when I didn't do anything wrong?! So my wife told me to quickly go to the bank, withdraw seven thousand, give it to them and be done with it. When I wanted to do this, they then suddenly told me that they apologize, but that I've got a surplus and not a shortfall. Despite this I ended there.
Then I had one friend at the Slovak Union of Manufacturing Cooperatives, where they needed a gatekeeper, so I went to work as a gatekeeper until the year 1989. [Editor's note: This association of manufacturing and other cooperatives was created in 1953. Currently (2005) it includes 143 member co-ops with a total number of almost 12,000 employees. Its main focus is consultancy, procedural and informational assistance for its member co-ops in economical, legislative and legal areas, in financing, with issues regarding taxes, payroll, accounting and statistics.] I was the kind of gatekeeper where when the director needed a speech, he sent someone to the gate in my place, and I went up to the head office. There they made me coffee and I wrote speeches for the director. On the occasion of the Velvet Revolution [28] he read a speech by me. During that time the invited me to come and work at the Slovak Union of Anti-Fascist Fighters [29]. At the Slovak Union I at first worked as the manager of the politico- organizational department, then I worked as the manager of the Secretariat, the union secretary, up to the moment when I didn't agree with the stance of General Husak, the union chairman. The two of us had differing opinions regarding the activities of this union. Then I worked for only two more years for the Simecka Foundation [30], where I worked in the archive on the restoration of a large quantity of documents to do with the Holocaust.
Life after 1989 continued for me, and progressed in a very interesting fashion. One didn't need to have a lot of political savvy to see that the totalitarian system, and the regime that existed here, couldn't hold on. It had no future. You can't have democracy in a society when the party, which proclaims itself to be the leading force in society, is itself not democratic. When the decision about who is going to be the director of a factory isn't made by professional officials, but the Secretary of the Communist Party. For the second time I saw that the totalitarian system was floundering between contradictions. Different were the political proclamations and different the practice that they implemented. I was among the first who even before November 1989 held the opinion that the regime was untenable. That doesn't mean that I was against socialism. No, not that. But against the practical application of that regime.
Recently my friend Vlado Czech and I were reading together a document from November of 1989, which I could sign again today. This document was also my creation, where I very critically evaluated the practices of the totalitarian system, and basically sketched out our notions of how society should further develop, especially concerning the application of democracy, solidarity and so on. Vlado Czech and I were the main people involved in the fact that the then leadership of the Slovak Union of Anti-Fascist Fighters was forced to resign. A new leadership was formed on new democratic principles.
My friend Vlado Czech then became the chairman of the City Committee of the Union of Anti-Fascist Fighters in Bratislava, and I became the head of the politico-organizational department of the Central Committee of the Anti- Fascist Fighters. At that time I was taking care of practically all documents of a political nature. At the next congress of the Union of Anti- Fascist Fighters I was elected as the General Secretary of the union, which was basically the second function after the chairman. And I can tell you, that in this function I gained a relatively large amount of support and popularity, and still to this day, functionaries reminisce that when I - I'm not saying it to brag or anything - but to this day they reminisce that in those days the union was a lot more active. It was the time from 1992 to 1996. After that I refused to run again, because there were disagreements between the chairman, General Husak and me.
As a former high-ranking military functionary, he instituted a 'military regime.' I, on the other hand, promoted democratic principles in this respect. What's more, I also had a different opinion as far as the future of the Union of Anti-Fascist Fighters was concerned. I promoted the idea that the union transform itself into one sociopolitical movement, and the chairman was for the union remaining a special-interest group. In this respect we differed. He had more support within the older leadership, and I saw that I won't be able to push through my opinion on the future of the union, and so I left. But the passage of time has shown that my opinion on this future of the union was justified. The union is now in the situation, that in a few years, when this generation is gone, its existence will be threatened.
Location
Slovakia
Interview
Alexander Bachnar