BROKEN MOSAIC PIECES

Speaking about stars, allow me to recall some weird episodes from the last weeks' displays of political dilettantism: a kind of broken mosaic pieces.

The scramble to remove red stars from the tops of public buildings (e.g. at the TV headquarters whose present chairman was, until three years ago, the

toughest slaved river of the press for many years in the Party's Central Committee).

The speed with which the Workers' Militia is scattered.

The insults suffered by those, even receptionists, who are unwilling to sign up for the new party, the HSP, after October 31, driven sometimes into nervous breakdowns. Those remaining in the party headquarters will have as many square metres of space per person as the inhabitants of Buckingham Palace.

The speed at which the troops guarding the party's central building are made to change into civilian clothes from their uniforms symbolizing respectable dignity—as if politicians did not know that in any decent West European state such buildings are guarded by armoured patrol cars. And while these people, dedicated soldiers all to the core of their being, are denied their proudly worn uniforms, those responsible forget to tell them that now they can behave as civilians even when they are requested to grant short interviews to the press.

For they have no permission to do that They must not even speak about what a feeling is now to wear civilian garb, and whether they envy or not their comrades guarding the Parliament two hundred yards away in dress uniforms.

A young man from the countryside, known to be an extreme radical, Imre Keserű, who had attracted much publicity in the reform circles, could say without fear before hundreds of his fellow delegates at one of the sessions of the Congress: we made a compromise in which we managed to get rid of the bloody-handed murderers among us, true, but we failed to draw the lines concerning who can be members of the party; and how should we get rid of the rats among us now? I hope Imre Keserű will not alarm the national press again, like he did last spring, if he receives unsigned letters once again, after what he said. / would be content to see him apologise to the inhabitants of his own town—and to every decent adult, in writing, in the press which, in spring, provided such space for the news of the "death threats" against him and probably will provide a forum now for his apology as well. Until I can read in just so many words and so many papers as then, I will regard Imre Keserű to be a battering ram rather than a reformer. In whose hand, I wonder?

Let us not sow winds now. that the storm is already here in the Carpathian basin.

In early summer, not long after I joined the Central Committee (but had not yet been actually employed there), I was bitter to recognize: the chance of holding elections before the end of this year was fading, even though that was my first condition on joining the CC. My other condition was that the election preparations and struggle should be directed by György Fejti of the

politicians. Thus, two weeks after my informal entry I sent a desperate letter to the CC officials in charge. (By that time, my "fans" in the press had sent about a dozen "letters" to Károly Grósz's office at the CC in a self-assured spirit of denunciation, but remaining all along under the cloak of anonymity.

It is easy to report on people that way—but I was used to it by then.) So, after such a lot of bitterness, here is my letter seeking hope in May 1989:

"Concerning my assignment in connection with the HSWP's election preparations, I would like to return to my earlier suggestion made in January 1989 still as editor-in-chief, according to which effective preparations can be made for the elections if the following aspects are taken into consideration:

- The staff working on the preparations should have the freedom to professionally involve independent experts (that is, not party apparatchiks).

- The HSWP's election success is, in my opinion, the key element of our country's political stability. There is as yet no definite political decision pointing that way, while the opposi- tion parties are already working their reservations and decisions of refusal concerning this year's elections. In that situation we should have a clearer decision than I we have today. Such a decision by the HSWP should necessarily be sovereign, made by the group of the H S W P ' s representatives in Parliament following a CC resolution. That decision is to contain the identical and visible standpoint of the HSWP Political Committee's different prominent leaders, since the present lack of unity is an election liability.

- Therefore I repeat my suggestion that we should establish a manager office focusing exclusively on the elections and working on an independent legal and financial basis—thus it can be regarded as an accountable enterprise operating freely in preparing for the elections, its technology and methodology, naturally and exclusively serving the interests and under the control of the HSWP.

- This enterprise would employ experts: social psychologists, election psychologists, linguists (that might be an exaggeration), journalist managers, altogether about 10 people who, employed to work full time, would even risk everything in endeavouring to perform the job in a professional way. My negotiations so far regarding the freedom to establish such a staff of experts in the premises of the Central Committee have not yet been successful. That, obviously, might be my personal failure as well. It seems to be likely, though, that an independent staff can be organized to perform such a task only if the members are all professionals undertaking the job as full-time employees. My opinion at the moment is that the methods of calling people in or providing temporary assignment cannot be successfully pursued. Thus, in my judgement, the current set-up—of course I mean only my own role—is not

a promising one. This is why I returned to the earlier suggestion indicated above which, if I am entrusted, I would undertake to elaborate until June 15.

- Until then I am asking for permission to do this work in my previous post of editor-in-chief. On that day my work contract would be terminated, after which I would have to take my holiday as stipulated by die laws of employment I would gladly spend even these two or three weeks on performing the above task, in case it is needed. In this way my work contract there would expire from July 1—and the new contract would come into force here, only as proposed above.

- There is no doubt in my mind that I can pursue this activity exclusively for the HSWP that will have remained and is to be maintained homogeneous.

This is the party I joined, and there is no other political solution possible for me. The election battle will clearly be as tough one and it will have to be fought in a professional way: for the HSWP."

So that was the case in May 1989.

October? Homogeneity? HSWP?

In May I did believe in the power of homogeneity. But what became of that homogeneity a short four months later? Didn't Imre Pozsgay pay too high a price by undertaking in the summer to participate in the four-man Presidium whose makeshift and forced character had been obvious from the very beginning? And were his partners—rivals— who, in return, announced that Imre Pozsgay was the Party's presidential candidate, harbouring only good will in doing so? For what did time tell? In the summer of 1989 Imre Pozsgay's authority was absolute and undisputable. In late summer the attacks began. And writing these words now, I am asking anxiously: what did the new situation created by the November 26 referendum bring for him? And at what price? Was he aided or hindered by the "rally" of a shady content at the Congress? It is still a mystery.

III.

TREATMENT "B"

1) W H A T I W I L L N O T DISCUSS H E R E

Now that our imagination takes us back to the congress halls, I would like to warn you in advance that I must leave a number of mysteries unsolved. Partly because I do not have precise information yet. Partly because in other cases I might be accused of personal bias. And partly even because in the closing phase of the Congress I decided not only to return my mandate—but also to leave the party. I cannot yet solve the problem of how the Budapest-based leaders of the group organized during the Congress with the name of

"people's democratic platform" could get the signatures of hundreds of their non—Budapest fellow delegates. / still do not know why only two nomination meetings were organized for those who, having given their signatures, probably desired more than that. I do not know the reason for this platform's leaders putting Csaba Tabajdi and Gyula Horn, two of the reformists' leaders, on a kind of COCOM list; and / do not know what runaway forces caused the incident in which, in the last hours of night and daytime the world-renowned Minister of Foreign Affairs, a recently increasingly original figure of our country's reformist forces was paired off with the not world-renowned János Gönci on a "one or the other" basis, forcing the issue until Rezső Nyers had to make an agonized decision. And why did all that pain him? And where did the Budapest "leaders" of the people's democrats hide László Iklódi, the agricultural co-operative president who, as a genuine country man, was the actual founder of this platform with his experience of 60 years? Where did the Bárd-Gönci-Krausz "city trio" sink his name during the secret negotiations? And how did the name of First Secretary Sándor Kiss of Heves county disappear? He is also well known to be a dedicated advocate of his thought and, not at all incidentally, it was Heves county that supplied the backbone of the unexpected recruiting campaign urged by the Budapest members. How come that hundreds of delegates, the bulk of this platform, learned only in the last-plus-one-moment, during the closed session of the Congress, that their (?) candidates for the presidium were Csaba Hámori, Béla Fabry, Lajos Menyhárt and Béla Katona?

And what is true of the news that on Monday night Miklós Németh conducted a lengthy negotiation with Ambassador Palmer of the U.S.? As did Rezső Nyers later, according to rumours? What did the Party's President have in those hours to talk about with the American ambassador, while well over a thousand delegates had no idea on what and whom they should vote for?

And is it true that, on Monday morning, having tired of the punishment to his prestige meted out by Rezső Nyers during the debate on party politics in the factories the previous night, Miklós Németh rose to his feet at last and put a stop to the "Budapest folksies" (organizing themselves behind Rezső Nyers) sending one ultimatum after the other, unlegalized by their members?

What kind of a Congress is it that is forced to leave all mediation to twice half a dozen men in the most important issue: the process of nominating and choosing the leaders? And why must it then accept at the closed session that it can no longer make any change? Again at the closed session, why must the Congress accept the reprimanding, domineering manners of philosopher Attila Agh from one side and editor András Bárd from the other, two unexpectedly strengthened political "leaders"? Angry they were, for there rose a hubbub at the closed session which did not want to recognize the binding compromise that they had stitched together at the secret talks and later legalized by Rezső Nyers! This is world politics in Budapest—with many self-appointed candidates.

2) F R A G M E N T S O F A C H A I N O F T H O U G H T S AT Z A L A E G E R S Z E G

The questions that took me to the country township of Zalaegerszeg on September 9,1989, were the same that led me through all the stations of my 8,000 miles trek made in the month and a half preceding the Congress: is ours a down-to-earth party, is its crisis grave, can it still rely on what it counted on: the countryside?

On that day at Zalaegerszeg I was elected to be a Congress delegate. The unexpected honour was mainly due to a 9-point program speech (see Appendix 2). I would like now to emphasize some key phrases, which were at that time hotly debated among the party membership. In those very days, following the announcement made by Imre Pozsgay, a political and ethical struggle was in full swing on whether the party could remain in the factories.

And there was the other issue: can the letter W be left out of the H S W P ' s name? What I had to say there rang similar to what the worker delegate József Fiziker was to put so clearly later at the Congress.

"I feel like the black in South Africa who, closing his eyes for a moment feels white and then, opening his eyes, is faced with die harsh reality. As for me, I also want to represent the blue-collar workers, those workers who are confused today concerning their situation, interests and identity, searching for something to identify themselves with.

What do these workers want? An urgent and basic change. They want equal opportunities rather than charity. They want a policy in favour of enterprises, so that they can see the opportunity of their advancement ensured.

They want a stop to privileges and possible new privileges. It is not an advantage, a label of some kind that they want—just a decent living, objectives to aim at and the appreciation of their own role in implementing them. They seek an identity in communities able to serve their interests shaped together, rather than in mechanisms force on them from above. They want order and democracy but not the kind of order and democracy dictated from above. They want a new party of left-wing thinking which can serve as

a basic guideline if it revolutionizes all generations, not wounding the interest of either the young or old people in doing so. I propose the Congress should apologise to the honest, diligent and talented people of Hungary for what happened previously, if the leaders of the party have failed to do this. I am deeply convinced of what even a note warned me this morning: we cannot make a living by beating our breasts. There is one thing we must know, though. We must take the mentality of this age into the movement—and, I believe, it is a moral duty of this new party to take on the values of the movement. You see, the gravedigger is being"buried today, but then, workers never wanted to be gravediggers. They wanted to march together with those whose aim was to create a human world here on Earth.

Let me pass on to you the opinion of a 76-year-old party member: his idea is worth considering. He sent me here to tell you that everybody should honestly do what they are good at, and it should not be political considerations, connections and different advantages that send people to leading posts.

A party, being on the left, must tell not only what is pleasant to hear, but also what is true. The nation in my opinion is not yet prepared for the change facing us, and I must confess that, beside the many fine objectives I would much rather put a strong emphasis on making sacrifices, since no success can be achieved without further sacrifices. I also think—and the labour movement also teaches—that it is not the workers demands that we must satisfy:

through hard and consistent work we should show them what they should demand. Thank you for your attention."

I thought at the time and still would like to hope that the HSP will remain a

workers' party, meaning "workers" to be the people who contribute to the public good by means of hand and brain. In that respect the point is not an ideological debate but the appreciation of the community man, and that perhaps there will be such men in the future's party as well.

During my trek in the country and seeing the last year and a half of the party, I was increasingly sad to realize how artists, scholars and other outstanding but politically moderate personalities were sqeezed out by all the elbowing in politics and the press. Meanwhile, I also increasingly felt how utterly undeserved a development it was in which leaders of large-scale industrial works or agricultural co-operatives or vital service companies, all employing thousands of people, were getting squeezed out of both public life and the press that not only reflects but also creates that public life.

That was a gravely unjust practice, and the situation has not changed since then, either. While we could hear the opposition members most favoured by the press several times a day, often complaining in those press forums about their having no press forum; while the press was dominated by people like Péter Tölgyessy who was hardly known even in his own profession half a year ago, or the FDA or YDA leaders who are clearly enjoying foreign financial support channeled through the Soros Foundation; while they were being made" heroes" at Prague's Venceslas Square; while János Kiss or Miklós Tamás Gáspár of the FDA were being turned by the press into personalities of national importance, similarly to Reverend Gábor Roszig, a HDF and YDA member whose victorious election campaign received national significance in the press—and while the HSWP members invited to participate in television or radio debates often happened to be of the less credible and colourless debater type—well, in all that noise there was not a word on the leaders in the sphere of production. The leaders of large industries, the people organizing life situations for others practically disappeared from the arena of public life. Except, of course, those who just happened to be active in selling out the nation's property, the company entrusted to them, enhancing their personal wealth as well as that of their foreign partners.

As I did earlier, on the eve and the first day of the Congress I tried, supported by my fellow delegate journalist colleagues who undertook to help, to promote the interest of major industrial enterpreneurs and the people in their charge to appear with adequate force at the Congress at least.

The attempt failed. Maybe they, and those of them who we approached with that purpose, disappeared in the same current as the journalists intending to undertake their support did in these four days. They disappeared because the

The attempt failed. Maybe they, and those of them who we approached with that purpose, disappeared in the same current as the journalists intending to undertake their support did in these four days. They disappeared because the