Newsgroups: bit.listserv.slovak-l
Date:         Sat, 5 Sep 1992 18:10:44 PDT
From:         lhdsy1!HOVMB.HOU281.CHEVRON.COM!TKMARC@UUNET.UU.NET
Subject:      Re: Paradigm shift

Commenting on parts of Jan's response:

>>Jan:
>>
>>The question is, if and when Slovakia exercises this right,
>>will it improve or worsen the living conditions of its inhabitants.
>
>Nobody is able to give an exact answer to this important
>question.  In spite of all the development od social science and
>general education there is still a big area of behavior and
>social activity which the man may examine only by doing it.
>Following a newsgroup about economics I've got persuaded, that
>astrology is probably a more exact discipline. Then, let's
>see how we'll manage this deal.

Wrong. This is not a matter of economics (which indeed is a rather
elusive science) but simple accounting.

>But in fact I'm not quite sure if it's correct, when we are
>correlating categories of human being concerning our personal
>and social identity, freedom and liberty with categories of
>living standards.

Agreed. I avoided the term "living standard" (zivotna uroven) because
like you I don't reduce the human values to just one--material
well-being. In my response to Marian I spelled out what I meant.

>The Slovaks wern't pampered by their history. They've got an
>permanent course in living within proper limits. Then the aspect
>mentioned by you probably want be the decisive one.
>
>>There are two major consequences of a split: the expenses associated
>>with the division, and the political and economic sanctions by the
>>rest of the world.
>
>A divorse as well as a division is an expensive undergoing.
>But I don't understand your frightening with political and
>economic sanction. The foreign politicians repeatedly claimed
>our right for selfdetermination, which we have to fulfill in
>a constitutional way. For what have we to be punished, then?

Correct, but understand that acknowledging a right does not preclude
consequences. CSFR (or Slovakia, or France) also have the right to
elect any political party, including the communist one. It does not
mean that other countries would not respond to it. But most of the
sanctions would not be official policies originated by other
governments, but the eroded investor confidence. Also, CSFR is a
small country as it is. The economy of scale plays an important
role here. Perhaps my choice of word "sanction" was not the best.

>>When the politicians who are preparing the way for
>>the split deny the heavy impact of these two factors, it's a wishful
>>thinking at best, and arrogant lying at worst.
>
>There is no other way to proof this hypothesis only to undergo
>this experiment.

Well, again, although this is not an exact science, we have enough
variables to figure this out. Like you said yourself, "A divorce as
well as a division is an expensive undergoing." It is not true that
you have to undergo the experiment of divorce in order to know that
it will be expensive, and its impact will be heavy.

>>Furthermore, there are other circumstances that compound the problem.
>>True, HZDS won in free elections, and its victory is a reflection
>>of Meciar's popularity.
>
>The popularity of a politician is the main atribute of his job.
>Therefore it sounds crazy if Meciar is all the time accused
>because of being popular, but nobody disturbs, that the news in
>TV and newspaper are full of data about the popularity of the
>American candidates for presidency.

It's an irrelevant aside, but let me assure you that it disturbs many.
The US presidential election is a total joke.

>That's an important criterion more: if the politician is keeping
>his promisses. Let's see. The account is mostly very simple.
>
>I don't know how may help Meciar's popularity in solving the
>problem with the huge budgetary debt. It's an heritage of the
>previous government. Will the people take it in account? That's
>the point where the jusice of the history is mostly hobbling.
>But that's his problem.
>
>>But who is Meciar? He's a thug (a "hulva't,"
>>as they say in Slovak); his choice of words and expressions might
>>be appropriate for a pub after midnight, but not for a government
>>officer;
>
>I'm not quite sure if I'm able here to follow your way of
>thinking. What did you mean with the previous chapter? Do you
>accuse Meciar for his behavior, or the voters because of giving
>their votes for a thug?

Well, neither. There is nothing one can do about either. I was just
leading to the paragraph about "consequences of having Meciar's
government."

>>His way of dealing with others who disagree with him is primitive
>>and disgusting (a reported incident: Meciar: "How much do you weigh,
>>dear colleague?" MP: "80 kilograms." Meciar: "Well, for me you're
>>just 80 kilograms of shit." ("tak pre mna ste iba 80-kilove hovno."));
>>his political platform can only described as populist, because truly
>>the only constant in his politics is to stand for what is the most
>>popular position and change it whenever advantageous.
>
>Once let us speak about the way how the journalists were dealing
>with Meciar. I'm curious if you will agree with them. What a
>position does take a politician, it's some kind of star dust.
>The main question is if he did managed the main problems of a
>society - political, social, economical, cultural etc. problems.
>Nor less important is the way of solving these problems. Nobody
>gives time to him. In two months time he managed to pass a new
>constitution. Is it enough, or not enough?
>
>I'll try to examine the reported incident. That's the first time
>I've heard it. But it wouldn't be the first time, that I'd heard
>a quite untrusty story. Unbelievable how many hate does he mobilize!

Let me know what you find--I'd like to know myself. I think it was
right before Carnogursky came in. I don't recall where I read it.

>>Additionally, there is the baggage of the Slovak Republic. The core of
>>the problem here is NOT that the Slovak Republic was a Nazi ally--that's
>>all history now. The problem is that some Slovak nationalists today
>>look at the old Slovak Republic with pride, consider it a source of
>>inspiration, and try to justify it. The rest of the world will never
>>have any sympathy for this.
>
>In accusations it is very incorrect to use expression like "SOME
>Slovak nationalist". Some Americans like to use riffle during their
>amok. Does it mean that ALL, or the MAJORITY of Americans like
>to use riffle and ALL or the MAJORITY are getting crazy and killing
>innocent people - of course, using riffles...
>
>You are right, they are some people feeling and behaving in the
>way which you described. But none of this people get an seat in
>the parliament, the extreme right or left parties are fighting
>for their simple being and the old-fashioned nationalists don't
>have any influence at the political life and decision-making.

I very carefully selected the expression "some Slovak nationalists."
I admit, I don't remember every detail of who said what. But I know
that I see a considerable degree of apologetics for the Slovak
State, even on this forum, sometimes overt, sometimes more subtle.
I know I have read that kind of stuff in the periodicals from
Slovakia. I realize that it is not true for ALL Slovak nationalists.
That's why I said SOME.

Like you said, SOME Americans use handguns as their sole argument (more
of them than Europeans)--and that's why the US is a more violent and
dangerous place, and that's why its image in Europe is in this respect
even worse than reality.

Even here in the US we hear about neo-Nazis in Germany and skin-heads
in the Czech lands--yet, only SOME Germans are neo-Nazis and SOME
Czechs are skin-heads.

Likewise, we hear about the Tiso's plaque in Banska Stiavnica (I think),
and a few demonstrations at the SNP square. If we hear about it, I'm
sure the Europe hears about it too. EXTREMELY bad PR.

In re Marian Kubaska's "treachery of nationals interests"--this is where
the REAL damage to Slovakia is being done! Because if and when Slovakia
becomes an independent country, these tendencies will hurt its image
much more than what Feldek says. But somehow, the people
(and I am NOT talking about you, Jan)
who so eagerly look after Slovak national interests in case of Feldek,
Kusy or Hoffman, never seem to be bothered by the Slovak State propaganda.

>>Against this background it is only understandable that there is increased
>>sensitivity to anyone with past associations with the Slovak
>>Republic or the Nazis (i.e. Slobodnik).
>
>I'm getting bored by the case of Slobodnik. It changed in a
>legend.  Do you know, that he was in the camp 10 days, that he
>saved the life of 3 French and one Russian partisan, etc. etc.?

I know nothing about him, and have absolutely nothing against him.
Sounds like it was totally blown out of proportion. If so, it's
regrettable.

>>So, the split will necessarily worsen the living conditions in both
>>Bohemia and Slovakia, because of the associated expenses combined
>>with the loss of credibility in the eyes of the world community.
>>This is the extent of what Bohemia faces in the event of the
>>split. Slovakia however will have a host of other problems: internally,
>>the consequences of having Meciar's government; externally, being the
>>perceived initiator of the split, which will further erode foreign
>>investor confidence.
>
>Do you know that already in 1991 the Czech government officials
>elaborated a plan how to organize the customs at the Moravian
>border?

Yes, I believe I have read that--it was public knowledge, wasn't it,
published in the papers and all? But what's your point? Don't tell me
it was the Czechs who wanted an autonomous state...

>Can you explain, please, to me what are "the consequences of
>having Meciar's government", i.e. a government based on results
>of free democratic election. Did we have to make a revolution
>against Meciar, or to manipulate the election results?

No. Indeed, HZDS won legitimate elections and is there to stay until
the next elections (unless HZDS disintegrates the same way VPN did,
in which case another bizzare transfer of power may take place).

>It's to early to say, how Meciar's government will be.

Come on now. We express political opinions here. If Perot were elected
a president of the US, this country would bear the consequences that.
I think Perot would really hurt the US (and many would argue with
that). In the same sense I don't consider the program of HZDS to be
the best one for Slovakia, and I don't see Meciar as the politician
who is willing and able to tactfully and diplomatically deal with
the Czech side in negotiations that are going to be anything but simple
and straightforward. You're right, we'll find out soon. I would honestly
be very pleased if I am proven wrong.

>>Unfortunately, most people in Slovakia are either unaware of these
>>issues, or right now they are simply not important to them. The
>>driving force behind this whole independence movement is not a rational
>>analysis of what is really best for inhabitants of Slovakia, but
>>emotional issues of pride, quest for recognition, and such.
>>Mr Frajkor does not include "Slovak Republic" in the address because
>>he thinks there might be another Martin in Bohemia, but because of
>>some odd satisfaction which has nothing to do with speeding up or
>>otherwise improving the delivery. However, while his peculiar
>>addition has no real impact, the split of CSFR has a potential of
>>having grave (not catastrofic, just grave) consequences for the
>>inhabitants of Slovakia.
>
>All this propagandistic rubbish, which you have got presented by
>Czech humanists and intellectuals is the best way how to keep
>foreign capital away from Slovakia, how to spread misbelieve to
>an unknown and newborn nation over all the world and how to
>weaken thed ability pf the Slovaks to act at the international
>market.

I am stating my opinion, as a private person, within an audience
of several hundred people, mostly academics. I'd like to think I can
divert the flow of capital or affect international markets, but that
would definitely be an illusion of grandeur on my side. You should
be talking to those who celebrate Tiso, because they made it to the New
York Times and I suspect it cost Slovakia megabucks.

Let me now expand on the driving force behind the separatist movement.
In your original posting you said:

>I can imagin my words sound like a propaganda speech shouted
>from barrikades. But we are fighting now for very simple things,
>basic values, to which you have got used a long time before.

The fight to establish an independent Slovakia by breaking up a
small country with a very good reputation into two minuscule
countries, one of which is, like you say, "unknown," is a fight for
values that people here do not understand. Haven't met anyone here yet
(and I'm talking about educated people who follow politics) who
either understands, or has any sympathy for it. I've been trying
to understand it myself, and can't. The value of having
an independent nation-state in the todays world is largely
incomprehensible and I'm afraid you won't be able to change that.
The only exception are forcefully annexed countries with completely
different cultures, like the Baltic states. Additionally, in their case
they're probably better off without being anchored to the collapsing
Soviet Union.

But I'd be interested, could you tell us in one relatively short
statement, what is the basic value (or values) represented by the
fight for independent Slovakia?

>Why do you trust to old-fashioned organization of the world?
>Look at Palestina, the Kurds and other nations and ethnic groups:
>It didn't appear a politician, who would able to say: let's give
>the souvereignty, dignity, freedom, liberty... This kind of problems
>and tasks need a fight against a traditional organization of
>states and international community. All the nature is developing.
>Why the organization of international life has to be kept the same?

It has nothing to do with trust. It has to do with working with what's
there. If you're saying that Slovakia should go about its business by
fighting the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, European
Community, NATO, and everyone else ... well, that's an interesting
proposition. I'm curious what do you think that would do to the
flow of foreign capital into Slovakia, and to the "ability of Slovaks
to act at the international market."

>And I'm very very sorry when I see, that well-minded and well
>educated people are depending in creation of their own
>standpoind on the information provided by these - shadows of the
>past.
>
>Once, being a young man, Mr Feldek mentioned to me: "One way,
>how to make a career, is to change your handicaps in your
>advantage." He follows this idea in his own way. Be careful...

I have never developed a mental dependency on Feldek. And I'll make
sure to guard against it.

Also responding to a related comment:

>                  Why does Kamil and others warn of "sanctions against
>the Czechs and Slovaks?"  Why should there be a "loss of credibility
>in the eyes of the world community?"
>
>Louise Hammer

Read the papers. I don't make the rules, and I don't claim they're always
fair.
                                 *  *  *

Jan, to close, I want to say that I appreciate your intelligent and
eloquent postings, as well as the opportunity for the dialogue. You
know, if anything, this exchange will help Slovakia rather than hurt
it, as you have a chance to respond to anything I say, and others
have a chance to make their own conclusions.

Regards,

--Kamil Marcinka (Internet address: tkmarc@hovmb.ion.chevron.com)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU