to come in Czechoslovakia. The Interview was conducted in Prague
The new technologies are being oriented on December 24, 1989 by Hubert Sandor and Catherine Verla. It solely by profit criteria. They are eliminathas been shortened somewhat for space reasons.
ing more jobs than they create. In these conditions, it can be said with certainty that capitalism cannot remove class struggle and replace it with with a corporative spirit. This is prevented by rebellions of the poor and unemployed.
Do you think that there are crises veloping today in our country as a result of socialism?
Can you call "socialist" a system in which there is no "free association of the producers," in which there is no control by
'e society over social ownership? I don't
Judging from the press, some economists here are saying that the socialist model was wrong from the start. It is responsible for everything, they say. It was the October revolution that threw the country into all its subsequent woes. They even say that there was no alternative to
Stalinism, which supposedly was based on the ideas of socialism. These arguments are based on the ignorance of people who lack any deep knowledge of their own history. In your country, they have not yet even published the platform of the
Left Opposition, which fought Stalin and proposed an alternative road for building socialism. In fact, you are now coming to its ideas
- building genuine socialist democracy and self-management. *
M Y FIRST question is the
following: why have you persisted in saying that you are fighting against the Stalinist system not in spite, but because of your communist convictions? How far have you been able to convince people of this?
At a meeting of ex-political prisoners, mostly from the 1950s, most of them very anti-communist, I stated that I was a Trotskyist, a revolutionary Marxist. I explained that it was my Marxist convictions that were the driving force behind my commitment; in my eyes there can be no socialism without human rights. And it seems that the system did not see my Marxism as a mitigating circumstance, as is shown by the time I have spent in prison during the past 20 years. Of course, you might say that my Marxism is an eccentricity or a sign of false thinking. But it is not so easy to view my activities - texts, the organization of youth in the 1960s, my involvement in Charter 77, in the Committee to Defend The Unjustly Persecuted (VONS), the defense of political prisoners and for the extension of free thinking — in the same way. There is respect for whatever motivates that kind of activity, be it religious belief or Marxist
There are big differences amongst us: there were those, like me, who saw the Charter as a step towards political revolution; others saw it as a way of spreading the word of Christ... respected them as they respected me. It was a real laboratory for the tolerance of different viewpoints amongst people engaged in a practical struggle. This was less the case in the emi• But do you not think that your persistent Marxism can lead to the charge that you are congenitally incapable of a radical break with the system, while the anti-communists have made a complete break?
But it isn't true. They do not make the complete break you are talking about. On the contrary: many of them are supporters of an authoritarian system. They want to calm down the revolutionary upsurge in order to put through economic reforms, and then there is the scramble for the posts all kinder of Daputy Motic polis: 11 all kinds of anti-democratic practis-
International Viewpoint #77 • January 29, 1990
CZECHOSLOVAKIA es....My criticisms of such practises are couched in a polite form at the moment, since the old regime has not been finally defeated. But I think this shows that my Marxism is more radical than their anti-communism.
This raises something very important from the point of view of my beliefs. I am interested in the emancipation of the individual, who changes from object to subject not only on the economic but also on the political level. What I want to discuss is not the words "socialism" ог "Marxbut the emancipation of human beings as the condition for social emanci• Yes, decades of Stalinism have confused the meaning of these words. Unfortunately we have to use words to think. In the Soviet Union, for example, there are lots of people who want to defend the interests of the workers and fight against growing corruption. Many of them are supporters of socialism. Unfortunately their spokespeople are too often connected - directly or otherwise - with the apparatus. There are also a lot of people who are fighting for democratic rights, national sovereignty, the right to initiative and responsibility and a radical break with the old system. Unfortunately, their spokespeople generally insist that there is no way forward except through the development of These two groups hardly overlap at all; only a very few people consciously reject at one and the same time the capitalist and conservative solutions. On the other hand, there seem to be more supporters of the "third way" in East Germany. What is the situation in Czechoslovakia?
My own opinion is that the market must be allowed to develop in Czechoslovakia. This might seem a step backward from the communist ideal of a classless society, but it seems to me inevitable now. I am of course a supporter of a plan that is demoworked out to decide the big questions, but we must avoid any illusion that it can regulate production down to the finer details. Only a market can allow real freedom of choice to the consumer for such things as footwear, ties and so on.
You will say that there is a problem of how far the market can impose its laws, how many employees an enterprise should be allowed in the private sector and so on. It is difficult to codify all this, but I think that, precisely because I consider a certain development of the market inevitable, it is necessary to give great weight to the problem of democratic control and the practical forms of workers self-management. This is even more true for investments by foreign capital: Poland must have received massive foreign supi port to get such a big debt, but it seems that, in the absence of workers (and consumers) control, little benefit came of it.
Unfortunately, not even worked out conception of economic and political self-management is current in Czechoslovakia. The other conception, that of full-scale privatization, has several times been discussed behind closed doors, but never openly presented. That will start with the legislative elections and will continue afterwards. All the political parties that are now being formed take a position on this. As for the workers in the enterprises, I am convinced that they will be opposed to privatization and the domination of Czechoslovakia by the Western economy, if this means attacks on their living standards, working conditions and produces social differentiation. At that point, I think, the struggle for socialism will finally begin.
The question of ownership, and power to dispose of, the means of production, is very important for me. The day after my last release from prison there was a meeting of the Coordinating Centre of the Civic Forum in Prague — this was before the Council was formed — where its programme was adopted. I voted against with three others. There were five abstentions and 60 votes in favour. The basic reason for my vote was one phrase — although no doubt there were other things that could be discussed - that stated that all forms of property should be equal. I asked if the form of property where the Politburo — or the party and state leadership — everything and deprives the working people of all power was equal to a cooperative where, for example, 20 people decided on what to produce, on their conditions of work and so on. If these two things are really the same, then stealing and crime are equal to honest work. I cannot agree with that, Of course, in the way I put it, nobody in Czechoslovakia would accept that all forms are equal. Of course the formulation is there in order to legitimize private property. • You pretended not to under-
Of course! Then, curiously, the phrase got into the outlines for a future Constitution, under an even odder form. There is no mention of the political system - it could be a monarchy; nor of the Federal Assembly, elections or the Presidency, but the phrase on the equality of forms of property is there. That did not get forgotten. Even so, I think that the great majority are clearly opposed to the privatization of the big enterprises. There are doubts about medium sized concerns and almost everybody, even me, is in favour of freedom of enterprise for artisans, family concerns and so on. This is almost a technical necessity. As I say, the real problem is not that of the number of workers or employees in this sector, but under what forms of control the economic opening to Western capital is going to take place. That is the real danger, because there is nobody in Czechoslovakia who could buy the enter• Despite your disagreements, you are a member of the Council of Dem-
No, of the Coordinating Council of Civic Forum. Furthermore, I am not the only dissident. There is a small left inside the • What currents are emerging and how will Civic Forum approach the coming elections?
The "Left Alternative" (see /V 175) was created on November 17. Our theses were edited after that, but drafted before. The "Left Alternative", like the "Czech Children" - who are monarchists - or the "Association of Anarchists" are a part of the flowering of dozens of — often rather marginal — new groups. Several groups are bigger, and have hundreds or even thousands of members. In the latter category are the Social Democracy, of which there are three groups in the Czech Lands and another one in Slovakia; the Green Party or rather parties; the Christian Democratic Party; and finally the Liberal Democratic Party, known as the "Democratic Initiative". These last are the most dangerous. They are absolutely determined to be a part of CF and wanted to have a Council member. Now they have got one, and someone made the following remark to me: everybody wears pullovers and uses familiar forms of address, but the DI people wear ties and speak formally. They are perceived to be a bit odd, but everyone respects them.
The big struggles will begin during the election campaign. But I see another danger for CF, that of repeating the kind of electoral process seen in Poland. In the circumstances it was a necessity in Poland, but nothing obliges us to do the same thing here, that is: to present a single CF candidate in each constituency. In such a situation no other candidate has a chance. It would be possible for the CF as such to present no candidates and support all those who support a democratic system in general. Or there could be three or four CF candidates representing the different parties or opinions. Of course, in this case, parties not recognized by CF would have • You mean parties tied to the old system or extreme right-wing par-
We should be careful before eliminating everything tied in whatever way to the old system. Take for example the Party and People's Party. They were an integral part of the old system: but there can be no question of throwing them out, because they were with us from the beginning - the Socialist Party helped us before November. Furthermore, these parties have carried out purges of their own at
A MARKET ECONOMY?"
"FOR OR AGAINST different moments. Even in the Communist Party a Democratic Forum has arisen, although I do not know what support it has. Although they remain in the CP, their slogans and ideas are correct enough and really democratic and I think that they will be able to make an impact at the elections, especially if they take their distance from the CP. But then what will remain of the
It is important to understand the relations between CF and members of the CPCz. In the Coordinating Centre in Prague there are no longer any party members. There were some at the start, but they have become ministers - Komarek for example. On the other hand, outside the capital there are often party members in the leadership of CF, which proposed members of the CP for the government.
CF must be the guarantor of democratic elections in the future, and take part in all the preparatory and ballot-watching commissions. It must allow popular control from below, but should not present itself as what it is not: a political party. That would be a big mistake. The mistake is connected to the desire of many to enter into the system as it is: you can see the demand "the interior minister should not be a CP member" turning into "we want this ministry to be headed by Mr. X." And if Mr. X wasn't one of us at the beginning, he becomes Mr. Y, who was... We are putting forward our own candidates to the Assembly deputies, to be coopted for a short period of perhaps six months. It is anti-democratic, because nobody has elected them and no-one can recall them, when the old deputies are, in fact, recallable by their electors! • What is the reality of Civic Forum? Who can join it? What are Its links with what is happening in the enterprisere is no worked out structure. The CF Coordinating Centre in Prague is more or less the 31 members of the Council, plus what could be called the apparatus, that is the unpayed helpers, perhaps 100 to 200 people. This centre rests on the Civic Forums in the city's ten districts and on the Prague Coordinating Centre, which is separate from Prague the situation is every uneven. There are for example localities and enterprises where a third of the people have given their names as CF members. Elsewhere the CF consists of nothing more than a few individuals, but they are by numerous people who come to meetings. There are also CFs in
There are more than 10,000 strike committees in Czechoslovakia, sometimes alongside CFs in the enterprise, sometimes identical with them. There is an association of strike committees with a rather different function to that of the Forum. They have a trade unionist line; not to launch strikes, but to maintain a kind of state of alert. The strike committees have adopted the objective of cleaning out the trade unions. The Central of TUs collapsed and was replaced by an Action Committee that wanted to reform the unions. workers have not accepted this. They want to set up another union structure, using the buildings and infrastructure of the old. They want to regain what belongs to them, but change the statutes rather than merely the personnel, as the Action Committee wanted. This is a syndicalist line close to self-management.
A year or six months ago all the enterprises became State enterprises. were no longer national corporations, but had statutes giving them more autonomy than before. The direct dependence on the ministry was replaced by a double dependence of the management on the ministry and the workers. Formally, a system of workers control was lished, described as self-management. It
CZECHOSLOVAKIA could be effective, if the workers really believed in it. But on the whole, they saw it as a gimmick by the authorities, and when they elected someone, they did it with a lot of suspicion. However, in some exceptional cases - 5 to 10% - the Councils were elected democratically, and these now coincide with the strike committees. And where this did not happen we often find that the strike committee wants to purge the "self-management" structure and replace the entire system. Having said this, attention now is focussed on the strictly political plane — the presidential and legislative elections and so on - and this kind of thing is not generally noticed. • Are the strike committees represented in the Civic Forum? Yes. Firstly, in the CF's Coordinating Council in Prague there is a so-called "liaison committee with the workers", whose official is also on the Council. Furthermore there is a workers' representative in the Council itself. The students are also represented in the Council, as are cultural workers.
But there is no division, for the moment, between a civil and political current and a current more directly tied to the workers. We all work together. • This is a key question. In Poland there is a division, if not yet an outright split between the "political" current, which is now in government if not in power, and a wing of Solidarnosc tied more directly to the enterprises.
But for the moment the workers in the factories are preoccupied with such things as Havel's election more than strictly social and economic questions. Also, although the economic situation here is hardly brilliant, it is far from dominating people's concerns as in Poland. • To return to strictly political questions. You said that the Socialist Party gave you direct help even before November. Can you tell us more about this party?
The Socialist Party is not all that socialist. It is a socialist/nationalist party. It derives from the old National Socialist Party of Benes, which always claimed the heritage of Masaryk'. Masaryk himself supported the social democracy. The old NSP was something between a liberal party and a social democratic party. It has always been a party of the intelligentsia of skilled workers and the liberal professions with socialistic tendencies. One might say, supporters of a "Swedish model". The SP had about 18,000 members and 16 deputies before November 17. Today they have doubled, maybe tripled in size. The Social Democratic Party may be 10