Czechs Far From Despair

To the Editors of the Crimson:

The following letter was written on March 14, 1948, by a student at Charles University, a man in his mid-twenties, who is doing advanced work in both English and Russian. He is a Social Democrat. His father, who is a carpenter in a village twenty-five miles from Prague, is a National Socialist. I pass this letter on, not as the whole story in Czechoslovakia, but as a characteristic student opinion. F. O. Matthiessen.

I think you might find it interesting to hear some news from the "new" Czechoslovakia. I suppose that you, as a good friend of out nation, are distressed and alarmed about our fate. Let me say, first of all, that we are all safe and sound and that we, after all, are far from despair. It is quite true that we have lost much in the last three weeks. If anybody were to have told me, a month age, what we were going to lose, I should certainly have despaired. But strangely enough, I do not despair today, even if we have just taken leave of our Jan Masaryk.

I will be perfectly frank: we have gone through a new social revolution; we have given up a good deal of democracy and individual freedom. But we have retained enough freedom for everybody to live and work either happily or contentedly, according to one's political views. And we have retained enough democracy for our state to leave it a possibility of developing into a new, more righteous and more moral democracy. We have learned in these days to look at things with harshly realistic eyes. By an uncontrolled terrible strength ensuing from the contrast of two opposite world ideologies, we were faced with facts which we had either to accept totally or reject totally. Every one of us had to do so. There was no other way.

For many the decision was quite simple. I spoke in these days to some workers and learned, to my great surprise, that they didn't know anything about the freedom of mind. Years of struggle for more bread have taught them to know only one freedom: the economic freedom. These people did not hesitate in the least how to decide. And they were very numerous and very resolute.

For many the decision was painfully difficult. This was also the case of the intellectuals and of us students. Every student was shaken by the events to his roots. This is true also for the Communist students. I have discussed with them and they were as unhappy and as distressed as I was. But also for us there were only two ways to deny a part of ourselves and go with the working class or to go against it. And so, in the cruel days of the end of February, we, progressive students, painfully aware of the fact that we were losing a part of our individual freedom, could not go with the right party students and call "Long live freedom" and, with the same breath, "Long live Petr Zenkl." We preferred to give up a part of our individual freedom to save the economic freedom for the whole nation. President Benes, with his utmost self-denial, showed us the way. We realized very well that every opponent of communism had to enlist, willy nilly, into the mercenary ranks of capitalism.

By the way, those protesting students were not so many as you have probably been informed by your newspapers. They were about a thousand and a half, not twelve thousand! And they were not shot at by the police. One single student was hurt in his ankle by a rebounded bullet, not on purpose, as it seems.

Also the Action Committees are certainly not so grue-some as they are described by the Western press. In the Central Action Committee sits also the Dean of our Faculty, Dr. Jan Kozak, Dr. Hromadka, the head of the Czech Brethren Church, and many other non-communists. In our faculty three professors and five docents were put on the retired list. None of really high standard or known to you. Also some few students--seven--were expelled. The English department is untouched. All the decisions of the Action Committee will be verified once more . . . I think even in this respect we did not betray President Masaryk's humanistic ideals.

I ought to say still a few words about Jan Masaryk's death. Nobody can know his state of mind in the minute of suicide and it is improper to give one's own explanation for absolutely certain. It is also improper to try to win some political capital out of this tragic event. It would be far better to be silent and pitiful. But when I hear the Western radio giving its various explanations, I must tell you what is the opinion of many Czechs.

Jan Masaryk, unlike his father, was more sensitive than rational. He liked very much our people, not as an abstract idea but as millions of individuals. He liked our working class and in the first days of our February revolution spontaneously went with them. His speeches from those days were very clear and very radical and, I must say, surprised many of us. His "I go with the people" and "With this new government I am going to govern with gusto" leave no doubt about their meaning. Then the crisis came. His reason told him that he went perhaps too far according to his previous political views. The revolution necessarily was accompanied by much profiteering and injustice which Masaryk loathed so much. Then came the anniversary of his father's birth and Masaryk had to read many letters of reproach and condemnation. Many of his friends, especially those from the West, did not try to understand him. They simply rejected him. And so, in a minute of great mental contradictions, he took to the fatal decision.

This is how many Czechs explain Jan Masaryk's death. Maybe, we are not right. Nobody can assert it. We would prefer to mourn for him without speaking about his motives. But we cannot help feeling offended by those who comment upon his death by the words, "Too late, but still."

I was told by Jarka that you are writing a book about your experiences in our country. I am eagerly looking forward to it. Nevertheless, I think that you ought to come to us very soon again and to write one more book about Czechoslovakia. About Czechoslovakia suffering and yet not despairing, afflicted by evil and believing in good, limiting freedom and democracy for some only to give it back, revived and strengthened, to all. I think you would understand.   Zdenek.