Our homeland is united

C Z E C H O S L O V A K I A

Reasons for the establishment
of Czechoslovakia The establishment of the Czechoslovak Republic on October 28, 1918 was the result of the desires of the Czech and Slovak nations in two directions:

• Establishing a fairer social order - abolishing the remnants of feudal injustice, improving the social status of working people, building a democratic society. The humanist-based TG Masaryk and his collaborators did not succeed in enforcing all the progressive changes against the resistance of right-wing groups - large capital, part of the church, landowners, etc., but in comparison with previous conditions it was a big step forward .
• Breaking out of centuries of German (and in Slovakia also Hungarian) domination . Masaryk, Štefánik and a number of other enlightened public people understood that the Czechs and Slovaks are basically just two branches of a single "Czechoslovak" nation - only as such belongs to the large "family" of Slavic nations, along with Polish, Russian + Ukrainian + Belarusian, Bulgarian, Serbian + Croatian + Slovenian ....

True, there were certain differences in the linguistic and cultural and social traditions of the inhabitants of the Czech and Slovak lands - centuries of oppression under different nations (in the Czech Republic under the German, in Slovakia under the Hungarian) and, as a result, mutual isolation, had to leave their mark. However, these differences, including differences in the economic level, were successfully reconciled and (with the exception of the tragic years of World War II, when both our nations were forcibly torn apart by Hitler's Germany) for decades, Czechs, Moravians and Slovaks lived harmoniously in common homeland and with their small differences they complemented and enriched each other (We can leave aside small excesses, sometimes used as an excuse for "pub" contradictions) . Czechoslovakia's relations with neighboring states were also at a fairly good level, and there was a real chance to gradually forget the former wrongs and hostilities.

Historical roots - national revival, Pan-Slavism
Slavic peoples , inhabiting a large part of Central and Eastern Europe, were forced for centuries to face the pressure of stronger and more aggressive neighbors, especially Germany. In the 18th and 19th centuries, under the influence of greater education and the weakening of feudal and ecclesiastical domination, emancipation efforts and the national revival were more widely applied to the enslaved nations . Enlightened thinkers tried to generalize these efforts into a broader context in the concept of so-called pan-independence : efforts to connect and cooperate with all Slavs. Not to exercise power and domination, but to be a model to other nations in innate peace and goodness of heart *) - to be better in the world!Slavs , Slavophiles, Pan-Slavists, fully recognize the qualities of all other nations, respect their originality, do not exalt themselves above them, learn from their strengths. In return, he tries to share their experiences of social coexistence and cultural heritage in a friendly way, which they do not impose on anyone.
*) This is precisely the diametrical difference compared to a similar-sounding pangermanism , which promotes the hegemony of the German nation and its claims to expansion and domination over other nations. It suppresses the originality of other nations and by force (often "fire and sword") imposes its ideas and orders on them.
The German humanist philosopher and writer Johann Gottfried Herder (1744-1803) in his book " Thoughts on the Philosophy of Human History   "he wrote a very remarkable opinion of his time and nationality on the accommodating and peaceful nature of the Slavs and their role in the wise and peaceful coexistence of nations:
   they grew fruit trees and led a peculiar life filled with merriment and music. They were benevolent, wasteful in hospitality, they loved free country life. But they were submissive and obedient, plundering and looting against their minds. All this did not help them against oppression, but rather contributed to it. Because they did not seek world domination, they did not have militant hereditary princes and preferred to pay taxes only when they could live in peace in their land, many nations, but mostly of German origin, cruelly sinned against them. And often under the transparent pretext of spreading Christianity. It was certainly much more convenient for the "heroic" Franks to enslave a diligent nation that cultivated agriculture and trade than to learn these skills themselves. We may be surprised that the soft nature of this people - even though they lacked bravery in fiery resistance, has for centuries perverted defeat and the most bitter anger at Christian masters and conquerors into slavish sluggishness, deviousness and cruelty? But the wheel of ever-changing destiny is spinning unstoppably. And because these nations inhabit most of Europe's territory, European politics will have to give up militancy and give more support to quiet diligence and peaceful contacts. And you, so deeply fallen, diligent and unhappy nations, will finally wake up from a long slumber, get rid of the bondage and enjoy your beautiful extremities from the Adriatic to the Carpathians, from the Don to the Elbe, as your national tribal property. " European policy will have to abandon militancy and give more support to quiet diligence and peaceful contacts. And you, so deeply fallen, diligent and unhappy nations, will finally wake up from a long slumber, get rid of the bondage and enjoy your beautiful extremities from the Adriatic to the Carpathians, from the Don to the Elbe, as your national tribal property. " European policy will have to abandon militancy and give more support to quiet diligence and peaceful contacts. And you, so deeply fallen, diligent and unhappy nations, will finally wake up from a long slumber, get rid of the bondage and enjoy your beautiful extremities from the Adriatic to the Carpathians, from the Don to the Elbe, as your national tribal property. "
   Apart from a certain idealization (Slavs as one nation, internal contradictions and discord) , Herder's view "from the other side" is admirably honest and captures the essence of the matter; he was based on knowledge of the conditions in his work in Central and Eastern European territories.

Division of Czechoslovakia
Note on language differences:
For those of us who live in Moravia, arguments about the differences between Czech and Slovak are ridiculous: Anyone who has ever heard the Haná dialect will certainly recognize that the differences between Haná and standard Czech are at least as great as the differences between Czech and Slovak. And yet no sensible Hanák will think that he is not Czech (Czechoslovak) and will not demand the separation and creation of an independent Hanák state ...
The break-up of Czechoslovakia in the mid-1990s (1993) must therefore be understood as a political fraud on millions of our citizens. - as a treasonous crime which, if it cannot be legally punished and remedied, should be condemned   at least morally . Only a few dozen people on both sides took an active part in it (more on the Slovak side, mainly in Bratislava and Žilina, elsewhere they were more in favor of maintaining a common state) . Other citizens were against the vast majority , some were manipulated ( chauvinist propaganda is psychologically very effective for many people - it is very convenient to blame someone else's failures) .
   But one thing is to be appreciated : that the division took place in a peaceful way , without violence and bloodshed!(Those in whose particular interest the division took place would often be willing to "go over the corpses" and provoke a civil war as in Yugoslavia) .

Together for the European Union
Opinions on the European Union (EU) vary considerably between politicians and citizens in our country and in other countries; however, this is beyond the scope of this topic. From a positive point of view, within a common Europe, fairer pan-European standards may be (?) More likely to be enforced in economic, cultural, social, environmental, legal, scientific and educational matters.
One can expect a departure from the currently promoted "market" mechanisms in education and health (towards equal access to quality education and health care), as well as openness in communication with the entire political spectrum without previous prejudices, discrimination, lustration and similar remnants of undemocratic approaches.
   Accession to the EU will perhaps somewhat mitigate some of the negative effects of the division of our state. The EU is, or has become, part of the neighboring states, in which some nationalist forces and groups have been a potential danger to our divided and weakened countries. After all, the position of two small "new" countries (unless they work closely together, which current politicians are resisting) in the EU, and the chances of positively influencing something, is significantly less than if we entered there as Czechoslovakia; The long-term continuity from 1918 would certainly have its weight .

Full members, or parasites and pathologists?
I would still like to give a small final reflection on the possible style of our work in the EU. There are two extreme options for us (and of course many different combinations) :

1. To be a parasitic and morally decaying burden - just to keep reaching for subsidies and investments and to servilely support every evil of rich and powerful circles longing for world domination.
2. To be an equal and full-fledged part - when we can no longer participate significantly economically, we could make a significant contribution in the cultural field and help cultivate the social climate . To bring our tolerant Slavic attitude, which has a tradition since the time of the national revival, together with the experience of the era of "socialism" in the spirit of convergence of progressive approaches to the development of society.

Which of these two extreme options outweighs depends on a number of internal and external circumstances.
If we remember the shameful attitude of our former president to the aggression against Yugoslavia (unlike the current president), or the support of our government's recent aggression against Iraq, it seems that so far, unfortunately, prevailed under No. 1 ...
   But let's be optimistic and believe in gradual prevalence of point 2 . We have enough proud and at the same time tolerant and cultured people, only they are not very "heard" in the cry of those who are pushing for point 1 .

RNDr. Vojtech Ullmann