An historical film is
attracting audiences in Berlin. “The
Silent Classroom” offers a fictionalized version of a remarkable protest in
East Germany and the more remarkable government reaction. In 1956, thousands of
Hungarians fought to free their country from Soviet domination and one-party
dictatorship. A class of seniors preparing for final exams heard of the revolt
from the American radio station in West Berlin, which the East German
government had forbidden its citizens to listen to. Hungarians asked people in
other countries to stay silent to protest Communist oppression. One student, Dietrich Garstka, told
his comrades, “We’ll do that too!” In class, everyone was silent for five
minutes.
The government went crazy.
The Hungarian
revolt of 1956 had installed a democratic socialist government before
Soviet tanks crushed the uprising three weeks later. The Soviets and the other
Communist governments in eastern Europe defined the revolt as
counter-revolution and asserted that Western spies were behind it. The Western
news media who reported the Hungarians’ program for freedom and human rights
were spreading false propaganda. Students who silently honored the uprising
were counter-revolutionaries, too.
Specialists interrogated the
students. The Minister of Education insulted and threatened the students:
unless they named the ringleaders, the whole class would not be allowed to take
the exams which qualified them for university. The class displayed
extraordinary solidarity and refused to give in to government pressure. They
were all thrown out of school.
Garstka soon crossed the
border into West Germany, which was still relatively easy in 1956, and was
followed by 15 of the other 19 students in his class. They took their exams
there and pursued their careers, cut off from family and friends.
The system that transformed
their silence into subversion was a perfectly self-contained organism. All
media were monitored and controlled. Information about internal problems,
weaknesses, and injustices was propaganda, fake news designed to weaken the
system, and thus counter-revolution. Anyone who taught uncomfortable facts
about history or politics was labeled an accomplice of Western enemies, a hater
of the system, and punished with the weight of the state. Science was not
allowed to contradict political ideology.
East German communism had
very different intentions and assumptions than the Nazi government which it
replaced. But both systems shared this enclosed structure of self-protection,
where deviation was treason, where facts were subordinated to rigid ideology,
where questioning was punished by exclusion. Both saw only black and white, and
jailed people who realized there was grey.
Those structures are the
opposite of democracy. But the forces of arrogant ideology, of undoubting
righteousness, of hatred for difference can exploit the tolerance of democratic
systems to disrupt them from within. The extraordinary democracy of the German
Weimar Republic in the 1920s allowed the Nazis to grow strong enough to
overthrow it. Or I should say that too many people in Germany, people
with power and influence, through weakness, self-interest, and political
expediency, let the Nazis come to power by not opposing them strongly enough.
Now in America we saw armed
men, who disdain our elected government, take over a public installation at the
Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, threaten government officials and then escape
without punishment. We heard a presidential candidate encourage his
supporters to beat
protesters and disbelieve any news he doesn’t like. We see virtually all
leading Republican politicians accept Trump’s vilification of the press,
self-enrichment in office, and smearing of the judiciary.
Americans who report on these
events are attacked with verbal violence. I have been called seditious, a
traitor. Activists for civil rights have been called communists and anarchists,
whose political activities are thus illegitimate. The whole progressive
movement, whose candidate, Bernie Sanders, almost won the Democratic nomination
for President, is identified as hating
America. Thousands screamed that the losing candidate in the last election
should be put in jail. They say that journalists who report uncomfortable
information about politicians they like are spreading lies. Many people have
urged this newspaper to stop publishing my articles, because they don’t like
the facts I write about.
Listen to the radio, scroll
around the internet, or go to rallies for the President, and you’ll find many
people with these attitudes. Instead of lurking on the fringes of the American
political system, these people are brought into the White House
and given
press credentials as if they were real journalists. The President has
called journalists “sick
people” who hate our country and the other party “un-American” and “treasonous”.
Telling the truth and defending democracy means being bombarded with insults
and threats from the small far right minority, who only see black and white.
What if they had full power
in our government? What would they do with me, the traitor? Or our journalists,
professors, scientists? Or you?
We must prevent that, to
avoid repeating the naive complacency of other peoples who have allowed their
freedoms to be taken away. Asserting your right to think and act freely can be
dangerous, as the East German students realized. But they demonstrated
solidarity, courage, and determination in the face of naked shameless power.
We have to do that, too.
Steve Hochstadt
Berlin, Germany
Published in the Jacksonville
Journal-Courier, March 6, 2018
No comments:
Post a Comment