MfD: Communists are not leftist enough for young radicals

Prague, Oct 1 (CTK) - The Communists (KSCM) are not attractive enough for young Czech leftist radicals who are full of hatred and venom, Stanislav Balik writes in the daily Mlada fronta Dnes (MfD) yesterday, in reaction to the Friday airsoft gun attack on President Vaclav Klaus.

The young attacker mocked the president's bodyguards. The incident made their chief resign and other resignations might follow. The whole system of politicians' security guards might improve to be really efficient, Balik adds.

However, this will solve only the consequences but not the heart of the matter: How come that someone takes a gun (though a toy version) and opens fire probably not over having suffered personal wrong and over any mutual conflicts but only "under the impression of a media image," Balik writes.

One of the most distinctive keys to the attacker's motives is his support for the Communist stream in Czech politics. Others are his strong feelings of social injustice, the fight against wrongs, and "capitalist oppression," Balik says.

Exactly such motives created the grounds of a recent strong movement which caused one of the most exorbitant wrongs, executions and the liquidation of whole groups of society, Balik writes, alluding to the communist rule (1948-89).

The governing elites should damp such passions and rage in the interest of the whole society, he adds.

The toy gun attack may look like a mere mischief but it seems more serious as it shows that violence has started being normal. "Yesterday it was an airsoft gun, tomorrow it could be a knife or a real gun," Balik points out.

He says the current situation resembles the first years of Czechoslovakia, after its establishment in 1918, in some aspects. He recalls two assassination attempts from that era - an unsuccessful attackt on the life of Czechoslovak PM Karel Kramar in 1919 and the killing of Finance Minister Alois Rasin four years later.

Both attacks were committed by young men whose opinions oscillated between revolutionary socialism and anarchism, Balik adds.

After the collapse of the communist regime in Czechoslovakia in 1989, one attack on a top politician's life was committed. In 1992, an unknown perpetrator attempted to kill the then KSCM chairman Jiri Svoboda who tried to democratise the party but in vain. He was replaced with a hard-core communist at the KSCM's helm six months alter, Balik recalls.

He says the present and the era 90 years ago have something in common. In both cases the society was shaken and affected by the disintegration of values, either a decline of confidence in authorities or generally an escalating violence in society.

The situation in 1918 was a clear consequence of World War One, while yesterday it might be caused by the culture revolution that has been underway in the West since the 1960s or economic problems of the recent years, Balik writes.

The feeling of a socially uncertain situation is also typical for both periods though the present welfare and the position of the lowest-income groups cannot be compared with the past, Balik says.

It is striking that the then and current Communist parties have a lot in common. Both are revolutionary parties chaired by opportunists who are far from genuine revolutionaries, Balik writes.

Such structures are naturally not attractive for young radicals who are leaving them with disappointment and are determined to carry out their individual actions, he notes.

The whole society is playing with fire. Nothing could ever be solved with hatred and venom, Balik writes.

"The biggest task for all, not only the president, government and parties, but also parents, teachers, foremen in factories, journalists, basically all who have some influence on their surroundings, is to prevent hatred and attenuate often nonsensical feelings of envy and malice. Otherwise any economic and social reforms, no matter if rightist or leftist, will be useless," Balik writes in conclusion.