A Life in Prague 1941-1968 Essay

Life under the Soviets was as cruel as that under the Germans. The end of German occupation signaled a new era of political tension and economic dislocation for the people of Czechoslovakia. After the Communist coup in 1948, the Czech people were once again introduced to the concept of totalitarian brutality. Many people were tortured and imprisoned by the state police for ‘subversive activities. Prison camps, almost equal in ‘splendor’ and ‘brutality’ were erected across the country. However, unlike the Nazi experience, this ‘new experience’ was never heard in the international stage. The tragedy of the Second World War became once again the scenery of Prague. However, much of the chapter’s content (pp. 93-143) seemed to focus on the hardships of the author. Kovaly seemed to have been frustrated with her role both as a woman and citizen. At times, she complained on the government’s lack of political will to guarantee the equality of women and men. Kovaly lived the life of a wealthy woman. She bought luxurious items, attempted to create a foundation (for children), and sought the support of top officials for financing her projects. Because she was the wife of a deputy minister, she was expected to participate in minor political meetings, and to become a role model to other women. Rudolf’s arrest turned her world upside down. Although an ardent Communist, his husband was suspected to be an ally of the West. Kovaly asked help from Ludvik Frejka, the head of the Economic Commission. Frejka, however, refused to help her. After a few weeks, Frejka was arrested and executed along with Kovaly’s husband. Kovaly languished in pain. She cursed the system for its anti-Semitic orientation. She wanted to denounce the brutality of the Soviet-led government, but had little power to demonstrate it. Her husband’s execution was portrayed as the continuation of German tyranny (under the guise of a Communist Party). She persistently argued that ‘being a loyal Communist does not guarantee safety, if you are a Jew, practicing or not. ’ It can be argued that Kovaly’s pessimistic attitude against the Soviet-led regime was borne out of hatred and repulsion. The Communists had driven the Germans but failed to instill the principles of equality and humanity into the hearts of the anti-Semitic population of Prague. In this chapter, Kovaly explained the consequences of Communist rule of Czechoslovakia. She argued that the Communist occupation did not free the Czech people from slavery. It was an instrument in the creation of a new political and economic form of slavery – slavery which is disguised by the principles of economic equality and political tolerance. She argued that while the war brought national shame and indignation to the country, the Communist occupation brought deprivation and perpetual fear to the common people. According to Kovaly, the cessation of freedom for the sake of necessity, economic equality, Party disciple, and even for the ‘false’ glory of the country, would only lead to the eventual demise of individual truths – truths which make individuals happy and content. Kovaly’s assertions are supported by many historians. For Toynbee, the Soviet occupation of Czechoslovakia signaled the end of freedom and individual merit. Toynbee argued that the real goal of Soviet occupation of Czechoslovakia was the eventual isolation of Western democracy. The country served as a bait for the Western powers to relinquished their claim of democracy in the East, particularly Czechoslovakia. For Ozment, the Soviet occupation of the country was necessary because Czechoslovakia served as the basement of German military power during the early 1940s. Czech support for Germany proved to be decisive and convincing. Hence, according to Ozment, the brutality of the Soviet occupation was a testimony to ‘revenge’ and ‘destruction’ of political freedom.