Biography

János M. Rainer (1957), Hungarian historian, professor of contemporary history at Eszterházy Károly University (Eger, Hungary), head of the 1956 Institute – Oral History Archive Department at the Hungarian National Széchényi Library. His field of expertise is Hungarian history after WWII, focusing on the 1956 revolution and the Kádár-period. His biography on Imre Nagy was published in Polish, Russian, German and English.

Presentation

The presentation has two main parts. The first part deals with the short-run consequences of the 1956 Revolution in Hungary and Europe. Within two months after the Soviet invasion of 4th of November 200 000 Hungarians left their country. It was the greatest move of population through the Iron Courtain in Europe except the special case of the GDR/Berlin up to 1961. Moreover, two months after the invasion the last Stalinist reprisal campaign started in Hungary during which 13 000 people were taken into internment camps, 35 000 were processed and 25 000 were imprisoned. 228 revolutionary participants were executed among them the Prime Minister of the Revolution. Reprisal actions against people demonstrating solidarity towards Hungary took place throughout Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. In this respect 1956 is a common experience and heritage for all the societies living under Soviet-type regime at that time.

Second part of the paper proposes some aspects to the long-run consequences of 1956. Politically the Hungarian crisis lead to the last phase of power struggle in Moscow between Stalin’s successors. Despite the periodical crises the total collapse of the Soviet system never occured later. Soviet-type rule system turned to the phase of buerocratic stability as Richard Loewenthal called it characterizing post-totalitarian system. Instead of chilisatic visions of a bright future contrasting the severe present the Soviet-type systems turned towards the tasks of modernization. In the supply of the regime there appeared calculable life-courses, modest consumerism, security of the everyday life in the levels of individuals and families.

What was the role of the 1956 Revolution in this Big Transformation? Was it a really significant historical event which changed the existing structures basically and for a long-run? 1956 did not do that but it changed the experience of that stable structures for an actually lengthy period. What changed (in Hungary at least) was the relationship of the society to the dictatorship; the dictature as a psychological status.

After the dubious images in the first half of the 20th century it was 1956 that created powerfully the image of Hungary and the Hungarians in the world covering somehow those previous ones. This image survived the transformation period in and after 1989. Concluding the paper emphasizes that it has just disappearing during the last decade. Unfortunately enough the impressions of present-day Hungary are covering the heritage of 1956 Revolution.