1987. Különkiadvány, 1987.03.12. / HU_BFL_XIV_47_2
3. Since 1982 the cocperation between the two groups has baocrne more intensive and coordinated. In 1982, the leaders of the two groups established a joint ccnsultative fórum called “The Tens", and sinoe that time they have arganized almost all political action (signature oollecticns, protests, etc.) in aoordinaticn with each other. Both groups supported and support the activities of the Duna Kor and have alsó infiitrated its leadership. On the "Oouncil of Ten" Ferenc Donath suggested the idea that a ccnference of intellectuals must be cxnvened—cn the model of the 1943 Szárszó ccnference— to riigraiss the State of the oountry and the task of the intelligentsia. The ccrplete “generál staff11 of the two groups, several well kncwn representatives of the humanities and social scienoes intelligentsia (among them three party members), as well as the “envira-nnental protectionists", and the so-called “reform eccncmists" participated in the June 1985 ccnference held in Mcnor. The goal of the oanferenoe designated by its organizers was to find a way out of the “increasingly deepening crisis” of Hungárián society which acoording to them was precipitated by the fact that the leadership—so to speak—missed the cpportunity to announce a ccnsistently democratic program that would satisfy national demands. However, the Mcnor ccnference alsó did nőt achieve the formulaticn of a joint action program; ocnsequently, cn the moticn of the radical bourgeois grouping preparaticns were started fór a new ccnference of the intelligentsia whose task—aocording to the plán—“would be to work out a therapy". 4. On the whole the circle of those aocepting a role in the activities of the cpposition-eneny have nőt increased since 1982; at the same time the—visible and invisible—indirect influence of the cppositicn groups has increased. It is nőt possible to evaluate the true influence of the cpposition-eneny groups in purely quantitative terms, cn the basis of the number of individuals playing a role in the cppositicn activities. On the cne hand the prestige and opinion-making pcwer of the intellectual circle which is willing to play a role in certain activities initiated by the cppositicn group (e.g. at the Mcnor ccnference) does nőt negligible effect on the opinions of intellectual—sinoe • there are a few prcminent social scientists and alsó artists among them. On the other hand cne of the synptcms of the loosening which has, cver the last few years, occurred in the social environment of the cppositicn is that in certain sectors and institutions of academic and cultural life principled conduct is nct asserted against cppositicn manifestaticns, the cpposition- eneny activities are nct uniformly condemned, and the political stanoe taken is nőt cansistent. Occasicnally, even responsible leaders tűm a blind eye to cppositicn manifestaticns and activities. Consequently, the influence of the cpposition has beocme strengthened. The ideological-political damage caused by cppositicn influence—cxnsidering its size—significantly surpasses the direct social danger of the activities of the so-called “hard oore" of the cppositicn. Hl. 1. Since 1982, qualitatively new traits characterize the intemational ccntacts of the cpposition-eneny groups. In the spirit of the “democratization program" anncxmced by the Reagan administraticn in the sunmer of 1982, official quarters of the United States govemment have distributed increased political and financial support to cppositicn foroes and groups opera ting in socialist countries, including Hungary. Foreign enemy organizations, agitation oerrters, and the activities of intelligense Services aleng these lines has beocme more energetic and qualitatively assumed new forms, and their cocperation with the leaders of the cpposition-eneny groups has beocme cl cser. ___________________________________________________±________________________________________ ____- 4 -
