PhDr. Ivan Fišera

* 1941

  • "There were polls being done. And I have to say that they had, in my estimation, as I observed it, two groups ready. Those who were in their forties, who bore the brunt of the changes, were being expelled. And those who were under thirty, they were being "crossed out". The way I observed it, it was divided. I was in front of that committee, too. And it didn't start out well for me. Because Rychta, who was in charge, said, 'So, tell us, comrade, why should you stay in the party?' At that time there was this man Hruza, and I have to remember the second name, that's important. Those were the two biggest orthodox communists. And he said, 'But the comrade here, as I listen to him, doesn't want to stay in the party.' So I went on talking, I started to say what I thought about all this. There was a man called Jaroslav Kučera, who was in charge of supervising us, an economist, a very unpleasant man. I also clashed with him again. And he said - when I was saying that it was not fair how they treated deserving party members and so on - and he spoke up and said, 'Bastards are better in politics than decent people.' And now there was a really comical scene, because the others realised what he was actually saying and said, 'Well, well, well, well, comrade, you've gone a bit over the top.' And to make it even lighter, because I like to make light of serious situations: my wife was working there at the time too, in that institute, and I went to her to tell her that I had been struck off. And there was a friend of ours, a psychiatrist, sitting there, and he said, 'Listening to you, I think I'll join the party.' And I asked him why is he saying that, whether he's crazy. And he said, 'Well, you know, I'd love to experience the kind of happiness you're experiencing right now.'"

  • "I got in and I was on my way. I had a lot of confidence because everybody knew me, or many people knew me. Again, some people didn't know me, so they didn't trust me. But it was immediately very hard work. I was getting to know people that Havel had full confidence in. I was getting to know people of another type, and the crowds were always coming up and wanting to talk to us. It was very dramatic, I won't drag it out, I was on duty on Christmas Eve, and I went up there and a man came up and immediately started talking to me. He sat down at the desk that dominated the big room, and that he wanted to speak on the radio and support Havel being elected on Christmas Eve as president. That was a really ridiculous thing to do, but I got the man out, it wasn't easy. Well, during the evening the news started happening in Romania. The situation was very serious, and the OF started to organize aid for Romania. They put me there as a dispatcher on the phone, so somehow I managed. And it was very arduous because I didn't know many names, but somehow it was managed. They were nice, smart people, ready for anything. When it was over, I asked for a cigarette and then I smoked again for two years. Because it was exhausting."

  • "Look, these are both very intelligent people who have high ambitions. They were guided to this, from what I have heard, by their families, and their mothers played a big role. And they may have some other reasons that lead them to do it, that they have to push themselves very hard, and they can do that, they go after it with a strong will, they study tremendously, and they can sell it well. Only it's very dangerous. And that's what happened. What's interesting is that both of them, despite initially trying to orient themselves towards the West - let's say that's the assumption - they were then apparently not completely accepted in the West, and both of them later turned very strongly towards the Eastern ruler Putin. And they were moving towards that in some way, because I guess there was some closure somewhere else. There would be reasons. Now it's changing again. It's very strange behavior. They are not an exception as a political type, I'm not a fan of harsh psychiatric judgments, but there is something strange about these personalities. And we see them even in the West, personalities like that. Now, I say my sort of basic feeling from all this is that the biggest killer of decent democracy are uninformed people, and very cunning, very strange personalities who can win over that part of the people who don't really have the opportunity to think much. I'm sorry to put it that way. It's a problem that bothers me more and more as we encounter it. This type of person is really killing democracy in a way because they can abuse it so well. Period. I don't know what else to say."

  • "And we also did a public opinion poll. The director of the Institute for Public Opinion Research was Dr Zapletalová. To see the shifts, that would not have been possible under the previous regime. And now we had the Institute of Public Opinion. Well, we had a poll done in Prague which showed that basically 95 percent or however many people supported Dubček. And I had it with me, so when I went through the Castle afterwards, I gave it to some people to give to Svoboda. Because I was of the opinion that it was necessary for them to have it quickly. It was unnecessary."

  • Full recordings
  • 1

    Praha, 01.02.2022

    (audio)
    duration: 01:39:24
    media recorded in project Stories of the 20th Century TV
  • 2

    Praha, 12.05.2022

    (audio)
    duration: 02:15:37
    media recorded in project Stories of the 20th Century TV
  • 3

    Praha, 02.06.2022

    (audio)
    duration: 02:02:30
    media recorded in project Stories of the 20th Century TV
  • 4

    Praha, 14.07.2022

    (audio)
    duration: 02:02:58
    media recorded in project Stories of the 20th Century TV
Full recordings are available only for logged users.

The biggest enemy of democracy is uninformed people and an authoritarian personality who knows how to win them over

Ivan Fišera during shooting
Ivan Fišera during shooting
photo: natáčení Post Bellum

Sociologist and former politician Ivan Fišera was born on 10 April 1941 in Německe (now Havlíčkův) Brod, but grew up in Prague. Both his parents were lawyers. His younger sister, Lenka Fišerová, played the lead role in the film Prayer for Kateřina Horovitz (1965). His father, Vladimír Fišera, was involved in the resistance organisation Petition Committee We Remain Faithful during the war. He worked for the Czechoslovak Institute of Human Labour. After the war, both parents joined the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia. In December 1949, his father committed suicide under unclear circumstances; it is probable that he was driven to it by the impending political persecution, or perhaps he was even forced to commit suicide. Ivan Fišera graduated from grammar school and then studied philosophy at the Faculty of Arts of Charles University. However, since the beginning his studies he was attracted to sociology, then considered “bourgeois science”. At university, he joined the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia and was chairman of the faculty committee of the CSM, witnessing injustices in the admission of students and the investigation of the student celebration of the Majáles. In 1965, he began working at the newly established Institute of Sociology of the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences. During the Prague Spring, he was a member of Zdeněk Mlynář’s political science team, which tried to devise alternatives to the political system in Czechoslovakia. He was expelled from the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia and had to leave the Institute of Sociology during the vetting process at the beginning of normalisation. He then worked at the Institute of Consulting at the Czechoslovak Committee of Public Management and at the Research Institute of Engineering Technology and Economics. He was engaged in the study of new methods of management, organised workshops and training for managers from industrial enterprises. In December 1989, he began working as a manager at the headquarters of the Civic Forum, becoming one of its elected representatives. In January 1990 he was co-opted to the Federal Assembly. He became a member of the Social Democratic Orientation Club of the Civic Forum, criticizing Václav Klaus and the project of coupon privatization. In 1992 he joined the ČSSD, but left the party after clashes with Miloš Zeman. He worked as an advisor to the Czech-Moravian Chamber of Trade Unions and taught at the Czech Management Centre in Čelákovice. In 2004, he became head of the team of advisors to then-Prime Minister Stanislav Gross.