Talk:János Kádár

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Kádár era[edit]

I put a POV banner on this section, since I believe it's strongly pro-Kádár throughout and largely ignores his role in the uncommonly brutal post-1956 retribution, as well as the moral, economic and intellectual crisis that his system got the country into. Moreover, it ignores the subtly racist (anti-Roma) attitude of his government that has been infecting public opinion to this day. The section also contributes original research, but I think in this case otherwise reputable sources can be so POV themselves that they are unlikely to help. Unconditionally portraying him as a person of moral rectitude looks especially cheesy. Maybe the debated nature of his reign should be more emphasized. (talk) 18:22, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

I think that this article presents an extremely biased POV of Kadar regime - particularly as i have seen various sources claimiing his regime to have been a "puppet regime" of Stalin, and strongly criticising the numerous executions of political prisoners under his regime (after he had promised them an amnesty). I agree that the debated nature of his reigh most certainly should be more emphasised. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Communist leader´s bones stolen[edit]

Read this article on CNN - somebody kidnapped his remains. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 17:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC).

I don't think this story about stoling his bones should be included here as this is an encyclopedy and not a news portal. Being.krAnk 16:23, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
The event is certainly notable. Common opinion is the perpetrators were hired by some descendant of 1956 revolutionary victims. Imre Nagy and his fellows were executed in 1958-59 on Kádár's order and buried in secret location most sacrilegously. The corpses were bound with barbed wire and wrapped in brown paper, then thrown face-down in pits. Those who were tall and did not fit had their legs broken off. The 1956 revolutionary heroes were exhumated, identified and re-buried properly in the now famous "parcel 301" only after communism fell. 08:58, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Retribution in 1956[edit]

The current notes only mention a handful of people executed, and fail to highlight that hundreds were executed and tens of thousands were sent to prisons and forced labour camps because of revolutionary involvement (both armed and civilian, e.g. strike organisation after the fall). This i.m.h.o. may suggest a falsely favourable picture of Kádár and should be filled in a.s.a.p., especially to illustrate the way he interpreted his already mentioned "anyone not against us is with us" policy. I am not enough of an expert on the topic to add anything, please help me out. 21:04, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


Kádár was known for his simple and modest lifestyle and had a strong aversion against corruption or ill-doing.[citation needed] He was often percieved as a convinced Communist who retained his beliefs throughout his life. This, however, did not stop rampant state corruption during the decades of his reign.

Im not disputing that there was state corruption but can you give some illustrations or was it just generally the case?

As a Hungarian who was a refugee of the 1956 revolution, then returned in 1979-1980, I can state on empirical evidence, that the country's officialdom was indeed lax in many respects. Most obviously there was a thriving black market.

1. Monetary exchange: Official exchange at the time was approximately 35 forints = $1US, however I could get triple that by paying in US dollars in supermarkets, department stores and so on. Some 'money agents' would turn $50US to the equivalent of $200US in forints. This was done by finding someone with a western passport to buy a box of perfumed soap (for example) from a state run department store, and reselling each cake of soap for a tidy profit. Hungarians were not allowed to buy goods like this.

2. Everyone wanted free market, and even though it was illegal, it existed out in the open.

3. Smuggling: Many Russian Iconography (including soviet tribal carpets) were taken through Hungary to the West. Customs always turned a blind eye - even without bribes.

4. Austrians (Viennese) would cross the border, hunt or buy petrol at cheaper soviet prices and return.

5. Car purchases - Officially, if you wanted a car, you could pay in forints and wait years on a list to get one, or just go out and buy one direct with US dollars.

6. Postal services - Packages were routinely opened and items stolen. This was a regular occurrence.

7. Any service paid for in forints was expensive in comparison to services paid for by 'valuta' or 'valuable western money'

8. There was non-monetary trade going on between the rural produce and urban products. Manufactured items (stolen by workers) often were traded for rural produce.

As for Kadar, whatever he was, accepted the status quo as with the rest of the government of the time. The economy worked, the soviets used the country as a holiday resort and there was an acceptable level of corruption (and socialism). The corruption couldn't be termed evil or criminal, but was more of a way of life. So IMHO the article as written is correct. Htcs 17:16, 23 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Htcs (talkcontribs) 17:13, 23 October 2007 (UTC)


Someone had added a textual note questioning neutrality, especially of the section titled "The Kádár era". I replaced the note with a tag, but have no opinion myself. Perhaps the tag should be replaced with {POV-check}? ... GlassFET 21:57, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

"but he was voted in a poll, the "best Hungarian" of the twentieth century"

"While Kádár later claimed that there grew a father-son like bond between them, the more plausible truth is that there grew a "somewhat adolescent cheekiness" between the two." —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:41, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:37, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Role in the Rajk case[edit]

I beleive the article hides Kádár's role in organizing the show trial of Rajk. At that time he was the minister of interior _and_ participated the interrogations at the ÁVH headquarters several times. According to the memoires (X) of Vladimir Farkas, at the late stage of the work, Kádár "convinced" Rajk to co-operate. He was not a victim that time but he was one of the highest ranking organizers of the show trial. I think this part of the article need to be heavily reworked to reflect the truth.

(X) Farkas, a former leader of the ÁVH, is far from being a neutral source, but he's work is generally considered reliable. He was the single person from ÁVH to show remorse and publishing memoires (detailing his own crimes as well). —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:35, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Yep. Kadàr's role in Rajk's trial is well described in Gough's book. In its current form the article is grossly misleading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:52, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Show trial of his own[edit]

"This time it was Kádár who was beaten by the security police and urged to "confess." "

I beleive this sentence need to be reworked. Although several rumors were distributed after 1956, there is no evidence that Kádár was tortured by the ÁVH. According to the best-known version of this story he was tortured by Farkas Vladimir (see above); he was beaten to half-unconscious and finally Farkas urinated into his mouth. After the death of Kadar and the fall of the communist state, Farkas managed to publish his memoires. In this book he admits being the leader of the "investigation" during the early part of the "Kádár-case", and he assumes responsibility of his oppressive activity at this and other fields, but he consistently denies that he physically tortured Kádár.

He aligns several arguments of his own version and some contradictions of the rumors. A notable example of them is that according to the documents of Kádár's Political rehabilitation in 1954 Kádár told that "I was not assaulted physically. This can be understand, since during this ten months I arrived such a mental state that no coercive measures were needed ... the arrest [and being expelled from the communist party] broke my hearth too".

Farkas cites examples, where the rumors can be traced back to Kádár and his friends. He claims that Kádár had multiple goals with blaming the torture on him. (1) Kádár could attack his rival, Farkas' father, Farkas Mihály, an other prominent of the Rákosi-era. (2) He could fix the crimes of the otherwise anonymous ÁVH on the Farkas family (including the execution of Rajk, which was assisted by Kádár as well). (3) After Kádár's treason of the 1956 revolution in Hungary Kádár wanted to gather moral credit by slanting himself as a victim of the Rákosi-era.

According to Farkas, unlikely most of the other prisoners of the ÁVH Kádár was handled gently during his leadership, e.g. his food was provided from a nearby restaurant. Kádár was forced to confess his "crimes" using mental pressure by Farkas and his colleagues. The transcript of the record of his interrogation by Farkas has been published since then, and it is spookily similar to the interrogation of Rajk by Kádár two years earlier.

Nemkovethetem (talk) 21:02, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

"Best Hungarian"[edit]

I put a citation needed tag on the sentence "Kádár's legacy is still disputed to this day, but he was voted in a poll, the 'best Hungarian' of the 20th century" with a very clear edit summary: "I can't see any reference to this in the article proper. When was the poll held, by whom and among whom?" There was no response. When I removed it, it was restored with "its true" It's true? Where are the sources? There's no way of attaching any significance to the sentence if you don't provide sources. Was this a poll held in an office somewhere in New York where nobody knew the name of any other Hungarian? And what year? 1956? 1989? 2011? If there was a poll that was notable then the full details, with appropriate citations, should be in the body of the article. Otherwise the sentence must be removed from the lead. Scolaire (talk) 22:55, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Now it has a citation, which says 1) he was voted the best Hungarian politician and not simply the best Hungarian of the 20th century and 2) it appears to be a blog/online diary that can be edited by everyone who submit a free registration to that site (European Tribune).
I don't know whether the cited sentence is true or not, but the source looks really much unreliable. If it was a significant poll, then it is definitely well documented and all the details (Where, when, by whom, from how many candidates, etc.) should be available either in some online or offline issue. Thehoboclown (talk) 13:01, 12 January 2012 (UTC)


This piece reads like something written by arch-apologist Zsuzsanna Clark. The man presided over a totalitarian state, but this is not really reflected in the article. FOARP (talk) 15:51, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

the state was not totalitarian under him, rather, it was authoritarian - read more about him; get you're facts straight. Kadar introduced several reforms, a form of collective leadership was even established and Hungary became the "happiest barracks in the Soviet bloc" (a popular saying during communist times)... Kadar's Hungary was the most liberal regime in the communist bloc between Khrushchev's ouster and Gorbachev's rise (with the exception of Dubcek, but he ruled for less then a year before he was ousted). --TIAYN (talk) 16:31, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
He betrayed his own people and murdered many. He is a traitor and a murderer. (talk) 07:53, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
@Trust -- Hungary was the best of a bad lot but that's only relative. Bad is still bad. Is Petain given such a laudatory treatment just because he did not invent Germany? (talk) 10:36, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

I have read the article, and I do have my facts straight. This piece suffers from some distinct problems resulting in a lack of neutrality. Firstly, as is noted above, there is no source given for the assertion that Kadar was voted the most popular Hungarian (the reference links to a blog post which describes Nagy as more popular, and which itself links only to dead links) - however, previous attempts at editing this have been reverted. Secondly, the piece relies overwhelmingly on a single source (A Good Comrade: János Kádár, communism and Hungary by Roger Gough) which is bound to result in a bias towards the opinions of that author. FOARP (talk) 22:43, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

That is true; there is only one way of fixing that; fix it yourself - i'm currently busy working on some other things. --TIAYN (talk) 23:33, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
There isn't that much scholarly material on Kadàr in English. Gough is a good book, perhaps too sympathetic to Kadàr, but quite explicit in pointing out the murky aspects of his story and character. However in this article any reference to Kadàr's treacherous , cowardly side is simply omitted. May that be a reminder of Wikipedia's inherent flaws. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

1956 Retaliation[edit]

"After the October, 1956 Hungarian Uprising against the Communist terror had been repressed, a satanic communist retaliation followed in its wake, and its magnitude is beyond comprehension. The number of those deported to Russia exceeded several thousands, while the number of political detainees, arrested and executed, rose enormously. Those persons who took part in the uprising (and this has been proved), have been executed, and those only suspected in participating in it have been sentenced to long prison terms. There is no mercy! This retaliation went so far, that even 14-15 years-old Freedom Fighters were sentenced to death. For this reason Prime Minister Janos Kadar, acting on orders from Moscow, made Parliament pass the most hideous legislation, namely, a bill to the effect that the Declaration of Age would be lowered from 20 years to 18. this means in practice that 14-15 years-old Freedom Fighter heroes could be executed on their 18th birthday, after torturing them in the death cells for several years. There were 150 youths executed in 1960."

- Sentenced for Life

Author: CSARDAS, Joseph

Publisher: Wollongong: Frank Joseph Dunántuli, 1962

Wraps. 106 p . Memoirs of Csardas' time as a political prisoners in Hungarian jails and forced labor camps. He attempts to "put on record the inhumanities of the Communists which by far outdo the atrocities committed by the terroristic Hitler regime"

Mikem3307 (talk) 23:58, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Its only too ban that that son of a bitch did not live long enough to hang for his treason. Fortunately some patriots did desecrate his grave. I guess thats the only way the Hungarian people can get their revenge against trators like that pig. (talk) 07:50, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Don't get confused. The article is way too soft on him by several orders of magnitude, but Hitler was a lot worse -- by several orders of magnitude. (talk) 10:40, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Translation of name[edit]

A mnor point, but the article notes - "After the Soviet victory in Budapest, he changed his name from Csermanek to Kádár, literally meaning "cobber" or "barrel-maker"." Can this be corrected to "cooper" or "barrel-maker"  ? [Cooper is also a common English surname, 'cobber' is Australian slang for 'friend']. Thanks. (talk) 12:29, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Bizarre point of view[edit]

He's being glorified and softened as if he were the mayor of Peoria instead of a communist dictator. Worthless article, one of the worst in Wikipedia. (talk) 10:30, 21 June 2016 (UTC)