Matyas Rakosi, How we took over Hungary

Caption: In February 1952, Matyas Rakosi, Secretary-General of the Workers’ Party and President of the Council in
Hungary, outlines the strategy pursued by the Communist forces so that they may seize power in the countries of Central
and Eastern Europe.
Source: Centre d'Information et de Documentation, Paris. Hongrie. Evolution de la mentalité de la population 1951-
1955. 1205/OC. 254016. F 60 BIS 5521.
Copyright: All rights of reproduction, public communication, adaptation, distribution or dissemination via Internet,
internal network or any other means are strictly reserved in all countries.
The documents available on this Web site are the exclusive property of their authors or right holders.
Requests for authorisation are to be addressed to the authors or right holders concerned.
Further information may be obtained by referring to the legal notice and the terms and conditions of use regarding this
site.
URL: http://www.cvce.eu/obj/matyas_rakosi_how_we_took_over_hungary-en-9a19d06e-4163-4f31-b2c9-
1bc9e65a380a.html
Last updated: 03/07/2015

1/6 03/07/2015
How we took over Hungary

by Matyas Rakosi

The general strategy of the Communists in their seizure of power in Central and South-Eastern Europe has long been known in the
free world. But this is the first occasion in which a leading Iron Curtain Communist has put on public record the main tactical
features: (1) Establishment of Coalition Front Governments; (2) Control of the police and security forces; and (3) Elimination or
absorption of the other Front parties. This article by Matyas Rakosi appeared in the March issue of the Hungarian Social Review
(Tsarsadelmi Szemle). Originally it was part of an address on 29th February, 1952, at the indoctrination course of the Hungarian
Workers Party.

Early in 1945 when our country had been liberated and when, after 25 years of underground work, the
Hungarian Communist Party was able to show itself legally and openly in the arena of political life, we soon
experienced that a good part of our Communists failed to realise the strategy and tactics of our Party.

What were the strategic aims of our Party at that time?

Like all other Communist Parties in the countries oppressed by Hitler during World War II, the Hungarian
Communist Party considered that its most important strategic task was to destroy the German Fascist
conquerors. To this end wide anti-Fascist coalitions were set up by the Communist Parties in these countries,
according to the directives of Comrade Stalin. These coalitions included peasants, small bourgeois and even
elements of the medium bourgeoisie — in brief all those ready to take part in the struggle for national
liberation.

The Communist Parties foresaw that the victory in this hard struggle would not only mean the defeat of
Nazism, but also the overthrow of the allies of Fascism, the big feudal land-owners, and the capitalists.
Victory would therefore result in the redistribution of the land.

It could be foreseen that this victory — while achieving the aims of a bourgeois democratic revolution —
would also open the road towards a dictatorship of the proletariat, because it was led by the workers’ class
which gives power to the people headed by the Communist Party.

We began our work by organising the Hungarian National Independence Front.

The greater part of our comrades, who did not know or failed to understand this strategic plan, accepted this
heterogeneous coalition with astonishment. How often did we hear the following reproach: “This is not what
we expected of you”. They even told us what they expected.

“In 1919”, they said, “the Imperialists overthrew the Hungarian Soviet Republic by armed force and restored
the dictatorship of the big land-owners and of the capitalists. Now the Red Army has liberated us. Let us
take advantage of the opportunity and restore the dictatorship of the proletariat”.

These comrades failed to realise that while the Imperialists could overthrow by force — though only
temporarily — the Hungarian dictatorship of the proletariat and restore the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie
and of the feudal land-owners, as long as the Communist Party had not won over the majority of the working
class, the core of the working people — and in the Spring of 1945 they had not been won over — a
dictatorship of the proletariat could not be set up.

In 1945 we discussed these problems only within the limited audience of Party meetings. At that time we did
not discuss the problem before the people because even a theoretical discussion of a dictatorship of the
proletariat as our final aim would have caused alarm among our partners in coalition and would have
hampered our efforts to win over the majority of the small bourgeoisie, and even of the working classes.

The time had come to clarify, in its entirety and in detail, this problem and to make our Party, and also the
working people, understand that the creation of a People’s Democracy, as a variety of the dictatorship of the
proletariat, became possible only after we had won over the decisive majority of the people of the working

2/6 03/07/2015
class. We must emphasise how the Communist Party won over the majority of the working class, how it
convinced the masses of agricultural workers and how it created the prerequisites of a dictatorship of the
proletariat. We must also show how and when we switched from the first period of a People’s Democracy to
the second period, the proletarian dictatorship, the building of Socialism. The analysis and elucidation of the
problems and the realisation of the experiences deriving from them will help us in future struggles and
strengthen our power of foresight and security.

First of all lot us examine the role of the Soviet Union in the creation of the Hungarian People’s Democracy.
The Soviet Army liberated us from the terrible selfdom of the German Fascists. With this they opened the
road to democratic evolution. It is obvious that the decisive prerequisite — the starting point in the creation
of the People’s Democracies — was the struggle and victory of the Soviet Union. Without them there would
have been no People’s Democracies. The Soviet Union protected us from diplomatic interference on behalf
of the Western Powers. She supported us during the peace negotiations, and later on when we established
our diplomatic relations.

All this naturally helped in strengthening the Communist influence, and the sympathies arising among our
working people for the Soviet Union also made our work easier.

During the task of reconstruction, and since then, we have experienced the support of the Soviet Union in
hundreds and hundreds of forms. The greatest help, however, is the advice and the directives of our teacher
and leader, the great Stalin.

Without all these factors our People’s Democracy would not have been created, its evolution would not have
been so swift, so strong and so void of violent shocks.

As early as during Land Reform we used the tactics of dividing our enemies or of neutralising them, if
possible. For this reason we fixed the lowest limit at 200 Hungarian acres (yokes), thereby leaving the great
majority of kulak farms unaffected. This was a great help in the smooth and quick implementation of the
Land Reform.

At the beginning of reconstruction we supported that part of the bourgeoisie which — if only temporarily —
joined in this work. This proved of great help in putting the technological intelligentsia to work — who at
that time followed the bourgeoisie.

When we demanded something, we measured possible reactions carefully, and whenever it was possible we
started by putting forward modest claims, thus preventing the enemy from joining and mobilising forces
against us. Then we increased demands and used, whenever possible, temporary forms.

For instance, first we demanded only Government control over the banks; later we demanded the
nationalisation of the largest banks. Similarly, in industry, we demanded only the nationalisation of the
mines; then we gradually increased our demands for the nationalisation of the large machine factories and of
the foundry industry. Thus the nationalisation of industry was achieved in 4–5 phases over several years.

When the war was over we tried to turn evolution into Socialist revolution. The Smallholders’ Party and the
Social Democratic leaders fought for the survival and strengthening of the capitalist system. They joined in
the Land Reform only unwillingly.

By the summer of 1945 it became obvious that the elements of the old régime — estate owners, bankers,
house owners, Horthyite politicians and officers were assembling in the Smallholders’ Party. This Party was
also supported by the Church, whose priests filled leading positions in the leadership of the Party, The
Imperialists at once established relations with this Party, mainly through the medium of their Budapest
diplomatic missions.

The relative strength of the parties was first shown by the November 1945 elections. The Smallholders’
Party achieved an absolute majority — 56 per cent. of the votes. The Communist party, which advanced

3/6 03/07/2015
neck to neck with the Social Democratic Party, got 17 per cent. of the votes. The Peasant Party obtained a
little less than 8 per cent.

It became obvious during the weeks preceding the elections that the Smallholders’ Party had obtained the
majority of the votes of our peasantry, and the majority of the small bourgeoisie.

Nevertheless, the Communist Party made use of the election results in order to strengthen its positions
further. Therefore, it demanded the posts of Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Interior, which, after
some delay, it obtained. In order to strengthen our influence within the Government, we created the Supreme
Economic Council through which we gradually came to influence key positions in economic life. Thus,
despite the election results, our Party extended its influence in the most important fields of Government
power.

But officers and Horthyite Government officials began to flock back from the West. The purge of
Government machinery slowed down. The old land-owners and their lawyers availed themselves of all kinds
of legal claims to demand the restitution of their land from the new owners,

Under the impact of this situation, the new land-owners (who totalled more than 500,000) applied to the
Communist Party for help.

At the same time we launched a counter-attack. In the villages and the towns we mobilised the masses, and
in the form of “popular judgments” and “popular movements” we removed reactionary elements from the
administration of villages and towns. Simultaneously with this action our Party launched a drive to unmask
reactionary elements in the Smallholders’ Party. The Communist Party demanded that the Smallholders’
Party itself was to take steps against its reactionary elements to help ensure the result of the land reform, and
dismiss from its ranks all the best-known reactionaries. These demands were openly supported also by the
Left-wing of the Smallholders’ Party.

At the initiative of our Party a Left bloc was formed within the Independent Front early in March, 1946,
which apart from the Communist party, the Social Democratic Party and the Peasant Parties, included also
the T.U.C. The new organisation — the parties of which won nearly 42 per cent. of the votes at the elections
— meant that the influence of the Communist Party on the workers’ class and the poor peasantry had
increased.

To stress its demands, the Leftist bloc early in March arranged a demonstration of Budapest workers. At the
threatening effect of the formidable mass meeting of more than 40,000 disciplined demonstrators the
Smallholders’ Party had to comply with our demands and exclude 21 of its most compromised deputies. It
was agreed that under no conditions must new land-owners be removed; that after the nationalisation of the
collieries, oil, and bauxite mines also would be nationalised, that banks would be taken under State
supervision, that the Manfred Weisz Works in Csepel, the Ganz factories, the Ozd Metallurgy Works would
be taken over by the State and that the committees purging the State apparatus of reactionary elements
would include trade union representatives.

So, four months after the election victory of the Smallholders’ Party, a new turn came: not yet a general
attack on capitalism, but we took vulnerable forward positions, which facilitated our progress towards the
proletarian dictatorship.

In continuation of the successful counter-attack in March 1946, the unmasking, elimination and isolation of
reactionary elements of the Smallholders’ Party continued without interruption. The Smallholders’ Party
was continually compelled to exclude or eliminate individual members or groups of members thus
compromised.

This work we called “Salami Tactics”, by which we cut out in slices reaction hiding in the Smallholders’
Party. In this incessant struggle we wore away the strength of the enemy, reduced his influence and at the
same time deepened our own influence.

4/6 03/07/2015
The Smallholders’ Party turned down a suggestion by the Communist Party to nationalise the flourmills, to
make kulaks and landlords pay “crop surrenders”, and to institute a property levy.

The Third Communist Party Congress called for the end of September 1946 outlined more resolutely the
road on which we set out in March. Its slogans were: “Oust the people’s enemies from the Coalition”; “We
build the country for the people, not for the capitalists”.

The most important target sat by the Congress was the establishment of a People’s Democracy, because only
by means of it could our country proceed towards Socialism without civil war.

Meanwhile reaction gathered fresh hope from the approaching peace negotiations. It reckoned that some
months after the conclusion of the Peace Treaty the Soviet troops would leave the country.

The Communists retaliated by uncovering the “Conspiracy”. The sharp fights of the 1946–47 winter centred
around it. In this the Smallholders were supported by the Social Democrats.

In winding up the conspiracy it became evident that its threads led to one of the ministers and even to the
Secretary-General of the Smallholders’ Party, Bela Kovacs.

In the course of the liquidation of the conspiracy the Smallholders’ Party was again obliged to exclude a
number of its members, of whom many were imprisoned as conspirators.

Eventually it was discovered that the Smallholder Premier, Ferenc Nagy, who was on holiday in
Switzerland, was the actual leader of the conspiracy. He preferred to resign and remain in Switzerland rather
than return to Budapest to face the charges against him.

Three days later the Catholic priest, Bela Varga, the Smallholder President of the National Assembly, who
was also mixed up in the conspiracy, escaped from the country.

By unmasking the conspirators we succeeded in freeing a large part of the Smallholders’ peasants and the
small bourgeois masses from the influence of reaction. Thus the Smallholders’ Party began to fall apart.

In this position we left the enemy no time to reorganise and regroup his ranks, but proposed new elections in
the weeks when there was the greatest confusion, helplessness and rivalry among the new reactionary
opposition parties.

The Western Imperialists now attempted to push the Social Democratic Party into the foreground against the
Communist Party.

We struck back with vigour, pointing out that the time was ripe to realise an organic unity of the workers by
the unification of the two parties. The Social Democrats were forced to sign a joint election ticket with the
Communist Party.

The 1947 election results showed a 40 per cent. increase in the Communist vote, which meant that the
majority of the industrial workers had begun to gather around the Communist Party.

After the elections our enemies made yet another effort to oust the Communists from the Government, even
demanding the Ministry of the Interior. Our Party energetically rejected these claims.

At the end of September 1947 a new Government was formed, in which, in keeping with the changed
conditions, the leading role of the Communist Party became even more conspicuous. We then accelerated
the rate of development. The treacherous Pfeiffer Party was dissolved.

This was followed within a few days by a further important step: the nationalisation of big banks, by which a

5/6 03/07/2015
considerable part of Hungarian industry became nationalised. This deepened still more the influence of our
Party on the working masses. It enabled us to strike a decisive blow against the hostile forces hiding in the
Social Democratic Party. We set up a special committee for this purpose, unmasking more and more openly
and rigorously the machinations with which Social Democratic leaders obstructed the development of our
People’s Democracy.

The fight for winning the majority of the industrial workers ended with the victory of the Communists and
the total defeat of the Social Democratic Party. In June 1948 the two parties were united on the basis of
Leninist–Stalinist principles.

Our Party acquired the support of the decisive majority of the working masses and ensured the creation of
the proletarian dictatorship with the help of the correct application of Bolshevik tactics. The Communist
Party obtained the leading role in the Government, it nationalised the mines, controlled the armed forces,
broke up the old State apparatus and started to build a new one from the ranks of the proletariat.

While both our hands were engaged in winning to our side the masses of workers and peasants, we
practically adjourned our fight for winning over the Army. We achieved this by preventing the Army from
reaching the strength permitted in the Armistice Agreement and the Peace Treaty.

Until 1948 the strength of the Army was only 12,000 men, instead of the conceded 65–70,000, and the
majority of even that small force was spread in small patrols along the borders.

In Budapest, where the political fate of the country was decided, there was no military garrison at all, so that
at times we had difficulties in selecting a representative company for the installation of foreign
Ambassadors.

But even in this small Army, fighting at close quarters went on for every post in the command from N.C.O.s
up to General.

When, however, the fight on the political level had been decided, naturally the conditions within the Army
changed too. We were then in a position to ensure that the Army became really a People’s Army. When in
the fall of 1948 our Party took hold of the Ministry of Defence, a beginning could be made with the
energetic development of the Army.

A desperate struggle was also going on all the time within the police force, which our Party had taken in
their hands.

There was a single position, the control of which was claimed by our Party from the first minute, and where
it was not inclined to consider any distribution of posts or any appointments according to the proportionate
strength of parties in the Coalition. This was the State Security Authority. We held this organisation firmly
in our hands from the first day of its establishment. We made sure it remained a reliable and sharp weapon
in the fight for the People’s Democracy.

6/6 03/07/2015