Article
Andrej Sámel, The First to Speak Out Against Mečiar and Warn Havel About Czechoslovakia’s Breakup
“Unforgivable, unjustified. It can never be forgotten.”
These are the words of Fedor Gál, who led Verejnosť proti násiliu (Public Against Violence, hereafter VPN), a civic movement that emerged during the Velvet Revolution as the main democratic opposition to the communist regime in Slovakia. He was referring to the story of my great-grandmother’s brother, General Andrej Sámel. My family has not forgotten. My grandmother even found old newspaper articles that include his quotes.
Velvet Revolution and the Fall of Socialism in Czechoslovakia, November 1989
This story takes place shortly after the Velvet Revolution. Because of its outcome, I can write freely today. That is something worth remembering as we mark the anniversary of the events of 17 November 1989.
With great hope often come people who do not mean well. Some are ready to use energy and momentum for their own benefit. Slovakia after the fall of socialism was no exception.
Shortly after November 1989, a lawyer who had worked in Nemšová began gaining popularity, Vladimír Mečiar. In the euphoric atmosphere of the early 1990s, it was very difficult to confront him or question his methods. What followed is now well known: increasing nationalism, concentration of power, pressure on institutions, controversial privatisation, and Slovakia’s growing isolation from the West.
At the time, however, this was far from obvious. Andrej Sámel, then Deputy to the Federal Minister of the Interior, recognised the direction early, at a time when very few did.
Andrej Sámel was not without experience: during the Prague Spring in 1968, he supported a pluralistic political system and openly opposed the invasion of Warsaw Pact troops, led by the Soviet Union, which brought those reforms to an end. He was subsequently pushed out of political life and persecuted by the regime.
Andrej Sámel Warned President Václav Havel, March 1990
More than twenty years later, in the period following the Velvet Revolution, after returning to political life, he decided, as Deputy to the Federal Minister of the Interior, to warn President Václav Havel about Mečiar, his growing nationalism, and the way he was building influence in Slovak politics, including efforts aimed at weakening Czechoslovakia as a federation.
Join the Library
Full access to my findings, personal stories, and what I learn from the people I meet.
Join the Library · €29.99 per year Fable 5 vs Opus 4.8: I Ran the Same… I Ran Object Detection on My Laptop, and Saw… Bot or Human? What My… Dependent on AI: Are We… Which Work Will AI Not Replace? Not Yet… Dead internet theory is becoming reality. Will we return…Get the full article by email and feel free to reply if you want to discuss it further.
Sources
Fedor Gál: Čriepok z mozaiky
Fedor Gál: Ešte raz a naposledy: Koniec príbehu
Luciano Antonetti: Arrestato Bilak Aprì Praga all'Urss
SMER-dnes (Slovenský východ, Mladá fronta dnes, Práce, Slezkomoravský den): Andrej prehovoril
Pavlík Vladimír: Ako Mečiar a Kňažko gen. Sámela žalovali
sme.sk: Generál Sámel sa označuje za jednu z prvých obetí nežnej revolúcie
The New York Times: Evolution in Europe; Czechoslovakia Detains Ex-Communist Party Leader and 4 Others
Zamudio Martínez, R.: La revolución de terciopelo en Checoslovaquia: cronología 1988–1990
Summary
Common questions on this article's topic
What was the Velvet Revolution?
Who was Vladimír Mečiar?
Who was Andrej Sámel?
What happened to Czechoslovakia and why did it split?
What was the Prague Spring of 1968?
What happened to Andrej Sámel after he warned about Mečiar?
If you have any thoughts, questions, or feedback, feel free to drop me a message at mail@richardgolian.com.
LinkedIn
Related articles
Europe does not have the capacity to face a full-scale, mass drone war of the kind we see in Ukraine. Three dependencies weaken it: China supplies the physical material for defence systems, the United States supplies capabilities Europe does not have, and twenty-seven states cannot agree how fast, or who pays. Rearmament plans exist, but they are being carried out slowly.
What happened, and how can it be reversed?
It happens every day. It is happening right now.
More articles
The same task, two models. Fable 5 against Opus 4.8. On paper Fable is the better model, with a larger context and stronger specs. And still it lost. Opus handled the task with a single round of checking for 721,000 tokens, while Fable needed nine rounds and burnt through 2.78 million tokens. The difference was not in the model, but in how I set the task. And I know it, because I measured it.
A few weeks ago I installed a small local AI model on my laptop that watches a live camera feed. I turned the webcam on in the dark, and in near total darkness it recognised me and the objects in the room. That such things exist, I have known for a long time. What opened my eyes was the accessibility. I installed it in one prompt, free, and it runs entirely on my machine, sending data nowhere.
I once wrote about building my own privacy-friendly analytics tool. It had bot detection from the first version, yet it was not enough. Direct visits took a strangely high share of my traffic. When someone claims that 20% of their visits are bots and 80% are humans, I used to think the same. Today I would say the opposite ratio is closer to the truth. This is how I got there.
I have Heidegger and my notebook beside me. I am asking where all of this is heading, where artificial intelligence is taking us.
Seventy per cent. That is where the first AI output begins, even when you give it the full company context and the best examples from the past. We are talking about the kind of output that cannot be defined programmatically. It is more complex. Often it is creative work. On one repeated type of output I reached eighty per cent within a week. Every further percentage point is harder than the one before.
For a long time we treated the internet as the main road. The place where work and relationships happen. Yet most of what we see on it today is, or soon will be, AI-generated: text, images, profiles and comments. The internet is turning into an online game full of bots, where you cannot be sure that a human is on the other side of anything. So I ask: was the online world the main road, or only a temporary detour that part of us will return from, back offline?
A few days ago I interviewed a senior marketer. An experienced man, years of practice. I asked him about AI. He said he barely uses it. He had one bad experience with the output and decided he was too senior for it to add value when it is not perfect. I know the other side too: professionals who automate everything that can be automated.
AI produces the graphic, the newsletter and the product page faster than a person. What is left for the one who used to do it is the judgement, knowing whether the output is good. But most people have worse judgement than AI. And whoever cannot judge quality cannot delegate either. How do you tell whether yours is the judgement a company relies on, or the kind it can replace?
In April, in the first part of this series, I wrote about an AI prediction system I had started building on my own machine. At the time the software was a few hours old and the prediction record was empty. The record since then has shown one thing: the system does not yet understand the market it is being asked to forecast. It can pull macro context, book value, earnings. But it cannot put those together into something that helps it understand the price.
Four days in Catalonia. No computer, no AI, almost no social media. I bought this notebook so that I could write down what I would think about, and what I would come across and learn on the trip.