| dc.description.abstract | The goal of this thesis is to show, through the history of the Hungarian minority in Romania,
what drives the self-organisation of a minority community, and to what degree, in what
respect is this historical, social phenomenon specific.
Beside the theoretical introduction, the thesis consists of eight chapters, organised into
three larger blocks. The structure reflects a methodological distinction as well: in the beginning,
some case studies are offered; these are followed by presentations of institutional and
conceptual history; in conclusion, an interpretive model is offered. The first part, entitled
Cleavages, contains three case studies. These present in detail the major historical turning
points, enhancing thus a better view of transitions. A turning point, in my view, is a situation
in which the answer given to a challenge transforms the entity giving the answer as
well.
The chapter on the change of sovereignty (I.2) is written not from a central, national point
of view, but from a local one. It focuses on the “little events” of the shift in sovereignty.
The history of the National Hungarian Party’s (Országos Magyar Párt – OMP) crisis in
strategy and leadership (I.3) shows the network of interests, the efforts to achieve Hungarian
political integration both in Transylvania and toward Budapest and Bucharest, leading
in the end to the genesis of independent Transylvanian Hungarian politics.
The chapter on the Transylvanian Party (I.4) illustrates the change in perspective induced
by the Second Vienna Award. (Hungarians in Northern Transylvania turned from a minority
into a majority.) More exactly, the function of minority nationalism (a sense of calling)
changed within the new context: after 22 years of Romanian dominance, the Hungarian
elite in Transylvania reached the conclusion that the minority question is basically a question
of power. Consequently, they did everything they could in order to create/maintain a
regional Hungarian dominance. By this, they broke with their former minority ideology, i.
e. transylvanianism, that stressed on minority cohabitation based on national autonomies.
The second part, entitled Frameworks, comprises four chapters focusing on two concepts:
Hungarian minorities policy and minority policy. The workings of the former are shown in a
Central European comparative context (II.5). The Hungarian minorities policies of Romania
and Hungary is presented in more detail. The case of Hungary is a minute analysis of the
typology of Transylvanian issues and the support policies developed by the Hungarian
government (II.6-7).
A separate chapter deals with the political strategies of the Hungarian minority in
Romania, differentiating between strategies of party politics and of social policy. The institutions
and the cultural-ideological movements find their place within the framework of
these strategies as well (II.8).
The concluding chapter of the thesis (III. Processes) is a long-term analysis of the ideasconcerning
integration developed by the Hungarian intelligentsia in Romania from 1919
till 1989 (III.9). It is intended to demonstrate the validity of the interpretive model presented
at the beginning (1.1). | fi |
