Otthon és haza : tanulmányok a romániai magyar kisebbség történetéről

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).