Nation-Building and Contested Identities: Romanian & Hungarian ...

MARIUS TURDAcommunity, the “national problem” of Romania is seen only as thecontainment of the ethnic competition between Romanians and Hungariansin the strict legal and administrative framework of Romaniaand Europe. 3Contrary to the fact that Romania has a “national problem,” the significantrole nationalism performs in this country is not easily acknowledged.4 After all, what makes Romania such an interesting case? Similarto other East European nationalisms, the Romanian nationalism combinesan ethnic essentialist philosophy (as developed in the 19 th century)with a suffused authoritarianism (determined by the image of the Nation-State), and a traditionalism that attempts to preserve the Romaniannation from external and internal menaces. By eliminating references toexternal historical, socio-cultural and political conditions as well as internalinteractions with other national groups, Romanianness is generallyreferred to in the nationalist discourse as pure and uncontaminated. Howdoes this monolithic version of national identity relate to the constructionof historical representation in contemporary Romania?At present, there is, by the very logic of nationalism and“Europenisation,” an intense conflict, focusing on questions of loyaltyand identity, among Romanian politicians and intellectuals. 5 Bothnationalists and Europeanists (if we assume that those EuropeanisedRomanians are not nationalists) vacillate between glorifying the State(nation-state, federal state, etc.) or the Nation (ethnic, contractual,etc.), depending on their ontological reference. 6 Whether the focus ison the liberal protectionism of the Europeanists or on the more militant,illiberal and anti-minority populism of the nationalists, I wouldargue that nationalism is the most encompassing ideology in Romania. 7There is probably no better perspective from which to examine thisassumption than to focus on how Transylvania appeals to the contemporaryRomanian political imagery.This essay examines this diffuse topic from a different perspective.Firstly, by assessing the vicious orchestration of Transylvania in the publicsphere, I examine the most attendant political and intellectual themes onthe Romanian discursive field. Secondly, by pointing out various conflictingdiscourses, I indicate the existence of an identity conflict within Romania.Lastly, I suggest that there is something more than simple adherenceto European values with which Romanians have to come to terms in orderto be externally accredited as such and internally create sufficient space toadjust complementary (even if conflicting) political and intellectualvisions.198