Nation-Building and Contested Identities - MEK

Nationhood and Identitydenied citizenship. Likewise, the efficiency of its use (or of its civic, politicaland social components) depends on the characteristics of the socialfield within the borders of the state.Following the same logic, in a nation-state where the concept ofnation is primarily territorial-political, such as France, the nation functionsas a public good. But the logic of nationhood in a state where thenation is primarily conceived ethnoculturally – such as Germany, andRomania as well – is no longer that of the public good, but rather the logicof the club. That is, the use of this collective good is restricted to the membersof the club. The Romanians “enjoy” their nation, while the Hungariansare excluded from it. Or, to conceive the situation from another pointof view, the Hungarians exclude themselves from it, by entering the “club”of the Hungarian nation, and enjoying its goods and services.One may as well conceive of nationalities as clubs within nation-states.Nationality constitutes a collective good that everyone may use for personalgoals, and no one can be prevented from enjoying it. This collective goodis abundant and so are its uses. But the quality of this good depends, naturally,on how it is used or abused. Perhaps every Romanian has a strongopinion on the use of nationality as a collective good by the “members ofthe club.” This is the logic of the Hungarians as well: they are members ofa club that extends its boundary beyond the (geographical) borders of theRomanian state. The collective good provided by the club – Hungariannationality – is produced and maintained by all the members of the club(both Hungarians from Hungary, and from abroad).If one confines the analysis to the ways in which Hungarians inRomania make use of their ethnicity, one may say that, beyond the immediate,perceptible disadvantages they experience – which can be identifiedin the discourse of the Hungarian elite in Romania – at a practical level,at least from a Romanian’s point of view, their ethnicity constitutes a considerableresource for the Hungarians. The first component of this resourceis knowledge of the Hungarian language. The advantages are easily identified.First, in the competition for positions in the state administration(obviously, this depends on the current formulation of the local administrationlaw), where speaking the Hungarian language is required, and second,in the opportunities created by the external homeland. One examplefrom academic circles is the foreign scientific literature translated intoHungarian, not yet available in Romanian. From this point of view, the situationof the Romanians is not (and can not be) symmetric. There are nostructural incentives to learn Hungarian and the contexts of actually practicingit are scarce. Moreover, Romanians do not dispose of comparableopportunities and means to learn Hungarian – the Hungarian language isnot compulsory or optionally taught in elementary or secondary schools.241