Petőcz Kálmán (szerk.): National Populism and Slovak - Hungarian Relations in Slovakia 2006-2009 (Somorja, 2009)
László Öllös: Time for Hungarian-Slovak Dialogue (Conclusion)
László Ollós focused on concrete goals or interests of ethnic Hungarians, but much less frequently when they focused on more general problems such as power abuse and arrogance of politicians who based their authority and legitimacy largely on anti-Hungarian sentiments." Sticking to pragmatism, parties representing ethnic Hungarians focused rather on filling posts within public administration organs, strengthening minority cultural institutions and achieving their economic goals while avoiding debates their leaders viewed as ideological and futile. But there is an essential difference between ideological debates and discussions on the value system. While the former primarily serve the purpose of attaining power goals of politics, the latter may also be directed against power goals. In no case must such a dialogue become a political tool; on the contrary, it should create space for examining fundamental cohesion principles of society or a political community even when it contradicts power interests or even those of the majority.12 That is why politicians embedded in the value system of power are never able to participate in these discussions in a constructive way. A dialogue with them quickly turns ideological because they use it to strengthen their own power positions and undermine those of their opponents. Perhaps that is why the opinion confrontation with the majority’s political representatives seemed ideological and - after several verbal squabbles that also featured some power elements - futile to ethnic Hungarian leaders who were after swift success and rapid results. But it is these discussions that give birth to new ideas. Since the Age of Enlightenment, the luckier half of Europe is well aware that just like politicians have the power to thwart or hinder the birth of works that generate fundamental ideas of the new age, they are equally equipped to create favourable conditions for the birth of these ideas and make sure that they are conveyed to their principal addressees, i.e. members of the political community. Modern political communities may speak of a true change in the system of values if the change concerns not only intellectuals and the ruling political elite but also a critical majority of community members. In an ideal case, the political community of a given country freely comprises citizens of different nationality.13 Based on historical experience of the 19th and 20,h century, we are compelled to make one rather obvious observation. At the turn of the 2 T' century, reaching a constitutional consensus rests with citizens who make up the state. This process must not be interfered by alien military force and cannot be thwarted by nationalists from neighbouring states. It is solely up to these citizens whether they reach it or not; at this point in history, they 258
