Székely Nép, 2010 (46. évfolyam, 59-60. szám)
2010-03-01 / 59. szám
zation. Yet, even this was not put down in writing, for if it had done it, the name autonomy would had to be defined. Instead it made a grand declaration under the motto: Unity, which is of course the ground of all autonomies. But whose autonomy was this? That of a political interest protection organization, which has become a political party, for it has degraded itself into a political party. Forgetting its original purpose to become the embodiment of Hungarian autonomy in Romania, it fell into a political comedy in search for tidbits from the corrupt meat pots of Bucharest. It did not define itself and instead it introduced the tactic of “small steps” and the desire to remain in coalition with the ruling parties under all circumstances. Once in a while it would turn back to assure us that it is still working for autonomy, even when the Romanians do not observe it. They did not observed it, neither did we Hungarians. But we had to observe that the Hungarian autonomy as a consequence of the corrupt RMDSZ political attitude has not become a reality. This became clear, when the RMDSZ kicked out Bishop Tokes from the association. I do not want to use more drastic expression about this tragic action, but it describes the character of the RMDSZ. It accused Tokes that he with his radical expressions gave ground for the rise of Romanian chauvinism. Yet everybody knew that the only “sin” of Tokes was his faithfulness to the original principle and aim of the RMDSZ. He was for everything that was missing in the RMDSZ. What came after was the complete downfall of the RMDSZ. It destroyed the inner opposition and created an even more powerful opposition in its own constituents. Everything that it was able to build up afterwards became grotesque, because its very self became grotesque, weather it admits it or not. When Bishop Tokes was elected to be a member of the European parliament, the RMDSZ had an other opportunity to recreate the Hungarian unity. Instead of bringing back the Bishop to its leadership position, it got red of him once again. This time he received more vote than the RMDSZ. Yet, how different would be the Hungarian unity in Romania and how much stronger would be the position and stature of Tokes in Brussels, if he would know that the hinterland is behind him. The truth is, that in spite of the efforts of Tokes and his willingness to come forward, there is no all encompassing unity. The RMDSZ continues its own selfish political game. It falls from one political coalition into another. We have to admit that this kind of political play is not different from the half century old tattered pan-handling, with the only difference that a more elegant beggar is sent from one table to another. HUNGERING FOR SUCCESS There is no unity, no solidarity, because there is no autonomy conception . And as a consequence the RMDSZ cannot define itself. This is the primary root of all its failure, all its sickly hunger for success. The dreary opinion that the Hungarian community of Transylvania has of the RMDSZ is diametrically opposed to the picture, that the RMDSZ would like to project. There have been some efforts to put some patchwork together. But the end result is, and we have to declare it categorically, that it has no autonomy conception. The emphasis is on completeness and unity. A million and a half citizens have the absolute right for a complete autonomy. Completeness simply means that it has the right to make decisions about its needs and democratic human rights weather other groups are opposed to it or not AUTONOMY IS IN ITSELF COMPLETENESS Even though the needs of the various Hungarian groups in Romania might have different geographical and societal circumstances, they represent a national unity. We cannot speak of a separate cultural and geographical autonomy. All Hungarians in Romania have the right to enjoy the benefits of autonomy. This is the reason that we talk about the unity of autonomy. The primary object is the geographic autonomy of the Szekler land, out of which can grow out the cultural autonomy of fall other Hungarian groups in the cities and villages with entirely Hungarian or multi population entities. This was the proper way, how the RMDSZ should have defined itself. Even though it was kept as a secret, this is what it wanted to mean. This is the way how it could have been the organization of all Hungarians in Transylvania. This could give a solid foundation to the Hungarian political life, and this could replace the tactic of small steps and lead to authentic success. This only could give meaning to the coalition participation in other political parties for the benefit of the entire country. And this would put an end to the impression that the political efforts of the Hungarian party is only a tattered pan-handling. If there is no autonomy conception and a solid organization which demands it, then there is no Hungarian political life. Individuals might participate in politics, but in the absence of unity and completeness, all these efforts remain a pathetic intrusion before the flesh pots of Bucharest. Page 2
