Trencsényi Balázs et al.: Nation-building and contested identities: Romanian and Hungarian Case Studies (Budapest, 2002)

Part 1. Modernity and national identity: approaches, dilemmas, legacies

The “Münchausenian Moment” 8 See I.G. Duca, “Doctrina liberalä” (The liberal doctrine), in Iordan Chimet, ed., Dreptul la memorie (The right to memory), vol. 2 (Cluj-Napoca: Editura Dacia, 1993). pp. 180-189; original edition, Dimitrie Gusti, ed., Doctrinelepar­­tidelor politice (The doctrines of the political parties) (Bucharest: Institutul Social Roman, 1923), pp. 144-154. 9 $tefan Zeletin, Din tara mägarilor (From the land of donkeys) (Bucharest: Nemira, 1998), p. 41. 10 Zeletin, Din tara mägarilor, p. 42. 11 Zeletin, Din tara mägarilor, p. 42. 12 Zeletin, Din tara mägarilor, p. 67. 12 Zeletin, Din tara mägarilor, p. 45. 14 Zeletin, Din tara mägarilor, p. 68. 15 Zeletin, Din tara mägarilor, p. 68. 16 Let us recall that, in Hayden White’s metahistorical scheme, Tocqueville’s his­toriographical genre is described as “tragedy.” See Hayden White, Metaliistory (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973), pp. 191-229. 17 Constantin Dobrgeanu-Gherea’s most important work is Neoiobägia: Studiu economic-sociologic alproblemei noastre agrare (New serfdom: Economic-soci­ological study on our agrarian problem) (Bucharest: Socec, 1910). 18 As Eminescu puts it, back in 1820 “two independent classes had been existing, one peasant class, originating from impropriated soldiers, and the other, a city­­dweller class. ... The history of the last fifty years is called ‘national regenera­tion’ by many, but it could be better called the history of the eradication of yeo­manry and guildsmen.” See Mihail Eminescu, Scrieri politice (Political writings), edited by D. Murärasu (Craiova: Scrisul Romanesc, 1931), p. 64. The reformation of the political establishment created an “unhealthy stirring” and craving for positions, “based not on labour, but on privileges.” This “flocking to the gates of privileges” carried the members of the “positive classes” along as well, leaving an economic void behind, which could only be filled up with alien elements - eminently with Jews. “Where are these positive classes in our country? The historical aristocracy - it must be historical to be of any impor­tance - almost disappeared, positive middle-class does not exist at all, the voids are filled up with strangers, the peasant class is too uncultivated, and although it is the only positive class, nobody understands it, represents it.” Eminescu, Scrieri politice, p. 70. On the Junimist vision of history, see Alexandru Zub, Junimea. Implicatii istoriografice (Junimea: Historiographical implications) (Ia?i: Junimea, 1976); and Zigu Ornea, Junimea si junimismul (Junimea and Junimism) (Bucharest: Eminescu, 1978). 19 Stefan Zeletin, Bttrghezia romänä. Neoliberalismul (Romanian Bourgeoisie. Neoliberalism). (Bucharest: Nemira, 1997), p. 103. 20 Adrian Marino pointed out that payoptism, contrary to the Junimist criticism, did not propose the uncritical imitation of Western forms, but had a strong capacity of self-reflexion and, in the writings of its proponents, one can find the roots of the ideology of “forms without substance” (forme fára fond) that was subsequently turned against them. See Adrian Marino, “Pentru neopa§optism” (For neo-pa$optism), Sfera politicii 60 (1998), pp. 12-26. 21 Zeletin, Burghezia romänä. Neoliberalismul, p. 424. 22 Zeletin, Burghezia romänä. Neoliberalismul, p. 429.

Next