Final Report of the International Commission on the - Minority Rights ...

<strong>the</strong>m. Thus, he concluded:
The solution that remains for us is, at a signal, to close <strong>the</strong> borders, to annihilate <strong>the</strong>m, to throw <strong>the</strong>m
into <strong>the</strong> Danube right up to <strong>the</strong> very last <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m, so that nothing remain <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir seed!
Thirty years later, a more mature Slavici, in a series <strong>of</strong> essays written in 1908 and entitled Semitismul
(Semitism), had not mellowed in tone at all. Blaming <strong>the</strong> Jews <strong>the</strong>mselves for <strong>the</strong>ir fate–a favorite tactic
<strong>of</strong> antisemites–he called for <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> all resources (toate armele) against <strong>the</strong>m, and again suggested that
a violent solution would be acceptable:
The hatred that has welled up against <strong>the</strong>se people is natural, and this hatred can easily be unleashed
against all <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m that have inherited wealth or acquired it <strong>the</strong>mselves, and could lead at <strong>the</strong> end to a
horrible shedding <strong>of</strong> blood .
Thus from <strong>the</strong> earliest decades <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong> modern Romania, <strong>the</strong>re was a strong antisemitic
current in <strong>the</strong> country’s political and intellectual life that was not on <strong>the</strong> fringes <strong>of</strong> society, but at its very
heart. Moreover, <strong>the</strong> language used to discuss <strong>the</strong> Jews was extreme, even in those early years.
Restrictions on where Jews could live, denial <strong>of</strong> citizenship, denial <strong>of</strong> livelihood, physical expulsion,
blood-letting, talk <strong>of</strong> drownings in <strong>the</strong> Danube, assault on Jewish religious belief and practice,
designation <strong>of</strong> Jews as foreign agents, enemies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> state and <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> nation–<strong>the</strong> language <strong>of</strong> separation,
de-humanization, and killing–appeared early on <strong>the</strong> Romanian scene.
In fact, <strong>the</strong> extreme antisemitic language introduced in those years echoed through <strong>the</strong> following
decades, right up to, during and even following <strong>the</strong> Holocaust. Much has been written about <strong>the</strong>
antisemitism <strong>of</strong> Mihai Eminescu. His opinions about <strong>the</strong> Jews were complex and not as extreme as
sometimes stated. But it is important that it was credible for a large segment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> population in <strong>the</strong>
1930s when <strong>the</strong> name <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> country’s national poet was invoked repeatedly, as during Octavian Goga’s
1935 parliamentary speech, as <strong>the</strong> forebear <strong>of</strong> rabid 20th century antisemitic extremism in Greater
Romania . Eminescu was not alone among <strong>the</strong> cultural leaders who expressed anti-Semitic opinions
during <strong>the</strong> period between <strong>the</strong> achievement <strong>of</strong> national independence and <strong>the</strong> establishment <strong>of</strong> Greater
Romania. Historian Alexandru D. Xenopol declared at <strong>the</strong> turn <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> century that only baptized Jews
should be eligible for Romanian citizenship and that those who did not convert to Christianity should be
physically removed from <strong>the</strong> country .
Even Nicolae Iorga, maturing during this period, despite his genius and admirable accomplishments
in scholarship and o<strong>the</strong>r fields, must be acknowledged to have been blind on <strong>the</strong> issue <strong>of</strong> antisemitism. A
creature <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> culture he came to epitomize, Iorga joined with A.C. Cuza in 1910 to establish <strong>the</strong>
Nationalistic Democratic Party, <strong>the</strong> first explicitly antisemitic political party in Romania. His early
writing was steeped in blatantly antisemitic language. In a speech in <strong>the</strong> Chamber <strong>of</strong> Deputies in 1910,
which he later republished in a pamphlet that included an introduction by A.C. Cuza entitled “The
Nationalists and <strong>the</strong> Problem <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Kikes” (“Naţionalistii şi Problema Jidovească”), Iorga reacted to
Jewish demands for citizenship rights by charging that “Jews from everywhere, <strong>the</strong> entirety <strong>of</strong> Kikedom”
had lined up against Romania and that granting rights to Jews would so fundamentally change <strong>the</strong>
character <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> state that
Romania would no longer be Romania. Its entire mission would disappear, its future destiny could not
be maintained.