Europeanisation, National Identities and Migration ... - europeanization

228 Judit Tóth and Endre Sik
The understanding of dispersion (as it is deducible from dispersal, the sense of the
classic notion of Diaspora) as Diaspora is of particular interest, as in that case what
is to be determined is the interpretation of dispersion. Compared to the ten-million
strong population of Hungary, even the ethnic Hungarian blocks of Transylvania
should be seen as living in dispersion.
Diaspora is nothing but dispersion. Therefore I regard the block of the Székely
community, even though you can travel for six hours in their midst without
hearing a word of Rumanian spoken anywhere; however, because of the great
distance and isolation from Hungary, this is a Diaspora. I am not here using
the notion of Diaspora in its religious sense as it is used in phrases like ‘the
dispersal of the Jewish Diaspora,’ neither in the sense of migration. That sense
is applicable to Hungarians in the West. That is, those who emigrate from
Hungary and settle down somewhere between Austria and Canada, form one
Diaspora. But regarding the Hungarian Diaspora I consider dispersal in a general
sense, meaning that political boundaries do not coincide with the boundaries
of language and culture. Viewed from Transylvania, the Székely community
is no Diaspora, the block of Hungarians in Partium is no Diaspora, but those
living in Transylvania Interior or the Banat are. Viewed from Budapest,
however, the Székely – in spite of their population of 600–700 thousand – are
by all means a Diaspora. The whole issue depends on where you look at it
from.
What I mean by Diaspora is dispersion. The Hungarians of Sub-Carpathia I
do not regard as Diaspora, as they do not live in dispersion. After all, the
Hungarians of Sub-Carpathia live in one large block.
In sum, it can be concluded that the whole of the Hungarian population living
within the Carpathian Basin is not regarded as Hungary’s Diaspora by the actors
of Diaspora-politics. However, a number of empirical arguments available may
provide us with a sufficient basis to recommend that the nature of the connection
of ethnic Hungarians across the borders and in the Carpathian Basin with Hungary
(a native country that they have never left) should be considered as one possibly
displaying Diasporic features.
For example according to recent sociological and anthropological findings:
• the symbol of Hungarian statehood (honouring the national flag) is just
as important for the ethnic Hungarians of Transylvania as the statehood of
Romania is for the Romanian population of Transylvania (Szakáts 1996);
• for Transylvanian Hungarians living in Hungary, Hungary is ‘home away from
home’ (Kántor, undated), and this dual loyalty to home survives decades
(Szakáts 1996);
• Hungary (although to a lesser degree, but even today) is ‘home turf’ for the
ethnic Hungarians of Transylvania (Bíró 1998).