LISZT :r886-1:986 -

Klra Hambtlrgcr, Jnos Kdrpti}

Mria Eckhardt, -Dezs Leg'!Jl, Adrm WillianJS ,
Tercentenary of the Liberation of Buda -- Agncs
Vrko'!)'i, Jnos J. Varga, Gyrgy Rzsa

Hungary and Dtente in Europe

_

- Mtys Szrs
_III _The New Media Act -

_
Rezs B1!J!sZ

For Whom Beauty Was Truth: rpd Tth the Poet

-

Balzs Lengyel

The Prerucament of Small Industrial Countries

- Jzsef Bogn1'
Approaches to National Minority Policy
-Rndolj Jo
.VOL.

xxvn. No.

:r03

AUTUMN

I986 $4.00

APPROACHES TO NATIONAL
l'AINORITY POLICY
by

RUDOLF JO

he wricings on both the words in the phrase minority democracy and the various interpretations on them would fill
libraries. Simple logic dictates an examination of nieaning
and implications after a review of the typical definitions of theconcepts; this examination would be on the connecclon that exists between
the actual situation ofminority peoples and the political arrangements of
the states which exercise power over them, However, considerations of
space here prevent this. As an initial deinition, let us content ourselves
wim the generalisation that in most instances there is a close connection
between the ways of looking at the minority or nationality as it shall be
hereafter referred to, and the handling of the s00a1 problem it raises.
Courses of action developed to solve the problem generally reflect a particular conception of nation and this includes the views on the essence and
social role of the minority.

Modern concepts of nationality

The experience of the past shows that two kinds of ideological approaches
have made a. reasonablecomprehension
and optimal regulation of nationality relations difficult, indeed, impossible. Although it is a slight simplification of acomplex ideology, one of them could be described as a liberal
approach directed at the individual; this saw as its goal the individual and
the libera! development of social and economic relations unfettered by any
interference. The second was the centralist and statist view which desired
to demoastrate that the strongly centralised state is the highest order of
socialzaton, the only eflicient shaper of human relariens. Although these
two views are necessarily in contradictien on many points in their un-

RUDOLF JO:. NATIONAL MINORlTY POLICIES

39

derstanding of the. nacionality problem, they do reveal some surpnsmg

points of similarity, for instance in the concept of the nacionalist state
that blurs over nationalities. Ariother feature they had in common was
that they found difliculties in assigning a place for a nationality as a historically developed separate community, an autonomous social phenomenon,
wid\in the framework of assimilation they produced. On the part of one,
thetotality of the separate and discreet citizens, as a social image, ques- rioned the racionality and justification of. developing otganic communities
based on a different language and culture. On the part of the other, a
monolithic "national". unity, produced centrally, exduded the possibility
of the organization of all types of autonomous groups.
Ethnicity is one of the possible lines of social intersection, aform of
collective difference; which may find express ion in external marks as weil
"as in inner values, attitudes and ambitions which are more diflicult to
observe -. The conjunctionof
nationality interests and the consciousness
of belonging together grow out of the similariry of characteristic featuresand of the stuationsthus produced.
InternalIy, ethnic groups are not homogeneous, rarher they are . units
divided in various ways whose members relate to the group as a whole
with varying levels of intensity. In addition,the features that. determine
nationality are themselves not constant and change over a larger period.
Nevertheless, the ethnic and cultural break-lines of society show a considerable permanence historically; the phenomenon of nationality has a
remarkable independence when 50mpared with other phenomena in its
own environment.
Classic .bourgeois-democratic
political concepts principaliy interpret
equal rights for the nationality as the equality of citizens-c-of ali citizensbefore the law. In this view, a minority is emancipted where its individuals enjoy equal rights, where they suffer no adverse discrimination
because of their language, race, nationality, and religion. Thus basic civil
and polirical rights must be guaranteed to every mernber of society. As
long as these, such as the freedom of the press and the freedom of assembly.
are fully asserted, through them the organizational frameworks of ethnic
self-expression will also develop ; consequently, this view argues in essence,
there is no necessity for separate political and legal arrangemnts to deal
with special nationality problems.
This approach to the problem of minorities is fundamentaily from the
side of political tolerance and this in practice generally me~ a neutrality
towards what pertains to a nationality. It is necessary to emphasise the
beneits, indeed the supremacy. of the most demoeratic versions of this

THE NEW HUNGARIAN QUARTERLY

attieude vis-a-vis a policy that suppresses nationality, that exerts 'force to

make impossible the self-organization of nationalities. Nevertheless, its
one-sidednesses and shortcomings must also be seen.
Freedom of speech does not necessarily mean freedom to speak in the
mother tongue; freedom of education does not necessarily include the
obligation to establish minority schools; the individual freedom of choice
of abode can extend but cannot substirute the rights of a group to remain
in their native region and to practice local self-government. Therefore it
is impossible to guarantee nationality inrerests, that is separate group
interests developing along one of the lines of intersection of the social
fabric, exdusively through the rights of the individual. It is- necessary
to protect the socialized entity, in a given instance of the ethnic minority
as a community; more preeisely it is necessaryro develop politicai arrangements that make possible the self-expression and self-realizarion of the
group. The state should not only recognize the fact of ethnic variety, it
should also establish the most favourable conditions for the survival and
development of minorities, This includes such collective rights as an educational system in the native tongue, a bilingual or multi-lingual public
adrninistration, the establishment of government institutions dealing with
the nationality problem and the establishment of autonomous regions. It
might be said that the more the communal rights a nationalitypolicy
guarantees to the minority, the better this policy meets its objectives.
The only manner in which the individual can reach complete social
ernancipation is when his own nationality ranks equal with the others.
Thus rhe development of the individnal assumes the full blossoming of
his national identity. Conversely, equal rights and freedom for the nationalities within a state can be ful1y.assrted 'only whenthe individuals
who form those nationaliries enjoy freedom and equality of citizenship;
ilius the autonom}' of the individual is a condition for the autonorny of the
narionality, Democracy for nationalities is an organic unity of these two
factors, indivisible from one another.

Nationality policy in Central and South-Eastern Europe

The socialist construction of government that developed from the second
half of the forties in Central and South-Eastern Europe produced numerous
original, and 'indeed pioneering, institutions of equality of status for
nationalities, which differed in extent and form from country to country, occasionally even from nationality to nationaliry. Provisions in the first

RUDOLF JO: NATIONAL MINORITY POLICIES

constitutions drawn Up covering the use of first language, the federarion

of narionalities and even terrirorial autonomy are worthy of note, not only
when compared with the practices of the past in those states but also in
broader international 'comparison, However, that era was one in which
the process of establishing the general institutions of nationality democracy
coincided with a growing domination of the anti-demoeratic exercise of
power. The value of the legal acquisition of colleecive rights was diminished
by the actualloss of a number of individual civil rights.
It is not surprising, therefore, that in the political sitnation that had
developed, some of the measures directed at ethnic equality remained on
the statutes, being simply unredeemed promises and never the social
reality. Minorities found themselves in a difficult sitnation particularly
where an overcentralised form of govemment was coupled with an institurionalised ethnocentricity on the part of the majority. As there are
numerous examples for the coincidence of the two phenomena, which
cansed serious antagonisms and dashes, it is worth subjecting some theoretical questions of nationalism and the political system to closer examination.
Nationalitypolicy
is one of the specific manifestations of the exercise
of power. In the poltical medium where the social basis for the making
and influencing of decisions becomes narrow, the opportunities for various
social groups, induding national minorities, to exert an influence on public
affairs beceme redneed. Because of the lack of social control and counterweight, total power mayeasily be in the hands of powers that profess
national exdusiveness-or
simply realise it. Expropriation of the political
centre in this manner necessarily leads to the ideology and practice of
nationalism. The latter means that the power in whom sovereignty
resides acknowledges and prornotes only a single cultural norm and that.
adjustment to that norm becomes the precondition to success for all citizens, Forccd assirnilation, the imposition of values of the "nation that
constitutes the state" onto the other community is usually an annexation
of the cultural awareness that follows territorial annezarion and often
proceeds with the ideological slogan of civic unity. But a unity which
consciously obliterates differences and an equality which deliberately
homogenizes, are in essence neither unity nor equality: they are the hegemony of one ethnic group over the other. The policy of assimilationwhatever the ideological colour in which it emerges-is always an erhnocentric policy. As history has shown with European fascism, ethnocratic
. policies assert themselves in the fullest way through autocratic forms of
govemment.

==

THE NEW HUNGARlAN QUARTERLY

The fascist regimes artempred to achieve the desired complete unity

of the national state by more than political means, induding the physical
removal (and elimination) of minorities on a massive scale, The term
Endlsung denoted one of the most cruel genocides of the modern age. 'TV e
no Ionger have such extreme forms of annihilation of wholegroups of
peeples today-at least not in Europe. Yet it must be kept inmind that
the forces, which see the solution to the minority problem in one of the
versions of cultural annihilation, have disappeared neither completely nor
everywhere. Thus it is necessary to point out that a cultural Endlsung
is also genocide, albeit a form prolonged in time, more civilised in
appearar;ce, but not necessarily more humane in it contents.
Both the past and the present provide examples of governments wishing
to make up for the lack of political democracy or of adequate standards
of living. by offering compromisesto nationalist groups within their majoriry nationality, thereby strengthening their social backgrond.But
ethno-centred decisions are optimal only in relation to their own scale of
values; in fact they do not profit-apart from some minor remporaty
benefirs-s-even the community in whose interest they have been brought
into being.
The ctitting off of opportuniries for independent ethnic progress causes
permanent damage to relarions with the national rninority and-where
rhere is. one-with that minority' s national state. It brings narionality -and
state into confrontation and becomes a constant source of conflict wirhin
a region or between groups of. counrries. This process also reinforces antidemoeratic trends within the country, sincethe power which sees the
autonomy of nationalities as a threat, would necessarily arrive at the
condemnation of alI knds of social and politicai autonomy-if in fact
that condemnation was not already tl existence, A nationality policy
which constancly ignores the ambitions of a national mip.ority is generally
- irielined to hold aU other peeples in contempt, even those its own propaganda shows a preference towards. Thus anti-minority attitudes must
rum into anti-majority attitudes ; nationalism, as apolitical weapon, is
a boomerang: in time it returns and strikes its wielder,
.
From the viewpoint of a national minority, the legitimate power is
that which is ready to accept its values and which meets the demands the
majority makes in developing its ethnic identity and increasing iti political self-government. When these are denied to thern, the minority would,
in the nature of things, attempt to change the policy; its relexes for selfdefence may a1so gain expression in endeavours to break away. The fact
that minorities appeared (and still appear) as forces contesting internal

-;..

RUDOLF JO:. NATIONAL

.-~
!
.1;

MINORITY

POLICIES,

43

me

and international relations in various parts of

world does not derve
from some peculiar property in their mental make-up, but is a political
phenomenon rooted in actua1 situations; as such, it is perfectly understandable from both the social and psychological aspects.
Wherever. power acknowledges ethnical diversity it legitimises itself.
Accepting the custorns, norrns, language, and culture.vand the other characteristicsof the' other .nationalities, alongside the values of the majority
natonality, breadens the social basis of power and increases the acceptability and stability.of the political system.

, Nailonalities and communitles

Linguistic and cultural values in multinational states are not independent of their environment but eloselv linked to the social and political
situations of the groups involved. The status of the language generally
mirrors the place of the given community; thus changing this latter is
not exdusively a marter for legislation 011 language but necessarily becomes
a political problem of the first order, that of participation in power.
Deprived of the forums in which their political will can be expressed, the
nationality is a potencia! community, in which theopportunites
of orga, nization are merely potential. The nationality becomes a real community
when it commands a minimum of decisions through which it can' shape
its own situation. In order to create this, changes must take place both in
the regu1ative and institutional system of political processes and in the
political culture of the society interacting with them.
In its full sense, minority policy indudes not only the active influence
of the state on the communities living within its boundaries, but also the
elemnt of self-government, through which the ethnic minority can express
its own ambitions in the social and political enironment. Without this
elemnt
power relations beceme one-sided and are not so much a political
system as one of defencelessness. To use another histone exarnple to clarify
the point: Adolf Hitler had a policy concerning German Jewry, but
to speak of a policy on the part of Germn Jewry towards Hitler would
be risible if the tragic end of the story were not known.
The acknowledgemenr and treatment by the state of ethnic groups living
on its. territory as social parmers and power factars is an important condition for the development of minoritv democracy. The opportunity for
expressing their own interests and manifesting their own will is indispensable to the survival of the community at a certain level of social develop-

an

THE NEW HUNGARlAN QUARTERLY

44

ment, Attempts aimed at establishing democracy in relations between

state and nationality must arrive at structural .changes, which ensure
representation of minority opinions and interests in addition to asserting
the principle of demoeratic majority. What makes nationality democracy
more than "plain" democracy is that it wants to emancipate people not
only in the sense of dtmos but also in that of etbnos.
The role of politics in shaping ethnicity became especially important
in our century, not the least because technical progress had industrialising,
urbanising, and mobility-increasingeffectswhich
reduced the significance
of the traditional autonornous forces of ethnic survival (village communities, large families and so forth). But this ~ame process also developed
new forms for the rninorities of transferring values and of expressing interests through the development of general and compulsory education and
through the new mass-media of radio and television. Or to put it another
way, what technical progress and its social consequences have taken away
from small nationalities who did not evolve their own independent states,
or from small ethnic groups (such as the opportunities for direct verbal
communication in small communities), they have also replaced, at least
in terms of opportunity, with new forms and means (for instance, with
the new means acquiring and distributing information' of audio and visual
recording, and the broadcast of these across long distances),
It needs to be emphasised, however, that mking good for the lost forces
of preserving and developing identity exists for these communities initially
only as possibilities, not as immediately realised foundarions; the extent
to which they can utilise them in fact depends not only on their own
talent for self-realisation (development level, relative proportion) but also
on the characreristics of the 'state in which they live. The current changes
in science and technology, such as the electronics revolution now taking
place (induding the spread of computers, video programmes, cable television, and satellite broadcast) establish theoretical opportunities .for
group survival and community organization in addition to chances of the .
complete assimilation of minorities and thus their concomitant disinregration Thus technical progress in irself does not assimilate; it rnerely establishes new conditions for ethnic exisrence. It does unambiguously increase
the responsibility on the part of the supreme power, which often enjoys
a monopoly or hegemony control-for
econornic or political reasons-of
the modern mechanisms which influence and shape the characteristics and
vital conditions of nationalities. Predctably, that kind of social and power
system, which even up to now has desired to integrate (and not to assimilate) peeples living in the territory of the state, imposing a uniform general
e

RUDOLF JO: NATIONAL

MINORlTY

POUCIES

45

condition to. all, will continue to democratically provide rnodern means

for developing these minoriries' national identity. Similarly, the type of
political structure that is permeated by majority nationalism is likely to
continue to reduce those possibilities. One does not need any prophetic
gifts to predict that if such tradirional, simple (and innocent) means of
the. transfer of nationality language and culture as some forms of children's
Iiterature are libra non grata, or expressly classified as dangerous, then no
inuninent attempts are to be expected there in something like the development of cable television for the nationalitieS-a
medium which offers
considerable scope for nurturing culrore in sm:all communities.
All of thegenuine and comprehensive social renewal rnovements (revolutionary or reform processes) of the twentieth century-starting
with
the Russian Revolution in 1917-have desired to achieve changes in the
relations between states and natonalities, (The weight of the "ethnic"
element in them, however, obviously depended on the size of the nationalities that lived on the given territory and on the depth of the antagenisms
between the ethnic groups.)
The linkage of interests was evident, Programmes aiming at reducing
extreme economic and social inequalities also directed themselves at one
of the triggering causes of the conflicts between nations. (The importance
of this was particularly great where divisions between classes and strata
more or less coincided with language and ethnic borders.) Equal opportuniries for each of the social groups, as a general goal, was in most instances
harmonically supplemented with a particular demand for equality for the
minority as a community in bandicapped. sitnation. Here the socialist
ideal and the concept of equal rights for minorities met and became interlinked.
The stroggles of sociaies for seif-government
The link between the general and the particular could also be seen in
structural changes to the political system. An effort airned at achieving
equality berween the individual and society and between society and the .
.state is a natural bedfeliow to the ainbitions of self-organization and selfexpression on the part of ethnic communities. Strong demands emerging
in several countries of the developing world. for autonomy for nationalities
falIs into the broader stream of the social struggle for self-government.
The most important feature here is the wish to be free of an absurd alternative, that in which the individnal may choose only between regulation
by the market or the state-in spite of the existence of ali the other forms

THE NEW HUNGARIAN QUARTERLY

of social organization. The desir for decentralization which is emerging

in many places and in a variety of fonns builds on a new concept of the
relations between individual, the community, and the central power. The
basic problem is no longer the number of rights and the amount of independence conceded by the state to society and its constitunt elements,
but the sort of authority with which the same society endows the state
in the demoeratic processes.
The rninority regional movement in Western Europe is a very characteristic trend from this point of view. Ethno-regionalism, the intertwining
of the struggles going on for regional self-government and nationaliry
rights, is a typical meeting-point of ethnic survival and direct local democracy. The decentralization in which it has an instrumental effect
does not meet only (or primarily) the demands of nationalities, but aims
at establishing a new mediating and relation system, a new harmony
between society and politics.
Nationality democracy cannot be viewed wirhin the framework of
only one state; it naturally has an international dimension in that it is
embedded in the nerwork of international relariens among the neighbouring
countries, of the whole region, indeed, somermes of an entire continerit.
The development and operarion of institutions of equal rghts may improve
inter-state relations ; conversely their remeval creates confrontation between
nations and states and gives rise to permanent conflicts.
It is an obvious fact that the solution of the nationality problem is
theprimary responsibiliry of the state in whose territory the nationalities
live. Thus when the sovereign power exercises a policy of forcible assimilatien, ethnic annihilation, and fails to provide even the opportunities for
self-defence and self-expression to the narionalities, it obviously increases
the responsibiliry the mother nation feels towards the future of its rninor- .
ities, ethnic brothers beyond the borders. In such a situation the mother
nation is not only justilied but even obliged to act within the limits of the
international system of norms. Moreover, no democractic elmnt in international politics can remain neutral when faced with blatant manifestations of nationality discrimination. Just as is the case of the wide conderrmarion of the racist policies of South Africa, the pressure of public
opinion should work against admitting as respcted members of the international community countries whose domestic policies are not based
on insttutionalised racial, national, language, or religious equality.
From the point of view of the development of nationality relations,
therefore, apolitical attitude which regards the demoeraric solution of
the nationality problem as irs duty, is not one that creates facrualproblems.

RUDOLF JO; NATIONAL MINORITY POLIOES

47

In a world system of separate state sovereigncies this must be so. The real
-~
source of anxiety and conflict is that some factors of power confuse the
notions of "domestic affair" and "affar of the Ministry of Interior" ;
those that do seek to settle the sitnation of the nationalities basicaliyor
exdusively through power-enforcement organizacions, such an approach
arouses a justiied enmity in inter-nationality relations in the narrow
(domestic) sense as weil as in the broader (inter-state) one.
It is in the interest of universal peace and security that the rights of
peeples shciuld be assrted in respect of every member of the international
community; nor _should this be disturbed by ninereenth-century antidemoeratic attitudes in which the nation "that constitutes the state" is
distinguished from thse that do not. In addition to the - wider considerations, ir: is -in the interest of each group of countries, in the interest of
bilateral relarions, naturally, that their relations should be characterised
by equal rights .and balaneed cooperation and not by disaceord between
nationalities.
Nationality and socialism
The most -concise and perhaps most appropriate description of the
essence of socialism is the protection of people. This ideology desires
to protect people individually and communally against ali social injustice,
subjection, and dependence; this, naturally, includes nationality relariens.
Consequently, any theoretical and power-policy manifestacion which
professes or realizesnacional exclusivity, which gives room to national
selfishness in majority-minority relations is not socialist in essence=whatever its possible formal appurtenances and references to the ideology.
Indeed, it ultimately discredits the idea itself as weil as its practice.
Politicai factors traditionaliy play a great role in the shaping of often
historically laden nationality relations in Central and South-Eastern
Europe. This fact justifies also the devotion of particular attention to
nationality democracy among me general social development problems
of the region. To do soinvolves talking about the differences in principles
and reality as they appear, without prejudice and closedness of the national
state, with objective openness. The new courses of economic growth,
justifiably demanded in a number of countries in this region, are unimaginable without the new courses of social development. The great importance
of the nationality problem is the reasonwhy the shaping of that course
cannot be managed without the change in attitudes and mode of action
a changing world demands in the management of ethnic processes.