"Between two Gentiles for one homeland"

The regime change in Romania after the wonderful December of 1989 opened a new chapter in the struggle for freedom of the Hungarian national community in Transylvania. An original democracy was built on the ruins of one of the darkest dictatorships in Eastern Europe, where the post-communist elite filled the Western-type forms of the rule of law with specific Balkan content. In this environment, the Hungarian political interest representation in Transylvania was conceived and took off in a matter of seconds on a historical scale, whose development history spanning more than two decades clearly outlines for anyone interested in the affairs of public life the fundamental fault line dividing Hungarian national politics and its actors into two camps. The residents of the political expert camps are distinguished from each other by their relationship to the main power and to Bucharest, which has continuously built a unified and homogeneous nation-state. While one camp, the Labanc, believes that the way to assert Hungarian interests can be found basically in the integration into the main power in Bucharest and in the use of the means of power from there, the other camp is the Kuruc in the organization of the community, the utilization of its internal reserves of power and its own autonomous institutional system operating in Transylvania with public rights. in its construction, in a word, in autonomy, he sees the solution to Hungary's survival and growth. The author of this volume, Tibor Toró T., is an active politician who has spent the past 24 years on the front lines of Transylvania's political battles in the national leadership bodies of the Hungarian representation or in the Romanian parliament. At the same time, as a member of some important Transylvanian intellectual workshops (Jakabffy Elemér Foundation, Magyar Kisebbség national policy review, Reform Foundation, Bálványos Intézet), he was an active participant in the theoretical and practical debates about the reform of Hungarian political representation in Transylvania and the dilemmas of Kuruc and Labanc type Hungarian advocacy. they said. The fruit of these discussions is this volume, which is a selection of the nationally relevant products of the past two decades. The published studies, positions, and interviews clearly testify to the author's moderate Kuruc commitment, but at the same time they also show that, in his case, his conviction in favor of autonomy does not preclude openness to the Bucharest Labanc-type approach rooted in the soil of real politics.