Harc, 1944 (4. évfolyam, 1-52. szám)

1944-08-12 / 33. szám

9 . \ X ' r\ Vol. IV. cvf. TREASON OR PATRIOTISM By MAX A. GOLDZIEHER, M. D. Hungarian advocates of friendship and close collaboration with their Central European neighbors are accused by political enemies of lacking in patriotism, mainly because they fail to insist upon the revisionist claims of the Hungarian Nationalists and do not agree with those who still dream about a restitution of St. Stephen’s Empire. It would seem timely to impartially investigate whether the patriotism of a Hungarian can be gauged by the degree of his insistence upon the territorial integrity of St. Stephen’s Kingdom. Patriotism in the noble, humanly desirable sense of the word can be defined as gratitude for the benefits a person derives from his mother country and his willingness to express this gratitude even at considerable personal sacrifice. Such benefits, in addition to material advantages, include the cultural heritage of a nation, the protection of liberty, personal safety, conscience and religion. Patriotism, moreover, is also based on the feeling of community with a large group of people who share the same traditions, a common history of their forefathers, as well as peculiarities of manners and forms of expression, all of which are rooted in the common past. Physical features of the mother country gain further sentimental value by the mediation of poets, painters, musicians, educators and by the influence of the daily press. It is fair to say that a patriot is obliged to subordinate his personal interests to that of his country. Yet, and this brings us to the core of the problem, who is to determine what the best interests of our country are. Is the government, ruling at that time, to decide what is best foir the country ? Perhaps, provided that this government represents the unquestionable will of the nation, but even in that case a true, yet more clearly seeing patriot may rightfully disagree with the prevailing views of his illadvised fellow citizens. One would hesitate to say off-hand that loss of territory is no advantage to any country, hence it should not he approved by a patriot. Unfortunately, the population of Hungary at the time of Trianon was not homoigeneous as in other countries, for instance, in France or Sweden; the periphery of Hungary was inhabited by Slavs, Roumanians and Germans who did not care at all to be Hungarians and hence, grabbed the opportunity to forego the “benefits” of continued Hungarian rule. Let us ask further: Of what were the people living in post-Trianon Hungary deprived by the loss of the amputated territories ? It is true that the illiterate masses of the North and Northeast represented cheap labor during harvest time for the big landowners of the Hungarian plain, a welcome means toi further depress the living standard of the Hungarian peasant. It is also true that Slovakia, Ruthenia and Transylvania offered an opportunity to the sons of impecunious Hungarian noblemen to be installed as county or state officials who could brutally lord it over the “dirty” Slovak or Roumanian. Truly enlightened patriotism would have tried to establish economic and cultural conditions, equally tempting for Hungarians and other nationalities to join in a common brotherhood. Why is it that Italians, Poles, Czechs and Hungarians become patriotic Americans ready to die for this country? Obviously, because we are all equal before the law and are given the same opportunity to acquire education and a chance at economic progress. The contrast between the efficiency of the American melting pot and Hungary’s failure to assimilate its nationalities clearly shows the stupidity and shortsightedness of the Hungarian policy. Hungarians, intellectuals as well as the ordinary middle class, were indoctrinated from early childhood with nationalistic propaganda: Hungary is God’s own country in which everything is just wonderful. To criticize institutions aimed at the perpetuation of the ancient feudal regime was unpatriotic; to acquiesce in the freedom of independence of territories inhabited by non-Hungarian nationalities, exploited or oppressed by Hungarian nobility was treason. Yet, it was compatible with the official kind of patriotism to favor a close alliance, first with the Kaiser and then with Hitler, in order to wage two ill-fated wars. It was not unpatriotic either to keep the Hungarian peasant destitute and illiterate, nor does it bother the conscience of these professional patriots that the Hungarian people is ruled with an iron hand by a small, predatory group which is utterly disinterested in the needs of the peasant and the worker. Real patriotism is best documented by an earnest endeavor to improve the living standard and the culture of the country; it does not depend upon veneration of historical symbols such as St. Stephen’s crown which are void of reality in respect to the individual Hungarian. Attempts fora better understanding with Hungary’s neighbors would contribute vastly to the economic and cultural progress of the Hungarian people. It is surely better for Hungary to arrive at satisfactory relations with its neighbors than to see St. Stephen’s crown make good its historical claims to sundry provinces, including Halicz, Lodomeria and Jerusalem. Only those whose mental age has not matured beyond the stage of a first year law student, or whose mind is utterly befogged by chauvinistic propaganda, can fail to see that Hungary’s salvation is possible only through sincere friendship with its neighbors. Let us hope that a community of interests and the joint belief in freedom and democratic institutions eventually will reunite the estranged members of the Central European family. NEW YORK, AUGUST 12, 1944 C Anti-Nam Newspaper 1 D. 1L A. fei. HETILAPJA m E. Mth ClrMt, X. T. C. *liH»®tási áru SfjMiUt 43». «■»kbta ei CjmuuUUmm ári...«UM Egye« iián) ára ........................ M uttate_ ! JdtfkL Sierkesiti: a ÖMAtg Blittisáfa Menekülni szeretne Horthy A londoni rádió jelenti augusztus 2-án: “Megbízható jelentések szerint H Horthy Miklós, Magyarország úgynevezett kormányzója, közölte a kormánynyal, hogy le akar mondani tisztségéről. A német kormány és a magyar vezérkar azt válaszolta a kormányzónak, hogy ez Magyarország katonai összeomlását eredményezné és így Horthy a helyén maradt.” No. 33. szám Magyar kiküldöttek kontaktust keresnek a Szövetségesekkel A Nya Dagligt Allehanda jelenti augusztus 2-án Bernből: “A szinnalak mögött rendkívüli események történnek Magyarországon. Hiteles értesülés szerint delegációt küldtek Lisszabonba, hogy kontaktust keressenek a szövetségesekkel. A belső feszültség tetőpontját, érte el Magyarországon. Fontos döntések előtt áll a kormány. A hadsereg tagjainak szabadságolását megszüntették. Budapest utcáin német csapatok állnak őrt.” A Morgantidningen jelenti augusztus 3-án Madridból: “A magyar kormány súlyos krízist él át. A magyar közvélemény, beleértve számottevő politikai köröket, meg akarja szakítani a kapcsolatot a németekkel. A képviselők egy része új miniszterelnököt akar és közeledést a szövetségesek felé.” Imrédy: "Szélsőjobboldali puccs küszöbön áll" Az Aftontidningen írja július 30-án: “Az orosz offenzíva nagy izgalmat kelt Magyarországon, mert annak egyik szárnya egyenesen Magyarország ellen irányul. Amint a front közeledik az ország határaihoz, egyre valószínűbb, hogy szélsőjobboldali fordulat áll be. Maga Imrédy Béla is kijelentette, hogy egy szélsőjobboldali puccs küszöbön áll.”