Transylvania's choices in 1918, economic point of view

Oh, that book must be true, is it? What does it say about Bessarabia? I mean, with Hungary perceived as an all-time-present threat, the utmost interest was to presebt Transylvania as being Romanian! IMO, at least...

???

@MMM
Sorry, I don't think I understand what you talking about?
Do you want to know the ethnic percentages in Transylvanis or economic situation of Bessarabia as it is presented there?

I am sorry to 'kill' an illusion (a spulbera o iluzie), but there were Rumanians from Transylvania, who advocated either the status quo (i.e., Transylvania to remain part of Hungary, with a degree of autonomy), or who believed in an independent Transylvania, as a country separate from both Hungary and Rumania.

I searched for the references to support the above statement, but could not find them yet. However, what I did find in a book was the enclosed poster, without any further explanation. When could this be issued and popularised?



Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on December 17, 2011 04:14 pm

I am sorry to 'kill' an illusion (a spulbera o iluzie),

@Denes: This propaganda leaflet you posted is a very strong proof to sustain that "some" romanians wanted to reject union? My opinion is that the leaflet was not even writen by a romanian. The leaflet it is even hilarious if it was suposed to be written by a romanian transylvanian: which "our" army was disbanded in Basarabia?? The whole text of the leaflet is a so stupid propaganda that in the era only really idiot people could believe it.

LE: the stupidity of the leaflet is that Iuliu Maniu was in fact a strong partisan of union with Romania. Maniu was the one who declared in late november 1918 at Arad to Oszkar Jaszi, minister of nationalities from Hungary, that romanians from Transylvania want to break relations with Hungary and union with Romania. To cite from memory the discussion from these 2 men:

- O. Jaszi: What do you want, romanians from Transylvania?
-I. Maniu: Teljes elszakadas. Rupere totala. Total breaking.

After that, Oszkar Jaszi left Arad. Maniu and other romanian politicians went out of the building (today the townhall of Arad), which was surounded by more than 10.000 romanians who atended the meeting that day. A group of romanian students went to Maniu and asked him to return to the meeting room and to declare union with Romania on the spot. Maniu and others replied that it would be easy to do so, but it would be better to make the union as a free will of romanians from Transylvania, not as a will of a few politicians. So he went back in the room and established the National Gathering from Alba Iulia to be on 1st of december (new style) 1918, 2 weeks from the day the discusion with Jaszi was.

Check THIS out . ROmanian propaganda

Anyway, Denes, what's the point anyway that you keep sustain that a small part of romanians from Transylvania didnt want union with Romania (I am sure that a small number of transylvanian hungarians didnt wanted Transylvania united with Hungary and sustained union with Romania in 1918. Is this relevant for the general hungarian atitude in 1918)?? Since when the opinion of a small number part of the population prevail on the opinion of majority part of the population??

This post has been edited by 21 inf on December 17, 2011 04:40 pm

I am sorry to 'kill' an illusion (a spulbera o iluzie), but there were Rumanians from Transylvania, who advocated either the status quo (i.e., Transylvania to remain part of Hungary, with a degree of autonomy), or who believed in an independent Transylvania, as a country separate from both Hungary and Rumania.

I searched for the references to support the above statement, but could not find them yet. However, what I did find in a book was the enclosed poster, without any further explanation. When could this be issued and popularised?



Gen. Dénes

I hate to disappoint you, Denes, but I'm pretty sure the leaflet was launched in 1940, in the days after the loss of Basarabia, and during/immediately after the days of the cessation of Cadrilater and N-V Transylvania. It requested for an independent Transylvania, in order for the province not to be included in Hungary. As far as I know, the episode was considered a populist stain in Maniu’s career, even if it might have been inspired by some of his followers in National Peasants Party, without his initial knowledge. However, it didn’t make too much of a stir, since the widespread and commonly held belief in those days was that anything is preferable to the annexation by Hungary - a fact unfortunately confirmed latter by the abuses and killings perpetrated by the elements from the Hungarian army, civilian population and administrative authorities.

Another possibility is that the poster was a piece of Hungarian irredentist and subversive propaganda (see the “illiterate” spelling), tons of which were smuggled and distributed across the frontier in 1938-1940, as R. V. Bossy, the Romanian ambassador in Budapest, mentions in his memoirs.

As for the voices claming an autonomous or independent Transylvania, I’m not aware of any of those. I don’t say they did not exist, but the fact was made irrelevant by the referendum and its credentials sent for/at the 1 December gathering. What I do know is that when, towards the end of the war, the new A-H emperor (Karl I) came with the idea of transforming the empire into a federation, the Transylvanian Romanians (among other nations within the empire) did not agree. So if they did not in a year in a moment in which Romania was reduced to the territory of Moldova and Russia was asking for peace, why would they do that (or even worse than a confederation, an autonomy as a part of Hungary) in 1918, after the Central Powers defeat?

This post has been edited by Agarici on December 17, 2011 05:19 pm

The declaration of Woodrow Wilson from 1918:

1. No more secret agreements ("Open covenants openly arrived at").

2. Free navigation of all seas.

3. An end to all economic barriers between countries.

4. Countries to reduce weapon numbers.

5. All decisions regarding the colonies should be impartial

6. The German Army is to be removed from Russia. Russia should be left to develop her own political set-up.

7. Belgium should be independent like before the war.

8. France should be fully liberated and allowed to recover Alsace-Lorraine

9. All Italians are to be allowed to live in Italy. Italy's borders are to "along clearly recognisable lines of nationality."

10. Self-determination should be allowed for all those living in Austria-Hungary.

11. Self-determination and guarantees of independence should be allowed for the Balkan states.

12. The Turkish people should be governed by the Turkish government. Non-Turks in the old Turkish Empire should govern themselves.

13. An independent Poland should be created which should have access to the sea.

14. A League of Nations should be set up to guarantee the political and territorial independence of all states.

Ah it's another lost topic, exactly what I was fearing 21inf's post form December 16, 2011 09:14 pm stared a emotional discussion regarding transilvania. How gives a damn for economics, emotional topics about Transilvania are a lot more interesting.

21inf and Agarici, I did not state this leaflet was issued in 1918. It was actually I who asked when was it possible issued? Check again my post.
Nevertheless of the date of issue, it is a proof that at a certain point there was a Rumanian movement for the independence of Transylvania, as asked earlier by 21inf. - see his quote on the top of my post.

Returning to the economic side of the story, I will keep looking for relevant info (I stumbled across this leaflet exactly when checking my refrences).

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on December 17, 2011 07:18 pm

Yeah, but only if you can look at them with the proverbial "grain of salt", or - even better - corroborate them with other sources! (sorry, but that's what's called "objective account" of history, as opposed to wishful thinking...)

Denes, there were back in 1918 a number of transylvanian hungarians who sustained the union of Transylvania with Romania.

21inf and others, please do not steer off the topic. You keep posting issues that are not relevant to the topic, namely Transylvania's choices in 1918 (in this case independence, version C from Mihnea's scenarios, or more precisely the economic aspect if Transylvania went independent). This in order the topic not to degenerate and draw early closure by the Admin. Thanks.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on December 18, 2011 10:34 am

Denes, I didnt went off-topic. You posted the leaflet who has no link with economical issues. You mentioned again the romanians who oposed union and I mentioned in consequence about hungarian who wanted union with Romania. Who says that their option (romanians, as well as hungarians) wasnt based on economical issues? (even if their numbers were insignifiant, but it seems that this small number have a great importance for you, I am curious why is so relevant to you )

From my part, if admins want to close this topic too, let it be, if it is considered a democratic way to solve discussions. Maybe it will be better to be opened separate topics to discuss all issues, if discussions are going off topic. There are interesting point of view who some forumist are expressing, it is true that most of them are not sustained with documents, but who am I, a half-true speaker citing the documents I have readed during years, as some guys from here put the label on me, to comment on those opinions?

LE: anyway, I'll keep away from this issues, as I see that I was acused that I started emotional discussions about the subject. Actually, I used more document based opinions more than many other forumist fellows, who just kept playing with "what if" scenarios. Have a further nice discussion here, guys!

This post has been edited by 21 inf on December 18, 2011 01:11 pm

21 inf,
I appreciate your interventions and I think they are on topic! The fact that some members (I do want them to understand that I am pointed exactly to them!!!) are bothered by your opinions, it's exactly their problem, actually for me to have a different opinion is a professional obligation (to speak like that), and, in fact, of this difference, we approach the truth! I am sorry to say, that apparently innocent words are in fact diversions, which, as an transylvanian, I feel more often, compered to others from other parts of our country! If you want to be on topic, dear members, please make the numbers talk and not you, bring documents and not share impressions to us! Thanks!

@MMM
I guess I understand your point, you doubt the credibility of the figures published in the book! Well what can I say? I quoted from this book because it's the one I have... On the other hand I give you a link where are other figures more accurate, since they are from 1919 ... at least so says the author:
http://www.istoriatransilvaniei.ro/vol2/v2c5.pdf

OK, now I’ve got the idea, but still don’t know what to say about the poster. I know that there was a rather vague and unclear “Maniu + autonomy” episode as described in my previous post, in the context of the turmoil generated in Transylvania by the Vienna decision - in many major cities taking place popular gatherings requesting for the government to reverse the decision (cessation), for Romanian army not to withdraw and/or for the civilians to organize their (armed) resistance. Their main target (at least for the politicians) was king Carol.

On the other hand, I maintain the opinion that, given the awful grammar, the leaflet may be a piece of adverse/subversive propaganda.