Die Politische Rede der Rumänischen Neutralität (1914-1916). Das Nationale Ideal in der Kriegsrhetorik
The Political Speech of the Romanian Neutrality (1914-1916). The National Ideal in the War Rhetoric

Summary/Abstract: The Great War marked a turbulent period in the history of Europe. In addition to the street demonstrations, the media’s role and the significance of the political discourse have acquired new meanings unknown before. The Romanian political scene also had obvious changes. The neutrality period reflects intense experiences and an unprecedented scale in the shaping of the partisan message full of a nationalist ideological burden. To explain the meanings (significations) of the political discourse we must try the deconstruction of language. A difficult task because it requires for the historian to move away from the pressure of the historiographical judgments and to admit that the rethinking of the past sometimes implies also a creative effort. The Romanian historians, with rare exceptions, have built an idyllic picture: that of the fulfilment of the national ideal seen as a “secular dream” in the troubled history of the people. Everything happens in the register of a historical heritage. It is imposed at any price the freedom of the Romanians of the Double Monarchy territory. Transylvania is the Romanian nation’s soul so the war called of “reunification” could have only one purpose: on gateways, beyond the Carpathians, against the Austria-Hungary. We get from this some simplistic approaches of the texts, sometimes with circumventions of content, which explains why we find in writings of different ages different conclusions containing the same ideas but pronounced in a different language and style. This attempt to equalize or to simplify what cannot be simplified confuses and impedes the understanding of reality. The bearer of the message does not always correspond to the typology of the political discourse. Neither does the political discourse correspond to the vision of the party. It also reflects individual beliefs converted into judgments, sometimes sensitivities capable of forming public opinion. The political debate during the neutrality involves a diversified type of speech and a language with a semantic range: on one hand, the sober analytical perspective which proposes reflections on neutrality in the dynamic of the war, on the other hand, a euphoric vision, with touches of pathos and a persuasive language, which reveals sensibilities and creates sublime metaphors for the nation.

• Details
• Contents