Blood and Homeland: Eugenics and Racial Nationalism in Central and Southeast Europe, 1900-1940

The Politics of Hatred: Scapegoating in Interwar Hungary

The Politics of Hatred: Scapegoating in Interwar Hungary* Attila Pók The loss, between 1918 and 1920, of two-thirds of pre-war Hungarian territory after the Treaty of Trianon (4 June 1920) caused trauma and repercussions, still felt in the present day. Not surprisingly, the “Trianon syndrome” is a standard point of reference when dealing with any aspect of twentieth-century Hungarian history. The argument of this chapter is that the conceptual framework of scapegoating is useful in explicating one of the key problems of twentieth-century Hungarian history—namely the relationship between anti-Semitism and Hungarian involvement in the implementation of the Holocaust in Hungary in 1944.1 If there had been a Hungarian Historikerstreit, this issue could well have been one of its focal points.2 The same question may also be asked differently: Does the Holocaust in Hungary represent the apogee of a long-term evolution in Hungarian anti-Semitism, one rooted in early modern and contemporary Hungarian economic, social and cultural history? Or, instead, was it the result of short-term antecedents rooted in interwar Hungarian society; can it, in fact, be traced to what we might call the “Trianon syndrome”? This chapter shall discuss the “complexity of complicity” in reference to the socio-psychological tool of scapegoating. In terms of method and sources much here is collaborative: throughout , the works of many colleagues, including historians, social psychologists , anthropologists and philosophers, are employed. There are five authors, however, whose ideas and insights were of particular importance in my conceptualization of scapegoating: Ferenc Pataki, whose 1993 article effectively described the idea of scapegoating;3 György Hunyadi, who, for decades, has been trying to build bridges between history and social psychology, and whose 1998 book on stereotypes during the decline and fall of Communism deserves more atten- tion;4 Randolph Braham, whose studies on the Holocaust in Hungary combined scholarly expertise with humanitarian and democratic commitment ;5 Omer Bartov, whose article, “Defining Enemies, Making Victims: Germans, Jews and the Holocaust,” fittingly contextualizes the Hungarian case;6 and a Ph.D. thesis on the “Trianon syndrome,” “Pursuing the Familiar Foreigner: Resurgence of Anti-Semitism and Nationalism in Hungary since 1989,” by Jeffrey S. Murer, which emphasizes the importance of critical theory for the study of antiSemitism .7 Finally, the choice of this subject was motivated by recent historical and political debates about the variant forms of terror and dictatorship that characterized twentieth-century Hungarian history. Historical Sources: The Scapegoat in the Old Testament The original meaning of the scapegoat is first explained in Leviticus, the third book of the Pentateuch. In the course of a ritual, Aaron lays both his hands upon the head of a goat and confesses all the iniquities and the transgressions of the people of Israel, thereby transferring the sins of his kin onto the goat that is, in turn, expelled into the wilderness . The message of the ritual is clear: the scapegoater is fully aware of his guilt and is most consciously trying to get rid of it. The nature of guilt is also determined by context: it infers admittance of a crime, having broken the law, which may arise from bad character or sinful, irresponsible behaviour. According to this ritual, however, the background to guilt is unimportant, for the scapegoater is tortured by remorse. Scapegoating is a comfortable way out of a troubling situation ; it provides relief. The scapegoaters of the Old Testament are not guilty; however, they are carefully identified as carriers of a burden. Mediaeval and early modern European cultural history provides numerous examples of this type of scapegoat. Many English sources, for example, write about the “whipping boy,” the young or low-ranking person forced to accept punishment for crimes committed by his superiors . English and French sources also describe “sin-eaters” that “ate up” the sins of the dead.8 In its original conception the ritual is in no way to be confused with a sacrifice, an offering to God that can also be a goat (a bull or a ram). 376 “Blood and Homeland” Methodology: Social Psychology and Scapegoating The scapegoat of modern social psychology is quite different. Modern twentieth-century scapegoaters are convinced of the guilt of their victims and consider themselves innocent. In Hungary, the loss of territory is the most important source of the greatest national traumas, and therefore scapegoating, on a national level, is connected to this issue. It is...