Sindicalism And Social Policies In Interwar Romania The Social Democratic Discourse
=== 18b47d98c5af1f78618cb82eb05061b31ca677ca_395664_1 ===
University
Faculty of Political Studies
Specialization Political Studies in English
Syndicalism and Social Policies in Interwar Romania: The Social Democratic Discourse
Content
Introduction
Chapter I. Socialist concepts in the Interwar period
Socialism and the syndicalism movement
Social identity in the Interwar period
Public discourse of syndicalism in the Interwar period
Chapter II. Syndicalism versus similar social movements in the Interwar period
The impact of Russian Revolution
Syndicalism versus Marxism
Romanian Syndicalism versus European fascism movements
Chapter III. Public discourse of Romanian Syndicalism
3.1. Patterns of research
3.2. Results of the research
3.3. Potential developments of the research
Conclusions
Annexes
Bibliography
Introduction
The thesis „Syndicalism and Social Policies in Interwar Romania: The Social Democratic Discourse” aims to objectively present the perspective of syndicalism in the Interwar Romania, based on an unique approach, as focusing on the public discourse retrieved in the newspaper of that period.
The theme was chosen, since the literature associated with the researched topic, is reduced, basically while debating about syndicalism and social policies, researchers will connect the concept with the communist period, which is likely to alter the nature of the social and political phenomenon. Historically, the communist movement in the Interwar period debuted as a syndical option, since the communists were interested in promoting their ideas of equality among workers, yet syndicalism is a particular chapter in the Romanian history, associated with democratic practice, as it will be suggested in the thesis.
In order to create an objective research, the results obtained from the Romanian studies associated with syndicalism will be completed with the evidences in the European studies based on the phenomenon. By adding external information to the local frameworks, the research will be complete and objectively structured.
The personal demarche proposed includes a content analysis on the most popular socialist newspapers in the Interwar period, „Mișcarea socială” („The Social Movement”) and „Munca” („Labor”). The newspapers were selected among other similar media creations, based on the importance of their editors, Ilie Moscovici in the case of „Mișcarea socială” and Constantin Titel-Petrescu, as associated with „Munca”. Both media personalities were also politicians, creating in the pages of the newspapers they coordinated vivid samples of mobilizing discourse. Ilie Moscovici and Constantin Titel-Petrescu presented to Romanian workers the importance of their rights, urging them to fight for their defense, in the spirit of the democratic balance existing in the Romanian state. Unlike the communists, the socialists were interested in coexisting with the current political forces, in order to obtain better work conditions, rather than canceling the ongoing structure of the Romanian democratic state.
The results obtained through this thesis can be completed by an extended content analysis, applied to similar socialist newspapers, in order to reveal the impact of the socialist discourse in the Interwar media.
Chapter I. Socialist concepts in the Interwar period
This chapter aims to briefly present the emergence and impact of syndicalism in the Interwar period. The approach is deductive, the analysis debuts with a concise overview on socialism, continuing with the effects of syndicalism as a socialist concept on the social identity of the period, as well as on the public discourse as the most eloquent effect of syndicalism.
1.1. Socialism and the syndicalism movement
According to Checkland (2000), focusing on the analysis of political and social movements in the 1880s, in UK, socialism was distrusted by Liberals, one of the traditional political forces in the British state. The emerging political and social movement was considered by Liberals and partially by Tories, as a disruptive form of collectivism, generating the end of existing social order and political configuration, starting from a micro level as the family or the individual property and reaching a global structure as the monarchy or the British state itself (Checkland, 2000, 24). Comparing with the continental form of socialism, the British version was considered a particular moral standard, since it focused on the implementation of human rights in a deeply industrialized state. Socialist scholars were interested to mainly analyze the income and wealth of individuals, in order to create suitable strategies for correct redistribution, but their strategies were directly rooted in the traditional liberal perspective, as consequence socialism in British was in fact a completion of an existing political and social pattern (Checkland, 2000, 368).
In France, socialism was assimilated with an existing political and social perspective, Jacobin patriotism, considering that French nation can only evolve through „self-abnegtion and the consciousness of collective duties” (Checkland, 2000, 27). In practice, socialism involved the need to subordinate all particular interests to the common interest, in order to create a new social order based on discipline and an improved social organization. Commonly to other European states where socialism flourished, the existing social and political background marked by war favored the massive adoption of the new concept as a political and social purification (Checkland, 2000, 27).
Similarly to the British model of socialism, the Romanian socialism can be also considered a moderate one, as mentioned by Keith Hitchins (2013). The scholar analyzed the evolution of political forces between 1866 and 1947, concluding that Romanian form of socialism was a gradual reflection of the European current in the period. In practice, the Social Democrat Party corresponding to the European socialist emergence, adopted a moderate discourse, including themes as the cancelling of „exploitation forms” (Hitchins, 2013, 393) and the transfer of production means or commercial property from companies to society itself (Hitchins, 2013, 393).
As an expression of socialism, syndicalism claimed the correct treatment of workers. Generally, syndicalism focused on the reach of equal standards for workers, in terms of social identity and economic improvement, mostly as income. Syndicalism is a direct effect of the European industrial evolution. As the majority of European states multiplied and diversified their industrial activities, the necessity of representative structures, able to monitor and defend their rights was natural (Proca, 2010, 2). There were also radical expressions of syndicalism as the violent riots in UK, in the 1910, when the workers protesting in the area of Tonypandy threatened the civil order in New Wales, prolonging to 1911, with repeated fights against workers in mines and police representatives (Checkland, 2000, 220).
1.2. Social identity in the Interwar period
Socialism, as its name indicates, was conceived as a movement dedicated to mass, to the protection of their rights. Workers' demands, unaccepted by other political organizations, were supported by socialist parties, focusing on the improvements of wages and labor condition. The image of the worker in the Interwar period was globally associated with underpayment and inadequate labor climate, threatening their physical or mental health, additionally women's condition was even more difficult, as they were granted reduced wages, comparing with men, for similar activities (Downs, 1995, 30).
Additionally to the image of the worker in large urban centers, in the Interwar period, a recurrent theme is that of the agricultural worker, burdened by the impact of the war on his main activity, agriculture, as well as the social and political changes in a macro context. For example, in order to establish a new social order, Lenin disposed in 1921 difficult conditions for agricultural workers, such as the requisitioning of grains, in exchange for their improved control over the land and the techniques used to increase production. Theoretically entitled as a socialist strategy, the monitoring established by Lenin through New Economic Policy, which was continued by Stalin through Socialism in One Country program, created the opportunity of this type of workers to use the black market as an alternative for their activities, while groups of peasants refused to cultivate, which was severely treated by the communist regime. Basically, in Russia and countries adopting the communist model, the agricultural worker was subject to an increased difficult climate, based on the impact of the war, as well to the collectivism imposed by authorities (Downs, 1995, 57).
In the European states with democratic regimes, the evolution of agricultural workers was moderate. Similarly to Russia, in Germany and France, the war affected the most productive arable land, additionally major groups of farmers were evacuated or were imposed to practice certain prices. Simultaneously, in urban center, daily life was exacerbated by the Wall Street Crash of October 1929, when prices of all commodities increased (Downs, 1995, 58).
1.3. Public discourse of syndicalism in the Interwar period
Socialism, as well as syndicalism as its main expression, was commonly associated in the Interwar public discourse with the concept of supporting democracy. For example, in the case of the Romanian context, socialist organizations or syndicates claimed they „fight” (Stănescu, 2002, 314) for democracy.
In the Interwar period, the proportion of the European population including industrial workers increased, mostly in northern and western areas of the continent. For example, in UK, the number of workers doubled between 1851 and 1914, reaching the level of 18.4 million. On the opposite, the number of agricultural workers decreased, representing 8.2 per cent of the labor force in UK in the Interwar period. A similar evolution can be remarked in the case of Germany or France. For instance, in Germany the population of industrial workers increased, reaching the level of 66 per cent as labor force, while in the case of France the proportion was estimated at 60 per cent (Atkin, Biddiss, 2009, 61). In order to represent the increasing interests of these social groups, specialized political, economical or social organizations were formed, creating a particular form of public discourse, focusing on the emancipation of workers and the claim of their rights, comparing with other social groups.
In the case of the Romanian situation, the First World War created a tense climate, both the population and the politicians considering that Romania used too much of its economic, social or military potential and received too little from its allies, as a consequence a new implication into a military configuration was regarded with skepticism (Hitchins, 2013, 300).
Gheorghe Bujor, one of the socialist journalists in the Interwar period, was debating upon the financial fiasco that a new intervention of Romanian into an European war could be created. The public opinion, as represented though the above mentioned journalist, admitted the tremendous costs of a new military action, yet the Romanians were willing to reunite all territories where their „brothers” lived into a major Romanian state, that could only be obtained through war with the historic neighbors, dominating the area as Turkey, Austro-Hungary or Russia (Jurca, 1978, 24).
In the pages of The Economic Magazine (Revista Economică, November 1917, 53), the article „România și războiul” (Romania and the war), Gheorghe Bujor critically points the unfortunate position of Romania among powerful states in the Balkans, as well as the historic necessity of his people to unite all Romanians into one state, similarly to the state created by the legendary Mihai Viteazul, a medieval ruler forcing both Turkey and Hungary to recognize the unity of Ardeal, Țara Românească and Moldova. The socialist journalist adds that the socialist force in Romania is interested to collaborate with the existing political parties, in order to find a solution to the historic dream of the Romanians:
The idea of the national unity of Romania continue to be the most desired goal for the socialists, as the potential participation of Romania to another European war could bring it closer to its fulfillment. Naturally, such a desire of participation included essential costs in terms of military service, economic supplies for the population, as well as the mental preparation of the people, who have witnessed once the terrible facts of the war. Yet, the imperious desire to see Romania once again completed was powerful enough to determine the majority of the Romanians to offer their sons to the battlefield, as well as their hard labor in factories and fields, in order to support the needs of the country (Revista Economică, November 1917, 53)
As mentioned by the journalist, between the national interests of Romania and the particular interest of the social movement there was the necessity of mutual support. The socialists encouraged the population to fight for its rights, including the right to unite the Romanian territories, while the authorities were expected to admit the presence of the socialist groups as active political partners in the Romanian society.
In the turbulent Interwar period, marked by antagonistic trends as skepticism or the necessity to rapidly enter the battlefields of a new war, the socialist discourse was a moderate one, inviting Romanians to consider their current position in Europe and fight for their national interests, as every people in Europe „was free to choose its own destiny” (Jurca, 1978, 30).
Chapter II. Syndicalism versus similar social movements in the Interwar period
In this chapter, syndicalism will be analyzed in comparison with similar social movements in the period, in order to highlight its particular features. As the general framework is established, the difference between syndicalism and fascism or Marxism will be applied also to the Romanian context of the period, in order to suggest the local assimilation of the concepts.
The impact of Russian Revolution
The Russian Revolution was initially a political revolution that overthrew the monarchy of Nicholas II, proposing the construction of a new governmental system. In terms of social change, the Russian Revolution was equivalent to the emancipation of peasants, asking for their personal freedom and a share of the land (Wade, 2005, 3).
In terms of objective, the Russian Revolution aimed to „break” (Wade, 2005, 160) the Russian empire, in order to create national sections of it, „highly centralized” (Wade, 2005, 160), in order to impose an improved administration. In addition, the Russian Revolution proposed to persuade the workers of the oppressed empire to reject the existing labor framework, in order to create a „multi-national struggle, ultimately pan-European” (Wade, 2005, 162), in order to form an advanced socialist state, correcting the errors of the former political regime.
As soon as the Russian Revolution debuted in Europe, the Romanian political forces attempted to know its prerogatives, in order to compare it with the existing political framework (Hitchins, 2013, 345). As a consequence, starting with 1871, as noticed in the pages of the magazine „Familia” (The Family), the Romanian audience was interested by the new political movement, Romanian personalities as Vasile Conta participating to the International meetings of Marxists. The journalists writing for the Romanian magazine considered that the Marxist movement has „a beautiful and noble purpose” (Jurca, 1978, 45), without describing it in terms of political strategies. In addition, the Romanian magazine remarked the rapid dissemination of the Marxism, which managed to be visible in less than a decade in all corners of Europe, unlike any other political force, since it proposed a common message of freedom and equality for all social classes, included the classes neglected by other political parties (Jurca, 1978, 45).
The emergence of the Russian Revolution created a particular feeling in the Romanian state, as the supporters of socialism considered they could impose a reliable political, economic and social model, as noticed in the case of the Great Socialist Revolution of October 1917. In the pages of the current newspapers, the event was associated with the idea of greatness, the debut of new era in the history of Europe (Hitchins, 1997, 204).
For instance, in a fragment of the document „Citizens and workers!” spoken to the public radio in October 1917, the Romanian socialists urges the Romanian people to „happily sing” (xxx, 1966, 72), since starting from the Baltic Sea to the Danube, „communities could find peace, as the Russian revolutionary government, in the name of the working people and millions of soldiers dead on the battlefield, started the peace treaty” (xxx, 1966, 72), in order to end the war. Commonly, in the same period, the local authorities considered the peace as the most advantageous position in the First World War, as a consequence the „joy” of socialists described a political action that was already in development, without their particular intervention (Hitchins, 1997, 247).
The most interesting fragment in the document is the call for a new political, economic and social order, as described in the need to cancel the historic parties, in order to create an improved administration:
Workers and citizens!
The energy, the honor and the belief of the Russian workers, the revolutionary socialism salved humanity from its fall. Starting with today, a new era is to written in the history of mankind!
Enough of the bourgeois parties, democratic parties, reforming parties.
The Russian Revolution made the first step, now no tyranny is to stop the revolution in all Europe (xxx, 1966, 72)
In the fragment mentioned, it is noticeable the tendency of Romanian socialists to consider that in their country the socialism will be as positively received as in Russia. In fact, the Romanians adopted a moderate position, similarly to the presence of fascism or other reduced political force, while the liberals and the conservators remained the majority (Hitchins, 1997, 247).
Syndicalism versus Marxism
As mentioned by Crick (1998), syndicalism is the „product of modern society” (Crick, 1998, 23). In no other historic period, including the Antiquity or the Medieval Age, a solid social movement focused on the protecting the rights of the poor, less able ones could not be formed, although during ancient times discriminated people as the humble workers revolted against their wealthy masters (Crick, 1998, 23).
For instance, in ancient Athens, although it was the cradle of democracy, incorrect relations between workers and the people who hired them were permitted, since the last ones were the citizens of the „polis”, while the workers were outsiders, as a consequence not benefiting of civil or political rights. In the agora, only the citizens could debate the social order and the future evolution of the polis, excluding workers, foreigners, as well as women (Crick, 1998, 24). Romans, on the other hand, understood the power of the multiple force represented by workers and attempted to include it in the political order of the state. A suggestive example is the case of the Gracchi brothers proposing agricultural reforms, in order to improve the existing labor conditions, as well as granting to workers the right to buy the land they work on for a generation, if they could find a possibility to negotiate with the master of the land. As Rome evolved, it included several categories of workers, not only the agricultural ones, also domestic workers, workers in architecture, as well as multiple categories of slaves. The Roman society established a clear difference between worker and slave, the last one having reduced rights or no right, comparing with the worker, who could gradually become a member of the wealthy social classes through a decent behavior and the gathering of revenues. On the contrary, the slave was „purchased” (Crick, 1998, 24), sold to another master, if the actual master was unsatisfied, forced to accept brutal practices based on the absence of individual freedom. The cases when a slave could become a free man or woman were rare, but the Roman society admitted them, as the former slave proved he/she assimilated the Roman values and promised to dedicate his/her life to the prosperity and peace of the Roman state (Crick, 1998, 24).
Despite the unequal treatment in the ancient world, the modern socialism is rooted in the tradition of the Athens and Rome. For example, the socialist urge addressed to proletarians to be united is an expression of ancient metropolis' interests to rely its objectives on a mass of active and supportive citizens, understanding the necessity to support with money, physical force or other means the positive evolution of the city (Crick, 1998, 25).
Socialism appeared as an alternative to the 1800s political strategies, using ancient structures, as well as contemporary ideas to create a personal identity (Crick, 1998, 30). For instance, the socialists admit the importance of the majority, as the ancient considered that the decisions assumed by the largest possible part of the society are the most correct. The majority in the socialist perspective becomes the „class”, more precisely the class of workers, historically discriminated. The purpose of the socialism is to correct the historic errors, by proposing the necessity that all members of the society could be equal in terms of rights, mostly rights in the labor area (Crick, 1998, 32).
Concretely, syndicalism refers to the rights of the workers, while Marxism engages in its fight against social injustice a larger social category such as the burgeoisie, which can include workers, as well as other social categories such as entrepreneurs. In fact, Marx in his works considers that the feudal aristocracy existing in the Russian society should be replaced with a new class, the bourgeoisie, willing to support the concept of free exchange on the market, as well as the idea of eternal peace among social classes (Crick, 1998, 78).
In the case of the Romanian syndicalism, a moderate tone can be remarked, as analyzing the activity of Constantin Titel-Petrescu or Ilie Moscovici. The socialist personalities mentioned rejected the affiliation to the Communist International movement in May 1921, choosing to form local parties based on the social-democratic concepts assumed. For instance, The Federation of Socialist Parties in Romania (Federația Partidelor Socialiste din România) represented a small party formed by members of the former Social Democratic Party (Partidul Social-Democrat), becoming after 1922 the Romanian Socialist Party (Partidul Socialist din România) and by members of small political groups in Transilvania, Banat or Bucovina. The socialist adepts in the Interwar period considered that Romanian as a „semifeudal” (Hitchins, 2013, 437) country should be transformed into a socialist state, based on the ideas developed by socialist promoters as Constantin Dobrogeanu-Gherea.
Among the socialists adepts in the period, Constantin-Titel Petrescu (1888-1957) and Ilie Moscovici (1885-1957) created a particular framework of socialism in Romanian context. The two politicians opposed to the idea of social revolution, considering there were no conditions suitable for such a tremendous social change in Romania, supporting their argumentation on the reduced economic growth of Romania, as well as the reduced social awareness of workers. Based on Constantin-Titel Petrescu and Ilie Moscovici, the only possibility available for Romania was the necessity of developing capitalism, doubled by the raise of awareness among workers, as they were not properly organized in syndicates and not informed about their rights and responsibilities (Hitchins, 2013, 437).
In order to perform his credo, Constantin-Titel Petrescu united small political groups into the structure of a new party, entitled The Social Democratic Party (Partidul Social-Democrat), in 1927. The new political structure was considered able to replace the Federation of Socialist Parties in Romania, reckoned to be too „slow” (Hitchins, 2013, 437) to serve the interests of an increasingly „powerful socialist and labor movement” (Hitchins, 2013, 437). Constantin-Titel Petrescu aimed to replace the existing „financial and political oligarchy” with a „democratic society based on the civic principle of equality for all citizens, as well as on the concept of the socialization of production means” (Hitchins, 2013, 437).
The new party created by Constantin-Titel Petrescu attempted to create a clear delimitation between its aim and the communist ideology in the period. For instance, its creator insisted that the reforms promoted by The Social Democratic Party should be applied as the party could manage to obtain the trust of the population through parliamentary democracy, excluding the scenario of obtaining social and political power through revolution or any type of violent act (Hitchins, 2013, 437).
Romanian Syndicalism versus European fascism movements
According to Hitchins (1997), comparing with other socialist movements in Europe, the Romanian perspective was one of the most solid ones, based on its exclusively ethnic feature, as the majority of the members of socialist organizations or syndicates were Romanians. The connection between syndicate and socialists is one of interdependency, unlike the rest of Europe as socialist thinkers formed both syndicates or political parties, generally the syndicate once formed evolved into a political group. In practice, the socialists encouraged the creation of syndicates, which were exclusively focused on the rights of workers, while in the case of other European states, syndicates formed by church or by other social groups can be analyzed (Hitchins, 1997, 105).
Fascism was created as an action movement, comparing with other political trends in the Interwar period, its activism being based on the „use of violence against political opponents” (Morgan, 2003, 10). From political struggle, fascism was gradually expanded to the society itself, as the fascists aimed to radically change their communities, in order to form what they believed to be the perfect image of society as Hitler intended to create a pure German society (Morgan, 2003, 12).
In the case of the Romanian political forces associated with syndicalism, their approach to fascism is minimal. In fact, nationalist parties as Garda de Fier (Iron Guard) were influenced by fascism and adopted a violent behavior in society. By contrary, socialists parties were interested in actively supporting the workers' emancipation, but respecting the democratic context of Romania (Cușnir-Mihailovici, Dragne, Unc, 1982, 11).
For instance, the Romanian syndicalism exclusively analyzed the improper working conditions in factories and workshops, where numerous workers were forced to work extra hours, without payment, into inadequate conditions in terms of humidity or air quality. Workers could not complain, in order to formally defend their rights, as the multiple laws in Romanian at that period did not include any reference related to the exploitation of workers by their employers. In fact, if they were not to accept the conditions of the employers, the workers were free to search for another job, which could be worse in terms of labor condition, whether they were able to find any job in the delicate Interwar context, marked by political and economical instability (Hitchins, 1997, 114).
The European Fascist movements in the period analyzed invited workers to „break the chains” (Hitchins, 1997, 115) of employers, in the quest of personal or national freedom, while the Romanian worker was overwhelmed by the necessity to find a job for an increased family, generally without any other income than the salary of the head of the family. In this context, although there were Fascist groups in the Interwar Romanian, their influence on the worker's mentality was minimal, as well as the influence of the socialist thinkers, comparing with the vehement actions of syndicates in the rest of Europe. But, comparing Fascist groups with socialist groups in terms of persuasion, the last ones were able to convince the Romanian workers that they could represent their interests in front of the authorities. „Ironically or not, the majority of socialist thinkers were born in a modest family, having their fathers working in a factory or on the field for 12-14hours or even 16hours” (Hitchins, 1997, 117), their personal experience helped the socialists to reach an expanded audience, comparing with the fascists, whose discourse was focused on themes that could not stir the interest of workers in such a degree as the socialists.
Basically, the Romanian fascists argued that the country needed a new social order, based on a correct administration and the respect of Christian values. In practice, Romanians are predominantly Christian, including Orthodox and Catholic adepts, yet the message of the fascist groups could not reach their „deepest desires” (Hitchins, 1997, 119), as the message of the socialists. Concretely, the syndicate and the socialist groups promised the Romanian workers that they would militate for correct labor conditions in the workplace, as well as the correct payment for the labor of each worker. As a worker earned 1,3 – 1, 5 lei per day, the message of the socialists was able to determine him/her pay attention to the potential improved practice created through the agency of syndicates or socialists groups.
Chapter III. Public discourse of Romanian Syndicalism
In this chapter, an objective analysis will be applied on the most significant newspapers and magazines associated with the Romanian syndical movement in the Interwar period. The analysis is based on the framework of the content analysis, as it generates both quantitative and qualitative results.
3.1. Patterns of research
In order to obtain a complete and objective image of the Romanian syndicalism movement, a content analysis will be applied on the magazines selected for the research „Mișcarea socială” („The Social Movement”) and „Munca” („Labor”).
Being both a quantitative and a qualitative research method, the content analysis provides essential data about the frequency and the impact of the researched theme (Krippendorff, 2004, 24). For instance, in the case of research theme of this thesis, the social democratic discourse existing in the Interwar period in Romania, the content analysis could focus on an unique item, such as a newspaper associated with the syndicalism movement, analyzing in a quantitative perspective the number of references towards syndicalism, while in a qualitative perspective, their frequency will be correlated with certain effects as informing the Romanian audience about the existence of the new movement, even manipulation. It is essential for a content analysis to include both aspects, in order to avoid any potential suspicion upon the objectivity of the researcher, as his/her qualitative demarche can be proved through the results obtained through the quantitative analysis of the theme (Agabrian, 2006, 10).
On the quantitative level of the content analysis, keywords associated with the syndicalism, such as „syndicate”, „worker”, „movement”, „justice”, „rights” will be retrieved in the texts analyzed and encapsulated into tables or graphics, suggesting their frequency.
Based on the results obtained through the quantitative analysis, the researcher can associate them with previous or current knowledge, in order to suggest a new perspective on the theme researched. In our case, we will apply a comparative analysis on the qualitative level, comparing the results obtained in „Mișcarea socială” with the results obtained in „Munca”, in order to suggest the impact of syndicalism for each newspaper, as well as its approach, while informing readers about the new movement.
The selection of newspapers and magazines as a unit of research is based on Keith Hitchins' argument that print press in the Interwar period was used by parties as a „weapon” (Hitchins, 1997, 134). Socialist parties and syndicates created newspapers or influenced the editorial direction of existing newspapers, in order to promote their cause. In addition to the objective of disseminating political messages, print press also created the advantage of creating and preserving „cohesion among the members of their organizations” (Hitchins, 1997, 134). Generally, the print press was used to inform particular segments of the Romanian population, previously discriminated in terms of free access to education or labor, that there is a new political force able to defend their rights, through public events as strikes (Hitchins, 1997, 134).
Generally, the socialist adepts benefit of the liberal laws regarding freedom of speech and the activity of press, in order to create an impressive number of newspaper and magazines, attempting to reach as possible a larger audience, comparing with competing political organizations. Unlike newspapers influenced by the communist ideology, socialist newspapers tended to adopt a moderate tone, being the „space” (Hitchins, 1997, 134) where public themes were debated, simulating a free dialogue between readers and journalists, whose mission was to force authorities to listen to the readers' suggestions.
Initially, the socialist newspapers and magazines were focused on the necessity to explain the socialist ideology, as well as the need to implement social reforms in the Romanian society. For instance, „Contemporanul” (1881-1891), after Constantin Dobrogeanu-Gherea became its collaborator, started to publish the works of Marx and Engels, as well as articles debating on the necessity to change the existing social and political context in Romania (Hitchins, 1997, 135).
3.2. Results of the research
The major research sources implied for the current research are the national magazines „Mișcarea socială” („The Social Movement”) and „Munca” („Labor”). During our research, we noticed that additional newspapers, based on general themes such as "Românul" included references on the syndicalism, as a consequence a brief analysis on this type of documents will be included, in order to create an objective context of the main research.
For instance, in „Românul” the syndicalism movement became the subject of a play written by Pierre Veber, ironically entitled „Convertirea lui Boulon” (The conversion of Boulon). The main character, Boulon, is a humble police officer with a modest salary, oppressed by wealthy characters as Madame Julia, the representative of the aristocracy. Feeling that he is oppressed, having his salary reduced, forced to work extra hours, Boulon replies to madame Julia that he would search for his justice to the syndicate, respectively the syndicate of police (Românul, 6 April 2014, 22). Noticing the determination of the humble police officer to ask for his rights, Madame Julia, as the voice of the aristocracy, considers he would obtain nothing, the syndicate being unable to force authorities to correct the existing social reality: „Your syndicate! He would wash its hands as Pillat” (Românul, 6 April 2014, 22). Although the text analyzed does not raise questions upon justice similarly to the texts of Ilie Moscovici, it is essential to remark that syndicalism was a current social reality, admitted by the general opinion in the Interwar period.
In the case of the newspapers and magazines engaged in the syndicalism movement as „Mișcarea națională”, the tone of the discourse is different, authors as Ilie Moscovici using a particular rhetoric, in order to engage the readers to support the cause of syndicalism. For example, in the article „În plin progress” (In the middle of the progress), Ilie Moscovici considers that the Romanian society should radically change through a social transformation, based on the workers' ability to support the economic growth, as well the imminent conflict with foreign forces as Germany or Russia (Mișcarea Socială, October 1929, 5).
In terms of quantitative analysis, the accent of the journalist relies on the keyword „workers”, as suggested in Table 1, as Ilie Moscovici considers that the social class of workers is able to change the future of Romania, constantly endangered by powerful external rivals as Germany or Russia.
Table 1. The use of keywords in the article „În plin progress” (Mișcarea Socială, October 1929, 5)
Completing the quantitative analysis with a potential qualitative analysis, based on the intentions of the journalist, the tone of the article suggests that politicians and citizens have to take in account the workers class as a formidable social power in Romanian society, able to surpass its limits as engaged in economic activities, being also able to defend the integrity of the territory. The social-democratic discourse of Ilie Moscovici in the article „În plin progress” is similar to a poem dedicated to workers, in order to encourage them to resist any potential discrimination and ask for their legitimate rights, being the only valuable defenders of Romania:
Diligent workers in peace periods, with your plough you will enrich the country; in times of danger, when you will be asked to draw your swords, you will not tremble. I will not forget that you, the workers on the fields and in factories, actively sweat for the country's prosperity and that your chests is a powerful shield of our freedom (Mișcarea Socială, October 1929, 5)
In addition to the engaging tone of the article, related to the unfortunate condition of the workers in the Romanian society, as well as their potential use in protecting the country, it is essential to notice that the journalist also referred to the peasantry as an essential part of Romania's evolution, able to compete with workers in factories in terms of economic results and patriotism.
In addition, Ilie Moscovici in the article „Lupta de clasă” (Social class clash) urges that workers should not feel frightened by the perspective of fighting for their rights, since the current evolution of European society asks for a rightful division of work and goods, in order that all classes could feel satisfied:
Without doubt, this debate can only end in one of the following strategies: either through public violence, either through the correct distribution of the richness from the wealthy ones to the less wealthy ones, either through the preservation of pauperism and as a consequence the preservation of social turbulence and revolution. It can be also possible that through an increased agricultural production and increased industrial production the Romanian state to be able to offer to the less wealthy ones the missing goods, without brutally gathering them from the wealthy ones (Mișcarea Socială, November 1929, 10)
Table 2. The use of keywords in the article „Lupta de clasă” (Mișcarea Socială, November 1929, 9 – 10)
Unlike the previous article analyzed, in the article „Lupta de clasă” the socialist discourse of Ilie Moscovici increases as intensity and is based through suggestive examples, in order to support his demarche. The socialist thinker mentions that the democratic Romanian state is obliged through its nature to offer a minimal lifestyle to all its citizen, not only the „wealthy ones” (Mișcarea Socială, November 1929, 10). Ilie Moscovici warns the public authorities that the dissatisfaction of workers cannot be refrained for a long time, being required for them to implement the most suitable strategies, in order to avoid „public violence” (Mișcarea Socială, November 1929, 10).
The journalist imagines that the Romanian state can also apply a strategy of equality, by providing goods to the less wealthy collected from the richer social classes. Ilie Moscovici urges that the social change is inevitable, the Romanians state has to react, unless it is interested to leave the nature decide its destiny through an increased agriculture which could provide food to all workers. In the case of the industry activity, any external presence is hardly able to support the efforts of the Romanian state to avoid the socialist demands, as industry is based on the direct labor of workers, its performance being dependent on their number and their motivation to work harder, in order to surpass the existing results. Globally, the selected fragment is suggestive for the tone of the socialist journalist, attempting to convince workers that they have to unite their efforts, in order to convince the authorities of the correctness of their intentions.
Comparing with the previous article, in the article „Lupta de clasă” keywords as „future”, „country” or „change” are replaced with new keywords suggesting the change of perspective for Ilie Moscovici, such as „fight”, „class” or „rights”. The article „În plin progress” can be considered the general opening of „Mișcarea Socială”, as Ilie Moscovici theoretically describes the importance of socialism in Europe and why Romania has to synchronize to its values, while in the article „Lupta de clasă”, the journalist focuses on the effective Romanian context, suggesting the lack of food or daily products among workers, comparing with the wealthy ones and the necessity of the Romania state to provide a balanced distribution of goods, in order to avoid potential public acts as a socialist revolution. The tone of Ilie Moscovici is a moderate one, although the theme he describes is a delicate one, affecting millions of workers, insisting on a democratic solution of the problem he exposed, in order to prevent the scenario of „social turbulence” (Mișcarea Socială, November 1929, 10).
In the article „Transformarea socială” (Social Transformation), Ilie Moscovici insists once again on the necessity to implement equality public strategies and proposes the democratic forces in Romania to consider the socialist position in terms of efficiency:
If it is not correct that the rich one to be robbed, it is not either correct for the lower social classes to be pauper. They have the right to receive a MINIMAL decent lifestyle (food, home, clothing, a correctly paid labor).
Friends of freedom, justice and social order, do reflect on the unbreakable justification of this affirmation:
There cannot be individual freedom, nor justice, nor order without a MINIMAL decent lifestyle assured to the people (Mișcarea Socială, December 1929, 24)
Comparing with the previous articles, the tone of Ilie Moscovici in the article „Transformarea socială” is vehement, the journalist asks for an immediate change in the Romania society, does not recommend anymore to public authorities that the socialist movement has to be taken into account as a reliable democratic force. Ilie Moscovici bases his argumentation on a logic framework, asking whether the Romanian society can survive without the liberal rights as „individual freedom”, „justice” or „order” (Mișcarea Socială, December 1929, 24). Knowing that it is impossible for a democratic state to continue in the absence of freedom, Ilie Moscovici considers that the Romanian state has to assimilate the socialist recommendations, in order to be effectively democratic for all its citizens, including the workers.
Table 3. The use of keywords in the article „Transformarea socială” (Mișcarea Socială, December 1929, 24)
In terms of keywords used, the article „Transformarea socială” repeats the expression „minimal lifestyle”, as the journalist highlights it with capital letters, in order to be visible to the readers, as the major idea of the text. In addition to this central keyword, the text also includes keywords that are frequent in other texts of Ilie Moscovici as „class” or „rich”, as well as new concepts such as „freedom” (Mișcarea Socială, December 1929, 24).
Unlike other texts written by Ilie Moscovici, in the article „Transformarea socială”, the journalist explains his ideas with a suite of details, as in the case of the concept „ MINIMAL decent lifestyle (food, home, clothing, a correctly paid labor)” (Mișcarea Socială, December 1929, 24), while in the previous texts he simply pointed that the Romanian state has to accept the socialist urges. The minimal demand of the workers is as common as the expectation of the richer classes, they only require enough food and clothing, a decent place to live, as well as the correct payment for their work. The untold argumentation of the journalist, implicitly understood from the text, is that if the Romanian state grants their decent rights, it will in fact respect its democratic structure.
In the article „Putea să fie democrație” (It could have been democracy), the above mentioned reasoning is continued, the main idea of the Ilie Moscovici is that the Romanian state could have been a genuinely democratic, if it were to accept the socialist movement. The journalist points the potential benefit of socialism, in order to determine the authorities understand its efficiency:
To reunite FAMILIES unequal as richness and as other aspects; to determine youth, adults and elders of all gender to work
To associate all these diverse individuals in capital, work and gift
To associate capitals in different areas as agriculture, commerce, industry production, in order to transform values into MONEY
To find a proportional method of distribution, so that every individual could be satisfied, both men or women, as well as youth („Mișcarea socială”, January 1930, 33)
In terms of keywords' analysis, the article „Putea să fie democrație” suggests a different perspective of Ilie Moscovici's socialist position: instead of focusing on the correct distribution of goods, although it is mentioned in the article but as a secondary theme, the thinker considers that the association is the key to solve the problems of the Romanian society. He insists that individuals has to associate „in capital, work and gift” („Mișcarea socială”, January 1930, 33), in order to provide improved results, that will be reflected in improved incomes.
Similarly to the previous article, the journalist uses the capital letters in order to highlight the importance of his idea, the fact that the hard work in all economic activities has to be associated with „MONEY” („Mișcarea socială”, January 1930, 33), which will support the personal projects of individuals of creating themselves a decent lifestyle. In addition, Ilie Moscovici adds that all categories on the labor market has to be treated equally, including men and women, known that women are considered less able than men to perform certain activities, as well as the elders and the youth, being present a prejudice considering that the elders cannot work as efficient as the youth, which can be cancelled in a similar way as the prejudice related to the work of men and the labor of women. Through a decent treatment, the journalist considers that all social categories, despite their gender or age, will be encourage to work and as a consequence, to improve the general lifestyle in Romania, insisting on the necessity to offer free access to labor market, in order to fulfill this objective.
The idea of equal distribution of goods is not omitted by Ilie Moscovici, preserving the tone in the previous articles, yet he considers that the Romanian society has to find a suitable system of system, without detailing how it should be implemented, in order to satisfy the needs of all social categories existing on the labor market.
On the level of the keywords used by the journalist, the article „Putea să fie democrație” includes new keywords as „to associate” or „capitals”, as well as „diversity” (Mișcarea Socială, December 1930, 33). The keywords reflect a new perspective of the journalist, he insists on the concept of „diversity”, as both men and women, as well as youth and elders have to work, in order to provide a decent lifestyle to themselves or to their families, additionally to support the positive economic evolution of Romanian among other European economies.
In addition, the keywords „to reunite” and „to associate” (Mișcarea Socială, December 1930, 33) indicate the intentions of the journalist to promote the association into syndicates, so that the interest of the workers could be better represented and defended, against any potential abuses.
Table 4. The use of keywords in the article „Putea să fie democrație” (Mișcarea Socială, December 1930, 33)
Comparing with the previous articles analyzed so far, the article „Putea să fie democrație” (Mișcarea Socială, December 1930, 33) provides a different perspective of Ilie Moscovici, focusing on extremely particular themes of the socialist discourse as the necessity to associate into syndicate, while in the previous texts he debated on general frameworks as the necessity to assure a decent lifestyle to workers.
Analyzing the impact of the local social – democracy, Ilie Moscovici considers that it is a historic mission to be assumed, as noticed in the article „Rolul nostru” (Our Role):
The activity of the social – democracy is logic and necessary, as it does not only include the urge to organize public protests, but to effectively prepare the workers for all historic events, little or major, that could occur. As the workers are sleeping, they cannot react through an unique, powerful will to reject any injustice (Mișcarea socială, March 1931, 15).
The journalist considers that in the absence of the socialist groups, the workers are defenseless in the social life, as there are no individuals or groups able to protect their interests. Ilie Moscovici also advances the idea that socialist groups might disappear, but their role as stimulating the emancipation of the workers will continue to produce effects, workers being informed about their rights, as a consequence susceptible to start defending them, as socialist parties might exist anymore:
Table 5. The use of keywords in the article „Putea să fie democrație” (Mișcarea Socială, December 1930, 33)
The keywords used by the journalist as „history”, „sleep” or „will” suggest his intention to determine Romanian workers to react against any form of injustice they might experience.
In the case of Constantin-Titel Petrescu, its presence in the socialist newspapers is reduced, comparing with the effervescent style of Ilie Moscovici as pointed so far. Constantin-Titel Petrescu wrote in „Munca”, in the article „Muncitorii noștri industriali” (Our workers in industry) describing the unfortunate situation of the Romanian workers after the War of Independence. His tone is temperate, gently seeking to improve the conditions of the workers, by asking authorities to react to the changes existing in the Romanian society:
The War prompted many losses of our administration, as well as our organization. Our leaders, usually neglecting the situation of the population, recommended us to silently accept the difficult times…
Yet, the bloody war opened our eyes and made us understand the answers for the questions we had in the past, as they remained unsolved, creating the dissatisfaction of the population (…)
Without a proper capital, without the required energy, we do not have at this moment a proper industry, able to support the national interests. We are selling the hard labor of our workers to the exclusively foreign interests of outsider companies! (Munca, April 1890, 52).
The idea of the Constantin-Titel Petrescu is that the Romanian authorities adopted an erroneous economic strategy, by allowing the presence of numerous foreign companies on the local market, when in a difficult period, as that after war, a more restrictive national strategy was required. In practice, the war caused human and economic loss to a national economy, already tributary to the hegemonic powers in the area as Turkey or Russia, as a consequence Romania should focus on its own economic potential, including the respect of workers' rights, in order to surpass the crisis period after the Independence war.
Although the war was a dramatic experience, Constantin-Titel Petrescu considers that it was the required experience to determine the Romanians understand that the current political class does not represent any more their interests.
Table 6. The use of keywords in the article „ Muncitorii noștri industriali” (Munca, April 1890, 52)
Comparing the style of Constantin-Titel Petrescu with Ilie Moscovici, it is noticeable the tendency of the first socialist thinkers to create simple phrases with reduced keywords, Constantin-Title Petrescu is not interested in creating rhetoric effects as Ilie Moscovici, but to have his message reaching the maximal audience of workers, in order to inform them that their interests are protected by a particular group, as his party. In the case of the article analyzed, „Muncitorii noștri industriali”, the keyword „population” (Munca, April 1890, 52) is the most frequent, suggesting the intentions of the journalist to address his message to the most silent part of the Romanian community, the population including workers, farmers or students, whose presence on the public sphere is not as visible as the deeds of the politicians. Similarly to Ilie Moscovici, Constantin Titel-Petrescu uses keywords as „capital” or „workers” to express the most frequent socialist themes in the contemporary socialist discourse, yet Titel-Petrescu's use is reduced, compared with the repetition of keywords noticed in the cased of Ilie Moscovici's texts.
In the article „Misiunea socialismului român” (The mission of the Romanian socialism), Constantin-Titel Petrescu explains the basis of the new political movement, in order to inform the Romanian population about the potential defenders of their cause:
The socialist group has a colossal mission: that of enlightening the workers from cities and villages upon their status, to organize the people around practical requests fulfilling its interests, in order to improve its current condition (…)
Here is a list of political and economical requests, that after our opinion, could form the program of the socialist party in România.
1. universal and direct vote, so that every citizen reaching the age of 20 years could vote
2. the necessity to assure a permanent military force
3. local autonomy
4. freedom for press, individual meeting and associations
5. free education for all students
6. the popular elections of judges, as well as free access to trials
7. women's equality in rights with men (Munca, May 1896, 33-34)
Comparing the perspective of the socialist thinker with the text of the Constitution established in the 1923, it is obvious that the King of Romania, as the leader of the country, analyzed the efficiency of the socialist demands and included in the supreme legal text. Yet, the majority of the socialist demands were similar to the liberal position in the period, with the exception of equal treatment between men and women, as well as the free access to education and justice, as a consequence the socialist request could be easily assimilated with the historic party's political program. Despite this counterargument, it is noticeable that the socialist adepts in the Interwar period were interested in improving the lifestyle of all social categories, not only the workers as their main focus, being one of the democratic forces existing in the Romanian society.
In terms of the frequency of the keywords used, the article „Misiunea socialismului român” includes several political concepts, pointed at least once by the author, in order to become visible for the readers, as follows:
Table 7. The use of keywords in the article „Misiunea socialismului român” (Munca, May 1896, 33-34)
As noticed from the table above, the socialist discourse proposes freedom as the main concept, the keyword being mentioned once, as well as in the case of the adjectives „free” (Munca, May 1896, 33-34), mentioned twice, for the correct educational system, the required freedom for press, in order to correctly inform the Romanian, as well as the free access to justice for every citizen interested in defending his/her rights, but unable to do it, based on the taxes perceived for trials. Similarly to the articles analyzed so far, in the article „Misiunea socialismului român” the journalist mentions his ideas about the status of the Romanian workers and the mission assumed by the socialist groups, yet it is essential to reveal the use of a particular keyword „enlightening”. Basically, the journalist considers that the socialist discourse is able to open a new perspective for the Romanians, as susceptible to ask for their rights as any other population in the Europe.
In the article „Muncitorul (The Worker)”, Constantin – Titel Petrescu also mentions the necessity of Romanian workers to take position in front of the traditional discrimination performed in the society between the rich and poor members:
Workers!
Two sides exist on this world, in an antagonistic relation: the rich ones and the workers.
The worker works hard a lifetime, on heat and on cold, in the rain and the snow, always hungry and refrained from the world's richness
The rich ones are like an old lady, capricious, beautifully dressed and perfumed, considering that work is shameful, while the hunger and coldness is only a story!
Some work all their lives and die, living as heritage their pauperism!
Others are born as rich, living their lives without any worry related to domestic needs, living as heritage their wealthiness! („Munca”, May 1903, 45).
Table 8. The use of keywords in the article „Muncitorul” (Munca, May 1903, 45)
In the article „Muncitorul”, the journalist focuses on the preservation of traditional discrimination between the rich persons and the workers, considered poor in contemporary society. The journalist implicitly suggest that the worker though his/her constant effort, in difficult conditions as the absence of food or the necessity to work in harsh environment, is able to support the richness of the wealthiest persons. Instead of respecting the effort of the workers, the wealthy class is criticized for its capricious mood, being compared with „an old lady” (Munca, May 1903, 45), having no respect for the labor that indirectly assures her current objects or services. In order to create a persuasion effect, to mobilize workers or adepts of the socialist concept, the journalist mentions the vivid image of death as unable to correct the lifetime discrimination, as a consequence the workers end their lives in the same poor condition, while the death of the rich ones is associated with their constant richness.
Analyzing the keywords of the fragment, it is essential the focus of the journalist on the word „rich” retrieved in the „rich ones”, „richness” or „wealthiness”. Using this keyword, Constantin – Titel Petrescu suggests that the rich class of the Romania society benefits of a comfortable status, comparing with the workers, forced to perform labor, in order to survive both as individuals and as members of their communities. Although the idea of family is not mentioned, it is indirectly understood as the journalist mentions that workers die as poor persons, offering as heritage their difficult condition, while in the case of the wealthy persons, death is associated with the preservation of financial or social advantages, the members of the family are not forced to think about their future, being already assured by their social status. Using the keyword „hunger”, the journalist creates a dramatic image, able to suggest the true condition of the worker, unable to correctly feed, as his/her work is underpaid and consequently, unable to offer a decent lifestyle to his/her family. A similar keyword, creating stylistic effects, in order to persuade the audience, is „weather” retrieved as „rain”, „snow” or „coldness”. The intention of the journalist is to point that the labor supporting the richness of some people is performed in severe conditions, without any concern about the status of the workers. They work during rain or snow, facing the difficult weather, in order to gain the revenues needed for themselves or their families. Although the wealthy class is aware about these efforts, the labor condition has not changed, being requested the intervention of the socialist groups, in order to correct the injustice.
Another fragment of the article „Muncitorul (The Worker)” highlights the dissimilarities between the historic parties existing in Romania. The liberals and the conservatives were constantly interested to preserve their benefits, as in Romania they represented the major political forces, creating a particular rotation as reaching the political power in state, neglecting the interests of workers, the social class supporting the evolution itself of Romania:
The Liberal Party, which leads Romania for so many years has become one of the most powerful parties, based on the labor of workers on fields and works in factories or workshops. The liberals affirmed they defend the rights of workers only to end the leadership of the old aristocracy. For instance, the liberals created some laws officially allowing the workers to compare themselves with the aristocracy, as the right to freely associate, the right to freely communicate their ideas. But in practice, these rights are only mentioned on the paper, as in different counties the bureaucrats prevent the workers to form associations or to ask the fulfillment of their rights.
The Conservative Party is represented by the members of the aristocracy, the old owners of fields.
These landlords aim to kneel even more the workers in agriculture, to transform them into dependent servants of their farms
The conservatives argued that Friday and Saturday should not be free days for the workers on the fields, as the liberals established, considering that the agricultural workers have the right to work on their personal fields too during these days, excepting the period of work on the fields of the rich aristocracy
The conservatives argue that currently workers are granted too many rights and the electoral law offers the political power to unworthy people …
The Radical Party of Gh. Panu is insignificant in Romania, as the leader performed the error of creating a union with the conservatives, supporting the old aristocracy. Although the radicals attempt to persuade the workers, they have to be as far as possible from the glittering slavery, as the radicals and the conservatives promise to offer the economic dependence of workers to landlords or owners of factories, as well as pauperism.
The Workers' Party. Excepting the three parties of the rich ones, there is also the party of workers in Romania, the socialist party.
The Workers' Party exclusively defends the interests of the workers of all economic areas.
The socialist cause is new in our country and now, through the electoral fight, it is determined to raise its flag and call the workers to join the cause, in order to win their right for freedom.
The electoral program of the socialist party includes the formation of syndicates and representative groups both in towns and in villages. The syndicates, as collaborating with internal and external similar groups, will fight to reach the local institutions, as well as the Parliament, in order to legally fulfill the rights of the workers (Munca, May 1903, 45)
The fragment mentioned is essential as the image of the political forces existing in Romania in the Interwar period, including the socialists. As the text it is written by a socialist thinker, his personal position is obvious, Constantin – Titel Petrescu directly considering that the socialist groups are the best political option for workers asked to vote for their future (Munca, May 1903, 45).
The journalist creates his persuasive discourse, by pointing the disadvantages of the rival political forces. The most notable ones, the liberals, since they had a constant leadership in Romanian politics, are considered unable to defend the interests of all workers, including workers on the fields or in factories. The journalist considers that the liberals only create a false political discourse, since they are officially interested to support the cause of the workers, in order to obtain an advantage over their political rivals, the conservatives. As a consequence, the legal improvements created such as „the right to freely associate, the right to freely communicate their ideas” (Munca, May 1903, 45) are in fact beneficial to the liberals and not to workers. The implicit message of the journalist, as the representative of a political party, is that in order to correct this situation, the voters have the opportunity to change it, by offering their vote to the rightful political group, truly interested in defending their rights.
A similar disappointed perspective is reflected in the case of the conservatives. As the traditional counterparts of the liberals, the conservatives are in fact tributary to the old political regime, dominated by aristocracy. If the liberals granted several rights to the workers, the journalist considers that the conservatives are in fact interested not to offer any legal improvement to them, listening to the landlords' requests of forcing the workers to continue being "dependent servants of their farms" (Munca, May 1903, 45). A suggestive example is the conservative denial of a liberal legal measure: the right of agricultural workers to works on their fields during Friday and Saturday. In the case of the conservative perspective, the workers obtained too many rights such as allowance already mentioned, which is likely affect the positive evolution, although it is not mentioned by the aristocracy how two days could pauperize the landlord. Another denial of the conservatives is related to the grant of the right to vote to multiple social categories, including workers, as the Romania attempted to impose a modern vote system, similar to the European model in the period. The conservatives considered the workers „unworthy” (Munca, May 1903, 45) to vote, as they were likely to offer their vote to parties as the socialist ones, promising to defend their rights, instead of the traditional parties, including the conservative one.
The political analysis of the journalist includes a third party existing in the period, which is considered less important than the previous ones, since it renounced to its political identity, in order to form an alliance with the conservatives. The radicals were also interested in the workers as a voting category that they had to persuade, but they proved, through their political decision, to be the supporters of the „glittering slavery” (Munca, May 1903, 45) created by the aristocracy, as a consequence they cannot be effectively trusted by workers, as the journalist indirectly mentions to his readers. In addition to the idea of slavery as the preservation of the old social status, the journalist considers that voting the radicals and the conservatives will only bring to the workers a more difficult condition marked by „pauperism” (Munca, May 1903, 45).
As none of the political forces analyzed is truly worthy to represent the interests of the workers, the journalist prompts the concepts of the socialist party he represents as the salvation to the current situation. The argumentation supporting the article denotes the political intentions of the journalist to persuade the readers to vote for a particular party, debuting with the presentation of the negative deeds of the rivals and ending with the positive projects of the party which deserves to be voted.
According to Constantin – Titel Petrescu, the Workers' Party, is the only reliable defender of the workers, including both the workers in the villages, as well as in the cities. The mention is essential, as the other parties tend to focus on one category, either the workers in agriculture or the workers in the factories, omitting the necessities of the other ones. The journalist considers that a genuine socialist perspective includes both sides, equally needing the protection of the authorities. The socialist thinker admits that socialism was a new social and political reality in Romania, yet he is confident that in a short time it will manage to become visible for its audience, the workers, as well as other social categories. According to the journalist, the socialist party is different to any other political group in Romania, as it promotes „freedom” (Munca, May 1903, 45), while the conservatives are interested in preserving the rights of the aristocracy and the liberals adopted a dual position, implementing some rights for the workers, but in such a degree that it does not perturb the status quo of the aristocracy.
In order to finally correct the historic errors in Romanian politics, the socialist party proposes a political program focused on the creation of syndicates. As indicated in the studies researched for this thesis, syndicates are the basis of the socialist movement, being the social groups defending the rights of workers inside a factory or workshop, tending to become political groups, claiming to the authorities the protection of workers' rights. A particular idea mentioned by the journalist is the necessity of syndicates to collaborate, in order to share their expertise and create efficient strategies for their members. Romanian syndicates should collaborate intensively with similar European organizations, in order to use their example as good practice to be implemented in the Romanian context. The journalist also adds that it is not sufficient for workers or syndicates to promote the socialist ideas only on a micro level as the local community, being required to step towards a macro level, the Parliament and other national institutions, so that a socialist improvement could be applied on a national scale, to improve the conditions of an increasing number of workers (Munca, May 1903, 45).
The keywords used by the journalist in the fragment are multiple, as the text revealed numerous details about the political performance in Romania. Generally, there are keywords associated with each political force as the „liberals”, the „conservatives”, the „radicals” and the „socialists”. A particular keyword is the „aristocracy”, which is not particularly associated with a political group, but is revealed by the journalist as influencing the conservatives and partially the liberals into adopting legal measure that limit the rights of the workers.
Table 9. The use of keywords in the article „Muncitorul” (Munca, May 1903, 45)
In the case of the keywords retrieved in the article „Muncitorul”, a general framework based on the similarities between keywords was applied. For instance, the keyword „land owing” includes keywords as „landlords”, „farms” or „agriculture”, in order to direct the research to the main idea, to reveal the impact of the old aristocracy, being the land of numerous lands and forcing the agricultural workers to accept its desires, despite their natural rights as not working during Friday and Saturday or asking a correct payment for the labor fulfilled on the landlord's farm. A similar situation can be noticed in the case of the keyword „law” including both the civil rights of the workers as having two free days per week, but also the electoral rights as having the right to vote. In the case of the keywords „dependence” and „slavery”, it was preferred a divided perspective, although they apparently suggest the same reality, the fact that the workers were indirectly force to accept the conditions imposed by the aristocracy. In fact, by mentioning that the workers on fields are still dependent to their landlords, the position of the journalist is moderate, while mentioning the „glittering slavery” (Munca, May 1903, 45), it is noticeable the revolt of the journalist against the discrimination performed against workers.
The frequency of the keywords mentioned suggest the opinion of the journalist, as criticizing the existing political parties, in order to impose as credible the party he represents. The most used keywords are „workers”, „rights” and „land owing”, suggesting that the major political influence of the aristocracy limits the rights of the workers in Romania. Additionally, the journalist frequently uses the keywords „law”, „syndicates”, „fight” or „institutions”, in order to suggest that the rights of the workers have to be mentioned in a legal context, in order to be respected, such as the institutions. In order to achieve an essential legal improvement, it is required for the syndicates to mobilize their efforts and demonstrate to workers that through a constant fight with the existing injustice, it is possible to positively alter their situation (Munca, May 1903, 45)
In the article „Social-democrația română” (Romanian social – democracy), Constantin – Titel Petrescu analyzes the features of the Romanian use of socialist ideas, comparing with the European model:
The Romanian social – democracy, as the social – democracy of the entire world fights for the total emancipation of the workers, including the economical, political, intellectual freedom of the workers.
Similarly to the European social – democracy, the Romanian social – democracy expands its fight, it is not only the injustice on the Romanian workers that it intends to correct, it is also any incorrect deed in the Romanian society (Munca, February 1904, 14)
The article „Social-democrația română” focuses on the need of the local social-democracy to express a complementary direction to the European approach, in order to legitimate its own perspective. The journalist considers that the socialists are the elements in a society such as the Romanian one able to „fight for the total emancipation of the workers” (Munca, February 1904, 14). Although it is based on the protection of the workers' rights, the journalist considers that socialism has to focus also on other social categories needing to be defended in the case of any injustice occurring in the society.
The keywords used by the journalist reveal his intention of comparing the local socialism with the European one, as he constantly use references to „Romania”, „Europe”.
Table 10. The use of keywords in the article „ Social-democrația română” (Munca, May 1903, 45)
Despite the feature of the socialism, as local or European, the journalist considers that has to be an universal concept, applied for additional social categories, willing to obtain their „emancipation” (Munca, February 1904, 14).
3.3. Potential developments of the research
As retrieved so far, the socialist discourse in the Interwar Romania was a democratic one. The journalists analyzed, who were also the leaders of essential socialist groups in Romania recommended workers to unite into syndicates, in order to be directly represented and supported in the case of abuses.
Similarly to other socialist thinkers, they express their revolt against the improper labor condition of workers or the incorrect underpayment, but their position respected the democratic context of the Romanian society. In none of their texts, Ilie Moscovici or Constantin Titel-Petrescu used a violent discourse towards their rivals, as in the case of the communist leaders, as mentioned in a common article in March 1939, in „Scânteia”, the most popular communist newspaper: „Off with the fascist traitors! Off with the capitalists! Off with the ones hiding the danger” (Jurca, 1987, 175). Commonly, the socialists as Ilie Moscovici and Constantin Titel-Petrescu could not be satisfied by the liberal or conservative regime, succeeding to the government, yet they did not implement reliable reforms to improve the status of the workers, yet their discourse is moderate, respecting the integrity of their rivals, focused on arguments to suggest the efficiency of socialism.
In addition to the socialist thinkers analyzed in this thesis, an additional research could include the work of Teodor Diamant, one of the early socialists in Romania, whose discourse is based on the encouragement of local intellectuals to adopt the new political movement, in order to prove their patriotism to their country (Jurca, 1987, 86). The research could create a comparative analysis between a socialist adept as Teodor Diamant and a marxist one, as Constantin Dobrogeanu-Gherea, in order to present the potential differences or similarities between the two perspectives focusing on the rights of workers.
In this chapter, several texts written by Ilie Moscovici and Constantin – Titel Petrescu were analyzed on a quantitative and qualitative level, in order to express their socialist ideas. Generally, the socialist thinkers in their role as journalists militate for the protection of the workers' right, insisting on the necessity to form particular groups as the syndicates or the political parties, able to represent their interests. Workers are constantly represented as poor, forced to work in improper conditions, while the other social classes, especially the aristocracy, is suggested as being rich based on the difficult efforts of the workers.
Conclusion
The thesis „Syndicalism and Social Policies in Interwar Romania: The Social Democratic Discourse” aimed to objectively present the socialist discourse in the Interwar period in Romanian.
In order to create a reliable framework of the research, the current literature was reviewed, focusing on the concept of syndicalism. The communist period in Romanian history was excluded, analyzing the Interwar period, in order to reveal the unaltered version of the socialist approach in Romania, as the Communist Party used the socialist concepts, in order to justify its intentions of obtaining and preserving the political power into an autocratic regime. In order to obtain an objective perspective of the socialist movement in Romanian, the thesis used both external and internal sources of documentation, such as the studies of Keith Hitchins or Mircea Stănescu.
The personal approach proposed relies on the content analysis applied to two major newspapers influenced by Interwar socialism: „Mișcarea socială” (The Social Movement) and „Munca” (The Labor). As their titles indicate, the newspapers' orientation is socialists, benefiting of the support of two essential socialist thinkers, Ilie Moscovici and Constantin – Titel Petrescu.
The research method selected included both quantitative details such as the frequency of certain keywords used to mobilize the audience, as well as qualitative aspects such as the stylistic effects created by the journalist, in order to persuade his readers.
Since the Interwar socialism is currently associated with a reduced literature, the research included in this thesis can be used as the basis of new studies, including additional socialist newspapers or disseminating documents as brochures. It is essential to reveal the socialist discourse of minor socialist thinkers, excluding Ilie Moscovici and Constantin – Titel Petreschu, who also leaded political groups.
As noticed from the texts analyzed, Ilie Moscovici tends to develop a more intense discourse, comparing with Constantin – Titel Petrescu, as the first socialist thinker uses vivid images or words, to describe the difficult condition of the workers and as a consequence to justify the necessity for a political force as the socialists to impose a new regime. In addition, there are texts of Constantin – Titel Petrescu, which suggest a similar style, as criticizing liberals for defending the old aristocray, instead of the workers, yet the second socialist thinkers tend to adopt a more moderate position in the Interwar socialist discourse. In addition, Ilie Moscovici reveals in his texts that the evolution of Romania reached the point of the final decision regarding the situation of workers, since it was impossible for the political parties as the liberals or the conservatives to deny the existence of the workers and the necessity to respect their rights. The socialist thinker bases his demarche on the European transformation, as syndicates tended to become more visible as a political force, able to determine voters or simple adepts to support their cause. In the case of continuing the existing injustice, Ilie Moscovici warns about the possibility of transforming Romania into a country of constant revolts, eventually brutal actions. Unlike the communists, the socialists' efforts preserved the democratic context of imposing their cause, their projects being peacefully implemented.
Generally, the articles of the two socialist adepts focus on the problems affecting the workers, such as the reduced rights or the incorrect implementation of the existing rights, but during the research unique documents as the electoral support of the socialists were retrieved. For instance, Constantin – Titel Petrescu analyzes the activity of the rival parties, the liberals and the conservatives, attempting to persuade his audience that a socialist party is the solution to improve the existing situation in Romania: the hegemony of landlords on the agriculture, as the improper conditions in factories.
In practice, as writing for the two newspapers, the two journalists combined their social roles, being both socialists and editors, as their texts attempt to persuade the audience that it was necessary to mobilize, in order to defend the rights of the workers. As mentioned by Ilie Moscovici in one of his texts, the workers did not ask for a dramatic change of the Romanian society, similarly to the Russian Revolution, but for the normal improvement of their conditions, including a decent wage, as well as a minimal protection in their workplace.
Globally, the thesis „Syndicalism and Social Policies in Interwar Romania: The Social Democratic Discourse” succeeded in presenting an objective image of the Interwar socialist discourse in Romania, being susceptible to be completed by further studies.
Annexes
A. Fragment from Constantin-Titel Petrescu's work (Munca, April 1890, 52)
B. Fragment from Ilie Moscovici's work (Mișcarea Socială, December 1929, 24)
Bibliography:
Agabrian, Mircea (2006), Analiza de conținut, Editura Polirom, Iași.
Atkin, Nicholas; Biddiss, Michael (2010), Themes in Modern European History, 1890-1945, Routledge, London and New York.
Checkland, Sydney (2000), British Public Policy 1776-1939. An Economic, Social and Political Perspective, Longman, Harlow.
Crick, Bernard (1998), Socialismul. Editura Du Style, București.
Cușnir-Mihailovici; Dragne, Florea; Unc, Gheorghe (1982), Mișcarea muncitorească din România 1916-1921, Editura Politică, București.
Downs, Laura Lee (1995), Manufacturing Inequality, Cornell University Press, London and Ithaca.
Hitchins, Keith (1997), Mit și realitate în istoriografia românească, Editura Enciclopedică, București.
Hitchins, Keith (2013), România 1866-1947, Editura Humanitas, București.
Jurca, Nicolae (1978), Mișcarea socialist și social-democrată din România, Editura Litera, București.
Kripendorff, Klaus (2004), Content Analysis. An Introduction to Its Methodology, Sage Publications, London and New York.
„Mișcarea socială”, October 1929, year 1, no. 1.
„Mișcarea socială”, November 1929, year 1, no. 2.
„Mișcarea socială”, December 1929, year 1, no. 3.
„Mișcarea socială”, January 1930, year 1, no. 4.
Mișcarea socială, March 1931, year 2, no. 10.
„Munca”, April 1890, year 3, no. 24.
„Munca”, May 1896, year 9, no. 156.
Munca, May 1903, year 16, no. 194.
Munca, February 1904, year 17, no. 216.
Morgan, Philip (2003), Fascism in Europe 1919-1945, Routledge, London and New York.
Proca, Ovidiu Gherasim (2010), Social-democrația în România pre-comunistă: Geneza mișcării politice socialiste și tema autenticității, în Analele Științifice ale Universității AL. I. Cuza din Iași, tomul V, 23-37.
„Revista Economică”, November 1917, year 9, no 43.
„Românul”, 6 April 1914, year IV, no. 77.
Stănescu, Marin (2002), Stânga politică din România în anii crizei (1929-1933), Editura Mica Valahie, București.
Wade, Rex A. (2005), The Russian Revolution 1917, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
xxx (1966), Documente din istoria mișcării muncitorești din România 1916-1921, Editura Politică, București.
Copyright Notice
© Licențiada.org respectă drepturile de proprietate intelectuală și așteaptă ca toți utilizatorii să facă același lucru. Dacă consideri că un conținut de pe site încalcă drepturile tale de autor, te rugăm să trimiți o notificare DMCA.
Acest articol: Sindicalism And Social Policies In Interwar Romania The Social Democratic Discourse (ID: 155211)
Dacă considerați că acest conținut vă încalcă drepturile de autor, vă rugăm să depuneți o cerere pe pagina noastră Copyright Takedown.