The Threat of Selective Democracy. Popular Dissatisfaction and Exclusionary Strategy of Elites in East Central and Southeastern Europe (original) (raw)
Related papers
The article analyses the dominance of unconventional forms of participation by political players in Central and Eastern Europe on the example of Hungary and Poland. We have observed that mass demonstrations can be organized largely as anniversary events, behind which the political parties occur as initiators and organizers. Moreover, members of political parties founded “grass-roots” organizations to enforce political issues. We will try to answer the question, what led to this situation, which political and societal events are significant in this context? Besides, we focus on implications of such "partisan" alternative forms of political participation for normative understanding of democracy. Classic and contemporary theories of civil society serve as explanatory models.
Competing External Demoi and Differential Enfranchisement: The Case of the 2022 Hungarian Election
Ethnicities, 2023
This analysis of the 2022 Hungarian parliamentary election highlights the phenomenon of competing external demoi, a situation that emerges when an incumbent government differentially enfranchises and mobilizes different external national communities for electoral purposes, thus triggering a competing mobilization of external voters by nonincumbent political actors. Hungarian parliamentary elections have increasingly become battlegrounds between the ethnic Hungarians living in countries neighboring Hungary, who have access to non-resident Hungarian citizenship and the right the vote in Hungarian elections by mail; and Hungarian emigrants in Western Europe who must vote in person at home or at embassies. These differences in voting access and the highly partisan mobilization of these two external demoi came to a head during the 2022 parliamentary election. This article seeks to explain the development of two different sets of external enfranchisement policies within a single case, a variation that is undertheorized in the literature, and uncovers the causes and consequences of the unique structure of external partisan polarization that emerged in the 2022 election. It argues that we must look at Hungary’s competitive authoritarian regime type in the context of “divided nationhood” and the relationship between incumbent hegemony and opposition mobilization in different types of external communities to explain this outcome.
Power and powerlessness of the civil society in Hungarian illiberal democracy between 2010–2022
Politics in Central Europe
In the study we examine the pulling, pushing and pulling back factors and events that influenced civil activism in Hungary between 2010–2022, which was the period of the birth of illiberal democracy in the country. We describe – relying on newspaper reports – the most important events and campaigns in the given period and their effectiveness. In Hungary citizenship activity is at a low level, even within Central-Europe. The viability of civil society is decreasing, especially in terms of financing opportunities, legal environment, image of civil sphere and ability to interest representation. We found that between 2010–2022 the presence of grievances as triggers was constant in the country, while the opportunity structures for action narrowed somewhat, but the illiberal Hungarian system is restrictive and not oppressive. There is a way to protest, to act in a different way, and actions do take place, but it is rarely possible to influence decision-makers - mostly in simple matters th...
Paternalist Populism and Illiberal Elitism in Central Europe
Just before the financial crisis, Ivan Krastev concluded that forces of populism and illiberalism were tearing Central Europe apart. 1 Nationalist populist actors were mobilizing against the 'excesses of postmodern culture, ' the 'collapse of traditional values, ' the 'liberal rationalism embodied by EU institutions, ' 'the unaccountability of the elites' and the 'corrupted elites and morally corrupting "others" such as ethnic or sexual minorities. ' Krastev did not find this phenomenon to be directly dangerous to democracy, for two main reasons. First, because populism-although viciously antiliberal-is not antidemocratic. And, second, because 'there is very little in the way of populist policies. ' 2 His relatively optimistic assessment was in line with those evaluations that acknowledged the potential positive contribution of populist parties and movements. In these studies, 3 populism is considered to be a temporary force, one that undermines sclerotic and collusive party systems, brings new issues to the agenda, removes taboos and after its collapse leaves behind a rejuvenated party system.
From Revolution to ‘Counter-Revolution’: Democracy in Central and Eastern Europe 30 Years On
Europe-Asia Studies, 2020
The essay explains the origin, scope and forms of the anti-liberal surge taking place in Central and Eastern Europe. Why have voters across the region deserted the liberal politicians who managed to secure peace and prosperity on the ashes of communism? Does the erosion of democratic values and institutions lead to autocracy, or something novel? Special attention will be devoted to the issue of order and chaos in the broader European setting. Can order be maintained without shared values across EU member states? The conclusions will point to the variety of hybrid regimes in Central and Eastern Europe and assess their impact. CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE IS AGAIN MAKING HEADLINES, but for very different reasons than was the case in the years following 1989. After years of impressive progress in which communist states were transformed into liberal ones, the region now has taken another turn, this time towards a new version of authoritarian politics. After dismantling the walls dividing states and societies, Central and Eastern Europe is now erecting new walls, albeit in different forms and places. After making enormous efforts to join European institutions, the region is now undermining these institutions. After struggling for the human and civil rights denied by communism, the region now promotes exclusive versions of national and religious communities. The pandemic has only reinforced the authoritarian tendencies in the region, with some of the governments using the emergency powers for their partisan political ends (Martin 2020). At the helm of this 'counter-revolution' against the fruits of the liberal revolutions of 1989 are not old communists trying to regain power but people who were among those who initiated the region's 'return to Europe' three decades earlier; Viktor Orbán and Jarosław Kaczyński are the most prominent among them. The revolutions of 1989 progressed through mass mobilisation and negotiation; the counter-revolution currently taking place is being forged through the ballot box. Populist politicians do not organise strikes or build barricades: they simply win elections. The revolutions of 1989 caused disruption and economic pain, whilst the current counter-revolution can pride itself on enjoying economic growth. The revolutions of 1989 were about 'catching up' with Europe, sometimes in demeaning conditions. The current counter-revolution is about restoring local pride and
Informal Exercise of Power: Undermining Democracy Under the EU's Radar in Hungary and Poland
2022
Hungary and Poland have seen the most widespread erosion of democracy in the European Union since Fidesz and Law and Justice started their authoritarian remaking in 2010 and 2015, respectively. Despite the EU's introduction of various doctrinal innovations, it could not force these regimes to comply with the core values of the EU. While the literature has focused on the formal violation of the rule of law, the links between informal power and the limited constraining role of the EU have remained undertheorized. This article aims to fill the gap by studying the informal exercise power of the Fidesz and PiS governments that helped them to create an uneven political playing field. Connecting the literature on hybrid authoritarian regimes and informality, it will be shown through three main domains how the Hungarian and Polish governments (1) distributed informal political-economic decisionmaking power informally throughout clientelist corruption, (2) captured the media through loyal oligarchs/allies, and (3) employed electoral clientelism to tilt the electoral playing field in their favor. While the study proposes a theoretical framework related to the Hungarian and Polish examples, it is also a warning for the EU to take the informal exercise of power seriously.
Democracy Towards Authoritarianism Under Illiberal Populist Leaders in Hungary and Poland
Central and Eastern European Review
A quarter of a century ago, the Soviet Union dissolved and the Cold War ended. Now the current political era involves a broad challenge to liberal democracy in the European Union. Central European countries such as the Czech Republic, Hungary, the Republic of Poland, and the Slovak Republic (‘the Visegrád Group’) joined the EU in 2004 with the hope that the post-Cold War era would be one of peace and stability in Europe, including (most importantly) the expansion of Europe’s democracy. A turning point came in 2014, however, when the Syrian refugee crisis hit the EU and caused a political ‘about face’. The European refugee and migrant crisis have strengthened right-wing populism among the European countries, including the Visegrád group. Obviously there are certainly similarities between the populist rhetoric of Hungary’s ruling party, Fidesz, and the Law and Justice party (known as PiS) which is governing the Republic of Poland. The two countries appear to be following the same path...
Illiberal Democracy in Central Europe
Banatul azi, 2018
With Viktor Orban's triumphant demand, back in 2014, for the abandonment of the liberal model in Central Europe, an entire societal model was called into question, model on the basis of which the post-communist transitions had taken place: the form of societal organization, the role of elites, social dialogue, civil society, the relationship between manipulation and political culture. The superiority of the nation came back to the forefront and from here, the slippages began: exclusivism instead of pluralism, monopoly on the truth, assimilation or exclusion, morality or the cry of the skilfully coordinated majority.