Advertisement

Comparative European Politics

, Volume 12, Issue 6, pp 620–636 | Cite as

The migration myth in the absence of immigrants: How does the conservative right in Hungary and Turkey grapple with immigration?

  • Umut Korkut
Original Article

Abstract

This article shows that the issue of immigration remains very central to understanding notions such as national identity and threats to homogeneity in Turkey and Hungary. Even in the absence of large-scale immigration, conservative socio-political leanings commonly prevail against immigration due to a general aversion of foreignness in societies. In presenting how two conservative right parties grapple with the self-inflicted problem of immigration, this article advocates that political parties usurp prevalent fears among their voters.

Keywords

Turkey Hungary political conservatism migration political parties 

References

  1. Ábrahám, A. (2013) Vízumot érnek a magyar kötvények (12 April), http://nol.hu/gazdasag/20130412vizumot_ernek_a_magyar_kotvenyek?ref=sso, accessed 10 July 2013.
  2. Aktürk, Ş. (2011) Regimes of ethnicity: Comparative analysis of Germany, the Soviet Union/Post-Soviet Russia, and Turkey. World Politics 63 (1): 115–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asylum and Migration Legislation (2005) Ankara.Google Scholar
  4. Briefing on International Migratory Movements from Turkey (2009) Mirekoc Policy Briefing, no: 2.Google Scholar
  5. Briefing on Migration and Asylum Seeking Movements to Turkey and Relevant Policies (2009) Mirekoc Policy Briefing, no: 1.Google Scholar
  6. Bozóki, A. (2010) Diversity and the European Public Sphere Eurosphere Country Reports no.14, http://eurospheres.org/files/2010/06/Hungary.pdf, accessed 29 November 2012.
  7. Császár, I. (2012) Stealthy restriction: Abortion discourse and the new constitution in Hungary. M.A. Dissertation submitted to Central European University, Budapest, http://www.etd.ceu.hu/2012/csaszar_ivett.pdf.
  8. Eslen-Ziya, H. and Korkut, U. (2013) Domestic work, gender and migration in Turkey: Legal framework enabling social reality. In: U. Korkut, G. Bucken-Knapp, A. McGarry, J. Hinnfors and H. Drake (eds.) The Politics and Discourses of Migration in Europe. New York: Palgrave/Europe in Transition: The NYU European Studies Series, pp. 37–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fait, N. (2013) African migrations toward Turkey: Beyond the stepping stone. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi 68 (1): 21–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fox, J., Vidra, Zs. and Horvath, A. (2010) Tolerance and Cultural Diversity Discourses in Hungary. San Domenico di Fiesole, Italy: Centre for the Study of Ethnicity and Citizenship, European University Institute, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies.Google Scholar
  11. Hárs, Á. (2009) Immigration countries in Central and Eastern Europe. The Case of Hungary. Idea Working Papers No.12, May, http://www.idea6fp.uw.edu.pl/pliki/WP12_Hungary.pdf, accessed 2 June 2012.
  12. Hlavac, M. (2011) Political ideology and individual-level attitudes towards immigration in the European Union: Evidence from the European Values Study, 2008/2009. MA thesis, Georgetown University. Washington DC.Google Scholar
  13. Horváth, A., Vidra, Zs. and Fox, J. (2011) Tolerance and Cultural Diversity Discourses in Hungary. Policy Research Reports. Budapest: Center for Policy Studies, http://cps.ceu.hu/publications/policy-research-reports/tolerance-and-cultural-diversity-discourses-hungary-2011, accessed 2 June 2012.
  14. İçduygu, A. (2009) Turkey: The demographic and economic dimension of migration. Mediterranean Migration 2008–2009 Report. San Domenico di Fiesole: Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, pp. 349–365, http://www.carim.org/publications/MMR-0809%20-%20Part%204%20-%20Palestine-Turkey.pdf, accessed 30 May 2012.
  15. Ipsos (2012) Global Kamuoyu Göç Konusunda Kaygılı, http://www.arastirmakutuphanesi.com/?pid=2123, accessed 3 June 2012.
  16. Kaya, I. (2009) Turkey: The legal dimension of migration. Mediterranean Migration 2008–2009 Report. San Domenico di Fiesole: Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, pp. 365–369, http://www.carim.org/publications/MMR-0809%20-%20Part%204%20-%20Palestine-Turkey.pdf, accessed 30 May 2012.
  17. Kirisci, K. (2000) Disaggregating Turkish citizenship and immigration practices. Middle Eastern Studies 36 (3, July): 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kirisci, K. (2009) Turkey: The political and social dimension of migration. Mediterranean Migration 2008–2009 Report. San Domenico di Fiesole: Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, pp. 371–382, http://www.carim.org/publications/MMR-0809%20-%20Part%204%20-%20Palestine-Turkey.pdf, accessed 30 May 2012.
  19. Korkut, U. (2012) Liberalization Challenges in Hungary: Elitism, Progressivism, and Populism. New York: Palgrave/Europe in Transition: The NYU European Studies Series.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Küçük, B. (2010) Diversity and the European Public Sphere: The Case of Turkey: Eurosphere Country Reports, No.4, http://eurospheres.org/files/2010/06/Turkey.pdf.
  21. Kulcsár, L. and Brown, D. (2009) Public perceptions of population change in Hungary. East European Countryside 15: 23–36.Google Scholar
  22. Mehta, J. (2011) The varied roles of ideas in politics: From ‘where’ to ‘how’. In: D. Béland and R.H. Cox (eds.) Ideas and Politics in Social Science Research. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 23–46.Google Scholar
  23. Schain, M.A. (2010) Managing difference: Immigrant integration policy in France, Britain, and the United States. Social Research 77 (Spring): 205–236.Google Scholar
  24. Simonovits, B. and Szalai, B. (2013) Idegenellenesség és diszkrimináció a mai Magyarországon. Magyar Tudomány 3 (March): 251–262.Google Scholar
  25. Sullivan, W.M. (1986) Reconstructing Public Philosophy. Berkeley, CA: The University of California Press.Google Scholar
  26. Szilassy, E. (2004) A külföldiekhez való viszony a serdülõk gondolkodásában. Regió 15 (2): 139–161.Google Scholar
  27. Tausz, K. (2011) A három részre szakadt Magyarország. Magyar Valóság 4: 58–71.Google Scholar
  28. Tóth, G.A. (2012) Constitution for a Disunited Nation. Budapest, Hungary: CEU Press.Google Scholar
  29. Tóth, J. (2010) Update: Changes in the Hungarian Citizenship Law adopted on 26 May 2010. European Union Democracy Observatory, http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/19616/Hungary.pdf?sequence=1, accessed 14 May 2012.
  30. Tóth, J. (2013) Migrációs jogi környezet Magyarországon. Magyar Tudomány 3 (March): 244–250.Google Scholar
  31. Yilmaz, H and Türkiye’de Muhafazakarlık (2009/2010) Türkiye’de ‘Biz’lik, ‘Öteki’lik, Ötekileştirme ve Ayrımcılık: Kamuoyundaki Algılar ve Eğilimler, http://hakanyilmaz.info/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/HYilmaz-Otekilestirme-02-İçerikselRapor.188160919.pdf, accessed 30 November 2012.
  32. Yilmaz, H and Türkiye’de Muhafazakarlık (2013) http://www.aciktoplumvakfi.org.tr/pdf/muhafazakarlik/04.pdf, accessed 24 July 2013.
  33. Yishai, Y. (1993) Public ideas and public policy: Abortion politics in four democracies. Comparative Politics 25 (2 January): 207–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Ltd 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Umut Korkut
    • 1
  1. 1.Glasgow School for Business and Society, Glasgow Caledonian UniversityGlasgowUK

Personalised recommendations