Advertisement

Chapter 6: Constitutional Identity? The Hungarian Model of Illiberal Democracy

  • András L. PapEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

By connecting to ongoing scholarly discussions on conceptualizing “illiberal democracy” and analyzing the phenomenon of the anti-democratic backlash in post-2010 Hungary, this chapter seeks to provide a description and an analysis of the “Hungarian model of illiberal democracy.” It is argued that the “Hungarian illiberal democracy” is not a construct of constitutional philosophy; nor is it a principle for constitutional design or something characteristically illiberal within the interpretative framework of political theory. Rather, it is a tool to channel, define, and dominate general political discourse and provide a discursive framework for political identification and ideologically biased (yet divergent and ad hoc) legislation. The morphosis of this Hungarian model of illiberal democracy manifests itself normatively through value preferences expressed in the new constitution as well as in a quasi-normative political declaration that serves as a manifesto for the new political community it envisages.

Keywords

Liberal Democracy Political Community Constitutional Identity Political Transition Constitutional Democracy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Bibliography

  1. Amnesty International. (2016). Annual report: Hungary 2015–2016. https://www.amnesty.org/en/countries/europe-and-central-asia/hungary/report-hungary/. Accessed June 2016.
  2. Anderson, P. (2007). Russia’s managed democracy. London Review of Books, 29(2), 2–12.Google Scholar
  3. Armstrong, J. (1982). Nations before nationalism. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  4. Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  5. Balzacq, T. (2010). Securitization theory: how security problems emerge and dissolve. Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Bánkuti, M., Halmai, G., Scheppele, K. L. (2012). Hungary’s illiberal turn: disabling the constitution. In: A. T. Gábor (Ed.), Constitution for a disunited nation on Hungary’s 2011 fundamental law. Budapest: CEU Press.Google Scholar
  7. Blokker, P. (2013). New democracies in crisis? A comparative constitutional study of the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovakia. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Bozóki, A. (2011). Occupy the state: The Orbán regime in Hungary. Journal of Contemporary Central and Eastern Europe, 19(3), 649–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bozóki, A (2015). Broken democracy, predatory state, and nationalist populism. In: P. Krasztev & J. V. Til (Eds.), The Hungarian patient. Social opposition to an illiberal democracy. Budapest: Central European University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bugarič, B. (2014). Protecting democracy and the rule of law in the European Union: The Hungarian challenge, LSE “Europe in question”. LEQS Discussion Paper Series, No. 79, 1–44.Google Scholar
  11. Chronowski, N. (2012). The new Hungarian fundamental law in the light of the European Union’s normative values. Revue Est Europa, 1(2), 111–142.Google Scholar
  12. Collier, D., & Levitsky, S. (1997). Democracy with adjectives: conceptual innovation in comparative research. World Politics, 49(3), 430–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Comaroff, J. L., & Comaroff, J. (2009). Ethnicity, Inc. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Csillag, T., & Szelényi, I. (2015). Drifting from liberal democracy: Traditionalist/neoconservative ideology of managed illiberal democratic capitalism in post-communist Europe, intersections. East European Journal of Society and Politics, 1(1), 18–48.Google Scholar
  15. Eurostat. (2016). Real GDP growth rate – Volume. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-datasets/-/tec00115. Accessed June 2016.
  16. Feischmidt, M., & Hervik, P. (2015). Mainstreaming the extreme: intersecting challenges from the far right in Europe, intersections. East European Journal of Society and Politics, 1(1), 3–15.Google Scholar
  17. Fox, J. E., & Miller-Idriss, C. (2008) Everyday nationhood. Ethnicities, 8(4), 536–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Freedom House. (2015). Hungary: nations in transit. https://freedomhouse.org/report/nations-transit/2015/hungary. Accessed 1 June 2016.
  19. Garcia, L. B. (2015). Participatory democracy and civil society in the EU. Agenda-setting and institutionalisation. Basingstoke: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Halmai, G. (2013). The rise and fall of Hungarian Constitutionalism. In: S. Benhabib, D. Cameron, A. Dolidze, G. Halmai, G. Hellmann, K. Pishchikova, R. Youngs (Eds.), The democratic disconnect citizenship and accountability in the transatlantic community (pp. 67–77). Washington, DC: Transatlantic Academy.Google Scholar
  21. Halmai, G., & Scheppele, K. L. (Eds.) (2012) Opinion on Hungary’s new constitutional order: Amicus brief for the Venice commission on the transitional provisions of the fundamental law and the Key Cardinal Laws. Princeton: Princeton University.Google Scholar
  22. Hegedűs, D. (2014). From front-runner’s “Euphoria” to Backmarker’s “pragmatic adhocism”? Hungary’s ten years within the European Union in a Visegrad comparison. DGAPanalyse (7). https://dgap.org/en/article/getFullPDF/25438. Accessed 1 June 2016.
  23. Helsinki Committee. (2014). Disrespect for European values in Hungary 2010–2014. http://helsinki.hu/wp-content/uploads/Disrespect_for_values-Nov2014.pdf. Accessed June 2016.
  24. Hobsbawm, E. J. (1992). Nations and nationalism since 1789: programme, myth, reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Hungarian Spectrum. (2009). Value structure of Hungarian society, 2009. http://hungarianspectrum.org/2009/10/13/value-structure-of-hungarian-society-2009/. Accessed June 2016.
  26. Huntington, S. (1991) The third wave: democratization in the late twentieth century. Norman, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
  27. International Monetary Fund. (2008, October 28). IMF, EU, and World Bank line up $25 billion for Hungary. IMF Survey Online. http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2008/car102808b.htm. Accessed June 2016.
  28. Jarábik, B. (2015). From Belarus to Hungary: lessons from a traditionalist revolution. In: P. Krasztev & J. V. Til (Eds.), The Hungarian patient. Social opposition to an illiberal democracy (pp. 319–324). Budapest: Central European University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Jenne, E. K., & Mudde, C. (2012). Can outsiders help? Journal of Democracy, 23(3), 147–155.Google Scholar
  30. Keller, T. (2010). Hungary on the world values map. Review of Sociology, 20(1), 27–51.Google Scholar
  31. Kis, J. (2012). Introduction: from the 1989 constitution to the 2011 fundamental law. In: A. T. Gábor (Ed.), Constitution for a disunited nation on Hungary’s 2011 fundamental law. Budapest: CEU Press.Google Scholar
  32. Knoema. (2016). World Data Atlas: Hungary – Gross Domestic Product. http://knoema.com/atlas/Hungary/GDP. Accessed June 2016.
  33. Kováts, E., & Põim, M. (2015). Gender as symbolic glue: the position and role of conservative and far right parties anti-gender mobilizations in Europe. Foundation for European Progressive Studies and the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.Google Scholar
  34. Kováts, E., Põim, M., Tánczos, J. (2015). Beyond gender? Anti-gender mobilization and the lessons for progressives. FEPS-FES Policy Brief.Google Scholar
  35. Kovács, A., Horváth, A., Vidra, Z. (2011). The Ferry-Country between East and West: debates on modernity and Europe in Hungary. In: A. Ichijo (Ed.), Europe, nations and modernity (pp. 158–182). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kovács, K., & Tóth, G.A. (2011). Hungary’s constitutional transformation. European Constitutional Law Review, 7(2), 183–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kövér, A. (2015a). Captured by state and church: civil society in democratic Hungary populism. In: P. Krasztev & J. V. Til (Eds.), The Hungarian patient. Social opposition to an illiberal democracy (pp. 81–90). Budapest: Central European University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Kövér, A. (2015b). Timike and the Sweetie Pies: fragmented discourses about women in Hungarian public life. In: P. Krasztev & J. V. Til (Eds.), The Hungarian patient. Social opposition to an illiberal democracy. Budapest: Central European University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Krasztev, P. (2015). Social responses to the “hybridization” of the political system: the case of Hungary. In: P. Krasztev & J. V. Til (Eds.), The Hungarian patient. Social opposition to an illiberal democracy. Budapest: Central European University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Lambert, G. (2015). Azután egyszer csak beütött a mennyko – interjú Tölgyessy Péterrel [And then all Hell Broke loose: An interview with Péter Tölgyessy]. Figyelo Online. http://m.figyelo.hu/cikkek/427802-azutan-egyszer-csak-beutott-a-mennyko—interju-tolgyessy-peterrel. Accessed 1 June 2015.
  41. Levitsky, S., & Way, L. A. (2010). Competitive authoritarianism: hybrid regimes after the cold war. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Majtényi, B. (2012). Legislative stupidities in the New Hungarian Constitution. Peace Human Rights, 1(9), 105–110.Google Scholar
  43. Mansbridge, J. J., & Parkinson, J. (Eds.). (2012). Deliberative systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Melegh, A. (2006). On the East/West slope: globalization, nationalism, racism and discourses on Eastern Europe. New York: Central European University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Mill, J. S. (Ed.) (1993 [1859]). On liberty. In Utilitarianism, liberty, and representative government (pp. 69–185). London: Everyman’s Library.Google Scholar
  46. Niederberger, A., & and Schink, P. (2013). Republican democracy liberty, law and politics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pap, A. L. (2014). Személyiségkép és alkotmányos identitás a Nemzeti Együttműködés Rendszerében (I. rész), [Personhood and constitutional identity under the new constitution]. Közjogi Szemle 2014(4), 1–11.Google Scholar
  48. Pap, A. L. (2015a) Who are “we, the people”? Biases and preferences in the Hungarian fundamental law. In: Z. Fejes, F. Mandák, Z. Szente (Eds.), Challenges and pitfalls in the recent Hungarian constitutional development –discussing the new fundamental law of Hungary (pp. 53–75). Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  49. Pap, A. L. (2015b). Személyiségkép és alkotmányos identitás a Nemzeti Együttműködés Rendszerében [Personhood and constitutional identity under the new constitution] Part II., Közjogi Szemle, 2015(1), 1–11.Google Scholar
  50. Pap, A. L. (2015c). Személyiségkép és alkotmányos identitás a Nemzeti Együttműködés Rendszerében (Personhood and constitutional identity under the new constitution) Part III., Közjogi Szemle (1).Google Scholar
  51. Pető, A., & Vasali, Z. (2014, January 20). The “laboratory” called Hungary: a challenge for understanding protest movements. OpenDemocracy. https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/andrea-pet%C5%91-zolt%C3%A1n-vasali/%E2%80%98laboratory%E2%80%99-called-hungary-challenge-for-understanding. Accessed June 2016.
  52. Pettit, P. (2013). On the people’s terms: a republican theory and model of democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Pew Global. (2009, November). End of communism cheered but now with more reservations. http://www.pewglobal.org/2009/11/02/end-of-communism-cheered-but-now-with-more-reservations/. Accessed June 2016.
  54. Rácz, A. (2015). Multi-vectorialism failing? The Russia-policy of the Orbán-government. Russkii Vopros (1). http://www.russkiivopros.com/?pag=one&id=619&kat=7&csl=69. Accessed June 2016.
  55. Rupnik, J. (2012). How things went wrong. Journal of Democracy, 23(3), 132–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rupnik, J., & Zielonka, J. (2013) Introduction: the state of democracy 20 years on: domestic and external factors. East European Politics and Societies, 27(1), 3–25.Google Scholar
  57. Sarlo, A. W., & Otarashvili, M. (2013, July). Can the EU rescue democracy in Hungary? Foreign Policy Research Institute. https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/167427/Wiktorek_Otarashvili_-_EU_and_Democracy_in_Hungary.pdf. Accessed June 2016.
  58. Scheppele, K. L. (2013). The rule of law and the Frankenstate: why governance checklists do not work. Governance, 26(4), 559–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Scheppele, K. L. (2014, May 6). Hungary and the end of politics. The Nation. https://www.thenation.com/article/hungary-and-end-politics/. Accessed June 2016.
  60. Shevtsova, L. F. (2000) Can electoral autocracy survive? Journal of Democracy, 11(3), 36–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Smith, A. D. (1996). Culture, community and territory: the politics of ethnicity and nationalism. International Affairs, 74(3), 451–452.Google Scholar
  62. Smith, A. D. (1999). Ethnic election and national destiny: some religious origins of nationalist ideals. Nations and Nationalism, 5(3), 331–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Smith, A. D. (2009). Ethno-symbolism and nationalism. A cultural approach. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  64. Szabó, A. (Ed.) (2013). Political orientations, values and activities of Hungarian University and College Students. In Active Youth in Hungary Research Group. Prague: Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung.Google Scholar
  65. Takács, P. (2015). A rózsa neve: Magyar Köztársaság – Az államok nevéről és a magyar állam átnevezéséről (The name of the rose: Hungarian republic: on the names of states and the renaming of the Hungarian state). Budapest: Gondolat.Google Scholar
  66. Tavares Report. (2013, June 25). Report A7-0229/2013 on the situation of fundamental rights: standards and practices in Hungary (pursuant to the European Parliament resolution of 16 February 2012). Report prepared by the European Parliament. (2012/2130(INI)).Google Scholar
  67. Til, J. V. (2015). Democratic resurgence in Hungary: challenges to oppositional movement (an open-ended conclusion). In: P. Krasztev & J. V. Til (Eds.), The Hungarian patient. Social opposition to an illiberal democracy. Budapest: Central European University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Tóth, G. A. (2012). Constitution for a disunited nation: on Hungary’s 2011 fundamental law (pp. 1–21). Budapest: Central European University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Vidra, Z., & Fox, J. (2014). Mainstreaming of racist anti-Roma discourses in the media in Hungary. Journal of Immigrant and Refugee Studies, 12(4), 437–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Vidra, Z., Horváth, A., Fox, J. (2012). Tolerance and cultural diversity discourses in Hungary. In: R. Zapata-Barrero & A. Triandafyllidou (Eds.), Addressing tolerance and diversity discourse in Europe comparative overview of 16 European countries (pp. 317–43). Barcelona: Barcelona Centre for International Affairs.Google Scholar
  71. Wenman, M. (2013). Agonistic democracy, constituent power in the era of globalisation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wike, R. (2010, April 7). Hungary dissatisfied with democracy, but not its ideals. Pew Global Attitudes Project. http://www.pewglobal.org/2010/04/07/hungary-dissatisfied-with-democracy-but-not-its-ideals/. Accessed 1 June 2016.
  73. Wodak, R. (2009). The discursive construction of national identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Wodak, R., Khosravinik, M., & Mral, B. (2013) Rightwing populism in Europe: politics and discourse. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  75. World Bank. (2016). Data: Hungary. http://data.worldbank.org/country/hungary. Accessed June 2016.
  76. World Bank Group. (2016). Resolving insolvency in Hungary. http://www.doingbusiness.org/data/exploreeconomies/hungary/resolving-insolvency/. Accessed June 2016.
  77. World Economic Forum. (2014). Insight report: the global gender gap report 2014. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GGGR14/GGGR_CompleteReport_2014.pdf. Accessed June 2016.
  78. Zakaria, F. (1997, November–December). The rise of illiberal democracy. Foreign Affairs, 76(6), 22–43.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department for the Study of Constitutionalism and the Rule of LawHungarian Academy of Sciences Centre for Social Sciences at the Institute for Legal StudiesBudapestHungary
  2. 2.Slovak Academy of Sciences Institute for SociologyBratislavaSlovakia

Personalised recommendations