Márton Szabó
Enemy and adversary in politics

According to the author, enemy and adversary are key categories in democratic politics both from a theoretical and a practical point of view. The category of adversary demonstrates that democracy is a competitive system and the designation of enemies by adversaries shows the boundaries of the democratic system. The essay details the issue in four parts. Firstly, it outlines the historicalpolitical situation in which the relationship between enemy and adversary became an important factor. This had three elements: the unclear division between state and society, the dominance of party politics, and politics is a mediated politics in a general sense. Secondly, the essay presents the political theories which reflected on the situation, namely the concepts of Carl Schmitt, Reinhart Koselleck, Murray Edelman and Ernesto Laclau. Thirdly, the essay analyses some important elements of political practice, above all the status of enemy-construction in democratic political systems and its different discursive methods. Finally, it provides a short summary of the Hungarian situation after 1990, in which enemy construction served as a tool for the right wing to oust their political enemies from the nation, while the left wing, from the community of democracy.


Sándor Kurtán
The Freedom Party (Austria)

After 1986 the political influence and support of the Austrian Freedom Party had been emerging like a comet. The hitherto small party became a medium party within one and a half decades (while the so far major two parties have sunk into the status of medium parties). All this was achieved under the leadership of Jörg Haider, the new head elected in 1986. Haider deftly linked the rhetoric, characterising Freedom Party, of the ideas coquetting with German nationalist and at times clearly extreme rightist thoughts with a populism - acting in the interest of the common man - and turning against the elite. As a result the vote base of the party was broadened, and in addition to elements of the middle class it deeply penetrated the strata of the working class, thus becoming a 'proletarian medium party' (taking over Social Democrats among workers in 1999). Haider and his party were able to create diffuse fear among the workers and those of low school education by their rhetoric. For this purpose they utilised opposition to foreigners and criticism of the EU . Haider has accomplished his success with the help of evolving a party structure that ensured an almost total authority for himself ('Führer party'). E lectoral success in 1999 (Freedom Party obtained the second largest number of votes) brought about even the possibility of participation in governance. Coalition government with the Austrian People's Party, however, ended up in catastrophe for Haider and his party: the spuriousness of populist promises became obvious by responsibility in governance. E ither those promises should have been put aside, or positions taken up in governance should have been relinquished. Neither of these steps was taken, and it led to a crisis in the party and next in its leadership. Haider's tactics ('we are in as well as out') did not work in 2002, and in the 2006 elections the party sank to the position of a small party, in addition the party was even split in 2005.


Tibor Szabó
The Forza Italia (Italy)

After the historical changes of 1992, a new type of political life began in Italy. The so-called 'tangentopoli' caused the collapse of the whole political system and the renewal of the political parties. In this situation a very new kind of political movement, the Forza Italia was born by the initiative of Silvio Berlusconi. This transformation period was necessary because of the crisis of the traditional party-system. The leader of Forza Italia, Berlusconi, served his financial power, and his influence on the whole Italian media to form the clubs of Forza Italia for organising right-wing Italian voters. The populist leader and his party, with the alliance of the other right-wing parties, like Alleanza Nazionale and L ega N ord formed a new government in 1994, and even today they have an influence on the political situation in Italy.


Tamás Polgár
The Progress Party (Norway)

The Norwegian Progress Party, since its foundation in 1973, has clearly become an institutionalised player with strong popular support and significant influence on both policy and government formation. Although the party has not yet held government office, the long-standing party leader, Carl I. Hagen, in his address following the extremely successful 2005 general elections, expressed his wish to transform the Progress Party into the 'Labour Party of the 21st Century'. The present paper examines the possible interpretations and relevance of this surprising phrase by analysing the foundation, institutionalisation, profile and strategies of this once 'anti-party party'. It argues that the description is less relevant in terms of policy preferences due to the fact that the party is mostly, though not entirely, characterised by a right-wing profile. However, in terms of its constituency, the party has managed to attract voters from both political camps, and most markedly from the two (then) major parties.


Gabriella Ilonszki - Réka Várnagy
Mixed Election System and Female Representation

The article gives a detailed overview about the representation of women in the Hungarian parliament between 1990 and 2006. Its argument is that early party consolidation and the closing down of the representative elite explain more the low level of representation than the electoral system itself. From a comparative perspective, a shorter consolidation period that is a shorter learning process might explain the differences in female representation between Hungary and other postcommunist countries in CEE . The mechanisms of selection and de-selection as well as the serious biases in the structure of candidacies draw attention to the role and responsibility of the partygatekeepers in this process. Finally, the lef-right division does not appear as a strong explanatory force as we might assume, despite the ideological differences and the quota regulations that are applied by the left.


Thomas von Ahn
Democracy or the Street?

In his paper the author embarks on studying what happened in Hungary since 17 September 2006, when Ferenc Gyurcsány's speech of Balatonöszöd became public, and what are the reasons in the background sharpening and deepening political conflicts. In the first chapter the author presents the primary circumstances and events of the explosion of the speech, and surveys what political and social forces have acted against the head of government in public and in the street. The next three chapters first present the reactions of the government, then outline the behaviour of the parliamentary opposition, finally the steps taken by street demonstrators are studied. Further on, the author attempts to explore the historical reasons behind the emerging grave conflict in domestic politics. He emphasizes two events of the twentieth century, the Trianon peace dictate, which has caused a deep and still not improving psychological crisis in Hungary, and its consequences can be pinpointed even in the conflicts that began in autumn last. N ext he discusses the revolution of 1956, setting out from the premise that the revolution of '56 belongs to 'living history' in Hungary, and it divides the nation even more than Trianon, enhancing the confrontation of the two camps to a dangerous extent.


György Schöpflin
Democracy, Populism and Political Crisis in Hungary

The author's paper is actually an answer and debate of Thomas von Ahn's writing entitled 'Democracy or the Street?' Basically the author is of the view that von Ahn did not fully understand the deeper causes of the crisis of Hungarian democracy emerging in the autumn of 2006, this is why he could reach the conclusion that the Hungarian right had got closer to the extreme right, and that it was moving at the borderline of democratic and anti-democratic politics. Schöpflin points out that the German author accepts too much the communication of the Hungarian media and press, whereas they show too much of one-sidedness, hence he also ends up in a one-sided reading of the events. The author does not regard the crisis of Hungarian democracy as that of the right wing, but as an operational crisis of the entire political setup, including both sides. He words and details three decisive causes of the development of crisis, namely: the first one is the mistakes of the institutional pattern of the Hungarian political system, the second one is the long-term consequences of the soft change of the system in 1989-1990, and the third one is the nature of the Hungarian democracy project the country could freely shape since the withdrawal of the Soviet troops.