Hungary: A Weimar for the 21st Century?

[J. J.]

Current standings in Parliament:

Government Coalition (263)
     Fidesz (227) -- Conservatives with an Authoritarian streak
     Christian Democratic People's (36) -- Christian, Social, and National Conservatives
Last Election - Ran as a coalition, winning 263 seats
Opposition parties
     Socialist Party (48) -- Ex Communist, current moderate Social Democrats 59
     Jobbik (46) -- NAZI, NAZIlike, NAZIish, neo-NAZI, (claims to not be NAZI) 47
     Politics Can Be Different (15) -- Soft Liberals, Progressive, Greenish 16
     Independent (14) -- Probably former Socialists 1

It is not quite Weimar.  More a turn to the center-right.

In 1932-33, you had a collapse of the center with the left and right gaining. 

[J. J.]

I was unaware that fascism was considered center-right. Thank you for informing me.

Considering that Jobbik is not in the coalition, I'd still call it center-right.

[J. J.]

I was unaware that fascism was considered center-right. Thank you for informing me.

Considering that Jobbik is not in the coalition, I'd still call it center-right.

J.J. does the absence of logic in your posts sometimes irritate you. I mean I understand the desire to be illogical, but does it ever irritate you?

I don't see a Weimar parallel.  Simply put, so you will get it, you had both extremes gaining The Nazis on the extreme right and the Communists on the extreme left.  In some ways, Germans were given a choice between right and left. 

Hungary looks more like a drift to the right, possibly internal to Fidesz.

[J. J.]

Stop embarrassing yourself, J. J. It's actually quite painful to watch.

You really have no idea of what happened in 1932, do you?

From what is being described, Fidesz has moved to the right, and the electorate has moved to the right.  You don't have the more extremest parties (on either the left or the right) making huge gains.  You don't have the most right wing party in the coalition.

If Jobbik starts increasing seats at the expense of Fidesz, you could be closer to Weimar, but that hasn't happened yet.

[J. J.]

Comparison to Weimar is incorrect. The comparison should be better to the earliest of the Hitler era, or, the founding of the Reich.

Even this is a false analogy. 

In Weimar, you had three party groups:

The Left:  SDP, Communists

The Center:  German People's Party (DVP), Centre (Z), and a few small parties.

The Right:  German National People's Party (DNVP), Nazis, a few small parties.

Until 1930, the main right wing party was the DNVP, but they never were in government.  All chancellors were either of the left or the center.  The Nazis were to the right of DNVP, and all other parties.

In 1930-32, both the Nazis and the Communists, extremes of both the right and left respectively, grew.  The Nazis displaced the DNVP as main right wing party in 1930.  Those differences are the key.

1,  In Hungary, the main right wing party, Fidesz, still there, and not in coalition with a righter wing party.

2.  There is no polarization.  The far left is not growing, and neither is the far right, Jobbik.

Had the DNVP gotten a majority (even in coalition) in 1930, you would have a similar analogy.

There is something going on, but it is not a repeat of Weimar.

I might liken it more to Spain under Franco, right wing authoritarian government.

[J. J.]

Comparison to Weimar is incorrect. The comparison should be better to the earliest of the Hitler era, or, the founding of the Reich.

Even this is a false analogy. 

In Weimar, you had three party groups:

The Left:  SDP, Communists

The Center:  German People's Party (DVP), Centre (Z), and a few small parties.

The Right:  German National People's Party (DNVP), Nazis, a few small parties.

Until 1930, the main right wing party was the DNVP, but they never were in government.  All chancellors were either of the left or the center.  The Nazis were to the right of DNVP, and all other parties.

In 1930-32, both the Nazis and the Communists, extremes of both the right and left respectively, grew.  The Nazis displaced the DNVP as main right wing party in 1930.  Those differences are the key.

1,  In Hungary, the main right wing party, Fidesz, still there, and not in coalition with a righter wing party.

2.  There is no polarization.  The far left is not growing, and neither is the far right, Jobbik.

Had the DNVP gotten a majority (even in coalition) in 1930, you would have a similar analogy.

There is something going on, but it is not a repeat of Weimar.

I might liken it more to Spain under Franco, right wing authoritarian government.

That would seem to be incorrect based on both the last election and the poll that was posted here.

What was posted indicated it hadn't.  I do see that Jobbik was a new party.  That said, its growth was substantially less than Fidesz.  There was also a center right party that dissolved prior to 2010; that could account for some of Fidesz's growth. 

[J. J.]

Dear Lord. Does JJ get paid to be retarded?

No, I just look at the numbers before going to Reductio ad Hitlerum.  The left collapsed in Hungary.  It didn't in Weimar.

[J. J.]

Repeating that over and over doesn't change the authoritarian nature of Hungary's government and the fact that they are actively making the country less democratic.

I agree, which is why I compared this to Franco's Spain, though that was a military victory.

What we are seeing is the left collapsing in Hungary.  Fidesz may be drifting the right or just might have become a "big tent" type party (Wiki suggests the latter might be true).

[J. J.]

Of course, JJ, Hungary isn't 1933 Germany and Orban isn't Hitler.[/obviousness]

The Weimar comparison means what it's supposed to mean. If you don't get it, I really don't know how to help you.

Well, I think there might be better analogies, possibly even Horthy. 

[J. J.]

Are U.S. Mensa's standards of admission that low, or J.J. is just some extremely bored due on the internet?

Bored. 

Sorry, but are any of you even vaguely familiar with Hungarian history between World War I and World War II?  You have a fairly good analogy there.

[J. J.]

Please, enlighten me, at least, with regards to His and Horthy's Circumstances. I know the basics about the man--right-nationalist, Regent of a country lacking a royal family, background in the Austro-Hungarian navy, either betrayed or was betrayed by the Axis depending on who you ask--but not much more.

In this regard, the Hungarian Parliament was dominated by a right wing party (they kept changing their names), but never the most right wing party.  Even then, the parties moved further to the right, but there parties further to the right.

It is a remarkably similar situation to today.

It was arguably a Fascist government, bit it was clearly to the left of the Nazis and their Hungarian allies, Arrow Cross.

[J. J.]

Just because your not a NAZI does not mean you are not a Fascist. Mussolini was a Fascist, THE fascist, but he was pro-jew. 

I think that is the point made with a comparison to Horthy.  He certainly didn't establish a liberal democracy.  Horthy and Unity Party, with its successors, were not the furthest people to the right, either in Europe or in Hungary.

Mussolini initially was not anti-Jewish, but that changed in the late 1930's.

[J. J.]

To point out the obvious/what everyone else is thinking, etc...

J.J., the reason why 'Weimar' was used as the title for the thread was almost certainly because the name has a certain resonance in this sort of context. Whereas, 'Horthy' doesn't mean much to anyone these days (if it ever meant much at all) and, anyway, is only arguably more 'relevant' because of geography.

It is very close to a repeat of the late 1930's Hungary, in terms of party domination.  Weimar was situation where there was polarization and center finally sided with the extreme right, against the extreme left.

The title is as good as "Reductio ad Hitlerum" would be.  "Hugary slipping toward Fascism," might have been a lot better. 

I think there are parallels between the government in the 1930's and today's Hungarian political situation.  And I would call the Hungarian government of the 1930's Fascist, though not Nazi.

[J. J.]

I get the impression that my post was read and not really read. Sigh.

It is very close to a repeat of the late 1930's Hungary, in terms of party domination.

Orban is claiming to rule as a Regent? You can certainly draw parallels with Hungarian dictatorships past if you like, but the fact remains that the name 'Horthy' means nothing to most people.

There is nothing about Orban being regent.  Sorry, but since we are talking about Hungary, it just might be more appropriate to cite the history of Hungary.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The Communists were gaining.  There was a polarization, with an electorate moving toward the extremes.  This is more of the electorate moving toward the right.

There is a better analogy, Hungary in the 30's and early 40's.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The only difference between 'Hungary slipping towards Fascism' and 'Hungary: A Weimar for the 21st Century?' would be that the one would be using more evocative (and emotive) language than the other.
[/quote]

Accuracy and emotion are two different things.  Comparing Hungary, drifting rightward, to the polarized Weimar is just hugely inaccurate.