Movement Entrepreneurship of an Incumbent Party. The Story of the Hungarian Incumbent Party Fidesz and the Civil Cooperation Forum

Metz, Rudolf

doi:10.17356/ieejsp.v1i3.41

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, in 2002 he established the Civil Circles Movement, which some two hundred thousand people joined within a year. In 2009, the "civil" organization, the so-called Civil Union Forum was established from above to support Fidesz and to hold political rallies: 118 it provided "the stage" and "the audience" for Orbán's performances.…”

Section: Demagogy Populism the Relationship Between The Leader And mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Theory and Practice of Plebiscitary Leadership: Weber and the Orbán regime

Körösényi

2018

East European Politics and Societies: and Cultures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most political science interpretations of the post-2010 Orbán regime have been written either within the framework of populism or in the democratization paradigm. We have learned much from these papers about Hungary’s drift in an authoritarian direction, but they also have drawbacks. This article aims to fill the gap between these two approaches and offers a theoretical framework to analyze the impact of populism and other trends of contemporary politics (like de-alignment, growing electoral volatility, citizens’ disengagement, personalization, legitimacy problems, the decline of party membership and partisanship, the mediatization of politics, etc.) on the political regime. It argues that these trends add up to an authority and regime type that can be conceptualized by Weber’s concept of plebiscitary leader democracy (PLD). PLD forms a new hybrid regime type that differs from comparative authoritarianism and other hybrid regime types known from the literature in three respects. First, PLD is less about institutional framework and procedures than about the sources of legitimacy; second, it serves better to understand how the regime works than measuring its distance from liberal democracy; third, it is an ideal type that aims to reveal the endogenous logic of democracy that generates authoritarian elements of the regime. The article also demonstrates the suitability of the concept of PLD for empirical research through presenting a structured case study of the Orbán regime. The PLD model enables us to reveal the endogenous logic of the Orbán regime and the impact of populist governance on it.

show abstract

Section: Demagogy Populism the Relationship Between The Leader And mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Theory and Practice of Plebiscitary Leadership: Weber and the Orbán regime

Körösényi

2018

East European Politics and Societies: and Cultures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the contrary, civil society organisations that were earlier engaged in negotiations, expert work and lobbying turn to community organising and protest activities (Buzogány et al, 2022;Gerő et al, 2023). Fidesz also organises large demonstrations from time to time and tries to mobilise its constituency by organising the aforementioned large demonstrations (Metz, 2015;Susánszky et al, 2016) or uses other topdown, vertical tools of mobilisation, such as the socalled 'national consultations' (Bocskor, 2018). Thus, it seems that in an increasingly autocratic system, the different forms of political participation also have a role in creating the legitimacy of or challenging the system, which implies that political integration goes together with different forms of political participation, according to the different constituencies, or, in our case, the different groups in our integration model.…”

Section: Political Participation Under the Orbán Regimementioning

confidence: 99%

Political integration mechanisms in Hungary (2010–2022)

Gerő,

Szabó

2023

Intersections

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since 2010, Fidesz has won four electoral victories in Hungary with a constitutional majority. In this paper, we argue that the main reason behind this overwhelming electoral success is the specific pattern of political integration that has evolved in recent years. The Hungarian case, as a consequence, may also act as a basis for a theoretical step forward in understanding the role of political integration in de-democratization processes. To understand the role of political integration, we explain how the Habermas-based political integration framework relates to the types of political culture, and then, with the help of representative data collection from 2018 and 2021, we define the integration groups and, using these, examine the party preferences and participation patterns that have developed in today’s Hungary. The Orbán regime successfully generates diffuse mass support: this is embedded in multiple social groups, although none of the integration groups can be considered the sole or primary supporters of the system.

show abstract

“…Thus, Fidesz engaged in a new organisational strategy of building a network called Citizens' Alliance. This strategy established a cultural and social community which relied on civic initiatives to mobilise its voter base (Greskovits, 2020;Metz, 2015;Szabó, 2011).…”

Section: Third Phase: the Hybrid Partymentioning

confidence: 99%

“Mass,” “Movement,” “Personal,” or “Cartel” Party? Fidesz’s Hybrid Organisational Strategy

Metz

Várnagy

2021

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the last decade, Fidesz has dominated the Hungarian political landscape, becoming the most extensive Hungarian party organisation in terms of party members, structuration, resources, and influence. The party’s organisational development has been determined by a constant strategic adaptation to new circumstances of political reality and new demands of the electorate. The article argues that in three phases of its development, Fidesz adopted different party organisation guidelines. As a result, a hybrid party architecture was formed involving various characteristics and strategies of mass parties (e.g., relatively large membership and ideological communication), movement parties (i.e., top-down generation of mass rallies and protest activities), personal parties (i.e., personalisation, centralisation of party leadership), and cartel parties (i.e., use of state resources, control over party competition). Instead of switching from one strategy to another, the party often used these strategies simultaneously. This flexible party organisation can balance among the different needs of effective governance, constant mobilisation, and popular sovereignty. The article aims to dissect these building blocks of Fidesz to gain insight into the emergence of the hybrid party model.

show abstract

Movement Entrepreneurship of an Incumbent Party. The Story of the Hungarian Incumbent Party Fidesz and the Civil Cooperation Forum

Cited by 10 publications

References 32 publications

The Theory and Practice of Plebiscitary Leadership: Weber and the Orbán regime

The Theory and Practice of Plebiscitary Leadership: Weber and the Orbán regime

Political integration mechanisms in Hungary (2010–2022)

“Mass,” “Movement,” “Personal,” or “Cartel” Party? Fidesz’s Hybrid Organisational Strategy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About