Conceptualizing the Theoretical Category of Neo-militant Democracy: The Case of Hungary

• Authors: Joanna Rak

Abstracts

EN

The article aims to formulate a theoretical category of neo-militant democracy that applies to study the nature and dynamics of democratic regimes after the 2008 economic crisis. It conducts an empirical test to verify the analytical effectiveness of the redeveloped category. The test takes a form of the case study of the Hungarian political system. Apart from a verification-objective, the research aims to identify and account for the dynamics of the Hungarian regime in terms of the neo-militant democracy principle. The qualitative method of source analysis serves to collect data on the processes of becoming neo-militant democracy. The selection of sources is deliberate and oriented on finding information about the implementation of neo-militant democracy measures in Hungary (2008-2019). The technique of qualitative content analysis applies to identify the nature of these processes. The theoretical tool is the category of neo-militant democracy, which simultaneously undergoes the empirical test. The main argument is that the process of becoming neo-militant democracy took a traditional form since the Hungarian neo-militant democracy principle drew on the traditional means introduced by Loewenstein rather than innovations advanced by the current research

Keywords

EN

militant democracy; Karl Loewenstein; neo-militant democracy; political regime; hybrid regime; Hungary; authoritarianism

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek
• Journal: Polish Political Science Yearbook
• Year: 2020
• Issue: 2 (49)
• Pages: 61-70

Dates

published

2020

Contributors

author

Joanna Rak

• Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań

• https://orcid.org/0000000205053684

References

• Aliens Act. (2001). Act XXXIX of 2001 on the Entry and Stay of Foreigners. Retrieved from: https:// www.legislationline.org/download/id/1090/file/94a91739d6eef46472d2f8e0c1d72e60.pdf.
• Asylum Act. (2007). Act LXXX of 2007 on Asylum. Retrieved from: https://www.legislationline.org/ download/id/7225/file/Hungary_Act_on_Asylum_2007_am2016_en.pdf.
• Bäcker, R., & Rak, J. (2019). “Trajektoria trwania opancerzonych demokracji.” Studia nad Autorytaryzmem i Totalitaryzmem, vol. 41, No. 3, 63–82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19195/2300–7249.41.3.5.
• Bocskor, Á. (2018). “Anti-Immigration Discourses in Hungary during the ‘Crisis’ Year: The Orbán Gov¬ernment’s ‘National Consultation’ Campaign of 2015”. Sociology, 52(3), 551–568. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1177/0038038518762081.
• Bogaards, M. (2018). “De-democratization in Hungary: Diffusely Defective Democracy”. Democratization, 25(8), 1481–1499, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2018.1485015.
• Bozóki, A., & Hegedűs, D. (2018). “An Externally Constrained Hybrid Regime: Hungary in the European Union”. Democratization, 25(7), 1173–1189. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2018.1455664.
• Buzogány, A. (2017). “Illiberal Democracy in Hungary: Authoritarian Diffusion or Domestic Causation?”. Democratization, 24(7), 1307–1325. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2017.1328676.
• Buzogány, A., & Varga, M. (2018). “The Ideational Foundations of the Illiberal Backlash in Central and Eastern Europe: The Case of Hungary”. Review of International Political Economy, 25(6), 811–828. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2018.1543718.
• Capoccia, G. (2005). Defending Democracy Reactions to Extremism in Interwar Europe. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Capoccia, G. (2013). “Militant Democracy: The Institutional Bases of Democratic Self-Preservation”. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 9, 207–226. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-102612–134020.
• Cliteur, P.B., Herrenberg, T., & Rijpkema, B.R. (2015). “The New Censorship”. In A. Ellian & G. Molier (Eds.). Freedom of Speech under Attack (291–319). The Hague: Eleven International Publishing.
• Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights. (2018). New restrictions on NGO activities in the Council of Europe member States. Retrieved from: http://website-pace.net/documents/19838/4246196/20180523- RestrictionsActivitiesNGOs-EN.pdf/4fe88e6b-8659–47d6–9f4a-836ae8bdea7b.
• European Commission. (2019). A new push for European democracy. Nurturing, protecting and strength¬ening our democracy. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019–2024/ new-push-european-democracy_en.
• European Commission for Democracy Through Law (Venice Commission). (2015). Opinion on Media Legislation (Act CLXXXV on Media Services and the Mass Media, Act CIV on the Freedom of the Press, and the Legislation on Taxation of Advertisement Revenues of Mass Media) of Hungary. Opinion no. 798/2015CDL-AD(2015)015. Retrieved from: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/ documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2015)015-e.
• Féron, É. (2004). “Anti‐globalization movements and the European agenda”. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 17(2), 119–127, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1351161042000 238625.
• Fundamental Law of Hungary. (2012). Retrieved from: https://www.legislationline.org/download/id/8205/ file/Hungary_Fundamental_Law_as_of_2019_en.pdf.
• Hungarian Constitution of 1949. (1949). Retrieved from: https://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cescr/ docs/E.C.12.HUN.3-Annex2.pdf.
• Ijabs, I. (2016). “After the Referendum: Militant Democracy and Nation-Building in Latvia”. East European Politics and Societies and Cultures, 30(2), 288–314. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0888325415593630.
• Krekó, P., & Enyedi, Z. (2018). “Explaining Eastern Europe: Orbán’s Laboratory of Illiberalism”. Journal of Democracy, 29(3), 39–51.
• Law on the Transparency of Organisations Supported from Abroad. (2017). Retrieved from: https://www. helsinki.hu/wp-content/uploads/14967_NGO_bill_20170407_with_reasoning.pdf.
• Loewenstein, K. (1935a). “Autocracy Versus Democracy in Contemporary Europe, I”. American Political Science Review, 29(4), 571–593. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1947789.
• Loewenstein, K. (1935b). “Autocracy Versus Democracy in Contemporary Europe, II”. American Political Science Review, 29(5), 755–784. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1947222.
• Loewenstein, K. (1937a). “Militant Democracy and Fundamental Rights, I”. The American Political Science Review, 31(3), 417–432. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1948164.
• Loewenstein, K. (1937b). “Militant Democracy and Fundamental Rights, II”. The American Political Science Review, 31(4), 638–658. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1948103.
• Loewenstein, K. (1944). “Legislation for the Defense of the State in Chile”. Columbia Law Review, 44(3), 366–407.
• Loewenstein, K. (1946). “Freedom Is Unsafe without Self-Government”. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 243, 47–49.
• Macklem, P. (2006). “Militant Democracy, Legal Pluralism, and the Paradox of Self-determination”. Inter¬national Journal of Constitutional Law, 4(3), 488–516. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mol017.
• Mareš, M. (2012). “Czech Militant Democracy in Action: Dissolution of the Workers’ Party and the Wider Context of This Act”. East European Politics and Societies, 26(33), 33–55. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1177/0888325411408070.
• McAdam, D. (1983). “Tactical Innovation and the Pace of Insurgency”. American Sociological Review, 48(6), 735–754.
• Molier, G., & Rijpkema, B.R. (2018). “Germany’s New Militant Democracy Regime: National Democratic Party II and the German Federal Constitutional Court’s ‘Potentiality’ Criterion for Party Bans: Bundes¬verfassungsgericht, Judgment of 17 January 2017, 2 BvB 1/13, National Democratic Party II”. European Constitutional Law Review, 14(2), 394–409. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019618000196.
• Müller, J.-W. (2012). “Militant Democracy”. In M. Rosenfeld & A. Sajó (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Law (1118–1132). New York: Oxford University Press. DOI: https:// doi.org/oxfordhb/9780199578610.013.0062.
• Orbán, V. (2014). “Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Speech at the 25th Bálványos Summer Free University and Student Camp”. Website of the Hungarian Government. Retrieved from: https://www.kormany. hu/en/the-prime-minister/the-prime-minister-s-speeches/prime-minister-viktor-orban-s-speech-at-the-25th-balvanyos-summer-free-university-and-student-camp.
• Palonen, E. (2018). “Performing the Nation: the Janus-faced Populist Foundations of Illiberalism in Hun¬gary”. Journal of Contemporary European Studies, 26(3), 308–321, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/ 14782804.2018.1498776.
• Pap, A.L. (2017). Democratic Decline in Hungary: Law and Society in an Illiberal Democracy Comparative Constitutional Change. New York: Routledge.
• Pállinger, Z.T. (2019). “Direct Democracy in an Increasingly Illiberal Setting: The Case of the Hungarian National Referendum”. Contemporary Politics, 25(1), 62–77, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1356977 5.2018.1543924.
• Press and Media Act. (2010). Act CIV of 2010 on the Freedom of the Press and the Fundamental Rules of Media Content. Retrieved from: http://nmhh.hu/dokumentum/162262/smtv_110803_en_final.pdf.
• Right to Freedom of Assembly Act. (1989). évi III. törvény a gyülekezési jogról. Retrieved from: http://njt.hu/cgi_bin/njt_doc.cgi?docid=10540.245094#foot1.
• Right to Freedom of Assembly Act. (2018). évi LV. törvény. Retrieved from: http://njt.hu/cgi_bin/ njt_doc.cgi?docid=209700.357568.
• Rijpkema, B.R. (2018a). Militant Democracy: The Limits of Democratic Tolerance. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
• Rijpkema, B.R. (2018b). “Weerbare democratie, Europa en het vraagstuk van de antirechtsstatelijke partijen”. In S.L. de Lange & J. Zuure (Eds.), #Woest: de kracht van verontwaardiging (170–193). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
• Sajó, A. (2005). “From Militant Democracy to the Preventive State”. Cardozo Law Review, 27(5), 2255–2294.
• Toomey, M. (2018). “History, Nationalism and Democracy: Myth and Narrative in Viktor Orbán’s ‘Illiberal Hungary’”. New Perspectives, 26(1), 87–108. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825X1802600110.
• Weill, R. (2017). “On the Nexus of Eternity Clauses, Proportional Representation, and Banned Politi¬cal Parties”. Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy, 16(2), 237–246. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1089/elj.2016.0418.
• Zwick, D. (2018). “No Longer Violent Enough?: Creative Destruction, Innovation and the Ossification of Neoliberal Capitalism”. Journal of Marketing Management, 34(11–12), 913–931. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1080/0267257X.2018.1536076.

Identifiers

DOI

10.15804/ppsy2020204

Biblioteka Nauki

2014409