Corruption in voters’ eyes undid the Socialist and Free Democrat parties in Sunday’s EU elections, political scientist László Lengyel comments in a contribution to hvg.hu.
There is no Socialist or liberal voter who could not cite an example of corruption, whether committed by ministers or mayors, he wrote. Arguments against corruption benefited Jobbik, Lengyel said, as the radical party was able to criticise both those in power and Fidesz.
Society was sensitive to corruption before the global financial crisis, but the meltdown made ordinary people particularly sensitive, Lengyel wrote, as they began to wonder “why should I suffer, why is money being taken away from me when the political elite is not only to blame for the crisis, but has accumulated wealth in the meantime?”
The tension between Roma and non-Roma evident in large and small towns and villages of north-east Hungary has accumulated over the course of decades, he observed, adding that the larger parties do not want, dare or know how to find a solution.
Where the central authorities have neither a platform nor a solution, Jobbik and the Magyar Gárda have offered protection and interest representation and act for those living in housing estates and in villages. That is why they have succeeded with voters in formerly Socialist and Smallholder regions.
At last a fair summary appears in print!
What is “fair” about the summary, Fabian?
It’s the same old story of “losers” talking about corruption and incompetence but doing nothing about it. Let’s wait and see how Jobbik fare over the next two years.
The spineless MSZP and their “buddies” in Europe
deserve the hatred and rancour that is so often
directed at right-wing parties who have done nothing but hold demonstrations.
Whichever way the wind blows MSZP and Fidesz are “old hat” and need to re-think their whole
modus-operandi in politics because people are, quite frankly, sick of the same old lies, corruption, empty promises and the total lack of any real know-how in terms of leading this country out of its current demise.
Excuses, Excuses, and more excuses..Lame Ducks each and every one of them!!!
T.Kovacs@ ‘Losers’??? From nothing to 14.7% and 3 seats in a few years?? And the commies(sorry socialists) from majority to 4 seats in 7 years,the zionist liberals (sorry szdsz) from second to 2.2% and zero seats(NOTHING in reality) in even less time.Those are the losers and the sad group of die-hard supporters who still can not recognise change when it comes.
Fabian. You have misunderstood my previous post.
I know Jobbik have had some success recently.
The “losers” I am referring to are those who keep on blaming Jobbik’s success for their own miserable showing.
Best wishes to you.
TiborKovács@My sincere apologies,busy days and reading too fast—please forgive! Thanks for your support
Do all ‘political scientists’ (whatever that designation means) have the same thought simultaneously, that thought being that people like nationalist parties by default, when the mainstream politicians have let them down? The English talking heads are full of the self-same patter. Allow me to try this instead: Mainstream political parties are so well buttressed by all other social institutions that they are unassailable. They become so complacent that the government gets to be indistinguishable from the opposition. Then all at once the system cracks, and eager, talented persons rise up to address the nation. Hungary has this with the Jobbik politicians, and Britain with the BNP ones, albeit to a much lesser extent. The difference between the two countries’ political condition is in that the English mainstream political class is much better buttressed than the Hungarian one. Compare both countries to the US, where there is not the slightest hope of a real nationalist political party rising, the fact notwithstanding that the people are becoming ever poorer. The political class is impenetrably buttressed there, and crack-proofed. So: hard economic times and corrupt politicians do not explain the rise of nationalist parties at all.
Sophie,
One ‘explanation’ does not fit all, forever.
One example to your ‘explanation’ (“Then all at once the system cracks, and eager, talented persons rise up to address the nation.”) is Milosovics and the rise of Serbian Nationalism.
Typical local thing and very successful.
Viking, Milosevic attempted to re-invigorate the Serbian domination of what was then Yugoslavia. Now, was that nationalism at all? I propose that it was a neo-colonialist ambition. It wanted to return to the deepest communist era. Of course, that did not go down at all well with the Croats, Slovenes, etc., whose own nationalism was burgeoning by then. It was the latter that brought down the Yugoslav Federation.
Sophie,
Of course, ‘My Nationalism’ is Good, others is ‘neo-colonialism’.
The catch is of course before anything can become ‘neo-colonialism’ it has to go through that small step of being ‘colonialism’, which then means that the rest of Yugoslavia were ‘colonies’ to Serbia.
You seem to be very eager to re-write every definitions that exists.
What is the problem to call a Spade a Spade?
Serbian Nationalism does not differ from Hungarian Nationalism, you just swap the word ‘Serbian’ to ‘Hungarian’.
It is the same ‘We are Superior’ ideology that you all share with the Zionists.
Maybe Csurka Istvan is right in something – Jobbik is just a bunch of Mossad-agents.
You are good at missing a simple point, Viking. I’ll have just one more go: The colonialism that had its manifestation in the Yugoslav Federation was neo-colonialism precisely because one national group, the Serbs, extended its dominance (with the help of Treaty of Trianon, then communism) over a clutch of other national groups. There is no ground on which you can run a parallel of it and Hungarian nationalism. And, do stop this ‘we are superior’ jeering, if you can. (Of course, I realise that you are constitutionally unable to resist it, i.e. it’s your personal Tourette’s syndrome.)
Sophie,
You keep repeating the same argument that Serbian Nationalism was neocolonialism.
The definition for neocolonialism does not support that statement though.
Regardless, the political ideology behind this ‘neo-colonialism’ was Serbian Nationalism, or do you now claim that it never existed such an animal?
Serbs cannot have Nationalistic feelings?
What do they have then, when they beat the shit out of ethnic Hungarians in Serbia today?
With your new definition the rest of Europe are ‘neo-colonialist’ against Hungarians and only Hungarians have ‘Nationalism’.
Viking,
You have a problem, kid. You are just too dumb to realize how stupid you are. The little you think you know about Hungary just ain’t worth sharing.
Go back to playing with yourself and your imaginary “Jobbik friends”. Dumbass.
Godot/Stan,
Sitting too much in the sun in the Nevada Desert again?
You seem to be a real clever guy in explaining things, so it is OK to blame the rest of us for not understanding you.
Viking,
I’m not as clever as Visitor and not as sophisticated as Sophie or Tunde, but compared to you even I feel like a real genius.
Godot,
“I’m not as clever as Visitor”
Well if cleverness is measured in the number of words one can write without making a coherent statement, I have no problem seeing Visitor as one of the most clever man today alive.
I though wonder how many brain-cells a person need to be able to apply the “Blame The Jew”-method on everything in life.
The question is if 2 is too much then they could actually start to disagree, and that would not be good.