Translate

Thursday, March 26, 2015

Deconsolidation of Democracy in the EU: the Case of Hungary


















by Ena Barisic


Andras Bozoki, on behalf of the Center for European Studies, came to the University of Florida to present his talk of Deconsolidation of Democracy in the European Union within Hungary. His main goal of the talk was to question the extent in which a nondemocratic regime can exists within the European Union.

He is a professor of Political Science at the Central European University. He is a visiting professor for Colombia University. His areas of research include democratization, political ideas, Central European politics, elites, public discourse and the role of intellectuals. He was president of the Hungarian Political Science Association. He previously served on the executive council of the European Political Science Network (EpsNet), and is currently a member of the executive council of the European Confederation of Political Science Associations (ECPSA).

Bozoki focused on Hungary’s transformation of power through the current Prime Minister, Viktor Orbán. Their economic stability has been sponsored and upheld not just by private banks in the Middle East, but by the European Union itself. The actions of Hungary seem nondemocratic, and are certainly being over looked. Many factors are involved within this change such as Hungary’s past, the rule of Orbán, and the reactions of the European Union.

In 2011, Hungary was declared the greatest success story of democracy. Currently, it is the complete opposite. There were economic hardships and transitions from the period of 1989-1994, leading into the major deconsolidation of their liberal democracy. The components that once held that regime were splitting into something else, leading into the period of 2010-2015: democratization from a major totalitarianism to a hybrid regime. Elections and dominating parties were becoming very common, leading to the control that Orbán holds.

Many people have claimed that he is becoming a dictator, stealing the wealth and resources from Hungary. He achieves this dominance by having all three types of legitimacies: traditional, rational, and charismatic. The public knows of his doing, but can’t do anything to dramatically stop it. The components of his rule, centralized power, legal constitutionalism, public security, and equality of the law, have drastically different than they should be. The main question? Well, it boils down to what actions have the European Union done so far, and what more they can.

No comments:

Post a Comment