137
E x p l a i n i ng C e n t e r - R i gh t D e f e at s
The battle fought on the right in the early 1990s in
Hungary
involved a Christian national
option (the MDF) and a liberal one (SzDSZ and Fidesz) and was won by the former. Later
developments brought the shift of the Free Democrats towards the Socialists and Fidesz’s
drift towards nationalist conservativism. Hungarian conservativism thus actually devel-
oped itself in opposition to the Westernizing and modernizing politics of social democrats
and social liberals. This formula brought reward to the Young Democrats in the form of
election victory, as well as domination of the right pole of Hungarian politics. Unlike the
UDF, Fidesz tirelessly tried to swallow and otherwise subjugate smaller groupings on the
right (KDNP, FKgP, MDF) and often succeeded in doing so.
3
While the current Hungarian competitive pattern is that of alternation of the left and
right, doubts regarding the degree of its moderateness linger. In fact, this competition has
become very intense and takes place in an increasingly polarized environment. Fidesz, in
particular, has been the target of frequent accusations of using extremist appeals for the
sake of mobilization, of political brinksmanship and of polarizing the polity.
Also not infrequent are opinions that both major actors in Hungarian political competi-
tion, the Socialists and Fidesz, have to a great extent rejected programmatic, policy-based
competition and instead slavishly followed the public mood, resorted to campaign popu-
lism and plundered state resources while in government to keep their populist promises.
Be these allegations substantiated or not, Tamás Lánczi in his chapter points out the role
of state paternalism (called the “new conception of the state”) in the electoral victory of
Fidesz in 1998, when the party juxtaposed its caring, family-oriented and patriotic pater-
nalism to the ‘cold’ technocratic policies of the Socialists and Free Democrats. Fidesz also
put its bet on inclusion, participation and mobilization of people. This has manifested
itself in its ceaseless encouragement to participate in the political process, as opposed to
the Socialist strategy of depoliticization of many spheres of public life. All in all, Fidesz
has embarked upon quite a unique political style in the region, scoring many successes,
but at the same time encountering harsh criticism and suffering demonization by its op-
ponents. Also, by its deliberate choice, prospects for the right in Hungary are framed by
the assumption that competition is to remain antagonistic and election results close to tied
for the foreseeable future.
In
Lithuania,
the largely national-conservative version of the right, embodied by the
Homeland Union, also came to dominate the right side of the spectrum in the early 1990s.
Its stature and success rested on anti-Communism and its resolute pro-independence
stances. Its achievement in the 1996 elections was based on the successful exploitation of
its predecessor’s self-discreditation. The Conservatives promised to increase living stan-
dards based on private initiative-induced economic growth, and this offer resonated after
four years of social democratic rule. They also offered the hope of increasing the standards
of public morality and benefited from the sowing of populist promises to various popula-
tion groups as well, as Mantas Adomenas notes in his chapter. Lithuanian Conservatives
did not face a serious challenge from other parties on the right until late in the 1990s,
3
MDF, a small national conservative party and remnant of a glorious past, is ailing in the shadow of Fidesz, but so
far resists all attempts to be taken over by it or included under the Orbanite umbrella.
