45
Wh y F i d e s z Lo s t : A S u c c e s s f u l Go v e r nm e n t…
with civic virtues and dedication to a highly active public life. More than ten thousand
civic circles were created country-wide within a few weeks. Their functions were coordi-
nated by Fidesz in the beginning, but as time passed they gained more independence from
the party (building a new center from public donations, etc.). The way they worked and
their role were somewhat similar to the clubs of
Forza Italia
.
While organization of the civic circles movement served to stabilize the status of Fidesz
and the right, the party was isolated from swing voters. Consequently, Fidesz had to re-
define its politics. Upon evaluating the failure at the polls, it was clear that Fidesz was not
sufficiently organized. The relative weakness of the party organization was also a conse-
quence of a necessity to fill vacant civil-service posts after the victory in 1998.
Attempting to capitalize on the lessons learned in its electoral loss, Fidesz – Hungarian
Civic Party decided to drastically redefine itself. At the biannual congress in May 2003
the name was changed to Fidesz – Hungarian Civic Union. The goal was to transform the
party into something akin to the modern European people’s parties, especially in terms of
the number of members, personnel and structure. This meant combining two traditions
of party evolution – that of the “Latin” and the German. Examples for the people’s party-
like structure were found in the German Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and Chris-
tian Social Union (CSU) and the Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP), while membership was
based upon the examples of “Latin” countries’ center-right parties like the
Forza Italia
and
the French Union for a Popular Majority (UMP) (
See
Navracsics, Tibor, “The European
People’s Party’s Birth,” unpublished manuscript, 2005.).
Fidesz was the first Hungarian party to introduce individual constituency organizations
that paralleled the traditional township level organizations. A constituent president,
named by the president of the Union upon the proposal of the local councils, leads the
constituency councils. He is personally responsible for the electoral preparation of Fidesz
in the given constituency, having authority over the local groups’ presidents. This was a
definite shift from the previous administrative-unit-based organizational structure. Trans-
formation brought along changes in functional areas, as well. Eight auxiliary organizations
(farmers, villagers, those active in cultural, workers and employees, women, pensioners,
local authorities, and ecologists) were formed after May 2003 for supporters who wanted
to avoid professional politics but who wanted to become involved in one of these fields.
The most remarkable change was the boom in membership and the development of new or-
ganizations within Fidesz. The expansion to a union made the party accessible for many who
were previously unable to enter the system. As a result of this, massive entries in the second
part of 2003 and the beginning of 2004 tripled the party’s membership and improved national
coordination efforts. Fidesz – Hungarian Civic Union thus became a real people’s party, the
only one capable of challenging the MSzP’s far-reaching and superbly organized system.
Change in Communication
Besides building the party structure and addressing competitive disadvantages, Fidesz also
had to develop a new image to improve the party’s negative perception among voters. The
primary aim was to increase its appeal with independent and leftist voters. The concept of a
union emphasized that Fidesz was more than a party and welcomed everyone as a member.
