Populism has become a wide spread phenomenon throughout the world. The danger of their backward-looking nostalgia for an idealized past, half-truths and fake news stories pose a threat for free and open societies.
How can and should democracies respond? How can liberal messages be communicated better? In what way can we bring big ideas and visions to the citizens? What solutions tackling populism have already worked on the local level?
Four countries from East to West, from North to South; four different leaders; one common challenge: populist autocrats in government – and Liberals opposing their rule. To shed light on the inspiring quest of Liberals from South Africa, Venezuela, the Philippines, and Hungary, FNF convened a panel discussion at the fringes of the Liberal International Congress in Andorra.
The speakers represented four countries on four continents which differ significantly in their history and culture. But they also share a sad reality: Freedom in their countries has decreased in the last 20 years and even more so in the last two years. At the same time, the populist rulers in Venezuela, South Africa, Hungary and the Philippines have all been elected at some point in the past, regardless of how autocratic or unpopular they are today. Continue reading →
All eyes are on France this week as the country plays host to the 2016 European football championship. Politically, however, the country is experiencing turmoil. An unpopular President Hollande is trying to push for urgently needed labor market reform. Meanwhile the handling of the refugee crisis and the threat of terrorism is boosting France’s far-right Front National (FN) party. In 2017 the French will go to the polls to elect a new President and Parliament. We sat down with the French liberal Marshall Memorial Fellow Bruno Selun to discuss the state of the FN in France today, looking ahead to 2017.
Preoccupied by illiberal developments in Poland and engulfed by the refugee crisis, the EU has to a great extent lost sight of the situation in Viktor Orbán’s illiberal democracy, Hungary. How illiberal is Hungary? What can be done to return Hungary to the course of liberal democracy and what has the refugee crisis meant for the survival of the Orbán government? Using the occasion to launch the book “Hello Dictator”, FNF invited the man who broke Orbán’s supermajority, the Hungarian parliamentarian Zoltán Kész, as well as Réka Csaba from the Republikon Institute in Budapest to discuss the book and latest developments in Hungary.
The Hungarian decline of democracy
The Orbán government has been criticized for limiting the freedom of the media, promoting corruption and changing the electoral laws to ensure its own survival. Both Csaba and Kész described the corruption which courses through every facet of Hungarian society. Csaba in particular pointed to the role EU funds play in propping up the Orbán government, by allowing it to sustain an economy which would otherwise be in shambles. The media is also increasingly kept in Orbán’s orbit with a mere 30% remaining independent according to Kész. At every corner the opposition is kept on the fringes of the debate. Kész shared an anecdote of a speech he was set to give at a school in his constituency, which was cancelled on short notice due to government pressure. This is just one example of the many illiberal tendencies penetrating Hungary.
Given these accusations it is not surprising that commentary on Orbán often descend into polemics. However, Csaba and Kész both stressed that polemics over Orbán, especially coming from other parts of the EU, only serves to solidify the Hungarian support for Orbán. Csaba made very clear that “Hungary is a democracy, just not the kind of democracy I would wish for my country”. The Orbán government thrives on political apathy which keeps voters at home on Election Day and to get those voters out foreign polemics will just push them into Orbán’s orbit.
The refugee crisis: Another lease on life for Orbán
The Hungarian government was one of the first to capitalize politically on the refugee crisis in Europe. By stopping the policy of letting refugees transit through Hungary on their way to Germany and other Western countries, Orbán created a terrible humanitarian situation in Hungary which he could then absolve the country of by closing Hungary’s borders altogether. As Csaba pointed out, Hungarian society was rife to struggle with the refugee influx. Orbán’s policies had driven the economy into the ground, inequality was plentiful and the country was not used to large-scale integration of refugees. Using these latent characteristics of Hungarian society, Orbán was able to galvanize supporters to his banner by portraying himself as the guardian against chaos. A clever political move, it breathed life into a government otherwise moribund by poor economic results and increasing popular discontent. The refugee crisis gave Orbán yet another opportunity to blame the EU for the woes of the continent, while cementing the relationship between fellow Visegrad leaders. This two-pronged strategy helped not only to deepen mistrust of the EU in Hungary, but also in honing Visegrad as a counter-identity, as Csaba put it.
There is however a counter-narrative of Hungary, and even though post-war Hungary is a relatively homogenous society, barring the presence of a sizable Roma minority, the country has not always been this way. As Kész pointed out, the country’s cosmopolitan identity flourished in the latter parts of the 19th century when Hungary welcomed individuals from all over Europe to settle in the country. Kész stressed that this tradition of openness remains latent in Hungary, but that it has to be reclaimed by the Hungarian public. Orbán is working against this, and is using the shutting down of the Balkan route to now mend fences with European neighbours. Kész described Orbán’s visit to German Unity Chancellor Helmut Kohl as just such an attempt to smooth over Hungary’s illiberal role in Europe. However, Kész warned Europe against appeasing Orbán, stating that success for Orbán means success for his Kremlin mentor Vladimir Putin.
The way forward
Hungary is at a crossroads economically and politically, ahead of the 2018 parliamentary elections. Rampant corruption, an economic system of crony capitalism and a government drunk on power characterizes Hungary today. Kész, a politician with tremendous local outreach, shared his experience that people are growing dissatisfied with the government, in spite of Orbán’s domestically popular stance in the refugee crisis. Tired with the system, he argued that voters would vote for anyone they find a credible alternative to the Orbán government.
Just as the answer to the troubles facing rule of law in Poland must come from within Poland, so too must answers to Hungary’s qualms come from within Hungary. The EU can and should play an important role in tightening control on the way Orbán spends his EU funding. The EU should also hold Hungary to the same standards as it does other member states, without descending into the kind of polemics offer by Jean-Claude Juncker when he greeted Viktor Orbán with the words “Hello Mr Dictator”.
This evening discussion was also an occasion to present the essay collection bearing the same name as the words uttered by Mr Juncker last year. In spite of other challenges the EU cannot lose sight of this illiberal state at the heart of the European continent. Hungarians need to be empowered to reject the Orbán government, but Europeans should not make the mistake of insulting Hungary in the process of wanting Hungary abandon illiberal in favor of liberal democracy.
You can read Hello Dictator by following this link.
Who are Trump`s supporters and why do they vote him from victory to victory? Classical liberal philosopher and historian Tom Palmer, Executive Vice President of the Atlas Network, asked himself these questions as it became ever more likely that after the first primaries Trump could be the Republican 2016 presidential candidate. He noticed that he was disconnected from Trump voters, he knew no-one who would admit to supporting Trump, yet he knew that support existed. In a telling interview with the BBC a voter said she supported Trump because he “said what she thought”. An interesting observation, Palmer has looked at the motivation of Trump voters and contrasted that with support for populism in Europe. During a whistle-stop tour of Europe, Palmer visited the Naumann Foundation in Brussels to exchange ideas on populism on both sides of the Atlantic and what liberals can do to stop future governments from being headed by populists such as Trump or Le Pen. Continue reading →
Venue: Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom, Avenue de Cortenbergh 71, 1000 Brussels
About the event:
Donald Trump is likely to win the Republican presidential nomination, Bernie Sanders promises free healthcare and college education for all to snag the nomination from presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton. In Europe, the populist Fidesz party has been hard at work to dismantle Hungary’s system of checks and balances, while fellow populists in Poland, France, Germany and the Netherlands are riding a high of popular disappointment with the way Europe has failed to handle the refugee crisis. Continue reading →
Populist parties claim that they are the only ones who care about people’s preoccupations, while the elites are deemed to be solely motivated by their own interests. Populist parties thus consider themselves as anti-system and anti-establishment. This simplistic rhetoric has seduced more and more Europeans this last decade. A variety of electoral results illustrates the rise of extremist populist parties, particularly in Denmark, where the Danish People’s Party obtained 22 seats in the National Parliament elections in 2011, in France, where Front National leader Marine Le Pen obtained 17,9% of the votes in the presidential election of 2012, and in Hungary, where the extreme-right wing party Jobbik won 47 seats in the national parliament in 2010. Continue reading →