IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/anname/v681y2019i1p78-96.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Political Nature of Ideological Polarization: The Case of Hungary

Author

Listed:
  • Federico Vegetti

Abstract

Polarization in Hungary is one of the most severe cases in Europe. It is predominantly elite-driven, and determined mostly by the antagonistic confrontation between the parties. Left and Right blocs oppose each other in a struggle where the loser is completely denied any influence on policymaking. The two blocs endorse opposing views on socio-cultural policies, but this division emerged as a consequence of the rhetoric and coalitional choices of parties, more than from the societal divisions that they ostensibly represent. Moreover, while the perceived ideological distance between party blocs is wide, the actual programmatic differences in the parties’ economic and social policy stances are modest. This article draws on a broad range of sources to describe the process of polarization in Hungary after the fall of communism. I discuss how a polarizing style of political competition can lead to a politically divided society and, over the long run, to democratic erosion.

Suggested Citation

  • Federico Vegetti, 2019. "The Political Nature of Ideological Polarization: The Case of Hungary," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 681(1), pages 78-96, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:681:y:2019:i:1:p:78-96
    DOI: 10.1177/0002716218813895
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002716218813895
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0002716218813895?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Powell, Eleanor Neff & Tucker, Joshua A., 2014. "Revisiting Electoral Volatility in Post-Communist Countries: New Data, New Results and New Approaches," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(1), pages 123-147, January.
    2. Druckman, James N. & Peterson, Erik & Slothuus, Rune, 2013. "How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(1), pages 57-79, February.
    3. Blais, André & Carty, R. K., 1991. "The Psychological Impact of Electoral Laws: Measuring Duverger's Elusive Factor," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 79-93, January.
    4. Shanto Iyengar & Sean J. Westwood, 2015. "Fear and Loathing Across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 59(3), pages 690-707, July.
    5. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    6. Corwin D. Smidt, 2017. "Polarization and the Decline of the American Floating Voter," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(2), pages 365-381, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Adam Lovett, 2023. "The ethics of asymmetric politics," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 22(1), pages 3-30, February.
    2. Daniel Kovarek & Gábor Dobos, 2023. "Masking the Strangulation of Opposition Parties as Pandemic Response: Austerity Measures Targeting the Local Level in Hungary," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 16(1), pages 105-117.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michael Bang Petersen & Ann Giessing & Jesper Nielsen, 2015. "Physiological Responses and Partisan Bias: Beyond Self-Reported Measures of Party Identification," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-10, May.
    2. Andrea Junqueira & Ali Kagalwala & Christine S. Lipsmeyer, 2023. "What's your problem? How issue ownership and partisan discourse influence personal concerns," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 104(1), pages 25-37, January.
    3. Grewenig, Elisabeth & Lergetporer, Philipp & Werner, Katharina & Woessmann, Ludger, 2020. "Do party positions affect the public's policy preferences? Experimental evidence on support for family policies," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 523-543.
    4. Erik Peterson & Shanto Iyengar, 2021. "Partisan Gaps in Political Information and Information‐Seeking Behavior: Motivated Reasoning or Cheerleading?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(1), pages 133-147, January.
    5. Fine, Adam D. & Rowan, Zachary & Simmons, Cortney, 2019. "Do politics Trump race in determining America's youths' perceptions of law enforcement?," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 48-57.
    6. Dieter Dekeyser & Henk Roose, 2022. "Polarizing policy opinions with conflict framed information: activating negative views of political parties in a multi-party system," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1121-1138, June.
    7. Duell, Dominik & Valasek, Justin Mattias, 2017. "Social identity and political polarization: Evidence on the impact of identity on partisan voting trade," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economics of Change SP II 2017-304, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    8. Anne-Sophie Neyra, 2022. "“Polish People Are Starting to Hate Polish People”—Uncovering Emergent Patterns of Electoral Hostility in Post-Communist Europe," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-26, November.
    9. Matthew I. Jones & Antonio D. Sirianni & Feng Fu, 2022. "Polarization, abstention, and the median voter theorem," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    10. Kemal Kıvanç Aköz & Alexei Zakharov, 2023. "Electoral turnout with divided opposition," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 60(3), pages 439-475, April.
    11. Peiran Ma, 2023. "The Impact of Political Polarization on the COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in the United States: A Qualitative Study," Journal of Politics and Law, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 16(2), pages 1-37, May.
    12. Gento Kato, 2020. "When strategic uninformed abstention improves democratic accountability," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(3), pages 366-388, July.
    13. Carla M. N. Caruana & R. Michael McGregor & Aaron A. Moore & Laura B. Stephenson, 2018. "Voting “Ford” or Against: Understanding Strategic Voting in the 2014 Toronto Municipal Election," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 99(1), pages 231-245, March.
    14. Grewenig, Elisabeth & Lergetporer, Philipp & Werner, Katharina & Woessmann, Ludger, 2019. "Do Party Positions Affect the Public's Policy Preferences?," IZA Discussion Papers 12249, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Carlos Alós-Ferrer & Johannes Buckenmaier, 2021. "Voting for compromises: alternative voting methods in polarized societies," ECON - Working Papers 394, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    16. Lars Erik Berntzen, 2020. "How Elite Politicization of Terror Impacts Sympathies for Partisans: Radical Right versus Social Democrats," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(3), pages 19-31.
    17. Roberto Pannico, 2017. "Is the European Union too complicated? Citizens’ lack of information and party cue effectiveness," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(3), pages 424-446, September.
    18. Schreiner, Nicolas, 2021. "Changes in Well-Being Around Elections," Working papers 2021/03, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    19. Christophe Crombez, 2004. "Introduction," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 16(3), pages 227-231, July.
    20. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 2002. "Political economics and public finance," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 24, pages 1549-1659, Elsevier.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:681:y:2019:i:1:p:78-96. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.