Hungary: Two Cheers for Democracy?
Rado, Emil, Contemporary Review
HOW is democracy faring two years into Hungary's first government elected by universal suffrage? Having a hard time of it, it would seem, but narrowly ahead on points.
I have been visiting Hungary annually for many years now, and some of the changes I noticed this year are disturbing. Talking to individuals, I found an almost neurotic sense of insecurity. Almost everyone I visited had had a double steel frame clamped on their front door and door-frame since last year because of the fear of burglaries; almost all multi-occupancy buildings now have their courtyard door locked day and night, with call-buttons against each occupant's name. |Just like back home,' I commented encouragingly, when the subject was raised, but this remark was felt to be in rather bad taste. Equally strong is the sense of job insecurity: with unemployment having risen from almost nothing to over 9% in two years and still rising by about 30,000 a month, literally no-one I met felt secure in their job. There was also a sense that things had happened for random and arbitrary reasons. |Look at me,' said a hospital consultant of some twenty years' standing: |my 20 year old daughter has just joined the Central Bank as a clerk, and her starting salary is twice mine'.
I also noted a marked souring of the political atmosphere. With the coalition Government's popularity in steady decline (the latest Gallup poll suggesting that the coalition partners would now get under 40% of the popular vote), and the political middle-ground firmly occupied by FIDESZ, the liberal Young Democrats party (whose rating now stands at 55%), the Government has been steadily drifting to the right. It has tried to make up for what it has lost in popular support by appointing party men and women to senior posts that were meant to be awarded on merit (|just like the Communists used to', said my Hungarian informants; |Like Mrs. Thatcher used to', thought I). |The time has come to stop talking about our opponents and start talking about our enemies,' said Mr. Csurka, Deputy Parliamentary Leader of the MDF -- the leading coalition party -- a few days ago, and Mr. Antall, the Prime Minister, who was present at the occasion, did not disown him.
What, then, are the principal bones of contention between the Hungarian Government and Opposition? First, the Act of Parliament that takes away the land of Agricultural Producers' Co-operatives from those who cultivate it now, and divides it up among its pre-1949 owners (most of them now in their 70s or 80s), or among their descendents (who mostly have no farming experience). While there was a generally agreed need to split up many co-operatives into smaller, more economic units, they had managed to feed the country, and even produced a large export surplus: what would the effect of the change-over be? In the short run, there is uncertainty about whether the land will be properly cultivated and livestock adequately maintained this year, given that ownership of the land may change hands between sowing and reaping. Also, the law is unclear about how buildings and machinery belonging to the Co-ops are to be shared out between present and future owners: no small matter. In the longer run, there is the real -- and tragic -- possibility that new, urban-based owners of land will just sell it, resulting once in the emergence of landless peasants and large landowners, without even the feudal inhibitions of the previous aristocracy.
An even more contentious issue has been the Zetenyi-Takacs Act introduced by two MDF backbenchers. It would have lifted the statute of limitations on |major crimes' committed by functionaries of the Nazi regimes in power before 1945, and by Communist functionaries after 1948. …