Using an original dataset of partisan protest events in Hungary (n = 4836) spanning 1989 to 2011, we argue that left-liberal parties’ neglect in cultivating civil society during the post-communist period had deleterious downstream effects on Hungarian liberal democracy. First, it enabled the growth of an illiberal, right-wing civil society that facilitated Fidesz-KDNP’s 2010 landslide electoral victory. Second, it deprived the left-liberals of mobilization resources that could have been used to carry out contentious collective action to counter Fidesz-KDNP’s early maneuvers at democratic backsliding, in particular their constitutional overhaul. The data allow us to trace patterns in partisan protest over time and across cities, illustrating the dangers of asymmetric mass mobilization (AMM) during the prevention and containment periods.
BóczJ. (2009). A nonprofit szektor strukturális átalakulása Magyarországon. A magyar nonprofit szektor az 1990-es évek elejétől a 2000-es évek közepéig [The structural transformation of the non-profit sector in Hungary. The Hungarian non-profit sector from the early 1990s to the mid-2000s]. [PhD thesis, Budapesti Corvinus Egyetem, Szociológiai és Társadalompolitikai Intézet].
2.
BremerB.HutterS.KriesiH. (2020). Dynamics of protest and electoral politics in the Great Recession. European Journal of Political Research, 59(4), 842–866. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12375
CapocciaG. (2023). Countering illiberalism in liberal democracies: Actors, strategies, temporalities. Unpublished manuscript.
5.
Castelli GattinaraP.FroioC. (2024). When the far right makes the news: Protest characteristics and media coverage of far-right mobilization in Europe. Comparative Political Studies, 57(3), 419–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/00104140231169029
6.
CsepeliG.GönczölK.GyörgyiK.HalmaiG.KaczibaA.OrmosM.PatakiF.TóthJ.VörösmartiM. (2007). Vizsgálati jelentés a 2006 szeptember–októberi fővárosi demonstrációkkal, utcai rendzavarásokkal és rendfenntartó intézkedésekkel kapcsolatos eseményekről.
7.
EllinasA.LamprianouI. (2021). Societal responses to right-wing extremism: Antifascist mobilisation against Golden Dawn in Greece. South European Society and Politics, 26(4), 437–464. https://doi.org/10.1080/13608746.2022.2097732
8.
EllinasA.LamprianouI. (2024). Movement versus party: The electoral effects of anti-far right protests in Greece. American Political Science Review, 118(2), 687–705. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055423000588
GerőM.KopperÁ. (2013). Fake and dishonest: Pathologies of differentiation of the civil and the political sphere in Hungary. Journal of Civil Society, 9(4), 361–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/17448689.2013.844449
11.
GillionD. Q. (2013). The political power of protest: Minority activism and shifts in public policy. Cambridge University Press.
12.
GillionD. Q.SouleS. A. (2018). The impact of protest on elections in the United States. Social Science Quarterly, 99(5), 1649–1664. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12527
13.
GreskovitsB. (1998). The political economy of protest and patience. East European and Latin American transformations compared. Central European University Press.
14.
GreskovitsB. (2015a). The hollowing and backsliding of democracy in East Central Europe. Global Policy, 6(S1), 28–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12225
15.
GreskovitsB. (2015b). Ten years of enlargement and the forces of labour in Central and Eastern Europe. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, 21(3), 269–284. https://doi.org/10.1177/1024258915585932
16.
GreskovitsB. (2020). Rebuilding the Hungarian right through conquering civil society: The civic circles movement. East European Politics, 36(2), 247–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/21599165.2020.1718657
17.
GyurcsányF. (2007). Szembenézés: 23 pontban hibákról, tanulságokról, tennivalókról [Reflections: 23 points about mistakes, lessons learned, and things to do] (pp. 1–48).
18.
HellmeierS.BernhardM. (2023). Regime transformation from below: Mobilization for democracy and autocracy from 1900 to 2021. Comparative Political Studies, 56(12), 1858–1890. https://doi.org/10.1177/00104140231152793
19.
HermanL. E. (2016). Re-evaluating the post-communist success story: Party elite loyalty, citizen mobilization and the erosion of Hungarian democracy. European Political Science Review, 8(2), 251–284. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1755773914000472
20.
HowardM. (2003). The weakness of civil society in post-communist Europe. Cambridge University Press.
21.
HutterS. (2014). Protest event analysis and its offspring. In PortaD. D. (Ed.), Methodological practices in social movement research (pp. 335–367). Oxford University Press.
22.
JakliL.GreskovitsB.WittenbergJ. (2024). Replication data for comparative political Studies Dataverse. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/EB2XXE
23.
KornaiJ. (1995). Transformational recession: A general phenomenon examined through the example of Hungary’s development. In KornaiJ. (Ed.), Highways and byways. Studies on reform and post-communist transition (pp. 161–208). MIT Press.
24.
KriesiH.KoopmansR.DuyvendakJ. W.GiugniM. (1995). New social movements in Western Europe: A comparative analysis. University of Minnesota Press.
LoewensteinK. (1937a). Militant democracy and fundamental rights, I. American Political Science Review, 31(3), 417–432. https://doi.org/10.2307/1948164
27.
LoewensteinK. (1937b). Militant democracy and fundamental rights, II. American Political Science Review, 31(4), 638–658. https://doi.org/10.2307/1948103
28.
MacklemP. (2006). Militant democracy, legal pluralism, and the paradox of self-determination. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 4(3), 488–516. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mol017
29.
MadestamA.ShoagD.VeugerS.Yanagizawa-DrottD. (2013). Do political protests matter? Evidence from the tea party movement. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 128(4), 1633–1685. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjt021
30.
McKennaE.O’DonnellC. (2024). Satellite political movements: How grassroots activists bolster Trump and Bolsonaro in the United States and Brazil. American Behavioral Scientist, 68(13), 1782–1803. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642241267939
31.
MeyerD. S.StaggenborgS. (1996). Movements, countermovements, and the structure of political opportunity. American Journal of Sociology, 101(6), 1628–1660. https://doi.org/10.1086/230869
32.
MeyerD. S.TarrowS. (2018). The resistance: The dawn of the anti-Trump opposition movement. Oxford University Press.
33.
MüllerJ. W. (2016). Protecting popular self-government from the people? New normative perspectives on militant democracy. Annual Review of Political Science, 19(1), 249–265. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-043014-124054
RijpkemaB. (2021). Militant democracy and the detection problem. In MalkopoulouA.KirshnerA. S. (Eds.), Militant democracy and its critics: Populism, parties, extremism (pp. 256). Edinburgh University Press.
38.
RuchtD.OhlemacherT. (1992). Protest event data: Collection, uses and perspectives. In DianiM.EyermanR. (Eds.), Studying collective action (pp. 76–106). Sage.
39.
SajóA. (2004). Learning co-operative constitutionalism the hard way: The Hungarian constitutional court shying away from EU supremacy. Zeitschrift für Staats- und Europawissenschaften, 2(3), 351–371. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfse.2004.003
40.
TeorellJ.TorcalM.Ramon MonteroJ. (2007). Political participation: Mapping the terrain. In Van DethJ.W.Ramon MonteroJ.WestholmA. (Eds.), Citizenship and involvement in European democracies (pp. 358–381). Routledge.
41.
UghyM. (2010). Kötött pályán: Az MSZP kampánya. Institute for Political Science, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 4, 17–35.
42.
UitzR. (2009). Hungary. In ThielM. (Ed.), The ‘militant democracy’ principle in modern democracies (pp. 147–182). Routledge.
43.
VüllersJ.HellmeierS. (2022). Does counter-mobilization contain right-wing populist movements? Evidence from Germany. European Journal of Political Research, 61(1), 21–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12439
44.
WasowO. (2020). Agenda seeding: How 1960s black protests moved elites, public opinion and voting. American Political Science Review, 114(3), 638–659. https://doi.org/10.1017/s000305542000009x
