[ad_1]
Viktor Orbán, László Kövér, Zsolt Németh and Lajos Kósa have been sitting in parliament for about thirty years; four of them from the parliament that changed the regime remained within eight cycles and three decades later. Today’s parliament adopted a political declaration on the occasion of “the restoration of the Hungarian popular representation system thirty years ago,” and this is truly political: noting that the second day of May 1990 is considered the first day of our recovered freedom, the impossibility of carrying out the regime change, post-communist wrote about the danger of slipping, which, according to a statement adopted by the majority of Fidesz, was only concluded by the new Fundamental Law of 2012.
Image: nntp.hu
Since 1990, parliament collapsed, lost its political weight, and pretty much everything else has changed, but the symbolic declarations, past politics of the present, still evoke regime change, only political marketing has become more professional around it. Where are today’s political announcements, such as the 1990 winning MDF, in which they attempted to impress the masses with prayers including Berzsenyi’s classical morality, Kölcsey’s patriotism, Széchenyi’s practicality, Petőfi’s drive, the weariness of Kossuth The wisdom, the sacrifice of Pál Teleki, the heroism of Bajcsy-Zsilinszky, the vocation of László Németh as a national educator, the political thought of István Bibó?
The communicative awkwardness of those who suddenly switched from politics to politics was receptive to even the most serious forces, not to mention the colorful folklore of regime change, such as the pro-kingdom Hungarian Legitimate Party, a disabled pensioner from Siófok, the Left Review Party or the Hungarian Health Party. Caraş’s Hungarian October party, Anna Petrasovits’ socdemas, or the palace businessmen’s party seemed to be quite serious organizations.
New songs of new times.
The election was attended by 58 parties, six of which finally made it to parliament: MDF, SZDSZ, FKgP, MSZP, Fidesz and KDNP – this map of the party became dominant for the next two decades. “This was the first election in the modern history of the country that was considered free and democratic on the basis of universal, equal and secret suffrage and more or less equal information opportunities,” says historian András Mink in the compilation of the anniversary of OSA. As he writes, due to the close results, it had to be recalculated in several districts, which is why the official result fell, the new parliament finally met on May 2, where announcements and receptions were made that shaped the change of regime.
Inaugural session of the National Assembly on May 2, 1990.
“The dominant political actors of the time were able to make responsible, generous, sometimes lofty gestures and were willing to cooperate, not only with words but also with deeds, avoiding the political crisis and cataclysm that threatened the first phase of regime change, the impending economic and social crisis. to defeat them together. The speeches from the first two days of parliament testify to this, ”Mink said, continuing with criticism:
We now know that this moment of grace did not last long. What seemed normal and evident in the spring of 1990 has gradually faded, and no trace can be found in the exercise of power today.
The big deal was due in part to personal issues and shared power, in part to a new governance build. At that time, the text of the MDF-SZDSZ pact was presented to Parliament, which was agreed by József Antall and Péter Tölgyessy on April 29. The pact was attacked much later, mainly from the most difficult part of the MDF, and then from the right in general, and many say it is one of the rare Hungarian examples of necessary political compromise in the interests of common sense and the country in The last decades.
However, the relationship between the MDF and the SZDSZ, the two main parties of regime change that have disappeared in the historical sink, had become quite angry by then. The election campaign was largely due to the struggle between the two groups, with practical issues such as the privatization method (the SZDSZ initially forced a spontaneous, rapid and interest-driven privatization, the MDF was more cautious) and personal issues such as election of the president in a rather cultural way. Tribal identities dominated.
the crimes
While the SZDSZ itself was a more radical, decidedly anti-communist and intellectual group, the MDF increased in popularity by emphasizing “quiet power.”
We do not have to forget our past with a strong anti-communist sentiment. (…) We do not want to replace people, we want to change the system that paralyzes people
They said of themselves. Even then, Antall flatly rejected the accusation of nationalism and said that those who attack them would also harm the country’s prestige.
The media war, which was then fully opened, began long before the election in the early 1990s. While the public changed its name and state security (the Dunagate scandal came to light in January), right-wing intellectuals felt that a significant portion of the press was drawn to the SZDSZ and left-wing reformers. The cultural struggle really broke out when Pozsgay fired Endre Aczél from the News chief and named István G. Pálfy, close to the MDF, in his place.
Csurka responded to the violent reactions with a scandalous radio note: in this, the writer, who had become the leader of the right-wing of the MDF, said that “the country is on the brink of ruin, an impious tribute is imposed on most families, and some, including democracy Also, don’t they treat the public with this? Well, that was enough. Both a fairy tale and a lie. It’s about Abu Dhabi, the holidays, the tobacco and the possibility of domination. “
Csurka, with veiled Jews, said that “a dwarf minority can accept with all of society that only their truth is the truth,” and spoke of the Lenin children, referring to the leaders of the SZDSZ, their sympathetic parents of communism, or their own departure. MDF management later stated this as a memorable phrase as part of Csurka’s writing work, of course the topos is very much a political topos that has been alive ever since, most recently by Mária Schmidt against the now-dead Rajk.
Either we or the girl
On the part of the SZDSZ, they accused the accusations of their left choice as alpine elections, and removed former members of the communist party who sit in the MDF presidency. A day before the first round, Tamás Gáspár’s writings in Miklós Speech caused another scandal. In this then conservative and liberal TGM, the new Horthy era scared: “… If the SZDSZ does not win the elections, we can predict that there will be no opposition in possession of their rights, so there will be no democratic government.”
Mucsa and fear, or a free Democratic majority. There is no third way
He has written in his memorable election text ever since. (According to an interview with the Index, his prayers have been defensible ever since, although he now speaks more forcefully about the “Cosmopolitan Mucos”). The acting President of the SZDSZ, the philosopher János Kis, no longer considered it so good to threaten the voter. They want an exchange economy in which the SZDSZ is a natural opposition to the MDF, and vice versa.
According to contemporary polls, most voters wanted a large MDF-SZDSZ coalition, but between the two rounds this was completely rejected by József Antall, there was a lot of opposition to SZDSZ in the party, and they felt great commitment in the opposite direction. Interestingly, a Fidesz Zsolt Németh argued in favor of the grand MDF-SZDSZ coalition, among others, saying that a strong government is needed. Then he thought that he should not be afraid of what was usual anyway: if the big governments that changed the regime were all in government, the successor party would be the main opposition force. “As for the possible increase in popularity of the MSZMP: perhaps the past few decades have been a sufficient safeguard against this,” he wrote. As we know, the MSZP still won an absolute majority in the next elections.
Commitment, not a hit
Although it did not become a large coalition, the MDF made an electoral alliance with its later coalition counterparts, small farmers, and Christian Democrats, the two sides still had to agree in parliament. Although the pact was officially concluded between the MDF and SZDSZ and was signed by various parties on both sides, in essence an agreement was reached between József Antall and Péter Tölgyessy. “In the eyes of many within the party, agreeing with the SZDSZ was somewhat sinful. Part of the MDF hated SZDSZ from the gut. But Antall was the president, he had room for maneuver. Then all the boards approved the signed agreement, of course there was still quite a stir, ”recalled Imre Kónya, the future leader of the MDF faction.
The negotiations took place at the MDF headquarters in Bem Square, and not in a tube shack, and Tölgyessy did not arrive in disguise, but in the brown sweater.
He said why he thought it was ridiculous when they talked about Antall doing it in a coup. According to him, at first Csurka also considered the pact to be good, but later he became its fiercest critic.
It was agreed on April 29 and announced on May 2, when the National Assembly was formed. “Both the government and opposition parties have a special responsibility to the nation: to consolidate emerging democratic institutions and make the country manageable. Therefore, it is considered necessary to reach an agreement on the issues of public law that affect the stability of democratic institutions and the governance of the country, “says the text. The agreement consisted of several points (it may be worth reading the document András Schiffer’s current response), the point was a series of commitments made for the sake of governance.
They significantly restricted the scope of two-thirds of the laws, incorporated the chancery system that ensured a strong prime minister position, and the MDF renounced the right to nominate a president for the benefit of the SZDSZ. More precisely, personally in favor of Göncz, about whom Antall also had a good opinion. At the same time, an agreement was reached with the media, which, while also a compromise, facilitated the continuation of the media war at least as much as it prevented it.
The magnitude of the moment
I see the fruit of our work, so it does not have a bitter taste that the resignation of my government can present today.
Miklós Németh and Árpád Göncz appeared before the inaugural parliament, and at that moment, as President of Parliament, he said: “I am shocked, fully aware of the magnitude of the moment and my future responsibility.” Formally, he entrusted Antall with the formation of the government, in such laudable words:
“I met Mr. József Antall, before being Mr. József Antall, at a very young age. (…) During this time I had the opportunity to know his moral and spiritual gifts. I have always been amazed at how deep his historical, constitutional and legal knowledge is. (…) I say all this so that, based on my personal experience, which is perhaps closer than his purely political experience, I can say that I consider that József Antall is perfectly suited to the task. “(Long applause)
Finally, comes Antall’s response, in which he asked for confidence, especially:
I want you to believe and know that no personal ambition is driving this problem. No professional desire leads.
How far does that sound now from a semi-alien world. Honly years have passed.
In this article, we have drawn heavily on the OSA Resource Collection.
(Cover image: National Assembly meeting on 2 May 1990. In the foreground are Árpád Göncz, László Sólyom, János Szentágothai, Prime Minister József Antall in the middle, István Balsai and László Salamon on the right, György Csóti standing behind them , Zsolt Zétényi behind József Antall on the left. In the upper right corner is Gyula Zacsek. Photo: Zoltán Szalay / Fortepan)
[ad_2]
