national populism and slovak – hungarian relations in - MEK

Peter UèeòNational Populism and Slovak – Hungarian Relations in Slovakia 2006 – 2009. Forum Minority Research Institute Šamorín – Somorja, 2009Finally, in addition to identifying the embodiments of national populism,the ‘situation’ of national populism should be addressed as well. Owing tothe shared ‘staple’, national-populist moment was capable of materialisingin some polities also in the form of alliances of various ‘unorthodox’ parties.Political coalition of the populist radical right with national populiststook place in the 1990s in Romania (PRM and PDSR) and Serbia (SRS andSPS). In Slovakia, in addition to stable cooperation of the HZDS and SNS,also the radical left element was involved in the form of the SlovakWorkers’ Association (ZRS).Slovak National Populist MomentBy way of example, let’s illustrate our views of the post-communist nationalpopulism on the case of Slovakia.The reason for which in the aftermath of the regime change any successfulopposition politics in Slovakia had to be based on a messageaddressing social impact of economic changes brought up by the transitionsand the widespread feeling among the Slovaks that the institutional/constitutionalarrangement of the Czechoslovak Federation was not fair, wereobvious. Slovak political elite were divided on how to response to thoseperceptions. While its ‘federalist’ and ‘civic liberal’ part held it was necessaryto withstand the bad weather by consistently sticking to the line ofeconomic liberalisation and preserving existing constitutional arrangements,a national(ist) opposition rose within their ranks.In general, Slovak opposition outside of the VPN reacted both to socialdeprivation (SD¼) and to a perceived unfairness of the form of the state(SNS, KDH). But it was Vladimír Meèiar, heading the opposition withinthe (nominally) civic liberal camp, who mixed the ‘remedy’ of nationalpopulism for all Slovak ails. First, he successfully combined the social andthe national aspects of the Slovaks’ disillusionment with the new order inhis (party’s) appeal to the people making the national interpret the social.Second, he added a strong populist ingredient to the movement by bothdefining the people (members of the Slovak nation affected by the post-transitiondeprivations) and pointing out the harmful elite which, ill-serving orbetraying the people was to be blamed for those deprivations. Finally, heprovided a suggestion for a solution (a “bearable transition”) appealing toa noteworthy number of Slovaks, that meant taking (some) economic andpolitical power to ‘Slovak hands’, those hands being the hands of peoplethat understood the needs and would not fail the people – Vladimír Meèiarhimself and his Movement for Democratic Slovakia.28