national populism and slovak – hungarian relations in - MEK

Approaching National PopulismWhat originated as a skilful opposition strategy for winning the power,soon (after the 1992 election victory), developed into a massive politicalcampaign and later into a version of the rule and governance 15 with thebroad consequences. Quite naturally, even though not without problems –both parties went through internal clashes and splits before the alliance ofthe radical right and national populism was possible – HZDS allied in furtheringits political project for Slovakia with the SNS. In terms of combiningnational and social criticism, though, the SD¼ never became morethan an occasional tactical ally of the HZDS. And it was not necessaryeither as for a sizable part of the Slovak electorate the ‘combined’ appealof HZDS was far more convincing than nationalism of SNS (not speakingabout KDH) and defensive ‘socialism’ of SD¼.In any case, nationalism was crucial to the success of HZDS project,but their interpretation of the national was different from the nativism ofSNS. To be sure, within the HZDS there were various wings, among them,along with ‘reform socialists’ of the 1968 veneer, and ideologically disinterestedpragmatists, also the nativist one. Nativist intelligentsia, which ralliedaround Meèiar in sizeable numbers, aspired to articulate a distinctivedoctrine or ideology of the Slovak national project, 16 but it was Meèiar himselfwho was deciding on the balance of wings’ influence and accentuatingthe desired messages to address the electorates.As convincingly argued by Deegan-Krause, quintessential to Meèiar’ssuccess was the capability to cement the nationalism and party choice (forHZDS) on one side, and to make this link largely independent from the versionof nationalism voters preferred. The crux of author’s argument is thatwhile in the aftermath of the regime change all types of nationalism (listedin the previous section) existed among Slovaks lacking any particularpattern, by the end of the 1990s Slovak nationalism converged around thepattern which was carefully manipulated and politicised for the sake of theinterest of the ruling group: “At the beginning of the decade, Slovakia’snationalists shared a sense of fear for the future of the Slovak nation, butthey disagreed about the real source of the threat. Some saw Czechoslo -vakia as dominated by Czechs and therefore sought independence, someworried about Hungary and Hungarians living in southern Slovakia, andsome feared that European integration would undermine Slovakia’s culture”(Deegan-Krause 2004, 651). “By the end of the same decade, Slovakia’snationalists were more likely to see the threats to their country coming fromall sides at the same time, and many speculated that enemies of the Slovaknation were actively working together in their attempt to undermineSlovakia’s sovereignty” (Deegan-Krause 2004, 652). 17National Populism and Slovak – Hungarian Relations in Slovakia 2006 – 2009. Forum Minority Research Institute Šamorín – Somorja, 200929