Jump to content

Talk:Hungarian nationalism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Parties

[edit]

Why do we list parties in the article? Do they have any common with Hungarian nationalism? Fakirbakir (talk) 07:59, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Fakirbakir:,
yes, a valid question...Hungarian nationalism are not necessarily identical with "natinonal conservative right-wing parties" who are not necessarily nationalists. Especially now some groups trys to connect Fidesz with Hungarian nationalism and far-right...maybe the list should contain only those recent & historic parties that surely may be connected to "Hungarian nationalism", or you have a better idea?(KIENGIR (talk) 10:37, 18 December 2018 (UTC))[reply]
Fidesz could be described as patriotic or even populist but the party should not be listed with Nazi parties. First I thought this party could not be called "nationalist" but after checking the term "Nationalism", here, I became a bit unsure about it.Fakirbakir (talk) 20:31, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Fakirbakir
jumping late in this discussion but there are an overwhelming number of sources in favour of listing Fidesz as a Nationalist party. Page edited accordingly. Aristeus01 (talk) 22:16, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The claim that Fidesz is a nationalist party was well sourced on the Fidesz page. Here are some additional 2018 journalistic sources for the claim.

--Jay942942 (talk) 23:28, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We have to be careful what is really true, or just glued or accused a party of something. Fidesz has no connection to the Hungarian Nationalism born in the 19th century and their current developments (= parties and movements on the line of radical or "old fashion" nationalism). Sure that Fidesz is a patriotic party, allegedly defending national interests, etc. but this is the not the traditional right-wing nationalism/Hungarian nationalism just because of the stance of the immigration policy and the different opinon regarding the future of the European Union.(KIENGIR (talk) 13:48, 30 December 2018 (UTC))[reply]
Wikipedia works based on sources and there are plenty to back up that claim. I understand most of those sources were from liberal news outlets, but there are also several conservative sources (Fox News, Daily Express, Breitbart) which say the same thing as well. I avoided listing those because other users would then claim they are unreliable. Do you have any sources advancing an alternative view?--Jay942942 (talk) 20:41, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Moreover and despite, or good faith should led us also in Wikipedia to try to present things most near to the truth, even in accordance with the rules and use sources that are as well the most near to it. The problem is that you still did not notice, that Fidesz has not any real connection to the traditional 19th century Hungarian nationalism (and their recent developments the listed parties really have/had) this article is about.(KIENGIR (talk) 20:17, 1 January 2019 (UTC))[reply]
Do you have a source for it having no connection? In the absence of that, we should go off what the reliable sources say. Furthermore, this article is Hungarian nationalism, not Hungarian nationalism (19th century). Surely newer movements should also therefore be included provided sources back up their inclusion under that label?--Jay942942 (talk) 12:05, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Who said it would be a connection, why should a source deny something that never existed? Not necessarily the article's title is decisive, by the description of what is the article meant for. Regarding the parties who are on the list, they self-allegedly by their program and philosophy qualify themselves of that category. before you would go further, I advise you to check also the Romanian nationalism article. It follows the same principle, there is not any similar party like Fidesz on the list, though regarding some issues between the Hungarian minority in Romania and the Goverment, or President who are linked to those parties that are not on list could be as well treated as nationalist by some opinions, by circles or by some actions (literally PDL, PSD, but personally even if i would treat some actions as "nationalist", I would not agree to qualify the parties in general as "nationalist parties"). In a way I think you mix as well "nationalist" with "national" somehow (as those who are not experts of any of the countries internal and external policies, or are trapped by superficial sources). Also in the Romanian article those parties are in the list who have clear far-right or self-alleged program of philosophy that without doubt qualify tham to the real, traditional nationalist category.(KIENGIR (talk) 00:36, 5 January 2019 (UTC))[reply]
A source advancing an alternative narrative is necessary to rebut the numerous sources that you say are false. We can't just take your word for it that this "never existed". Also, I would not hold up an 4 year old article with no sources whatsoever as a model.--Jay942942 (talk) 23:00, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your concerns, but in case the Hungarian Government or Fidesz would defend itself, you could say again it is just their opinion, even if it is sourced...as well, in case not just this article, but the other mentioned article should be once roborated and commensurated, as following similar principles (though I did not check other countries, but would worth it). Anyway, I will try to find and insert sources slowly.(KIENGIR (talk) 23:08, 7 January 2019 (UTC))[reply]

Fidesz

[edit]

There is an edit war here over whether or not Fidesz should be featured in this article and it appears that some involved have a partisan agenda. What should we do? Charles Essie (talk) 20:21, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The ideology of the Hungarian Fidesz is Right-wing populism and National conservatism as we can see on the main page and here http://parties-and-elections.eu/hungary.html, it is not the same level as Nazi style parties like this Arrow Cross Party. It is filthy politic, for the left wing the other side is fair right and for the right wing the other side is far liberal. OrionNimrod (talk) 20:38, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is based on sources, not personal opinions. The phrase and categorization are supported by studies and should be restored. Aristeus01 (talk) 14:15, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Aristeus01, I see you are quite a big obsession about Hungarian articles as a Romanian user, we could see many times that your knowledge is limited or only deliberately cherry picked (mostly negative things) in several Hungarian topics . Fidesz - National conservatism: that is a Wiki rule that you cannot add a different ideology what is the main article of the party.
I do not see in your sources that Fidesz would be "Hungarian nationalist party" https://www.populismstudies.org/viktor-orban-past-to-present/, https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/159167061.pdf, I see you do not know what does mean National conservatism, I admit, in English language these expressions are very similar. In Hungarian we use different words "nemzeti =national conservatism" "nacionalista =nationalist" which is more right than the previous one, and the most right is the "soviniszta =chauvinism". But I cannot doubt that you can find thousand of political bloggers from the other politcal side who think Fidesz is same as Hitler party :D probably you are intentionally focusing to find these bloggers.
For example Fidesz (national conservatism) banned Magyar Gárda (made by Jobbik who was nationalist, but it changed and today not anymore)
Comparing with Hungary, in Romania since WW2 all parties were nationalist (even the communist party) should we list all of them in the Romanian nationalism pack? They are more nationalist than the Fidesz itself, so I can understand that if a Hungarian party has a "slighly more nationalist tone" (but what about the deeds?) than the others that you think it is a very big "nationalism". :D OrionNimrod (talk) 12:22, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sooner or later we all have to face the man in the mirror. When Hungary will have to do that I hope you'll have the wisdom to say the road taken was not the best and not "it's all because of the büdös oláhs!" For now the best you can do, it seems, is call people "obsessed" if they disagree with your unsubstantiated opinion based on nothing but patriotic feelings, and worse refer to their ethnicity as a premise for bias from their part. "You have to be Hungarian to understand" seems to be the only argument brought so far.
In 5 minutes I can conjure a number of sources to support my edit. That's how Wiki works: if it is something generally agreed it will be easy to find citations from different and unrelated sources.
A New Political Movement Emerges on Hungary’s Far Right - Foreign Policy Research Institute (fpri.org)
Europe and right-wing nationalism: A country-by-country guide
Right-Wing Populism in Central Europe: Hungarian Case (Fidesz, Jobbik)
HUNGARY’S 2022 ELECTION: ISSUES FOR CONGRESS.
Performing the nation: the Janus-faced populist foundations of illiberalism in Hungary
Notice that among the sources there are Hungarian authors.
Your whataboutism with Romania as example misses the target, as I do not have a better opinion of Romanian political parties, just more incompetent, and the attempt of seeing shades of nationalism is just your personal interpretation.
All in all, I challenge you to provide with independent sources that dismiss the Fidesz and Jobbik nationalist categorization. I'm aware, as we discussed before, that they are not monochromatic and there are steps taken towards a more "mature" political agenda. However, until the international community and specifically the RS community starts to acknowledge that, here is where we are. Aristeus01 (talk) 13:07, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Aristeus01
I think I did not make personal harassments, so please do not put word in my mouth. I pointed out only that you are not Hungarian, because it means you could know much less things or biased things than native residents, even I saw this biased or limited knowledge many times when you edit Hungarian medieval historical things, interesting in your edits you presented mostly negative or strange things in Hungarian related contents. (Could you edit Hungarian related things to add a positive or neutral contents as well?) And this is not my opinion what is on the Fidesz party article (I never edited) and it is not my opinion what is the self determination of a party.
I do not know what is the business with Fidesz with an the article about an another party (non Hungarian author): https://www.fpri.org/article/2018/07/a-new-political-movement-emerges-on-hungarys-far-right/ As I said you just deliberately cherry picking, even you do not read the articles (I do not think 5 min enough to find and read all of them as you claimed), you just google "Fidesz + nationalism" and you can share 1000 websites. Fidesz itself a National conservatism, you can see the national word there, but this does not mean a Nazi style nationalism as like the Arrow Cross party which is on the list.
As you can see I did not touch Jobbik in the list, but it is changed since 2020, if you like it or not, I bet you can find many articles about it.
Are you joking? [1] A criminal couple who robbed jewellery shop how can be a political movement???
Could you tell me what is your real purpose to extend this article? To show Hungary is a full of hardcore nationalist country? I think you could have deeper knowledge in the subject in Romania, you could find more and more hardcore examples in Romania, for example against local Hungarians, those things did not exist in Hungary, just one example among many: [2][3] OrionNimrod (talk) 14:33, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@OrionNimrod
Believe it or not I came to actually like some of your edits and points. Some.
Here however:
"I see you are quite a big obsession about Hungarian articles as a Romanian user, we could see many times that your knowledge is limited or only deliberately cherry picked (mostly negative things) in several Hungarian topics" - how is this not personal? Where is the source critique?
"Could you edit Hungarian related things to add a positive or neutral contents as well?" - I already have, but those edits do not seem to trigger your interest 1 2 . What you call negative is just reality, not the embellished propaganda promoted it seems in some Hungarian circles. And I did write about Romanian nationalism and its dark side much more than about the Hungarian one.
My purpose is to expand and improve Wikipedia with sourced information, something that seems to be against the intentions of some on this article. Again, your reply here does not satisfy the requirements. I did not revert to give you time to come up with sources to support your edits, not another upset anti-Romanian speech. I am willing to wait longer, there is no rush, but I'm not going to cave in to some empty criticism. So please, next time come up with sources to support your point not these xenophobic speeches. Aristeus01 (talk) 15:15, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if you think it was an insult Aristeus01, I apologize. I was thinking about this kind of edits: [4]I tought a comparison that an average native Hungarian history fan user who learned many things through his life, access tons of Hungarian sources which can read, could have deeper knowledge in Hungarian things. But of course I do not doubt everybody could be expert in every topic if he invest a lot of effort. I do not think that was an anti-Romanian speech.
I see you are worry about Hungarian nationalism, note, these incidents are non exist in Hungary, recent anti-Hungarian deed in Serbia: [5] [6] There are plenty these incidents in Slovakia, Ukraine, Romania, Serbia against local Hungarians which are non exist inverse in Hungary against local Slovaks, Romanians, Serbs, Ukrainians. The new history book in Russia by Putin claim that the revolution of 1956 was a Nazi revolution :D this is also a source...
"I already have, but those edits do not seem to trigger your interest" Sorry but I am not following you, and not every articles on my watchlist. Nice, however those things just grammatical corrections or links, I was thinking about a new or improved content. As you can see I am focusing on Hungarian related articles, and Romanian things only if those are related to the Hungarian articles like we did it together Romanian lexis#Hungarian influence, and many articles we evolved together to present Romanian and Hungarian viewpoints, I appreciate it I think mostly we could work good. I also added positive Romanian things, like in the Mongol invasion I emphasized the Vlach-Székelys protected the passes and catched together the invaders or in the Vlach law the Vlach were enstrusted to guard road to ensure the safety of the people, tradings, etc
"not the embellished propaganda promoted it seems in some Hungarian circles" Like what? That Obenpullendorf in Austria was not a Hungarian but a Romanian settlement between 800-1400 as you stated Talk:Pannonian Romance#Deleting sourced content? :D
Ok, so you admit that all nice things in the Hungarian history is just a propaganda and we should write about only bad and negative Hungarian things. Right? This remember me, it was in the tv a previous communist old man who said very angry the Hungarian history books are not good "It is unacceptable that István Dobó is called a hero!" "the text refers to the Hungarian soldiers of the war with the Turks as heroes, leaving no freedom for the student to reach the appropriate conclusions." "we shed tears for the fallen Turkish soldiers..." So according to him a person is not a hero who defended a castle against the Ottoman invasion who made many bloodshet and many crimes. I bet in Romania this nonsense in unimaginable, for example this year became Avram Iancu year in Romania, he with his men uprooted one by one full Hungarian settlements, thousand of Hungarians in a really cruel way (sawing limbs, burning alive, killing pregnant women, babies, etc). I could call this rather an "embellished promoted propaganda" that in 2023 he could be a hero in an EU country, that is why I said the nationalism is far stronger in all Romanian parties than in the Fidesz however you are worry only about this. OrionNimrod (talk) 17:42, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@OrionNimrod
I'm glad to see we returned to more positive communication but I cannot help to notice the sources for the edits are missing. As we seem to be the only two left in this conversation would you be ok with 3rd opinion? Aristeus01 (talk) 17:10, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think you mix the "national conservative" with the "nationalist" word, I admit the words are similar. I never heard in Hungary that Fidesz would be "nationalist" party, that word used for other parties. It called always as "national conservative" party.
But still I am curious what does mean by you that you dedicated to remove "nice" Hungarian things: "the embellished propaganda promoted it seems in some Hungarian circles" For example like what? Like that King Saint Stephen was a Hungarian king and not a Romanian king as some Romanian nationalist claim? Just please help to understand your motivation. OrionNimrod (talk) 17:16, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The motivation here is that these entries are supported by RS and it expands on the topic. Aristeus01 (talk) 17:46, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As you can see the edit history or the talk page many Hungarian editors already did not understand the existence of Fidesz in this category, I think this article is not well know by Hungarian users, not me, but I bet it could be many Hungarian users who will always remove Fidesz from here as this is not the proper category. OrionNimrod (talk) 18:50, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

3O Response: There's a fair bit of muddying of the waters here (including commenting on another editor's nationality to dismiss their opinion, which is beyond inappropriate), but it looks clear enough to me. We have five high-quality sources which explicitly and unambiguously refer to this as a nationalist party. Unless some other sources of similar quality can be produced which dispute that characterization, we follow what the sources say, not our own opinions as editors, and we don't do "Butbutbut" disputes when good sources are clearly aligned on something. It doesn't matter whether I think it's nationalist, or whether either editor here does; what matters is that there has been demonstrated a clear consensus of good-quality sources that it is. So, the article should reflect that. Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:46, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Seraphimblade, Fidesz ideology is National conservatism as presented in the own article, why should we overwrite its own main topic?.
National conservatism#List of national conservative political parties Fidesz here in this list with provided sources.
Tthis article is Hungarian nationalism, where Nazi parties are in this category, like Arrow cross party and neo-Nazi organizations https://24.hu/belfold/2015/08/10/hitler-emlekturara-keszulnek-a-magyar-nacik/.
The current governing Fidesz party (who governed Hungary in a long period in 1996-2002, 2010-today)i s not this kind of party as those Nazi organizations. Aristeus01 is mixing the "national conservative" with the "nationalist" word, I admit the words are similar. Still I think native Hungarians have deeper knowledge in the political situation in Hungary. "national" party does not mean "nationalistic" party.
Could you show me exactly which good source claim and which sentences that Fidesz is a Hungarian "nationalist" party and not a Hungarian "national conservatic" party?
This provided source by Aristeus01 would be good source? If you read, this source then I see it is about a different party about the more radical more right wing "new radical nationalist political force" Our Homeland Movement party, while that source is claim that Fidesz is "center-right Fidesz" https://www.fpri.org/article/2018/07/a-new-political-movement-emerges-on-hungarys-far-right/
This is also a good source, election list, the party list as National conservatism: http://parties-and-elections.eu/hungary.html OrionNimrod (talk) 09:29, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Seraphimblade thank you for your time and input!
To be clear, touching on what @OrionNimrod replied, I do not agree with the equivalence between nationalist and Nazi nor do I intend to present Fidesz as one of the latter category. Even more, including in the list of national conservative parties provided, we can see examples of those being listed in the Nationalism page of their respective country, as the two terms are by no means mutually exclusive. And, reading further in the article criticised by @OrionNimrod, we can see that Fidesz politic is classed as "illiberal ethno-nationalism".
That compared to Arrow Cross Party or a contemporary party of the radical right orientation Fidesz looks less radical is not within the scope of our debate. What we discuss here is whether there are enough RS to list the party in this article, and, as you said, with clear consensus among them, which there is. Aristeus01 (talk) 11:19, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I find "the illiberal ethno-nationalism that defines Orbánization" that word in this content. "Orbanization", this would be the Fidesz party? What does many "orbanization" a new term? :D We can see "presence of radical nationalists to his (Orban) right" so it does not list Orban in this category.
"The presence of radical nationalists to his right inoculates Mr. Orbán from competing instrumental and communicative exigencies. Instead, he directs his energy on, as Andrew Feenberg wrote in another context altogether, on “gaining control of a new base of power, the coercive and administrative institutions of the modern state.”[16] Mr. Toroczkai’s MHM plays the political vanguard of a sort, not of Mr. Orbán personally, but undoubtedly of the illiberal ethno-nationalism that defines Orbánization. In Georg Lukács’ memorable phrase, the MHM fulfills its destiny by remaining always one step in front of Mr. Orbán’s move rightward.[17] And the farther right the MHM moves and the sharper its political rhetoric becomes, the more Jobbik political terrain opens to Mr. Orbán for the taking and the more marginalized Hungary’s center-left opposition parties become."
Indeed the National conservatism had nationalist elements but it is different than the simple "nationalism". Also Fidesz was founded in 1988, which year it became "Hungarian nationialist" party what is your opinion?
Still I see this in the main article Fidesz: Fidesz – Hungarian Civic Alliance (Hungarian pronunciation: [ˈfidɛs]; Hungarian: Fidesz – Magyar Polgári Szövetség) is a right-wing populist and national-conservative political party in Hungary, led by Viktor Orbán.
I do not see Fidesz is a "Hungarian nationalist party" also not like this: Far-right politics
Probably the article would be good to split nationalism and ultranationalism.
Btw I do not doubt that many people, political bloggers from opposite political circles label everybody as "nazi" "ultranationalist" etc.
Honestly I have really not much interest in today politic, I am interested to edit history contents, mostly old ones, they are mostly more relaxed. OrionNimrod (talk) 12:02, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OrionNimrod, I'm talking about the sources listed above. You may need library access or the like to get to the EBSCOHost ones, but those are scholarly research. In terms of easily accessible ones, we are talking about, for example, the Foreign Policy Research Institute ([7]), which refers to "Orbanization" as illiberal ethno-nationalism, and the BBC ([8]), which explicitly, while discussing Fidesz, states flat out Hungary has two nationalist parties, with Fidesz being one and Jobbik being the other. Do remember that your personal thoughts on Hungarian politics are completely irrelevant, no matter how well-informed you believe yourself to be on the subject. The only thing that matters is what sources say (and BBC and FPRI are certainly not just "bloggers"; they are highly reliable sources), not any "But the sources should say this instead of this!". If they don't, the article reflects what they actually say, and I'm afraid that's all there is to it. What they clearly say is that Fidesz is nationalist, not "national conservative" or anything of the like. Do you have any sources (not "Butbutbut", but sources) which state otherwise? Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:10, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hungarian_nationalism&oldid=1202844605"