Abstract
이 연구는 악셀 호네트의 ‘인정투쟁’이론으로부터 발전시킨 ‘적대와 인정의 정치’라는 틀로 공산체제 붕괴 이후 중유럽의 정치변화를 헝가리를 사례로 하여 분석하는 것을 목적으로 하였다. 헝가리는 1989~2010년 사이의 체제전환 기간 동안에 온건다당체제와 양당체제가 유지되면서 여야간 정권교체를 이룸으로써 비교적 안정된 민주주의와 함께 ‘인정의 정치’를 보여 주었다. 정당 간 경쟁은 존재하였지만 경쟁세력을 타도하고자 하는 홀로주체적 정치의 모습은 찾기 어려웠다. 하지만 2010년 이후 헝가리 정치는 크게 변모한 것으로 평가된다. 2010년 집권한 오르반 정권은 포퓰리즘적 정치로 특징지워지며, 현재까지 3연임에 성공하였다. 오르반 포퓰리즘은 비자유주의적 민주주의로 정당화되었으며, 민주세력과 반대세력에 대한 탄압, 언론자유 억압, 그리고 민족주의의 동원과 반 난민 및 반 유럽연합 정책을 전개하고 있다. 오르반의 포퓰리즘으로 인하여 헝가리에서 서로주체적 ‘인정의 정치’는 홀로주체적 ‘적대의 정치’로 변화되었다. 2010년 이후 헝가리 민주주의는 후퇴하거나 퇴행하였고, 민주주의와 권위주의의 사이에 위치하고 있다. 사르토리의 정당체제론을 적용할 경우 오르반의 포퓰리즘은 일당우위정당체제와 패권정당체제의 경계에 서 있는 것으로 보인다.The purpose of this thesis is to analyze political changes in post-communist Central Europe―focusing on Hungary―with the framework of the “politics of antagonism and recognition” that has been developed from Axel Honneth’s theory of “recognition struggle.” In Hungary during the system transformation period of 1989-2010, a relatively consolidated democracy that operated with moderately limited pluralism or the two-party system was maintained, and the politics of recognition was sustained. Though competition and conflicts among the political forces were present, it was difficult to discern antagonism in politics aimed at getting rid of opposing forces. Since 2010, however, Hungary’s politics are considered widely as having changed enormously. Vitor Orbán’s second administration, which took power in 2010, is characterized as a populist regime and has succeeded in winning three consecutive elections. Orbán’s populism has been justified as illiberal democracy. His regime has suppressed democratic and opposing forces, severely infringing on freedoms of the press and speech. The regime has also mobilized nationalistic sentiments in Hungary and has implemented anti-EU and anti-refugee policies. Because of Orbán’s populism, the politics of recognition has been transformed into the politics of antagonism in Hungary. Since 2010, Hungary’s democracy has receded and deteriorated. The political environment seems to float between democracy and authoritarianism. When we apply Sartori’s theory of party systems to Hungary, it seems that the country is situated on the border between a predominant party system and a hegemonic party system.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.