CENTRAL EUROPEAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW
Volume 19. Number 73. Fall 2018
Csaba Varga. Carlos Flores Juberías, József Szájer, Gábor Csizmazia, Edit Fabó, Máté Szabó, László Domonkos, János Simon
CENTRAL EUROPEAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW
Quarterly of Central European Political Science Alliance
Volume: 19 Number: 73
C O N T E N T
Introduction – of Editor-in-chief
Csaba Varga: Law and History, Law as History? – On the historicity of law in Europe
Carlos Flores Juberías: The EU’s Perfect Storm – Borders, discontent, shaky alliances, and external threats
József Szájer: The Sargentini Report on Hungary is a Collection of Lie
Gábor Csizmazia: The Trump Administration’s Relationship with Central Europe – On the strategic and a political track
Edit Fabó: A New Theory for the Examination of Human Society
Máté Szabó: 1968 in Hungary- Half of a century have passed…
László Domonkos: Soviet Soldiers Who Switched Sides During the Hungarian Revolution
János Simon: Hungarian Parliamentary election in 2018 (8 of April 2018)
CONFERENCE, CALL FOR PAPER
Integration vs. Segregation – Muslims and another communities in EU – Sept. 27. Budapest
VIII.WCSA Conference – World Complexity Science Academy, 14-16 Nov. Roma, Italy
XI.Roma Life Docfil Fest – 17 of Nov. 2018, Budapest, Hungary
Xenophobia – A Call for Tolerance in the EU – June 6-8 2019. Oradea, Romania
Krzysztof Brzechczyn ed.: Between Solidarity and Independence. Political Thought of Fighting Solidarity by Michał Kwiecień
About the Authors
CEPoliti Review Fall 2018, Vol. 19. No.73. Quarterly of CEPSA
Editor-in-chief: János Simon
General Assistant of Editor: Dr. Borbála Kossuth
International Assistant of Editor: Alessandro Marengo
Executive Committee of CEPSA:
International Advisory Committee:
Csaba Varga: Law and History, Law as History?
The term ‘law’ is mostly connected with certain peculiarities of (1) the usual customary course of social practice, (2) the decisions made by authorities acting in the name of the law, and (3) enactments by the bodies competent to pass laws. Only real functioning in action shows what and to what extent is real in the claim of law to autonomy. For law is shaped in interaction with social totality, which enables its autonomy to develop but at the same time this makes interaction relative and in extreme cases illusory as well. As to its evolution, Law and History have own paths differing according to whether law is considered as an instrument or as a part of culture. At the same time, Law taken as History itself shows organic unity, raising as central issue the historicity and the need of totality approach for its investigation, with a query (if at all) of a predominant moment in it. Up to now, three big disciplines have evolved for some specific analysis, namely, Historische Rechtsschule, Historical Jurisprudence, and Marxism. Our present-day knowledge suggests that, all that notwithstanding, law (a) lives an own life to a considerable extent, largely independent of apparent conditions, and (b) develops mostly by following own inertia while borrowing from available patterns. As also shown, (1) law is composed not only of rules, nor merely of rules and principles; (2) the culture giving it a meaning is historical, as carried by human practice reconventionalising conventions through their continuous re-actualisation; therefore, (3) neither immobility nor leaps in development are characteristic of it; but (4) any step it takes might be the issue of social compromise in the form of some pragmatic response.
Carlos Flores Juberías: Unsettled borders, growing discontent, shaky alliances and external threats: The EU’s Perfect Storm
The European Union is in such an undeniable existential crisis that even politicians and analysts with diametrically opposed ideological backgrounds have agreed in its diagnosis, and in the urgent need of a shock therapy capable of stopping what looks like a race towards destruction of the European project. The purpose of this essay is to rapidly review –even at the price of having to be extraordinarily synthetic in its approach– the problems that have plunged the European Union into the most serious crisis of its long history. Problems that in any case are susceptible to be grouped into four major labels: those that have slowed down and even reversed the European integration process; those that have generated the increasingly serious internal fractures that the Union is now suffering; those that derive from the deterioration of the traditional alliances of the Union; and those that threaten the leadership of the Union in a world that is increasingly globalized.
Gábor Csizmazia: The Trump administration’s relationship with Central Europe – On a strategic and a political track
The dualism of the Trump administration’s foreign policy is a source of inconsistency in the transatlantic relationship. Washington’s strategic track is focused on the realities of geopolitical competition and is aimed at preserving the West through strength, while the political track of ‘America First’ introduces populist nationalism and a controversial stance toward the liberal international order and allies. Notwithstanding overall European dismay with President Trump’s foreign policy, it has received less criticism from Central Europe, giving a reminder of the transatlantic divide between America’s ‘old and new European’ allies. The article examines the reasons of this phenomenon by reviewing how the strategic and political tracks manifest themselves in Central Europe and how the Visegrád states relate to them. The enhanced U.S. efforts in the face of Russia’s geopolitical challenge are crucial components of the strategic transatlantic security bond for these countries while their debates with Brussels and Western Europe on border protection, the emphasis on the nation-state and the view of the EU elite and bureaucracy provide a political boost to their relationship with Washington. Yet the Trump administration’s foreign policy dualism creates controversies in Central Europe too where strategic and political considerations also call for European unity.
Edit Fabó: A new theory for the examination of human society
A new and comprehensive theory was published by co-authors Tamás Dénes and János Farkas in Hungary in 2015. The title of their book is “The Theory of Human Society on the Basis of Multistructural Model”. According to the authors’ starting point, living systems, such as human society, can only be described in a multistructural manner in the most complete way. Therefore, the tools come from the mathematical graph theory and meet social aspects as well. However, the authors had to introduce new tools to the multistructural model. For example, the theory relies heavily on the structure-different-effect as a basic rule of social motions, the generalization of linear time, the structure time for societies’ own time and for “development”, or the information-cognition-knowledge hierarchical concept-triad. Dénes and Farkas give a guide to the theory, theoretical antecedents, then present society as a living system (the concept and its fundamental law) and the functioning of society, and finally create social development and evolution. Their work includes a radical change of approach that will lead to new solutions for social science research.
Máté Szabó: 1968 in Hungary – Half century passed
In Hungary the lack of dramatic collective experiences did not make 1968 to a common focal point of collective memory, like1956 remained despite of the toughest censorship in culture and thinking of Hungarians. The general feeling was to survive with the Hungarian reforms successful an international crisis of the Eastern bloc, an idea of the “Hungarian Sonderweg” embodied in the personal role of the former bloody-handing dictator of János Kádár, who become in 1968 the image of being politically able to survive the special role of Hungary against the radical, but looser Dubcek in Prague. There were no strong official criticism and propaganda on the Czechoslovak experiment, being basically similar to the Hungarian New Economic Mechanism. Its failure made up an important point of internal and external legitimacy of the Kádár regime. One may look upon 1968 in Hungary as a victory of the Kádár regime, over its former anti-revolutinary, dogmatic image and over the revisionism of the Czech Party before the intervention. The period between 1968-1973 become this way an important legitimacy of the reformist character of the Kádár regime which was able to utilise it during the1980’s, in establishing new cooperation with the West and opening up the regime for economic and cultural experiences and more tolerance towards the dissent which made important preparatory steps to the system transition in 1989. 1968 stands for a victory of Kádár and of “Kádárism” which was characterised by Ágnes Heller as the “dictatorship over the needs” or by the Western publicists as “Goulash-Communism”. The regime itself booked it as silent victory, which resulted in very strong and long lasting legitimacy without discussions. After 1989, 1968 could not be established for alternative Hungarian historical consciousness as it become important at least in the Czech Republic, unlike the new Slovakia. In Hungary, 1956 the ant-Stalinist revolution and freedom fight against the Russians and SU become the new source of legitimacy and of republicanism. We may state, that 1956 being the main and genuine contribution of Hungarians to the history the anti-socialist fights. An irony of history, that 1968 which is an emblem for the radicalism and revolution in Western hemisphere and certain extent in the Eastern bloc too, for Hungary went into the history as associated with a “good bargaining” giving autonomy in foreign policy to the Soviets for receiving internal autonomy –for a while- in economic and social affairs, so a moment of world history of radicalism is a momentum of reformism and of clever opportunism in Hungarian history.
László Domonkos: Soviet Soldiers Who Switched Sides During the Hungarian Revolution
The following essay is about the Soviet soldiers who switched sides during the Hungarian revolution of 1956. For switching sides in any armed fights, usually fleeing from the unit (desertion) is needed –or, in a lucky case- being taken into captivity. While the first is considered a deadly sin, the latter can be handled, with some understanding, as just an unlucky event. We might add, though, that it depends on the country – the Soviet Union in particular, even after Stalin’s death, was not amongst the more tolerant states, to say the least. But desertion or being taken into captivity were still not even close to switching sides. To do that, one needs a complete identification both emotionally and rationally – to understand and experience what the other, the opposite side fights for. it is impossible to define the exact number of the Soviet soldiers who switched to the Hungarian side during the revolution and because of this we have to be really careful with the estimations. It can be stated, however, that it is more than likely that more than a hundred people took on the fights in 1956 on the Hungarian side.
János Simon: Hungarian Parliamentary election in 2018
The result of the election: The center-right Fidesz-KDNP got 133 seats of the Hungarian parliament’s 199 seats, according to official results. Such a two-thirds “super-majority” would allow the party to change the constitution on its own. The result was great victory for the Fidesz–KDNP alliance, preserving again its two-thirds majority, with Viktor Orbán remaining Prime Minister. The Orban-government was elected 4th times (in 1998, 2010, 2014, 2018), which is remarkable in the history, but most important that in the history of European democracy never happened, that a political party won 3 times with the two-thirds of seats of Hungarian parliament.
The title of the issue No. 73 of Central European Political Review (CEPSR – CEPoliti Review) is PARTURIENT EUROPE. We publish studies from illustrious social scientist about the international relations and his consequences to EU and Central Europe and about the possible new ways of social science.
In the CEPSR No. 73 there are some studies about the current international relations and his consequences for Central European. Carlos Flores Juberías wrote a chapter about the problems that have plunged the European Union into the most serious crisis of its long history. One concret sample is the Sargentini Report about Hungary in September 2018. József Szájer in his famous speech about this “LIBE Committee Report” in the EU stressed that the report is a lie. In EU those people talk about the violation of the rule of law and democracy and lecture Hungary, who has no intention to abide by even their own rules at all. They do all of this to get revenge on the Hungarian people who are against mass immigration “What is the rule of law? The rule of law is when not certain people’s and certain groups’ tyranny, but the law rules.”
One of the main goals of the journal editorial board of CEPSR is to make it available to the broadest circle of readers from among experts and persons with a serious interest in the issues of the unique space of Central Europe, from the different perspective of international relations, history, political science, sociology, anthropology and art-sociology, respectively. The main reason for publishing the Central European Political Science Review is to serve and to enhance Central Europe, to broaden and to spread the thoughts of Central Europeanism, and Europeanism.We suggest you to read our web-site and contact our assistant if you have a paper for CEPSR or any questions: email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org
Between Solidarity and Independence. Political Thought of Fighting Solidarity
(edited by Krzysztof Brzechczyn).
Poznań-Warszawa, Poland: IPN 2018, pp. 192.
by Michał Kwiecień
Independent Self-Governing Trade Union “Solidarity” has been the best known symbol of the Polish anti-communist resistance for foreign public opinion. This causes smaller organization to be less known or even absent in scientific research abroad and public memory in Poland. The book „Between Solidarity and Independence. Political Thought of Fighting Solidarity”, tries eliminate this gap. It is devoted to various aspects of the political thought of the “Fighting Solidarity” – a radical Polish anti-communist underground organization, established in June 1982.
The initiator and chairman of the organization was Kornel Morawiecki, who was not satisfied with the strategy of struggle with the communist system developed and adopted by the Independent Self-governing Trade Union “Solidarity” after introduction of martial law in 1982. The “Fighting Solidarity” presented an uncompromising political line, strongly encouraging mass street demonstrations against the communist authorities. This organization was founded in Wrocław, but very soon its divisions and groups were established in the cities all over Poland. Except “Solidarity”, it become the greatest opposition organization in the 1980s in the Polish People’s Republic. In the 1980s. “Fighting Solidarity” had not only program of struggle with communism, but its leader Kornel Morawiecki also tried to outline political development after the predicted fall of communism. He introduced the term ‘solidarism’ and attempted to outline the future form of government in Poland.
This book is an ambitious response to the need for a complex discussion of the assumptions and main ideas of the political activity of “Fighting Solidarity,” an organization that has not been given as much attention in the academic debate as the world-famous Independent Self-Governing Trade Union “Solidarity”. The book is divided into two parts: “Around the Political Thought of Fighting Solidarity” and “Political Thought of Fighting Solidarity in Documents and Memories.” The first part consists of seven articles, where the authors discuss various aspects and areas of the organization’s functioning. Each chapter of the book includes summary in English which makes it more accessible for foreign readers.
In the ‘Preface’ Krzysztof Brzechczyn in the synthetic way presents the beginning and history of the “Fighting Solidarity.” In the first chapter of this part, Zdzisław Krasnodębski (‘Republican Message of the Program of the Fighting Solidarity’) looks for a republican values in the activity and program of Independent Self-Governing Trade Union “Solidarity” and the “Fighting Solidarity”. According to him, the political credo of Morawiecki’s organization can be seen as a radicalization of the program of “Solidarity” from the period 1980-81. The linking chain of both organizations programs was social teaching of John Paul II expressed during his pilgrimages in Poland.
Krzysztof Brzechczyn in an essay „The Attitude of ‘Fighting Solidarity’ to the Political Transformation” presents the attitude of the leadership of “Fighting Solidarity” to the transformation of the Polish political system in 1988-1990. According to him “Fighting Solidarity” criticized the Round Table agreement and election of Wojciech Jaruzelski for the president of Poland. This organization demanded also free parliamentary elections, withdrawal of Soviet troops from Poland, civil control over the army, lustration and de-communization. Because of this radically anti-communist agenda the activists of this organization were marginalized in Poland in the 90th.
Marek Golińczak in the chapter “’Our Motto: Free and Solidary’. The Union of Soviet Republics in the Periodicals and Programs of Fighting Solidarity Organization in 1982-1989” analyzes the organization’s foreign policy concepts and activity. The next three authors describe the content of various underground journals published by this organization in different cities of Poland. Juliusz Iwanicki presents religious motifs presented in “Biuletyn Dolnośląski”. Katarzyna Wilczok and Klaudia Rok analyze political thought of the Fighting Solidarity in „Wolni i Solidarni” (printed in Katowice) and “Solidarność Zwycięży”/“Solidarność Walcząca” (Kraków).
In the closing chapter of this part Przemysław Janiszewski outlines the presence of this organization in Polish historiography. He recognizes that despite the fact, that Fighting Solidarity was the second largest oppositional organization in Poland, there are only about 20 publications about its history, including both books and papers in journals.
Second part of the book presents memories and documents illustrating primarily the final period of activity and the development of political thought of “Fighting Solidarity” as well as two interviews with members of the Executive Committee of The “Fighting Solidarity” – Andrzej Myc and Andrzej Zarach. The book ends with recollection of Kornel Morawiecki, who describe attitude of organization towards Round Table agreement in 1989.
The comprehensive approach to the subject and the strong support of historical sources make this book a unique compendium of knowledge about the ideas and program of one of the most important political organizations in the newest history of Poland, and maybe in the whole Central Europe.
Table of contents of the book
Preface, Krzysztof Brzechczyn //
Chapter I: Around the Political Thought of the Fighting Solidarity // Republican Message of the Program of the Fighting Solidarity, Zdzisław Krasnodębski / The Attitude of Fighting Solidarity to the Political Transformation, Krzysztof Brzechczyn / “Our Motto: Free and Solidary”. The Union of Soviet Republics in the Periodicals and Programs of Fighting Solidarity Organization in 1982-1989, Marek Golińczak/ Religious Problems and Topics in “Biuletyn Dolnośląski”, Juliusz Iwanicki / The Social and Political Issues and the Political Thought in the “Wolni i Solidarni” Monthly, Katarzyna Wilczok / The Social and Political Publicism in the “Solidarność Walcząca” and “Solidarność Zwycięży” Journals, Klaudia Rok / The Fighting Solidarity in Historiography. A Bibliographic Essay, Przemysław Janiszewski //
Chapter II: Political Thought of Fighting Solidarity in Documents and Memories // Fighting Solidarity was an Organization of Active Resistance, Interview with Andrzej Myc, a member of the Executive Committee of the Fighting Solidarity Organization / From the Union of Socialist Youth to the Fighting Solidarity, Interview with Andrzej Zarach, a member of the Executive Committee of the Fighting Solidarity Organization, / Fighting Solidarity. Organization’s Agenda and Condition, Andrzej Zarach / Ideological Declaration and Statut of Poznań Political Club “Wolni i Solidarni” / Ideological Declaration of Kalisz Political Club “Wolni i Solidarni”/ Electoral Declaration of Poznań Electoral Agreement “Solidarity and Independence” (“Free and Solidary” Political Club, “Independence” Liberal Democratic Party and Fighting Solidarity) / Fighting Solidarity towards Round Table Agreement, Kornel Morawiecki / List of shortcuts / Index of People
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Csaba Varga is a Hungarian jurisprudent, Research Professor Emeritus at the Institute for Legal Studies of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and Professor Emeritus at the Pázmány Péter Catholic University, founder of its Institute for Legal Philosophy, acknowledged under his directorship as a “Place of Excellence”. A laureate of Széchenyi Prize, the highest honour in scholarship in his country. His overall interest has ever ranged from legal philosophy & methodology via patterns of judicial thought to comparative legal cultures, and since the fall of communist dictatorship, also to issues of transition and the rule of law. In addition to his fifteen authored and twenty edited books in English/German—the majority of which are made available on http://www.mek.oszk.hu/indexeng.phtml, http://drcsabavarga.wordpress.com, https://ppke.academia.edu/CVARGA, http://philpapers.org/profile/15287 & http://ssrn.com/author=1182696 — He is member of the Editorial Board of CEPSR and at the same time regular author of the CEPSR. email@example.com
Carlos Flores Juberíás is a Spanish jurisprudent, Doctor in Law from the University of Valencia, as well as he obtained a Bachelor degree in Political Science from UNED University. Since 1995 he has been professor of Constitutional Law and since 2013 he has been accredited as a professor at the University of Valencia. Between 1993 and 1995 he was a visiting professor at the University of California, San Diego. His research field focuses on the comparative study of electoral processes, the configuration of the party system in the new democracies of Central-Eastern Europe and the formulation of new democratic institutions. Selected publications: Eastern Europe: General Overview. The Handbook of Electoral System Choice (2004); Las nuevas instituciones políticas de la Europa Oriental. Centro de Estudios Constitucionales (1997); Parlamentarismo vs. Presidencialismo: Nuevas Constituciones de la Europa Oriental. Estudios Políticos (1993). firstname.lastname@example.org
József Szájer is a Hungarian jurisprudent, Doctor in Law from the University of ELTE Budapest. Postgraduate studies in Oxford University (Balliot College), Chicago University. Currently he is PP MP in Brussel. His books are: Jogállam, Szabadság, Rendszerváltoztatás (1998), /Rule of Law, Freedom, Regime Change/ Európa (2004), Szabad Magyarország, szabad Európa (2014). /Free Hungary, Free Europe/ email@example.com
Gábor Csizmazia is an assistant lecturer at the National University of Public Service (Hungary), teaching U.S. foreign and security policy, transatlantic relations, security studies, and theories of international relations. His PhD research focuses on U.S. foreign and security policy concerning Central and Eastern Europe. He has been a visiting scholar at the George Washington University (Washington D.C.) and is a 2018 Marshall Center Scholars Program participant. In The work – published in current issues of CEPSR – was created in commission of the National University of Public Service under the priority project KÖFOP-2.1.2-VEKOP-15-2016-00001 titled „Public Service Development Establishing Good Governance. firstname.lastname@example.org
Edit Fabó graduated as a librarian and Hungarian language and literature teacher from Berzsenyi Dániel Teacher Training College in 1987. She has a great experience in the field of librarianship at the University Library of Eötvös Loránd University (ELTE) in Budapest. Fabó enriched knowledge with managerial (1998) and sociological (2000) qualification and gained a doctoral degree in the field of cultural history (2009) at ELTE. She entered into the Hungarian Sociological Association (2010) and became a founding member of the Section of Family Sociology (2011). Meanwhile, she was admitted into the Public Association of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (2011) as well. She joined to the World Complexity Science Academy in 2012. Fabó’s recent publications are as follows: “Az együttgondolkodás emlékezete.” In Fabó Edit – Ferone, Emilia – Ming Chen, James (ed.). Systemic Actions in Complex Scenarios. Newcastle upon Taine: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2017, 81–102. email@example.com
Máté Szabó is a professor of political science of the University Eötvös Loránd, Faculty of State and Law, Institute of the Political Science, Budapest, Hungary. He was a research fellow of the in Germany on many universities, the Netherlands Institute of the Advanced Studies, Wassenaar, and of the European University Institute, Florence, Italy. Guest professor in Hamburg (Germany), Tampere (Finland), Taipei (Taiwan) at the departements of political science. He is specialized in civil society, social movements and political protest and theory of law, politics and human rights as well. He published more than 300 scientific contribution in Hungarian, English and German. 2007-2013. He was elected by the Hungarian parliament as ombudsman of Hungary, parliamentary commissioner for human rights for six year. His term terminated at 2013 October, since he is again a professor of political science at the Eötvös Loránd University of State and Law. He visited Taiwan for scientific exchange with the Soochow University Centre for Human Rights and carried out research there as well teaching 2013, 2015, 2016 appr 8 month. He visited in Tübingen (Germany), Taiwan (Greater China Studies), Centre in 2015 and 2016 and gave lectures there. He was a research fellow of Institute of Advanced Studies Kőszeg (Hungary) in 2017 doing research on civil society and democratic transition in Taiwan and in Hungary, with special focus on the Control Yuan. firstname.lastname@example.org
Krzysztof Brzechczyn is a titular professor at the Department of Philosophy in Adam Mickiewicz University and employed in the Institute of National Remembrance in Poznań. He has authored four books (in Polish) and numerous papers in Chinese, English, German, Italian, Polish and Romanian. His is the chairman of the Poznan Branch of the Polish Philosophical Society and a member of the Main Board. Fields of interests: philosophy of history, philosophy of social sciences, theory of historiography; the full list of his publication is in his profile at https://one.academia.edu/KrzysztofBrzechczyn; email@example.com.
Michał Kwiecień is a PhD candidate in the Department of Philosophy of Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań. His main areas of interest include philosophy of history and philosophy of economics; firstname.lastname@example.org.