Fidesz in 1988

Thanks to the miracles of modern technology, we can now easily access Hungarian daily newspaper coverage of the years just before the collapse of the one-party political system. Although it is true that without the Soviet leadership’s acquiescence the opposition forces most likely wouldn’t have been able to establish a multi-party democracy, in 1988 and 1989 Hungary  was the scene of intense political dialogue and burgeoning political organizations. In November 1988, Reform, a newspaper which described itself as “the first independent, democratic paper after many decades,” listed 30 “alternative organizations” already in existence, including Magyar Demokrata Fórum, Fidesz, and Új Márciusi Front. The paper also listed several independent trade unions.

Fidesz, which was established on March 30, 1988 as an alternative to KISZ (Kommunista Ifjúsági Szövetség), was constantly in the news by the fall of that year. But Viktor Orbán, who later came to dominate the student organization and eventually the party, was nowhere to be found in 1988 because he had rather unexpectedly been called up to serve another stint in the army. During this period, Zsolt Németh, later undersecretary in the ministry of foreign affairs, often represented Fidesz in interview situations. He, together with Gábor Fodor and Tamás Deutsch, essentially ran the show. And they marketed themselves effectively. By the time Fidesz held the first leg of its maiden congress on October 1-3 and the second leg on November 19-20, Fidesz was practically a household word.

After the October part of the congress, László Juszt, the well-known television reporter, interviewed four members of the Fidesz board — Tamás Deutsch, Zoltán Rockenbauer, Mihály Szécsényi, and Gábor Fodor — in Reform. Juszt, who apparently attended this historic congress, compared the proceedings to a squadron meeting of grade-seven pioneers. Moreover, claimed Juszt, the way the Fidesz leadership outlined the structural framework of Fidesz “it weirdly reminds one of the structure of MSZMP.” He predicted that the new student organization would not survive. How wrong he was, as was László Kövér, now speaker of the Hungarian parliament, who delivered a speech during the first part of the Fidesz congress in which he expressed his belief that “it is not likely that Fidesz will ever be a significant, sweeping political force.”

From the outset, the main concern of the KISZ and MSZMP leaderships was that Fidesz’s official name, Fiatal Demokraták Szövetsége, didn’t include the word “szocialista.” According to those present at the birth of Fidesz, a minority, including Kövér, preferred a name that included the adjective, but apparently it was not a divisive issue. “Fidesz” appealed to them. An alternative combination with the word “socialist” in it sounded awkward. At least this is the impression I gained from an interview that Gábor Fodor gave early on. Yet later, a unified response must have been adopted by the spokesmen of the organization because all of them explained when interviewed why the organizers had shunned the socialist label. Over time, they said, the word had been applied to so many divergent regimes that “socialism” had become almost meaningless. The Soviet Union under Stalin was a “socialist” country, as were Yugoslavia, China, and North Korea. Moreover, there was also “national socialism” and “Christian socialism.” Better to avoid the term altogether.

So, in this respect, the speech that László Kövér delivered during Fidesz’s October 1988 congress, the transcript of which István Vágó, the DK politician, discovered lately and posted on Facebook, was not out of line. He was just repeating the early party line, so to speak. In it, Kövér, who today sees communists hiding behind every bush, declared himself to be a committed socialist. As he said, “for me socialism’s core value is tolerance, which includes the respect of political convictions, including the possibility of establishing other non-socialist political organizations.” In fact, Kövér was quite capable in those days of being perfectly civilized and of participating in discussions between KISZ and Fidesz. Moreover, he expressed Fidesz’s willingness to get involved in the legislative process that was being prepared, which was supposed to establish a bona fide rule of law in Hungary (Esti Hírlap, November 16, 1988).

László Kéri, the still active political scientist, gave an interview at the time in which he pointed out that there was barely any difference in political views between the Fidesz leaders and the reformists within KISZ (Magyar Nemzet, November 16, 1988). For example, a highly placed KISZ leader declared in A Jövő Mérnöke, the student paper of the Budapest Technical University, that “within a year there will be a multiparty system in Hungary” (October 7, 1988). About a month later, Ferenc Gyurcsány, who was president of the university section of KISZ, announced that some of Fidesz’s suggestions at the meeting should be incorporated into the rules of an umbrella organization which would include several student organizations (Népszava, November 28, 1988). KISZ by then had a “reform office,” whose director predicted that “the multi-party system” was inevitable (Képes7, November 26, 1988).

In brief, the old order was coming to an end and Fidesz was among the alternatives waiting in the wings. As Mihály Szécsényi, a member of the first Fidesz board, said, Fidesz doesn’t want to cooperate with KISZ but wants to coexist with it (Képes7, November 5, 1988). The coexistence came to naught because KISZ simply died on April 22, 1989.

June 6, 2020