Cultural Autonomy in Hungary: Inward or Outward Looking?

Abstract

Since the late 1980s, the interpretations of policy toward Hungary's minorities-most notably the country's 1993 minority law and the minority self-governments established as part of a system of nonterritorial autonomy (NTA)-have been the subject of debates in politics and academia in at least two critical respects. Aside from the declarative character of the law, foremost has been the question of Hungary's kin-state activism toward Hungarians abroad and the implications this has carried for domestic minority issues. A second-and related-question has concerned the extent to which cultural autonomy and minority rights are in accordance with the needs of the Roma, by far the country's largest ethnic minority group. A growing number of scholars have accepted the argument that the minority law was enacted because of concerns regarding Hungarian minorities living in the neighboring countries. In our view, it is more appropriate to ask instead how Hungary's kin-state policies have influenced the opportunities for domestic groups, and, in particular, how Hungary fits into the broader context of post-Communist state-and nation-building projects. This is the approach we take in this article, which aims to unpack and reconcile the complex and seemingly contradictory findings on the Hungarian case. Our conclusions are drawn from a content analysis of parliamentary debates on the minority law-something that has never previously been undertaken. This is supplemented by semi-structured interviews with former and current politicians and minority activists.

Horizontal Redistribution and Roma Inclusion in the Western Balkans: The “Exclusion Amid Inclusion” Dilemma

“…Moreover, in systems where there is (non-territorial) cultural autonomy for ethnic groups, Roma also seem to miss out. While in theory, such systems could enforce the protection of some special linguistic, educational, or other cultural rights, concrete cases show that such policies do not provide a clear path to economic equality and more equal political participation (e.g., Sansum & Dobos, 2020).…”

Jewish by Law: Legislative Operationalizing of Race and Ethnicity in Holocaust-Era Hungary

“…Fuzzy Conceptualization, Rigid Operationalization: Race and the Law Political and legal measures that serve to operationalize race, ethnicity, or nationality intrigue legal, historical, and political scholars (Stergar and Scheer 2018;Dobos 2019;Sansum and Dobos 2020;Smith 2020, Pap 2021. As argued earlier (Brubaker 2015;Pap 2021), the past decades brought transformative changes in how the meaning of the terms of (first of all gender, but also) ethnoracial identity are assigned and conceptualized in social sciences and humanities and to a certain degree in politics and law.…”

Conceptualizing and Operationalizing Identity, Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality by Law: An Introduction

“…Analyzing political and legal measures that serve to operationalize race, ethnicity, or nationality is a growing area of nationalism studies that brings together legal, historical, and political scholars (Dobos 2020;Sansum and Dobos 2020;Smith 2020;Stergar and Scheer 2018). In 2018, I convened a research group involving over 50 scholars from various disciplines on "Identity, Race and Ethnicity in Constitutional Law," under the auspices of the International Association of Constitutional Law.…”