“Mass,” “Movement,” “Personal,” or “Cartel” Party? Fidesz’s Hybrid Organisational Strategy

In the last decade, Fidesz has dominated the Hungarian political landscape, becoming the most extensive Hungarian party organisation in terms of party members, structuration, resources, and influence. The party’s organisational development has been determined by a constant strategic adaptation to ne...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Rudolf Metz, Réka Várnagy
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Cogitatio 2021
Materias:	cartel parties fidesz hybrid party strategies mass parties movement parties personal parties Political science (General) JA1-92
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/6485c2aa738348f19541e377c6e344fa
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:6485c2aa738348f19541e377c6e344fa
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:6485c2aa738348f19541e377c6e344fa2021-11-24T11:48:17Z“Mass,” “Movement,” “Personal,” or “Cartel” Party? Fidesz’s Hybrid Organisational Strategy2183-246310.17645/pag.v9i4.4416https://doaj.org/article/6485c2aa738348f19541e377c6e344fa2021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/4416https://doaj.org/toc/2183-2463In the last decade, Fidesz has dominated the Hungarian political landscape, becoming the most extensive Hungarian party organisation in terms of party members, structuration, resources, and influence. The party’s organisational development has been determined by a constant strategic adaptation to new circumstances of political reality and new demands of the electorate. The article argues that in three phases of its development, Fidesz adopted different party organisation guidelines. As a result, a hybrid party architecture was formed involving various characteristics and strategies of mass parties (e.g., relatively large membership and ideological communication), movement parties (i.e., top-down generation of mass rallies and protest activities), personal parties (i.e., personalisation, centralisation of party leadership), and cartel parties (i.e., use of state resources, control over party competition). Instead of switching from one strategy to another, the party often used these strategies simultaneously. This flexible party organisation can balance among the different needs of effective governance, constant mobilisation, and popular sovereignty. The article aims to dissect these building blocks of Fidesz to gain insight into the emergence of the hybrid party model.Rudolf MetzRéka VárnagyCogitatioarticlecartel partiesfideszhybrid party strategiesmass partiesmovement partiespersonal partiesPolitical science (General)JA1-92ENPolitics and Governance, Vol 9, Iss 4, Pp 317-328 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	cartel parties fidesz hybrid party strategies mass parties movement parties personal parties Political science (General) JA1-92
spellingShingle	cartel parties fidesz hybrid party strategies mass parties movement parties personal parties Political science (General) JA1-92 Rudolf Metz Réka Várnagy “Mass,” “Movement,” “Personal,” or “Cartel” Party? Fidesz’s Hybrid Organisational Strategy
description	In the last decade, Fidesz has dominated the Hungarian political landscape, becoming the most extensive Hungarian party organisation in terms of party members, structuration, resources, and influence. The party’s organisational development has been determined by a constant strategic adaptation to new circumstances of political reality and new demands of the electorate. The article argues that in three phases of its development, Fidesz adopted different party organisation guidelines. As a result, a hybrid party architecture was formed involving various characteristics and strategies of mass parties (e.g., relatively large membership and ideological communication), movement parties (i.e., top-down generation of mass rallies and protest activities), personal parties (i.e., personalisation, centralisation of party leadership), and cartel parties (i.e., use of state resources, control over party competition). Instead of switching from one strategy to another, the party often used these strategies simultaneously. This flexible party organisation can balance among the different needs of effective governance, constant mobilisation, and popular sovereignty. The article aims to dissect these building blocks of Fidesz to gain insight into the emergence of the hybrid party model.
format	article
author	Rudolf Metz Réka Várnagy
author_facet	Rudolf Metz Réka Várnagy
author_sort	Rudolf Metz
title	“Mass,” “Movement,” “Personal,” or “Cartel” Party? Fidesz’s Hybrid Organisational Strategy
title_short	“Mass,” “Movement,” “Personal,” or “Cartel” Party? Fidesz’s Hybrid Organisational Strategy
title_full	“Mass,” “Movement,” “Personal,” or “Cartel” Party? Fidesz’s Hybrid Organisational Strategy
title_fullStr	“Mass,” “Movement,” “Personal,” or “Cartel” Party? Fidesz’s Hybrid Organisational Strategy
title_full_unstemmed	“Mass,” “Movement,” “Personal,” or “Cartel” Party? Fidesz’s Hybrid Organisational Strategy
title_sort	“mass,” “movement,” “personal,” or “cartel” party? fidesz’s hybrid organisational strategy
publisher	Cogitatio
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/6485c2aa738348f19541e377c6e344fa
work_keys_str_mv	AT rudolfmetz massmovementpersonalorcartelpartyfideszshybridorganisationalstrategy AT rekavarnagy massmovementpersonalorcartelpartyfideszshybridorganisationalstrategy
_version_	1718415050818977792

“Mass,” “Movement,” “Personal,” or “Cartel” Party? Fidesz’s Hybrid Organisational Strategy

Ejemplares similares