The New York Times: This recipe defeated Orban and is sufficient to defeat Trump policy

The writer, M. Giessen is the story of the historic political transformation that Hungary witnessed with the fall of the rule of right-wing nationalist leader Viktor Orban, who dominated political life in the country for 16 years, as a model that may hold important lessons for the United States in confronting populism and authoritarianism, especially with regard to the phenomenon of Donald Trump.

In his article in the New York Times, the writer starts from a huge festive scene in the capital, Budapest, where tens of thousands gathered in front of the Hungarian Parliament building to celebrate the inauguration of Peter Magar as Prime Minister, in an event that was considered an official announcement of the end of the “Orban era.”

The square that witnessed historical moments in Hungary, from protests against the Soviet occupation to demonstrations against previous governments, has returned to become a scene for a radical political transformation, even though the Orban regime had redesigned it architecturally in a way that implicitly aimed to prevent any large mass gathering.

The article described the atmosphere of the celebration as a mixture of astonishment and patriotic excitement, as young people participated who had only known their country under Orbán’s rule, intellectuals who had lost hope years ago, and families who came from villages and provinces after seeing Magar during his extensive election tours that included about 700 cities, towns and villages.

Success equation

The writer confirms that Magar’s rise seemed, at first glance, impossible, because Orbán was not just an ordinary prime minister, but rather a leader who built an integrated system of political, media and legal dominance, controlled the media, weakened the opposition, amended election laws in favor of his party, Fidesz, and gradually transformed the state into something resembling an authoritarian regime disguised as a democratic façade.

Even the global conservative right looked at Orban as a successful model, and prominent right-wing American figures actually visited Budapest, and the American Conservative Conference held its activities there, and American officials from Trump’s camp also expressed their admiration for his experience.

But the surprise came when the TISA party, led by Peter Magar, was able to achieve a sweeping victory and a constitutional majority, enough to cancel many of the amendments imposed by Orban on the political, judicial and media system.

Any attempt to defeat Trump in the United States may need a new figure from outside the traditional Democratic political establishment

The article focused largely on the “success equation” that Magar used, and considered it replicable in other countries, especially in the United States, noting that the first element in this recipe was broad popular organization, as Magar did not rely in his campaign on advertisements and media alone, but rather on a huge network of volunteers and local groups, known as the “Tisa Islands.”

The article pointed out that Magar used direct, face-to-face politics as a weapon against propaganda and fear, and while Orbán was relying on intimidation campaigns against immigrants, minorities, and the European Union, Magar was meeting people in squares, villages, and cafes, which created a direct relationship of trust between him and citizens, and revealed the weakness of the “politics of intimidation.”

A figure outside the political establishment

The second element of the recipe was Magar’s sharp and clear political language. While the old opposition was content to describe Orbán’s regime as “corrupt,” Magar described it as a “mafia state,” that is, a system based on organized crime and exploitation of the state for the benefit of a narrow network of beneficiaries.

According to the writer, Magar did not avoid direct confrontation, but rather prepared for it in advance, as he obtained membership in the European Parliament to guarantee political immunity, and dealt aggressively with the slander and blackmail campaigns that targeted him.

One of the main points emphasized by the article is that Magar did not succeed because he was a “dissenter” from Orban’s party only, but because he was not part of the traditional opposition that had lost the confidence of the street, because many believed that the weakness and hesitation of the old opposition helped Orban consolidate his rule.

Therefore, the writer believes that any attempt to defeat Trump in the United States may need a new figure from outside the traditional democratic political establishment, someone who can address angry voters without being linked to the old elites.

The article also attaches great importance to the role of non-partisan social movements, because various groups participated in toppling Orban, including teachers who protested against state control over education, activists who exposed violations in child care homes, students, and human rights organizations, in addition to activists from other communities.

Corruption issue

The article focused on the issue of corruption, as it is the most important axis, explaining that the Hungarian voter did not vote only because of the economic crisis, but because people felt that the ruling regime had plundered the state and insulted public dignity. Indeed, opinion polls after the elections showed that corruption was the first reason for Orban’s downfall, ahead of even inflation and the high cost of living.

The article discussed the European Union’s role in weakening Orban’s regime, as the Union, after years of leniency, began freezing funds and aid allocated to Hungary due to violations of the rule of law and corruption, which made voters feel that Orban’s nationalist policies harmed their daily interests.

Therefore, Magar made rebuilding the relationship with Europe an essential part of his campaign, while at the same time emphasizing the preservation of Hungarian national identity. He raised the European Union flag in front of Parliament, but also kept Hungarian nationalist symbols, to combine patriotism and openness rather than pitting them against each other.

Ultimately, the article poses an open question: Can Peter Magar actually keep his democratic promises? Is he a true reformist or just a softer version of right-wing nationalism?

Despite the doubts, the writer believes that the Hungarian experience has proven something important: even authoritarian regimes that appear entrenched can be defeated if there is new leadership, broad popular organization, a clear moral discourse, and the ability to restore the idea of ​​the homeland from the hands of the populists.