1 / 13

Slovakia

Slovakia. Peter Spáč 28.11.2013. General conditions. Post 1989 Slovakia provided a solid base for populism Factors : negative economic impact after 1989 problematic realization of privatization of public property negative public image of domestic politics

rianna
Télécharger la présentation

Slovakia

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Slovakia Peter Spáč 28.11.2013

  2. Generalconditions • Post 1989 Slovakiaprovided a solid base forpopulism • Factors: • negative economicimpact after 1989 • problematicrealization of privatization of public property • negative public image of domestic politics • polarization of the party system(and the society) – peak in the 2nd half of the 90s

  3. Waves of populism in Slovakia • 1. wave(emerged after 1989): • HZDS (MovementforDemocraticSlovakia) • ZRS (Association of SlovakWorkers) • 2. wave(1998-2002) • SOP (Party of CivicUnderstanding) • SMER (Direction) • ANO (Alliance of New Citizen) • 3. wave (around 2010) • OĽaNO (Ordinary People and IndependentPersonalities)

  4. 1st wave (HZDS) • Separatedfrom the main Slovak dissentmovement • Leader – Vladimír Mečiar (in leaduntil 2013) • Dominating Slovak party in the 90s • Usage of populismevenafterbecoming part of the establishment

  5. 1st wave (ZRS) • Separatedfrom the transformedcommunists • Radicalleft party withextensiveuse of populism • Complexattacks on allruling (and existing) parties • Situated in a role of the defender of the betrayedmasses • Presentedas the only „clean“ alternative

  6. 2nd wave • Specificsituation of the 2nd half of the 90s • Extensivepolarization of the party system • Growingnumber of citizens and votersseekingfor a „middle way“ • Thesetrendslead to emergence of different type of populistparties

  7. 2nd wave (SOP) • Created in 1998 by a popularmayor Rudolf Schuster wholaterbecame the Slovak president • Centre / centre-left party withanaim to stayneutral • Pressure of the culminatingpolarization of politics and society  SOP had to choose its bloc position • Connectionwithanti-Mečiarpartiesresulted in decline of support • Enteringgovernment 1998 started the end of the party

  8. 2nd wave (SMER and ANO) • Createdafterelections 1998 – still a strongpolarization • Main features: • professional PR and communication • party structureonlyas a secondaryaim • critisicm of the establishment • callfor a new generation of Slovak politicians • Differences: • SMER – denial of anyideologicalstance • ANO – openlycentre-rightliberal status

  9. Evaluation of V. Mečiar and M. Dzurinda by supporters (2001)

  10. 3rd wave (OĽaNO) • Createdbeforeelections 2012 • Structure: • not a classical party (4 members) • basisforindependentcandidates • „Ideology“: • strongcritisicm of parties and party system • maintopics – corruption, partitocracy • Application of the „Gorilla“ scandal in electoral campaign

  11. Success rate of populistparties

More Related