In illiberal autocratizing regimes anti-gender ideas become part of the ideology which informs the developing autocratic regime and its policies and practices. In such contexts democratic institutions are maintained but defy rules of accountability, democratic representation and human rights. The space for and voice of opposition and dissent, including feminist opposition, is curtailed and undermined including in parliaments. Many argue that in such cases parliaments serve no purpose other than to legitimize the democratic façade of the regime, becoming rubberstamps for decisions made by the executive. The question is, can we speak of feminist responses in an autocratizing parliament?
Confirming other findings, our research indicates that there is more to parliaments and oppositional actions within such regimes than being rubber stamps. We argue for the need to attribute democratic functionality and agency to parliamentary opposition in autocratizing contexts, even if their responses may differ from feminist responses given to anti-gender campaigns in parliaments operating in consolidated democracies. In illiberal autocracies, parliaments become a protest arena where opposition MPs advocating for gender equality confront the regime. They use various protest strategies to highlight the regime’s anti-gender stance, and to showcase their pro-equality positions to both the regime and the public. In the absence of formal avenues to shape the agenda and achieve policy successes we see a movementization of parliamentary politics and the use of confrontative framing, strategies and coalition building patterns.
What does feminist resistance look like in the Hungarian Parliament? Operating in an autocratizing context since 2010, the Hungarian Parliament increasingly defies procedural rules of democracy to expedite legislative processes, blocking possibilities for the opposition to set the agenda or initiate substantive debates. Yet when analyzing the intensifying debates around gender equality and LGBTQIA* rights, we find that parliamentary opposition is far from passive.
Framing gender equality and LGBTQIA* rights more radically and in connection to democracy
Hungarian MPs use an increasingly outspoken and gender-specific language to articulate policy problems related to gender equality and women’s rights. This is in sharp contrast with the de-gendered language and the absence of explicit mentioning of women’s rights that characterized Hungarian parliamentary debates prior to 2010. A pivotal, openly sexist statement by a FIDESZ MP in 2012 marked a turning point, leading to a more explicit use of gendered language in public and parliamentary responses.
In the current context, opposition responds to regime hostility in more radical ways; giving more emphasis to the transformation of gender power relations and highlighting the complex and multifaceted nature of gender inequality. As one MP (and research participant) states “Violence comes from power, and violence must be countered because it undermines civilized social relations between women and men” (Politician 1). Another MP argues: “It is not women who need to change, but women need to be taken out of this oppressive situation, it is precisely here that the power relationship must be seen, and the oppressive relationship must be eliminated” (Politician 6). Radicalization of framing is bolstered by invoking feminist knowledge and testimonials. This includes referencing feminist expertise and narrating well-known cases of violence against women. It also involves showcasing gendered power imbalances and state failures. These stories are used to evoke empathy and condemn the anti-gender equality features of the regime.
In response to the open hostility of the autocratic Hungarian regime, opposition frames gender equality and LGBTQIA* rights as a constitutive part of the wider democracy agenda. This is new, as feminist tenets in Hungary were previously rarely integrated with mainstream democracy frames. Opposition to the regime now highlights anti-feminist politics as an aspect of democratic erosion. Opposition MPs agree that attacks on gender equality are inherently attacks on democracy. A good illustration of this is the parliamentary decision proposal submitted by the united opposition in 2019 to ratify the Istanbul Convention. Ratification and therefore the promotion of gender equality is presented as a condition of democracy.
Building coalitions with and giving voice to feminist civil society
While feminist civil society is an outcast of the autocratic Hungarian regime, we observed powerful coalition-building initiatives and partnerships between parliamentary opposition and feminist and LGBTQIA* rights advocates in civil society. Partnership thrives through a two-way exchange of knowledge and resources which contribute both ways to evening out autocratic asymmetries. On the one hand, opposition MPs step in to obtain and share restricted data with the public and civil society, especially since 2015 when the amendment of the Freedom of Information Act restricted civil society’s access to public data.
On the other hand, MPs bring feminist knowledge accumulated by CSOs to the Parliament, amplifying their voices by providing them with a platform within the Parliament. They directly refer to civil society and organize joint parliamentary committees like the For a Diverse Hungary grouping. By integrating CSO knowledge and giving voice to marginalized groups, opposition MPs work to counteract their systematic political exclusion and to improve accountability. They recognize the interconnected struggles of formal politics and civil society, highlighting the importance of these coalitions in advocating for gender equality and democratic resilience.
Using disruptive and confrontative strategies typical of civil society
Given the autocratizing parliamentary routines and the shrinking access, opposition MPs responses to anti-feminism turn to specific modes of everyday pragmatic engagements. They use performative and disruptive strategies and non-standard modes of intervention to expose the regime’s gendered redlines and non-democratic operations and to represent their own gender equality agendas.
Opposition MPs insistently work on keeping the gender equality issue on the agenda. The agenda is largely controlled by the FIDESZ majority; therefore, opposition MPs bring up issues before or after the main agenda. To gain visibility they repeatedly submit their proposals to the plenary and to committees regardless of the expected outvoting. For example, opposition MPs tried 19 times between 2014 and 2020 to pass a Parliamentary Decision forcing the government to start ratification of the Istanbul Convention. They also keep gender equality on the agenda, discussing prominent gender issues in the most diverse and (on their faces) irrelevant debates. As the opposition space shrinks, we see the use of confrontative protest strategies inside the Parliament. These strategies serve to expose misogyny, with one participant noting that “[they] have made some amazing, provocative political statements […] they would specifically incite our male colleagues to the point of, say, shouting at them, and then […] snap at them and say, well, here he is, here he is, the sexist” (Politician 1). They also serve performative functions by visualizing claims through dress codes or using billboards. Under these circumstances of the shrinking space, opposition MPs use spaces beyond the sessions extensively; from corridors and media rooms to, ultimately, the streets.
Protest in the Hungarian Parliament, image courtesy of Párbeszéd
While the political regime has disproportionate control over resources, leaving only limited space for opposition to serve constituencies, some opposition MPs still find ways to prioritize direct constituency work. They talk about their duty to represent their constituency, the duty to take up individual cases in the face of the hostile regime.
Finally, reframing the anti-feminist and anti-LGBTQIA* narrative of the government stands out as a key strategy used by many opposition MPs; taking back concepts that are now used and abused by the regime (such as “family’, “care”, “feminism”, “gender”). One male MP calls for a feminist coalition in order to reclaim feminism as a useful term (Politician 5). The parliamentary group For a Diverse Hungary highlights the importance of not entering the reactive response trap and maintaining an autonomous agenda, regardless of what the regime insists on.
In Hungary, in the face of an autocratizing parliament, we still see a robust arsenal of feminist opposition strategies to counter the regime’s mounting anti-gender ideology, demonstrating significant agency and resistance. This blog demonstrates how responses can be captured through a movementization of formal political opposition.
Authors: Andrea Krizsán and Mirjam Sági, Central European University. 29th August 2024