Political polarization and its consequences on democratic accountability

This paper first explores the polarizationthesis, according to which between 1990-2010 political polarization increased to a large extent in the Hungarian political elite and among citizens, although it did not undermine the stability of the political system. Second, it gives an endogenousexplanation for this phenomenon. Third, through theoretical discussion and empirical examples taken from Hungarian politics it is revealed that although growing polarization has not generated regime instability, it reduces, or might reduce, the efficiency of the operation of democracy. Five mechanisms of the effects of ideological polarization which weaken democratic accountability are explored.

The Socioeconomic Background of the Divergence of Belarusian and Ukrainian Political Systems

The aim of this paper is to analyze the political, social and economic background of the divergence of Belarusian and Ukrainian transitions. We focus on Belarus in order to find explanation for questions such as why could Lukashenko remain the authoritarian leader of Belarus, while in Ukraine the position of the political elite had proved less stable and collapsed in 2004. On the theoretical framework of elite-sociology, we seek to determine whether the internal factors (as macroeconomic conditions, standard of living, the oppressive nature of the political system and the structure of the political elite) play a significant role in the operation of the domino effect. This article emphasises the determining role of immanent internal factors, thus the political stability in Belarus can be explained by the role of the suppressing political regime, the hindrance of democratic rights and the relatively good living conditions that followed the transformational recession. Whilst in Ukraine, the markedly different circumstances brought forth the success of the Orange Revolution.