Why had the ethnic minorities dominace over the Hungarians in the parliamentary elections in the 1867-1918 period?

Aug 2019
12
Hungary
#1
Heavy dominance of ethnic minority elected liberal parties in the Hungarian Parliament
The Austro-Hungarian compromise and its supporting parliamentary parties remained bitterly unpopular among the ethnic Hungarian voters, and the continuous successes of the pro-compromise liberal parties in the Hungarian parliamentary elections caused long lasting frustration among Hungarian voters. The ethnic minorities had the key-role in the political maintenance of the compromise in Hungary, because they were able to vote the pro-compromise liberal parties into the position of the majority/ruling parties of the Hungarian parliament. The pro-compromise liberal parties were the most popular among ethnic minority voters, however the Slovak Serb Romanian minority parties have remained unpopular among the ethnic minorities. The nationalist Hungarian parties - which were supported by the overwhelming majority of ethnic Hungarian voters - have always remained in the opposition. The only short exception was the 1906-1910 period, where the Hungarian supported nationalist parties could form government.


prof. András Gerő (2014): Nationalities and the Hungarian Parliament (1867-1918)

http://www.geroandras.hu/2014_Nationalities_and_the_Hungarian_Parliament.pdf
 
Aug 2019
12
Hungary
#3
It is possible that ethnic minorities simply didn't want to vote for Hungarian nationalists.
Okay, but why didn't the minorities vote for their own (Slovak Romanian Serbian etc..) nationalist minority parties ? Because the ethnic minority parties were also unpopular among the minorities...
 

Maki

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,412
Republika Srpska
#4
Okay, but why didn't the minorities vote their own (Slovak Romanian Serbian etc..) nationalist minority parties ? Because the ethnic minority parties were also unpopular among the minorities...
Well, they most likely believed that by voting for Hungarian parties they could achieve more and also block Hungarian nationalists from gaining power. Also, as far as the Serbs are concerned, for a significant amount of time there was no unified Serb party.
 
Likes: Futurist
Aug 2019
12
Hungary
#6
There was also some pro-Hungarian gerrymandering that further weakened the parties of the ethnic minorities.

I know only such "gerrymandering" when the minorities were invited to pubs and get free alcohol, than the drunken people were transported to the polling stations. It worked like the so-called "chain voting". Chain voting, a vote buying scheme (with alcohol in this case) in which a crook gives the voter a pre-voted ballot, the voter votes that ballot, and then after leaving the polling place, sells his blank ballot to the crook, who votes it and then gives it to the next willing participant. This tactics works great with envelopes in the voting-cabins until this day.
 
Likes: Futurist

Maki

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,412
Republika Srpska
#7
No, there was actual gerrymandering. For example you would have Serb villages being put into Hungarian majority election units. This notably caused Svetozar Miletić's party to achieve significantly lower results than expected at the elections in 1869.
 
Likes: Futurist
Aug 2019
12
Hungary
#8
No, there was actual gerrymandering. For example you would have Serb villages being put into Hungarian majority election units. This notably caused Svetozar Miletić's party to achieve significantly lower results than expected at the elections in 1869.

What I mentioned is a very real gerrymandering with alcohol / money etc.. In many countries you can be sentenced to jail for organizing CHAIN-VOTE and offering money alcohol etc...
I know it otherwise. The liberal Party of Kálmán Tisza and István Tisza (later renamed as National Party of Work) created a lot of districts in Transylvania Upper-Hungary Voivodine to counterbalance the Hungarian majority areas. Hungarian majority areas and Hungarians did not supported to pro-Ausgleich ruling Liberal party. The nationalist coalition only could defeat the Liberals in the election of 1906, thus nationalist parties could form a government between 1906-1910. Hungarian majority election districts had usually much bigger population, thus they could send fewer politicians to the parliement than their real demographic ratio.
 
Likes: Futurist

Maki

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,412
Republika Srpska
#9
I know it otherwise. The liberal Party of Kálmán Tisza and István Tisza (later renamed as National Party of Work) created a lot of districts in Transylvania Upper-Hungary Voivodine to counterbalance the Hungarian majority areas. Hungarian majority areas and Hungarians did not supported to pro-Ausgleich ruling Liberal party. The nationalist coalition only could defeat the Liberals in the election of 1906, thus nationalist parties could form a government between 1906-1910. Hungarian majority election districts had usually much bigger population, thus they could send fewer politicians to the parliement than their real demographic ratio.
Keep in mind that Miletić was a big opponent of the 1867 Compromise and would thus be undesirable for any pro-compromise government. Preventing him to gain much influence would also be a plus for any pro-Compromise government.
 
Likes: Futurist
Aug 2019
12
Hungary
#10
Keep in mind that Miletić was a big opponent of the 1867 Compromise and would thus be undesirable for any pro-compromise government. Preventing him to gain much influence would also be a plus for any pro-Compromise government.
Unlike the Liberals (Led by Tisza Kálmán and his son István), the nationalist coalition government (1906-1910) wanted real Western European style nationalization process. The nationalist always often mentioned that the previous liberal governments were too minority friendly with their minority rights idea, because Hungary had to follow the hard-line true Western European (British French German) policy models against minorities. In the countries of western European powers there were no minority rights, the British, French and German legal systems denied the right of minorities. The so called Lex Apponyi is often cited by Czech Romanian and Serbian historians as an example for the so-called magyarization, despite the nationalist government was not able to execute it because of the total lack of teachers who could speak the Hungarian language in minority areas. When István Tisza and his liberals regained the power, they abolished Lex Apponyi law, because their liberal voter base were the minorities.
 
Likes: Futurist

Similar History Discussions