Page 59 - AEI Insights 2018 Vol 4 Issue 1

Szanto, 2018

nationalist crowd who views such agreements as a constraint on U.S. sovereignty regardless of
their pragmatic value.

In the politics of sovereignty one can observe a trend similar to that of securitization: certain
policy issues are elevated to the level of a fight for sovereign rights in an attempt to remove
them from normal political discourse. They are used as a rallying cry and citizens are expected
to fall in line to fend off supposed threats to sovereignty. Interestingly the second National
Consultation 2017 does not ask whether one believes in the existence of the ‘Soros Plan’. It is
treated as an unquestionable fact. The questionnaire only offers to options: one is either in
support of the Government’s fight for sovereignty or one is a traitor supporting the selling out
of the country to foreigners. This is not far removed from the ‘with us or against us’ mentality
of the War on Terror.

In the end, by employing the politics of sovereignty the Government is exchanging long-term
stability for short-term political goals. Essentially, causing long-lasting damage to the
foundation of a cooperative international order is viewed as an acceptable cost to garner support
for the next election. Unfortunately the quality of politics is largely determined by the quality
of the electorate: as long as the politics of sovereignty remains an effective tool, one should
expect political powers to try to exploit it, regardless of costs. In this instance one can see the
unfortunate failure of the European Union to demonstrate to large segments of society how the
Union benefits them and why its continued existence is to their best interests. Whether the EU
leadership likes it or not they have to descend from the ivory tower of Brussels and fight for
the survival of the EU in the trenches, capturing the hearts and minds of previously neglected
constituents. The alternative is the continued ramping up of populist rhetoric and gradual
degradation of the Union.

The politics of sovereignty in economic policy

The politics of sovereignty is not limited to the refugee issue. It is also employed in the context
of economic policy. As shown above, the first National Consultation in 2017 has dedicated
significant space to the idea that Hungary is under attack due to its economic policies. The
central components of the Government’s economic policy are the implementation of social
welfare programmes and a focus on trickle-down economics. First, the government has
significantly revised the tax code in order to reduce the financial burdens faced by the
electorate. The original tiered personal income tax system was abolished in favour of a flat-
rate system. Originally the rate was set as 16 percent, regardless of income, however it has been
further lowered to 15 percent in the following years. (Jogtár, 2015) Similarly, the Government
has recently reduced corporate tax to a flat 9 percent from 10 percent (small and medium
enterprises - SMEs) and 19 percent (large corporations). There are two points to note
concerning these moves. One, the Government seems to favour an American-model of trickle-
down economics: One key goal of the reduction of taxes is the expectation that the money
saved will be reinvested by both citizens and corporations, e.g. through increased consumption
of goods. Two, the Government is adopting an aggressive strategy to attract multinational
corporations (MNC) by undercutting corporate tax rates in other member states. MNCs play a
crucial role in the economies of the region, the arrival of a new manufacturing plant or logistical
centre creates hundreds and thousands of jobs, as well as promote infrastructural and urban
development. The government is eager to capture the attention of such MNCs by offering more
favourable conditions compared to neighbouring states.

59