Latest news with #MátéKocsis
Yahoo
20 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Opinion - It's not just Trump: The right in Europe is also cracking down on citizenship
President Trump's efforts to end birthright citizenship have not taken place in a vacuum. They are part of a growing pattern of incumbent leaders strategically changing who is allowed to vote and jeopardizing the quality of democracy in the process. This year, the governments of Hungary, Italy, and Germany have similarly proposed or attempted to institute sweeping changes to their citizenship laws. Efforts to reduce or remove citizenship rights are increasingly common. In each case, elected officials presented their efforts as necessary actions to resist the influence of foreign interests and outsiders while restabilizing domestic politics. In a way, it's a win-win for them. If their efforts fail, they have shown supporters they are committed to reshaping their countries around populist and nationalist sentiments that have grown in popularity. When they succeed, they give themselves a meaningful electoral advantage by removing voters who might oppose them. In March, Hungarian Máté Kocsis — a member of Prime Minister Viktor Orbán's Fidesz Party — announced that Fidesz would propose legislation to revoke citizenship from dual citizens whose 'activities endanger the national sovereignty, public order, territorial integrity or security of Hungary.' The legislation was justified as a response to international non-governmental organizations and media outlets whose work was framed as interfering with Hungarian domestic politics. Two weeks later, the Italian government issued a surprise decree that would drastically limit diaspora Italians' ability to claim citizenship through the law that grants citizenship to ethnic Italians around the world. This rule change has been framed as a necessary corrective after an increase in citizenship applications from diaspora Italians in Argentina, Brazil, and Venezuela. It is also noteworthy because Italian voters abroad consistently support moderate-progressive parties, even as conservative and anti-establishment parties have been gaining a dominant role in parliament. A few days later, in Germany, the newly elected center-right government proposed stripping citizenship from 'terror supporters, antisemites, and extremists who call for the abolition of the free and democratic basic order' as part of their negotiations to form a new government. This proposal was criticized by Human Rights Watch for being 'unclear what, if any, safeguards would exist to prevent arbitrary and discriminatory application, and violations of human rights.' The events we currently see in Hungary, Italy, Germany and the U.S. align with an emerging global pattern of incumbents strategically and selectively pushing for formal changes to citizenship laws. Efforts to choose who votes are nothing new — U.S states in the Jim Crow South famously used a variety of techniques including poll taxes, literacy tests, and whites-only primaries to obstruct Black Americans from voting. Democratic countries have revoked citizenship before — in 1946, roughly 70,000 American citizens living in Canada all lost their citizenship after voting in Canadian elections. But the current trend of laws throttling citizenship started in the mid-2000s. The graph above shows that leaders around the world increased their attempts to decide who gets to vote via changes to citizenship laws around 2008, with substantial increases starting in 2010. Reforms of this type are part of an emerging playbook that incumbents have increasingly used since the fall of the Soviet Union to re-level the electoral playing field to their advantage while minimizing harsh condemnation from their powerful democratic allies. By altering who can access citizenship, incumbents can influence election outcomes by affecting who is allowed to vote in elections. Since the efforts pass through government, incumbents do not attract the same level of negative attention as they would receive for jailing or repressing their opposition or committing observable forms of electoral fraud. Incumbents' efforts to manipulate citizenship and election rules also create opportunities to capitalize on the growing support for populist, nationalist, and nativist sentiments by showing voters that they are willing to neutralize the influence of outsiders by permanently removing them from elections. By attempting to revoke citizenship status from members of their opposition, incumbent leaders can show their supporters that they are committed to obstructing voters who would otherwise influence the future of their countries to their supporters' discontent. In each of these cases, elected officials are taking steps to show their supporters that they are willing to try to incrementally shape the electorate in their image while keeping up the appearance of upholding democratic process. If the attempts fail or are blocked by courts, elected officials have demonstrated their willingness to act against the forces that their supporters oppose. In fact, if these leaders fail to pass these citizenship measures, it might even reinforce the idea that their opponents — outsiders, opposition parties, courts, NGOs, and international media — are too powerful. And of course, if they succeed, elected officials in Hungary, Italy, Germany, and the U.S. will have prevented potential opposition voters from accessing the franchise, which could help solidify their grip on political power in the future. Andrew Foote is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Political Science at Binghamton University, State University of New York. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
a day ago
- Politics
- The Hill
It's not just Trump: The right in Europe is also cracking down on citizenship
President Trump's efforts to end birthright citizenship have not taken place in a vacuum. They are part of a growing pattern of incumbent leaders strategically changing who is allowed to vote and jeopardizing the quality of democracy in the process. This year, the governments of Hungary, Italy, and Germany have similarly proposed or attempted to institute sweeping changes to their citizenship laws. Efforts to reduce or remove citizenship rights are increasingly common. In each case, elected officials presented their efforts as necessary actions to resist the influence of foreign interests and outsiders while restabilizing domestic politics. In a way, it's a win-win for them. If their efforts fail, they have shown supporters they are committed to reshaping their countries around populist and nationalist sentiments that have grown in popularity. When they succeed, they give themselves a meaningful electoral advantage by removing voters who might oppose them. In March, Hungarian Máté Kocsis — a member of Prime Minister Viktor Orbán's Fidesz Party — announced that Fidesz would propose legislation to revoke citizenship from dual citizens whose 'activities endanger the national sovereignty, public order, territorial integrity or security of Hungary.' The legislation was justified as a response to international non-governmental organizations and media outlets whose work was framed as interfering with Hungarian domestic politics. Two weeks later, the Italian government issued a surprise decree that would drastically limit diaspora Italians' ability to claim citizenship through the law that grants citizenship to ethnic Italians around the world. This rule change has been framed as a necessary corrective after an increase in citizenship applications from diaspora Italians in Argentina, Brazil, and Venezuela. It is also noteworthy because Italian voters abroad consistently support moderate-progressive parties, even as conservative and anti-establishment parties have been gaining a dominant role in parliament. A few days later, in Germany, the newly elected center-right government proposed stripping citizenship from 'terror supporters, antisemites, and extremists who call for the abolition of the free and democratic basic order' as part of their negotiations to form a new government. This proposal was criticized by Human Rights Watch for being 'unclear what, if any, safeguards would exist to prevent arbitrary and discriminatory application, and violations of human rights.' The events we currently see in Hungary, Italy, Germany and the U.S. align with an emerging global pattern of incumbents strategically and selectively pushing for formal changes to citizenship laws. Efforts to choose who votes are nothing new — U.S states in the Jim Crow South famously used a variety of techniques including poll taxes, literacy tests, and whites-only primaries to obstruct Black Americans from voting. Democratic countries have revoked citizenship before — in 1946, roughly 70,000 American citizens living in Canada all lost their citizenship after voting in Canadian elections. But the current trend of laws throttling citizenship started in the mid-2000s. The graph above shows that leaders around the world increased their attempts to decide who gets to vote via changes to citizenship laws around 2008, with substantial increases starting in 2010. Reforms of this type are part of an emerging playbook that incumbents have increasingly used since the fall of the Soviet Union to re-level the electoral playing field to their advantage while minimizing harsh condemnation from their powerful democratic allies. By altering who can access citizenship, incumbents can influence election outcomes by affecting who is allowed to vote in elections. Since the efforts pass through government, incumbents do not attract the same level of negative attention as they would receive for jailing or repressing their opposition or committing observable forms of electoral fraud. Incumbents' efforts to manipulate citizenship and election rules also create opportunities to capitalize on the growing support for populist, nationalist, and nativist sentiments by showing voters that they are willing to neutralize the influence of outsiders by permanently removing them from elections. By attempting to revoke citizenship status from members of their opposition, incumbent leaders can show their supporters that they are committed to obstructing voters who would otherwise influence the future of their countries to their supporters' discontent. In each of these cases, elected officials are taking steps to show their supporters that they are willing to try to incrementally shape the electorate in their image while keeping up the appearance of upholding democratic process. If the attempts fail or are blocked by courts, elected officials have demonstrated their willingness to act against the forces that their supporters oppose. In fact, if these leaders fail to pass these citizenship measures, it might even reinforce the idea that their opponents — outsiders, opposition parties, courts, NGOs, and international media — are too powerful. And of course, if they succeed, elected officials in Hungary, Italy, Germany, and the U.S. will have prevented potential opposition voters from accessing the franchise, which could help solidify their grip on political power in the future. Andrew Foote is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Political Science at Binghamton University, State University of New York.
Budapest Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Budapest Times
Kocsis: We did not join NATO or the European Union to be a serf
'We did not join NATO or the European Union to be a serf but a member with full rights,' Máté Kocsis, the group leader of ruling Fidesz said. During The Bold Truth About Hungary podcast, Kocsis said the EU leadership was 'so committed to Ukraine's entry' that 'it no longer matters who is an ally or who is an enemy, or a neutral party … we are members of NATO and the EU … we are their allies, peers, their partners … even if we have a different position on some important issues.' 'Then there is Ukraine, which is not a member, nor an ally … no doubt, it has been attacked … but not by Europe,' Kocsis said. He said plans to fast-track Ukraine's European Union membership was 'the best decision in view of their own interests, since nine out of ten agricultural companies in Ukraine are in fact in US, or Western European … ownership.' The EU's direct agricultural subsidies would therefore 'transit Ukraine and land in Western Europe,' Kocsis said. Kocsis also said if Ukraine were to be a member of the EU, the country could send 70-75 deputies to the European Parliament, some 10 percent of the whole assembly. Those MEPs, he added, 'would be grateful to the incumbent, liberal Brussels elite' and 'would not join the Patriots group associated with (Hungarian PM) Viktor Orban.' Ukraine does not like that 'the Hungarian government wants to make a decision over their EU accession based on feedback from Hungarian voters,' Kocsis said. He said it was obvious that Ukraine was 'trying to discredit Hungary's referendum (on Ukraine's entry) and put Hungary in a situation in which we could be accused of making preparations for a military intervention, which could then prove Ukraine's position in the international arena'. 'I am certain it all is behind the games and considerations of the Ukrainian secret services,' Kocsis added. The Ukrainian leadership is trying to 'make Hungarians uncertain in their decision … should they oppose Ukraine's entry, Kocsis said, adding that some of the Hungarian media contributed to Ukraine's 'misinformation campaign'. He singled out news portal which he said had reported that the government's Voks2025 survey had been 'met with the public's total disinterest' whereas 1.2 million had returned the sheets to date. 'Ukraine appears to be manically trying to prove that Hungary is in fact pro-war rather than pro-peace,' Kocsis said, adding that the opposition Tisza Party was working to achieve the same end. He insisted that Ukraine was painting a picture of the people recently arrested on charges of espionage 'so that they could later accuse Hungary of plans to send tanks to Transcarpathia.'
Budapest Times
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Budapest Times
National security committee to be convened over Magyar's connection to Ukraine's influence operations
Máté Kocsis, the ruling party's group leader, said on Facebook on Friday that Fidesz has proposed convening parliament's national security committee over opposition Tisza Party leader Péter Magyar's connection to Ukraine's influence operations. Kocsis said it was vital to 'clarify new information that surfaced in the press today on a connection between Ukrainian influence operations and the Tisza Party'. He said Hungary's secret services would have to conduct a thorough investigation into Magyar's connection to a high-ranking officer in Ukraine's military public administration. 'In light of all this, we have initiated convening another meeting of the national security committee for next Tuesday, where we will request a briefing on these matters, and, if possible, we will propose releasing the available information to the public,' Kocsis said.
Budapest Times
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Budapest Times
Kocsis: Transparency act is best tool for combating Ukrainian propaganda
Máté Kocsis, the head of Fidesz's parliamentary group, said on Facebook on Thursday that the transparency act is the best tool for effectively combating 'Ukrainian propaganda'. Kocsis said NGOs and media financed from abroad first spread 'migration propaganda before moving on to gender propaganda and then war propaganda'. 'Now the same organizations are the most important advocates of Ukrainian propaganda aiming to discredit Hungary,' Kocsis said.
