On the Media: Lessons From Hungary’s Democratic Backsliding. Plus, What Makes a Resistance Movement Successful?
Released June 6, 2025 by WNYC Studios

Hosts: Brooke Gladstone and Micah Loewinger

Introduction

In this episode of On the Media, hosts Brooke Gladstone and Micah Loewinger delve into the alarming trend of democratic backsliding, both globally and within the United States. The episode titled “Lessons From Hungary’s Democratic Backsliding. Plus, What Makes a Resistance Movement Successful?” explores the erosion of democratic institutions, the role of media manipulation, and the dynamics that make resistance movements effective. Through in-depth interviews with experts and journalists, the episode provides a comprehensive analysis of the current political climate and offers insights into safeguarding democracy.

The State of US Democracy

Micah Loewinger sets the stage by questioning where the United States stands on the democratic backsliding scale. He references an academic study that has become a popular meme within resistance circles online: if 1% of the population participates actively in resistance movements, there’s a 50% chance the regime will falter. This probability increases to a certainty when participation reaches 3.5%, a figure that has resonated widely across social media platforms.

At 04:15, Loewinger introduces Professor Pagel from University College London, who categorizes 464 actions taken by former President Donald Trump that, in her view, undermine democracy. These actions are sorted into five overlapping categories:

1. Weakening Democratic Checks and Balances (e.g., firing government watchdogs and requiring agencies to submit draft legislation to the White House).
2. Weaponizing State Power Against Personal Enemies (e.g., targeting law firms tied to prosecutors in Trump’s cases).
3. Undermining the Rule of Law (e.g., the Justice Department ordering prosecutors to drop charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams).
4. Controlling Information (e.g., determining the White House press pool via press statements).
5. Suppressing Dissent (e.g., detaining individuals like a doctoral student at Tufts University for expressing dissenting opinions).

Christopher Rufo, a conservative activist, mirrors strategies seen in Hungary, drawing parallels between Trump’s administration and Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s illiberal regime.

Interview with Juana Philip: A Romanian Perspective

At 02:01, Juana Philip, a Romanian journalist, shares her experiences as her country teeters on the brink of becoming an illiberal regime. In the midst of Hungary’s backsliding, Romania faced a presidential election where nationalist candidate with Trump-like views nearly won but was ultimately defeated by a pro-democracy, pro-EU candidate. Philip questions the narrative of American exceptionalism, noting, “It was very weird for us” (02:46), as the US, traditionally seen as a beacon of press freedom and democratic values, also shows signs of democratic erosion.

She highlights alarming practices such as arbitrary deportations and media threats, drawing uncomfortable parallels to Hungary’s situation. This conversation underscores the growing skepticism about the robustness of American democracy among international observers.

Insights from Andrew Morantz: The Hungarian Media Landscape

Andrew Morantz of The New Yorker provides a detailed account of his observations in Hungary. He discusses the metamorphosis of the country’s media landscape, describing it as a gradual extinguishing of independent journalism. At 09:10, Morantz recounts his visit to the Central European University (CEU) in Budapest, which has been significantly depoliticized under Orbán’s regime. The once vibrant institution now stands as a “Potemkin University,” a facade of its former self.

He also interviews Gabor Mikloshi, a former editor at the independent news site Index. Mikloshi explains how subtle editorial interferences initially went unnoticed but eventually led to his departure from the outlet (17:17). Morantz describes the transition of Index to Partizan, a YouTube-based independent media outlet that operates openly yet under constant threat of government suppression. Despite this, Partizan remains a popular platform, symbolizing both resilience and the blurred lines between resistance and regulated media.

Conversation with Martin Gulyash: Founding Partizan

Martin Gulyash, founder and lead anchor of Partizan, shares his journey from avant-garde theater to political activism. At 19:28, he describes how state cuts to arts programs propelled him into activism, leading to protests against Orbán’s attacks on educational institutions like CEU. His firsthand experience with government repression, including his arrest and community service sentence (20:06), fuels his commitment to independent journalism.

Gulyash emphasizes the importance of fairness and maintaining professional integrity even in hostile environments. At 23:35, he advises Hungarian journalists to remain rational and avoid emotional biases, fostering respect even from adversaries. He warns against creating echo chambers, advocating for a balanced approach that critiques both the government and the opposition without alienating broader audiences.

The discussion shifts to the impact of new legislation on media operations. At 25:04, Gulyash explains a proposed Hungarian law that would penalize foreign funding for NGOs and media organizations, effectively crippling the financial viability of independent outlets like Partizan. Despite these challenges, he remains optimistic, highlighting ongoing fundraising efforts to sustain operations (26:36).

Gulyash also contrasts the strategic, patient approach of Orbán with the more impulsive nature of Trump, arguing that the tactical differences could influence the trajectory of democratic erosion differently in Hungary and the United States (27:41).

Exploring the 3.5% Rule with Christopher Rufo and Maria J. Steffen

Christopher Rufo and Maria J. Steffen, political scientists and co-authors, delve into the mechanics of successful resistance movements. At 42:40, Rufo discusses the "3.5% rule," derived from their 2010 study with Erica Chenoweth, which posits that when at least 3.5% of a population engages in active, nonviolent protest, democratic regimes are likely to be overthrown.

They cite recent examples, including Brazil’s protests leading to Bolsonaro’s ban from public office until 2030, South Korea’s Constitutional Court upholding President Yoon Suk-yeol’s impeachment, and Serbia’s Prime Minister Milos Vučević resigning after widespread anti-corruption protests. These cases demonstrate the power of diverse and broad-based coalitions involving business leaders, faith organizations, trade unions, and civil society groups.

Rufo emphasizes the critical role of security forces in resistance movements. At 46:30, he explains that when members of security forces refuse to obey orders or defect to the side of the opposition, it signals the potential collapse of authoritarian regimes. The Philippine People Power movement is highlighted as a prime example, where mass mobilization and defection within the security forces led to the ousting of Ferdinand Marcos.

However, Rufo and Steffen also note that modern authoritarian regimes have adapted by enhancing surveillance and repressing larger-scale participation, making nonviolent resistance more challenging today than in the past (49:40). They argue that despite these obstacles, the success of nonviolent movements worldwide offers hope and actionable strategies for those feeling powerless in the face of political turmoil.

Lessons for American Democracy

The episode juxtaposes Hungary’s experiences with the current state of American democracy, drawing lessons on maintaining and protecting democratic institutions. Andrew Morantz highlights that unlike Hungary, the United States possesses strong civil society institutions, affluent and diverse elites, and a rich landscape of local and national journalism that can serve as counterbalances to authoritarian tendencies.

Steven Levitsky, a political scientist and co-author of How Democracies Die, is referenced to underline the importance of “civic muscle” — the collective strength and engagement of the populace in upholding democratic norms. Morantz argues that American institutions like law firms, universities, and the Supreme Court have played pivotal roles in resisting anti-democratic measures, showcasing the resilience embedded within the country’s democratic fabric.

Despite these strengths, the episode acknowledges that the US is not immune to democratic backsliding, citing events like the January 6th Capitol riot as indicators of underlying vulnerabilities. The conversation underscores the necessity for ongoing vigilance, active participation, and the preservation of democratic norms to prevent the entrenchment of authoritarian practices.

Conclusion

On the Media’s exploration of Hungary’s democratic backsliding and the dynamics of successful resistance movements serves as a sobering reflection on global and domestic political trends. Through insightful interviews and comprehensive analysis, the episode emphasizes the fragility of democratic institutions and the essential role of active, nonviolent resistance in safeguarding freedom and transparency. As the United States grapples with its own political challenges, the lessons from Hungary and other global contexts offer valuable guidance on fostering resilience and sustaining democratic values.

Notable Quotes:

• Juana Philip at 03:09: “It was very weird for us [in Romania], seeing the narrative of US Press being a high standard, and US Democracy being the model, start to crumble.”

• Andrew Morantz at 07:03: “The way they do it here and the way they're starting to do it in your country as well, they don't need to use too much open violence against us. The new way is cheaper, easier, looks nice on TV.”

• Martin Gulyash at 20:01: “I was arrested for 72 hours... It reinforced my belief that that type of journalism, that type of activism is absolutely necessary in this country.”

• Christopher Rufo at 44:04: “It takes about 3.5% of the population. The 3.5% rule is based on the research that Erica Chenoweth and I conducted back in 2010.”

• Maria J. Steffen at 50:40: “When you look around the world, even in the face of some of the most brutal forms of tyranny that have been successfully challenged by people who organize, their ability to prevail is what offers hope.”

Key Takeaways

1. Democratic Backsliding: The erosion of democratic institutions in Hungary serves as a cautionary tale for other democracies, including the US.

2. Media Manipulation: Governments can subtly undermine press freedom without overtly suppressing independent journalism, making it crucial to maintain robust media watchdogs.

3. Resistance Movements: Nonviolent resistance, when supported by at least 3.5% of the population, has a high likelihood of effecting democratic change. Diverse coalitions and the defection of security forces play pivotal roles in these movements' success.

4. Civic Engagement: Strong civil society institutions and active civic participation are essential in resisting authoritarian tendencies and sustaining democratic norms.

5. Adaptation of Authoritarian Regimes: Modern authoritarian governments employ sophisticated surveillance and media control tactics, necessitating adaptive and resilient resistance strategies.

6. American Resilience: The United States possesses unique strengths in its democratic infrastructure and civil society, which can be leveraged to counteract emerging threats to its democratic fabric.

This episode of On the Media offers a comprehensive and thought-provoking examination of the fragility and resilience of democracies in the face of rising authoritarianism. By drawing on international examples and expert insights, it underscores the importance of vigilance, active participation, and strategic resistance in preserving democratic values.