Recently, Szigetvári and a blogger closely affiliated with the Hungarian opposition had a little, public spat on Twitter. The disagreement was about criticisms of the new Hungarian electoral system (see an English version of the Twitter conversation below). Sounds arcane, I know. So why is it important?

It’s important because their sniping over Twitter exposed a truth that many of us have said for some time:

Kim Lane Scheppele, the Princeton University professor so often held up as an independent expert on Hungary is, according to Szigetvári’s tweets, working hand in glove with the opposition, conferring with them in long meetings and relying heavily on their analysis for her own writing.

Viktor Szigetvári served in the Gyurcsány Government, was the Socialist Party campaign manager during the Gyurcsány era and is now co-chairman of Gordon Bajnai’s opposition political party called Together 2014. While we don’t agree on much, I’ve known Mr. Szigetvári for some time as a fellow political scientist and respect him as knowledgeable and experienced in the field of political campaigns.

Last week he made a comment on Twitter about an article that appeared on the Hungarian news site 444.hu. It was critical of the electoral system, and he said it was “more precise from a legal perspective and content-wise than Kim Lane Scheppele”.

That was too much for Eva S. Balogh, a former professor and writer of the well-known blog, Hungarian Spectrum. She takes Szigetvári to task - on Twitter - for airing such criticism so publicly. “We are working ourselves to death here, and you all are ruining everything,” she tells him, not specifying what she means by “we” but referring to the professor as their “supporter” in a piece posted later to her blog.

But in the course of their conversation, we learn that Szigetvári has “had many personal meetings” with Scheppele. He adds that the “last time we had a lengthy dinner together was a month and a half ago”.

“I have been helping her understand the details of the system for two years,” Szigetvári tweets at one point. She “accepts my expertise,” he says, and “she has used/is using my analyses on numerous points”.

You see the problem. The professor, always presented with her Princeton affiliation and as an independent expert, is now peddling a story about how Hungary’s upcoming parliamentary election will not be free and fair, but this so-called expert is drawing her conclusions seemingly entirely from sources deeply embedded in opposition political parties.

The professor is quoted regularly and has been a guest contributor on Paul Krugman’s blog at the New York Times. She has even been called upon to testify as a Hungary expert at a U.S. Congressional hearing. Rarely does she acknowledge Szigetvári or his political foundation in her work. When she does, she never states the political affiliation of her sources. She does not cite sources – or have lengthy dinners with sources? – from the other side.

Many would say that that is not serious scholarship. Some would say it’s much worse, intellectually dishonest. Yet, this is what passes as a Hungary “expert.”

Exasperated by Szigetvári, Balogh tells him that “Kim has too high an opinion of you”. In her subsequent blog post she adds that “a politician should never turn against supporters of his cause,” adding that “party loyalty is important. If someone cannot adhere to this basic rule of the game he or she should get out of politics.” So criticism of the independent expert at Princeton is an act of disloyalty to the party line.

“You all deserve to fail,” she says. “You have no idea what you’re doing. I’m done with this. My opinion: you have no business being anywhere near a campaign.”

The following is an English translation and reconstruction of the Twitter conversation that took place between Balogh and Szigetvári on March 15th. The original is, at time of writing, available here in Hungarian.

Eva S. Balogh @esbalogh 3:04 PM – 15 March 2014

@szigetv What happened to the March 12th article about Kim Lane Scheppele?

Szigetvári Viktor @szigetv 3:08 PM – 15 March 2014

@esbalogh Something happened to my post?

ESB: Yes, it’s gone. Did someone take it down? Because it wasn’t very nice.

VSZ: I didn’t take it down, nobody took it down, it’s still there. I know Kim and respect her. But she sometimes weakens her own arguments.

VSZ: For example, she likes the proportional electoral system but that in itself does not make normatively every other system bad.

ESB: You shouldn’t put that opinion out there for everyone to see. Tell her [privately].

VSZ: I have no idea why I cannot disagree with her on certain points, with all due respect to her.

VSZ: And in my post, I said only that the 444.hu article wrote more moderately about the problems. That’s not an outrageous observation.

ESB: You don’t recall correctly. [You wrote that the other article is] “more precise from a legal perspective and content-wise than Kim Lane Scheppele”. You all deserve to fail.

VSZ: Well, I’m sorry. I think you’re mistaken.

ESB: How am I mistaken? [You wrote that the 444.hu article is] “more precise from a legal perspective and content-wise than Kim Lane Scheppele” Did you study Law?

VSZ: No, I did not study Law. But when it comes to electoral law, for example, Kim accepts my expertise. The last time we had a lengthy dinner together was a month and a half ago.

ESB: Kim is polite to everyone. The same cannot be said for someone who behaves like you.

VSZ: Well, then enough of this. I’ve had many personal meetings with her, and our personal relationship is one of respect. We agree for the most part.

ESB: I sent her [your] post because I was so outraged. We are working ourselves to death here, and you all are ruining everything.

VSZ: She has used/is using my analyses on numerous points. But, in my opinion, there’s an article out there that described even more precisely the problems [with the electoral system].

ESB: Yes, in my opinion, Kim has too high an opinion of you. In my opinion. Sorry.

VSZ: I’m not exactly sitting here twiddling my thumbs, believe me. I hope it hasn’t upset Kim, that in my opinion someone articulated it more precisely than her.

ESB: The Government has already attacked her. She doesn’t need you doing it as well.`

VSZ: But please understand, I’m not attacking her. And whatever the Government says is unquestionably unacceptable, including Magyar Nemzet.

VSZ: For the most part I agree with her statements and always have, I have been helping her understand the details of the system for two years.

VSZ: There are things I see differently. That doesn’t mean that I was criticizing her, certainly not in the way the Government criticizes her.

ESB: But you said that the opinion of those two nobodies is from a legal perspective and content-wise better than hers. That’s quite a compliment!!!! Don’t you think?

ESB: Do you think this should be trumpeted to the whole world? You show an interesting way of thinking.

VSZ: Those are not just two “nobodies” but two good journalists. Whatever. I didn’t say anything offensive about Kim. I just found a better/more precise article.

ESB: You have no idea what you’re doing. I’m done with this. My opinion: you have no business being anywhere near a campaign.

By Ferenc Kumin

Source: A Blog About Hungary

This opinion does not necessarily represent the views of this portal. Your opinion articles are welcome too, for review before possible publication, via info@xpatloop.com