Petőcz Kálmán (szerk.): National Populism and Slovak - Hungarian Relations in Slovakia 2006-2009 (Somorja, 2009)
Kálmán Petőcz: National Populism and Electoral Behaviour
Kálmán Petőcz dans does not fully correspond to the territory of mentioned 16 districts. Except the districts of Dunajská Streda and Komárno that are numerically dominated by ethnic Hungarians (their overall share reached 83.3% and 69.1%, respectively, in the 2001 population census), all other districts comprise a relatively homogeneous ethnic Hungarian majority in the south and an almost homogeneous Slovak majority in the north.8 The only exception may be found in the Nitra district where the town of Nitra is in the southeast surrounded by a crescent of villages stretching from Veľký Kýr to Jelenec pod Zoborom that are dominated by ethnic Hungarians. Nevertheless, the southern parts of the said districts form a relatively continuous strip of land where people of Hungarian origin (i.e. inhabitants with Hungarian identity) constitute a majority.’ Therefore, the ethnic border (i.e. the northern border of ethnic Hungarians’ homogeneous territorial settlement) is quite easy to demarcate, the only problematic area being the one between Nové Zámky and Nitra where ethnic Slovak and ethnic Hungarian enclaves alternate. As Table 1 shows, the overall share of ethnic Hungarians in the 16 examined districts totalled only 33.1% in 2001, declining by over 3% compared to 1991. If we included the cities of Bratislava and Košice, the overall share of ethnic Hungarians on the examined territory would decline further to 24%. However, if we demarcated the (actual) ethnically mixed territory by the northern border of ethnic Hungarians’ homogeneous territorial settlement, then the share of ethnic Hungarians on this territory would remain above 50% and would in fact approach 60%. It is not this study’s ambition to draw any political or ideological conclusions from this fact.10 All we care about is methodological correctness of research. The currently applied methodology of data collection - be it for statistical or research purposes - has been adapted to the country’s existing administrative and territorial organization; however, the real life as well as social and economic relations may not adapt immediately to artificially created administrative units that are subject to frequent changes. Therefore, researchers specializing in sociology, political science or social psychology would quite logically expect particular qualities, features and characteristics established on a territory demarcated by the actual ethnic border to differ at least partially from results established on the ‘ethnically mixed territory’ that has been artificially defined by the borders of newly created administrative units. For instance, it is fair to assume that the town of Tisovec located in the northern part of the Rimavská Sobota district will not show the same characteristics of ‘ethnically mixed territory’ as the town of Jesenské located in the southern part of the same district. Similarly, the town of 106
