METSZETEK
Vol. 4 (2015) No. 4
ISSN 2063-6415
DOI 10.18392/me sz/2015/4/10
www. me sze ek.unideb.huwww. me sze ek.unideb.hu
Edi Sch anz: Communi y is mo e han jus a physical space 129
DOKTORI MŰHELYEKBŐL
Communi y is mo e han jus a physical space
Discuss his s a emen wi h speci ic e e ence o he ole o he concep
and expe ience o con empo a y communi y
EDIT SCHRANZ
Deb eceni Egye em, Humán Tudományok Dok o i Iskola
Szociológia és á sadalompoli ika dok o i p og am
In oduc ion
Wha happens i among he membe s o a socie y and among he smalle and
la ge uni s and g oups making up he socie y us and con idence seems o be
disappea ing a once? Wha happens i con idence eposed in o each o he all ic im
o social di e ences as well as o he economic / cos -o -li ing boxing o mode n
in o ma ion socie y? How o s op he c isis symp om ha seems o be de eloping his
way and which is shown in he agmen a ion o communi ies?1 Wi h o he wo ds,
is i possible o “s ick again oge he ” a communi y o e en a whole socie y s a ed
o disin eg a e? The ques ions, e en i no so cha ac e is ically ph ased, p o ide
sociologis s ac ually wi h he scope o unde s anding ou mode n, indi idualis ic
wo ld (Habe mas 1994). Gus ield (1975) depic s dicho omy o communi y and
socie y in a way ha we should in e p e communi y as a pe ading, signi ican
con as . By now li e a u e seems as i i was only be able o pic u e he changes
aking place in he images bo h o he socie y and communi y desc ibing hem by e en
mo e p onounced, con adic o y p ocesses. The changes ha send messages on he
disin eg a ion o ca ego ies and ames becoming insecu e ins ead o he secu i y
and in eg a ion quasi missed by Habe mas. I also seems as i —quasi as an answe
gi en o his p ocess—occlusion/seclusion bo h on he pa o communi y membe s
and he a ious communi ies om he seemingly unknown and insecu e changes
we e mo e in ensi e (Légmán 2012). We in end o cons ue hese phenomena on
he nex pages, bu due o ex ension limi s wi hou he need o comple eness o
social in e p e a ions. We wan o do i wi h he help o mainly one dimension:
alue p e e ence h ough he example o a gi en socie y, namely he Hunga ian one.
Thus we ge o he s abili y and he solida i y o he membe s o he smalles uni o
socie y, one which accep s and exp esses a ious alue p e e ences, he amily.
1 The e is no way o go in o de ail in his s udy conce ning he issues being he well- easoned social
issues aised in ou p esen age. Maybe a whole olume would be insu icien o discuss he opic. Fo he
momen , we conside ed aising he issue a all e y impo an .
METSZETEK
Vol. 4 (2015) No. 4
ISSN 2063-6415
DOI 10.18392/me sz/2015/4/10
www. me sze ek.unideb.hu
130 Edi Sch anz: Communi y is mo e han jus a physical space
DOKTORI MŰHELYEKBŐL
1. Communi y and us —ques ions, ideologies, in e ses
1.1. CONFIDENCE VERSUS TRUST
Gyö gy Csepeli, in his 2014 s udy, w i es ha he us in he en i e y o he mode n
social sys em which is shown by he membe s o he socie y owa ds he economic
and poli ical eli e shows whe he a socie y is ideal o no . He belie es ha us
appea s as a ool o collec i e e lec ion on social phenomena and dis inguishes
be ween he us o membe s o socie y in he social sys em (con idence) and
us be ween people ( us ). He pu s an emphasis on he ac ha high con idence
index bo h a he le el o in e pe sonal and in e ac i e ela ions e e s o he ideal
unc ioning o socie y. In he opposi e case i is e y likely called c isis (Csepeli 2014).
On he o he hand, Csepeli conside s he wo in e media e s a es, when con idence
in socie y exis s, bu us be ween people does no , and he in e se o his, he
indica o s o change. “I ’s a sign o eg ession in o he Gemeinscha s a e i con idence
disappea s bu us emains.” (Csepeli 2014: 19 e e s o Ko nai – Ro hs ein – Rose
– Acke man 2005)
I ’s no by chance ha we deal somewha longe wi h he wo d con idence i sel
as an ins umen o communal e lec ion gi en o social phenomena—as men ioned
abo e. I will ge an impo an ole in he nex pa o his s udy, whe e we in end o
demons a e by a de ini e popula ion exis ing signs ha may indica e changes ac ing
owa ds disin eg a ion in a socie y.
We can ind he he elemen s o he a o eme ioned idea in a di e en o m in
Fe dinand Tönnies’s wo k al eady. In his Communi y and Socie y (1887), he was
he i s o make ideo ypical di e en ia ion (Csepeli 2014) be ween communal
o ganiza ion ma king he na u al s a e o man and la e social o ganiza ions (Tönnies
2002). Theo ies se o h by Tönnies, on he one hand, allow us o no ice no only
he di e ence be ween he ela ionships de eloped om “secu i y”-based, na u al,
amily communi ies and communi ies o mode n socie y made up o indi iduals on
pu pose based on supe icial con ac s. On he o he hand, hey gi e an oppo uni y
o us o ca y on he hough un il we ana omize he ope a i e unc ions o mode n
socie y, o he ideas o au hen ic and—in espec o he whole socie y—unau hen ic
exis ence o he economic and poli ical sys em.
1.2. TRADITIONAL VERSUS MODERN
Howe e , can he phenomena disco e able in cu en socie ies acing ou
disin eg a ion ha , ega ding he esul s o sociological esea ch, poin ou he
de elopmen o he c isis o con idence (Ko ách – K is ó 2012) be in e p e ed as
he b eakup o communi ies? O a e we simply wi nessing he disappea ance o old,
METSZETEK
Vol. 4 (2015) No. 4
ISSN 2063-6415
DOI 10.18392/me sz/2015/4/10
www. me sze ek.unideb.huwww. me sze ek.unideb.hu
Edi Sch anz: Communi y is mo e han jus a physical space 131
DOKTORI MŰHELYEKBŐL
adi ional o ms o communi y along wi h he appea ance o new ones? (Légmán
2012)
Acco ding o Tönnies, in adi ional socie ies he place o he indi idual is p e-
disposed, pe sonal iden i y is de ined by he communi y and ela ionships a e s able.
Indi idualism o mode n socie ies which in e ms o sociological in e p e a ion ha e
begun along wi h indus ializa ion did no make good o adi ional communi ies.
Disappea ance o old clus e s and eme gence o new ones a ound he indi idual—
pu ing him o he in he ocus (U asi 2002)—does no mean only ha he old
ones ( amily, ela i es, wo kplace ela ionships) ha e been subs i u ed by new,
loose bonds (Beck 2003). I means also ha o he e ec o ce ain social e en s,
he cons an cyclicali y o anishing-eme ging communi ies ypical o socie ies
o he wise de eloping and o ming in a na u al way is discon inued. Tha is adi ional
communi ies a e elimina ed, hey a e no eplaced and hus no new ones appea in
hei places (Hankiss 2002).
Jü gen Habe mas, howe e , akes a a he i m s ance. P oceeding om
indi idualism as well, he e alua es he loss o ames ma king communi y inhesion as
a consequence o indi idualism. He says ha he lack o in eg a ion esul s in iden i y
c isis in he socie y (Habe mas 1994). This sugges s ha he misses he secu i y
p o iding, in eg a ing e ec o adi ional communi y image in mode n socie y
(Légmán 2012). A he same ime, An hony P. Cohen, acco ding o he challenges
o he e a, s udies communi y om a di e en aspec han he ep esen a i es o
classical sociology o he g ea p edecesso s om he Chicago school do2. Al hough
buil on he wo k o he p edecesso s, as we al eady e e ed o ha in connec ion
wi h Du kheim, Cohen’s wo ks do no miss he “doc ines” o Webe ei he . Cohen,
when in es iga ing he idea o communi y, did no examine communi y i sel only.
He also wan ed know how he membe s o communi y eally de ine and imagine
again hei g oups and iden i ies (Cohen 1985). Acco ding o Cohen, a he le el o
e e yday li e— amily, iends, neighbou hood, i al y and jealousy as he o ien a ion
poin s o social p ocesses— he exis ence o communi y basically depends on sense.
This “sense” comes in o being, on he one hand, by human in e ac ions. On he o he
hand, i is an unb eakable pe cep ion o he “bounds” which communi y bounds
a e desc ibed as o symbolic ype by Cohen. No only because di e en meanings
do mean di e en hings o people, he says, bu also because sensing communal
2 Cohen has belonged o he hi d “gene a ion” o communi y s udies. Wes e n communi y s udy
o igina es basically om sociology, i s o all he Chigao School – e.g. Lynd; Pa k – Bo gess – McKenzie;
Zo baugh; Why e, as well as he social an h opology o B i ish impe ialism—e.g. E ans-P i cha d; Rees.
This school has come a simila way in o he Wes e n-Eu opean coun ies, as well. I s i s “gene a ion”
has aken communi y o g an ed; communi ies we e conside ed as s a ic, ha monized and unc ionally
heal hy g oups. The second “gene a ion” has essen ially ca ied on in he same di ec ion, e.g. Newby;
Mina – G ee ; Nisbe ; Pa sons S acey; Willmo (Bencze 2010).
METSZETEK
Vol. 4 (2015) No. 4
ISSN 2063-6415
DOI 10.18392/me sz/2015/4/10
www. me sze ek.unideb.hu
132 Edi Sch anz: Communi y is mo e han jus a physical space
DOKTORI MŰHELYEKBŐL
bounds may be comple ely insensible o people being ou side o he communi y.
Symbolic bounds a e “illegible”—he w i es in his book: The symbolic cons uc ion o
communi y. “You canno d i e a b idge ac oss a i e which you canno see” (Cohen
1985: 37)—he adds o emphasis.
1.2.1. The cohesion o he “we” consciousness
Compa ed o Cohen’s symbolism Elemé Hankiss3 app oaches he issue om a
mo e ealis ic aspec in his book da ed back in 19794. Fo him communi y means
he coexis ence o people who a e held oge he by a common objec i e, in e es o
alues, ha is he “we” sense. His s andpoin is ha he mo e o hese ou c i e ia
a e p esen in he li e o a communi y, he s onge i s inne cohesion, e iciency
and esis ance agains ou e e ec s a e. Howe e , says Hankiss, communi y as
he ca alyse o he e ol emen o human pe sonali y, is as much an impo an
ins umen as “dange ous” i is, “because i can uin and e en elimina e human
pe sonali y, human au onomy” (Hankiss 2004: 171). And hough Hankiss ins ances
he e he pe sonali y des oying p ac ice o Hi le jugend, oday we can exac ly
iden i y p esen p oblems o “we” and “you” wi h i , pai ed wi h poli ical heo ies
hidden behind he shield o he “absol ing” ole o communi y. Fo his e ela ion,
he issue o mode n communi ies and he po en ial solu ion o exis ing p oblems,
howe e , i is no e adable o exac ly know wha he wo d “con idence/ us ” means.
Wha i means oday and mean hen when—acco ding o a ious c i e ia and no
inciden ally also in o de o seek answe s o sol ing social p oblems— he s udy
o human communi ies and human socie ies was s a ed. The sha e o oubles o
p esen socie ies as a ood o hough is he ac ha he ac ions and hough s o
a communi y o communi ies o a ce ain coun y (Islamic S a e) seems o ha e
become global by now. Mo eo e , apa om geog aphical loca ion, based on ce ain
c i e ia, i uni es people—who ac ually do no belong o a communi y in close e ms
o classical sociology based on Spence ’s doc ines—in o an ideological communi y,
he communi y o de ence.
3 Elemé Hankiss (1928–) Hunga ian sociologis , philosophe , alue- esea che and li e a y his o i-
an, holde o he Széchenyi-awa d.
4 A ha ime he e was s ill a socialis sys em o go e nmen in Hunga y. The published book was
i led Social T aps and Diagnoses and he e was qui e a good u nou o i . I was due o i s con en which
ga e an exac analysis o dis o ions a ec ing communi y and i s sense in o he hands o eade s (as well
as he pa o leade s o he one-pa y s a e who we e willing o ead he book). (The au ho )
METSZETEK
Vol. 4 (2015) No. 4
ISSN 2063-6415
DOI 10.18392/me sz/2015/4/10
www. me sze ek.unideb.huwww. me sze ek.unideb.hu
Edi Sch anz: Communi y is mo e han jus a physical space 133
DOKTORI MŰHELYEKBŐL
2. “Secu i y” in con as wi h ee choice5
2.1. SOCIETY-WIDE DISTRUST—THE EXAMPLE OF HUNGARY
Membe s o he Ins i u e o Sociology o he Hunga ian Academy o Sciences s a ed
a esea ch p ojec h ee yea s ago which was going o las o se e al yea s and was
o be conduc ed in se e al s ages. The p ojec aims o su ey he exac de ini ion o
he phenomena ha became pe cep ible as a consequence o he social ansi ion
happened du ing he wo decades ollowing he change o he poli ical egime6
in Hunga y in 1989/90. Resea che s hope i will esul in an expec ed change o
pa adigm. P ecisely, sociologis s wan (ed) o igu e ou how in eg a ion7 does and
how does no unc ionin he p esen Hunga ian socie y. The ini ial wild shoo s8 o new
capi alism in Hunga y hen by i ue o he economic c isis in 2008 he e en mo e
spec acula social di e ences esul ed in pe cep ible aul -lines wi hin he Hunga ian
socie y. Addi ionally, he e e less manageable inequali y and non-con idence being
p esen a bo h he mac o and he mic o le els o socie y ha e by now pe cep ibly
manhandled ci izens’ belie eposed in alues. Also o ha eason esea che s
s udied he issue along us and con idence9 espec ing bo h he in e ac ion o wo
5 Z. Baumann (2000) asks he ques ion in his book i led: Liquid Mode ni y; Fo ewo d: On Being
Ligh and Liquid.
6 The change o he poli ical egime ma ks he e a o Hunga ian his o y in he cou se o which he
Hunga ian s a e became a democ a ic s a e b eaking wi h he one-pa y s a e as well as i s cul u al and
ideological ela ions. The new poli ical and economic eli e ha ing been es ablished and o ganized by he
end o he 1980s we e willing o s and less and less he supe ision o he weakening pa y leade ship.
By 1988 he pa y ope a ing he one-pa y egime has los i s suppo p o ided by bo h he majo i y o
pa y membe s and he wide anges o socie y. The majo i y o he popula ion u ged adical changes as
well as a peace ul al e a ion o he egime ha would cease he dic a o ship o he one-pa y sys em and
besides ensu ing poli ical igh s also would p o ide social secu i y o e e y o i s ci izens. Opposi ionis
o ganiza ions ha e de eloped; he p edecesso s o u u e pa ies, such as he Hunga ian Democ a ic Fo-
um(MDF), he Associa ion o F ee Democ a s (SZDSZ), he Associa ion o Young Democ a s (FIDESZ)
and he Independen Small Fa me s’ Pa y (FKGP). The change o he poli ical egime in Hunga y b oadly
means an e en in he cou se o which he s uc u e o he Hunga ian socie y has begun o change.
7 In e ms o sociology we can dis inguish h ee le els o he concep o in eg a ion: 1. he le el o
social heo y, 2. he le el o “ ac ual sociology” o “p o essional le el” e e ing i s o all o g oups in eg-
a ed pa ially in o socie y, and 3. he e e yday “layman’s” le el. A he le el o academic social heo ies
he concep o in eg a ion is connec ed o he issues ha how he mass o people, g oups, ac ions, ins i-
u ions, no ms, e c. will become—a mo e o less— unc ioning whole, i.e. how hese will e ol e o socie y
(Ko ách 2012).
8 P i a iza ion no adequa ely egula ed by he ansi ion go e nmen s and he legal loopholes o
aking he o me socialis s a e p ope y in o p i a e owne ship b ough o h unexpec ed disp opo io-
na eness in he socie y wi hin a ew yea s. (The e a o he new “wild capi alism”.)
9 “T us and con idence mean he acclama ion o he way a socio-economic sys em unc ions. I also
means a socio-psychological mechanism ha may in luence he beha iou o hose pa icipa ing in he
sys em posi i ely and se es as liaison be ween pe sonal mo i a ions and ai hs as well as o ganiza ional
and social objec i es o be achie ed,” (Csepeli in Hajdu 2004; Csepeli Gy. – Ö kény A. – Székelyi M. – Ba na
I. (2004). T us and mis us . Socio-psychological di icul ies on he way leading o ma ke economy in
Eas e n-Eu ope. Sociological Re iew, 1. 3–35.)

METSZETEK
Vol. 4 (2015) No. 4
ISSN 2063-6415
DOI 10.18392/me sz/2015/4/10
www. me sze ek.unideb.hu
134 Edi Sch anz: Communi y is mo e han jus a physical space
DOKTORI MŰHELYEKBŐL
pe sons and he le el o he whole socie y. The s udy anged om he dimension o
he amily h ough employee g oups, economic uni s as well as he in eg a ion and
disc imina i e dimension o mino i ies o he disin eg a ion o local communi ies
as well as o he ex ension o social e ec s made by he social eli e and he ac s o
inequali y. Wi hin he ames o his s udy he e is no way o add ess all men ioned
dimensions. Howe e , i we app oach he dimensions o no ms and alues om
he s andpoin o a social g oup conside ed o be he mos ulne able one (Fu long
2002), i.e. heyoung gene a ion, i u ns ou immedia ely why he p esence o he
disin eg a ion p ocess can be aced in he Hunga ian socie y. Tha ’s why we shall
ocus on his example la e on.
2.2. DISINEGRATED IMAGE OF SOCIETY
T us , as Bence Ság á i w i es in his s udy, enhances he eeling o an indi idual o
belonging o a communi y. A he same ime, i does no mean he exclusion o o he
g oups. The lack o us , howe e , leads o he e osion o social capi al which ends
up wi h isola ion and he disin eg a ion o s uc u es. Communica ion channels do
no wo k and de e io a ion o human ela ions begins. Rumou -monge ing s a s
and p ejudices and s e eo ypes ge s onge (Allpo 1954 in Ság á i 2012).
Resea che s hemsel es ound ha d o ace he ac a e he i s s age o he
p ojec had been inished ha in espec o social in eg a ion he le el o us and
con idence in Hunga y is ex emely low compa ed in e na ionally.
Acco ding o he ou comes o he analyses made ins i u ional con idence has
signi ican ly dec eased since he change o he egime and us eposed in o he s
diminished, as well. In his ega d Hunga y is anked in he las hi d o Eu opean
coun ies. (Figu e 1.)
Figu e 1. Change o gene alized con idence in Hunga y (in a scale o 0–1), 1982–2008
Sou ce: Volume o Social In eg a ion 2012
METSZETEK
Vol. 4 (2015) No. 4
ISSN 2063-6415
DOI 10.18392/me sz/2015/4/10
www. me sze ek.unideb.huwww. me sze ek.unideb.hu
Edi Sch anz: Communi y is mo e han jus a physical space 135
DOKTORI MŰHELYEKBŐL
Rejec ion o no m ansg essions is qui e high, hough esponden s seem o be
insince e in connec ion wi h he ac ion o ansg ession. Compa ed a an Eu opean
le el, Hunga ians assume o he s iola e he no ms a an ex emely la ge a e while
hey a e among he las ones o admi hei own ac i i y o he ansg ession o
no ms. This a i ude, as we shall see, a ec s he hinking o young gene a ions o a
la ge ex en .
A he end o he i s decade o he 2000s Hunga ian people pe cei ed an a e age
a e o co up ion. A he same ime, acco ding o he co up ion pe cei e index
o T anspa ency In e na ional used in in e na ional compa ison, he judgemen o
pe sons in ol ed in e na ionally was ha he si ua ion o Hunga y is obse ably
ge ing wo se10 (Hajdu 2012). “Summing i up, i Hunga ian socie y has o be anked
in a scale o well in eg a ed and disin eg a ed socie ies hen—based on he examined
dimensions—we ha e o say ha Hunga y a he shows he image o a disin eg a ed
socie y” (Hajdu 2012: 60)– s a es Gábo Hajdu in his compa a i e s udy.
The ques ion is igh ully posedabou he ex en poli ics is esponsible o he
a ousal o he cu en si ua ion, and in addi ion o, o a he , as a unc ion o his, he
ex en he in elligen sia a e a aul . Is an Ha csa, in his e iew published in 2007
in Szociológiai Szemle11, b ie ly implies ha by he ea ly-mid 2000’s “ he decline in
he social weigh o he in elligen sia is no a[n exclusi ely] Hunga ian phenomenon”
(Ha csa 2007: 257). Howe e , his asse ion does no de ac any hing om he
ele ance o ha which he au ho s o he book ha se es as a basis o his
analysis w i e abou he easons o he dep ecia ion o he Hunga ian in ellec ual
eli e. The s udy w i en by he sociologis s Kuczi – Ko ách – and K is ó en i led12
A szociológia sze ep ál ozása és az é elmiség ú ja a ha alomból13 desc ibes he
p ocess ha e en hough a e he egime change o 1989 he ques ion o e hinking
he ole o sociology a ose—which placed in o he ocus o he new pa adigm shi
he e ision o he s a i ica ion o social classes— he p ocess ell ic im ho he
“bad habi s Hunga ian sociology” (Ha csa 2007: 256). Wi h he a oidance o ac ual,
public sociological deba es, he unc ion, impo ance, and oe o he sociologis
p o ession changed—p ac ically dep ecia ed, becasue he poli ical “class” (Ha csa
2007: 257) ejec ed he in elligen sia’s need o he p ac ice o con ol o e poli ics o
be unques ionable. Mo eo e , he sp ead o mass media ans o med he s uc u e
o he public, signi ican ly lim ing he in elligen sia’s oom o manou e ing. In
10 News o 17 h Oc obe 2014: he USA posed a p ospec i e p ohibi ion o en y agains nea ly en
Hunga ian ci il se an s, diploma s and la ge en ep eneu s ha ing close liaison wi h he go e nmen ,
because e idence was ound ha hey ied o in luence Ame ican businesses ope a ing in Hunga y. Sou -
ce: online daily newspape s www. index.hu; www.h g.hu; www. o igo.hu
11 Sociological Re iew.
12 In: Tá sadalmi me sze ek, edi ed: Ko ách Im e.
13 Sociology’s ole change and he in elligen sia’s pa h away om powe .
METSZETEK
Vol. 4 (2015) No. 4
ISSN 2063-6415
DOI 10.18392/me sz/2015/4/10
www. me sze ek.unideb.hu
136 Edi Sch anz: Communi y is mo e han jus a physical space
DOKTORI MŰHELYEKBŐL
he wo ds o E zsébe Szalai, he in elligen sia slowly los i s independence, and
i s membe s—wi h he excep ion o a na ow goup—ended up in he sphe e o
in luence o he poli ical and economic eli e (Ha csa quo es Szalai 2007: 257). While
looking o connec ions, app oaching he esponsibleness o poli ics om he o
side o he pa adigm shi —o ul ima ely, lack he eo — he unheld deba es abou
he alidi y s a i ica ion s udies a e mos p obably explained by he insensi i i y
o poli ics and he poli ical eli e, he p oblema ic ela ionship be ween poli ics and
science, and he pa ial p ojec i iza ion, ma ke iza ion o science (Ha csa 2007).
These a o emen ioned phenomena, howe e , did no push Hunga ian socie y
owa ss in eg a ion ei he .
Re u ning o he summe ized esul s o he MTA Sociological Ins i u e, in he
esea ch done on he le el o indi iduals in he analysis dealing wi h ela ionship
ne wo ks cen e s a ound he ques ion “Whom o be us in?”. Resul s a e unequi ocally
hough -p o oking he e, as well. I u ned ou ha in an a e age Hunga ian people
ha e e y ew con iden ial ela ions and e en wi hin hese he a io o ela i es is
high compa ed o ha o iends (Albe – Dá id 2012). Acco ding o s udies we
need o add ha “abou he hal o he adul popula ion li es in a “disin eg a ed”14
amily” … and no hing p o es ha a amily made up o a ma ied man and woman
and hei child en—and only and exclusi ely his one—would be “in eg a ed” in all
cases (Tó h 2012). In my opinion, based on hese s ong bu unequi ocal s a emen s,
his allows us o s a o unde s and wha can lead o he disin eg a ion o ei he a
na owe o a wide communi y o e en he ames o he socie y i sel in he middle
o Eu ope in ou mode n age. I amily as he smalles uni o socie y (U asi 2012), a
communi y based mos ly on he ies o blood canno be a su icien ly secu e poin o
he membe s o he socie y in many cases—as sugges ed by he abo e s a emen —
hen wha kind o example can many u u e gene a ions in a socie y ake wi h hem
o he jou ney and wha alues a e hey going o ep esen ?
2.3. LOSS OF TRUST AMONGST THE YOUNG GENERATION
When in es iga ing he alue dimensions o he age g oup o Hunga ian you h and
young adul s (15–29) esea che s wan ed o know how his gene a ion could be
desc ibed and cha ac e ized in Hunga y. Mo eo e , hey hough i was impo an o
analyse o wha ex en does hei hinking di e om ha o he elde gene a ion,
ha o hei pa en s. We ha e o no e he e ha a he beginning o he ansi ion
14 In he s udy Olga Tó h measu es he ex en o in eg a ion/disin eg a ion wi hin a amily by he
good o bad unc ioning o he amily, he igh ness o ela ionship be ween amily membe s and he
quali y o amily li e.
METSZETEK
Vol. 4 (2015) No. 4
ISSN 2063-6415
DOI 10.18392/me sz/2015/4/10
www. me sze ek.unideb.huwww. me sze ek.unideb.hu
Edi Sch anz: Communi y is mo e han jus a physical space 137
DOKTORI MŰHELYEKBŐL
p ocess ha has aken place in Hunga y i was assumed ha he gene a ion bo n
in he ea ly 1990s would al eady ollow di e en alues by i s age o wen ies han
he wen ysome hings o he 1990s. This was in acco dance wi h he collec i e
social expec a ions: aking isk, inno a ion, dynamism and compe i i eness “should
cha ac e ize” he young gene a ion o he 2010s in an expec edly de eloping, open
socie y (Ság á i 2012). Compa a i e analyses, howe e , show a disillusi e di e ence
in con as wi h he expec ed esul s. In his s udy i led “Age o ansi ions?—The
Socie y’s Image o Hunga ian You h” Bence Ság á i depic s wo conspicuous
di e ences in e ms o compa ing his empi ic esea ch o EU s udies. One o hem
is ha in he opinion o young age g oups in Hunga y he ansg ession o no ms is
necessa y no only o economic success, bu also o e e yday li e15. We can see wi hou
special explana ion ha his is an e iden p oo o he alue c isis and he loss o
con idence. So i is, mainly i we add he a i ude men ioned abo e o he e ec ha
people do no eally admi hei own ansg essions o no ms while hey b ing on
hose occu ing in o he coun ies. Tha is, i i was allowed wi hin he e i o y om
gene a ion o sugges he app op ia eness o accep ed, unw i en “ ules” o “wangle”
o gene a ion o he expec able economic bene i s, while e e ybody exac ly knows
wha would be app op ia e acco ding o he ules o gene al no ms. This is bound o
be he iew o young age g oups on he ansg ession o no ms. We assume howe e ,
ha his esul s in inc easing aul -lines ins ead o o cing cohesion wi hin a socie y
o communi y. Tha is i does no assis he p edominance o “coope a i e s a egy”16
(Hankiss 2004: 44) in he ac ual human and social p ac ices. Righ ly is he issue
aised on how his e osion o us /con idence could be s opped hen? Should all
his be conside ed as he abo e men ioned symp om o c isis o does i i in he
concei ed “mo emen s” cha ac e izing mode n communi ies and socie ies? We
assume ha i does no i in, bu we a e going o gi e de ailed explana ion on he
ele an e idences in ano he s udy. (We need o no e hough ha inding a solu ion
o his communal p oblem seemingly ep esen s a majo challenge o he all- ime
esponsible poli ical go e nance.) The o he conspicuous di e ence as Ság á i
indica ed in his pape is—acco ding o one o he esul s o he Eu opean Social
Su ey ci ed in he s udy— ha he a e age sa is ac ion o Hunga ian young people
wi h he e ec i e poli ical and economic sys em sco ed 52. Compa ed a a Eu opean
le el his is quali ied as e y low ( he lowes ) index17. (Figu e 2.)
15 I is impo an o no e ha —acco ding o he s udy— his poin o iew is ypical no only in he
case o young people s udying in highe educa ion bu o he Hunga ian you h in gene al.
16 Elemé Hankiss desc ibes coope a i e s a egy as ixed in he p ocess o a phenomena ela ed
o socie y. This includes no me ely he coope a i e beha iou o he indi idual aking he in e es s o
he majo i y in o conside a ion bu also ha he indi idual does no gi e p io i y o his/he own di ec
pe sonal in e es s agains hose o he communi y in cou se o he p ocess. (Social T aps – Diagnoses,
2004: 44.)
17 The a e age alue o he index measu ing sa is ac ion sco ed 58 in he comple e ESS sample while
METSZETEK
Vol. 4 (2015) No. 4
ISSN 2063-6415
DOI 10.18392/me sz/2015/4/10
www. me sze ek.unideb.hu
144 Edi Sch anz: Communi y is mo e han jus a physical space
DOKTORI MŰHELYEKBŐL
Hankiss Elemé (2004): Viselkedéskul ú ánk o zulásai. In: Tá sadalmi csapdák és
diagnózisok. Osi is, Budapes : 157–205.
Ha csa Is án (2007): “Osz ályokon innen, a agy úl” – Tá sadalmi me sze ek:
ha alom, é dek, indi idualizáció és egyenlő lenség a mai Magya o szágon.
Nap ilág (2006), Budapes
Janky Béla (2005): Indi idualizmus, e a izmus és a poli ikai a i űdök kapcsola a
a bizalommal. In: Medgyesi Má on – Tó h Is án Gyö gy: Kockáza , bizalom és
ész é el a magya gazdaságban és á sadalomban. Tá ki, Budapes : 70–80.
h p://www.socialne wo k.hu/cikkek/ a sTokeKo e .pd (download 27.09.2015)
Ko ách Im e – Dupcsik Csaba (2012): Be eze ő megjegyzések. In: Ko ách Im e –
Dupcsik Csaba – P Tó h Tamás – Takács Judi (sze k.): Tá sadalmi in eg áció a
jelenko i Magya o szágon. Tanulmányok. MTA Tá sadalom udományi Ku a ó-
közpon (Szociológiai In éze ), A gumen um Kiadó, Budapes : 7–17.
Ko ách Im e – K is ó Luca (2012): Eli és á sadalmi in eg áció. In: Ko ách Im e
– Dupcsik Csaba – P Tó h Tamás – Takács Judi (sze k.): Tá sadalmi in eg áció
a jelenko i Magya o szágon. Tanulmányok. MTA Tá sadalom udományi Ku a ó-
közpon (Szociológiai In éze ), A gumen um Kiadó, Budapes : 30–45.
Légmán Anna (2012): Közösségképek. In: Ko ách Im e – Dupcsik Csaba – P. Tó h
Tamás – Takács Judi (sze k.): Tá sadalmi in eg áció a jelenko i Magya o szágon.
Tanulmányok. MTA Tá sadalom udományi Ku a óközpon (Szociológiai In éze ),
A gumen um Kiadó, Budapes : 357–369.
Ság á i Bence (2012): Az á mene ek ko a? – A magya ia alok á sadalomképé ől.In:
Ko ách Im e – Dupcsik Csaba – P Tó h Tamás – Takács Judi (sze k.): Tá sadalmi
in eg áció a jelenko i Magya o szágon. Tanulmányok. MTA Tá sadalom-
udományi Ku a óközpon (Szociológiai In éze ), A gumen um Kiadó, Budapes :
63–83.
Somlai Pé e (2012): A családi s abili ás kapcsola i szemléle e. ile:///C:/Use s/
edi /Downloads/somlai_pe e _a_csaladi_s abili as_kapcsola i_szemlele e.pd
(download 27.09.2015.)
Tó h Olga (2012): Tá sadalmi in eg áció és család. In: Ko ách Im e – Dupcsik
Csaba – P. Tó h Tamás – Takács Judi (sze k.): Tá sadalmi in eg áció a jelenko i
Magya o szágon. Tanulmányok. MTA Tá sadalom udományi Ku a óközpon
(Szocioló giai In éze ), A gumen um Kiadó, Budapes : 363–383.
Tönnies, F. (2002): Applica ion o Gemeinscha & Gesellscha As Rela ed o O he
Typologies. In: Communi y & Socie y (Du kheim; Cooley; Red o eld; Becke ;
So okin; Webe ; Pa sons) Do e Publica ions INC. Mineola, New Yo k
U asi Ágnes (2002): A bizalom hálója – Mik o á sadalmi kapcsola ok, szolida i ás. Új
Mandá um Kiadó, Budapes

METSZETEK
Vol. 4 (2015) No. 4
ISSN 2063-6415
DOI 10.18392/me sz/2015/4/10
www. me sze ek.unideb.huwww. me sze ek.unideb.hu
Edi Sch anz: Communi y is mo e han jus a physical space 145
DOKTORI MŰHELYEKBŐL
U asi Ágnes (2006): T adicionális család indi iduális é ékp e e enciákkal. In:
Czibe e Ibolya (sze k.): Családszociológia. Deb eceni Egye em, Deb ecen