“Of course it did!” “Of course it didn’t!” supporters on either side will insist without a moment’s hesitation. But what is the truth about this supposed change of regime? Let’s take a closer look.

Entire libraries have been written—and no doubt many more books will be—on the question of what politics actually is. Some argue that it is about the common good. Others believe it is fundamentally about power. Still others see it as the art of defining friends and enemies.

Yet there is a strong case for the view that politics is, above all else, communication. If your message is more convincing, if it resonates more effectively, if the majority of voters believe what you are saying, then you shape the political landscape. If not, you lose.

This perspective helps explain much of what has happened in Hungary since the spring of 2024—and, in truth, since at least 2010. But for now, let us focus on the question posed in the headline: did the Tisza Party’s victory on 12 April 2026—perhaps even more decisive than many had anticipated—constitute a genuine change of regime?

One “change of regime” after another?

Those old enough to remember the 2010 general election will recall that Viktor Orbán and Fidesz had their own powerful slogan following what was, perhaps, an even more emphatic victory than expected. They described election day as a “polling booth revolution”. The reaction was much the same as it is today: those who had voted for the winners embraced the phrase, while supporters of the defeated parties either laughed it off or dismissed it with outrage.

There was, however, another political slogan from that period which is even more relevant today. Shortly after taking office, the newly elected Prime Minister announced the creation of the System of National Cooperation—the political framework that would soon become widely known simply by its Hungarian acronym, the NER, and which, over time, evolved from an official designation into a highly charged political label.

In that sense, it was Fidesz itself that laid the groundwork for Péter Magyar’s current rhetoric about “change of regime”. After all, in 2010 they too spoke of establishing a new political system. And if the government that came to power in 2010 chose to define its own rule as the System of National Cooperation, why should a new government not claim the right to establish a different system of its own?

But has the system actually changed?

Does a political system really change simply because Viktor Orbán declared it so in 2010—or because Péter Magyar declares it in 2026?

To answer that question, it is worth taking a closer look at Hungary’s previous undisputed change of regime: the transition of 1989–1990. Few would question that a genuine transformation took place then. The debate concerns not whether it happened, but whether its consequences were ultimately beneficial.

The country’s constitutional order was fundamentally reshaped. Hungary ceased to be the People’s Republic and became the Republic of Hungary. The collective Presidential Council of the People’s Republic was replaced by the office of the President of the Republic. A multi-party political system was introduced, allowing any political party to contest elections.

The practice of governing through decrees carrying the force of law—a mechanism that had largely reduced Parliament to a formality by enabling the Council of Ministers to legislate without parliamentary approval—was abolished. And, of course, the centrally planned socialist economy gave way to a capitalist market economy.

That is what many people would describe as a true change of regime.

Those who hold this view would argue that 12 April 2026 brought about nothing more than a change of government—significant, perhaps, but not a transformation of the political system itself.

If you missed: Péter Magyar has set out how he intends to unseat the Hungarian President Tamás Sulyok: the plan, step by step

Everything is relative

So who is right?

In all likelihood, no one is entirely right—and yet everyone has a point.

Perhaps that is precisely what makes politics so fascinating. Each of us can feel convinced that we are the ones who truly understand the world.

After all, we already know the answer: politics is, ultimately, communication.

Interested in reading more? In our related article, we take a closer look at how Péter Magyar has outlined his plan to unseat Hungarian President Tamás Sulyok, step by step.