I think you're taking a lot out of context to make a point that I'm not sure I understand. First, the democratic constitution allows an amending process so nat

I think you're taking a lot out of context to make a point that I'm not sure I understand. First, the democratic constitution allows an amending process so naturally it makes sense that you can repeal it. Transitioning from a democracy with checks and balances to an authoritarian one-party system is 'legitimate' if you want to use that term. The end result is not a democracy. Secondly, don't let your apparent dislike of Krugman cloud your reading of this. Under laws that preceded Fidesz’s election last year, political parties that are anti-constitutional may be banned. Some have suggested that Fidesz could eliminate Jobbik in this way. In fact, Europe probably would not mind if Jobbik were excluded from public life because other European countries can ban extremist parties also. But what about Fidesz’s primary competition – the Socialists? Scheppele's concern with this is not that socialists will get punished, but that the only two viable parties will be eliminated. Democracy or no democracy, that's payback. This statement is so ridiculous I don't know if you mean it seriously or not. Do you mean to say that you would rather have no democracy with revenge than a functioning democracy with unpunished crimes from the past? The laws of a country are not where you go to get 'payback' against people you don't like. You take it to the courts... if you have any left.