Orbán: Hungary for Hungarians, Europe for Europeans
Print Friendly and PDF

Is this supposed to be a bad thing? If it was referring to any other continent and civilization, it would be a truism. (Pictured above, actual Hungarians.)

Viktor Orbán, who has a somewhat mixed record when it comes to supporting Western patriots, triggered the enemies of Europe again by delivering a powerful speech that declared Hungary belongs to Hungarians and Europe to Europeans.

“The real threat is not coming from the war zones but from the depths of Africa”, the Prime Minister highlighted. ”With the disintegration of the countries of North-Africa, the defence line which once protected Europe, and which absorbed the masses of people coming from the interior of Africa, has evaporated”, he explained.

”What we have at stake today is Europe, the European way of life, the survival or disappearance of European values and nations, or their transformation beyond recognition”, the Prime Minister pointed out. ”We would like Europe to be preserved for the Europeans”, he stated. “But there is something we would not just like but we want because it only depends on us: we want to preserve a Hungarian Hungary”, he stressed.

[Orbán: Europe Is at Stakeby ?ry Mariann and Jancsó Orsolya, Magyarhirlap.hu, July 25, 2015]

As some American conservatives are being forcibly reminded by their base, the nation isn't a cheap combination of some dirt, floating abstract "values," and a piece of paper that the government doesn't follow anyway. The nation is the people. When the people are dispossessed and deconstructed, the nation ceases to exist.

Europe faces an existential threat with the immigration invasion from Africa. The decisions Western leaders take in the coming years will determine whether Africa stops at the Mediterranean or the Baltic Sea. Orbán recognizes this. Other leaders either do not, or, more likely, actively favor the transformation taking place because it will strengthen the power of the political class.

They are assisted in this effort by the media. For example, at The Guardian, one Cas Mudde, who specializes in pathologizing the "radical right," (i.e. normal people), is screaming for the European Union and the United States to go after Orbán.

He writes:

While Orbán lacks the eloquence, and classical training, of Enoch Powell, make no mistake: this speech was more significant that Powell’s infamous Rivers of Blood speech of 1968. While Powell was a member of the Tory shadow cabinet, a position he lost because of the speech, Orbán is the almighty ruler of Hungary – more or less jokingly referred to as Orbánistan by his opponents. He doesn’t just warn about “the survival or disappearance of European values and nations”, he organises xenophobic referendum campaigns and builds walls on his borders – roughly 25 years after the Iron Curtain was lifted in, of all places, Hungary.

[The Hungary PM made a "rivers of blood" speech, and no one caresJuly 30, 2015]

Several points.

  1. Notice how warning about the "survival or disappearance of European values and nations" is apparently a bad thing. Why? Isn't preventing such an occurrence the first responsibility of any Western leader?
  2.  "Xenophobic referendum campaigns" where people get to vote on issues like immigration are also bad apparently. I suppose Mudde wants the American system, where there is a referendum and if people vote the "wrong" way, the courts simply toss it out and say it doesn't count. Because that's how democracy works.
  3. Building a wall to prevent an unwanted invasion is different from building a wall to keep people in the country. Do we really have to spell this out? Incidentally, the Iron Curtain was about suppressing the independence of Eastern European countries and making sure the truly important decisions were made outside the country. Sounds a bit like the European Union.
  4. Orbán is referred to as the "almighty ruler of Hungary," or "Orbánistan." But elsewhere in the piece, Mudde speculates Orbán  is simply using an "opportunistic strategy in order to fend off the Jobbik challenge." Which is it? Is he an "almighty" God-Emperor of the Magyars or a threatened democratic politician responding to the concerns of his constituents in order to stay in power?
  5. Enoch Was Right.

One more excerpt.

As leaders from around the world descended on Paris to speak in defence of free speech, however hypocritical they were, the Hungarian PM used the #JeSuisCharlie demonstration to launch an anti-immigration campaign that is becoming more problematic by the day.

So unlike other politicians who posed for the cameras and then pursued the same suicidal policies, Orbán took action against an obvious security threat. Incidentally, anyone who uses the term "problematic" unironically is a terrible person.

What's interesting about the contemporary Western debate about mass immigration is that pro-invasion advocates no longer bother denying the effects of their policy. The eradication of traditional Western nations and the dispossession of Western peoples is held to be a self-evident good. Indeed, they are allowed to talk about the motivations and inevitable effects of their policies, it's just unacceptable when "nativists" point them out.


Print Friendly and PDF