One of the first Hungarian-language articles I read this morning was from the notorious government-financed Origo. The quality of journalism exhibited in that piece was among the worst I have ever encountered. Not that it was full of obscenities, as with so many other outlets, especially the likes of Pesti Srácok, 888, and Ripost. Instead it revealed such sycophancy toward the great leader that it was sickening. The editor must have felt that during this summer season Viktor Orbán’s name hasn’t appeared often enough in his paper, so they came up with an article titled “The thoughts of Viktor Orbán in the speech of the French conservative opposition leader.” Laurent Wauquiez, the chairman of the Republicans, received rounds of applause whenever he talked about the dangers posed by the flood of migrants who don’t have the right to settle wherever they want. This was a poor excuse for writing an article in praise of “the thoughts of Chairman Orbán,” who was never mentioned by name in Wauquiez’s speech, but it did offer Origo an opportunity to republish all the alleged dirt it had amassed on Emmanuel Macron. How did Macron come into the picture? “Wauquiez naturally criticized the weak Macron,” noted Origo. The paper then followed up with a paragraph on the sadistic captain of Macron’s guard and the French president’s liaison with the man. Journalism worthy of The National Enquirer.
Reading this article inspired me to take a look at Origo’s coverage of foreign news in the last few days. I collected three days’ worth of horror stories about migrants’ criminal activities. I found 13 such articles, from which I learned that a Muslim migrant in London wanted to butcher a lamb in his own front yard; in Austria a migrant is being sent home because he is not gay as he asserted; the Swedes want a radical change in immigration policy; in Sweden migrant gangs rule the cities; shocking data from Great Britain reveals that there are 25,000 extremist jihadists in the country; in France a migrant prisoner wanted to rape his social worker. Similar articles have been appearing regularly in Origo for the last two years.
After spending a couple of hours going through this massive propaganda package I found LMP’s Péter Ungár’s latest article, “Let’s stop moralizing and mourning democracy’s passing,” even more objectionable than I would have otherwise. In this piece, Ungár tries to convince his readers that the Hungarian public’s visceral reaction to the migrants is a revolt of the masses against globalization and a response to their loss of control over their lives. People feel helpless at the increasing prospect of losing their national culture. The opposition should support the government’s anti-migrant policies because “today ethnic-cultural homogeneity may become valuable for many because it is a guarantee against the complete globalization of the world.”
The European elite, according to Ungár, went against the wishes of the Europeans, so “if we [the opposition] want to be successful we must declare openly what we have known all along, namely, that the European political leadership was wrong and therefore it deserves to be punished by the Hungarian people.” In addition, the opposition shouldn’t be listening to the “crooning media elite who are constantly carping about dictatorship and the loss of democracy,” because by condemning Orbán they are also passing judgment on his voters as well. Stigmatizing the Fidesz camp only encourages them to stay together and become more devoted to the cause. Instead of moralizing, the opposition should change tactics. Instead of trying to outdo Fidesz in political fights, the opposition should apply a soft touch, moderation, restraint. That is the key; Fidesz will be surprised by this new approach. Instead of shouting, Ungár suggests “debate.”
This last piece of advice is one of the most ludicrous Ungár could come up with. Debating with Viktor Orbán or any of the Fidesz politicians? Good luck! Orbán gives interviews only to foreign journalists, and his scripted fortnightly radio interviews are not really interviews. He is unwilling to engage in any meaningful exchange in parliament. The insignificant opposition is totally ignored; none of their proposals is ever debated. Decisions are made without any consultation with experts.
I would say that ascribing Hungarians’ negative feelings toward the refugees to their fear of globalism is equally ludicrous, especially in light of the massive propaganda campaign that has been going on in the last three years.
Finally, I have never heard of a successful opposition that dislodged a government party by wholeheartedly supporting the most important part of its program. Because this is what Ungár is suggesting here. He also seems to believe that the opposition should tiptoe around such issues as the authoritarian rule of a quasi-dictator because the regime’s supporters might become offended. Don’t shout, he says, but debate and use restraint. Does Ungár really believe that, by supporting Fidesz’s immigration policy and telling EU leaders that Hungary has just cause to punish them, current Fidesz supporters will shift their loyalty to LMP?
Ungár says that “it is not shameful to agree with Fidesz in questions concerning migration,” but given the Orbán government’s treatment of the refugees there is plenty to be ashamed of. It is enough to think of the news of the last few days that the Hungarian authorities didn’t feed some of the people in the transit zone, referring to some regulation. Moreover, they wouldn’t allow anyone from the outside to provide food for the refugees. Human rights activists had to go to Strasbourg to seek relief.
I really wonder what Péter Ungár, son of Mária Schmidt and LMP member of parliament who is vying to replace Bernadett Szél as the whip of the party, is up to. Of course, it is possible that the young man has absolutely no talent for politics, but one could suggest a less charitable explanation for his strange suggestions. His sudden appearance as an LMP politician strikes a lot of people as suspicious. Ungár, by the way, is not the only one in the party who wants to steer LMP to the “national” side of politics, which means the nationalism of Fidesz and Jobbik, as opposed to those treacherous liberals who believe in the European Union and work against their own nation in the European Parliament. Soon enough LMP must choose sides, which may lead to its self-destruction.