I was away recently, and while I was away, Hungarian prime minister came to Tusnad (near where we now live) to make a speech at the annual "Tusvanyos" event. This was the venue last year for the famous speech he made where he argued for illiberal democracy. This year's speech was not about that but about immigration, and predictably was not exactly liberal or tolerant or even demonstrating any form of human empathy.
It may be that many people outside Hungary are not really aware of Orban and his views, so I have decided to relay his entire speech here (as translated by Hungary Today, here - a source which is not exactly anti-Orban, and so I think you can take it as a fairly faithful translation of what he said). I have annotated it, not because I really think it needs to be annotated for normal people to see through the rhetoric and see what lies beneath, but well, because this is scary stuff and it needs to be highlighted, and because from what I gather from social media Hungary is currently in the grip of some very serious and very unpleasant anti-immigrant rhetoric, which is being played out very publicly, and will, before long, I'm afraid, lead to worse than simply just angry words.
So, anyway, here, in full, with annotations in bold italics, is Orban's speech.
Good morning,
Allow me to welcome attendees at the open university camp. I am
glad to have the opportunity to be reunited with Bishop László Tőkés, [Such
a shame that one of the heroes of the 1989 Romanian revolution should have sunk
to being a puppet for this extremist Hungarian PM] I am pleased to see
dozens of my old fellow combatants, and I particularly welcome the Szekler
flags I can see. Thank you all for coming. Following my success last year in
causing uproar (provoked by my presentation on the end of the era of liberal
democracies and the advent of illiberal democracy), this year my task is not an
easy one: the bar has been set too high. Having searched through every
available dictionary on political philosophy, I drew a blank: I could find
nothing that representatives of today’s western ideological mainstream could
find sufficiently offensive compared with last year.[I don’t know, Viktor, you seem to
have done a good job, in coming up with the vile far-right garbage you’re about
to launch into. Don’t do yourself down
so much. Rest assured you do manage to
be deeply deeply offensive most of the time] And now Bishop Tőkés has just said that at
times he finds it hard to keep track, and warned us that we should not overdo
the Brazilian-style on-the-ball tricks, because we might trip over our own
feet.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
A year ago I said that we are living in times when anything can
happen, and this is still true today. Who would have thought that Europe would
be unable to protect its own borders, even against unarmed refugees? Who would
have thought that things would get to the point at which, for instance, the
head of the Islamic community in France would publicly suggest that the French
State could hand over redundant Christian churches, because there is a demand
for them to be converted into mosques? [This by the way is not true, but even if it
were, if there are buildings lying empty – as many churches are – why not use
them for something else. There are
converted churches all over the place, why would it be a problem? Oh yes, of course, in the dog whistle world of Orban, this
is all code for the idea that “The Muslims are taking over”.] Who would have thought that the United States
was tapping the telephone conversations of German political leaders? This has
finally been revealed, and it is not the end of the world. And who would have
thought that we Europeans would act as if nothing had happened, and amicably
continue free trade talks with a counterpart who probably knows our negotiating
positions before we do ourselves? And furthermore, who would have thought that
the Americans would deploy weapons in Central Europe, and the Hungarian
parliament would find itself pondering the thorny question of whether or not Hungary
should sign up to this? And who – other than us – would have thought that by
the end of 2014 Hungary would be the second-fastest developing country in the
entire European Union?
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The uncertainty of the future may even prompt us to consider the
nature of the future in a political context – or more precisely, the nature of
being able to understand the future. We tend to conceive of the future – or, to
be more exact, knowledge of the future – as if we were a captain navigating our
ship into the unknown: we are at the prow, with telescope in hand, scanning the
horizon for unknown shores. Those with the sharpest eyesight or the most
powerful telescope will be first – the first to possess knowledge of the
future. It is as if the future stood before us, out there in the unknown, like
an undiscovered continent which existed in the real world and was waiting for
our approach. But, dear friends, the nature of the future is completely
different from this. Its most important characteristic is that it is not
fully-formed; indeed, it does not exist at all, and will only occur hereafter.
Therefore, there is no point in straining our eyes to see the future. It is
better to think of the future as if we were rowers in a race, sitting with our
backs to the bow. Like rowers, we can only see what is already behind us, and
that which happens to come within our field of vision. We must direct the bow
of the boat towards the future, and as the shore unfolds before our eyes, we
must deduce the future from that which we already know. In other words, in
thinking about the future we are not competing to looking far ahead of us, but
rather competing to understand the past. The winners will be those who can
better understand the past, and who can come to the right conclusions more
swiftly and more courageously. This is the starting-point of political
leadership and planning. [Nicely put. Shame you’ve started looking
back and pining for the certainties of the 1930s]
Dear Friends,
This is good news, because to understand we need intelligence –
we need brains – and across the world nothing has been as intelligently
distributed: everyone is convinced that they have a little more of it than
others do. If we think about the future of the European Union, and our own
future within it, we should first examine the past of the European Union.
Despite all our sharply critical remarks, we must point out that the European
Union is in itself a great success: in terms of peace, development and welfare.
It is nevertheless true that up until 1990, the peace that had endured since
World War II was not due to us Europeans, but to the Americans and the
Russians, who decided on the affairs of Europe for us; there is no doubt,
however, that since 1990 the success we have achieved has been our own success.
Whatever problems may weigh on our minds now, this fact cannot be negated – even
by events since 2008.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
At times there are phenomena which enable us to understand a
given era, and which encapsulate its essence. In our lifetimes, modern mass
migration is just such a phenomenon. Looking through this window, we can see
the whole world. It is by this that the world is framed, and it is through this
that we can understand where we are and what awaits us.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Let us speak plainly: the intensification of modern-day mass
migration is a consequence of political processes. [Primarily inequality, Mr Prime
Minister, though you’re about to argue that it’s something else] The
countries of North Africa once functioned as a defence zone protecting Europe,
absorbing the masses of people coming from Africa’s interior. [Ah,
so the reason people are migrating to Europe is because there is no Gaddafi
there to repel them? ] And the real threat is not from the war zones,
Ladies and Gentlemen, but from the heart of Africa. [Now we’re getting to it, now we’re
getting to the core of Orban’s dark heart, so to speak. The heart of Africa.
That’s the real “threat”. No more dog whistle racism, this is the real thing]
With the disintegration of North African states this line of defence has been
spectacularly breached, and North Africa is no longer able to protect Europe
from a vast flood of people. As a result, a problem has developed on a truly
unimaginable scale. [In fact the vast majority of refugees trying to come to Europe are coming from places like Syria and Afghanistan, but obviously those people are a little too obviously refugees for this point to be made as Orban would like, so we'll just pretend it's the whole of sub-Saharan Africa attempting to march on Budapest] I agree with former President Sarkozy, who said on French
television just the other day that the current wave of mass migration is only
the beginning. There are one point one billion people in Africa today, more
than half of them under the age of twenty-five. According to Mr. Sarkozy,
before long hundreds of millions of people will have nowhere to live, and
insufficient food and water. [So, rather than focusing on that problem,
which wouldn’t be a bad thing, we’re going to ensure that this situation
remains. That about the size of it?] Following in the footsteps of today’s migrants, these people
will leave their homelands. [As people have done for centuries. Millennia
in fact. As a proud Magyar, Mr Orban, perhaps you might even spot an irony here…
but let’s not trouble ourselves with that and move onwards] In other
words, what is at stake today is Europe and the European way of life, [whatever
that may be] the survival or extinction of European values and nations
– or, to be more precise, their transformation beyond all recognition. [Yes,
immigration changes the countries that end up hosting immigrants – though it
changes the immigrants more – but is this necessarily a bad thing? I think you
can argue quite forcefully that it changes the countries that are left behind
for the worse. Look at the countries of Eastern Europe. Look at Romania, Orban,
the country from which you made this speech. A country that has lost 15% of its
population in the last 10 years, that is losing its best and brightest. Yes, migration is a problem, but not in the
way you are trying to scare people about] The question now is not
merely what kind of Europe we Hungarians would like to live in, but whether
Europe as we now know it will survive at all. Our answer is clear: we would
like Europe to remain the continent of Europeans. [Again with the irony. OK, let’s
define this European thing. What makes someone a European? How many generations
back do you have to go to be one? We all came from “the heart of Africa” at
some point] This is what we would like. We only say “we would like
this”, because this also depends on what others want. But there is also
something which we not only would like, but which we want. We can say we want
it, because it depends only on us: we want to preserve Hungary as a Hungarian
country. [Hungarian or Magyar? There is
a difference, and it’s an important one. As Pal Lendvai argues in his excellent book, there is a sense of “Hungarianness” which is about inclusiveness and
making a nation out of disparate ethnicities, and then there is something
other, a “Magyar” idea which is much more about ethnic purity. The distinction
is key, though in the Hungarian language there is no word other than Magyar for
“Hungarian” in this way, so it wouldn’t exactly come out in translation] It
is important to point this out over and over again, although this may appear a
cliché in our circles. Yet we must point this out over and over again because
there are some who think otherwise. However incredible it might be, and however
difficult it might be for us to acknowledge it with the intellectual and
spiritual reserves at our disposal, there are indeed some who think otherwise. [Yes,
of course there are. No doubt there is some vast global conspiracy even now
which is trying to turn Hungary into a country of Uruguayans, or of
Seychellois, or something]
The European left, dear friends, do not see immigration as a
source of danger, but as an opportunity. The left has always looked upon
nations and national identity with suspicion. They believe (and take note of
their choice of words) that the escalation of immigration may fatally weaken –
indeed eliminate – national borders, and in historical terms this would also
constitute the attainment of the left’s as yet unimaginable long-term goal.
Although this may sound absurd at first, if we focus in on Hungary, it is
likewise perhaps no coincidence that in 2004 the Hungarian left incited
animosity against Hungarians in neighbouring countries [Note for outsiders - the animosity engendered by the Orban government in neighbouring countries is FAR FAR greater than that engendered by its predecessor], while today they are
ready to welcome illegal immigrants, whom they would greet with open arms. [Christ
man. Do you really believe this nonsense? What other massive conspiracies do you
have up your sleeves? The moon landings
were faked? 9/11 was a Mossad plot? ] Quite simply these people, these
politicians, do not like the Hungarian people – and they do not like them
because they are Hungarians. [Oh for fucks sake. The Hungarian left do not like
Hungarians? Give me a break you
ludicrous buffoon. This is pathetic] Similarly, a fair number of
centres of financial and political power in Brussels also have a vested
interest in erasing national structures, and eliminating national identities.
Just imagine, Ladies and Gentlemen, what would have become of Hungary if the
left had had the chance to form a government in 2014. [It would be like France, for
example, or some other European country in which the soft left had formed the
government. It would probably have lots of problems, just as it does now, just
slightly different ones. But let’s face it would not have been radically
transformed, other than the fact that it wouldn’t be governed by a racist piece of dirt like you] It is a shocking thought, but let us
just imagine it for a second: within a year or two, we would not have been able
to recognise our own country; we would be like a refugee camp, a kind of
Central European Marseille. [Yes of course. I wonder if there was anyone
in your audience who actually believed that.
I certainly hope not]
We know that meeting a bear in the woods is no laughing matter –
and neither is a parliamentary election. [Ha ha very funny. Mr Comedian. Nice Szekely
gag there. Good work. Always nice to play to your crowd.]
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Here must note that the upsurge of migration is also related to
the fact that some people see the West’s human rights fundamentalism [Oooh,
nice expression, and one that begins to get to the heart of your vileness,
Viktor: “Human rights fundamentalism” A belief in human rights is a form of
fundamentalism now is it? I’m guessing there are certain humans you’d like to
argue don’t have the same rights as others, are you? We’re getting there, aren’t we? Back to the 1930s, I can see that’s where you’re
going with this] as an invitation, regardless of the reasons they have
for wanting to leave their countries. Because naturally there are genuine
refugees, but there are many more who are merely seeking to enjoy the benefits
of the European lifestyle. [This is bollocks, mate. You’re presenting these people as mad
holidaymakers. It’s a huge wrench for people to leave their homes, a huge
trauma. You must know this, enough Hungarians have done this, have become
economic migrants because of lack of opportunities and a desire for something
better for their children. It’s not about a “lifestyle” it’s about desperation.
] As this many people would never be able to enter the territory of the
European Union legally, more and more of them are accepting the risks
associated with illegal immigration – and more will do so in the future. And as
the European Union only has principles, but no genuine sovereignty (for
example, it has no border guards), it does not know how to handle this new
situation.[For once I agree with you.] Brussels is unable to protect the people of
Europe from the flood of illegal immigrants; [“flood”. Hmmm] in the
words of a former German finance minister, “The problem with Europe is that it
keeps kicking a can up a hill, and is surprised to find that it keeps rolling
back”. The European Union started out as an economic alliance, and later also
became a political alliance; today it needs to act as a sovereign power, but in
order to do so it needs to further reduce national sovereignty. As the old
Budapest joke has it: at first they set off in the right direction, but they
couldn’t keep to it; then they set off in the wrong direction, but this time
they kept to it perfectly.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The mission of the European Union led to genuine long-term
solutions to genuine problems: peace instead of war, a common market instead of
separate markets, inclusion for the poor instead of exclusion. The European
Union was pragmatic, and also relatively flexible; hence its unique
organisational solutions. But it is obvious that something has gone wrong, and
Europe has become an ideology instead of genuine solutions. Europe no longer
concentrates on the problem, but merely considers whether a given solution
weakens or reinforces its own closed system of ideologies. [Again, I actually agree here. I
may have to have a good hard chat with myself if things go on like this. In my
defence I suspect we perceive the closed set of ideologies that represent the
EU’s problem somewhat differently] Europe has become an ideological
obsession; if something is reasonable and successful but strengthens the
sovereignty of a nation state, it is to be discarded – indeed, it is seen as an
enemy, and the more successful it is, the more dangerous.[Ah yes, we do disagree. Phew.] This
is the essence of the Hungarian story. [I have no idea what this final rhetorical
flourish here is supposed to mean]
Ladies and Gentlemen,
What we Hungarians do is successful, beyond doubt, but it is not
in accord with Brussels’ ideological concepts; in other words, it does not
weaken Hungarian national and state sovereignty, but reinforces them – and from
this point of view it is to be condemned. [Well, when it’s about enacting proto-fascist
media laws, then I think they have a point]This is why the European
Union is unable to resolve the crisis in Greece, which is a practical problem
calling for a practical solution.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
We Hungarians have a vested interest in a strong European Union,
and take the view that successful solutions make Europe strong. European
mainstream political and intellectual forces believe that Europe will be strong
if it is somehow forged into a United States of Europe. Looking at our
continent from this perspective, we Hungarians are Europe’s Gaullists. The fact
that there are no individual bodies of separate nationhood within the United
States is a function of its nature, rather than its structure. Therefore we
must not imitate this aspect. By contrast, the nature of Europe resides in the
fact that it is composed of nations; in other words, attempting to create a
United States of Europe is a crazy idea. America is not made great by the fact
that there are no nations within it; America is made great by the fact that it
is able to come up with successful solutions. Therefore, if the European Union
wants to be successful, it must find its own viable solutions. Whether it will
be able to do this in the future, we do not know; but we do know that it has
fallen short of this since 2008, ever since the beginning of the economic
crisis. Since 2008 people have formed the impression that the European Union is
doing the same thing over and over again, yet every time expecting a different
outcome.[Another paragraph with which I can find little to disagree]
Many of you may perhaps remember that the first country needing
a rescue package after the 2008 crisis was not Greece, but Hungary. Yet since
2010 we have succeeded in reducing the debt to GDP ratio, making Hungary one of
the few Member States where this has happened. If we want to evaluate and
appreciate the efforts of the Hungarian people on their merits, we should cast
a glance at Greece. We are proud to have repaid our debt to the IMF ahead of
schedule, and only a small tranche of European Union aid remains to be repaid,
which we will do when it falls due at the beginning of 2016. Remember that
Hungary never requested any debt relief or rescheduling. Some may see this as a
weakness, while to others it is a virtue; I belong to the latter group. And all
this has happened against a background of growth in Hungary’s GDP which has
been outstanding in comparison with other Member States. It is something rare
in the history of the Hungarian economy, my dear friends – and nothing short of
unique in recent decades – that the economy’s external and internal balance
indicators are improving in tandem, and the economy is also growing at the same
time. Meanwhile we have succeeded in correcting two earlier errors: we have
done away with retail foreign currency loans, and thus prevented a financial
collapse; at the same time, we have succeeded in renationalising a number of
previously privatised strategic assets which constitute a core element of
Hungary’s national sovereignty. [I’m not familiar enough with Hungary’s
economy to comment on any of this. I suspect that there is a great deal of spin
here, but I could be wrong]
Ladies and Gentlemen,
When I said that illegal immigration is like “the ocean in a
drop” – in that it encapsulates the whole world – I was also referring to the
fact that from it we can deduce the most important tasks facing us in the years
ahead. We must now talk about four issues which will become priorities
throughout Europe in the period to come, and which will constitute the bulk of
our tasks here in Hungary.
The first such question is the problem of national identity.
Thirty years ago, many Europeans saw the answer to European social problems in
so-called multiculturalism. In our circles I do not need to spell out the
difference between “multi-ethnic” and “multi-cultural”. [I think you probably do, Viktor,
as I suspect I know what you mean by the sentence, and even possibly what you
therefore think of as “our circles”] Today, however, increasing numbers
of people see multiculturalism not as a solution to problems, but as the cause
of them. [Ironic that this speech should be made in Transylvania, which for
centuries has been a multicultural society] Over the past thirty years
several European countries have decided to welcome masses of people coming from
places with different civilisational roots. I do not believe we should pass
judgement on this experiment; in fact I think we should not even allow
ourselves to state our view on the outcome of this experiment. All we can say –
but we have to say it firmly, having seen the results elsewhere – is that we do
not want to repeat this experiment on our country; this is something that we
have the right to say. [Hang on. You don’t want to say anything
about the results of this “experiment”, but you do not want to repeat it? Is that saying nothing about it? Interesting
verbal gymnastics there, Mr Orban. And in referring to it as an "experiment" it implies that there are some social scientists sitting there saying "I wonder what would happen if we invited millions of people to come and tried to integrate them", as opposed to there being a period of migration which governments responded to, just as they have always done. ]
Another question that we must tackle openly and plainly is that
there is a clear correlation between the illegal immigrants who are flooding
into Europe and the spread of terrorism. [Bollocks. Utter utter bollocks].Interestingly,
this is obvious in English-speaking countries, but many others deny it. [OK
let’s look at European terrorism. I’ll even go with the mainstream view of what
constitutes terrorism to make it simple. The IRA, ETA, Red Army Faction, Baader
Meinhof gang, Chechens, etc, etc. None of them in any way whatsoever related to
immigration. The July 7th attacks in London? Carried out by British
people (Though, since we all know what Mr Orban is getting at here is the idea
that it is non-white skinned people that are the problem,
he will no doubt see that attack as verifying his point). The 11-M attacks in
Madrid are actually the only ones that I can think of carried out by
immigrants]. Only recently, a senior public security official from the
United States pointed out in Hungary that the correlation between these two
factors is clear.[It must be true then. A single unattributed source said so]
It is undeniable that we are simply incapable of screening out terrorists from
such an enormous mass of people.[Just as it is undeniable that it is
impossible to stop any form of crime before it is committed. Which is to say
undeniable but completely facile at the same time] Ladies and
Gentlemen, we must agree with British Prime Minister David Cameron, who says
that we shall not be able to resolve this crisis unless we stop these people
right at the outset, when they are about to leave their own countries [Who
are "these people", Viktor? Come on say
it. Perhaps “In our circles” you don’t need to spell it out]
The third problem which we shall have to cope with – after
multiculturalism and terrorism – is a problem which is economic in nature.
Western experience shows that illegal immigrants contribute to rising
unemployment. This fact has become particularly obvious in the period since
2008, when the European Union has been struggling with an ongoing economic
crisis, and when for most European countries (because not every country is
Germany), this high rate of unemployment represents one of the main sources of
tension. The arrival of new waves of people in countries with already high
unemployment rates results in even higher unemployment. This is as simple as
one plus one equalling two. [ Well, yes and no. You are explicitly referring
here to “illegal” immigrants – I’m not comfortable with any human being
referred to as “illegal”, but anyway – and those people do not show up on the
figures. They cannot get legal employment anyway, and they cannot receive
benefits. So, what exactly is the proof
of this rise in unemployment? Migration does cause stresses in employment, but
through unscrupulous employers hiring people for low wages rather than other
reasons primarily. It sounds logical what you’re saying, but in fact you’re
trying to trick the audience here]
And finally let us also mention a subject upon which political
correctness in Europe has enforced a guilt-ridden silence. According to police
statistics in western countries, those states with large numbers of illegal
immigrants experience dramatic increases in crime, with a proportionate
decrease in public safety. [OK now we’re getting to it. Immigrants are criminals. ] Let me
cite a few examples as food for thought. According to UN statistics – not
statistics from the Hungarian government, but from the United Nations – Sweden
is second only to the southern African state of Lesotho in terms of figures for
rape. [And? You’re blaming this on immigrants? This is loathesome stuff,
Orban, absolutely loathesome. Sweden has perhaps the widest definition of what
constitutes rape of anywhere. If Sweden is prosecuting more men for rape than
anywhere else, this says positive things about Sweden, frankly.] According
to a 2013 British parliamentary report, the number of Muslims in British
prisons has tripled over the last fifteen years. [Muslims are more likely to be
imprisoned by the British state? It may be true, but there may be more than one
reason for that. In addition the number of muslims in Britain as a whole may
have tripled in that time period so in fact this may actually be saying nothing
at all] In Italy, one quarter of crimes in 2012 were committed by
immigrants. [If this is true, and I wonder whether it is, where did those immigrants
come from?] And the list goes on.[There is a thorough analysis of this whole paragraph of the speech
here http://hungarianspectrum.org/2015/07/27/fact-checking-viktor-orbans-latest-speech/
]
In summary therefore, Ladies and Gentlemen, we can say that
illegal immigration is equally a threat to Hungary and to Europe. It is a
threat to our common values and to our culture, and even to our diversity. [Like
“diversity” is a concern of yours, Viktor] It is a threat to the security
of European people – a threat which undermines our ability to cement our
economic achievements. For as long as it was able, Hungary attempted to enact
measures which took full account of its neighbours’ interests. Hungary has
found itself in a trap, however, as not only must we reckon with ever more
waves of mass migration from the south, but countries west of us have expressed
the intention to return to Hungary those people who have already passed through
our country, after previously entering it illegally. We are therefore under
pressure from both the south and the west. The truth is that we are unable to
endure this.
The question of mass migration is a question of common sense and
morals, a question both of the heart and the mind; as such, it is a question
which is extremely complex and profound, and one which provokes strong
emotions. [Indeed. It does provoke strong emotions. Compassion among some, and
hate among others] Societal questions like this can only be tackled if
we identify points on which we can all agree as a community. This was the
purpose of the Hungarian national consultation on immigration, the official
outcome of which I would now like to share with you. As part of the national
consultation, by 21 July one million two hundred and fifty-four completed
questionnaires were received. We sent out eight million questionnaires, and
more than one million have been completed and sent back to us.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
From these completed questionnaires we may conclude the
following. More than two-thirds of Hungarians see the issue of the spread of
terrorism as relevant to their own lives. [When asked specifically about terrorism?
Not much of a surprise] Three-quarters of them believe that illegal
immigrants are a threat to the jobs and livelihoods of Hungarians. Four-fifths
of Hungarians think that the Brussels’ policy on immigration and terrorism has
failed, and that we therefore need a new approach and more stringent
regulations.[Is this actually what was said, and in response to what question? All
seems a bit dodgy to me] In contrast to Brussels’ lenient policy [I
thought you said Brussels doesn’t have policies?], four-fifths of
Hungarians encourage the Government to adopt stricter regulations to curb
illegal immigration: regulations allowing us to detain people who have
illegally crossed Hungarian borders, and to deport them within the shortest
possible time. [Camps? Hmm, I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. It is the 1930s in your
head after all] And according to eighty per cent of those who completed
the questionnaire, illegal immigrants should cover the costs of providing for
them during their time in Hungary. [So Syrian refugees who have lost
everything, their homes, their families and their lives need to pay for their own
incarceration? How exactly are you going
to enforce that? Come on, let’s hear this, it’s got to be good.] Tough words, a firm stance – but this is
the Hungarian stance. And finally, the most important response, which takes
precedence over all others so far, is that the overwhelming majority of
Hungarians – ninety-five per cent of those who completed the questionnaire –
think that we must focus support on Hungarian families and the children they
can have, rather than on immigration. We can clearly see that the Hungarian
people have not lost their common sense. The results of the consultation
therefore show that Hungarians do not want illegal immigrants, and do not share
the intellectual derangement of the European left. [Hang on a second, there is a lot
of inconsistency here. Europe has no policies, yet it’s in thrall to its own
policies. The attitude of the EU towards immigration is driven by whom? The European
left? Despite the fact that very very
very few of the EUs members have a left wing (or centre left) government? How
has this "derangement" gained such traction?] Hungary has decided, and
this is how the Hungarian people have decided. This means that we want to
remain a safe and stable country, a united and balanced nation in the uncertain
world which surrounds us. Because though I may be right in saying that in the
world today anything can happen, I am perhaps not wrong in believing that, in
contrast to this, none of us want Hungary to be a country in which anything can
happen. [Just to remind you one more time, Viktor, as you obviously had
forgotten by this point, you were making this speech not in Hungary, and the
vast majority of your audience were not in fact residents of Hungary. It’s
tricky I know to remember these things, but you seemed to imply earlier that
national borders were something you cared very deeply about]
Thank you for your attention.
And thank you, Viktor for your clear and overt message of hate and racism. In some ways I would rather you nail your colours to the mast in this way than be all secretive about it, like the UK government. But you do scare me, because you do control the media in Hungary and you do have a lot of power, which means that we may indeed be returning to the 1930s as you would clearly wish, in which you are no longer bound by "Human Rights Fundamentalism" and can proclaim certain humans to be lesser and therefore fair targets for your detention camps, and your forcible repatriation and whatever else you might be planning.
Posts
