You might think Hungary is a faraway country. Small and landlocked, it has a baffling Finno-Ugric language few outsiders master. What do its corruptions and conspiracy theories have to do with the UK?
When I was in Budapest in August last year, I met Marta Pardavi. I worried about her and her friends in the Hungarian human rights movement, but I did not think I needed to transfer my fears back to the UK.
To understand her predicament, you must know that the ruling party, Fidesz, and its president, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, rigs the constitution, the electoral system, most of the media, the judiciary and Hungary’s cultural institutions.
The handmaiden of autocracy is corruption. If Hungarians want to see a doctor or win a government contract, they have learned to reach into their pockets. Budapest is not a European capital now: It is Moscow on the Danube.
Because any sane electorate would throw him out, Orban needs an enemy to scare Hungarians into voting for him on Sunday. He has come up with a novel combination of anti-Jewish and anti-Muslim bigotry. A classic dish with a modern twist, you might say: Two “others” for the price of one.
The Hungarian state has saturated the country with propaganda portraying the liberal Hungarian-Jewish financier George Soros as a menace to the nation. The rootless cosmopolitan is planning “to resettle at least 1 million immigrants annually” in the EU in general and Hungary in particular, Fidesz said.
As Soros does not command a government, Fidesz would have struggled to explain how he could flood Europe with Muslims. It is as if British ministers were pretending the choice before the electorate was between the Conservative party and Human Rights Watch.
However, Orban rarely has to explain. Most TV stations and newspapers obey the government and their hack propagandists have worked to turn the marginal non-governmental organizations (NGOs) Soros funds, with no power beyond the ability to seek judicial review of the treatment of refugees, into agents of a supernaturally powerful Jew.
When I met Pardavi, the state-sponsored attacks on her Hungarian Helsinki Committee were so extreme they appeared to me to be an incitement to violence.
She shrugged and said that was the price of working in Hungary.
The climate has turned colder since the summer. If Fidesz wins re-election, it has promised laws that would treat NGOs as threats to national security.
Meanwhile, someone is running black ops against the Helsinki Committee and the Civil Liberties Union for Europe.
Imposters posing as sympathizers have tried to trap human rights workers into making off-the-cuff remarks Orban can twist and use against them.
You might think Hungary is a faraway country, but former US White House chief strategist Steve Bannon does not think so.
He praised Orban as “the most significant guy on the scene right now.”
Orban showed how German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s decision to allow columns of refugees to march across Europe could create huge opportunities for the far right. And not only in Hungary and Poland, whose government is imitating Orban’s tactics with dog-like devotion.
Although no one could be further from a demagogue than British Prime Minister Theresa May, it remains a matter of record that the Brexit campaign won with the help of the fake claim that Turkey was about to join the EU — two years on and it is still outside — and with posters depicting the coming Muslim invasion.
Beyond these scares lie faint signs of trouble to come. I have watched men and women I once admired turn from principled opposition to Muslim reactionaries into opponents of any version of Islam. I am talking about a handful of people, but consider how their numbers might grow on the “respectable” right.
The EU has been its “other” since former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher’s last days. Where will the right turn when Britain leaves? The terms of the divorce will be so bad that perhaps the right will carry on blaming the EU for its failures for years to come.
However, if it needs a new enemy to motivate its base, one only has to look to Orban or US President Donald Trump to guess who that “other” might be.
As for Orban’s cosmically evil Jews, turn to the British left. For a generation, its dominant voices have failed to draw a line between criticism of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and fascist ideology.
Like right-wingers who no longer care about the difference between opposition to radical Islam and anti-Muslim bigotry, they accept no restraint.
It cannot be repeated often enough that anti-Semitism is a racist theory of power. Leftists have always been susceptible to the “socialism of fools,” because in their worst moments they believe democracy and human rights are shams hiding the capitalist puppet masters. It is all too easy to move from saying the puppet masters are the “capitalists” to the puppet masters are the Jews.
To stay only with British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn, he has taken the shilling of the Iranian state — which is not only anti-Semitic, but misogynist and homophobic — defended a more-than-usually-vicious vicar who said Jews were the secret conspirators behind 9/11, a mural that paid homage to Nazi conspiratorial “art” and a Palestinian activist who revived the medieval conspiracy that Jews drank the blood of Christian children. Rather late in the day, he decided it was politically prudent to repent.
However, mark the reaction of his supporters last week. They did not believe Corbyn’s contrition was sincere. Thousands signed a letter stating that he was a victim of a “very powerful special interest group,” or as British Labour Party activist Christine Shawcroft put it after defending an alleged Holocaust denier (as you do): “This whole row is being stirred up to attack Jeremy.”
In Budapest, the far right has Jews plotting to destroy Christian Europe by bringing in Muslims. In London, the far left has Jews plotting to destroy the Labour leader with fake accusations of racism.
Hungary is a faraway country, you say. Not so far away.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
RSS