Bernard-Henri Lévy interviews Orban and writes about it in The Atlantic.
This reminds me of when Putin allowed Masha Gessen to interview him.
I don’t really get why they do it. First, ideologues who hate you will not think or say any better of you for your “magnanimity”.
“Why did you choose this monastery? Why such an austere site?” …
“Because my old offices were in the Parliament building down the hill on the other side of the Danube, and that wasn’t good from the point of view of the separation of powers.”
He would have been more truthful had he said, Because I wanted to dominate this town, which is the only part of the country that is still resisting me.
Indeed, BHL claims he doesn’t believe Orban from the get go in their conversation. So is there any point to it whatsoever?
Second, why grant such privileges who hate you in the first place? Say what you will of him, but even Trump isn’t inviting the Maddows and Molly McMew’s for heart-to-hearts at the White House.
Third, there’s a good possibility they’re going to go overboard to portray you in as bad light as possible after the interview. That’s what ideologues do. Though in Orban’s case, I do wonder if BHL had to do even do much of that.
Frankly, Orban comes across as kind of dumb, or at least naive.
With one exception, which occurs when I raise the case of Gábor Iványi… By revoking the fellowship’s church status, the regime has choked off its funding.
“I know Iványi well,” he interrupted me. “He baptized two of my children. But it was a decision by the Parliament, which is absolutely responsible for church affairs. Moreover …”
He hesitates, seeming to search for words.
“Moreover, he called me a fascist. And that is the only thing for which I cannot forgive him.”
So he admits to having a grudge against this Iványi fellow, but assuredly his troubles are purely parliamentary in character, in a country where his party commands a supermajority, but most certainly in no way is Orban a fascist and he will get very upset if you call him that.
Like, I don’t care, but that’s the takeaway that intelligent normies will have on reading this, thanks to Orban buying into the frame that accusations of fascism are legitimate and necessarily bad. Never cuck!
“Are you thinking of Marine Le Pen?”
Hearing this, he stiffens, and his laughter disappears.
“Absolutely not! I have nothing at all to do with Madame Le Pen. Nothing.”
“Why not?”
“Because Laurent Wauquiez warned me that she was a red line.”
“Laurent Wauquiez?”
“A friend of mine. I have a lot of friends in France, you know.”
Why is this Wauquiez fellow important? Why does Orban feel the need to disavow so stridently? It is perfectly legitimate to cooperate with opposition forces in foreign countries. Why exactly is Orban obligated to treat MLP as a pariah?
And when I ask him about the source of the Magyar strain of anti-Semitism, which was, after all, one of Europe’s deadliest, he counters with this astonishing response.
“Béla Kun.”
Kun was a Lenin ally who, in 1918, founded the short-lived Hungarian Soviet Republic.
“Yes,” he insists. “Béla Kun. The Jews played a large role—an unfortunate fact, but a fact nonetheless—in his abortive attempt at a Communist revolution. And that is what undid the fine alliance in Budapest between the Jewish and Magyar people.”
Is he aware that, by equating the terms Jew and Bolshevik, he is reprising one of the major themes of 20th-century anti-Semitic propaganda?
The one saving grace about this interview is that BHL is too smitten by his own ethnocentric derangement to really dig that shiv in.
“You know full well that they didn’t stay.”
“That’s true. But they could come back. That’s the rule in the European Union. A migrant always has the right to return to the place where he entered the Schengen Area. And you have to understand something: Hungary has always been a land of passage; everybody, absolutely everybody, has traipsed through here. I have no desire for that to start up again.”
He concedes that the right of return is valid for only six months and that, as a result, any risk of a “reverse tsunami” is slight.
He also concedes that the former Orbán had lauded Hungary for serving as an escape route for East Germans seeking refuge in the West. …
“Even if the pope does not agree with you and continues to reaffirm the duty to welcome and shelter migrants?”
Silence.
He seems to concede a lot in BHL’s retelling. I do hope an independent video was made?
“And Erdoğan?”
“There is something you have to know about Erdoğan. He’s a big soccer fan, like me. And soccer fans share a trait. They have a muscle here, in the lower back …”
He leans out of his chair a little, as if to show me his lower back.
“And that’s what Erdoğan and I did the first time we met. We touched each other’s lower back—and recognized a fellow fan.”
Erm, OK.
“Let’s call it a miracle. Shouldn’t this miracle be all the more mistrustful of the Ottoman imperialism that is galloping back in Ankara?”
“Yes, of course. But once again, pay attention …” He gestures toward the shelves of the library in which he closets himself every Thursday. “Scholars have made a lot of progress. Especially the linguists working on the Finno-Ugric matrix from which the Turkish and Magyar languages are derived. I mean to say that our two nations have a past that is what it is, but we are also cousins.”
No serious scholar puts any stock in the hazy theory that is known in Ankara as Pan-Turanianism. But it seems to meet the needs of Viktor Orbán.
This nationalist mysticism is exactly the image you want to portray to the Blue Checks and normie NCPs who would read anything by BHL in the first place.
Unless you meant to troll them. Then that’s perfectly fine.
But in that case, why DISAVOW Marine Le Pen and wish SOROS good health and good luck?
And when I, in turn, ask him, in front of the camera, if he might have a message for his former mentor, he responds not once, but twice: “I wish him good health and good luck.”
Going on.
“I mean to imply that we must be careful. Very careful. We must support Ukraine, since it is the main bulwark between us and the Russians. At the same time, we must not provoke Putin. And that is why I oppose the European Union’s sanctions against him.” …
“The Europeans are being incredibly hypocritical. On the one hand, they lecture us. On the other hand, I wasn’t the one, at least as far as I know, who launched the Nord Stream 2 project that puts you at the mercy of Russian gas.”
OK, that’s good, but it’s far too defensive.
I think of what is rumored in Budapest about Orbán’s business ties with Putin and the Kremlin.
And I think of what I am going to say on a Budapest stage in a couple of hours about this real-world Luke Skywalker who may have gone over to the dark side of the Force, become the puppet of the oligarchs’ empire, and made his old friend Lőrinc Mészáros the richest man in the world in the same way Caligula made his horse a senator.
Throughout this interview – as retold by BHL, at any rate – I was consistently surprised by the low quality of Orban’s replies that I would have assumed he’d have stock answers to.
But this is perhaps one of the big questions that I haven’t figured out how I’d answer myself were in Orban’s (or Putin’s) shoes.
Obviously, as they are running perpendicular to – if not directly against – globalism, all of these people need a moneyed counter-elite that is loyal to them personally (as opposed to the rootless cosmopolitanism that oligarchies naturally evolve towards). For Putin, that is people like Sechin, or the Rotenbergs. In Hungary, I assume it is people like Mészáros.
Sure, “advanced” Western countries such as Sweden don’t do that. But on the flip side, they pay even more to Somalis on permanent welfare. I for one would take Sechins over Somalis. The Sechins are at least temporary, while Somalis are forever.
This is actually rather similar to Dugin’s concept of “patriotic” corruption: http://akarlin.com/the-triumph-of-patriotic-corruption/ (though Dugin, being a tolerant man, would never libel Somalis so).
However, ordinary people – understandable – don’t really take it that well when you couch you and your friends’ corruption in “patriotic” terms. But to have a sovereign country, you need a bunch of rich guys who are loyal to you and can bail you out in an emergency. At least if you’re not willing to go the full hog and establish overt controls over the elites, like China does with its red telephones from Zhongnanhai to the CEOs of its biggest companies.
But I have no idea how to elegantly justify this even though I’ve thought about it quite a bit. The dominant strategy seems to be to ignore it, or play “you too” games. Which are never all that convincing because Western agents aren’t really that rich – they don’t have access to the nation’s feeding trough, after all, and while NGOs can be rather generous, they’re never going to compete with nationwide infrastructure contracts or state-owned resource giants.
I suppose for reason Orban still wants to stay in the EPP fraction in the EU parliament, though by now it’s pretty clear they want his party booted out. Maybe he’ll change course after the elections on May 26?
But Hungary’s position in the EU of course mandates a certain caution in dealing with the heavyweight members like France and Germany. Orban’s also tried to retain friendly relations with Germany’s CSU (who, despite what many people believe, are just the usual slimy Christian democrat traitor cucks), although that has proven pretty much futile, with the CSU’s Manfred Weber now being a leading part of the anti-Orban charge.
Going on too much about Christianity strikes me as a serious weakness of Orban’s conception of nationalism, given the actively subversive pro-mass immigration stance of pretty much all churches today (it also alienates more secular people).
It’s of course especially bad with the Catholic church, but this Gábor Iványi, a Methodist, also seems to be a pro-“refugees” subversive.
I was perplexed by this audience he granted BHL back in April, and I’m still perplexed. Why?
Mészáros is a very dumb front man. The previous front man, Lajos Simicska was smart and a member of his inner circle; but he thought he was a legitimate businessman, when he wasn’t, and had a quarrel with Orbán. In 2014, Orbán got rid of him. (He has now given up his business empire, which he couldn’t operate very well against the full force of the government. But he had some business skills, so it took until 2018 to force him out of his media empire, and he could have held out longer; he gave up after the election made it clear that he had no hope against Orbán.)
There’s no such danger with Mészáros, because he’s truly dumb. He’s now the second richest person in Hungary, at least on paper. In 2010 he was a barely middle class gas fitter.
Orbán recently decided to reorganize his media empire, which meant that Mészáros had to give up some of his possessions. He complied without hesitation. The guy is a nobody.
Orbán himself is a Calvinist. So invoking the Pope means nothing to him. Of course Orbán cannot say that, because he doesn’t wish to alienate his mostly Catholic constituency. He also knows it would be used against him internationally in propaganda among Catholics.
Local Calvinist churches in Hungary have a lot of autonomy (even against their own bishops), and they are often nationalistic. In the late 1990s one of the four Calvinist bishops was heavily associated with nationalism. His son (a Calvinist minister himself) was a leading member of the far right MIÉP (Hungarian Justice and Life Party) and later Jobbik, while his daughter (also a Calvinist minister) held a number of speeches for these parties (so either a member or a sympathizer, and very publicly so). (His other two daughters were medical doctors, their political positions were not publicized.)
https://hu.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heged%C5%B1s_L%C3%B3r%C3%A1nt_(reform%C3%A1tus_p%C3%BCsp%C3%B6k)?wprov=sfti1
I think they are less nationalistic these days, but still at least there is a lot of nationalism in the Reformed Church (their official name).
Is that connected to collective memories of the counter-reformation pushed by the Habsburgs in the early modern age?
I knew Orban’s a Protestant…still, BHL’s point isn’t completely off the mark. There seems to be a lot of pathetic “Error has no rights, Deus vult” tradcath larping among a certain kind of right-winger oblivious to the active role of the Catholic church in promoting mass immigration.
I assume he means that the French cuckservatives would kick him out of the EPP if he supported Le Pen (although they have been suspended from participation anyway and yet still have not left, so he shouldn’t worry about that anyway)
Yeah, I think it’s pretty much connected to the counter-Reformation. In the late 16th century it’s thought that almost the whole country joined the Reformation, and the Habsburgs had to employ violence to re-convert maybe half the population. Catholic peasants from Germany were also settled (among them half my ancestors), pushing Catholic percentage still higher. Those who stayed Calvinist became fiercely nationalistic in the 19th century.
Though of course many Catholics also joined nationalism, and even earlier many anti-Habsburg proto-nationalists like Rákóczi or Frangepán were Catholic. (Catholic aristocrats, to boot.)
Thanks, that’s interesting, something that probably isn’t well-known outside of Hungary.
Trump finally met (and praised!) Orbán. The amount of butthurt from the likes of The Guardian (they criticized both for manspreading!) or the Financial Times was amusing. I don’t know if it’s a victory for Orbán. He was only received for five minutes by Dubya in 2001, and just a photo op with Obama around 2011, but Trump has already met or even visited most leaders from the neighborhood. Anyway, it’s great just ahead of the European election.
Frangepán was not the best example because he was actually a Croat (Frankopan). Like one of his co-conspirators, Zrínyi (Zrinski in Croatian). Wesselényi, the leader of the conspiracy was Hungarian (also Catholic).
Though Zrínyi’s brother was a great Hungarian poet. So ethnicity for these aristocrats was not totally unambiguous.
I don’t know, is it really a good thing to be praised by Trump?
Trump’s anti-intellectualism and personality (vulgar, crassly materialistic, frequently sounds like an imbecile) are profoundly alienating to many people…being associated with him kind of reinforces Orban’s weak points you’ve pointed out so often (investing more in football stadiums than in education).
There’s also the entire issue that Trump’s “nationalism” is little more than exceptionalist American chauvinism plus absolutely mental support for the more extreme forms of Zionism.
If Trump is crazy enough to order military strikes against Iran, I wouldn’t want to be associated with him in any way.
Hungary often vetoed EU resolutions against Israel. Often in the last minute, without explanation. This is part of Orbán’s strategy I guess.
Are there any news stories about it in Germany? A leftist Hungarian outlet recently wrote that a recent veto caused a huge scandal in European circles.
More interesting perhaps is the total obsession that the Atlantic, edited by a jew, has on Orban and Hungary in general.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/06/george-soros-viktor-orban-ceu/588070/
The writer of that article is jewish, too, of course. I highly doubt that intelligent non-white readers of Atlantic see much reason for this blanket coverage of a small state in Europe which has no direct consequences on their lives. This is a jewish obsession.
The war against Iran is probably the dumbest thing Trump can come up with yet.
I don’t know tbh, I don’t read or watch German mainstream media anymore. But I don’t think it’s a prominent issue, criticism is focused more on the “refugee” issue and Orban’s alleged illiberalism in domestic politics.
I understand why Orban feels he needs to forge a positive relationship with Israel to deflect accusations of antisemitism, but I’m rather wary of the pro-Zionist leanings of many European right-wingers. AfD in Germany has also started doing that nonsense and recently brought up a proposal in the Bundestag to ban (!) the BDS movement (meanwhile the Israeli ambassador accuses them of nostalgia for the Nazi era).
If there’s another Mideast war (which doesn’t seem entirely unlikely given recent moves by Trump’s administration), there’s a huge potential for being damaged by such pro-Israel activism, for little gain to one’s own cause.
Orbán probably needs it in the hopes of getting support from the US. Since there are talks of sanctions against Hungary, he probably needs what allies he can get.
But you are correct in that the benefits are questionable, while the potential downside is enormous.
That hasn’t happened so far though, has it? Didn’t the state department admonish Hungary because of the closing down of Soros’ Central European university?
In general I see little reason to trust Trump or put any hopes in him (nor people once associated with him like Bannon…I’d prefer if he stayed out of European politics), Trumpism is too bound up with American exceptionalism and an aggressive foreign policy. But you’re of course right that Hungary’s situation is precarious. A lot probably depends on the EU elections and how strong the right will be in them. Maybe Hungary could at least gain Italy as an ally.
It was hard work to get the meeting with Trump not blocked by Congress or the Deep State. So yes, it’s not very useful, but at least somewhat useful. The negative fallout will also not happen in Hungary, because Hungarians won’t care that much. Back in 2002-3 the then leftist government supported the Iraq War and Orbán was skeptical, but no one cares nor cared back then. I’m pretty sure that on a personal level Orbán doesn’t think this war or Iran policy will be good for anyone but Israeli nationalists. But it seems like a cheap way to get some support or at least stay handshakeworthy in some important circles.
Perhaps it’s a bit more complicated than simply deflecting charges of antisemitism. Trump, Orban, Salvini, Netanyahu, even Putin, see each other as ideological allies, and this ideological alliance occasionally cuts through geopolitical lines. Using the Zionists as allies is, indeed, a tool to forward this ideology without the historical baggage that’s usually tied to it. And, though this is distasteful for most of the rank-and-file supporters of this ideology, its leaders may feel it necessary to garner wider appeal and convert the normies. Or, Jewish power is really all that and you need at least a faction of the Jews on your side to win.
Orban is very cozy with a segment of Jewish power. Holocaust revision can earn you a prison sentence. Though so far I haven’t heard of anyone actually punished this way, it did put a damper on free speech. Any criticism is being redefined as antisemitism, and eventually it will be possible to drag someone to court for it, I believe that’s the goal.
Also, the largest American-style, Zionist neoprotestant church in Hungary, Faith Church, has allied with him.
Orban was clearly stupid here, he probably thought that by cucking to (((BHL))) he would gain some kind of points against the EUs increasing push to destroy Hungary as an independent nation.
Israel is toxic among young people and cucking on Israel looks weak. A lose lose proposition as Jews won’t let up on their attacks.
Yes I am familiar with Hungarian Protestants being highly nationalistic.
In reality Putin has always pursued Russian national interests in the Middle East when they collided with Zionist aims. Trump quite the opposite. For Orban and Salvini it is irrelevant.
Yeah, the Congregation of Faith, a cringeworthy American-style neo-Protestant church…
His son is also now starting some neo-Protestant movement.
Well, that was a humiliating performance… And of all people, why such a creep like Lévy?
Mostly true of Calvinists. Lutherans are mostly of German descent, while these neo-Protestants… they are mostly the usual Zionist Evangelicals. Even if not very Zionist (though I believe all of them are Zionist to at least some extent), they are an American transplant.
What specific things make you say this?
Calvinists are the vast majority of the Protestants.
Why would you categorize Orban with Putin?
Putin’s political position in Russia, is much more analogous with Merkel in Germany.
I would guess, Orban is more analogous with Trump.
Personally, I never really took Orbán all that seriously. I always assumed that his alleged nationalism (Oh, the crime of nationalism!) was really just a necessary political maneuver on his part, resulting from the growing popularity of Jobbik ten years ago. Jobbik, on the hand, strikes me as the real deal; but I guess Hungarians could never elect them without getting expelled by the EU, so Orbán it will be …
I agree that Israel is toxic with Western European young people (generation Z and millennials), in countries like the UK and Ireland.
However, I was in Israel last year, and half of the tourists we saw are groups of young hipsters from Moscow. It’s just at the beginning stage of becoming fashionable with them.
Actual Israel (as opposed to the political one) has a very liberal atmosphere. So it’s always going to maintain attractiveness for a subset of young people that are adventurous enough to vacation there.
Sadly, that’s how it’s turned out. But that wasn’t always true: back during the presidential campaign of 2016, Trump was, in fact, the only major candidate in the race who championed a less aggressive foreign policy. He famously advocated a pull-out from Syria and a détente with Russia, for example. And even on Iran, though he made clear he was against the JPCOA, he never advocated use of force. But two years later, Trump was a different man … sad.
The way these European nationalists are in the habit of turning on each other, I half expect that, about year from now, if BHL is interviewing Matteo Salvini, the latter will distance himself from Orbán by labelling him a ‘dangerous extremist’ or some such, as a way of trying to win respectability with the MSM.
All of which is a very bad sign. If you doubt what I’m saying, just look at what’s become of the Zio-Rapture-Christians in the US … total cuckasoids.
https://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Younger-Republicans-are-less-supportive-of-Israel-poll-finds-587810
The Rottenberg brothers built the Crimean bridge – as far as I can tell, the work was done quite quickly and competently. So (based on what I know) they are more of a “Swedish” type of businessmen.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t Moscow hipsters disproportionately … (((you know)))? Or are Russian Christian young people actually getting into Israel?
That is certainly good news, when I hear the word “bipartisan” in US politics it pretty much always means doing everything Israel wants. How good will it be when in the future bipartisanship means Israel is hated by everyone.
You see the same habit in domestic politics; civic nationalists are constantly denouncing one another for being too extreme, it is very tiresome. Farage is the perfect example.
His turn to the right started back in the early 1990s, and was a very long process. Contrary to what many people thought at the time, it was probably heartfelt.
Meanwhile, Jobbik has been moving left since 2014 at the latest, it’s now probably to the left of Fidesz.
It is hard to believe it now, but even the Church of England was nationalistic at one time. Here is the Bishop of London in 1915:
But maybe that is better described as support for the establishment of the day.
I thought that this headline in the LA Times was interesting.
Hungary’s strongman, who echoes Trump’s rhetoric, will visit the White House
The Atlantic has fallen a long way since it published Herrnstein’s 1971 article on intelligence, which Nixon spoke about on the tapes:
It is quite interesting, but it was also occurring under the shadow of total war.
I don’t think the current pacifist rhetoric of today would survive in case of a full-scale war between Great Powers, but how far they would go would be interesting to find out.
Trumpism is too bound up with American exceptionalism
More headlines like the following would go a long way in curing America’s ills:
Major Earthquake in China
Two Americans Injured One with a Broken Arm
Death Toll for Chinese in the Thousands
Most tourists there are still old Christian pilgrims. Russian pilgrims are not young people – they are old, or at least usually 40-70 years old, and seem usually to leave their children at home. In ancient historical sites, they walk groups, wearing the same hat, with a guide (I was following them a lot to listen to their guide).
Last year, we could also see it’s beginning now to become fashionable with young hipster tourists. Attraction for young hipsters, is because of the liberal atmosphere in the evening.
Oddly enough, he did buck one trend – he was against bombing cities, which I understand many newspapers supported.
There was quite an interesting on The Atlantic website last week, about the effects of different generations in American politics.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/05/coming-generation-war/588670/
The young generation is going to be a lot more liberal, but fortunately for American political culture a lower proportion of them vote in elections – graphs from the article:
https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/2019/05/Screen_Shot_2019_05_03_at_9.39.20_AM/fedc0ebed.png
https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/2019/05/Screen_Shot_2019_05_03_at_9.44.26_AM/1eeb0c7b5.png
Putting aside the obvious ideological biases, I don’t think any head of state should allow himself to be interviewed by The Atlantic. The writing style of Ta-Nehisi Coates is just a thumb in the eye of civilization.
I was just thinking about this. In some ways America is the universalist state par excellence. It has virtually open borders and universal suffrage. But it is actually deficient in one way: voting is not compulsory, like it is in Australia, or in much of Latin America, or NK. Or in some Arab states where it is, but only for males (not universalist.)
I expect this might change. Freedom of speech may not last very long either.
100 years later…..
Sadly it does not have the video, where he tells people off for being ‘homophobic’ in an extremely gay way and how gays and Muslims should stick together because they are both hated minorities. He also patronises a bemused looking Muslim in a funny hat sitting next to him.
How so? Both Putin and Orban are effectively in the “center” of their political systems and enjoy massive support.
They are even, of late, converging with each other on actual policy and values to some extent.
It is a sad decline.
Funny to think that the Africans are more conservative now (albeit they are not very representative of their general pop). Episcopalians in America might be the gayest branch. In some studies, they have outscored Jews on IQ – might have something to do with it.
Wauquiez may be the next president. Le Pens are a clan of losers, who will never be anything.
Worse, the Le Pens are the sort of people that justify, even to the most radical leftist or economic rightist, a collaboration between top right and top left parties. For example, AfD is one of the reasons why Germany’s government is not here nor there since 2013. Similarly, Macron will have no problem in co-opting the left, the right, or maybe even both to his government, thanks to that stupid witch. And this is how all debate, including that on economy and that on crap that interests silly people (abortion, immigration, Russian hackers) gets to be controlled by the mainstream parties, to a worse degree that in the previous 2-party system.
I don’t believe in 4-D chess in regards to Orban. He won thanks to the crisis and the famous “we lied day and night”. He keeps on winning thanks to the growth that is manifest all across the Eastern side of EU. His vocal emissions could be as well replaced by gargle sounds.
It’s true that a leader from FUKUS would not talk to an opposing journalist. It’s true that they are advised that an incumbent should avoid debates. But, in most cases, they avoid debate due to the Shapiro-level verbal abilities. I suspect Macron would leave crying from a debate with Melenchon. (But he dominated Le Pen Jr. nontheless. I’m sure he’d dominate her American equivalent, Ivanka. They are not siring their best.)
Orban has the balls to talk, even if he might not have the brains needed. His strategic goals are different, since this interview won’t have any effect on his voters. He might be suffering from a provincial complex, so he talks to anyone coming from the West. (“Oh, look, I am in NYT!”) And he is groveling when he attends EU summits. So he talked – but who cares what he said.
This doesn’t make sense. If there were no nationalist parties, then obviously politics would be even more dominated by centre-right and centre-left parties. Why would anyone care whether Germany alternated between centre-right and centre-left governments or a centrist coalition?
Probably the gayest comment ever left on AK’s blog.
The original European nationalism started with Reformation: using native languages, sense of national community, and opposition to far-away (corrupt) Popes. Catholicism has always been a universalist, quasi-globalist ideology. When the effective Christian world was small – and European – it was not that harmful to the more advanced nations, today they are out of control. There is almost no difference between Catholic and communist ideology when it comes to the brotherhood of mankind and that is a downward spiral into the lowest common denominator future – but we can all pray together and the Pope can once a year wash some filthy feet. Today’s Protestants are often worse.
As you suggested, antagonising Catholic masses is a foolish policy, so Orban stays silent. But he strikes me as an insecure type who wants to have it both ways. He met with BHL out of fear, he is signalling that he is not ‘bad’. In that he seems similar to Trump, and even Putin (not sure, Putin might have other reasons). When the so-called representatives of the new reformation of the global order are so tentative, there is not much hope – they will fold under pressure.
Well Reiner Tor has said agree, and he must know a lot more than I.
But I would assume Orban’s views are more similar to Trump?
I wonder where Orban’s views are, if you compare Trump, Merkel and Putin on various points:
Putin is placed in position by established power and is supported by mainstream media (Trump was almost the opposite, until Fox supports him).
Putin is renationalizing some industries, including parts of the media (while allowing them to oppose his views).
Putin tries to support moderate social conservatism.
Putin is supporting religion as an extension of state capacity
Putin is following fiscally austere policy due to his advisors (this reminds a lot of Merkel, while Trump is quite the opposite).
Putin supports open borders and creation of larger multinational agglomerations (this is similar to Merkel).
Putin supports diversity of ethnic and religion (this sounds like Merkel, although I haven’t seen anything about how Merkel manages it competently).
Putin supports international organizations and Primakov’s multilateralism in foreign policy (Trump believes in unilateralism and “law of the jungle”).
Are you retarded?
http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3026.htm#article7
Orban is probably a kind of intellectual who enjoys debating his views with opponents and is open with his views.
Putin is from a very different professional background and his interviews are usually a form of conscious PR.
Some 13 years ago there was a TV show where the home of him and that of then prime minister Ferenc Gyurcsány were featured. There were basically no books in his house. Lest you think he was already using e-readers back then, he famously couldn’t turn on a computer.
So, not really an intellectual. He’s smart, but not intellectual at all.
Very reasonable, looks like he has some semblance of sanity, but…
”
…if he really thinks that of all things those symbolic sanctions are “provoking” Putin, he is not sane sadly. The only thing provoking him would be any lack of sanctions.
And the other motive, is to add support for the local construction businesses.
All the protests today against using public garden for construction of another church, which almost nobody will use.
Lol what level of eccentric would you be that you cannot turn on a computer?
But according to Wikipedia, he was studying political science in Oxford Universirt and “His personal tutor was the Hegelian political philosopher Zbigniew Pełczyński”?
Also that he had worked as a sociologist:
“he lived in Szolnok for two years, commuting to his job in Budapest as a sociologist at the Management Training Institute of the Ministry of Agriculture”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Orb%C3%A1n
Dissent from within parties with a shot at government have a small chance of turning into action. When socialists and populars have to circle their wagons, this sort of dissent disappears, and you are left with grandiose speeches from nobodies like Le Pen.
For better or worse, Brexit is essentially cancelled because the Tories are able to host an internal opposition. In contrast, in France, you have a government acting as one, leading to questions such as “who is this Wauquiez fellow”. In Germany, Merkel is equally unaccountable to voters. (They sort of voted her out twice, until now.)
Similarly, Lofven was almost voted out, but thanks to the stupid protest vote, his 33% coalition runs the country. If only 1% of the protest vote would have gone to the historical right wing, Sweden would have had a right wing government. Instead, 13% went to the hypothetical fash, who get to talk shit and do nothing.
I can’t see why would anyone be happier with a red-green government, over a Moderaterna-Liberalerna government, if they have any sort of right wing ideals.
The referendum resulting in Brexit was caused by David Cameron’s fear about UKIP, so that is just not true. Similarly in several Nordic countries with significant Nationalist parties, all of politics has shifted further to the right on immigration. Growth of the National Front in the 1970s also played a part in imposing (until New Labour) tighter immigration restrictions.
I do not know as much about internal party arrangements in Europe, but it is very difficult to try and take control of a party within. In Britain for instance, Conservative party leadership was until recently entirely controlled by MPs and in Labour it was only the avoidable stupidity of MPs which allowed Corbyn to get onto the ballot. In America they had Trump, but he was constantly undermined by his party and subverted.
A right-wing government which would have done nothing (or loosened immigration rules), as cuckservative parties around the world have done when not under pressure from nationalists.
That sounds like a punchline
I have seen EU justify the post-2014 sanctions as a traffic ticket for violating the international rules. The idea being that of course the sanctions don’t work, but something had to be done.
That way of thinking appeals to people who teach sociology at a Management Institute for the Ministry of Agriculture, they run the EU. It is a complete virtual fiction created in their heads by too many books: politics is not traffic enforcement, EU is not the police, and there are no international ‘rules’ (see Kosovo for details).
Orban is trying to sit on a fence – not a bad idea for Hungary that has historically suffered a lot from embracing all the latest fads and ideologies. But it won’t work.
Have you seen the Conservative Party Treasurer?
https://www.financeuncovered.org/investigations/ehud-sheleg-tory-treasurer-halcyon-gallery-ran-sheleg-binary-options-binary-affiliates/
Bishop Bell in WW2 criticised the RAF’s area bombing, so who knows?
I don’t really see that much pacifist rhetoric by churches anyway tbh though (compare it to their denunciations of “racists”). iirc Southern Baptists and the like were vocal backers of the 2003 Iraq war.
iirc Southern Baptists and the like were vocal backers of the 2003 Iraq war.
I don’t recall any wars where the SB people were in widespread opposition.
Is Orban actually wrong in regards to Bela Kun’s regime making some–if not many–Hungarians anti-Semitic? I mean, Jews were treated pretty well in pre-WWI Hungary, no?
Saying less than you know and avoiding pretentious language is a learned skill and takes discipline. And it’s also more masculine. Weak men talk a lot and the level of pretentious language they use is inversely proportional to their masculinity. In his book Think Like a Champion and Trump 101, Trump says to be brief, say less than you know, and convey a lack of sophistication (it’s good to be underestimated). Trump went to the top Ivy League business school, became a multi billionaire in Manhattan, and one of his favorite books is Mario Livio’s The Golden Ratio. It’s a good bet to assume his IQ is 2 SD’s above all of his critics at Politico, NYT, WP, et al.
Btw, IMO, a guy’s testosterone level can be determined by what he thinks of Trump.
Cult-like devotion.
It was the Moderate government under Reinfeldt which engaged in a Blair-esque opening of borders, precisely because they faced no accountability from the right.
I was thinking more about society in general, perhaps I should have made that clear.
But on this specific case it also seems that there were objections from Lutheran, Methodist and Catholic clergy about the war.
Southerners are warlike and historically have supported just about any war anywhere.
They can be compared to Germany’s former east elbians.
Let us list the centrist-right (‘moderate’) governments that pushed open borders and cheap labor in EU: Merkel, Cameron, Rutte, Macron, the corrupt guy in Spain – and the whole elite leadership of EU in Brussels that is mostly center-right, Juncker, Tusk…
There are a few hapless Blair-like center-left socialists, but the heavy lifting has been done by the center-right politicians. Cheap labor and open borders are their sweet spot – their core belief. To vote for moderate right in order to change those policies is insane.
Blair wasn’t a socialist though, the refutation of old-school socialism was one of the key changes of New Labour.
You’re right, that was a somewhat stupid comment on my part. The Catholic church of course strongly criticized the Iraq war (one of the few positive things I can think of about it), as did mainline Protestants both in Europe and the US.
I don’t know though if there’s that much pacifist rhetoric in society in general, even in Europe there’s been a lot of support for “humanitarian interventions” over the last 25 years. Just think of all those “We need to do something to save the children of Aleppo!” reports. That something would have meant bombing or other forms of military intervention, so not exactly pacifist either.
Perhaps you’re right and it’s just my personal perspective that’s been warped by listening to too many UN-like lectures.
I do feel that there is a kind of videogame-format to presentations by media like CNN.
The hapless Tony was on the socialist spectrum, he picked all the worst aspects of modern leftism. Almost all EU socialists today are Blair-like.
It is also one of the reasons why the “top right and top left parties” in Germany were suffering in the last elections. Such collaboration is only good for them if they can keep the pariah down.
Otherwise, they lose.
The French electoral system makes it easier to keep the pariah down, but that is less true elsewhere.
You aren’t familiar with Orban, are you?
http://www.criticatac.ro/lefteast/the-economics-of-orbanism/
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClV_x1uWIAATZcT.jpg
What about you ? What are you ? The world can’t wait to hear your answer.
Blair was radically left wing in a way old labour never were. The triumph of the new left.
https://www-dailymail-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4785616/amp/Corbyn-Blair-Guess-one-s-real-menace.html?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQDoAEC#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From %251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fdebate%2Farticle-4785616%2FCorbyn-Blair-Guess-one-s-real-menace.html
Bishop Bell in WW2 criticised the RAF’s area bombing, so who knows?
Bishop Bell wasn’t a pacifist, actually, he was objecting to the scope of “area bombing”:
They are every bit as bad. The earthen state of Israel, God’s own chosen people, they cannot do wrong, if they do, it is up to God to discipline them. I am convinced the whole darned operation is a cunning Zionist idea, starting from the Scofield bible with the silly explanations. I talk to some on internet boards, they are fanatical. The leader of the church used to be against Fidesz, now they are for it. Also, all Zionist churches I know of also preach some form of prosperity gospel, as if greed and Zionism would go hand in hand. Benny Hinn, the opulently rich faith healer, who never managed to heal even one person, is about to come visit them. I used to be a member at this church ( I was very young and had a stormy childhood, so belonged to their target population), but now I really wish these Americans had stayed out of my country with their tainted preaching.
The state of Israel bought Jerry Falwell a private jet
Correct.
It works in the modern age.
Got in through connections, certainly didn’t seem brilliant to his classmates (third hand personal information but from credible people).
Not difficult when you start out with a lot of real estate in NY. Manhattan prices exploded in the last 30 years.
I wouldn’t doubt that his IQ is 1SD above that of those people. But he is not a genius.
He was clever enought to see an untapped market (working class white guys) ignored by everyone else, was able to speak to them, and used them to win. He’ll win again if his oppenents repeat their strategy. Biden suggests they won’t but we’ll see what he will do in his party’s primaries, he may be pushed to the fringes.
The Scotch-Irish went from fightng and killing Catholics in Ireland to fighting Injuns in the New World, then Royal Brits, then Yankees, then Germans, then Arabs.
Assuming that those journalists have an IQ of around 115, this would imply an IQ of 130. While I’d find it possible, it might be too high. (Though there is the interesting theory that he’s very smart, but dyslexic. This would explain a lot.)
Otherwise it’s a very good comment.
I’d guess Trump is around 120, but 130 would not be surprising. At his level there is a certain “”floor” below which someone wouldn’t be able to manage. Bush II, a much worse president than Trump, was at 125 according to Sailer’s research (Bush probably declined due to heavy drinking):
http://www.unz.com/isteve/my-article-on-john-f-kerrys-iq/
In comparison, here are the IQ scores of various Nazi leaders:
http://miyaguchi.4sigma.org/gradytowers/nazi.html
1 Hjalmar Schacht 143
2 Arthur Seyss-Inquart 141
3 Hermann Goering 138
4 Karl Doenitz 138
5 Franz von Papen 134
6 Eric Raeder 134
7 Dr. Hans Frank 130
8 Hans Fritsche 130
9 Baldur von Schirach 130
10 Joachim von Ribbentrop 129
11 Wilhelm Keitel 129
12 Albert Speer 128
13 Alfred Jodl 127
14 Alfred Rosenberg 127
15 Constantin von Neurath 125
16 Walther Funk 124
17 Wilhelm Frick 124
18 Rudolf Hess 120
19 Fritz Sauckel 118
20 Ernst Kaltenbrunner 113
21 Julius Streicher 106
The Cavalier and Scotch-Irish combination worked pretty well for awhile.
(You left out fighting the Spanish.)
Is this supposed to be someone else (in which case maybe Unz should be notified), or are you agreeing with yourself?
I guess he wanted to agree with another comment, but by mistake ended up pressing the agree button on his own. Or just pressed the button by mistake with no intention of doing so at all.
I actually meant it seriously, I wasn’t aware the Agree/Disagree/LOL/Troll button worked on one’s own posts (if I was joking I would have said “It is good that you are not disagreeing with yourself).
You can try, as I just tried. But I accidentally opened the drop down menu several times, so I was pretty sure it would work.
Yeah, it works. I just assumed it would be greyed out like when the button has been used within an hour.
I tried to agree to iffen’s reply, lol. I wonder what happened to my agree.