A short article in The Economist
Rarely does the English language press spend much time on Hungary. So Hungarian journalists and politicians tend to give undue weight to anything written about the country in reputable English language newspapers and magazines. If in a long article about some shady arms deal to Afghanistan appears in The New York Times in which Hungary is mentioned along with practically all other Eastern European countries, at least two dozen articles appear on the subject and the prime minister launches an investigation. Yesterday Hungary was singled out for criticism in a short article that appeared in The Economist entitled "A Magyar mess." It began: "Financial markets are jumpy about several east European countries. One of the more vulnerable is Hungary, notorious for its budget and current-account deficits. Once the local wonder child, Hungary is limping, its government outmanoeuvred by the opposition, its economy sclerotic and its population resentful." In Hungary, in brief, Chicken Little is triumphant, the sky is falling.
Indeed, there is a totally fatalistic public attitude even, or perhaps especially, in left-liberal intellectual circles. Everybody seems to be convinced that there is no way for the MSZP to win the elections in 2010, which is bad enough. But the real tragedy, in this view, is that the Fidesz will receive more than two-thirds of the the parliamentary seats and then this surely will be the end of Hungarian democracy. They envisage such changes in the constitution that would morph the current parliamentary system into a presidential type of democracy which in Hungary could lead to a destruction of the rule of law as it exists today. They already see Viktor Orbán moving over to the strengthened position of president, and then God help us!
Then there are those, also among the supporters of the MSZP, who think that perhaps the best chance for the party would be the resignation of Ferenc Gyurcsány. These people naively think that Viktor Orbán and Fidesz would be more cooperative without this thorn in Orbán’s side. Didn’t Orbán and his party say that they refuse to engage in any conversation with a liar? Perhaps if Gyurcsány disappeared from the political scene members of Fidesz wouldn’t leave the room when the prime minister speaks. There would be dialogue. There would be cooperation. I don’t think that it is necessary to emphasize that this is an absolutely wrong assumption. Nothing would change. Orbán’s appetite would only increase. With a lame and grey politician, like Péter Kiss for example, the MSZP would have even less of a chance for victory.
Now there is a new twist. A young but influential MSZP politician, Attila Mesterházy, came out with the idea that perhaps the best thing for MSZP would be to get rid of SZDSZ. If János Kóka threatens to quit the coalition if his party can’t achieve its original aims, especially in the questions of health care, then why doesn’t the MSZP say: "Fine! Go! Empty the ministerial seats, give back the car keys!" Admittedly, then MSZP would have to form a minority government. Mesterházy rather optimistically predicted that this new situation wouldn’t be problematic at all. SZDSZ would support the government from the outside. SZDSZ politicians very rightly countered: how can Mesterházy be so sure that this would be the case. Katalin Szili also liked this idea. Gyurcsány, on the other hand, outright rejected it.
Meanwhile, all the former presidents of the National Bank, a number of former ministers of finance, and many, many economists are suggesting draconian economic cuts that would be political suicide. The government cannot take away pensions, child support, the three-year government subsidy after each baby, and I could continue. Yes, it would be advisable to lower taxes but how when, as The Economist points out, "some 20% of workers pay four-fifths of income tax." And Hungarian society is not heavily skewed between the haves and have-nots.
Of course, the government could do a number of things before they take away pensions. The most important problem to address is the black economy. Does that mean targeting the tax-free status of those who allegedly earn only the minimum wage–all 1.2 million of them? That’s a blunt instrument that could hurt the truly poor without identifying those who are gaming the system. According to The Economist the black economy may account for 18% of GDP. I think this is probably a low figure. But, even assuming The Economist’s guess, just think how much more viable the Hungarian economy would be if all income were reported. Tax enforcement is never popular, but it’s almost always effective. Here I am, the small business classic tax evader: "Janos is going to jail for tax evasion. Oops! I’d better record these profits." And all of a sudden the coffers start to swell.
In addition to enforcing individual tax collection, Hungary would be wise to reduce the business tax rate from its temporary 20% back to its original 16%. But let’s be realistic, this is not enough. Politics is still the deal breaker. As The Economist said: "Hungary’s politicians are doing what they do best: squabbling for short-term advantage, while leaving structural problems untouched." An excellent cartoon appeared in today’s Népszava which depicts the situation very well. There is a little boat. Written on its side: Magyarország. At one end of the boat which is sinking, half drowning there is the captain, Ferenc Gyurcsány. At the other end, high up of the sinking boat there is Viktor Orbán in triumphant mood. The title: Az előny (Leading).
Meanwhile let me quote a short comment on the Economist article, obviously written by a right-wing Hungarian. Isn’t it nice to see the world in such simple terms? I didn’t correct the fellow’s English:
"There are some half-truth in your articles, as it is usual. First $2. This vote is not about $2 or not, but against a government, recruited among old communists and close friends and which illegible, couldn’t tell truth either to their supporters, achieved criminal-diplomacy and corruption and the prime minister is mentally instable. The well over than 50% voted against lies, the unlimited corruption and undemocratic way of administration."
Simple, isn’t it? Get rid of the mad prime minister, get rid of the communists, get rid of those who conduct "criminal diplomacy," and bring in democracy as this fellow and many like him envisage it. And all the problems would be solved.
*********But the real tragedy, in this view, is that the Fidesz will receive more than two-thirds of the the parliamentary seats and then this surely will be the end of Hungarian democracy.*********
@Eva
Do you think that maybe, just maybe, you are not quite rational, and a bit hysterical when it comes to Viki?
*********They envisage such changes in the constitution that would morph the current parliamentary system into a presidential type of democracy which in Hungary could lead to a destruction of the rule of law as it exists today. They already see Viktor Orbán moving over to the strengthened position of president, and then God help us!*********
Now you may not agree with Viki’s economic policies. Hell, being a libertarian I certainly don’t. But to assert that:
a) the Hun. parliementary system will be morphed into a presidential democracy
b) which would lead to a dictatorship run by Viki
is, uhm, a bit extreme and a more than a bit ironic — being that most, if not all, MSZP and SZDSZ members are FORMER COMMUNISTS.
Why do you give the Communists a free pass for their transgressions against and encroachment upon humanity?
You, who, if I am not mistaken left Hungary for a free market and democratic society.
I guess you can call me bitter and biased, I suppose I am considering both sides of my family suffered at the hands of the Communists – and perhaps an illegimate observer of Hun. politics, no?
But if I am biased and disqualified, then so are the survivors of the Holocaust.
*********According to The Economist the black economy may account for 18% of GDP. I think this is probably a low figure. But, even assuming The Economist’s guess, just think how much more viable the Hungarian economy would be if all income were reported. Tax enforcement is never popular, but it’s almost always effective. Here I am, the small business classic tax evader: “Janos is going to jail for tax evasion. Oops! I’d better record these profits.” And all of a sudden the coffers start to swell.*********
Tax coffers are unlikely to swell. More effective tax enforcement is nothing more than a cost/tax on the black market. Do you think an additional tax/cost will have no effect on the black market?
Question is then — is Hungary better off with a large black market and current tax revenues? Or is Hungary better off with a smaller black market and marginally more tax revenues. I don’t know, and I don’t advocate breaking the law, but my instincts suggest the former.
Lastly, I would appreciate it if you would deign to respond to my comment, most especially on your POV on the former Communists and their current incarnation, the Hun. Left. I would happy to openly and honestly share my biases on my blog as I have de facto consistently done.
Varangy,
I think you need to up your reading skills a bit. The first half of your post you refer to statements not made by Eva, only what she refers to. I did though, initially, became a bit surprised when reading it. The keys to understand Eva’s piece lies in the beginning “But the real tragedy, in this view” and in the end “They already see”.
Also why do you only have a problem with the old Commies in MSZP and SZDSZ? The ones in Fidesz, MIEP etc – They are not worth your attention?
Varangy, quoting me: “But the real tragedy, in this view, is that the Fidesz will receive more than two-thirds of the the parliamentary seats and then this surely will be the end of Hungarian democracy.********* @Eva Do you think that maybe, just maybe, you are not quite rational, and a bit hysterical when it comes to Viki?”
It’s not worth reading the rest. The only thing I can suggest: read more carefully. This is not what I’m saying but certain people in Hungary. The important words are: “in this view.” Perhaps a little more attention to detail would save you a lot of trouble.
Well, I see I’m requested to answer this too: “being that most, if not all, MSZP and SZDSZ members are FORMER COMMUNISTS. Why do you give the Communists a free pass for their transgressions against and encroachment upon humanity?”
I’m not giving free pass to anyone. The problem is that the whole Hungarian right is full of former so-called communists. Full. More communist party members were in Orbán’s government than in Medgyessy’s or Gyurcsány’s. This hysterical anti-communism twenty years after is artificially whipped up. Suddenly every right-winger claims that he was a victim when most of them lived quite well. The whole thing is disgusting.
As for your claim that almost all members of SZDSZ were members of the party, it is simply not true. The founders of SZDSZ were the only people who openly opposed the regime and did something against it while those people who scream most about the communists now did nothing or were actually members of the party. Keep in mind: there were 800,000 members of MSZMP and most of them white collar workers.
The funny thing is that there are more ex-communist party members in Orban’s front line than in the Socialist-Free Dem cabinet. Including the ludicrously moustachioed ex-foreign minister Martonyi who joined the party a year before it was dissolved.
I’m in the middle of translating a couple of passages by Miklós Szinetár, the theater director. It talks about those skeletons falling out from the closets of the loudest red-baiters. I will make it available when finished.
The true aims of the fidesz was blurted out at the last election by MIkola, the “health policy expert” during an election rally. They intended to solidify the fidesz’ rule for the next twenty years.This goal is the raison d’etre of their entire existence. No lie and no chicanery is too low or too embarrassing for them to achieve this. Principled politics has long gone out of the party.
I did seem to recognize, on the other hand, in the socialists a glimmer of more discipline and also more intelligence for a while.
However, the referendum has elicited from them the most cowardly knee jerk reactions.
They somehow came around to think that appeasing the fidesz and adopting their hair-brained, woodoo economical policies will somehow restore the electability of the mszp.
Appeasement unfortunately, (or fortunately) carries in itself its own punishment. The socialist government has no choice other then proceeding with the reforms, come hell or high water, or be ground down in the next election into ignominy anyway. Their only saving grace might be a bit of success with the reforms.
This will be an admirable opportunity to separate the men from the boys.
They also seem to have forgotten the importance of the reforms to the country. They are so preoccupied by the daily political give and take that the larger picture dissipated from their mind.
In my opinion they should proceed to the tax system’s reform and leave the health care reform to do its job.
Here is the promised Szinetár piece.
“The whole thing [the mad anti-communist attitude in certain circles] is especially titillating when smaller and bigger skeletons, from bygone days and more recent, fall out of the closets of the loudest sermonizers.
Indeed, in those “cursed times” [the Kádár regime] there were quite a few uncles busy in the workers’ movement whose sheer name helped and protected the then young man who now shakes his fist. Among those who nowadays are red-baiters there was a college student who tore the wedding ring off his colleague’s finger for being a vestige of a petty bourgeois mentality.
And those who want to be the national idols today at the beginning managed to get ahead due to their regional accents and somewhat exaggerated pedigrees of peasant origin. Later many of them made more frequent visits to the Soviet Embassy to denounce the watered-down frigidaire socialism and the cosmopolitan Comrade Aczél than go to Kossuth Square today. Although they show up there often enough.
I was once witness to a scene when a man who today loudly rails against the so-called socialism was madly waving the certificate his father received for his efforts “For the Socialist Fatherland” that at the end assured his acceptance at the Acadeny of Dramatic and Cinematic Art.
The selection is endless. We have among the loud ones a man who composed songs for the pioneers and the workers’militia, party secretaries of all sorts from the lowest to the highest level. And then we ought to mention the party secretaries of the Hungarian Television, just to pick one profession. And of course, all those relatives and in-laws. After all in 7 + 33 years few people could remain outsiders.
I offer this Varangy’s consideration.
While Varangy has a keen mind, it is clear from his initial post that he is exercising some old demons that terrorize and color his current perceptions. Even I, as a relative neophyte Hungarian observer know about the fascinating irony that many in Fidesz and other fringe right wingers are ex social-climbing commies. I even have a couple of in-laws who embody this. They once had high rank party jobs and both are now front-pew Christians who are now big-time Fidesz supporters.
Every one keeps bleating on about “Old Communists”. When communism was the ‘only game in town’ – if you wanted to eat you became a communist. Any person with average intelligence can learn ‘Das Capital’ or whatever ‘Holy Writ’ was used by rote. To do so did not mean that you believed what you had learned.
What worries me is the cloud cuckoo-land economic ideas of Fides and their attempt to create as Kruschev said of Stalin ‘a cult of personality’. I have always wondered what makes Olban Victor ‘tick’ I now think I have some idea thanks to the wisdom and knowlage of all those who contribute to this Blog. I would like to learn more about his psyche. I collect poisionous little toads (Lenin, Starlin, Hitler, Haynau the Hyena) and perhaps here we have another in the making.
Ferenc Gyurcsány is on the other hand perhaps a Statesman in the making. In his shoes I would leave the Health reforms alone and get onto the big reform – the tax system.
*********But the real tragedy, in this view, is that the Fidesz will receive more than two-thirds of the the parliamentary seats and then this surely will be the end of Hungarian democracy.*********
@Eva
I do not know why Fides are so cock-a-hoop. I saw a POP which showed 39% ‘Dont Knows’. 39%! with 2 years to go next election. If I were a ‘book maker’ (one who takes bets) I would very wary of writing MZSP, SZDSZ, MDF etc off (giving long odds) It is not yet a ‘one hores race’ and ‘a week is along time in politics’
I am am a little late coming back to this conversation. My apologies. Also, I see I mis-read your post. Again, my apologies.
Where to begin?
@Eva
Believe you me — I am well aware of the Communists among the Hun. Right. For the record, I am not a FIDESZ-er, but I also do not suffer from OVDS (Orbán Viktor Derangement Syndrome). I have openly stated my views and biases many a time — my political leanings are very libertarian with a fairly, what I think, moral as well as cynical spin.
I trust no Hungarian Party.
Eva, I would like to ask you as to your view of the Communists and ex-Communists? I believe massive injury has been done to Hungary, Hungarian society, and Moral Principle as there was no high-level purging undertaken in 1989/90 for the sins against humanity committed by the Communists. Had some blood flowed in the streets of Budapest, perhaps all Hungarians, on the Right and the Left would be better off today.
******Varangy…is exercising some old demons that terrorize and color his current perceptions.******
@Vladimir
I find your comment uninformed and, even personally insulting. I repeat, I have also admitted my biases and POV — unlike most people in the English-language Hungarian blogosphere — in order to facilitate discussion.
Why should I simply forgive and forget the tragedies and encroachment of human rights visited upon my family and friends by Communists, in the name of Communism?
If you are interested, I can list a few on my website — and you can tell me how ‘colored’ I am.
Why should we give the Hungarian communists (or any communist) a free pass after 1989/90?
We certainly didn’t with the Nazis. Eva, didn’t like my Communist-Nazi comparison — why not? Why is it inaccurate?
Is it not ridiculous that the Communists change their WHOLE philosophy from centralized economy and zero personal freedoms to a market economy and democracy in the space of a year or two?
How do dictators become democrats overnight?
******Every one keeps bleating on about “Old Communists”. When communism was the ‘only game in town’ – if you wanted to eat you became a communist.******
@Odin’s lost eye
Bullshit. This is a common excuse, pathetic justification and ultimately a false myth.
Both sides of my family were educated and, while not wealthy, were middle or upper-middle class.
One of my grandfathers was very well-known and respected among engineering and social circles in Budapest. He was repeatedly approached by the Communists to become a party member and take a LEADERSHIP position.
Allow me to assure you, had my grandfather joined, two things would have happened:
1) Financially, our family would have been substantially better off. University admission would have been a cakewalk and we would have enjoyed numerous benefits unavailable to non-Party members.
2) Knowing my grandfather, his raw intelligence and facility with people, most likely, would have rocketed to the top of the Party in no time at all.
Why didn’t he? Because he knew what the Communists were doing was morally wrong in which every way. He did not want to support or associate himself with their ideals or actions in any way, shape or form —- even though our family suffered b/c of his refusal to sell his soul.
*****Any person with average intelligence can learn ‘Das Capital’ or whatever ‘Holy Writ’ was used by rote. To do so did not mean that you believed what you had learned.*****
Of course not. That is why exactly so many previously Hungarian Nazis were welcomed to and joined the Hungarian Communists.
I agree with Varangy that some form of lustration after the system change would ultimately have benefited Hungary socially and economically. It is too far after the fact to try that today.
Also, the suggestion that everyone had to become a communist to eat is an outright falsehood. Certainly it came with rewards, but one could lead a middle class existence under the “aristocracy of the proletariat” without becoming a party member.
In my family’s case, I have an uncle who was an engineer. Because of his smarts and knack for languages, he did quite well, and despite being approached about joining the party, he refused to out of principle, effectively meaning he turned down a significant pay raise. To this day he stands by that decision.
Many of the people who would later go on to form the SZDSZ were the people who supported Imre Nagy in the 1950s, and became disillusioned with communism after Kádár threw a lot of them in jail.
Some people are already shouting that a Fidesz super majority will lead to the end of democracy in Hungary, which is quite outlandish of a statement. My question is how democratic is it to lie to the people about the state of a nation, then drive through changes against their will, even if some of those changes will ultimately benefit the country?
Hatodik Oszlop,
you ask a very signiticant question about lying and democracy.
Reading your and Varangy’s posts makes me realise once again that there are very still bitter personal and family histories involved in Hungarian politics that I can’t emotionally connect with:
But, as a Briton who had no connection with Hungary before 1993, the thing that struck me most about the Gyurcsany lies story was this: how could he be so naive as to admit that he had been lying?
Tony Blair lied to the British People about the existence and significance of Sadddam’s weapons of mass destruction. This lie has cost almost 200 British lives. When his chief of staff was recently questioned about whether he had any regrets about this, he answered that he wished they had promoted the war in Iraq on the basis of regime change instead.
I believe that Tony Blair sincerely believed that fighting in Iraq was the morally right thing to do. He also knew that the majority of British people did not. His political job was to find away of persuading them otherwise: the weapons of mass destruction story was the means he chose. Politics is like this in even the oldest democracies.
I think this situation will continue until the knowledge and critical thinking of the electorate improves. In my lifetime, the British electorate came to understand the illusionary nature of the tax and spend economic policies of the Labour party, and it no longer possible for any party to offer this kind of solution to economic problems.
Adrian,
Point taken about Blair, but there are two significant differences between Blair and Gyurcsány. I can’t say why Gyurcsány thought admitting to lying would be a good thing or if it was naivety on his part or not.
Of course all politicians lie, and my guess is the Hungarians knew that too. But Blair never came out and admitted “yeah, I was totally making things up, and now I’ll do the complete opposite of what I promised.” Furthermore, Blair tried to bring people over to his side, as opposed to Gyurcsány, who after admitting to lying, (and not apologizing for it, only for the coarse language), said “don’t worry, it won’t hurt.”
I would say what’s hurt the current gov’t perhaps even more than the lies speech is their attitude of not trying to connect with the people and banking on reforms bringing in quick returns, which obviously, they have not, basically leaving them pissing into the wind.
Hatodik Oszlop,
Your point about Gyurcsány’s “attitude of not trying to connect with the people and banking on reforms bringing in quick returns” is reminiscient of Margaret Thatcher, who like Gyurcsány is, was an immensely devsive figure. It’s worth speculating whether her career was saved by the timing Falklands War, because there had certainly been no quick return on her reforms by the time of the 1983 election.
How much do you think the current unrest is due to Gyurcsány’s personality, and how much due to disappointed expectations of democracy?
I find the existence of the Magyar Guarda, and Orban’s decision not to participate fully in Parliament more disturbing than Gyurcsány’s lies.
Adrian,
Most observers would agree that if there is no Falklands War, Thatcher serves only a single term. Incidentally, unlike Gyurcsány, it was public unrest (the poll tax riots) that led to her resignation within a year.
I would say a lot of the unrest comes from Gyurcsány’s “I know what’s best for you” attitude. If he had made more of an attempt to connect with the people immediately, that could have been to his benefit, but ultimately, the whole “I lied to get reelected and am admitting that and don’t give a toss what you think” attitude was ultimately too much.
Fidesz fully participates in parliament, they just walk out whenever Gyurcsány speaks, which I admit, is very childish and stupid, which the Fidesz campaign against Gyurcsány has also frequently been. They are far from being a perfect opposition, despite the opportunity provided to them by the government to look better than they really are.
The Magyar Gárda is as much a threat to Hungarian democracy as Blue Peter is to Gordon Brown. The guard is a fringe proto-fascist organization that diverts attention from real problems, but ultimately achieves nothing other than being the bogeyman the left needs in order to scream “fascism! fascism!” Their existence is much more beneficial to the left than to the right.
A British cabinet secretary once had to admit in an Australian Court of Law that he had not lied but had been ‘Economic with the Truth’. I understand that the important part of Mr Gyurcsány’s “lies speech” was not that he had lied (or been economic with the truth) in the run upto an election, but that HE WOULD NOT DO IT AGAIN under ANY circumstances! Not for them, not for the party etc. If this is true and only history will tell, maybe Hungary has found a good leader.
I agree with Adrian when he says
***** I think this situation will continue until the knowledge and critical thinking of the electorate improves. In my lifetime, the British electorate came to understand the illusionary nature of the tax and spend economic policies of the Labour party, and it no longer possible for any party to offer this kind of solution to economic problems. *****
I agree with him that there are no ‘quick fixes’s for the economic state of Hungary. Electors always expect jam to-day and are disapointed when they have to wait until tomorrow. As to disconnection from the people when you have to do what Mr Gyurcsány is trying to do you cannot be Mr ‘Nice Guy’.
In the matter of the ‘Old Red Men’ Winston Churchill said two things
Talking about Lord Beaverbrook “It is better to have him (them) on the inside looking out than to have them on the outside looking in”
“Be magnanimous in victory”. to which I would add ‘they will not understand this, they would not have been ‘magnanimous’ and it will worry them’. The past is dead! let the dead bury the dead and do not live in the past! As old as I am I still ‘live for tomorrow’.
Teaching in Hungary leads to me to think that fascism is more than a fringe interest.
I have always thought that there was too much “nemzet” in Hungarian political discourse. Even in Gyurcsány’s recent speech he advocated the MSZP as the party of “national” progress – what’s wrong with plain old progress?
My teaching career started in a Roman Catholic grammar school. There a student ernestly expressed the desire to ethnically cleanse his village of gypsies. And the History teacher told his class on 9/11 that the Americans got what they deserved for helping the Jews.
Things calmed down when I moved school to a staffroom which was largley supportive of the MSZP. This changed suddenly when Gyurcsany took over leadership of the party, and one of my more reasonable colleagues who had worked with Gyucsany in KISZ (spelling?) the communist youth organisation, moved over to Fidesz. Shortly after another colleague explained to me how she hated the Jews, who had destroyed a History teacher’s legal career and reduced him to teaching. The Anti- gypsy diatribes in the staffroom became so inflamed that I got sick of hearing “cigány, cigány, cigány” and started attacking racism from my colleagues when I thought I heard it.
Interestingly, in the heated dsicussion about tax reform on this blog no-one has mentioned the function of gypsies in the moral economy here. I think that tax reform is the most pressing issue for Hungarian Government, and the biggest problem is that no-ones pays it. When The government introduced a 20% tax on bank interest, we went into APEH to declare my overseas income, and the APEH clerk advised us to go away and not tell anyone about it. Get into any discussion about tax in school, and immediately the gypsies come into the equation. “I not paying taxes so the government can give it to the gypsies”. This is one way Hungarians justify their widespread tax evasion to themselves.
This year things have really heated up with the arrival of the first Hungaristas in my class. If you wanted a political cast to your teenage rebellion in my time you wore a CND, “Nuclear Power No Thanks”, or even a “Support the Miners” badge. Now pre-Trianon Hungary in Arpad stripes are fashionable and the hardcore go in for swaztikas and SS insignia.
One girl, charming, intelligent, polite, and serious wrote me a essay under the title “My Heroes”. Szálasi Ferenc was her hero. I didn’t know what to say, so I turned to one of my colleagues for help. He apparently advised her that she had to realise that it was not the sort of thing she could say. I feel that outside of Budapest “European Values” are not widely understood and at best only paid lip service.
Yesterday one of my classes boycotted one of my lessons because I had described one of the cartoons in their student’s day manifesto as racist. It was photograph of a chinese class, except all the faces had been replaced with the face of one child who had such extreme mongoloid features that you couldn’t tell if the child was a boy or a girl or was healthy or the victim of some genetic disorder. Over the photograph, the reader was invited to decide which person was the teacher, which were girls etc. It took a long time to explain to my colleagues that the use of extreme facial characteristics – like Nazi depictions of Jews, or Hergé’s depictions of Aficans were – innocently intended or not – racist. Replace the images with more typical Jewish(?), African or Chinese face and the racist/humourous message is lost.
Sorry, very anecdotal but good to have it of my chest.
Adrian,
Keep up the good work in school, it is needed!
My experience is similar about the racist undertone in Hungary today. Arguments and thinking reminds me of my GrandParents generation in Sweden. The IronCurtain obvoiusly encapsulated peoples minds in more than one sense.
Varangy/Toad: “Eva, I would like to ask you as to your view of the Communists and ex-Communists? I believe massive injury has been done to Hungary, Hungarian society, and Moral Principle as there was no high-level purging undertaken in 1989/90 for the sins against humanity committed by the Communists.”
I must confess that I didn’t get much further than that, but I’m quite glad to answer this question. First and foremost, I’m not looking at this question from the narrow point of view of my family’s history. My grandparents and my parents had lost everything they ever worked for as a result of the communist takeover. But I’m not foaming at the mouth as some others do who most likely lost less or nothing. As a historian I take a larger view: all this was unavoidable because Hungary ended up among the countries which were occupied by the Soviet troops. It was a historical inevitability what followed. The Rákosi period was awful: the Hungarian people suffered incredibly. After Stalin’s death there was a political thaw and as a result came 1956. The Kádár regime’s first few years were almost as awful as the Rákosi regime’s darkest days, but after 1963 the dictatorship became more and more bearable. Eventually, most people didn’t even realize that they lived under a dictatorship. I’m almost certain that if the Kádár regime managed to keep up the standard of living people would have lived under the regime happily ever after. But it couldn’t. Plus the Soviet Union lost its grip on the satellite countries. Thus came the change of regime.
That change of regime was based on a negotiated settlement. The politicians of the new democratic regime couldn’t say that “you negotiated with us about a peaceful transtion, but now we turn around and will put everybody in jail whoever collaborated with the former regime.” And a lot of collaborated to some extent, including József Antall who became a director of a museum. And there were millions like him: doctors, engineers, members of the academy, who knows who else. There were 800,000 members of the party. No one suspected until the very end that this regime will come to the end. They had to live, they had to make a career. They didn’t have to do anything awful. They didn’t have to kill anyone, they didn’t have to put other people to jail. Therefore, I simply cannot see how how earth you could punish the so-called communists. Everybody was part of the system. As József Antall said to the people who wanted to “punish” everybody: “tetszettek volna forradalmat csinálni.” Meaning in English difficult to render with its subtlety, but basically he meant: “You didn’t make a revolution. So what are you talking about.” I would like to say the same to you and your relatives: you didn’t make a revolution! So, what are you talking about?
Eva,
1) Unbelievably and sickeningly, you are nothing more than a Communist apologist. I will address all your ‘points’ on my blog sometime soon.
2) Why do you ignore the rest of my commentary with a very condescending ‘I must confess that I didn’t get much further than that’?
Eva,
I have cogently responded to your insulting comment here:
http://frappansklise.tumblr.com/post/30621841
I await a response.
Varangy,
Get down from your high Hungarian moral horse and deal with reality.
Eva spoke about the Hungarian experiance, not Communism in general.
Some of those 100+ million you claim died due to Communism, died to defend what we in the West call freedom. Stalin and Soviet *were* allied to the US and UK during WWII. Did they die in vain?
Did the Allied sailors and soldiers, who protected the transport of material to Soviet during the WWII also die in vain? So Stalin could send more of his soldiers to die on the front, this time with weapons.
History is not suitable for a BorderLine personality.
Varangy and I have tangled on some of these issues in the past, and often I do not agree with him. In particular, I am not convinced a violent outcome in 89/90 would have had the positive “cleansing” impact he/she believes. Moreover, I believe the fundamental negative legacy of communism does not lie not primarily within the MSZP. The problem is, sadly, far graver. The problem is embedded in the society and the people that have (1) a feeling of entitlement (i.e., the the we deserve the Hungarian State to take care of us) and (2) a feeling of such high cynicism (i.e., the system is corrupt so if I cheat or am corrupt it is morally justified). These characteristics are left over traits from the Communist era. Particularly sad is that FIDESZ and Orban in particular while claiming to be anti-Communist pretend that the people are entitled, that the State is the answer for most problems and that all we need is more socialism (just don’t call it that!), nationalism and a strong leader and then Hungary can be rich and happy again and maybe ever restore the pre-Trianon borders. This of course is a lie, and a far worse lie than any lie Feri ever laid on the public.
Having said all this, I am absolutely appalled by Eva’s comments:
“… after 1963 the dictatorship became more and more bearable.” and “I’m almost certain that if the Kádár regime managed to keep up the standard of living people would have lived under the regime happily ever after. ”
What is your test for “bearable” and what is your test for “living happily ever after”? Just because there was more food available and somewhat better travel opportunities, this excuses what happened? This means REAL freedom and liberty are no longer relevant? These statements are so patronizing it is shocking. Life may have been more bearable but compared to what? And who decides? You? Who managed to leave the country? I think the test for bearable in New Haven is a little different than the one you posit for Hungary! Kadar? The USSR?
I think sadly this attitude is not so uncommon. Even at times Orban has wallowed in nostalgia for the Kadar era. It is scary and appaling. That people should be content that life was better than it was under Rakosi or Szilasi, I really can’t believe that is a serious argument.
NWO: “Having said all this, I am absolutely appalled by Eva’s comments: “… after 1963 the dictatorship became more and more bearable.” and “I’m almost certain that if the Kádár regime managed to keep up the standard of living people would have lived under the regime happily ever after. ” What is your test for “bearable” and what is your test for “living happily ever after”?”
You can be appalled, but unfortunately that’s the truth. Most people didn’t give a hoot about freedom. Living standards went up and up and up, there were more and more goods in the stores. Everybody and his brother built his own house plus a weekend house in the country. Real changes occurred in the countryside for the better. This was one of the fastest growing and most peaceful periods in modern Hungarian history. And all that was more import to Hungarians than some abstract notion of “freedom.” I myself don’t approve of this attitude but whether I like it or not or whether you like it or not that was the situation. Change of regime didn’t come because of some burning desire to live in freedom. Very sad, but unfortunately very true.
Varangy: “Eva, 1) Unbelievably and sickeningly, you are nothing more than a Communist apologist.”
No, I’m a realist and I know Hungarian history, including the history of the Kádár regime.
Eva,
So why did regime change come? My impression is that that the Hungarian Communist party was ahead of the pack here. Am I mistaken? If not what motivated the leadership to hand over power?
Adrian,
Even my very nationalistic acquaintances would never sing the praises of Szalasi. As to the anti-Gypsy comments, I cannot condone them, but bad economic situations tend to bring out the worst in people, irrespective of what country they were in.
After the communist rise to power, talk of what Hungary did in WW2 was very limited and it has only been open for discussion since the system change, and obviously a lot of those ugly feelings that were bottled up for so long have come to the surface. You could also compare the East and West Germans, in that a majority of far-right talk comes from East Germany, where after the war, everyone was told they had all been anti-fascists, and it was only the West Germans who had been Nazis.
To the rest,
WWII deaths are not considered part of the 70-80 million. Those numbers are almost always thrown in as victims of fascism/Nazism. But regardless of what numbers one states, it’s far too many.
And while I agree that economics led to the demise of the regime, it was a catalyst, but by no means the sole reason. Replacing the boot stamping on your face with a clean trainer is hardly an improvement.
Adrian: “Eva, So why did regime change come? My impression is that that the Hungarian Communist party was ahead of the pack here. Am I mistaken? If not what motivated the leadership to hand over power?”
I think basically two things motivated the MSZMP. One, they realized that the country’s economic situation was critical. They no longer could appease the population by material means. On the contrary, they had to introduce an austerity program and they feared, rightly I think, that such a move would turn the people away from the leadership. Two, it was becoming obvious that the Soviet Empire was dying and Gorbachev was ready to relinquish his country’s grip on Eastern Europe. Thus, the prospect looked quite grim: a less and less popular government without an outside prop. In the region every country was moving in the direction of giving up the socialist system, and thus it would have been pretty unimaginable that the Hungarian MSZMP could go on. The circumstances emboldened the democratic opposition (consisting originally no more than a couple of dozen people). But even so, the population at large had mighty little to do with the change of government. The ordinary folks were just watching what was going on, and most likely didn’t understand half of it. The only thing they hoped for was that suddenly they would live as well as the Austrians. Big surprise followed when one factory after another closed and millions of people lost their jobs.
Adrian: “How much do you think the current unrest is due to Gyurcsány’s personality, and how much due to disappointed expectations of democracy?”
I think the latter is much more important. But I think that Orbán’s relentless attacks on the government from 2002 on certainly doesn’t help the situation. Orbán is also a decisive personality: people either adore him or hate him. That seems to be the situation with Gyurcsány also.
Eva,
thanks for answering my questions, even though the answers were disappointing “The ordinary folks were just watching what was going on, and most likely didn’t understand half of it”. If you are right, the result of the referedum makes it clear that even if they are no longer just watching, they still don’t understand half of it.
There seems to be still be one light at the end of the tunnel: the destruction of SZDSZ would facilitate the move towards a two party system. Although I may agree with a lot the SZDSZ have to say, a two party system makes politics a race to the centre which in itself is a guarantee of stability. I put political stability above the realisation of my own policy preferences.
Accordingly, I have to admit to seeing the good in Viktor Orban, however much I despise his rhetoric and his changes of conviction – he has created a political party which commands the loyalty of a sizeable chunk of the electorate and also draws the teeth of the far right. I am not in favour of an electoral system which could hand as much power to Jobbik as it has handed to the SZDSZ. I would be happier, although if it could be shown that Fidesz is not just a personal union, and could survive intact the departure of the great man.
However, the departure that seems more likely at present is that of my family. For the last eleven years, Hungary has provided us with a much better quality of life than we could expect in the UK. It is the only home my children have known, even if some people regard them as “not really Hungarian”.
It may not be that Hungary has a devisive political leaders, but that it has devisive political culture, of which race and party are just local manifestations.