Mária Vásárhelyi is a sociologist whose main interest is the state of the media. She is the daughter of Miklós Vásárhelyi (1917-2001) who served as the press secretary of the second Imre Nagy government. As a result he and his family, including the three-year-old Mária, were deported together with Imre Nagy and his family to Snagov, Romania. Miklós Vásárhelyi received a five-year sentence for his activities during the 1956 Revolution. I should add that Mária Vásárhelyi is one of my favorite publicists in Hungary.
* * *
Dear Mrs. Lantos,
Although we have not met personally, your late husband and my late father, Miklós Vásárhelyi, used to hold each other in high esteem; therefore I take the liberty to write this letter to you.
The tie between your husband and my father was not only based on common historical experience and mutual personal sympathy; they also shared some values that were manifest in moral and political issues that both of them found crucially important. And both of them bravely took a stance whenever they saw those values endangered. Among these principles the idea of freedom was of primary importance, as well as the representation of human rights, or responsibility for the situation of the minorities and the oppressed. Both fought in the Hungarian armed resistance against the fascist occupation; they worked to bring down the state socialist dictatorship; they stood up for the rights of Hungarian communities beyond the borders; and also spoke out after the democratic transformation, when racist and anti-Semitic views came to the fore on the political scene.
As far as I remember, among Hungarians living abroad, your husband was the first to protest when István Csurka’s anti-Semitic pamphlet “Some Thoughts” was published. He also raised his voice in 2007 when the Slovak Parliament reaffirmed the infamous Beneš Decrees. Your husband was most determined in his condemnation of the establishment of the Hungarian Guard, an anti-Roma and anti-Semitic organization, whose purpose was to intimidate and publicly humiliate the minorities in Hungary. To my knowledge, when he last met Viktor Orbán he made a point of expressing his dismay about how several politicians from Fidesz gave support to the foundation and activities of the Hungarian Guard, with Fidesz as a party not distancing itself unambiguously from that paramilitary organization.
The deep, principled understanding and mutual appreciation between your husband and my father was testified to by the speech Tom Lantos made in the House of Representatives on October 6, 2005, in which he emphasized my father’s “significant contribution to the cause of freedom and democracy,” as someone “who played a critically important role before and during the 1956 Hungarian Revolution, and again in the 1970s and 1980s, in the struggle to transform Hungary from a one-party communist state into a multi-party democracy.”
In the light of these facts I am certain you will understand why I find it so important to write to you about the House of Fates, on whose International Consultative Board you were invited to be a member. I am convinced that this institution, rather than serving its officially proclaimed aim of keeping the memory of the Holocaust alive and drawing the public’s attention to the tragedy of child victims, would serve the falsification of history, the politically motivated expropriation of historical memory, and purposes of party propaganda. The policies of the Orbán administration during the past few years, and its ambivalent (to put it mildly) relations with the extreme right; its policy of ignoring the growth of anti-Semitism in Hungary; as well as all that we know about the project so far – its contents, the circumstances of its establishment, the name itself, the location selected and the deadline chosen for its construction, the person in charge, the choice of the trustees – tend to suggest that the real purpose of the new European Educational Center is to downplay whatever responsibility Hungary had for the Holocaust and to mend the damaged international reputation of the current right-wing government.
During the past few years there have been more and more acts of desecration of Jewish symbols, prayer houses, cemeteries, and attacks on individuals whom the attackers took to be Jewish. A series of international and Hungarian sociological surveys give evidence of an extraordinary growth of anti-Semitism within Hungarian society; at least one fourth of the population openly declares it has anti-Semitic views, and many more people are simply prejudiced against the Jews. Everyday anti-Semitic discourse (zsidózás) is quite common in the streets and other public spaces. The same surveys make it clear that while the economic crisis played a role in the increased number of these occurrences, its effect has been boosted in the right-wing and extreme-right political context. Meanwhile, according to comparative research conducted in nine EU member states, it is Hungary where people of Jewish descent feel the most threatened. In 2012, 91% of the members of the Hungarian Jewish community said anti-Semitism had recently worsened to a smaller or larger degree; it is the largest portion among the countries surveyed. During five years, the number of those who consider anti-Semitism a serious social problem has nearly doubled. I am, of course, aware of the fact that anti-Semitism has become more widespread in most European countries, but it is still revealing that while only 11% of the Jewish community in the United Kingdom thinks of anti-Semitism as “a very big problem,” in Hungary 49% hold this view. In the UK 18% of those identifying themselves as Jews have contemplated emigration because of “not feeling safe as Jews”, while in Hungary this ratio is 48%.
I also believe that Viktor Orbán and his party are heavily responsible for the growth of anti-Semitism in Hungary. The Hungarian government’s reputation is rapidly worsening in the eyes of the democratic world, and this is largely due to their particular responses to ever-growing racism and anti-Semitism as well as some of their decisions concerning personal appointments and cultural policy, which gave fuel to such vicious emotions. Falsification of Hungary’s history, whitewashing the crimes of the Horthy era, elevating well-known anti-Semites (public figures, politicians, writers) to the national pantheon, while throwing mud at brave and honest left-wing and liberal patriots, are all features of the current government’s cultural and heritage policies. Parts of the media, which this government supports morally or financially (in direct and indirect ways), are full of overt and covert racist or anti-Semitic statements. Several of the figureheads of the pro-government press openly incite hatred against homosexuals, Jews, and the Roma. In the first rows of the so-called “Peace Marches,” demonstrations organized to prove that there is mass support behind Fidesz’s policies, there are well-known anti-Semites. One of the leaders of the quasi-NGO responsible for these marches used to be a founder and intellectual leader of the Hungarian Guard; another one, an emblematic figure in Fidesz, is a journalist whose work can be legally criticized as anti-Semitic, according to a court ruling. Still another leading figure of the Fidesz-related media can justly be called the father of Holocaust relativization in Hungary.
The government uses doublespeak. On the one hand, the deputy prime minister at the conference of the Tom Lantos Institute, Hungary’s ambassador at the United Nations, or, most recently, the President of the Republic, have used words of humanism and solidarity commemorating the victims of the Holocaust and admitting in unambiguous language that the Hungarian state and public administration bore responsibility for the murder of 600,000 of our Jewish compatriots. On the other hand, the government itself and government institutions have made countless gestures to the far right, relativizing the Holocaust, and denying that the Hungarian state apparatus was responsible to any degree.
This intention of downplaying Hungarian responsibility for the Holocaust is most apparent in the preamble of the Fundamental Law (Constitution), promulgated in 2011 under the Fidesz government, which states, “our country’s self-determination [was] lost on the nineteenth day of March 1944”. Which means that Germany as the occupying power must bear full responsibility for the deportation and wholesale murder of Hungarian Jewry. Apart from the fact that it was not an occupation in the international legal sense (the German armed forces did not occupy any Hungarian territories against the will of the Hungarian government), plenty of historical evidence and the testimonies of the survivors prove that the Hungarian authorities’ zeal and effectiveness in organizing the deportations shocked even the Germans, including high-level SS officers, while a significant part of the population watched the deportation of their fellow citizens with utmost indifference. The narrative that the government suggests through the text of the Fundamental Law is, therefore, an utter lie. Similarly, the planned 70th anniversary commemorations of the Holocaust are marked by an intention of falsification and lies – including the establishment of The House of Fates European Educational Center.
The name House of Fates is evidently an allusion to Nobel laureate Imre Kertész’s novel Fatelessness, but its message is quite the opposite. It suggests that being murdered in a concentration camp was the fate of those children, but, although they lived through it, the fate was not theirs. As Kertész writes, “if there is such a thing as fate, then freedom is not possible (…) if there is such a thing as freedom, then there is no fate (…) That is to say, then we ourselves are fate.” (English translation by Tim Wilkinson) This is how the main protagonist of the novel, Gyurka Köves, formulates the key to his own story, when he realizes that whatever happened to him was not his own fate, although he himself lived through it. The name House of Fates is not just a play on words but a complete misinterpretation of the essence of the Holocaust. And not just the name but also the site is a telling sign of the intellectual emptiness behind the lofty and bombastic use of the Holocaust as a political instrument. Holocaust researchers and survivors all agree that the Józsefváros Railway Station is not a symbolic site of deportation, and no children were taken from there to Auschwitz. The historian in charge of the project’s concept – who once happened to call the Horthy régime, which presided over the Hungarian Jews’ total deprivation of rights and exclusion, “a democracy until 1938” – is not a Holocaust expert. During the past 25 years, she has not produced any publications of scholarly merit on this subject but was at the center of quite a few scandals.
The plans that have been leaked out indicate that the central message of the Educational Center would not be the tragedy of innocent children but the rescuers, those brave and honorable citizens who put their lives at risk in their efforts to help and save their persecuted compatriots. Naturally, there should be monuments commemorating their bravery and sacrifice, but why must the plight of many thousands of murdered children be used for that purpose? This is the dishonest betrayal and political utilization of the child victims’ memory.
Dear Annette Lantos, living thousands of kilometers away from Hungary you may not be aware of all this. That is why I felt it was my duty to inform you of these issues and draw your attention to some aspects of the cause in support of which your late husband’s memory and your own name are being used. I ask you to reconsider whether you want to participate in the Consultative Board’s proceedings.
Mr. Paul: February 2, 2014 at 4:47 pm | #45 Quote
“Boross claimed that at the reburial of Horthy there was a commemorative circlet(?- koszorú) sent by the Budapest Jewry with the text: “A hálás budapesti zsidóságtól” -/ “from the thankful Budapest Jewry”. I found this odd that the reporter wouldn’t correct this. It does not seem like a true story.”
It is, Mr. Paul, it is. It was published as an attachment to Horthy’s memoirs, go to: http://www.hungarianhistory.com/lib/horthy/horthy.pdf
to “Letters to the Editor on Horthy’s re-burial”, p. 328:
“János Blumgrund of Vienna, Austria, a Hungarian Jew, appeared on a
Hungarian TV interview on the occasion of Regent Horthy’s re-burial in
Hungary, with a caption “Jewish wreaths on Horthy’s grave”. A news photo
was published widely at the time showing hand held placard at the scene, with
the legend: “The Grateful Jewry” on it. It was Mr. Blumgrund who held the
sign. Letters to editors criticizing Mr. Blumgrund’s action were written by
other Hungarian Jews.”
One critical letter and Mr. Blumgrund’s response are printed there. Also a letter by Naftali Kraus; I think he is a rabbi in Budapest now, and several other documents.
While you are perfectly right, do you have any idea, how to get through the message and to whom? Do you think, it’s enough if we put our suggestions/ideas/analyses front of the public, and it will produce some effect, they will listen to us? Or what are we going to do with the result of the “workshop”?
Actually I am serious, in case of doubt.
Watching the events unfold from a distance gives a certain perspective, what may help to focus on the main parts – as I learned so far, and it certainly has a value to whom interested, but are they?
I saw Boross. Instead of pontificating about history he should sit down and read a few books. Or, even better, simply retire. He is certainly one of the proponents of the Horthy cult and the rehabilitation of the Horthy era. He was the one who suggested Szakály for the job at the Veritas Institute. Naturally, he claims that he knew nothing about Szakály’s far-right connections. He doesn’t seem to grasp the significance of the monument and why people are upset. All told, he is a man of far-right sympathies.
In fact, Antónia Mészáros although normally very well prepared, wasn’t always on the top of the situation. She doesn’t seem to know much about the circumstances and the details of the occupation and therefore she couldn’t counter Boross’s claim of a direct connection between the Germans and the deportation.
I’m just reading Veesenmayer’s testimony at the Endre-Jaross-Baky trial and it is clear as anything that there was some German pressure but if the Hungarians said no, the Germans couldn’t do anything. By then they simply didn’t have the personnel.
Spectator: “While you are perfectly right, do you have any idea, how to get through the message and to whom?”
Good question. The start is a modern programme that is shared by the opposition and that is “inclusive” in the sense that even people who do have some sympathy for Fidesz can get interested in. I am afraid that this is still missing.
Here are some revealing documents from 1944.
Off course it does, and a lot more in my estimation. But then again, the present state of things bound to party-politics and the importance or priority of topics decided by hierarchy among the parties, not the subject or the goal as it should really be, even if today’s demonstration gave some positive input.
Maybe we should star up The Expat Political Analyst’s Party and participate 😀
“I’m just reading Veesenmayer’s testimony at the Endre-Jaross-Baky trial…”
Eva, if it is in English and available online, may I ask for a reference? Thank you.
No, it is in Hungarian but sometime soon I will translate the important parts.
Boross, chief caterer to apparatchiks in Southern Pest before 1989 is a big fan of Horthy and his regime, and his father was ennobled (made vitéz) by Horthy. That is not new.
But he is also an éminence grise of the current tyrant of Hungary. This is troubling.
Spectator, of course you should participate. Expat or not. But I know already how complicated that is because I was trying to exactly find out how expats could participate. Not because I am one but because I know some of which I thought they could do something more actively. In the meantime I was told that they are “not speaking about politics” (anymore). Nevertheless, yes, the expats could indeed contribute quite a lot.
Well, I would wonder 1) What is there to win 2) What is there to lose 3) What is the leverage and 4) What is the window of opportunity.
And I prefer those negociations to be public, because it normally gives a chance to bring the press in, and if the press is doing their job the public may, even if they have to read beetween the lines, get an idea of what the endgame is.
In this case, my guess is the Mazsihisz chose to make their position public because the Government had failed to listen to their input before. It seems the whole Veritas / House of Fates / Crappy memorial shebang was decided in a hurry on the back of an envelope, whereas such projects normally take several years to mature. The Fidesz way, as usual.
I been saying please ESPOUSE the pro-active topics of winning the upcoming elections, (As @Petofi is also, above) we are sidelining the GREAT issues before us, the ones that are íIMMEDIATELY AHEAD, by falsely discussing the war monument, the Nazis, the Arrow Cross, the Hungarian WWII roles. These are a BRILLIANT Orban-Fidesz tactics to get the Jobbik votes over to Fidesz and consequently to try to get a rerun of the 2/3 majority success!!!!!!
I suggest in all sincerity that the Hungarian Spectrum, if this organ wishes to help Hungary forward through a liberal-left win in the immediate upcoming elections, that we get OFF this ticklish dirty neverending and terribly boring Christian-Jewish conflict-argument which has been generated by Fidesz as bait hung on the fishing hook.
Lets not bite the bate thrown to ALL of us !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Instead lets put our brains to inventing the WINNABLE election issues.
Consequently I ask Eva, Chief of this publication to assist us and Hungary to WIN a fight for a DEMOCRATIC government. Consequently to direct our discussion to the IMMEDIATRE issues at hand, the ones that can make a significant CHANGE not the age old story of Christians and Jews going at each other. I am BORED and feel ashamed to be one of the few to have to request this change.
Thanks for a wise turn away from this discussion.
Any help I can add with ideas as to how to get a lively discussion on Election Strategy within our group, please dont hesitate to get me involved SOONEST. There is unfortunately NO TIME TO LOSE.
@Andy – While I generally agree, that we should respect the themes of the respective article in our discussion, I disagree regarding the reasoning.
In my opinion the main issue to the government – means Orbán and his gang – IS the election, the whole charade about and around the Holocaust and that dreadful kitsch has been thrown on the public and us thereupon is to distract and divide the attention, and as a side-effect appeal to some Jobbik supporters too.
That’s why we trying to deal now with issues should have dealt with long ago – we are forced into following the script of a skillful Fidesz narrative.
Furthermore, we can not ignore these side-issues, even if their purpose clear, because of the general importance of those core values what they dealing with, overtly or in a direct fashion.
(Now I even realized, that “skillful” is a gross understatement, devious would have been more appropriate, I guess.)
Andy: ”Instead lets put our brains to inventing the WINNABLE election issues.”
Yes and let us put our brains to squaring the circle. (According to the best mathematical authority it cannot be done.)
The road to hell is paved with ”winning strategies”. Try to win at any price and you sacrifice the future. (That is what Orban is doing).
The opposition should not waste their possibly last chance to reach the electorate by making concessions to opportunistic ideas such as giving voting right to people who will not have to pay the ensuing taxes. It is not ”winning strategy” to try to explain to the electorate that there is no such thing as cheap electricity and there is nothing specially glorious about being Hungarian, but it has to be done – not in the future but now. It will take long time to sink in.
In order to win the future the opposition must forget about “winning strategies” and begin to tell the truth.
Interesting statement by the Lantos Institute;
Comments are closed.