Supplement

Click here for the original.

Star of David in breechcloth

Letters from Turkey

My dearest Aunt,

I am happy you joined the Peace March, a little walking does wonders for your health at your age. However, I can't figure out what the message of that demonstration was. I understand Zsolt Bayer, one of the chief organisers told BBC: "I would call it a march for peace, to show the government it is not alone, he said, and to show the European Union that we don't like how they are treating it."

OK, fair enough.

“a march for peace” – is Hungary at war or threatened by war?

“the government is not alone” - less than 2 years following a democratic election one can hope the government is not alone

we don't like how the EU is treating Hungary – not too specific, and as there were no speeches we should rely on the banners.

The main message carried by the chief organisers reads: We will not be a colony!

I can only agree with that, Hungary should not be a colony. But who wants to colonise this country?

It is very clear from the following banners. There are two enemies – probably acting in alliance. The European Union and Goldman Sachs. 

According to the banners the EU = CCCP, that is the Soviet Union, 

and the invaders should go home, well, that we have known that for a very long time (ROMANES EUNT DOMUS)   
. 

How the European Union could go home bugs my mind. Where is the home of the EU? Hungary is a member, is it not? Am I missing something? 
The Piece March seems to suggest an analogy between the pressure by the EU on the high-speed acts of the Orban government and the crushing of the 1956 revolution by the Soviets. That analogy may explain why the crowd felt they have to march for peace. Hungary is uprising, and as a consequence faces bloody retributon. As in 56. In 1956 the crowds demanded that Russians go home. That made sense, Russion troops liberated Hungary from the Nazis and then did not find their way back home and stayed in Hungary as "temporary" occupiers. Rusky go ho,me made sense, and of course nobody demanded the state of the "Soviet Union go home" - as now the crowd wanted the European Union to leave. But then a banner reading "Europeans go home" would be explicitly schizophrenic. I see only one way to solve the axymoran and that is to demand the government to break with the EU.

So instead of uprising, Hungary could leave the club elegantly without breaking the Chinaware – which was not possible under Soviet rule. But probably most Hungarians want to stay. I could catch but a single banner suggesting to break with the EU: 

“Shall we be members or free? EU No!“ paraphrasing the National Poem by Pefőfi: “Shall we be slaves or free?” 

But nothing is lost yet. We have hope. In whom we trust? Even though the organisers said the crowd will march in support of the government there was not a single banner I could find on the internet praising the government or any member of that body. Not even the President of the State, supposedly Dr. Pál Schmitt, who supposedly embodies the unity of the nation and represents Hungary according to Article 9 of the Fundamental Law. 

Pro banners only for the prime minister, Mr. Viktor Orban, the inventor of a new era rightfully coined (by me) as Viktorian. We love you Viktor. We are with you! Orban is right!

He is for us, we are for him. Thank you Viktor! 

I am Orban too (whatever that might mean).

And Hungarians should not be lectured on democracy or conditions of loans because the EU, IMF even the USA are toddlers compared to Hungary. Hungary: 1116 years old. Impressive. 

I regret the banner stops there. It could have gone on like this:

Ancient Rome: 2800+ years

Ancient Greece: 3300+ years

Ancient Egypt: 5050+ years

You see my dear aunt the older the culture the deeper the shit they are in. Hungary should be happy to be so young compared to Grece, you can still pay the teachers and your politicians for a while.

Who is responsible for the dept, who is the arch enemy? Goldman Sachs of course. The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc is a huge investment banking firm and the sound of their name is enough to blame them for the misery of Hungary. The sound of their name, because in reality the majority of the government bonds are actually owned by Franklin Templeton Investments. But see, this looks impressive: 

This tells it all: 

but replace Goldman Sachs with Franklin Templeton, it just doesn't sound right.

Oh Lord, save us from Franklin Templeton? Not powerful at all. I do not know why, it just isn't.

One of the best banners I think is the one pinpointing the obvious but obscured connection among EU, men without balls and Cohn Bendit.

It reads: We are still EU members, but lest we should be eunuchs like that stinky beast Cohn Bendit. Brilliant! First of all it is elegant for playing with the words. EU - eunuchs, wonderful and does bear some truth in it. Second, it is extremely sensitive and polite, because they called Cohn Bendit a beast and not a swine, which would not be kosher at all.

However, the winner of the banner competition for me is this one:

In some Muslim countries the Star of David would not be covered but proudly shown and then burned obligatoryly. Perhaps that is also true for some European countries at demonstrations of Nazis or the extreme right. However, in any democratic European country a crowd supporting its conservative government such a banner would not be tolerated. Conservative gentlemen simply don't behave like that. They would take that as a provocation. I just  wonder about the nature of negotiation on the case of the Star of David - which was worn by hundreds of thousands in Hungary and not as a fashion item and not very long ago. Did the organisers say: "OK, we agree but please do not show it to the foreign press. Cover it with something. Adam and Eve wore breechloths, so it should be no offence to Jews." I do not know how this banner got there and how it was transformed, but this story is sad and funny at the same time. Hungarians do have a sense of Monty Python type British humor, for semi-covering the star and demanding the USA, the Union and Izrael (or Jews in general?) to go home (What have the Romans...). 

Many banners read that Hungary is a democracy.

[We are].from heart and soul (with very small characters right above "e") Hungarian democrats  

I think Hungary is a democratic country. But for how long?

This is the link to the Unites States Constitution: http://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Constitution.html

Read it carefully: Constitution.html and not Constitution_Republican_Party.html

This is the official link to the Hungarian Fundamental Law at the Parliamental Portal: http://www.parlament.hu/angol/alaptv_angol_fidesz.pdf

which translates as /fundlaw_english_FIDESZ.pdf, where Fidesz is the party of Viktor Orban. Interestingly, the name of the file suggests that the official Fundamental Law is a Fidesz version. Were there any others? Of course not. Perhaps they just wanted to emphasise their copy right to their Constitution.


By the time you receive my letter they may correct that (again, sad and funny) mistake. Letters travel slow these days. It is extremely cold here and the caravans are hold back by heavy snow, camels have very little forage left.

I hope you are in good health, please join every march – there will be quite a few – to stay fit.

Yours, as ever, Kelemen 

Hardly any influential foreign journalists understand the Hungarian language. Unfortunately.

Letters from Turkey

My dear Aunt,

the Batthyány Society of Professors issued a logical explanation why

„The reproachful attitude towards Hungary has spread”. 

Do they 

„imply that the politicians and institutions of the world collude in doing injustice to this country? Well, not exactly. In fact, it is pretty sure that all false allegations spread from within this country...” [i.e. Hungary]

Pretty sure, the professors say. See, you can't catch me, I can give you examples of conspirational theories from any hue of the spectra if you wish.

So why would politicians and institutions of the world attack Hungary so reproachfully? Because “Unfortunately, hardly any influential foreign journalists understand the Hungarian language”. 

Now this is truly unfortunate, we should do something about it, perhaps education, such as, will help our nation are. I thought this line of explanation was copyrighted by Miss Teen South Caroline (US Americans don't have maps) but no, it was not, it is being used by conservative university professors. I know you are busy with Öcsi (I wish he gets better) so do not read the whole document but the “Explanation” section consisting of three short paragraphs. 

The first paragraph says that since foreign journalists do not read Hungarian they indiscriminately accept the false allegations spread by the Hungarian opposition. Why do they not accept the truth from the mouth of the government? For that to understand you need to study the second paragraph which gives you the brief history of the Socialist Party – including the family matters of a former prime minister who “married the grand-daughter of an arch-Stalinist”. Why is the marriage of Mr. Gyurcsány crucial in understanding the false allegations made by Ms. Clinton, Mr. Barroso and the IMF? That is unequivocally revealed by the third paragraph: under communism 

“these people [referring to Hungarian journalists, I guess] developed strong links with their colleagues in the western press and other institutions (perhaps even to intelligence services) [sic!], and they are still able to use these links to serve the interest of their political side.”

Now wait a minute! What breed of Hungarian journalists – under communist rule - would risk a death sentence for developing strong links to institutions and intelligence services of the “enemy”. The communists? Bogs my mind! (And please do not come with the double agent argument, because I shoot back with my triple agent theory.)

Anyway, the heart of the problem is the complete ignorance of the Hungarian language by leading politicians of the world. See, if Ms. Clinton or Mr. Barroso could somehow turboprop [I know this is a noun] their understanding of the Hungarian language, they would be propelled to under the Tree of Enlightenment in no time. But Ms. Clinton and Mr. Barroso are unable to do so, because they don't have maps, as such. 

If they could get a hang of Hungarian they would revoke their false allegations with due apologies, and of course they would feel to be obliged to fire their expert advisors who developed strong links with the communists some 30 years ago. And are still under the influence.

When Ocsi gets better (anyway, does sitting by him non-stop really help your dog?) you could read the whole text, a real diamond in the publication coal mine of the Hungarian professorate. This is what education is all about: there is good, there is evil and the difference between the two is clearly marked by the superabundance of adverbly adjectives [I know my place in English grammar]. 

If I am 100% right, what I am endlessly, I do not need to understand the arguments of the other side, because those must be ridiculous - because they are wrong. If I am right, what I am. Understanding their motifs and secret tactics is time spent well, because that helps me to win the case.  

The headline of the document is: “(Mis)Judgement on Hungary”. I think the full title should read "(Miss Teen South Carolina's) Judgement on Hungary".

What did the vet say? You can always get a new one. I mean a new vet!

Bye now, I love you

Hysterism against racism

Letters from Turkey

My dear Aunt,

I am with you on that point. Moreover, you do not need rocket science to create a package of some cherry-picked solid facts, a bit of exaggeration sprinkled with morsels of blatant lies and you have a set of arguments which can be used for or against any cause. The more emotional and the less rational, the better. And once you launch your package, bits will be picked up, reproduced, modified and disseminated, a self-organising campaign will emerge if seeded properly. After a while nobody will know what the facts and who the sources are.

Fukuyama's eloquently written analysis of the emerging (rather sinking) soft dictatorship in Hungary contains some factual errors. Somebody somewhere must have stated that the retirement age of constitutional judges was lowered and this comes back again and again as an incriminating evidence, although it it not true. And this is from a philosopher, a scientist, who works from facts.

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/fukuyama/2012/01/23/do-institutions-really-matter/

So no wonder, people who do not make a living of studying facts and are emotionally involved in some issue make more mistakes. Take as an example the serial murders of the Roma in Hungary between July 2008 and August 2009. The first attacks were not sufficiently investigated by the police either because of racist prejudice, laziness or apathy. No matter what the reason might have been, it was a gross professional error. But unfortunately this is repeated all over the world: attacks against the poor are never examined so thoroughly as attacks against the rich and infamous. Not just negligence, but the repeated crimes committed against the Roma by the Roma also increased the threshold of the authorities. Brutal fights erupt from time to time between Roma families, sometimes guns are shut. Loan sharks regularly intimidate non-paying customers by shooting at their houses or beating them up. Nobody died in the first four attacks (of the series as we know now) many people – including myself - thought these were acts of intimidation by loan sharks. February 23, 2009. was a turning point in the attitude because that day a five year old child was murdered in the most brutal way. Roma loan sharks do not execute 5 year old kids. Nazis do. However, the police saw no connection among the attacks until their similarities became obvious: at the edge of the villages houses of poor Roma families were put in flame by Molotov cocktails, escaping people, young and old were shot at indiscriminately. 

Still, eyes of the investigators were blurred and if you read the last paragraph of the report from that time

http://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/article/79451-dark-secret-towns-anti-roma-attacks

you would see why. If the attacks were not committed by Roma loan sharks, than they must have been done by the anti-Roma Hungarian Guard. So this is the crowd you have to watch to find the murderers.

The FBI helped the police to set the profiles of these coward criminals who were finally tracked by cell phone data. Although they did not use their phones at the scenes, they were not smart enough to turn them off, or leave them at home.

Four men were arrested. They do not seem to have any affiliation with political parties or with the openly anti-Roma Hungarian Guard banned in 2009. Interestingly, one of the accused had been under surveillance since 2004 because of his open, militant racist remarks. The Office reported that surveillance was halted in early 2008, interestingly, just when the group started to get arms. According to other sources the surveillance lasted until August 8, the very day of the attack at Piricse.

http://hvg.hu/itthon/20110414_titkosszolgalati_megfigyeles_romagyilkoss

Another suspect of the four gentlemen worked as an informator for the military intelligence and reportedly made remarks that he could help to track the murderers for the hefty reward. That notion was not picked up by his link.

The case is not yet closed, surprises may arise. But even now, we know for fact that one of the guys was practically an agent for the military and the other suspect was watched closely right until he would have deserved an even closer surveillance. Nothing else is needed for a conspiracy theory: The government was involved in the murders in some way, either by initiating them, or at least by not halting them until the whole world watched Hungary. Is our package of facts done to prove the racist attitude of the Orban government? Not really, because all this happened during the previous government. I am sorry.

How are these events interpreted by the great pianist Andras Schiff in an interview given following a conference on anti-Semitism in Hungary?

“Aber es ist auch ein moralisches Problem. Es gab und gibt offene Pogrome gegen Roma, die von der Polizei und der Justiz überhaupt nicht oder nur sehr schwach geahndet werden. Die bewaffneten Garden der Jobbik-Partei zünden Roma-Siedlungen an und die Polizei greift nicht ein. Ein Vater kommt mit seinem kleinen Kind auf dem Arm aus einem brennenden Haus und wird von den Jobbik-Leuten mit Maschinenpistolen niedergeschossen.“

http://www.tagesspiegel.de/kultur/rechtsruck-in-ungarn-das-selbstmitleid-der-ungarn-und-schiffs-kritik-am-schweigen-der-eu/6065504-3.html

He basically says there is a moral problem: open pogroms have been going on against the Roma and the authorities watch them with folded arms. Members of the Jobbik (a radical right wing party in the Hungarian and European Parliement) kill a child with machine guns etc.

Non of it is true. There were no “pogroms” - and to use the term pogrom is especially unfortunate in a German newpaper. What happened in 2011 was frightening, but nothing like a pogrom. Although the socialist government banned the Hungarian Guard, that paramilitary organisation was able to get reborn anew under a different name. That allowed them to move into a village and march on the streets in uniform to intimidate the local Roma population. Until a new law constructed by the Orban government was accepted by the Parliament these thugs were just marching up and down. And then it was over, and unlike during the previous government you do not see groups dressed in black uniforms marching anywhere. It is over, thanks to Mr. Orban, the man I am not a fan of.

Hysteria is true emotions evoked by false facts. Political hysteria on one side elicits hysteria on the other side. Hysteria is a dialogue stopper. There is nothing to discuss. Should you present all the evidence to Mr. Schiff to make him see that his facts are wrong, he might say, all right, all right, but still I can feel Hungary is a racist country. Should you present all the facts to the extreme right, that the language of the Jobbik in the Parliament is anti-Semitic, even if it is coded, you could not rock their conviction that the attacks against, well, Hungary (? Orbán, the Sacred Crown?) is led by the international Jewry.

It is convenient to keep this style of arguments, because that does not force anyone to do anything. For the Roma, for example. Roma are poor because of the racist discrimination by Hungarians. No, the Roma are poor because laziness is encoded in their genes.

Either case, the authorities are not responsible. Society as a whole is not responsible. 

And it is a killer of everything. For a Berliner (like like Bobby Kennedy)

https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&hl=en&source=hp&biw=1366&bih=677&q=berliner&gbv=2&oq=berliner&aq=f&aqi=g10&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=1086l2900l0l3717l8l8l0l1l1l0l78l450l7l7l0

pogroms, communities in flame, children massacred by machine guns as portrayed by Mr. Schiff should ring a bell: it is like hell, nazi Germany. And I do not want to live as my father did under (or for) Hitler. I'll never ever go to Hungary, bye Balaton. 
For the crypto anti-every-race-but-us-Huns that type of argument based on false facts is the betrayal of your mother(father)land. And tragically, there seems to be no middle ground. 

When will they ever learn? Sung by my love at grandma age:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKvdPsnkPC0

Best to you.

P.S. I remember, we've had that. Again, I am not suggesting that communists and Nazis, the extreme left and the extreme right are equal when racism is considered. I just do not want hysteria to be the language of discussion (óξύμωρον – oxymoron)
I love you, but I have to go. 

We are proud, we hold, we are us, Huns

Letters from Turkey

My dear Aunt,

I suggest we should really move on from the Fundamental Law of Hungary to more fundamental questions, such as the tragic shortage of geographical maps in the US of America.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEHMA1q-SSM

Americans need our help if we can find them on this Globe without maps!

I know you and I knew you would cherish this text. Why does it bug your mind that I am not so enthusiastic about it? Also, why do you feel to be personally offended by some EU politicians coining the Law as nationalistic rather than patriotic. You did not write this! You do not have to identify with this! And then you must of course , because you are first of all a member of communities, religious, ethnic, cultural – and only then an independent individual. The Law eloquently summerises this: “We hold that individual freedom can only be complete in cooperation with others.”. But I hold that true cooperation with others can only be based on individual freedom. Scratch cooperation in lack of individual freedom and you find coercion. Do you see the difference?

I am first of all an individual

(as we are all different: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVygqjyS4CA)

Five year old Johnny loves his mother, moreover, he IS in love – he promised to marry her when he grows up. You ask him why, he tells you that Mom is the kindest, the most beautiful, the whateverist. And it may sound odd but true, if you listen to the little men at the playground you might hear them competing on the beauty of their mothers or strength of their fathers (gender stereotypes – I know - but that is not the point here). They may even fight over the issue, little 5 year olds, whose mother is the cutest.

But little children, chimps or ducklings do not love Mom for her beauty. It is the other way around. They see her beautiful because they love her. So simple. The need to get attached to the caregiver is hardwired in their brain. This is the basis for imprinting learning. Now, you may love your mother-tongue, your home, your village, your contry, your religion, your nation, your culture, fine. But to appreciate all this you do not need to prove your stuff is superior over my stuff. You were simply brought up in this, you are imprinted, enjoy.

So please do not give me a list of things you are proud of to make me compete.

http://www.parlament.hu/angol/alaptv_angol_fidesz.pdf

“We are proud of the outstanding intellectual achievements of the Hungarian people.” Outstanding, compared to whom? Us Turks? We built steam baths in Buda (still working) at the time when even kings of Europe did not clean their genitals regularly.

“We are proud that this people fought in defense of Europe for many centuries...” Well, in defense of whom? Again, us Turks? If you look at the map, seriously, which power was in between the Ottoman Empire and Europe at that time? The Huns? Of course not, they were the Hapsburgs.

And we could go on and on. I love you more than fighting over words. You happen to like sentences starting with “shell be obliged” and I don't. You seem to love statements with deep emotional charge, I don't. I love facts, you do not mind. You are a painter, I am in math. I am free, and you are sinking into soft dictatorship without noticing it. At the beginning. Holding your breath does not help. Keep an oxygen tank at hand. And honey for your cup of tea.

Still love you, but let us find some common grounds, bye...

Adult children shall be obliged to look after their parents

Letters from Turkey

My dear Aunt,

sure, there must be great passages in the Fundamental Law. Even among the few picked at random I found a sentence both important in practical terms and elevated ethically.

Although it is another obligation (of which there might be more than of rights in the Law), I fully endorse it.

Article XVI

(4) Adult children shall be obliged to look after their parents if they are in need.

Now, I have adult children and I am in need. Great need. As in this case there is no reference to a law to be written I take the obligation at flat value, my children should look after me unconditionally, period. That is good news. 

That is the practical part, but the morality of that message is more important. A true Christian idea, no ifs and buts. Adult children shall be obliged even if they were physically assaulted, abused, raped, sodomised, neglected, maltreated or simply unloved. The Fundamental Law of Hungary would oblige Elisabeth Fritzle to help poor Joseph, who is indeed in need serving his sentence.

A short paragraph and still embraces the essence of Christian morality: forgiveness and unconditional love.  

I really have to go now, please do your homework (remember?), love.

"Property shall entail social responsibility"

Letters from Turkey

My dear Aunt,

the Fundamental Law does reflect a philosophy or at least a viewpoint, a way of thinking. Not necessarily coherently, but it does. Again, I have no problem with that, it is simply not the kind of text I would read every night before going to bed.

You write I misinterpreted Article O: „Every person shall be responsible for his or herself, and shall be obliged to contribute to the performance of state and community tasks to the best of his or her abilities and potential.”

See, this is in line with article XII obliging you to contribute:

Article XII

(1) ... Every person shall be obliged to contribute to the community’s

enrichment with his or her work to the best of his or her abilities and potential.

This is not a mistake. This is philosophy. So what if you don contribute? What if you do not want to contribute with your work for the enrichment? You do not want, because you happen to be selfish, or autistic, or simply dislike the community. It does not matter a bit, you shall be obliged to work for the community by the Fundamental Law carved in concrete as only a 2/3s majority can change it.

And here is a weird one, Article XIII which obliges not only the persons, but the property itself (could be poor translation, how would I know).

Article XIII

(1) .... Property shall entail social responsibility.

So what if my property does not entail? Will it be confiscated (just kidding). Again, I have not read the Law and probably will never read it.

I just picked some sentences at random. Basically, I can classify the text into two categories: poetic text without concrete meaning, or factual statement on something which could be regulated by a simple law.

Here is a poetic one: “In order to create and maintain peace and security, and to achieve the sustainable development of humanity, Hungary shall strive for cooperation with every nation and

country of the world.” Why? Why should Hungary strive for cooperation with North Korea?

And here is an example for the other kind: “With the exception of the President of the Curia, no judge may serve who is older than the general retirement age.” So what if 120 years from today there would be a shortage of judges? Hungary simply running out of them? You will not be able to ask a 65 year old judge to stay in office for another 5 years unless you change the Fundamental Law. True? Not quite. You can change the definition of “serving”.

The same happened to the definition of flat rate taxation. Hungarians pay 16% flat rate tax, which for many means more than 16%, because strangely they do not pay taxes after their income, but after their income + certain percent of their income. So that 16% carved in a cardinal law becomes 20-30 or whatever percent. Prof. Fukuyama is right, not institutions but good practice guaranty democracy. But again I would add, until unwritten conventions evolve the laws should be scrutinised, and compliance with the law should be checked. Why don't you sue your government for taking more that 16% of your income?

I really have to go now, love.   

"Obliged to contribute"

Letters from Turkey

My dear Aunt,

I am really very busy with other things... I am happy you love the new Fundamental Law of Hungary. I have no problem with that, it is simply not written in the style I like. 

The Law starts with an imperative (God bless the Hungarians :-) and then goes on saying that

"WE, THE MEMBERS OF THE HUNGARIAN NATION, …. with a sense of responsibility for every Hungarian, hereby proclaim...",

where the term Hungarian is not defined. It would not be problematic in the US: you are American if you are a citizen, and you are not, if not. In the Carpathian Basin it is a bit more complicated: "We promise to preserve the intellectual and spiritual unity of our nation torn apart in the storms of the last century." meaning naturally that by Hungarian the Fundamental Law means ethnicity and not citizenship. Therefore, „members of the Hungarian Nation” who wrote the law are not necessarily citizens of Hungary, and they feel responsible for every ethnic Hungarian in and outside of the country, which is fine. But then who has the sense of responsibility for the citizens – not necessarily Hungarians – of the country? And this is just the first sentence yet.

I am busy, apologies. Please read and interpret the following sentence which I picked at random:

„Every person shall be responsible for his or herself, and shall be obliged to contribute to the

performance of state and community tasks to the best of his or her abilities and potential.”

And this is not poor translation. And no, it is not from North Korea. This is „Article O” of the Hungarian Fundamental Law. So how is it? As far as I am concerned the most important task right now is to get the economy growing so we can get out of this mess. For that, Hungary has to pay the loans back in a timely manner. Shell I be obliged to contribute to this? Shell I be obliged to sell my belongings and transfer the money to the government as my contribution to the „performance of state … tasks”?

In my world citizens (not „Hungarians” in general) pay the government to solve the tasks of the state.

Look, I have no problem with this Law. I do not believe that on the ground of Article O any government would ever oblige me for anything. I just do not like the philosophy behind it. It is simply not my cup of tea. If it is yours, please, enjoy. But keep some honey at hand, just to make sure.

Best to you as always

Fukuyama on Orban

Letters from Turkey

My dear Aunt,

my answer is definite no and no. Hungary is not a dictatorship and Mr. Orban is not a dictator, no matter what Daniel Cohn-Bendit says
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgScDXYoQLE

The interesting questions to me are these: could Hungary evolve into a dictatorship, does Mr. Orban have the capacities of a dictator.

Please read how Francis Fukuyama is thinking about such issues:

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/fukuyama/2012/01/23/do-institutions-really-matter/

(Even those who do not approve of Mr. Orban should acknowledge that the man ignites thoughts in the minds of the finest thinkers.)

Prof. Fukuyama shows that the British prime minister has more power than his Hungarian counterpart, there is no Constitutional Court in the UK, and I would add the UK does not even have a real written constitution. So then why does half of the world believe that England is a democracy, while Hungary is an autocratic country?

According to Fukuyama:

...the “democratic dictatorship” constituted by the Westminster system has worked in English history because of the underlying moderation of English politics: while some may have been tempted, few prime ministers have sought to use their majorities to, for example, shut down the opposition press.

And we can go further, no British prime minister is allowed to do many things even if legally empowered to do so. That is because politics is governed greatly by unwritten conventions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_convention_(political_custom)#United_Kingdom

In an openly brutal dictatorship you know your place. You are either for or against, you know your friends, you know your enemies. Decision makers in Hungary were socialised in a “soft dictatorship” ruled by János Kádár. Now that was tricky. Most Hungarians were happy that the brutal Stalinist dictatorship passed, Kádár did not interfere with the personal lives of his subjects, who were able to by small auto-mobiles, build their homes or live in small flats owned by the city council. The country did not prosper but few people went to bed hungry and everybody had a bed. There were no political prisoners.

Few people realised that they live in a totalitarian system. The poet György Petri knew and expressed the essence of soft dictatorship in two lines: “I glance down at my shoe and – there’s the lace!/ This can’t be gaol then, can it, in that case.”

There were laws on the press, on the right of association and there were the unwritten, even unmentioned conventions on how far one could go in criticising the system openly. There was no formal censorship, because it was not needed, self-censorship did the job. The system changed more than 20 years ago, however 20 years is just a blink of the eye for unwritten conventions to evolve.

As a child I was struck by the posting in every public building: “Spitting on the floor is strictly prohibited”. Why do they forbid what nobody would do? Later I learned such notes had a function earlier, when chewing tobacco was trendy. Tobacco elicits salvation, poor guys had to spit, and they sometimes spat on the floor, sometimes into those nice ceramic cylinders which were still available in my childhood although without any function at that time. A few years later the signs and the cuspidors simply vanished – nobody is in urgent need to spit any more and everybody knows spitting on the floor is not nice.

Lowering the retirement age of thousands of judges from one day to the next is not illegal, is not antidemocratic, not unconstitutional. It is simply not nice. A gentleman would never do such a thing. The general retirement age is actually being increased by 6 month every year until it reaches 65. This will affect me, still, I say this is fair, because it is gradual, foreseeable, predictable, I know exactly what to expect if I live that long (I am working on it right now). Decreasing the retirement age from 70 to 62 without any warning, without any transition (well, except for a 6 months waiting period for some) is not fair. And it does not make sense either. If the true aim was to set a universal retirement age without exceptions they could have done it gradually until the increasing retirement age of the general public meets the decreasing age of the judges at 65. Why not? So what is the true aim?

Professor Fukuyama! Young democracies without strong conventions do need strong institutions, checks and balances, and monitoring from outside. To keep the floor tidy.

Independence of the media and higher education in Hungary

Hungarian Media Laws in Europe
http://www.seemo.org/hungary/files/Hungarian_Media_Laws_in_Europe_final.pdf

and

Loss of Independence of the Hungarian Accreditation Committee (HAC) threatens international Recognition of Hungarian Degrees

http://www.mab.hu/doc/RECOMMENDATIONS_2011.doc

Letters from Turkey

My dear Aunt,

I do not have much time right now, ten minutes is the most I can cut from my lunch break.

I made the point in my letter yesterday that even if every single line of new Hungarian laws has precedent in the laws of various countries - the result is a unique combination and should be examined as a whole. You ask several questions, unfortunately this time you do the homework or get no answer for a while. I am busy.

You will find examples for clever combinations in the report released by the Center for Media and Communication Studies recently.

http://www.seemo.org/hungary/files/Hungarian_Media_Laws_in_Europe_final.pdf

Just read the Executive Summary.

“Media Authority independence.: in response to international concerns regarding the independence of Hungary’s new Media Authority, the Hungarian government cites EXAMPLES of media authorities from nine European and EU-member countries which it states are less independent from the government than in Hungary (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK). The Hungarian government cites EXAMPLES of the appointment procedures of members to the media regulatory bodies in these countries. ALTHOUGH IT IS ACCURATE that some or all members of these bodies are appointed by the government, in all nine cases the expert assessments indicate that the Hungarian government’s EXAMPLES INACCURATELY cite or OMIT key formal and informal elements of the appointment and/or regulatory systems which would provide a more complete assessment of the level of regulatory independence with which these bodies operate in practice. Experts also find that the media regulatory bodies cited do not have the equivalent regulatory scope as Hungary’s Media Authority. For instance, unlike in Hungary, in all nine examples given, the media authority referenced is responsible for regulating broadcasting and audiovisual media but has no content-related authority over all media sectors, including both the print and online press. Furthermore, in all nine cases, the media regulatory body cited is not the sole—or in some cases even the most powerful—media authority in that country. in six of the nine examples, the Hungarian government cites an incorrect or former regulatory body and/or an inaccurate or outdated appointment procedure or law. “

This is but a single paragraph of the exhausting report. I cannot judge how accurate the analysis might be, but the European Union definitely will, because this issue is high on their agenda.

The second document

LOSS OF INDEPENDENCE OF THE HAC THREATENS INTERNATIONAL RECOGNITION OF HUNGARIAN DEGREES

http://www.mab.hu/doc/RECOMMENDATIONS_2011.doc

might help you to see clearly in your other question. The International Advisory Board of the Hungarian Accreditation Agency – so not only I - states that in those European countries where the minister is involved in the nomination of members there are safeguards to guarantee the independence of the accreditation board. So again, the low does not have to explicitly state that the Council is independent, and it is OK for the minister to delegate members, however, all these together risk the loss of independence of the Council. Ironically, the Advisory Board released this statement after studying the draft of the law, and the act was passed by the Parliament without any changes.

Now I get back to work.

Yours, as ever

Hungarian Laws and the European Standard

Letters from Turkey

My dear Aunt,

you said prime minister Mr. Viktor Orbán can prove that the new laws in Hungary are not unprecedented For every single line of the new laws he can present a precedent in the jurisdiction of this or that European country. If true, why is the EU attacking Mr. Orbán so vehemently?

It can be true. It can be true that there is a precedent for creating a National Jurisdiction Office and give it power and influence on all matters. It's not unheard of to appoint it's president for 9 long years. To lower the retirement age of judges from 70 to 62 without any transition is probably unprecedented, but it does not affect democracy. Hundreds of new judges will be appointed this year and thousands of cases will be re-opened, well, fine, this is the direct consequence of changing the act on retirement, no problem with that. So us Huns should not worry, there is nothing new or antidemocratic in this law.

However, put these all together: the most powerful position is filled for 9 years, this person has tremendous influence on the appointment of hundreds of judges this year, and will apoint dozens to the preemptied leading positions, all these together is worrisome. And by the way, that person happens to be the wife of an influential Fidesz politician.

Or take just one aspect of the new law on higher education. The accreditation committees are critical in maintaining the quality of higher education. To be effective, accreditation boards should be independent of governments, political parties, churches, practically everything, perhaps even of themselves. "ENQA considers the autonomy of institutions and independence of quality assurance agencies within national HE systems as a necessary condition to ensure the full exercise of their responsibilities, notably with regard to the provision of accurate and consistent information to the general public." http://www.enqa.eu/mission.lasso

First of all in the new law the word “independent” was omitted. No big deal, perhaps the way the Committee is set up will ensure independence. Well, the Committee has 12 members, 6 of which will be delegated by the minister of education (or of whatever, as names of those institutions change with every government) and 6 members by the president of the Hungarian Academy of Science. The chairman of the Committee is appointed by the minister with the approval of the academy. So is this board independent of the government? Is there no way for the minister to influence members delegated by him/her? And again, you should know that accidentally, the president of the Academy is a former minister of education in the former Fidesz government. So the former and the present ministers of education decide on the members of the independent Accreditation Committee.

You should know I do trust the integrity of these two gentlemen, profs. Miklós Réthelyi and József Pálinkás . I cannot trust the minister or president of the future, I do not know who they will be. Even if I trust them, is it not worrying, that the Committee evaluating the quality of every institution will have members delegated by two openly religious, Christian conservatives?

My sweet aunt, you do not spend so much time in the kitchen as I do, but you will still appreciate this metaphor. Hungarian goulash (which is a soup) is delicious with its beef, vegetables, sweet and hot paprika. Sour cherry soup is another favourite of mine: the fruits floating in the cold liquid with heavy cream, sugar and cinnamon. Perfect ingredients. So we can combine them as we wish: let us fry some cherries in hot lard, add the cream and beef , spice it with hot paprika and cinnemon and serve it lukewarm. Indigestible! Quite a surprise for Mr. Orban, because there is precedent for each of these ingredients to be used in famous dishes. Sure, but not for this unique combination.

This Viktorian era (my spell checker wants to change Viktorian to Victorian, Viktorian apparently does not have any sence :-) in Hungary is indeed a unique combination of many good things.