you can donate for gov't independent NGOs and press

fireroller wrote:

the (re-)westernisation of Hungarian society.

I am an expat. I am not a citizen even of the EU. So I know "what I think" can be easily dismissed. And I believe the future of Hungary I is up to Hungarians not matter what I think. But none the less, I do have my opinion, I personally and on a cultural level, would prefer to *not* to see the McDonaldization of Hungary.

Personally, what I liked about central Europe when I first came here (in the last century), is that is was in fact *not* westernized. It was a nice and interesting mix of east and west. This is not really a binary issue in my opinion.

A little history:

So called "westernization" has a long list of historical burdens that it has not shed till today. Just the form of engagement has changed, but the fundamental question still is "Cui bono?" (who benefits, or more direct: follow the money). When one looks at most calls for "westernization", one can find that the economic, political, and social factors are usually more in the direct, short term and immediate interests of the "west", than in long term benefit of those of the local population being affected (exploited). Cross reference the Berlin Conference of 1884–85 to show how a few people in a small room dictated the future of Africa. Sometimes even the local populations own leaders collude with the "western" interests to the detriment of the local population. And often the western interests are myopic and biased, since they seem to consider it "obvious" that everyone wants to be "westernized". And some of the local people start to get annoyed by all this. Maybe they don't want to be "westernized" (especially in *how* the westernization process it done). And so the western interests come across a very basic known law of physics: To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

How effective that "reaction" is varies. In the 19th century those locals that objected were met with a bullet from either a Winchester or a Lee-Metford. (If you have not read "The Scramble For Africa" by Thomas Pakenham consider doing so.)

Today we are seeing a different reaction: the so called "Illiberal" effect.

fireroller wrote:

"If you feel that a more democratic "Open Society" in Hungary is of importance to you

I recommend everyone read "The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad" by Fareed Zakaria (yes, he was the one who applied the "Illiberal Democracy" concept to modern global geopolitics):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fareed_Zakariahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Future_of_Freedom:

Basically he points out that historically human liberties and basic rights arrived first before democracy, and those countries that follow this pattern create the most stable liberal democracies. Or in other words, the over-application of the simplistic concept by the "west" of first promoting "democracy" is flawed and has in fact backfired, and created the illiberal democracies we have today. Real liberalization may take generations. It will not be simple. It will not be easy. And it may now take even longer because the "western" political leaders forget or ignore their own histories, and/or trying for the quick result, since not such much money to be made by western interests in such a slow path.

You are writing down interesting thoughts, and you being foreign-raised makes them more unique. But for me, it somehow does not seem to refer to hungary (but I am tired, too). I do not see it the way "Hungary is not in the west, but it must be westernized". On a global scale, CEE is of course part of the "western cultural sphere", bordering to Russia (the Osman Empire left Europe soon a century ago).

By "re-westernize" I meant in a very simplifying way to recover more of those characteristics in society, especially those connected to running the state, which I do find GOOD and which we - in a wide sense of the word - "imported" from the west (of Europe) in the last 25 years, of course not the first time:
clear limitation of the government power (e.g. by the constitution court) and of the persons associated with it, government independent judiciary, a sufficiently stable legal situation for enterprises to flourish (not too much retrospective taxation), seeking of a certain consensus in crucial questions (e.g.:new constitution, a new power plant with a russian loan of 10Bn USD the loan-contract of which was classified(!), but fortunately leaked), more free press, generally less of those eastern-european "I am stronger so I can have anything" moments in public life and governance, e.g. not changing election laws *every* time before the elections, some sort of care for minorities like roma, lgbt, woman from the majority...

I believe these ideas which are clearly more present "west of the Leutha" than here (I lived 20 years there) represent the good site of "westernisation". Maybe these ideas are not suitable or directly applicable for a small native people in the pacific, but clearly applicable to societies of the CEE region, even if changes are slow.
I think, the above mentioned organisations are successful in catalysing changes in society which lead society norms toward the above ideas which are, at least in principle, required in the European Union.

So I am talking about these boring  western norms, sorry:) I just like things like this.

I am simply, and personally, drawing a line between "westernization" and "liberalization". One is good. One is questionable. But often (and in my opinion, unfortunately) the two are mixed, combined and presented as an inseparable package. "If you want one, you gotta have the other" type of mindset, which I think is not necessarily true or even desirable. I think that liberty, transparency and good government "by the people" is important. But, I also like uniqueness. I like how different cultures have different views and express them. I would not like to see such cultural values lost. And there are many differences between Hungary, in Central Europe, and other countries in Western Europe to make this relevant. So even if the end result one may hope for may be similar, the path there should not be considered singular. How the UK or Germany got there may be different than how Hungary gets there. It must include local culture and local history. It must be local, bottom up and organic if it is to be a meaningful transition and a lasting one.

It may not even happen in our lifetime. I know this is a horrid thought to the "Internet Generation" that we are part of that expects instant results (i.e. a web site I tried to access was down last night -- and for a second I actually got annoyed until I realized what a silly response I was having). But the real world is simply more complicated.

P.S. For what it is worth, I do 110% agree to help NGOs. And for those reading this that do not have free cash to give to any cause or NGO you believe in, don't forget that your free time is also appreciated. Consider volunteering your time to help. Even doing some "boring" paperwork for the NGO can help a small, cash limited NGO spend what little money they have more effectively on the issue they are committed to.

Liberalism is a mental ilness nothing more, the last thing is needed to promote libtard ideologies.

So liberalism is a mental illness. So apparrantly you are mentaly sound. Just one question : what the hell is 'libtard ideologies',never heard of it. Perhaps before you qualify millions of people as mentaly ill,you should examine your mental state! - Just a taught!

capttamas wrote:

.... is 'libtard ideologies',!

I think it's a made up word joining liberal and retard. 

Bit like TeaPartyTard.

keine wrote:

Liberalism is a mental ilness nothing more, the last thing is needed to promote libtard ideologies.

Liberalism, is a conjugate of the adjective "liberal" and the suffix "ism" to turn it into a noun. The root source of "liberal" comes from the Latin līberālis which means "of freedom, befitting the free". For example, the freedom of expression.

The fact you are able to write your post, freely without government interference, is due to applying liberal principles: in this case you are applying your freedom of speech. Or in other words, it is the application of liberal principles that allows you to have the freedom to not only consider this a "libtard" concept, but more importantly to express it publicly, freely and without government censor or repercussions.

If you really find liberalism to be "libtard", I might suggest to avoid being a hypocrite to your own belief system against freedom, you might consider self censor and not posting.

Or at least acknowledge that there is a difference between basic "liberalism", which you are in fact enjoying and using as a basic human right, and maybe some brand of "extreme ultra-liberalism" which you do not like and thus is a point and topic for honest debate.

NY Times article, looks like ordered piece by Washington. Does it seem to you that it is accurately reflects the situation in HU?
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/11/04/op … .html?_r=1


P.S. My own take on HU is superficial impressions that of a visitor. However I share them anyway:) I do not see Hungarian culture being much different from Central European, despite attempts by some groups to paint it as dramatically different and thus requiring its own special non-Western way of developing. In their law-obedience and punctuality Hungarians are much closer to Germans than to Turks or Ukranian Slavs across the border. Nationalism is a tool , it is an illusion of exceptionalism and it is a very useful tool for certain governments. I don't think this current phase will lead the whole country into dead-end. It will pass, rather quickly as HU is open to the rest of the Europe and would not be able to install any iron or goulash curtain around itself. Plus of course, the economy, HU is not Russia, it cannot sustain itself autonomously, it needs Europe and thus it will succumb to more Democratic forms of gov. sooner than later. I am certain that HU democracy will follow Finnish model of government rather than Greek or Slavic. In other words, I am not worried:)

MOHCTEP wrote:

NY Times article, looks like ordered piece by Washington. Does it seem to you that it is accurately reflects the situation in HU?
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/11/04/op … .html?_r=1

Yes, pretty much it does seem like that. 

I'm not sure people really support Orban to the depth he seems to enjoy.

I suspect for many they are worried about their public sector jobs.

But I'm an outsider so it's pure speculation.

MOHCTEP wrote:

NY Times article

Not an article. Clearly labeled what it is, an opinion piece.

I like the NY Times. Good full spectrum reporting.

They also ran this article showing Norway may be doing the same in the US as Hungary accuses it doing in Hungary:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/07/us/po … .html?_r=0

And antisemitism is currently growing all over Europe (and maybe more common in places like Germany than Hungary):

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/02/world … itism.html

NATO is not as equal as some think. Hungary is not the only problem here. Even recent comments make it less a "team" player, there are basic issues that need to be mentioned to be fair: For example, most (not just Hungary) of Eastern Europe has not been contributing a fair share of NATO costs for a long time:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/06/world … ?ref=world

And a nice one about the Stadium:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/04/busin … p&_r=0

Etc. etc. etc.

Overall, yes, there is a lot of fear of job loss here. In journalism and other sectors.  And I find what little contact I have had with many journalists here left me with the opinion they were not really interested in "investigative" news for many reasons. And that was true even when the socialist party was in power. (But I also personally know about some good Hungarian journalists, that do good journalism and investigative reporting -- so it is not non-existent). Basically, I see it this way: It is a small country. Everyone seems to know everyone else (if not actually related to each other). And when you live on an island, you tend to not want to make enemies (especially of those in power -- no matter who, or what party structure, is in power).

When the socialist (76 year old ex-communist (really)) won the mayor race in my village, the "new" mayor and the village council sent out a signed letter to the village saying "there would be no opposition" allowed to their government. Note, this was not a Fidez party person who wrote this. Overall, I think people outside Hungary are really unaware of what really happens in Hungarian politics. It is more complicated and twisted than they think (socialist calling themselves "liberals" are not necessarily the good guys).

But as an expat, while I think national Hungarian politics are interesting to read about, and at times a bit eye brow lifting, it should, IMHO, overall be left mostly to the Hungarians to work out.

I am personally too busy trying to work out US Political stupidities of the past few decades (national and international): Is it two or now three wars if we count the re-deployments to Iraq? Wasted billions of dollars on mostly nothing. Not to mention things like "stamped, approved, and paid by the US Government and CIA" dictators like Augusto Pinochet (i.e. Pinochet good. Orbán bad.  ).

P.S. Gasprombank can pay Hungary's costs from the cash found in the bank's pocket lint. I for one do not think that EU money will necessarily keep Hungary in the EU if Hungary's leadership is willing to sell out to others (which would be a jewel in someone else's crown to have an Anti-EU thorn in the middle of Europe).