An Egg Without a Shell, a Country Without Borders
European history is a history of invasions
The following is a guest post by Dr. Mária Schmidt, director general of the House of Terror Museum and the XXI Century Institute.
Hans Peter Schwarz, one of the most renowned representatives of German historiography and author of the authoritative and official biographies of many CDU personalities, has devoted his latest book to the mass migration threatening Europe. The retired scholar was born in 1934 and has accomplished everything – ranks, medals, influence – that a historian can achieve in Germany. I am emphasising this because his work, which has prompted my further examinations, is characterised by courage, forthrightness, and bluntness, qualities increasingly uncharacteristic of Germans. Unlike Schwarz, Germans seem today to please themselves with using the proven method of silencing opposing views but have not yet launched this kind of character assassination offensive against him. They have also not bothered with another giant of German historiography, the recently deceased Ernst Nolte – fallen victim to the “progressives,” whose names even then were not worth remembering. The title of Schwarz’s book is a provocation in itself, rather than using the mandatory term “refugee,” which the press and the public are expected to abide by, Schwarz consistently writes “Völkerwanderung,” or “migration of peoples,” using an expression that nobody in Europe has had the courage to utter in Europe – with the sole exception of Viktor Orbán. The book is entitled The new Völkerwanderung towards Europe. About the Loss of Political Control and of Moral Certainties. (Die neue Völkerwanderung nach Europa. Über den Verlust politischer Kontrolle und moraslischer Gewissheiten, Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 2017, München.)
Schwarz starts with pointing out that the European continent, which is inhabited by half a billion people, cannot afford to lose control over its borders and become hostage to a misconceived foreign policy. Of the many authors of this misconceived policy, he specifically mentions the various decision-makers of the European Union, the legal framework adopted by the Union, and the courts enforcing it, as well as the national leaders who are unable to gauge the weight or the consequences of their decisions. He points out the responsibility of Chancellor Angela Merkelwhose mistaken analysis and inexplicably amateurish behaviour is putting the already greatly challenged European Union to an extreme test. The European Union has been taken hostage by a utopian way of thinking, which has burdened the eastern half of the continent for half a century. It is an empire-like entity that has never been tested by anyone anywhere, and whose founding fathers sought to create a future based on the noblest principles shored up with goodwill. Its role and fate increasingly remind one of the defunct League of Nations or its successor, the UN, which has also excelled in selectively interpreting the values they are meant to represent and spread. To be more precise, what are those common European or Union values to which the advocates never stop referring? Democracy, checks and balances, peace, freedom, inviolable and ever more boundless human rights, the rule of law, supranationality, progress, tolerance, nonviolence, etc. Yes, all of this sounds reminiscent of the offer made to justify the new order set up after the two world wars, which was allegedly not a reflection of the balance of power at that given moment but rather a guarantee of a principled world at last. Instead of armed conflict, there should be peaceful dialogue, settlements initiated by the peace-loving peoples of the world; however, in reality the 20th century resulted in an interminable series of wars, as well as a Cold War for almost half a century. This may be one reason why the unconditional supporters of the European Union consider the peace-making mission of the Union as their supreme argument. Yet in actuality, if armed conflicts have been avoided since the 1951 agreement on the establishment of the Coal and Steel Community, it was thanks to the two superpowers of the bipolar world – the United States of America and the Soviet Union. Nonetheless, the world has since become unipolar and subsequently multipolar. Europe became a battlefield in the Balkans, Georgia, Ukraine, and Crimea, and a civil war is simmering in Macedonia. The European Union’s promise to replace power politics and national egoism with cooperation and joint decision-making was cast into doubt as early as the financial crash of 2008 and remains so with the migration crisis still unfolding.
Hooray, we’re on holiday
“The murder of a beautiful theory by a gang of brutal facts”
- Walter Lippman
Citizens live within the boundaries of nation states; hence, their democratic rights are linked to a given territory. In the first epoch of the life of the European Union until the second half of the 80’s, there was mutual rapprochement among Western European democracies politically, economically, and culturally speaking, but the borders between them remained intact. Border controls between France and West Germany were abolished in 1984 and one year later the Schengen agreement was signed – abolishing internal border controls, which were thereafter confined to screening criminals. Dismantling borders also meant giving up defence capabilities as border protection is a substantial element of national defence and sovereignty. Schengen quickly became popular among vacationers, businessmen, and naturally drug-dealing gangs, human traffickers, pimps, and international terrorists; warnings by law enforcement fell on deaf ears. For federalists, who were gaining ever-increasing influence in Europe, Schengen meant an irreversible, decisive step towards creating a supranational federal state. At the time, a simple declaration was sufficient for a member state to leave the Schengen system; now Schengen has become an integral part of the European system of covenants, and thus, it is practically impossible for nation states to terminate their membership. Meanwhile, the trans-border activities of international terrorist and criminal groups prompted European leaders to set up Frontex in 2004, a border protection agency whose mandate is confined to observation without extending to intervention. This is why after ten years it still only employs 318 people! In 2016, following the first wave of mass immigration to Europe, Frontex was assigned additional duties and the number of its employees reached a record high 1,500! (Wikipedia knows only about a 2020 target figure of 1,000!) Given the grand scope and the character of the challenge, it is obvious that Frontex serves as an authentic alibi organization. It reminds Hungarians of a scene from a folk tale, where a heroine “brought a present to the king without bringing one.”
Today, Schengen means that European borders are not properly secured and are easy to trespass. According to the directives of the European Commission, the European Parliament, and the European Council, the external member countries concerned must secure the external borders themselves. The pressures of migration became an especially tough challenge for the Balkan states and especially for Greece and Italy because of their long coastal borders. Since early 2017, over 45 thousand migrants have landed on Italian shores, a 44 per cent increase from the same period last year. This year, 1,222 people have lost their lives attempting to cross the Mediterranean. Over 200 thousand migrants are expected to make the journey from Libya to Italy by the end of the year. Their numbers amounted to 170 thousand in 2015 and 180 thousand last year.
MoamerKaddafi, Libya’s dictator from September 1, 1969 to August 20, 2011, and former Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi(Forza Italia) agreed that Libya would halt migrants en route to Europe. Following the export of Western democracy to the Maghreb, these states were destroyed and their dictators were overthrown, providing an opportunity for human traffickers and NGOs to transport several million illegal migrants to Europe. To this day, they still help migrants reach Italian shores by the thousands every day – some of them remain in Italy, while others continue on toAustriaandGermany.
Since January 2015, Greece, under left-winger Alexis Tsipras, has made great efforts in order to contain migration. While his conservative predecessor,Antonis Samaras built a fence to defend against the influx from Turkey, Tsipras hurled hundreds of thousands of migrants towards the Balkans, perhaps in an effort to blackmail Greece’s creditors, the Germans – who continue to appeal to European values and human rights.
The European Court of Human Rights – an Important Link in the Chain
"The immigration issue in Europe is a very rare historical eventwhere a region does not defend its borders but instead has opened its borders."
An intolerable situation has resulted from the position taken by some European decision-makers who have not only made the protection of borders more difficult but also have made it simply impossible by referring to the protection of human rights for new immigrants in order to prevent border closure. These are the same human rights, presented as European values, which were among the reasons why both French and Dutch citizens rejected the draft Constitution of the European Union in the 2004 referenda. However, that has not prevented EU bureaucrats from pretending as if there existed a mandatory, commonly accepted European Constitution stipulating these rights – similar to theinvisible constitutionthat was only known to the Hungarian Constitutional Court presided over byLászló Sólyom, who invoked it whenever he attempted to extend his competence to new areas. It is worthwhile at this pointto quote Jean-Claude Juncker, the powerful president of the European Commission, “Yes, the EU Constitution would lead to ‘transfers of sovereignty’” from individual nations to the EU, “but would I be intelligent to draw the attention of public opinion to this fact?” he asked. “Sometimes EU deal-making must be protected from public scrutiny,” he said, “when it becomes serious, you have to lie.”
The main proponent of migrants’ human rights is the Strasbourg Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which is the Federalist’s beloved organization – for whom tighter European integration means more human rights. In today’s strongly Americanized Europe, the decisions between right and wrong, good and evil are readily passed on to the judicial elite. Judges are presented as infallible – media and opinion makers caution everyone from criticizing their verdicts. Some even talk about the dawn of juristocracy. TheECHR has grown into one of the protagonists of the migration crisis and is playing an integral part in exacerbating the Union’s condition, which comes as a result of the Schengen system’s failure. The Court’s numerous, idiotic judgments against Hungary have become an instrument for escalating the migration crisis. According to Council Directive 2004/83/EC of April 29, 2004, the rights of immigrants supersede those of the individual countries and the right to protect their outer borders! It is thanks to this principle that Europe became exposed to mass migration. In 2011, the European Union made matters worse by adopting a series of policies making it easier for refugees to remain in Europe. Based on this verdict, the ECHR declared that migrants could not be sent back to Greece because “conditions there are unworthy of human beings.” In 2017, the ECHR condemned Hungary for refusing to grant asylum to two Bangladeshi migrants, and in the process, not providing interpreters in their mother tongue and handing them documents in writing – a significant violation of their human rights since they were illiterate. Such verdicts by the European Court of Human Rights will be enough to kill the last drops of respect in those who still harbour illusions about courts! Let’s have a look at the map to see where Bangladesh is exactly. No matter how you turn the map you will have a hard time arguing that Hungary is the nearest country obliged under the Geneva Convention to grant Bangladeshis asylum. Then what is this all about? The Soros-funded humanitarian organization, Hungarian Helsinki Committee filed the case Ilias & Ahmed v. Hungary because the two Bangladeshi citizens were held in a transit zone for 23 days before being returned to Serbia. In its March 14, 2017 decision, the court declared that the procedure adopted by the Hungarian authorities was in violation with paragraphs one and four of article five of the European Convention on Human Rights, which stipulate the right to freedom and security, as well as articles number three and thirteen because conditions in the transit zones are inhumane, a matter on which the plaintiffs could not speak. The court found that expelling them to Serbia was also inhumane, since they would not be guaranteed humane treatment in that country! In addition, the court also found that Hungary did not abide by the rule that each case must be judged individually and the safety of third-party countries must be taken into consideration. The court disregarded reports and further evidence submitted by the asylum-seekers, which contained information about what kind of countries could seriously be considered safe! The ECHR also found that Hungarian authorities laid a superfluous burden on the poor migrants by expecting them to prove that they would find themselves in danger if they were to be sent back home through a chain of successive expulsions. In other terms, Hungary was not allowed to ask the asylum-seekers whether they would actually find themselves in danger by being expelled to Serbia, and from there to Greece. We should have known, because as the court had already established several times, migrants in Greece find themselves in inhumane and humiliating conditions. We have thus come full circle. According to the ECHR, the transit zones are also trouble spots because the basic human rights of asylum-seekers are being violated there. (Never mind that according to the German court, airport transit zones in Germany are in full compliance with the rules.) In its first instance ruling, the ECHR ordered Hungary to pay €18,705 to each of the two Bangladeshis in compensation, in addition to paying for court expenses.
In a small bonus, the independent, non-political and very non-governmental organization, Hungarian Helsinki Committee, threatened to drag the Hungarian government into bankruptcy by filing a series of similar complaints.
This is what happens when judges who are not answerable or accountable to anyone become policymakers by reinterpreting their own competence and job description. They brand EU member countries as non-safe or condoners of inhumane treatment and thus claim that new immigrants have an inalienable right to the welfare and services Germans or Swedes are able and willing to offer. They find that several EU member states or countries waiting for accession are not offering living conditions on an appropriate level, although migrants supposedly facing life-threatening danger at home are automatically entitled to such conditions. Italy was also found in violation because 24 Eritreans ship passengers were turned back to Kaddafian Libya. The ECHR examined the case for a full two years before ordering Italy to pay €50,000 in compensation to each of the passengers on similar grounds to the 2017 Hungarian case. An amount that was more than sufficient to pay for their return passage to Europe. As these cases prove, human rights judges want to prevent countries from turning back migrants and are intent on assuring that even if human traffickers fail in their job, migrants will be supplied adequate fees at their disposal upon delivery. The ECHR has become the most important and most reliable ally of human traffickers! European citizens have to stand up against the ECHR, which has been overstepping its jurisdiction and acting as a political body. It is in fact intolerable to claim that the migrants flooding our continent should enjoy priority status over Hungarian, Greek, or Serbian citizens – who, according to the judges, live under inhumane conditions. All citizens who earn less than these human rights judges – whose salaries are exorbitantly high – should sue them, in hopes that they’ll be awarded the same pay the judges are getting tax free.
We are facing a vicious circle. Human traffickers are profiting by delivering migrants to the borders of Europe. From that point forward, European countries then have to pay for their room and board. Whenever there’s a bump in the road, non-governmental organizations deployed by Soros appear on the scene and help them proceed – like in the Italian waters where NGOs “give a helping hand to stranded vessels” before the coastguard arrives because somehow they always are the first ones on the spot. And of course, migrants are never taken back to Libyan ports. They always reach the Italian shores. (see MTI. 2017.04. 29. Embercsempészettel gyanúsítja a migránsmentő szervezeteket egy szicíliai ügyész. – Migrant saving organisations suspected of human trafficking by a Sicilian prosecutor.)
Whenever this process faces a hurdle, Soros-funded watchdogs arrive and sue noncomplying states for the necessary funds to continue the operation without hindrance. All in all, in one way or another, it is the European citizen’s that have to pay the migrants and human traffickers’ hefty bills – either by paying a fine or providing welfare subsidies. The organizers, the human traffickers, and the humanitarian souls make good money, whether their stakes are small or big, like Soros’s.
For the larger part of today’s European leaders, the alleged human rights of each individual illegal migrant take priority over the will of European citizens. It is Brussels, Berlin, and Strasbourg versus Budapest, BratislavaandWarsaw. That is what is tearing Europe apart – we are at a time when Europe is directed by a tax-evading drunkard who passes his time speaking gibberish, kissing whomever he comes across, and grinning like an idiot while pulling his guests’ ears or neckties.
Geneva, Geneva, you wonderful
“A nation that cannot control its borders isn’t really a nation.”
- Ronald Reagan
All Union member countries are signatories to the 1951 Refugee Convention and thus have committed themselves to granting temporary asylum to political refugees under the conditions specified in paragraph two of point sixteen. That asylum is provided in cases of emergency – when people have to leave their homelands because their lives are in danger on account of civil war or persecution (if belonging to given religious, ethnic, or social communities). The duty to grant asylum falls upon the first safe country, but only to the extent that the asylum seeker does not jeopardize its internal security. Just as in the case of the Schengen Agreement, the Geneva agreement can also be renounced without any justification required, given one-year notice. (For example, Turkey joined under the condition that it would only grant asylum to refugees from European countries.) Currently, however, certain European countries, including Germany, are interpreting refugee rights universally – encompassing economic migrants and their new-found entitlement to live wherever and however they choose.
International refugee regulations have obviously become obsolete, for they were born in a previous century and under very different conditions. Today, the Earth is inhabited by over 6 billion people – it is impossible to grant each of them asylum when it can only be refused after thorough evaluation as a result of individual proceedings. With intricate and elaborate juridical justifications, which would imply years of tedious trials and with the right to successive appeals, such regulations make it impossible to expel migrants – not to mention the apparent fact that decisions determining which countries are safe are ultimately left to the whim of human rights judges. If things are to remain as they are, then we are writing the death certificate of the European Union.
The Anatomy of a Mistaken Decision
"A whole industry has been built on “migrant caressing.”
A perhaps well-intentioned but certainly thoughtless and mistaken decision in the autumn of 2015 unleashed over one million new migrants into Germany. At that time, over 400 thousand migrants had already been denied asylum five years prior but had yet to be deported, according to German authorities.
Schengen, as we know, was a German idea. Enthusiasm for a unified Europe had become a compulsory exercise for the German elite. Similarly, the argument, “I want a European solution” had become an irresistible excuse for governing forces in Germany. Hiding behind European Union cover lays an established escape strategy for the German elite, which has been unable to get rid of its inferiority complex and fixation on compensation for its guilt. In a similar way, Germans daydream about the end of nation states and a federalized Europe, hoping thus to finally leave Hitler behind – they have obviously forgotten that a new German-led United Europe was Hitler’s darling project. In 2015, that distorted world outlook of the German elite was matched with the idolization of the Third World that had become a fixation of leftist journalists for decades and, as a result, has transformed into support for the migrants. Socialism, as we know, was born on German soil and its domestic and international variants are both deeply rooted in German public thought. “Immigration is, rather than a burden, a gain,” said Federal President Joachim Gauck, a former East German pastor in a January 2013 keynote – who at the same time forged the notion of“Willkommenskultur,”which two years later become official policy. Then in 2015, virtually the entire German elite, led by the chancellor, nearly fainted from the consciousness of their own goodness and graciousness. They were immensely fond of being on the right side of history at last – they were the goodhearted, the magnanimous, and helping those in need. They were proud and happy – not only goodhearted and generous but also rich enough to afford that luxury. They tricked themselves into believing that as soon as they could prove to be pro-Europeans to the extent that they viewed their nation as nothing more than just a burden and shame, then they could finally turn the corner and escape the Second World War. They were also confident that their protégés would be grateful or at least they would not remind them so frequently of Adolf. On the surface, Germans tend to be in fact infinitely sentimental, romantic, and dissimulate to disguise their arrogance and cynicism. They know no in-between – once turned and sent into one given direction, no matter what happens they will not stop before reaching “the bunker.” This remains true today. They were unable to correct their bad decision in time because once the directive was set to the “we will manage” (wir schaffen das) agenda, then no matter the consequences Germans will follow the order. Who are the new arrivals and where do they come from? What are their intentions? Are they economic migrants, or are they running for their lives? The answers to these questions didn’t matter. What mattered was that the Germans were supposed to be faultless and even better than anyone else.
The New German Wonder Weapon: the Quota
"Politicians are like bad horsemen who are so preoccupied with staying in the saddle that they can't bother about where they're going."
- Joseph A. Schumpeter
The decision-makers of the European Union are German leaders. The Union has become incapable of making decisions or reacting due to its reluctance and procrastination – that is the tactics of Merkeling. EU leadership has become completely Merkel-compatible.
From July 2012 until the end of the year, 300 thousand migrants landed in Europe through Greek and Italian waters; another 125 thousand arrived in the first half of 2014 through Italy alone. About 35 thousand migrants applied for refugee status in Italy, while the rest went on towards Austria, Germany, and Sweden. The pressures on Greece were of a similar magnitude. Thus, Europe could have and should have prepared for the year 2015. In fact, it had become obvious that the Union had lost control over its own borders!
Most political leaders nonetheless did not bat an eye. What’s more, whenViktor Orbánlaunched a poster campaign and a national consultation warning about an incoming tsunami of mass migration threatening Europe, he was berated. He was accused of inciting and alarming people without reason or clue. They said he was creating the image of an enemy that only existed in his head. He was poked fun at for weeks on end and ridiculed by omniscient insiders, the “experts,” “independent thinkers,” “European-minded,” and “the objective” – never mind that one month later, Frontex DirectorFabrice Leggeriwarned that there were about 500 thousand to one million migrants in Libya preparing to embark on the journey to Europe. When hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants rushed through Europe in militant and well-trained formations, European bureaucrats started coming up with new responses and quickly found their wonder weapon: the quota. They intended to relocate 160 thousand people among the various member states according to a certain mathematical formula. There were no strategies for protecting the borders or countering the activity of human traffickers. Instead, a dependable, professional solution was found – a quota system, which was beautiful on paper and irreproachable in bookkeeping terms. Never mind that it doesn’t work. Never mind that the idea itself was unrealistic. The migrants wanted to avail themselves of the welfare systems of Germany, Sweden, Holland, France, and Great Britain, enjoy the living standards, and relish the migrant-caressing treatment of those countries – to which, according to the ECHR, they are entitled! And although many migrants have darker skin than the average European, they are not simple-minded enough to content themselves with Hungarian unemployment subsidies plus mandatory public work. Therefore, they take the first opportunity to leave the Eastern Bloc and head to the West. However, despite the obvious failure of the first experimental quota, the Germans and European leaders continue to insist not only on the system but also want to further develop it into an automatic distribution mechanism. Maybe they think they once again have a “wonder weapon” at hand.
Accepting the quotas would compel Hungarians to live with foreigners who have been settled in our homeland by others against our will. That would violate our national sovereignty, ignore the voice of Hungary’s citizenry, and override Hungary’s exclusive right to decide who should receive asylum citizenship.
That’s just the cherry on top of the cake in terms of how the political elite and public opinion are masterfully manipulated by western European media. It is sufficient for certain sources and “civil society” to provide the emotional photo of a dead child in order to put decision-makers under strong enough pressure to abandon what little remains of their sobriety and survival instincts and join those forces that have a vested interest in the so-called “life-saving business.” This was the simple but effective method used to induce European decision-makers into making the right, submissive decision according to the ten-point action plan adopted by the European Council in April 2015. It was declared in fact that the most important task of the Union was to prevent people from drowning at sea, but the new priority did not take further measures to halt the death of mankind, rather it had the effect of sending more people into the Mediterranean! The fleets dispatched by the European Union into the Mediterranean have thus eased the job of human traffickers because now it is sufficient for traffickers to lead boats packed with migrants into the open sea because they will be promptly rescued by the Union fleet or even more frequently by “relief organisations,” who will then safely and comfortably transport migrants to European shores.
Let’s examine the situation clearly: the courts, some prominent politicians of western governments, and leaders of the European Union behaving like loose cannons, coupled with NGOs exerting pressure on legislators and cooperating with organized crime, are destabilizing Europe and undermining the order of the continent. Preaching humaneness and human rights, bathing in the sunlight of their supposed moral superiority, they are in fact promoting organized human and drug trafficking as well as the free flow of trained terrorist fighters into Europe! In January 2016, 77 percent of the 91,671 illegal migrants had no travel documents whatsoever! No one wants us to believe that this well-oiled human trafficking and smuggling network, which has been given a unique chance by the ‘humanitarian’ organizations, will make full use of this opportunity. Among the unidentified and unscreened migrants there are people trained for inflicting terror attacks – their luggage may be full of weapons, drugs, and who knows what else. It is inexplicable that migrants are exempt from baggage checks, not to mention extensive body searches, when it is mandatory every time documented citizens arrive at the airport. Even so, it was highly unnecessary for enthusiastic volunteers to showcase a “sample” gym bag filled with nothing but diapers, handkerchiefs, thermoses, and panties. (This “spontaneous” show seemed a bit fishy.) It is rare for political leadership to voluntarily incite chaos in its own country, but that’s precisely what the Germans did, not only domestically but also on the continent as a whole. September 13, 2015 will go down in history as the starting date of the collapse of Germany and the European Union in its wake, Schwarz notes.
Fake News Media
"The fake news media is also the enemy of European citizens.
The fake news media is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American people."
- Donald Trump, Twitter, 02/17/2017
The political elite led by Germany’s irresponsible Chancellor Angela Merkel, her dumb and rude Austrian colleague,Werner Faymann (2008-2016), and a few utterly distrustful European decision-makers have put themselves on a moral pedestal and are still unwilling to step down. As usual, anyone refusing to join them along their fatal path is criticized and dismissed as fascist. Similarly, anyone who reminds these politicians that they are bound by oaths to serve their nation and Europe, rather than the other 5.5 billion inhabitants of this globe or even Soros’s NGOs, is dismissed. Austrians and fawning western media have transported migrants from Hungary by train, bus, or taxi, to make their journey westward as comfortable and safe as possible. Those absurd reports that flooded the western world describing the supposed disregard of Hungarian authorities towards migrants, coupled with absurd slanders about Hungary, are an inhumane and cruel accusation towards us all. In mid-September 2015, Austrians came across the border in personal cars and thumbed their noses at Hungarians while smuggling people across the border, demonstrating that as Western citizens they were above the law and could afford anything. After all, they were the goodhearted ones who were on the side of the poor migrants against fascist, Nazi Hungarians!
Later, when the Hungarian government completed the first fence along the Hungarian-Serbian border, our nation was subjected to a coordinated, violent attack by the western political and media world. Orbán once again became the antagonist of progressive Europe. On September 16th, migrants were encouraged to break through the protected border at Röszke in a trained and coordinated fashion, leaving border guards no choice but to repel migrants with tear gas and water cannons, which of course was judged by pro-migrants as brutal and intolerable fascism. We’d better not forget that then and there we defended Hungarian statehood – our country, our birthplace – against organized attack.
The fake news-infested world is proving that the “independent” actors of the mainstream media are actually acting in unison, with the intention to deny the right of the sovereign Hungarian state to control its borders and defend its territory.
We will not forget that when we erected a fence in order to stop the flow of migrants, we were being judged with haughty arrogance by many Germans, Austrians, and other Westerners. Their lackey media, including the “authoritative” American press, forged photos, films, and stories to be used in slander campaigns against us – in reality these biased reports belonged sooner to fictional horror novels not on our news channels.
Therefore, whenever these antagonists continue to make bewildering comments about the Russians infiltrating campaigns and supplying fake news we just wave it all away. We have already been through the necessary training a long time ago. We were exposed to Soviet propaganda under communism, and since then we have taken several courses – including the one during the migration crisis – on how the world’s free press works. The few remaining faint illusions have since melted away due to the crazy frenzy of lies and slander in the autumn of 2015. Although we saw on live TV broadcasts that 85-90 percent of the migrant army rushing through our country was made up of strong, young men of military age, western newscasts and on-site reports would almost exclusively show women and children. So much for authenticity and credibility.
Austria would soon set up their “winged gates” and shut down our borders, just like the Germans did. In addition, the Germans were compelled to ask Turkey for help, which was morally, judicially and geopolitically in full conformity with the rules. As always.
As far as we’re concerned, we’ve learned to see a similar source of danger in German aggression, which was stiffened in moral superiority with its raised index finger. And still, arrogance flowing down from the moral pedestal, even if supported by legal arguments, has never made anyone attractive. Germany has been and has remained the most problematic country in Europe.
The autumn of 2015 also proved that Germany and the EU leadership that it commands are unfit for handling crises. German politicians only started coming to their senses in the wake of the New Year’s Eve scandal in Cologne and the astonishingly high number of sexual assaults, which could not be kept a secret despite their efforts. They secretly asked the Austrian government to close down the Balkan migration route – they were inclined to abide by this request due to increasing pressures from local public opinion. In February 2016, the ten countries affected by the Balkan route migration (all except Greece) met in Vienna to seal Europe’s border in Macedonia. They also pledged to treat the Macedonian border as the outer border of the European Union and to jointly defend it; thus, in March 2016, the Balkan route was closed. By this time, the Balkan states had aligned themselves with Budapest and expressed their displeasure with Westerners’ haughty impotence, taking border protection into their own hands, temporarily at first, but then with longer term measures. Let’s be clear – if the Balkan states hadn’t repulsed the waves of mass migration, the European Union would have crumbled by now.
The reason why destabilizing Macedonia has become so important for philanthropist George Soros, who has a stake in the migration business, is because it is a necessary step towards re-opening the Balkan route, which has been closed for a year now.
By now, the same political leaders in Germany and Austria who in September 2015 excoriated Orbán, from the moral height of their migrant-loving positions and imaginary European solution, have become spokesmen for the cause Orbán continues to represent. Now, they are moving his proposals through parliament – positions that were once angrily rejected but now have suddenly become apt to manage the dire situation.
Schengen was killed by the migrant crisis and can only be resurrected by strengthening Europe’s outer borders. Europe’s sense of security has evaporated, along with public trust in European political institutions and their leaders. On June 23, 2016, Britons suddenly turned their backs on the entire system and opted for Brexit, meanwhile we have made our southern border impenetrable.
No strategy in sight
"The Western man is defined by his place in the productive rather than in the self-reproductive process."
The saddest thing of all is that neither the European Union nor Germany has any strategic plans for what to do with the migrants already here and the ones intending to come. Over the past 18 months, the migrants have been described by the independent media as a mass of brain surgeons, artists, and nuclear physicists but have often turned out to be illiterate, with one third possessing only an elementary education and only ten percent holding some kind of degree.
The terror danger they represent is also common knowledge (Paris, November 23, 2015;Brussels, March 22, 2016; Nice, July 14, 2016;Cologne, December 31, 2015; Berlin, December 2016; etc.). Crime statistics have increased with the arrival of migrants and grave integration problems are appearing everywhere.
By now, it is even admitted by the German press – which was so famous for its migrant-caressing attitude – that the number of criminals arriving to Germany has superseded original expectations. Over one million unscreened migrants have moved into Germany from regions under jihadist control in Libya, Iraq, and Syria. There obviously exists a mindboggling degree of irresponsibility on the part of the elected government. Migrants disappeared from the sight of the authorities by the hundreds of thousands before asylum requests could be processed; but authorities are unable to deport even those who have been rejected. What were they expecting? At present, 5 million Muslims live in Germany, according to official numbers. Almost ten percent of the populations of Austria, Sweden, Spain, and Greece are Muslim – and we haven’t even explored their right to family reunion. This is why rather than coming forward with a meaningful strategy, the bureaucrats in the EU and Germany are talking about migrant quotas – devised by their chancellor as a get-out-of-jail free card to unburden herself from the trap she so irresponsibly jumped into. The quotas would mean a standing relocation mechanism, which would make it possible for those interested in the migrant business to continue importing aliens with the compulsory participation of all member states.
That would shortly result in continent-wide destabilization and situations of civil war, which would make the interventions of NGOs and relief organizations indispensable in order to establish peace. Was this possibly one of the topics at Soros and Junker’s recent chit-chat party? I would be surprised if they exchanged views only on the CEU, the situation of Hungarian NGOs, and Ukraine!
It is neither worthwhile nor necessary to deny that powerful financiers and politicians meet and discuss from time to time. These meetings, however, are never widely publicized, perhaps to hide monetary influence within our democracies. “I’m ready to be insulted as being insufficiently democratic… I am for [having] secret, dark debates,” Juncker once said.
The demonstrative, public scene of George Soros and Juncker exchanging kisses in late April 2017 carries a specific message. Then, in an unprecedented series of events, Soros was personally received by five EU commissioners. No politician on Earth, not even the president of China himself, could achieve that much! The public message is that Soros is graciously feeding the EU leaders from his hands in exchange for unhindered cooperation between his migrant-supporting, patronizing organizations and the powers of the European Union.
"Liberalism is the ideology of western suicide"
- James Burnham
Hungarians share this continent with about half a billion other European citizens. We have the sufficient strength and experience necessary to take back control from the hands of those who have produced this catastrophic situation. Hungary cannot afford to lose control over its borders or becoming hostage to a misconceived foreign policy. In 2015, we were bombarded with the first wave of great migration. (Ludger Kühnhardt: Die Flüchtlingsfrage als Weltordnungproblem. Massenzuwanderungen in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Abhandlungen zu Flüchtlingsfragen, Band, XVII. Wien. 1984.) We have yet to regain our balance and the new immigrants have no cause to try their luck elsewhere – we have to be ready for a new invasion.
Sources of my remarks are being referred to in the text, while the rest of the data and of the statements are drawn from the book under review.
This article was translated from the Hungarian-language original, "Tojás héj nélkül, ország határ nélkül," which was published on Látószög.