For the first time in its history, yesterday the European Parliament urged the EU to act against a member state, Hungary, with some arguments that surprise because of its strong ideological load.
The successors of the Dutch communists who supported the Soviet invasion of Hungary
After the investigation I have done for this post, I ask myself: who leads the European Parliament? There are some striking data that I have not seen reflected in any media. This EU offensive against is motivated by a report (can be read here) of the Dutch MEP Judith Sargentini. This MEP belongs to the Dutch leftist and environmentalist party GroenLinks, which emerged in 1989 from the union of the Communist Party of the Netherlands (CPN) with other leftist parties. The fact is that in November 1956 the CPN supported the Soviet invasion of Hungary, which led to strong protests at the party headquarters in the Felix Meritis building on the Keizersgracht in Amsterdam, with protesters calling the Communists “murderers”. Six decades later, the GroenLinks, successors of the CPN, remain committed to imposing their ideology in Hungary.
The curious concept of democracy of the allies of Sargentini
In the European Parliament, the GroenLinks are part of the Greens-European Free Alliance (EFA). In the Eurocámara one of its Spanish partners is the Galician Nationalist Bloc (BNG), a far-left separatist formation that supports the communist dictatorship of Cuba. Among the Spanish parliamentary partners of the GroenLinks in that alliance are also Iniciativa per Catalunya Verds (ICV) and Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya (ERC), far-left parties that in 2015 voted against a European Parliament condemnation of the persecution of the opposition in Venezuela. In 2014, Sargentini described as “dangerous” that USAID worked to “change the regime in Cuba,” obviating that this regime is a communist dictatorship that violates human rights. Are these the ones who give democracy lessons to Hungary?
Sargentini is one of the “reliable allies” of the Soros foundation
In this new offensive against Hungary, the heirs of Dutch communism have had a powerful ally: the millionaire George Soros, known promoter of leftist campaigns around the world, especially those related to the promotion of mass immigration and open borders, and also with the weakening of national sovereignty in favor of the growing power of supranational organizations such as the EU and the UN (according to some sources, he contributed to the recent separatist process in Catalonia). There is a document entitled Reliable allies in the European Parliament (2014 – 2019), published by the Open Society European Policy Institute, an organization founded by George Soros. As it happens, Judith Sargentini, the author of that report against Hungary, appears on page 77. Moreover: according to the Hungarian newspaper About Hungary, three of the five members in charge of preparing the Sargentini report are mentioned as “Reliable allies” for the foundation of Soros.
Sargentini prepared his report with various entities linked to Soros
The traces of Soros in this EU offensive against Hungary do not end there. The list of organizations that have contributed to this Sargentini report includes the following:
I repeat my question: who is leading the European Parliament?
Constitutional guarantees: is there a scale for Hungary and another for others?
As for the content of the Sargentini report, there are things that are very striking. For example, the complaint that the unconstitutionality procedure in Hungary “does not provide for a time limit for the exercise of constitutional review and does not have a suspensive effect on challenged legislation”. The same happens in Spain, where such a remedy does not suspend the challenged law; as for the deadlines, we have been waiting eight years for the Constitutional Court to rule on a law, without so far there is the slightest indication of response. Maybe the EU has not cared because the law appealed is what makes abortion a right. On the other hand, some member countries do not even have a Constitutional Court: this is the case in France and the Netherlands. In France, this function is exercised by a Constitutional Council composed of politicians, in turn appointed by the President of the Republic, the President of the National Assembly and the President of the Senate. In the Netherlands it is Parliament itself that reviews the constitutionality of the laws that Parliament has voted on. Criticism of the EU? Not even one.
Are Hungarian private TVs the only partisans in Europe?
The report also complains about the bias of Hungarian public television, and regrets even that private channels make a “partisan” coverage of the elections and that the last election campaign was “highly polarized and lacking critical analysis.” Reading these criticisms I thought that it was a joke: have they seen the public televisions of other countries in Europe? Have they seen other private channels? In Spain we have cases of obscene manipulation in one area and in the other, but the EU is silent. Maybe because the Spanish governments, unlike the Hungarian government, have been obedient to the mandates of progressivism?
Judicial independence: the brazen double yardstick of the EU
The criticisms that the Sargentini report makes to judicial independence in Hungary are applicable to many other countries. I already referred to it here. In Luxembourg the judges are appointed by the Grand Duke, who is the Head of State. It is the country of Juncker, the president of the EU, but I have not seen anyone asking him to account for it. In Germany and Spain the members of their Constitutional Courts are appointed by the Legislative Power. In the same way, in Spain all the members of the General Council of the Judicial Power are elected by the Congress and the Senate, that is, by the political power. Any criticism from the EU in this regard? Not even one.
The EU calls for more freedom of speech in Hungary and attacks Internet freedom on the same day
Very striking is the EU’s criticism of freedom of speech in Hungary. Although I am Spanish, I have a healthy habit of informing myself about what is happening in that country through its national media, and there are different tendencies. I have never seen a media censored for their opinions. In fact, it is the EU in that report that criticizes the Hungarian private media as being “partisan”: they are private and they have the right to be as partisan as they want (and people have the right not to follow them, if that is not to their liking). The paradox is that on the same day that it approved that report against Hungary, the European Parliament approved a new directive to erase even more freedom on the Internet, putting obstacles to the sharing of news on social media. With what moral authority does Hungary criticize the same EU that is adopting measures of a dictatorship? Recall, in addition, that in other countries of the Union, such as Spain, laws are being passed that limit freedom of speech and even impose censorship against those who do not agree with the gender ideology.
That Hungary defends the family makes it less democratic?
In fact, that same censorship is observed in the report of the Dutch MEP, when she criticizes that in Hungary there are textbooks that “contain gender stereotypes, depicting women as primarily mothers and wives.” What needs to be done to please the EU, to hide the mothers and to censor any reference to motherhood? Another point of the report, again loaded with the ideological prejudices of the Dutch MEP, affirms that the definition of family that makes the Hungarian Constitution of 2011 is based on “conservative beliefs”.
And what does that Constitution say? This is what his Article L states: “Hungary shall protect the institution of marriage as the union of a man and a woman established by voluntary decision, and the family as the basis of the nation’s survival.” There must be many conservatives in the world, even among the left, since this is the family as understood by the vast majority of humanity. Why Hungary should censor it, to give satisfaction to those who defend a gender ideology that already in its origins abhorred the family? Read Shulamith Firestone, one of the founders of that ideology, talking about “the tyranny of the biological family” and proposing: “Unless the revolution takes root the basic social organization – the biological family, the link through which the psychology of power can always subsist clandestinely – the parasitic germ of exploitation will never be annihilated.” Are these Marxist nonsense which according to the EU should appear in the Hungarian Constitution?
The EU seems intent on becoming a new USSR for Hungary
I could extend more, but these and other points have been treated by Francisco José Contreras, Professor of Philosophy of Law at the University of Seville, in a brilliant article published today in Actuall, in which he duly dismantles the criticisms made by the EU to Hungary. I recommend your reading. In it Contreras points out the following: “Orban’s agenda enters into a resounding collision with the neo-Marxist project of gender ideology, LGBT claims, radical feminism … The sparks of that shock shine throughout the Sargentini Report.” Both that and the migration issue are the keys to this EU offensive against Hungary. With this offensive the EU is not trying to improve the democratic quality of Hungary. That is a weak excuse that remains in evidence reading the Sargentini report. Rather, it seems that the EU wants to exercise over Hungary the same ideological domination exercised by the USSR in that country until 1989. It must be remembered that last April the Hungarians already expressed in the polls, by an overwhelming majority, their rejection of that Europe increasingly Soviet and less democratic. All my support to Hungary from Spain before this offensive against its national sovereignty.