Helping the Common Enemy

George Handlery

Duly Noted

The pressure of uncontrolled migration is more than a source of concern for the select that govern us. Since the previously docile masses are directly impaired, public attention is focused on the phenomenon and its consequences. Except for the world wars, no other issue has stirred up as much interest as does the inflow that is, as a growing number perceive it, muting into an invasion.

Populations that used to be easily led, now concentrate on the incursion of hostile and integration-resistant masses. Popular perception –feeling a threat- and the stance of the elites –all is fine- is contradictory. Its degree is significant. Assessments collide, and that results in a mutual loss of trust. Out of touch, and therefore failing to “compute” the self-evident danger, is a charge of the “barefooted” against their governors. Those retort by accusing plain people of under-education and for falling for “populists”.  A candidate for office has expressed this alienation when she tagged critics as “deplorable”, politically illiterate rednecks.

The gap between the clashing assessments of reality is wide-spread in advanced societies. It illustrates the process through which established parties are losing their traction. Meanwhile, movements thrive, that, by traditional wisdom, have no chance to prevail. A result of this realignment is that some perplexed “world leaders” gaze helplessly at their involuntary early retirement.

The “political class” reacts to the disobedience of the “born to be led” by attributing the deviance to a lack of culture, education, and upbringing. The media, celebs, pundits, and “education” echo the message. Although a portion of the “disqualified” continue to remain silent, those activated by the crisis that hits them, are agitated. They articulate their concern by accusing their leaders of being detached from reality, and limited in their vision due to the colored filters over their eyes.

While encountering defiance from outside its circles, the challenged elites are resist to descending from the heights of their claimed moral superiority. To defend their besieged citadels, distortions are fed to the under-informed by those that have the media to amplify their claims. The projected deformed reality does not improve by the fact that its exploiters often believe their pretentions.

Let this be illustrated by Colleen Bell of “The Bold and the Beautiful” fame. The Ambassador represents Obamian interests in Hungary. UN organs and “Brussels” second her disapproval which is shared by Europe’s ruling insiders. The complaint about unfairness claims that, in 1956, when Hungarians that fled Soviet re-conquest, they were welcomed in the West. (Similar charges go to the Czechs regarding their welcome in1968.) The Hungarians are asked why, having been generously received, they now refuse to take in the Moslems and Africans that knock on their door.

In case you suspect an inequity, you should consider this. The comparison equates what is dissimilar which deprives the judgment of its legitimacy. Having been a participant, the resort to the first person is justified.

When I came, I did not regard Americans as deviants, the women as whores. I did not wish to impose on my new country my version of the communism I had fled. Having asked for admittance, I knew that I am entering an order that deserves emulation. Thus, I wanted was to participate in that system, serve it, and to become a good American. Due to my background, I did not reject my new country’s ways, and so I wished to integrate to strengthen the land and the system I had chosen. Summary: I admired my host’s order which I recognized as providing the greatest happiness to the greatest number. Ergo, I meant to assert myself by becoming successful within it –and not by abolishing it. Thankful, I raised no demands and I wished to restart my life according to the generous terms made available to me.

Hungary happens to be a country which is committed to new, “post liberal”, politics. As such, Budapest has a leading role in protecting Europe from the results of wishful thinking and a liberal relativism that depicts capitulation as an act of virtue.

In part, but not exclusively, the role Played by Premier Orbán is emulated because of his successful resistance to a masked invasion. Summarized, the policy is; “refugees, yes, economic migrants, no.” Also, the indigenous have a right to determine “with whom they wish to share their country”. Thus, those given protection must accept the ways of those that they ask to harbor them. The way of life, the Judeo-Christian culture, advanced democracy, and national sovereignty –lost and recently regained, therefore valued-  are sacrosanct. These values cannot be “negotiated” or diluted to fit multicultural fantasies. By settling in a country, the entrant accepts its culture and institutions. Thereby integration is a duty of those that come as guests that remain free to leave if they reject what is offered to them.

The reader might have discovered that he considers these ideas to be self-evident and that he agrees with them. If so, he needs to hide in a dark corner. He has met criteria that makes him into a “xenophobic extremist”, and thus part of a deplorable “right-wing” Nazi fringe.

There is something highly dangerous about such curses. That is because there are on the right and –sorry to bring it up- also on the left, delusion ridden extremists that plead their demented case by resorting to violence. If the thunder is overused to damn irritating opinions, then, in time, the condemnation will lose its magic. Genuine extremists will benefit. A comparable “overdose” that seeks to de-legitimize, unfolds regarding “sexual abuse” and related matters. Ever more persons report abuse by Mr. Trump. As the crowd grows, one wonders how that predator found time for his business. Yes, this might decide the election, but it also brings an inflationary devaluation of claims of harassment that are based on fact.

Calling those that are critical of left-liberalism fascist extremists, does more than to dull the knife. At one point, those that hold maligned PC-skeptical views, will react. It might go like this: “I think that what is being condemned matches my observations and conclusions. I am an OK person; if what I think is called evil, then the accusation does not hold water. If my take of matters is labeled with words of contempt, then, after all, those supposedly evil things might not be as bad as I was told”.

By invoking destructive but unfitting labels as a weapon to crush critics, our political class is, due to the overuse, not crushing the “incorrect”. What it achieves is to deprive concepts of their meaning. That might ultimately legitimize, among those with shaky political knowledge, the ideologies and movements that are, unthinkingly and unfairly, summoned to justify the effort to “excommunicate”. The beneficiary is not our political culture, but the cause of the common undemocratic enemy.

Comments are closed.