Double standards in Europe through Slovak case studies -- did you know these?

Remove all ads!

No I'm not (in fact, it has a good chance even Europe will follow Orbán's style, even if not in the media law).

The reason I look "worked up" in this thread:

If the hypocrisy and double standard is so normal and noone should be "worked up" on criticism, then how come the posters were so "worked up" on the media law in the other topics

(1) The media law isn't more topical than Slovakia either for THOSE who hadn't known about the media law until I posted the thread

(2)
- Hedvig's case is still topical: there are STILL CHARGES against a framed girl in a "democratic EU country". She still goes to sleep every day knowing she is under charges punishable up to 5 years of prison. And it's not North Korea. It's the EU.
- The language law is still topical: you still can get your ass fined to a lot of money in Slovakia for USING YOUR OWN MINORITY LANGUAGE.
- The Benes decrees are still in effect. Every Hungarian and German involved is still considered as a criminal per the collective guilt. What would you say if a jew law or (e.g. in USA) slavery law would still be in effect (even if without practical effect). IT IS ABOUT THE DIGNITY OF HUMAN BEING.

Maybe they are not topical for a bunch of asshats who didn't hear about media law and when they heard it they criticized it with full strength but then didn't say even say about Slovakia: "indeed, the listed things are a great shame". Oh, because Hu media law is "topical", it is the "news", it is the "interesting" now! Just like it the reality shows in TV! What's new is important and interesting! The fact that people's FUNDAMENTAL DIGNITY is violated somewhere else does not matter.... it can be taken with a grain of salt....

 

In what? He's hardly the first right-wing demagogue, and that's how he's portrayed, that Europe has seen in the last decade.

Umm... were they? I kinda doubt Ragusa or Tal lost half an hour of sleep over this. At most, they imo think it's a BS law that will harm Hungary.

 

Scan the papers and there'll be lots of stories about human rights abuses in Indonesia, nationalization of private companies in Venezuela, a multiple murder in Hungary, Italian mobsters bribing government officials in the Vatican, Canadian politicians taking kickbacks, and Australian politicians screwing kangaroos.

I read such articles with interest, and they are good to know and be informed about, but I don't get that worked up over them because I klnow that often there is more to the story than is writen and I also know that many news services and reporters have particular axes to grind.

Oh, I made up the last one, sorry Harbourboy!

 

If I started a thread telling everyone the sky was green (the media laws are just) and started fervently arguing with anyone who spoke otherwise, people would spend a bit of time pointing out how stupid my arguments are and that they sky is really blue. It does not mean they are getting worked up about it. Same applies here. The reason these "asshats" haven't been worked up over this silly Slovakia thread is because there's no fanatic Slovakian arguing that what was done was good and just and for the betterment of the grand nations of Slovakia.

Finally, a link for you, Baronius, who is surprised at the hypocrisy with which the nation-states act.

And LK - don't worry about the Australians. We all know it's true.

 

I am not sure about Ragusa...

Read my earlier answer to Tal about why I open these threads, and you will understand. It's not that it is for convincing you

Slovakia is in the European Union. The cases I presented are not about shi**y mobsters or usual bribing and politics:
- THE BENES DECREES GAVE A BASIS TO A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY (not I said it, someone much more important and famous), TAKING THE HOME OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE, AND THE LAWS ARE STILL IN EFFECT IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
- NO OTHER EUROPEAN UNION COUNTRY HAS A KNOWN CASE OF FRAMING AN INNOCENT GIRL BECAUSE OF HER ETHNICITY
- NO OTHER EUROPEAN UNION COUNTRY RECEIVED AN OFFICIAL LETTER FROM THE COMMITTEE OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF U.S. CONGRESS WORRYING FOR THE ABOVE THINGS

In other words, the Slovak cases are not usual ones in the European Union; they are unique ones in their antidemocratic level; otherwise, Tom Lantos wouldn't have sent a letter about it from the U.S. Congress Foreign Committee.

What I often see missing in certain people on the web (let it be anyone) is the LACK OF HUMAN EMPHATHY. All you are thinking about is your miserable, black & white notions about ideal laws, ideal "arguing" etc., e.g. taking framed poor girls in the European Union and genocide-legalizing laws in the European Union into one page with sh**tty world news such as mobsters, politicians etc.
One day, perhaps, you will learn what humanity and empathy means, not just your notions about law ideals and other theoretic things in your heads.
And you will learn to make a difference between news and news.

You know, if you just write "in what", I could have actually found the reaction reasonable. But trying to be "clever" again by automatically degrading him to "right-wing demagogue"... you are one of those who were brainwashed by the press and media (and while you now protest that you have your own thoughts -- not really, in this case, you just think so).

Orbán chose a different -- and promising -- path, also in economic considerations. If he gets the proper support for it, it has a good chance to be successful. This is what many places in Europe may follow, if it proves to be good.

 

This is a valid point, and I believe that part of the reason that Ragusa was so fervent on the media issue is because he had concerns about how the impact it could have within the EU on a broader scale (i.e. he had a personal interest).

It doesn't mean that Baronius can bring up any topic he wishes and expect to get the same level of participation. The topic of this thread just isn't making the same impact. Baronius is welcome to insist that people are being cowards by not responding (of course, he has no way of knowing why they aren't getting all hot and bothered by this topic). But my observation is that people just aren't that interested....

 

I don't think people are not responding...

And the cowardice was for else. It still stands. Many people prefer that their notions about "freedom of speech" are implemented and enforced always, and when some country apparently breaks those, then that country must be punished. Unless. UNLESS! Unless that country s**** the d*** of their country/government. Because then it suddenly becomes "politics" and "natural in politics" which is acceptable and totally fine for them.

Those who are not interested can just use their time for something more useful to them. Those who rather just read the topic passively are welcome to keep reading it.

 

I think that on some levels it is even simpler than bias.

It is totally natural that in Hungary the Slovak language law is a far bigger issue than anywhere else, after all the law prohibits speaking Hungarian. We condemn the law as crap on an abstract level, but form Hungarians it is personal. I can understand that.

For similarly simple reasons Jews will probably take a greater interest in the issue of anti-Semitism than non-Jews. If you want to read about the sh*thole Robert Mugabe turned Zimbabwe into, you will find news about that first of all in South African and British media, after all South Africa is the neighbour (and recipient of refugees) and the Bits take interest because Zimbabwe is a former colony, part of the commonwealth and because a good number of Brits have actually lived there. I could go on.

 

To be a bit more chill:
- We do not know about examples in the European Union where a citizen is framed by the police due to political instructions AND the case is obvious both locally and internationally (if there had been even 1% doubt about this case i.e. the Slovak state didn't frame her, Lantos from US wouldn't have criticized it so self-confidently)
So not that it's some "isolated case of a crime", it is a UNIQUE CASE in the *European Union* where police frames INNOCENT citizens due to POLITICAL instructions. There is just no known example to this in any EU state, because if such a thing got public, the government would immediately do its best to save its reputation and solve the case. But it seems Slovakia didn't need to worry about its reputation... as those who so much worry for HU democracy were totally silent about the Malina case...

The Benes decrees -- I don't know if you Ragusa feel that their still-in-law status is OK that in the spirit of the European Union (and which is much more important: taking into account the SENSITIVITY of those whose family suffered because of them).

 

Look, the Benes decrees are bad, but they are not going to go away when we keep screaming and wailing about it. Hungary screaming and wailing will not make the Slovak language law go away either. It may make you feel good, but it won't help your Hungarian brethren behind the border one bit. Odds are it will have an negative effect.

There are other ways, and they take time. The Czechs and Slovaks are not going to repeal them unless they see that they were wrong and unjust. To identify such historic errors and accept responsibility for them is not an easy thing to do, much more so as they consider themselves victims of the German occupation and nothing but, and see the Sudeten-Germans as co-culprits in their occupation. History isn't fair, and if you're aggravated enough, hindsight isn't 20/20 either.

That Czechoslovakian nationalism also ignores a couple centuries of shared German-Bohemian history is another matter - the German writer Kafka was a child of the Austro-Hungarian empire and a native or Prague. To me the episode amply illustrates the shortcomings and general inanity of traditional European romantic nationalism.

The Sudeten-Germans have been compensated by Germany, not generously, but still, so there's no rush (a bit cynical to add, and the Sudeten-Germans are dying out. The ones I know are in their mid seventies or early eighties). No reason to like the Benes decrees, but ample reason not to press the matter. Considering what Germany has done in Czechoslovakia during WW II we aren't exactly in a position to complain. There are more pressing contemporary matters to deal with.

 

Since the title of this topic is "Double standards in Europe" and some of you here said that the anti-Hungary happenings are just normal because the media law is so bad etc., here is some addition (source: guardian.co.uk):

Yeah, this topic is not about the media law, but it was inspired by it. Ragusa and some others hijacked the topic at the beginning (still talking about the HU media law), trying to prove that pointing to other countries does not make sense, and it is just an excuse regarding the media law etc. Well, now, European Council of Foreign Relations also "points" to other countries. And they mention double standards. Just like I did. And you tried to discredit me. Will you try to discredit ECFR as well?

 

Taluntain, please, try to grow up a bit:

The whole guardian.co.uk article can be relevant in the strictly media law related topics, indeed. The present topic is about double standards, not the mainstream discussion of the media law.

The part I cut out is VALID IN ITSELF as well. It mentions that a double standard is applied against Hungary.

I didn't quote it to defend the media law here (the media law is defended in the other thread instead). It was about the double standard.

Your ridiculous post would make sense IF quoting the full article ACTUALLY CHANGED THE MEANING of the part I cut. But it doesn't. It states there is a strong whiff of double standard against Hungary. How does quoting the full article change on this, i.e. that there is a double standard against Hungary, eh, Tal?

It seems you were also a bit misled (brainwashed?) by the international or -- based on your posts -- the Slovenian press. Because you really seem to think he is some sort of dictator and the democracy is in danger in Hungary. Well, you will never see this "see you in Orbán's court" type of happening in Hungary.

For example, one of the biggest absurdities of the "protests" (and that is how these protesters discredited themselves) were the empty front pages, and the lots of anti-government (occassionally very rude -- no, not just harsh, instead very very aggressive) texts and articles in the Hungarian press (well, not in the whole press, but that doesn't matter here regarding my point). And on top of it all, the texts that "PRESS FREEDOM HAS COME TO AN END IN HUNGARY". And what is the absurdity here? Well, if press freedom indeed ended and there is CENSORSHIP, how the hell is it possible TO PUBLISH the empty front pages, the aggressive & rude anti-government articles, and the text "press freedom has ended"? If it indeed ended, they would prohibit and censor these materials, wouldn't they?

Finally:

This miserable talk and excuse, "we attack the government, not the people" etc., also occured in the European Parliament. I don't know where this ill, sick approach comes from (left-liberals maybe?), but IF YOU RUDELY ATTACK A PERSON ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE and won by 2/3 majority, that is an INSULT TO THE PEOPLE AS WELL. Don't bother disproving or twisting it; when a group of people -- e.g. a tribe, for the sake of an ancient example -- chooses/elects its leader, THEY CHOOSE HIM FOR A REASON. To represent them. Insulting their leader IS an insult to the whole group. This is an ancient law and no matter how certain people try to twist it, it is one of the most fundamental unwritten laws.

Orbán won in clear, democratic elections. Even the Socialists didn't question the legitimacy of the 2010 election. This means that everyone agreed that a very significant part of people voted for his party and himself. Orbán clearly presented his programme before the elections. Those millions of people knew what they vote for. And they chose. Calling Orbán a dictator who makes dictatorship is an insult to the will of those who elected him.

 

Non sequitor.

No it's not.

Do I want to get involved in this?... nah.

 

I think you two are both quite off there. Misquoting articles? How terrible. Here's a more accurate picture of what the guardian was trying to say:

It's clear that's what the article is about. Stop trying to misinterpret what the good Simon Tisdall was trying to portray.

 

First, it's non sequitur.

Second. People are preparing to burn a witch [Hungarian media law]. What are the charges? A man shouts: "She transformed me into a lizard!!!" The only problem was that this was shouted by a man, not a lizard. How come? "Oh, the spell expired in the meantime". Yeah. It expired. So does the unjustified hysteria & propaganda regarding the media law. Because its poor basics slowly collapse and nicely dissolve & disappear in the soil. (If someone knows a more accurate or complete form of the witch story, please share.)

 

It's "Turned me into a newt"

 

I didn't know my ex-wife was in Hungary. Well, better you than us. Good luck and watch your back.

 

I will. A suggestion for you in USA: kinder surprise eggs are illegal and guns without permission are usually not. Can you exchange the two regulations please?

Thanks for the correction, Octara! I learnt a new English word today: newt. And found the original story.

 

"Arguments from analogy are notoriously weak, because before one can make the argument work, one has to establish that the two cases are truly analogous."
- Searle

They aren't.

Thank you for correcting my typo. Do you perhaps need help with constructing coherent sentences and sound arguments?