When New Vac Times was launched, I had only vague ideas on what the opinion pieces are to be about. But I had the firm intention of never writing about Orban. That's a cottage industry nowadays, I despise the man and I'm loath to see that he is getting the attention he visibly craves.
But the conviction must have been shallow because a single podcast episode with two political scientists was enough to change my mind. Not because what they said about Orban was novel or interesting. Just the opposite. Their take on him is now common wisdom among liberal western intellectuals. It is also wrong. Plus, the New Vac Times has been created to be a safety valve to vent out stark opinions, so the columnist's friends and family won't get burdened with them.
So let's get it over with.
Viktor Orban is misunderstood, opined the podcast guests, misunderstanding their subject themselves. When people say this, what they mean is that there is more to Orban than meets the eye. My opinion is the exact opposite. OV is exactly what he looks like. People just don't look closely enough.
But I grant it that Orban is misunderstood. With some oversimplification, by two separate groups of people for two separate reasons. One group consists of ordinary liberal people. To them, Orban is a shamelessly corrupt, immoral, cynical wannabe dictator who supports Putin's fascist war against Ukraine because of cold, economical reasons (cheap Russian gas, the benefits of playing for the two sides, etc) and perhaps for personal benefit.
The other group is made up of liberal intellectuals and political scientists who see Orban as a kind of enfant terrible, a dark wunderkind of international politics. A gifted, amoral authoritarian, who was at least a decade ahead of his time and recognized that the era of liberal democracies might be a historical anomaly. That the future might belong to strongmen, and authoritarian rule might suit Hungary's interest better than clinging to the declining institutions and ideas of the West.
Both groups are wrong. The former because of the lack of imagination, the latter because of too much of that. Ordinary people are less off the mark, though.
What people on the street get wrong
Here is why I think the idea that Orban is simply playing a cynical game is wrong. Orban is not a shrewd, cold-hearted accountant who has carefully measured the pros and cons and come to the conclusion that it's in Hungary's best interest to be a Russian lackey (again). And he is not in it only for the money for himself, either. But because he is a genuine believer in the idea that democracy's era of supremacy is over, and he welcomes it. He never met a dictator he didn't like. Insiders described years ago how impressed he was by the way Putin treated his subordinates (that is, humiliating them). He said openly that he feels much more at home in post-soviet states than in Brussels. States run by ex-communist functionaries when not by ex-KGB men. Where torture and murder are still part of the political culture. He is also a megalomaniac narcissist obsessed with power. One can find interviews on the web from ten years ago where Orban is talking in cringeworthy English to Western journalists and every second word he utters is "I". Every third is "strength". The motto of the Hungarian Presidency of the EU in 2012 was "Strong Europe". And this was the way he spoke not to his base but to a Western audience he still tried to woo then.
Orban supports Putin not because it's in his long-term interest. But because he wants a world where the strongmen rule openly. Men he craves to belong to.
and what academics get wrong
Many intellectuals and political scientists see Orban as an exotic, intriguing specimen in their fields. He is a bad man, but a statesman-caliber leader with dark and grandiose ideas. He recognized the flaws of liberal democracy and offers an alternative in the form of Christian nationalism. But there is a much simpler explanation for his actions and his turn from a liberal politician to an authoritarian strongman. Orban is an incredibly corrupt politician who made his friends and family billionaires and enough of his supporters millionaires. As a reigning prime minister, he was caught on tape advising his wife's company on the smart strategies for winning government subsidies. Preempting the democratic ways of removing him from power is simply a way for him to stay out of prison. This is not a hyperbole. To Orban and his clique, a lost election and a politically independent Chief Prosecutor could mean years behind bars.
No one likes to face being a simple piece of thieving shit, so I'm sure Orban convinced himself that his authoritarian turn is necessary for the country, and showering taxpayer money on friends and allies is just the way things are done everywhere in the world.
So why do intellectuals ignore Occam's razor and project the image of an ideological adversary to a base criminal? I think because of two simple reasons. One is overdoing the basic requirement of scientific analysis. Avoid confirmation bias by trying to steelman your opponent's argument. But too much fairness turns into a self-congratulatory exercise. Too many people are patting themselves on the back for their generosity of giving the benefit of doubt to people who really and obviously don't deserve it.
The second reason has even more to do with vanity. If you are a political scientist or public intellectual whose vocation is to ponder abstract ideas like liberty, ethics, morals, value systems, etc, your profession defines the framework in which you think about real-world problems. You can't use your knowledge and tools to understand, let alone predict, decisions made based on a single person's greed, resentment, and insecurity. Honestly, you are useless at best and a distraction most of the time. So let's pretend there is more to Orban. Let's imagine there is some malicious but grand idea animating the man that is worth grappling with. Otherwise, no one will ask for your opinion, and the Viktor Orbans of the world are not only dangerous and depressing but boring.
what I get wrong
Here is my very brief take on Orban, beyond what was said above. I'm sure don't hit the bullseye either, but I'm close enough. Orban is an insecure man who has always had a chip on his shoulders. First, as a child of a lowbrow country-bumpkin family when he went to study in big-city Budapest. The second time as the leader of a small, not very significant country on the international stage. He is indeed a megalomaniac with other personality disorders in the medical sense. He feels that he is a statesman of historical caliber and Western leaders don't appreciate him. This resentment, the need to justify his venality and to escape its consequences, and historical contingencies are what made him what he is today. A not very interesting story.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment