Hungarian Politics

[The Brain]

TriAnon conspiracy nuts appear to be doing well.

[Tamas]

[The Brain]

AI is good now. Took me a few minutes to realize it's fake.

[Tamas]

Couple of "fun" things: a few days ago the Russians hit the one Ukrainian town with a significant Hungarian population with a missile strike of an American factory. This was news in Hungary of course.

The so-called President of Hungary posted a message on Facebook saying well wishes to those injured in the Russian missile strike.

Two hours later the word "Russian" was edited out of the post. Which made the whole thing a scandal. It must have found disapproval in Fidesz circles as well because by the evening Orban called it a Russian strike as well, and he only gets involved in such climbdowns f serious damage control is needed.

With this President (I won't even write his name, he is completely inconsequential) continuing to be an abject failure for Fidesz even though his only job would be to be a quiet sock puppet, rumours have resurfaced that there are plans being drawn up to have Orban take his place.

I think it's a gamble he might actually try. Change the constitution to turn from a prime ministerial setup to something like France's, Orban becomes president for 5 years, so even if Peter Magyar wins the election and becomes prime minister, Orban can block everything and also keep the country as a Russian puppet.

[Tamas]

Seemed for a while like Fidesz was slowly wrestling back the initiative, but some newspaper interview somewhere re-ignited another pedophile scandal where a guy very clearly defended by the system for a decade was pimping out boys in the juvenile prison he was running.

There are only rumours, no evidence, of a few very high-ranked Fidesz officials being in his clientele, including the very repulsive Deputy Prime Minister. I don't know how quickly this would have fizzled out if the Deputy PM just kept his mouth shut but he talked about it in Parliament (about how he never "partake in sinful affairs" as if rape of kids is some sort of relationship) and his whole body language just screamed "guilty" - maybe he is innocent and just nervous about getting lynched by an angry mob but one thing is sure: he gave a lot of validity to suspicions with that speech.

Another interesting tidbit, the government seems to be blaming MI6 for starting this rumour. Singling out the Brits is a brand new thing and it makes me wonder if it is a sign of some Russian agency taking charge of their campaign.

[Josquius]

What is it with the far right and paedophilia...

[Tamas]

What is it with the far right and paedophilia...

In a recent political podcast a journalist had a good point: a system like Orban's (and Trump's etc) is based on loyalty to the leader and the fact that if you are "in" then you have protection from the law. The latter is bound to draw in paedophiles and other similar trash.

[frunk]

With Trump they've actively been courting those that are in trouble with the law for I think two main reasons.  It further erodes the rule of law and loyalty is fine but being owed a favor and having blackmail on someone is great insurance.

[Sheilbh]

I don't think there's any evidence of abuse or allegation of it. But I'd just note that Lord Mandelson stepped down literally this month over his relationship with Epstein. Obviously there are also other politicians form the centre left in that birthday book.

In this country following Jimmy Savile, there were many allegations of historic child sexual abuse at the hands of politicians and military figures, which were promoted by Labour Deputy Leader Tom Watson, against a lot of figures. The vast majority of those claims were discredited if not outright disproved and the source for the allegations subsequently convicted - it is worth noting that the overwhelming majority of his accusations were against politicians who were eiter Jewish or rumoured to be gay (two minority communities who have often been at the centre of allegations about crimes against children in our history - so just a thing to always be mindful of). However the one accusation that stood up was Sir Cyril Smith the larger than life (in every sense) leading Liberal MP for Rochdale.

So I'd be reluctant to make a direct link between paedophilia and any specific political tendency. But I think the perception of its presence in elite/establishment circles is incredibly destabilising - perhaps impossible to recover from (thinking of the Catholic Church in Ireland, say) - and, I think, a gift for anti-system parties.

In a recent political podcast a journalist had a good point: a system like Orban's (and Trump's etc) is based on loyalty to the leader and the fact that if you are "in" then you have protection from the law. The latter is bound to draw in paedophiles and other similar trash.

Not necessarily around paedohpilia but I think another important factor is compromising material. Roy Cohn did tape everything and came up in the McCarthy hearings. I think there have been studies that engaging Roy Cohn as your lawyer was likely to significantly reduce any sentence - it is suggested because in at least some cases he had stuff on judges. He is, of course, Trump's mentor.

I don't think we need Cyrillic for kompromat - it's been part of our politics (and establishment life) for a long time.

[Jacob]

What is it with the far right and paedophilia...

My hypothesis is that pedophilia coincides with unchecked authority. Where there are wielders of power who cannot be be held to account,  it will happen.

We will see scandals about it where the unchecked authority is either weakening or not fully firm yet (assuming it's a topic that its socially acceptable to discuss at all).

I'm fairly certain that left wing organizations - and apolitical ones for that matter - will have that kind of abuse if there are no safeguards.

... it's just that right now the reactionary right is going all in on power without unaccountability.

Scouting organizations, church groups, newly forming authoritarian political groupings fit that

[Syt]

Yeah, I think it's more an authoritarian than a right/left thing.

[Josquius]

I do like the theory Tamas mentioned, that people who know they're into illegal stuff would be attracted to a system that lets them do what they want in exchange for loyalty.
That people with unchecked power would naturally go that way...I'm not sure. If I were to become Supreme Chancellor my tastes wouldn't suddenly shift so I'm into kids.  But then to get into that position wouldn't I need a completely different personality and might not this personality also be one that leads to beliefs quite different to my own?
Also to consider there's the two types of paedo; those for whom its their genuine orientation and those who do it purely for the power kick.

I'll note its not just with those in power that the far right taste for paedophilia tends to be seen. It comes out quite a lot about local level brown shirts in democratic countries. You really don't see this about their equivalents on the far left.
That there's no link to politics for those with a mainstream affiliation I'd believe. But there definitely does seem to be a noteworthy issue on the far right.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah, I think it's more an authoritarian than a right/left thing.

Maybe it's part but I think there's an awful lot of opportunism/access to victims that drives it. I'm not sure it's necssarily power or authoritarian - I think predators go where they will have access to victims and I think they then play into whatever the prevailing culture of that environment is for sympathy/defence. Sometimes that will be authority, sometimes playing down the victim or to institutional loyalty, or even to sympathy in some circumstances. I think they're basically predators who adapt to their environment. If you're rich and powerful or in a position of authority it is easier to access victims and (as with every other crime) get away with things.

But, I understand the biggest organised sexual abuse uncovered in this country is the grooming gangs (the scale of victims is more, for example, than reports into sexual abuse by clergy). That's taxi drivers, fast food workers, market stall holders (although aware I'm being slightly conspiratorial I think there may be more going on with some of that). But there's availability of vulnerable girls, often in care or with very difficult home situations, out at night. The biggest defence wasn't authority (it's taxi drivers, market stallholders etc) but the denigration/perceived lack of worth in the victims. Plus taking advantage of well-meaning desires in the police, councils and social work systems to not be perceived as racist/fears for community relations.

Similarly, for example in the UK and elsewhere in the 1970s and early 80s there was one hell of a fight on the radical left and within gay liberation and queer liberation movements to draw a line between those movements and pro-paedophile groups. They would typically frame it as the "liberation" of a child's sexuality - rather than being about them. And there was a relative amount of sympathy that this was, perhaps, the next liberation fight. In the UK the leading civil liberties group (our equivalent of the ACLU) took up their cause and you had, until the 80s, really admirable gay rights campaigners like Peter Tatchell willing to make common cause. I don't think there was necessary power there but there was opportunity and for want of a better word maybe "useful idiots" willing to support/defend that behaviour.

But the other side of this that also needs to borne in mind is that these were often quite chaotic communities - lots of squats, lots of young people who had possibly been kicked out or had run away from unwelcoming homes, lots of rent boys and other sex workers. At the time the UK had an unequal age of consent and like the civil rights groups in the US, gay rights groups were looking for the perfect gay teen couple to use in a test case (as it happened they actually split up during the case but pretended to stay together for the good of the cause). There was a moral line that absolutely needed to be drawn and pro-paedophiles needed to be kicked out of the movement, but at the same time it was a chaotic world. I think it was precisely that it was a slightly blurred lines chaotic world (especially in the 70s and 80s when lots of young people ran away to the big city to be free), with a radical politics that made the pro-paedophile lot glom onto.

The original British Queer as Folk (made in 1999) would not get made now because it slightly walked this line in a way that I think we would find unacceptable now (but was a revelation to a 13 year old me ). The age of consent for gay males at the time was 18. The first episode was basically about a 15 year old (played by Charlie Hunnam) running away from being bullied at school and having a shit time and going out in the Manchester gay scene and sort of pursuing sort of getting picked up 30-year-old Stuart (played by Aiden Gillen) with a very explicit sex scene. Stuart never asks how old Nathan is and Nathan doesn't volunteer it and it becomes a later plot point. But the entire tone was fun, celebratory and it being about liberation, not concerned or "play for the day" style exploration of a young lad exploited by lecherous older queers (throughout the series there's a question of who is "exploiting" who). I just don't think that could get made today.

[Josquius]

There was that recent show about the trans person, I didn't watch the whole thing but caught snippets of it flicking through channels, a key part of that seemed to be them as a rent boy having sex in school uniform. So not sure queer as folk wouldn't be made today.

Interesting on paedo liberation. Hadn't heard that stuff before.
Though I must say I do think we need that to an extent - not on allowing sex with kids but on the front of it being natural for some people to have those desires so please just chat to your GP about getting help to make sure you do nothing bad.
It's going quite back to the queer as folk era with the paedogeddon stuff. Other concerns have taken over it. But nothing has improved on that front in itself.

[Valmy]

Interesting on paedo liberation. Hadn't heard that stuff before.

It was a thing back in the 20th century. All the Freud stuff about sexual repression making us all crazy, so kids needed to be sexually liberated for their mental health. It got...pretty creepy.