Viktor Orbán pontificates on 1944

As controversy continues to swirl around the government’s decision to erect a monument commemorating the March 19, 1944 “occupation” of Hungary by the Third Reich,Viktor Orbán decided to explain the symbolism of the monument. If Orbán thought that this lengthy explanation would help his cause, he was mistaken. In fact, he got himself into even deeper water than before.

Thanks to the diligence of the young pro-Fidesz crew of mandiner.hu, the letter is already available in English. By and large, I will use their translation except for a few times when I think the translator misinterpreted the meaning of the original or where there are grammatical errors.

The letter is addressed to “Frau Professor Katalin Dávid.” It seems that Katalin Dávid, a ninety-two-year-old highly respected art historian, wrote something about the controversial monument which she entitled “Memorandum.” Her piece is not available online, although it was either published somewhere or circulated among friends. It seems that she was not unfriendly to the idea of erecting such a monument because Orbán profusely thanks Dávid for her “kind gesture” and notes that her style is superior to the writing of those intellectuals who “use the public tone of general contempt.” Her “Memorandum,” he writes, “is the first to avoid the bar counter of cheap political pushing and shoving that is practically unavoidable these days.” In brief, all those who oppose the erection of the monument behave like crude, presumably soused guys who shout at or even shove each other in a bar.

After expressing his opinion of Hungarian intellectuals, he goes on to share his own ideas about the history of the period. Well, the “cheap” Hungarian intellectuals immediately shot back. József Debreczeni, who is intimately familiar with Viktor Orbán’s thinking, described this pompous letter as both unbecoming and dangerous for the prime minister of a country. Debreczeni, who has a soft spot for József Antall, whom he rarely criticizes, brought up a similar mistake Antall committed when he lectured about what he personally thought of the role of Miklós Horthy. At least Antall was a historian before he became a politician.

The very first problem is that, as usual, Viktor Orbán doesn’t tell the truth about the government’s original concept for the monument and what it was supposed to stand for. He now says that the idea was always to create “a memorial to hundreds of thousands of innocent victims.” Thus, we would have a truly odd situation here: those Jewish organizations who object to the erection of the monument don’t want to see a memorial to the victims of the Holocaust. Surely, that would be madness. Indeed, it would be if it were true.

But let’s go back to what the government initially wanted the monument to express. The name of the monument was simply: “German occupation of Hungary, March 19, 1944.” The description of the monument emphasized that “Archangel Gabriel [is] the man of God, symbol of Hungary.” There is not one word about victims. Moreover, the government required that “the monument must faithfully reflect the loss of Hungary’s dignity and independence and in its monumentality it must express the tragedy of the occupation that overtook the whole nation.”

But now, for Orbán, the Archangel Gabriel highlights something else as well: the anti-Christian nature of the German regime in 1944. “The invading German empire of the time swept away the two-thousand-year-old European Christian virtues and the Christian expectations and teachings with regard to politics and power, and so the victims, whether of Mosaic faith, Christian or without faith, became the victims of a dictatorship that embodied an anti-Christian school of thought. To successfully grasp this very complicated historical and spiritual structure within a sculptural composition commemorating the victims is a true creative feat.” Indeed, it would be a feat if it had any truth to it. Surely, Viktor Orbán must be confused if, while writing about the Shoa, he focuses on the anti-Christian nature of  “the German empire of the time.” As if the mass annihilation of Jewish people had much to do with the anti-Christian ideology of the Nazi regime. After all, the victims were not sent to the gas chambers because of their religion but because of their genes. (By the way, in the above sentence I changed “orthodox” to “Mosaic faith” because in this context “óhitű” refers to what Hungarians used to call “izraelita vallású.” I want to point out Orbán’s avoidance of the words “Jew/Jewish.”.)

Dialogue Viktor Orbán style Fruzsina Magyar, wife of Imre Mécs, is taken away from Szabadság tér today

Dialogue Viktor Orbán style /  Fruzsina Magyar, wife of Imre Mécs, is taken away from Szabadság tér 

From Archangel Gabriel we can now move on to the symbolism of the imperial eagle. Viktor Orbán also has a definite opinion on that subject. The question for him is whether the invaders were Nazis or Germans, and in his view the invaders were Germans. He bases this opinion “primarily … on constitutional law.” They were Germans “who at the time happened to be living their lives in a country organized according to the Nazi state structure. Differentiating between the two and assessing the implications is the business of the German people and less so that of Hungarian commentators who otherwise acknowledge German national virtues and are usually sympathetic towards the failings of others.” This is how Orbán explains why they don’t use the Nazi variation of the German imperial eagle. Thus, the message is that for the sins of Nazi Germany all living Germans are still responsible. They are the ones who must take care of that problem, says the prime minister of a country whose government and the majority of its population refuse to admit their own responsibility for the Hungarian Holocaust. As for Orbán’s remarks about those wonderful Hungarians who “are usually sympathetic toward the failings of others,” it makes me sick.

His final words on the monument are that “from a moral perspective and with regard to the historical content of its system of allegories, this work is accurate and flawless.”

Now let’s turn to how Orbán views the role of the Hungarian government and the Hungarian people in the events of the Hungarian Holocaust. According to him, it is undisputed that “Germany bears responsibility for what happened in Hungary after 19 March 1944,” and this fact is determined by “our Fundamental Law.” That is, the new constitution which his government proposed and enacted and which claims that as of March 19, 1944 Hungary lost its sovereignty. This might be an undisputed fact for Orbán, but as we know from weeks of historical discussion on the subject it is an immensely complicated issue. Nevertheless, it is well documented that Hungarian authorities played a significant role in the events after March 19.

Hungarians who analyzed this particular part of the text found the following sentences problematic from a historical and lexical point of view. Although Orbán, after stating that Germany was responsible for the events post March 1944, also admits the responsibility of the Hungarian political leadership, he adds that in his view “the charge of collaboration and the related responsibility holds true in this case.” The word “collaboration” is odd here because the word in Hungarian means pretty much what the English meaning of the word is: “treasonable cooperation in one’s own country with an enemy occupation force.” The Hungarian definition adds that a collaborator is a traitor and that we use the term mostly for collaboration in World War II. Orbán, therefore, either doesn’t know the meaning of the word or is purposely using it to emphasize that Germany was an enemy of Hungary. Hungary’s leaders were, it seems, collaborators because they “did not initiate any form of resistance …; they did not launch a national defense or national rescue mission, they did not attempt to protect the freedom and assets of the country’s citizens, and they didn’t even have the strength to set up a government in exile.”

Note that, according to Orbán, Hungary’s leaders are guilty not because of what they did but because of what they didn’t do. It wasn’t that they actively collaborated; rather, they failed to defend the country against the German invaders. This interpretation, it seems to me, pretty well exonerates them from responsibility for the Hungarian Holocaust.

Then comes what Orbán rather mysteriously calls “the issue of cohabitation.” It took me a little while to figure out that he was talking about Jewish/non-Jewish relations in Hungary since he assiduously avoids the mention of Jews in his letter. Orbán asks, in what he describes as the most important question, “What can we do, especially our own generation born after the events who are committed to Christian values, to national self-respect and to national pride based on correct self-knowledge?” In his view Hungarians did everything they could have done. They apologized, they made reparations, “but at the same time we cannot bear a responsibility that is not ours to bear.” Without the German occupation nothing would have happened to Hungary’s Jewish population. Therefore, “without the acceptance of these facts it is difficult to imagine a sincere cohabitation based on trust in the future.”

If I interpret this last sentence correctly, Viktor Orbán tells us that Hungarian Jews and non-Jews who don’t agree with his concept of history ought to leave because “sincere cohabitation” will be impossible. This strikes me as an only lightly veiled threat of the ugliest kind. For good measure here is the last sentence: “And our generation became followers of radical, anti-communist politics because we had had enough of an insincere life built on a lack of trust.” One could ask, what does anti-communism and the lack of trust in the Rákosi and Kádár periods have to do with the relationship between the government and those who oppose Viktor Orbán’s revisionist view of history? What is he talking about? Is he accusing his opponents of ties to the “horrid” communist past? It’s possible.

This whole letter is shameful and outrageous.

 

 

 

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
gdfxx
Guest

Another similarity with Ceausescu: asking for the Jews to leave the country. The difference is that Ceausescu got paid to do it, I doubt that Orban will get paid by anyone.

petofi
Guest

“According to him, it is undisputed that “Germany bears responsibility for what happened in Hungary after 19 March 1944,” and this fact is determined by “our Fundamental Law.”

Ain’t Viktor a peach? He gives an OPINION which becomes a FACT because of the “Fundamental Law” he had set up to support that very OPINION.

Laughable.

Member

“What can we do, especially our own generation born after the events who are committed to Christian values, to national self-respect and to national pride based on correct self-knowledge?”
I just would like to make a note here: Before Orban committed himself to Christian values, he committed himself to communist values and/then to atheist values, liberal values, then the values of conservatism. WHat I mean to say is that the whole life of Orban is a big “pava tanc” “peacock dance”. He did not invent it, but he born into it.

steve397
Guest
Reading Mr. Orban’s letter to Prof. Katalin David reminded me of the Karinthy story on explaining the school report. Why he is answering this to the lady who has written to him is explained but it is not quite clear to me why he is not getting down to discussing the matter with Mazsihisz to whom he promised an answer before he builds his Memorial to “all those who suffered due to the German occupation, etc.” Is not quite clear to me why he is not writing to me who has had a few remarks in this blog and elsewhere I am not told, but I am only an 88 years old survivor who lived in Hungary between 1926 and 1946 and who was an eyewitness to the times he is trying to whitewash, although he denies doing that by accepting that there were a few occurrences in Hungary for which their German comrades cannot have been responsible. I cannot fathom, why Mr. Orban is debating whether it was the Germans or the Nazis? Those who died in Kamenets Podolsk or in the many Camps of Europe were not wondering who killed them. The fact is that it was the… Read more »
latefor
Guest

Some1 – “I just would like to make a note here: Before Orban committed himself to Christian values, he committed himself to communist values and/then to atheist values, liberal values, then the values of conservatism.”

Or maybe he experienced all the above which led to his return to God. Amen.

Gyogyulast Varo Nep
Guest
thor
Guest
OT: don’t forget that the absolutely disgusting bullying by the Hungarian government of the Norwegian government is continuing unabated with respect to the Norway Grants Fund. The Norwegian government mandated the Hungarian Ökotárs Foundation, but along with three other foundations, to decide on the Hungarian grants. János Lázár, Orbán heir apparent and best pupil of Orbán (also head of the prime minister’s office) immediately went ballistic because according to Lázár, the [the deeply corrupt, I might add] government should haven gotten the mandate to decide on the grants and accused Ökotárs as being close to LMP, the green party, which just got in with 5% of the votes and has about 2.5% of the mandates. (“On 12th February 2013 the second NGO Fund of the EEA/Norway Grants to strengthen Hungarian NGOs was officially launched at a grand opening event. This year, in the first round the calls will support micro and macro projects in various thematic areas as well as internships in the Donor States.” “The Fund is operated by the Hungarian Environmental Partnership Foundation – Ökotárs Alapítvány (HEPF) in cooperation with Autonomia Foundation, Foundation for Development of Democratic Rights (DemNet) and the Carpathian Foundation-Hungary”) The Norwegians answered politely, rejecting… Read more »
Rev. A W Kovacs
Guest

Petofi (not the real one!) – It was not just Nazis, but Germans – who elected and cheered on the Fuehrer, Heil Hitler, in great assemblies in stadiums and plazas, and who fostered his war on their neighbors and the extermination of millions of the ‘unfit.’ … Where did you find this celebration of oppression in Hungary? – Read my response to Eva Balogh on this blog, and the true story by an American diplomat who was there in Budapest. … You Socialists on the outside are slinging mud, but the fact is Hungarians protected their Jewish neighbors as long as possible, and it was rump governments that failed their nation by collaboration with the Nazi overlord.

petofi
Guest

@Rev. K

“…the fact is Hungarians protected their Jewish neighbors as long as possible…”

Yup. We’ve got a family friend who was in his teens in the 40s. Hungarians regularly ‘protected him’ by beating him to a pulp time and time again. “It’s good for you! It’ll toughen you up. What’s more, you can get glasses for your shattered eyes and look more like a jew-intellectual.” And you know what, Reverend, every time they beat him up he thanked them for their help… said it was enough…but time and again, the ‘help’ never stopped coming.

An
Guest

All right, so if I follow Orban’s line of thinking correctly, the German’s are responsible for their (Nazi) government’s actions but the Hungarians are not responsible for the actions of their government that allied and collaborated with the Nazis?

Rev. A W Kovacs
Guest

The Germans decided their own path, to follow the Fuehrer.
The Hungarians under duress had no choice and were impressed into servitude by the Germans, forcing leadership choices with a heavy hand, out of Hungarian control.
If you can’t see apples and oranges are different, you won’t see any difference here.
Read: Regicide At Marseille by Tibor Eckhardt, 1964, Smallholder party refugee to USA.

steve397
Guest

It could be of interest to read Ms Dávid’s letter.
On the other hand I read a number of Hungarian press comments on Mr. Orban’s reply and some are quite anti-Orban and as stupified as I am. No doubt I am looking at non-representative press in the two-thirds Orbanistan country.

Lajos
Guest
Reverend (re your comments at 10:34): Firstly, those Jewish neighbors of yours were actually Hungarians. And the Hungarian majority did not protect the minority, some did, not too many (to be diplomatic). You came a bit late to this blog, so regulars would have to re-link the many original documents they linked already clearly showing what the local people did, instead of protecting them. (For starters, they were mighty happy to see their generally richer neighbors leave and immediately took over their property.) You have apparently zero idea about the historical discourse, you have no idea about the scholarship on the era. You are like the proverbial man who has been to the hospital as a sick man and therefore thinks he is qualified to talk authoritatively about medical issues. You may have heard this and that from your parents and your fellow congregation members (who were, let’s face it, more likely than not the beneficiaries or the descendants thereof of the Horthy-system) but you are apparently out of your depth when it comes to history and facts. Unfortunately for you those facts go against your beliefs, because, let’s face it again, what you you say are beliefs going against… Read more »
Mrozek L.
Guest

Rev Kovacs is referring to a couple of paragraphs from John Flournoy Montgomery’s book, which is the Bible of the Horthy whitewashing crowd here in America. Even Horthy’s grandson and great-grandson disagree with Montgomery’s uneducated observations. We all forget that Horthy was a 74Y old man in 1944, almost senile, hated the Jews, interested only his own survival. It is shameful that he was not tried in Nürnberg.

Feng-Jimenez
Guest
Dear Mr. A. W. Kovacs: I understand that you like first person accounts of very noble and dignified Christian Hungarians very much, but couldn’t you perhaps open also to mainstream historical scholarship? It may be surprising to hear about this concept, but there is such a thing as source criticism (even though it originates from biblical studies), ie. I do not believe what I read just because it is printed in paper. Especially when such statement or evaluation is written by someone who has a vested interest in establishing one particular view. Your source Tibor Eckhardt before joining the Smallholders Party was one of the founders of the extreme right-wing and madly anti-semite Ébredő Magyarok Egyesülete and then he also lead the similarly extreme-right wing Magyar Nemzeti Függetlenségi Párt also called Fajvédő Párt (not to be confused with the Magyar Fajvédő Párt). Can he be expected to be a reliable source? Me, I try to collect evidence and ascertain myself whether some statement is true or not. This approach, given your job, is probably alien to you. I could also refer to printed books by ‘respectable’ god-fearing Hungarian denying the holocaust, but that would not make the book any more… Read more »
PWT
Guest

Rev. Kovacs, it’s obvious that we cannot change your mind about the history of 1944, but you should, at the very least, as a minister, be able to recognize that there is no theological justification possible for using the Archangel Gabriel to represent Hungary as a victim. In the Bible, Gabriel is a messenger of God to nations, not a nation himself, and prophesied in Ezekiel as the destroyer of Jerusalem. Furthermore, there is absolutely no Jewish or Christian precedent for the idea that an angel, let alone the Archangel Gabriel, could be a victim of human violence. The state of Hungary representing itself by an angel is sacrilegious, period.

Member

Rev: ” the fact is Hungarians protected their Jewish neighbors as long as possible,”

Pile of lies Reverend, but if you repeat it often….. The FACT is that my father with his family was marched to the Tattersal by Hungarians. My father(8 year old at the time) was responsible to carry the food for the family. He was spit on by Hungarians, and the food was knocked out of his hands by a Hungarian, who was screaming “You do not need this any more your filthy Jew.” Let me repeat. He was 8 year old.
For your education: http://www.holokausztmagyarorszagon.hu/index.php?section=1&chapter=7_2_4&type=content A little wake-up call.

Member

latefor
April 30, 2014 at 10:18 pm Quote
Some1 – “I just would like to make a note here: Before Orban committed himself to Christian values, he committed himself to communist values and/then to atheist values, liberal values, then the values of conservatism.”
Or maybe he experienced all the above which led to his return to God. Amen.
———-
As if…. so, what you saying that after serving the communists, getting his free education, belittling the religious in the Parliament, he found God? You are saying that after living under communism, finding democracy, he found that it does not work. After receiving millions from the EU, he found that he does not like the EU any longer and encourages others to march against the EU? THere is always an explanation. Let me tell you what it is called. It has nothing to do with finding God (just before you declare that he is Jesus Christ). It is called opportunism! Amen!

MK
Guest
“there is no theological justification possible for using the Archangel Gabriel to represent Hungary as a victim” For every normal person the angel represents the innocent victims. Only an idiot thinks that a country as a whole can be “innocent”, or guilty or even that terms like that can be meaningfully applied to a country. Even Dr. Balogh writes: “a country whose government and the majority of its population refuse to admit their own responsibility for the Hungarian Holocaust.” Even though she commits a clear falsification of history when implying that the “majority of Hungarians are responsible” even then she doesn’t talk about the country itself. So even a pro-Socialist falsification of history only go so far as blaming only the “majority of population” as being responsible for the Holocaust and not Hungary, the whole country itself. Imagine the surprise of such a Hungarian today when he learns that he is “responsible for the Holocaust”. When he/she learned in school about Nazi Germany, Hitler, how the Germans designed, built, operated, guarded death camps where they committed mass murder. He/she already learned about Hitler, and the Germans living 70 years ago, and likely they are considered to be “responsible”, Creating a… Read more »
Istvan
Guest
What a truly bizarre letter Prime Minister Orban wrote in relation to the memorial. It is clear to me that the Prime Minister has a problem with what Goldhagen described in his book Hitler’s Willing Executioners about Germans being applied to Hungarians so the crimes of racism must be attributed to the heathen ideology of National Socialism. As Hungarians our national guilt as ethnic racists is far from unique, such racism is prevalent worldwide and can have murderous consequences. I have no doubt my own Grandfather committed atrocities in the name of the Empire during the suppression of Serbian independence movements prior to WWI. Our collective history in Central Europe in relation to the consequences of racism, a racism that found its way to nations we have emigrated to combining with indigenous racism here in the USA by the way, is deeply disturbing. What must George Soros be thinking now about the scholarship his Foundation granted to Orban in 1989? I have for years been looking for years to see if Soros would ever reflect on the role his foundation made in relation to the promotion of Orban and where this has all ended up. Soros is the same guy… Read more »
kommentelo
Guest

“I have no doubt my own Grandfather committed atrocities in the name of the Empire during the suppression of Serbian independence movements prior to WWI.”

Sorry but this sentence seemed a bit off to me, can you explain it a little? Isn’t it a little overzealous to suspect your own ancestors of atrocities or war crimes without evidence? And then I have never heard of such a thing as “the suppression of Serbian independence movements prior to WWI.” my historical knowledge limited as it is tells me that such a thing never could have existed at that time. Simply because Serbia was already independent many decades before WWI so it couldn’t much strive for independence it already had. Territorial expansion, and gobbling up other territories, and conquest: any of these Serbia could have desired prior to WWI, but not independence.

steve397
Guest

I have the feeling that the Rev. Kovacs ia neither a clergyman nor a Hungarian, but one of those who is interested in the whitewashing of Admiral Horthy.

Mihail
Guest
Regent Horthy already was in prison while he was living. However he was put in prison by Hitler. Yet some people still maintain the lie that they were allies and not enemies. You imprison your enemies not your allies. So after the nazi leader Hitler imprisoned Horthy, it was the US American troops that freed Horthy from Hitler’s prison. If the Americans thought Horthy was guilty of ANYTHING they could have charged, tried and convicted him but they did nothing of the kind. The Americans had full chance to do anything, dishing out any punishment including ordering Horthy’s execution if he were guilty of war crimes. Horthy died of natural causes as a free men, while supported by grateful Jewish families whose life he contributed to saving. During Horthy’s 1993 reburial there were many who attended and brought flowers and inscriptions, one of which had the text “From the grateful Budapest Jewry”. -look it up. So it was the Americans and other allied powers at the time that collectively declared Horthy innocent. History cannot be changed retroactively and rewritten that Horthy was executed in 1945 because he lived long into the 1950s. History cannot be changed so easily and it… Read more »
True Opposition Now
Guest

The best cure for Hungarians would be to see Horthy in real colors.
A sorrow nobody, who led the nation to a suicide.
His mini opposition, and other sane people could not make up their mind to destroy his rule, his respectability.
The same is going on with Orban.
An accomplished turncoat. A violent dictator.
Still there is no effective opposition to dismantle his rule.

weisz
Guest
I have seen reports that the high leadership of MAZSIHISZ was invited to the office of Prime Minister to have dialogue. This was done presumably to discuss previous contentious issues such as: House of Fates, a historian called Szakayl, and the monument itself. it can be read that: “Regarding the House of Fates project, the participants agreed to jointly make a final attempt at developing a system for cooperation that guarantees the credible presentation of history, reflecting the Hungarian Jewish community’s approach. A project planned to be set up in the Rumbach Sebestyen street synagogue in central Budapest which currently has the working title House of Coexistence was also discussed at the meeting. Mazsihisz leaders submitted to Orban their relevant plans and exchanged views on this project. The prime minister and the government representatives demonstrated a sensitive and open approach, the statement said.” Did MAZSIHISZ reverse its previous stance and change into “cooperative mode” with regards to the government??? It is almost if you could feel the wind changing, previously their stances were hard and unforgiving. And now they even propose new projects and ideas like the House of Coexistence? So please, Can anyone translate all of this into plain… Read more »
Member
MK May 1, 2014 at 7:53 am Quote “there is no theological justification possible for using the Archangel Gabriel to represent Hungary as a victim” For every normal person the angel represents the innocent victims. Only an idiot thinks that a country as a whole can be “innocent”, or guilty or even that terms like that can be meaningfully applied to a country. ——– You can say whatever you wish. You can pretend the sky is lemon colures and the grass is purple. A sane person would listen to what the artist who designed and made the monument had to say. according to the artist (not thos who try to explain whet he explained), Párkányi Raab Péter: „két kultúra jelenik meg: az egyik, mely úgy gondolja, hogy erősebb (de mindenképpen agresszívebb) fölé tornyosul… rátelepszik és lecsap, a másik szelídebb, lágyabb vonású alakra, Magyarországot képviselő, megtestesítő Gábriel arkangyal figurájára, aki a kultúrtörténetben, vallástörténetben Isten embere, Isten ereje az Isteni erő.” “Two cultures come to life: the first that thinks he is stronger (but certainly more aggressive) towers above …. settles on, and pounces on the more gentle, softer-featured shape, that personifies and represents Hungary, the shape of Archangel Gabriel, who in… Read more »
Istvan
Guest
My grandfather was a child warrior effectively for the Austro-Hungarian Empire in the late 1800s and as an adult up through the first two years of WWI. At that point both he and his brother deserted and somehow avoided being shot by either the Italians, Austrians, or Germans who had in many ways taken control over the Empire’s troops. Bosnia and Herzegovina were under Austro-Hungarian military and civil rule between 1878 and 1908 when it was annexed. During that time there were a series of “pacification” operations against a variety of separatist movements including Serbian ones. The idea of a unified South Slavic state (typically expected to be spearheaded by independent Kingdom of Serbia) became a popular political ideology in the region at this time, including Bosnia and Herzegovina. Austro-Hungarian authorities signed a treaty with the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople by which the Emperor gained control over the Serbian Orthodox Church in Bosnia and Herzegovina in exchange for annual reimbursement. Serbs largely disapproved of Austro-Hungarian control over their religious institutions, and agitated so they organized a struggle in order to gain their religious autonomy. The struggle was ended in their favor of the Serbs in 1905. From my understanding both… Read more »
Member

Mihail
May 1, 2014 at 9:13 am Quote
Regent Horthy already was in prison while he was living.
However he was put in prison by Hitler. Yet some people still maintain the lie that they were allies and not enemies. You imprison your enemies not your allies.
——

I had a hard time to follow what you wanted to say, but let me tell you something.
Do not let history and facts get in the way of your thinking of Horthy was in prison, but just for the record
1941 Kamianets-Podilskyi Massacre
First Jewish Law of 1938, two more laws were passed the next year. Let me remind the readers that Horthy was a happy camper at the time . THere was no pressure from Germany regarding this law. THey simply brought these laws in to please.

Mihail, you must read more history.

Istvan
Guest
Responding to an earlier post: My grandfather was a child warrior effectively for the Austro-Hungarian Empire in the late 1800s and as an adult up through the first two years of WWI. At that point both he and his brother deserted and somehow avoided being shot by either the Italians, Austrians, or Germans who had in many ways taken control over the Empire’s troops. Bosnia and Herzegovina were under Austro-Hungarian military and civil rule between 1878 and 1908 when it was annexed. During that time there were a series of “pacification” operations against a variety of separatist movements including Serbian ones. The idea of a unified South Slavic state (typically expected to be spearheaded by independent Kingdom of Serbia) became a popular political ideology in the region at this time, including Bosnia and Herzegovina. Austro-Hungarian authorities signed a treaty with the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople by which the Emperor gained control over the Serbian Orthodox Church in Bosnia and Herzegovina in exchange for annual reimbursement. Serbs largely disapproved of Austro-Hungarian control over their religious institutions, and agitated so they organized a struggle in order to gain their religious autonomy. The struggle was ended in their favor of the Serbs in… Read more »
kommentelo
Guest

@Istvan

it was very interesting and also enjoyable to read your more detailed explanation. I see that your original comment was intended to be about Bosnia and Herzegovina and not about Serbia which was what caused the confusion at least for me. Coincidentally a country named Bosnia-Herzegovina exists even today. But still it was quite interesting to read the background of your ancestors.

@MK and Some1

MK writes:
“Only an idiot thinks that a country as a whole can be “innocent”, or guilty or even that terms like that can be meaningfully applied to a country.”

Some1 writes about the artist of the monument:
“personifies and represents Hungary, the shape of Archangel Gabriel, ”

From these two comments it simply follows that the artist of the monument was an idiot 😀

cheshire cat
Guest
“the German’s are responsible for their (Nazi) government’s actions but the Hungarians are not responsible for the actions of their government that allied and collaborated with the Nazis?” An, you are spot on! This was the first logical fallacy that jumped at me from his letter. He says it wasn’t the Nazis who occupied Hungary but “the” Germans. So the eagle, which is still Germany’s symbol today, is OK. But the angel only represents the victims, not the whole of Hungary. Gabor Fodor was the first one to point out that in the original description of the statue the archangel is described (by Antal Rogan) to symbolise Hungary as a whole as innocent victims. Why is Orban pretending to be surprised that so many understand it that way? This is what I think must have happened: the government decided to erect a statue to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the German occupation, and it was rather short-notice. They had it planned, commissioned and funded very quickly and it wasn’t thought-over, debated properly before made public. The original description itself was full of grammar and logical mistakes, all done hastily and in a rather amateurish way. By now they must have… Read more »
wpDiscuz