Speaker 1: For more than fifteen years, the country of Hungary has
Speaker 1: been a sort of conservative beacon in Europe, standing against
Speaker 1: the dominance of the EU, the European Union, protecting its
Speaker 1: borders and boldly and unapologetically proclaiming the principles of free markets,
Speaker 1: traditional family values and also Christianity. Recently, however, there was
Speaker 1: a sort of shock election in Hungary and the opposition
Speaker 1: party came to power. Victor Orban, having ruled for some
Speaker 1: fifteen or sixteen years, has been out of power and
Speaker 1: the new government, while running and a sort of centrist platform,
Speaker 1: is now beginning to show its true colors. I'm delighted
Speaker 1: to have as a guest blash Orban, no relation to
Speaker 1: Victor Orban. Blash Orban is the former political director for
Speaker 1: Victor Orban, and he's also a member of the Hungarian Parliament.
Speaker 1: He's here to update us on what's happening in Hungary
Speaker 1: right now. Blash welcome, thank you for joining me. The
Speaker 1: two of us had the pleasure of sharing a stage
Speaker 1: together a few months ago in Budapest. This was at
Speaker 1: Sea Pac Europe being held in Budapest, and we had
Speaker 1: a very interesting Yeah, we had a very interesting discussion
Speaker 1: focusing a little bit more on American politics. But I
Speaker 1: want to ask you about Hungary. May I start by
Speaker 1: asking you, I'm sure you've had some weeks now just
Speaker 1: to do a bit of a post mortem on what
Speaker 1: the result of the recent election meant in Hungary. In
Speaker 1: other words, many of us expected Victor Orban to win again.
Speaker 1: Perhaps you did as well. What happened? What did the
Speaker 1: Hungarian people vote for this time around?
Speaker 2: Well, thank you very much first for having me and
Speaker 2: have another conversation.
Speaker 3: I enjoyed the last time as well.
Speaker 2: Losing an election is always bad, so I would recommend
Speaker 2: everyone to win every single election, but unfortunately, in a
Speaker 2: democracy it's not possible. Sixteen years, it's.
Speaker 3: A long time.
Speaker 2: Europe as you and probably the audience also knows that
Speaker 2: it's struggling economically. We have a war in our neighborhood
Speaker 2: which goes on for like four years. It has a
Speaker 2: devastating consequence. I'm not talking about the security aspect, but
Speaker 2: the economic aspect, rising energy prizes, affordability issues, inflation and
Speaker 2: so on and so on. And so a new political
Speaker 2: party emerged. They were backed by Brussels with every mean
Speaker 2: which was possible. They were backed by the Ukrainians as well.
Speaker 2: They were backed by foreign secret services, they were backed
Speaker 2: by the big social media platforms, they were backed by
Speaker 2: European Commission censorship machinery.
Speaker 3: So we had a huge fight.
Speaker 2: But this time the majority of the Hungarian citizens voted
Speaker 2: for change. The opposition party made tons of promises and
Speaker 2: they told that told the voters that they are not
Speaker 2: going to change the fundamental structure of Hungarian politics and
Speaker 2: the most important social policies. But of course, as it
Speaker 2: happened so many times, when some is just using the
Speaker 2: slogan of hope and change without any content, it turns
Speaker 2: out after the election the promises are not as they
Speaker 2: were before, and the liberal takeover and the Brussels needs
Speaker 2: are coming to be more and more visible on every
Speaker 2: day political issues. Why we lost is I think we
Speaker 2: lost because we were not able to convince the voters.
Speaker 2: But we were on the right side and so therefore
Speaker 2: many millions of people voted in favor of us, so
Speaker 2: we have to keep fighting and representing them. Victor Urbain
Speaker 2: was for like sixteen years accused of being a dictator,
Speaker 2: But show me a dictator who is losing elections and
Speaker 2: stepping down and having a smooth transition procedure.
Speaker 3: So what is the good thing in a bad thing.
Speaker 2: Is that at least we could prove move to the
Speaker 2: entire international audience that all these accusations and claims were wrong,
Speaker 2: because like in a democracy, sometimes you louse, sometimes you fight,
Speaker 2: but there is always a way to come back.
Speaker 1: The new party headed by this guy, I'm not sure
Speaker 1: if I say I'm saying his name right, but Peter Maggiar,
Speaker 1: I guess is the way I would pronounce it.
Speaker 3: And he is here and it is quite good.
Speaker 1: Well, I've a I feel good about that. I would hate,
Speaker 1: you know, hate to say his name wrong. Well, an
Speaker 1: event he comes out of your party. He's sort of
Speaker 1: a dissident, and as you mentioned, he ran as a centrist.
Speaker 1: I think I saw him saying even after the election,
Speaker 1: something like, you know, don't think that we are going
Speaker 1: to be opening the border just because a new party
Speaker 1: has come into power. I got the impression, and some
Speaker 1: people commented on social media that this guy is going
Speaker 1: to be a kind of Victor orban Light. He's going
Speaker 1: to be in the same direction, although maybe with a
Speaker 1: softer footprin But as it turns out, now that we
Speaker 1: have a little time to get a gauge on what
Speaker 1: the new government is doing. It looks like there are
Speaker 1: some really troubling signs. And I don't just mean that
Speaker 1: he's adopting different policies, but rather there seems to be
Speaker 1: an attempt to, you could almost say, turn their victory
Speaker 1: into something more permanent, subvert the opportunities for free debate
Speaker 1: and free elections in the future. Talk a little bit
Speaker 1: about some of the measures that you are seeing that
Speaker 1: are sort of rigging the process in a manner that
Speaker 1: is troubling for constitutional and parliamentary democracy.
Speaker 2: So for American audience is probably hard to see, but
Speaker 2: in every single European member states, the politics it's quite simple.
Speaker 2: There are the pro Brussels parties who are signing up
Speaker 2: with the liberal approach of the Brusselian elite. This is
Speaker 2: mainly an auto itarian liberal attitude, where you're using state power, censorship,
Speaker 2: financial regulation to keep control even if the will of
Speaker 2: the people turns to different directions. This is the reason
Speaker 2: why EU is not able to have proper answers to
Speaker 2: the migration challenge. For example, it's not because the European
Speaker 2: citizens are not aware of the fact that mass migration
Speaker 2: is a problem, but the center, so the federal structure
Speaker 2: is trying to push direction, to push things into a
Speaker 2: different direction. This is what's going on, and this has
Speaker 2: happened in Hungary as well. When a pro Brussels party
Speaker 2: is taking over, it means that auto itarian liberal tendencies
Speaker 2: are emerging immediately. That first decision was the most anti
Speaker 2: democratic decision you can imagine. They banned the banned the
Speaker 2: Hungarian people from re electing Victor Orban if they want
Speaker 2: to do so, because they terminated his limit and they
Speaker 2: said that it's not any more possible to vote for
Speaker 2: Victor Orban, even if the people wants to do so.
Speaker 2: The second one was like they try to ban the
Speaker 2: conservative politicians to be re elected after they spent twelve
Speaker 2: years in the parliament. Imagine that there is a political
Speaker 2: party in the US which says that you cannot be
Speaker 2: a US senator because you have been a Unis senator
Speaker 2: for twelve years, so now.
Speaker 3: Your termin issue is over.
Speaker 2: They made a constitution. They are planning to accept the
Speaker 2: constitutional change, which is saying that the president mandate is
Speaker 2: over simply because he's not coming from their political party.
Speaker 2: And you're probably heard and seen that we have a
Speaker 2: very vibrant conservative ecosystem, Angieo Stink Tank, civil society organizations.
Speaker 2: Here they introduced a law a very communistic way of understanding.
Speaker 3: They want to.
Speaker 2: Ban those institutions, close those institutions that nationalize their assets,
Speaker 2: and the same thing happening with the church institutions, mainly
Speaker 2: in the field of education. So you can see the
Speaker 2: clear sign of auto itarian liberalism.
Speaker 3: When when when when.
Speaker 2: You, when you, even if you win election, you are
Speaker 2: afraid of the people's decisions and you want to do
Speaker 2: everything to keep control on the system. This is something
Speaker 2: which which which shouldn't be acceptable on the soil of Europe.
Speaker 1: It seems like with regard to the banning of victor
Speaker 1: or ban as well as the restrictions on future and
Speaker 1: members of your party running again, the government was kind
Speaker 1: of sneaky about it in the sense that they didn't
Speaker 1: say we are banning the opposition. What they did was
Speaker 1: they came up with rules that were neutral on their face.
Speaker 1: So something like nobody can run for re election after
Speaker 1: so many years, and yet the clear impact is to
Speaker 1: fall on your party and benefit their party. So what
Speaker 1: seems to be a kind of neutral principle is in
Speaker 1: fact highly one sided in its application.
Speaker 3: Yes, it's true.
Speaker 2: Imagine the situation that after the first term, by then
Speaker 2: administration is coming up with the constitutional change where they
Speaker 2: are saying that people with blonde hair cannot be former
Speaker 2: presidents with blonde hair cannot be re elected. Who is
Speaker 2: the former president with blonde hair is Donald Trump? So,
Speaker 2: like you know, that's personalized legislation. Everybody knows, even them
Speaker 2: are saying it out loudly that this is because people
Speaker 2: have had enough with Victor Orban. You know, he lost
Speaker 2: the election, he won like five elections, he lost many more.
Speaker 2: But why don't we let the people to decide what
Speaker 2: they want to achieve, what they want to introduce if
Speaker 2: they are afraid of the from the will of the people.
Speaker 2: So that's the question, and it's a very very very
Speaker 2: liberal approach. I would say, this is how things are
Speaker 2: operating in Europe right now. They were canceling election in
Speaker 2: a neighboring country. They were trying to jail the most
Speaker 2: prominent figure of the conservative opposition in France, maney In
Speaker 2: Lapenz Jordan Bardella.
Speaker 3: The secret services is.
Speaker 2: Putting under pressure if there which is the most popular.
Speaker 3: Party in in Germany.
Speaker 2: So Unfortunately, this is the everyday reality in Britain. If
Speaker 2: you are committing hate speech crimes which means you are
Speaker 2: criticizing migration policy or the current leader of the country,
Speaker 2: you go to jails.
Speaker 3: Unfortunately, this is the everyday reality.
Speaker 2: In Europe, in every single country which is governed by
Speaker 2: the liberals.
Speaker 1: Why is it so complicated to get prescription medication? You
Speaker 1: know what you need, your doctor knows what you need,
Speaker 1: and yet somehow you're forced to deal with appointments, insurance approvals,
Speaker 1: pharmacy delays, and endless red tape just to get access
Speaker 1: to basic medications. That's the problem with the system. It
Speaker 1: puts bureaucracy in between patients and the care they need.
Speaker 1: This is why I love All Family pharmacy. They make
Speaker 1: the process simple, safe and secure. You go online, complete
Speaker 1: a short medical form, A licensed doctor reviews your request
Speaker 1: and prescribes if appropriate. They've got over four hundred medications
Speaker 1: available and ship directly to your door. Whether you're looking
Speaker 1: for antibiotics, hybermectin, benzidole, hydroxychloric when NAD plus, blood pressure medications,
Speaker 1: thyroid medications, peptides, many other treatments, you'll find them all
Speaker 1: in one place. Go to All Familypharmacy dot com slash danesh.
Speaker 1: That's All Familypharmacy dot com slash danesh. Use code dinesh
Speaker 1: ten to save ten percent again Allfamilypharmacy dot com slash
Speaker 1: dnesh with the code denesh ten. If you are someone
Speaker 1: you love is turning sixty five soon, pay attention. The
Speaker 1: moment you hit that age, everything changes. Sure, you become
Speaker 1: eligible for Medicare, but you also become a target. The
Speaker 1: junk mail, the robocalls, the fine print. It's overwhelming. This
Speaker 1: system is confusing by design, and it benefits big insurance,
Speaker 1: not you. I just turned sixty five. I went through
Speaker 1: this and let me tell you, if you don't know
Speaker 1: what you're doing, you could wind up overpaying or losing
Speaker 1: access to the doctors you trust. That's why I work
Speaker 1: with Chapter. They're independent, They don't push one plan or another.
Speaker 1: They just help you find the one that's right for you.
Speaker 1: Chapters advises are smart, honest, and they actually care. They
Speaker 1: compare every Medicare option nationwide to make sure you don't
Speaker 1: miss a thing, and it's completely free. Chapter help me
Speaker 1: and thousands of my viewers and listeners save real money
Speaker 1: and a ton of stress when it comes to medicare,
Speaker 1: So take back control. Click the link and connect with
Speaker 1: chapter today. Well, Lash, what do you think on the
Speaker 1: issue of migration? What do you think is the motive
Speaker 1: for opening the borders in this way? It seems like
Speaker 1: it is imported into so many of these countries, a
Speaker 1: whole host of problems, increase dependency on the state and
Speaker 1: so an economic burden, a burden on the schools and
Speaker 1: the education system. This is not even to mentioned issues
Speaker 1: of crime. They are greater risk of terrorism. Why would
Speaker 1: these Europeans, why would the elites in Brussels, for that matter,
Speaker 1: see this as a net plus for Europe. Let's put
Speaker 1: ourselves in their places for a moment. What do they
Speaker 1: stand to gain from this?
Speaker 3: So in just a.
Speaker 2: Couple weeks time, I will be a member of the
Speaker 2: European Parliament and I would try to fight for my
Speaker 2: country there in Brussels. And I went to the Parliament
Speaker 2: a couple of weeks ago to make to make the
Speaker 2: first meetings and prepare for the new job.
Speaker 3: And I was by accident walking through the hallway.
Speaker 2: Which was which was which was for the Green Party,
Speaker 2: which is the most liberal and verdical and leftist party
Speaker 2: in European Parliament, and there were just signs and bier
Speaker 2: wars on the walls decorated by the Greens for the
Speaker 2: people who are walking there, and that was one sign
Speaker 2: where they were saying refugees welcome, everybody welcome, and bring
Speaker 2: your families as well.
Speaker 3: So I had a feeling and they were very proud
Speaker 3: of it.
Speaker 2: So that's not just happening by coincidence or by letting
Speaker 2: it happen by negligence, but that's their political strategy and
Speaker 2: they are very proud of it, and that's the majority
Speaker 2: of the current European Parliament. Many of them are not
Speaker 2: saying it out loud, but the voting record, their track
Speaker 2: record is obviously showing that they are together with the Greens.
Speaker 2: And I think the reason behind it is sometimes it's
Speaker 2: called a conspiracy theory, but in reality it's population exchange
Speaker 2: on voters who are in favor of their policies, and
Speaker 2: they think that only the immigrant background population will be
Speaker 2: ready to who are dependent on the state, would be
Speaker 2: ready to support their radical policies, which is otherwise not
Speaker 2: supported by the the the original people of Europe. That's
Speaker 2: one element, and the other element is there are some
Speaker 2: some economy, economic need for workfare or at least this
Speaker 2: is This was the argumentation ten years ago. I'm not
Speaker 2: sure whether it's still the case, since the economic decline
Speaker 2: of Europe is like visible. Unemployment rate will be growing
Speaker 2: and we are not just talking about the AI but
Speaker 2: like the industrialization.
Speaker 3: Which is which is which is going on in Europe.
Speaker 2: So I'm not sure whether this is still a valid argumentation.
Speaker 2: What I do think is there are the leftists who
Speaker 2: deeply believe that they have to replace the people they need,
Speaker 2: different people with different without having affiliation or natural affiliation
Speaker 2: towards their own on nation and homeland, because otherwise they
Speaker 2: are not going to win elections and grab power. I
Speaker 2: know it's simple, but I am following very closely the
Speaker 2: European developments field of migration for ten years, and this
Speaker 2: is what's going on.
Speaker 3: And with the.
Speaker 2: Migration Pact, everybody they accepted the new law. Everybody is
Speaker 2: communicating that you know, this is a solution to solve
Speaker 2: the problems. But the entire law is allow is about
Speaker 2: that if people entering the territory already enter the territory
Speaker 2: of you.
Speaker 3: How we distribute them among each other.
Speaker 2: And how we welcome those people who are who are
Speaker 2: passing our borders illegally, and how we create open refugee
Speaker 2: camps for them, And what is the capacity of every
Speaker 2: single country has to maintain just because having like enough
Speaker 2: open open enough for Refugyes, So the situation is very
Speaker 2: bad in Europe and happy to see that in the
Speaker 2: United States there is a government which is fighting against
Speaker 2: illegal migration. If it also if it requires tough decisions,
Speaker 2: but this is the only way to do so.
Speaker 1: Well, as you mentioned a little earlier, that the conservatives
Speaker 1: in Hungary have done something that is certainly not the
Speaker 1: case in America and quite unique and extremely impressive, which
Speaker 1: is to build a cultural and intellectual a social ecosystem
Speaker 1: of think tanks, universities, educational institutions, media and all of
Speaker 1: this is a way to be able to compete in
Speaker 1: the public square to advance your arguments. And you said
Speaker 1: that this new government is trying to come up with
Speaker 1: schemes or maybe already has to take over this cultural
Speaker 1: infrastructure that has been built over many many years. How
Speaker 1: are they doing that, what is their pretext or excuse
Speaker 1: for doing it, and are they going to succeed?
Speaker 2: Well, it's not very sophisticated. They just say that they
Speaker 2: have the power to do so, and they are They
Speaker 2: know that it's against the constitutions, so they modify the
Speaker 2: constitution because they have the majority.
Speaker 3: To do so.
Speaker 2: There is a new Minister for Education who is very
Speaker 2: much in favor of gender ideology. She immediately started to
Speaker 2: put pressure on the church institutions.
Speaker 3: What are they doing?
Speaker 2: How is it possible that they have an independent agenda
Speaker 2: which is different from the state agenda. Probably you have
Speaker 2: seen there were some pictures immediately on the major bridges
Speaker 2: of Budapest. Pride flags emerged. Previously under Victor but and
Speaker 2: there were only the national flags, but now everywhere pride
Speaker 2: flags and some places Ukrainian.
Speaker 3: Flags of these are that's a clear sign of.
Speaker 2: Changing the priorities and and about the constitutional ecosystem. They
Speaker 2: just want to nationalize it. Of course, we are fighting.
Speaker 2: We use every opportunity we have. That's a legal battle.
Speaker 3: And I can also say that there are many, many.
Speaker 2: Millions of people in Hungary who are supporting these institutions,
Speaker 2: and there are also many millions in Europe who are
Speaker 2: supporting these institutions. Because the fight what they are taking
Speaker 2: is not just about Hungary. It's about how we counter
Speaker 2: the supernatural nature of European Union and how we preserve
Speaker 2: national identity and national sovereignty.
Speaker 3: So i'm i'm, i'm.
Speaker 2: I'm optimistic about that that we will find supporters and
Speaker 2: and these ecosystems will survive. But but the situation is
Speaker 2: is not easy, and it should concern everyone, not just
Speaker 2: in Hungary, but all across the Western world.
Speaker 1: Well, as we close out you, you're a man of
Speaker 1: philosophical disposition, and so I don't hesitate to ask you
Speaker 1: a broader question, which is that in a parliamentary system,
Speaker 1: you have a majority rule, uh, and you have kind
Speaker 1: of power to the people. But in the American system,
Speaker 1: the American founders were just as afraid that the majority
Speaker 1: would abuse its power as they were afraid that some
Speaker 1: aristocracy or monarchy might do so. And as a result,
Speaker 1: one of the ideas that the founders tried to work
Speaker 1: against is what they call tyranny of the majority, tyranny
Speaker 1: of the majority. But it seems like in parliamentary democracies
Speaker 1: there is not an adequate obstacle or break against tyranny
Speaker 1: of the majority. Do you think that that is a
Speaker 1: structural problem in parliamentary democracy, or are there some remedies
Speaker 1: within parliamentary democracy that can keep a check on exactly
Speaker 1: what you've just described happening now in Hungary.
Speaker 2: Well, if I may answer with the philosophical answer, I'm
Speaker 2: happy to do so. So I think there are checks
Speaker 2: in both systems. The question is whether they are legal
Speaker 2: checks or non legal checks. So, for example, in a
Speaker 2: case of the United States, like many times, constitutional changes
Speaker 2: and the structure changes are managed by legal bodies, like
Speaker 2: for example, the acceptance of gay marriage as it was evolving,
Speaker 2: Like once the Supreme Court in the US said that,
Speaker 2: you know, it's according to the US Constitution.
Speaker 3: Is not allowed to have gay marriage.
Speaker 2: Then they were saying, after a couple generations that every
Speaker 2: state can decide freely whether they have and then they
Speaker 2: said that it's mandatory to provide it according to the
Speaker 2: same text. So if you have a system like this,
Speaker 2: then you give enormous power to the different legal bodies
Speaker 2: in a parliamentary system. If they have the supermajority, the
Speaker 2: legal bodies can do not more. But there is still
Speaker 2: and there has to be a constitutional culture and an
Speaker 2: environment where you simply don't do things because it's wrong,
Speaker 2: it's not allowed to do so, like banning your opponents
Speaker 2: to be erected by the people. If they want to
Speaker 2: do so, it's unacceptable. And even if you can do
Speaker 2: it legally, it undermines your legitimacy and undermines your previous decisions.
Speaker 2: So sooner or later we will reach a point where
Speaker 2: where the Hungarian people will say, look, this is not
Speaker 2: we voted for.
Speaker 3: This is not what we allow to happen.
Speaker 2: Even if you can do it, and there is no
Speaker 2: constitutional body which can stop you, it's not possible. And
Speaker 2: if you go further to that direction, then it can backfire,
Speaker 2: probably not immediately, but one or two years time.
Speaker 3: So this is what I'm hoping for.
Speaker 2: It's a different structure now, the Hungarian constitutional.
Speaker 3: Culture is before is before a test. We will see
Speaker 3: the result.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think what you're saying is that the remedy
Speaker 1: comes from the people themselves. In other words, that if
Speaker 1: there is a violation so egregious, it will be perceived
Speaker 1: by the people as an abuse of power. And so
Speaker 1: when the people do get their say, they're going to
Speaker 1: be able to speak out against it and vote against it.
Speaker 1: If this is what the new government does, well, thank
Speaker 1: you Balasha orban thank you for joining me. I really
Speaker 1: appreciate it. Very eye opening and somewhat disturbing picture of
Speaker 1: what is happening in your country.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much. I appreciate guys.
Speaker 1: I want to announce I have a new book coming
Speaker 1: out in the fall. I'm very excited about. It's called
Speaker 1: The Stones cry Out subtitle Biblical Archaeology, Prophecy and the
Speaker 1: Last Days. The book outlines the greatest discoveries in Biblical
Speaker 1: archaeology that affirm the Bible, confirm the presence of the
Speaker 1: Jews in the Holy Land, and also support the twin
Speaker 1: foundations of Western civilization, which are Athens and Jerusalem. The
Speaker 1: Stones cry Out has rave reviews from archaeologists, from leading pastors,
Speaker 1: and from prominent commentators of The book, published by Charisma Books,
Speaker 1: is available now for pre orders on Amazon. So I'm
Speaker 1: calling a new early birds to order your copies now.
Speaker 1: You'll be the first to get it when it's out.