Orbán: The West Sees Immigration As A "Way Of Getting Rid Of The Ethnic Homogeneity That Is The Basis Of The Nation-State"

By Remix News

In Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s speech at Tusványos in Romania, he focuses on the intractable differences developing between the East and West of Europe, with immigration one of the key divisions. He not only rejects the Western view on immigration, but sees it as an agenda with a very specific ideology behind it, which is designed to erode the nation-state entirely.

“But Westerners, quite differently, believe that nation-states no longer exist. They therefore deny that there is a common culture and a public morality based on (the nation-state). There is no public morality, if you watched the Olympic opening yesterday, you saw it. So, they also think differently about migration. They believe that migration is not a threat or a problem, but in fact a way of getting rid of the ethnic homogeneity that is the basis of a nation. This is the essence of the progressive liberal international concept. That is why the absurdity does not occur to them, or they do not see it as absurd,” he said.

He said that this contrast between East and West is playing out through war and the movement of peoples, saying that while hundreds of thousands of Christian people are killing each other in the East, “in the West of Europe, we are letting hundreds of thousands of people into a foreign civilization, which is absurd from our Central European point of view.”

This dramatic ideological cleavage is not a “secret,” according to Orbán. He said that the documents and policy papers coming out of the EU shpw that the “clear aim is to transcend the nation.”

“But the point is that the powers, the sovereignty, should be transferred from the nation-states to Brussels. This is the logic behind all major measures. In their minds, the nation is a historical, or transitional, formation of the 18th and 19th centuries — as it came, so it may go. They are already in a post-national state in the Western half of Europe. It’s not just a politically different situation, but what I’m trying to talk about here is that it’s a new mental space.”

Orbán says that the Hungarian perspective is different, which is why the government is taking measures now to ensure it has a resilient social structure, and the first step is to combat Hungary’s demographic decline. He noted that progress in this area had been made in the preceding years but acknowledged that there has been a standstill and new measures must be taken.

“By 2035, Hungary should be demographically self-sustaining. There is no question of a population being replaced by migration. The Western experience is that if there are more guests than owners, the home is no longer a home. This risk should not be taken here.”

Orbán notes that not everyone in the West is happy about the demographic transformation taking place in their countries, and in many cases, there are strong majorities against continued mass immigration. This, in turn, has led to a sharp increase in repression against dissenting voices and increasingly undemocratic trends in Western countries.

And finally, the last element of reality is that this post-national situation that we see in the West has a serious, I would say dramatic, political consequence that is shaking democracy. Societies are increasingly resistant to migration, gender, war and globalism. And this creates the political problem of elites and the people, elitism and populism. This is a dominant phenomenon in Western politics today…This means that the elites condemn the people for drifting to the right. The feelings and ideas of the people are labeled xenophobia, homophobia and nationalism. The people, meanwhile, in response, accuse the elite of not caring about what is important to them, but of sinking into some kind of mindless globalism.

Consequently, the elites and the people cannot agree with each other on cooperation. I could mention many countries. But if the people and elites cannot agree to cooperate, how can it become a representative democracy? Because here we have an elite that does not want to represent the people, and is proud of not wanting to represent them, and here we have the people who are not represented.”

Continue reading at rmx.news