About Jewry and anti-Semitism – Hungary is nervous before the elections
There is an election campaign in Hungary today and a lot of things fit into it, the struggle and the fight is completely legitimate. But a legitimate contest cannot legitimize all means and goals. Péter Márki-Zay, an opposition candidate (winner of opposition elections), sometimes speaks of Jews, while the pro-government media and pro-government Jewish public figures object to him. What is the reality of the situation and what is not?
- Is Péter Márki-Zay (MZP) anti-Semitic?
To do this, we should conceptually clarify what anti-Semitism is. In its common use, Jewry is a system of hate and a consistent system of thinking that predisposes to Jews (in its more advanced form), in which it returns as an enemy against Judaism. In this sense, the MZP is not anti-Semitic, and it is not clear from these statements that it sees Judaism as an enemy. What can be discovered, however, is the use of the concept of Judaism without context, taking the concept for granted, as well as the fact that it applies to whom it is intended, they may not ask for this use at all. Arthur Finkelstein’s (now deceased) right-wing media tax or other Jewish government’s advice to call a Jew cannot be anti-Semitic either, because these people were formerly Jewish before the general public, so this use is called – if the public is accepted – by others. also applicable and appropriate. Also for those who are in other corners of the political space. However, what is accepted may not be recommended. The leader of an opposition party coalition that includes Jobbik, which also produces actual problematic and ongoing anti-Semitic affairs, should avoid this type of allusion and naming in its communications because it is misleading.
- Is the sharp reaction of pro-government media to Péter Márki-Zay’s remarks justified?
During the election campaign, the opponents try to discredit each other and expire each other just to gain an advantage. Péter Márki-Zay translates his unreflected remarks as anti-Semitism in the pro-government press, because that is how he can best portray him, and this is the only language he considers his words to be politically translatable. This particular decoding is also aided by the leaders and personalities of the Jewish organization within the Fidesz government, who, merely as an expression of their loyalty, join in this campaign, and we look forward to reaping the rewards of loyalty after the election. The problem with this is, on the one hand, that they make the concept of anti-Semitism extremely shoreless and purely politically interpretable. This means that it is interpreted solely in a political context and only in connection with Fidesz does its accusation of desecration arise. Based on these readings, only the Fideszians can be downsized or just “listed”. Representatives of the government media and Allied Jewish forces are disturbed by the fact that for years the ruling press has taken for granted attacks on elected leaders and some rabbis of neolog Jewry (Mazsihis) and Jewish personalities as a matter of course. this type of communication, attacking only Jewish religious leaders, accusations based on traditional clichés, can reinforce anti-Semitism. Hence, anti-anti-Semitism, which manifests itself solely in the defense of its own government, “Jews,” as well as against the opposition, in the heat of the election campaign, is transparent and unreliable.
- But why are these many “anti-Semitic” articles born?
In Hungary, the situation in the 1990s (in the field of communication) was similar to the current one in many respects. Then the left created cases from which the anti-Semitism of the other “camp” could clearly be deduced. Today, it is as if the right has learned from the (already disintegrated) left-liberal camp at the time that anti-Semitism can be successful in the political struggle. The problem (and it used to be) is that, with presumptions of good faith or bad faith, there is no Jewish Vatican, no international Jewish body to which these complaints can rise and be judged. A real complaint to an imaginary and fictitious judge is not very effective. Delegating anti-Semitism exclusively to Jobbik, the political “outsourcing” of anti-Semitism, contradicts the widespread Hungarian anti-Semitism measured and documented by Hungarian sociologists on behalf of the Deed and Defense Foundation. There are anti-Semites not only among the Jobbikos. The insecure voters who may be targeted by this campaign may not be interested in this whole Jewish / anti-Semitic linguistic, political battle and mischief.
Anti-Semitism in Hungary is historically tied to the right and, although it has germs, even the power of Western European-style left-wing anti-Zionism is not limited to one or two (otherwise influential) Internet portals. The problem is also exacerbated because the weeding out of direct anti-Semitism from right-wing public life is commendable because the divisions between Jews and non-Jews in which anti-Semitism can re-emerge (e.g., politics of remembrance) are organically present on the right. And at that time we had not yet talked about the state communication with immigrants, “strangers”, György Soros, which could be a hidden medium for all the opposition to Judaism. Only then should we talk about the fact that the interests of Judaism are not just about providing elements of direct Jewish practice, because that does not in itself require democratic conditions. For these interests, even if Judaism feels among them, also depend on the establishment of those social conditions, as a result of which justice, fairness, and justice prevail.