Catastrophist analysis of the future of the 70ies generation in Hungary

Despite I always complain about Hungarian pessimism, I would like to warn young Hungarians about what sort of future might be awaiting them. As some Hungarian friend just told me on the phone, none. Of course, that was a joke. I hope my warnings don’t cause more pessimism, but help to understand the situation and act with responsibility.

I have the feeling that some of the worst legacies of Communism in Hungary have been pessimism, fear and conformism, which still remain in Hungarian society. I have met many people that think this way: ‘If something may go wrong, it will surely go wrong, so why try it?’ or ‘There is nothing worse than failure, so let’s not try anything new, let’s not assume responsibilities if they involve risks’ or even ‘What we have is bad, but there is nothing we can do to change it, it is always someone else’s fault’. Other examples of this mentality would be ‘Never admit one’s mistake, because that is something very shameful...’. I think that this attitude I’m talking about comes from the lack of freedom of the communist times, the ban on new ideas or attitudes, the paternalism of the State. People were not the entire owner of their own future, so they didn’t think about it with responsibility and only tried to follow the way marked by the regime and not make mistakes. They had to be careful not to show themselves too much, to be too original. Also, some of these characteristics may also come from the mixture of the equalitarian and paternal system that some anthropologists say it is part of the Hungarian culture. But this is too difficult to me.

A consequence of that is a need to follow orders, a strong effort to be within the main stream, and a lack of vision and responsibility towards the future. The future is decided by external rules, but never questioned by oneself. Of course, I am exaggerating in order to explain my ideas. But what I want to say is that people are uncomfortable with making their own decisions and are not used to thinking about their own long-term future.

But before I lose the thread, I would like to come back to the main point of this article, the future of the generation born in the 70ies, early 80ies. I would try to be concrete and schematic (something very difficult to me):

- With the change of regime, there was a need of newly educated working force. The old generation wasn’t good for many of the new posts of the new regime, some of them created with the arrival of foreign companies. Suddenly young generations (of the 70ies and early 80ies) had very good job opportunities, which in other countries only seniors have.
- Many of those young freshly employed have been enjoying better salaries than their parents, meaning that they have reached success in an early stage of their life. Of course, life has been difficult for many people, but a significant rate of young people has been very lucky and has had good opportunities and salaries. How many young people have a better car than their parents?
- Besides, many of them received support from their parents (like it used to be necessary during the communism) and got a free apartment, for example, a very common thing in Hungary which enormously eases their economic situation.
- So suddenly life became quite easy for them. Some of them may have experienced that they have everything they want without hardly any effort. Some of them don’t care much about the future because they never learnt how to do it, everything was quiet easy for them, they live the present, they have everything, more than they expected when they were kids, and they didn’t learn to have further ambitions because they are already better than their parents. They have provided themselves with all necessary (according to their parents) but they remain naïve and somehow scared before life.
- But future may be a little bit tougher, if they don’t learn to plan and care about it (which doesn’t mean adopting a catastrophist attitude, but having ambitions and fighting for it):
- The generation behind them may be an important competition in the labour market. They may be even better educated and the entrance of more people in the labour market will put pressure on salaries. Companies will be able to employ someone else, younger, cheaper and better prepared, so salaries will stop increasing.
- Also, the political situation has created a false reality in the country. The forint was too strong, so Hungary became suddenly expensive and people could buy foreign goods that some years before they could have not. Besides, people paid too little taxes in relation to what they got in exchange from the State. But the country’s economy had not grown as quickly as people’s purchasing power.
- Now they situation needs to be fixed, the state’s debt has increased a lot and it will need to be solved with more taxes and less benefits. People will have to work more to buy imported goods because Forint’s price has returned to the reality (the only way to be competitive, to export). Summarizing: more taxes, higher prices, less purchasing power.
- But one very important issue that affects youngsters is the retirement of their parents. On the one hand, the state won’t be able to pay the retirement of their parents, because it hasn’t enough money. Moreover, most of the aging people don’t have private pension plan, they never thought it was necessary. Besides, the living expectancy of the mature people is increasing significantly (better food and living conditions), and the birth rate is very low, which again it means the State won’t have money to pay pensions to retired people. Therefore, the people in the 20ies and 30ies now will have to provide for their parents, who will live long, too long....
- In the top of all, the young and casual generation will once feel like they need a family, which means much more expenses than living alone. And their parents won’t be able to help them anymore!

Well, this is just a catastrophist analysis, not to be taken too seriously, not to offend anyone (though I admit it sounds offensive). I just want to express some ideas (maybe a little bit provocative) that may be of some interest to someone. By the way, today I also went to the beach, fantastic weather, but it is going to change soon, so maybe it was the last day this year in Barcelona.

2nd October 2006

Banana republic of Hungary (the President shows himself as a good candidate in the ‘clumsy politicians’ contest)

Today I read in the Catalan press (unfortunately I don’t have the patience to read every day the Hungarian press, only check it in exceptional cases such as the current one) that right after the perfectly predictable results of the municipal elections, the Hungarian President accused Gyurcsány of threatening Hungarian democracy. His words were direct and tough, and although many of them were true, he shouldn’t have said that, because his position means he should not take part in the political fight between parties.

As he said, Gyurcsány’s resignation is not part of his competences. Therefore, he shouldn’t try to force his resignation with a very offensive speech. His attitude is at least as immoral as Gyurcsány’s. He is suggesting that Gyurcsány has not the moral authority to rule the country anymore (which I agree), but he is nobody to make moral judgements. Sólyom’s statement has no legal value, which makes it totally useless. It means that instead of stabilizing the country, he is trying to influence the people to protest against the PM. Some of the things he said were correct (defending democracy), but he lost all credibility when he attacked Gyurcsány.

The President should be aware of his competences and not make political campaign against one of the political parties. If he is not entitled to remove the PM, he should not express his opinion on this issue. It is not by chance that he is not allowed to decide who should or should not be the PM. Sólyom should only do his duties and not influence the people with his statements. It is the Parliament that has the power to swear in and remove the PM and discussions on the issue should be carried out there.

Please, Mr Sólyom, the President of Hungary has not much to do, so try to do that as best as possible and don’t complicate the situation. You give stability to the country, not substitute the Parliament in the political decisions, because this way you are withdrawing the legitimacy from the Parliament. You are the Head of the State, therefore you should be neutral in the political contest. I you are not authorised to remove Gyurcsány, then don’t try to force his resignation with tendentious statements.

The scandal of Gyurcsány’s speech seems not to get solved because the current politicians are incapable to face reality and make a brave decision. And now, the President of the country has showed himself as a good candidate to win the competition of clumsy politicians.

Én is a Szabadság téren vagyok!

Well, in fact, I’m on the beach, in Sitges. The weather in Barcelona is especially nice this year, and despite being October, the temperature is the same as in July.

However, I am demonstrating in the Szabadság square, at least my soul is. Just as many Hungarians are finally doing, although it didn’t look like it was going to have any consequence, because the PM is trying to keep its post at any price. But demonstrations have consequences, because people that are showing their disapproval to Gyurcsány’s words are a little bit freer than what they were before and this means that they won’t stay in conformity. I am glad to see that Hungarian society is recovering the freedom and the sense of responsibility that entails. Do not complain any more all day long, do something! That is the point. If you don’t like something, change it, and demonstrations are a way to participate and change things in a democratic society.

Large demonstrations will also have consequences because the people that have showed their disapproval won’t vote for this government anymore. Demonstrations will remain in the mind of the people and memories will come into their minds in the next elections. Some people say: the ones that are demonstrating are the same that voted for the opposition. But this is not true. There are always a lot of hesitant people in between the two main parties, and scandals like this may make them change their opinion. Demonstrations make people think, make people realise that something is wrong, and many of them will come to the conclusion that the PM should resign. I am glad to see that people don’t let themselves convince by Gyurcsány’s big words. I am glad to see that not everyone is so easy to cheat.

I am glad to see how demonstrators themselves took the issue seriously and stopped the hooligans that were using the political issue as a scapegoat for their frustrations. I am glad to see that after the first riots, peaceful demonstrations remained. When someone is demonstrating peacefully, it means that has something to say. If someone is demonstrating violently without any need for it, it means that has nothing to say. And Hungarians understood that and took distance from violent hooligans.

A normal PM should have resigned after the current scandal. But Gyurcsány didn’t, just like George Bush, who didn’t resign after it was discovered that the existence of massive destruction weapons in Iraq was a lie to justify the war. Gyurcsány doesn’t want to resign. But Socialists should have forced him to resign, and they will pay for having not done anything.

Fortunately Gyurcsány will have to resign after the results of the current municipal elections. Demonstrators are therefore lucky, because the municipal ballots will allow a more immediate success of their demonstrations. Without these elections, Gyurcsány could have probably stayed in power trying to rule the country (without success) and the Socialists would have surely lost the next legislative elections. But now the Socialists will have to get rid of Gyurcsány as soon as possible. It is their only chance to overcome the current crisis, try to rule the country during the next years and have some chances in the next elections. There is no other possibility for them. They have already lost a lot of posts in the city councils (a lot of Socialist politicians will lose their salary) due to Gyurcsány clumsiness and obstinacy, to his lack of ability to admit a defeat. He has damaged the Socialists enough and they won’t let him continue. His rivals within the party will have facts to base their criticism on, and with the defeat in the municipal elections he will have much more rivals than he had yesterday, many fellows angry because they lost their seats.

He says he is the only one that can save Hungary. What a vanity! Nothing more far from reality! He is just a member of a team. He is the leader, but only thanks to the support of the Parliament. He was part of an electoral list (yes, in the top position) and the Parliament can remove him whenever they want. Someone else could substitute him, probably maintaining the same team and project. He is already burnt-out, he has lost legitimacy because he hasn’t got the support of the country anymore and without support he can’t rule. It is not true, that he is the only existing leader. He and Orbán are the only ones not eligible to the post.

My analysis of the situation is the following:
- Gyurcsány and his team try to impose a reform in the Government and the institutions. As in any reform process, some people within the party oppose. He makes that clumsy speech to show his power and gain support among his colleagues.
- Some of the members of his party, probably the ones whose post could be threatened by the reform, leak the speech to the press to get rid of Gyurcsány. They want to maintain their posts, their influence, or even gain more power. The PM is betrayed by his enemies in the party.
- Gyurcsány doesn’t want to give up. He has enough support from his party to try to maintain his position. The reform is necessary. The Socialists (and their SZDSZ partners) that want the reform fear that without Gyurcsány they won’t have enough power to go ahead with the reform. They fear that internal opposition won’t let them carry out the reform. Without Gyurcsány, a battle within the Socialist party could jeopardize the reforms. They don’t realise that it is too late for Gyurcsány and that another solution should be found. They try to gain time. The PM hopes that people will accept the situation, go back to their homes and continue complaining without doing anything.
- The Socialists probably thought that Gyurcsány should continue with the unpopular reform program, get totally burnt-out and then one or two years before the next elections, substitute him by someone new (not disgraced by the unpopularity of the reforms). As they did with Medgyessy, and as they have been doing in the Barcelona’s city council during the last 10 years (which I believe it is not very democratic). This way, the unpopular (and necessary) reform program would only burn-out one socialist leader (Gyurcsány), and the party would prepare the next leader, removing Gyurcsány from his post one year before the elections in order to finally close the current crisis and to catapult a new politician towards the victory, ‘clean’ from the stain of this issue or the unpopularity of the reform.
-The results of the municipal elections (very predictable in a country with normal people) don’t give the Socialists any other chance than making Gyurcsány resign.

What should have been done:
- After the scandal of Gyurcsány’s statements, the MSZP and SZDSZ should have made the PM resign and should have appointed a new PM to carry out the reforms. They should have listened to the people, accept the situation and replace the fallen leader. With the change, the people would have calmed down and the new person would have enough legitimacy to rule the country. Gyrucsány, after his speech, his attitude and his lack of support won’t be able to rule the country, especially when there are some difficult reforms to be carried out. During difficult times, if the Government doesn’t have the support of the people, it is impossible to do anything. People won’t make any effort or sacrifice if they don’t believe in their leader. With a negative attitude and atmosphere in the country, the economy won’t take up.

- An alternative would have been a motion of confidence, right after the first week of demonstrations, but now it is too late.

Gyurcsány’s unforgivable mistakes:
- First of all, his speech. Even if the meaning of the speech was not wrong, there are expressions that can’t be used. It is not the same saying ‘I stole your pen but then I regretted it and gave it back’, or saying ‘I borrowed it and then I gave it back’. One politician can say that he made mistakes, or that he made bad decisions and policies, or that he didn’t carry the necessary reforms because the people wasn’t ready for them, but can’t say that he lied about the economic figures. He can say he showed the figures from a positive angle, but he can’t admit that he told lies. Words matter and admitting immorality (lies) is enough for people to remove their confidence from the politician. He admitted voluntarily having lied to the people, having cheated them to get their ballots, and this is unacceptable, he has lost the confidence of many people.
- Later, he was wrong presenting himself as a hero, as the only savour of the country. He should have admitted his mistake from the beginning. He shouldn’t have asked for people’s help. He is there to help the country, to rule it, not to save it. He is not indispensable, he is at the hands of the voters, who decide which candidate they want.
-He should have resigned after the demonstrations didn’t stop, or at least made a motion of confidence in the Parliament.
The incapability of the government to face the situation and to remove Gyurcsány from the power has made the MSZP lost the municipal elections and will probably drag the case until the next legislative elections. There is no need to make new elections now, but it is necessary to remove the PM and chose another Socialist of the same team. The country needs a reform, but the people need a leader that doesn’t appear to lie from time to time, someone they can trust.

The MSZP, SZDSZ and many Hungarians may be defending Gyurcsány as a way to counterattack the offensive of the right wing. They are building a bastion around the PM in order to repeal FIDESZ’ attacks. However, they don’t realise that they shouldn’t be repealing FIDESZ’ attacks but looking for an appropriate and original solution to the crisis, even if it agrees in some point with FIDESZ’ will. Hungarian society is very much divided and some cultural (almost racial) issues are mixed in that division, issues that come from the World War II. I think that a mature mind should understand that rejecting the right wing doesn’t mean doing always the contrary, and that they should admit that Gyurcsány made a big mistake and he is not appropriate anymore to rule the country. This doesn’t mean giving in before the right wing, it means looking for solutions to the current situation and having the maturity to make ones own decision, although it seems similar to right wing’s.

As they say, ignorance is brave. Taking into account the place where I am living (Barcelona), this might be a good example.

19th September 2006

Back to reality, retaking my blog and talking about Hungary

After years of ignoring my blog, something has happened that makes me write again.
Lately my life has been stricken by a stormy relationship, again my heart fell into the merciless clutches of a distance affair. Now I have been abruptly freed, which has somehow destabilized me and her departure has left a still rather perceptible whole somewhere inside. Trying to get back into track after one and a half year waiting and naively believing stories which again happened not to be true. Now, I have to discover what is reality and what was just an illusion, since a new light has illuminated what happened in the last year.

But what I want to talk about is Hungary, this was only some lines about my personal background.

Today even the Catalan media were constantly reporting on the demonstrations against the Government in Hungary.

I am just a foreigner that lived in Budapest for three years, learnt the language and travelled to the country every now and then for ten years. Therefore, my knowledge of Hungary is limited. As they say, ignorance is courageous, maybe that is why I am courageous to write these lines. But maybe I can offer a different point of view.

When two years ago Gyurcsány was appointed PM without elections (because his predecessor –a rather eccentric person- was forced to leave by his own party), I said to everyone that he was not good. Young successful businessman, it was clear to me that he made the money in a dirty way during the change of regime (like everyone that made money in Hungary during the change of regime, because corruption and dirty business was the norm at that especial period –and still is in Hungary, see the film Rokonok, from István Szabó-). I understand that if you are an entrepreneur and you lived in those times, you have to accept the reality around you and try to go ahead. But if you really made a lot of money, this means that you took part in really dirty things, that you probably had to be dirtier than other very dirty people. Therefore, I am sure that very rich people are not just accessories of the things that happened on those times, but also responsible for them. The more and the faster you increased your wealth during the change of regime, the more possible is that you have things to be ashamed of. Gyurcsány took advantage of the fast privatisation of those days. He was a member of the Socialist Party and used his contacts to his own interest. Of course, if he hadn’t done that, someone else would had, but not everyone with contacts accepted to get involved in that dirty way of stealing the last belongings of the State. In a normal situation, when a state company is privatised, free competition allows the state getting a good price for it (see the privatisation of the airport: the state is not accepting any price for it). But in those times, privatisations were done very quickly, and the state accepted any money for them because in fact the politicians ruling the state were using his power to benefit themselves before the authoritarian regime withdrew the perpetual power from their hands. Yes, everything was legal, but not right.

Also, I think that businessman and politicians are of a different kind, especially successful businessmen. Of course, there are both corrupt, politicians and businessmen. In fact, they are strongly linked. But their duties are different. And a politician is never 100% successful himself and is more used to vague ways of measuring the results and success. How can a successful businessman, used to ruling and being applauded, accept that his decisions have to favour also the people that are constantly opposing and annoying him? The truth is that I can’t explain it better, but somehow I feel that the managers of a company (which they own, at least a stake of it) is not in the same position as a PM, who doesn’t own any right on the people he is governing, but has just the duty to defend the interest of the people of the country. A businessman usually pursues his own interest or the interest of the people he represents (shareholders), but a politician is supposed to rule for all the people, also for the ones that oppose him.

Maybe is a matter of excessive ambition (they are used to making a lot of money, and working to earn more and more money) and a lack of democratic principles, such as accountability before the country.

Anyway, successful businessmen don’t make good politicians, at least most of the times, and it has something to do with the idea of serving the people instead of serving oneself.

Well, I am not the only one that disliked Gyurcsány. It was me and some other millions of people.

Also, I don’t want to mean that Orbán was better. While Gyurcsány seems to be immoral and pursuing his own interest, Orbán seems to be a dictator-alike politician, because he hasn’t understood that people already rejected him after having had his opportunity as PM. Orbán is ruling in the FIDESZ as if it was his own party, not a union of people representing ideas. Orbán was already rejected by Hungarians and should not stand for PM anymore.

Unfortunately some politicians believe that ruling the country is within their own rights, or represent a group that believes so. In these cases we have dictators, or dictators-alike politicians. But sooner or later they fail, since people are not a company, they are free, no one is in the right over them.

Anyway, I think that the statements of Gyurcsány and the way he has cheated the Hungarians (even about the economy!) proof that I was somehow right (me and some other millions of people). Even if he didn’t do anything different than other politicians, he should accept that people don’t trust anymore for his clumsy words and ideas and should leave his post: a politician without support can’t rule a country. The way he is trying to present himself as the savour of the country is really pretentious and embarrassing.

Finally, I have to say that I am very glad to see that Hungarian people are finally demonstrating in the streets and reacting to the events, not just complaining in the bus all day about everything they don’t do anything to change. Maybe one day will get rid of the communist oppressive inheritance and see themselves as somehow owners of their own fate? Maybe one day they will have the courage to be the masters of their own lives?