No. What Europe needs is more men like Orban. When two people have mutually incompatible views finding a compromise often isn’t the optimal solution. A wants more urine in the water supply while B wants none at all. So is just a little urine in the water supply a good compromise?
As silly a metaphor as ever I read!
All complex problems of this nature require compromise.. only a fascist sees one and only one solution: a final solution perhaps?
It seems a perfectly sensible example of how splitting the difference is not always the right solution. We could both think up many more, no doubt you might point to an example of a putative less extreme version of National Socialism.
And ‘only a fascist’ ? That is a stretch definition of the word ‘fascist’. Totalising thought is of course also common to Marxist-Leninism, modern identity politics, Islamism, and extreme environmental advocates.
The substance of the issue:- no, Hungary (and the UK) is under no moral obligation to accept people deposited on its borders by criminal people smugglers. It does not need to accept half of them.
Last edited 2 years ago by Andrew Fisher
Alex Cranberg
2 years ago
It is so refreshing to read this brief cogent analysis which (regardless of the actual prescription offered) eschews the usual hyperbole to focus on fundamentals
Well, I suppose if you ignore the actual prescriptions you could find it refreshing. I read the concluding sentence several times and still cannot make out what is being suggested.
I think it means that the concerns of the Somewheres should be recognised, rather than the views of the Anywheres being assumed to be as historically guaranteed to succeed, as Marxists thought of communism.
Andrew Fisher
2 years ago
Hungary is a small nation with a much reduced area from the traditional state after being considered a defeated nation in World War 2. It has every right in my view to protect its identity from mass and uncontrolled immigration. But in any case, it is of course impossible to solve the problems of the developing world by allowing everyone who wants to and can afford to pay a people smuggler from being able to enter and settle in your country. The people who advocate are never willing to specify any limits whatever to the scale of this migration. The asylum laws were designed for a different era, are now being abused on a huge scale, and either need to be reformed or ignored. Instead many Western nations prefer grubby deals, such as that between the EU and Turkey, to reduce migration flows.
Dominic Campbell
2 years ago
Orban is quite within his rights to protect his fellow citizens and their civilisation from a flood of alien immigrants. We can see the results in France, Germany, Sweden and of course the Uk. Unchecked immigration equates to invasion.
Liz Walsh
2 years ago
This Pope lacks gravitas. Many of us miss Benedict a great deal. If a leader of a nation does not put the interests of his nation primus inter pares, he’s not much of a leader. If a Pontiff does not effectively discriminate between what it is Caesar’s and what is God’s, it is not confidence-inspiring.
No. What Europe needs is more men like Orban. When two people have mutually incompatible views finding a compromise often isn’t the optimal solution. A wants more urine in the water supply while B wants none at all. So is just a little urine in the water supply a good compromise?
As silly a metaphor as ever I read!
All complex problems of this nature require compromise.. only a fascist sees one and only one solution: a final solution perhaps?
I suspect that whatever compromise is, or is not, negotiated, the reality, in the long-term, will turn out to be something different.
It seems a perfectly sensible example of how splitting the difference is not always the right solution. We could both think up many more, no doubt you might point to an example of a putative less extreme version of National Socialism.
And ‘only a fascist’ ? That is a stretch definition of the word ‘fascist’. Totalising thought is of course also common to Marxist-Leninism, modern identity politics, Islamism, and extreme environmental advocates.
The substance of the issue:- no, Hungary (and the UK) is under no moral obligation to accept people deposited on its borders by criminal people smugglers. It does not need to accept half of them.
It is so refreshing to read this brief cogent analysis which (regardless of the actual prescription offered) eschews the usual hyperbole to focus on fundamentals
Well, I suppose if you ignore the actual prescriptions you could find it refreshing. I read the concluding sentence several times and still cannot make out what is being suggested.
I think it means that the concerns of the Somewheres should be recognised, rather than the views of the Anywheres being assumed to be as historically guaranteed to succeed, as Marxists thought of communism.
Hungary is a small nation with a much reduced area from the traditional state after being considered a defeated nation in World War 2. It has every right in my view to protect its identity from mass and uncontrolled immigration. But in any case, it is of course impossible to solve the problems of the developing world by allowing everyone who wants to and can afford to pay a people smuggler from being able to enter and settle in your country. The people who advocate are never willing to specify any limits whatever to the scale of this migration. The asylum laws were designed for a different era, are now being abused on a huge scale, and either need to be reformed or ignored. Instead many Western nations prefer grubby deals, such as that between the EU and Turkey, to reduce migration flows.
Orban is quite within his rights to protect his fellow citizens and their civilisation from a flood of alien immigrants. We can see the results in France, Germany, Sweden and of course the Uk. Unchecked immigration equates to invasion.
This Pope lacks gravitas. Many of us miss Benedict a great deal. If a leader of a nation does not put the interests of his nation primus inter pares, he’s not much of a leader. If a Pontiff does not effectively discriminate between what it is Caesar’s and what is God’s, it is not confidence-inspiring.