Translation of “Peter Boross: Immigration is not a cultural but ethnic conflict” (“Boross Péter: Nem kulturális, hanem etnikai konfliktus a bevándorlás”) appearing in conservative on-line daily magyarhirlap.hu.
The fate of our nation is the most important. In handling the crisis human considerations have to be sent to the back – says the former head of government.
The problem of immigration is neither one of civilization or of cultures but an ethnic conflict, emphasized Péter Boross to our paper in an interview, who believes all of this is the product of the failed Middle-East policies of the United States. The European Union needs to create a common armed forces, and impose peace in the crisis area together with the United States. The economy needs to be restored with US money and the immigrants need to be sent back. He also says that the center of the European Union should not be Brussels, which he believes works according to western left-liberalism, but the geographic center of the EU, somewhere in eastern Germany.
The left-liberals discovered Saint Stephen’s warnings to Prince Imre over the past months. What do you say about this?
It proves they only read part of the warning, or did not even see the actual text. Saint Stephen was our conquering king, who extended power over people speaking other languages. It is completely natural to accept from him the statement “A kingdom of one language and one set of customs is weak and fragile” inscribed on his banners in this way. But the line preceding the quoted one reads that “guests bringing different languages and customs increase the light of the court.” From this, it is apparent that after the expansion, Saint Stephen wanted to to keep the leaders of the conquered peoples in the court in order to prevent them from inciting the people against him. This was a correct approach, as he did not slaughter them but clarified with them the power relationship. By the way, Hungary’s willingness to accept immigrants after the Turkish conquest of the 16th century resulted in tragedy several centuries later, and culminated in Trianon. This is precisely why Hungarians are sensitive about immigration. The opposition’s statements either arise from ignorance or bad intentions, but truly go against the nation.
What consequences does the current migration hold for us?
If there was no European Union, only nation-states, operating in Europe, then presumably it would have been easy to stop this wave. Unfortunately, the European Union is only providing its impotence time and time again, and with this demonstrates the condition that in history large empires could only come about through conquest.
The community works under the legal direction of Brussels- Strasbourg-Hague. The geographical location of the center is also important. In that direction the aura of western left-liberalism clearly influences the European Union’s interpretative framework–that ideology which is a prisoner of human rights clichés. That is why the EU’s leaders dare not politicize honestly. Everything is affected by political correctness. Meanwhile, the western-centered union is expanding east in a decidedly different political minded area. This is why I think it is a logical question whether the center of the union should not be in Brussels, but in the geographical center of Europe, somewhere in Germany, and rather somewhere in the east. However, I think it is not by chance that this did not happen. Nor the fact that not a single central EU institution can be found in Prague, Cracow, or even Budapest.
The immigrants cannot adopt to Europe because of the different civilization—you can hear this statement a lot these days. Do you also share this point of view?
Today nobody dares to say that immigration is not a problem of culture and civilization, but an ethnic problem. At the same time millions of people speaking different languages and with a different skin color are arriving to Europe. It is very important that it is not only their culture that is different, but their instincts, as well as their biological and genetic properties.
It’s already a cliché that third generation immigrants in Western Europe stand in opposition to the peoples that took them in. What conclusions can be derived form this?
Culturally they should have assimilated a long time ago, since they attended the schools of their adopted state and are aware of the media, the relationship system, and the behavior habits of Europeans. But this failed. Cultural integration has not yielded anything good. Unfortunately, if this has not been a successful process in the case of the gypsies living with us, then there is not much chance that this is possible with the hoards of Muslims crossing the green border. The left-liberals are either totally indifferent or opposed to national motivations here and elsewhere. In fact, they work against the national interests. As they fill a defining political, economic, and media position in the European Union, we can have very big problems from this in the following decades.
Do you not fault the European Union for failing to strongly oppose the immigrants?
If the president of the European Commission was a politician of character, he would have warned Serbia not to place the immigrants on our borders. He simply should have slammed the table and told them that if they want to joint the European Union, then they have to take a strong stand against migration. Anyway, it was a huge political mistake to elect Jean-Claude Juncker as Commission president, who previously only led a country the size of a city, Luxembourg. He couldn’t have even sensed until now that a state exists in a different relationship system than a city. This is not a good reference for the leader of a community made up of nation-states. His uncertainty and incompetency arises from this. A personality like that of Chancellor Helmut Kohl is missing from European politics.
The immigrants should create order in their own countries, nearly every politician is of this opinion. But how can this be achieved?
The European Union should not be thinking in terms of its own refugee quota system, but in forming its own armed forces. After solidarity with the Americans it is first necessary to create peace in the Middle-East countries. Afterwards the refugees can return to their countries of origin. The countries must be put in order economically. This has to be done primarily with American money as they started the war in the region without thinking long term and based on momentary interests. The Americans live in a competitive culture that has no human content. The word “culture” should be understood here in quotation marks, as I would rather call them semi-literate.
What does that mean?
The thing is that the Americans enforce a ruthless approach by favoring the strong over the weak in everything. With them the strong are free to trample the week. They named this system “absolute democracy”. After putting their hands on the world, they think that from an “Arab spring” a functioning democracy will form. The multiplicity of their mistakes has contributed to the current situation. In reality, they are completely unsuitable intellectually to lead the world. Rome was wise back then. They left the conquered provinces in peace and officially adopted some of their gods in Rome. Washington does the opposite. It wants to impose its own God, Democracy, on the conquered countries.
Don’t you think it a hopeless task for Hungary to stop the waves of refugees? What will temporarily sealing the Hungarian-Serbian border achieve?
Prime Minister Viktor Orbán is doing everything he can, but the government’s hands are often tied by EU law. This is terrible because countries unaffected by the illegal border crossing are in a decisive position with regard to refugee matters. The government cannot be too hasty to take action because the consequences would be unforeseeable. Just remember that after previous disputes with the EU the question of taking away our right to vote came up. Solving the problem requires a comprehensive solution. I am convinced that such a solution will be born within a few months as it is necessary to act. I hope that Hungary would not be so foolish as to allow immigrants deported here from the West to remain on the grounds that we were the ones to register them. At the same time, the Greeks, on the other hand, did not do this, even though the migrants first crossed their borders, and in this way wash their hands.
Then what should we do?
Clearly we should also deport those who arrived here unlawfully. Unfortunately, the oppositions’ news broadcasters play on peoples’ emotions by showing the crying faces of children, and in this way manipulate public opinion. But the fate of our nation takes priority in this question, and human considerations must be sent to the back in handling this crisis. The Hungarian-Serbian border closure will not be a solution since neither Croatia nor Romania are members of the Schengen border defense union, and in this way they can only cross our borders from those directions. The fence, on the other hand, clearly shows our government’s firm resolve stop the immigrants. It cannot do more at this time.