Jenő Csiszár: Well, let’s get started!
Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for welcoming me so warmly. But the really big event here isn’t me, but the return of Jenő.
Prime Minister, I’ve been looking at your shoes, because the lighting’s good. Those kicks have been well polished. Did Santa Claus stuff them, or were Santa Clauses queuing up to fill them?
I really love chocolate, so instead of putting out shoes on the window ledge, I always put out boots. That’s what I did this time too, and I wasn’t disappointed. My wife’s a good woman who takes good care of me. But what’s even dearer to my heart is that every afternoon on the 6th [of December], I wait for a phone call from my mother, who says, “Vikki, when are you coming? Santa Claus has left a package for you here.” Once a child, always a child.
I’m here to do my show “My Dad’s World”, and you, Prime Minister, are doing “My Mum’s World”. But the order is very important, because mother always comes first.
That’s strange, because I’m going to say two things that point in different directions. I learned that women hold families together: men come and go, but women stay. And no matter how many of us get together anywhere, we always end up sitting in the kitchen while my mother cooks. This clearly shows that women are at the centre of everything. At the same time, I think there’s a problem with men, and we need to take care of them. I feel that some of Hungary’s problems lie less with women and more with us men. This isn’t why we’re here today, it’s a topic for another conversation, but I feel that men should do more for their families. Let me give you a small example. There’s a subsidised football academy in Topolya/Bačka Topola, with both Serbian and Hungarian children. I asked the head of the academy, who’s Hungarian, whether the difference in mentality that I’m most familiar with among adult male athletes – specifically in football – also exists in Topolya/Bačka Topola, where they live together in a mixed community. He said that Serbs are better fighters, mentally stronger. And I asked him to explain why. He said that when he stands at the gates of the academy and parents and grandparents are bringing their children, the situation is as follows: Hungarian children are brought by their mothers, Serbian children by their fathers. To this my wife says, “Of course, that’s because Hungarian men are lazier.” I don’t think that’s true – instead I think that the division of labour is different. I think the essence is that in Hungary men are more often absent from their families than we think. I don’t know how to solve this, or whether it should be solved from within – from the heart – or from outside; but men are missing from families, and this is evident in the way children are being brought up. Sorry, that’s not why we’ve gathered here together.
No, no, no, no, no, don’t apologise – this is very important. But, you know, you’ve been promoting me – and promoting me frighteningly well.
You?
Of course, I’ve never had such promotion in my life. You’ve crafted a moving pedestal for my profile portrait, like I’m a target in a fairground shooting gallery. In one week, we’ve received so many messages and questions that we won’t be able to cover many of them because we don’t have much time.
In a way, Jenő, I’m indebted to you. There is and was a show called “My Dad’s World”.
Yes.
It was in the nineties.
And I wanted to ask if you listened to it.
That’s what I want to say. This is in the nineties – older people remember this, so it’s young people who should be paying attention. In the nineties, when the great wave of freedom broke, all kinds of new programmes appeared, there were these laugh-a-minute shows that have endured to this day. Thanks to the great rush of freedom, somehow in the nineties everything was – perhaps understandably – so superficial: it felt so fake, so performative. And then suddenly there was a show that wasn’t fake, that was real, that was serious, that didn’t just surf on the surface, but wanted to dive deeper. I was a busy man even then, and back then my vanity prompted aesthetic considerations within me – it matters how a person looks. So I used to go to the gym – but late at night, only after work. And in the gym the radio was always on. Jenő, all of…
No!
Yes, yes, I was pumping iron to the sound of your voice.
So then. It was a stroke of luck that you didn’t get stuck under the weight. Prime Minister, I don’t need to tell you that I won’t be conducting a political interview, but instead we’ll be using the structure of “My Dad’s World”.
We don’t know what will happen, but something will.
I’ll try to bring back “My Dad’s World”. I can promise two things – no, three things – that I have to deliver. There could be Jerk of the Week…
Jerk of the Week… Great.
To nominate the Jerk of the Week. To nominate the Awesomeness of the Week.
That’s easier.
And My Dad’s World was about me chatting away and playing music. There won’t be any music now, but the listeners have sent in all kinds of questions and messages. Nothing will be fake and no taboos.
Okay. Difficult.
Things are heating up.
Yes, I’m looking for the emergency exit.
So we’ve collected them, we have forty minutes, and we’ve already used up ten, so now we have thirty minutes. Let’s get going, because there are some serious topics too.
Okay!
So first, back to the promo, I’d like to promote you because Viktor’s news channel launched a few days ago.
Ah! You see?
The news channel. Go ahead, check it out! That one’s alright too, that one’s alright too. You can vote on this. You can vote on two entries in Awesomeness of The Week, and you can also vote here. Entry number one: the minimum wage will increase by 11 per cent.
That’s really awesome, yes.
Quite major awesomeness. Entry number two: after twelve years, the Hungarian women’s handball team is back in the world championship quarter-finals.
That’s also really awesome, and we beat the Romanians in the process – so that’s two awesomenesses.
And now let’s look at the jerkishnesses! Entry number one: Tisza has disowned its own austerity package and is also disowning its own experts. That’s one entry.
This is a two-directional jerkishness. One direction is towards us. If you ask for the public’s trust, then you should say what you want to do with it. There’s a problem there, but it’s a minor one. I don’t think that would win. But when you push your own experts aside, that’s not fair. They’re working, Heaven knows how many…
They study at three or four universities, they get their degrees…
They work for months, they compile tables, in which Tisza comes out badly, because it can only come out badly. And then Tisza says, “Who are you? I don’t even know you – goodbye!” This is also a problem, no doubt about it. That’s the bigger deal.
And entry number two: Brussels would kill the cuts in household energy bills by banning Russian natural gas and oil.
Major jerkishness.
That’s right.
We can use this expression because in jerkishness there’s something human, isn’t there? Of course, we’re talking about Brussels, where there isn’t much humanity, but there’s still something human in the word jerkishness. It’s a good word, by the way, it encompasses many things.
Thank you very much.
One of its meanings is that you don’t care about others. That’s arrogance, isn’t it? When you do something that you think is good for you, but you don’t care what happens to others. And I’m sure I could find arguments to show how well thought out the considerations behind the Brussels decision are, but it’s certain that considerations affecting us aren’t among them. So what will happen to us as a result of their decision – that Russian oil and natural gas can’t be imported into Europe, and therefore not into Hungary either – might not be a big problem from France’s point of view. But what will happen to us, whose lives – or at least our families’ budgets and the success of our businesses – depend on this, on whether or not we have it, and at what price? So anyone who doesn’t take that into account… For example, President Trump didn’t follow that route. He also made a decision to impose sanctions. History will decide whether that decision was right or wrong, but then we told him, “Mr. President, this will kill us. You obviously haven’t made this decision to push the Hungarians around, but it will kill us, so make an exception.” He said, “I understand”, and he did what we asked. So that’s fine. In Brussels there’s no point in me saying, “Make an exception”, because I’d say this, and since – up until now – sanctions require unanimity, if they didn’t make an exception voluntarily, I’d veto it. This isn’t stubbornness, it’s just standing up for what’s right. Now they’ve come up with the idea of reclassifying them, and from now on they won’t be considered to be “sanctions”, but “trade policy decisions”. For the lawyers I’ll say that sanctions require unanimity, but trade policy decisions don’t. And now they’ve bypassed us. This is jerkishness.
Then we’ve agreed. Let the vote begin.
Can’t I nominate something? Excuse me, can only you nominate, or can I too?
Well, of course.
These are your picks.
Okay, here you go, here you go then. But then you’ll be influencing…
Yes, yes, I’ll be influencing them. Okay, okay, but I admit…
But you’ll be influencing them: if you like it, well, if Viktor Orbán likes it, then…
Don’t underestimate the rebels, Hungarians’ capacity for resistance.
Not the viewers but the trolls, who could have started the vote at this very moment.
Okay, I don’t care, we don’t need them – it doesn’t matter, they’re not here.
Okay, they’re not here, okay.
My pick is different, because I think it’s a kind of jerkishness to constantly plunder Brussels’ coffers while lecturing Hungarians about corruption. Then it comes out, and they get arrested. That’s what happens in Brussels.
Okay, but I think that’s awesome.
Okay, then yes.
They’re arrested, finally! Awesome, right?
Yes. So what do we enter this one under?
Prime Minister, now…
It’s good for both.
Let’s put this to the vote! Who says this is jerkishness? Raise your hand! And who says it’s awesome that they’re locking them up just like that, and we finally get the win?
You lost, Jenő.
Okay. I’ve said my piece, because, according to the old wisdom, it’s good for someone to lose to a prime minister.
Yes, yes. But now we’re joking about it, and maybe as it’s Saturday and the weekend we’re allowed to joke about serious things from time to time, but this is a serious matter…
That’s right.
Because, citing some fault they find in us, the rule of law and so on, they want to impose all kinds of serious sanctions on us – which we defend ourselves against when we can, but sometimes we suffer. And meanwhile their record in these matters is much worse than ours. So the fact that Brussels is abusing its power is a serious matter. It’s called us to account on matters in which its record is much worse than ours. How is this possible? This is a serious matter, because it’s costing blood – or if not blood, then billions of euros. There’s a lot at stake here – even if we joke about it, because the whole thing’s truly absurd. It’s as well to recognise that this is a brazen, insolent and shameless abuse of power, which has consequences, and which we must fight not only jokingly but also seriously. I’d like to express my gratitude for the support I’ve received from Hungarian voters in this campaign – including, I believe, the people of Kecskemét, who have always given me their full support. Jenő, I know you don’t follow political statistics; but we’re in Kecskemét now, and I can say without any sentimentality, straightforwardly, man-to-man, that the people of Kecskemét have never let me down, even in the most difficult times. And I’ve never let them down in the most difficult times either. But to put it positively, we’ve always been able to count on each other, and I hope this will continue to be the case in the future. We’re in a very strong national, right-wing, Christian fortress.
That was the light-hearted introduction, okay? So, a light-hearted introduction. Now, continuing in the style of “My Dad’s World”, I’ll throw out a topic and let’s see what questions there are. And, of course, tomorrow is the second Sunday of Advent. That’s the hope. At the moment, the slogan is, “Those who want peace, are with us” – and it’s more than a slogan, it’s a serious matter. It’s a great honour for me to be able to talk to you now, because this war is very hard for me. You see, we have two 18-year-old sons, twin boys. Their mother was a professional athlete. My sons want to be professional athletes, that’s their career path. They play water polo.
Good luck!
And I don’t want them to die in a war. Because that’s not what we had in mind. Right? And meanwhile I read all kinds of crazy things about the need to launch a pre-emptive strike against Russia. I’m reminded of the timeless wisdom in [the Hungarian film] “Üvegtigris”: “Is everyone here stupid?” It’s just that I’ve got children here, you’ve got children and grandchildren, and everyone’s got… So this isn’t a game. Someone presses a button, and then…
I have two things to add to that. The first is that war – wherever it is, but especially if it’s in your neighbourhood – is a painful thing. So these aren’t toy soldiers, and they aren’t toy weapons, and they’re not electric gadgets that you can use to simulate war at home. This is a war in which people are dying. And it’s not only painful that they’re dying, but that after each death there’s a widow left behind, a mother in mourning, and an orphan. Every death is a human tragedy – not only for the person who dies, but also for those who survive. This is a war in which many people are dying. It’s not my place to judge them, but these are two Slavic peoples – some say one, but we don’t need to discuss that now. In any case two Slavic peoples, and the Slavs are good soldiers – and also quite cruel. So when Slavs go to war, it’s painful, it’s brutal, there’s very little mercy – you can hear it and you can see it. So war is bad. This is why I think we owe thanks and gratitude to God that America finally has a president who, in my opinion, hates war. I’m not saying that he doesn’t use it or that he doesn’t wage war from time to time, but I’m certain that he hates war from the bottom of his heart, because he believes that by definition war is a bad thing. I’m sure about that. And we Hungarians need to grasp this opportunity, because finally there’s a much bigger player in international politics who wants peace. The other question we must ask, based on what you say, is how close this is to us. Because war is bad in itself, but will it reach us? Can we take seriously the warning signs that I often send, that this is a war we could be drawn into, or could be dragged into? And the news I have to share with you is bad. So this war isn’t far away, and it’s not only geographically close, being in a neighbouring country, but it’s also politically close. And now, I don’t want to spoil your Advent, but I have to say that European leaders have decided that Europe is going to war: the decision has been made. It’s not “maybe” or “possibly”, or “they’ve taken leave of their senses”. It’s already happened: I sit there among them, the decision’s been made, it’s been written down, and they’re even saying it. The official position of the European Union is that by 2030 the European Union must be ready for war – a war to be fought against Russia. They’re building a war economy. You don’t build a war economy in two months. They’re converting vehicle manufacturing to weapons manufacturing, to the production of armoured vehicles. I could list the examples. There’s also a branch of scholarship involved in studying pre-war periods. This is something that social scientists study, I read about it, and according to the classical view, there are four stages of war, of war expansion. The first is when diplomatic relations are severed. This has happened. The second is when economic sanctions are introduced and economic cooperation is cut off. We’ve been through that too. The third is when conscription and the transition to a war economy come into play. This is where we are now, this is where Brussels is. And the fourth is the stage of conflict. So it’s no coincidence that we’re holding large anti-war rallies. These aren’t called this because we had no better idea, but because that’s the danger. Now, for Hungary to ensure that Europe stays out of the war is a task that needs to be worked on, but we must be aware that it’s beyond our power. Here, we can only pray that God won’t take away the minds of the leaders of countries that are much stronger and more powerful than us. But if as a Hungarian you can’t prevent Europe from marching into war, what can you do? One only needs to open a history book, and see this is not a new task: you have to stay out of the war. And the only question is this: Are you able to stay out of the war? Even though we wanted to, we weren’t able to stay out of the First World War, and we weren’t able to stay out of the Second World War either, when we also wanted to. István Tisza didn’t succeed, and neither did Miklós Horthy. We need to understand why they didn’t succeed, and if we want to stay out of the next one, how to do it. I’m not saying that I think about this day and night, but in my work I do spend a lot of time thinking about it. I’m not going to share all my thoughts on this with you now, because then we’d still be sitting here until next Advent; but I just want to say that in order to stay out of war, you need strength. The weak are always pushed into war. This is why we must seize every opportunity to make Hungary strong. You have to be strong in economic terms, politically, and in terms of protecting sovereignty, so that when the difficult moment comes you’re able but only to say “no”, like Tisza did – because Tisza said “no”, but then he was ground down by the Viennese machine and ultimately consented to the war. Or when for a long time Miklós Horthy said “no”, but then in 1944 the Germans occupied Hungary and pushed us into the war – and we’d even taken such steps earlier. So we must pay attention to history, learn from it, and prepare ourselves so that we can stay out of it if what we want to avoid actually happens: if Europeans really go to war in 2030. It won’t be easy, it will be complicated, and it will take mental strength. The angels of war – but I think they’re rather the devils of war – always convince people that you’re better off with war than without it. There will be a great temptation. We’ll have to resist it, defeat evil, and stand up for peace. That moment will come, and I’m preparing myself spiritually for it. I could also say that I don’t want to take the conversation, Jenő, excuse me, into an electioneering direction…
No, not at all, I’m drinking in your words. Well, this is serious!
…but I could also say that the 2026 election, which awaits us in April, will be the last election before the war. Whatever government we have in 2026, that government will have to fight for Hungary and save Hungary from the threat of war that’s very likely to be approaching us. Whatever kind of government we have in 2026 will determine our fate in relation to the war. If we have a pro-Brussels government, they will drag us into the war. If we have a national government that isn’t pro-Brussels, then we’ll have the chance – and even the strength – to stay out of it. We’ll have the chance to stay out of it.
I said that there are text messages, questions – of course we try to become interactive to some extent. But what I found a few days ago, from a rather clever economist named Jeffrey Sachs, fits in here…
I don’t know him in a personal sense, but I’ve known him as an economist since 1992.
Yes, he said that “Hungary has found itself in a diplomatic situation that’s rare in Europe. Washington, Moscow: Viktor Orbán is a grand master of dual-track diplomacy.”
Then at the end, at the end…
Then he continues, and this is what you were talking about, and it’s very serious: “Budapest is a durable bridge between rival geopolitical blocs, and so not only peace” – and this is very important, what you’re doing – “but also continuity in economic policy history, which are things after peace arrives.” This is being said by a smart American…
Yes, and I think he’s right about that. I don’t always agree with him on everything. He was a great theorist on the problem of economic transition, on how to move from communism and a planned economy to a market economy. Having talked to him a lot, our views didn’t coincide on that; but I think that on this issue I tend to agree with what he’s said. Because it’s not just a matter of gathering strength and figuring out how to stay out of it, but also what happens after you’ve stayed out of it. Because if you’re one or two steps ahead of the others, then you’ll be successful. Big countries don’t have to be very smart, but we do. A big country is strong, it has size and power, and even if it’s late in figuring something out, it can still assert its interests. But a country the size of ours has to be smart: “bubek”, as they say in Pest. You have to go ahead, you have to be one or two steps ahead of everyone else in your thinking, and your actions must also be in line with that anticipatory thinking; then you can overtake countries that are larger than yours, or you can be competitive with them – otherwise you’ll always lag behind them. This is why a country the size of ours can’t afford to be stupid. I’d also like to draw your attention to this in our political decisions: stupid people should never be elected to lead the country, because we’ll pay the price for that many times over. This doesn’t mean that philosophers and intellectuals of all kinds should always be put in charge of the country, because the intelligence I’m talking about refers more to natural intelligence than to education. Education isn’t a bad thing, it doesn’t harm people, but it’s not what matters – what matters is whether natural intelligence and a good heart are in balance with each other. This is why politics is open to everyone, and I encourage everyone’s involvement. So politics isn’t just a career path open to people who have graduated from elite schools; any decent person can become a leader, because you need a different kind of intelligence – not academic intelligence. Returning to the question, what Sachs says is important. Are we preparing for the post-war world? I can report that we are. In fact, I’m generally preparing for everything – for example, I’m preparing for us to win in April 2026. I don’t mean what you think I mean – that I’ve already got the champagne on ice. That’s not what I mean by thinking ahead. No, there are small expert working groups whose job it is to look at what hasn’t worked well over the past fifteen years or the past four years, or what’s become outdated and needs to be done differently from how it’s being done now. And they should have plans, because now we’re going to campaign, and there’s a street fight. So we can’t think about these things. But there are people who are thinking about, for example, the structure of government, which is a complicated machine: where it needs to be adjusted – especially in view of the threat of war – so that it works better than it’s been working so far. So thinking ahead is important – and also in international politics. Although I can’t reveal every detail, I make no secret of the fact that I’m negotiating with the Americans about what kind of economic cooperation there should be between Hungary and America after the war. And I’m also negotiating with the Russians about what will happen if the entire sanctions system is lifted, because it won’t remain in place forever. They don’t want to cut Russia out of the Western global economy, but rather to do business with it again and build economic relations with it. So we Hungarians need to be ready to take advantage of this at the right pace and in the right way. So in this sense, for example, I’m preparing for a large business delegation to visit Moscow in early December in order to specifically discuss the issue of economic cooperation. So we need to think ahead, because if God helps us, the war will end without us getting dragged into it. Let’s assume that the American president is successful, reintegrates the Russians into the global economy, the sanctions are lifted, and we find ourselves in a different economic space. Right now we’re in a space defined by sanctions, which is pushing us together, making us huddle together, because we’re prohibited from doing things. But if the American–Russian agreement is in place, that space will expand. And then those who are prepared will be best able to seize the space and take advantage of the opportunity. So Professor Sachs is right.
Well, it’s good that I introduced that into the conversation, that I found that – lucky, so a lucky stroke. Even a blind hen can find a grain sometimes. We need to speed up, because there are so many questions and topics, and very little time. We’re moving forward, not backward, so we’re keeping an eye on the time.
I’m on board.
So Kamilla Szántó has written in about this topic, and I don’t think I need to comment on it, because on the subject we’re talking about now there are those who don’t think the way we do: “There’s this constant talk everywhere: Brussels, Brussels, Brussels… war, war, war… Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine. Surely even you don’t think that anyone would believe that anyone would want this war?” Briefly, really.
That point is smarter than you’d think from the way you read it out.
Okay, I read it out. Point taken.
If I may say so.
“Let Viktor Orbán praise you.” Thank you very much!
No, no! But you probably read it that way because you assumed there was malice behind the question.
Yes. Is that a problem?
And there probably was.
Okay.
But that doesn’t mean the question isn’t a good one. God can make good things come out of bad things, so this is a malicious but important question. And it’s indeed difficult, and I think that whoever asked the question, even if they probably don’t sympathise with us now…
Kamilla Szántó.
…is a sensible lady, because this is an important question. With two world wars behind us, for a sensible person it’s hard to imagine how the heck anyone could possibly think that a war could turn out well, and that therefore war could be a goal. A normal person doesn’t believe that, and it doesn’t make sense to us, it seems absurd. But unfortunately this isn’t the case. Partly it’s because those wars were a long time ago and didn’t affect everyone in the same way. We have a history of suffering – I’m not saying that no one else’s was as great as ours, but ours was exceptionally severe. If we do a quick calculation, we lost 900,000 people in the First World War, we lost 600,000 in the Second World War, 200,000 people fled immediately after the Soviets arrived, then 200,000 Germans were deported, and then, in 1956, around 200,000 left. If I add all this up, that’s 2.1 million people we lost. That’s our history of suffering. If these people were still alive, along with their children and grandchildren, we wouldn’t be talking about demographic problems, or about being a small country, or things like that. We’d be a powerful force. So I just want to say that not everyone has a history of wartime suffering that’s as huge and deep as ours. If we look at it, not every country was bombed as badly as we were – especially, say, Budapest. I don’t know the history of Kecskemét from this point of view, but I do know the history of Budapest – which the Germans declared a fortress, blowing up all the bridges, and shelling Pest from Buda; meanwhile the Russians came from the east with massive ground forces and shelled the city, and the Anglo-Saxons bombed it. Well hello! Anyone who doesn’t understand this doesn’t understand foreign policy. Hungary can only count on itself. And if we don’t do it right, we could end up in a situation in which everyone is our enemy instead of our friend. So what I’m saying is that the devastation of war is much more deeply ingrained in the Hungarian soul and much more deeply ingrained in our instincts than it is in those of many Western European politicians. Therefore what’s obvious to us – that war can only be bad – isn’t thought of in the same way in the West. They think, for example, that money can be made from it. And in this matter money is increasingly taking over. Take a look and watch what happens over the coming week. There’s increasing talk about what will happen to the 200–230 billion euros in frozen Russian assets. It’s been there all along, but up until now they’ve been reluctant to talk about it. Now, however, they’re talking openly about it, because if the Russians and the Americans come to an agreement, they’ll take that money off the table. It’s difficult to imagine that one of the world’s best-equipped presidents – in terms of professional service – on the Russian side, and one of the best-equipped American presidents on the other side, would leave a large pile of money on the table. But the Europeans have thought that this would be money they’d get – and, of course, that they’d give this money to Ukraine. But what will the Ukrainians spend it on? According to the news, they’ve signed agreements with the French to purchase a hundred fighter jets, with the Germans for this, and with the Italians for that. So there are a lot of huge arms deals going on here, which will ultimately benefit Western European countries, with this money eventually finding its way back to them after circulating for a bit. And as we get deeper and deeper into the war, the economic lords of war, the warlords, will exert an increasingly strong influence on decision-making. So already after some time… Excuse me, according to the records, in the First World War Franz Joseph would have accepted everything the Serbs had demanded earlier – no, but in the end they’d have implemented them, saying that then there would be no war. But the soldiers in Berlin said, “We’ve already started.” I just want to say that as time goes by, war decisions are increasingly slipping out of the hands of politicians and being transferred elsewhere – partly to soldiers, and partly to economic specialists. So diplomacy must retain its authority, its power, its centrality in decision making – because, after all, we are the ones authorised to represent the interests of the people; otherwise power will slip away into the hands of war-driven and economic figures representing narrow, vested interests. And that causes trouble. So my message to this lady is not to assume that her way of thinking is universal. She’s smarter and more level-headed than most Western European leaders, so she should take the threat seriously.
You’ve convinced me. Okay. I’ve forgotten the lady’s name, haven’t I? I didn’t write it down, okay.
After all, she was right after all.
Okay. Zoltán Kakucska: “Only the wing beats of a hummingbird are as fast as Jenő Csiszár’s tongue.” And so we come to domestic politics. Another gem popped up this week. You should only quote classics accurately, shouldn’t you? So, what I’ve gathered about this is the following: “A forged, imaginary, non-existent, but fake document that Viktor Orbán cobbled together on ChatGPT.” Well, it’s the Tisza Party’s economic policy strategy. Three sentences.
Oh!
Why, does it deserve more?
Yes, I think it does. This ChatGPT thing is serious stuff. Once I had to quickly write a speech on the topic of economic neutrality. And one of my colleagues said, “Let’s not kill ourselves, let’s just type a request into ChatGPT, and it’ll write it for us – let’s see what comes out.” I said, “Let’s see!” In a few minutes, I got a speech that was 80 per cent okay. I even asked for a radical tone, emphasising national sovereignty. That’s how it was written. So what I’m trying to say is that, regardless of Tisza, there’s something on the horizon that needs to be addressed, which could be either a blessing or a curse. I don’t know what will come of this, I just want to say that there’s something here that separates performance and words and image from the person, from the owner of the thought itself. Something’s happening in the world, and we need to be prepared for it. Coming back to the Tisza Party, we can see it’s good for something: it brings out these thoughts in people. As for its economic programme, Jenő, I can’t talk about it in two sentences. A lot of people in Hungary believe that there are many types of economic policies to choose from, since people have so many good ideas, and we’ve got so many excellent economic policymakers who know what needs to be done. But the truth is that when things are brought together, the measures, the proposals, the plans, there are really only two types of economic policy on the table: either right-wing or left-wing. This can be analysed at length, but there’s a key point which I’d like to say. I rarely have the opportunity to talk about this…
So I’ve leaned back to just listen.
…but, insofar as it’s worth delving into these programmes, there’s a core issue here. The difference that separates the two options before us, from which we and our politicians – but also we as voters – will have to choose, is what we think about where money should be spent. Those on the Left think that it’s not good for money to be in the hands of ordinary people and businesses: money’s in the right place when it’s in the hands of politicians. This is because, according to them – and there’s some logic to this – the world is unfair, and injustices must be corrected somehow. And when injustices arise in the economy we should intervene, take the money away, and instead of letting the economy itself decide where the money flows, we ourselves, through political decisions, should direct the money here and there. And this will create a more just world. This is an attractive idea, but the problem is that every time it’s been tried it’s only ever led to disaster. This is because politicians are human beings too, they can make bad decisions, and so on. The extreme form of this is the planned economy, the world of state seizures of food and produce, which we can trace all the way back to Karl Marx. Those on the Right think differently about this. They think that of course we’re a community, a nation, a city, and we have common needs: we need police, we need public lighting, we need to heal the sick, and we need to care for the elderly. So we need money for collective purposes, but we should only take from people what’s necessary for this, and leave the rest with them – because then they’ll decide what’s good for them and what’s not. And we shouldn’t decide what’s good for businesses – they’ll decide that. This is why the Right says that we need a minimal state, a state that takes only what’s necessary for its functions and leaves the rest where it is. The end result of this is that the Left always raises taxes, and the Right always lowers them. That’s all you see – and at the end of the day it’s a difference in thinking. I just want to say that of course I don’t know how they put this programme together, but it’s a textbook left-wing programme. The end result is tax increases. And it wasn’t written by stupid people. They’re scratching around in the right place. For example, I took a look at the dog tax, right? Or a canine tax, or whatever you want to call it.
I wanted to ask about that.
Sorry, I can’t comment on a cat tax, as there’s no register of cats, so I don’t know if that makes economic sense. But what, for example, did I find out about dogs? I found that Hungary has the highest number of dogs per capita in the entire European Union: there are 29 dogs for every 100 Hungarians. So when the Left is thinking about what grounds they could use to take money from people, perfectly logical grounds are provided by dogs, for example: “If there are so many of them, and we’re in such a leading position in European terms, then let there be a dog tax too.” I just want to say that these little absurdities, for which the authors will of course be punished by the voters, aren’t stupid in themselves. But when they’re arranged according to left-wing logic, they paint this picture of the world: “We will decide for you what will be done with the fruits of your work.” And in terms of economic policy I think this is the dividing line that we need to take into account.
We have very little time.
No, we have as much time as the audience want before they go home.
Okay, okay, okay. So, according to this, the “My Dad’s World” vibe is comfortable for you.
Sorry, but this is very important. They didn’t come because of us: we came because of them.
Prime Minister, if you continue like this, there will be a standing ovation at the end. I’d like to read a question sent by SMS from someone named Zsolt Józsa. He writes: “‘Ask anything’, exclamation mark, ‘I won’t answer anyway. That’ll be a good show too.’ Let’s say I ask where Fidesz’s economic programme is – when will the Prime Minister announce it?” He’s also well-meaning, isn’t he?
Yes, yes.
So okay. Of course.
Yes, but all malice can be used for something good. I read and learned from Széchenyi that it’s very important to use the stones that are thrown at us to build a staircase. How true! Now, for example, this obviously malicious question would give me an opportunity for this, but I don’t want to bore you by reciting Fidesz’s economic programme. But it offers an even greater opportunity, because I won’t recite it, but instead play my ace: we’re a governing party, and our programme isn’t on paper, but in real life. So that’s what we’re doing! My dear friend, look, here it is!
Terrible…
I’m playing for three points, not for a draw.
It’s terrible, terrible, because I have to look around for something that will fit in, but we said that “My Dad’s World” will get tough. Klára Dobrev [leader of the opposition party Democratic Coalition] wrote this.
Well! We didn’t get out of bed for nothing. Yes?
“For twenty-four hours we’ve known that Péter Pál Juhász, the monster from Szőlő Street [juvenile correctional centre], has abused an underage victim. How long will you continue to shield paedophiles?”
I think it’s an important question.
“When Semjén needed to be shielded, you spoke up immediately. Now you’re silent. How long will this continue?”
I’m going to say some harsh things, but it’s Advent, so I’ll try to do so gently. First, let’s take the question seriously. In my opinion, anyone who touches children should be chopped up into little pieces. There can be no argument about that!
[Clapping] Sorry, I’ve slipped out of character.
As my mother would say, I’d scratch his eyes out. The other thing is just so I don’t let that one lie. The questioner’s husband was prime minister, and so their record is that of a left-wing government. And in the data I see that before 2010 there were 80 paedophiles in prison; since 2010 – according to the latest figures – there are 700. So who’s shielding whom?
Can we move on? “My Dad’s World.”
Smaller than little pieces: I wouldn’t be able to cut them up more.
Johanna Keresztesi: “Where’s the cash, Prime Minister?” Márk Markó and Szabolcs Zsiros: “Where are the billions stolen from the MNB [Hungarian National Bank]?”
What I can tell you about the MNB is that it’s a painful issue, because the accusation is that money disappeared from there. So I suggest that we don’t deal with this in a cavalier manner, but instead remind ourselves that we managed the transition from a planned economy to a market economy, and that in this system everything incurs responsibility. In today’s economy there are decision-makers behind every decision involving money. There are accountants, financial directors, auditors, supervisory boards and regulatory bodies, so nowadays it’s not impossible to find out whose decision led to the disappearance of the missing amount. And this must be found out, regardless of whether they’re right-wing, left-wing, Fidesz, non-Fidesz, or whatever. It’s unacceptable for any state institution – including the Central Bank – to be unable to account for every last penny. That’s not acceptable! Accounts must be settled, and if someone’s made a mistake, they must be held accountable. There can be no excuses! And I very much hope that these wide-ranging investigations – because now everyone’s involved, the State Audit Office, the police, everyone – will uncover the truth, and in the end we’ll have a clear picture of the situation. And on that basis everyone will get what they deserve. But although the Hungarian National Bank has a significant amount of money, it’s much less than the country’s money or the budget, so the question of where the cash is – or where the bread is, as Uncle Pista Csurka would say – extends beyond the National Bank. I made a list for myself, because in every city this kind of “goodwill” manifests itself in this form, and I get this question everywhere. I looked to see where the cash is in Kecskemét. The bypass ring road is in there. There’s 57 billion for the renovation of roads within Kecskemét. Four new nurseries, three nursery renovations, nine kindergarten renovations and nine school modernisations. There’s the renovation of the City Hall – which is fantastic, congratulations, it’s one of the most beautiful buildings in the world, and the City Hall in Subotica/Szabadka is the only one I’ve seen that can compete with it. The City Hall. Kada Elek Technical College: 5.5 billion has been invested already, and another 14 billion will be invested soon. The Kodály Institute, 28 billion. We’re providing loan support to businesses. I’ve compiled data on how much support businesses in your county have received in this area: they’ve received 100 billion forints. I’ve collected the figures for Kecskemét separately: how much have the people of Kecskemét received? They’ve received 23 billion. In addition, I’d like to mention that we’ve doubled Hungary’s national wealth – doubled it! And I offer this as a symbolic illustration: when I entered office for the second time in 2010, the National Bank’s gold reserves stood at 3.5 tonnes, whereas now they stand at around 110 tonnes. Of course, knowing life as I do, I can’t say that the current course or government is flawless. Nor can I say that things that shouldn’t happen don’t happen sometimes. But I give everyone their due. So I don’t want to say that we’re without fault; but I can’t accept that, after fifteen years of government, it’s not obvious to everyone that during these fifteen years Hungary has prospered. Families have prospered, businesses have prospered, and the whole nation has prospered together. We can do even better, and yes, we’ll show that.
Prime Minister, there are still a lot more questions, but we’ve raced ahead of ourselves. Here at the end, there are of course two things we need to nail down: What’s the Jerkishness of the Week, and what’s the Awesomeness of the Week?
I wanted to talk about something else, but isn’t that possible any longer? I brought a couple of thoughts.
Prime Minister, so did I.
Yes, yes. I don’t know if I can take over control of the show from the host.
Anything you like. Of course whatever happens, they’ll shoot the host anyway – because when a show goes wrong, they never blame the guest, always the host.
Don’t feel sorry for yourself – journalists are in a privileged position. I remember we played a football match once against a team of journalists. To start the match I went to the centre spot as team captain, together with the journalists’ team captain. He greeted me with this: “My friend, the result will be whatever I write.” So the journalist, or the reporter…
That’s good, that’s good!
…don’t go seeking sympathy from me, as I think I’m more exposed. But I wanted to sneak this in somehow…
Please.
…because at first glance it will seem funny, but then you’ll all realise that it’s tragically serious, or we may realise that it’s tragically serious. The United States recently created a new national security strategy, which describes how to think about the world from an American perspective and how to think about potential adversaries and partners. That’s their business, and for us it’s not interesting in itself; but they also wrote about Europe, and that is interesting. The viewers shouldn’t think that I’m the only one saying such “wild” things about Europe, such “strange” things as I usually do. I read the following in the new version of the US National Security Strategy, published a few days ago: “A large European majority wants peace, yet that desire is not translated into policy, in large measure because of those governments’ subversion of democratic processes.” [Minister of the Prime Minister’s Cabinet Office] Tóni Rogán may be very influential, but there’s no way he wrote this. And then in the text there’s something which is even more worrying than what I’ve said so far: “Should present trends continue, the continent will be unrecognizable in 20 years or less. As such, it is far from obvious whether certain European countries will have economies and militaries strong enough to remain reliable allies.” This is serious. So it’s not just that we’re seeing a major transformation in Western Europe, but that our allies, as a result of this transformation, expect Europe to change in such a way that it may no longer be a reliable ally of the United States. At first glance this is a technical text, but it reveals such profound interrelationships that it’s worth devoting some time to thinking about it. I’m only bringing this up for those who doubt that Europe is heading in the wrong direction and facing serious threats, and who think that Hungary should follow Brussels’ lead, and that only the stupid, civic, right-wing, nationalist, Christian government fails to see this obvious fact. I wanted to remind them – not necessarily the people sitting here – that we’re not the only ones saying that there’s a problem. Europe’s biggest ally is saying exactly the same thing about Europe’s problems as we are. Therefore let’s take everything we’ve been saying and everything we’ve been noticing seriously, and draw the appropriate conclusions – going right back to the bombing of Budapest. We can only count on ourselves. We must remain independent, we must remain sovereign. This isn’t only a matter of honour, not only a matter of self-respect, but also an economic issue. Hungary always suffers economically and fares badly when it’s not its own master. We’ve only fared well and been successful when Hungary was a sovereign, independent state which went its own way. When I transcribe it to the Hungarian experience, this is what I think is the meaning of the American report.
It’s really very important that we didn’t omit that. Thank you very much! That’s the sign of being with a great guest. You added that little bit more: it was already a stellar performance, it was already a fireworks display, and then you topped it off with that little flourish. Prime Minister, thank you very much for that.
And how much more is left in reserve!
How much is left in reserve? What flak will I get? “You didn’t read this, you didn’t read that.” But now we really only have two things left to do: to name the Jerkishness of the Week, and the Awesomeness of the Week. In your opinion, which is the winner of Jerkishness of the Week? It’s Tisza disowning its own austerity package and disowning its own experts.
Brussels got away with it.
Brussels got away with it, for now at least. And for the Awesomeness of the Week, the English bookmakers would quite clearly have given it to…
Yes?
…the minimum wage increasing by 11 per cent.
Whoa! I thought the opposite. I thought the opposite, because I read the statements of the Hungarian women’s handball team players before the match against Romania. Yesterday was terrible…
Against Japan, yes.
…and it almost killed me. But against Romania everything was fine. It’s not easy to make a good statement before a match against Romania, is it? It’s easy to slip up. And I watched to see how the girls would handle it. They handled it flawlessly. They said everything we think, so nothing can be held against them. My favourite was when one of them said that we’re going for them, that’s…
Prime Minister, maybe after April you could hold some auditions there, because you might find some useful communication staff?
They are, they are! There were some very talented athletes here. I heard some more today, and there are some. Minister Szijjártó is doing the right thing by looking at athletes. And those who have retired from sport, who have been athletes in the international arena, don’t have to be trained for life in the international world. That’s one. Two: their hearts are in the right place, because they’ve worked their whole lives to see the Hungarian flag being raised. They want the Hungarian flag to be raised, and the national anthem to be sung. There’s no problem there.
Yes.
Nothing’s off course there, there will be no accidents. Three: courageous people. That’s what’s needed in diplomacy. That’s why in the foreign service we’re looking for former athletes who have the desire and ability for this and are willing to take on the challenge of public service in foreign affairs and domestic politics. I’m also looking for them – I’m looking for athletes who don’t want to continue as coaches or sports managers after their careers are over, but who want to put their strength to work in public service. So this is an invitation letter: our door is open to all of you!
Prime Minister, thank you very much. I’m just sorry that many questions have been left unanswered, and the questions are pouring in, and I think – I know – that my one-off “My Dad’s World” has taken flight.
The scoring judges will decide.
Okay, and I have to honestly admit that it was a thrill. It was thrilling for me – thank you very much!
We’ll see.
I’d like to continue, okay.
After all these meetings, we’ll see what people thought. Because it’s one thing how we felt here, we’ll talk about that…
Okay.
…but that’s secondary. What’s important is how people felt, because it’s not easy. I don’t want to waste their time in these workshop discussions, but it’s not that easy to figure out. How do we usually meet? There are events, large gatherings, something happens, and the Prime Minister comes and gives a speech. But we’ve been doing that for thirty-five years, haven’t we? I try to say new things, but since I think the same way about so many things, it’s difficult for me to always say something new that might be exciting for you. So we’re looking for formats that allow us to talk about public life, politics, our country, family, and our shared issues in a way that’s somehow useful and exciting for you, because of the novelty of the approach. This was an experiment, Jenő.
Aha! I’m the laboratory rabbit.
We’ll see.
Okay, so after this, from now on, I’m the laboratory rabbit. Okay, fine. I hope I made it a little more entertaining and that I was able to push your buttons just a bit.
I could have provoked myself more, but that’s okay, that will…
Prime Minister, thank you very much! Ladies and Gentlemen, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán!
Go Hungary, go Hungarians!
