Orban's divisie rhetoric and tricks explained - it won't work anymore

Seeing through Fidesz's right wing deception: the trick the Republicans, the Conservatices, Le Pen and now Orban employs

Hungary is descending further and further into the abyss under Orban. Economically only the EU subsidies keep the country afloat. Recently to keep his campaigning - entirely based on artificial fear from migration - Orban's government even stopped feeding those who apply for a refugee permit. This procedure can last for days. They try to tell people to leave before an official decision has been made, thereby basically cancelling out their application. As inhumane and evil as it can get.

Luckily, more and more people are starting to understand the communication strategy of Orban's Fidesz. And besides communication there is nothing that keeps them afloat. Orban gets support basically for reiterating every week a nice, romantic, nationalist fairy tale to his voters.
I describe here this strategy, give some examples, and tell you how to avoid falling for it.

This fairy tale is based on the schematics that there is always a new challenge or threat to Hungary. The evil person, the source of the threat is always portrayed by Fidesz as someone who is or can legitimately challenge Orban's rule, or who points out real faults with it. Such institutions and people get depicted as the evil ones and Fidesz as the saviors. Fidesz repeates its lies so often at every possible time that after a period people start discussing non-existent issues. They forget that the issue doesn't exist and start behaving as if it would.

For example Fidesz started talking of 'the liberals'. There is and never was a unified camp either in politics or among voters in Hungary that could have been identified meaningfully as such. But they repeated this lie often enough and it stuck. Now many journalists and opposition people debate as if they would be liberals and the issue would be to show that Fidesz is wrong about liberals, or that liberals and right and Fidesz is wrong.

But more and more people see it now that the correct solution is simply to point out that Fidesz is lying in the first place. There are no liberals. The problem they are talking about doesn't exist. And hence, they are just bullshitting very expensively at the voters' money instead of working.

There is a simple method to counter the effects of this rhetoric. Every time Orban, Le Pen, the Brexiters, Republicans, or people saying they are 'conservative' or 'liberal' state that there is a problem and they are the only ones who can solve it do one thing. Calmly ask yourself: is that a real problem? When Orban says that he is the only one looking at the nation's interest is that true? No. I'm against Orban and I look at it. So his claim is false. Our values and goals are the same. Where is the difference? In the facts: namely, the facts Orban wants to build his case on are non-existent. Plainly said, they are lies. This is how easy it is.

Another example: there is no threat of gay people in the world or threat of 'genders' or 'feminism'. Does any sane people disagree with the following 3 claims?
1 Gay people should be left alone to live their lives as everyone else.
2 People with all kinds of genders should be left alone to live their lives as everyone else.
3 In areas where women are disadvantages simply because they are women - in some jobs in their pay, in some legal procedures, in some stereotypes and educational institutions - they should be treated as equals.

No one disagrees with these things. This is what sane gay activists, gender activists, and feminists ask for. Since every normal grown up understands these things and agrees on this, there is no threat.
So, where is the issue? The issue is with the likes of Jordan Peterson lying that there are bigger threats (to freedom of speech, gosh), Trump railing against women because some are protesting against him, and so on. The problem is with the hate mongers who get hung up on non-issues, like how someone experiences their gender.

Call these liars out, and just move on. Don't give them attention, time, energy. Let's keep building a normal world, work, spend quality time with our families. Not everything is politics. Folks like Orban and his Fidesz would like us to believe everything is. Politics is in how we behave in our families, what we think of food, art, literature, fun, gender, etc. That is not true. Politics has nothing to do in most of these places. But sensationalist and populist politicians gain power by pretending that there is. I don't blame people who are tired and confused by the world for getting duped. It happens to all of us. Just make sure you turn away and don't vote for these people. Take a break, enjoy your life, build you community, talk with your neighbour and vote for sensible people, not sensationalists.

Blame and criticism, learning and endorsing - attitudes of nations

Many people say today that the West is in decline. Nothing could be further from the truth. The US and the EU are developing steadily, GDPs are at all time highs, military are massive and strong, and budgets have been cut back and loan exposure pushed down. At the same time, somehow, most people still want to live in these places.
Saudis go to the UK, Syrians to Germany, Chinese to the US, Koreans to Japan, Philippinos to Australia, Brazilians to Japan, and so on, and so on. Tell me when people start to try immigrating into China en masse, except from even more dictatorial states like North-Korea or Bangladesh (work related travel, like that of Vietnam doesn't count).

A lot of politicians and nationalist citizens are butthurt when their country is criticised. That rests on an enormous misunderstanding. Namely mixing up blame and criticism. Or thinking they are the same. Usually its the butthurt people, who are not running their countries well, who bash the West.

Criticism is just pointing out that something is wrong. But it is not saying that you are faulty for it. Your country can lack a fair justice system (like China, Pakistan, Russia and many others states do). But that is not saying that this is the individual Chinese citizen's fault. If someone tells me my country could do something better - i.e. they criticise my country - I listen to them. Why? Because they take the time and effort to give advice. If I disagree or their criticism is mistaken I can explain this to them. We both gained something and had an interesting conversation. If they are right: it's a chance for me to improve.

Blame is when something wrong is pointed out and responsibility is attributed for it. So, while it is wrong to blame the ordinary Chinese girl or guy for the bad legal system, or the average Hungarian for state corruption, and so on, it is right to blame Chinese politicians or Hungarian politicians for these things. They are the bosses, the decision makers who could change things.
Hence, people who love their country - whether they are the citizens of the US, of one of the EU countries or any other country - should learn from criticism and when justified blame their politicians.

The average person has nothing in common with his or her elected officials. No interests shared. If there is no pressure on politicians they will look to their own interests, as Bentham aptly pointed out 200 years ago.

So, don't take criticism and blame personally. Take it as a chance to gain insight on what you should pressure your overlords to change to make your country better!

A good example comes from Japan's history. Japan was forced in the 1850s to sign unfair trade-treaties with Britain, the US, Russia, France and other countries. These treaties pushed the country into a semi-colonial position. Japan also received a lot of criticism from these countries for its backwards legal institutions, poor external trading and industrial policies, etc.
Did the country deny the obvious - that the countries twisting its arm were doing better? No. It patiently put down its ass. It learned and studied how to reform its institutions, how to change its leadership, how to train its people and build up a well working industry and market. After this, between 1890 and 1911 it could revise most of the unfair treaties. In fact it grew so strong by the 1930s that the US felt threatened by it.*

Japan didn't endorse everything that Western advisors, experts, politicians, business people, philosophers and others recommended or tried to force on it. It took on those things which were useful for the country. Good management practices from the British and the Americans, yes; insane free market principles that erode society, no. Efficient army and - at the time - cutting edge uni organisation ideas from the German and the French, yes; racist colonialist ideas, no.

Being open to criticism and learning doesn't mean that you endorse everything uncritically that others tell you. It doesn't mean that others blame you and you accept responsibility. It means you are a sensible person who can choose which criticism to endorse as advice, and you can help explain to others why you think your system works better when you don't want to change.

If China would have been in a position to do the same after the 1840s or after WWI it could have become a stable power much faster. It started the same process as Japan in the 1970s however, but it only took it about forty years - thanks to its massive size, territory, military aggression and strong central government - to become the largest economy in the world.

So, when small, badly run and deeply corrupt countries like Hungary talk about the end of the West and deny that the EU is doing well...its obvious what's going on: they can't use criticism to develop. This choice is disastrous for the country: the leaders' vanity is hurt and for this reason the whole country is pushed towards Russia and China, authoritarian, and not very efficiently performing states. Time to stop such governments. Time to kick out such leaders. Time to sit down, learn, and improve.

* 34(That is why the US tried to blackmail Japan into giving up some of its conquests by stopping selling oil to it. And that's what prompted Japan to push to South-East Asia in search for oil, which triggered the US's backlash and the Pacific War. But that's another story.)

Our new feudal realms - part 1

Two years ago I wrote a post that showed how we are lapsing back into feudalism. Extremely wealthy elites of professional, life-long reigning politicians and born-rich business and land owners have an enormous influence. They decide what happens in politics. These people are not members of a single nation. There are rather interests groups of them who work together. There are a few such groups in the US, in China, in the EU, in Russia and in most countries.

These people have figured out how to exploit democratic institutions for their own purposes. They rely on expert PR teams, lobbyists, spin doctors, rich supporters who own media outlets and links with the military. Most of these folks are motivated by money, or by ambition, or by a belief that they are the best for the world. Or a mixture of these. None of these delusions are true.

 

Some evidence would be nice you say?

China made Xi Jinping lifelong head of the party and the country. This is tragic. China was in a chaotic and exploited situation at the end of the imperial system around 1910. The abolishing of the old system was followed by almost 40 years of bloody civil wars between local warlords, strongmen, the communists, and the republicans. The British, the French, the Americans, the Russians, German, Dutch, and the Japanese all used this upheaval to push their influence on the country.
Maybe China went then the right way, maybe it didn't. But at least it abolished the single-person rule system, it became a strong free state, and had decent, stable government. The lack of human rights, of free speech, of accountability and transparency is tragic and horrible, as is police and party brutality. Add to this military aggression. Still, for the average Chinese citizen things were better than before.
This period is over. The country is back to the old system. Communism effectively was turned into a one-person lad dictatorship again. A sad, tragic story for a great country and people.

Turkey's democracy got gutted by Erdogan and his cronies. This process took place in front of our eyes, it is well documented and understood. Again, a sad end to a promising path to a country that was a much freer state 20 years ago than it is today.

Putin holds Russia firmly in his hands and showed in several state orchestrated cases against influential business and media actors that he is not afraid to use the whole state machinery to take anyone down opposing his circles.

Trump said several times that he is looking up to Putin and Xi as successful, respectable leaders.

And Orban in Hungary is the prime example of someone deconstructing the democratic state at light speed in order to establish himself and his family at the centre of the state permanently. Other anti-democratic leaders or would be leaders in the EU are dreaming of the same - most notably in Poland - but have been kept in check so far by the other countries and their own population. It seems that only the Hungarians, who have suffered from a semi-feudal monarchic systems inequalities until WWII - are foolish enough to choose returning to the old system, instead of trying to make democracy work.

We will soon find ourselves again as peasants and servants. In a world run by aristocrats and kings.

 

Vincent Van Gogh, Femme semant/Peasant Woman Sowing with a Basket (1881)

Excusing tyrants

There are always well educated and well-off people who are willing to justify what authoritarian strongman do. Putin has such supporters, Xi has them, Erdogan does, Trump too, and so does Orban in Hungary.
As disgusting as Orban is, there are people who are credible enough - as literary critics, not that that's an amazing proof of sound political judgment - who are sympathetic to him. The one I'm talking about is Tibor Fischer, long-time Fidesz sympathizer.
The Guardian has the fairness to introduce right-wing opinions, and the desire to earn clicks by outraging people, and decided to publish an apology piece for Orban, penned by Fischer.
Fischer is alright on literature. Not very knowledgeable and certainly not a friend of anything in literature that came after the 1920s, but hey, at least he sort of knows there what is he is talking about.
When it comes to politics he is just one of those intellectuals who think that politics is a battle of values and ideals, and that when a politicians work is discussed it is not important to look at
- legal changes
- changes to the welfare system
- corruption connected to that politician
- geopolitical implications.

On the first front Orban's performance is appalling. Fidesz modified the electoral laws in a way that it is very hard to beat it, they modified in several places the laws protecting workers' right to the benefit of company owners, they modified the laws about detention and these play now much more into the hands of the police, and so on.
On the second front Orban's government is doing even worse. Since Fidesz had been elected - 7 years ago - they have scrapped several benefits to people with amputated limbs, people with disabilities, people with chronic illnesses. The minimum amount of pensions is around £80 per month, and the minimum wages (currently at £277/month) are taxed for 16% income tax just as the largest salaries of millions of Forints (thousands of pounds).
On the third front, Fidesz's corruption is unprecedented. Medgyessy, Gyurcsany, and Bajnai were deeply corrupt and their cabinets and parties stole us much as was possible. However Fidesz perfected the art of channeling government money into their own pockets. They set up hundreds of companies, use government schemes (construction orders, local government schemes, land law, etc.) to this purpose. The leaders of the party set up through their friends their own companies which sell Hungarian citizenship and they made around 4 billion Euros so far.
On the fourth front, Fidesz is working hard to undermine the EU and slow down NATO, and is drawing ever closer to Putin's Russia. This is not only disastrous for Hungary and Europe, it is also deeply insulting for all those Hungarians who suffered the Soviet forced 'friendship', which was in fact an occupation.

Fidesz is now shutting down a University because Putin does not like Soros. Soros uses his private funds to support NGOs to foster balanced journalism, transparency, and to educate people up to US and European standards. CEU is just a much better run University with higher standards than most East-European institutions. Putin hates Soros because many opposition leaders made use of the support of organizations founded by Soros's charities. So, Putin instructed Orban to make the operations of CEU impossible. And Orban, like an overly eager puppy, jumped.

This is the Prime Minister and party which Fischer is excusing.

Why people leave Hungary

Janos Lazar, one of the leading FIDESZ politicians, offered an explanation of why so many Hungarians left the country in the last 13 years (about 800,000 out of 10.2 millions). According to Lazar people are deceived: they earn more on paper, but actually their quality of life is lower than it would be in Hungary. They can't afford anything and live as wage slaves.

Well, let's have a look at the numbers. I think it would be reasonable to say that Hungarians would be wiser to stay home given three things: the value of their earning would be high in international comparison, they could make savings that would amount to something at national level, and the ratio of their income to the price of consumer goods would be at least as good as in other countries. To find out how Hungary performs in these three respects we will have a look at the average earnings and consumer price indices, looking at data both from the EU, the Hungarian state, and individual business analysts.

Most Hungarians leave for other EU countries like Germany, Austria, Sweden, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, and the UK. These are some of the most robust economies of the EU (and the world) and they have managed to regain growth and expand since the crisis. Most of the Hungarians who've left the country are young, speak at least one foreign language well, and a large proportion has University education (a big number are trained nurses, doctors, and engineers with significant work experience too).

What do the numbers tell us then about staying in Hungary?

First earnings: one of the lowest in the EU. The average someone makes in a month after taxes is around 600-650 Euros (£550 or $700). Not a lot. In international comparison it is very little. This means that Hungarian will have difficulties in travelling, doing business internationally, investing, and of course accumulating significant savings.

Here is the official data from the Hungarian Central Statistics Department. Take into account that they actually show higher levels than real earning averages because they don't include people who are on the public-work programme (kozmunka program). They earn only 76% of the minimum wage. Also, pay attention to the huge gap between Budapest and the other regions. Add to this that the top 10% of earners earns about 10x as much as the bottom 30% and you get a very scary picture of what it is like to be poor, working class, or lower working class in Hungary.

What do the consumer price indexes tell? We see that the salaries are about one-third of the EU average, or a little below, and are about 20-25% of that of the more developed EU countries.
Accordingly, prices should also be one fourth, one fifth, to get the same quality of life.
Sadly, that is not the case. The prices in some respects (accommodation) are around half of what they are in West Europe, but everything else is around 60-80% of the prices one pays for goods in Germany, Austria, or the UK. Which means that the average Hungarian can buy one fourth or one fifth of what the average German, Austrian, or Brit can. If the average Hungarian wants to spend more, or has to spend more, than they can't make any savings or get into debt.
This is not very interesting when it comes to clothing or computer games, but when we think of what one's insurance or what treatments one can pay for one's children it becomes very dire and gloomy.

What's the conclusion? Nobody should stay home to make FIDESZ richer. As much as I love and respect Hungary - the universities, the land, the Balaton, the food, my parents, my family, my friends, the amazing literature and art scene, the remarkable health system, the solid school system - at the moment decent lives can be better built abroad. Until the government channels most of the EU development funds into its own pockets, condones corruption, flirts with Russia and curtails rights, demolishes the free media, closes down universities, and goes against civil right groups and punishes refugees instead of helping them, it is not a good place to live.

Migrant and refugee children forced into prostitution

It had been known now for some time, but this article today in the Guardian calls attention to it again:
Many migrant and refugee children are travelling alone, they are extremely vulnerable, and there are plenty of smugglers as well as locals - in Greece, in Italy, in Hungary, in Serbia, and so on - who take advantage of them. Some of them are forced to have sex, some cajoled into it, some raped, some told to do it to earn money if they want a transport organized to their parents.

The UNHCR (the UN Refugee Agency) also has a longer, detailed report on the issue with all the data. Read it here.

See more in the article here.

To see more info on the issue read a report on the high numbers of disappearing children, even in countries like Germany.

I find it quite disgusting and horrific that while all this happens people like Mr Orban continue to present migrants as some kind of grave danger to us. It is vulnerable people who are at risk and should be helped. Hungary had been urged many times of course to do something about the people stranded on its borders but it blatantly refuses to offer any assistance to anyone.

At the same time Orban's circles are making billions (in Euros) on selling Hungarian citizenship to foreigners from outside the EU. It doesn't matter who you are, for 250,000 you can become a Hungarian (and thus an EU) citizen. The scheme is operated by friends and business partners of Orban and other high ranking FIDESZ politicians (most prominently the very much mafia-boss like Antal Rogan). After much criticism they have halted the programme, but only temporarily. It is of course all legal: FIDESZ uses its two-thirds parliamentary majority to pass laws like this.

A website for volunteering and charity work in Hungary

Why isn't there a website in Hungarian that collects all useful social activities which are done without the government? That could be the basis for Hungarians who are looking for a strong, non-political identity, that emphasizes a commitment to community spirit.

Such a non-political view could be the foundation of strong citizenship. Instead of giving away rights to the government and accepting a more authoritarian leadership, it could foster independence.

That would surely be more beneficial for all of us then the current lukewarm soup of not doing anything and complaining. Or the imbecile staring into the past for role models that the current government is engaged in.

Three important things about the Hungarian referendum about refugees

There are three things everyone has to understand about last weekend's Hungarian referendum about the refugees:

1. The referendum is not valid. The number of people who went to vote was too small.

2. Many of the people who did not go to vote did not go because they hate Orban and his regime, government and they did not want to lend their support in any form to their propaganda vote.


3. Still, there are too many Hungarians who bought into the governments propaganda. Roughly 80% of the media is controlled by the government or close allies of the government in Hungary. The message they sent blurred the distinctions between refugees and migrants, and between innocent average people and potential terrorists. It demonized hundreds of thousands of innocents fleeing wars and terrible conditions.

One of the posters of the Ketfarku Kutya Part (The Two-tailed Dog Party), reading: 'Did you know? There is a war in Syria.' These signs were set up to mock the government's state-money sponsored hate campaign against refugees and immigrants. See more posters here.

A Hungarian Kokeshi doll maker

Congratulations to Reka Vasarhelyi-Toth, who won the second prize in Japan for her creation 'Dress-up Kokeshi cupboard'.

Check out Reka's works here, and you can see the award winning creation here.

Kokeshi dolls are cute and unique. It is always lovely to see that some of my compatriots are creating value and engage with other cultures at the same time. A rare thing at home, where many people still sneer at anyone young caring for creating something and engaging with arts, literature, culture, or hobbies in general, other than traditional folk dances.

Building a healthier society, part II.

The Hungarian government will most likely - and hopefully - fail in its efforts to prevent the EU from accepting a quota for distributing refugees across EU member countries. The government's systematic hate campaign hasn't achieved anything else so far than raised their popularity amongst uninformed, frightened, or xenophobic people. But it hasn't managed to stop people from entering the EU, it hasn't improved the security of the EU, and it won't help in alleviating the problems of the refugees who need help. Since this is so, it is high time to put down on the table a few practical ideas on how to relate to the refugees once they will be with us in Hungary and what policies to work on.

1. Communication and the Education of the Public
First of all the government has to communicate clearly that the people who will be sent here are people whose cases have been assessed and they are eligible for refugee status.
Another issue connected to communication is that the government will have to be prepared to support local authorities and the refugees in the first years by providing translators and interpreters, as well as computers and other devices which can be used to make official procedures faster and easier for all parties involved.


2. Pedagogy and Schools
Second, the government needs a teaching strategy. Refugees just like anyone else are people who are happy when they have a secure, normal life, when they have a job, when their kids get a normal education and have a chance in life. The event of foreigners coming to Hungary in larger numbers will be a welcome chance for a generation of Hungarians to get normal experiences about people stemming from other places. This is a fundamental experience in a world of almost 8 billion people, and an experience which most Hungarians still lack. A teaching and pedagogical strategy will hence be vital. The goal is of course to help the children in the refugee families to i) learn Hungarian, ii) improve their English, iii) learn the skills needed to work in Hungary in the future successfully, contributing to the populations well-being. To achieve these ends the authorities responsible for education would have to train teachers who can speak fluent English to be prepared on how to address the children arriving in their schools and how to negotiate with their parents, how to cooperate them to achieve optimal teaching outcomes. These teachers should also be given some minimal understanding of the cultures and environments from where the kids coming here are arriving from. The government should also prepare psychologists so that the traumatized children and students can have access to therapeutic exercises, and can have a chance to learn how to handle their experiences.

3. Preparing and Supporting Local Communities
Third, the government should prepare those communities where the refugees will be settled. The communities should be able to ask questions from experts on the countries and cultures where the refugees are coming from, they should have access to counselors who will stay in these places and they can have a close, personal relationship with, and they can turn to when they have problems with the newcomers. Local help and assistance in the form of extra workforce for the social services, police, and educational services will be needed. The sooner these people are recruited the better: they can get to know the local circumstances before the refugees arrive. They'll have their hands full in the first months after that anyway. The local communities could furthermore be made to think more explicitly about how they function. What is important for them? What norms or habits might refugees find hard to adapt to, or might not even know about? How could they be helped in adjusting and what activities could they take part in?

4. Employment
Fourth, and most crucially, the government will have to come up with ways in which it can harvest the workforce that refugees provide. People who arrive are mostly young - naturally, not the oldest, frailest people make such a journey, and families send their youngest to safety first. How could these people be best allocated? The government will have to prepare the local authorities to measure their skills and map their capacities well. People could be straightaway offered positions that match their previous training if they are professionals.

5. Healthcare
Fifth: workers and capacities in the healthcare services will have to be prepared and supported too. They will have to look after more people, and might encounter problems which are not typical in northern, milder regions and climates.
Healthcare workers will also have to be informed about some do-s and don't-s.

6. Personalized Support
Local services, like the social workers' network, will have to play a large part in integration. They will need to visit families and communities regularly, help in settling disputes, help in educating people. They also have to be prepared to assist refugees in the first period by explaining basics laws, rights, community norms, and helping them get involved in local activities and ways of life.

And that's just a part of all the foresight, planning, and preparations that is needed. Do we see any of the East European governments engaging in it? Nah.

Building a healthier society, part I.

One of the main problems I encountered when I moved back to Hungary - the country where I grew up and spent most of my life - was that people lack a firm sense of social identity as well as solidarity.
I returned to Hungary for a bit, after having spent years in the UK and Japan. It was a rough experience to look around here.
When I lived at home 10 years ago I was under the apprehension that one of the main reason why people in West European countries are much better off is because governmental institutions are more developed there. But the most interesting thing I observed in the UK was that in many respects the social system and the schooling system was more frugal than in Hungary (although: much better organised). That was when I started to realize that the main problems in Hungary have to do with its specific history. These problems cannot simply be solved by technical developments of institutions or laws. The people who work at the institutions, who live their everyday lives here have to change most. What the British and the Japanese have and we lack is a rich, multi-layered sense of identity, a sense of being a civilian, and an incentive to solve their own and their communities problems through solidarity and cooperation.

Social institutions and civil activity were present and developing in Hungary in many forms between the 1867 agreement with the Austrians and the start of World War I. But the war and the political turmoil following it didn't do much good: between 1918 and 1921 Hungary was briefly taken over by the communist party, who were chased away by paramilitary rightist troops, and then while the consolidation of the parliamentary order was underway lost 2/3 of its territory when the Treaty of Trianon became effective. Our politicians sided with the Germans and got into World War II, standing on the wrong side. Throughout this period the governments preserved much of the political privileges and influence of the upper classes in a deeply divided society where poverty was a huge concern. After the war while rebuilding was still underway when the Soviet Union gobbled up the country and it became the field of a large scale social experiment in building institutions and introducing social policy which only had rudimentary roots in the country before.

The Communist system under the Soviet occupation, which lasted until 1989/1990, forced people not to go against the state. And it also promoted that they should rely on the state for everything. For most Hungarians it is still a natural reaction to look to the state in times of trouble. This instinct is what the current government is relying on. They try to appear as a strong and caring state that solves all problems. Of course this is not true. But even if it were true the main problem is that at the moment most Hungarians are not willing to look after their own and their communities' needs. They continue to depend on the state. When the economy is not going well, when the government isn't working well, the voters grumble, but that's about as active as they get most of the time.

When I arrived home I saw a society that is fundamentally divided about political issues. As if people only had a political identity. Politicians are trying to make voters believe that their identity is defined by which party they support. But in reality people are members or communities. They have families, friends, jobs, goals, interests and hobbies. And their relatives and communities have problems, have issues. People also have positive ideas that could be realized without the involvement of the government. It is a mistake to always wait for Big Brother to look after us. What we should foster in this country is a sense of being able to organize small, non-political groups, which help us feel as members of communities, without having to feel as members of a political party. I don't like any of the current political parties very much and I'm not a member of any of them. I have a mild sympathy for LMP, but very often I find their approach impractical, cumbersome, and on many issues they seem to lack good suggestions and ideas.

At the same time I do see a lot of potential in people who live here. They can make this a nicer place, a more enjoyable place. They can change: I'm sure Hungarians are not only capable of taking seriously not musical festivals and dance competitions, talent and reality shows, but also substantive issues like poverty, lack of education, lack of social services, lack of support for the elderly and the sick, and a lagging economy.
We could take these issues seriously and put in a few hours of work every week to make local organizations - charities, volunteering organizations, support services, clubs, etc. - work. Local people know best what they need and how their problems can be solved. That way, we wouldn't need to rely on others, and especially not on the government to help us. At the same time we would regain a sense of belonging, of being three-dimensional people who have a home, who have a community, who have interests and can enjoy themselves on their weekends. That is what this country is lacking. Not more administration and certainly not a larger government collecting even more taxes and paying even more politicians.

A calmer report of the refugee-situation

In September I wrote a short essay and gave it the title 'A calmer report'. I didn't publish it at the time and I'm sorry for that now. But sadly, it is still relevant. The fundamental questions about how we should deal with the people coming to Europe haven't been settled. The cruelest and coldest options still have many supporters. People are coming here from regions that have been thorn by wars and from places which are so much poorer than most European countries that the average citizen here couldn't even imagine.

I'll copy what I  wrote then here. It is a longer piece, but the main message is short and simple. The situation could have been and can be solved. All that is needed is to stay calm and act professionally. What we have learned from the 20th century should be that as soon as we notice that politicians are simply trying to secure their position by fear-mongering and hate campaigns against immigrants, it is time for them to go. If they don't want to, we should make them. After all they are supposed to represent us and we - the citizens - lend them our power and authority. They would be nil without that, and without our money.

A calmer account of the treatment of refugees in Hungary

The current situation in Hungary is that there have been more than a 170 000 people entering the country through the Southern border this year without any permit. This has caused substantial panic amongst politicians and shown that many of the Hungarian and EU regulations and measures in place are inadequate to handle a situation when whole countries collapse – as is the case with Syria and Libya now. Those displaced are counting on the European countries. Their hopes are encouraged by the fact that most countries in the region have repeatedly claimed to be exemplars of solidarity, democracy, and that they are seriously concerned with protecting human rights.

The media and the politicians have also been occasionally confused about the situation, not talking about the issues at hand, but about irrelevant topics or generating fear instead of seeking practical solutions. Of course nobody in Europe wants to accept higher risk of terror or living with extremists. But this does not call for panic and exclusion, but for increased and better security and more advanced methods of social, educational, and personal integration. The Hungarian government has been both one of the most vocal participants in this debate and one of the most often criticised ones. So, let’s just stop for a second and ask ‘What is going on in Hungary?’

But before a detailed discussion of the government’s actions I have to shortly address the role and behavior of two groups within Hungary: The police forces and the volunteers working at both the registration camps by the Southern border and at the transit zones in Budapest and the Austrian border. The police came under some international and domestic criticism. Many of them have been unhelpful, rude and hostile to the newcomers. Nevertheless one should take into account that the number of the police forces is too small to deal with an event of such a scale. Most policemen behaved supportively and did a professional job. Several cases of friendly, supportive interaction have been recorded where the individual policemen went well beyond their duties in providing help. All in all, as a Hungarian it has been quite comforting to see that most the forces on the grounds have dealt with the pressure, tiredness, long hours, and uncertainty professionally: there have been no reports of violence or brutality.

The civilians who volunteered and the charities have been remarkably active. Doctors have been at work tirelessly, people have brought or donated towards the cost of medicine, food, clothes, drinks, extension cords, tents, blankets, and for the children, toys. There have been volunteers who translated and interpreted, prepared guiding materials, organized food distribution and helped liaison between the refugees and migrants, and the police and officials in tense situations. All in all, the situation hasn’t affected the average Hungarian citizen much: there were occasional traffic jams one the motorway between Budapest and the Austrian border, and disturbances in the train schedules at one of the three major train stations in Budapest, Keleti (Eastern) station.

Besides the overworked police and charities (the number of people crossing the border every day without permits can be checked here: Anyone can check out the data: http://www.police.hu/hirek-es-informaciok/hatarinfo/elfogott-migransok-szama), the ones who have been truly adversely affected were those coming to Hungary to seek refuge and to travel on towards other EU countries. Their treatment and situation often leave a lot to be desired: In Hungary the cold weather is setting in – at night it can be around 4-6 celsius degrees and it often rains for hours – and there aren’t enough proper shelters to accommodate all the refugees. Also, their registration has in some cases been going terribly slowly and they haven’t been provided with adequate, detailed information about the legal procedures that they have to go through before they can enter an EU country and move around freely within its borders. What caused these problems?

With the above question we have arrived at the main problem: The government level actions in Hungary. Parliamentary seat holder and co-leader of the party LMP (­Lehet Más a Politika/Politics Can be Different) told in an interview that the Prime Minister informed him and the other party leaders in a meeting held last winter that the number of people arriving and seeking asylum in the EU will drastically increase in the summer. The questions comes naturally to mind, that if the government had this information already last winter, why did they not act on it? Why have they not constructed adequate accommodation, showers and toilets, why have they not hired more interpreters and translators and prepared materials about the regulations and rights of those arriving here and crossing the borders to apply for refugee status? Why have they not increased the numbers of the police and interacted with the EU’s border control services (FRONTEX)? I can only risk an interpretation of the behavior of the government based on what has been said and done by them so far. But I do think that the interpretation is very hard to doubt and in fact is the true account of what is happening in Hungary at the governmental level at the moment.

What has done the government done so far? It started a giant poster campaign in the Spring. The posters were placed in several locations in Hungary, with messages in Hungarian on them such as ‘If you come to Hungary you have to respect our culture’, ‘You cannot take away the jobs of Hungarians’, and similar messages. Adherents of the ruling party FIDESZ have accordingly started to talk about the dangers of immigration, branding those arriving here in advance as immigrants and not refugees, and assuming that they want to live and work here. The latter assumption also turned out to be false: Most people arriving at the Hungarian borders are reluctant to apply for refugee status here because they don’t want to stay here. At the same time the government also initiated a ‘consultation with the people’: They have sent a form in a letter to everyone of voting age and asked questions like ‘Would you rather that the government spends its money on illegal immigrants or on Hungarian families and children?’ All the questions stressed that none of the people coming here have any just claim on our solidarity and support. They also tried to make people accept a false dilemma, that it is impossible for the state to help the refugees and to perform its normal duties to its citizens. Whether this was intended as a statement of a fact or a threat to Hungarians remains a mystery.

Being occupied with the above mentioned media campaigns the government did not make adequate preparations for when the masses of refugees and migrants actually arrived: The situation escalated sharply in June-July, and the numbers entering the country are still rising day by day. Nevertheless, practically no preparations have been made: Authorities tried to house all refugees at the same accommodations and shelters that have been used for decades now. These buildings are decent, but old and can’t accommodate as many people as they were suddenly supposed to. The government started opening registration camps along the border, amongst them the one that became most famous, the one next to the small town of Roszke. Roszke was intended as a place for registration where the people arriving would only stay at most one or two days until they are registered. Accordingly, there wasn’t any proper accommodation and no sanitising facilities. The government took quick measures, but still, it did not make use of the information it had of the scale of the issue at hand: the number of administrators doing the registration was far smaller than what was needed. There weren’t enough translators, not enough properly translated information packages, no information points about EU procedures and rules. At this point, instead of expanding on the available services provided to the incoming masses of people, the government chose to build the controversial fence.

As can be glossed from this much, there have been very few practical steps to help the migrants, but many steps that aimed at vilifying and alienating those coming to the EU seeking shelter and a brighter future. While it might be true that a number of Germans resist the idea of accepting more refugees into their country and have set accommodations on fire, at least there were accommodations. The Hungarian government has instead focused on creating more registration camps. Two small ‘temporary’ accommodation camps are under construction since more than a month, but there have been no news yet of them having been completed. Hence, there is no proper accommodation, no shelters, only transit camps and registration camps. When huge numbers of refugees and migrants who have been registered travelled to Budapest to try and find a means of travelling on towards Germany and Sweden, the Mayor’s Office had to step in and organize ‘transit zones’, where people on the move could temporarily stay, and had access to at least some water, electricity and toilet facilities.

Thus, the capitol had to step in to fill the void left by the government. But according to EU law these people were not allowed to travel: Their application for refugee status has to be evaluated in the country where they have registered, and they have to register in the first EU country that they enter. Of course Greece – a country in terms of GDP, PPP, and average earnings still better off than Hungary - does not do its duty as an EU member and sends on most people without registration. Did the government at this point take action to alleviate the condition of the people stranded in Hungary? Not really. Just this week Parliament has passed new laws that deem Serbia to be a safe country for refugees. This notion of ‘safe’ garnered a lot of criticism: The notion of a safe country for refugees is standardly taken to mean that those seeking asylum, applying for refugee status have a reasonable chance of actually getting the status, their case will get a fair and balanced treatment, and if their case is judged favourably have a reasonable chance of settling in the country. Looking at the statistics of the acceptance rates of applications for refugee status in Serbia is very discouraging, and the Serbian government hasn’t been very proactive in accommodating refugees in the country. These are some of the main reasons why most refugees move on.

The new law passed by the Hungarian Parliament also makes it possible for the government to declare a state of emergency due to the huge numbers of people crossing the border without permits and to deploy the military on the borders to assist the police in turning people back, registering them, preventing them from leaving the registration camps before having completed a the registration procedure, and so on. The move of deploying the military and granting extra rights to the police and deploying the military very controversial and many Hungarian politicians, lawyers, legal organizations and civilians have spoken out against, but to no avail. The governing party has two-thirds majority and some members of the far-right party Jobbik have also supported the new law.  

In the last two weeks the government has also repeatedly rejected the idea of setting up an EU sponsored and run ‘Hot Spot’, like the ones in Italy and Greece. In some cases the Prime Minister struck a horrible tone in his speeches. He said for example that since Hungary hasn’t forced other European countries to take in a proportion of the roma population of Hungary it would be unjust to force Hungary to accept the quota-based distribution of refugees. Besides antagonizing their voters, the government also employed another method in their communication strategy: They systematically conflate the two issues of a) the difficulty of registering and accommodating those who enter the EU, with the issue of b) what treatment and support the refugees and migrants receive. They hide the fact that support and services for the incoming masses have been wholly inadequate by repeating that they are only doing their duty in registering them and only letting them leave towards other EU countries if those countries agree to accepting them. Of course they do their legal duty in performing the registration process, but that is no reason and does not necessarily have to be done in ways that are wholly inadequate. The standard move of the PM and other government officials in the debates has been – employed often by foreign minister Peter Szijjarto and by the head of the PM’s office Janos Lazar - to accuse anyone criticising the work of the Hungarian government of criticising all Hungarian and pretending that the government is criticised for doing the registration, while in reality they were clearly being criticising for not providing adequate accommodation, food, information, travel, and sanitary circumstances.

Sure enough, there has been some panicking and unjust criticism coming from other countries. The fence has by many been treated as a symbolic issue, as sending the message that the EU countries are actually not committed to the values that they often claim to be championing. Whatever we make of that debate, the fence has not been used to keep everyone out of the EU: there are doors on the fence and the police and volunteers guide those arriving at the border to the doors, where they can enter, get medical support, food and water, and are registered. This made the arrival of refugees and migrants much more organized and contributes both to the security of Hungary and the EU as we can actually know how many people and who has entered the EU. It also made the work of the authorities and the volunteers and charities easier and more effective. Furthermore, it makes the work of traffickers harder as well, and many more have opted for entering in the legal way since the fence has been put up.

Another debated issue about which there has been much confusion was that of registering people and preventing them from travelling on to other EU countries. Some journalists seemed to have seen this as some strange form of cruelty on the part of the government. But it is by no means obvious what Hungary should do in the current situation: Greece and Italy let large numbers of people move on unregistered. This is clearly not okay: These people don’t have papers, EU authorities have no idea where they are coming from, they don’t have working permits, and addresses. In case their applications are judged unfavourably and they have to leave the EU it will be nearly impossible to trace them. When Hungary did let refugees cross to Austria and eventually to Germany last weekend these two countries have both signalled that this should not happen again in such an uncontrolled fashion. An additional problem relating to registration is that many people before crossing the border throw away their papers and so cannot be identified by the authorities. The police have to accept their words for who they are and where they are coming from. Two weeks ago German journals have announced that Germany accepts the applications for refugee status of all those fleeing from Syria. It has been misunderstood that this only applies to people who were at the time already in Germany. So, currently, about 95% of the people crossing the border say that they are Syrians and seek asylum. Before news of the misunderstood German policy became public a significant proportion of people claimed to come from Irak, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, and Eritrea.

Two other cases which have gathered much attention were the photo of a woman, a child and a man lying on the tracks at the Bicske train station, police standing around them and grabbing them. The photo has been taken by some to show the police aggressively throwing people to the ground. Since then videos of what happened have been published: The Syrian man, the husband and father of the woman and child in the photo, laid on the train tracks in an act of protest against not being allowed to leave the country for Germany. His wife tried to persuade him to let go of the tracks, while police observed. The man has suddenly grabbed his wife, who was holding their child, and pulled them down on the tracks too. That is when the police grabbed the man, freed his wife and child, and took him away so that he can’t harm himself and his family. The other infamous case has been that of the far-right TV-reporter Petra Laszlo who has kicked refugees, amongst them some children. This behavior has not been common in Hungary in the last months and her behavior does not represent the majority opinion of how we should relate to refugees and migrants. The case of Ms. Laszlo is currently under investigation by the police.

If taking only a brief glance on some leading journals it seems that passion has subsided somewhat and more balanced opinions are starting to appear. But in fact what is rather happening is that some journalists and politicians are taking the side of Mr. Orban and his government. The problem with this is that the debate does not become clearer, only more polarized. Participants actually accept that the rhetoric employed by the government is actually the right way of thinking and talking about the issues at hand. As I have tried to show in this piece, this is far from the truth. The Hungarian government could have done plenty more to avoid a crisis, to provide normal support for people entering the country. The rhetoric of fear mongering, of talking up the risk of refugees spreading diseases, of terrorism, of the difficulties of accommodating people from Arabic countries with different religions and cultural background did nothing to help solve any of the practical issues that Hungary or the EU faces in the moment.

So, why did the government adopt this stance? Taking into account the government’s earlier policies and position on such issues as the Ukraine, its relation to Russia and president Putin, its strange remarks about a failing EU and the follies of democracy, two goals can be discerned. FIDESZ is conscious of the fact that the way they have communicated – even when not in harmony with how they act – has garnered them enough support to win two-thirds majority in parliament twice in a row. With emphasizing the message against cultural diversity and multiculturalism they also appeal to voters who would otherwise maybe vote for Jobbik - the far-right party – in the next elections, i.e. they are also fishing for votes. At the same time they try to weave a story about Hungary being the country which fulfils its duty of protecting the rest of the EU. At one point Szilard Nemeth has talked in terms of them and us, and some journalists close to the government have liked the current situation to the advances of the Ottoman armies in the 14^th-17^th centuries. The goal of these moves is to show that Hungary is a valuable, serious member of the EU, and at the same time thereby to justify Orban’s actions and political views.

All in all the government’s strategy could be summarized as aiming at alienating the refugees and showing a strict and stern stance towards the problem. This way the government seems to hope to avoid having to take its share from helping and taking in refugees. So, what was the just part of the criticisms against the Hungarian government? It is surely true that there is a significant lack of amenities and supplies, and services aren’t adequate. The government has conducted misleading and anti-refugee media campaigns. Members of FIDESZ have repeatedly spoken of ‘aggressive illegal immigrants’ but there are no known, reported cases of any violence against Hungarians. It has also been repeatedly claimed by Hungarian journals and analysts supporting the governing party that mostly young man are arriving who might be trained soldiers or terrorists. Maybe there are people who are terrorist or trained soldiers, but if one takes a quick glance at the police statistics it can be seen that on most days about one fifth of all people entering the country are children, many are female or old. Also, many of the man have families at home.

What is needed currently to help sort this situation out? The most important would be more cooperation among EU member states. Unique solutions are no solutions at the moment because the whole region, culture, economy, and politics will be affected. Instead of trying to gain support at home, politicians should abandon the media strategy to make this process into something that we disagree over, and should work on transforming into an exemplar of cooperation. Many EU member states are already exhibiting remarkably cynical thinking about human rights abuse in China and African countries, and other important issues. Let’s not make things even more indefensible by ignoring people fleeing collapsed countries.

What we need urgently are practical proposals. The EU member states need to provide those considering a move to the EU realistic information and realistic help. People shouldn’t have to risk a long, dangerous – often perilous - and expensive journey to Europe to discover that they are being turned away. Also, those who can start a new life in the EU shouldn’t pay to traffickers and smugglers. Cheap, safe, sustainable and regulated transport services could be set up and operated with a profit. We need to get the information needed to those who need it. Those who have just fled their countries and are full of hope and longing for a safe and stable place where they can imagine living and their children growing up will become victims of traffickers telling fairytales about Europe and misleading people so as to make them give up everything and risk the journey. Relegating some of the administration to safe camps nearer their countries of origins, migrants and refugees could receive faster and fair treatment. These operations could be conducted jointly by EU states, giving both more practical experience in how to work together and create job opportunities.

There is also clearly need for more initiative in integration: governments should work on making plans about how the working potential of the refugees could be best made use of, how their children should be schooled, how they can become proficient in the local language as fast as possible. Also, due to the difficulties of the registration process further background checks and security measures will have to be implemented.

As I have indicated, I see the main problem in the way the Hungarian government is using the situation to gain advantage in a broader political debate within the EU. The real victims of this situation are the refugees, and in the long run both them and those EU citizens who will have to deal with the lack of clear policies and guidelines, helpful integration projects and an effective, standardized administrative system that can handle the applications quickly, reliably, and fairly – both to those seeking a safe new home in Europe, and those already living here. As I have suggested a good way to start is to talk more about the facts and about practical solutions, and way of doing so is to familiarise ourselves with the data. Getting the facts right should then easily dispel the rhetoric employed by politicians who want to trade on the misfortune and suffering of others to gain political influence.

Hungary's true face as the refugee influx has revealed it

Recently Janos Lazar has accused the European Commission of having launched an investigation into breaches of EU regulations by Hungary to take revenge for Hungary's staunch and firm response to the 'migrant-crisis' and 'illegal immigration'. The Hungarian government uses these last two terms to label the group of issues surrounding the arrival of masses of people into Europe. Janos Lazar is Minister of the Prime Minister's Office, so what he says is what Orban thinks. What Orban thinks is what his ministers think.

Of course Orban and Lazar are wrong as usual. Lazar has been the strongman posing as a 'defender of Hungarians' when he accused Hungarian NGOs of accepting money from Norway Grants to run campaigns against the government. These ridiculous claims have been proven wrong since then and no matter how hard the tax office (NAV) tried they couldn't find faults with the accounting at the NGOs investigated.

The same is the case this time. Lazar - as often - is talking blatant nonsense. The EC has problems - and rightly so - with procedural issues. That is, Hungary didn't follow certain EU rules which are binding to all members in the way they dealt with migrants. This is a purely legal issue. Similar procedures have been started against other countries which failed to comply with particular regulations and laws.

Orban's and Lazar's statements are not the first ones. They are part of a large campaign they have been conducting systematically. The strategy is simple: raise panic at home, accuse others of not doing anything, bring in drastic measures (which aren't necessary in reality), and then pose as the defender of the people. Lots of votes at home: granted.

The main problem of course is not that Hungarian government hasn't provided enough translators for the refugees or such small issues. It is that the government has failed morally. It has refused and refuses to support and help anyone. What strikes me still is that the government is very popular at the moment in Hungary. I think that the moral failure is mostly the governments, but at least a number of voters who should know better and could think for themselves share in the blame.

Politics and public opinion

It is a very interesting myth that was around for a long-long time in Central- and Eastern-Europe that it is somehow the duty of artists, university teachers, and others in white-collar jobs to take responsibility for voicing their criticism against unjust, unfair and bad government action.
In itself there isn't anything wrong with such a view, but it does look a bit dated and exclusive. The other problem with it is that a lot of people just pushed aside the burden of getting information about political and public issues, waving their hands towards the intellectuals who are supposed to be responsible for shaping the public debate.
At the moment sadly no one else but the government has the resources to really determine what the public thinks and talks about - except of course if one thinks for oneself, or is willing to read blogs, internet magazines, and foreign newspapers, news sources.
Nevertheless there are a few promising young analysts who often advance smart and insightful criticism against the government. Zoltan Cegledi is such a person, and his latest post on his site is also a nice proof of this. (Although I disagree with the complaints about food in schools. Food is healthier now, and the kids eating way too much sugar, fat and salt so far will have to get used to it in their own interest.)

Population growth in Europe, refugees and immigration

This post is just a short notice to all those who lean right and believe politicians who are panicking about the increase of the percentage of Muslims in Europe and the transformation of Europe and European culture.

The only threatening transformation is that Europe will become even more closed, hard to access and hard to settle in.
Have you ever thought about how hard it is obtain a job or residency permit in Europe for people outside the EU? This applies to Japanese, Russians, US citizens, all the South Americans, Canadians and so on. The countries where people are being let into the EU are mostly either countries that have been colonized, plundered and repressed for hundreds of years by the British Empire, France, Belgium, and other EU members or countries where poverty or wars create such miserable circumstances to live that any well-off country has a moral duty to help at least a number of people.

The current swollen migration changed this pattern a bit: people are arriving from war thorn regions in masses - from Irak, from Syria, from Afghanistan, from the borderlands of Pakistan, from Somalia. But so are people from poor countries and regions who just want a chance for an easier life.
I think a region as well off as the EU does not have any right to refuse a sustainable number of immigrants either way, but it surely is true that nor the EU nor any of the member states - not even the ever-so-proud-of-its-fence Hungarian government - has any good ideas on how to deal with security screenings and background checks in a practical and fast way. And that's a must.
Nevertheless, the most important thing of course is to support as many people as we can to provide the chance for a normal life for them. The rest - how we solve the security checks, how we solve their integration, how we solve their education, etc. - are all just secondary administrative questions. They are difficult questions but this is not an argument against letting people in need into Europe. They are questions which need to be solved by smart professionals. I won't even address ridiculous and cruel opinions like PM Orban's according to which we can just refuse anyone to enter Hungary. I wish we could refuse to listen to PM Orban anymore, but as long as his party is in charge of governing the state media channels will echo even his farts and hail them as words of a true genius.

After this cursory treatment of the principles which underpin my stance let's look at a few numbers. Many European citizens are worried about the percentage of Arabs amongst the population and there are plenty of very well paid 'experts' who are nothing but professional scare mongers. The facts are the following:
Germany has a population of roughly 81 million people at the moment. Out of this, about 2,7 million are Turkish, who are not Arabs and even if some of them are believers they are by no means radical. About 600 000 are Arab. Now this means that if Germany would accept 800 000 refugees and migrants this year and the next its population would swell to about 83,5 Millions and there would be 800 000 + 800 000 + 600 000 Arabs totaling at 2 200 000 (which is still more than the real numbers, since many of the current Immigrants are Asians and Africans and not Arabs, but let's over estimate things a bit). This would still be only about 2,5 percent of the population. Europe's total population is about 500 million. 2 200 200 would be less than 0,5 percent of that, and that is not only the number of Arab people coming to Europe but the number of all the people coming to Europe, assuming they all stay in Germany.
According to estimates of the French state they have a Muslim population of about 8-10% of the total population in a country of about 61 million people, that is about 5-6 million Muslims. Even if Germany were to accept all 800 000 people this year and the next - which they will not: they have already started sending people back - we would be talking at most about 8 200 000 Arabs (not all of them believers, and only a handful of them radical believers) in Europe, which is still less than 1,5% of the total population of the EU. Fair enough, there are large Arab populations in Europe in other countries, for example in the Netherlands, the UK, or in Sweden. But even if you would take all these numbers into account the total of Arab people (not all of whom are Muslims) would be well below 3% percent of the total of the population of the EU. Add to this that not all Muslims are serious believers, and that not all serious believers are radicals. Also add to this that not all radical believers would be willing to commit crimes or violence - that is only a tiny fraction of people.
So, taken everything together, the danger that Europe will be transformed by immigration or that Europe would be changed into a Muslim or Islamic political organization are nonexistent.