On the eve of the referendum on compulsory European migrant quotas, columnists made a last effort to convince the public about the best course to follow.
In Hetek, former Liberal MP Peter Hack explained why he and his evangelical ‘congregation of faith’ church, have decided to vote ’no’. At the same time last year, he recalled, Prime Minister Orbán was the only European leader to urge countries to protect Europe’s outer borders, while today virtually all leading politicians on the continent say so. Meanwhile, Austria is preparing to build a fence along the border with Hungary, while Great Britainis building a wall around the French side of the Chunnel. Hack suggests that European elites consider themselves an enlightened group who know better what European nations need than the people living there. He calls that attitude ‘Bolshevik behaviour’, because it means that today’s European elites treat the people with deep contempt and accuse of populism those who invoke the opinion of the population. Hack therefore thinks it fit to vote ‘no’ and thereby to ‘express support for a new concept of European integration.’
On Mandiner, Brigi Kiss envies those who feel no remorse or bad conscience at the sight of the miserable people fleeing from atrocious living conditions or outright war. She was in two minds, she writes, as she deems it unacceptable to allow hundreds of thousands of people to cross one border after another without being vetted by European authorities. Therefore she believes that a thorough debate would have been important on the crucial issue of mass immigration into Europe. Since there has not been one, she concludes, she does not feel like voting either yes or no and has decided to cast an invalid vote
In an unusual editorial comment, 168 óra, which usually carries signed Op-ed p
In a similar vein, Népszabadság also condemned the idea of the referendum but acknowledged that it presents democrats with a serious dilemma, since plebiscites are ‘the most sacred institution’ of democracy. ‘Most of us’, the leading left-wing daily continued, want to express our rejection of this ‘mockery of democracy’ by abstaining from the referendum, but others feel they should express their support for the principle of popular sovereignty by participating while casting an invalid vote. Népszabadság considered both solutions legitimate and expressing ‘deep contempt’ towards what it calls a ‘filthy and irresponsible government game’.
On Index, Szabolcs Dull reassu
In his regular Magyar Nemzet column,