Jews and antisemites in Viktor Orbán’s country

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán stands out for his systematic opposition to the EU’s dominant values and policies. So it’s hardly surprising that, since October 7, he has stepped up his support for the Israeli state, not hesitating to label the slightest criticism from his European partners as antisemitic. Here, János Gadó lucidly analyzes the paradoxes of a government which, while trying to pass itself off as a friend of the Jews, traffics in the memory of the Holocaust and recycles the most hackneyed antisemitic tropes.

 

I. Conflicting facts

Democracy is in decline; the public sphere is dominated by the government media, which constantly spews visions of enemies and anti-Hungarian malice, with George Soros, the Hungarian-born Jewish billionaire, regularly appearing as the ultimate manipulator – the situation is bad.^[1] At the same time, the government media are careful in making direct references to Jews – explicit or implicit. The government media also vehemently deny that Soros’s Jewish origin has anything to do with the campaign that is being run against him.^[2]

The words ‘progressive’ and ‘progress’ are commonly used as derisive terms in the government media. Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said in his 2023 national keynote speech that “progress today means three things: migration, LGBTQ and war”.<footnote> Viktor Orbán: „Western values do not need to be portrayed in a bad light, they are in a bad light themselves” (promenad24.hu)</footnote> Regarding migration, he had previously stated that Hungarians want to live in the community of Central European nations and do not want to become a “mixed race”. Following international outcry, he clarified: he did not mean this in a biological sense, of course.

The stronghold of this cursed progress is “Brussels”, elevated to the status of a mythological arch-enemy. In his speeches, held on national holidays, Orbán regularly returns to the same vision: the Hungarian nation is waging a freedom fight against its oppressors in Brussels. An example: “In Europe today, it is forbidden to speak the truth… It is forbidden to say that in Brussels they are plotting to bring in and settle foreigners as quickly as possible.” Sometimes the tone is even harsher than that:“…we shall fight against what the empire of George Soros is doing to Hungary, and what it wants to do to Hungary. This is our homeland, this is our life, and we have no other. Therefore we shall fight for it to the end and we shall never surrender. (…) we must fight against an opponent which is different from us. Their faces are not visible, but are hidden from view; they do not fight directly, but by stealth; they are not honorable, but unprincipled; they are not national, but international; they do not believe in work, but speculate with money; they have no homeland, but feel that the whole world is theirs. They are not generous, but vengeful, and always attack the heart – especially if it is red, white and green.” 

The mythological Jew could not be described with more eloquent terms. 

The Hungarian nation is forced into a ceaseless struggle against its enemies – consumers of the government-controlled media are informed on a daily basis. But Jews are not among these enemies. Not formally at least.

The government’s worldview is based on the grievances of the Hungarian (Magyar) nation, it is arch-conservative and does not know what self-reflection is. The historical period closest to it in spirit is the Horthy regime between the two wars. Admiral Horthy’s regime – in keeping with the spirit of the times – was semi-officially antisemitic until 1938 and officially antisemitic after 1938, when Nazi inspired anti-Jewish legislation started. 

The government does not embrace the Horthy regime’s overt antisemitism, but it does embrace Horthy’s reactionary, religious nationalism. It is not surprising to see an article in the Hungarian government press calling for a “fair assessment” of Miklós Horthy.^[3] The latter practically means one thing: to absolve Horthy of responsibility for the deportation of 435,000 Hungarian Jews to Auschwitz (as he was the regent of Hungary at the time of the deportations in 1944). Even Jewish leaders spectacularly loyal to Orban protested against such attempts.

The Hungarian nation is forced into a ceaseless struggle against its enemies – consumers of the government-controlled media are informed on a daily basis. But Jews are not among these enemies. Not formally at least. Meanwhile influential positions in the government media are often filled with former far right journalists, who currently refrain from vilifying Jews. 

A good example of this is Zsolt Bayer, the proud owner of the ruling party’s number 5 membership card, whose many virulent antisemitic and racist utterances are preserved on the Internet. Bayer, who continues to attack the government’s enemies in his usual vulgar style, has stayed mum on Jews for quite a few years.

The case of István Csurka is another striking example. Csurka, a popular playwright, favored by the pre 1989 Kádár regime, became a prophet of antisemitism right after the regime change in 1989 and continued where his inglorious predecessors had left off in 1945. Until his death (2012), Csurka didn’t stop to mobilize against the liberal-Bolshevik world conspiracy that was dooming Hungary. He can rightly be called the champion of Hungarian antisemitism after 1989.

Today, prominent journalists in the government’s quasi-official daily newspaper (Magyar Nemzet) lionize Csurka^[4], are saying that his prophecies about Hungary’s enemies have all come true. Obviously, Csurka’s unbridled paranoia appeals to them. Meanwhile they just ignore the fact that in Csurka’s visions Jews were the source of ultimate evil. A telling example is the following quote by Csurka. It is from the speech broadcast on Hungarian Radio in January 1990, and is still regarded as the keynote speech of post-1989 antisemitism: “… as long as a dwarf minority can make the whole of society believe that only its truth is the truth, […], there is no prospect of the great popular masses of Hungarians feeling at home in their own homeland. Wake up, Hungarians! You are being misled again! The Aster Revolution^[5] is over, this is now the era of the Béla Kuns<footnote>Béla Kun, leader of the 1919 Hungarian Soviet Republic, an archetype of the “communist Jew” in anti-Semitic minds.</footnote>, even if the new Lenin-boys^[6] are scolding Lenin.”

The above-mentioned journalist of Magyar Nemzet praises this text as a prophecy fulfilled. He simply ignores its obvious antisemitic message. Meanwhile, when looking at the coverage about the war in Gaza by Magyar Nemzet or other strongly pro-government media, it can be seen that they are mostly moderate, lacking overt or implicit anti-Israel attitudes. In fact, in the public sphere, dominated by the government media, the Palestinian victims of Israeli oppression, so frequently mentioned in the mainstream Western media, are very rarely brought to the fore.

Indeed, criticism of Israel in the name of respect for human rights from the left is invariably denounced as antisemitism in disguise by the media close to the government, who thus find an easy way of deflecting the accusation of antisemitism.

The anti-Israeli tone thus remains confined to the opposition media, and especially likely to appear on websites independent of the government, where the words “Israel” and “genocide” are easily confused. It should be noted that only the most extreme bangs of the radical left and right, which are only of marginal importance, are distinguished by an aggressive anti-Israeli stance. However, it is customary for the editorial line of many opposition media to accuse Israel of systematically destroying Gaza’s hospitals, or to dismiss Israeli arguments by referring to the Washington Post. When dealing with Israel, the opposition press mainly uses the mainstream Western media as a source of information. The Hungarian right-wing press previously used to be quite notable for its antisemitism and anti-Zionism, so this change of tone is obviously at the behest of the government. Indeed, criticism of Israel in the name of respect for human rights from the left is invariably denounced as antisemitism in disguise by the media close to the government, who thus find an easy way of deflecting the accusation of antisemitism.

Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has publicly stated on several occasions that “there is zero tolerance for antisemitism in Hungary”. From time to time, the Prime Minister or his close associates are seen together with visibly orthodox Jewish men. Jewish cultural festivals take place all year without any incident. Important projects by Jewish communities receive substantial state support – as part of the religious “renaissance” in Hungary, strongly encouraged by the government. The government’s favorite Jewish community, the United Israelite Congregation of Hungary, (the Hungarian wing of the Chabad Lubavitch movement, EMIH by its Hungarian acronym) led by Rabbi Slomó Köves, is receiving particularly generous government subsidies. It can be measured in tens of millions of dollars, and EMIH’s infrastructure is growing rapidly.

In the public sphere, dominated by the government media, the anti-Israeli tone is not prevalent. Palestinian victims of Israeli oppression, so familiar from the Western mainstream media, are rarely shown In the ultra-conservative, nationalist Hungarian government’s worldview, Muslim religious groups are seen as a source of danger (see migration). Since Palestinians belong to this category, the Hungarian government media is insensitive to pro-Palestinian anti-Israel sentiments. In fact, such left-wing anti-Israelism is exposed as covert antisemitism by the government media in order to throw back the accusation of antisemitism. This trend, which has been visible for years, did not change after  October 7: the right-wing media, dominated by the government, is not receptive to accusations of “Palestinian genocide” and similar allegations. 

Hungary, under the Orbán government, has become Israel’s number one political partner in the European Union: in the EU, the UN and other international fora, Hungary has on several occasions refused to vote in favor of resolutions condemning Israel – in violation of the EU’s unified policy. And even more so after October 7. Pro-Israel policy goes so far that pro-Palestinian demonstrations are practically banned in Hungary, on the grounds that “supporting terrorism” is not allowed.  

However this conduct should be seen as part of the Orbán government’s policy against the EU’s mainstream. This policy includes intense political and economic relations with authoritarian leaders outside Europe: Putin, Xin Chi Ping, Council of Turkic States. This policy has led to the formation of the new grouping in the European Parliament, Patriots for Europe, which is an alliance of radical right-wing parties. Quite a few of these parties have an antisemitic past, which they now reject and compensate for by adopting a pro-Israeli political stance.

The government wants to direct  the way the Holocaust is remembered in Hungary. The responsibility of the state apparatus of the time may be mentioned, but the behavior of the Hungarian population in 1944 is generally spoken of in very unassuming terms – if at all.

In its own way, the government is very concerned with the memory of the Holocaust. It has spent nearly ten billion forints (28 million USD) on the construction of a new Holocaust memorial institution. The “House of Fates” would have served to tell the story of the Hungarian Holocaust from the perspective of universal human responsibility thus pushing the question of Hungarian responsibility into the background. The attempt was unsuccessful and the large-scale construction remained unfinished, as there were no historians in Hungary or abroad with the necessary professional reputation to lend their names to the project.

The government also spent billions of forints to buy the inheritance of the only Nobel Prize-winning Hungarian writer, Imre Kertész, and to set up the Imre Kertész Institute to take care of it. The intention must have been the same as in the case of the House of Fates: since the focus of Imre Kertész’s work is the Holocaust, the government wants to direct  the way the Holocaust is remembered in Hungary.

In general, with the tacit support of the government, a certain tradition of Holocaust commemorations has developed over the last twenty years: at a national as well as at a local level. On Holocaust Remembrance Day, the Jewish community (where it still exists) and representatives of the state and local municipalities join together to commemorate the Jews who were deported and murdered in 1944. They emphasize the decisive role of the Jews in the development and modernization of the country (the city), their contribution to the Hungarian economy and culture. The commemorators punctuate the loss that the Hungarian and Jewish communities suffered as a result of the deportation of the victims and condemn exclusion and hatred in general terms. Little is said about the antisemitism of the Hungarian society of those times. The responsibility of the state apparatus of the time may be mentioned, but the behavior of the Hungarian population in 1944 is generally spoken of in very unassuming terms – if at all. I have not read of any commemorative events where the local population’s rush to seize the property of the deported Jews in 1944 was mentioned.

The absence of antisemitic violence is a recurring element in government propaganda, especially when the scourge of migration is discussed.

The above paradoxical and contradictory situation is further exacerbated by two quantifiable facts: on the one hand, the negligible level of antisemitic violence and, on the other, the particularly high level of antisemitic prejudice. The Action and Protection Foundation (more on that later) specialized in researching and combating antisemitism and has  recorded 128 antisemitic incidents in 2023. This is almost three times the figure of 48, which was recorded in 2022. The increase can be clearly linked to October 7, as the monthly figures show: while a total of 18 antisemitic incidents were recorded between January and September 2023, 110 were recorded between October and December. Three quarters of these were hate speech acts. The level of violence remained low: in 2023, just as in 2022 only one violent act had been recorded. Generally, Orthodox Jews (in the traditionally “Jewish” parts of Budapest) can go about in their traditional dress. The absence of antisemitic violence is a recurring element in government propaganda, especially when the scourge of migration is discussed. However, as far as antisemitic prejudice is concerned the proportion of people in Hungary who hold such prejudices is 63%, which puts us in third place among 16 EU countries.^[7] The European average is 39%. 

While its attitude to antisemitism is highly controversial, the government and the government media regularly use accusations of antisemitism against their political opponents. Thus in 2022, a fierce campaign was being waged against the opposition party Jobbik, stigmatizing its rampant antisemitism. What they forgot to add is that Jobbik, which started out as a truly antisemitic-fascist party, has since abandoned its antisemitism and is attacking the government on a national-conservative and anti-corruption basis. 

The then president of the largest Jewish organization, the Federation of Jewish Communities in Hungary (Mazsihisz), who was reluctant to join the anti-Jobbik propaganda campaign, was also a frequent target of these accusations, with claims such as”He does not take the fight against antisemitism seriously.” The government (media) is far less vocal in its criticism of the Mi hazánk (Our homeland) party, which carries on the far-right tradition of Jobbik, but is not really anti-government.

George Soros is also regularly accused of antisemitism (!) by the government media – in connection with his support for anti-Israel organizations. The anti-Soros campaign’s recurring absurd accusation in the government media is that Soros – who was in hiding by that time – helped loot his fellow Jews in 1944. Thus, the xenophobic government media is permitting itself to give a moral lesson to a Holocaust survivor.

It is also worth mentioning that there is no Islamic antisemitism in Hungary either, because the government, which uses “migrants” as bogeymen, does not allow immigration – Islamic immigration least of all.

II. The worldview of the “Illiberal System”

I will try to put the above facts in a broader context below.

Viktor Orbán’s ultra-conservative, reactionary value system, which he calls „illiberal”, is a mirror image of the values of the European Union. What is good for them is bad for us and vice versa. This is also reflected in the policy towards the Jews.

The European Union’s worldview is secular and humanistic – the Orbán regime is religious and premodern. Accordingly, quite a few EU member states restrict Jewish religious practice (banning or attempting to ban kosher slaughter and circumcision) on humanistic grounds. The Orbán regime, on the other hand, opens the door wide to Jewish religious practice. (It has provided government support for the establishment of a kosher slaughterhouse and promotes Jewish pilgrimage tourism.) And it does not fail to criticize the EU for restricting the freedom of Jews to practice their religion.

The illiberal ideology goes the opposite way: it portrays Hungarians as victims and not as perpetrators. Accordingly, there is a lack of introspection and thus the national self-image should remain intact.

The attitude to the Holocaust is fundamentally different in the two “camps”. In the EU’s western member states, there is a generally accepted perception that their nation bears moral responsibility for the destruction of the local Jewish population and that there is no way to pass this burden to others. This has led to a serious crisis of traditional national consciousness, which has been replaced by other ideologies (multiculturalism, anti-racism, minority rights).
The illiberal ideology goes the opposite way: it portrays Hungarians as victims and not as perpetrators. Accordingly, there is a lack of introspection and thus the national self-image should remain intact. The silent cult of Horthy (allied with Hitler after 1938), could not be possible otherwise.

The European Union is firmly based on multiculturalism, inclusion and anti-racism.
These noble ideals, however have been misused to create a newer version of antisemitism called anti-Zionism, which seeks to exclude the State of Israel from the community of nations accusing it of racism, genocide, etc. (The slogan “Israel is doing to the Palestinians what the Nazis did to the Jews” clearly reflects a deep-seated desire to shake off responsibility for the Holocaust.) This trend has left its mark on EU attitudes towards Israel, accepting in principle, but often highly critical. We need no better example than Josep Borrel, High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, whose strident anti-Israel rhetoric –  especially since October 7 – has continued to inflame tensions between the EU and Israel.

The Orbán regime is religious -nationalist, tolerates multiculturalism at best, (see Orbán’s comment on “race mixing”) and regards inclusion as a codeword for migration. Migrants are the greatest danger in Orbán’s vocabulary, against which Hungary is protecting Christian Europe.
On this religious, nationalist, anti-immigration ground the Orbán regime regards the Netanyahu government as an ally. Hungary is a frequent supporter of Israel in the EU. The Hungarian government media attack the Israel critical reporting of the Western mainstream media and label it antisemitic time and again.

Since October 7, 2023, Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó has spoken out in favor of Israel on several occasions, more than once defying the EU’s collective position. (Just as he has spoken out on many occasions in favor of Russian interests and against a united European position in support of Ukraine.)

As a legendary figure of multiculturalism and inclusion, George Soros has become an almost inescapable target of Orbán’s propaganda. Citing some Israeli authors, this propaganda claims that attacking Soros is not antisemitic. Here, criticism of Soros’ policies is grossly confused with his demonisation. Soros’s anti-Israel stance is rightly criticized – but the heartless, cosmopolitan, speculative billionaire that Soros is portrayed as is not a criticism, but the essence of antisemitic stereotypes.

From the above, it is clear that where EU policy is critical of Jews, religion or Israel, Orbán’s policy is accepting – and he never fails to stress this. Where the EU is accepting – multiculturalism, anti-racism – the Orbán regime is not welcoming. Where the EU is on the path of self-examination (Holocaust remembrance), the Orbán regime cannot and will not follow – since in its self-image, the nation can only be a hero or a victim.

On this religious, nationalist, anti-immigration ground the Orbán regime regards the Netanyahu government as an ally.

As mentioned above, a quiet (unofficial) Horthy nostalgia is an integral part of Orbán’s worldview. Miklós Horthy, the regent of Hungary between 1919 and 1944, was a staunch antisemite, in keeping with the zeitgeist of the time. He sought to marginalize the Jews, who played a key role in Hungary’s modernisation. Orbán draws on Horthy’s example in making enemies, but he does not embrace his antisemitism. The post-Holocaust zeitgeist does not allow it. So it seems that Orbán is not seeking to marginalize the Jews, but to give the Jews a place and a role in his grand national vision. Above all, this role would be to spread Hungary’s good name in the world and protect the government from accusations of antisemitism. Israel’s steadfast support before and after October 7 can be seen as part of this strategy.

If Hungarian Jews are willing to declare in international forums that they live undisturbed in Orbán’s “System of National Co-operation”^[8], then the government, with its authoritarian power, is willing to guarantee this undisturbed life. (Whatever “undisturbed” means in the government’s sense.) Here the lack of freedom applies to antisemites as well.^[9]

III. Jewish reception of the illiberal regime

This would be the pact – unwritten, undeclared – proposed by the Orbán regime. The vast majority of Hungarian Jews, who wholeheartedly hate the Horthy nostalgia, are not ready for the role offered to them – but Jewish organizations have reacted in various ways. The remnant of Hungarian Jews – after the experience of Nazism and Communism – deeply hate all authoritarian regimes; they are liberal, anti-racist, pro-minority – schematically portrayed as New York Jews. They subscribe more or less to the same values as George Soros – who from 1980 onwards made a great effort to move Hungary towards liberal democracy. (The fact that anti-racist, pro-minority slogans can also be turned into anti-Israel ideology, and George Soros is not entirely blameless in this, is an experience that has not yet reached the majority of Hungarian Jews.) 

Therefore if there is any group of people in Hungary who are not receptive to Orbán’s Soros-demonizing, Brussels-bashing politics, it is certainly the Jews. These – perhaps somewhat pointed – observations are backed up by a comprehensive survey of Jews in Hungary in 2017.^[10] According to the data, the values and cultural consumption habits of Jews reflect liberal tendencies that differ strongly from the Hungarian average. As far as their political preferences are concerned, one percent of the 1,879 respondents said they would vote for Fidesz. At the same time, 72% of them considered the government media to be antisemitic (Orbán has been in power since 2010.) 

No survey on the opinion of Hungarian Jews was conducted after October 7. They are obviously divided by the paradox that the nationalist, anti-democratic government press supports Israel, while the free, democratic opposition press is much more critical. However, the major Jewish denominations have clearly welcomed the government’s pro-Israel stance. So where in the world can you find Jews who, after the experience of the Holocaust, are not bothered by an enemy-seeking, nationalist worldview, by the dismantling of democracy and the construction of a corporatist regime?

There are two large groups of these Jews. One, as has been mentioned, is the group of supporters of the current Israeli government in and outside of Israel. Israel is the number one target of Jew-hatred in the world today. Hatred towards it is expressed essentially in left-wing, human rightist, pro-minority language. (“Israel tramples on the rights of Palestinians”, etc.), therefore much of the Israeli public has become disenchanted with this ideology. They do not believe – quite rightly – that granting the Palestinians their rights will bring peace and end the hatred directed towards them. All this became even more obvious after October 7.
Thus, Israeli politicians representing them easily find a common platform with Viktor Orbán’s regime, which – on a pre-modern ideological basis – also rejects human rightist ideology.
The paradox of this mutual sympathy is best illustrated by the following fact: both governments claim that “we are surrounded by enemies who want to destroy us” – which is certainly true in the case of Israel, but not in the case of Hungary.

One of the most important gestures of the Lubavitch movement was to defend the Hungarian government against accusations of antisemitism in the context of the anti-Soros campaign

The other group is the Chabad Lubavitch movement, whose Hungarian wing, the aforementioned EMIH, is Orbán’s Jewish ally and partner in building the corporatist system. According to the teachings of their master, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, the young emissaries of Chabad are paving the way for the Messiah worldwide: they build an institutional network as large as possible to bring the Torah to as many Jews as possible. They welcome the local authorities as partners in this endeavor, and they are ready to meet the expectations of these authorities themselves. If this power is authoritarian, that is an advantage, as it avoids the cumbersome formalities of democracies, as is the case in Russia and Hungary.

Slomó Köves, the talented and ambitious political leader of the Chabad movement in Hungary, proved to be a good partner for the government in Hungary. He did much to introduce the Orbán government to American and Israeli Orthodox Jewish circles. He has published spectacular photographs of meetings between Hungarian government officials and Orthodox rabbis. A meeting between Orbán and Israeli Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi David Lau can be an effective counter-argument if the government were to be accused of antisemitism.

One of EMIH’s most important gestures was to defend the Hungarian government against accusations of antisemitism in the context of the anti-Soros campaign. “Soros appears in the public eye not as a Jew, but as a symbol of global capitalism.” If we call the campaign antisemitic, we ourselves are validating the paradigm of “global capitalism equals Jewry” – Köves argued at the time.^[11] The House of Fates, mentioned above, which sought to shift the story of the Holocaust from Hungarian to universal human responsibility, was taken over by Slomó Köves in 2018. The project foundered^[12] – but it reflects Slomó Köves’ loyalty to the NER system. (However, Slomó Köves’ loyalty is not without limits: he also protested against the aforementioned newspaper article calling for Horthy’s rehabilitation.^[13]

EMIH has thus been smoothly integrated into the corporatist NER system.<footnote>EMIH refers to a study supposedly carried out by the Institute of Jewish Policy Research (JPR) in 2022. „A first-of-its-kind index combining different measures of Jewish experience found that Hungary and Italy are the best countries in Europe for Jews to live in.” However, as of writing this, the study, titled “Europe and Jews, a country index of respect and tolerance towards Jews,” cannot be found on JPR’s website.</footnote> Over the last twenty years it has built up an institutional system that rivals that of the indigenous Mazsihisz (in existence since 1867). The state support showered on EMIH can be measured in tens of millions of dollars.^[14] The tragedy of October 7 has once again strengthened the cooperation between EMIH and the government. The “Neokohn” website maintained by the EMIH is a strong defender of Israel therefore is on good terms with other government media outlets.  October 7 also curbed the escalating struggles within the Jewish community in Hungary.

The government also discreetly intervenes on EMIH’s behalf in case of internal struggles in the Jewish community. It confirmed the EMIH-affiliated leaders of the Hungarian Orthodoxy. Thus EMIH has practically absorbed the Hungarian Jewish Orthodox denomination, a community of small size but of great tradition. With all this, EMIH managed to attract the support of 2549 Hungarian Jews. This is the number of Hungarian taxpayers who, under Hungarian law, donated one percent of their taxes to the EMIH in 2023. There is no other, reliable indicator of public support for religious denominations in Hungary.

The same figure is 12,612 regarding Mazsihisz, the largest organization of Hungarian Jews. Thus, among the highly assimilated Hungarian Jews, Mazsihisz has the largest support. Mazsihisz’s predecessor was founded in 1868, and represents “neolog” (then progressive, now conservative) oriented Jews. Neolog Jews declared themselves Hungarian by nation and Jew by religion. Throughout its history, neolog leadership has always been loyal to the ruling power: in the tragic year of 1944, and again during the communist era. Crippled by two kinds of totalitarianism, the organization had little to do with freedom after 1989, and its obsolescence was a subject of ridicule in Hungarian Jewish circles for many years.

Only András Heisler, elected president in 2013, tried to change this course, steering Mazsihisz consciously in a modern, inclusive, liberal direction. Meanwhile, he was not afraid to enter into conflict with the government. When the government erected a memorial in central Budapest in 2014, on the 70th anniversary of the Hungarian Holocaust, depicting Hungarians and Jews alike as victims of German aggression, Heisler withdrew from cooperation with the government – and Mazsihisz membership stood behind him all the way. After that, Mazsihisz did not take part in the programmes of the Holocaust Memorial Year organized by the government. Heisler also had the courage to call on the Prime Minister to stop the anti-Soros campaign, drawing attention to its antisemitic overtones. (The Prime Minister replied in a cold, polite letter: the request was rejected). All this has increased the prestige of Heisler – and that of the long despised Mazsihisz – at home and abroad.^[15]

Meanwhile however, Heisler had serious difficulties while modernizing Mazsihisz’ ineffective institutional system. Thus, Mazsihisz was unable to deploy modern tools in the systematic fight against antisemitism, and Mazsihisz did not achieve any significant results in this field.

The “zero tolerance” towards antisemitism, as the Prime Minister calls it, means one thing: the regime reserves the right to say who is or what is antisemitic in any given situation.

The systematic monitoring of antisemitism was initiated in 2012 by the energetic Slomó Köves, who established the Action and Protection Foundation (TEV by its Hungarian acronym) with the involvement of several Jewish organizations (including Mazsihisz). The organization was initially very active, but after a few years the other Jewish organizations abandoned it, saying that they had no influence on its actual functioning.^[16]

TEV’s biggest undertaking was the aforementioned 16-country comparative antisemitism survey in 2020. The costly survey was largely funded by the Hungarian government. The results were disappointing for the client, however, as they showed that Hungarians rank very high in terms of antisemitic prejudice. The survey, which was heralded with much media hype at the time of its launch, was quickly forgotten: it is not even listed on the TEV’s Hungarian-language website.^[17] After that, TEV’s activity has slowed down. The website’s last monthly report is from August 2023. The last annual summary also contains data from 2023. As of this date of publishing (September 19, 2024), there is no mention on the website about antisemitic incidents in 2024.

IV. Conclusion

In the circumstances described above, the “zero tolerance” towards antisemitism, as the Prime Minister calls it, means one thing: the regime reserves the right to say who is or what is antisemitic in any given situation. On this basis, it can brand politicians or even Jewish leaders, as it wishes.

Hungary is characterized by a negligible number of violent antisemitic incidents (even after October 7) and a high proportion of prejudiced people, in contrast to England or the Netherlands, where the number of violent incidents is incomparably higher, while the proportion of prejudiced people is much lower.

Whenever in Central Europe the search for enemies and hidden powers is at the forefront of the political agenda, the public will inevitably find the Jews. Jews are the only general, ubiquitous enemy available. This explains why, despite the silencing of direct antisemitic voices, the proportion of antisemites in Hungary today is one of the highest in Europe. However, people don’t rush to express this opinion now, because the regime that completely dominates the political right expects them to do so.

Thus, the situation in Hungary can be summed up as follows: the Hungarian prime minister is keeping a firm grip on the demons he himself helped to unleash. (Meanwhile, humanist Western Europe is also struggling with demons of its own, unleashed by postmodern Jew-hatred, which speaks the anti-racist language.)

October 7 has further strengthened this policy, as these tragic events can well be integrated  in the Hungarian government’s anti-immigration agenda, threatening with Islamic masses and terrorism. However, given the government’s good relations with anti-democratic countries (China, Russia, Turk Council), it is difficult to assess how long this will be compatible with the cordial relationship with Israel.

---

János Gadó