Our news site has never, up until now, reached out to Jobbik politicians directly with questions and there is certainly a strain within the Hungarian opposition, which continues to argue that the far-right party must remain in quarantine. When the opposition cable news network ATV changed its policy a few years ago and invited Jobbik politicians in for interviewers for the first time, there was an uproar in some quarters, and I can understand the anger and frustration. But the reality is that Jobbik has been a major player in Hungarian politics since the European Parliamentary elections of 2009 and may emerge as a “kingmaker” in the next election, if Prime Minister Viktor Orbán cannot secure a majority. Simply ignoring the party makes less sense than exposing it to direct, critical media attention.
After writing a piece on the rise of Tamás Pintér, a newly appointed Jobbik MP who has taken a decidedly moderate tone, I did a bit more digging. I found that while on the surface and at the national level, Mr. Pintér has not made extremist statements and has been relatively level-headed, the same is not true for some of his statements made at smaller, local events in his home town of Dunaújváros. This has long been a critique of those who say that Jobbik’s attempt to moderate its image is a sham: while they avoid extremism nationally, little has changed at the local level, where politics and rhetoric is as far-right as ever. Last year, Mr. Pintér spoke at a local commemoration of the 1956 Revolution in Dunaújváros. I listened to his speech and noted that he spoke about how “political and economic elites are competing for favours from Israel.” This is a classic example of dog whistle politics and coded anti-Semitism.
So on July 12th, I wrote to Mr. Pintér and asked four questions, indicating that we would publish his answers verbatim and would appreciate his feedback. A few days later, when he did not respond, I wrote again. I have yet to hear back from Mr. Pintér, so I am sharing with our readers our (thus far) unanswered questions.
Tamás Pintér (Jobbik). Photo: MTI/Zoltán Balogh
1. In your most recent press conference, you mentioned that an important aspect of your work in parliament will be uncovering cases of corruption around the government. Ákos Hadházy of Politics Can Be Different (LMP – Lehet Más a Politika) has already been engaging in this, and rather successfully, I might add. On a regular basis–normally each week–he exposes or uncovers new examples of corruption. How will your approach differ from his and also from what LMP has been engaging in for several months?
2. You mentioned that you intend to help Jobbik in its efforts to become a broader, people’s party. Perhaps you are also aware of the suggestion that while nationally, Jobbik is looking to engage in a more moderate, less racist form of communication and identity politics, at least in comparison to the previous period, at the local level extreme rhetoric continues unabated. In your hometown of Dunaújváros, when did Jobbik decide to turn its back on extremist politics and what are some concrete examples of how this change has been implemented?
3. Last year in Dunaújváros, you gave a speech on October 23rd, on the anniversary of the 1956 Hungarian Revolution. In this you claimed that the “members of Hungary’s political and economic elite are competing with each other for favours from Israel.” Yet Israel is governed by a right-wing coalition and even includes radical and nationalist right-wing parties, like Yisrael Beiteinu. Concretely, how are Hungarian elites competing with each other for favours from Israel? What activities would make this most evident?
4. As a Member of Parliament, you will have to walk by the Holocaust monument known as “Shoes Along the Danube” on a regular basis, when you go to work. The monument recalls the Hungarian Jews who were murdered and shot into the river. What responsibility does the memory and legacy of the Holocaust in Hungary place on the shoulders of Hungarian politicians today?
