Hungary is struggling with how to remember the 70th anniversary of the Holocaust —when 560,000 Jewish and Roma Hungarians were assembled, robbed, tortured, and executed, mostin an unprecedentedly fast four-month blitz at the end of the war. The attempted genocide was carried out by Hungarians—thanks to the governing Hungarian Arrow Cross party–and the nation’s German allies, at the very end of World War II. (http://www.ushmm.org/m/pdfs/Publication_OP_2010-01.pdf)
Many people here still don’t regard the Jews and Roma of Hungary as real Hungarians. So the seeds of that original disaster remain in the culture. The far-right Jobbik party actively campaigns on these themes, blaming them for Hungary’s stagnant economy. The ruling Fidesz party—which will win re-election in April—is more duplicitous about this, speaking out of both sides of Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s mouth. But lately Orban’s government has tipped the balance to the anti-Semitic, anti-Roma nationalistic side, hoping to steal Jobbik’s votes for their own Fidesz party in Hungary’s April 6 parliamentary elections.
Of course it isn’t easy, after all those years of Communism, to build a national economy that works. It’s even harder to create enough equity and mobility to inspire people to get a better education, take innovative risks, and build a safe and just community together. This requires accountability, and trust. These two qualities are hard to find in Hungary. Instead, the current political leaders like to blame some “outsiders” for conspiring “against the state” for their own gain. They say it is the Americans, the European Union, the socialist opposition, and, increasingly, it is the “Gypsies”, and the Jews. They are the reason the elected leaders cannot give you a decent life. These political leaders don’t seem to worry that are playing with fire; it’s not their responsibility to think about the Holocaust carried out by their relatives sixty years ago, in these very neighborhoods where I live and walk every day.
A recent visit to the Budapest Holocaust Memorial on Pava St. offered me the exact names, faces and fates of many of the people where were murdered by their countrymen during World War II. There are Hungarians living here today who looked the other way as their Jewish and Roma neighbors were carried off and murdered. Perhaps they even participated personally in the roundups. They had a lot to gain, especially the apartments and goods and jobs of the Jewish Hungarians, who were vital leaders of the Hungarian national culture and economy. In 1920, 22.7% of actors, 27.3% of writers and scientists, 17.6% of painters, 23.6% of musicians, 50.6% of lawyers, and 59.9% of physicians were Jewish, according to Yale historian Eva Balogh, who writes an anti-government blog, Hungarian Spectrum. Many of Budapest’s most admired buildings were designed by Jewish architects, but today’s school children are ignorant of these facts.
Even though the Hungarian government claims to be mobilizing the nation to remember the Holocaust under an international spotlight, there is no evidence of an honest discussion now in Hungary—or interest in showing school children the deserted memorial exhibit on Pava St.—to understand what happened, who did it, and how that could have been possible. This is in sharp contrast to Hungary’s ally in both world wars—Germany—which of course has always borne the greatest burden of guilt for the Holocaust, and has also done the best job of educating subsequent generations about the dangers of anti-Semitism, eugenics and race-based conspiracy theories.
A different history is being invented in Hungary these days, with new statues being erected in prominent locations, in order to exonerate Hungarians of any wrong-doing. The narrative is that brave Hungarians have always been the victims of outsiders—in the case of 1944, they now want to say it was all done by the Germans, plain and simple. There is a new statue, put up by a church that is officially sanctioned by the government, lionizing Hungarian Regent Miklos Horthy, who, they don’t care to mention, voluntarily allied Hungary with the Germans during World War II. (See the thumbnail picture of the Horthy statue at the top of this blog.)
The aristocratic Horthy, who presided over the laws robbing Jews of their property, jobs, and freedom to marry non-Jews, forcing them into slave labor, and causing the unnatural deaths of at least 60,000 Jews before 1944, has a contested legacy because of his attempt to change course in the final days of the war. He had entered into an alliance with Germany from the beginning, supporting the Nazis with soldiers, material, Jewish laborers, and propaganda, until they started to lose.In 1944, he tried to secretly withdraw Hungary from the Axis, but Germany found out, invaded Hungary, pushed him aside, and installed the more extreme Arrow Cross government. Together these Arrow Cross Hungarians and their German partners killed half a million Jews in the final four months of the war. A garden at the beautiful Dohany St. Synagogue—the second largest in the world—was originated after World War I to honor the Jews who had built the Hungarian nation and defended it during the war. In 1944 the garden instead became a mass grave for Hungary’s no longer “honored” Jews.
The statue of Horthy depicts him up as a nationalistic hero worthy of emulation. Now a second new statue–a project passionately put forward by Prime Minister Viktor Orban—will further depict the Hungarians as victims of the Germans. This fits well with the House of Terror museum, which Hungarian school children ARE taken to, in the former headquarters of both the Arrow Cross and the Communist secret police. There is a lot of blame here against the Allies who dismembered greater Hungary after World War I, against Communists, and against Germans. But there is no accountability here for what the Hungarian government did to its Jewish and Roma citizens during World War II, which is laid out in exquisite detail at the much less visited Pava Street memorial.
The good news is that there is international pushback against this second statue, which is an official project of the Orban government. Prominent Hungarian and American Jewish groups have withdrawn from the 70th anniversary Holocaust commemorations, and the controversy has stained the Orban regime.Hungarians who know him say that Orban is not himself an anti-Semite or even an anti-Roma racist; rather he finds it useful to stir up these nationalist emotions in order to further accumulate and exercise power.
Orban tries to have it both ways, deploying his EU-friendly cabinet officers to mollify the West, while actively funding anti-Semitic projects and people, winking as government-funded church schools re-segregate Roma children, and as government-supported apparatchiks rewrite the nation’s history. His government loses lawsuits and diplomatic skirmishes with the European Union, but nevertheless proceeds with impunity.
The most vulnerable and despised citizens in the Hungarian national narrative are the Roma (gypsy) people, who remain caught in a centuries-old complex dynamic of poverty, illiteracy and discrimination across Europe. The Hungarians have received millions of dollars from the European Union to help integrate their Roma population, which has lived here for over 400 years. The government has little to show for this investment. Here is a unique feature the Orban regime has introduced: if you declare officially that you are a member of the Roma minority, you are allowed on April 6 to vote ONLY for the Roma ticket—which features candidates only from Orban’s Fidesz ruling party.
A new report by my friend Magda Matache at Harvard’s FXB Center shows how anti-Roma violence is rising in Hungary. Zsolt Bayer–a racist who holds a top editorial job at a newspaper sanctioned by the Orban government , is a founding member of the Fidesz elite,a friend of Orban’s and a beneficiary of government funding–wrote in January 2013 that Roma are no better than animals, who do not deserve to live with the rest of us humans. Is this not what happened in the run-up to the Holocaust?
It is hard, in the face of all this, to live in this country. But even though I am a foreigner, I have found a way to stand up. I have sought out wonderful Hungarians who are working against these racist themes and practices. We have linked and energized each other with a project inspired by the Not In Our Town (www.niot.org) movement in the USA. We have had support from the US and Norwegian embassies, Central European University, and scores of Hungarian activist groups. ELTE social psychologist Gyorgy Csepeli, a prominent Hungarian scholar and public intellectual, is among those working with us to actively defuse the dangerous anti-Roma narrative. He is conducting workshops in towns around Hungary, talking people-to-people, trying to avoid the party politics that make honesty so difficult. Some times the Hungarian government is even on our side. It may be tokenism, but every bit of help is appreciated.
Hundreds of us gathered last Sunday night in Prague, to conjure the spirit of Vaclav Havel at the first Forum 2000 conference in 16 years that he wouldn’t attend himself. Olda Czerny, who faithfully served in Havel’s cabinet and ran these conferences, also died last year. We were feeling sad about all this when Jan Urban, the journalist who taught us how hard it is to “teach old cats to bark,” introduced a video of Havel onstage, carrying a guitar. Havel was joking that he wasn’t really a philosopher, playwright or politician, he was just a “guitar carrier,” a “roadie,” he said, for Joan Baez. When the lights came back on after this video, a luminous Joan Baez stepped onto the stage in person, and we sang “We Shall Overcome” together.
The next morning the Dalai Lama was there, in a video, exhorting that “we should feel more sense of responsibility” now that Havel is no longer on this earth. “His spirit we must carry.” He and Havel were essential allies. “Good things must start from one individual,” the Dalai Lama said. “Develop new ideas. We must implement.”
How can we channel Havel’s philosophy about how to promote human rights in difficult places? People came from Burma, Venezuela, China, the Roma ghettoes of Romania, India, Egypt, Japan, Kenya, Morocco, Russia, Belarus and elsewhere to share their strategies and concerns about this. Hundreds of students also participated, asking penetrating questions.
“The still very rich western world got more deaf and blind than before,” said Czech foreign minister Karol Schwartzenberg, in the clearest voice I have ever heard him speak. But this only means we must work to open their eyes, he said. “The chances are bigger. In Burma, I saw the effect again…Use the power of the powerless. It works.” Madeleine Albright also offered hope and advice. “Modern technology has made it harder to conceal facts,” she said. “We need to use technology to educate, not to enflame.” My favorite Czech storyteller, Jiri Stransky, advised with Havel-like simplicity that we must “educate by telling stories.” Stransky, who served 10 years in communist prisons, including 6 1/2 years of hard labor in a uranium mine, said he was taught by the “best brains” of Czech society since they were there in prison with him. “I have a doctor of prison sciences,” he joked. Romanian Valeriu Nicolae showed a clip from the film he is making about his club for Roma children who want to learn how to read, write and do math.
The new supranational institutions, such as the European Union, make it “harder to demagogue,” and make nationalist appeals “less of a factor in harming the destiny of people,”
said Enrique ter Horst of Venezuela, former UN deputy high commissioner for human rights. While there was a spirit of grace and determination at this gathering of people who are working in the hardest places in the world, we also heard some urgent warnings. Ukrainian and Belarus opposition figures talked about how bad it is. A panel pondered “Is Hungary a Democracy” and had a difficult time concluding that it is. Chinese blogger Michael Anti said that Google should leave China because all the servers in the country are in Beijing, in the hands of the government. There are no independent servers, neutrally passing data through the networks. When Chinese people put emoticons on their Chinese knockoff social network pages and microblogs, the government is mining that information to learn their opinions and gauge public sentiments at all levels, he said. Not surprisingly, the best comments were from Havel himself, shared by his English translater Paul Wilson. Wilson said the Havel presidential library should have over its mantel, his simple summary of how they brought down Communism: “We did what we could, and that meant we could do more. So we did more.”
If everyone is now a journalist, thanks to mobile media tools, how can consumers create a nutritious news diet for themselves? How can they sort out what reality is captured and what is constructed and therefore presumably less authentic?
This was the question we were chewing over at Gerbaud’s legendary Budapest patisserie yesterday. I was with two of the most experienced and creative thinkers about global media: Rosental Alves of the University of Texas, who knows everyone and everything about Latin America journalism, and Behrouz Afagh, head of the BBC’s Asia and Pacific news coverage. The day before, we had all heard a terrific idea from Fred Ritchin, the USA dean of news photographers, now a New York University photography professor because he left as photo head of the New York Times in 1982.
Here is Fred’s idea: when you digitally publish a serious news photo you imbed a link on the left corner of the image, that when moused over, shows a “before” image taken of the same subject just before the selected image, and in the right top corner, a link that shows an “after” shot taken just after the main image. It’s a way of seeing whether the selected image was constructed or was actually taken–as authentic photojournalism is supposed to be– from a real flow of action. This process itself could be faked, of course, as can almost everything now. But there would be a low incentive to fake these contextualizing “before” and “after” shots, since the point is that they would be voluntarily included by those who are trying to hold themselves accountable to a professional standard of veracity.
This kind of device, which unfortunately didn’t capture the imagination of our colleague Ethan Zuckerman at the MIT Media lab when we posed it to him as something we would like to see his designers create, is related to my own long-fantasized authentication tool. I would like a tool that would enable those who want to be held to a veracity standard (a “Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.”) The creators and spreaders of information would imbed a visible bug in any image, video selection or piece of text, that would carry its provenance. Where did this “fact,” image or story originate? We might also create a function to track where has it been since? It would automatically create a history like those we can access now for any given Wikipedia entry. The content that would be “bugged” would have to be fixed, like a pdf, which would make it difficult to remix or tweak. But that’s exactly the point. Its the raw material of fact, before it gets thrown into the great mixmaster of the web.
Of course, those doing risky communication would forgo using this history bug, in order not to be tracked down. This is sort of the opposite of Tor. (All tools can be used for evil. That doesn’t mean we should shy away from creating new tools.)
For those who are working hard to offer or find verified, authenticated facts and images, this little bug could offer a missing accountability factor. If people understand where a story (or image) comes from, they might know more about what credibility to give it. It could be introduced on a voluntary basis by the purveyors whose vetting is considered essential to their brand (New York Times, BBC.) This wouldn’t solve all the problems of critically evaluating the flow of content, but it would give us a tool we could sorely use.
If you add another feature—an automated or nonautomated micropayment feature that is tied to the authentification—then you might just have an interesting tool that would not only help people figure out what to take seriously, but would pay for this higher veracity stuff, supporting the often expensive production of investigative journalism and other hard-to-get vetted and contextualized news items.
Anyone like/hate these ideas? Your feedback is awaited.
Central European University is a unique place, a gem. It is fragile. What happens here is extremely difficult to do. CEU takes people from damaged countries and helps them work for a better world. It encourages critical thinking, and seeks an honest engagement with history. It has no dominant nationality; students and faculty are drawn from over 100 countries. They embrace change, but work to channel it in positive directions…
It is to the great credit of George Soros that he invests and cares about this, rather than just going for the high-octane, easier tasks of lining up stars from Princeton, Cambridge, LSE, Oxford, Shanghai and Singapore. People from these places came this week to help launch CEU’s new School of Public Policy and International Affairs, whose motto is “purpose beyond power.” These luminaries are doing something great in their own settings, but it is frankly less ambitious than what we are taking on at CEU. And no matter how brilliant they may be, the things they know are a shadow of what the CEU community knows and does.
I am seeing a Dalit woman and a Roma woman, both of whom came from utterly outcast families, growing up barefoot with no prospects, come to CEU and flourish, with inspiring contributions to make to the larger world as well as their own embattled communities. In order to build a university that takes advantage of their experiences and ideas, and equips them to contribute to society, there are people who are working around the clock, and on weekends, with every bit of genius and energy they can muster. These are people who could have had easier lives at other universities. I am talking about John Shattuck and Wolfgang Reinecke, Liviu Matei, Noemi Kakucs, Kinga Pal, Kati Horvath, Ildiko Moran, Janos the driver, Sybil Wyatt, Peter Almond, Stephen Fee. High and low, they give it absolutely everything, to the detriment sometimes of their own health and personal lives.
A film that captures some of these stories is in its final editing phase. It is complex, subtle, and wonderful. I look forward to sharing it soon with all of you.
So how far should real journalists go in saying that someone is “misstating” the facts, i.e. lying? This was raised recently by the NYTimes ombudsman. http://t.co/rn2GLZrx …Everyone came down on the poor fellow to say DUH, of course, that’s what real journalists are supposed to do! But it’s not so simple. Most politics is entirely faith-based. Why else would someone listen to those blow-hards on radio and tv, who lie day after day to paint a scary world full of conspiracies? Look for example at all the “documentaries” that claim the US government actually created the terrorist http://freedocumentaries.org/int.php?filmID=94 attacks on the World Trade Center.
Or on any day of the week, look at how Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly or Ann Coulter or Laura Ingram push their mythical versions of Obama and US history out to the public. Are they lying? Yes! Do they know they are lying? I’m not sure. Reality and fantasy have merged into a coherent political vision that has real traction out there. Just look at the Tea Party guy who didn’t realize the “government” that he hates provides the Medicare that he loves.
So maybe its time to organize some more effective journalistic fact-checking. We need to take the great fact-checking websites: http://www.snopes.com/ for urban legends, and http://www.politifact.com/ and http://www.factcheck.org/ for USA political assertions, and connect them with red and green hyperlinks from the news texts to their findings.
So if a story about Obama or Romney making assertions is filled with green words, that means the links will show those statements to be factually pretty good. But if they are filled with red words, that means the links will show how the statement is distorted or untrue. By clicking on each green or red word, you could read each reference (like a footnote) that would tell you why it’s demonstrably true or false.
If the journalism is presented in paper, rather than digital form, you could place the story in the middle of white space, and then have cartoon balloons going off on all sides framing the story, each telling whether the phrase is true, and on what basis we determined that.
I have long fantasized about having a tag on information that floats around the internet—kind of a “Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval” that would indicate transparently the story’s original source and verification. The food chain of a factoid would then be visible—we could see whether it started out as malware, or whether it really appeared in that official budget document.
The sad part is I don’t think proving something is false will automatically take away its power to appeal. I’m remembering the “Swift Boat veterans” lying about John Kerry’s role during the Vietnam War, in a tremendously effective attack that he failed to counter. A woman interviewed by the NYTimes was asked if she knew the allegations were false, and what she thought when she was shown conclusively that they were. “It doesn’t make any difference,” she said; she still hated John Kerry.
Fairy tales would be fine if they weren’t the basis for going to war, and electing those who might choose do that again on the basis of other fairy tales. So we have to keep looking for ways to persuade people not only to figure out what is true and false…but to care and act on those facts.
, who served 10 years in communist prisons, including 6 1/2 years of hard labor in a uranium mine, said he was taught by the “best brains” of Czech society since they were there in prison with him. “I have a doctor of prison sciences,” he joked. Romanian Valeriu Nicolae showed a clip from the film he is making about his club for Roma children who want to learn how to read, write and do math.
The creators and spreaders of information would imbed a visible bug in any image, video selection or piece of text, that would carry its provenance. Where did this “fact,” image or story originate? We might also create a function to track where has it been since? It would automatically create a history like those we can access now for any given Wikipedia entry. The content that would be “bugged” would have to be fixed, like a pdf, which would make it difficult to remix or tweak. But that’s exactly the point. Its the raw material of fact, before it gets thrown into the great mixmaster of the web.