Skip to comments.Orbán move evicting Budapest university 'unlawful' [says EUSSR top court; Soros university]
Posted on 10/10/2020 8:38:21 PM PDT by Olog-hai
The EUs highest court on Tuesday (6 October) ruled that changes by Hungary to its higher education law which forced a university founded by Hungarian-born US billionaire George Soros to quit the country, was in breach of EU law.
The 2017 legislation put the Budapest-based Central European University (CEU), established in 1991 by Soros, under pressure in what became one of prime minister Viktor Orbáns emblematic battles with the EU.
At the time, the university said it had complied with all the new rules, but the Orbán government refused to sign off on allowing the university to stay in the Hungarian capital. The CEU then relocated to Vienna.
Orbán has vilified Soros for years, arguing that the billionaire philanthropist wants to undermine Europes Christian identity with his liberal views on migration, and accused critics of working with the billionaire, which Soros has denied.
Orbán last week called the commissions annual rule of law review Soros-report.
(Excerpt) Read more at euobserver.com ...
Time for Hungrexit.
Hungary, the nation that stands up against Soros! He’s from there, they know him best, hate him most...
Those people over there sure do have a lot of problems over there. I wish them great luck in resolving all of that over there. I hope we keep it over there to the extent we can. Meanwhile, go Hungary! The Ottoman Empire is openly attempting to re-spawn. Will there be anything to oppose it? Russia looks game, but Turkey is in NATO. Problematic. Over there problems that the globalists would love to drag everyone else into ... Again. No thanks.
How many divisions does the EU have?
Yes. Hungary had an exorcism that cast out the Soros devil.
So send in the Dutch army with its pot smoking hairnet wearing `soldiers’ infiltrated by muzzies.
EU thinks they’re so powerful.
Just bulldoze it to the ground.
The entire set of EU-making “treaties” was a totally, and totally unnecessary set of actions by western European states, just for seeking a common free market for labor, goods and functioning economic enterprises.
Europeans did not need to force each other into compliance on any rules outside the sphere of trade and commerce. They have always been able to be at peace with each other without socially living exactly like each other.
The globalists thought otherwise and they are wrong.
It was not “nationalism” that caused the wars in Europe - the mantra from the Left. Europe was not so ripe with “nationalism” prior to WWI as it was ripe with imperialism - well armed rich states wielding imperial power over other states.
Part of the European imperialism was waning - the Ottomans were on the way out,
and part of the imperialism was growing - the Russian, British empires, the French colonial empire had all grown,
the Dutch foreign colonial empire was stable, |
Spain’s empire had declined greatly
Portugal had recently lost imperial claims to Britain
Germany, was not a global empire as much as it was a late getting together of German areas that had been individual states or previously occupied by Germany’s neighbors
the Austro-Hungarian Empire would be dismantled by WWI
and all these empires had various degrees of conflicts stemming from their imperial ambitions, alliances between different empires and states, and/or thinking one or another other empire was a threat to their interests.
Most all of that was imperialism, not nationalism. (On that I take the German side against France, not forgetting that some German territories had become part of France only by French occupation by Napoleon and held by France as WWI opens).
The only part that was a very recently accomplished “nationalism” was the very historically late formation of a united national state of the German people, joined together finally and in some circumstances out from under others who had occupied German speaking lands when the Germans were weak by not being united. (most Americans do not understand that Germany was a very new state, very late European state, as such, as WWI opens).
But even so, as much as they might try, and diplomatically succeed at blaming Germany for WWI, it was not German “nationalism”. Germany at that time was behaving no differently than the other major European states, concerned about a “balance of power” and concerned that it was always others who threatened that balance by their actions and their alliances with others against them.
And yet, all those great powers joined a fight that actually began not in their own territory but in the Balkans, where peoples were recently freed from either occupation by the Ottomans or from pressure by the Ottomans. But all the empires in Europe scrambled over alliances with the Balkan states as they were a possible southern bulwark for all of Europe against any resurgence of the Turks.
It was their imperial alliances, not nationalism, that led the Europeans to take sides over the Balkans, and to defend those alliances when the Balkan states become at war with each other.
It is complex, but from the end of WWI on which included the Russian revolution as well and the founding of the Communist Soviet Union under its banner of “international socialism”, the Left has continually blamed Europe’s wars, particularly WWI and WWII, falsely, on “nationalism”.
And then we get to WWII. Was it German “nationalism”? No. It was very late German imperialism, under a dictator, behaving more like a French imperialist Napoleon at a time when the rest of Europe had tired of its Napoleons.
It is the Left’s fakery over European history, blaming nationalism for Europe’s wars, from which the EU treaties arise to crush free and truly independent western European states, under the lie that they cannot be truly free and independent, and be at peace with each other. It is a lie for exactly the opposite finding coming out of WWII - wars against each other have been bled out of most of western Europe after centuries of wars among them. Western Europe was led by events into a state where it could be internally at peace without crushing the nation state out of existence.
The desire to crush the nation-state out of Europe has nothing to do with peace. It is 100% about internal dominance over them for nothing greater than just to have that power.
Not just internal dominance, and of course not for the first time. It’s all about anti-Americanism.
“Not just internal dominance, and of course not for the first time. Its all about anti-Americanism.”
I disagree. The EU would have been forced on Europe even if America did not exist.
Possibly, but one of the biggest motivators is anti-Americanism. It’s been that way since the Kaiser stated he wanted “a United States of Europe to oppose America”. It literally is revanchism for the two world wars.
mea culpa, I accept my ignorance
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.