I have noticed with sincere surprise how much emotion, even with hysterical strokes, the announcement that, if nothing changes in the performance of the presidential candidates, my intention is the same as Cristian Tudor Popescu’s – to vote for Kelemen Hunor in the first round of the presidential elections, has stirred up. In short, we are few, traitors to the nation, understood, downright useful idiots of Moscow.
From the beginning, I am already a bit tired of the deontological arrogance of some journalists who have so often missed the mark that the pond has almost dried up, and all that's left of the stick are just splinters.
After supporting Daniel Morar wholeheartedly in the diabolical endeavor to destroy Justice and in the hatred against Laura Codruța Kovesi, explicitly sending those who warned of the disaster to a psychiatrist, when you slandered in a despicable way one of the most valuable judges in Romania just to support your theories, but validated the new DNA chief knowing the role he played in Nicolae Ciucă's plagiarism case, it's good to be more attentive to the length of your own nose than to lessons for others.
The right to an opinion is free, controversy is essential in a democracy, but with decency and respect. Insulting a different or incomprehensible point of view is just arrogant vulgarity.
Essentially, I did not intend to have any discussion about Kelemen Hunor, my vote being explained as a protest, but if we have reached a point of few, I will detail it, at least to show that there are not only useful idiots of Russia, but also useful idiots of profitable electoral nationalism.
Profile of Kelemen Hunor
First premise - Kelemen Hunor has minimal, absolutely theoretical chances of reaching the final and not even theoretically becoming the President of Romania.
Second premise - in presidential elections, we should vote primarily for the person, with their specific data.
Kelemen Hunor projects a profile totally different from what we see in this campaign gone awry, desolate in crosses, icons, pretzels, cool water, ants, sweet plums, and other such irrelevancies for the choice that needs to be made. It's as if someone really wants to make us stupid to vote accordingly.
Kelemen Hunor is the only one who raises concrete relevant issues for the country. Whether they are correctly formulated, whether they identify or not correct solutions, is to be discussed, and personally, I have had and have numerous points of disagreement with him. But we have things to discuss, we have things to agree or disagree on fundamentally, not just reasons for insults or mockery.
In a combination dominated by impostors, with criminal suspicions in places, Kelemen Hunor has no contestation regarding academic or criminal integrity. He completed his studies on time, two serious faculties, and most importantly, this is evident in his entire performance without even examining his CV.
Is his party questionable? Of course! UDMR is full of barons and has its corrupt members. But I would like to be shown a candidate who doesn't have such things behind them. I have been diametrically opposed to UDMR on justice issues, but at least there were clear and acknowledged oppositions. Now, the party most pro-justice has criminals, in the understanding of that time, on the electoral lists.
I have not heard Kelemen Hunor speak nonsense without reason, I have not heard him joyfully utter nonsense or cheap populism. I don't know, thank God!, what his house and yard look like, whether he likes pretzels or not, and whether he feeds ants or not.
I know he is married and has children, but I have not seen his family displayed for electoral purposes. I am glad that I don't know if he is religious or not; it's an absolutely private matter. I am glad that I don't know what his non-political passions are, except that he has written poetry and a novel.
But I know what his ideology is, I know exactly how he positions himself in relation to essential issues because his positions are always predictable.
I believe that among progressive conservatives and conservative social democrats, Kelemen Hunor is one of the few politicians with clear ideological consistency.
And even his adversaries acknowledge: he is extremely serious in any type of relationship, whether in politics or with the press.
The Shadow of Kelemen Hunor
Yes, the shadow of Kelemen Hunor is his proximity to Viktor Orban. However, it must be carefully analyzed if we want to move beyond slogans and hysteria.
1. I have never heard Kelemen Hunor make any illiberal statements. I have not found any anti-European statements, on the contrary. Here is what he said at the EPP Congress in Bucharest: "prosperity has never come from the East. Freedom has never come from the East, and neither has security. (...) Please do not see us only as a growing market, as a problematic and turbulent region, but as a shield that protects Europe.
I hope that on June 9, we will not only consolidate what we have now, and be satisfied that we have won the most mandates in the EP, but have the power together to make the necessary corrections. Let us have the power to give citizens hope and the belief that Europe is the best place on earth."
Or: "Many times we say that we are dissatisfied with what surrounds us, we are often dissatisfied with the European Union, but we must say very clearly and sincerely that certain investments would not have been made without European funds, they would not have been possible."
2. I have not heard any statements of support for Vladimir Putin from Kelemen Hunor. On the contrary, he had a position unequivocally in disagreement with Viktor Orban.
"From my point of view, Russia should go back to its previous borders. This means that Ukraine should win the war and push Russia back behind the borders and restore Ukraine's territorial integrity. (...) Ukrainians need to be supported in this war, as much as the Union can support, as much as the United States can support, yes, of course, and every effort must be made to push Russia back. From Russia, at least since Ivan the Terrible, security, freedom, and prosperity have never come to the west. Even now, neither freedom nor prosperity comes from Russia. That is why this aggression must be stopped, must be rejected."
3. I have not heard any revisionist statements from Kelemen Hunor. Generally, considering that I no longer have pimples on my face, but wrinkles, I understand that all nationalist charges are for electoral use, that in the EU and NATO, seriously, the issue of revisionism is not raised, and statements on this subject are nothing but soap bubbles to attract attention.
We need to be vigilant about Hungarian revisionism, not realizing how well it can be exploited by Moscow, the periodic surge of unionism with Moldova.
The true shadow of Kelemen Hunor is the failure to distance himself from Viktor Orban's excesses.
If you do political analysis, not just yesterday, but at least the day before, you know very well that a small party, especially an ethnic party, is forced to be pragmatic or disappears idealistically. If an ethnic political formation must exist or not on the Romanian scene, we have been discussing for decades. The fact is that it exists legally. The proximity to Budapest is a pragmatic decision with its cost.
And, speaking pragmatically, the fact that in complicated times, in the relationship between Bucharest and Budapest, with not always convergent interests, there is a very skillful line of communication willing to walk on a wire, like the one represented by Kelemen Hunor, is not at all a bad thing, on the contrary.
Romania's major problems are not caused by Viktor Orban and his statements, they are caused by Romanian politicians who are impostors and incompetent. Just as the EU's problems are not caused by Viktor Orban; he cynically exploits vulnerabilities created by other weak politicians for his own benefit.
Is UDMR also guilty of Romania's major problems? Like any party that has been in power, yes. But the first step in finding a solution is identifying the problem and discussing it, and Kelemen Hunor is the only one doing that in this campaign.
So, I repeat, if none of the candidates with real chances comes up with serious content until the elections, the voting intention will materialize. And in the second round, I will do as I did in 2019, that is, I will invalidate my vote. When there is nothing to choose from, I do not choose.
I do not urge anyone to do the same; whoever wants can stick to slogans and complaints, of which I am completely fed up.