Talk:Viktor Orbán

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Interesting articles (parking spot)

Here's an interesting article on some of Orbán's agenda items, for future reference: [1] --1990'sguy (talk) 22:54, 8 April 2018 (EDT)

Here are two good op-ed articles that I think do a good job at challenging leftists who oppose Orbán, who misrepresent pretty much everything about him: [2][3] --1990'sguy (talk) 18:30, 11 April 2018 (EDT)
Another good op-ed, by Pat Buchanan, on Orbán's victory: [4] --1990'sguy (talk) 21:18, 20 April 2018 (EDT)
Another good defense from ridiculous claims that Orban is somehow "anti-Semitic" because he opposes George Soros: [5] --1990'sguy (talk) 22:24, 10 July 2018 (EDT)
Here are some other interesting articles on Orban: [6][7] The first one is clearly biased against him, but it gives some good information about his migration policies. --1990'sguy (talk) 15:38, 18 July 2018 (EDT)
This article is clearly biased against Orban, but it is detailed and seems to make a decent effort to fairly explain why Orban is critical of liberal Western Europe and the U.S. establishment: [8] --1990'sguy (talk) 16:35, 12 August 2018 (EDT)
I think this commentator is being too critical of Orban, but it's still a decent read: [9] --1990'sguy (talk) 21:37, 23 August 2018 (EDT)

We should follow the outcome of these laws and constitutional amendments that the Hungarian parliament passed (the "Stop Soros" laws and a constitutional amendment making mass migration population replacement illegal): [10] --1990'sguy (talk) 11:37, 20 June 2018 (EDT)

At least one member of an establishment European government supports Orban, though his boss disapproves: [11] --1990'sguy (talk) 20:44, 1 July 2018 (EDT)
These articles, and this WP permalink, discuss (mainly in passing) some interesting policies enacted by Orban that might be good to research and add: [12][13][14] --1990'sguy (talk) 22:04, 13 July 2018 (EDT)

Nice -- Orban apparently has a good relationship with Chuck Norris: [15] --1990'sguy (talk) 17:04, 29 November 2018 (EST)

Orban and Turanism

Contrary to popular belief, Hungarian nationalism is not a single ideology. Instead, Hungarian nationalism can be described as a cate ingory of ideologies, some which are fundamentally incompatible with one another. Perhaps the biggest divide among Hungarian nationalists is that between Western Christendom and Turanism.

Now, many of you probably don't know what Turanism is. Hungarian nationalists who believe in Turanism call for Hungary to reject Western Civilization and instead embrace values held in common by "Turanid" peoples. "Turanid" peoples are another name for "Ural-Altaic" peoples, which in turn are supposedly culturally, linguistically or ethnically related peoples of Inner Asian and Central Asian origin, like the Finns, Japanese, Koreans, Sami, Samoyeds, Hungarians, Turks, Mongols, Manchus, and other smaller ethnic groups.

Turanism is the central premise of another nationalist party with seats in the Hungarian Parliament: Jobbik. This is one of the main reasons why Fidesz (Orban's party) and Jobbik consider each other enemies and refuse to form coalitions with each other despite both parties being opposed to globalism and Jobbik supposedly purging some of its more explicitly pro-Nazi elements.

Turanism is also the central premise of the People's Alliance, the new governing coalition in Turkey. This is especially alarming. Not only is a Turanist government now in control of a country that can reasonably be considered a potential future great power, but also because the People's Alliance is controlled by Erdogan. And as we all know, Erdogan is an Islamist dictator who wants to recreate the Ottoman Empire, despises Israel, admires Hitler, and has provided covert support for jihadist groups that have launched attacks on both European and American soil.

The People's Alliance creates two horrific precedents: (1) It is possible for a Turanist party to come to power in a European country (Turkey has territory in Europe despite having most of its territory in Asia, much like Russia); and (2) It is possible for right-wing populist movements to be co-opted either by Islamists or by Islamist sympathizers on the radical right who blame globalism on certain ethnic groups and see radical Islam as a potential ally instead of an enemy.

Going forward, I fear that Orban will come under increasing pressure (particularly from younger Hungarian nationalists, who are much more favorable towards Turanism than previous generations) to abandon his pro-Western Christendom policies and instead embrace Turanism. Should he give into that pressure, we can forget about Hungary being an ally, because anybody who thinks being in Erdogan's sphere of influence is a good idea cannot be considered an ally under any circumstances. And should he resist that pressure, well, I wouldn't put it past Erdogan to start messing with Hungary internally in ways similar to how Soros and other globalist leaders have done so. --Geopolitician (talk) 16:00, 29 June 2018 (EDT)

Orban has been very vocal in preserving cultural Christianity in Europe, and he's not a fan of Muslim migrants. Fidesz also is in a coalition with the Christian Democratic People's Party (though the latter is more of a satellite of the former). One more thing -- Jobbik doesn't like non-Hungarians (Roma, Jews, Syrian migrants), and since Islam is so closely associated with the mass migration, I don't think there's much danger of Hungary embracing Islam minus a mass influx of migrants. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:50, 29 June 2018 (EDT)
You're missing the big picture here. Erdogan knows he can't get Eastern Europe to submit to Islamism directly through mass migration. But he seems to believe that he can get Eastern Europe to submit to Islamism indirectly by playing off ancient racial hatreds. Historically, Eastern Europeans in general harbored deep resentments towards Western Europeans. They saw Western Europeans as perpetual bullies that demanded that Eastern Europeans be like them, only to keep rejecting Eastern Europeans as not being enough like them. European Turanid nationalist parties like Jobbik seek to use these ancient resentments as a basis to call for their countries to turn away from Western Civilization and regress to their ancient, neo-pagan, Inner/Central Asian roots. Abandon traditional Christianity and replace it with a "Turanid Christianity" that follows Inner/Central Asian values instead of European values. Be less like Germany and be more like Kazakhstan. If that sounds like an Inner/Central Asian version of ethno-pagan movements like Christian Identity or the Nation of Islam, that's exactly what that is. And Erdogan apparently believes that if he can get Hungary to install a regime that follows this absurd ideology, he can get Hungary to submit to his future Caliphate without converting to Islam or even be conquered by force, in the name of racial solidarity. This sounds like a premise that defies logic and reason. And that's exactly why it's so dangerous. --Geopolitician (talk) 23:39, 29 June 2018 (EDT)
Wow. Very interesting comments. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 20:56, 1 July 2018 (EDT)
I can't tell if you're giving a complement or using sarcasm. And quite frankly, I don't care. Now's hardly the time for either. The rise of Erdogan's People's Alliance government in Turkey is a major threat to both Orban and the Western conservative movement in general. Given that (1) Erdogan has demonstrated on countless occasions that he is willing to incite violent uprisings in his own country and sponsor terrorist organizations in foreign countries to achieve his goals; and (2) the infamous Grey Wolves paramilitary/terrorist organization is part of the P.A. coalition through its connections to the MHP (the junior partner in the P.A. coalition); I wouldn't put it past Erdogan to try to incite disloyalty, if not outright rebellion in Hungary if Orban doesn't toe the Turanist line.
And another thing. If you don't think Hungarian nationalists who support Turanism won't align with Erdogan should he try to take down Orban, think again. Erdogan is an Ottoman Islamist. He doesn't support the "convert to Islam or die" ideology espoused by Wahhabi/Salafi Islamists like al-Qaeda and ISIS (although he's more than willing to use those groups as pawns when necessary). Instead, he supports the idea of converting non-Muslim countries to what I would call "Honorary Islam." "Honorary" Muslims don't worship Allah, recite the Koran, or pray five times a day. Instead, they destroy their country's traditional culture from within and create a new culture that is considered acceptable to the caliphate, and participate in wars of jihad when asked to do so by the caliphate. All in the name of a common cause. The original Ottoman Empire enforced this policy in many parts of its European territory, including Hungary. That's why much of the Balkans is not Muslim despite being part of the Ottoman Empire for hundreds of years. Erdogan is well aware of this. And that's why he thinks it's possible to bring Europe under Turkish/Muslim rule without either mass migration, mass conversion, or conquering by force. He believes he can still win by sponsoring movements that would serve as "honorary" Muslims. One of those movements is the Hungarian Turanist movement, which would love to have Hungary be part of a pan-Turanian alliance that would "stick it" to both the West and the East and reject all aspects of their cultures. --Geopolitician (talk) 18:58, 2 July 2018 (EDT)
No sarcasm at all. I'm absorbing all this (it's saving me a lot of time cause I've focused elsewhere over the past two decades). What about NATO? And what about Turkish-Ukrainian and Turkish-Russian relations? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 23:16, 2 July 2018 (EDT)
NATO. Turanism has had a complicated relationship with NATO. Traditionally, Turanid nationalists are anti-West, for reasons I've already explained. But during the Cold War, they saw the Soviets as the greater of two evils because (1) Turanid nationalists consider Russia a mortal enemy due to Russia's occupation of Central Asia in the 19th and 20th centuries; and (2) most Turanid nationalists are anti-Communist. In the '70s, NATO intelligence agencies covertly sponsored attacks by the Grey Wolves (which is now the paramilitary wing of Erdogan's People's Alliance coalition) in order to suppress left-wing movements that threatened to install pro-Soviet regimes in NATO member states. This in my opinion was one of the stupidest things NATO did during the Cold War, because it could've potentially altered the outcome. Mehmet Ali Agca, the man who attempted to assassinate Pope John Paul II in 1981, was a member of the Grey Wolves. Imagine if the attempt had succeeded. Anti-NATO and/or pro-Soviet sentiment in Catholic countries would've spiked. The Solidarity Movement in Catholic-but-Communist Poland would've been seriously damaged, if not collapsed entirely. The fall of the Iron Curtain would've been delayed, if not entirely prevented. Now, let's talk about the post-Cold War era. With the USSR gone, Turanid nationalists are now going back to their anti-Western roots. Although they still hate Russia, they now see the US as the greater of two evils. Many advocate that their countries leave NATO and align with Russia and China as part of an anti-West coalition. However, I don't think Erdogan will do that, because doing so will destroy any obligation for European NATO members to protect Turkey should it end up at war with the US (an event that I think is inevitable at this point).
RUSSIA. As I already stated, Turanid nationalists tend to be very Russophobic, but many currently consider the US to be a greater evil than Russia, and therefore call for a temporary alliance with Russia (and China). Whether Putin is willing to ally with these people is a million dollar question. Putin sees Turanism as a potential security threat for Russia because this form of nationalism could lead to the creation of separatist movements in the Caucasus and Siberia, both regions which Russia needs to hold if it expects to remain a great power in the future. Turanism is also a major issue in the debate between Traditional Christianity and Eurasianism/National Globalism among Russian nationalists. Eurasianists and National Globalists in Russia want Russia to reconquer the territories of the old Russian Empire, including the southern Caucasus and Central Asia. However, this would cause a major demographic shift where the new Russian empire would have a population where the majority comes from a Turanid race (note that the birth rates in Central Asia are higher than they are in Russia). The Eurasianists and National Globalists don't care about this because they too want Russia to reject the West and become a "Eurasian state." But the Traditional Christians don't want this to happen. They want Russia to remain Russian and Christian. Currently, Putin is engaging in a balancing act to prevent these two fundamentally incompatible forms of Russian nationalism from going at each other. But I don't think that's going to last. Eventually, one side has to win this debate. Which side wins likely will affect the course of history.
UKRAINE As long as Russia and Ukraine hate each other the way they do, Ukraine will be on the opposing side of whatever side Russia chooses in the Traditional Christianity vs. Eurasianism/National Globalism debate. That's the only thing I can say about Ukraine on this matter. --Geopolitician (talk) 13:41, 3 July 2018 (EDT)
Again, Wow! This is all good stuff. . With the USSR gone, Turanid nationalists are now going back to their anti-Western roots - that's the eye opener. In both Soviet and modern times, it seems secularized Muslims have been willing to work with godless Communists, and now the modern Russian Federation, to keep fundamentalist Muslims at bay (feel free to correct any misperceptions I might have). A Russian Federation that includes secularized Muslim republics, and a large segment of secularized Muslims in its military, is the only hope the Russian Federation has to survive. This is in contrast to Western and NATO powers, which have shown a willingness to arm and equip Salafi -jihadi and Wahabbi groups since 2008 to counter Iran (Libya, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, for instance).
As to the Ukraine, there's a racial component at work, in my estimatation. Russians regard Ukrainians as half-breeds, inbred with Turks, who have bastardized the slavic language with Turkic. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 14:24, 3 July 2018 (EDT)
Have you ever read "The Next 100 Years" be George Friedman? Very interesting book, coming from the founder of STRATFOR, which some consider to be a shadow CIA project. "The Next 100 Years" contains predictions that are consistent with a worst case scenario for a "Turanid Revolution." Both Russia and China collapse in the 2020s. Their Ural-Altaic-majority territories break away. Many of those territories become part of the spheres of Turkey and Japan, both countries becoming increasingly nationalist and expansionist great powers, largely due to the help of the United States. Turkey and Japan both turn against the United States once they grow powerful enough. The entire world order shifts, with the United States leading a coalition to contain Turkey and Japan; and to a lesser extent Germany, France, and Mexico. All these things happen following a Second Cold War between the United States and Russia that begins in 2015. Funny. The Second Cold War is widely thought to have begun right around 2015, due to the Ukraine Crisis. And given that STRATFOR may be a shadow CIA project, it's almost as if that book's giving hints about what the United States (or at least the Deep State) has in mind for geopolitical strategy.
If you haven't figured it out yet, yes, I do believe the Deep State played a role in Erdogan's rise to power. However, I don't believe the Deep State controls Erdogan. At least not anymore. Some elements of the Deep State still support Erdogan, but others want him dead because of his opposition to Saudi hegemony over the Sunni Muslim world. This complicated relationship between Erdogan and the Deep State could possibly mean that both the theory that the failed coup was a false flag and the theory that it was sponsored by the CIA are true. The Deep State planned the coup, but one faction decided to be a double agent, notified Erdogan in advance, and planned with him on how to both survive the coup and come out more powerful than ever. This complicated could also explain why Trump (in my opinion) is having trouble compiling a coherent strategy on Turkey. As Erdogan grows more powerful, the rift between different factions of the Deep State over him will widen. Eventually, one side, desperate to win, will rat the other out. I wouldn't be surprised if Trump's lack of action on Turkey has to do with him waiting for this to happen so he can determine which side to ally with in order to take the whole thing down. --Geopolitician (talk) 10:52, 5 July 2018 (EDT)
What about the Gulenist movement? I'm of the opinion a generation of Gulenists (who were big Clinton Foundation donors) are being bred and nurtured in the United States to one day be a global, non-Arab, alternative to the Muslim Brotherhood. They would have close ties to the US. This explains Obama's close support for Gulenists, and the US-inspired Gulenists coup attempt. It's a factor in the Deep State's disposal of Mike Flynn.
The future of NATO is at risk. Right now, Erdogen appears to be blackmailing the EU & Germany with the threat of unlimited immigration. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:29, 5 July 2018 (EDT)
Gulen was an ally of Erdogan for many years. In fact, Gulen played a role in Erdogan's rise to power. It wasn't until 2013 that they had a falling out. Gulen says it was because he tried to expose corruption in Erdogan's regime, but I don't buy it. What I think is really going on is that it all goes back to Saudi Arabia.
Make no mistake. Saudi Arabia is on the decline. Years of falling oil prices and bloated military budgets have caused it to go heavily into debt. The IMF projected a few years back that Saudi Arabia is headed for a major financial crisis, possibly even bankruptcy, by the end of the decade. My theory is that the House of Saud is well aware of the financial situation, and is responding to it with an increasingly belligerent foreign policy. It is lashing out at anybody who poses a threat to the hegemony it has had over the Sunni Arab world since the 1970s, including its own Sunni allies. Turkey is by far the most powerful of Saudi Arabia's Sunni allies. Hell, I actually think Turkey is more powerful than Saudi Arabia itself today. And under Erdogan, Turkey has become increasingly assertive as a leader of the Muslim world. Therefore Saudi Arabia, which once saw Erdogan as a close ally, now sees him as a grave threat. The Saudis want Erdogan gone, that's the bottom line.
Now, here's where I think Gulen came into play. Saudi Arabia urged its supporters within the Deep State to arrange a coup to overthrow Erdogan and replace him with a puppet that would toe the Saudi line. Gulen fit the bill, and thus the collaboration began. The coup would've succeeded, had it not been for pro-Erdogan factions in the Deep State ratting out on their own comrades and making arrangements with Erdogan to sabotage the coup using double agents and make sure that the outcome placed Erdogan in a better position than ever before. After the coup, Erdogan covered up his collaboration with the factions of the Deep State that supported him in order to dupe anti-globalists into thinking he's one of the good guys when in fact he's not.
Initially, Trump was one of the people who Erdogan had duped. But after the election, Trump found out the truth. And when he did, he dramatically changed his planned Middle East policy. He decided to ally with Saudi Arabia despite its role in various Deep State atrocities not out of ideology, but out of convenience. Trump despises the Saudis, but the last thing he wants to see happen is the country fragmenting and being gobbled up by Turkey and/or Iran. Such an event would be a foreign policy catastrophe on a scale not seen since "Truman lost China." This would explain among other things Trump's massive arms deal with the Saudis, the Qatar crisis, and the so-called "reforms" of Prince bin Salman. It could also explain why Flynn was ousted so early and so easily. Flynn didn't want to go along with Trump's pro-Saudi policy (which is not a surprise since Flynn previously worked for a firm with ties to Erdogan), so Trump threw him under the bus and let the Deep State have him. The whole "Flynn lied to Pence" thing was just a cover. A cover necessary for national security reasons. Why do I say "for national security reasons?" Because Trump knew that Erdogan and his supporters in the Deep State would want Trump's head on a platter once Trump took action. And they do want his head on a platter. One of Erdogan's allies in Qatar placed a $150 million reward for Trump's assassination in May of 2017 in response to Trump's Middle East policy.
As for NATO, Erdogan is an even bigger threat to NATO than even the migration issue. I'm 100% convinced that Erdogan believes that war with the United States is inevitable. If he expects to win that war, he's going to need a major ally. China can't help him because it's not powerful enough to project a large military presence in the Europe and the Middle East, and Russia won't help him because Putin doesn't trust him. The only option left would be the EU, and Erdogan has a golden opportunity to play the EU against the US. He has the opportunity to incite anti-Americanism among both the globalist elite and the more radical nationalist parties who see America as the cause of all of Europe's problems and want a federal Europe designed to counter American influence. If he does that, then all he has to do then is stay in NATO, and when a crisis breaks out, invoke Article V against the United States. His European allies could then come to his aid and try to sabotage the American war effort by expelling or even attacking American troops stationed in Europe. And if the US continues to respond militarily against Turkey and perhaps even Europe itself, than the globalist elite has the perfect excuse to transform the EU into a federal state. To destroy the last of the sovereignty of the EU member states. And to create a quagmire that the United States will not be able to win on its own. --Geopolitician (talk) 16:17, 5 July 2018 (EDT)
Ok, ok, you and I are reading the situation and events very similarly up to the firing of Flynn and a little beyond. But two questions: (1) There was talk of collaboration between Turks and Saudis (perhaps Eygpt, too) on a nuclear weapons program should Iran develop a bomb. This was a big selling point for Obama's Iran nuke deal - to head off a Middle East nuclear arms race. With the deal off, why isn't it a big fear today? Isn't a nuclear Iran still the bogeyman for Saudis & Turks? (2) Isn't Erdogen using migration now to do exactly what you say about being a threat to NATO? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 02:25, 6 July 2018 (EDT)
Obama signed the Iran nuke deal before Turkey and Saudi Arabia had their falling out. After the failed coup attempt, Turkey switched sides in the Saudi-Iranian conflict. Turkey still hates Iran, but post-coup attempt it considers Saudi Arabia the greater of two evils. So at this point the conversation should be about the possibility of Turkey collaborating with Iran, not Saudi Arabia, on a nuclear weapons program. This actually makes the arms race situation in the Middle East a lot worse, because if Turkey has collaborated with both Saudi Arabia and Iran, then that means Turkey may have given Iran classified information about Saudi Arabia's nuclear program, and/or used information from both nuclear programs to help construct a third nuclear program: Turkey's.
And yes, Erdogan is using migrants as tools to get concessions out of NATO. He has demonstrated his will to use them many times before. But in the long run, I don't think that will be his strongest card to play. In the long run, his strongest cards to play are anti-American and anti-Trump sentiment in Western Europe, and anti-Western civilization sentiment in Eastern Europe. Erdogan knows time's running out, and that he won't be able to turn Europe against the United States through migration. His goal now is to exploit political and civilizational differences among Europe's native populations, in hope of splitting them on pro-American and pro-Turkish lines. And given his past willingness to go to extreme lengths to achieve his goals, I wouldn't put it past him to push this policy to the point of Europe descending into another major war like 1914 and 1939. I know that sounds like the fantasies of a madman, but that's exactly what Erdogan is. A madman, who has monstrous delusions of grandeur. I mean, look at this map. He wants an empire that unites all of these peoples. How could he not be a madman? --Geopolitician (talk) 09:13, 6 July 2018 (EDT)
Hmmmm, you're bringing me around to a new point of view: While Stoltenberg responded to Trump today, "The strength of NATO is that despite these differences, we have always been able to unite around our core task to protect and defend each other because we understand that we are stronger together than apart," Al Monitor reports, “There is no doubt in Europe (and possibly in Ankara too) that the bridges between Turkey and the EU have been burned — both on substance, with the massive deterioration of the rule of law in Turkey and at the personal level, with Erdogan’s repeated assaults on EU leaders in the past year and a half. No warm embraces can be expected on the margins of the NATO summit”
This makes about as much sense as Pelosi & Schumer saying, "His behavior this morning is another profoundly disturbing signal that the President is more loyal to President Putin than to our NATO allies," while Trump tells NATO to spend 4% of GDP on defense. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 19:12, 11 July 2018 (EDT)
Stoltenberg is delusional if he thinks that the current tensions among NATO members are part of some sort of phase that will be overcome due to "understanding that unity equals strength." Whether he sees it or not, NATO is coming apart by the seams, and it's not because of Trump. Even if Hillary had won, NATO would still be a dead man walking today.
The Al Monitor report is correct. There's no love lost between the EU and Erdogan. But the EU hates Trump just as much, if not more than it hates Erdogan. I have zero doubt that Erdogan will take advantage of that fact as conflict between the US and Turkey grows closer.
Meanwhile, I'm glad that you're acknowledging just how nonsensical it is that such conflicting statements and reports exist. If there's one recurring theme in the modern media, it's the utter inability to tell the truth regarding whether there is war or peace, if there's freedom or slavery, or if there's ignorance or strength. And I'm not just talking about left-wing media. I'm talking about right-wing media too. For at least the last 50 - 60 years, media in general have been obsessed with protecting the reputations of the political forces they support, to the point where they don't even bother to report legitimate issues that could have profound effects on future generations. I mean for example: "Hey! We shouldn't report on al-Qaeda in Afghanistan because that would make Carter/Reagan look bad, even though we can't explain why it would make him look bad!" Or, "Hey! We shouldn't report on bin Laden that much because that would make Clinton look bad, even though we can't explain why it would make him look bad!" Or, "Hey! We shouldn't report on ISIS because that would make Obama look bad, even though we can't explain why it would make him look bad!" Or, "Hey! We shouldn't report on just how close Eurasia is to war because that would make Obama/Hillary/Trump look bad, even though we can't explain why it would make him/her look bad!" They are all cowards for keeping us in the dark over fears that are rooted in their greed, and not in reality. The fact that we have to resort to looking deep in the bowels of the Internet and reading obscure articles that are either hidden from plain view on major media sites or available only on obscure websites, is appalling beyond belief. If/when World War III breaks out, no sane historian would leave out "the media refusing to tell the masses what's going on out of greed and arrogance" as one of the causes of the war. --Geopolitician (talk) 22:31, 11 July 2018 (EDT)
Yep. Al Monitor is a good source. The Meduro-Erdogen nexus I didn't know til now. Seems to me it only exists to tweek the U.S. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 00:42, 12 July 2018 (EDT)
Erdogan (and Putin) have zero incentive to support Maduro outside of "sticking it to America." Venezuela is broke. It can't afford to pay back any of its debts. China has already given up on bailing out Venezuela, and Russia may soon give up as well. --Geopolitician (talk) 11:22, 12 July 2018 (EDT)
This thread has been very informative and helpful to me. Now if you can just round it out and summarize bringing it back to Orban (rather than Erdogen) will make it complete. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 23:19, 12 July 2018 (EDT)
Good call. Well to summarize my point, the inclusion of a Turanist party in Turkey's current governing coalition means that Erdogan will not be able to fully consolidate power and destroy the last vestiges of Turkish democracy unless he includes Turanism as part of the new state ideology he is trying to construct. Thus, the 2018 Turkish elections are a major victory for the wider Turanist cause. The elections have demonstrated that it is possible for Turanist parties to come to power either directly or indirectly through democratic elections, as opposed to by force. This turn of events has very serious implications for Hungary, a country where Turanism is very popular among nationalists, particularly younger nationalists. It has the potential to start a civil war in the nationalist camp over which identity Hungary should embrace. Should Hungary embrace its membership of Western Christendom? Or should Hungary reject Western Christendom and instead embrace its ancient Inner/Central Asian roots? Viktor Orban has made it very clear that he prefers embracing Western Christendom. However, recent events in Turkey point to a real possibility that Orban will see some of his own political allies turn against him over the Western Christendom vs. Turanism debate. If/when that happens, we can guarantee that we will be seeing political turmoil in Hungary. Just how bad that turmoil will be, I cannot tell you. In the end, how Erdogan responds to such turmoil in Hungary is the wild card. Erdogan has demonstrated on countless occasions that he is willing to resort to sponsoring extremely violent uprisings in other countries (particularly Syria and Iraq) in order to expand Turkish influence. Should Erdogan attempt to interfere in Hungarian affairs, European leaders in general and Orban in particular must be prepared for the worst.
Meanwhile, should that scenario occur, mainstream European nationalist parties must be prepared to expel members who advocate alternate forms of nationalism which are fundamentally incompatible with the idea that current borders and national sovereignty must be protected. Turanism is an example of such alternate nationalisms. Other examples include National Globalism (Eurasianism, European Identitarianism, etc.), Nazism, any kind of pan-nationalism or irredentism, and any kind of nationalism that espouses paganism or radical secularism. If Hungarian nationalism can be subject to serious co-optation attempts by fringe elements, then so can any other European nationalism, or any other nationalism, period, for that matter. --Geopolitician (talk) 13:15, 13 July 2018 (EDT)
UPDATE: At the time of my last posting, I was not aware that Jobbik had already split among ideological lines between moderates and hardliners a few weeks earlier. The moderates won the resulting power struggle, and a splinter party called "Our Home Movement" has been created by hardliners who are angry with the direction Jobbik is now moving in. What this means for both parties and for the Turanist movement in general I cannot tell you, as the next Hungarian parliamentary election is not until 2022. What I can say however is that Orban can sigh with relief as his ideological arch-rival within the general Hungarian nationalist movement is virtually in a state of civil war. --Geopolitician (talk) 09:44, 30 August 2018 (EDT)

Here's an Upate on Turkey (pgs. 21-24) the new Congress will be dealing with; it seems there is a movement among Democrats to pass a Magnitsky- style sanctions act against a NATO ally, labelling Turkey as a human rights violator. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 14:38, 6 September 2018 (EDT)

Finally, the Democrats doing something I agree with. Although I'm sure the bill contains something that will somehow turn it into a poison pill for us. Congress is an expert at doing that. That being said, this story has nothing to do with Orban. If you want to find a recent story about Orban and Turkey, take a look at this story, and this story. Just when I was sighing with relief that Jobbik was falling apart... --Geopolitician (talk) 10:58, 11 September 2018 (EDT)
This is not good news. One of the missions of the Turkic Council is to form a common foreign policy position among its members. Orban knew this before signing on to have Hungary become an observer member. This indicates that he wishes to base Hungarian foreign policy on the interests of Turanid (NOT Turkic, because Turkic is a sub-group of Turanid, and Hungary is not Turkic) peoples. I hope he realizes that this is fundamentally incompatible with the idea of Hungary as a defender of Christian civilization, which he emphasized in another speech he gave less than two months ago. Like any other international organization, the Turkic Council is going to be dominated by the most powerful member, which in this case is Turkey. If Orban signs up for this, then we're essentially going to be seeing Erdogan dictating to Orban how on how he should be modeling his foreign policy. And if Orban starts listening to Erdogan, then we will have no choice but to write him off as a lost cause. I for one don't see any difference between an Islamist government, and having a non-Muslim government that bases its foreign policy on the shots called by an Islamist government in another country. Let's just hope that if it comes to that, we don't see people in the nationalist populist movement outside Hungary beginning to shill for Erdogan due to his influence on Orban. --Geopolitician (talk) 11:31, 11 September 2018 (EDT)