Root Vegetables vs. Pig Heads: Anatomy of a Silly Question

Last week the politics of migration in Hungary reached another - particularly classy- high. Root vegetables carved as strawmen, also known as “bird-scarers”, were put up at the Southern border of Hungary to scare off the ones who are on the run to save their lives. György Schöpflin, a Member of the European Parliament for Fidesz, responded to the international criticisms regarding this innovative protection of national sovereignty by saying that placing pig heads at the border instead would actually do a better job deterring the Muslims entering the country. As we do not want to inspire Mr. Schöpflin or the government itself any further by criticizing these ground-breaking technologies of border control, we want to further discuss the costs and benefits of each option, and ask for your opinion as well, as this is what democracy requires.
Should Hungary use root vegetables or pig heads to defend its borders? As the sovereign citizens of this country, you can go and cast your vote on 2nd of October, and have your say on the issue.

So, should it be option 1 - root vegetables?

First of all, root vegetables constitute a significant option as they are widely used in the national cuisine of Hungary: Vadas maria and Goulash, just to name a few of the traditional dishes, use root vegetables as ingredients, satisfying culinary pride and national sensations. Secondly, root vegetables are abundant in Hungary, which decreases the amount of investment that needs to be made in order to strengthen the border controls. Plus, carving the border-guarding-root-vegetables can be introduced as an activity for the school children, which is a win-win situation: children of this country will grow up knowing that they took part in these novel efforts, and, well, the carving will get done. As root vegetables are available throughout the year there will also not be any shortage of border materials. 

Or should it be the second and LAST option for saving Hungary: pig heads?

The retrieval of the local Hungarian pig breed, Mangalica, known for its especially juicy and tasteful meat, provides a great opportunity to communicate the right message at the border. Even though the facial features of Mangalica might wrongly come across as “cute”, and, therefore, have the counter-effect of attracting migrants as Mangalica are lop-eared, we believe that the accompanying blood around the neck should make up for it. This will surely communicate the idea to Muslim migrants that they are not welcome here, as everyone residing in Hungary is obliged by law to consume one serving of this national delicacy at least once a week to reiterate their loyalty to the Hungarian values.

So, what is your take on this question of high importance? Do you think it is root vegetables or pig heads that constitute the most effective means to protect Hungary?

What? …… Do you think this is a silly question? Does it remind you of another silly question that will be asked under the name of a referendum on 2nd of October?

The beautifully formulated question “Do you want to allow the European Union to mandate the resettlement of non-Hungarian citizens to Hungary without the approval of the Parliament?” gives you two options:

Option 1 - Voting ‘No’ means to support the government’s xenophobic propaganda and politics of fencing off.
Option 2 - Voting ‘Yes’ means to agree with a scheme of forced relocation by the EU that places a problematic concept of ‘fairness’ between states above solidarity between human beings with wishes and choices.

Both options talk only about what might be the better way to decide over people’s lives and to allocate them. Both talk about people as burden, which is met with bureaucratic and forceful rule, and both ask to decide over the future of people who are denied any political voice. As with the root vegetable vs pig head question, the question implies that there IS a problem, that there IS a ‘burden’. We call for the reformulation of all the questions that have carefully been crafted to imply that some lives are more worthy than others, that bureaucracy, fences, or food items can stop people from seeking refuge, and that the political elite can reduce human life and dignity to objects of political propaganda for their own interests.

Choosing any of the two options in such silly questions legitimizes them and the implications they entail. This also adds weight to the validity of the question and the outcome. What if we wanted neither vegetables nor pig heads, neither “the Hungarian solution” nor “EU politics”? What if we did not want to be distracted by deciding over the decoration of the fence; what if we did not want the fence and all the politics of fencing off in the first place?

We call for the boycott of the so-called referendum. More than that: We will not let our voice be silenced or orchestrated by the calculations of the political elite. We will not buy into the manipulative politics of fear. We claim politics back and thus the right of everyone to decide over their future. We boycott the question and the referendum, because we believe in an option C: Solidarity with people seeking international protection and support of their choices of countries to claim asylum. A free choice of country to claim asylum does not only allow for reduction of the currently enormous amounts of resources for upholding the forceful structures, it would reduce painful waiting times and improve the arriving process. This means to put in the center of the discussion the guarantee of protection and the possibility to start again a life in dignity. Only when we challenge the silly options given and ask the right questions instead, we can work towards such a vision of life in dignity for all. And finally all vegetables and animals could live freely without being cast into roles they do not wish to take, decorating fences, that we do not want.