
Hungary's Prime Minister Orban Is Allowed to Rule by Decree - adelHBN
https://www.wsj.com/articles/hungarys-orban-wins-right-to-rule-by-decree-during-coronavirus-crisis-11585584669
======
beloch
It's a little scary how some leaders are using this pandemic to grab power.
Even Canada's PM tried to grant himself emergency powers that went a little
too far. He had to back down because he controls a minority of seats and the
other parties noticed what had been snuck into an emergency bill [1].

If this almost happened in Canada, we should expect there will be a lot of
countries where citizens will have to make noise to ensure emergency powers
don't become permanent powers.

[1][https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/politics/liberals-to-back-
off-...](https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/politics/liberals-to-back-off-on-broad-
spending-powers-without-oversight-in-emergency-funding-bill-1.4865204)

~~~
dmix
I'm amazed this didn't make many headlines, even here in Canada.

If a politician in the US, UK, etc tried to push an emergency bill that
allowed them to tax/spend without any congressional/parliamentary oversight
for 1-2yrs it'd be a big deal. Not to mention the current government didn't
even win a majority government... so it's hardly the same as some rubberstamp
parliament.

I guess because it didn't pass parliament?

Regardless this has to go down as one of the biggest attempted power grabs in
the history of Canada.

We're already seeing what that might have meant, a few days ago Trudeau
announced _any_ company (even major public multinational companies) that loses
30% of business would get up to 75% of wages covered... the problem was the
bill that just got passed said none of that. The bill was limited to small
_private_ companies with <$12 million in revenue and had no measures of "lost
business" (which makes far, far more sense, why give companies with access to
plenty of capital the same help as struggling small/medium businesses? Not to
mention "lost business" is very easy to manipulate for big companies).

------
ramblerman
The scariest thing to me about this pandemic is not leaders and governments
doing this. In some ways it's to be expected.

What terrifies me, is how eager I was at the start of this pandemic for the
government to lock me and my fellow citizens in their homes. We have drones
policing in Wales now, shouting "stay inside to save lives". And April fools
jokes have been forbidden.

Not even George Orwell ever imagined such a perfect scenario. Fear is really
powerful, specially against such a strange enemy, one we can't see.

~~~
hyko
There’s no law that I’m aware of prohibiting April fool’s jokes. If you can
stomach other people’s disapproval, you can fill your boots without fear of
government intervention.

Your willingness to support the lockdown is no doubt based on the evidence
that expert scientists have presented to the government; that’s about as far
from arbitrary decree as you can get.

Is it dangerous? Absolutely. The counterweight to the government seizing and
consolidating their new powers and running amok with them is democracy. That’s
what we’re doing here: remembering our right to free speech, and asserting it.
It’s perfectly reasonable and compatible with democracy to recognise that some
freedoms have been suspended for epidemiological reasons; you’d have to be a
hopeless ideologue to want to assert the right to assemble right now.

~~~
mcv
The vital part here though is that it remains science-driven. Not all
governments have a good record of following science, and the moment they stop,
the justification for the harsh measures disappears.

If you're going to overrule or disband the parliament of people's
representatives for this, maybe it should be replaced by a parliament of
scientists.

~~~
jmiskovic
Science has completely different mindset and that wouldn't work well with
governing job. Science is operating in almost anarchy to push boundaries and
constantly revise previously accepted theories. Governing needs more cohesion
and stronger guidance. Engineers, on the other hand...

~~~
mcv
The issue here is that we accept that these very intrusive measures are
necessary because epidemiologists tell us that they are necessary. If
politicians want to implement similarly intrusive measures that are not backed
up by science, we won't accept them. So direct approval by scientists is vital
for our acceptance of these measures.

~~~
jmiskovic
I agree. In case of covid-19 the scientific consensus was quickly reached and
clear enough for world to respond accordingly.

------
onetimemanytime
Well, people are so lucky to have such a leader leading in these times. I say
do away with elections too, why take chances? /s

Power is aphrodisiac and a lot of these "emergency" powers will stay, one way
or another. Hard term limits, of 8 years, should be mandatory for everyone.
Will not solve everything, but better than nothing.

In a lot of countries they rule be decree anyway. The leader control
everything, the party, the parliament and eventually courts. So while the
parliament passed it, actually one person and his close circle decided it.

They get everyone on their side with Plata o plomo...a share of corruption
money or you have the entire state on your back.

------
anjel
Recall that the Patriot act after 911 was a veritable Trojan horse of new
governmental powers having nothing to do with terrorism and it's success paves
the way for the 2020 pandemic power grabs.

------
mam2
in some ways it will not be dangerous since most people will basically have
all time now to watch how he uses these newfound powers..

------
ulzeraj
Although Orban already had aspirations of being a long term dictator after Xi
and Putin, it hits really close to home when a country inside the EU decides
to do that. Apparently the world is becoming some kind of Absurdistan.

~~~
dntbnmpls
> Although Orban already had aspirations of being a long term dictator after
> Xi and Putin, it hits really close to home when a country inside the EU
> decides to do that.

EU already had that before Xi or Putin or Orban. Helmut Kohl lead germany for
16 years. Angela Merkel ( sometimes called the leader of the EU ) is on her
4th term as chancellor of germany. In the US, we have senators/congressmen who
hold onto their power for decades. Just because people serve a long time
doesn't mean it is a dictatorship. And it also doesn't make it a bad to thing
have political stability.

> Apparently the world is becoming some kind of Absurdistan.

It was already that unless think its only bad when russia, china and hungary
does it.

~~~
cafard
FDR was not long dead before the US ratified the XXII Amendment to the
Constitution, providing that nobody might be elected president more than
twice, or more than once if he had served more than two years of someone
else's term.

Any long-serving member of the House of Representatives has become such by
standing for election every other year; any long-serving senator by standing
every six years. In some cases (think of Strom Thurmond) the election seems to
be more or less a formality; but people do turn out and vote.

------
snisarenko
Hi HN mods,

I don't want leave unrelated comments. But I have genuine question here.

Why is this article allowed to stay up on Hacker News and be open for
discussion ? How is this related to hacker news or hacker/tech culture ?

Is it worrying that Hugary's PM is grabbing authoritarian powers? Sure. Does
this have wide implications for Europe? Sure.

But if this article is allowed to stay up. Then why was the post about the
House Intelligence Committee Report on FISA Abuses nuked from the front-page
last February ?

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16292336](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16292336)

One would think, illegally spying on a US presidential campaign is pretty
worrying as well (its a bi-partisan issue, that could affect both parties, so
put down your pitchforks). In fact, such event could undo the underpinnings of
the US democracy. A pretty important topic to discuss I'd say.

~~~
fatbird
The mods don't read threads, and don't respond to questions directed at them.
Traffic on HN is too high for them to actively monitor. They depend upon users
emailing them to alert them to issues with content.

Meta-comments like this are useless at best, trolling at worst.

~~~
snisarenko
Even if mods don't respond. I think this comment is useful for the community
as well.

There is no dedicated meta-discussion section on hacker-news. So it has to
happen somewhere.

And no I am not trolling. I do value the high signal to noise ratio on HN,
which is why I participate. My comment is meant to make not just mods, but
users think about what counts as signal, versus noise on this forum.

~~~
fatbird
I don't think you were trolling, but you were addressing the mods while aiming
at the users, which is a coy sort of tactic to have a meta-discussion. Why not
be more direct and address the community about whether a broader range of
acceptable topics is desired?

~~~
snisarenko
If I appeared coy, I am sorry. That was not my intention.

I've seen comments in several previous HN discussions respectfully address the
mods. Based on this I assumed it was fair to address comments to mods if it
helps improve quality of HN discussion.

