With all due respect, Ryan,
RyanShort1 wrote:
...I am of the opinion that most of the wiser folks I know DO see it that way. If you look at the historical progression of socialistic, or communistic revolution - peaceful OR violent, there are plenty of similar examples.
Er, speaking from my experience of European history, there's not a single example where a socialist or communist organisation has started from a minor part of government and ended in dictatorship.
Without being rude, and trying to ignore partisan issues (in a country I don't have a stake) I am frankly amazed at the over-excitement by some Americans over what is a perfectly normal minor change of government and the need to ascribe party motives to a dubiously useful 'security' organisation with roots in both US parties.
BTW, it's 'socialist' and 'communist' not '..istic' - the problem (1917 - 1970) wasn't left wingers, anyway, but totalitarianism by and against fascism. (If you need a socialist to be your bogeyman you aren't actually looking at the political theory, but the problems of developing totalitarianism.)
Quote:
The Hungarians actually had a LOT of history with that and may have a historically enlightened perspective there.
Which is the second reason I suggested the gentleman in question should have known better - it's nothing like what happened there.
Thirdly, messing about with airport access and paperwork to fly wasn't an issue in Hungary at any stage. They were worried about much bigger issues - and no, there was no equivalent progression from one to the other.
Apologies for the digression (FWIW, I don't advocate, endorse, or (totally) despise any political system, and have no time for party politics.) - let's keep away from informed or ill-informed political comment and stick to defeating the bill.
Regards,