Miklos Szantho: Let’s Dare to Declare, Hungary Is the Center of the World!

Proportionally, Hungary has produced more Nobel laureates than any other country in the world — but what do we, as Hungarians today, do with these achievements? Does the famous “Hungarian mindset” really exist, and why is it important that our research rests on sovereign foundations? At the opening of the traveling exhibition 'Martians – Hungarian Scientists and Nobel Laureates,' our newspaper discussed these questions with Miklos Szantho, director of the Center for Fundamental Rights and chief patron of the project. The conversation also touched on the impact of wartime narratives, ideological battles in the digital sphere, and how new political actors are trying to quickly gain a foothold in public life.

Miklos Szantho, director of the Center for Fundamental Rights (Photo: Center for Fundamental Rights)

– I firmly believe so. The language we speak and the cultural environment in which we grow up have a strong impact on our thinking. It does not override the laws of creation, but it gives direction. People may say that Hungarians are melancholic, “laughing through tears,” and have carried many tragedies. Yes, that’s true, but we survived. And we can express this survival ability through our language. How many former European peoples have disappeared or no longer speak their original language or understand their culture? That did not happen with us. Consider this: in the middle of a German-speaking region of tens of millions and a Slavic-speaking region of hundreds of millions, the Hungarian language hasn't just survived, but it's also preserved its uniqueness. That alone is extraordinary. Moreover, the expressive power of Hungarian is exceptional and does tend to shape our thinking — just think of the imagery in the word “testver” (body and blood, meaning brother - ed.). This distinctive way of thinking has, unsurprisingly, led to achievements that placed Hungarians at the forefront of science, politics, and the arts. So yes: the Hungarian mindset exists, it is unique, and we can be proud of it.

– Is there anyone in Hungarian scientific or cultural life who has particularly inspired you, even if their lives and careers are not featured in this exhibition?

– I could list many names, whether among our Nobel laureates or contemporaries; I would, for example, also include Tibor Kapu. But if I had to highlight a single, inspiring figure from Hungarian scientific or cultural life, it would be Ferenc Herczeg. He was nominated for a Nobel Prize, although unfortunately he did not receive it. Yet, I believe Ferenc Herczeg is one of the most remarkable Hungarian writers, able to speak with unparalelled uniqueness about the greatest dilemmas and questions of the Hungarian people. And he did this not only with extraordinary content but also at the highest level linguistically, using the Hungarian language with such beauty and power that few others have matched.

– The Martians exhibition was organized by the Hungarian Brand Association with support from the HUN-REN Hungarian Research Network and the Center for Fundamental Rights. Do you think Hungary needs a sovereign research network?

– Absolutely. Without entering into deeper debates, Hungary remains the inheritor of certain structures left over from the communist era. These survive as enclaves in certain scientific fields and are, in many cases, still shaping the mindset, the approach, and even the direction of research. Let’s be honest: these do not represent a sovereignist or patriotic approach. Regardless of what anyone says, science, whether in the humanities or natural sciences, does have its own ideology. If research is not guided by common sense, the reality of creation, and, not least, national interest, it will eventually start serving foreign, even insane interests. Just consider the clash — or “collaboration” — between biology and gender ideology. That is why we need a sovereign Hungarian research network, one that is capable of shedding the chains of the past and truly thinking and working from a Hungarian perspective.

According to Miklos Szantho, the Sovereignty Protection Digital Civic Circle has a role not just in politics, but also in scientific and cultural matters (Photo: Center for Fundamental Rights)

– You are the founder of the Digital Civic Circle for Sovereignty Protection. The world of science is increasingly moving online, where we see the proliferation of not just knowledge, but also of fake news and pseudoscientific views. These can easily undermine communities. Do you think the digital civic circle has a role here?

– Absolutely. In fact, I believe the entire Hungarian right-wing patriotic community has a role, especially in this so-called “post-truth” era. The left-liberal side tries to normalize the idea that opinions can be facts, that anyone’s personal identity, as they perceive it, constitutes scientific reality. This is a classic fake news example, such as claims that there are biological genders beyond male and female. Yet they try to sell these statements as facts, often successfully, particularly within the globalist, woke narrative. It’s as if someone tried to decide by vote whether gravity exists. Natural laws cannot be rewritten by political tricks. That’s why conscious defense is needed, and this is where the Digital Civic Circle for Sovereignty Protection comes into play. Gender ideology, migration, or even pro-war narratives are all eroding the fabric of national sovereignty.

– So the digital civic circles can voice its own views and take a stand not just on political, but also cultural and scientific issues?

– Why not, when we see that, on the other side, “famous actors” are trying to explain to us what a “good life” is? I also see a dangerous misconception in the idea that nation-states should be abolished in favor of a global, or at least a European, federation. Or the narrative that “European interest” means supporting Ukraine until Russia kneels. These are ideological messages, not facts, and they all tend to undermine the fabric of national self-determination.

– You mentioned that the right is increasingly active in the digital sphere. How does the leftist-liberal side react, and how do you see the balance of power on social media in this struggle?

– The leftist-liberal side behaves online much like it once did in the traditional media: it sees the space as its own domain. They consider social media their exclusive fiefdom, which is why they are so frustrated when the right enters the arena but speaks not according to their rules. They were frustrated when Megafon was founded, when right-wing influencers appeared, at the Fighters’ Club, and now again, as the right-wing digital civic circles increasingly establish a presence online. It is no coincidence that they try to make a mockery of this tool: what was once their exclusive platform is now becoming multi-voiced. This development undermines the one-sided opinion bubbles they had so successfully inflated. Moreover, social media can easily produce a spiral of silence, in which a small but loud troll army can force the rational majority into silence — and breaking out of this spiral is essential. One of the most important goals of the digital civic circles is to organize patriots online and give them the opportunity to act together when necessary, whether on a social platform, or in real life.

– Let’s stay on politics for a moment: new polls appear almost weekly claiming that “the Tisza is flooding.” Do you see this as real political strengthening, or just another internet illusion?

– This is a classic optical illusion: since summer, the Tisza Party’s popularity has not surged—it has actually declined, as shown by the latest Nezopont survey. There are several reasons, all of which can be traced to recent public events. It emerged that Ukrainian intelligence had successfully approached the Hungarian left, primarily the group around Peter Magyar; they wasted the summer and lost ground, compounding mistake after mistake—take, for example, the irresponsible and amateurish statements made by the Tisza Party leader during the extreme weather events that caused significant storm damage. Moreover, the Western European stance on the Russia–Ukraine conflict — which the Tisza Party fully supports—appears to be weakening, while Donald Trump’s peace strategy mirrors the Hungarian prime minister’s antiwar approach in an Americanised form. Leaked tax hike plans from Peter Magyar’s group also illustrate the point: while Fidesz governance benefits even those who do not vote for them, the Tisza Party’s proposals would harm even their own supporters.

However, historical precedent also clearly suggests we should approach leftist pollsters’ surveys with a healthy dose of skepticism. Look at the past 15–16 years: the same scenario repeats itself before every election. This happened in 2013, 2017, and 2021. Each time, a new “unsung hero” was built — a figure into whom the leftist-liberal media, pundits, and certain pollsters projected all their hopes and illusions. This was true for (ex-PM) Gordon Bajnai, (former Socialist leader) Attila Mesterhazy, (former Jobbik chief) Gabor Vona and Peter Jakab, and most recently, opposition politician Peter Marki-Zay. Half a year to a year before the election, polls would suddenly show a 7, 10, or even 15 percent lead. But these were not genuine opinion polls — they were tools of shaping public opinion. Political science calls this “expectation management,” artificially generating hope for their base in order to mobilize it. And so far, it has never succeeded. Now the same charade is being replayed: another political bubble that can be inflated but will inevitably burst. Just because Peter Magyar is loud and active on social media, it is increasingly clear that he is merely a mediocre political import.

Cover photo: Miklos Szanthó, director of the Center for Fundamental Rights (Photo: Center for Fundamental Rights)