Although Brussels should theoretically only have supranational powers in certain areas defined by member states, what we see in reality is that the proposals previously – and quite aptly – referred to as directives are increasingly turning into imperial decrees. This has been done in the name of the greater glory of liberalism, perversely calling the attempt to dismantle local self-determination (national sovereignty) a form of freedom and democracy. The rapid transformation of the legal framework can be labeled as the rule of law by some because, according to woke ideology, only those who accept that freedom is slavery and war is peace can be considered truly virtuous.
I have previously explained that in the murky legal systems of the Middle Ages, only the ecclesiastical legal order was mostly constant, coherent, and sufficiently stable to lay the foundation for the early form of legal certainty. From Christian philosophy springs the concept of natural law, which can be considered an early equivalent of the rule of law insofar as it attributes ultimate sovereignty to the divine order of creation, and as a result, stands above human-made laws – which must therefore comply with the demands of divine justice. Simply put, written law cannot go against the created order; otherwise, it is not valid law.
This principle is in stark contrast to woke ideology, whose declared goal is to challenge the created order to the point where the fundamental building blocks of our society are eroded until we no longer know what a family is, creating chaos where – as the Hungarian language so expressively puts it – we no longer know if we are boys or girls. Since the social contract that ends the chaotic state of nature described by Hobbes – where humanity is unable or only limitedly able to cooperate and improve its goods, and where constant competition and wars destroy the common good – is built on natural law derived from Christian cultural roots, it is a natural endeavor of those uninterested in social welfare to fundamentally alter the created order. Simply put, the few decades known as the Pax Americana are not solely due to the military might of the United States but also to the legal and societal achievements rooted in Christian philosophy. The wars, crises, and migration crisis of recent years have repeatedly provided opportunities to undermine these achievements.
After 2015, with the outbreak of the migration crisis, the right of national self-determination, which obliges small and large countries to cooperate on a mutual, partner-based level, was questioned. If a foreign power can question the boundaries within which a country wants to protect its culture or physical security without harming others, what prevents us from questioning other rights of the criticized country? This is the great trap of compulsory immigration, which has turned from a directive into an imperial decree hidden under the cloak of woke virtue-signaling: If we rearrange the framework of one of the four fundamental conditions of statehood (permanent population, identifiable and defined geographic territory, government exercising power over the population and territory, and the ability to engage with other states), what prevents intervention in the other three?
The woke ideology is an excellent tool in this process because it maintains the appearance of respecting the principle of non-intervention between countries, while in reality, it shapes – or rather mocks – their legal systems in the way described above. Woke is anything but the rule of law.
The rule of law must ensure equal opportunities, not social homogeneity. Two illustrative examples:
- In a rule of law state, there must be a defined concept of marriage, which must be accessible without discrimination to all persons who meet the rules. However, it need not grant the right to marry to those who do not fit into the conceptual framework of marriage. Other, similar statuses can, of course, be provided.
- Employee rights must be guaranteed by every rule of law state, but not that less competent individuals are hired by right simply because they belong to a minority. This would undermine the principle of fair competition.
Woke, however, does the exact opposite, constantly chipping away at the legal order with its aggressive campaigns that have retroactive effects or disadvantage other social groups, fragmenting society wherever it appears. That is why we must distinguish between the rule of law and the woke state. Brussels is the latter.
Translated and edited by Evan Right
