Is There a Pilot on the Plane?
Slovenian original: Ali je pilot v letalu?
The Slovenian text is the original. This English version was translated with the help of AI.
In mid-August this year, 68-year-old Robert Chain of Encino, California, repeatedly called the newsroom of the Boston Globe and threatened to kill journalists because they were “enemies of the people.”
On August 24, Matija Stepišnik, editor-in-chief of Večer, posted an ironic comment on his Facebook profile about entrepreneur Ivo Boscarol’s announcement that he intended to move abroad because of the proposed changes to tax legislation. After a “journalistic piece” in which Nova24TV described Stepišnik as a “hooligan commissar,” the comments included a post by user Boris Ivicak (quoted here unedited): “A bullet in the head for such scum, he is not worthy to walk on slovenian soil.”
On August 25, in the eastern German city of Chemnitz, a fight broke out in which 35-year-old Daniel H. was stabbed to death. Police arrested a 23-year-old Syrian and a 22-year-old Iraqi as suspects. In the days that followed, Chemnitz saw mass far-right demonstrations organized by the Alternative for Germany together with other far-right groups. The riots turned violent, and several foreigners were injured after demonstrators hunted them through the streets.
On August 27, the editor-in-chief of Večer reported the death threat to the Maribor police.
On August 28, Italian Interior Minister Salvini and Hungarian Prime Minister Orbán named French President Macron as their main political opponent. Macron agreed with them and said he would not back down in defending Europe against nationalism and hate speech.
On August 30, the US Federal Bureau of Investigation arrested Robert Chain on suspicion of sending “threatening communications,” an offense punishable by up to five years in prison.
On the same day, the weekly Demokracija published on its front page a photograph of a white female body with black hands reaching for it, under the headline “Migrants bring rape culture to Slovenia.” The cover provoked a wave of protest and condemnation. While many recognized it as hate speech, the Office of the President of the Republic of Slovenia said that “the President always refrains from commenting on the media so that he cannot be accused of interfering with freedom of speech and of the press.” The statement also stressed “the President’s well-known positions on the need for mutual respect,” though unfortunately without explaining who, in this particular case, was supposed to respect whom. Demokracija demonstrated its respect for the culture of intolerance again in its very next issue, with a blatantly homophobic cover.
In the first days of September, the proposed tax changes, which had been added to the coalition agreement at the initiative of the Left party and had so angered entrepreneur Boscarol and some of his colleagues, became the subject of heated debate in the media and on social networks. It culminated in an open letter from the Slovenian Entrepreneurs’ Club, whose leadership complained bitterly about “the inflammatory tone, the spreading of untruths, indecent political culture, populism, bias and, above all, inadmissible hate speech against entrepreneurs…” After the letter was published, Borut Pahor promptly invited representatives of the club to a meeting at the presidential palace.
On Monday, September 3, German Chancellor Angela Merkel strongly condemned the far-right riots in Chemnitz. The same day, more than fifty thousand people gathered for a concert against racism under the slogan “We are more.” The concert, publicly supported by German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, began with a minute’s silence in memory of the murdered Daniel H.
In the first week of September, videos appeared online of masked men in uniform, with beer bellies, axes and semi-automatic weapons, who had allegedly been parading and training in the forests of Styria. When it turned out that this paramilitary formation was led by Andrej Šiško, failed candidate for President of the Republic of Slovenia and self-proclaimed commander of the armed forces of the land of Styria, politicians stirred too and even condemned and deplored the whole affair. On September 6, the Slovenian police detained Šiško on suspicion of inciting the violent overthrow of the constitutional order.
Some columns write themselves, but still, from my side, a thought or two.
First, about taxes. Debates, including heated ones, about tax policy, the interests of business, the needs of the public sector and the welfare state are not unique to us. Entrepreneurs, of course, have every right to defend their interests, but the same right must be granted to those who defend the interests of the public sector and the welfare state, even if we don’t always agree with their rhetoric or all their arguments. And let us not forget that we enshrined the welfare state as a value in Article 2 of the Constitution. Tax policy and redistribution are ideological topics par excellence, at the center of political battles in every election in every democracy. But here we don’t like ideological topics and divisions. Instead of seeking the balance that best reflects the public interest (which of course includes ensuring the conditions for a competitive economy), we “transcend” ideological divisions by turning one of the options, which defends a logical but partial interest, into a state religion and a test of patriotism. Criticism from entrepreneurs is thus by definition the voice of reason, while criticism of their criticism is hate speech, whose victims are promptly invited into the warm bosom of presidential attention and protection.
But evidently there is not room in that bosom for everyone. For victims of hate speech, that is. When it comes to racism, intolerance and homophobia, the President’s attention, judging by his office’s statement, turns elsewhere, out of fear of being accused of interfering with freedom of speech and of the press. Let me reassure the President at once: such worries are completely unnecessary. Condemning unacceptable, offensive, racist, homophobic, antisemitic and similar statements, even when published in the media, can in no way be understood as interfering with freedom of speech or of the press. What is more, since such statements attack and undermine constitutionally protected values, condemning them is something one could even expect from the President of the Republic, as part of his job, if you like. If he needs inspiration, he can hop on the Franco-German train.
But far be it from me to discourage the President from caring about media freedom. If that care is sincere, then in today’s Slovenia he unfortunately has no shortage of opportunities to prove it. But again, silence will not do; it will take moral authority, an ethical stance and clear positions. For example, when an editor is threatened with “a bullet in the head,” or when a party leader calls women journalists prostitutes, or perhaps when a writer and columnist receives a threatening letter and white powder in an envelope. For example.
I don’t yet know how the police will act on the report of the death threat against Večer’s editor-in-chief, but in the case of the Styrian militia they have, at least so far, done their job professionally. That, however, in no way diminishes the responsibility of politicians. It is not enough just to wring one’s hands and sigh, “Oh dear, oh dear, how terrible, who would have thought such a thing could happen.”
We cannot and must not pretend that there is no causal link whatsoever between tolerating hate speech, racism and nationalist populism on the one hand and armed masked men tramping through Slovenian forests on the other.