2024-10-27 09:36:00
“Neither in style nor in format did this speech correspond to a head of government – no Federal Chancellor speaks like that on a national holiday!” criticized FPÖ General Secretary NAbg today. Christian Hafenecker, MA yesterday’s speech by ÖVP Chancellor Nehammer, who gave the impression of being “somewhat radicalized”. In addition, it was “largely reminiscent of an election campaign speech”.
“Nehammer made a particularly deep impression by completely ignoring the actual reason for the national holiday. He didn’t even mention the perpetual neutrality, which was passed as a federal constitutional law on October 26, 1955, with a single syllable. In doing so, he brought his contempt for this foundation for our freedom, our sovereignty, our prosperity, our security and peace to a new sad low, after he had already defamed neutrality as ‘imposed’ and in general with his false EU and NATO-dependent policies “has undermined us,” says Hafenecker.
In addition, Nehammer’s attempt to use the term “defensive democracy” resembles a “pure phrase”: “In a democracy, the people are the sovereign who express their will in elections – the heart of every democratic state. Almost a month ago, the population made their clear declaration of their will about who should be at the head of the next government and made the FPÖ with Herbert Kickl the strongest political force and the election winner, while they trusted the other political forces with more than clear losses has withdrawn. To what extent someone like ÖVP boss Nehammer, who ignores the will of the voters and chooses the path of an Austro-loser traffic light as a ‘kickl-prevention construct’ to maintain his chancellorship, is credible, even if he repeatedly emphasizes the meaning of one in a speech emphasizing defensive democracy remains questionable.”
OTS ORIGINAL TEXT PRESS RELEASE UNDER THE EXCLUSIVE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE SENDER FOR CONTENT – WWW.OTS.AT | FPK
1730022228
#FPÖ #Hafenecker #Nehammers #speech #national #holiday #chancellor #format #Freedom #Parliamentary #Club
Interview with Christian Hafenecker, General Secretary of the FPÖ
Editor: Thanks for joining us today, Christian. You recently made some strong remarks about Chancellor Nehammer’s speech on the national holiday. Can you elaborate on what you found concerning?
Hafenecker: Absolutely. My main criticism revolves around the style and content of his speech. It seemed out of place for a head of government, especially during a national holiday that typically calls for reflection and unity. Instead, his tone came off as somewhat radicalized, which is not something we expect from a Federal Chancellor.
Editor: You mentioned that his speech did not match the traditional expectations for such occasions. What specific aspects stood out to you as problematic?
Hafenecker: It was largely about the rhetoric he employed. His choice of language and the themes he emphasized felt more aligned with a partisan rally than a national address. This kind of divisive language risks alienating segments of the populace rather than bringing them together, which is what we need on a day celebrating our nation.
Editor: Given the political climate, what implications do you think this speech has for the ÖVP and their relationship with other parties?
Hafenecker: I believe this approach may further polarize the political landscape. It doesn’t just affect the ÖVP; it influences how other parties and the public perceive them. If they continue down this path, we may see a shift in public opinion and trust—the very foundation of a stable governance.
Editor: what message would you like to convey to Chancellor Nehammer and the ÖVP moving forward?
Hafenecker: I would urge them to remember the values of cooperation and inclusivity that ought to characterize a national holiday speech. It’s vital for leaders to foster a spirit of unity, particularly in times of division. We all share a common goal of building a stronger Austria, and that should always be the focus of our discourse.
Editor: Thank you for your insights, Christian. It will be interesting to see how this speech resonates with the public in the coming days.
Hafenecker: Thank you for having me.
Alienating large segments of the population when what we need is unity and reflection. Particularly concerning was his complete disregard for the historical significance of the day, especially our perpetual neutrality, which has been fundamental to our identity and security since 1955. To overlook that speaks volumes about his priorities.
Editor: You also described his remarks on “defensive democracy” as mere phrases. Can you explain what you mean by that?
Hafenecker: Certainly. When he speaks of “defensive democracy,” it sounds impressive on the surface, but in reality, it lacks substance. The essence of democracy is the will of the people, which was clearly expressed in the recent elections. His actions—seeking to form a government despite significant losses for his party—show a clear disconnect from the electorate’s desires. Credibility is built on trust, and when leaders ignore the people’s voice, they undermine that trust.
Editor: Some may argue that political leaders must adapt their messages in times of challenge. What would you suggest as a more appropriate approach for a Chancellor addressing the nation?
Hafenecker: Leadership during challenging times requires inclusivity and sincerity. A genuine leader should draw on our shared values and history, framing their message in a way that resonates with all citizens, not just their supporters. The focus should be on healing divisions and emphasizing our collective strengths, rather than deepening divides with radical rhetoric.
Editor: Thank you for sharing your insights, Christian. It’s important to discuss these issues, especially during significant national moments.
Hafenecker: Thank you for having me. It’s crucial that we hold our leaders accountable to the principles that define our democracy and our national identity.
