Rajchl may be dividing society, but his bedroom is not a battlefield. Where does public scrutiny end and ordinary bullying begin?
At first glance, the story of Jindřich Rajchl, YouTuber MikeJePan and a viral video that allegedly shows a politician having sex might seem like a bizarre internet episode. But it's not about entertainment. It is about a line that is becoming increasingly blurred these days - the line between public and private, between criticism and bullying, between opposition to political views and violations of fundamental rights.
Jindřich Rajchl, today an MP elected for the SPD and chair of the PRO movement, has long been one of the most prominent representatives of the disinformation and populist scene. His rhetoric is full of aggressive rants, conspiracy theories, false moralistic gestures and contempt for minorities - be they sexual, ethnic or religious. It is no wonder that for many people it is a symbol of the dangerous return of the politics of fear and hatred.
But it is precisely because his views upset so many people that we need to be wary. Because even those who rightly point out the dangers of his words can become dangerous themselves - the moment they cross the ethical line. The publication of a video with sexual content purporting to show a man similar to Reichl is not a brave gesture of civic courage, but a violation of human dignity. And the argument that it is "exposing the hypocrisy" of a man who espouses traditional values does not hold water here.
Privacy is an inviolable right, not the privilege of those with whom we agree. If we start tolerating invasions of the privacy of people we hate, sooner or later the same logic will turn against any of us. In this sense, the words of Vít Rakusán, who described Rajchl as one of the most dangerous people in Czech politics, but at the same time condemned the invasion of his privacy, carry extraordinary weight. They are a reminder that democracy is based on rules that apply to everyone - even those who would prefer to abolish them.
Another dimension of the case is also disturbing: according to Rajchl, the YouTuber's associates were supposed to film his 16-year-old daughter at their home. Whatever the reality, the very fact that we consider such a thing possible shows where we have come. In a society that feeds on sensationalism, even a politician's child can become a tool of media warfare.
Mikael Oganesjan, known for his provocations, is thus once again on the edge, and perhaps long past it. But internet courage and the desire for ratings do not justify attacks on privacy. Such "activist" methods only strengthen those they are supposedly aimed at. They allow Reichl to play the role of victim - and paradoxically gain the moral high ground in the eyes of his supporters.
There is a way to fight Rajchl: confront him with the facts, dismantle his manipulations, expose his demagoguery. But not by going into his bedroom, not by persecuting his family, not by resorting to the logic of tabloids and public lynching.
When one fights hate with hate, one does not defeat it, one only turns it into something else. Maybe more sophisticated, maybe more acceptable, but just as destructive. And that is the real danger of our time: that in the name of "justice" we forget the boundaries that once protected everyone, not just those with whom we agree.
Henry Rajchel's privacy is no less than anyone's. And if we prove our moral superiority at his expense, sooner or later we will discover that there are no more boundaries. Just an empty field where the one who is not afraid to be even crueler wins.
