Can anyone help me get Internet addresses of individuals at Budapest for
the purpose of corresponding with them, just for the fun of it.

THANKS,
R.Czincz Canada
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
 : ComputerLink Online Inc.            Realms of Despair!            :
 : (416)233-5410                       telnet mud.compulink.com 4000 :
 : 106 lines, 300-28,800 bps           endless medieval enjoyment!   :
 :                                                                   :
 : Join our International Teleconference --> chat.compulink.com 9000 :
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------

>
> Which one. US, Canadian, Swedish etc.
> There is no pure capitalism. Some of the systems are closer to socialism than
> to capitalism.
>

They all based on capitalist property relations, whatever is
state controlled, is in the interest of capital and not controlled
democratically.

>
> Economically the early christians were very close to pure communism, but
> greed took it over.
>

The conditions for capitalism or socialism did not exist that time.

> Eve! Do not worry to much about the social systems. The best, hopefully
> will develop not by social engineering of some intelectuals, but by evolution
> It probably will have the right amount of socialism and capitalism.
>
> Sandor

Darwinism doesn't work for human society, the changes occur much faster.
(pre-history 20 000(+) years, slavery 5000(+) years, feudalism  2000(-)
capitalism 500(?)... But even on this scale we haven't got the time to
wait for it to happen, as the laws of nature were learned and used,
the same should be done now for the laws of society,
first time using a cooperative/democratic/conscious effort.
Otherwise bloody wars/revolutions, accidental/deliberate
environmental damage will finish us very soon! Just look carefully to
the events of 1994. Anything positive for future developments?

>Idopont: Thu Dec 15 21:01:36 EST 1994 HUNGARY #166
>
>           At the risk of sounding like I am nit-picking, I have to add to
>            this conversation that Hungary did lose terrritory after WW II
>           , the so-called Bratislava bridgehead--5 villages on the south
>           side of the Danube opposite Bratislava.  Not much territory, bu
>           t still a loss.  Ken Nyirady

        Not much territory, but of strategic importance! Without this
territory Slovakia could not have stolen the Danube to put into operation the
power plant at Bos two years ago.

                                                Makra Zsigmond

On Thu, 15 Dec 1994 14:39:03 -0600 > said:
>
>I think a crucial point in all of this is that generalizations are
>impossible.

--No, they are not impossible.  They are difficult, but necessary.
Of course, they are always arguable.  For example, a frequent topic on
this list is the amount of anti-Semitism in Hungary.  Some argue that,
as a general rule, Hungary on the whole is anti-Semitic.  Others argue
that, as a general rule, Hungary on the whole is not anti-Semitic.
I don't doubt the sincerity of those on either side, but clearly
both sides are arguing from a generalized position.  Without doing
that there could be no examination of the issue, could there?

  I cannot claim all liberals are hypocrites, and I cannot claim
>all conservatives are heartless.

--Nor would I.  As a general rule, however, I believe that the
Liberal establishment has lost touch with its traditional
constituency.  I am a member of a profession whose national
organization periodically surveys its membership.  One of the
demographic characteristics surveyed is the educational and
social background of the members.  Most of the members come from
educated backgrounds with relatively high incomes.  Most of the
members espouse liberal social views.  Very few of the members
come from poverty.  Some do.  Very few have any relationship with
poor and working class people except as they encounter them as
clients.  Most actually spend most of their working days with
middle-class clients.  I have taught and worked in this field
for thirty years.  I believe that I can generalize that while most
of them espouse liberal views, most of them really don't want
economic redistrubution.  Most of my colleagues really believed
that the Clinton plan for medical care would pass, and that it
would result in low-cost medical care for everyone.  I do not
accuse my liberal colleagues of evil.  I do believe that they
are naive.

  Many people who hold to liberal views in
>America grew up poor, and are not afraid of getting their hands dirty.

--Sure.  But most don't have to get their hands dirty because they have
good middle-class jobs.  Good on them.  But my point is that they are
not in tune with the working classes any more.  This is why many
working-class people voted for Reagan.  They also voted for Clinton,
thinking that he was a different kind of Democrat--one who believed
as they did.  The last election seemed to indicate their displeasure.

>Earlier, Eva Durant (I believe it was) indicated that everything
>alternative in America gets labelled kook or crank.  Unfortunately, its
>true when it comes to liberals.

--But it wasn't so long ago when conservatives were labelled kook or
crank, was it?  Remember the 1964 election?  And remember the strange,
outlandish campaign of the John Birch society to impeach Earl Warren?
And wasn't Gene McCarthy labelled as a kind, but misguided liberal kook?
Of course, we tend to label extremists as kooks.  But we are fairly
even-handed over time about doing it.  Others come to mind.  Father
Coughlin, Eugene Debs, and my favorite, Norman Thomas whom I had the
pleasure to meet and spend a couple of hours with, as one of a group of
very liberal students like I was then, back in 1949.  We thought that
he had all the answers, then.  Charming man.

  Conservatives have found it easy to label
>them, one label being that of rich dilettante, assuaging their "guilt"
>through pseudo-politics.

--Sure.  John Lindsay, former mayor of New York, was known as the
quintessential Limousine Liberal.

  If I understood rightly, Janet Brown was
>responding to just this sort of comment.

--Yes, and Ms Brown, if you're listening, I would like to apologize
for my harsh tone.  I'm a mean old bastard with the scars to prove it,
and you are probably a very nice person with a kind heart.  My reaction
was because I'm used to people assuming that I must have been born
rich because I have anti-Marxist views.  They often make that
generalization.  From my perspective, Marxism has done a lot more
for middle-class intellectuals than it has done for the working class.

  Another example is the
>conservative knee-jerk labelling of everything Marxist or socialist as being
>one and the same as Marxist-Leninism.

--Interesting you should say that.  I have a number of British friends,
whom I assure you I love dearly, who are socialists.  Most consider the
Labour Party to be too far to the right and won't joint it!  Prior to
the end of Russian domination in Eastern Europe, they defended the
USSR and its satellites.  They recognized that there were some problems,
but nevertheless, on the whole, they believed that Eastern Europe was
on the right track.  After the fall, they said, "Oh, well, that wasn't
really true communism.  It was Leninism."  I can also cite for you a
very nice Hungarian scholar who was an apologist for the old communist
regime who, in her recent writings, is backtracking like Hell.  I'd
rather not identify her, because she really is a lovely human being and
has always meant well.

>Of course, I won't argue that aren't liberals like Charles described, just
>as I hope Charles will accept that some conservatives are really
>oppurtunistic, money hungry monsters who do wonderfull things like test new
>vaccines on remote villages in Chile, only to accidently infect every man,
>woman and child with incurable diseases.
>
--And you are generalizing that this is a direct application of
conservative political beliefs?  These people went there to callously
experiment on human subjects because they voted Republican?  Nothing
like this could have happened with LBJ back in the White House?

>        Another thought on those neat conspiracy theories concerning
>Germany, France and Britain, and former Yugoslavia.  Maybe Western
>governments think it would be benificial to long term stability in the
>Balkans for the region to be ethnically homogeneous, and by secretly aiding
>the Serbs, they are simply utilizing what appears to be the easist route to
>their goal.

--Actually, this is a possibility.  Not as a deliberate conspiracy, but
as the unconscious reason for not taking more effective action.

>        Once again, I don't believe a word of what I just wrote.
>
--Far be it from me to generalize about this statement.

--Note to Joe Pannon.  I won't post on this subject any more.  I
realize that it is not directly Hungarian.  I would defend myself
by saying that this list does get away from direct discussion of
Hungary fairly often, but it is the most interesting bunch of people
I have run into on the Internet.  I've been on a couple that were
supposed to be about social policy, which is my field, and most of
the postings are announcements of conferences in which like-minded
people talk to each other, or self-serving adverts for the poster's
lastest book.  On this list, people do argue openly about ideas.
Maybe I could generalize that Hungarians really are a very
sophisticated bunch who really are citizens of the world.  But
I won't.

As ever,

Charles

> >
> >I think you do not represent the views of the present working class,
> >or any sympathy with it. That is the point. You sold out comrade.
>
> --But for a good price.  That is the American way.  Most of us from
> the working class do the same.  Sorry you don't approve, beloved
> sister Eva.
>
Any guilt? Oh, I know, you give to charity, strictly to the deserving
poor.  Better than nothing... or is it?

>
>>It's unrealistic and ridiculuos because Hungary's history and
>culture have
>>very little in common with either Russia or Serbia.
>
>of course it is nonsense to claim that hungary's history has very
>little
>in common with either russia or serbia. that is like claiming catalan
>history has little in common with french and spanish history
>or that irish, welsh, scottish history have little in common with
>english history.
>

According to this, Hungary might as well just blend in the way Catalonia
has been absorbed by Spain or the Scots and Welsh by the U.K.?

>>these ignormasus opinions
>
>when referring to people, the noun is "ignoramus" and the adjective
>is "ignorant".
>

I think on a list where probably over half the contributors are not native
english speakers, it is not fair to correct someone's grammar.  On the
other hand, name  calling is pretty rude!

TB

Date sent:  15-DEC-1994 21:29:11 >
>>
>> It's useless to argue with you, but it's still fun.  I note that
>> unemployment is down in Britain and the U.S.
>
>I don't know about the US, but here under the years of Thatcher the
>way to collect the data was changed about 20 times. If you count in again
>the 16-18 year olds, who are not in education, wives/husbands who cannot
>claim any benefit, because somebody is in the family working, etc etc,
>you'll end up with the same - or worse figures.
>
Actually, yes!  US unemployment figures ignores those who no longer search
work, and those who have never tried.  House wives (though few families can
afford the luxury these days), teenagers, etc. are ignored.  Also, a good part
of the wonderfull low unemployment lies in the expansion of temporary
work:  jobs at low wages, without benifits, with absolutely no security.  It's
the sort of job I hold now...Not to mention the expansion of low pay, no
benefit, no status jobs which lead no where, equalling no improvement in
any shape or form (they might have in the past, but now they become an end
in themselves).  4.25 USD/hr in America is almost enough for a single
person to support a gerbil on, but not quite.


>> Most people are not
>> making arms.  You paint an interesting picture of the U.S.  Rich
>> people living in armed camps, poor people dying in the streets, and
>> arms factories humming away, grinding out weapons automatically.
>
>With your enthusiastic help - we are getting there...
>
In USA, a lot of people favor a return to Reagan style militarization,
since it would cause factories to be built, etc.  Not quite the same as
favoring war or military action.  I think a good term for this would be
"social welfare."

>> Maybe we on this list could pass the hat and gather enough money
>> for you to spend a couple of weeks here.  On the other hand, then
>> you wouldn't be as much fun to communicate with.
>>
>Hear, hear!!  Try me.
>


I have no money to spare.  I am both a student and a full time worker,
married, and poor as dirt.  Oh yes, Charles, I am also a Liberal.  I get my
hands dirty every day.


                Full of joy,

                        Thomas Breed
                        

                "Like Prometheus still chained to that rock
                        In the midst of a free world"

Date sent:  15-DEC-1994 21:56:29
>>
>> > I never claimed the
>> > political spectrum forms a line; I imagine it as a circle.
>>
>
>What about a spiral? Shouldn't there be something new/improved
>coming up at times?

Now we're getting somewhere (though I have no clue where)!  How about a
sphere?  Or a hypercube?  Why shouldn't we admit that the terms "left wing"
 and "right wing" are insuffiecent to describe governments?  Yes, this
contradicts some of my earlier posts, but opinions (unlike convictions) are
meant to be changed.

>
>If it is a repeat such as:
>  free market/keynesist/nationalist/fascist/islam capitalism,
>burocratic/totalitarian/nationalist/islam "existed" socialism, it doesn't
>matter what the name    - did   not   work, old and rightwing as far
>as I'm concerned. (And I am.)
>If you have anything new to say: that's left wing. Non existent much,
>so why are you getting so upset?

>"Marx is dead, Lenin is dead and I don't feel so good lately..."
> (graffiti)

 I get upset because people keep labelling the pseudo-Marxism of former
"Communist" states as left wing (or new), when, in this day and age, they form
simply a more subversive form of the right wing (desire to return to what
was).



                                Thomas Breed
                                

                        >Por su puesto es mi puesto<

In #166  wrote:

Hungary lost land because it got cought on the wrong side in both world wars.
I know there were kinda stuck with the Austrians, but the bet on the wrong team
in WWII.  Win some lose some.


        I don`t think hungary had much of a choice of which "team" to bet.
Hungary tried to break away from Germany and become a neutral country, but
then Germany invaded Hungary, and Hungarians were forced to fight for Germany.
Actually half the time the Hungarians were fighting with the Russians, again
they did not have much of a choice. Hungarians where placed between ranks of
Germans/Russians so if they fought they were slaughtered by the enemy, and if
they refused, they executed by whoever they were being forced to fight for.

        For a long time towards the end of WWII the danube was the Eastern
Front in the central of Hungary, the Germans on the west side and the Russians
on the east. In Ercsi, where my parents grew up, the village changed hands
so many times that even the opposing sides did not know who held Ercsi.
In a situation like that you have no choice but to help which ever side is
holding a gun to you head!


        Karcsi

On Thu, 15 Dec 1994 21:50:09 -0600 > said:
>>
>Actually, yes!  US unemployment figures ignores those who no longer search
>work, and those who have never tried.

--Joe Pannon, I lied.  One more once.  Everyone familiar with how the
U.S. employment figures are arrived it is aware of what is included
and what is not.  The alternative would be to go door-to-door each
week.  Despite their shortcomings, they are useable as one indicator
of economic health or illness.  Nobody who uses them is deceived by
their omissions.

                                                              Also, a good part
>of the wonderfull low unemployment lies in the expansion of temporary
>work:  jobs at low wages, without benifits, with absolutely no security.

--Some are sure.  But it's a start, isn't it?  A number of companies
use part-timers as a trial period and hire full-timers from those who
work out well.

>the sort of job I hold now..
                  4.25 USD/hr in America is almost enough for a single
>person to support a gerbil on, but not quite.

--Then, in the words of that great philosopher, Bette Middler,
why bother?  Obviously, it helps you to have the money coming in.
>>
>In USA, a lot of people favor a return to Reagan style militarization,
>since it would cause factories to be built, etc.  Not quite the same as
>favoring war or military action.  I think a good term for this would be
>"social welfare."

--As I understand it, Slick Willie is asking for an increased military
budget.  Didn't he run as a Democrat?
>
>I have no money to spare.  I am both a student and a full time worker,
>married, and poor as dirt.

--Many of us educated types spent years in your status.  We believed
our poverty to be temporary and for the most part, it was.  Good luck
to you.  In addition to building character, you probably will learn as
much working as you will in class.  As an undergraduate, I worked from
about 11:30 p.m. until around 6 in the morning and then went to class.
I drove a truck hauling newspapers to carrier pick-up points, and railroad
stations.  Minimum wage was $1.10 U.S., but I got $1.25 for working nights.
Lived in an attic with three other guys.  Looking back, I would do it
all over again.  But drink less beer.

  Oh yes, Charles, I am also a Liberal.

--So was I until I figured out the poverty of the idea.  It assumes that
people are, at bottom, good and that they wish only good to others.  And
that if people don't believe this, the government will see to it that they
are good.  Oh yes, and that some guy in Washington knows intimately the
problems of Northport, Alabama and knows just what to do about them using
an endless supply of cash from taxpayers who believe that Washington
makes better decisions about how to spend their money than they do.

    I get my
>hands dirty every day.

--Right.  All liberals do.  No liberal ever puts on a suit, probably
doesn't even own one.  Spend all their spare time in humanitarian
service.  You like that generalization better?  Seriously, if I had
made a postive generalization about liberals, would you have challenged
it because it is wrong to make generalizations?  Or would you have
accepted it without a struggle?

Okay, Joe Pannon.  This IS  it.

Charles

On Fri, 16 Dec 1994 10:35:41 +0000 Eva Durant said:
>>
>Any guilt?

--No.  What about?  I worked hard, educated myself, and made a good
living finally, and have now retired.  I made my living, before I
got into teaching, by investigating cases of child abuse and neglect
and working with these families, helping them to find jobs and provide
better care.  Later I did marriage counseling for a number of years,
working in a not-for-profit social agency.  In my teaching and
publications I have advocated for full employment, more equitable
taxation, and simpler welfare programs for those unable to work.
I have had a hand in the education of several thousand professional
social workers most of whom staff mental health institutions, work
in children's protective services, or work in protective services
for older people.  I don't make weapons, and am not a stockholder
in any company that does--although the pension fund might have some,
I haven't looked.

I started out believing that government could solve all problems.
I worked in government for several years, and realized that this
point of view had serious limits.  I now believe that the best
solution to poverty involves a rational government that works
with a healthy market system in order to get the balance right
between profit and the need to address human problems.  If you
want to make fun of me, Beloved Sister Eva, go ahead.  I don't
mind, since I'm used to criticism and had to contend with armed
teen-aged gangs in one of my early jobs and am still here.

Charles

To Paul: Don't be so sure of your grammar if you keep misspelling it...
        Greetings,              Robert the linguist

In article , zcapl74 >
writes:
>         Frankly I do not agree with  (d.a.), I cannot
> see where you got the idea from that hungary "...regained at least most of
> the territory in the course of the thirties and WWII" and then you go on to
> way that "After (notice, capital letter at the beginning of a sentence) WWII
> Hungary returned to its post WWI boundaries...". Hungary lost almost
> two-thirds of her territory after WWI and then some more after WWII, so
> Hungary was larger after WWI than after WWII, and not the same size.
>
>         Further more, when did Russia and Austria loose any territory. I
> recollect that there was the matter about Prussia which was taken by Germany
> from Poland, then taken by Russia when they drove out the Germans in WWI (?),
> and then eventually returned to Poland.
>
>         What areas did the Germans loose? They lost the Sudetenlands (however
> you spell it) and the Rhine valley (O.K. also Prussia), none of which was
> theirs to start of with. And what did Romania and Czechoslovakia every loose?
>
>
>         Karcsi


I don' know what Czechoslovakia lost. But I can inform you that Romania lost
Basarabia (the actual Moldavia), taken by the USSR, and the Quadrilater, taken
by
Bulgaria.

Constantin

PS: All these complaints about the Trianon treaty sound like border
revisionism.

Constantin Donea:
>PS: All these complaints about the Trianon treaty sound like border
>revisionism.

        How about all those complaints of Moldavia and Bukovina?

        Norb

>
> --That was the point, Sister Eva.  My father and his mates had other
> things to do and weren't interested in management.
>
They would have grown interested, if the managing director had
a 75% rise, the shareholders were doing well, and they had a cut
in their jobs/wages (see: British Gas).

> controversy over who owns the land.  Some old feudal landowners have
> apparently raised historic claims.
>

Their folks probably worked overtime for some king, do you blame them?

>  > --And our radicals have turned against educating people with skills
> and knowledge, and are primarily concerned with producing revolutionaries.

How come all these horrid conservatives are about then? Perhaps all
those freshly produced revolutionaries don't own the media, so we
don't know how vocal they maybe. I do hope you're right!
What is needed are people who are able to think and make decisions
for themselves and able to learn new skills. Knowledge available
from all those databases... and gets updated every second.

> European socialism is more sophisticated, as I tried to explain to you.

Better at speaking bs.  Your beloved Bambi had lessons from Clinton,
I thought you should note that.

> Even Tony Blair has come out against bad teachers, poor schools, and
> lax discipline.

Who hasn't? Hate to tell you: money would help. Any promise of that?

> To a true socialist, education in skills and knowledge
> is the great leveller.

Same opportunities even better.


> It may disappoint you to learn that most ordinary
> Americans believe that too, even if the vote Republican.

Why should it disappoint me? Most ordinary Americans don't
vote republican. Say 80% register. Say 70% of that goes to vote.
40+% of that vote republican. Is that majority? I don' t think
the democrats are better, if you haven't noticed. That's why
I think democracy stinks. You have to be a millionair if you want
to have your voice heard, and not many of them progressive...
And the one who is is not very popular on this list...

>
> >That's why you have your drug/crime centres, the so called education
> >system still turning out  surplus "factory fodder".
>
> --Not quite correct.  The sensible educators are trying to cope with
> drugs, but the influence of the streets is pretty strong.

That somehow missed the point?


> --Most of the people that I know who manage businesses put in long hours,
> and work THEIR arses off.  You can't run a business and let it run itself.
> It just doesn't work that way, despite the Marxist rhetoric.
>

You can if it is a big business. Small business is different.

> >
> --Most people here improve their skills and do not do crime and drugs.
> We really do need to take up a collection to bring you here.
>

I did not indicate in my posting that I think that 50%+ of US citizens
into that sort of thing. But a worrying percentage is. Same worries
in less extent all over the place.

Czechoslovakia lost the Carpatho-Ukraine/Sub-Carpathian Ukraine
           /Trans-Carpathian Ukraine/Ruthenia/Karpatalja (your choice) aft
           er WWII. Ken        

On Dec 15,  5:52pm, George Antony wrote:
> Subject: Re: Hungarian Wine Recipe
> (stuff deleted)

> As for the recipe:
> Get some plonk, add the same amount of water (or anywhere between
> 50 and 0 per cent, depending on personal preference for hangovers),
> put cinnamon sticks, whole cloves and black peppercorns into it
> (the latter is a family variation to the theme: use cautiously or
> leave out), skin half a lemon and/or orange with a potato peeler
> and drop the peel in, sweeten with honey/brown sugar/golden syrup
> to taste.  Warm until it is starting to simmer (NB the boiling
> point of alcohol is below that of water!), strain, serve.
>
> Do not use ground spices as they cannot be removed and leave
> an unsightly brown sludge.  On the other hand, microwave ovens are
> just fine.
>
> Caution: the spicy sweetness makes this concoction very drinkable
> and thus potentially dangerous.
>
> George Antony


The German name for this would be Glu"wein, and in Scandinavia I believe it
is called Glugg.  Could anyone tell me the Hungarian name for it?

Heather Olsen

It cannot be beauty, for I have none;
and it cannot be my wit, for he has not enough to
know that I have any

-- Catharine SEDLEY,
Puzzled about why she was mistress to James II

Cheers,
Gotthard

Uzleti kapcsolatot szeretnenk kialakitani magyar cegekkel.

EXPORT-IMPORT
Tatra Security Systems, INC
Vecsey Laszlo
Cegtulajdonos

700 Jane Dr.
Franklin Lakes, NJ 07417 USA
Tel: 201 891-1555
Fax: 201 891-1449
E-Mail:    

I can't put my finger on it but I am almost 100% sure that I saw a piano
version of it in John Thompson's old books for children who are learning to
play the piano. I also have a recording of it, a vinyl record from Hungary,
containing one one side Hungarian, and on the other, an international
collection of Christmas songs. I am almost certain that any collection of
Hungarin Christmas songs on CD would have that particular one on because it
is so famous.

By the way, thanks to Gotthard for the lyrics of these three Christmas
carols. I will never forget my first Christmas outside of Hungary, up in the
Austrian Alps. About 50 of us, students, lived in a Gasthaus and the owners
of the Gasthaus organized quite a nice Christmas dinner for us. They came and
sang Christmas carols and asked us to sing some. It was pitiful: none of us
knew the lyrics. The good Austrians were duly horrified.

Eva Balogh

I thought that we just had finished a fairly fruitless argument on the
Hungarian-language Forum on antisemitism and at last we can move on to
something else. But Andras Pellionisz was obviously not satisfied with the
status quo and decided to publish an article from a weekly called Uj Elet
(New Life), in which an article appeared about 100 Armenian and Georgian Jews
settling in Nyiregyhaza. And if that wasn't enough, Peter Andras Nemenyi,
another man who claims that he is not an antisemite, published news about
secret agreements between the Horn government and who knows whom else about
settling 200,000 former Soviet Jews in Hungary.

Gotthard translated these two articles for our benefit in this list. I, being
a subscriber of both, have the dubious privilege to read this drivel twice,
once in Hungarian and once in English. I already wrote a sarcastic little
letter to the Forum, saying that accepting the Armenian Jews in Hungary could
be, in fact, very beneficial, and we should welcome these people with open
arms since both the Armenians and the Jews have the reputations of being
excellent businessmen and Hungary badly needs new capitalists! I am sure that
a goodly number of those who will answer will not even get the irony! I also
wrote about Kun and Trianon about which Gotthard asked. The borders of
Trianon, notwithstanding with Mr. Nemenyi's counteropinion in today's digest
of Forum, have nothing whatsoever to do with Kun and the Hungarian Soviet
Republic. As I tried to explain on the Forum, the territorial committees
arrived at their findings well before March 21. These borders were not only
accepted in toto but also the negotiators of Czechoslovakia, Romania and
Yugoslavia were unofficially told about them still in March. The Hungarian
Soviet Republic lasted only 133 days; the Hungarian peace delegation didn't
appear in Paris until January 1920. In between there was plenty of time to
change those borders if the peacemakers thought that Hungary, now no longer
Soviet-dominated, deserves better borders. They didn't!

I must say that it is a terrible misfortune that Pellionisz and Nemenyi hold
such extremist views which they try to propagate on the Internet. These
postings give a bad name to Hungary and Hungarians although we all know that
only a very small portion of the Hungarian people hold such views. See the
election results of Mr. Csurka's party.

Eva Balogh

Andras Kornai touched on the Hungarian safety net and social
services``completely out of proportion to its national product.'' I am no
economist but it is not terribly difficult to figure out that the debt by
itself is not the problem. The problem is no economic growth and a huge
foreign debt--that is Hungary's current predicament. In fact, the government
has to borrow more and more money to maintain the safety net and the current
social services. I read in Janos Kornai's article (appeared in Nepszabadsag a
couple of months ago) that there has been no economic growth to speak of in
the last eighteen years while the government kept borrowing and borrowing. Thi
s is a terrible situation. If Hungary borrowed money in order to improve its
infrastructure, for example, it would not be at all a calamity. But borrowing
money to fulfill the government's obligation on what in the United States we
call "entitlements" is an insupportable proposition.

Andras further states his wish (with some skepticism) that Horn would "show
some strength to show some strength and break the goddamn unions, starting
with MA1V." According to today's "Hirmondo" the strike was called off after a
day because the president of MA1V "personally" garanteed the half of four
percent raise over and above the ten percent pay hike which the government
was willing to give. This is a mystery to me: how can the president of a
company personally guarantee anything? Could someone enlighten us on this
subject.

Eva Balogh

In anie even partlie civilized societie, material rewards flow to those who
understand the flowing of them, or hav the pouer to arrange the flow (this is
alwais a minoritie).  There is a limit to mere coercion, although this can go
quite far: Imperial China, imperial Russia, the Polish Commonwealth in its
late years; there are examples all across Europe.

Therefore, a modicum of justis is needed even in the harshest and most coerciv
societie, to make up the gap between force and the order that is to be achievd.
Unhappilie, all this is based on law and judgement, and even if no judge is
corrupt, the clevver alwais can abuze the law.  Lawyerdom collectivlie tends
to work for the alreadie elite, even when there are lawyers who reallie work
"pro bono".

In the USA, in the robber-baron dais, public opinion of them then and later
varied.  John D Rockefeller and J P Morgan alwais were hated.  I hav read that
manie workmen believd that Henry Ford rightfullie became rich, even though he
was a fairlie paternalistic employer.

Carnegie was a curious case: he came from the same Scotland that produced Adam
Smith, whose ideas were mingled with notions of Puritan Calvinizm into the
"deserving and undeserving poor".  It seems that late in life he concluded
that not all of his successes were the product of his virtus, and that luck
means sumthing, and that led him to found the Carnegie libraries (I guess he
had his Adam Smith purer). I know little of public opinion anent him, but, as
far as I know, he nevver was as greatlie vilifyd as Rockefeller or Morgan.

That is, I believ along with Ecclesiastes that "the race is not always to the
swift, or the victory to the strong", but luck has much to doo with it.

I further believ that civilization needs an underclass.  It is an outcum of
law and order--that is, there alwais will be those for whom law and order work
wo.  If we want to abolish povertie, we need to abolish law, and therefore
also civilization.  We need the societie of Marx s infamous maxim, "from each
accordind to his abilitie, to each accordind to his need"--of cours, if one
believs me, no civilized societie can achiev this, for no law can enforce this.

I understand that the medieval Church likewize thought, for one often runs
across Dame Fortune in the likes of "Piers Plowman":  If worldlie success is at
best weaklie correlated to one s vise and virtu, no:one can afford to make much
distinction between great and small, rich and poor, and societie is obliged to
sustain the poor.

On Fri, 16 Dec 1994 15:49:31 +0000 Eva Durant said:
>>
>They would have grown interested, if the managing director had
>a 75% rise, the shareholders were doing well, and they had a cut
>in their jobs/wages (see: British Gas).
>
--Oh, sure, that would have pissed them.  I notice that even John
Major has stirred himself over that one.  But I must say that I don't
think that the British really understand the market system.  And
don't expect me to defend the current government.  It creaks and
groans with age, and hasn't any magic left.

                                        Some old feudal landowners have
>> apparently raised historic claims.
>
>Their folks probably worked overtime for some king, do you blame them?

Well, Beloved Sister Eva, prior to 1848 or so, most of those feudal
landlords paid no taxes.  No, I don't have any sympathy for an idle
noble class and I am surprised that you are defending them.
>
>How come all these horrid conservatives are about then? Perhaps all
>those freshly produced revolutionaries don't own the media, so we
>don't know how vocal they maybe. I do hope you're right!

--Most of the press in this country is Liberal.  Nobody argues that
point much.  The owner may be conservative, but most of his or her
employees aren't, and the owner doesn't care as long as they sell
advertising space.

>What is needed are people who are able to think and make decisions
>for themselves and able to learn new skills. Knowledge available
>from all those databases... and gets updated every second.
>
--I quite agree.  I believe in teaching every child as much as they
can stand--and then pushing them even harder.  If more people knew
how to do things, we'd all be better off.

>> European socialism is more sophisticated, as I tried to explain to you.
>
>Better at speaking bs.  Your beloved Bambi had lessons from Clinton,
>I thought you should note that.

--Sorry.  I missed something.  I don't know who Bambi is.  Tony Blair?
Surely he doesn't listen to Clinton.
>
>> Even Tony Blair has come out against bad teachers, poor schools, and
>> lax discipline.
>
>Who hasn't? Hate to tell you: money would help. Any promise of that?

--Our Left hasn't.  I keep trying to tell you, Beloved Sister Eva, that
our Left is mired in the 1920s.
>
>> To a true socialist, education in skills and knowledge
>> is the great leveller.
>
>Same opportunities even better.

--Sure.  Agreed.  But one has to be prepared to seize the opportunities.
>
>
>                             Most ordinary Americans don't
>vote republican. Say 80% register. Say 70% of that goes to vote.
>40+% of that vote republican. Is that majority?

--Rarely do we get a vote of 70%.  The assumption is that those
who don't vote, don't care.  No government in this country ever
has a clear majority.  But, unlike Australia, we are not required
to vote, so the victory goes to whoever gets the most votes of
those that are cast.  How else could it be done?

 I don' t think
>the democrats are better, if you haven't noticed. That's why
>I think democracy stinks.

--I noticed.  And to borrow Churchill's phrase, "Democracy is
a terrible form of government.  But it beats the alternatives."

 You have to be a millionair if you want
>to have your voice heard, and not many of them progressive...

--Not true.  Malcolm X wasn't a millionaire.  Neither was
Martin Luther King.  Nor is Betty Friedan.  Nor Gloria Steinem.

>And the one who is is not very popular on this list...
>
--And who is that.  Tell!  Tell!

>> --Not quite correct.  The sensible educators are trying to cope with
>> drugs, but the influence of the streets is pretty strong.
>
>That somehow missed the point?
>
--I don't understand.  What was your point?

>> --Most of the people that I know who manage businesses put in long hours,
>> and work THEIR arses off.  You can't run a business and let it run itself.
>> It just doesn't work that way, despite the Marxist rhetoric.
>>
>You can if it is a big business. Small business is different.
>
--I doubt it, but then I don't know any more great industrialists than
you do.

>> --Most people here improve their skills and do not do crime and drugs.
>> We really do need to take up a collection to bring you here.
>>
>I did not indicate in my posting that I think that 50%+ of US citizens
>into that sort of thing. But a worrying percentage is. Same worries
>in less extent all over the place.

--Good.  Most of us agree that too many people have involved themselves
with crime and drugs.  Most of us are ordinary people just trying to
raise families and get on with our lives.  You really need to know
more Americans.  We're brash, but we're not evil.  And be warned,
if I get to Britain next summer, I'm going to try to find you.  My
wife and I would certainly want to take you our for a slap-up
capitalist dinner.  Manchester is not far from our home base in
Nottingham.

Charles

Subject: Re: Interesting article in Wall Street Journal
From: Joe Pannon, 
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 23:34:06 -0800
In article > Joe Pannon,
 writes:
>> Left wing, or liberals, actually refer to
>> those seeking change and a break with the past.  When Communists
first came
>> to power, they affected a break with the past, and were therefore
far Left,
>
>So were the Nazis.  So they were then Leftists, too, right?
>Aren't we interchanging here Left-Right pairs with
Radical-Conservativ
>ones?
>
>Joe

according to adolf hitler --- and i presume we can accept him as a
reasonable source
for nazi ideology and intentions --- the aim was to *return* to
"traditional values",
to counter what he blamed the left fortrying to do and to *undo*
what the left wing and centre-left coaltions had wreaked.

in english and continental usage, left and liberal are far from
synonymous. i believe
the notions come from the french national assembly of two centuries
ago and have to
do with seating arrangements, whereby the left was the radical side
and the right was the conservative side.

and yes, until at least after the wall came down, communists,
socialists, anarchists,
social democrats were called loosely "the left", with liberals "the
centre" and
conservatives and reactionaries, such as the tories in england, the
cdu/csu in germany
or the liberal party of australia "the right".

to someone with a vantage point from abroad, clinton and/or the
democratic party
in the usa is anything but "left wing', anything but "socialist". if
anything, it looks
to be a centre-right party.

that is not to agree or disagree with it, nor is it meant to claim
that from an internal
point of view (in the usa) the democratic party  seems to be
right-wing, albeit more mildly so than the republican party. it is
merely to oint out that on an international
scale, the democrats seem to be more right-leaning than left-leaning.


d.a.

:Az apostoli hitvalla's
:======================
:Hiszek egy Istenben, mindenhato' Atya'ban,
:mennynek e's fo~ldnek Teremto"je'ben;
:e's a Je'zus Krisztusban,,
:o" egy Fia'ban, mi Urunkban;

etc. etc. Am I the only one for who these prayers sound totally ludicrous?

Now that we have both Evas' contributions, everyone can pick the Christmas
most sympathetic to him/her.  Here are a few comments.

First, Eva Durrants atheistic/communist version: Telapo is not Father
Christmas, but Father Winter, a Russian import, a communist version of the
time-honored figure of Mikulas (pronounced ME-KOO-LOSH).  The original figure
is ST Nicholas, a bishop in  Asia Minor (Nicosia?) in the early centuries of
the Eastern church.  He was supposed to be a patron of the poor who would
bring bags of gifts to those in need.  What Eva thought to be a walking stick
is of course a bishop's staff.  And what she thought to be a girl (Jezuska)
is, as everyone except the children of the most hard-core communists in
Hungary knows, is none other than the infant Jesus, who, whith the assistance
of the angels, is supposed to bring the gifts to the children.  As Eva says,
the meals on Christmas Eve were typically fish or some other non-meat dish,
as on Fridays.  Meat, typically goose, was for Christmas day.

My own recollections parallel more those of Eva Balogh. We celebrated
Christmas as the birth of Christ.

 As far as the "krampusz" , or little devil dressed in black, his role was to
threaten the little ones if their behavior got out of line during the visit
by Mikulas on December 6th, St. Nicholas' day.

Christmas Eve usually ended by the grownups and older children going to
midnight mass.  The next day was spent visiting or entertaining relatives and
friends.

The Chritmas tree was usually taken down on January 6 (Vizkereszt = Epiphany
= 3 Kings' day = 12th day of Christmas?), the official end of the Christmas
season.

Ferenc Novak

How can Hungary grow out of her debt with the kind of tax load
businesses are under?  Growth needs economic stimulus which is lowering
of taxes.  But that, as I understand it, would be against the promises
made to IMF for obtaining further credit.

Lowering of taxes may temporarily make the deficit worse than it is now
and debt servicing more difficult.  So this could hardly be done without
at the same time cutting entitlements.  However, the mood of the country
is such, that the government is afraid to do it.  They are dammed if
they do, dammed if they don't.  I don't see any way out of this than a
combination of measures an debt relive must be part of it.  The longer
they postpone this the fewer the options available.

Joe

Eva Balogh's short treatise on Trianon should be required reading for anyone
interested in 20th century Hungarian history.  Trianon, even after nearly 75
years, is weighing heavily on the Hungarian national psyche, and is the basic
reason for the bad blood between Hungary and some of her neighbors.

To understand the magnitude of the tragedy that Trianon represents we have to
remember that Hungary, whose borders had been practically unchanged (except
for temporary occupation) for a thousand years, in 1920 lost two thirds of
its territory and some 70 percent of its population under the terms of a
peace settlement imposed on her.  To make matters worse, Romania, the biggest
beneficiary of the settlement, received more territory than what remained in
rump Hungary.  Moreover, that territory included all of Transylvania, which
had a history of its own as the final refuge of independent Hungarian
statehood during the Turkish and Austrian occupations of much of the country
during the 16th and 17th century.

It is true that much of the population in the lost territories was not
Hungarian, but the peacemakers did not draw the boundaries along ethnic lines
even when that would have been possible.  Rather, the new borders were drawn
to give the successor states major highways and railroads just on their side
of the border, and, in the case of what is now Slovakia, the Danube became
the border, even though it sliced right through a solid ethnic Hungarian
region.  As a result, every third Hungarian national found himself a citizen
of a foreign country without moving away from his birthplace.

It is hardly surprising that the nation never accepted the forced treaty of
Trianon and that a revision of the borders became a national obsession.
 There were some feeble signs of willingness on the part of the Entente
countries to consider a border correction during the first few years after
the war, but nothing came of them.

When Czechoslovakia began to feel threatened by Germany over the issue of the
Sudeten Germans, talks began with Hungary over handing back some purely
ethnic Hungarian territories to Hungary.  Britain, Italy and Germany offered
to mediate and if asked, to arbitrate between the parties.  After the talks
collapsed, Italy and Germany (Britain stayed away) were asked to arbitrate
the dispute.  The result was the first Vienna Award, redrawing the border,
more or less along ethnic lines, to Hungary's benefit.

In 1940, after Hungarian-Romanian talks also broke down, the same two
parties, again acting as arbitrators, redrew the borders between the two
countries.  Because most ethnic Hungarians were not in the immediate vicinity
of the Trianon borders, the new boundaries resulted in about equal numbers of
minorities on both sides.

Unfortunately for Hungary, she received justice from the wrong parties.  Even
though the two Vienna awards resulted in a more or less equitable
distribution of land, the post WW2 settlements restored the Trianon borders,
mostly at Soviet insistance.  The US, which never ratified the Trianon
treaty, was willing to leave at least some of the recovered territories with
Hungary, but eventually gave in.

Someone asked: did Bela Kun and his Bolshevik regime affect the outcome of
the WW1 peace settlement?  The answer is yes, because the Entente was afraid
of his forces linking up with the Russians and drew the eastern lines of
demarkation (which became  -- more or less -- the eventual Hungarian -
Romanian border) farther to the West than originally planned.


F. Novak

P.S.   As I am not a professional historian, I welcome any corrections to
factual data.

I don't dispute Eva Balogh that dismemberment of Hungary was already agreed
upon by the victorious Entente powers before Bela Kun came to the scene,
however there is the following factor to consider:

There is a good chance that if Hungary had maintained her armed forces
after WW I, it could have weighed considerably more at the negotiation
tables than count Apponyi's appeals.  Case in point is the fate of the
Western-Hungarian city, Sopron, which was also to be given to Austria
with several villages around it.  It was only after an armed
insurrection lead by one of the "infamous" white terrorists, Pal Pronay,
that the victorious powers agreed to hold an internationally supervised
referendum in the area and thanks to its results, Sopron and those
villages were returned to Hungary in 1921.  If this worked in Sopron, it
could have worked elsewhere, too.

And this is where Karolyi and Bela Kun comes in.  They deliberately
destroyed whatever remained of Hungarian armed forces after WW I leaving
the country so defenseless that even the otherwise not highly rated
Romanian Army could walk into Budapest.

Joe Pannon

- Hungarian - Ukrainian talks about questions of border crossing
were held in Budapest. The experts discussed ways of updating the
Hungarian - Soviet agreement on visa-free travel concluded in 1978.
  Taking into consideration the recent changes an understanding was
reached on the interpretation and application of the document. These
talks constituted the first steps towards a new and modern agreement
on this matter between Hungary and the Ukraine.

- The next round of Hungarian - Slovakaian talks on the Basic Treaty
takes place in Bratislava (Pozsony) today.=20
  The experts discuss the two drafts presented earlier. The Hungarian
delegation is headed by Mr. Gyorgy Szenasi, Head of the Department of
International Law of the Hungarian Foreign Ministry.

Dr ORCZAN Csaba


   Tozsdei collumna:                 
   Parlamenti tudositasok magyarul:  
              in english :           
           =20
 ***      Subscript MET-PARL adress:      ***

*********************************************************************
Free service, but all contributions are welcome. /Dijmentes kiadvany,
de koszonettel fogadjuk a tamogatast=20
Publisher/Kiado:IB000EA5 AT HUEARN
                     ORCZAN, Zsolt L.     e-mail.:
Editor in-Chief /Foszerkeszt=93:
                   ORCZAN, Csaba Sandor   e-mail.:=20
Correspond/Levelezesi rovat:              e-mail.: =20
MET_________Hungarian Electronic Stock &Commodity Exchange________MET
             MET   BUDAPEST PoBox. 311.   HUNGARY,H-1536
=1A

In article "Re: Help! Information needed about Christmas in Hungary"
Eva Durant > wrote:

> By the opinion of the loud (vocal?) majority on this list, if you
> admit that you had any good time in Hungary before the collapse
> of the so called socialist regime, or that it had a few achievements,
> you are automatically an agent of that past regime...
> 

It means, there are in Hungary at least approx. 8-9 million agents of
that past regime.

Imre Vago, Debrecen