E. Durant wrote:

>> Almost perfect, if you add to this that collectivisation is not really
>> possible by democratic way than you can have an idea why ML fails. If
>> you have different opinion (and I bet you do :-)), tell me how to nationaliz
e
>> my fictive factories if I do not want to sell them. No, don't tell me
>> that I will understand and see the greater good, because I am a bad
 'burzsuj'>
>
>You'd get compensation if you prove your need for it, if this
>was the policy accepted democratically.

What is this 'if you prove your need for it' means? Why does anyone
have to prove his/her 'need' for his/her property. I know that in M-L
theory the big fortunes come from 'kizsakmanyolas', but if you want
to make a 'democratical' transition, you have to accept the laws of
the previous system (i.e capitalism). Unfortunatelly (for whome :-))
those laws make these fortunes absolutly legal, so if someone does not
want to sell his/her properties in a democratical (capitalist) system
it is not possible (at least legally) nationalize those properties.


>People who own factories represent a very small minority indeed.
>Much smaller, than say the unemployed or those not earning
>enough at the moment to live decently.

It is true, but again, you cannot make an election about someone's
property, nobody else has anything to do with it. If you don't accept
this your transition is not democratic anymore (in the sense of capitalist
system). I guess this story about the transition is a 'leragott csont',
I don't know any bigshot of M-L who could see any other possibility than
revolution (i.e undemocratical transition).

>If the factory owners come together to solve the problems of this
>other troublesome minority (majority in a lot of places),
>than fair enough, I don't think anyone will vote for
>taking over their factories.

You know, I know, they know that this won't happen.

Janos

There was someone on this list who did that.  Then please contact the
person below.

Martha

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 01:26:13 -0500
From: Holly Henke >
To: Multiple recipients of list TESLJB-L >
Subject: Re: SOROS English Language Teaching

I would like to talk to anyone who has participated in the SOROS English
Language Teaching program.  Please email me.

Holly Henke

In article >, Jon Sorenson
> says:
>
>Members of the List,
>
>  I would appreciate any help on contacting a student at the University in
>Debredcen,  Thanks in advance for any information anyone might have, Jon
>Sorenson

Try the Hungarian Home Page on the WWW. It has addresses (and links?)

Regards,

George

 ********************************************************************
/ *** George Szaszvari ** Cybernautic address:  *** /
/ Independent Commodore Products Users' Group *** C=64 stuff wanted /
/          Interested in s/h chess books? Ask for my list!          /
********************************************************************

At 07:53 03/04/96 -0500, Joe wrote, rather neatly, I thought:

>At 07:19 AM 4/3/96 -0400, Johanne L. Tournier, who unsuccessfully tries to
>sweeten her right-wing views by saying that it is libertarian, wrote:

Somebody once said that ambivalence is an inherent part of being human. Just
as I am wary of dogmas which pretend to offer a universal panacea, I am wary
of people who proffer such panaceas, feeling that they are usually doing so
for their own purposes, and would be far more respected by me if they simply
admitted so.

Let me give yesterday morning's example. Regrettably, Secretary of Commerce
Ron Brown and a number of American businessmen were killed in a plane crash
on their way to Bosnia to arrange business deals with the Bosnians. Pres.
Clinton said it was noble that these guys were not going to Bosnia out of a
desire for profit but because they wanted to build the peace in Bosnia. What
do you think? I think they probably were motivated by the idea of a new
market and increased profits to be gained by entering it. To me it seems
hypocritical to deny the *selfish* aspect which is present.

You may be absolutely bang on when you contrast the *right wing* and the
*libertarian* elements, but of course to some extent your view of *right
wingers* is probably conditioned by the *left-liberal* characterizations of
the Canadian media. However, I recognize in myself the contradictory
tendencies of a desire for as much personal freedom and opportunity as
possible (the libertarian) and the desire for a niche in a world which is
comfortable and certain and does not change too much, too fast. For this
reason, I sometimes refer to myself as a *small-c reactionary.*

>>That is your interpretation. Capitalism is not the be-all-and-the-end-all.
>>It is a tool for the efficient production and distribution of goods, giving
>>the producers and consumers of goods the maximum possible opportunity for
>>selling and buying - the law of supply and demand. The moral framework is
>>provided by religious and cultural beliefs. If they are lost, the capitalist
>>system itself seems empty and without meaning - in your phrase,
>>"you...contribute to the bottom line and then you die." But that may be your
>>own opinion and not necessarily shared by others who still retain the
>>moral/religious framework which makes life more meaningful.
>
>Johanne.
>
>Don't prayers usually end with an "Amen"?
>
>My views on the economy, the meaning of life, and other stuff, are not
>unique.  Henry David Thoreau (1817-62) once wrote, "But lo! men have become
>the tools of their tools".  Was Thoreau a commie?

Unfortunately, my education is severely lacking in some respects, so I
cannot comment on Thoreau from personal observation. Perhaps from what I
know of Thoreau, I might suggest that he was a visionary/idealist - if I
remember, wasn't Thoreau the inspiration for much of the *Back to the land*
movement in the late 60's? Well, that movement exerted a lot of influence on
me, in the sense that I chose to settle in a rural area where I could plant
fruit trees, keep bees, and raise vegetables, all grown organically. Was he
a commie? Didn't Thoreau live in isolation at Walden Pond? The whole thing
about *communism* is living *communally* - so how could a hermit,
so-to-speak, be a communist? I think the Shaker community would be closer to
true communism, and look at how successful they were!
>
>Where do libertarian right-wingers turn to for guidance and inspiration?
>Who are your mentors (or should I say, tormentors?).
>
>Joe Szalai

I have very few mentors now, because there are very few people that I really
believe in idealistically, but when I was a teenager, politically, I was
completely, idealistically enthused about Barry Goldwater. I attended a
draft Goldwater rally in Washington, D.C. in July 1963 - note, that was
before the Kennedy assassination. At that point, Kennedy was an unsuccessful
president who had not succeeded in passing much of his domestic agenda, and
we felt that Goldwater had a real shot at the presidency. He was such a
breath of fresh air - but of course after the assassination, Johnson
benefitted from the resultant wave of political sympathy and successfully
painted Goldwater as an extremist, which he wasn't. Goldwater's father, I
believe, was Jewish, although Goldwater wasn't raised as a Jew. Looking
back, I feel Goldwater was probably not the right type of personality to be
a good president - he *did* tend to shoot from the hip, in the sense that he
would speak out without considering the consequences of his statements. But,
as a political personality, of course it could be said that he and William
F. Buckley, Jr., whom I also had the pleasure of meeting back then,
virtually founded the conservative movement in the U.S.

By the way, the usual line is that it is the rich who are conservative, and
it is considered that it is in their own self interest for them to be so.
However, it is important to note that the bedrock polictical workers in the
Republican Party that my mother and I consorted with when I was a teen, were
generally of modest circumstances. There were a few genuine conservatives
who were well off, but most of them were very idealistic, because they were
in the minority. The rich Republicans tended to be the
middle-of-the-roaders, they were not the idealistic conservatives, they were
the ones who were in politics for more mundane, practical and possibly
materialistic reasons. (By the way, I saw your comment on financial
resources, after I started to draft this. I have been in practice as a
solicitor for ten years and have three degrees (one of which is an MLS, by
the way), and I am netting about the same as you are. Remember, I live in
the middle of nowhere. There are compensations for living in God's country,
but big salary is not one of them).

In addition to Goldwater and Buckley, both of whom were inspirational to me,
the third most important person in my (political) development would have to
be Ayn Rand. It is interesting to me to note how radically opposed she was
to the collectivist mentality - of course the individual reigns supreme in
her world view, and selfishness is the supreme virtue. While I don't endorse
all of her views by any means, I will say that I admire her genius - she was
a Russian Jew who fled Russia during the Revolution and absolutely mastered
the English language. She was an absolutely beautiful writer, and I feel it
is phenomenal that a Russian immigrant could be so eloquent in an adopted
language. Her books were important to me largely for conveying the
importance and the dignity of the individual. However, I do disagree with
some of her fundamental precepts, such as the notion that people *never* act
altruistically, which I disbelieve. However, Ayn Rand helped me to survive
as a teenager, and I do find some of her ideas most stimulating and
exciting, even when I disagree with her. I truly believe she was a genius.

What I took from these people was the importance of the individual, and the
fact that the individual *can* make a difference in society. I do not see
this as necessarily involving exploitation, which seems to be a central part
of your view of capitalism. I would be interested to hear any examples you
could dredge up of how these individuals may have been exploiters. Believe
me, my father and grandfather were strictly on the receiving not the giving
end of any exploitation in our system, and I would not personally
participate in any exploitive system if I could help it. To me, the sense of
the value and worth of the individual (that includes you, too, Mr. Szalai!)
is essential to my mental well-being.

By the way, it is interesting to note that Rand and M-L were similar in some
respects. They were both atheists who elevated material systems to the point
of being secular religions. And both Rand and Marx were Jewish,
interestingly enough. (I only mention their Jewishness, because I have it on
my mind, given that anti-Jewish thread which is being cross-posted onto
soc-culture-magyar).

I would never claim to be a Christian. I think some of the phoniest people I
have ever known were some of those who professed to be Chistians. But I do
believe in a Higher Power, which I believe to be God, and as I get older, I
am more and more convinced that there was a genuine moral advancement
represented by Jesus's message, although whether he was the literal *Son of
God* or not I do not know. I think, contrary to Ayn Rand's and Marx's
philosophy, that mankind is not the ultimate. I believe it is good for
people to have a little humility, and bend the knee to forces more powerful
than they. This could be translated as "living in harmony with nature" - and
I do think some natural laws can be translated into the human sphere -
despite the fact that Social Darwinism is a discredited philosophy. Whether
or not it is discredited, I think there may be a kernel of truth in it. In
other words, large multinational corporations and large multi-national
states may seem to be successful, but may actually be going the way of the
dinosaur. Adapt or die! If they are too large, they cannot adapt
sufficiently to changing conditions, they will go the way of all flesh. A
society composed more of small, independent businessmen/women is a healthier
society - more satisfying for the entrepreneurs who own their own
businesses, and more resilient, flexible and adaptable to changing
conditions because individuals can respond in multivarious ways to changing
conditions. Some businesses fail, just as in nature, some species die out,
but overall there aren't the huge convulsions as represented by ATT laying
off 40,000 workers.

I have considered mentors, not tormentors. They are different, aren't they?

Tistelettel,

Johanne

Johanne L. Tournier
e-mail - 
>

Joe Szalai wrote:
>

> Do you wear a uniform?
>
> >Most of us are just average folks.
>
> Are you trying to scare me now?
>
> Joe Szalai

Joe,

        Why do you think that I would be trying to scare you or anyone for that
matter? My purpose in writing that post was to allow fellow list members
to understand a little about me and from there understand something of
my views.  Since the topic has been predominantly economic systems I
felt that I should include such information that would have an effect on
my personal biases.   As far as condemning my candor, didn't you tell us
about your income just a few posts ago?

Regarding the uniform, I wear one sometimes but not everyday.

Perhaps we could start a thread on flyfishing in Hungary.


Regards,

Doug

Joe Szalai wrote:

>  I don't know if his figures are true or not,
> but I didn't expect anyone to reveal their income as I have.

The figures are correct, although not down to the penny.  If you would
like you can check through the my employer.  The rate of pay for
deputies is a matter of public record.

Regards,


Doug

Joe Szalai wrote:

>  I don't know if his figures are true or not,
> but I didn't expect anyone to reveal their income as I have.

The figures are correct, although not down to the penny.  If you would
like you can check through the my employer.  The rate of pay for
deputies is a matter of public record.

Regards,


Doug

In article >Joe Szalai, ever
willing to embarrass himself in a public forum
> writes:

>>P.S. -- Are you gonna answer the counselor's question or are you gonna
>>just throw out your normal round of bluster, hoping it will cover your
>>tracks?
>
>Bluster.  It's free.
>
>Joe Szalai
>
>
And that's precisely why you never get anywhere with these arguments you
start. Don't quit your day job.
Sam Stowe

At 08:48 AM 4/5/96 -0800, Doug Hormann wrote:

>Since the topic has been predominantly economic systems I
>felt that I should include such information that would have an effect on
>my personal biases.   As far as condemning my candor, didn't you tell us
>about your income just a few posts ago?

Doug,

I was not condemning your candor.  Quite the contrary.  I appreciate your
openness and honesty.  They're two caracteristics that I would never
criticize.  I may not agree with some of your economic or political views
but your willingness to be honest should be applauded by all.

>Perhaps we could start a thread on flyfishing in Hungary.

Perhaps.  However, I've developed a couple of successful techniques which I
consider a trade secret.  But just out of curiosity, do you do your fishing
close to large urban areas or out in the wilds?  Personally, I've gotten
lucky in both.

Joe Szalai

At 09:04 AM 4/5/96 -0500, Sam Stowe, who has finally come to his senses and
now wants to extricate himself from a debate he's lost, wrote:

>And that's precisely why you never get anywhere with these arguments you
>start. Don't quit your day job.

I won't.  But really, Sam, I thought this debate was going to end with a
bang, not a whimper.  Better luck next time you try to pin me down.

Joe Szalai

S. Bihari wrote:
>Mike,
>
>> "Nessze vila'g vetette, feku"dj bele s aludja'l"
>
>I have never ever heard this one.  What on earth is "nessze?"
                                                     ^^^^^^^^^^

        To Martha or S. Bihari:

        Nessze literally translated means, "Here!" or, "take this".
As far as I know it is not colloquial but may be regional.

Mike.  :)
http://users.aol.ocm/MikeC16958/home.html
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

In article >, Aniko Dunford
> says:
>
>Dear George:
>
>Yes -  and  - are you telling us something, that we all don't already know?
>And - where is the relevance of the Beatles' past to this discussion?
>(Geez, already, what's with you two from the UK?  Confusing of eras - two in
>one night? - is it the air?  Give this poor tired brain a break - will ya)?
>
>I do believe, that Joe's posting of "egy nota" was in response to a question
>posed by Johanne Tournier; which required a simple yes or no answer; so
>cleverly brought to light by DH. Of course Joe, being Joe, he had to be
>original with his response.  My response to Joe; was simply in context with
>above -  which you have now taken way out of context ... by this very
>posting.  So, please put the bishop back where he was - you're in check.
>
>BTW - for the record - I have been to Liverpool; and have always considered
>his and the rest of the group's success to be most incredibly admirable -
>(not that it means anything in the scope of life - or has any relevance to
>the topic) and;

I'm sorry you didn't understand the context. I'll elucidate:
John Lennon's *Imagine* was posted (to make whatever point the poster
intended.) A reply stated that well-off Lennon was not a good example.
I interjected (more as an aside than any direct involvement in the main
thread) that Lennon was not always well-off and that the criticism
against quoting Lennon wasn't really valid (on the basis of Lennon being
well-off, since he...duh...hadn't always been well-off. I also tried to
point out that Lennon shouldn't criticized for having that money and *not
giving it away. He did actually give quite a lot away.) Hope that clears
it up for you.

I'm hope the slight digression didn't upset you too much, but I didn't
start or even initially reply to the Lennon thing: I simply joined in to
point out something: I suggest you take up *the relevance of Lennon* to
the thread with them. Anyway, if you know all about Lennon (some people
don't, evidently) then the context of my posting in relation to the
previous two should have been clear, yes? You do realize, of course, that
threads do tend to develop and lead onto all kinds of other interesting
issues; perhaps the header should have been changed to suit you?

BTW, if you've been to Liverpool, and had a good look around, you'll know
that there are some pretty desperate slums there (London has a good share,
too, but Liverpool has some of the worst I've ever seen. Despite that,
it is, on the whole, a great town and I generally like the people...much
friendlier than London.)

Regards,

George

 ********************************************************************
/ *** George Szaszvari ** Cybernautic address:  *** /
/ Independent Commodore Products Users' Group *** C=64 stuff wanted /
/          Interested in s/h chess books? Ask for my list!          /
********************************************************************

In article >, Aniko Dunford
> says:
>
>Actually and for the record; below is Aniko's statement, in response to a
>E.Durant  (who's para's been cut)
>>>> I wonder if the author also examined the working conditions in many many
[snip]
>George responding:
>>Sounds pretty much like working conditions in many a western country.
>>Showers? What a luxury! As a child in 50s Britain I used to use a wash
[etc, etc]..

>Aniko... to George... George! - Please.... get your mind off that chess
>game, already!! You are clearly not here with this tonight!!!  (Unusual mind
>you...setting me up for checkmate perhaps?)  - Please, read this from the
>beginning... so that you can relate the cuts to the person and the comment
>too.  The above para is in answer to hers - where, she was relating Brittish
>vs Hungarian standards...way back when.  And, you are arguing exactly my
>point - against my point!!! - am I missing something here??? - Like I said
>on a previous posting... give this poor old tired brain a break, will ya?
>You're really confusing the issue here!!!

I'll admit that this posting could easily be misunderstood. It was made in
a *general* context to the main theme that originated this thread, (*The
Kadar Regime* was started by Ms Balogh, if I remember correctly, to avoid
confusion with an earlier thread from which it was developing.)

Ms Durant's position is that things in pre-1990 Hungary were not as black
as many would have us believe, no? The Rest beg to differ. I am only
prepared to argue as devil's advocate on this issue, so am not really
arguing for or against, except to ask people not to overstate their case
and paint western capitalist democracies too snow white (see previous
postings.)

The above posting you refer to was just adding my voice and quoting
examples from my experience for anyone, arguing from any point of view,
to take into account. On the points about showers, toilets, living
standards, etc, I just wanted to add (caustically, true) that there
wasn't a vast amount of difference for many people (how many?) in the
West (myself included.) I reiterate, it was just additional info for all
and if I'm going to argue it's usually for broader principles (without
wishing to sound pompous) and to get a discussion out of a rut and to
develop into the kind of thing I prefer (selfish, ain't I?) I know
there's a lot of superficial *I'm right, your wrong* knee-jerk arguing
going on, but please understand that not all comments are necessarily
in this vein. Hope this clears things up a bit :-)

Regards,

George

 ********************************************************************
/ *** George Szaszvari ** Cybernautic address:  *** /
/ Independent Commodore Products Users' Group *** C=64 stuff wanted /
/          Interested in s/h chess books? Ask for my list!          /
********************************************************************

>>I have never ever heard this one.  What on earth is "nessze?"
>                                                     ^^^^^^^^^^
>
>        To Martha or S. Bihari:
>
>        Nessze literally translated means, "Here!" or, "take this".
>As far as I know it is not colloquial but may be regional.

        Oh, well. Occasionally spelling can play tricks with you. I assume
you meant the word "nesze," like in the saying, "nesze semmi, fogd meg jol,"
meaning, "Here is nothing, grab it (hang on to it)."

        Eva Balogh

Johanne writes about Goldwater, Buckley, and Rand:

>What I took from these people was the importance of the individual, and the
>fact that the individual *can* make a difference in society.

        As we all know Marxism puts very little emphasis on the importance
of the individual in society. That is, Marx's notion of history was built on
his belief that only economic changes affected the superstructure. Thus, if
Hitler hadn't been born, there would have been perhaps another Hitler, or
even without such man the history of 20th-century Germany would have been
the same. Most of the "Marxist," "pseudo-Marxist" Hungarian historical
writings followed this way of thinking and therefore history textbooks paid
a lot of emphasis on economic developments, little on political history, and
almost nothing on biographies. Now, they are serious attempts to break out
of the straitjacket of Marxist historiography.

        While I was in Hungary I discovered a four-volume history of Hungary
designed mostly for teachers of Hungarian history. The series's title:
Magyarok Europaban, and accordingly, the authors (each volume has a
different author) instead of following the former Hungarocentric way of
describing Hungarian history, they make a conscious effort to place events
in the political, cultural, and economic history of Europe as whole. This is
very important because, as I found out about a year ago on this list, most
Hungarians seem to be completely unaware of Hungary's historical
backwardness because they never learned Hungarian history in comparison to
the history of the rest of Europe.

        Another change is the emphasis on the individual. Right now I am in
the middle of the second volume and just finished with the reign of King
Matthias (Ma'tya's) and began the reign of Ula'szlo' II
(Wladyslaw/Vaclav)(1490-1516). The author of the volume, Ferenc Szaka'ly,
emphasizes time and time again that Ma'tya's didn't change the existing
political institutions of the country but through the sheer power of his
personality he managed to give an entirely different meaning to the office
of the king. Ulaszlo didn't change the institutional edifice either but
because he was a weak man, the upper nobility in no time managed to get the
upper hand and Ulaszlo, while on paper reigning under exactly the same
circumstances as Ma'tya's, became nothing more than a puppet in the hands of
the upper nobility.

        This may all be very far from the topic being discussed, but I
thought it was interesting that even in small ways, like the role of the
individual in history, Marxist way of thinking is becoming completely
abandoned. Otherwise, I highly recommend these four, inexpensive volumes
(about 700 Ft per volume--less then $5.00) for anyone who would like to have
a good reference book on Hungarian history.

        Eva Balogh

Dear Doug,

>        Why do you think that I would be trying to scare you or anyone for tha
t
>matter? My purpose in writing that post was to allow fellow list members
>to understand a little about me and from there understand something of
>my views.

        I enjoyed your post very, very much. Thank you.

        Eva Balogh

In article >, Doug Hormann >
inadvertantly provides me with the best laugh I've had in weeks and rises
considerably in my estimation by suggesting that:

>Perhaps we could start a thread on flyfishing in Hungary.
>
>

Dear God, let's not! Joe, I think you need to have a little heart-to-heart
with Doug about just what kind of fish you've been reeling in.
Sam Stowe

Hello.  I will probably be in Hungary for at least a few months next year as an
exchange English teacher.  So, I was wondering, what's the exchange rate
these days?  According to the preliminary agreement with the placement agency,
I will be paid "at least" 20,000 forints per month, in addition to housing and
a few perks.  I'm quite sure that that's close to no pay (I'm
looking at this as basically a volunteer assignment), but how close is it?
        Also, owing to an irrational phobia of things financial, I don't really
understand how the currencies of Hungary and the Western countries
differ -- I know that the forint isn't really "convertable," but I don't
really understand what that means.
        Finally, if you happen to be a Hungarian-speaker in the Amherst-
Northampton, MA area, and would consider tutoring me, please drop me a line.
        Any help will be appreciated by a dumb American who wants to learn.

--Brian Glover

Dear Brian, you asked:

>So, I was wondering, what's the exchange rate
>these days?

        It is around 148 forints to the dollar.

According to the preliminary agreement with the placement agency,
>I will be paid "at least" 20,000 forints per month, in addition to housing and
>a few perks.  I'm quite sure that that's close to no pay (I'm
>looking at this as basically a volunteer assignment), but how close is it?

        The average gross salary is around 45,000 forints.

>        Also, owing to an irrational phobia of things financial, I don't reall
y
>understand how the currencies of Hungary and the Western countries
>differ -- I know that the forint isn't really "convertable," but I don't
>really understand what that means.

        It is, for all practical purposes, convertible. I just transfered a
fairly large junk of money to my American bank account without any trouble
whatsoever. The change to de facto convertibility occured at the beginning
of the year.

>        Finally, if you happen to be a Hungarian-speaker in the Amherst-
>Northampton, MA area, and would consider tutoring me, please drop me a line.
>        Any help will be appreciated by a dumb American who wants to learn.
>
        With a few months of Hungarian will be useful. I knew a fellow who
had to know some Hungarian before he could enroll at the Debrecen University
Summer School: one semester of two hours a week was quite enough. I am
afraid, I am really too far to help you--good two and a half hours.

        Good luck, and keep in touch with us,

        Eva Balogh

>         Nessze literally translated means, "Here!" or, "take this".
> As far as I know it is not colloquial but may be regional.
>

Sorry, Mike.  That is spelled with ONE "sz" - therein lies my confusion.
Sure, I know the word, no matter how my elders tried to discourage me
from its usage, as it is considered fairly crude/impolite.

Now I know the intended meaning, but maintain that I have never ever heard
the proverb before.  Is it only from your region, perhaps?  I am from
Budapest.

Would you mind offering an English translation of the complete proverb?

Thanks,
Martha


On Fri, 5 Apr 1996, Michael Csiki wrote:

> S. Bihari wrote:
> >Mike,
> >
> >> "Nessze vila'g vetette, feku"dj bele s aludja'l"
> >
> >I have never ever heard this one.  What on earth is "nessze?"
>                                                      ^^^^^^^^^^