E.Durrant wrote:

>the only problem being that he had nothing common with
>socialism as a democratic and non-capitalist entity.
>He in fact did not have a consistent political theory;
>he was a demagogue, produced and made powerful by
>a decaying capitalist system, when the labour movement failed, as a
>consequense of the  non-democratic and demagogue
>though non-capitalist ergo in a deformed way, socialist USSR.
>When capitalism is too week, and the socialist movement gets
>defeated, a totalitarian bonapartist regime fills the powervacuum.

What a piece of propaganda!! It reminds me to my 'uttoro' time!
Mozgalmi munkabol jeles!

PS: Pusztuljon a reakcio egyszalig, eljen Rakosi Matyas sokaig!

.
> Wake up and look at the world for a change.
>                                              Amos
>

Well said. Look for the causes of all poverty and injustice,
not just the temporary "Ain't I a goody-goody" feeling.

You are keep going on about "human nature" and how people are selfish
and the "poor will be always with us". Charity is a firm ally of the
status quo. If you were really so selfless, dare to look into the
causes - fight the unfair system itself - perhaps not as comfortable,
it is not giving you the warm feeling, that you are better -
and better off - than so many others.

Yes, I am selfish - I have never said I was not - I want a world
where people live in dignity without the chance of falling through
remnents of safety-nets. It feels me with shame when people are
forced to beg.  You can live with that comfortably - I cannot.
I bet, a bigger percentage of my fairly meagre income goes to
what I think is the right way to go about to eradicate poverty,
than what yours.  And I don't get the social niceties with it like
being on the board of this and that, having big parties
where I can flaunt my goodness and my wealth...
Yuk

>
> At 09:30 AM 6/21/97 +0100, Eva Durant wrote:
> >>
> >> At 11:01 PM 6/20/97 GMT, Eva Durant wrote:
> >>
> >> >Well, I can only speak about Hungary, and the free dental care I
> >> >received in Tab (Somogy) was superior to Rochdale (Lancashire).
> >>
> >>         Well, we all know about the English national health system. ESB
> >>
> >>
> >
> >you mean, that untill it wasn't recked by the free-marketeers
> >it was the best and most comprehensive health service in
> >the world? Yes, I expected you to know that.
>
>         But it isn't anymore, is it? ESB
>
>
>

please read a bit more carefully; it says above:""recked by the
free-marketeers"  i.e Margaret Thatcher type monetarism, if you
fail again to get my drift.

There is nothing wrong with my political sophistication. Don't tell
> me that you haven't noticed that the right and the left have a lot in
> common. Or, perhaps you don't want to notice it. You shouldn't forget that
> Hitler's party was "national socialist." The socialism is not that far from
> the thinking of the right. ESB
>
>
>

the only problem being that he had nothing common with
socialism as a democratic and non-capitalist entity.
He in fact did not have a consistent political theory;
he was a demagogue, produced and made powerful by
a decaying capitalist system, when the labour movement failed, as a
consequense of the  non-democratic and demagogue
though non-capitalist ergo in a deformed way, socialist USSR.
When capitalism is too week, and the socialist movement gets
defeated, a totalitarian bonapartist regime fills the powervacuum.

At 10:13 PM 6/20/97 -0400, Joe Szalai wrote:

JSz:

>>>By the way, Ferenc, you're starting to sound like a socialist when you
>>>empathize with the "needs and concerns of the people".  Good work.  Keep it
>>>up.

ESB:

>>        Why are you so surprised? The two sides are rather close. ESB
>
JSz:

>I'm surprised by your lack of political sophistication.

        There is nothing wrong with my political sophistication. Don't tell
me that you haven't noticed that the right and the left have a lot in
common. Or, perhaps you don't want to notice it. You shouldn't forget that
Hitler's party was "national socialist." The socialism is not that far from
the thinking of the right. ESB

At 09:30 AM 6/21/97 +0100, Eva Durant wrote:
>>
>> At 11:01 PM 6/20/97 GMT, Eva Durant wrote:
>>
>> >Well, I can only speak about Hungary, and the free dental care I
>> >received in Tab (Somogy) was superior to Rochdale (Lancashire).
>>
>>         Well, we all know about the English national health system. ESB
>>
>>
>
>you mean, that untill it wasn't recked by the free-marketeers
>it was the best and most comprehensive health service in
>the world? Yes, I expected you to know that.

        But it isn't anymore, is it? ESB

Hi Joe, you said:>
>I almost never give money to charities.  People in need should never ever
>have to depend on charity.  If there's a genuine need, then it's a social
>responsibility and I'll gladly pay higher taxes, along with everyone else,
>to help them.
[...]
This is no surprise.  Most people with extreme social agendas have proven
so.  They, without fail, always boast the loudest of having  "the best of
all ideals, solutions to Paradise"  with no concrete idea or plan action,
(that becomes the responsibility of 'someone'/anyone else) but even worse,
display zero will for action.  Increased taxes as a means to their end
generally being the easiest way out if not first on their agenda ...(but
 ... with intent to apply only to those, whom they perceive as being "more
advantaged", usually translating to corporations, private industry at
large).  One, which after the fact, they can scream about the loudest as
having been unfairly imposed upon their 'low to middle class selves" also
 ...bizarre catch 22  ... ain't it? I could, easily write about 20 pages of
facts regarding this catch 22 and it's adversities ... instead...

 .....Please, take the time to go to: www.herald.ns.ca/index.html.  Then to
back issues.  On page C2, dated May 28th is an excellent article written by
the Director of Sport NS. (Think it was under Opinion, entitled "Sports,
recreation must be an option for all"  Very enlightening.  It also reflects
all of the mandates of one of my favored organizations. (you'll be
surprised to realize that while our ideals are vastly different, (better
make that worlds apart in addition to being vastly different), our ideas
are frightfully similar...  of course, I could also write another hoard
regarding this topic too. Don't really think that Eva D., or you would
appreciate it though. So"t

Best, Aniko

Durant : At 06:21 PM 22/06/97 GMT, you wrote:
>Yes, I am selfish - I have never said I was not - I want a world
>where people live in dignity without the chance of falling through
>remnents of safety-nets. It feels me with shame when people are
>forced to beg.
[...]
But obviously not enough to get you off your fanny, to do something
concrete about it.  Sides, if you stopped wishing long enough, and wanting
to be God, you might (long shot) realize that that's were the very
organizations you complain, nay severely bitch about come in handy.

The government bodies and charitable chartered organizations spend a ton of
money on administration.  You too, can organize a body of people to work
for a cause of your own, as easy as anyone else.  (It does take work though
 .... work I am certain you'd rather spend dreaming, wishing.)  Thereby,
ensuring that the monies go exactly where it is you intend them to get to.
Mine you see, is KIDS, of dyslectic nature, and sports.  For instance; a
private school has been established for dyslectic children, where none of
the students even realize that they are underprivileged.  Receiving
education that enables them the self esteem main streaming is not able to.
I cannot help but feel, that they will eventually become better equipped to
handle their adult lives as a result.

Club facilities, equipment and coaching has been provided to several
different sports, which offer an alternative to the streets and malls,
where kids of all social background are able to join and reach
accomplishments resulting in high self esteem along with a positive
environment to grow in, away from their often neglectful and
counterproductive environments.  This effort has resulted in keeping over
1500 kids off the street over the last ten years, who otherwise might well
be alcoholics, drug addicts or in correctional centers today.

Committees have been formed to help those athletes who have reached
international levels of competition to allow for their continued
participation, without having to take on jobs for which they have either
time or energy for once attending to school and training.  The government
is letting them down tremendously by cutting down and in some cases totally
eliminating funding for such.  Many of these kids over the last ten years
have or are now graduating with honors, scholarships while the ones not,
are maintaining averages not less than 75% academically.  They are healthy,
committed and well balanced individuals.  I would dare say, that only a
handful of them would have enjoyed this right of participation otherwise.

Groups of volunteers have been organized in order to accomplish running of
kayak and canoe regattas, for which there is very little funding from the
government.  You will find these people (roughly 30) each and every
weekend, between May and Sept, on a local lake judging, timing, announcing
and in safety boats from seven am to often 8 pm, offering this service to
approx  500 kids .... who would otherwise be elsewhere.  Sun, rain or
shine.  Then, there are others, offering vehicles to drive trailers of
boats to and from these regattas ... rising at six am.  Then, others are
building, repairing, docks boats paddles and motors, running around for
lunches for those kids who's parents have neglected to provide.  Along with
a handful more, involved in raising funds for their respective clubs, so
that the kids can remain in the sport at a minimal cost to the parents -
despite of social standings.  All of the above at their own costs, and on
their own time.  About 30% of whom have no kids whatsoever involved.

Families are being assisted by way of mentors who offer ways and means of
how better to handle their lives, re-educate themselves, most often finding
on sight training for them with local private businesses.  These people,
are on social welfare, with no hope or dreams.  The group of volunteers
helping here often succeed with re-establishing just that.  Comments back,
often reflect gratitude, for having had been given an opportunity to seize
living off of the charity of the taxpayers.  Some others remain
uninterested in wanting to help themselves for whom, social welfare remains
to be the option.

You know Eva, I keep repeating this .... you'd serve yourself well by
asking questions sometimes, without jumping to conclusions of your own
based on nothing at all, but your own conception of how things might be.

In all of these efforts/organizations the work, talent is offered FREE, as
in volunteer; as in not drawing a salary from the state; as in ... so that
tax dollars can be diverted to other places of your dreams.  (Usually
towards something wasteful mind you, like more comfortable chairs to sit
on).  But since by refusing to get involved yourself, you delegate the
responsibility of the fate of your  tax dollars.  Leaving you of course to
continue to do that, which you do exceptionally well. .... complain and
dream and wish ... and feel sorry for the less fortunate.  Venomous towards
those, who are not.  Yuk is right Eva!   It is due to people *exactly like
you*, that others, who are willing and capable and decide to offer "FREE"
time, and talent eventually stop.  They, eventually get worn down by being
trampled upon, demeaned by the loudness of the voices of those, who'd
rather spend their time as you.  Replacing them becomes increasingly harder
 ... since it is your type of  mindless utters that get heard most often ...
 the doers, you see, tend to do so quietly, and without wanting to be even
thanked.  And .. guess who looses?  Because, like it or not, your tax
dollars will remain to be spent in other areas - of gravely less importance
to the extreme social conscience mind at this, being the present.

>I bet, a bigger percentage of my fairly meagre income goes to
>what I think is the right way to go about to eradicate poverty,
>than what yours.
[...]
As usual you are quite badly informed .... or are unable to exercise
rationale regarding the stats you seem to rely on so heavily.

>And I don't get the social niceties with it like being on the board of
this and that,
[...]
You'd have to join just one organization with a mandate to raise funds for
whatever reason, to understand just how uninformed, stupid and moronic your
above statement really is.(another long shot)  Yes,  I am certain, that it
is tremendous fun .... giving hours and hours of your already spent mind
and body, to meetings, along with weekends upon weekends of same and more
 .... when others like you are enjoying your family circle ... or brewing
more dreams.... but most often than not reasons to complain about.  Do
these bodies of people around the world a GIANT favor!  Keep your mouth
shut, or decide to join one.

The social niceties you see; become really very simple.  Read above.

>having big parties
>where I can flaunt my goodness and my wealth...
>Yuk
Yuk is right!   ... people who become doers for their causes rarely have
time for parties. That, you see, costs money, which is budgeted to better
and bigger causes.  As for flaunting the goodness, believe me it's really
very rarely ever done.  Most of the time, the people involved have not a
clue where the monies are generated from, and by whom.  One of our
mandates, you see, is to keep autonomy and as much as possible reduce the
impression of charity to those on the recipient end.  In many cases they
have no idea that the right of participation even results from charity - be
it in school, or in sport.  Back to flaunting ... in this case, it's been a
major pleasure!  I work very hard to do what little I can, for the cause(s)
I deem important to me.  And, although I am not changing the world at
large, at least I will and can boast about having made some minute
differences in peoples lives along the way .... I doubt that any effort has
proved be counterproductive thus far.  Nor are they something I ought to be
made to feel ashamed about ...  At least, not nearly as much as any one of
your moronic like statements displayed in this and many similar posts.  Go
read the article I told Joe about.  You too might (third longshot) find it
enlightening!
>
I used to think your words to be entertaining at times ... Now, you've
managed to  reduce them to that of moronic - and that is extremely kindly
put.  Grrrr....

Go dream some more Eva!  It's served you really well thus far.  The world
has, already, become a better place thanks to your efforts.  Congratulations!
Aniko

At 18:21 22/6/97 GMT, you wrote:
>.
>> Wake up and look at the world for a change.
>>                                              Amos
>>
>
>Well said. Look for the causes of all poverty and injustice,
>not just the temporary "Ain't I a goody-goody" feeling.
>
>You are keep going on about "human nature" and how people are selfish
>and the "poor will be always with us". Charity is a firm ally of the
>status quo. If you were really so selfless, dare to look into the
>causes - fight the unfair system itself - perhaps not as comfortable,
>it is not giving you the warm feeling, that you are better -
>and better off - than so many others.
>
>Yes, I am selfish - I have never said I was not - I want a world
>where people live in dignity without the chance of falling through
>remnents of safety-nets. It feels me with shame when people are
>forced to beg.  You can live with that comfortably - I cannot.
>I bet, a bigger percentage of my fairly meagre income goes to
>what I think is the right way to go about to eradicate poverty,
>than what yours.  And I don't get the social niceties with it like
>being on the board of this and that, having big parties
>where I can flaunt my goodness and my wealth...
>Yuk
>
>

>
Hi!
I am always surprised by the either/or attitude of people in this matter.
If there is a famine or unemployment or whatever and people are in distress
the immediate need is to help these people to survive. That is the role of
charities and they need money to carry out this necessary task. At the same
time it is necessary to look at the causes of the distress and find ways to
overcome them. This is generally a longer term task which involves
extensive efforts in education. Usually the charities providing the "band
aid" solutions are not the most suitable to come up with long term
solutions since the latter often involves government policies on the one
hand and changes in lifestyle on the other.
I definitely give to charities but am also involved in groups working for
long-term solutions. Most importantly I keep a constant watch on my own
lifestyle to see how I can cut back extravagencies particularly in the use
of resources with the slogan "live simply so others may simply live".
Regards
De'nes
Denes BOGSANYI  ATRACI
133 Osburn Drive
MACGREGOR
Australia
61 6 254 3636

This is as big a COP OUT as there exists. Advocating social
responsibility
- in a bleading heart manner - and then relegating the responsibility
part
to 'along with everybody else'.  But this is one of the problems with
what
I call 'sloganeering'.  Say anything that's impressive,  but don't do
any-
thing that's helpful.
And then  you are trying to lecture  everybody else about  social
respons-
ibility. This is not only sad, Joe,  but it is also pathetic.  Besides,
as
Aniko has said, talk is cheap. This is all you do, Joe.
Wake up and look at the world for a change.
                                             Amos

Joe Szalai wrote:
>
> I almost never give money to charities.  People in need should never ever
> have to depend on charity.  If there's a genuine need, then it's a social
> responsibility and I'll gladly pay higher taxes, along with everyone else,
> to help them.
>
> Joe Szalai
>

If I haven't mentioned sloganeering before, I do now. If you want to
see a bad one, a very bad one, read below. This can't even be called
propaganda, Janos Zsargo is too kind. She would have been kicked out
of party school for such a cocktail of nonsense.  Did you copy Lenin
or Stalin?
                                                 Amos

PS - I have underlined the more bizarre parts of this parroting.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

Durant wrote:
>
>          There is nothing wrong with my political sophistication. Don't tell
> > me that you haven't noticed that the right and the left have a lot in
> > common. Or, perhaps you don't want to notice it. You shouldn't forget that
> > Hitler's party was "national socialist." The socialism is not that far from
> > the thinking of the right. ESB
> >
> >
> the only problem being that he had nothing common with
> socialism as a democratic and non-capitalist entity.
  ----------------------------------------------------
> He in fact did not have a consistent political theory;
                            ----------------------------
> he was a demagogue, produced and made powerful by
  ---------========================================
> a decaying capitalist system, when the labour movement failed, as a
  -----------=================-----------=======================
> consequense of the  non-democratic and demagogue
                      ============================
> though non-capitalist ergo in a deformed way, socialist USSR.
  =============================================================
> When capitalism is too week, and the socialist movement gets
       ======================          =======================
> defeated, a totalitarian bonapartist regime fills the powervacuum.
  =========----------------===========------------------------------
>
> 

I must come to the defense of Eva Durant here. The different approach to
charity may be the result of cultural differences.  Europeans  (and Joe)
think very differently of charity, they believe it is demeaning. Here in
the States, we see it as a temporary help until a more permanent one can
be devised.

Durant wrote:
>
> .
> > Wake up and look at the world for a change.
> >                                              Amos
> >
>
> Well said. Look for the causes of all poverty and injustice,
> not just the temporary "Ain't I a goody-goody" feeling.

   And just how do you know what I feel?

> You are keep going on about "human nature" and how people are selfish
> and the "poor will be always with us". Charity is a firm ally of the
> status quo. If you were really so selfless, dare to look into the
> causes - fight the unfair system itself - perhaps not as comfortable,
> it is not giving you the warm feeling, that you are better -
> and better off - than so many others.

   I haven't said anything about "human nature", that's your thing. I
haven't mentioned anything about being selfless,  comfortable,  being
better, having a warm feeling, and being better off than others.Those
are your selections - no wonder, you "really know me well".

> Yes, I am selfish - I have never said I was not - I want a world
> where people live in dignity without the chance of falling through
> remnents of safety-nets. It feels me with shame when people are
> forced to beg.  You can live with that comfortably - I cannot.
> I bet, a bigger percentage of my fairly meagre income goes to
> what I think is the right way to go about to eradicate poverty,
> than what yours.  And I don't get the social niceties with it like
> being on the board of this and that, having big parties
> where I can flaunt my goodness and my wealth...
> Yuk

Yuk is right. You are making a bunch of assumptions here.  I am not
a gambling person, but this shouldn't bother you. Go ahead and bet.
Being on a board? You mean surfboard? Don't make me laugh!  But you
are not willing to stop there. You have just  made me rich who also
flaunts his wealth (wow, Eva Durant declared me rich, so I must be)
and at the same time I am a party animal. Well, well, well!

> 

As you have "told" Aniko and Eva to read the messages,  perhaps you
should follow your own advise.But if you can read all these into my
messages, you are in  the wrong profession.  I assume  there is one
where reading between the lines will expose the truth, any truth.
                                                             Amos

PS - How about changing the subject when the discussion is off the
     original one -

At 06:09 AM 6/19/97 -0400, Ferenc Novak wrote:

>In my experience one can no more draw generalized conclusions about life in
>Hungary from a brief stay in Budapest  than trying to understand the USA on
>the basis of having seen New York.  Visiting other cities or the countryside
>can yield a much more valid picture of the present-day Hungarian reality.

There is a big problem with this statement: the population of Budapest is 2
million, about 20% of Hungary's population. The population of New York City
is about 8 million, less than 4% of the US population. If New York's
population were 50 million (to match proportions), understanding New York or
the US would not be that far from each other.

Gabor D. Farkas

At 07:36 AM 6/20/97 -0400, Joe Szalai wrote:

>The other morning, on CBC radio, they were talking about those photographs
>of unsmiling people from the former Eastern Bloc
>countries.  It appears that the people on those photographs weren't
>smiling, not because they didn't like the system - as people in the West
>have been led to believe - but because they had bad teeth.

I am surprised that you believe everything the CBC says. I am afraid they
are wrong on this one.

>Apparently, dentists in the former Eastern Bloc countries didn't
>keep up with changes in that profession.  And nobody realized the
>dire consequences that photographs of unsmiling people would have
>in the West.  In any case, we now know that unsmiling doesn't equal
>unhappy.

Dentists did keep up. The government did not keep up supplying them with
modern apparatus and materials. And, to me, those who never smile do reflect
lack of joy, as that system was.

>Now, I'm just wondering if there's a correlation between bad teeth
>and dislike for the former system.  If there is, then Eva Balogh, Amos
>Danube, Aniko Dunford, Gabor Farkas, and others on this list, must have
>awful, awful, teeth.

I can't speak for the others (although it is about time to organize a
reunion and see each other;-) but my teeth are OK, thank you fro your question.

> Or, they're in love with capitalism because, under
>this system, they were able to afford dentures and
>can now smile again.

No, but this system agave me access to a superior dental care. I was
horrified by the sight of a good friend of mine in Transylvania, same age
with me and wearing dentures.

Gabor D. Farkas