Mike,

> "Nessze vila'g vetette, feku"dj bele s aludja'l"

I have never ever heard this one.  What on earth is "nessze?"

Martha

At 10:10 PM 4/3/96 -0500, Joe Szalai wrote:

>Gabor, I think you misunderstood me.  I agree with the income disclosure of
>ALL public sector workers, regardless of income.  In fact, I'm in favour of
>disclosing EVERYONES income.  It is the ONLY way to insure that everyone's
>paying their required tax.  After all, if one has nothing to hide, then one
>has no reason to hide the amount of their income.  No?

No Joe, I did not misunderstand. I don't know how that works in Canada, but
here in the US it is the IRS's job to insure that everyone  is paying teir
required tax. And believe me, they do make sure we do.

I don't think that it is anybody else's business what my income is. It is a
question of privacy.

Gabor D.  Farkas

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

It is the Hungarian spelling of Nessie, the Loch Ness monster :-).

Gabor D. Farkas

In article >, The Artist
Formerly Known As Joe Szalai > sputters:

>Sam is now trying to evade my original question by putting a date
>restriction on it.  However, he does have a point about Christian
>totalitarianism.  It has not been practiced for a long time.  On the
other
>hand, if I substitute "Islam" for "Christian", then Sam's point starts to
>fall apart.  Iran is a theocracy.  In the name of Allah, they govern like
>Marxist-Leninists.  I'm not sure about Iran, but I believe that at least
one
>Muslim country recently made apostasy a crime once again.  The
>Marxist-Leninists style of governing was not new.  Nor is/was the M-L'ers
>object of wielding political power.  All political parties want that!
>
>Joe Szalai

I'm not trying to avoid your question. I just don't want to compare apples
and oranges. A society that has reached an industrial level of technology
is a far different organism than one still at a pre-industrial stage of
development. I even invited you to give us all some examples to argue
from. That's the equivalent of allowing you to start out of the blocks a
couple of seconds ahead of every one else in a foot race.

As usual, though, you're more interested in hysterics than you are in
actually talking through an issue. And, as usual, you're talking out of
your ass on something you know nothing about. The Islamic regime in Iran
is much less "socialism with a turban" than it is an mixture of Shiite
theocracy, Persian traditionalism and bazaar capitalism. For those of our
readers who, unlike Joe, actually want to learn about something before
yammering about it on this newsgroup, there's an excellent article in this
month's "Atlantic Monthly" about the rising influence of bazaar
capitalists in radical Islamic movements throughout the Mideast.

Finally, the difference, once again, between M-L and Christianity (and
Islam and most every other major religion in the world) is that
Christianity allows the believer the intellectual freedom to compare faith
to experience and observation and attempt a reconciliation of the two. M-L
dogmatically insists that it knows exactly how history will unfold and
does not brook any kind of critical stance on the part of the believer to
compare M-L's claims against the reality of what M-L does in practice. If
it did, you and Eva wouldn't always have to fall back on that limp crap
about how "true" M-L has never been tried. You'd instead be able to admit
that it has been tried and didn't work and be able to either amend and
refine it from there or walk away from it entirely. One more important
point -- Christianity (and Islam, et. al.) are belief systems that touch
on every aspect of human existence. M-L's dilemma (and its downfall) is
that it must either politicize those other aspects or stand mute on them.
Sam Stowe

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?

> J. Hernadi,
> G. Farkas
> E. Balogh

They seem to continuuously refer to the times pre 70-s,
and I agree with most of the things they say.
However, from the 60s/70s I should me more of
an authority, as I happened to live there.
>From the seventies there were building programs, no-interest
loans for housebuying/building, those with 3 or more
children had a good chance for their own place.
No, still not satisfactory, with lots of
marriages braking down in the first few yers while
living with in-laws or building a house after work.
 but comparable
- and sometimes favourably - to living conditions
on council estates here.
Most of my friends live/lived  on "lakotelep",
a bit smaller flats, but far more civilised
circumstanses, than lots of them here.

I think you all live in a timewarp, like if time stopped
between 56 and 89.
There were still a few outside toilets in the village in the
80s, but no sign of homelessness or crowded conditions.
When I arrived in the UK in 1973, our first place had outside
loo (shared with others) 100 yards down a pot-holed pass.
(My friends from Hungary were comforting me: Eva, but it
is "angol vece"!)

Eva Durant

>
> I wonder if the author also examined the working conditions in many many
> factories.  It is my understanding that countless workers were subjected
> to extremely hazardous conditions, with absolutely no regard for their
> physical well being.  As for the showers, good thing!  Since most of them
> had none in their homes!
>

I had the dubious pleasure of working in Hungarian and in English
factories, thank you. I wonder how many of the individuals
who refuse considering whatever I say on this list can say that.
My husband had the chance of comparing actually the same
workshops: milling/turning. So I can say, that in the 80s
health and safety conditions were comparable (NOT
satisfactory in either places).  I assure you, that
in towns there were more showers in HUngarian homes,
this part of civilisation haven't seem to reach the
british isles together with the continental quilt,
till the 80s.



> >
> Interesting that you should bring this into the topic.  I distinctively
> remember being in classes with well over 35 students per teacher..during
> the 50's and 60's.  And I don't recall much contact time with any of my
> teachers.  For that matter, I recall very little concern displayed in
> general for the students by the teaching body.  Regarding school
> management, they simply considered themselves as being gods - and parents
> were to bow down - big time! Let alone, be asked for co-operation.  In
> general, I have no idea what you are comparing what with.>


Perhaps you should have paid a visit since those times.
I did teach a year in 1983. Don't you think that
is a more relavant witnessing?
Judging what I had found in the UK, I don't think
classes in average state-schools were any better
in the 50s/60s in the UK or in the US (I've seen
Hairspray   :)   and Yes, Sir etc ...)


>
> I don't know much of the UK Eva, but, in Canada at least, we have had
> little choices but to continue with our carreers, while raising families,
> without having had the option of even dreaming about subsidized nursery
> care, or the luxury of having extended family at hand.  Yet, most people
> seem to manage very well, considering.

So what did you do? The choice is a nanny - you have to have
a very good job for that! Or unskilled care of next door
neighbour.   Not available to or favourable to the average
person. The village nursery was absolutely brilliant for
a nominal fee. There is no better word to describe it.
I haven't seen a better one here, not even a private one.
Such an educational start is indeed what was probably the
most successful and productive bit of the education.


 Also, we have learned to recognize
> the fact that when anything becomes *subsidized* also ends up costing us
> bundles in the long run...by way of increased taxes.  Hungary today, is
> still paying for those well subsidized nurseries, at a time, when they are
> less and less used by today's generation, many of whom; while still have
> the choice, simply opt for other routes of care for their children.  Makes
> me wonder why that might be; considering you keep telling us how great
> they were/are.

They cost and arm and a leg now, that must be something to do
with it.  Also, there is pressure to get back women to the
kitchen sink, the unemployment figures look so much better
than. These Hungarians learn the western ways real fast!!!
I rather subsidise nurseries than the arm trade. Its even cheaper
and more cost-effective...


>
> In closing, your words tell me, that what you are looking for is truly
> Eutopia.  You want it all!  Job security, subsidized everything, no power
> to private enterprise - those filthy capitalists - and, you likely would
> have it all come about, by abolishing all taxes - am I right?
>
> Aniko Dunford

Well, your utopia is a well-functioning and democratic
capitalism, providing enough wealth and choice for everyone.
Please admit, that this is a utopia, as even increasing
growthrate do not provide a satisfactory living standard for all
etc, etc, and I am not going into the "necessary" unemployment,
armament, production for artificially created needs, etc,etc.

I think my proposal for the future is actually more practical,
yes, a collective ownership and control of wealth-creation
and distribution, but this time democratically, using
all the information technological advances for this.
No unemployment and no taxes and 20 hours per week to work.
Make more sense, than war and competition, think it over,
just once, please.  Try to step over your very
understandable 50s/60s trauma,
if the change only takes place with a collective and
participatory involvement, and everyone aware what
is the aim and safetyguards against anything that now
we know could go wrong. I think is more practical,
and more humanly/morally fulfilling, than anything
capitalism could/can ever offer.

I really have to go now, it was suppose to be postponed today,
why one is "nomail" one is "postpone" - bloody capitalist
chaos, if you ask me... :)

Eva Durant

Megjelent a Magyarok Vasarnapjaban valamikor tavaly februarban:


         Nymlt levil a Vasarnap olvassihoz.

     Nehiz szmvvel fogtam e levil mrasahoz. In, mint hith| katolikus,
minden katolikus keresztiny zjsag is hmrkvzlVszerv sorsat a
szmvemen viselem, de k|lv- nvsen az egykori KMV-jait, ami az vt
kontinensen szitszsrt katolikus magyarok kis pildanyszamban
megjelenV vilaglapja volt. Ez az erV az vsszefogas, a mindent
atfogs, mindenre kiterjedV egyetemes katolikus keresztinysig
diadalmas misszisjanak paranyi tvredike volt.
  De ez mar a mzlti. A mostani Vasarnap mar nem katolikus,
hanem elsVsorban nemzeti magyar, masodsorban keresztiny. A
tartalom vallasossaga pedig katolikus szemszvgbVl annyira
megvaltozott, hogy tvbb mint valsszmn|, levelemet a szerkesztV zr
zgy vagja a lekvzlisre nem kmvanatosak kosaraba, hogy csak zgy
dvrren.
  Ennek ellenire zgy irzem annyival tartozom az igazsagnak is az
egykori KMV emlikinek, hogy az Anyaszentegyhaz videlmiben
szst emeljek.
  ElsVsorban magyar, masodsorban keresztiny? Szeretnim
leszvgezni, ha a keresztinysig nem elsVsorban van jelen valahol,
valamiben, valakiben, akkor mar sehogyan sem lehet jelen, mert a keresztinysig
mind hit is erkvlcs dolgaban az emberi lit
legmagasabb foka, s mint ilyen, elsVdleges helyet kell betvltenie a szemily, a
csalad, a tarsadalom is az egisz emberisig iletiben.
Amennyiben ez nem igy van, akkor a keresztinysig megsz|nt
jelen lenni, mert linyegibVl fakadsan nem tud masodik vagy
sokadikrend| tinyezVkint egzisztalni. Ha elsVsorban magyar
(nimet, zsids, vagy akar gvrvg), maisodsorban keresztiny, akkor
nem keresztiny. Mikor irtik meg a nipek, hogy keresztinynek
lenni annyit jelent, mint az Isten akaratanak, szandikanak, ciljanak
vnkint vallalt, esk| alatt elkvtelezett cselekvV riszese lenni. Mi a
keresz-
tinysigben Isten gyermekei lett|nk aminil nincsen nagyobb.
Elkvtelezettsig|nket sz|leink is keresztsz|leink vallaltak
helyett|nk, amit felnVtt korban vnkint sz|ksiges megerVsmteni. A
birmalkozasban vallalva ezt a kvtelezettsiget, is a Szentlilek
Zristen kegyelmi ajandekaiban megerVsvdve elk|ldett|nk a
tanzbizonysag titelre, az Zrjizus tinylegesen felkent lovagjaikint,
az Isten Orszaganak polgarakint, s ennil nincsen tvbb. Ennil
nem tvbb magyar ( spanyol, svid, lengyel, roman...) irdekekirt
ilni is halni. Senki embert a nemzetisigi szarmazasa nem tesz
naggya az Isten szemiben. Rokonaink is Vseink puszta lite nem
ok az |dvvssigre. Hanem aki az Isten akaratat cselekszi az il
vrvkki.
  Legyen magyar nemzeti vallas? Szerb, orosz vagy roman
ortodox mintara? Legyen az zj hit vagy reformalt? Esetleg a
"judeo"keresztinysigtVl is f|ggetlen? Sajat "isteneink" legyenek?
Baal, Molok, Amon vagy Jupiter? De azok is idegenek. A magyar
mindig tvbb! A magyarok istene legyen veled!
Tehat legyenek magyar "isteneink"? Vissza a pogany mzltba:
Turul, Vahor, Gvrcs..., hat vnkint tir vissza is borul le a nip ezer
esztendV mzltan Kajar fekete balvanya elVtt? Mert a vagyakat V adja.
  Elvetni az Egyhazat, mert az idegen is azirt tivztra vezet? Vajon az Egyhaz
ztjai nem igazak, nem inkabb a nipek ztjai nem azok?
  ElVszvr is vegy|k fontolsra, hogy az Anyaszentegyhaz az Zr
Jizus Krisztus titokzatos teste, iltetV lelke pedig maga a
Szentlilek Zristen. Ezirt az Egyhaz b|ninek a hangoztatasa a
Szentlilek elleni b|n. az Egyhaz maga nem lehet b|nvs, legfeljebb
a beletartozs szemilyek, akik esendV emberek.Mert senki
emberfia szemilyes b|ne nem szall ra az Egyhazra, amikippen az
Egyhaz glsriaja sem vvez kvr|l senkit csupan azirt, mert
csecsemV koraban keresztvmz ala tartattatott.
Anyaszentegyhazunk tanmtasa, teolsgiaja is dogmatikaja hit
is erkvlcs dolgaban vrvk irviny|, nem szorul semmi nem|
reformra, valtoztatasra. Ezirt migha sokaknak nem is tetszik
Egyhazunk soha nem fog reformalsdni, vagy vnmaga ellen
protestalni.
  Nek|nk lenne talan okunk szigyenkezisre, szemles|tisre,
pirongasra, amiirt Vrizz|k, svjuk (konzervaljuk) a meglevVt?
Amikippen atyaink megVriztik szamunkra valtozatlanul,
hamismtatlanul.Mind St. Agoston, Aquinoi St. Tamas, akar Loyolay
St. Ignac..., mind ugyanannak a hitnek altal lettek vrvkvsei az
mgiretnek. Kimondatott, hogy veletek maradok a vilag vigzetiig.
Ha pedig vel|nk, akkor nem massal! Ugyan mikor hagyta el a lilek
az V Egyhazat? Kivel? Melyik szakadar kedviirt? Talan
Arianussal? Vagy kisVbb Husz Janossal? Vagy mig kisVbb
Lutherrel? Mert ha vele, akkor nem Kalvinnal. Vagy annak a
szektanak a kedviirt amelyik holnaputan fog megalakulni valahol
Amerikaban? Ne feledj|k, hogy Jizus a botlas kvve is a
botranykozas sziklaja! Ma pedig Jizus helytartsja, valamint a
sziklara ipmtett Egyhaz tvlti be ugyanazt a szerepet. Kinek ez,
masiknak az liszen a szegletnek fejivi
  Az igazsag egy is oszthatatlan. Vagy mgy igaz valami vagy zgy.
Principum contra dictionis. Nem lehet az egymasnak ellentmonds
magyarazatok is irtelmezisek sokasaga az egyazon Igazsag
LelkitVl szarmazs kinyilatkoztatas. Ha a turul madar az isten,
kvvessitek azt, ha a Baal jarjatok utana, ha pedig a Molok
aldozzatok annak! De ha az Zr az Igazsag is az Ilet, akkor
jarjatok az V ztjait! Mert ahany nemzet annyi vallas, de az csak
azon egy nemzetsig fiainak van nyitva, is egyenkint mind tivztra
vezet. Egyed|l a keresztinysig kapuja all nyitva minden nip,
nemzet is nyelv szamara, mert a keresztinysig-akar tetszik
sokaknak, akar nem-, internacionalista.

 -Elsvsorban magyarnak lenni annyit jelent, mint Koppannyal
harcolni a "nagyravagys Vajk" is az idegenek ellen, keresztinynek
lenni pedig nem jelent mast, mint az igazsagirt,  a misszisirt, egy
nip megkeresztelkedisiirt is megmaradasairt elesni St. Istvan
zaszlsja alatt.
- Elsvsorban magyarnak lenni annyit jelent, mint Vata
martalscaival garazdalkodni is halalba k|ldeni St. Gellirtet,
keresztinynek lenni pedig, hogy vallalni a martmr halalt.
- Elsvsorban magyarnak lenni annyit jelent, mint Bethlen Gabor
fejedelemmel harcolni a katolicizmus ellen, a nip-nemzeti
protestans vallas irdekiben,  keresztinynek lenni pedig annyit,
mint Pazmany Piter irsekprmmassal is a magyar p|spvki karral
elmenek|lni kinyszer|lni.
  A keresztinysig tehat valami mas, mast kir is mast mgir, mint
amit a nipek, nemzetek is egyinek elvarnanak, szeretninek. Ezen
azonban semmi csodalkozni vals sincs. Az Isten m|ve a
vilagtvrtinelemben soha sem nyerte el a tvmegek tetszisit, mgy
tehat az sem, hogy a keresztinysig a nemzetek fvlvtt all. A
keresztinysig tanmtasanal fogva internacionalista: Tegyetek
tanzbizonysigot a vilag vigsv hataraig, minden nip... A
keresztinysiget szidni, az Egyhazat karomolni annyi, mint a
Szentharom-sagot gyalazni. Ez az igazsag! A Mindenhatst nem
sajatmthatja ki egyetlen nemzet sem.Szilsvjobboldali cionista
talmudi magyarazatokkal nem lehet az Zrjizust zsidstlanmtani,
hogy a magyar jobboldal szamara "szalonkipes" legyen. Ez
egyszer|en abszurd is nevetsiges! Az mrasokat nem lehet
szitvallasztani. Ha abbsl valami nem igaz, akkor miirt lenne a
tvbbi risze az? Aki csak riszleteit olvasta is nem is hisz benne, az
prsbalkozik olyan riszekre is lelni ami a sajat elkipzeliseit
alatamasztja. (Avagy tudatos ez?) Mert ha a megvalts jvvetele nem
felel meg a kinyilatkoztatott mgiretnek, abbsl logikusan
kvvetkeznik, hogy a zsidsknak nem is lehetett volna mas, mint egy
a sok hamis messiasok kvz|l. Ez azonban nem mgy tvrtint, mert
akik igaz hittel is szmvvel vartak, azok kvvettik, is martmrsagot
vallalva tanzbizonysagot tettek rsla. Pontossan mgy teljesedett meg
az mras, ami kimondta, hogy meg fogja osztani a nipet. Az pedig
egyszer|en nem igaz, hogy a zsidsk nem fogadtak be, hanem
csupan egy risz|k. Fvleg a vezetvik. Pont azirt nem tudtak egyszer|en elkapni,
mert tzl nagy tvmeg kvvette is hitt benne.
Ezirt volt sz|ksig az arulsra, hamis tanzkra is az ijszaka leplire,
hogy titkon is gyorsan vigezhessenek vele, ahol szintin
megteljesedett az mras. S nem is lehetett ez maskint. Miirt ment
volna egy idegen Izraelbe azt hmrdetni, hogy szemilyiben
teljesedett meg az mras, melyben az az Isteni mgiret, hogy fiaidbsl
|dvvz|l minden nip is nemzet. Termiszetesen mint Isteni
szemily nem volt zsids, de mint ember a zsids nipbe kellett
eljvnnie. Tudomasom szerint egyetlen-remeknek ippen nem
nevezhetv m|-, a talmud emlmti a megvaltst nagyon tiszteletlen
msdon filig gvrvgnek, de az nem az igazsag letiteminye, sem a
magyar |gyet nem fogja elvbbre vinni. Hit nilk|l nincs
keresztinysig! Keresztanysig nilk|l pedig nincs megmaradas!
  "Az igazsag felmagasztalja a nemzetet, a b|n pedig gyalazatara
van a nipeknek."  Pil.14.34
  K|lvnben elveszmti erkvlcsi jogat az egyin is nip a kritika
gyakorlasra, ha nem az igazsag szerint mtil, hogy abbsl ip|ljvn is
lehetvsigeihez mirten ahhoz formalja jelenit, jvvvjit, akkor
csupan a szereposztassal eligedetlen. Mtiletre is kritikara sz|ksig
van, DE mtilj|nk, bmraljunk is cselekedj|nk az IGAZSaG szerint.
Mert ha abbsl elvessz|k a legkissebb i bet|t, mi marad utana?
  Kmvanok a Magyarok Vasarnapja fvszerkesztvjinek,
munkatarsainak, olvassinak is minden keresztiny magyar
testviremnek egy IGAZABB 1995-vs esztendvt.


\dvvzlettel: Attila Tuchardt

At 09:51 PM 4/3/96 -0800, Gabor D. Farkas wrote:

>No Joe, I did not misunderstand. I don't know how that works in Canada, but
>here in the US it is the IRS's job to insure that everyone  is paying teir
>required tax. And believe me, they do make sure we do.
>
>I don't think that it is anybody else's business what my income is. It is a
>question of privacy.

I'm surprised at your faith in the IRS branch of the government.  Is this a
sudden conversion?  If I were an American (heaven forbid!!), I, as a
taxpayer, along with you, would be employers of the folks who work at the
IRS.  Because I employ them I want access to all their work.  I want to know
if they are processing your, and everyone elses, taxes properly.  The only
way to do this is to allow taxpayers access to their work.  I do not have
blind faith in ANY branch of the government.

A "question of privacy" is what allowed, and continues to allow, political
and economic abuse around the world.  If you believe that you have the right
to know how much public sector workers earn, and I believe you do, then
everyone has the right to monitor their work as well.  Wouldn't you want to
keep an eye on your employees?  Knowing how much you pay them is meaningless
unless you know that they are doing their job.

If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.  As for privacy, you
can spend your money on whatever you want.  I don't care.

It's taken me some time but I'm starting to see some positive aspects of the
right wing Hayekite criticism of government.

Joe Szalai

P.S.  That "heaven forbid" quip above is for Sam Stowe's edification.

At 12:35 AM 4/4/96 GMT, George Szaszvari wrote:

>These are your words, not hers. She has already stated that she does not
>support the pre-1990 regimes. She is always looking for something better.
>Any sane person can only applaud that. Are you really so self-satisfied?

Yes she is, George.  And now, like any zealot, she wants to control our
memories of the past because she understands that whoever controls the past
controls the future.  I wonder where she learned to be such a dedicated
revisionist.

"Nem fontos kidobni a baba't a mosovizel".  My Hungarian may not be very
good but this fine English proverb is one that could benefit some of the
rabidoids on this list.

Joe Szalai

On Thu, 4 Apr 1996, Joe Szalai wrote:

> "Nem fontos kidobni a baba't a mosovizel".  My Hungarian may not be very
> good but this fine English proverb is one that could benefit some of the
> rabidoids on this list.

For the benefit of those, who speak no Hungarian on this English -
language list, it means that we do not have to throw the baby out with
the bath water.

Happy Easter/Passover to all of you and yours!
Martha

George Szaszvari:

>Yes, let's! Sport was very well supported in the Eastern bloc....
Generally speaking, communist
>regimes did well for sport.

        Of course, the very real question here is: is it a good thing?; is
it really important?; is it perhaps even harmful! I used to be transfixed at
the time of the Olympics; by now my enthusiasm almost completely
disappeared. I keep looking at those poor little girls and boys-- some of
the girls as young as 12-13 year old--in gymnastics, swimming, skating, just
name it, and I get a very negative feeling about the whole thing. Why should
we think that spending millions on sports--not the kind of sports which help
to keep the population fit, but the kind of sports which will earn the
"nation" gold medals at Olympics--is actually a positive development.
Something which should be brought up on the plus side of any regime.

>In her summary Ms Durant is only saying that holding smug views about
>an unquestionably more equitable West is dangerous. Please explain the
>rights of the individual to the Guildford Four, the Birmingham Six,
>the businessmen wrongly imprisoned as scapegoats by the guilty government
>ministers in the *Arms to Iraq* affair, police chief John Stalker who
>was sacked for exposing the *shoot to kill* policy in Northern Ireland,
>the Indian women forced to undergo degrading virginity tests before being
>allowed into Britain, or for that matter most Asians, blacks, or even
>just most foreigners on the problems of living in xenophobic Britain,
>Dr Al-Massari who is being victimized by the British government because
>the Saudis want it that way, Hanratty who was wrongfully hanged and the
>innumerable victims of *rough justice* in Britain (there's even a high
>profile TV programme inundated with outrageous cases!), the large numbers
>of women imprisoned and criminalized simply because they don't have the
>money to pay exorbitant rents, council taxes, the price of food for their
>kids, the growing army of unemployed and homeless on the streets, etc,
>etc, etc. Rights of the individual in the West? Really?

        Well, let's compare it to the record of the marxist-leninist
inspired Soviet Union or the satellite countries after 1948. Somehow I think
that the list would be a great deal longer: like 20 million victims, or
something similar. Please, again, don't lose perspective. Sure, there are
abuses everywhere, but these abuses in democracies are relatively rare and
freely aired in the media. Compare that with the record in the so-called
socialists countries and the muzzling of the press.

>Yes, Ms Durant is clearly wasting her time....:-)

        Yes, I am afraid so.

        Eva Balogh

Joe Szalai wrote:


> Who are your mentors (or should I say, tormentors?).
>
> Joe Szalai

        Perhaps you can explain to us why thousands of Chinese were lined up in
Hong Kong for British papers. I'm sure it's all because they want to see
the sights in London.  You know, Big Ben, Parliament, The Changing of
the Guard, plus that wonderful British culture.  Could it be that
they're concerned about the "changing of the guard" in their own
country, or the possibility of a "cultural revolution" of another sort?

        People who's ancestors have inhabited Hong Kong for centuries are
leaving in droves Joe.  Who are their tormentors?


Regards,


Doug

Eva Durant wrote:
>
> >
> > 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 capitalis
t
> > system itself seems empty and without meaning - in your phrase,
> > "you...contribute to the bottom line and then you die." But that may be you
r
> > own opinion and not necessarily shared by others who still retain the
> > moral/religious framework which makes life more meaningful.
> >
>
> My poor brainwashed self has no idea about these religious
> and cultural beliefs that are essential for capitalism to
> function.  Please, Johanne, lighten me up... Can atheists
> be good capitalists?  I thought christianity did not value
> the material world all that much... am I confused?
>
> Eva Durant

While you may have ample indoctrination to speak eloquently of the
benefits of Marxist-Leninist ideology, when you drift from the path of
communist enlightenment, you truly show how poorly equipped you are for
this discussion.  After reading this last post, it's clear that you are
not even passingly knowledgeable about christianity or probably any
other religion.  Christianity like most faiths, does not endorse any
particular economic system.  In fact those who have tried to find such a
message are continually confounded by the Bible's seemingly
contradictory passages regarding such.

        To answer for Johanne, atheists can and many are good capitalists. So
can Catholics, Lutherans, Unitarians, Animists, Buddhists, etc.

        Perhaps the question you should be asking is this:  Can anyone be a
good communist?

Regards,

Doug

Joe Szalai wrote:
>
> At 06:11 AM 4/2/96 -0400, Johanne L. Tournier wrote:

> >How about the question of whether or not you are a Socialist?
>
> Yea!  How about a full-blown show trial?
k it would work because most people have already made up their mind.
>
> Joe Szalai

A simple yes or no would probably suffice.


Doug

At 10:58 PM 4/3/96 -0800, Aniko Dunford, our erstwhile observer, wrote:

>> Anecdote: when we lived in Hungary (80s), my husband due to lack
>> of Hungarian language skills, ended up as "bekacsosz" (river
>> warden) for the local coop.   In 1987 all such employees -
>> mostly semi-retired/handicapped old people except the odd
>> mancunian, were called to a meeting. The boss said:
>> "Comrades, we have to apply from now  capitalist
>> methods of production. You are all fired!"
>>
>Thank you for sharing this.  Speaking for myself only, I can finally
>place the root of your past displayed philosophies.

And speaking for myself (who else could I speak for anyways?) I suggest you
not get into PR work for capitalism.  People need bread, not psychoanalysis!

Joe Szalai

At 07:19 AM 4/3/96 -0400, Johanne L. Tournier wrote:

>Joe, Joe, Joe . . .
>
>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 and Sam, please feel free to sing along.  It's not as rousing as
"The International" but that's OK with me.

               IMAGINE

       Imagine there's no heaven
       It's easy if you try
       No hell below us
       Above us only sky
       Imagine all the people
       Living for today...

       Imagine there's no countries
       It isn't hard to do
       Nothing to kill or die for
       And no religion too
       Imagine all the people
       Living life in peace...

       You may say I'm a dreamer
       But I'm not the only one
       I hope someday you'll join us
       And the world will be as one

       Imagine no possessions
       I wonder if you can
       No need for greed or hunger
       A brotherhood of man
       Imagine all the people
       Sharing all the world...

       You may say I'm a dreamer
       But I'm not the only one
       I hope someday you'll join us
       And the world will live as one

                         John Lennon

OK, OK.  I'm a Lennonist!  Are you happy now?

Perhaps I should have quoted Madonna's "Material Girl", but you already know
the words for that!

Joe Szalai

> Just because you manage to survive a system, doesn't mean
> that you have no moral reason to critisize it and trying
> your best to change it.  Your reasoning would mean no
> change ever advocated anywhere, those who couldn't survive,
> couldn't have made the case afterall... Loads of vocal critics
> (e.g. Csurka) did rather well under Kadar, by the way. Some
> got the push to leave specially from the USSR with this
> reasoning...
>
> Eva Durant


        I'm glad to see that you and Joe are "surviving" the rigors of
capitalism so well.  Perhaps I should write a letter to comrade Castro
of the Workers Paradise of Cuba and ask him to award you a medal for
your bravery in enduring this brutish and mentally crushing existance.
Perhaps he will invite you to the Worker's Paradise to invest you in the
Hall of Heroes personally. With any luck, your fraternal socialist
comrades won't shoot you down as you come in to land and then you can
ride triumphantly into the city in Fidel's personal '52 Chevy. (You know
the one, it has the small bronze plaque that says "Hemingway rode
here!") Thousands will line the parade route, whether to cheer or push
the car when it breaks down is anyone's guess. Bring me back a box of
cigar's won't you?


Regards:-)

Doug

Joe Szalai wrote:
>
> At 07:19 AM 4/3/96 -0400, Johanne L. Tournier wrote:
>
> >I just get a
> >chuckle out of the thought that you decry the evil capitalist system, while
> >you are being supported by that same system (and very comfortably, too, I
> >would think). Doesn't that seem the least little bit contradictory to you?
>
> OK Johanne.  I gross $2,136.58 every month.  My after tax take home pay is
> $1,448.16 per month.  I have not had a pay raise for over four years because
> of the economic situation.  I'm not complaining about my comfort level.  I
> can get by.  However, I'm always interested in knowing the income of the
> proponents of the political right wing, libertarian or otherwise.  Do you
> have it in you to tell us your income, before and after taxes and tax
> loopholes?   I think it's always good to know the income of opinion makers.
> You've made your opinions quite clear.  Will you tell us how much you make?
> By the way, the Conservative government in Ontario has a very definite
> Hayekite bias.  They hate the public sector so much that they are trying
> everything to make it more accountable.  This week, all public sector
> workers who make more than $100,000.00 had to disclose their income.  At the
> University of Waterloo, where I work, 52 people had their incomes disclosed.
> Most are deans, top administrators, and department heads.  I guess the
> Conservatives forgot that many of these people are opinion makers and indeed
> helped to elect the present government.  Interestingly enough, letters
> appeared in the local daily newspaper in which the authors argued that the
> incomes of all opinion makers be made public.  I have no doubt the
> Conservatives have started something that they will deeply regret.  I
> applaud their policy!!  The income disclosure movement has arrived.
>
> Joe Szalai
>
> P.S.  The above figures are in Canadian dollars.  And, oh yes, I have a
 degree.


Dear Joe,

Just so everything is out on the table.  I am a  deputy sheriff working
full time in a local high school as a school resource officer.  (A
combination of traditional law enforcement and teaching) and I've been
with the department for about seven years.  I make about $43,000 a year.
After taxes, I bring home about $1200 every two weeks.  My wife is a
forensic DNA specialist and makes about $10,000 a year more than I do.
I have a mortgage, two cars and one child.  All in all a pretty good
living.  I have a degree in History (1988) from Willamette University in
Salem, Oregon. I'm a registered Democrat.

        My father was a school teacher. My mother a homemaker. She is legally
blind and has not worked outside of the home. (So much for the argument
that under capitalism you aren't valuable if you cannot produce.)  My
father died in 1976 and since then my mother has lived comfortably on
his retirement pension.  She still lives in a house that she owns and
that my father and I built.

        I went to a private university paid for partly by Veteran's benefits
and academic scholarships. The rest I'm still paying for.  I've taken
advantage of social programs that were available, but for the most part
I've paid my way as I went. After my father died, I received Social
Security payments until I joined the Navy.  I could have stayed on the
dole until I was 21 if I'd gone to college right after High School, but
I decided to join the Navy instead.

        As you can see, I'm not filthy rich.  However, between my wife and I we
make a comfortable living that even allows for a few luxuries from time
to time. We've saved enough for a two and a half week trip to Hungary
and don't have to worry about paying the bills every month. I can
indulge my passion for mountain biking and fly fishing without feeling
too guilty about it. I guess you could call us comfortably middle class.

        The media says that many of my countrymen claim that such a life is
unobtainable for the average college graduate.  I say balderdash!  I
didn't graduate with honors nor do I have any friends in important
places (present company excluded), but after sending in about six job
applications I ended up where I am.  Was I lucky?  Who knows?  I know
that I've worked towards a goal and for the most part things have worked
out.

        I hope this will give you a frame of reference Joe. Not all capitalists
are corporate moutpieces, or wealthy wastrels preying on working class
unfortunates. Most of us are just average folks.

Regards,


Doug

Joe Szalai wrote:
>
> ALL public sector workers, regardless of income.  In fact, I'm in favour of
> disclosing EVERYONES income.  It is the ONLY way to insure that everyone's
> paying their required tax.
>
> Joe Szalai


What a smashing idea! Let's have an agency to make sure everyone pays
their taxes.  We can call it the Internal Revenue Service.  Then we can
fill out some archane paperwork called a tax return every year and they
will tell us if we've paid enough taxes.

Tell me Joe, where do you come up with these brilliant ideas?

Regards,

Doug

In article >, The Right Rev.
Joe Szalai, God's Other Son > brings this
down from the mountain on tablets dictated to him by a rather
dodgy-looking burning bush:

>P.S.  That "heaven forbid" quip above is for Sam Stowe's edification.
>
>

The devil you say. (That's for your own edification, bubba.)
Sam Stowe

> =====================================================================

                        THE VISA-FREE LIST

"Discussion of how to gain another nationality for visa-free travel"

> =====================================================================

VISA-FREE an unmoderated discussion list covering the problems
associated with international travel.  In particular the issues
discussed will cover acquiring a different nationality to overcome
these problems.  VISA-FREE is open to anyone wanting more information
on visa-free travel, or with useful tips about gaining another
nationality quickly.  It is also open to specialists in nationality
law.

Over time it is expected that documentation covering the relevant
laws of countries that grant their citizenship quickly will be
archived for subscribers to the list.  Also information covering
problems that people have experienced when using a new passport
will be covered.

There will also be an e-journal called "THE VISA-FREE JOURNAL" sent
to subscribers.  Anyone wishing to write to the list-owner directly to discuss
relevant issues and who does not wish this circulated to the list may do so.
The address is .  Please also state whether you would
mind if your comments are put into the journal.  The list-owner will
respect any requests for privacy.  The list-owner's public key is:


-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6

mQCNAi/xbwUAAAEEALZolxs1l/DbYtEOIJV71EdsDepzR+DhLPPATIMwYiYgU9Yc
PRIa6aUI4VKrtz23/3Nz4pFP45kCfKUehsJ3oqtXzGWqCqIpPVm4q4d6oV44Csn5
EykR3ujlzYaCopzsYRD9E/EIaxVztnIantfLeN0IwQL0k9XazPkj64yNL1lpAAUR
tCRTYW0gUmlsZXkgPHNhbUBiY2xpbXNlci5kZW1vbi5jby51az4=
=nj7+
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----



IMPORTANT: Anyone offering specialist assistance to VISA-FREE must
provide the list owner with the relevant laws applicable to any
citizenship programme offered, in the form of plain text to be
archived and made available to the list.  Also the legal basis of
any programme must be fully verified with the list owner before
permission is granted for circulation to the list.  This is to
safeguard the integrity of the list.  Permission will not be
unreasonably withheld from such people.  At the same time the list
-owner reserves the right to exclude those people who do not adhere
to the purpose of the list, engage in unnecessary flaming or offer
services of a dubious nature.


To subscribe to VISA-FREE, please send the message:

        "SUBSCRIBE VISA-FREE"
    (without the quotes and without your name!)

        to  

To send messages to the full list:  

For messages to the list owner:  

Sam Riley (AKA "Sanwar Ali")
List-Owner


> --------------------------------------------------------------------------

*****BCL IMMIGRATION SERVICES*****

40 South Audley Street, Mayfair, London W1Y 5DH, UK.
Tel: +44 171 495 3999 or +44 171 495 8662, Fax: +44 171 495 3991.

e-mail: 

"International Immigration and Nationality Law since 1988"

OWNERS OF THE "VISA-FREE" E-MAIL LIST AND PUBLISHERS OF THE E-
JOURNAL "THE VISA-FREE JOURNAL".
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------

At 08:47 AM 4/4/96 -0800, Doug Hormann, wrote:

>   Perhaps you can explain to us why thousands of Chinese were lined up in
>Hong Kong for British papers. I'm sure it's all because they want to see
>the sights in London.  You know, Big Ben, Parliament, The Changing of
>the Guard, plus that wonderful British culture.  Could it be that
>they're concerned about the "changing of the guard" in their own
>country, or the possibility of a "cultural revolution" of another sort?
>
>        People who's ancestors have inhabited Hong Kong for centuries are
>leaving in droves Joe.  Who are their tormentors?

I don't know.  But if you're trying to draw a little sketch to illustrate
your concern for peoples necessity to flee a certain, or uncertain, economic
future, then all I can say is, "hold on to your day job".  Your etch has no
market value!

I agree with you that many, if not all, the people from Hong Kong are
leaving because they want more opportunities and prosperity and they don't
see that happening once China takes over.  England, and Canada, I might add,
are letting many people from Hong Kong in simply because they have money.  I
assume that you know that there are a few poor people in Hong Kong but do
you also know that no one is taking them in.  After all, countries like
Canada have immigration quotas!

If you care about issues like these then I'd like to see your support of
Mexicans, and others, being allowed into the US.  They too are seeking more
opportunity and prosperity.  Or how about showing your support for those
Hungarians who may want to go to Germany or Austria in their search for a
better life?  You really should speak up on these issues if you want me to
believe that your concern is genuine.  And, while you're trying to think of
yet another half witty reply, keep in mind that the free flow of people is
good for business.   People from Mexico and Latin America could greatly
reduce production costs because they'd be happy to work for much less pay.
And that would be good for business.  And what's good for business is good
for America.

Do your patriotic duty, Doug.  Speak up!

Joe Szalai

At 01:38 PM 4/4/96 -0500, you wrote:

>Johanne and Sam, please feel free to sing along.  It's not as rousing as
>"The International" but that's OK with me.
>
>               IMAGINE
>
>       Imagine there's no heaven
>       It's easy if you try
>       No hell below us
>       Above us only sky
>       Imagine all the people
>       Living for today...
>
>       Imagine there's no countries
>       It isn't hard to do
>       Nothing to kill or die for
>       And no religion too
>       Imagine all the people
>       Living life in peace...
>
>       You may say I'm a dreamer
>       But I'm not the only one
>       I hope someday you'll join us
>       And the world will be as one
>
>       Imagine no possessions
>       I wonder if you can
>       No need for greed or hunger
>       A brotherhood of man
>       Imagine all the people
>       Sharing all the world...
>
>       You may say I'm a dreamer
>       But I'm not the only one
>       I hope someday you'll join us
>       And the world will live as one
>
>                         John Lennon
>
>OK, OK.  I'm a Lennonist!  Are you happy now?
>
>Perhaps I should have quoted Madonna's "Material Girl", but you already know
>the words for that!

Ok...time to steel from Johanne;  Joe...Joe....Joe... (thanks Jo!)
This is very uplifting Mr. Lennonist! Only one teeny weeny problem!!! When
John Lennon recorded the above, (which I believe made the top hits for a
good long while, if my memory serves me right) he enjoyed a financially
sound lifestyle, well above and beyond the comprehension of *most of
humanity*.  Easy to speak of a Utopic Fantasy, when such cushions await you
beyond your guarded gates and unending resources!  - nor - have I ever heard
that he willingly parted with any of his *possessions* for the benefit of
humanity at large.  As such, the words of his "nota" become just
that...word, speaking of the same Utopic Fantasy so often wittnessed on this
list? :) - Try another one!

Aniko Dunford

At 08:14 AM 4/4/96 -0500,Joe Szalai wrote:
>At 09:51 PM 4/3/96 -0800, Gabor D. Farkas wrote:
>
>>No Joe, I did not misunderstand. I don't know how that works in Canada, but
>>here in the US it is the IRS's job to insure that everyone  is paying teir
>>required tax. And believe me, they do make sure we do.
>>
>>I don't think that it is anybody else's business what my income is. It is a
>>question of privacy.
>
>I'm surprised at your faith in the IRS branch of the government.  Is this a
>sudden conversion?  If I were an American (heaven forbid!!), I, as a
>taxpayer, along with you, would be employers of the folks who work at the
>IRS.  Because I employ them I want access to all their work.  I want to know
>if they are processing your, and everyone elses, taxes properly.  The only
>way to do this is to allow taxpayers access to their work.  I do not have
>blind faith in ANY branch of the government.

Here we agree, indeed. The only problem is that I do not remember saying
that I had blind faith in the IRS. Through the Congress (elected by me) I
keep an eye on them (as they keep an eye on me).
I consider the IRS a necessary evil. Taxes exist, most of us pay them
honestly but many don't. Someone has to enforce the code (a code that I
would not mind changing, for example to a flat tax, a la Forbes) and that is
what the IRS is for.
>From what I hear the equivalent agency in Hungary is much less successful in
enforcing the local tax code. The numbers about the underground (not taxed)
economy are frightening.

Gabor D. Farkas

In article >, "Eva S. Balogh"
> says:
>
>George Szaszvari:
>
>>Yes, let's! Sport was very well supported in the Eastern bloc....
>Generally speaking, communist regimes did well for sport.
>
>        Of course, the very real question here is: is it a good thing?; is
>it really important?; is it perhaps even harmful! I used to be transfixed at
>the time of the Olympics; by now my enthusiasm almost completely
>disappeared. I keep looking at those poor little girls and boys-- some of
>the girls as young as 12-13 year old--in gymnastics, swimming, skating, just
>name it, and I get a very negative feeling about the whole thing. Why should
>we think that spending millions on sports--not the kind of sports which help
>to keep the population fit, but the kind of sports which will earn the
>"nation" gold medals at Olympics--is actually a positive development.
>Something which should be brought up on the plus side of any regime.

The psychology of humanoids in social communities gives sport its meaning.
It is a very good thing and very important for people's self-esteem. People
also need to express themselves, find out the truth about themselves (this
is where the word *compete* derives from, the search [for truth]), people
need challenges away from the bread winning routine, that's why they climb
mountains, etc. The same question could also be asked of Art, Music, various
crafts, etc. (Ironically, it's a very M-L question!!) This takes us into
the bigger, more *core* subject of Achievement. What is it? Answer that
and you answer a lot of questions about human activity. BTW gymnasts
globally start much younger than 12-13. It's often only 4-5! You've also
heard of the child prodigy in music, maths and chess? I've seen and worked
with some. A child can be outstanding in a field of endeavour and happy too!

>>In her summary Ms Durant is only saying that holding smug views about
>>an unquestionably more equitable West is dangerous. Please explain the
>>rights of the individual to the Guildford Four, the Birmingham Six...
[snip]..
>>...innumerable victims of *rough justice* in Britain (there's even a high
>>profile TV programme inundated with outrageous cases!), the large numbers
>>of women imprisoned and criminalized simply because they don't have the
>>money to pay exorbitant rents, council taxes, the price of food for their
>>kids, the growing army of unemployed and homeless on the streets, etc,
>>etc, etc. Rights of the individual in the West? Really?
>
>        Well, let's compare it to the record of the marxist-leninist
>inspired Soviet Union or the satellite countries after 1948. Somehow I think
>that the list would be a great deal longer: like 20 million victims, or
>something similar. Please, again, don't lose perspective. Sure, there are
>abuses everywhere, but these abuses in democracies are relatively rare and
>freely aired in the media. Compare that with the record in the so-called
>socialists countries and the muzzling of the press.

Yes, yes, yes, we all know this already. Nobody is losing perspective,
but let's take another step up the ladder of developing this thread and
get off the bottom rung for a change!!! We realize that the comparisons
are supposed to be between the nasty reds and the snow white west, but
there is a tendency to overstate one's argument and gloss over the abuses
in the west.

Just because the press was muzzled in the Eastern bloc, and the Stalinist
Rakosi regime was particularly nasty, that doesn't mean the press isn't
also muzzled over here and that a lot of very nasty crap doesn't happen
under the auspices of our wonderfully benevolent and equitable western
governments (this is sarcasm, BTW.) The west does it all by subterfuge,
secrecy and much cleverer propaganda than the unsubtle stuff spewed out
by eastern bloc states. You'd be surprised at the amount of slimey
monsters crawling around underneath the glossy surface of their bullshit
if you'd take it upon yourself to check it out. I've seen some of it
first hand, too: a press D-notice slapped on embarrassing events on
British military bases in Germany (a picket of civilian workers on strike
were deliberately mown down by their manager in a truck,,,the perpetrator
got off scot-free.) It made the German press bigtime. The British press?
No way! And that was just a relatively small thing. Speak to soldiers who
served in Borneo, Aden, Northern Ireland, etc. It will boggle your mind!
Read Anthony Sampson about western corporate, er, *global misdemeanours*
(euphemistically, in the best tradition of western propagandists.)

I know the Soviet and other communist regimes were largely made up of
real swine, just as Ms Durant does (and has stated many times), but I
just don't like to see the myth of the benevolence of western capitalist
regimes propagated so readily just because everyone could point a finger
at someone else...let's broaden our horizon and share the criticism fairly
all around...

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 >, Eva Durant
> says:
>
>> I wonder if the author also examined the working conditions in many many
>> factories.  It is my understanding that countless workers were subjected
>> to extremely hazardous conditions, with absolutely no regard for their
>> physical well being.  As for the showers, good thing!  Since most of them
>> had none in their homes!

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
bowl in the bed-sitter with water heated up on the stove.

>I had the dubious pleasure of working in Hungarian and in English
>factories, thank you. I wonder how many of the individuals
>who refuse considering whatever I say on this list can say that.
>My husband had the chance of comparing actually the same
>workshops: milling/turning. So I can say, that in the 80s
>health and safety conditions were comparable (NOT
>satisfactory in either places).  I assure you, that
>in towns there were more showers in HUngarian homes,
>this part of civilisation haven't seem to reach the
>british isles together with the continental quilt,
>till the 80s.

I've lived in several places in countries around capitalist Europe
where the only toilet was a outside one (usually without sewage pipes,
the porcelain [if you were lucky] with just a hole in the ground.)
I get the strong impression that most contributors to this group
have lived very sheltered middle class lives. No wonder they're
giving Ms Durant such stick!!

>> Interesting that you should bring this into the topic.  I distinctively
>> remember being in classes with well over 35 students per teacher..during
>> the 50's and 60's.  And I don't recall much contact time with any of my
>> teachers.  For that matter, I recall very little concern displayed in
>> general for the students by the teaching body.  Regarding school
>> management, they simply considered themselves as being gods - and parents
>> were to bow down - big time! Let alone, be asked for co-operation.  In
>> general, I have no idea what you are comparing what with.>

Come and look at British state schools. The above comments could well
be describing them today (as Ms Durant more or less says.....)

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 06:16 PM 4/4/96 -0400, Aniko Dunford wrote:

>When John Lennon recorded the above, <snip> he enjoyed a financially
>sound lifestyle, well above and beyond the comprehension of *most of
>humanity*.

Then, at 10:58 PM 4/3/96 -0800, Aniko Dunford, responding to Eva Durant's
story of how her husband lost his job in Hungary because of a switch to
capitalist methods of production, wrote:

>Thank you for sharing this.  Speaking for myself only, I can finally
>place the root of your past displayed philosophies.

Well, well, well, Aniko.  Seems like you can't win for trying.  What you're
really saying is that it doesn't matter what your financial situation is -
you just can't criticize capitialism.  Perfection.  And you say that I'm
utopian.  Whew!

Joe Szalai

At 11:30 AM 4/4/96 -0800, Doug Hormann wrote a little about himself and told
us how much money he makes.  I don't know if his figures are true or not,
but I didn't expect anyone to reveal their income as I have.  It's just not
done (in Canada).  It's been my experience that Hungarians reveal their
incomes quite readily, whereas Canadians see that as taboo, sort of like
incest.  Anyone else notice that?

At 11:30 AM 4/4/96 -0800, Doug Hormann also wrote:

>I can indulge my passion for mountain biking and fly fishing without
>feeling too guilty about it.

Really?  I'm not much for mountain biking but I too have a passion for fly
fishing.  I've been doing it most of my life.

>Just so everything is out on the table.  I am a  deputy sheriff working
>full time in a local high school as a school resource officer.

Do you wear a uniform?

>Most of us are just average folks.

Are you trying to scare me now?

Joe Szalai

A short while back I posted a note about Mike Sakal's forthcoming
book:   __Dayton Hungarians:  Their Stories, Glories and Folklore__ .

        Mike called me tonight and told me that the response has been
overwhelming.  Less than one hundred copies are available in the print
run.  He wants to thank everyone for their response.  If you are interested
in reserving a copy, please call or write Mike as soon as possible.

        Mike Sakal, Writer and Editor
        Dayton Hungarians History Book Project
        9705 Miami County Line Road
        Union OH  45322

        (513) 884-7555
        he does not have e-mail

        This is a not-for-profit project that has grant coverage.  The book
contains oral histories and photos and a history of the Hungarian community
in Southwestern Ohio.

In article >, Yoko Ono fan Joe
Szalai > writes:

>Johanne and Sam, please feel free to sing along.  It's not as rousing as
>"The International" but that's OK with me.
>
>               IMAGINE
<Snip lyrics...>
>
>                         John Lennon
>
>OK, OK.  I'm a Lennonist!  Are you happy now?
>
>Perhaps I should have quoted Madonna's "Material Girl", but you already
know
>the words for that!
>
>Joe Szalai

Strange. I would have though the lyrics to "Revolution" were directed at
you. And I always had you pegged as a Paul McCartney fan.
Sam Stowe

P.S. -- Instant Karma's gonna get you...

In response to my posting to Re: Kadar Regime,
Eva Durant replies:

>> J. Hernadi,
>> G. Farkas
>> E. Balogh
>
>They seem to continuuously refer to the times pre 70-s,
>and I agree with most of the things they say.
>However, from the 60s/70s I should me more of
>an authority, as I happened to live there.

First of all Eva, the replies to your posting above,  along with my own,
were in direct response to your following statements (to refresh your memory):

"That in Hungary inspite of the totalitarian conditions there were still
positive developments; brainwashing was not particularly successful and was
given up gradually.  There were internationally accepted successes in the
arts, sciences etc., and and Hungary seemed to possess comparable number of
happy people to other countries".

Considering the contents of the above quote from you  -  which began this
entire debate -  with it's obvious reference to timeframe, I can honestly
say that your opening statement comes as a great surprise; and your
following words, leave me in equal as much of an awe.

In article >, ANIKO DUNFORD
> says:
>
>Ok...time to steel from Johanne;  Joe...Joe....Joe... (thanks Jo!)
>This is very uplifting Mr. Lennonist! Only one teeny weeny problem!!! When
>John Lennon recorded the above, (which I believe made the top hits for a
>good long while, if my memory serves me right) he enjoyed a financially
>sound lifestyle, well above and beyond the comprehension of *most of
>humanity*.  Easy to speak of a Utopic Fantasy, when such cushions await you
>beyond your guarded gates and unending resources!  - nor - have I ever heard
>that he willingly parted with any of his *possessions* for the benefit of
>humanity at large.  As such, the words of his "nota" become just
>that...word, speaking of the same Utopic Fantasy so often wittnessed on this
>list? :) - Try another one!

Er, excuse me, but John Lennon (and the rest of the Beatles for that
matter) wasn't exactly born with a silver spoon in his mouth. In fact,
his upbringing was very much feet on the ground working class. He got
into the music business to get away from all that depressing stuff,
although, even after he'd made it big time, those memories were always
there to haunt him. Take a visit to Liverpool and check out the poverty
and rats one day and you'll understand where this stuff comes from...

Thank you,

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 08:50 PM 4/4/96 -0500, you wrote:

>Well, well, well, Aniko.  Seems like you can't win for trying.  What you're
>really saying is that it doesn't matter what your financial situation is -
>you just can't criticize capitialism.  Perfection.  And you say that I'm
>utopian.  Whew!
>
No, no, no Joe; what I am really saying, gets being edited....cleverly mind
you... to reflect what it is you are trying to get me to say...?  Perhaps if
you leave them in one piece, they  *ouch* just might make sense to you too!

Regards,
Aniko Dunford

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

At 12:01 AM 4/5/96 GMT, you wrote:
>
>Er, excuse me, but John Lennon (and the rest of the Beatles for that
>matter) wasn't exactly born with a silver spoon in his mouth. In fact,
>his upbringing was very much feet on the ground working class. He got
>into the music business to get away from all that depressing stuff,
>although, even after he'd made it big time, those memories were always
>there to haunt him. Take a visit to Liverpool and check out the poverty
>and rats one day and you'll understand where this stuff comes from...
>
>Thank you,
>
>George

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;

You're ever so welcome:)
Aniko:)
Ciao!

Joe Szalai > wrote:
>At 10:58 PM 4/3/96 -0800, Aniko Dunford, our erstwhile observer, wrote:
>
>>> Anecdote: when we lived in Hungary (80s), my husband due to lack
>>> of Hungarian language skills, ended up as "bekacsosz" (river
>>> warden) for the local coop.   In 1987 all such employees -
>>> mostly semi-retired/handicapped old people except the odd
>>> mancunian, were called to a meeting. The boss said:
>>> "Comrades, we have to apply from now  capitalist
>>> methods of production. You are all fired!"
>>>
>>Thank you for sharing this.  Speaking for myself only, I can finally
>>place the root of your past displayed philosophies.
>
>And speaking for myself (who else could I speak for anyways?) I suggest you
>not get into PR work for capitalism.  People need bread, not psychoanalysis!
>
>Joe Szalai

Now Joe: If you intend to *rain on my parade* at least do it
efficiently and fairly. Your anecdote, was preceeded by a paragraph which
you chose to cut.  It was BTW, very relevant to my thought process.

Aniko:)

At 02:14 AM 4/4/96 -0500, Sam Stowe, who should be readying himself to
celebrate the resurrection on Sunday rather than prolonging his non-argument
with me, wrote:

>I'm not trying to avoid your question.

Then what have you been doing the last week?

>I just don't want to compare apples and oranges.

Don't cry the blues now.  You've been comparing apples and oranges all along.

>A society that has reached an industrial level of technology
>is a far different organism than one still at a pre-industrial stage of
>development.

Yes it is.  But oppression by any other name is...?

>I even invited you to give us all some examples to argue from.

Say what?

>That's the equivalent of allowing you to start out of the blocks a
>couple of seconds ahead of every one else in a foot race.

Do you think I need the handicap?

>As usual, though, you're more interested in hysterics than you are in
>actually talking through an issue.

Can't argue with you.  You're the expert on hysterics!

>And, as usual, you're talking out of your ass on something you know nothing
>about.

I thought the aroma therapy would do you good.

>The Islamic regime in Iran is much less "socialism with a turban" than it
>is an mixture of Shiite theocracy, Persian traditionalism and bazaar
>capitalism.

Wow.  Blow me away, man.  How many 'kinds' of capitalism are there?  I'm
told that the market behaves naturally.  If that's true, then there's no
meaning in turban, bazaar, tribal, peasant, pre or post anything, kind of
capitalism.  Why do you insist on saying that apples are oranges?  Say "NO"
to genetic engineering!

>For those of our readers who, unlike Joe, actually want to learn about
>something before yammering about it on this newsgroup, there's an excellent
>article in this month's "Atlantic Monthly" about the rising influence of
>bazaar capitalists in radical Islamic movements throughout the Mideast.

Is that the article that's a reprint from "The Watchtower"?

>Finally, the difference, once again, between M-L and Christianity (and
>Islam and most every other major religion in the world) is that
>Christianity allows the believer the intellectual freedom to compare faith
>to experience and observation and attempt a reconciliation of the two.

Hmm.  Religion "allows" intellectual freedom?  (Or should that be, Religiion
allows "intellectual" freedom?)  What a novel concept!   I think I should
check it out.  Later.

>M-L dogmatically insists that it knows exactly how history will unfold and
>does not brook any kind of critical stance on the part of the believer to
>compare M-L's claims against the reality of what M-L does in practice.

Unfortunately, this is a 'de riguer' tendency of anyone, or any party, in
power.  This is not a good way to indict the M-L'ers of uniqueness.  Perhaps
your argument is with 'power' or 'the degree of abuse of power' and not M-L
excesses, per se.

>If it did, you and Eva wouldn't always have to fall back on that limp crap
>about how "true" M-L has never been tried.

But they didn't, Sam.  They didn't.  Remember?  Power corrupts and absolute
power corrupts absolutely.  Surely you're not suggesting that M-L'ers can't
be corrupted?  Remember that their politics and policies were not created in
a vacuum.  Rightfully or not, they believed that they were surrounded by
hostile countries.  If you believe it, your politics will reflect it.

>You'd instead be able to admit that it has been tried and didn't work and
>be able to either amend and refine it from there or walk away from it
>entirely.

Which would cause you less consternation, Sam?  I'll do it Sam.  I'll do it
just to keep you happy.  Trust me!

>One more important point -- Christianity (and Islam, et. al.) are belief
>systems that touch on every aspect of human existence.

Yes.  You're right.  But that's a problem for me.  I don't want it to touch
my existence but it does.  It is pervasive.  It makes me unfree.  But that's
what we call freedom.  Doublespeak methinks.  But freedom's just another
word for...

>M-L's dilemma (and its downfall) is that it must either politicize those
>other aspects or stand mute on them.

"Must"?  Are you an M-L theorist?  What is to be done?

>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

At 10:23 PM 4/4/96 GMT, you wrote:
Dear George:

>In article >, Eva Durant
> 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
>>> factories.  It is my understanding that countless workers were subjected
>>> to extremely hazardous conditions, with absolutely no regard for their
>>> physical well being.  As for the showers, good thing!  Since most of them
>>> had none in their homes!

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
>bowl in the bed-sitter with water heated up on the stove.
Aniko cuts in:
Ditto; finally, we're beginning to get on track here!  And no, the showers
were not in a western country.... they are described by E.D. as having been
in Hungary.

Eva Durant:
>>I had the dubious pleasure of working in Hungarian and in English
>>factories, thank you. I wonder how many of the individuals
>>who refuse considering whatever I say on this list can say that.
>>My husband had the chance of comparing actually the same
>>workshops: milling/turning. So I can say, that in the 80s
>>health and safety conditions were comparable (NOT
>>satisfactory in either places).  I assure you, that
>>in towns there were more showers in HUngarian homes,
>>this part of civilisation haven't seem to reach the
>>british isles together with the continental quilt,
>>till the 80s.
George:
>I've lived in several places in countries around capitalist Europe
>where the only toilet was a outside one (usually without sewage pipes,
>the porcelain [if you were lucky] with just a hole in the ground.)
>I get the strong impression that most contributors to this group
>have lived very sheltered middle class lives. No wonder they're
>giving Ms Durant such stick!!

Aniko cuts in ... again... how rude.. but oh so necessaire... for the
record..  George; re above; do you realize, that you are arguing Eva
Durant's points agains Evan Durant's points? Or, am I really going bonkers here
?
>
Aniko here again:
>>> Interesting that you should bring this into the topic.  I distinctively
>>> remember being in classes with well over 35 students per teacher..during
>>> the 50's and 60's.  And I don't recall much contact time with any of my
>>> teachers.  For that matter, I recall very little concern displayed in
>>> general for the students by the teaching body.  Regarding school
>>> management, they simply considered themselves as being gods - and parents
>>> were to bow down - big time! Let alone, be asked for co-operation.  In
>>> general, I have no idea what you are comparing what with.>
Now, George:
>Come and look at British state schools. The above comments could well
>be describing them today (as Ms Durant more or less says.....)

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!!!

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

On Wed, 3 Apr 1996, S. Bihari wrote:

> "Ki mint veti a'gya't, u'gy alussza a'lma't"
>
> Literally translated, it means: "(The quality of) your sleep depends on
> the way you make your bed."  Figuratively, however, it implies that the
> success of your endeavors depend on your (careful) preparations.
>
> Martha
>
E's itt van me'g: "Ki mint vet u'gy arat"