There is an interesting article by TGM in the July 1992 issue of
_Journal of Democracy._  The title of the article is _Socialism, Capitalism
and Modernity_ and in it he says the following about East European
liberalism:
___________________________________________

"It is important to understand that the resistance to liberal democracy in
Eastern Europe rests on no ethical arguments save one (if this can be
considered ethical, as I think it can): namely, that liberal democracy
is _alien_.  Oswald Spengler said in 1918 that the trouble with German
Liberals was not that they were liberal, but that they were _English_.
This argument, I am sorry to say, prevails.  Not long ago in Bucharest,
Romania, there was a public demonstration against 'Abroad' as such.  The
main complaint against socialism today -- even in Russia!--is that it
resulted from foreign conquest, or in other words, was a species of rule
by agents of 'Abroad.'  (In fact, communism created the first wholly
indigenous elites in East European history, replacing the cosmopolitan
imperial aristocracies of old.)  The innocent Orient raped by the brutal
and cunning Occident - this is the image that dominates discussion of
both socialism and capitalism in Eastern Europe. [. . .]

 _The Plight of East European Liberalism_

Eastern Europe's liberals are routinely accused of being in cahoots  with
the socialist left.  They very seldom are, but the romantic-populist right
sees clearly that they are both 'Western' and modernist, which is enough
to damn them both.  The liberal movements are fighting a rearguard battle.
This is not to deny that a democratic revolution did take place in Eastern
Europe, but the democracy that came out of it is of the Jacobin variety: a
majoritarian, plebiscitarian, antipluralistic democracy transfixed by the
old socialist myth of direct participation.  There is nothing about it
that is liberal.

All the surveys and polling data show that public opinion in our region
rejects dictatorship, but would like to see a strong man at the helm;
favors popular government, but hates parliament, parties, and the press;
likes social welfare legislation and equality, but not trade unions; wants
to topple the present government, but disapproves of the idea of a regular
opposition; supports the notion of the market (which is a code word for
Western-style living standards), but wishes to punish and expropriate the
rich and condemns banking for preying on simple working people; favors a
guaranteed minimum income, but sees unemployment as an immoral state and
watns to punish or possibly deport the unemployed.  In one Hungarian poll,
more than 80 percent of the respondents condemned communism as "evil", but
when asked to name their favorite politicians, listed four former
communist leaders among the top five.  These results could be dismissed as
a reflection of passing confusion, one of the temporary 'difficulties of
transition.'  To my mind, however, that would be a grave mistake.  The
opinions summarized above are characteristic of a situation that has not
essentially changed since the emergence of revolutionary socialism.

East Europeans still do not want to accept the 'alienated' individualism
and social diversity of liberal capitalism, but are unwilling to return to
the kind of harsh, even tyrannical, rule that would be needed to forge
essential unity.  Are they really unique in this?

Some might say that all this represents a resurgence of 'conservatism,'
but the rejection of modernity is not conservative.  After all, it was not
Burke but Robespierre who was unable to make his peace with modernity."
__________________________________

Zsuzsa Csergo

Charles Atherton writes:
>My own belief is that most academics are middle class children and have
>developed a sense of middle class guilt because their families have done
>well and they, the children, don't appreciate how hard it is to make
>a good living.

There is a lot of truth to that. I heard it from an early SZETA member (way
before it was legal) that yes, she is involved because she feels class
guilt, coming from a nice comfortable family situation. To the extent that
self-made men (and women!) tend to feel little compassion towards the less
fortunate (their reasoning goes: hey I could make it so I know it's doable
-- the fallacy is obvious) and academia has fewer of them, this goes some
way towards explaining things.

> I am working class, myself.  My father worked in a tractor factory and
> belonged to the United Auto Workers.  I am an academic,
So you are not working class -- your father was. BTW, to be a UAW member
these days is to be pretty high on the totem pole, since these kind of solid
blue-collar jobs are disappearing. Most people who enter the workforce with
a comparable skill level in the nineties do *not* make over $20 an hour, do
*not* have benefits, and can *not* count on a powerful union. Most jobs are
in services, at less than half the wage, no benefits, no union (the two are
of course related).

> but I was taught early that the world didn't owe you a
> damned thing and that if you wanted something, you had to work for it.
And I bet that's what you are teaching your children too. But since they
come from a middle class family they might feel class guilt nevertheless.

> I would suggest that socialism is primarily a middle class pseudo-religion
> that middle class children believe in intellectually, but are secretly
> thankful that they don't have to live under.
Socialism/communism as we knew it had lots of religious aspects. But it was
also popular with the agrarian poor, who didn't have any class guilt. Still
a quarter of the world (China) has to live under it, and who does and who
doesn't seems to do little with class, more with geography. Whether you are
rich or poor, feel guilty or not, if you live in North Korea you live under
it, if you live in South Korea you don't.

Just for the record, while I don't think that "guilt" is appropriate, I do
think that privileges by birth are nothing to be proud of, and a system that
offers equal (or at least less unequal) chances to those coming from less
privileged family environments is preferable to one that does nothing to
address the issue that we are born free, but not born equal.

Andra1s Kornai

Despite Jeliko's ingenious hints, my reluctance to get my news from the
Unification Church has nothing to do with the religious beliefs of the
paper's owners.  The World & I does not belong to individuals or to a
corporation.  The paper belongs to a church (unlike the New Yorker).
This is fine with me; I have nothing against the Christian Science Monitor,
for example.  But the Moonies are not just any old religious group, as you
may know.  They are a proselytizing church with a less than sterling
reputation for probity.  Proselytization and objectivity are difficult
concepts to reconcile.

With the amount of information floating around, the question is not what
to read, but what not to read.  As long as I have a choice, I'd just as
soon stay away from products that carry such an obvious blemish.  This is a
consumer choice, not a judicial decision.  They may or may not be an
objective news source, I don't know.  I'm just a consumer deciding which
product to buy.  Since this particular blemish does not bother you, your
choice as a consumer differs from mine.  It is hard to tell if this makes
you a more open-minded customer than people who choose otherwise.  But
don't let this bother you.  Go ahead, read the Moonies and feel superior
to people who don't.

-----
Gabor Fencsik

Andras Kornai takes exception to my calling TGM a "one-man Hungarian
neoconservative movement", but does not go as far as to actually name a
second Hungarian neoconservative.  It is not easy to gauge how much
influence TGM's writings have nowadays.  As a matter of fact, I did not
mean to imply that he lacks influence.  It would have been just as correct
to call Hayek a "one-man neoconservative movement" in Britain during the
forties.  Influence is not a matter of numbers.  It does work in strange
and mysterious ways though:  people are often influenced by the thoughts
and writings of folks they never heard of, and certainly have not read.
Hayek is an excellent example.

Andras offers interesting speculations as to why the neoconservative view
remains such a cry in the wilderness.  I would hesitate to attribute the
intellectual vacuum on the right to the influence of Marx, or Lukacs, for
that matter.  TGM is one of the very few intellectuals in Hungary who are
unabashedly pro-capitalist.  This makes him an exception in Hungarian
intellectual circles.  The view that Property is Theft is still widely
held in Hungary, and many Hungarian intellectuals would be embarrassed
to come out and sing the praises of private enterprise in public, even
in cases where they have no aversion to the filthy lucre in their private
life.  TGM is an exception.  He supports capitalism on political and
moral principles, not considerations of economic efficiency.

I think anti-capitalist views predominate among Hungarian intellectuals
for the same reason they predominate among the population at large.  Marxism
has nothing to do with it.  It is an open secret that the last Marxists
disappeared from Hungary many years ago.  One is much more likely to bump
into Marxists on the streets of Seattle than Budapest.  The aversions and
prejudices regarding capitalism go much deeper than the Communist episode
of 1948-89.  They are leftovers from the feudal era, pickled and conserved
by a long series of authoritarian regimes since then.  The ethos of
capitalism calls for a culture of risk-taking, trustworthiness, creative
destruction, enterprise, self-reliance.  I think it is safe to say that
these virtues have not been cultivated in Hungary since the end of the
pre-WWI liberal era.  And that era, as we know, ended with a bang, not a
whimper, and it also ended with the liberalism of the previous 50 years
discredited and in ruins.  I have no doubt these very virtues will take
root eventually, but I am not sure whether we'll live to see it happen.
And even when it does happen, intellectuals as a group are going to be
the last to notice.  I'm afraid TGM is likely to remain a lone voice for
a little while longer.

In the meantime, we should count our blessings, and observe that a one-man
neoconservative movement is preferable to no neoconservative movement
at all.  At least the vacuum on right side of the political spectrum is not
completely filled by the likes of Csurka, who peddle a socialist program in
a rabid nationalist coating.

-----
Gabor Fencsik

Seems that the "existing" capitalism has as much to do with the ethos
below, as  "existing -ex socialism with its aims. I can go into details
if required, but none of the risktaking, trustworthiness etc is around me
here in the UK. Eva Durant


 >The ethos of capitalism calls for a culture of risk-taking, trustworthiness,
 creative
> destruction, enterprise, self-reliance.  I think it is safe to say that
> these virtues have not been cultivated in Hungary since the end of the
> pre-WWI liberal era.  And that era, as we know, ended with a bang, not a
> whimper, and it also ended with the liberalism of the previous 50 years
> discredited and in ruins.  I have no doubt these very virtues will take
> root eventually, but I am not sure whether we'll live to see it happen.
> And even when it does happen, intellectuals as a group are going to be
> the last to notice.  I'm afraid TGM is likely to remain a lone voice for
> a little while longer.
>
> In the meantime, we should count our blessings, and observe that a one-man
> neoconservative movement is preferable to no neoconservative movement
> at all.  At least the vacuum on right side of the political spectrum is not
> completely filled by the likes of Csurka, who peddle a socialist program in
> a rabid nationalist coating.
>
> -----
> Gabor Fencsik
> 

On Tue, 19 Jul 1994 22:35:57 -0700 Andras Kornai said:
>> I am working class, myself.  My father worked in a tractor factory and
>> belonged to the United Auto Workers.  I am an academic,
>So you are not working class -- your father was.

--First of all, please let me apologize for intruding in this discussion.
I am not Hungarian, but a professor whose field is social policy.  I am
very interested in Eastern Europe because of the transition and its effects
on social policy.  Having visited Budapest for academic purposes in 1991,
I find that Hungary has a special fascination.  It has a unique historical
position, and highly intelligent, sophisticated people, who, like all of us
have their bloody-minded moments.  I fell in love with Hungary, so I'm
hardly objective.  I try not to get into direct network discussions, but
am content to be what Internet language calls a "lurker," but it was late
one night, and I let myself get drawn into this discussion.  I'll try to
be careful in the future!  Having said that, I guess I'm into this one
for the time being, so I'll stick my neck out for a bit.

Your point is that, as an academic, I have moved up in class over my
father.  Sociologically, that would be correct.  Emotionally, it is
not that simple.  I have a great respect for people who do dirty jobs
for a living.  I cannot discard old habits--I raise my own vegetables,
just like Pop did, and I am never happier than when working on an engine
or working with a pick and shovel in my back garden.  A lot of my
views are conditioned by my working class background and some of my
colleagues consider my humor somewhat earthy and crude at times.  In
America, we have a saying:  The apple never falls far from the tree.
Whether I want to be or not, I am more like my family than I am
different from them.

 BTW, to be a UAW member
>these days is to be pretty high on the totem pole, since these kind of solid
>blue-collar jobs are disappearing. Most people who enter the workforce with
>a comparable skill level in the nineties do *not* make over $20 an hour, do
>*not* have benefits, and can *not* count on a powerful union. Most jobs are
>in services, at less than half the wage, no benefits, no union (the two are
>of course related).
>
---My father died in 1958, having been retired for four years.  He
never made $20 an hour.  He had an assembly line job.  He never would
have gotten it if it hadn't been for the war.  Still, your point is
valid in part, since it was a decent job at the time, although not
as good as such a job would be now.

>> but I was taught early that the world didn't owe you a
>> damned thing and that if you wanted something, you had to work for it.
>And I bet that's what you are teaching your children too. But since they
>come from a middle class family they might feel class guilt nevertheless.
>
---Not so far, but your point is still valid.  Maybe in another generation
or two.

>Socialism/communism as we knew it had lots of religious aspects. But it was
>also popular with the agrarian poor, who didn't have any class guilt. Still
>a quarter of the world (China) has to live under it, and who does and who
>doesn't seems to do little with class, more with geography. Whether you are
>rich or poor, feel guilty or not, if you live in North Korea you live under
>it, if you live in South Korea you don't.
>
---But, as we saw in Hungary, Poland, and the former Czechoslovakia,
even though you have to live under it for awhile, you don't have to
totally accept it, and when the opportunity arises, you either escape
from it or work to change it if you don't like it.  Both alternatives
take considerable courage.

>Just for the record, while I don't think that "guilt" is appropriate, I do
>think that privileges by birth are nothing to be proud of, and a system that
>offers equal (or at least less unequal) chances to those coming from less
>privileged family environments is preferable to one that does nothing to
>address the issue that we are born free, but not born equal.
>
--I agree with you completely.

Charles Atherton

Subject: Re: Liberals Everywhere (where was Bibo)
From: JELIKO, 
Date: 17 Jul 94 16:26:20 GMT
In article > JELIKO, 
writes:
>
>Imi Bokor writes:
>> JELIKO ) wrote:
>> : I believe that anti-Semitism was always a territory of a small
minority
>in
>> : Hungary.
>
>> : Regards,Jeliko.
>
>> these observations are not shared by the jews i know in budapest. most
>changed
>> their names to hide their jewish identity. blum became banyasz,
schwartz
>> became sasadi, schwartz became somlai, breuer became barta, blassz
became
>> dozsa, augstein became agas, blumenstein became budai, blum became
>baranyai,
>> etc. this was not because of the tolerance and acceptance experienced
>from
>> the vast majority of the population.
>
>So the Jews who changed their names or maintained the changed names in
the
>US, also did it because of the above reason?

i must confess that i have no idea about which jews from hungary in the
united states of america have preserved or modified their surnames what
their reasons might be. i must also confess to being unable to see the
relevance of this to the question of the extent of any anti-semitism in
 hungary.

> Beside which all the name
>changes you cited were from German to Hungarian. A lot of, for example,
>Slovaks and Germans also Magyarized their names. Is your argument valid
in
>that case also?

the names you cite as being german are, as you have correctly noted,
of german origin. nevertheless, i doubt that anyone bearing these names
would be surprised at being taken to be jewish on the basis of the
surname.

i know several families in hungary of slavik and germanic background and
none felt the need to change their names. of course i could be mistaken,
and names like szomov, szlavik, novak, hinterleitner, lukovics, bojcsuk,
muller could be the names attila and arpad gave their daughters.

my argument concerned the perceptions of the jews i know in hungary. they
tell me they live in a veritable sea of anti-semitism. they tell me that
it
was the fear of this anti-semitism that lead them or their parents to
change their names. their perceptions could be wrong. they could be
imagining it all. but then, what has prompted this mass paranoia?

d.a.

Jeliko--

You're a little off on my views. I assume that no news source is impartial.
Journalistic objectivity does not exist. That's why it's best to grab one's
news from a variety of sources, as I try. Actually, discussion lists such as
"Hungary" are arguably a better source of news, since every statement can be
potentially dissected right after impact. How much effect does a letter to the
editor of the New York Times have? Perhaps the Times should host discussion
threads.

As for the Moonie-owned paper: well, it's a Moonie-owned paper,

Regards, Marc

Andras--

For the moment, the far right is still shell-shocked by the results of the
election, running around telling anyone who'll listen that the end of the
world is at hand. What they do when they regroup is anyone's guess.

Regards,

Marc Nasdor
          "Intellectual property is intellectual theft."

                                                      -Anonymous

KEDVES OLVASO !

LEHET OTTHON DOLGOZNI NYUGATI CEGEKNEK/SZERVEKNEK MELYEK
VALUTABAN FIZETNEK?  HA HALLOTT VALAMILYEN MUNKAKOZVETI-
TO IRODAROL, VAGY EGY MUNKALTATOK REFERENCIA LISTAJAROL,
KEREM SZEPEN ERTESITSEN.  BARMILYEN MEGOLDAS ERDEKEL, ES
NAGYON SZEPEN MEGKOSZONNEK MINDEN JOTANACSOT.

TISZTELETTEL:

DR. SZABO ATTILA
MONTREAL/CANADA

In reply to your message of "Wed, 20 Jul 94 15: 15:10 EDT."
             >
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 94 13:11:23 -0700
From: 

> Jeliko, and others,
>
> It seems the name Gerencser is not an uncommon Hungarian name.
>                    ^^^
> However, my name is spelled Gelencser

I think that was small joke at your expense, it's a stereotype that
orientals mis-pronounce L as R.  E.g.: What is a "rook, rook"?  What
you hear when Godzilla flies over Tokyo.  (Or Godzirra fries...?)

--Greg

Charles,
>If the presence of Chinese is such a great threat to the Hungarian
>way of life, should we in America welcome so many Hungarians?  By the
>same logic, wouldn't they be a threat to the American way of life?
>Personally, I enjoy having so many internationals in this country,
>and don't see a problem.  Just wanted to comment on what seems to
>be a problem in logic.

No inconsistancy here, Charles.  First, there is not even a noticeable
number of Hungarians coming to the US, but your point is immigrants in
general.  The US is unique in the world in being populated by people
from around the world, though western Europeans certainly have a greater
claim to the legacy of the US than most ethnic groups, based on history;
it is not insignificant that British, Dutch, German and French people
were the ones who shed blood and make great sacrifices to establish this
country - the rest of us came when the hard work was done.  You will notice
that among the signers of the Declaration of Independence, there is not
one Wang, Patel, Szabo, Kowalski, or Kim, among them.  The point is, out
of at least a sense of gratitude and curtosy (spelling?), immigrants to the
US should have no reservations about assimilation.  The assertions by the
Hispanic US federal judge who performed an citizenship swaring-in cerimony
in Spanish, that taking the oath of citizenship would mean more to these
people if it were done in there native language, is bull - he should be
stripped of his judgeship for this act of promoting treason.  This type of
shameless rejection of the culture and adopted kinship to their new
country is an example of the tangible results of multiculturalism.  But agian,
the US is alone (with the possible exception of Australia) in being made up
of people from other places.  Hungary is not such a country - for the most
part, though there certainly are Hungarians with other than Magyar ancestry,
and as I said, I'm one fo them, as are most of you on this list.  With a very
few exceptions, every country in the world is populated by an ethnic
group which settled that country.  Rejection of large scale, or small scale,
immigration is the right of every country, as part of their right to
control their borders.  In fact, control of state borders is a fundamental
characteristic of a country.  As long of such a desire for isolation is
not linked to beligerance, as was the case with Hitler, self imposed isolation
is a reasonable course.  No one has a right to immigrate to any other country.

Paul

DEAR READER:

I AM LOOKING FOR INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS WHO EMPLOY
WESTERN CITIZENS (AMONG THEM THOSE OF HUNGARIAN ORIGIN)
IN HUNGARY.  IF YOU KNOW ABOUT ANY REFERENCES, THAT MAY
HELP IN THIS REGARD, PLEASE SHARE IT/THEM WITH ME. I AM
ALSO INTERESTED IN EMPLOYMENT AGENCIES WHO COULD MEDIA-
TE BETWEEN SUCH ORGANIZATIONS AND PROSPECTIVE EMPLOYEES

YOUR HELP WOULD BE VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.  THANK YOU IN
ADVANCE.

RESPECTFULLY YOURS:

ATTILA SZABO, Ph.D.
MONTREAL/CANADA

On Tue, 19 Jul 1994, JELIKO wrote:

> The HVG has the exchange rates listed.


Thank you!

                                                        Attila

On Wed, 20 Jul 1994 15:07:15 EDT paul said:
You will notice
>that among the signers of the Declaration of Independence, there is not
>one Wang, Patel, Szabo, Kowalski, or Kim, among them.

--You've made a good point.

  The point is, out
>of at least a sense of gratitude and curtosy (spelling?), immigrants to the
>US should have no reservations about assimilation.

--I can't argue with this either, given the polyglot nature of this country.

  The assertions by the
>Hispanic US federal judge who performed an citizenship swaring-in cerimony
>in Spanish, that taking the oath of citizenship would mean more to these
>people if it were done in there native language, is bull - he should be
>stripped of his judgeship for this act of promoting treason.

--Well, I assume that you are intentionally using hyperbole.

Hungary is not such a country - for the most
>part, though there certainly are Hungarians with other than Magyar ancestry,
>and as I said, I'm one fo them, as are most of you on this list.

--Doesn't this sort of destroy your own argument?

  With a very
>few exceptions, every country in the world is populated by an ethnic
>group which settled that country.

--At this point, I suspect that there are very few that have pure stock,
if by that you mean people of a single ethnic group.

  Rejection of large scale, or small scale,
>immigration is the right of every country, as part of their right to
>control their borders.  In fact, control of state borders is a fundamental
>characteristic of a country.  As long of such a desire for isolation is
>not linked to beligerance, as was the case with Hitler, self imposed isolation
>is a reasonable course.  No one has a right to immigrate to any other country.
>
--All of this is legally true.  But a country that never accepts others soon
becomes very insular and fails to thrive, I think.

Charles

In reply to your message of "Wed, 20 Jul 94 19: 34:34 EDT."
             >
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 94 17:16:25 -0700
From: 

Zoli Fekete writes:
[Moonie paper vs Christian Scientist paper]

I'm making no claims for the "objectivity" of a Moonie paper.  I have
no idea how much/little editorial independance there is at the paper or
 magazine.

Covers are good for deciding on which book to buy, I suppose, but as
far as judging the contents...reading is pretty good too.

I only brought up the Monitor to establish the possibility that a
church could publish "responsibly".  As I know nothing of CS political
views, I acknowledge your point about the Moonie rightist reputation.

I was hoping someone on the list knew the reputation of some of the staff I
 listed.


--Greg

Greg,
> I wonder how many people read the Christian Science Monitor?
 I find it much better coverage than the NYT-Boston Globe-Newsweek-Time
bunch, their takes are balanced (though sometimes predictable), and
their affiliation hardly shows outside their small Bible Corner column.
Naturally any organization valuing their religious conviction more than
the life of their children is a bit too right-wing for me ;-(, but it
does not seem to affect their non-religious reporting in general. It's
left as an exercise to the reader to figure how is this different from
the Moon-sect, widely regarded as harboring rightist political leaning,
whose WashTimes is considered on either side of the political spectrum
the last refuge of conservative voice in DC...

Dear Jeliko,

> why did you start making snide remarks about something you have not
> even seen? I will judge your other opinions the same way in the future.
 Did you mean this is going to be some change ;-(? My remark did not
refer to the magazine you mentioned, on which I take no issue till you
show something that is supposed to be unbiased - then we may decide
whether it really is or just fitting well with your preference. I just
pointed to the high irony in your mentioning Moon's WashTimes concern
that many regard as a prime exhibit of biased/advocate journalism.
 As for the question of Jewish bias in the NYT I do not see where does it
get you - the one area they unabashedly take side is anything related to
Israel. It may not have to do with the ownership, but that's the way
their journalists are.

-- Zoli

II  would also be ingterested
I would also be interested in possible places of employment in Hungary of
WEstern citizens.

>> It seems the name Gerencser is not an uncommon Hungarian name.
>>                    ^^^
>> However, my name is spelled Gelencser

>I think that was small joke at your expense, it's a stereotype that
>orientals mis-pronounce L as R.  E.g.: What is a "rook, rook"?  What
>you hear when Godzilla flies over Tokyo.  (Or Godzirra fries...?)


Although this is way off Hungary, let me point out the following east-asian
linguistic tidbit:

Chinese speakers tend to substitute "L" for "R", e.g., "vely nice flied
lice."
Japanese speakers tend to substitute "R" for "L", e.g., "rook, a rittle
rion."

Both mispronunciations are overcompensations because their own languages use
sounds that are somewhere between our hard "R" and "L".

bill

P.S.  Even further off topic, Godzilla's original Japanese name was "Gojira".
 An American producer changed it for U.S. consumption.

If cultural preservation is not an issue; if identity to one ethnic
group, and not to another, is not an issue, why are any of you on this
list?  Does having a Hungarian lineage have any importance?  I would assume
ethnic identity is an issue with most people who take some interest in
their heritage.  It is not surprise that it is a source of pride for the
non-European groups who well meaning anarchists opposed to my views on this
topic are defending.  Why is it that Japanese, Chinese, and Asien Indians
tend to marry within their groups?  Ethnic identity seems to be an issue
with them, does it not.  I have Indian friends who tell me their families
would flip out if any of my friends would date or even worse, marry an
American.  The reasoning is, an American or other non-Indian cannot accept
their culture, and religion, and is not an Indian.  As a matter of fact,
even marrying into another INdian group is strongly opposed, ie. a
Pujab man and a Gugurat girl, or two people from any 2 Indian states.
Again, the prejudice" racial policies of Japan seem to escape the scorn
of you all who attact ethnic isolation in Europe.  Should not Japan and
South Korea be expected to accept economic refugees, as western Europe
has, including European refugess?  If you asked Japan is accept it's
share of the refugees from Bosnia, then you'd see some racism.  They would
not allow such a mixing between ethnic groups in their country, but are all
to happy to allow Euroipe to take in the refugees Japan should be
responsible for.  It seem ethnic identity is not an issue, so long as it's
the loss of a European group at risk.  That is the ultimate in hipocracy, and
is too strong of a trend to be ignored today.

Paul

Marc writes:

> For the moment, the far right is still shell-shocked by the results of the
> election, running around telling anyone who'll listen that the end of the
> world is at hand. What they do when they regroup is anyone's guess.

My impression just from this list was that it wasn't only the far right
that was unhappy with the results.  There were quite a few liberals
among them.

Joe

Charles Atherton writes:

> I find that Hungary has a special fascination.  It has a unique historical
> position, and highly intelligent, sophisticated people, who, like all of us
> have their bloody-minded moments.  I fell in love with Hungary, so I'm
> hardly objective.

All right!  We need more people like you, Charles.  If for nothing else
to at least balance the effect of some Hungarian-born here in the U.S.

> In America, we have a saying:  The apple never falls far from the tree.
> Whether I want to be or not, I am more like my family than I am
> different from them.

We have the same saying in Hungary, too, but mentioning it is considered
not politically correct these days;  too many of the current ruling
elite over there are the children of the former Communist nomenklatura.
They would like us to belive that at least in their case the apple fell
far from the tree.  That's why even here, on this list, it's not
advisable to ask from the wearer of a familiar name: "By the way, aren't
you by any chance related to ...".

Joe Pannon

Dear Greg,

I did not mean to write "[Moonie paper vs Christian Scientist paper]" -
just to point out that some people (myself included) do read CSM and find
it reasonably unbiased; then I tied in my answer to Jeliko, that was not
directly related to CS (or any churches for that matter).
> I only brought up the Monitor to establish the possibility that a
> church could publish "responsibly".
 A point well taken - but no cigar for it ;-) (unless you find someone
actually arguing this). In our context "Moonie paper" signifies a product
of a political publisher, rather than that of a religious institution. I
believe CSM would never state as fact their conviction the way TW&I lead
in the Aug. issue with the editorial on abortion: "there is no serious
doubt [...] that Roe v. Wade is bad law."

> I was hoping someone on the list knew the reputation of some of the staff
 The editor hinted in some editorials at his inside knowledge of the Moon
Church's affairs, but that's all I did (or cared) to find out. I am not
calling into question their objectivity, just could not help noticing the
irony of a 'Moonie paper' brought up as an apparent example for
impartiality. As a matter of fact the magazine does not seem extremist;
however it does show an unmistakeable right slant (oops, I guess this
must be leaning for there's only such thing as leftish slant ;-)).
 But these are only side issues since indeed it is not the cover that
should be read. It may be interesting to get some facts from the article
Jeliko cited - for example those who did not know could learn that the HU
broadcast media was taken over by government lackeys in the media war
waged by the MDF. However the piece is clearly partial against the
Socialists so it ought to be taken with a grain of salt what they have to
say on how Horn's relation with the press is perceived in Hungary.

-- Zoli

In reply to your message of "Wed, 20 Jul 94 23: 02:15 EDT."
             >
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 94 20:46:06 -0700
From: 

Zoli Fekete writes:

> I did not mean to write "[Moonie paper vs Christian Scientist paper]"
Sorry, I once again sacrificed accuracy for brevity.  Replace vs with &
for a more accurate synopsis?

> just to point out that some people (myself included) do read CSM and find
> it reasonably unbiased;
Umm, would you believe, this is what I expected?

> I
> believe CSM would never state as fact their conviction the way TW&I lead
> in the Aug. issue with the editorial on abortion: "there is no serious
> doubt [...] that Roe v. Wade is bad law."
Perhaps they asked Ruth Bader Ginsberg (sp?)


> just could not help noticing the
> irony of a 'Moonie paper' brought up as an apparent example for
> impartiality.
Watch for my "Irony, what is it?" post.  :-)


--Greg

> if your heritage is threatened by the existence of other people, perhaps
> you had better step off the planet.
>
> Yours,
>
> John Cannan
>

Seconding the motion.
- colin

Marc writes:
> You're darn right, and not only that, they've practically phased out despoit
> bottles, and they won't give cash for plastic ones.
>

> -Marc
>
There are two types of plastic bottles -- the 1.5 litre ones are
retruned at 30ft each. Coca-Cola Amitail Hungary has been running the
program for 16 months as a marketing experiement.

colin