In article >, "Johanne L. Tournier"
> writes:

>>You've expressed your love for Ayn Rand and Barry Goldwater before.
With
>>such heros did you manage to get dates when you were younger?
>
>Joe, I had to wait till I came to Canada to find guys who didn't feel
>threatened around me! ;-))

This shows how out of it I am. Until Johanne wrote this, I'd never given a
thought to the connection between one's sexuality and one's economic
beliefs. And what the heck is wrong with my American brothers that they'd
pass up the opportunity to make time with la Tournier? I get married and
they turn into morons the minute my back is turned.

> (I should make it clear that although I do admire Ayn Rand, I wouldn't
want
>to live in a society which was actually run in accordance with her
ideals.
>However, I will give her credit for being a daring and original thinker
and
>a great writer).

I am trying to think of someone as absolutely repulsive as Rand and her
egomaniacal pseudo-philosophy. To be fair, it ought to be someone who
hasn't advocated or carried out genocide
 ......H-m-m-m-m-m.........H-m-m-m-m........H-m-m-m-m.......Nope, sorry!
I'm just not getting anything on my mental radar screen.
Sam Stowe


"The truth comes in
a strange door."
-- Francis Bacon

At 01:50 AM 1/21/97 GMT, Sam Stowe, in "Re: Soros anti-Capitaist?", wrote:

<snip>
>This shows how out of it I am. Until Johanne wrote this, I'd never given a
>thought to the connection between one's sexuality and one's economic
>beliefs. And what the heck is wrong with my American brothers that they'd
>pass up the opportunity to make time with la Tournier? I get married and
>they turn into morons the minute my back is turned.

There's more, Sam.  Have you ever noticed, and here I'm being theoretical,
but have you noticed that most of the women who are opposed to abortion are
women I wouldn't want to get pregnant anyway.  I'm saying this knowing that
other men have also said the same thing.  There's more to sexual politics
than meets the eye.

>> (I should make it clear that although I do admire Ayn Rand, I wouldn't
>want
>>to live in a society which was actually run in accordance with her
>ideals.
>>However, I will give her credit for being a daring and original thinker
>and
>>a great writer).
>
>I am trying to think of someone as absolutely repulsive as Rand and her
>egomaniacal pseudo-philosophy. To be fair, it ought to be someone who
>hasn't advocated or carried out genocide
>......H-m-m-m-m-m.........H-m-m-m-m........H-m-m-m-m.......Nope, sorry!
>I'm just not getting anything on my mental radar screen.

What about Ronald Reagan?  He was as "pseudo" as can be.  Many Canadians are
still shaking their heads that our neighbours elected him twice.  By the
way, we're still shaking our heads that we elected Mulroney three times.

Joe Szalai

Hungarian content:  Does anyone think that our great Hungarian nationalist
and stud muffin, Istvan Lippai, would be a good time in bed?  How about the
kitchen table?  Food for thought, eh?

"Status quo, you know, that is Latin for "the mess we're in.""
              Ronald Reagan

In article >, Joe Szalai
> writes:

>
>Paralysis by analysis.
>
>Joe Szalai
>
>P.S.  Sorry for the late response but I always find it difficult to
>criticize nice, but empty, words and phrases.
>
>

In other words, you can't answer my critique cogently, but it sticks in
your craw so badly that you cannot let it go. You must have spent a long,
long December fuming over this one.
Sam Stowe

"The truth comes in
a strange door."
-- Francis Bacon

****************** CALL FOR ACTION ****************

Priority:
    normal

Background:
    The Danube lawsuit  at the International Court in The Hague will
open delayed in March, 1997. This lawsuit will adjudicate on
the dispute between Hungary and Slovakia concerning the rerouting of
the Danube onto Slovak territory. It is essential that we gain the
support of world public opinion.  We have only 6 weeks, please help.
    Krisztina Medonca has created a homepage for the protection of
the Danube. We have to reach, that as much people as possible read it.

What to do:
  Please help in starting a chain letter. Send the attached letter to
at least 5 of your friends. Such a chain letter, if started only by
a thousand people, but resent by each recipient to their friends,
could wake public opinion. PLEASE ACT!!


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


Dear Friends,

an environmental activist has dedicated a section of her Web
site to the restoration of the famous Danube Wetlands, which were
destroyed by the building of a disastrous power plant in Slovakia.
Please take a moment to read the attached summary and visit the site.

www.goodpoint.com/duna.htm

Summary: In the mid 80's Slovakia (the country formerly known as
half of Czechoslovakia) began construction on a series of dams aimed
at generating hydroelectricity.  The plan was originally based on a
1977 agreement with Hungary, requiring the diversion of the Danube,
the border river shared by the two countries. Considerable pressure
from the former Soviet Union influenced the agreement. When it became
apparent that the plan would result in catastrophic environmental
damage Hungary backed out of the agreement.  Slovakia went ahead and
illegally diverted the river, depriving Hungary of her natural
resource. The result is devastating environmental and economic damage
to Hungary, all for a mere 2-3% of Slovakia's electricity needs. In
February the International Court of Justice will begin hearings on
this case, the first environmental issue ever brought before the
Court. The ruling could have long term effects and set environmental
precedents around the globe.

Please help spread the word to friends and acqaintances who may
want to know about this important issue. PLEASE SEND 5 COPIES OF
THIS MESSAGE IN 96 HOURS.

Thanks for your attention.

E. Durant At 11:38 PM 20/01/97 +0000, you wrote:

>

>> No, I, at least, I am not aware of your innuendo as above.  What "do" you

>> mean by "private property"?

>> Regards,

>> Aniko


>I mean private property that is the type that can employ - and

>thereby use other people. Your house and swimming pool is no such,

>but your factory or your shares are.  You could  have personal

>property even in the ex-soc countries. You are free to own

>private property in capitalism, but only a minority is able to live

>with this freedom.

[...]

The clarification is appreciated, but; At least in Canada, the percentage of
 "private enterprise" or if you prefer "private property" has been steadily on
 the rise for many years, statistically speaking or ortherwise.  It has been
 openly recognized by the government, that it is "the private property" owners
 who are the "new backbone" and therefore stabilizing factor of our economy.


Distribution of industry sectors has and continues to greatly change.  The tren
d
 of downsizing by many magnates, brought serious changes in people's attitudes.
 They are becoming more more self reliant and entrepreneur oriented, rather tha
n
 relying on long term job security and it's associated benefits from the
 magnates.  I can add, that a similar trend is evident in Hungary, where a
 significant number of people are venturing out on their own; and becoming
 "property owners".  In short; I beg to differ greatly with your view on this.


>If you have a freedom that is meaningless for the

>majority, than it is a worthless one. Just like the so called

>"freedom of choice", that usually works only for those who can afford

>it, again, a minority.



[...]

Like I said, we highly disagree on this.  To me, any entity that is ever
 increasing, significantly contributing towards a country's economical stabilit
y
 or growth can hardly be regarded as "minority".  Perhaps I could have agreed
 with you about 20 years ago or more.  But not today.



<bold><italic><fontfamily><param>MS
Serif</param><color><param>ffff,0000,ffff</param>Best Regards,

Aniko D.

</color></fontfamily></italic></bold>

At 9:26 PM -0500 1/20/97, S.J. Magyarody wrote:
>>
>>Transylvania was part of Hungary in 1848/49; civil war raged there.
>>Romanians burnt Hungarian villages, Hungarians executed more than 7,000
>>Romanians (citizens of the the Kingdom of Hungary). Serbs, Croats and
>>Slovaks, also citizens of Hungary, took up arms against Kossuth's
>>government. There were many Hungarian officers in the Austrian armies of
>>Windisch-Gratz and Haynau. 1848/49 was a revolution, war of independence
>>and civil war combined.
>>
>>Peter I. Hidas (Montreal)
>>historian
>
>
>Thanks for telling us, that so many  Romanians have been executed by the
>Hungarians. Now, for the sake of balancing the scale, and to alleviate our
>feelings of guilt, would you mind  telling  us, how many Hungarians were
>executed by the Rumanians (the citizens of the  Kingdom of Hungary)? The
>names of communities like Kisenyed, Zalatna, the villages of Also-Feher
>county, to mention a few,  must be known to you.
>By the way: Where did you find the 7000 figure? In the works of Pascu or
>Lanctranjan?  An even number should alwais carry a caveat; "approximately
>or estimated".
>
>S.J. Magyarody

During the civil war many Hungarians were killed. Kilings followed
killings. Gorgey ordered the execution of a couple of Magyar aristocrats
who sided with Windisch-Gratz. Hungarian revolutionary tribunals had 154
suspects executed. In the Pest District alone 123 persons had been shot
without benefit of trial. Kossuth's Transylvanian courts sentenced 478
individuals to death and an additional 4,834 were massacred by his
supporters. From the fall of 1848 to the summer of 1849 military courts
active near the Southern Front ordred the execution of 467 persons, mainly
Serbs. On 22 March 1849 the Hungarian General Mor Perczel's firing squads
shot 45 Serbs. In Transylvania the murderous civil war was stopped only
when General Bem took charge of the area.
For a complete list of the executed and murdered and related data see
Hungarian National Archives (Orszagos Leveltar), General Papers (Altalanos
Iratok), D 37/1850/8207.

Hungary paid dearly for the mistakes of Kossuth, for the nationality
policies of the revolutionary regime. The post-Compromise liberalism of
Eotvos and  Deak was not taken seriously by the Hungarian gentry.  The
minorities were ill treated from the mid-1870s again. The road to Trianon
led  through the Pest-Buda of 1848.
It is conceivable that the present Hungarian government when signed new
treaties with Slovakia and Romania remembered not only the Yugoslav civil
war (Bosnia) but events of long ago, 1848/49.

Peter I. Hidas

.
>
 . Owning private property is not a freedom, it
> is a right. Rights are not abolished because the majority does not take
> advantage of them. Just imagine on Martin Luther King-day that someone would
> suggest that the rights of the black minority should be abolished because
> they are meaningless to the white majority.
>
> Gabor D. Farkas
>

To have a right has the same meaning as to be free to do something,
I thought.

What rights of the black minority are meaningless to whites?
To be treated the same as other citizens, and no discrimination
in education/jobs/etc. These are important for whites, too,  though some of the
m
take it granted.

If I live in as society that is fiercely proud of the right to own
property, I get a wee bit upset, if I am stopped in having any...
I don't think I am alone in this. And if you come up with the
nonsence, that if you just work hard for x years in a job that
pays 1/3 of the  "official average" than you will be able to acquire
even the esteemed consumer status (forget about property),
than 1/3 of the population proves you wrong.
If the lucky few make it from poverty to riches, it is more to do
with luck, than being more clever or more diligent than the rest.
This tends to upset people who "made it"...

I can't see what's wrong with  giving a thought to a society, where
everyone has the chance - without any need for luck - to make it.
And to make it doesn't just mean to have all the comforts of life,
but also a meaningful, creative, fulfilling life, that at present  is not even
had by a lot of those who had "made it".

E.Durant wrote:

>I can't see what's wrong with  giving a thought to a society, where
>everyone has the chance - without any need for luck - to make it.
>And to make it doesn't just mean to have all the comforts of life,
>but also a meaningful, creative, fulfilling life, that at present  is not even
>had by a lot of those who had "made it".

The only problem with the thought that it is a dream. There has never been
such society and never will be. There will always be difference between
peoples.

J.Zs

>At 9:26 PM -0500 1/20/97, S.J. Magyarody wrote:
>>>
>>>Transylvania was part of Hungary in 1848/49; civil war raged there.
>>>Romanians burnt Hungarian villages, Hungarians executed more than 7,000
>>>Romanians (citizens of the the Kingdom of Hungary). Serbs, Croats and
>>>Slovaks, also citizens of Hungary, took up arms against Kossuth's
>>>government. There were many Hungarian officers in the Austrian armies of
>>>Windisch-Gratz and Haynau. 1848/49 was a revolution, war of independence
>>>and civil war combined.
>>>
>>>Peter I. Hidas (Montreal)
>>>historian
>>
>>
>>Thanks for telling us, that so many  Romanians have been executed by the
>>Hungarians. Now, for the sake of balancing the scale, and to alleviate our
>>feelings of guilt, would you mind  telling  us, how many Hungarians were
>>executed by the Rumanians (the citizens of the  Kingdom of Hungary)? The
>>names of communities like Kisenyed, Zalatna, the villages of Also-Feher
>>county, to mention a few,  must be known to you.
>>By the way: Where did you find the 7000 figure? In the works of Pascu or
>>Lanctranjan?  An even number should alwais carry a caveat; "approximately
>>or estimated".
>>
>>S.J. Magyarody
>
>During the civil war many Hungarians were killed. Kilings followed
>killings. Gorgey ordered the execution of a couple of Magyar aristocrats
>who sided with Windisch-Gratz. Hungarian revolutionary tribunals had 154
>suspects executed. In the Pest District alone 123 persons had been shot
>without benefit of trial. Kossuth's Transylvanian courts sentenced 478
>individuals to death and an additional 4,834 were massacred by his
>supporters. From the fall of 1848 to the summer of 1849 military courts
>active near the Southern Front ordred the execution of 467 persons, mainly
>Serbs. On 22 March 1849 the Hungarian General Mor Perczel's firing squads
>shot 45 Serbs. In Transylvania the murderous civil war was stopped only
>when General Bem took charge of the area.
>For a complete list of the executed and murdered and related data see
>Hungarian National Archives (Orszagos Leveltar), General Papers (Altalanos
>Iratok), D 37/1850/8207.
>
>Hungary paid dearly for the mistakes of Kossuth, for the nationality
>policies of the revolutionary regime. The post-Compromise liberalism of
>Eotvos and  Deak was not taken seriously by the Hungarian gentry.  The
>minorities were ill treated from the mid-1870s again. The road to Trianon
>led  through the Pest-Buda of 1848.
>It is conceivable that the present Hungarian government when signed new
>treaties with Slovakia and Romania remembered not only the Yugoslav civil
>war (Bosnia) but events of long ago, 1848/49.
>
>Peter I. Hidas

Dear Mr. Hidas;

You have not  given a strait answer, just disseminated some more
anti-Hungarian propaganda.

I repeat the question:

 Now, for the sake of balancing the scale, and to alleviate our
>>feelings of guilt, would you mind  telling  us, how many Hungarians were
>>executed by the Rumanians (the citizens of the  Kingdom of Hungary)? The
>>names of communities like Kisenyed, Zalatna, the villages of Also-Feher
>>county, to mention a few,  must be known to you.

Ted Fischer wrote:

>Capitalism does not work in a vacuum, despite the contrary efforts of
>such countries as China and Vietnam, who will soon enough discover the
>genie will not go back in the bottle. (Although that "soon" might be a
>generation or more...) Capitalism only makes sense within the framework
>of "liberalism", in the proper old-fashioned sense of the word.

        How true. This is really the crux of the matter. There is, for
example, the Munkaspart in Hungary. The Munkaspart is the *unreformed*
communist party. A couple of weeks ago, one of the party's vice president
made himself available on the Internet and has been a regular contributor to
the discussions on the Hungarian-language list. In some ways this move
should be welcomed: this is the first time that a Hungarian party leader is
taking advantage of the Internet and is engaged in debates about politics.
In any case, it seems that the Munkaspart somehow would like to combine
restrictions on the free market with direct democracy. I tried to explain to
him that the two cannot be combined: there can be no democracy without
economic freedom. And, I guess, in the long run, there can be no free market
economy without political democracy. Ted is quite right: sooner or later the
Chinese government will find this out also. In fact, just this afternoon
National Public Radio announced that the Chinese government is trying to
impress on the population the good old "socialist values." Well, we all know
what that means!

        Eva Balogh

> The clarification is appreciated, but; At least in Canada, the percentage of
>  "private enterprise" or if you prefer "private property" has been steadily o
n
>  the rise for many years, statistically speaking or ortherwise.  It has been
>  openly recognized by the government, that it is "the private property" owner
s
>  who are the "new backbone" and therefore stabilizing factor of our economy.
>
>

I would be a little bit skeptical with such everyday media tirada, I
wouldn't mind seeing some figures. The trend is more and more wealth
in fewer and fewer hands, I would doubt if Canada is any different in
this repect.



> Distribution of industry sectors has and continues to greatly change.  The
 trend
>  of downsizing by many magnates, brought serious changes in people's
 attitudes.
>  They are becoming more more self reliant and entrepreneur oriented, rather
 than
>  relying on long term job security and it's associated benefits from the
>  magnates.  I can add, that a similar trend is evident in Hungary, where a
>  significant number of people are venturing out on their own; and becoming
>  "property owners".  In short; I beg to differ greatly with your view on this
.
>
>

Oh, downsizing, what a lovely word. Do you mean, sacking people and
employing temporary contract people with worse working conditions?
I haven't noticed any shortening of the working week or more holidays
for ages, on the contrary. The most "entrepreneur oriented" country
in the EU is the UK, guess where are the working conditions and the
average wage  worst.
Look at any public survey, if people have to choose between
job security and "self reliance", they go for the first, unless their
daddy is a "magnate"

Funny, you should mention Hungary, HVG statistics just stated, that
the "mood for starting businesses" is sharply declining in Hungary,
as people are worried about the clamping down on tax-evasion.
There are some other revealing statistics, the public opinion
reckons, that you can only make it in your business if you cheat.
Three points for the wise people of Hungary.


> >If you have a freedom that is meaningless for the
>
> >majority, than it is a worthless one. Just like the so called
>
> >"freedom of choice", that usually works only for those who can afford
>
> >it, again, a minority.
>
> 
>
> [...]
>
> Like I said, we highly disagree on this.  To me, any entity that is ever
>  increasing, significantly contributing towards a country's economical
 stability
>  or growth can hardly be regarded as "minority".  Perhaps I could have agreed
>  with you about 20 years ago or more.  But not today.
>
>

They contribute to their own economic stability. They couldn't care
less about the country. The ones that count are international anyway
and shift their business wherever they can get the cheapest worker,
if it is a dictatorship, so much the better. What is different today?
Less wars? Less chance of a nuclear/environmental catastrophy?
Less misery in the third world? Take off your pink glasses, they
blinding you.




> <bold><italic><fontfamily><param>MS
> Serif</param><color><param>ffff,0000,ffff</param>Best Regards,
>
> Aniko D.
>
> </color></fontfamily></italic></bold>
>

At 1:32 PM +0000 1/18/97, Sam Stowe wrote:
 Wasn't
>there a guy named Ban Jelacic who organized the South Serbs in 1848 and
>unceremoniously chased the Hungarian rebels out of the crownlands south of
>the Danube?

Jelacic was defeated by the new Hungarian army and was chased in the
direction of Vienna.
At that point the Hungarians were not considered "rebels".

 And didn't the Hungarian rebels spend a lot of time and
>available manpower sending armies into Erdely during 1848-49 (including
>General Bem, I think, at some point) trying to keep the Romanian peasants
>down? That doesn't sound miniscule to me. It sounds like it might have
>drawn off enough manpower and resources to make it easier for the
>Austrians and the Russians to move in.
>Sam Stowe

General Bem was sent to Transylvania to fight the Austrians and the
Russians. He defeated both in December 1848-January 1849. The Russian
troops were forced to retreat to the Danubian Principalities. General Bem
was also able to stop the civil war in Transylvania.

Peter I. Hidas
>
>"The truth comes in
>a strange door."
>-- Francis Bacon