At 02:07 AM 2/2/96 -0500, Sam Stowe wrote:

>By the by, Joe, according to a National Public Radio story broadcast this
>evening (Feb. 1) on WUNC, Patsy's "I Fall to Pieces" is Pat Buchanan's
>favorite song. Time to break out the kd lang CDs.
>Sam Stowe
>
>Hungarian content -- Does American country and western even compute in
>Hungary?

I hope not!  Don't forget, Hungary has culture! ;-)  But hey, I can't
explain why country and western is so popular in Quebec because they have
culture too.  Maybe it't just a matter of time before Hungarians start to
line dance.

Sam, I'm worried about your infatuation with Pat Buchanan.  You must know by
now that far right-wing demi-gods thrive on uncritical adoration.   But if
you're that way, why not support Forbes.  After all, the American dream is
about equality.  There's no reason why the president of General Motors and a
school crossing guard in Raleigh shouldn't pay the same percentage of tax.
Fair is fair.  Just don't expect both to pay the same percentage of income
when they buy something.  That would be taking equality too far, wouldn't it.

It is a bit ironic that Buchanan's favorite song is by Patsy Cline.  When KD
Lang first appeared on the Canadian scene, she claimed that she was the
reincarnation of Patsy Cline.  Given her voice, I could understand her
claim.  Given that Buchanan is a born again christian and KD is a
reincarnation, I would have thought that Buchanan would have gravitated
towards KD.  Her sexual orientation wouldn't be a problem for Mr. Buchanan,
would it?

Joe Szalai

On Friday, Feb.2, 1996 I posted a text to bit.listserv.hungary
titled: "Milestones" Honour the Memory...about
Time Magazine characetrizing "56" as "political unrest"
I felt that this issue is very relevant.
The posting was visible through Saturday, Feb.3, and Sunday
morning. After that it disappeared from the list of articles.
Can someone tell me what might happened?
Peter Kaslik
E-Mail:

Hungarian born, Canadian businessman-accountant  (C.M.A.) will travel to
Budapest during the summer,1996 for three weeks.

   Will take on assignments to look for business opportunities,  do
investment and business evaluations and audits.

--
Robert Gelb C.M.A., Robert Gelb and Associates Inc.
12 Bradenton Drive,Willowdale,Ontario M2H 1Y5, Canada
(905)940-2380, (905)946-1734 FAX
e-mail: 
- Investment Specialists
- Business Plan Preparations and Evaluations,                           -
Business Management and Financial Consulting
- Mergers and acquisitions

> This problem of knowledge is at the root of the reason socialism failed.
> Government
> officials cannot evaluate the "worth" or value of different products,
> because in the economy values are subjectively held.  This is true also of
>  capital
> goods and labour.  As a result, the socialist countries produced things
> that nobody wanted, and wasted precious resources.
>
>

What you call socialism failed, because there were no democratic
means to value anything. And yes, capitalism will fail for the
same reason.


>
>
> Yes, governments are made up of people, and people who imperfect.  To err
> is human.  If the government were made up of one omniscient Being who
> knew the exact motivation behind every action, you might have a point
> about government intervention.
>
>

Yes, but there should be a better/ more democratic way of
control, than every 4/5 years choose the one (by the minority
of those who bother to vote) who give the most sincere smile?
As both the frre market and the wellfare style capitalism
failed, there are not a shread of ideas moving about.
Only wild guesses asto what the people would be willing to vote
for.  The idea of politics is to offer ideas. I thought foolishly.
Eva Durant

I thought this would be of interest for our
considerable number of US listmembers.
Eva Durant


> ------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
> From:           (Jim Warren)
> Subject:       ACTION! Please, act NOW to get presidential candidates online
> Folks,
>
> There's a time to read and contemplate.
>
> There's a time to discuss and debate and haggle -- with peers who have
> about the equal power as you have over the nation's future.
>
> And there's a time to ACT -- to DO SOMETHING! To IMPROVE OUR POTENTIAL FUTURE
.
>
> Please ...
>
> I urge you ... I implore you --
>
> Act NOW.
>
>
> It is obvious that we MUST act. We MUST move our nation's "leaders" --
> sometimes fearfully kicking and screaming -- into the Information Age.  We
> must demand that those who wish to lead us must drive the "information
> superhighways" that they are so zealously, piously -- and *ignorantly* --
> attempting to police.
>
> We MUST make them aware of the net's power as a tool of freedom and
> democracy -- and effective grassroots action -- before they destroy its
> potential.
>
> For they are endangering us all, through posturing stupidity and
> self-rightous arrogance.
>
> That we MUST act is obvious from numerous examples. To name just a few:
> *  The administrations' (plural) zealous, continuing suppression of
> standardized personal privacy protection for communications and files --
> via globally- published, freely-available robust cryptography; blockading
> needed privacy for business and citizens -- who are now "presumed innocent"
> *only* during trial; only *after* being arrested and indicted;
> *  Last year's half-billion-dollar wiretap law, that forces every telephone
> company to make our nation wiretap-ready for whichever facist first chooses
> to abuse that awsome power;
> *  This year's successful efforts to make the government into our parent
> and overseer -- a federal daddy censoring all that we say or see, if we
> dare to use any "telecommunications device" (and it *doesn't* just
> censoring the net!);
> *  The just-passed Telecommunications Deform Act -- that grants so much
> freedom to those giant corporations who paid so much to those who voted ...
> freedom to create cartels, to price-gouge where they have functional
> monopolies, to sell our electronic news media to unscrupulous foreigners,
> and to allow whichever media giant has the most money to buy control of and
> monopolize the print and broadcast news channels in any geographic area;
> and
> *  The legislation by senior Republican Congressman Henry Hyde, just
> reported in net email, that would allegedly classify all abortion
> information -- *medical*, social or political -- as "obscene," prohibiting
> its discussion using any telecomm device, including telephones and the net.
>
> (And that's not as draconian as what other senior "leaders" have proposed!)
>
>
> YOU -- each of us -- CAN help presidential candidates better understand the
 net:
>
>
> PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES ONLINE DEBATE, NOW!
>
> As one tiny step for those asking to "lead" us into the 21st Century and
> the Information Age -- to help them understand the net's potential -- I
> have invited presidential candidates to participate in a week of online
> debate (requiring only a few minutes daily; from any place; at any time;
> presumably/hopefully with their staff doing the typing).  Each day, the
> candidates themselves, will question each other, followed by their
> responses and then by rebuttals -- all of limited length submitted within
> agreed-upon daily time limits, with pointers to additional online
> information if they desire.
>
> As the most significant current target of opportunity, I proposed the
> debate for the Republican primary's presidential candidates.  Because the
> driving force of their competition is likely to end after the Iowa caucuses
> (2/12) and the New Hampshire primaries (2/20), I proposed that the debates
> begin next Monday, Feb. 5th, and conclude Feb.11th.
>
> If we can set the precedent with the Republicans, now, then substantive
> online presidential debates will be likely prior to next November's general
> elections.  If the primary debate doesn't happen now, it seems likely that
> major presidential candidates will not debate online until the next
> century!
>
>
> MAJOR NATIONAL NEWS MEDIA COOPERATING
>
> The U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, Knight-Ridder's MERCURY CENTER at the SAN
> JOSE MERCURY NEWS, and New Jersey's second-largest newspaper, the ASHBURY
> PARK PRESS, have all agreed to carry any substantive presidential debate on
> their public websites, and others are likely. (As a data-point, Mercury
> Center typically gets 300,000 to 400,000 hits per day, and tops 500,000 on
> "hot" news days.)
>
> Numerous reporters, columnists and editors with mainstream media have said
> that they would cover any substantive online debate that included major
> candidates. Today, Reuters carried a major story about the proposed debate,
> and others will appear shortly in U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT and in the
> NATIONAL JOURNAL -- among others.
>
>
> THREE CANDIDATES HAVE ACCEPTED -- BUT FIVE OTHERS REMAIN UNCOMMITED
>
> Lugar, Taylor and Collins have already sent signed commitments to
> participate.  Another candidate said no; another said yes and signed --
> then reneged (below).
>
> The agreement is that the debate will occur only if there are at least four
> candidates.  And, unless at least one more "major" candidate joins the
> debate, it's doubtful that the press will consider it substantive and worth
> significant coverage.
>
> The remaining candidates *must decide by NEXT MONDAY*!!  Please -- help them:
>
>
>
> ASK THOSE WHO WOULD BE OUR PRESIDENT TO PARTICIPATE IN OUR FUTURE -- NOW
>
> The non-commited candidates will participate only if they believe that (1)
> lots of people [voters] are interested, and (2) the press is likely to
> cover it.  (The press *will* cover it, *if* several of the "major"
> candidates participate.)  As a voter, please ...
>
>         1.  Phone, fax and email the candidates, NOW, asking them to
 participate
>         -- if they want us to believe they are competent to lead us into the
>         Information Age.
>
>         2.  Email this message to every person you know who lives or works in
>         Iowa or New Hampshire (e.g., *all* the staff at the numerous computer
>         magazines in NH!).
>
>         Please - do it NOW!
>
> Yes, the campaign managers *are* working day and night and through the
 weekend.
>
>
>
> Let's demonstrate the power of the net -- before arrogance or stupidity
> demolishes its power and potential.  Thanks for reading.
>
> --jim
> Jim Warren, GovAccess list-owner/editor )
> Member, Freedom-of-Information Committee, Soc. of Prof. Journalists - Nor.
 Cal.
> Advocate & columnist, MicroTimes, Government Technology, BoardWatch, etc.
> 345 Swett Rd., Woodside CA 94062; voice/415-851-7075; fax/<# upon request>
>
> [puffery:  John Dvorak Lifetime Achievement Award (1995); James Madison
> Freedom-of-Information Award, Soc. of Professional Journalists - Nor.Cal.
> (1994); Hugh Hefner First-Amendment Award, Playboy Foundation (1994);
> Pioneer Award, Electronic Frontier Foundation (its first year, 1992);
> founded the Computers, Freedom & Privacy confs, InfoWorld; blah blah blah
 :-).]
>
>
>
> Lamar Alexander: 615-327-3350; fax/615-340-0397, Campaign Mgr Dan Pero
>         
>         http://www.lamar.com/~lamar/
> Phil Gramm: 202-467-8600; fax/202-467-8696, Campaign Mgr Jeb Hensarling
>         
>         http://www.gramm96.com/
> Pat Buchanan: 703-848-1996; fax/703-827-0592, Campaign Mgr Terry Jeffries
>         
>         http://www.buchanan.org/
> Bob Dole: 202-414-6400; fax/202-408-9446, Campaign Mgr Scott Reed
>         [apparently no email except via webpage]
>         http://www.dole96.org/
> Steve Forbes: 908-781-5111 [the best # I've found]; fax/908-781-6001
>         
>         http://www.forbes96.com/
>
> Those who have commited to debate:
> Dick Lugar: fax/317-931-4106, Mark Lubbers         <== WILL debate!
>         
>         http://www.iquest.com/lugar/
> Charles Collins: 912-994-8219; fax/912-994-7995, George Gruner  <== WILL
 debate!
>         [may be] http://computek.net/public/collins/collins.html
> Morry Taylor: fax/515-264-7510, Campaign Mgr Bill Kenyon        <== WILL
 debate!
>         
>         http://www.webcom.com/~morry96/
>
> Those who have delined or reneged (might be worth email or a call):
> Bob Dornan: fax/703-644-5117, Campaign Mgr Terri Cobban    <== "Yes," then
 "No."
>         [I have a staffer's email address, but I believe it's nor public]
>         [may be] http://www.umr.edu/~sears/primary/dornan.html
> Alan Keyes: 503-463-1818; fax/602-263-7790, Nat'l Polit.Dir George Uribe <==
 NO.
>         
>         http://www.keyes.gocin.com/
>
> Keyes campaign manager sent email saying, "I do like the concept and so
> does Ambassador Keyes. Unfortunately we can't spare a week for a staffer to
> service the program." (Yes, we spoke and I explained how online forums
> operate, and how easily they can be done using minimal and flexible time.)
>
> Dornan campaign manager Terri Cobban verbally agreed to debate, twice --
> two days apart -- and they later faxed a written commitment, signed
> explicitly by "Bob Dornan." But on Wednesday afternoon (1/31), Cobban
> called and said they were cancelling. When I asked for a signed fax
> confirming this, she said, "No, I feel a verbal statement is sufficient at
> this time."
>
>
> - Have a nice day
> ****************************************************
> internet: 
> 
> Prodigy:  TVDS96A
> http://pages.prodigy.com/FL/aditya
> ****************************************************
>
>

I am interested in buying Hungarian stamps prior to 1950, letters and
postcards and any military photographs.  Please send description and
price.

Sincerely,

Joe Lenyi

There has been a short discussion about WWI last week. I expressed my
opinion about how the US entered the war. According E.Balogh it was
wrong and as Eva is an expert of this subject I did not want to argue.
However I had some questions to her in a personal E-mail and she replied
that detailed answers would be sent next day. As I did not get anything
yet and I am interested in the history of WWs I decided to send my opinion
and questions to the list, too.
At the end of the discussion last week S.Stowe mentioned how much
problems the allied powers had in 1917 (G.Britain & France). Like
shortage of manpower, submarine war, the uncertain situation in
Russia. So first about manpower:
It is possible that the antante powers had this kind of shortage,
but I think the central powers had it, too. They had fought against
Russia for 3 years which was costly in human life, and they had at
least as much lost as the allies at the western front, too. Beside
the allies had the possibility to bring soldiers from their colonies
while Germany had not.
About unrestricted submarine war:
Sure it caused a lots of problem to G.Britain and also the US (lots
of shipment ended at the bottom of the ocean), but as far as I know
the Germans could not maintain the critical level of destruction for
longer period. Also, the submarine war could be very detructive, but
it was far less effective than the blocad created by the Royal Navy
around Germany. I do not know how it affected Germany, but I am sure
if something could not be found in central-Europe (Copper, Nikkel,
kauchuk, etc) the German industry could forget about it.
The failure of allies on battlefield:
Well, I do not understand this completly. The WWI was a so called
'trench-war', the frontlines did not changed significantly after
a short turmoil at the beginning (at least on the western front).
Both sides tried everything (chemical warfare, etc) to achieve a
breakthrough without any succes and with great losses. Until the
appearence of tanks nothing really changed. The war was rather a battle of
materials and supplies, and the question was who can afford it longer.
In this sence the allies were in much better situation (in my opinion).
The possibilities that Russia finish the war:
This is a point. It was probably a real option. But as far as I know
it remained only a lost possibility for the germans, because war
was continued on the Eastern front. As I remember from my history
studies, even the communist fought against the Germans and the
peace at Brest-Litovsk was made by Lenin and the bolsheviks.
So I cannot really see any reason why the Central Powers had more
chance to win in 1917 then the allies except the uncertain situation
in Russia. Furthermore it is difficult to me imagine that the end of
WWI was not the result of a longterm process, but a sudden surprising event.
How and excatly when the decision was achieved then and it was really
impossible to make any prediction?

Janos

Where can I find if commercial services (AOL, CIS, etc.) or educational
institutions provide internet access in Budapest?

Is there a listing of access providers in Budapest?

TIA.
--
**      Carlyle Maw             

>
>         If changing our beliefs to something more logical was so easy,  we
> would have all reached Nirvana eons ago.  Instead senseless human pride and
> often mindnumbing ignorance keeps us from giving up those things that make
> no sense even after it has become clear that adhearing to them is idiotic
> and purposeless.


     I   did not state at any point, that it was easy.
However, it happens.  The sooner people start to question and being
critical about their own thinking, is the better, even if it can
be painful.

>
>         To say that Marx formed his theory based on only his look "at
> historical/ economical/ natural scientifical  data for his 'prouncements'"
> is to say that he wasn't human at all.

I did not say "only". You seem to add these timy, but important
words...

Eva Durant

> Eva, you really need to crack open a book now and then.  The British were
> the first to entangle against Hitler?  You might get a bit of an argument
> from the French and Poles, not to mention a few others who merely let him
> roll on through without a fight.  By the time the British entered the war,
> they truly didn't have any choice.   Whether they helped to make it so by
> Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler is irrelevent.  Given this, their
> motives were entirely noble;  the defense of their sovreign nation.
>

I'm not into the business of defending the Brits, but weren't
they the first actually declaring war on Hitler without
their own territory being threatened first?
Eva Durant

>
> Certainly one of the root causes, but not the only one. Not only would
> socialism require an Omniscient Planner, it also requires Obedient
> Executors for whom work is a matter of honesty and pride (a munka
> becsu2let e1s dicso3se1g dolga), wages be damned.
>

I know it takes imagination to rip yourself from
the images of stalinism. But the phrases you refered to
passed theirselling date before 56. Try to project from
existing conditions NOW to the FUTURE. It can be done...
Eva Durant

At 06:29 PM 2/3/96 -0500, Eva S. Balogh wrote:

>        I just heard on Public Radio: in the United States men spent 11
>minutes a day doing housework!

And most people on this list believe that North American men do more
housework than Hungarian men!  I'd love to know how many minutes Hungarian
men spend on housework.  I guess we'll find out once they start doing some
and it becomes measurable.

I wonder what kind of housework can be done in 11 minutes?  If I'm not
mistaken, it takes slightly more than that to make a Kraft macaroni and
cheese dinner.

The fact that most men don't do housework is legendary.  My local newpaper
prints 'The Better Half', a syndicated comic, every weekend.  The comic
features Harriet and Stanley Parker.  This past weekend the comic showed
Stanley sitting on a sofa with pen and paper in hand.  Harriet is standing,
with arms crossed, in front of him.  The caption below the picture says,
"I'm busy writing a book called 'How To Be A Perfect Husband.'  I won't have
time to help with housework anymore."

The humour in 'The Better Half' consists of Harriet endlessly trying to get
Stanley to be a better husband, to do more housework.  Harriet is the
proverbial nag and Stanley is the skilled excuse maker.  The comic is lots
of fun because the people and the situations are recognizable.

I guess that most cultures, including Hungarian, have comics that feature a
less than adequate husband and a nagging wife.  No doubt some men view 'the
nagging wife' as a universal archetype.  I view it as an indicator of
universal oppression.

And just what is 'nagging', anyway?  According to British Labour politician,
Lady Edith Summerskill (1901-80), "Nagging is the repetition of unpalatable
truths".

Joe Szalai

The noted Hungarian historian, Istvan Nemeskurty, has published
a fascinating study (in Hungarian) of the events of the years 1920-1944
in Hungary. It contains a wealth of little known facts and quotations
from contemporary observers.

        Nemeskurty Istvan, Bucsupillantas
        Szabad Ter, Budapest, 1995.

The book gives an excellent portrait of the last decades of the
Hungarian Kingdom.

CSABA K ZOLTANI

Dear Eva,

In the last century we have seen the rise and fall of different
ideologies, the two most prominent being facsism and "communism".
Capitalism - of various degrees and colours - has outlived both of
these, despite its faults, real or imagined.  The state of the world,
despite what you say, has improved considerably in the last century.
There have been success stories - eg. Japan, Korea, Chile - which have
not been equally matched by failures.  In fact, the failures tend to be
countries that have "delinked" themselves from the "world order".  (eg.
Cuba - which has proved it can hardly survive without Soviet aid, North
Korea, the ex-Soviet bloc). Even India has recently discovered that it
cannot live in its relatively isolated state.

What it comes down to is this.  The burden of proof is on you.  We have
seen what the market can do despite the
distortions of ubiquitous government intervention; we have also seen the
failure of the socialist experiments in Central and Eastern Europe.
Why, Eva, did they fail?  What kind of specific propositions do you
have to make that could be followed in the next attempt of socialism,
that would 1. avoid the failures of the past 2. be an improvement over
capitalism and 3. not create a system of socialist repression.

I would like to hear your proposals for "the day after the
revolution".  Specifically what would have to be done that would
fulfill the above points?

There is also the problem of value that must be solved in creating a
socialist system.  How would a socialist state determine how much of
what would be produced, and at what price it would be sold?  In the
market system there is a system of prices, which are based on the
subjective evaluation by the buyer and seller.  Values, in economics,
are considered subjective.  You may, perhaps, agree with Marx (and Adam
Smith and David Ricardo as well) that the value of a product is
determined by the amount of labour that has been invested in it.  I
think this theory has been discredited sufficiently since that time.

But supposing your model socialist government did use the labour
theory of value to determine prices.  What would happen if people
really didn't want to buy at the price that was deemed appropriate?  Or
if they wanted to buy more than was available?  What about new
inventions?  How could the planning agency decide whether to sponsor a
new invention, and then, how much of it they would produce and at what
price?

The ball is in your court, Eva.  Socialism - from hard line East German
to "softie" Yugoslavian - has failed.  If anyone wishes to call back
the dead, he better come up with some pretty good reasons why that
system would be better than the present system, and how that system would
not fail like the ones attempted.  No use shouting slogans.  I want
detailed arguments.


jim.



\_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_

James D. Doepp
Department of Economic Theory
University of Miskolc

I must find a truth that is true
for me... the idea for which I
can live or die.
-Soren Kierkegaard

\_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_ \_