Hollosi Information eXchange /HIX/
HIX HUNGARY 177
Copyright (C) HIX
1994-12-28
Új cikk beküldése (a cikk tartalma az író felelőssége)
Megrendelés Lemondás
1 Re: Trianon (mind)  25 sor     (cikkei)
2 Re: Orange blood (mind)  85 sor     (cikkei)
3 Re: A Christmas Story (mind)  76 sor     (cikkei)
4 Help (mind)  7 sor     (cikkei)
5 Honfoglalas/conquest (mind)  26 sor     (cikkei)
6 Re: A Christmas Story (mind)  21 sor     (cikkei)
7 Re: Honfoglalas/conquest (mind)  26 sor     (cikkei)
8 Re: biological relationship (mind)  22 sor     (cikkei)
9 Re: Orange blood (mind)  14 sor     (cikkei)
10 film footage (mind)  17 sor     (cikkei)
11 Re: biological relationship (mind)  18 sor     (cikkei)
12 Re: Honfoglalas--occupation (mind)  139 sor     (cikkei)
13 Marx's weakness (mind)  21 sor     (cikkei)
14 Re: We are #1 (fwd) for Charles (mind)  52 sor     (cikkei)
15 Hungarian Folkdancing (mind)  6 sor     (cikkei)
16 Re: Orange blood (mind)  23 sor     (cikkei)
17 Re: We are #1 (fwd) for Charles (mind)  48 sor     (cikkei)
18 Re: biological relationship (mind)  33 sor     (cikkei)
19 occupation (mind)  28 sor     (cikkei)
20 Re: occupation (mind)  53 sor     (cikkei)
21 Re: We are #1 (fwd) for Charles (mind)  53 sor     (cikkei)
22 Re: Hungarian Folkdancing (mind)  8 sor     (cikkei)
23 "Keseru Ifjusag" (mind)  8 sor     (cikkei)

+ - Re: Trianon (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

from >:
+i think you are mistaken on that point. when was the first hungarian border
+drawn up? how long was there a turkish occupation? for how long was there a
+separate kingdom of transylvania. from the time of the turkish occupation
+until after world war i there was no sovereign separate hungary. that
+alone takes care of a large chunk of the thousand years, and perhaps
+pertinently, it takes care of all but seventy odd years of the last
+three or four centuries.

>From the time of one of Istva'n s erlie successors, I forget which, up until
Trianon, Hungarie s borders were almost alwais the same, aside from the Turkish
occupation.  Austrian rule left the borders right there where thei formerlie
were, but Hungarie was not independent.  There were attempts to German make the
nation, and Germans were planted, but the latter were few--that is, Austrian
rule was not Austrian occupation.

+i wonder if you are seriously proposing the redrawing of boundaries
+upon the "traditional lines" of four centuries ago. or do you only
+wish to do that in the special case of hungary?

Over the centuries verie little has changed; if you mean Matya's s Hungarie,
with Vienna, then no, but that was personal conquest.  The same for Serbia s
Stephen the Great or Dushan; their kingdoms, too, were a matter of personal
conquest.  From Poland to Serbia, little has changed but for the Nazi
elimination of the Jews, and the Turkish depopulation.
+ - Re: Orange blood (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

> Felado : 
> Are there any parents who are not proud (most of the time) of their children
> and their accomplishments?
See Imi's answer (btw I said something very similar in my previous
posting about how grandparents can take some indirect pride in their
grandchildren's achievements but not the other way around).

> You mean "kozgazdasagtan" is not an inherited trait? :-)
Unfortunately not:-(

> OK, but would not some pride be appropriate if one on his (or her) own
> manages to move from the lower denizens to a higher level. There are many
> cases when one succeded in spite of very low beginnings.
Depends on the level of your personal involvement. Just because it was
done by "one of your own" it shouldn't be a source of pride, there has
to be some element of personal responsibility.

> And there are examples of "rags to rags" in three generations also, even
> without the absurdly high estate taxes.
True.

> > I doubt it. Tribes of a few thousand are extremely suspectible to famines,
> > contagious diseases, floods, and other catastrophies. Therefore the typical
[...]
> > among the tribes composing the "nation".
>
> I am sorry but this sounds to idyllic. Related or partly related tribes often
> fought more among themselves and in fact contributed to the downfall of their
> brethren by siding with the "outsiders". Just take the examples of the
> Greek-Persian conflict, the Gothic divisions fighting each other, the Spanish
> conquest of Mexico, the European conquest of N America or even today the
> behavior in Central Europe.
No idyllic aspect was intended -- these "nations" are like any political
alliance, often lasting only for a few years or decades. That doesn't
take away from the idea that such social organization has a clear survival
value (at the group level).

> I am not so sure that it was not artificial. While the value of Cuman
> settlement was understood by some circles even before the Mongol entry into
> Hungary, the original resistance because of the different life style,
> religion, etc., was very strong and IMHO it was appearing to some people at
> that time as artificial. After the population voids created by the Mongol war
> it was still artificial, but created much less resistance because of a
> changed circumstances.
I guess the thesis to be debated is whether the original seven tribes were
ethnically the same -- it is my understanding that they were not, but I'm
interested in arguments pro and con.

> >If Paul is so ready to celebrate and
> > preserve ethnic diversity, he should ponder how this ethnic diversity was
> > preserved for tens of thousands of years before the appearance of the
> modern
> > nation-state: it was preserved by a social organization that made room for
> > different ethnicities, languages, and cultures *within* the same nation,
> not
> > through some 18th century ideal of the ethnically, linguistically, and
> > culcurally cleansed nation-state.
>
> There were changes long before the XVIII century. Just look at the faith of
> Pechenegs, Avars, Cumans, Jazygi, etc., in Hungary versus the Slovaks,
> Saxons, etc., some groups assimilated relatively fast while others maintained
> or even developed a special ethnicity within the same system. As a matter of
> fact some groups assimilated and developed an ethnicity different from that
> of the main group. The word "Tot" was used originally to describe gepidic and
> other gothic remnants in the Carpathian basin, many of these groups
> assimilated into other than Hungarian groups in the same area and developed a
> different ethnicity from their original.
I don't see how what you say argues against what I was saying: of course
there were such changes, all over the map, long before the 18th century.
All I said was that the ideally homogeneous nation-state is a late idea, and
one that is contrary to the practice of "nationhood" prior to that age.

> Please lets leave Bernal out of the widely "accepted" theories. He has some
> interesting facts and a lot of unsubstantiated assumptions.
True, but I didn't cite him as an accepted authority, merely as someone
who gives a good idea of the possible scope of non(Indo)European
influence. Since you accept the main thesis, we might as well leave
Bernal out.

> > > There are differences, and they are good!
> > Some are and some aren't.
> OK, now how shall we decide which is which?
On a case by case basis.

Andra1s Kornai
+ - Re: A Christmas Story (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Marc Nasdor writes:
> I also found Jeliko's Xmas posting to be moving and refreshing,
particularly

Thank you.

> I just hope you're not thinking of doing any drastic "downsizing" in your
> particular businies, Jeliko. Having one of the Big 6 management
consulting
> firms for a client, I am regularly horrified at the kinds of radical
downsizing
> that gets recommended to ever-so-willing companies who are quick to
embrace
> the short-term bottom line, and who then get into trouble when expansion
time
> rolls around.

I am sorry, but I can't comprehend how someone from the outside could tell
me how to run my company, particularly when the so called "management
consulting" companies never really managed anything. IMO, every
organization, depending what it does, needs special management skills. I am
sure there are other folks who could do it better, but only if they know a
lot about what we are doing.

> I am one of the legion of "temp" workers (so often spoken of in the
media) who
> finds quite a bit of abuse in the new paradigm of "outsourcing" which is
all
> the rage in business. We are continually ripped off by employment brokers
who
> demand our loyalty but treat us as hired meat, and threaten us if we show
the
> least bit of independence or, God forbid, entrepreneurship.

Strange, I thought "management consulting companies" would be the flag
carriers for enterpreneurship :-). But I refuse even to read the miriads of
unsolicited letters they send out. Is it perhaps one of Hungary's problems
is that the first thing they did when the "opening to the west" occured is
that they hired "management consultants"?

> Marxism may be dead, but similar issues that gave rise to it are surely
alive
> and well. At least in America, it's possible to agitate (read: lobby) for
some
> government regulation that sometimes even does some good.

IMO, the difference between Marxism and our system is that here we still
let people ask for something instead being told by someone (who is
generally a self-elected "genius") what is best for them.

> Jeliko, if you are the model employer you make yourself out to be, then
you
> are to be commended for it, and you are probably the exception rather
than the
> rule.

I know many others who are as good or better. There is always someone to
emulate.

I have avoided getting back into the full-time work force bacause (1) the
> money isn't as good as freelancing, and (2) in today's climate, I cannot
trust
> most companies to look out for my interests.

Well Marc, everything has two sides, if you selected the more "cutthroat"
bodyshop approach, you have to take the bad with the good. I know some
folks who are very happy freelancing, while others would not want it except
as a last resort. Generally, loyalty in the workplace is a two way street.
I know many on both sides who do not appreciate it. I expect every employee
to do his or her best and nothing less, for that I owe them treatment like
I would expect in their shoes. If I was treated that way in my previous
employment I would still be there. No magic there.

> Regards and happy holidays,

Same to you and Family, Jeliko.
+ - Help (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

I would like some information about a Hungarian writer by the name of
Dezso Koztolanyi. He wrote a book entitled "Complaints about a poor little
child" Apparently it is the story about a general practitioner (family physicia
n). I would like to know who the writer was, when he lived, where I could get
his book and anything about the story that anybody knows. Any help with this
would be much appreciated.
             Sheldon Levy-Brown University
+ - Honfoglalas/conquest (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Imi Bokor is again at it! This time, he objects to my translation of
"honfoglalas" as "establishment of the fatherland." All right, if he prefers
he can translated as "conquest of the fatherland." I sure don't care. He also
complains about my stating that the number of Magyar conquerors had to be
large because otherwise the Hungarian language would have disappeared in the
sea of Slavic languages spoken in the area. And to support his contention, he
brings up the case of South Africa! South Africa? Obvious comparison isn't
it. A lot of people on the list find Imi Bokor's statements anti-Hungarian. I
don't call it that: maybe he just likes to contradict. Soon, he might tell us
that actually the "honfoglalas" was one of the great historical tragedies of
the area, just as Jan Palacki, the 19th-century Czech historian claimed.
After all, said Palacki, it divided the Western Slavs from the Southern
Slavs. And golly, if these wretched Hungarians hadn't arrived there in the
9th century, all those Slavs, Southern ones and Western ones would have been
one happy family. Just as the Croats and the Serbs or the Czechs and the
Slovaks, or as the Czechs and the Poles, etc. etc.

The arrival of the Hungarian tribes in the Pannonian basin was a unique,
clearly definable occurrence. We know the date; we pretty well know the
circumstances behind the westward migration. They arrived, they looted
Western Europe, they eventually settled, they established a kingdom and
became a Christian country. The date is important for Hungarians and to many
other people as well, including all those people who were affected by that
"conquest."

Eva Balogh
+ - Re: A Christmas Story (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

On Tue, 27 Dec 1994 09:36:03 PST JELIKO said:
>
>Strange, I thought "management consulting companies" would be the flag
>carriers for enterpreneurship :-). But I refuse even to read the miriads of
>unsolicited letters they send out.

--This is probably why your business runs well.

Marc Nasdor said:

>> Jeliko, if you are the model employer you make yourself out to be, then
>you
>> are to be commended for it, and you are probably the exception rather
>than the
>> rule.
>
--This is what made me butt in.  I don't think that Jeliko's posting
was designed to make himself out to be anything.  It was just a thoughtful
man's reflection on a very human event.  I thought it was almost poetic.

Charles
+ - Re: Honfoglalas/conquest (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

On Tue, 27 Dec 1994 12:54:42 -0500 > said:
>Imi Bokor is again at it! This time, he objects to my translation of
>"honfoglalas" as "establishment of the fatherland." All right, if he prefers
>he can translated as "conquest of the fatherland." I sure don't care.

--Please forgive a stupid question that a Hungarian might not ask.  We're
talking about events in the 10th century.  That was not a time that played
by today's rules, was it?  Does it matter whether the honfoglalas was
establishment or conquest?  That is, if it was establishment, should
present day Hungarians rejoice?  And if it was conquest, should they
beat their breasts in shame?  As I understand it, some 400,000 Magyars,
driven out of where they were by the Pechenegs, came to the Carpathian
Basin and conquered some 200,000 scatterd Slavs living in a sparsely
settled area.  So?  The Angles and the Saxons weren't the original
inhabitants of England, either.  Seems to me to be critical of the
Magyars of the period is reading history backwards.  I can't think
of any modern country that didn't belong to someone else at one time or
another.  There's even some reason to suspect that the American Indians
were not the original settlers in America, but displaced earlier
stone-age people.  The events of the 10th century make sense in terms of
the 10th century.  They can't be judged morally according to the standards
of the 20th.

Or did I miss something important?

Charles
+ - Re: biological relationship (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Bela Batkay writes:

> My really favorite example, however, is the present-day Bulgarians, whom
many
> uniformed people regard as "looking like" their Finno-Ugric language
speaking
> Asiatic ancestors.  The only problem is that most scholars believe that
those
> Bulgarians who look "Asiatic" do so because of their descent from the
Mongol
> conquerors of the 13th century, not because of any "racial" kinship to the
> original Finno-Ugric conquerors.

I am sorry for questioning this detail, but the exposure of the Bulgarians to
the XIII century Mongol invasion was about the same duration or even less as
that of Hungary, thus I would not call it a "conquest". I do not know who the
"most scholars" are because this is the first time I heard about this theory.
As a matter of fact, they had in the Bulgarian neighborhood Pechenegs and
Cumans much longer than Mongols. During the crusades the Bulgarian alliance
was always mixed with Cuman and Vlach cohorts in the written references.

Regards,Jeliko.
+ - Re: Orange blood (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Imi Bokor writes:

> on the other hand, i do not see how henry ford iii contribued to his
> grandfather's achievements, nor indeed, do i see how he could have.

> d.a.
We were talking about Family pride. Families exist outside the Ford clan.
Just for the record I am very proud of my parents and my children also.
I will not interpret what the Ford family pride content is. Your remark about
the grandson contributing or not to the grandfather's achievement does not
add much to the argument. If we would discuss whether he added or not to the
achievement it could be relevant.

Jeliko.
+ - film footage (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Greetings,

My father tells me that some of his Hungarian buddies, here in
America, saw him in a documentary about the 1956 revolution.  The
documentary was made in the late 50's or early 60's.  I guess there's
some brief footage of him in his tank, on a bridge in Budapest
looking across towards the Soviet tanks.  He said he never saw the
film.

Anyways, I'd love to find this film, even though I know it's a
longshot.  Is anyone aware of a film archive or any other documentary
film sources for that matter that deals with Hungary?  I'd like to
search the titles and possibly borrow the films.  Thanks in advance
for the help.

Alfred Gal

+ - Re: biological relationship (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Charles writes:

> I've seen
> people like those in Budapest on the streets of Tuscaloosa!  Of course,
> Tuscaloosa is a pretty cosmopolitan city, although I don't expect any of
> you lot to believe it, since it is in Alabama.

As a matter of fact I heard people in Hungary address each other as:
Et Tu Scaloosa? So I am not surprised at the similarity. Besides which, there
were "Black Hungarians" also in the history books. I also heard about
"blamalni" which had to have some connection with A la bama. I think it may
have been the eight Hungarian tribe showing up there...........As soon as the
rest of the folks in Hungary will realize the significance of this they will
also have names like Caleb, Jethro, Mary-bell and so on or the Alabama names
will change to Botond, Csaba, Gyongyi. Why can't we make history when some
neighbors are so successful at it. :-)

Regards,Jeliko.
+ - Re: Honfoglalas--occupation (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Date sent:  27-DEC-1994 14:20:05
>
>Thomas Breed adds his own two-cents worth about the meaning of "honfoglalas,"
>which literally means "establishment of the fatherland." The word is
>exclusively used to describe the establishment of Hungary in the ninth
>century when the Hungarian tribes led by Arpad occupied the Pannonian basin.
>The Hungarian-Turkic tribes came with all their belongings, according to some
>estimates, their numbers being approximately 200,000. In any case the numbers
>had to be quite high, especially in comparison to other peoples already
>settled in the area. As I said earlier, otherwise the Hungarian language
>wouldn't have survived. A good counter-example is Bulgaria where the native
>Slavic population was in majority and accordingly the Bulgars' language
>didn't survive.

I thought the original point was that the honfoglalas differed
fundamentally from occupation because it was an linguistic/cultural break
with the past.  A major point of my posting was that the break was not
sudden but also gradual, taking place over history (including the period of
Magyarization), as the number of Hungarian speakers expanded to those of
non-Hungarian descent.  The point was, initially the Honfoglalas included
also the elements of occupation.  Later history has erased the evidence of
this through assimilation, etc.
Yes, the numbers in the tribes played an important role.  The most
important factor, however, is always cultural viability.  The Hungarian
culture and language proved more adaptive and found itself in a position of
military superiority to the original Slavic inhabitants of Pannonia, etc.
Consider the history of the Indian minorities (who were once majorities) of
the Americas.
>
>First of all, I would like to correct Thomas Breed's understanding of the
>ethnic and historical realities of Hungary. The original Hungarian-Turkic
>tribes, involved with the "honfoglalas," didn't occupy Croatia which was an
>entirely separate kingdom under their own kings. Croatia's association with
>Hungary came about the following way.

My apologies:  you are right on this count.

>As far as Magyarization is concerned, it is a mistake to think that Hungary
>all through its 1,000 years of existence did nothing else but tried to change
>the nationality of its non-Magyar speaking inhabitants.

Never claimed it did.  For much of that time, however, Hungary controlled
various ethnic groups around them.  "Occupied" them, you might say.  I
thought that was the whole point of the original post.

 Nothing is further
>from the truth. If the Hungarian government had tried to do such thing for
>centuries on end, it would have succeeded just as France succeeded in making
>whole of France French-speaking. Magyarization as a desirable end was perhaps
>practiced for thirty years in Hungary, all told.

And the holocaust went on for even less time in Germany.  I won't condemn
either country, but I will condemn what was done.

 From about the 1880s on. Now
>admittedly there were substantial demographic changes, especially at the expen
>se of the Slovaks but most of it came about by migration (especially to
>Budapest) and through the growth of urban centers.

At least you admit that there were other ethnic groups under Hungarian
political control.  That's called occupation, regardless of how they might
have been later Magyarized.

 Now, I am sure that Tony
>Pacek is going to dispute this and will quote half the world saying the opposi
>te but I am convinced that the little success at Magyarization the Hungarians
>enjoyed was due not so much to coercion but to more natural causes,
>especially rapid economic growth between 1867 and 1914.

I agree with you absolutely:  it was mostly natural.  That does not make
the policy of Magyarization any more palatable, and it doesn't change that
fact that Hungary was involved in the occupation of surrounding lands.
Slovakia, if I am right (please don't kill me if I'm not), had been part of
Hungary from Honfoglalas times onward.


>As far as the nice deal of the Dual Monarchy is concerned it was indeed a
>very nice deal, although the Hungarians didn't appreciate it as much as they
>should have. However, I don't think that the Habsburgs acted foolishly when
>they made the compromise with the Hungarians. First of all, saying that "the
>Slavs" were in majority is rather meaningless. Just because your language
>happens to belong to the same language family it doesn't mean that you are
>the same as others in that language family. I can't imagine anything more
>absurd than to throw the Czechs and, let's say, the Serbs together, saying,
>"well, they are Slavic people, aren't they?" Pan-Slavism, however attractive
>it seemed from Moscow, was not a viable route for the Slavic people of the
>Habsburg Monarchy.

Why?  Pan-Slavism had VERY deep roots in Habsburg lands.  Eva, you quoted
Jan Palacky in a recent response to Imi Bokor.  He, along with others, were
the initial proponents of Pan-Slavism.  This Pan-Slavism was basically
limited to the Slavs living within the Habsburg lands, and were in fact
pro-Habsburg.  The fact that they were in the majority was not meaningless:
the fact that they were non-Hungarian was important enough.  Had there been
Universal Manhood Sufferage, a majority of the representatives would have
been non-German and non-Hungarian.
I do agree with you that it did make the most sense to the Habsburgs to
compromise with the Hungarians:  they had rebelled to the most effect in
1848.  They were the most dangerous non-German ethnic group to the
monarchy.

 Also, one must realize that the Habsburgs inherited not so
>much the people, as the lands--the Kingdom of Bohemia, the Kingdom of
>Moravia, the Kingdom of Croatia, the Kingdom of Hungary. The carving up of
>the Monarchy along ethnic lines would have been absolutely unimaginable not
>just by Vienna but also by the political leaders of the different countries
>themselves, and this is true not only of the Hungarians but also the Czechs
>and the Croats.

Exactly what I stated above.  The Pan-Slavists sought political power
within a Habsburg system.  Later, the Serbs and Russians were to use the
same name to justify imperialistic policies.
The lands you listed above were established under Habsburg sovereignty
mostly through occupation.

 All in all, in comparison to Hungary with its 20-25 million
>inhabitants, the Kingdoms of Bohemia and Moravia, on the one hand, and the
>Kingdom of Croatia, paled in size and political strength.
>
And the point is?  Traditionally, the Habsburgs inherited lands.  The
emergent political theory of ethnic nationalism during the last part of the
19th century changed that.  Which was why electoral regions were being
constantly redrawn, in an attempt to retain German and Hungarian
majorities.

Of course, all this is unrelated to the initial point:  the establishment
of Hungary resulted in the occupation of surrounding areas inhabited (to
this day in some cases) by non-Hungarians.  Later history may have led
those groups to assimilate and be colonized, but it all began with an
occupation.

I hope everyone had a happy holiday, and happy almost a new year!


                        Thomas Breed
                        

                "Like Prometheus still chained to that rock
                        In the midst of a free world"
+ - Marx's weakness (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Datesent:  27-DEC-1994 15:11:47

Glen - thank you very much for your quick reply.  I agree with you that
Marx was unscientific.  Yes, he was attempting to strengthen his arguements
by refering to them as scientific, utilizing a common 19th century
technique.  I still disagree with the arguement you used to disprove Marx.
Yes, it may seem unlikely that his predicitons will come true, but that
does not disprove him.
My personal analysis for why he is  unscientific is as follows:  there is
plenty of proof of other "historical forces" than economic inequalities (though
they do play an important role).   Secondly, if the dialectic is
scientific, there should be no place for Marx in History.  If it is
inevitable, what is the point of propaganda and exhortations?



                        Thomas Breed
                        

                "Like Prometheus still chained to that rock
                        In the midst of a free world"
+ - Re: We are #1 (fwd) for Charles (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Date sent:  27-DEC-1994 15:21:08
>
>On Fri, 23 Dec 1994 21:40:58 -0600 > said:
>>>>
>--I meant that Reich was making a political statement.  And it was
>written prior to the Clinton election, too, wasn't it?

Circumstantial evidence.  Prove that it is propaganda, and I'll treat it as
such.  I think it would be hard to find ANY list of statistics that does
not support a particular political view or serve a special interest.
>
>
>--I think that your argument is a non-sequitur.  Is it your argument
>that if we knew more about world issues, more of us would emigrate?  I
>don't think that conclusion follows.

Or it might give people a little more perspective and lead them toward
changing things for the better.  Many of the young, world-wise people I know
are planning on moving elsewhere, which I find unfortunate.

 One thing.  When I was a child,
>we studied geography as a subject in school.  We had geography books
>with maps, information about the climate, peoples, products, and
>organization of the countries of the world.  We studied geography,
>with increasing levels of sophistication, from about second through
>maybe eighth grade.

But in the time of your childhood, was the America number one in so many
wonderfull things?  Even if that was during the Depression (I don't know
when you were born), other countries were also having problems (economic
and otherwise).  Things have changed since then, and definately since the
50's and 60's.  I will not utilize the whining "America is doing so badly"
arguement that floods the media.  The problem is that other industrialized
nations have improved more rapidly than America.

 In  high school, a course in World History was
>required of all students.  Sometime after the Second World War, the
>public school curriculum changed.  Geography and history got combined
>into social science which incorporated a big dose of sociology, but
>got away from learning about where countries were, what they did
>there and what those countries histories were.  That stuff was
>considered irrelevant.  You will recall that a frequent cry on
>college campuses was for education that was currently relevant.
>The chattering classes of the day didn't want any old stuff.  My
>thesis is that, ironically, it was the radicals themselves that
>turned students away from a world-conscious education!  People
>of my generation know where the Iberian Peninsula is, and what
>the Pripet Marshes are.  And can usually locate them on a map.
>People who came to consciousness after, say, 1950, give or take
>a few years, really got a different kind of education.
>
Agreed.  Broad scope has fallen to specialization.
+ - Hungarian Folkdancing (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

I have a friend who is looking for Hungarian Folkdancing in the NYC
area.  She is moving to Stonybrook Long Island NY.  She would also like
to find out about Hungarian Folk dance performance groups as she is in
one is the LA area.
--
Michelle Sandler 
+ - Re: Orange blood (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Halasz Sandor writes:
> You refer to at least partlie civilized nations.  Not civilized nations
hav a
> stronger feeling of us against the rest.

Gee, I picked even some "barbarians" but they are too civilized in your
opinion.

> In Africa, there is a bigger group,
> not a nation in the NAn Indian sens, but a group of tribes that all speak
> essentiallie one tung.  When one of these fights another of them, thei
follow
> rules of war, that restrict that which mai be doon in war.  When one
tribe
> fights others outside the "nation", these rules are not in effect.

That also happened with the NA Indians, it still does not support the
behavior claimed by Andras and some still sided with the invaders and used
the invader's more (or less?) cruel method of warfare against their own
brethren tribes. Apparently everything is fair in warfare (I just can't
switch to fare in warfair YET, but will try sometimes in future).

Regards,Jeliko.
+ - Re: We are #1 (fwd) for Charles (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

On Tue, 27 Dec 1994 15:47:50 -0600 > said:
>
>Circumstantial evidence.  Prove that it is propaganda, and I'll treat it as
>such.

--Safe bet.  Obviously, I can't prove it.  You know that.  I don't
know Mr. Reich and am not privy to his thoughts.  But it remains
my conclusion.

  I think it would be hard to find ANY list of statistics that does
>not support a particular political view or serve a special interest.
>>
--Probably.  But in my professional articles, the only special interest
is in making the case in order to get it published.

>Or it might give people a little more perspective and lead them toward
>changing things for the better.  Many of the young, world-wise people I know
>are planning on moving elsewhere, which I find unfortunate.
>
--Really?  Where are they going?

>But in the time of your childhood, was the America number one in so many
>wonderfull things?  Even if that was during the Depression (I don't know
>when you were born), other countries were also having problems (economic
>and otherwise).  Things have changed since then, and definately since the
>50's and 60's.  I will not utilize the whining "America is doing so badly"
>arguement that floods the media.  The problem is that other industrialized
>nations have improved more rapidly than America.

--I wonder if you have kept up.  One might have made that argument in
the 1960s.  In Europe today, unemployment is high, economies are
stagnant, except maybe for the U.K. surprisingly, and the welfare
state is changing.  I happen to think that the change is positive,
but most of my European friends do not.  And, yes, I grew up during
the Great Depression.  I sometimes sign myself the Old Bastard, since
I was born in 1931.  Amazing that such a senile oldster has managed
to use a computer, nem?
>
>You mentioned once that I too could be a "kook."  Would that be "First
>Class" like yourself, or do I still have to work at it?
>
--The title was bestowed on me by Average Sister Eva Durant of
Manchester.  I suppose that you will have to speak to her about your
kook status.  She is on vacation just now, but will be back after
New Year's.  E-mail is wonderful because one can interact with so
many lovely people!

Charles
+ - Re: biological relationship (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

On Tue, 27 Dec 1994 14:32:26 PST JELIKO said:
>
>As a matter of fact I heard people in Hungary address each other as:
>Et Tu Scaloosa? So I am not surprised at the similarity. Besides which, there
>were "Black Hungarians" also in the history books.

--Strange you should mention this.  When I was in Budapest, I ran into
a number of black teenagers down near the city centre where the Gypsies
congregate to sell lovely handicraft items.  I was explaining this to
a black colleague from Detroit at the little bar in the hotel where we
were booked.  He said that he never heard of such a thing.  The next
night, he and another colleague from Ethiopia went down to the city
centre.  There were the same teen-agers.  Undisputably black and speaking
Hungarian.  I suspect that they were African, but they were wearing
Chicago Bears warm-up jackets and other American football team colors.

                                                                As soon as the
>rest of the folks in Hungary will realize the significance of this they will
>also have names like Caleb, Jethro, Mary-bell.

--You've never been here, have you?  Our local steel plant is a division
of British Steel.  The local tire factory is owned by Michelin.  We have
a JVC factory which manufactures video and audio tapes for the parent
Japanese company.  We have a couple of Canadian firms and most recently
Mercedes has started a plant that will manufacture recreational vehicles.
We have a Thai restaurant, uncountable Chinese restaurants, Italian
restaurants, and even kim chee in the supermarkets.  I don't know anybody
called Caleb, Jethro, or Mary Belle.  Many of the local residents came
from elsewhere in these days of high mobility.  Probably even from
Hungary.  Get off my back!  Tuscaloosa is one of the best-kept secrets
in America.  We even hope to have running water next year.

Charles
+ - occupation (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

 wrote:
>Never claimed it did.  For much of that time, however, Hungary controlled
>various ethnic groups around them.  "Occupied" them, you might say.
>At least you admit that there were other ethnic groups under Hungarian
>political control.  That's called occupation, regardless of how they might
>have been later Magyarized.

        "Occupation" does not refer to control over ethnic groups, but rather
to control of geographic areas which had some sort of status as sovereign
states.

>...Hungary was involved in the occupation of surrounding lands.
>Slovakia, if I am right (please don't kill me if I'm not), had been part of
>Hungary from Honfoglalas times onward.

        Here you seem to change your definition of "occupation" to what I say
it is, but then you proceed to apply it to the Hungarian situation
incorrectly--there was no Slovakia until this century.  There are certain
groups who maintain that there was an independent Slovak empire prior to the
Honfoglalas.  Some of them have set up a gopher server which can be accessible
through the CERRO server.  They have a huge text file up there purporting to
be a concise history of "Slovakia" from pre-Hungarian days to the present--
oddly enough, it was written by a mathematician; of course, us poor idiots
who were/are being trained as historians on this Hungarian list know that
an education in math not only produces good mathematicians but good
historians as well.....

        Norb
+ - Re: occupation (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Date sent:  27-DEC-1994 20:41:41
>
 wrote:
>>Never claimed it did.  For much of that time, however, Hungary controlled
>>various ethnic groups around them.  "Occupied" them, you might say.
>>At least you admit that there were other ethnic groups under Hungarian
>>political control.  That's called occupation, regardless of how they might
>>have been later Magyarized.
>
>        "Occupation" does not refer to control over ethnic groups, but rather
>to control of geographic areas which had some sort of status as sovereign
>states.
>
>>...Hungary was involved in the occupation of surrounding lands.
>>Slovakia, if I am right (please don't kill me if I'm not), had been part of
>>Hungary from Honfoglalas times onward.
>
>        Here you seem to change your definition of "occupation" to what I say
>it is, but then you proceed to apply it to the Hungarian situation
>incorrectly--there was no Slovakia until this century.  There are certain
>groups who maintain that there was an independent Slovak empire prior to the
>Honfoglalas.  Some of them have set up a gopher server which can be accessible
>through the CERRO server.  They have a huge text file up there purporting to
>be a concise history of "Slovakia" from pre-Hungarian days to the present--
>oddly enough, it was written by a mathematician; of course, us poor idiots
>who were/are being trained as historians on this Hungarian list know that
>an education in math not only produces good mathematicians but good
>historians as well.....
>
>        Norb

Originally, kings ruled over peoples (ie. king of the Franks versus
France).  Sovereignty eventually was eventually transfered from tribe to
region.  As a historian, I'm sure you are aware of this political
development.

This might be a weak link.
If you don't accept this:  fine.  If this was not an occupation, please
give me a term which fits.

 I'm aware of the Slovakian Empire theory, but don't give it much
credence.  Let's not use the name "Slovakia" but instead refer to the
Eastern and South-Eastern lands of the Great Moravian Empire.  The
Hungarians seized controll of these lands.  If this was not occupation,
what was it?

Of course, we could always ask a mathematician and be enlightened. :)

                        Thomas Breed
                        

                "Like Prometheus still chained to that rock
                        In the midst of a free world"
+ - Re: We are #1 (fwd) for Charles (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Date sent:  27-DEC-1994 21:00:30
>
>On Tue, 27 Dec 1994 15:47:50 -0600 > said:
>>
>>Circumstantial evidence.  Prove that it is propaganda, and I'll treat it as
>>such.
>
>--Safe bet.  Obviously, I can't prove it.  You know that.  I don't
>know Mr. Reich and am not privy to his thoughts.  But it remains
>my conclusion.
>
You are welcome to your opinion, just as I am welcome to mine.  I won't be
swayed untill you produce proof, however.
>
>>But in the time of your childhood, was the America number one in so many
>>wonderfull things?  Even if that was during the Depression (I don't know
>>when you were born), other countries were also having problems (economic
>>and otherwise).  Things have changed since then, and definately since the
>>50's and 60's.  I will not utilize the whining "America is doing so badly"
>>arguement that floods the media.  The problem is that other industrialized
>>nations have improved more rapidly than America.
>
>--I wonder if you have kept up.  One might have made that argument in
>the 1960s.  In Europe today, unemployment is high, economies are
>stagnant, except maybe for the U.K. surprisingly, and the welfare
>state is changing.  I happen to think that the change is positive,
>but most of my European friends do not.  And, yes, I grew up during
>the Great Depression.  I sometimes sign myself the Old Bastard, since
>I was born in 1931.  Amazing that such a senile oldster has managed
>to use a computer, nem?
>>
Nem, I know others also older than myself who makes me look computer
illiterate.  Impressive:  I hope I'll be able to keep up so well when I
reach my later years.

But to cut to the chase:  yes, I agree that Europe is having problems.
America is still #1, however.  Before you can get me to buy this arguement,
you would have to convince the statistics were flawed.


>E-mail is wonderful because one can interact with so
>many lovely people!
>
>Charles

I'll second that!  Happy New Year!


                        Thomas Breed
                        

                "Like Prometheus still chained to that rock
                        In the midst of a free world"
+ - Re: Hungarian Folkdancing (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Michelle Sandler asks about Hungarian folk dancing in the NYC area--
Kalman Magyar, of Passaic, New Jersey, teaches folk dancing and has a troupe
of young dancers who perform locally.  The American Hungarian Heritage Museum
in New Brunswick, NJ, would also have information about groups down that way.
Finally, Hungarian House in NYC must also have some info.

Good luck!
Be'la
+ - "Keseru Ifjusag" (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Edesapam keres egy konnyvet.  Ugy hivjak hogy KESERU IFJUSAG.  Sajnos nem
tudjok ki irta.  Annyit tudunk hogy Nagykanizsai volt.  Azt hiszem az
`56-os idokrol szol.  Nem ismeri valaki ezt a konnyvet vagy pedig hol
lehetne szerezni?

Koszi.

Az e-mail cimem 

AGYKONTROLL ALLAT AUTO AZSIA BUDAPEST CODER DOSZ FELVIDEK FILM FILOZOFIA FORUM GURU HANG HIPHOP HIRDETES HIRMONDO HIXDVD HUDOM HUNGARY JATEK KEP KONYHA KONYV KORNYESZ KUKKER KULTURA LINUX MAGELLAN MAHAL MOBIL MOKA MOZAIK NARANCS NARANCS1 NY NYELV OTTHON OTTHONKA PARA RANDI REJTVENY SCM SPORT SZABAD SZALON TANC TIPP TUDOMANY UK UTAZAS UTLEVEL VITA WEBMESTER WINDOWS