Gabor agreed to my forwarding this note from him. His points are:
 -- postpone discussing the .hix issue - I've done that already
 -- separate the s.c.h & s.c.m debate into two questions
  - whether s.c.h to be created
  - if so, whether s.c.m to be kept

 He summarizes reasons for and against, to which I only have to add that
organizing dual voting is difficult (and only single ones are official);
and if we were to vote subsequently then opposition to having both may
easily kill s.c.h in the first turn even if just renaming in one step
would have enough support.

On Tue, 28 Feb 1995, Gabor J.Toth wrote:
+ > Kerlek, tedd meg (es persze ne aggodj, a halozat nagy elonye hogy nem
+ > lehet igazandibol tulkiabalni ;-))!
+ Hat tulkiabalasrol nem volt szo, az biztos, ugy tunik  a hev elkapta a
+ tarsasagot, es a nyugodt  gondolkodasnak az nem hasznal. Azt gondolom,
+ a javaslatom amugy is erdemes kettevagni. Elso korben gondolkozzunk es
+ szavazzunk az s.c.h  letrehozasarol  es az s.c.m megszunteteserol;  ez
+ epp eleg egy   slukkra.  Aztan hogy hogyan  hozzuk  ki  a  forgalmat a
+ HIX-rol az USENETre,   negyedik szintu hierachiaval, vagy  maskent, az
+ s.c.h vagy az s.c.m alatt, az mar legyen egy kovetkezo menet.
+
+ Ha elfogadod, hogy   ket dologrol  legyen a  szavazas  (azaz az  s.c.h
+ letrehozasa  es   az s.c.m   megszuntentetese),  akkor   a  kovetkezot
+ tennem fel szavazasra:
+
+  - hozzuk  -e letre az    s.c.h-t.  Az ide vonatkozo elkepzeleseidet
+    osztom.
+  - ha letrehoztuk az s.c.h-t, megtartsuk -e az s.c.m-et.
+    Mellette (azon  kivul,  amit mondtal):  helyet adhat magyar  nyelvu
+      diszkusszionak;
+    Ellene: masnak  mas lehet vele a  celja, es  ket dologrol nem lehet
+      igazan jol vitatkozni egyidejuleg.   Szuntessuk meg az  s.c.m-et,
+      aztan ha valakinek barmi okbol faj  erte a szive, akkor hozza(uk)
+      letre ujra.

Zoli , finger  for the charter of s.c.h
* Wallace Sayre said, "Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter
* form of politics, because the stakes are so low."  He didn't know
* Usenet: welcome to the next level.             (Ron "Asbestos" Dippold)

I was still a teenager (decades ago), when I read in a novel by Jokai (I
don't remember which, it may have been Egy magyar nabob or its sequel
Karpathy Zoltan, please don't ask me to reread them) that in Paris, a
gentleman who wants to show off with his knowledge of the world, declares
that in Hongrie there are nasty Hungarians who oppress the nice Magyars
-- or the other way round.  My point, the distinction has historical
background, from the period when the Kingdom of Hungary was a
multinational country.  Maybe someone wants to pursue this.     Robert

Please, send to:my Fax
 George Lang / Fax # (617)552-2889. Thank you.

Estimated Sr,

In order to complete a research work, we need to know if these former
Hungarian Communist politicians are alive or not, and if they aren't,
the year they did:

President       Szakatasis (1948)
Prime Ministers Dinnyes (1947)
                Molnar (1947-1948)
                Hegedus (1955-1956)
                Kallai (1965-1967)
                Fock (1967-1975)

Any info or suggerence will be wellcome. In advance, thank you very much:

Roberto Ortiz
Computer and Documentation Centre
Univ. of Bilbao
Spain

Roberto Ortiz wrote:

> Estimated Sr,
>
> In order to complete a research work, we need to know if these former
> Hungarian Communist politicians are alive or not, and if they aren't,
> the year they did:
>
> President       Szakatasis (1948)
> Prime Ministers Dinnyes (1947)
>                 Molnar (1947-1948)
>                 Hegedus (1955-1956)
>                 Kallai (1965-1967)
>                 Fock (1967-1975)
>
> Any info or suggerence will be wellcome. In advance, thank you very much:
>
> Roberto Ortiz
> Computer and Documentation Centre
> Univ. of Bilbao
> Spain

Here you are some dates I have found in:

Bo:lo:ni Jo'zsef: Magyarorsza'g korma'nyai 1848-1987, Akade'miai Kiado', Bp.198
7
                 (Governments of Hungary 1848-1987, Academic Press, Budapest 19
8
7)

Dinnye's Lajos (Budapest,1901.4.16 - Budapest,1961.5.4)
Fock Jeno" (Kispest,1916.5.16 - )
Hegedu"s Andra's (Szilsa'rka'ny,1922.10.31 - )
Ka'llai Gyula (Berettyo'u'jfalu,1910.6.1 - )
Molna'r Erik (U'jvide'k,1894.12.16 - Budapest,1966.8.8)
Szakasits A'rpa'd (Budapest, 1888.12.6 - Budapest, 1965.5.3)

Friendly:

Rappai Andra's

This is a summary forwarded, do not read if you don't think
the criticism of the US is not relevant to Hungary. As a
form of economy strongly recommended by the majority of
this list to follow for other countries - I think is
important. 
>
>
> THE CLINTON VISION
> Noam Chomsky
> ISBN 1-873176-92-9
> CD 56 minutes
> $12.98
> Orders to:
> AK Press
> POB 40682
> San Francisco, CA 94140-0682
> U.S.A.
>
> Contact Patrick Hughes
> (415) 923-1429
>
> For those among you who have had the  pleasure  of  hearing  Noam
> Chomsky fire one of his critiques at the rule of capital, this CD
> will give you the opportunity to enjoy and learn once again.  For
> those  who  haven't  heard this anarcho-syndicalist Doctor Who of
> the Academy, here's your chance to listen to him as he blows  the
> media  smoke away from the Clinton Presidency, while he holds the
> mirror of logic to the face of lesser evil.
>
> How does he do it?
>
> Being a world renowned expert in the field of linguistics  helps.
> But  don't  let that scare you.  Chomsky is as easy to understand
> as a clear blue sky.  He follows his usual method here. By taking
> quotes from the most "respectable" of sources--the  "Wall  Street
> Journal",  the  "New  York Times", U.N. statistical documents and
> Bill Clinton's own speeches--he is able to expose  the  smell  of
> burnt  human  flesh  underlying the cost-efficiency ethics of the
> ruling class chefs--in this case their Chief Executive Officer in
> the State apparatus.
>
> So, what is the Clinton Vision?
>
> Listen to this CD as Chomsky makes it stand up on its three  hind
> legs--the  globalization of capital, the replacement of bourgeois
> democracy with corporate totalitarianism, and the gulagization of
> unproductive (of profit) members of the proletariat.
>
> The globalization of capital has and is being ratified in various
> international  trade  agreements:   NAFTA,  GATT  and  the  Asian
> Pacific Agreement.  Noam chooses  to  illustrate  this  by  using
> Clinton's visit to the Boeing complex to sign the APA.  According
> to  the  Clinton Vision, Boeing sets an example for the future of
> U.S.  capital in the New World Order.  Boeing,  a  company  whose
> stockholders  enjoy immense State subsidy in the form of research
> and development costs via the military, is that hybrid of current
> successful market competitiveness.  Little did you know that when
> you hopped that jet to Newark, you  were  riding  in  a  modified
> bomber  design.   The  mingling  of  the State and capital is the
> model of the Clinton Vision, whether it is Boeing, Cray  Computer
> or  the nuclear power industry in the U.S.A..  That this model of
> capital is being ratified in agreement after agreement on a world
> scale shows that other ruling classes realize  the  same  vision.
> Needless  to say, Chomsky makes it clear that their interests and
> ours are not the same.
>
> Linked to this notion for  the  need  to  ratify  corporate/State
> capital's  dominion  over  the world market by "agreement" is the
> corollary need to distance control over political decision making
> from the unwashed masses.  As if the distance  were  not  already
> great  enough,  agreements  like NAFTA, the APA and so on tend to
> have clauses embedded in them which  prohibit  national  entities
> from   passing   laws  which  conflict  with  their  "agreed"  on
> positions.  Thus the governing model of  the  Clinton  Vision  is
> more  and  more  closely  aligned with the totalitarian operating
> structure of the modern corporation and less and  less  with  the
> republican   form   of   government  initiated  by  the  American
> revolutionaries of the 18th Century.
>
> Connected to both the international agreements and the increasing
> attraction of the corporate power pyramid as a means of political
> rule, is the answer to that age old capitalist question--"what to
> do with the unemployed?".  The Clinton Crime Bill and the billion
> dollar prison construction plans  are  no  accident  of  history.
> We're  not rebuilding the infrastructure here; we're constructing
> the gulag of the future for those who, according to Chomsky, have
> no value to the privileged elites of the U.S.A..   "Human  beings
> have  value  only in so far as they contribute to profit making."
> Seems  to  be  the  prime  directive  of  the  modern   bourgeois
> "Enterprise".
>
> This lecture provides us  with  both  a  lesson  in  contemporary
> political  economy  and an example of how to cut through the crap
> of  media  mystification.   The  "Clinton  Vision"   demonstrates
> conclusively that relying on the lesser evil is not the solution.
> The hard truth is that we can only depend on ourselves, organized
> as One Big Union.
>
> Mike Ballard
>
> This review is from the pages of the "Industrial Worker", newspaper
> of the Wobblies.  Send $15 for a 1 year sub to:
> Industrial Worker
> PO Box 2056
> Ann Arbor, MI 48106
> U.S.A.
>
>
>

On Wed, 1 Mar 1995, Eva Durant wrote:
> > U.S.  capital in the New World Order.  Boeing,  a  company  whose
> > stockholders  enjoy immense State subsidy in the form of research
> > and development costs via the military, is that hybrid of current
> > successful market competitiveness.

        So you find direct subsidies like those given to the West
European consortium Airbus more palatable?

> > Little did you know that when you hopped that jet to Newark, you were
> > riding in a modified bomber design.

        Boeing is currently producing five different commercial
transports, and none have anything whatsoever to do with bombers.  (Of
course the drawing board 747 was made in response to a government contract
offer, but Lockheed won so Boeing received no governemnt funds.)

        Norb