Dear listmembers,

Yesterday's _Lidove noviny_ carried this commentary on the recent Slovak
elections, and since it seemed to have some relevance to the interests of
this list, here's a rough translation:

Isolation of Slovakia would also Threaten Us

Although Slovak President Michal Kovac has not yet officially stated to
whom he will entrust the formation of a government, it is more than likely
that for the third time it will be the HZDS Chairman Vladimir Meciar who
assumes the Prime Minister's seat.  This will happen in spite of the open
conflict between the two politicians, which has already stretched from the
speech by Kovac in Parliament in March, when he openly called on Meciar to
resign.  The then premier on the other hand promised that after the early
elections he would initiate Kovac's recall.

The president, however, regardless of the thus strained relations with the
most popular politician in Slovakia, has no other choice.  A potential anti-
Meciar bloc, recruited from a coalition of the left-wing parties of the Common
Vote, Moravcik's Democratic Union, and Carnogursky's Christian Democratic
Movement, would have to rely in parliament on the Hungarian coalition and the
extreme-left Union of Workers of Slovakia of L'uptak.  From certain signals
it seems that it's rather Meciar who can count on these "workers" support,
instead of Carnogursky or Moravcik.  The great popularity of Meciar among
the members and voting supporters of L'uptak's party testify to that.

Even if certain politicians have let it be heard that cooperation with the
Hungarian coalition is also under consideration, a direct participation of the
Magyars in any sort of government is difficult to imagine under present Slovak
conditions.  The question remains how the left-wing Common Vote will behave.
Views within the SDL (Party of the Democratic Left--"reformed" ex-communists)
and in the end in the entire election coalition about cooperation with Meciar
differ, and most likely this will be the cause of the coalition's demise.  If
the Common Vote as a whole, or its greater part, decided to go into opposition,
Meciar would have no other option than to invite the Union of Workers of
Slovakia and the Slovak National Party to cooperate with him.  Thus a govern-
ment without any international support would be formed.  Not one of these
formations has a significant political ally in Europe nor are they members of
any international political organization.  This fact would deepen further the
isolation of Slovakia.  A government, in which figured representatives of the
extreme nationalist SNS (Slovak National Party) would without a doubt worsen
relations with the neighbours.  The Chairman of the SNS Slota has called
several times in his speeches for the banning of the activities of the Magyar
parties.  Even Meciar himself has pulled out the anti-Magyar card--the pro-
Meciar paper _Slovenska republika_ came out the day before the elections with
the headline "Whoever doesn't vote HZDS is voting for Hungarian autonomy."

The increasing anti-Magyar campaign of certain Slovak media and politicians
has brought about unity of all Slovak Magyars.  Their coalition gained more
votes in the elections than the official proportions of Magyars living in
Slovakia.  This also testifies to the fact that the more an anti-Magyar mood
increases in Slovakia, the more the Magyar minority will isolate itself from
society around it.  Greater isolation, however, will lead to increased
pressure for the creation of cultural, educational, and as a final consequence
even extensive territorial autonomy.  The worsening of relations between
Slovaks and Magyars within Slovakia will also certainly have external effects.
The present Hungarian government places a reasonable emphasis in its foreign
policy precisely on the defense of the rights of its minorities in Romania
and Slovakia.  A worsening of Slovak-Hungarian relations could be a de-
stabilizing factor within the Central European region.

Even if here and there at electoral meetings of HZDS or SNS the phrases turned
up about the "intentional liquidation of the Slovak economy, which Prague
organized to ensure an outlet for its products," the Czech card was the last
one by which Slovak politicians could gain points in the electoral struggle.
Only two parties had the words "Czech Republic" in their party programs.
And that was the Movement for a Prosperous Czecho-Slovakia, which actually
called for the recreation of some sort of entity similar to Czechoslovakia,
and the Democratic Party, which pushed for better than normal relations with
the Czech Republic.  Both parties failed in the voting.  The prospective
isolation of Slovakia would also mean a certain danger for the international
position of the Czech Republic.  The Central European region is generally
seen in the world as a single entity, and a single destabilizing feature
means a threat to the position of each country in the region.

(the article was signed by Premysl Svora).

<  cultures being tolerated as is done in Europe.  If Gypsies or any groups
<  want to live by traditions in they traditions villages, fine, but don't
<  bring it to the national level.  It is wrong to expect the nation to
<  accept local minority beahviors which are repulsive to the majority ethnic
<  group.
<
<  Paul Gelencser


     Absolutely!  Like those damned Hungarians in Slovakia that want to erect
statues of traitors.  Shoot the bastards!  Or those lousy Magyars in
Transylvania that want their kids to learn Hungarian (a peasant language).
Ceaucescu knew how to handle 'em.  How bloody repulsive these people are!

..marc ;)

Paul,

If you do support your arguments with facts, would you please share the results
of the research done about Gypsy culture that suggests that it is a part of
that culture to value stealing? I'm sure you wouldn't say that just because
"everybody knows that gypsies steal" - after all you have no racist paranoia
whatsoever, do you? As to your argument about the dominance of local culture in
Europe, are you saying that Gypsies should either assimilate or leave? We
(Hungarians) let them in, so now we kick them out? So what would you say, if
you were told that? Somebody in your family was an immigrant (I have a feeling
that not that long ago...), so what if Americans who were here before you or
have ancestors who came here in the sixteenth century told you that it's time
to leave? Hungarians are traditionally undemocratic, it's in their blood, they
have no idea of the Protestant work ethic, etc. Don't tell me the US doesn't
have a very well defined culture. At one point you say cultures are different,
and that's it, nothing wrong with that! Then you say some cultural traits are
good, some are bad. Would you please underline in the future the dominant
argument in cases like that? :-) Thanks!


                                                Adam Galambos
   (You can also find my name in the information box preceding this posting!)

[ Article crossposted from rec.travel.europe ]
[ Author was Elizabeth Strickler ]
[ Posted on 6 Oct 1994 16:27:18 GMT ]

I have a friend who will be arriving in Budapest on October 18th.
He is an American high school history teacher and will be looking for work.
Does anyone know of any opportunities or have any suggestions on
where he might find work. Also, he will be looking for long term
places to stay and needs advice in this area as well.

Any information is appreciated.

--

\|/--_   -_-      ----           ###         _- ----------------------
-0    -_-   --       -__ %~- ____#0        _-   Elizabeth Strickler
|\     ^                 0\~     /\   /\  -
|_(___/ \_    ||_________/     _/  |_/  \_     

--

\|/--_   -_-      ----           ###         _- ----------------------
-0    -_-   --       -__ %~- ____#0        _-   Elizabeth Strickler
|\     ^                 0\~     /\   /\  -
|_(___/ \_    ||_________/     _/  |_/  \_     

George wrote:

>Could you please elaborate on this, 'parasite economics' is missing from my
>economist training.
>
>I would also be interested in your views on Gypsy life in the US compared to
>Eastern Europe, if you have experience with or an opinion on the latter.
>I presume there would be much less traditional prejudice against Gypsies in
>the US (but I may be wrong).  If so, to what extent has Gypsy life change,
>measured in such things as education levels, ratio of various occupations,
>unemployment rate, traditional family structure (is tribal organization a
>correct term ?), sedentary v. nomadic lifestyle, compared to the Eastern-
>European situation ?  I suppose the people going to the US may have been more
>enterprising/resourceful than the general Gypsy population, so the comparison
>may not only reflect the social environment.
>
>As a matter of interest, from which countries did Gypsies mainly go to the
>US, and is there a difference between Gypsies originating in different
>old-world countries ?


What I mean by "parasite economics" is things like reliance upon welfare
just because it is there, not because you are really sick and can't work.
That sort of thing.

Because Romani people originally came from India, much of the underlying
culture is based upon a caste system. Therefore, non-Roma are considered
ritually unclean, and this causes problems with group interaction. It is
difficult to maintain caste norms when you must work and live among
"unclean" people.

I have, indeed, spent quite a bit of time in Central Europe (Hungary,
Rumania, Slovakia primarily). There is prejudice galore in the U.S., too.
Just because, as I said before, the negative behavior gets reported and
generalized. We are, of course, less visible here. So I think that more of
the "romanticism" has remained surrounding Gypsy identity in the U.S. As far
as lifestyle goes, Roma in the U.S. are generally better off than those in
Europe. Many are still only nominally educated.

There are a great variety of groups that have arisen out of the Romani
diaspora. Some speak Romanes, some do not. Some retain an extended family
organization (clan-based, some might call it), some do not. The cohesiveness
lies in the core of beliefs about cleanliness/uncleanliness that resembles
Judaism in many ways. The majority of Gypsies in the U.S. are from East
Central Europe (often by way of South America) and from Great Britain. The
former maintain traditional lifestyle and language more than the latter.
There are differences in language based upon the country of origin, for
example my family speaks Romanes w/ more Hungarian loan-words than groups
from Serbia. I don't know about the "more enterprising" theory. On its face,
it makes a certain amount of sense. And, for the most part Roma in the U.S.
do better economically than those in Europe. But this may be related to
better opportunities rather than strictly to ambition.

Hope this helps answer some of your questions.

Rebecca Tracy
OSU Slavic & East European Studies
e-mail 

Marc, you weren't paying attention.

I said:
>><  cultures being tolerated as is done in Europe.  If Gypsies or any groups
>><  want to live by traditions in they traditions villages, fine, but don't
>><  bring it to the national level.  It is wrong to expect the nation to

NO PROBLEM IF THEY WANT TO "live by traditions in they traditions (traditional)
 villages".  You selectively excluded my exception for enthnic minorities
caused by the moving of border, and I gave the example in Hungary of te
Ukrainians and Slovaks.  Please explain why you decided not to include the
caviot in your comment?  Here is a perfect example of taking a comment out
of context, and the worst part is, everyone on the list saw it.

For completeness, here is what you wrote (I'd like to include what I wrote, but
I didn't keepa copy of my posting - see the archives if you disagree with my
characterization that you took my comments out of context).

>     Absolutely!  Like those damned Hungarians in Slovakia that want to erect
>statues of traitors.  Shoot the bastards!  Or those lousy Magyars in
>Transylvania that want their kids to learn Hungarian (a peasant language).
>Ceaucescu knew how to handle 'em.  How bloody repulsive these people are!

If you are a minority due to borders moving, you deserve some accomodations.
If you are minority due to your migration, keep you culture in your neighborhoo
d
and don't expect the nation to recognize you, unless it choses to.  As an
American, the analogy I see is the pressure that minority ethnic groups bring
through their own lobby groups for the US society to be forced to accept them,
 that
is what drives my oppinion on the topic in Hungary.  There is no reason in the
US for Spanish language peoples to receive the privilaged treatment they receiv
e
in the form of voting ballots, public records and services, and education.  I
 draw
this analogy to the Gypsies, and others.  The immigrants to the US from Europe
were expected to learn english, but were allowed to keep their cultur and
 traditions
at home and through clubs and festivals - tey didn't expect to have they
 children
educated in French, Italian, Greek, Hungarian, Polish, etc.  Unless someone can
 point
out why this doesn't apply to Europe ( and I acknowledge that I am not an exper
t
 in European history
so there may be something I am not aware of), this can apply as well there.
 Please
notice, I am not talking about tossing immigrats out without consideration - us
t
just that they must accept the dominance of another culture when they migrate t
o
another country, and I did make allowances for minorities created by borders
moving (I am being repetative since some folk choose to forget things that don'
t
suit they point of view).  Gypsies and immigrant, and Hungarian culture has
benefitted from them by accepting some aspects of their culture (mainly their
 music),
but this has been by choice, not force.  If there are aspects of gypsies cultur
e
that Hungarians don't want to accept, that ok too.  Why do you, Marc, see a
 problem
with the preservation of a dominant culture in their native land?  Why do you
 reject
they idea that there can be negative aspects to a culture, as well as positive
 aspects?
The may distinction I draw is between monirities created by migration and those
created by someone deciding to change the map - choice versus circumstance.
 There is
mothing prejudiced about that.

Paul

Adam Galambos,

>If you do support your arguments with facts, would you please share the result
s
>of the research done about Gypsy culture that suggests that it is a part of
>that culture to value stealing? I'm sure you wouldn't say that just because
>"everybody knows that gypsies steal" - after all you have no racist paranoia
>whatsoever, do you? As to your argument about the dominance of local culture i
n

You apparently didn't see the earlier posting on this topic, so I can
understand you confusion.  The reference I used was a report by either the
news show 20/20 or 60 Minutes about 2-3 years ago an the growing number of
Gypsies in western Europe.  They reported of problem in Rome and England.
[The reason for the report, I think, was that at the time there was a large
migration from Bulgaria or Albania to Italy]  The point of the report was that
on the whole, gypsies were causing problems where they appeared (not all
 Gypsies,
and I'm getting tired of repeatedly pointing that out and being ignored). The
camera crew showed some Gypsie children, about 4-8 years old, stalking tourist
and picking their pockets.  Later they when to a Gypsie camp and the parents
said they see stealing from those from whom they can steal, as being ok (sort o
f
survival of the fittest attitude).  All of this was on tape, and was broadcast
here in the US.  I didn't make it up, it was reported.  If you have an arguemen
t
on the accuracy of the report, talk to the producers, but don't accuse me of
racist paranoia when i repeat what has been braodcast by a liberal news program
.

>Europe, are you saying that Gypsies should either assimilate or leave? We
>(Hungarians) let them in, so now we kick them out? So what would you say, if

I'm pretty sure there was no border control 500 years ago, or whenever they
 came,
so let's nat talk about being let in.

>you were told that? Somebody in your family was an immigrant (I have a feeling
>that not that long ago...), so what if Americans who were here before you or
>have ancestors who came here in the sixteenth century told you that it's time
>to leave? Hungarians are traditionally undemocratic, it's in their blood, they

The US is an immigrant country, and one of the few on Earth.  The countries in
Europe are NOT immigrant countries, though there are pockets of immigrant all
 over
(Germans in the Czech Republic, Italians in Scotland).  The difference between
immigration to the US and among European countries is orders of magnitude, and
cannot be compared.  The only people who could claim some right to tell my
family, or any other American family to leave, are the NAtive Peoples (American
Indians), and they would have some right to do so since every treaty signed
 between
the US government and te Indians was broken by the US government.

As an aside, the questions of the AMerican Indians right to the North American
land is in interesting one.  Imaging there had never been a US.  How would the
world be different.  No one would have been there to stop the Nazis and the
Japanese Empire, or Communism.  Yet, the US grew to greatness by stealing and
destroying the culture of the Indians.  Sure radio and tv would have been
 invented
eventually, but maybe would still not exist today.  On the face of it, I would
 like
to say we should all leave the US, and return the land to the Indians, but then
we would be destroying a country responsible for so much good. I cannot say I
 have
an answer for this topic, but be sure that I understand the relevance of my
 comments
on immigration into Europe, to US history.  I guess this goes to show the
 answers
are not always easy, nor obvious.

Paul

George Lazar is lying, as usual. Csurka in Portola Valley appeared
in front of an audience that was certainly much younger than the
"average age of 65".  Indeed, it was as typical of a cross-section of
Hungarian-Americans as at any event, other than Saint Nicholas' day,
that is explicitely for children.  I admit, Lazar may not know too
much about events of the Hungarian community (least of Saint
Nicholas' day) as he does not appear to be part of that society, at
least his name is nowhere in the "Hungarian Telephone Book" that
lists more than 1,500 Hungarian-Americans in the San Francisco
region. I have $1,500 to bet, that if a poll were conducted among the
fifteen hundred listed, many-many more than 23 (the ominous 1.5%
as in Hungary) would vote for Csurka.  Why do you think all anti-
Hungarian regimes of Hungary are avoiding like a plague giving
voting rights to their citizens who are abroad?  The simple reason is
that those who maintain their national identity as Hungarians, even
as emigrees, are prone to sympathize with a man who stands up for
his Nation against those whose favorite pastime is to viciously
badmouth patriots and patriotism.

Magyar Istvan

Rebecca Tracy wrote:

>Because Romani people originally came from India, much of the underlying
>culture is based upon a caste system. Therefore, non-Roma are considered
>ritually unclean, and this causes problems with group interaction. It is
>difficult to maintain caste norms when you must work and live among
>"unclean" people.

Thank you Rebecca for the honest most "defenders of the weak" on this
list haven't shown.  I wasn't aware of this belief by the Roma, but
it is a clear example of an unacceptable idea people of all political
ideas can agree on.  It doesn't make Roma bad people, and certainly doesn't
make them good people, but it is an idea held by people of that culture
which is wrong in the eyes of Europeans.  Imagine that, a negative cultural
attribute!  Shocking that the world is not like the image shown at the
'It's a Small World After All' ride at Disney Land.  Can we agree that this
belief is not worth defending as part of Roma culture in Europe?  At the
same time, I'm sure therare folks on the list who will defend this too.

Paul .

..and I would like to welcome Mr. Magyar Istvan to the list.  I don't know
much about Csurka and Portola Valley, but it's always nice to have another
conservative leaning peerson on the list - gets lonely sometimes :-)

Paul

Paul writes:

[...]
> If you are a minority due to borders moving, you deserve some accomodations.
[...]
> There is no reason in the
> US for Spanish language peoples to receive the privilaged treatment they
 receive
> in the form of voting ballots, public records and services, and education.

The US-Mexican border moved, so, by your logic, there is a reason; at least
in the Southwestern states.

I don't know what portion of Mexican-Americans are descendants of more
recent immigrants.

--Greg

Istvan Magyar wrote:
>the "Hungarian Telephone Book"
>lists more than 1,500 Hungarian-Americans in the San Francisco
>region. I have $1,500 to bet, that if a poll were conducted among the
>fifteen hundred listed, many-many more than 23 (the ominous 1.5%
>as in Hungary) would vote for Csurka.  Why do you think all anti-
>Hungarian regimes of Hungary are avoiding like a plague giving
>voting rights to their citizens who are abroad?

I presume this criticism includes the government of the late PM Antall, with
Istvan Csurka as chief ideologue and deputy president of the leading
party of the coalition.  Recall that they also did not give overseas-settled
Hungarians the vote even though they had a majority in the legislature.
Am I the only one feeling that you are a little tangled up in your argument ?

As for the broader issue, I think it is fair to let only those to vote
who are willing to live with the consequences of their vote, that is,
in Hungary rather than kibitzing from across the ocean.  Note that this
excludes me too.

George Antony

Do other European states allow non-resident citizens to vote?

Is Hungary following or violating a European norm?

--Greg

Greg:

> Do other European states allow non-resident citizens to vote?

As far as I know most if not all democratic countries, including the US,
allow their citizens abroad to vote.  Among the former Communist Bloc
countries Poland and Romania also does.

George's disdain for such practices sounds good on the surface, but if
followed consistently, it would also apply to in-country citizens on
government dole.  What is to restrain them to vote on politicians taxing
the productive citizens to oblivion so they could get more benefits for
themselves?

BTW, George was also off the mark blaming Antall's coalition government
for the present situation.  True, they were then the majority,
however, the election law requires 2/3 majority which Antall never had.

Just one more thing: frankly, I don't think the emigre vote would be
substantial enough to make a difference in the outcome except in tightly
contested elections perhaps.  I think only a small percentage of
Hungarians abroad would bother enough to avail themselves of the
franchise.  So, the permit to vote would be more of a gesture, a stretched
out hand, than interference in domestic elections.  The gesture, however,
could create a great deal of good will that would, in the final
analysis, be worth more than the votes themselves.  As it is now, more
and more Hungarians I talk to here come to the conclusion that all our
kins in Hungary want from us is our MONEY and they think they did their
good deed by making us feel good about ourselves when we gave that money.

And that's the way it is on this Thursaday, October 6, 1994, on the
Hungarian national day of mourning (Oct. 6, 1849).

Joe Pannon

Thanks to Rebecca for the interesting information filling the gaps in my
knowledge.

Rebecca wrote:
> The majority of Gypsies in the U.S. are from East
>Central Europe (often by way of South America) and from Great Britain. The
>former maintain traditional lifestyle and language more than the latter.
>There are differences in language based upon the country of origin, for
>example my family speaks Romanes w/ more Hungarian loan-words than groups
>from Serbia.

It must be fascinating to map the differences among sections of the diaspora
in terms of the influences absorbed from the social environments.  I was
amazed at reports that a good number of Gypsies in Slovakia declared
Hungarian as their mother tongue: I do not think they have much to thank
Hungarians for, still they stick to our language notwithstanding the double
discrimination that this would bring upon them.  To me it would appear as no
loss to them to discard one assumed language and take up another one, it
may even lead to a marginal improvement in their social position, still they
do not do it.  I recall reports implying the same phenomenon in Romania.
This certainly goes well against the prejudicial notion of Gypsies only
wanting to take advantage of non-Gypsies.

> for the most part Roma in the U.S.
>do better economically than those in Europe.

Is this all of Europe or only east of the defunct Iron Curtain ?

>But this may be related to
>better opportunities rather than strictly to ambition.

It may reflect both, in various proportions.  Sociologists may be able to
figure out what the mix is ;-).

This leads to the broad question of how one can reconcile two very different
cultures to mutual satisfaction, without the assimilation of the minority ?
Such problems exist in many places, often between indigenous people and latter-
day settlers, so the implications of finding some solutions would be immense.

George Antony

Greg asks--
>Do other European states allow non-resident citizens to vote?

Yes, at least two--Austria and France.  Two Austrian students of mine either
recently voted in the Austrian referendum on EU membership, or will vote in
the parliamentary elections upcoming this weekend.  Both elections involved
paper ballots, to be signed and delivered to the Austrian consulate in New
York on specified dates.

For what it's worth, Brazil also forbids its non-resident citizens to vote
in Brazilian elections.  A recent immigrant friend of mine from Brazil ar-
dently defends this practice by saying that, after all, non-resident citi-
zens don't have a real stake in the outcome.  No amount of effort on my
part succeeded in convincing him of the value of the American--and Austrian
--practice of absentee ballotting.  Go figure!

Regards,
Be'la

Could anyone help me to find free (or very inexpensive) accomodation
in Phoenix Arizona for two weeks between November 18 to December 2,
1994 ?
I am a medical student and got an elective training position for that
period. I would stay in the hospital for the whole day so a bed would
be enough for the nights.

I leave for the States in October 24, so please send E-mail bbefore
that day if you can help

Andras Fenyves