||Re: List Behaviors (mind)
|| 39 sor
||Re: Elteto's comments (mind)
|| 196 sor
||Re: Elteto's Comments (mind)
|| 59 sor
||Re: Americans in Bosnia (mind)
|| 30 sor
||Re: Elteto's comments (mind)
|| 19 sor
||Re: List Behavior/Hungarian Defamation (mind)
|| 12 sor
||Muszikas in NYC. (mind)
|| 8 sor
|| 23 sor
||NATO and Hungary (mind)
|| 20 sor
||To Jennifer (mind)
|| 13 sor
||Re: Anti-Americanism (mind)
|| 59 sor
||Slovak language law is unacceptable (mind)
|| 210 sor
||message for Sandor (mind)
|| 9 sor
||Re: Anti-Americanism (mind)
|| 97 sor
||Response to James Doepp (mind)
|| 5 sor
||bounced posting (mind)
|| 114 sor
||Re: American GI`s (mind)
|| 41 sor
||Re: anti-American?? (mind)
|| 66 sor
||Re: van-e Kanadai Kultura? (mind)
|| 48 sor
|+ - ||Re: List Behaviors (mind)
Am I the only one who has the feeling, that the letters
arriving from the janoskiss aol.com address were sent
to provoke also the listowner? Whoever sent them, now
can contentedly sit back and say: see, cenzorship ...
Pellionisz might have been angry or hurt that his efforts
to organize a new October revolution using this list were
not exactly praised by everyone. But no, he would not hide
behind a common name like Kiss Janos, he would never change
his nobel (sorry, just a simple typo for noble) name like
that. He would go to great lengths to get his writings
published (e.g. sending them to a Journal where his
collaborator happens to be the Chief Editor), but he
would never resort to cheap tricks.
I also beleive that the letters sent by Joseph Toth,
or Szucs Andras were not written by him, or by one
of his multiples. In my opinion they were not even
written by human beings; they were written by
neural networks, developed on NASA support. Useless
in space exploration, but perfect puppets in politics.
They were based on the tensor network theory of the
central nervous system, developed and forcefully
promoted by Pellionisz and trained on his writings,
and past history. Relatively good clones, I must
admit, although somewhat linear, low-dimensional, therefore,
Those who would like to enjoy the complete past and
future works of the master and his robot followers,
might want to subscribe to the nemzet pouring from
the siliconvalley source. Or as an alternative, they
might just stay on this list: if the address list
will be snatched by the owners of siliconvalley com
from the Hungary list, it will even be impossible
to get rid of the curse of nemzet (see the ongoing
debate on HIX TIPP).
|+ - ||Re: Elteto's comments (mind)
> Felado : Pannon Jozsef
> Temakor: Re: Elteto's Comments ( 61 sor )
> Well, somebody is wrong on this: either Sulyok or Braham. Since Sulyok
> represented the state against Imredy, I have a hard time to believe that
> he would deliberately cover up for Bardossy. But I let it at that.
As we all noted, the trial was about other issues.
> >The example is highly relevant, both for similarities and differences.
> >Unlike in Mi Lai (I'm not sure of the spelling either), the civil
> >administration learned about the fact almost immediately. So Ba1rdossy
> >knew, but didn't start proceedings. Ka1llay did.
> As I recall, the Mi Lai massacre was not discovered in Washington
> immediately, but I am not strong on that. Can anybody else recall the
> details on this?
That's how I remember too. But the De1lvide1k massacres were brought to
the attention of the government immediately, indeed they were stopped
by a direct order from Budapest.
> >is an absolutely critical difference: the fate of the Vietnamese
> >returnees was (and I think continues to be) actively monitored to see
> >that they don't get killed or imprisoned. The Ba1rdossy government
> >made no effort at monitoring the fate of those expelled.
> To my knowledge it was the protests that also stopped those deportations
> by the Hungarians after Kamenets-Podolsk.
Yes. But that's quite different from the government itself monitoring the
fate of the deported. A difference of life and death.
> But again, was it proven that they were done with at least Budapest's
> tacit approval, even if not at express orders? I think not.
The government orders deportations, and makes no special provisions to
guarantee that those deported do not come under even graver threats. If
this doesn't constitute tacit approval, what does?
> After mentioning the alleged Putnok deportation to an old Jewish friend
> of mine who grew up in a town not far from Putnok, he said he never
> heard of the case. He also confirms that to his knowledge only
> non-Hungarian citizen Jews were deported at the time.
(see my response to Mr. Zolta1ni's posting below)
> Well, Bardossy sure was no Kallay.
On that we agree. I also think that the critical line for "war criminal"
runs between the two. Just out of curiosity, where do _you_ think that
line goes? Was Szto1jay a war criminal? Was Sza1lasi?
> Felado : [United States]
> The book by Levai (Zsidosors Magyarorszagon, Budapest, Magyar Teka,
> 1948) mentions Putnok, but only in context of the internment of illegal
> aliens. The events are not documented. Gonda Laszlo, A Zsidosag
> Magyarorszagon, 1526-1945, Budapest, Szazadveg, 1992, does not mention
> Putnok. Braham briefly mentions Putnok, but mainly in context of the
> Jewish deportations after the German invasion, and not as something
> related to Bardossy, see vol I, p.172, or vol 2, p.36-7 (1988).
Vol I, p.172 is smack in the middle of the chapter called "A
Ba1rdossy-korszak" (The Ba1rdossy-era). What on Earth are you
talking about? Here's the quote:
"Jo1 ne1ha1ny magyar a1llampolga1rsa1gu1 zsido1t egyszeru3en csak aze1rt
tarto1ztattak le, mert sza1lka volt a helyi hato1sa1g szeme1ben. I1gy
pe1lda1ul a putnoki zsido1kat, noha valamennyien magyar szu2lete1su3ek
voltak, csaknem kive1tel ne1lku2l Ko3ro2smezo3re sza1lli1totta1k, s
ott a1tadta1k a ne1met SS-nek e1s a katonai hato1sa1goknak"
(Several Jews who were Hungarian citizens were arrested simply because
they were a mote in the eye of the local authorities. For example the Jews
of Putnok, though they all were Hungarian by birth, were almost without
exception transported to Ko3ro2smezo3, and handed over to the German SS
and the military authorities)
Since this is the second time Csaba K. Zolta1ni "quotes" literature in this
manner, I would like to call attention to the fact that this is a well
known tactic of revisionsts. To quote from the Canadian Supreme Court
judgement concerning the case of Ernst Zundel:
>>Orthodox historians point to sources which support their theories; the
appellant and other "revisionist" historians point to documents which do
not exist or which do not say what they claim they do.<<
Braham says it rather clearly that Hungarian citizens were also swept up
in the deportations. Mr. Zolta1ni can dispute Braham's conclusions, but
he is not at liberty to state Braham doesn't say what he says, sorry.
> A. Geyer
> indeed claims in his tract (1960) that the "a putnoki zsidokat az utolso
> pillanatban forditottak vissza Korosmezorol", i.e. the deportees, at the
> last minute were turned back at Korosmezo (i.e. at the border).
Geyer is cited by Braham (and so is Le1vay, by the way, in the same
> Braham points out, the Hungarian authorities were unlikely to have known
> about the German intentions regarding the illegal aliens who have been
> deported to Kamenec-Podolsk.
And in fact, the British authorites were unlikely to have known about
the Vietnamese intentions regarding the boat people who were deported.
That's precisely why monitoring their fate was necessary.
> Indeed, upon learning about the actions of the Germans, the Hungarian
> interior minister, Keresztes-Fischer, stopped the deportations.
> >seems like the best you can offer in Bardossy's defense is comparing
> >him to current war criminals
> This is not a defense of a person but that of the historical record.
> Taking a snippet only distorts the view and certainly can mislead,
> especially those who are unaware of the history of the time.
Well, take a larger snippet. Include the previous and the following
prime minister. Compared to them, Ba1rdossy stands out even more clearly
as a war criminal.
> Based on accessible transcripts, no evidence was presented at the trial
> that Bardossy ordered any atrocities or that he had foreknowledge of
> what was to happen to deportees who were requested by the Germans for
> labor service.
Did I say he ordered them? I said he failed to punish, or initiate
proceedings against those directly responsible.
> The record makes it clear that Bardossy's trial was political retribution
> not the search for justice.
This was not in dispute. Please don't stop here, but ask the question:
_why_ was political retribution sought? The country lost a disastrous war,
with hundreds of thousands of Hungarian citizens killed by its "ally"
Germany, and other hundreds of thousands killed in action. Hungary lost
the territories it regained temporarily, and overall was not in good
shape. One would think the leadership, and the policies followed by the
leadership, had something to do with this outcome. "Mistakes were made."
But by whom? Go2mbo2s? Imre1dy? Perhaps there were better scapegoats than
Ba1rdossy, but I doubt it.
> John F. Montgomery, the US envoy to Hungary between 1933 and 1941, in
> his book, Hungary, the Unwilling Satellite, Vista Books, Morristown, NJ
> 1993 (reprint of the 1947 edition), writes as follows:
> "After the German attack on Yugoslavia(1) the question was who should
> occupy Bacska, formerly a valuable province of Hungary, the German or
> the Hungarian army? Apart from considerable Hungarian minority
> inhabiting that territory, the Serbs, themselves, preferred Hungarian
> occupation. Thus, except for one incident(2), when Hungarian troops in Novi
> Sad (Ujvidek) at the order of the German High Command(3) committed cruel
> excesses against the population, that territory escaped the brutalities
> inflicted by German troops of occupation in other parts of Yugoslavia.(4)
> It also must be noted that the Hungarian government applied reprisals
> against the military commanders guilty of the Novi Sad massacre.(5) Four of
> the responsible high officers were condemned to death but were abducted
> by the Germans before execution and given full rank in the German
> SS-proving in whose behalf they had acted".
This seems extremely biased to me. (1) Hungary joined the attack on the
second day. (2) At least three "incidents" totalling over three thousand
victims. (3) The German High Command had no powers to order massacres, in
fact it had no power to order military action by Hungarian troops. (4) After
having been terrorized into submission. (5) Another Hungarian government,
(that of Ka1llay) not the one under which the atrocities were committed.
> As far as declaring war is concerned, Montgomery writes as follows:
> "President Roosevelt evaluated the situation correctly. He knew that
> war declarations coming from those small countries were forced by Hitler
> and he was, therefore, inclined to ignore them. On June 2, 1942, that is
> after six months of Soviet insistence, the President sent a message to
> Congress stating that Rumania, Hungary and Bulgaria had declared war
> on the United States, but he added: "I realize that those three
> governments took that action not upon their own initiative or in response
> to the wishes of their own peoples, but as instruments of Hitler."..."
Instruments of Hitler, yes. But who made Hungary an instrument of Hitler?
In general, the thesis of the "unwilling satellite" has much less to
substantiate it for Germany between the two wars than it has for the
Soviet Union after WWII. Against the Soviet rule there was a revolution,
(some say even a war of independence). Against the German rule there was
no popular uprising. In fact, we see an increasing tightening of ties with
Germany prior to the war, largely undertaken on a voluntary basis, and
an increasingly popular home-grown nazi movement (nyilasok).
> If Andras has sources to support his broadbrush charges of "war crimes"
> committed by Bardossy, he should make them public. Some of us have
> an open mind on this matter.
Well, my charges were indeed broad enough for their truth to be self-evident.
|As prime minister Ba1rdossy was responsible for: (a) openly racist
|legislation (harmadik zsido1to2rve1ny) (b) deportation and massacre of
|Jews (Hungarian citizens) at Kamenec-Podolsk (c) massacre of civilians
|(mostly Serbs) at Backa
You offered no evidence to refute these charges. The only thing that might
be in dispute is whether Hungarian citizens indeed fell victim at
Kamenec-Podolsk, and it is clear that the Putnok case only proves that
Hungarian citizens were deported initially. If they were returned, this
particular group escaped mass murder (for the time being), but given the
overall manner in which the deportations were carried out (see Slachta's
letters, published by Tama1s Majsai, Ra1day Gyu3jteme1ny E1vko2nyve vol 4
pp 205-206, vol 5 pp 217-218) it would have required a miracle for only
illegal aliens to come to harm. As for the introduction of openly racist
legislation, and the Backa massacres, are you disputing that he was, as
prime minister, responsible?
|+ - ||Re: Elteto's Comments (mind)
> Felado : Eva S. Balogh
> Temakor: One more word on Bardossy ( 39 sor )
> Bajcsy-Zsilinszky, Rassay, Janos Zichy, and Geza Szullo demanded an
> investigation and Bardossy ordered such an investigation but "the governor
> [meaning Horthy] through his chief-of-staff assured the officers responsible
> for the massacre that nothing would happen to them." [In the original:
> "Bajcsy-Zsilinszky, Rassay, Zichy Janos es Szullo Geza vizsgalatot
> koveteltek. Bardossy ezt el is rendelte, a kormanyzo azonban katonai
> irodajanak fonoke utjan megnyugtatta a vereskezu katonatiszteket, hogy nem
> lesz bantodasuk."
Braham has pretty much the same story:
>>A korma1ny valo1ban kiku2ldo2tt egy vizsga1lo1bizottsa1got Babos Jo1zsef
ta1bornok, katonai u2gye1sz vezete1se1vel. Babos titokban a nyilaskeresztes
pa1rtnak volt tagja. A bizottsa1g jelente1se a leme1sza1rolt zsido1 e1s szerb
a1ldozatokro1l azt a1lli1totta, hogy "partiza1nok" voltak. Ba1rdossynak
politikailag rosszul jo2tt az u2gy, e1s iparkodott mine1l gyorsabban fa1tylat
bori1tani ra1. Nem volt hozza1 ba1torsa1ga, hogy a "hadsereg becsu2lete1be
ga1zoljon", me1g keve1sbe1 ahhoz, hogy maga1ra vonja a Harmadik Birodalom
haragja1t."<< (p 179)
(The government indeed sent out a commission of inquiry led by the military
prosecutor, General Jo1zsef Babos. Babos was secretly a member of the Arrow
Cross party. The commission's report claims the Jewish and Serbian victims of
the massacre to be "partisans". The affair was politically bad for Ba1rdossy,
who hurried to cover it up as soon as possible. He didn't have the courage to
"assault the honor of the army", much less to bring the wrath of the Third
Reich upon himself.)
How much responsibility Horthy has for the initial coverup I don't know. But
the fact that under the same governor a different prime minister could get
convictions shows Ba1rdossy to be anything but zealous in protecting the
the integrity of the Hungarian Army.
> "Muvelt, europai latokoru, megfontolt embernek tartottak, aki a kul- es
> belpolitikaban egyarant a magyar uralkodo osztalyok erdekeinek megfelelo utat
> fogja jarni. Bardossy azonban olyan idopontban lett miniszterelnok, amikor
> meglehetosen szeles koruve valt az a benyomas, hogy a nemeteknek minden
> sikerul. . . ." [Summary: Bardossy was considered to be a well-educated man
> with wide intellectual horizons who would both in internal and external
> affairs will consider the interests of the Hungarian ruling classes. However,
> Bardossy became prime minister at the time when the impression became
> widespread that the Germans are never wrong.]
Oh, no question he was a well-educated man with wide intellectual horizons.
I'm not sure European Video Distributors carries it, but I can highly recommend
the documentary "A ne1p neve1ben" which shows him defending himself in the
"People's Court". Based on the original newsreels and some supplementary
footage, this is an absolutely fascinating documentary. The kangaroo court
atmosphere comes through very clearly. And so does the enormity of the crimes.
The scenes with Ba1rdossy are particularly chilling, as it is quite obvious
that the prosecutors (and the far from impartial judge) are no match for
Ba1rdossy. Sza1lasi comes across as the pathetic idiot I think he was, but
Ba1rdossy comes across as "a well-educated man with wide intellectual
horizons". Yet somehow, kangaroo court and all, one comes away from with the
feeling that the world is a better place with Ba1rdossy executed. Not a nice
safe place, not with this prosecutor and this judge, but still, the amount of
evil in the world was decreased.
|+ - ||Re: Americans in Bosnia (mind)
> And, yes, the world needs some kind of international policing of certain
> basic principles (if you ask me to a much greater extent than it is done
> now), and only the US seems to have the residual guts and idealism to fit the
> George Antony
I wonder, could you spell out, these certain principles?
So far the US was quite content to put up with very
nasty dictatorships, if they purchased enough arms, or
happened to oppose left-wing politics, even
democratic ones at times... Lets see; tha Shah
was a good friend - not a democratic chap, so the rise
of fundamentalism and anti-US feelings were to be expected
in that region as a consequence. There were a few decades
of support to not very nice regimes in Haiti, Indonesia,
Thailand, Chile, Argentina, Saudi-Arabia and Quvait are
not the democratic progressive forces that come to mind...
need I go on?
Afganistan: arming any war-lord faintly anti-Russian:
see the results, this same policy in Africa is paying bloody
dividents. The US defends corporate interests of multinationals,
nothing else. If they put troups in Bosnia, it is because
they don't want the region to risk stability in Europe,
a role to play, as their significance
has fallen since the demise of the USSR.
Military spending has to be explained more thoroughly
these days and now it will be easier.
|+ - ||Re: Elteto's comments (mind)
As for the introduction of openly racist
>legislation, and the Backa massacres, are you disputing that he was, as
>prime minister, responsible?
A trial must take into consideration the degree of responsibility. It seems
that Bardossy's responsibility for massacres was indirect. Initially he
opposed the declaration of war on the Soviet Union. He was condemned to
death for the declaration of war on the Soviet Union and not for his other
crimes. The trial itself was contrary to Hungarian and European judicial
jurisprudence. I consider Bardossy guilty but I do not believe that he
received a fair trial and a fair judgement. (See also Akos Major
NEPBIRASKODAS FORRADALMI TORVENYESSEG, Budapest, 1988).
Peter I. Hidas
Peter I. Hidas, Montreal
|+ - ||Re: List Behavior/Hungarian Defamation (mind)
George Antony wrote:
: ...Again IMO, dispensing with ethnic hatred, and
: even with animosity, is a sign of maturity. Viz. Switzerland, Germany,
: France, Austria, Italy vs Hungary and her neighbours. ...
There seems to be enough ethnic hatred dispensed against Turks in Germany
and North Africans in France to make this distinction less than clearcut, IMHO.
|+ - ||Muszikas in NYC. (mind)
On March 15th, Muszikas will be playing at a place called Symphony Space in
NYC. Anybody know, exactly, where this is???
john_czifra @ shi.com
|+ - ||Privatization (mind)
Barna Bozoki quotes Geza Bankuti, a businessman, who describes the Hungarian
business world along these lines:
>(".. alig van tisztesseges kereskedelem,
>viszont "mindent szabad" jelszoval egy erkolcsokre fittyet hanyo uzleti
>vilag jott letre, amit a polgar termeszetesen pillanatok alatt megutal.")
Or in English:
>there is hardly any honest commerce, with the
>"everything free" slogan a morally bankrupt economy developed, and
>naturally the citizens hate it.
The only change I suggest in the translation is to substitute "everything
free" to "anything goes." In any case, no one denies that there is corruption
in Hungary today. But this corruption is not an inevitable result of
capitalism--as Barna Bozoki suggests with this quotation. Rather, it is the
result of transition from command to market economy. Commercial laws have not
been worked out; there is a cavalier attitude toward taxation partly because
of lack of business morality and partly because of too high taxes. With time
a certain business ethics will develop, we all hope.
|+ - ||NATO and Hungary (mind)
Jancsi Cziffra writes:
>What will Serbs think of Hungary?? Will
>they retaliate on Pecs?? Will some terrorists try to blow up the barracks
>in Beirut), maybe they blow up Ferihegy, thus making the stay in Hungary
>much more involved.
Sure, anything can happen, but let's hope that none of these will. I am
somewhat skeptical of ultimate peace in the Balkans but, at the same time, I
don't think that the Serbs of rump Yugoslavia and Bosnia will launch a war
against their northern neighbor just because NATO troops were allowed to be
stationed in Hungary. After all, the Serbs were one of the signatories to the
agreement, which allowed these NATO troops to be present. Hungarians seems to
be desperate to belong to Europe and NATO and therefore they can't sit on the
fence when practically all other countries of Europe participate in the
|+ - ||To Jennifer (mind)
>My father told me that when you
>cross the border into Hungary, it's like going back in time.
Getting to be less and less so. As for your learning something about the
country of your ancestors, just stick around. There is plenty of discussion
on this list. Also, under soc.culture.magyar you will find many
English-language news items about Hungary.
|+ - ||Re: Anti-Americanism (mind)
The kind of knee-jerk anti-Americanism typified by Szalai and Durant is
exactly why most Americans have a problem with sending our nation's
soldiers anywhere for peacekeeping missions or anything else. It's obvious
at this point that those wealthier European nations with the ability to
actually intervene militarily have no intention of taking any substantive
action to put a stop to the slaughter in Bosnia. Let the U.S. move,
however reluctantly, to separate the combatants and try to restore some
sense of a normal, peaceful life to the civilians who are suffering so
terribly and it's a case of dat Ole Evil Empire on the prowl.
You two are disgusting. You'd countenance continued murder of civilians on
a Hitlerian scale simply because it offends your politically exquisite
sensibilities to see American troops tackling a tough and unwanted job
that no other nation will do. Tell us all, Durant and Szalai -- who will
enforce the peace in Bosnia if not the United States? Are the Swedes
likely to send 20,000 combat troops there and use their firepower
effectively? Let's see -- who else will probably be acceptable to your
beautiful, lofty judgement? The Danes? The Norwegians? The Swiss?
And I don't mind your anti-Americanism all that much. You're welcome to
your prejudices, no matter how juvenile I might think they are. What I
object to is your mutual propensity to start whining about mistreatment
when anyone dares to gesture in your direction and observe that the
emperor has no clothes. If you're both going to use this public forum to
promote anti-American views, have the guts to stand up and take
responsibility for those views.
Szalai ur, nothing saddens me more than a Canadian eager and willing to
attack the United State at any turn. I love Canada and her people. I can
think of no other nation in the world that represents so many of the most
noble, worthwhile traits of which humans are capable. Canada has done her
duty in Bosnia against all odds as part of the UN peacekeeping force. At a
time when much of the West should hang its collective head in shame for
the inaction and cowardice which led to tragedy on such a grand scale in
Bosnia, Canadians can take great pride in their willingness to do what's
right and decent. I hope and pray that you are not at all representative
of Canadian public opinion. I don't think you are.
Comrade Durant, your reflexive anti-Americanism is less appalling to me. I
realize there is a certain segment of middle- and upper-class Britons who
take a great amount of pride in flaunting their radical Marxist
sensibilities through bashing the United States at every turn. This group
was hard at it even before the rise of Marxism and socialism. Your only
saving grace is your futile banality -- shackled to a third-rate ideology
that cannot possibly explain the paradoxes of human behavior and cruelty
in an adequate manner. Fortunately, we confine your soulmates to the
college campus and the House Republican Caucus here in the Great Satan. I
don't expect that will change because the majority of Americans sense,
quite rightly, that the Marxist obsession with "homo economicus" doesn't
even come close to capturing the sum total of human existence. You, madam,
are a dinosaur.
You two may continue ranting and raving about American perfidy in our
actions in Bosnia. But the free ride is over. You can expect to be
challenged at every turn from now on by me or someone else on the list who
understands that the truth of American involvement is much more complex
than either of your hatreds for my nation will allow you to admit.
|+ - ||Slovak language law is unacceptable (mind)
Here's a little tid-bit of info. for those who criticize Liptak Bela and the HL
for it's actions. Read and learn!!
john_czifra @ shi.com
In his response to Bela Liptak's letter, his excellency, the Ambassador of
the Slovak Republic, Mr. Branislav Lichardus observed that the new law's
"main purpose is to preserve the historically developed form of the language,
as is common practice in many European countries, such as France,
Belgium or the Netherlands." In order to take care of this endeavour,
parliamentary legislative action or executive goverment orders were used
in the strongly nationalistically minded XIX. century. In a hypothetical
extreme case, in a totalitarian state of our century, Big Brother could simply
diktate("k" is used by purpose): speak only and exclusively
Government regulated Slovak or else...If this is not the intention of the
new law, then what are the heavy fines for??? Anyway, the result is an
In democratic societies, the deeply rooted patriotic (and not
nationalistic!!!) task of protecting the rich traditions of one's mother
tongue is entrusted to the Lingustic Departments of the National
Academy of Sciences, and never to the government and it is
definitely off limits to the police.( Language use in unenforceable ,anyhow.)
Language by police enforcement at its best is comparable
to a marriage by the sheriff, and at its worst it would be a spiritual
At a much higher degree of freedom and tolerance, Americans don't even
use linguistic recommendations from a National Academy of English
- which does not exist in this country - but "accepted the common law
customs of intelligent conversation." (L. Pederson:
Language,culture and the American heritage). At one point John Adams
proposed that Congress establish an American Academy "for refining, correcting,
improving, and ascertaining the English language." Later, this is how Thomas
"There are so many differences between us and England, of soil, climate,
culture,productions, laws, religion and government, that we must be left
far behind the march of circumstances, were we to hold ourselves rigorouly to
standard." On the other hand: " If, like the French Academicians, it were
proposed to fix our language, it would be fortunate that the step were not
in the days of our Saxon ancestors, whose vocabulary would illy express
the science of this day. Judicious neology can alone give strength and
copiousness to language, and enable it to be the vehicle of new ideas."
And there it is! The English language without legislation, without
government regulation and protection, or a National Academy's institutional
care (and, please don't even dare to think of police protection or heavy fines
for"Un-American" vocabulary!) - American English : the only universal
France - the role model for the Slovak and Romanian neo-nationalists -,
unfortunately,had a pivotal role in the development of language-nationalism
or language-chauvinism. (Even the term"chauvinism" is of French origin.)
Since the historical age of Louis XIV. through the Napoleonic wars
up to de Gaulle's towering figure the French were obsessed with the
development of a standard language for all French people.
The underlying reason was that among the European nations France
had the most fragmented language: 8 different languages and a score
of regional dialects. (The differences are not subtle or minor. For
example, such basic word as "yes" is "oui" in French, yet it is "oc"
in Provencal.) The French centralists picked the North-Eastern dialect
(spoken around Paris) as the "real" French, and reinforced its spread
by legislation, executive orders and centrally controlled cultural
policy. The result is what is known today as the French language.
The birth of the centrally governed nation-state after the revolution
provided the political tools for the French chauvinists either by direct
effect of the new laws or by the distortion or misinterpretatation ot the
revolutionary slogans as in the case of misusing the principle of
"egalite"for the oppression of minority languages. In 1866 instruction
on or teaching of minority languages in French schools was simply
forbidden by Paris. It took about 125 years for the situation to change.
And to change it did, quite remarkably! Therefore, for a Romanian or Slovak
politician to speak of the historical French minority policy without
considering the present situation - it seems to be a case of intentional
disregard for the whole truth. And the wholetruth lies in the current
policy of the French government and of the country's spritual elite
trying to correct past mistakes by protectingand promoting the
instruction and use of minority languages in all the regions
where they did exist historically. (In some cases
the government even helps to resurrect a "dead" language
as it happens in our days with the breton language in Normandy, site of
the invasion in the second world war).
The reason of this change in the last ten years or so is twofold.
The first is the appearance on the poltical scene of a welcome but also
feared newcomer: United Europe. The French now consider the minority
languages and cultures as part of the global French heritage and as such
the best protection against denationalization in a United Europe.
The second reason is similar: it is the ever growing fear of the domination
of the English language in the United Europe, in general, and the
agressively increasing americanization of France, in particular. They fear
-what they call - the "Disneyland-syndrome" and the" McDonaldization"
as a real menace against French culture and traditions.
Therefore, in a remarkable turn of policy, it is now Paris which wants the
survival of the minority languages. Now the French considers them reliable and
powerful allies against English penetration. As a first step, since January of
1993 bilingual instruction was introduced in all state schools in regions
where minorities exist. In parallel to the new language policy,
county leaders were requested to promote and sponsor the cultural events
of minorities (such as publication of litterature and books, subvention of
musical and dance performances, theatrical presentations and of films).
Claude Hagage, the worldwide known French linguist declared that
the government of United Europe should sponsor the minority languages
and their cultural traditions as a powerful competitor versus
American cultural penetration. Hagage's forecast for the coming generations
of United Europe: each person will speak at least 3 to 4 languages.
The major minority-languages in France are the following: Occitan-
language family, about 3 million people (8 languages, the most
important is the Provencal), Basque 250,000 people,
Bretons 50,000 (2.5 million people have forgotten their forefather's
language view of former French policy; many of them are relearning now),
Catalans, Basques, Corsicans, Flemish,and German.
Some landmarks of the situation in 1993: Bilingual instruction is in effect
in Provence, Corsica, Basqueland and other minority areas. In 1992 the
University of Montpellier conferred the first MD in Occitan language.
( A remarkable resurrection if we consider that manuscripts in
Provencal (Occitan) dating back to the 11th century are preserved in French
museums.) In 1993 there were 200 students specializing in Occitan
language in the same university. There are Occitan chairs in other
French universities too. ( A couple of years more,
and there will be bi-lingual signs on the French Riviera: in French and in
Provencal). Even before the new French policy started (1993),
there were 17 private schools in Provence teaching in Provencal,
and their number was growing. In the corner of the Atlantic Ocean
by the Pyrenees, around the city of Bayonne live the Basques of
France. Their number is only about 250,000. ( On the
southern slopes of the mountains, in Spain lives the big majority,
about 2.7 million Basques, in the Autonome Basque Territory.) In 1993
there were 38 bilingual schools In Basqueland, besides purely Basque
schools ("ikastola" in Basque). where instruction is in Basque, and French
is taught as a foreign language. There was only one bilingual high-school at
On the University of Bayonne there were 50 students specializing in
Basque. Basque language and litterature chair existed in the universities
ofBordeaux and Toulouse. The Bayonne radio station had a daily one hour
Basque programm. The French Channel 3 broadcasted a Basque TV programm
of 1/2 hr per month. However, the Basques don't need this, they can
listen day and night to the programms of the TV-station in the Autonome
Basqueland in Spain. In Corsica ethnic identity feeling is very strong, and
their political demand for autonomy is even stronger.
(All this data was collected patiently and preserved in my files on the
On the new French language and cultural policy my latest source is from:
The New York Times, May 3, 1993, the riport of Ms. Marlise Simons :
"Provencal heralds language revival.")
With other words, the presentation above is a worst case scenario:
currently - i.e. two years after the new language policy - the situation
of the minorities in France
should be much better. I consider the French treatment of their minorities
very important for the case of the Hungarian minorities. Both the Romanian
and the Slovak Parliament provided new instruction and language
legislation, inspired and encouraged by the historical French mistreatment
of her minorities.
It should be shown to these ladies and gentlemen that we are not living
anymore in 1866-Europe when - with one stroke of pen - instruction in
minority languages was eliminated in France, thereby becoming the
pioneer countryin "ethnic cleansing." While de Gaulle considered
United Europe to be " la patrie des nations", , today's France step
by step is becoming a "fatherland of national communities". In the
France of 1993, a Basque student, member of an ethnic group numbering
not more than 250,000 souls, could choose between 3 universities in
order to obtain a degree in Basque languageand litterature.What
selection does a Hungarian student have in Pozsony,in Nagyenyed,
in Ungvar, in Kanizsa?
None at all!
I would strongly recommend to the Hungarian Coalition, the HHRF, MVSZ,
Egyutteles, KMKSZ., RMDSZ and VMDSZ to have a second look
on the situation of the minorities in France - not as anideal goal for us
( which it is no, at least not yet! Italy, Spain, Finland, Switzerland
should be our chocies!) but in order to be able to unmask the sleek
attempts of our adversaries to use France as an excuse to continue
humiliating our brethren, to continue to deprive them from their
basic human rights. Respect for one's language cannot be obtained by
sheer force, by police action or by heavy fines. It will be earned by
tolerance, magnanimity, love and respect for the other party's language and
I think, it would be very important that somebody with proper background
make a complete survey of the minority situation in France, including
language use, instruction, schools, universities, collective rights if any,
cultural life, poltical activity, acceptance by the public, government
relations etc. It would be also important to establish contact with the
Occitans ( 3 million people, a powerful grup. It was Illyes Gyula who
first informed us about them in the "Szellem es eroszak"). Actually both
the Occitans and the Basques - a total of cca. 2.8 million souls - number
more than the "erdelyi magyarsag" . These latter have 2-2.5 million
souls but they certainly are not largest ethnic group in Europe as we
frequently used to say without checking it thouroughly. The Basques
and Occitans are neither. The largest ethnic group in Europe are the
Russians: their number roughly estimated at 25 million people.
Whenever the turmoil is over, and Russia stabilizes,
the Russians should be our best potential allies for achieving
international recognition of"national community" (The
term"minority" is obsolete) rights. Even if they are not the largest
ethnic group of Europe, the erdelyi magyarsag is a very-very respectable
Once the French connection is eliminated, the Central and Eastern European
authors and enforcers of absurd and unacceptable "new" (actually older
than 100 years in their spirit!) instruction and language legislation
become totally naked: the hidden motives are out in the stark sunshine.
It will be easier to fight them. Let's do the survey, please. I think the
Magyarok Vilagszovetsege should be able to find some money for it.
Thank you fou your kind attention.
|+ - ||message for Sandor (mind)
I got your e-mail this morning and tried to reply twice but my messages were
returned. Try and e-mail me again. If for some reason that dosen't work
you'll have to make your posting to this list.
|+ - ||Re: Anti-Americanism (mind)
Sam Stowe wrote:
>The kind of knee-jerk anti-Americanism typified by Szalai and Durant is
>exactly why most Americans have a problem with sending our nation's
>soldiers anywhere for peacekeeping missions or anything else. It's obvious
>at this point that those wealthier European nations with the ability to
>actually intervene militarily have no intention of taking any substantive
>action to put a stop to the slaughter in Bosnia. Let the U.S. move,
>however reluctantly, to separate the combatants and try to restore some
>sense of a normal, peaceful life to the civilians who are suffering so
>terribly and it's a case of dat Ole Evil Empire on the prowl.
>You two are disgusting. You'd countenance continued murder of civilians on
>a Hitlerian scale simply because it offends your politically exquisite
>sensibilities to see American troops tackling a tough and unwanted job
>that no other nation will do. Tell us all, Durant and Szalai -- who will
>enforce the peace in Bosnia if not the United States? Are the Swedes
>likely to send 20,000 combat troops there and use their firepower
>effectively? Let's see -- who else will probably be acceptable to your
>beautiful, lofty judgement? The Danes? The Norwegians? The Swiss?
>And I don't mind your anti-Americanism all that much. You're welcome to
>your prejudices, no matter how juvenile I might think they are. What I
>object to is your mutual propensity to start whining about mistreatment
>when anyone dares to gesture in your direction and observe that the
>emperor has no clothes. If you're both going to use this public forum to
>promote anti-American views, have the guts to stand up and take
>responsibility for those views.
>Szalai ur, nothing saddens me more than a Canadian eager and willing to
>attack the United State at any turn. I love Canada and her people. I can
>think of no other nation in the world that represents so many of the most
>noble, worthwhile traits of which humans are capable. Canada has done her
>duty in Bosnia against all odds as part of the UN peacekeeping force. At a
>time when much of the West should hang its collective head in shame for
>the inaction and cowardice which led to tragedy on such a grand scale in
>Bosnia, Canadians can take great pride in their willingness to do what's
>right and decent. I hope and pray that you are not at all representative
>of Canadian public opinion. I don't think you are.
>Comrade Durant, your reflexive anti-Americanism is less appalling to me. I
>realize there is a certain segment of middle- and upper-class Britons who
>take a great amount of pride in flaunting their radical Marxist
>sensibilities through bashing the United States at every turn. This group
>was hard at it even before the rise of Marxism and socialism. Your only
>saving grace is your futile banality -- shackled to a third-rate ideology
>that cannot possibly explain the paradoxes of human behavior and cruelty
>in an adequate manner. Fortunately, we confine your soulmates to the
>college campus and the House Republican Caucus here in the Great Satan. I
>don't expect that will change because the majority of Americans sense,
>quite rightly, that the Marxist obsession with "homo economicus" doesn't
>even come close to capturing the sum total of human existence. You, madam,
>are a dinosaur.
>You two may continue ranting and raving about American perfidy in our
>actions in Bosnia. But the free ride is over. You can expect to be
>challenged at every turn from now on by me or someone else on the list who
>understands that the truth of American involvement is much more complex
>than either of your hatreds for my nation will allow you to admit.
Thank you for your well written response.
(I'll ignore your paternalistic tone.)
Your concern for the suffering people of Bosnia is genuine. Your desire to
do something, - anything, to end this terrible conflict is obvious. I hope
that everyone reading this list shares your view and concern on this issue.
I know I do!
But please do not try to negate my criticism of American policy by saying
that this is the only policy that will, finely, end the suffering and
killing. By saying this, you are also saying that a-n-y criticism of this
policy means that the critic is less concerned about the suffering than you
are. That just isin't the case!
I don't want to get into an, "I'm more concerned than you are, so my
argument is more superior", debate. That is not the point.
Europeans could have stopped the conflict if they had the political will.
With a little co-operation from the Americans, the job may not have taken
long. But that did not happen. There was a massive failure of political
will and leadership in the early days of this conflict. Political roles in
a one superpower world are new to all the parties.
The Americans will stop this war if they want to. They certainly have the
power. However, I have not seen any plans (American or European) to end the
war. To me, there is a big difference between 'stop' and 'end'. For how
long are the Americans willing to stop the war. And at what cost?
Unfortunately, if there is no plan to end the war, Americas effort may only
result in the postponement of the killings. Lets co-operate to end the
|+ - ||Response to James Doepp (mind)
I don't disagree with your points. We may be in agreement that empires are
not always as pretty as they present themselves. At any rate you wont get
me defending Soviet excesses in the world.
|+ - ||bounced posting (mind)
I'm forwarding this without comment.
Dear Dr. Agnew:
I haven't got the time to explore if I am on your black list or not,
but felt appropriate to post my writing below on occasion of your
sad decision. Please post it for me if you will.
I appreciate you good services with free press and wish you luck
with your experiment with censorship.
Dr. Andras Pellionisz
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 14:40:04 -0400
From: "L-Soft list server at GWUVM (1.8b)" >
Subject: Rejected posting to
You are not authorized to send mail to the HUNGARY list from your
account. You might be authorized to send to the list from
another of your accounts, or perhaps when using another mail program which
generates slightly different addresses, but LISTSERV has no way to associate
this other account or address with yours. If you need assistance or if you have
any question regarding the policy of the HUNGARY list, please contact the list
------------------------ Rejected message (83 lines) --------------------------
Received: from GWUVM (SMTPUSER) by GWUVM.GWU.EDU (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with
BSMTP id 4388; Wed, 29 Nov 95 14:39:18 EDT
Received: from skysrv.Pha.Jhu.EDU by gwuvm.gwu.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP;
Wed, 29 Nov 95 14:39:02 EDT
Received: from skysrv
by skysrv.Pha.Jhu.EDU; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 14:33:51 -0500
Received: from mail.internet.com (pinta.internet.com)
by skysrv.Pha.Jhu.EDU; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 14:33:41 -0500
Received: from pinta.internet.com by mail.internet.com (8.6.11/InetCo-Hub-1.0)
id OAA26481; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 14:38:55 -0500
Received: from netcom.netcom.com by mail.internet.com (8.6.11/InetCo-Hub-1.0)
id OAA26476; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 14:38:54 -0500
Received: by netcom.netcom.com (8.6.12/Netcom)
id LAA00618; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 11:01:02 -0800
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 11:01:02 -0800
Subject: On some hidden blessings of censorship
Hugh Agnew, "Listowner, " without dispute has all
the right of imposing any kind of censorship on his list. Especially if
he invokes this rationale: "It is based at my university, which is a
private academic institution dedicated to research and teaching....
My reputation, and that of my university, are touched by the nature
and value of the list traffic--even if in miniscule ways."
Personally, I rather uphold the American tradition (protected by the
First Amendment of the Constitution), that is the envy of the World.
Especially of oppressed peoples e.g. that of Hungary, where press,
again, is only "partially free". I do believe that freedom of
expression results in a press that is vastly superior to all the rest
(that are censored in some form or another).
While it is profoundly sad to see this "Hungary" list die as far as
free press is concerned, Mr. Hugh Agnew's resorting to censorship
"to protect his reputation and that of his university" is certainly
not without certain hidden blessings.
By his taking over and declaring ultimate control and responsibility
for the content of postings, we have in Hugh Agnew a person (and in
his University an Institution) that can now be held directly
responsible for offenses emanating from his list.
I will insists, for example, on Hugh Agnew's stopping, to protect his
reputation and that of his university, all the slandering of my name
that has been going on lately in his personal list. I might add that the
Hungarian Antidefamation League will also be helped by Mr. Hugh
Agnew's declaration of his personal and his University's institutional
responsibility that no sexist harassment can defame (and deny
existence of!) Hungarian Freedom Fighters of 1956, etc, and the
offender is removed from his list as well. Or, his list will have
instantly defined its place among the controlled media by what it
excludes and what it does not.
It can be seen as truly refreshing that -by his own declaration-
Mr. Hugh Agnew is personally responsible now for the cleanliness of
this list. Further, should he be unable to adequately police thoughts
of contributors to his list, his University will do the required
institutional police work.
We are not this lucky with most other lists and forum of "Internet".
Most (still) operate under the First Amendment of the US
Constitution. Many specifically put on a "disclaimer", making the
opposite of Mr. Hugh Agnew's assumption of responsibility rather
explicit: i.e. that they are "technology providers" for expression
and assume absolutely no responsibility for, or control over, what is
Since Hungarians have built up a very long experience under
communism with controlled media, for instance Janos Kiss' silencing
is eerily reminiscent of sentencing certain writers to "silencing" for
certain number of months under media control under Janos Kadar
(executed by professional thought policeman Gyorgy Aczel), most
Hungarians will have no problem at all accommodating little
temporary re-emergence of thought police.
Will have no problem with judging its character and ultimate success,
Dr. Andras Pellionisz
|+ - ||Re: American GI`s (mind)
On Wed, 29 Nov 1995, SMMor wrote:
> I fail to see how many Hungarians would draw a connection between American
> troops, who are there to defend Bosnians, and Russians, who were there to
> occupy Hungarians, stationed in Pecs.
The Americans, though soldiers have
> been known to do a dirty deed or two, would not be there to keep the
> Hungarians "in line." If the citizens of Pecs and its environs are smart,
> what they would do is jack up prices on food, drink, etc., in order to
> fully benefit from the "American invasion."
no, prices will rise on their own. BUT don't forget all the new
businesses that will start up to serve the American soldiers. There are
costs and benefits...
They should just ask the
> people of Zagreb....
James D. Doepp
University of Miskolc (Hungary)
Department of Economic Theory
"Mr Turnbull had predicted evil consequences,...
and was now doing the best in his power to bring
about the verification of his own prophecies."
|+ - ||Re: anti-American?? (mind)
On Wed, 29 Nov 1995, Joe Szalai wrote:
> James Doepp writes
> I wouldn't build the alter of American democracy too high. How were the
> Americans promoting democracy in Chile when Allende was elected. The US
> also supported every tin pot dictator in Latin America as long as the
> financial interests of the United Fruit Co. were secure. How did that help
Interestingly enough, I was thinking of Chile as one of the American
foreign policy successes. I know that Allende was 'democratically'
elected, but his movements were away from democracy. Pinochet was no
democrat, but under his regime there was certainly more freedom than
would have been the case had Chile fallen to the Soviets.
I agree there are many cases where the US policy has been even
anti-democratic. The US supported Fidel Castro, for example, in Cuba
before he came to power. They also supported the Sandinistas...until
congress saw which way they were going (or rather, had gone). Some of the
'banana republic' deals were anything but clean.
> >Russian foreign policy has a history
> >of imperialism. Soviet foreign policy was even worse, not only creating
> >an empire, but destroying cultures and crushing peoples with carrying out
> >its propaganda of "international socialism".
> I'm not sure that American foreign policy was much different from Soviet
> foreign policy.
The above statement hardly deserves an answer. Do you not remember how
active the USSR was in Latin America? Or do you still believe the Soviet
lie that these guerilla groups were purely local? And what normally
happened to countries where the Soviet Union interfered? In Africa, for
dictators were replaced with totalitarian dictators. Inefficiency was
replace with gross inefficiency and even mass starvation (witness
They just operated in different parts of the world. In
> this century, the US has sent the troops into central America more often
> than the Soviets have invaded eastern Europe. Both nations have a history
> of imperialism. (No doubt Joe Pannon will see this as another 'code' word.)
again, the two lady-pushers
Personally, I am not "pro-American" as far as 'culture' is concerned
(American culture is an oxymoron) I have a particular distaste for
McDonald's, Hollywood, Coca-cola, and the like. BUT I *do* say, that the
US has a lot of good things about it, and much that it has contributed to
the world over its short history.
By the way, isn't this the *Hungary* newsgroup, not the US foreign policy
newsgroup? Perhaps we should be speaking about Horn's foreign policy
instead. (oh, for the days of Jeszenszky Geza...)
|+ - ||Re: van-e Kanadai Kultura? (mind)
On Wed, 29 Nov 1995, DARREN E PURCELL wrote:
It was I who wrote that (jd)^
> I ask this because the question of a common Magyar culture often spring
> to mind when I think of my Magyar friends who live in Serbia or Romania
> and they tell me that they have problems when they come to Hungary at
The difficulties that Hungarian minorities in surrounding countries have
when comming to Hungary, is based on a couple things:
1. Their expectations are too high. They have been denied their rights
as Hungarians to use their language, they have been treated poorly
because they are Hungarians. Now they come to Hungary, and expect to be
treated like brothers. They come to the land where people are free to
use their language and religion, but they find they are not accepted, and
people don't give a --- about language and religion.
2. Local Hungarians' ignorance. People in Hungary have been lied to for
the past forty years about the minority problems in surrounding areas.
Although almost everybody has relatives or friends living in the
surrounding countries, they haven't been there themselves, and do not
realise what the situation is for those living there. They have had
freedom to use their language, so the language is not so important.
Because of their ignorance (and the attitude that "we have enough problems
of our own...") Hungarians have little sympathy for and are insensitive to
their fellow-hungarians accross the borders.
James D. Doepp
University of Miskolc (Hungary)
Department of Economic Theory
"Mr Turnbull had predicted evil consequences,...
and was now doing the best in his power to bring
about the verification of his own prophecies."