||Re: Nationalism (mind)
|| 10 sor
||Let's be accurate, Mr.Pellionisz (mind)
|| 35 sor
||Class suit ? (mind)
|| 29 sor
||Thoughts on a debate (mind)
|| 36 sor
||Fencsik vs Truth (mind)
|| 86 sor
||Confronting the IMF (mind)
|| 68 sor
||church-state relations (mind)
|| 6 sor
||Re: Komaromi Name (mind)
|| 3 sor
||Cease and Desist (mind)
|| 18 sor
||'Forum' list (mind)
|| 14 sor
|+ - ||Re: Nationalism (mind)
>The Center for Global Research is preparing a special publication dealing
>with issues of nationalism. If you are interested in writing about some
>of the issues facing Hungary (gypsy culture, Hungarians in Slovakia,
>Romania and Serbia etc,) please contact Dr. Chris Kuehl at CGR.
Could you tell me more about The Center for Global Research?
Peter I. Hidas, Montreal
Peter I. Hidas, Montreal
|+ - ||Let's be accurate, Mr.Pellionisz (mind)
Since I was trained as a historian I am a stickler for accuracy. Mr.
Pellionisz (and some others of his ilk), on the other hand, specializes in
distorting other people's views. Let's analyze his latest. (And by the way, I
ignore here his other distortions concerning my views on the Hungarian
Revolution of 1956.) Here is Mr. Pellionisz:
>In "Forum", Ms Balogh is practically alone with her strange views that
>re-paying a $30 billion debt is "easy" for Hungary (why is abortion and
>suicide breaking all records then?) Indeed, Ms Balogh has to resort to
>calling Dr. Endrey "senile" to try to "hold the [SZDSZ-party] line"
Let's start with Ms Balogh's "strange views" that repaying the debt is
"easy." Let me quote myself:
>Meanwhile more sober voices declare that (1) it is not necessary to
>reorganize the debt because Hungary manages its debt load quite easily
It is quite clear from this sentence that it is not Ms. Balogh who holds such
strange views but others: "more sober voices declare." Among these, the
economists of the Hungarian National Bank and of late an economist and banker
who published her views on the Op-Ed page of HVG, a leading economic weekly,
whom I quoted verbatim on the Forum. According to them the Hungarian debt
load is "manageable."
By the way, putting the sentence "hold the [SZDSZ-party] line" between
quotation marks gives the impression that this judgment on my political views
comes from some higher authority. As far as I remember that comes from either
Mr. Pellionisz himself or from one of his cohorts. Therefore, their accuracy
is highly suspect. Call it what you wish I am for the austerity program,
reform of the administration and the existing social services, privatization,
true market economy and the repayment of Hungary's debt. And I am against
mindless propaganda of the sort Mr. Pellionisz specializes in. I consider it
not only dangerous but primitive.
|+ - ||Class suit ? (mind)
Joe Pannon writes:
>Personally, I'd like to see such a precedent setting law suit proceed,
>because one thing banks hate most is bad publicity. For this reason,
>even if they are sure they could win the case, they'd rather settle than
>go to trial.
Exactly. I know of similar suits in the pharmacy industry where companies
have paid huuuuge sums to settle out-of-court instead of trying to win the
otherwise seemingly easy cases. The reason: such legal processes hold on
several years long, and during the product in question just does not sell.
>But my hunch is that this effort to get the law suit started will fizzle
>out before long, in the good old Hungarian "szalmalang" tradition.
>Especially because they'll have trouble raising the funds for such an
>expensive law suit.
I go further. The class suit action is quite a stupid idea. This game has
to be played on government level otherwise no way to wring concessions from
the IMF. It is political game. Besides, the contracts in question were made
between the IMF and Hungarian state institution. Single Hungarian citizens
just can not act in US court instead of the state institution (however they
might sue in Hungary, i don't know. That would be an interesting thing !)
I still think that the original idea is a good one. I say it again: it is
entirely a political game, the economical, legal and other technical de-
tails are secondary, the discussion went to wrong direction.
|+ - ||Thoughts on a debate (mind)
I have followed, first with interest, then with a growing sense of
desperation (and finally, with utter disgust) the debate over the Hungarian
debt and the various ways of coping with it. Unfortunately, that debate has
by now degenerated into nasty ad hominem attacks on the side of some
(Fencsik, Balogh) who, instead of offering alternatives to proposals advanced
by others, seem to delight in ridiculing them. I never heard of Gabor
Fencsik before and have no idea of what axe he has to grind, but was
genuinely shocked by some of Eva Balogh' s comments, totally out of character
for a person I believed her to be.
One can read a lot of the low self-esteem and lack of fundamental
self-respect Hungarian society as a whole seems to be suffering from these
days, when nothing made, believed or advocated by Hungarians is regarded
worthwhile, unless it was done or said by someone in some other, preferably
The Endrey proposal is a case in point. Instead of addressing the basic
point, some preferred to make fun of the name, titles, even the domicile
(what? Hodmezovasarhely? Can anything sensible come from such a place?) of
dr. Endrey. So what if some of the details of the proposal seemed
irrealistic (such as the choice of the competent court)? Shouldn't all of us
help others to correct mistakes instead of just criticizing and ridiculing
them? If the idea is irrealistic, let's just say so and let it go at that.
What is the sense of calling someone senile, or the figment of someone
else's imagination? I get a sense that the people who resort to this style
of debate feel themselves threatened by radical new ideas and, lacking a
rational response, proceed in cutting them down the only way they can.
Let me state my opinion on the Endrey proposal: Not being of a legal
background, I have no idea of its merit. But I have a great deal of
admiration for someone who has the initiative (and the courage) to advance
such a novel idea. Even if this particular idea is totally impractical, we
should respect the man for caring enough to advance it. Last but not least,
let us remember that the history of mankind is replete with examples of
people who, while ridiculed and persecuted by their contemporaries, dared to
think differently and were vidicated in the end.
|+ - ||Fencsik vs Truth (mind)
I am hoping, in the interest of Mr.Fencsik, that he is not a lawyer
and/or keeps clear of anything requiring precise thinking. For all his
"name dropping" of assorted legal terms, he is doing a very sloppy
job with the raked bunch. This is evidenced e.g. from his untruthful denial
of "original jurisdiction" of the USA Supreme Court in certain issues,
notably in which a State (or the USA as a whole) is a party; for instance
in controversies with foreign States, such as Hungary or her citizens.
But we don't even have to hairsplit in "legalese" to have it demonstrated
that Mr. Fencsik is most characteristically long on laudmouthing yet comes
up as a classic case of the "truthfully handicapped" (to use a "pc"
term when labeling a liberal in style).
First, Mr. Fencsik appears to be unable to remove himself from the pit of his
primitive error, "mistaken identity". It is impossible for him to realize
that the lawsuit against IMF/WorldBank is Dr.Endrey's radical idea, not
mine. Readers of "Hungary" know that I went on record much earlier with
a very different, conservative debt-REDUCTION plan for Hungary. Of course,
mistaken identity might not be his unintentional bona fide error, if he
were to follow some (not so well) hidden agenda; to launch an "ad hominem"
attack on ME. Thus, he misuses Dr. Endrey's issue to placate me, who
simply PUBLICIZE Endrey's proposition (which is rather nifty, I won't deny).
An understandable (though ugly) course, since there is no doubt Mr. Fencsik
is not an exception in understanding that the crux of the matter in Endrey's
attempt to sue IMF/WorldBank is "raising awareness". (A much nicer pc term
for what Mr. Fencsik came to learn & love as "agit prop".) Thus, Mr. Fencsik
sees an enemy in those who *uphold truth* (could not care less about truth
itself). PUBLICITY, of course, as Mr. Fencsik unwittingly volunteers
to assist in demonstrating, arises even from the initial controversy: "WHICH
legal platform is most appropriate for the lawsuit?" Debate of this issue
alone could whip up spectacular clashes e.g. on the "original jurisdiction"
of the Supreme Court (or lack thereof, Ms. Balogh & Mr. Fencsik ??? :-)
Thank you, Mr. Fencsik & Comp.,for your kind assistance; your sloppiness with
basic terms was an extra help in playing up this controversy for a good start.
For those who cannot follow the seemingly "overcomplicated" rationale of
the game of "Fooling Fencsix", let me illuminate the role of "publicity" in
the avoidance of lethal injuries by a classic example. Suppose, just as a
thought experiment, that Hungary walks down the pitch dark alley between
communism and capitalism, where she is viciously attacked by a hardened
repeat-criminal, actually ten feet tall and fully armed, who whispers this
all-too-familiar IMF-line into her ears "Your money or your life!"
What is poor Hungary to do? Shall she meekly hand over all she's got?
Even kneel down to be easier abused, brutally raped?
If she fears for her life yet still has got remnants of her spunk that she
used to be famous for, she would better "scream for publicity"!
Not chiefly because the poor lady has a strong likelihood of beating the
ten-feet-tall criminal to punch. But because even hardened criminals are
strangely respectful of the spectacle of being caugth pants down, midst
of raping & robbing an innocent victim.
Now comes a little extra savvy, not unusual in cases involving Hungarians.
She is actually better off if she throws in a good amount of "controversy".
For instance, screams "FIRE! FIRE! FIRE!" (all in upper case and boldface,
instead of whispering in lower case "help, please help, would someone kindly
crack open a window at least; look, I am raped and robbed!"). For the world
is very "hard at hearing" when invited to rush to help out small nations
against fully armed, ten-feet-tall, hardened repeat-rapists. Screaming
"FIRE!" (although the usage of the term is perhaps controversial) works
more forcefully alerting the audience "YOU'RE NEXT!"
Am I revealing too much for the criminals? Would they back off knowing
the tactic of self-defense? Or would Mr. Fencsik, the script having been
revealed, ashame himself and cease and desist attacking me? NO WAY!
Criminals are driven not by their rational needs, but by their unbound
vicious instincts. Mr. Fencsik,having been ridiculed for helping me reveal,
by his youthfully ignorant naivete, his motives, will fabricate alternate
pseudo-issues in his desperation of trying to placate me, you'll see.
So be it. "PUBLICITY" is the enemy of criminals and of those profiting
from the crimes. And by "publicity" one does not mean mere "domestic
publicity", as Mr. Fencsik erroneously would like to believe, again.
(One would restrict Dr. Endrey's concept, the whole "debt-write-off debate",
to "Forum", written in the Hungarian language, if that were the case).
FULL WORLDWIDE PUBLICITY is called for, in the case of raping Hungary and
robbing her blind!
Likewise,if anyone wishes to identify him/herself as taking the rapists' &
robbers' side, in plain view, and not the side of the victim, supposedly
their Homeland, we are better off for these characters if they disgrace
themselves in English, in the open columns of "Hungary".
I yield the floor to "Mr. Fencsik & Comp": "Go ahead, make our day!"
|+ - ||Confronting the IMF (mind)
Tamas Kocsis sees an analogy between the proposed IMF lawsuit and the
Dalkon Shield-type mass tort cases against pharmaceutical companies:
> I know of similar suits in the pharmacy industry where companies
> have paid huuuuge sums to settle out-of-court instead of trying to
> win the otherwise seemingly easy cases. The reason: such legal
> processes hold on several years long, and during the product in
> question just does not sell.
In order to make sense of this analogy, Tamas would need to ask the
question: what is it exactly that the IMF is selling? And what does
it mean for the IMF's "customers" to stop buying?
If you try to ponder this question, you will see where the problem
lies. Hungary needs the IMF far worse than the IMF needs Hungary. If
anyone is selling anything here, it is Hungary. As a matter of fact,
Hungary is in the unenviable position of a seller in a buyer's market.
What Hungary is trying to sell is government paper. It has to keep
selling the stuff because the state spends more money than it takes
in. In the market for government paper, the IMF is a very prominent
buyer. When they stop buying, all the others stop buying. As a
result, the IMF has colossal leverage over Hungary. Dr Pellionisz has
a weakness for incendiary rhetoric, so he prefers he word "slavery" to
characterize the situation. He stretches the point. In any case,
what we have here is not a relationship between equals. It rarely is,
between overstretched borrowers and nervous creditors.
Is this state of affairs desirable? Obviously not. How did Hungary
manage to get into this situation? There is plenty of blame to go
around. All Hungarian governments from the 70's to the present day
have contributed to the problem. Not so much by borrowing per se, but
by frittering away the proceeds of earlier loans. Most of the money
borrowed in the 80's was spent to subsidize consumption. Little of it
was productively invested. Since the demise of Communism, Hungary
continued to borrow (at roughly twice the rate of 80's). The proceeds
of the new loans have mostly been used to subsidize an obsolete
industrial structure, and avoid having to make hard choices. The state
kept pouring (borrowed) money down the same old ratholes to keep
loss-making industries going.
Is the IMF at least partially responsible for all this? I think so.
I think they should have taken a much harder line for most of the last
15 years, insist on structural reforms, industrial restructuring,
faster privatization, an independent banking system. They are pushing
for these things now, but its is a bit too little, too late.
The advocates of the IMF lawsuit are making two crucial mistakes, in my
opinion. One is to keep harping on the debt as the root of all evil --
and consequently looking at some miraculous wiping out of the debt as
the panacea to solve Hungary's problems. The debt is a result of
structural imbalance in the Hungarian economy. At this point, just
reducing the rate of increase in the debt would require major reforms.
In other words, the debt is the symptom, not the disease.
The second mistake is the belief that confronting the IMF is good for
Hungary. This is a very dangerous proposal. The disaster it would
cause is comparable to losing a war. There would be economic collapse
and hyperinflation. To find out what would happen under such a
scenario, take a look at Peru. They have tried this tactic, and their
economy has gone down in flames. They were made an example of. It
will take decades for the Peruvian economy to recover. It is the
height of irresponsibility and callousness for folks like Mr Pellionisz
to wrap themselves in the national flag and urge a course of action
that will bring the country nothing but chaos and ruin.
|+ - ||church-state relations (mind)
I am writing an article on church state relations in post stalinist
hungary and i was wondering if anyone had any information on key articles
on the subject and/or opinions that you may have on the subject. my
thesis will most likely be something like "why, unlike the polish catholic
church, didnt the Hungarian catholic church participate significantly
in the nations struggle against Communism?
|+ - ||Re: Komaromi Name (mind)
Koma'rom is the name of a region of Hungary (not sure which part).
Koma'romi means "from Koma'rom".
|+ - ||Cease and Desist (mind)
Today's missive from Dr Pellionisz was a bit more convoluted than usual,
but I think I could parse most of it. I especially liked this part:
> Am I revealing too much for the criminals? Would they back off knowing
> the tactic of self-defense? Or would Mr. Fencsik, the script having
> been revealed, ashame himself and cease and desist attacking me? NO
> WAY! Criminals are driven not by their rational needs, but by their
> unbound vicious instincts.
In answer to your question: no, I don't think you are revealing too much.
In fact, you sound rather restrained and reasonable, considering.
So do I understand correctly the lawsuit is off? The "script having
been revealed"? Pray do keep us posted.
|+ - ||'Forum' list (mind)
I was wondering if anybody could please help me. I have only email
access to the internet and would like to subscribe to the 'forum'
hungarian mailing list. Unfortunately I am unable to find how to do
this from anywhere else.
I would sincerely appreciate any help on this matter.