There are a couple of Hungarian place names in Canada.  Just outside
Kitchener (called Berlin til 1916) Ontario, there is a Kossuth Road and a
place called Kossuth that only has a couple of buildings, one of them being
the Magyar Haz.  Along the lake front in Toronto, there is Budapest Park.
In Budapest Park there is a monument to the 1956 Revolution and the
inscription on it reads "Freedom for Hungary,  Freedom for All.

In Saskatchewan there is a town called Esterhazy.  It is located east of the
capital, Regina, and is in an area that used to be called the Hun Valley.
The Hun Valley is along the Qu' Appelle River and there were several
settlements with Hungarian names.  There were places called Otthon, Beke,
and Kaposvar.  The river there was also called Kaposvar.  The only Hungarian
place name that still exists today is Esterhazy.  The rest is history.

Joe Szalai

Dear fellowlistmembers,

Kossuth's popularity in this country during his visit was indeed a
public relations phenomenon, but it dimmed somewhat, at least in the
environs of Washington, D.C., when after the famous address to the
congress he and his entourage decamped leaving their hotel bills charged to
the US Congress (!:-).  I don't know whether the hotel-keeper ever got his
account settled, but perhaps he patriotically considered it a contribution
to the Free Hungary movement.

Sincerely,

Hugh Agnew

Dear Hugh,

Thanks for the following gem!  Are you back among us or still in
beautiful Prague?

Joe, thank you, too, for the info!  I am still collecting; keep those
cards and letters coming, folks!

Martha

On Sun, 23 Jun 1996, Hugh Agnew wrote:

> Dear fellowlistmembers,
>
> Kossuth's popularity in this country during his visit was indeed a
> public relations phenomenon, but it dimmed somewhat, at least in the
> environs of Washington, D.C., when after the famous address to the
> congress he and his entourage decamped leaving their hotel bills charged to
> the US Congress (!:-).  I don't know whether the hotel-keeper ever got his
> account settled, but perhaps he patriotically considered it a contribution
> to the Free Hungary movement.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Hugh Agnew
> 
>

George Antony wrote:

 > There are no two rules that could be paired with ethnicity.  The
 > furthest one can go is that Hungarians are more passionate in
 > debates than Anglo-Saxons, but that does not extend beyond
 > fairness in decent Hungarian circles.

As a new reader to this list, I found Ur Antony's comments noteworthy.

With the caveat of not knowing any of the history that lead to his
quoted comments, I might suggest that it is clear -- even to a
newcomer -- that Ur Antony rarely travels in decent Hungarian circles.

The passion that he dismisses as the mark of coarseness in Magyar man
is in fact within the traditional culture of continental European cafe
society.

To suggest that a nation that produced Petofi Sandor, an heir to the
traditions of the keepers of the Bibliotheca Corviniana would in
proper _decent_ circles demure and shirk from his Truth in the name of
some Holy Allegiance to _fairness_ clearly indicates Ur Antony's
isolation not only from all *decent* Hungarian circles, but of all
Southern European ones.

The passion he decries is the historical legacy of all men -- an ongoing
tradition from Athenian times.  The rules of free debate and discourse.

Ur Antony however laments those traditions and decries the passion of
all men who seek and live for Truth.

Whether they were Athenian, or enlightened European men who lived by
the sword -- he decries those who transferred the skills of fencing --
the thrust and the parry -- to dialogue, a position he might
re-evaluate after reading these words.

And once Ur Antony has given some thought to the front of his
argument, he might well turn to the back -- a simple look away from
the Hungarians and to the English and their traditions.

Before he contrasts the Eastern "Balkan" (barbaric) style, and his
perceived Western "Anglo-Saxon" (civilized) style, he might look no
further than British tabloids or the House of Lords to see that
childish behaviour and passionate articulation are not just the pervue
of the barbarian Huns.

Churchill and Margaret Thatcher certainly are noteworthy examples of
the tradition of passionate discourse that is the legacy of all,
unless of course ... in fairness ... Ur Antony feels that they never
travelled in decent Anglo-Saxon circles??


--
  Istvan Laszlo O Szaraz von Keszi

       "Ha ferfi, legy ferfi ..."

At 07:56 PM 6/22/96 -0600, "Istvan Laszlo O Szaraz von Keszi" wrote:
> George Antony wrote:
>
> > There are no two rules that could be paired with ethnicity.  The
> > furthest one can go is that Hungarians are more passionate in
> > debates than Anglo-Saxons, but that does not extend beyond
> > fairness in decent Hungarian circles.
>
>As a new reader to this list, I found Ur Antony's comments noteworthy.
>
>With the caveat of not knowing any of the history that lead to his
>quoted comments, I might suggest that it is clear -- even to a
>newcomer -- that Ur Antony rarely travels in decent Hungarian circles.

        I read George Antony's lines at least three times and I came to the
conclusion that Istvan Laszlo O Szaraz von Keszi completely misunderstood
George's message. George said exactly the opposite what Istvan Laszlo O
Szaraz von Keszi claims he said.

        Eva Balogh

On Sat, 22 Jun 1996, ??? > wrote:

> As a new reader to this list, I found Ur Antony's comments noteworthy.
                                        ~~~~~~~~~

Istvan, (or is it Laszlo?)

I, too, find Mr. Anthony's comments noteworthy, but for entirely different
reasons, that I will not enumerate at this time.

In English, we address people as Mr.; Mrs.; Miss; Ms.; Dr.; Professor - I
am sure that you are getting the picture.  Ur, holgy, urno, kisasszony
and the like are strictly reserved for Hungarian texts.

Finally, I am happy to see a quote from Hungary's great poet, Sandor Petofi.
(Or, if you insist, Peto"fi Sa'ndor.)  Except, I would have appreciated a
more precise citation.

>
>        "Ha ferfi, legy ferfi ..."
>

If memory hasn't yet failed me completely, this should have been:

        "Ha ferfi vagy, legy ferfi..."
        [ = If you are a man, be(have like) one...]

Martha

At 19:56 22/06/96 -0600, Istvan Laszlo O Szarasz von Keszi wrote:
> George Antony wrote:
>
> > There are no two rules that could be paired with ethnicity.  The
> > furthest one can go is that Hungarians are more passionate in
> > debates than Anglo-Saxons, but that does not extend beyond
> > fairness in decent Hungarian circles.
>
>As a new reader to this list, I found Ur Antony's comments noteworthy.
>
>With the caveat of not knowing any of the history that lead to his
>quoted comments, I might suggest that it is clear -- even to a
>newcomer -- that Ur Antony rarely travels in decent Hungarian circles.
>
>The passion that he dismisses as the mark of coarseness in Magyar man
>is in fact within the traditional culture of continental European cafe
>society.

He didn't state that a passionate style of debate is a mark of coarseness,
he simply said that the only thing that would distinguish Hungarian debating
style from, say, the British is that the Hungarian tends to be a bit more
passionate. He did, however, state that the FORUM had been taken over by a
noisy bunch of extremists, whose "debating style conforms with their
unsavoury political views." He seemed to clearly indicate that these
unsavoury types are not typical of most Hungarians - decent or otherwise -
in either their views or their debating style.
>
>To suggest that a nation that produced Petofi Sandor, an heir to the
>traditions of the keepers of the Bibliotheca Corviniana would in
>proper _decent_ circles demure and shirk from his Truth in the name of
>some Holy Allegiance to _fairness_ clearly indicates Ur Antony's
>isolation not only from all *decent* Hungarian circles, but of all
>Southern European ones.

I find the shrill and hate-filled tone that I have discerned from some of
the gentlemen (and I do use the term loosely) who have crossed over to this
List or SCM from the FORUM to be both irrational and misleading, to say the
least. One can feel passionately about all sorts of things without using a
hysterical tone and without excoriating  those who happen to disagree with
one's views. The Truth in my view will most often come out when differing
views are allowed to be aired in an atmosphere of reasoned discourse,
something which seems to be anathema to these individuals. As a right-winger
myself, I find it scary that people can seriously hold such hate-filled and
distorted views, and that these seem to be right-wingers, too, people with
whom I would like to feel some kinship. Instead I only feel disgust when I
read their claptrap. (I would like to note specifically that I do not
include people like Kadar Gyorgy in with that group).
>
>The passion he decries is the historical legacy of all men -- an ongoing
>tradition from Athenian times.  The rules of free debate and discourse.

The tactics of these extremists have nothing in common with the tradition of
reasoned discourse which we have inherited from the Athenians.
>
>Ur Antony however laments those traditions and decries the passion of
>all men who seek and live for Truth.

If you are equating the views of the extremists on the FORUM with the
seeking after truth, I think you are sadly mistaken.
>
>Whether they were Athenian, or enlightened European men who lived by
>the sword -- he decries those who transferred the skills of fencing --
>the thrust and the parry -- to dialogue, a position he might
>re-evaluate after reading these words.

Where did he write that? Not in the message you are citing!
>
>And once Ur Antony has given some thought to the front of his
>argument, he might well turn to the back -- a simple look away from
>the Hungarians and to the English and their traditions.
>
>Before he contrasts the Eastern "Balkan" (barbaric) style, and his
>perceived Western "Anglo-Saxon" (civilized) style, he might look no
>further than British tabloids or the House of Lords to see that
>childish behaviour and passionate articulation are not just the pervue
>of the barbarian Huns.

He didn't say that, nor did he imply it!
>
>Churchill and Margaret Thatcher certainly are noteworthy examples of
>the tradition of passionate discourse that is the legacy of all,
>unless of course ... in fairness ... Ur Antony feels that they never
>travelled in decent Anglo-Saxon circles??
>
I have been a member of this List for just about six months now. I have
observed George Antony comment on a number of varying topics over that time.
He comments are always thoughtful, perceptive, well drafted, and to the
point. They may even be, yes, a tad passionate.

I hope you will enjoy the give-and-take on the List as I have over the past
number of months, but I suggest that you take the time to read  and
carefully analyse what the Listmembers are in fact saying.

Yours respectfully,

Johanne

Johanne L. Tournier
e-mail - 
>
>--
>  Istvan Laszlo O Szaraz von Keszi
>
>       "Ha ferfi, legy ferfi ..."
>
>

Close to 40,000 Hungarian refugees settled in Canada between 1956 and 1960.

Peter I. Hidas, Montreal

One more info. in connection with Kossuth:  there is a
    bust of him in the basement of the Capitol in Washington,
    DC -

            Amos

Eva wrote:
 Calling a man like Arpad Go:ncz as "Szovjetpartizanarpibacsi" is, if
not bloodcurling, certainly very low. How can anyone of call a man whose
whole life was spent opposing the soviet system "soviet" anything? And what
about the "partisan" part? Fighting against the Germans should not be the
object of scorn! I think this is what Andras was trying to say.

I am very proud of the few partisans who fought the Germans and their
 supportersin Hungary. The problem is, that there were too few of them. A
 Hungarian
resistance movement could have made some difference during the renewal of
the Trianon treaty in 1947.

Peter I. Hidas, Montreal

A long article in Monday's Nepszabadsag with the above title describes the
problems of education in Eastern Europe. The author assigns the blame to
fact that governments, in addition to health and social spending reduced
mainly the spending on education, partially as a result of pressure by
international monetary institutions. The article speaks about a scheduled
meeting between the World Bank and IMF on one side and the Educational
"Internationale'" (sounds like the former anthem of the Communist movement)
on the other side, the latter one being a conglomerate of teachers' unions
from all over the world. The meeting was announced at a union conference
held in Budapest.

At the conference the participants decried the fact that government spending
on education is getting smaller everywhere. The local governments are not
supposed to support education, thus education suffers. Teachers' salaries
are not keeping up with the inflation.

Collective bargaining between unions and the government is barely working
because laws are non-existent, labor relations are not clear, unions are
weak. The unions usually get results only through drastic actions, like
demonstrations and strikes.

Teachers are threatened by massive unemployment due to demographic pressures
and the increase of weekly workload (which in Poland is now 18 hours).

The Internationale' is asking that the right to collective bargaining be
included in the constitution or at least assured by law. They are also
asking that tuition-free education should stay a constitutional right and
that the level of teacher salaries should be guaranteed. And all this under
the coordination of the Internationale'. They are also asking that the
unions be included in negotiations between governments and the international
monetary institutions. Thus they can assure that "government will not make
the  wrong decisions under the pressure of the international monetary
institutions".

To this I can add: God save the education from teachers' unions that
continuously preach about the level of education but only care about their
members' level of compensation.

Gabor D. Farkas

In article <4q7n31vmgg7.fsf@hp>,  says...

> > There are no two rules that could be paired with ethnicity.  The
> > furthest one can go is that Hungarians are more passionate in
> > debates than Anglo-Saxons, but that does not extend beyond
> > fairness in decent Hungarian circles.

>As a new reader to this list, I found Ur Antony's comments noteworthy.

>With the caveat of not knowing any of the history that lead to his
>quoted comments, I might suggest that it is clear -- even to a
>newcomer -- that Ur Antony rarely travels in decent Hungarian circles.
>The passion that he dismisses as the mark of coarseness in Magyar man
>is in fact within the traditional culture of continental European cafe
>society. To suggest that a nation that produced Petofi Sandor, an heir to
>the traditions of the keepers of the Bibliotheca Corviniana would in
>proper _decent_ circles demure and shirk from his Truth in the name of
>some Holy Allegiance to _fairness_ clearly indicates Ur Antony's
>isolation not only from all *decent* Hungarian circles, but of all
>Southern European ones.
>The passion he decries is the historical legacy of all men -- an ongoing
>tradition from Athenian times.  The rules of free debate and discourse.
>Ur Antony however laments those traditions and decries the passion of
>all men who seek and live for Truth.
>Whether they were Athenian, or enlightened European men who lived by
>the sword -- he decries those who transferred the skills of fencing --
>the thrust and the parry -- to dialogue, a position he might
>re-evaluate after reading these words.
>And once Ur Antony has given some thought to the front of his
>argument, he might well turn to the back -- a simple look away from
>the Hungarians and to the English and their traditions.
>Before he contrasts the Eastern "Balkan" (barbaric) style, and his
>perceived Western "Anglo-Saxon" (civilized) style, he might look no
>further than British tabloids or the House of Lords to see that
>childish behaviour and passionate articulation are not just the pervue
>of the barbarian Huns.
>Churchill and Margaret Thatcher certainly are noteworthy examples of
>the tradition of passionate discourse that is the legacy of all,
>unless of course ... in fairness ... Ur Antony feels that they never
>travelled in decent Anglo-Saxon circles??


My dear fellow, I find your comments most worthy and interesting, but
please allow me to inquire about the following:

a) the House of Lords: is not the House of Commons the vulgar theatre
of passionate speeches, rather than the House of Lords. The latter
actually conduct themselves rather dispassionately from what I've seen
and heard.

b) tabloids: are these anti-intellectual rags unique to Britain? What
about Eastern Europe, the US, etc?

c) Maggie Thatcher was, in contrast to the orator Churchill (in his
day parliamentary debate involved much more mutual respect than today)
an hysterical type of character, apparently passionate, often full of
bullshit, which she sold to the dear British public who so often swallowed
it hook, line and sinker :-(   Her style was suitable for the more recent
practice of consistently debunking one's parliamentary opponents as idiots,
liars, etc, although use of such terminology is considered *unparliamentary*
and any accusation of, e.g., *lie*, can only be couched in euphemisms such
as *untruth* :-)

Basically, though, I agree with you as far as the principle of what
you write goes (I think.) Perhaps it's just a question of the prevailing
political climate that dictates what is acceptable, or not, in how one
debates?

Your humble servant,

George Szaszvari


--
 George Szaszvari, DCPS Chess Club, 42 Alleyn Park, London SE21 7AA, UK
 Planet Earth, Milky Way Galaxy **** NW London Computer Club **** ICPUG

In The News - Edited excerpts from the LA Times

A man in Hungary has invented a musical condom. Women tend to prefer
sensuosus melodies like Ravel's "Bolero", while men tend to prefer "The
Anvil Chorus". For afternoon quickies, they have the "Minute Waltz".
It's the perfect gift for your "Big Bopper"... or your "Little
Richard". There's even one for women who fake it... it features a
"Millie Vanilli" tune.