Hungarian Studies Newsletter, 1986 (14. évfolyam, 47-50. szám)
1986 / 49. szám
ARTICLES & PAPERS (Continued) changes are necessary for the structural transformation of the economy that has been hindered by the practice of overregulations and ‘manual guidance.’ “Such transformation will require efficient investments that conform to market conditions. In this respect, too, greater scope needs to be given to decision making by the firm that has to take the risks and enjoy the reward of its actions. One may, then, ensure that ‘the new growth path’ lives up to its name as adjustment occurs through exports and efficient import substitution, thereby leading to higher rates of economic expansion.” The author is prof, of political economy at the Johns Hopkins U. and consultant to the World Bank. □ Dreisziger, N[andor] F. “Research Note: Hungarians in the Canadian West.” Prairie Foruml 0:4.2 (Fall 1985) 435-453. Hungarians have been active in the settlement development of the Canadian West since the closing years of the nineteenth century, but scholarly research about them did not really begin until the 1970s. Since that time a number of academics have done work on this subject and have published results of their findings in articles and books. This study surveys the state of scholarly investigation of the Hungarian community of the Canadian West, explores some of the themes voiced by researchers, and comments on the need for further scholarly work in this field. In addition to basic research, investigation in a social historian frame of reference would be welcome. Such research could provide data for comparison with data already collected in the Békevár area. Martin L. Kovács from the U. of Regina is presently engaged in such a project in the Kipling area of Saskatchewan, and Margo Csapó at the U. of British Columbia has started research on the Vancouver Hungarians. The author is prof, of history at the Royal Military College at Kingston. □ Hanak Peter. “Between East and West: Is there a Central European Identity?” Occasional paper. East European Program, European Institute, The Wilson Center. 10 pages. The division of Europe into two or more geopolitical regions has been arbitrary and dependent on the criteria by which the division is thought. Historically, the lines of division were along cultural (religious) differences. Thus, countries which were dominated by Rome and adopted Western (Roman) Christianity were referred to as Western Europe, and those with allegiance to Constantinople (Eastern Orthodox Church) were usually referred to as Eastern Europe. After World War II the lines of division shifted to assume political character and generate confusion. The present intent of division is to separate countries with communist governments from those of democratic governmental systems. Dissatisfied with the implications of such a division, it was suggested (by journalists and bureaucrats) that the eight states which constitute a buffer zone between the Soviet Union and western-type democracies should be referred to as East Central Europe (or occasionally Central East Europe). The author analyzes the dynamics of division and the consequences. He concludes that East Central Europe has no adequate identity. The intellectual elite of the region has only a faint awareness of it. Responsibility for the state of affairs lies in nationalism which has pitted small nations against each other, weakened them and exposed them to the great powers that have ruled the region for centuries. This nationalistic rivalry has so far proved more powerful than any regional community consciousness. The author is member of the Institute of History, HAS. □ Király, Bela K. “The Armed Forces and the Working Class in the HUNGARIAN REVOLUTION, 1956” New Politics 1:1 (Summer 1986) 193-212. The role of the military in political change either as a political force in itself or as an instrument of political sources has an extensive literature. Not all of it is well informed. On the 30th anniversary fo the 1956 revolution one still finds writers, who allege that the success of the revolution was mainly due to pre-revolutionary underground activities, supported by foreign political power-sources. The author, who was a participant-observer of the events in 1956 as supreme commander of the Hungarian National Guard (the armed forces of the revolution during those fateful days), insists that the revolution was spontaneous and initiated by domestic forces alone. It was a revolution pure and simple, which received its strength from ideological cohesion among the population at large in regard to attitudes toward the Soviet occupation and toward the management of public affairs. In addition to the military, the industrial workers constituted the strongest organized force, playing a decisive role in the revolution and its aftermath, when the military had long gone back to their barracks. In an appendix the author provides a transcript of the Basic Rights and Duties of the Workers’ Councilsendorsed by the October 31,1956, meeting of the Central Workers' Council of Greater Budapest. The author is prof, emeritus at Brooklyn Coll, and the Graduate School of the CUNY. He was also Major General in the Hungarian army before his arrest in 1951 and again held that rank during the 1956 revolution. □ Lackó, Mária. “Behavioral Rules in the Distribution of Sectoral Investments in Hungary, 1951-1980,” Journal of Comparative Economics 8:3 (1984) 290-300. An attempt is made to determine empirically the basic criteria for the distribution of the available investment funds among claimants, i.e., among firms or sectors of the Hungarian economy. Time series of investments in the 1951-1980 period and behavioral equationsshowthat investments were determined by two simple rules that were supplied at the same time in virtually all sectors: (a) investments were adjusted instantaneously and unconditionally to macroeconomic tensions; (b) the sectoral distribution of investments remained relatively stable. The essay requires some familiarity with statistics. The author is on the staff of the Institute of Economics, HAS. Cl Volgyes, Ivan, “Kádár’s Hungary in the Twilight Era,” Current History 1984 November, 361-5. This essay surveys the political evolutionary process in post-1956 Hungary. Acknowledging the progress made during the past years, the author sees continuous problems in most every field, such as the “nationality question” especially in view of the Hungarian minorities in Romania and Czechoslovakia; the growing inequalities in the distribution of wealth; the private sector outpacing the “working class” in terms of income; the presence of a permanent subculture (underclass); and the growing rate of crime. “The conflict between the egalitarianism of Hungary’s official ideology and the inequality permeating the system cannot be solved easily.” The external constraints to changes in the domestic field are obvious. The country cannot leave the Warsaw Pact; it cannot oppose Soviet foreign policy initiatives and interests; it cannot meddle in the affairs of other socialist states. Since the constraints are overbearing, “the regime is 6 No. 49. AUTUMN 1986, HUNGARIAN STUDIES NEWSLETTER
