Új Magyar Út, 1954 (5. évfolyam, 1-12. szám)
1954-01-01 / 1-2. szám
CONTENTS Although the nationalism of the XIXth Century still maintains a strong influence in the concerned countries, their intellectual elite has long ago recognized the vital necessity of the federation. Therefore, there is a great deal of hope that this goal can be accomplished in the near future. ★ ★ ★ KÁROLY FODOR, a qualified political and economics writer (New York, N. Y.), considers in his column “Iron Curtain” the resistance of the peasantry as the most important sector. This resistance was responsible for the downfall of the Rákosi government in June, 1953, the discontinuance of land collectivism, the withdrawal of 40 percent of the peasantry from state collective farming which occurred in spite of the loss of the many advantages which the communist government extended to state collective farmers, and in spite of condemning themselves in fact to hunger and misery. This resistance of the peasantry is supported by sympathetic and constantly sabotaging working class. Because of the individual and group sabotaging action of the Hungarian society, great deletions have occurred in the planned economy to such an extent that the first five year plan is a failure. ★ ★ ★ GERGELY HAJNÓCZY, economist and one of the editors of the paper, (Geneva Switzerland) analyzes in detail the work of Miklós Szabó, a Hungarian emigrant economist entitled “The New Order of Hungarian Industry.” Mr. Hajnóczy, who is a moderate socialist, approves in part the aims of Miklós Szabó, according to which the workers must have and be guaranteed a voice in management in the industry of liberated Hungary, in the leadership entrusted with the shaping of economic life, and in the healthy growth of small capital by which the stock in Hungarian industrial corporations may reach into the hands of the working class. On the other hand, however, he cannot agree with the theory of the author that such stock should be turned over to the owners as well as the workers of war damaged industry as compensation for such damage, by which the new Hungarian economic life would become debt ridden even before starting for the war losses suffered. ★ ★ ★ ^ LÁSZLÓ MÉRLAKY, a contributor of the paper, in his column on “World Forum”, analyzes the year 1953 as “the year of changes.” Although the long awaited death of Stalin brought no radical changes in the soviet world, the deposition of Beria, the disturbances in the satellite nations, as well as the end of the Korean war, the clarification of the Iranian question, and the unanimity among the western nations represent important changes in world politics. The united point of view which began at the Bermuda conference and which continued at Berlin, is the result of the new policies of the Eisenhower administration which in the face of struggle against soviet tactics met with success. ★ ★ ★ BÉLA T. KARDOS in his “I am an Europamerican” points out those basic principles which are common in the civilization and culture of the two leading continents. Oversimplifying his statements, we come to the conclusion that America could not exist without Europe, and Europe could not have sur-81 —
