Postscript about the Ukraine-Russia Crisis

TOM KANDO 

 At the risk if seeming wishy-washy, let me add to my analysis of this conflict. The situation is serious enough to warrant this: 

There are two sides to the issue: 

My post of Feb. 1 "War Against Russia is not an Option" states Russia’s concerns. I express my worry about NATO’s expansion after the fall of the Soviet Union. We are now reaping the consequence of this error. At the same time, Russia’s brutal invasion of its neighbor must be condemned. 

In my last post, I noted Russia’s historical tendency to resort to war against its neighbors and to support regimes opportunistically and immorally for its own nationalistic aims (for example its support of Syria’s murderous Bashar Al-Assad). So there is plenty of blame to go around. 

Because of the stakes, and the fact that they pit the two nuclear superpowers against each other, there is no rational alternative to diplomacy and negotiations. This must include two things regarding Ukraine:

(1) Its free and independent existence and 

(2) its neutrality. Finland is a good model, even though some experts argue that the Finnish model does not apply. 
As to the rest of NATO and new members such as the Baltic states: These issues should be resolved by determining the possible and the feasible, during protracted negotiations. Presently, we are statutorily obligated to go to war if these NATO members are attacked (same regarding the mini-states that came out of the former Yugoslavia, plus the former Eastern European Soviet satellites). This is an absurdly heavy blanket promise. Are we ready for nuclear World War Three over a state smaller than Sacramento?

Russia's Invasion of Ukraine

Tom Kando 

Putin finally did it. Once again he is invading a country so as to annex it, or parts of it. This is clear and simple. 

Nevertheless, there are those who see moral equivalency between Putin and Biden, between Russia and America, or worse, see America as the chief troublemaker. Trump is wholeheartedly supporting Putin, calling his action “genius.” 

The default position of old-fashioned anti-Americans has always been moral equivalency between us and our opponents, or even assigning the bulk of the blame to the US. The tired refrain is that we ourselves have invaded dozens of countries, so who are we to lecture other countries? US imperialism. 

There is no question that the conquest of the North American continent was a terribly cruel and imperialistic endeavor. But I am referring here to the most recent century, especially American foreign policy since the end of World War Two. Yes, it is true that America has invaded many countries during this period. It had appointed itself world cop, responsible for the status quo. 

But unlike Russian (and earlier German and other European imperialism), American imperialism hardly ever ANNEXED the countries or territories which it invaded. Our invasions of Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and many other countries were not meant to make those countries into American territory. 

Russia’s invasions are meant to redraw the map, to annex territories. So it was when Stalin attacked Finland in 1939, so it is today with regard to Ukraine. 

Pragmatic Idealism

by Madeleine Kando

If I had to choose one word in the English language to describe my oldest daughter’s personality, I would describe her as ‘pragmatic’. My husband likes to describe her as ‘Dutch’, as if she was a piece of cheese. She is after all, half Dutch, half Hungarian. Dutch on her father’s side, Hungarian on her mother’s side. 

But calling her ‘Dutch’ does not do justice to her OR Dutch cheese. There are hundreds of types of Dutch cheeses and many flavors of pragmatism. Calling someone ‘pragmatic’ is just as vague as describing someone’s personality as 'Dutch', but for lack of a better word I will stick to that description.



The word pragmatic comes from the Latin word ‘pragmaticus’ (being skilled in law or business) and the Greek root ‘pragma’, which means a thing done, a fact. I personally like the following definition of a pragmatist: ‘One who acts in response to particular situations rather than upon abstract ideals; one who is willing to ignore their ideals to accomplish goals.’


Well, in that sense, we are all pragmatists by default? The question is not whether you are willing to ignore your ideals in the face of reality, but how far you are willing to go.



It is often said that the American character is quintessentially pragmatic. American inventors like Thomas Edison, and Alexander Graham Bell epitomize Pragmatism and the Yankee spirit of tinkering. Pragmatism says: ‘Try something and see if it works’. America itself was an experiment. Pragmatism judges whether something is good by its consequences. Pragmatism says that there are no absolute truths. Nothing is sacred. Ideas are basically there to give actions their purpose. Not the other way around.



For example, is it pragmatic to steal a car so you won’t have to walk to work? Well, according to one of the founders of pragmatism, William James, pragmatism is what works for the majority of people. If everyone started to steal cars, it wouldn't be good for the people whose cars got stolen (or for the car thieves who go to jail), so in the long run, stealing a car to go to work is not pragmatic.



If pragmatism is so American, it is in danger of suffering a slow death. How come we have so many 'principled' politicians in government? The current grid-lock is a direct result of falsely-interpreted idealism on both sides of the isle. From the Republicans' obsession with anti-abortion to the unwillingness to compromise on the Democratic side. It's all very non-American, if you ask me.



Some Early Childhood Memories from World War Two and its Aftermath

TOM KANDO 

While I remember many of the experiences described in this series of articles, I also rely on things which my mother and my grandmother told me. 

I was born in Hungary at the beginning of World War Two. I remember the bombing raids on Budapest. My extended family owned and lived in a large house on the beautiful slope of the Rószadomb - the Hill of Roses. It had been built by my great-grandfather at the turn of the twentieth century. He was a math professor at the University of Budapest. After the war, when the Communists took over Hungary, the government confiscated our family estate and populated it with half a dozen families in need. One of the rooms was allocated to my grandparents, who were permitted to continue to live there and share the communal kitchen with the new inhabitants. During the war, the house was still ours, and that is where my entire extended family lived. 
Sometimes, the allied bombing raids were a nightly occurrence. The planes came from the West to drop their bombs on Budapest's industrial sectors located in Obuda, on the eastern outskirts of the city. Ours was a three-story house with balconies and a basement. When the bombing started and we had to run for shelter, everyone would quickly exit the family room on the second floor by way of the veranda and run down the outside stairway. 

One night, the sirens started blaring again. As usual, my mother and my grandparents grabbed the kids and began to hurry out of the family room. Grandfather Imre was carrying me. As everyone was running down the balcony towards the stairs, the sky was lit up by spectacular explosions. The air defense batteries were doing their best to shoot the planes out of the sky. I was mesmerized and, pointing at the explosions, I said to Imre “Look grandpa! Beautiful fireworks!” Imre confirmed that the light show was indeed a firework, which made me feel even better. Everyone hurried down into the stinking damp basement and spent the rest of the night there by candle light, my twin baby sisters Madeleine and Juliette, my parents Ata and Jules, my grandparents Margit and Imre, my great-grandparents Mano and Julika, uncle Bela and aunts Ferike and Ica, cousin Evi and others, all huddled together and keeping each other warm under piles of old blankets and empty sacks of hemp, while the explosions were reverberating in the distance.

Accent Discrimination

By Madeleine Kando

I speak English as if it were my native language. My native language is Hungarian, but I was too young when I left, so I no longer speak it. It is buried beneath other languages that I had to learn on the way to adulthood. I am a language mutt, you might say. Were it not for my accent, which I am told is French, I could impersonate the most diehard native English speaker. 

The only language that I speak without an accent is French, because I learnt it before my speech apparatus settled itself in the comfortable language groove that native speakers always dig for themselves. But before I could learn my multiplication tables, my French had to be tucked away in the bottom of my backpack, when we moved from Paris to Amsterdam. I learnt Dutch quickly and perfectly, without anyone noticing that I was an imposter. Or so I thought.

The problem is, that you cannot hear your own voice the way other people hear it, unless you use a recording device. The fact that I couldn’t hear my own accent protected me from the harsh reality that when people heard me speak, they saw a French duck, but I thought of myself as a Dutch swan.

Kachru's Three Circles of English

English is the Lingua Franca of the world. Non-native speakers use English to communicate with each other, which allows an Eskimo to speak to a Pigmy, to a Dutchman or a Russian without having to learn all these languages. He only has to learn English and presto, he is able to attend a Pigmy conference on how to grow taller, a Dutch workshop on how to build dykes, or read a manual on how to install a samovar in his igloo.

Of the one and a half billion people in the world who speak English, only 380 million are native speakers. Not only are they in the minority, but most of them are ‘mono-lingual’. They only speak one language. Who can blame them? Why bother learn another language if everybody else speaks your language?

Accent Discrimination

English is the undisputed global ruler, but there is English and then there is English. Speaking English without an accent (called neutral English), immediately puts you in a privileged position on the chessboard of life. You could have five post-graduate degrees and an IQ of 180, but none of that matters when you are a person in the possession of an accent. There are jobs and even entire careers that I would not waste my time applying for, knowing that I have a foreign accent. Can you imagine the President of the United States delivering the State of the Union with a French accent? People would roll on the floor laughing.

Accent racism is a result of our basic desire to classify others, to group them in a certain hierarchy and to differentiate friend from foe.* It is a global phenomenon, but it is ironic that ‘neutral English’ should be the norm when two third of English speakers have an accent. It’s like asking the entire male population to wear a crew-cut because a minority of American men are subjected to this atrociously disfiguring custom when they enlist in the army.

War Against Russia is not an Option

Tom Kando 
So now it’s Russia, Ukraine, maybe war, etc. As if what the world needs is another war!
Tucker Carlson, that abominable Fox News hate monger, is siding with Russia in the Russia-Ukraine confrontation. In an earlier era, this would have been seen as treasonous. Had any public figure supported the Soviet Union when it invaded Hungary in 1956, he might have been criminally prosecuted. 
There is no question that Putin’s saber rattling and Russia’s looming invasion of Ukraine are cause for alarm. At the same time, I have a feeling of deja vu and some unanswered questions: 
During much of my life, there was a Cold War. For decades, Russia was the bogeyman. We were told that the Soviet Union, the Commies, were coming. They were going to invade us, nuclear war was around the corner, we fought in Korea, Vietnam, and many other places to keep the Russians at bay. We created NATO: 
The Growth of NATO membership:

1949: Original members (12): Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, United Kingdom, United States

1952: (2): Greece, Turkey

1955 (1): Germany

1982: (1): Spain

1999: (3): Former Russian satellites: Czechia, Hungary, Poland

2004: (7):Former Communist states: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia 

2009: (2): Former Communist states: Albania, Croatia 

2017: (1): Former Communist state: Montenegro

2020: (1): Former Communist state: North Macedonia