The author examines – through historical documents – the forms of workers resistance in Hungary in the 50s reactions to the state cutting back on workers' income by increasing production norms and shortages in state organised supply caused by forceful collectivisation in agriculture. According to the study, the retreat from and later absence of collective protest cannot be explained by strong suppression only. Workers and especially women have invested more and more in their private sphere that completed the uncertain and low income from the state sector securing the living of families. Not even the most successful families were completely self-sufficient but the experience gained in the 50s became a key factor in the development of the ideal of social privatisation.

The author points out the endogenous ineffectiveness of capitalism that is regarded by mean stream authors as anomalies but from a community viewpoint the "effectiveness" of capitalism gets a different angle. Let's the ball from the dots!

The article is only available in Hungarian.

The first part of the study reviews the Hungarian state socialism's literature on commuters and gives a picture on the way how the official discourse addressed commuting workers. It is important to be noted that urban workers often envied families having income both from industry and agriculture and this split was reinforced by propaganda. Nevertheless a large group of long-time commuters came from the poorest, for whom moving into the cities and taking non-skilled industrial jobs could mean certain positive social mobility. In the second half of the study the author analyses documentaries how they present in the 70s and 80s the poverty and lack of protection of commuters travelling on "black trains" as a social question.

The article is only available in Hungarian.

The article, starting from the debates surrounding the new Hungarian Health Insurance Reform Act (ultimately aiming at the privatisation of the health service) attempts to analyse the destruction of social welfare systems in East Central Europe. While politically endorsing the rearguard fight trying to save the remnants of the welfare state, the author is sceptical concerning their future in the post-Fordist era. The article makes a sharp distinction between the egalitarian, statist (nationalising) and redistributive model on the one hand and the normative concept of ‘socialism' on the other.

The article is only available in Hungarian.

The renowned Sovietologist and labour historian examines the question how the Soviet labour history writing developed in the West, what were the major paradigms of historiography and what direction the research tends now. He concludes that the "golden age" of workers in historiography has ended too; while earlier they were depicted (and celebrated) as heroes of the revolution but the trendy catchword now is "people's impulsiveness"; they are in the end victims of their "own" revolt against oppression. Nonetheless of this pessimistic picture of historiography the author – at the end of his study – describes certain promising research fields which can offer (also) new perspectives to labour history writing.