And what did this superiority consist of? What made Russians superior over Latvians?Quote:
I mean, the bit about Russians getting superior housing in Latvia, and some cultural or language insensitivites.
Printable View
And what did this superiority consist of? What made Russians superior over Latvians?Quote:
I mean, the bit about Russians getting superior housing in Latvia, and some cultural or language insensitivites.
Immigrants from Soviet Union did not need to learn local languages - Russian was enough and only Latvians needed to know both.
Also as I said - immigrants got apartments outside of normal queue.
Soviet ideology was basically the same as in Nazi Germany.
Only "master race" were Russians not Germans.
Latvians could understand Russians, while Russians did not understand Latvians - Latvians had an advantage!Quote:
Immigrants from Soviet Union did not need to learn local languages - Russian was enough and only Latvians needed to know both.
Not the same, otherwise the Baltics wouldn't stll worship the German SS.
Attachment 295
Maybe in Russia it was not true (russian speakers were "master race" after all).Quote:
It's not true basically, but you entitled to your opinion.
But in occupied territories it was like that.
Soviet long term goal was to make russian speaking "soviet nation".
And looks like they already succeeded in Belarus.
Mishau - what does http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuperjanov_Battalion have to do with nazis?
Mishau - looks like you do not like Putin - but you are repeating his propaganda here...
That's why the Soviet Union was ruled by a Georgian for many years.Quote:
Only "master race" were Russians not Germans
I am almost certain that the Soviet Union made a very big issue out of promoting the idea that it was a union of quite different states.
And to say that the USSR was fascist like is just crazy talk - nobody hated fascism more.
I think the USSr actually tried to make a point out of recognizing the local countries.
I remember it from watching some kids stuff from there in my childhood and I found it very fascinating to have a massive country that was made up of different peoples. My country was not like that - everyone was the same back then. Remember watching programs with Soviet kids in national costumes etc -- I had a big fascination for such costumes as a child so I still remember it to this day. Something about a puppet that visited children across the USSR. And there was talk about "we are a big family" and lots of idealistic concepts like that.
Perhaps it was the Russians that had the last word, and Russian language used as the main language, but it definitely seemed like the tried to value all the different cultures and teach kids about it. At any rate, lots of other countries have done a much worse job of it.
It would be interesting with a thread about minority people in Russia, for example. I still find the idea of one country-many nationalities very fascinating.
No.Quote:
Perhaps it was the Russians that had the last word
Yes. There had to be a common language, Russian was bigger than all the other taken together. But other languages were supported.Quote:
and Russian language used as the main language
No it's your wishful thinking. Soviet long term goal was totally different. "A spectre is haunting Europe-the spectre of Communism" - the author is?
Please read some history books first in order not to seem so ignorant. You could start with Second International for instance, though I don't think you'll ever bother -- much easier to throw uneducated inventions here.
They have already done it.Quote:
I think Latvians would rather give their whole country to the USA as a vassal state and sell themselves as slaves to international capitalism
In the nowaday world, those who are not "slaves of international capitalism" are slaves of hunger, thirst and cold weather. It's good and very convenient to speak out on how evil those corporations and businesses are while you in fact use them everyday to maintain the basics of your life. Go move to a third world country and live on up to $3 a day, then you can say how much you enjoy being out of the "big greedy filthy capitalism".
I am currently a slave to international capitalism, but under decidedly better conditions than those that manufacture the goods that my employer sells. They work in Bangladesh and similar places for a few dollars a day. Should I be satisfied with the unfairness of that?
With pollution, greed and exploitation?
I choose the red pill!
Ok, just to give an example that's relevant, and an alternative. People in the USSR for example, did not work international corporations and they had an acceptable standard of living for a few decades, as far as I know.
Even though they were not rich, they were also relatively free from worries about job and housing, I think. They had free healthcare, good education and decent holidays. That's more than many in the USA, for example.
What if that had ended differently and they would have continued to improve their standard of living like in the 1960s? It is not entirely unfeasible. With better leadership, that might have happened.
Giving up and giving in to corporations and international capitalism is not the only option. T
There are alternative movements today - ecological, religious etc.
We do not have to be slaves to capitalism.
And what happened with the Latvians and the other Balts the minute the USSR disintegrated? Every corporation in Scandinavia cooked up an idea of how to profit from the new situation and the fact that the Balts were in really dire straits. And the Germans too.
Cheap textile production, foreigners bought their property there for bargain prices, outsourcing of programming... buying their antiques and art for prices below the real value, you name it. Previously honest Baltic people became crooks and ruthless criminals.
I am not so sure how much more dignified their situation really is, compared to in the Soviet past. I guess they are more pleased with the situation and that's what matters. But Latvia for example is in terrible debt, up to their ears with the IMF etc. All the Scandinavian banks opened up there, and in my opinion did not behave very ethically. Before, they were part of the Soviet Union, now they are part of the European Union. Both of these are superstates that limit national freedom. The European court can overrule any Latvian court. The European Union itself is not democratic in the way that it is governed. It's a meritocratic bureacracy. Whether there is really more democracy now is debatable.
I saw some seriously poor people in Latvia. They would probably have had a much more dignified lifestyle in the USSR. I visited Jurmala before the end of the USSR, in my childhood - it was a bit grey and no good shops. But there wer no beggars or dirt-poor people around. And I think many buildings were in a better state of repair. The feeling I strongly recall was of coming from a small country to a superpower country, similar to visiting some part of the USA perhaps. Now, when visiting Latvia, the feeling is quite different.
It's a shame about the military bases and excessive Soviet military installations in the Baltic states. It's really ugly and can totally sympathise that the Balts must have hated having them there. I would have.
(Deleted. L.)
The population of Latvia has decreased significantly, many people have left the country since the fall of the USSR. But the unemployment is very high. How can it be?
Do you know why "there was no unemployment in the USSR"? That's very well covered in that old Soviet joke, "How come the Soviet people know no unemployment? Because everyone has something to do - the first one builds something, the second one takes down what the previous one has built, the third one rebuilds what the previous one has taken down, etc."
Latvians were force-fed all this commie bullshit long enough - and reality shows that communism DOES NOT WORK.Quote:
than read a single word written by that particular author, or even look at the front page of the book in question...
How? There are no privileged migrants from USA, Americans do not deport or execute anyone, they do not forcefully conscript Latvians and send them to war, they do not go and take away our land or property. (Unlike Russia in 1940s)Quote:
They have already done it.
Many people are working illegally (especially in rural areas) or abroad (in Schengen area there are no border controls) and are not informing government about it - so this number is not very accurate.Quote:
But the unemployment is very high. How can it be?
All enslaved under Russian fascists.Quote:
very fascinating to have a massive country that was made up of different peoples
Of course not - they were immediately arrested by police (also Jūrmala was a popular tourist resort at that time (High-ranking Communist party officials liked to spend holidays there)).Quote:
But there wer no beggars or dirt-poor people around.
Thanks to crooks from Tautas Partija (they are no longer in government) (we were not the only one - Greece has the same problem).Quote:
But Latvia for example is in terrible debt, up to their ears with the IMF etc. All the Scandinavian banks opened up there, and in my opinion did not behave very ethically.
No - Scandinavian banks are fine - Russian on the other hand are a completely different matter.
One month ago Bankas Snoras in Lithuania and Latvijas Krājbanka in Latvia went bankrupt because of criminal actions of their owner Vladimir Antonov (Russian criminal).
Problems with Parex (also an "eastern investment") also increased the debt.
That's why "investment from the East" is not healthy - I hope our new government will realize that.
So - problems caused by reckless spending should be fixed with even more reckless spending?Quote:
Austerity pushed onto peripheral states has lead to slowdowns/recessions/depressions.
Only this time it was our decision to join the EU - they did not send tanks here.Quote:
Before, they were part of the Soviet Union, now they are part of the European Union.
Of course - commie occupants robbed them.Quote:
Even though they were not rich
My grandparents lost everything when they were deported to Siberia.
Many people who returned form Siberia later found their former houses and flats already occupied by "liberators" and were forced to live in communal flats instead. (only in 1990s they (or their descendants) got their properties back if they lived long enough).
Now I'm planning to start my own business - 30 years ago commies would throw me in a prison for that.
Of course - it was an occupied territory after all - local "burgeous nationalists" and "fascists" needed to be kept in check.Quote:
It's a shame about the military bases and excessive Soviet military installations in the Baltic states.
And Hanna - you said that beach in Liepāja was nice - in Soviet Times most of Kurzeme's beaches were off-limits to everyone except military (trespassers were shot) - to prevent people escaping to dirty, burgeous, capitalistic Sweden.
Those who work abroad can't be counted as working people in Latvia.Quote:
Many people are working illegally (especially in rural areas) or abroad (in Schengen area there are no border controls)
Почему люди считают, что старны Балтики должны быть чем-то лучше Афганистана, Ирака и Ливии? В конце концов, вхождение Прибалтики в состав СССР не противоречило международным правилам на тот момент, и было признано всеми странами, включая США. В отличие, скажем, от вторжения в Ирак, которое ООН не санкционировал. Думаю мы можем поставить Балтийские страны и страны востока в один ряд - если раньше над Прибалтикой глумился Советский Союз, то теперь будет глумиться США. Особенно, если принять во внимание, что страны Восточное Европы, включая Балтику, считаются в ЕС странами второго сорта.
Сама Латвия участвовала в куче агрессивных войн: в Ираке, Афганистане и т. д. Или поддерживали их в НАТО. Вопрос: у них были какие-то интересы в Ираке, или они очень боялись Саддама Хусейна?
Yes - if they inform our government - but many choose not to.Quote:
Those who work abroad can't be counted as working people in Latvia.
http://metrobloggen.se/metrobloggen/...ism_sweden.jpg
Ok, I obviously don't think that, or I wouldn't be studying an Eastern European language. I don't think most people feel that way. In IT at least, we know that the Eastern European collegues are usually first class.
However, in the 90s I did, for a while. At the time it seemed that everyone in Eastern Europe had just lost every sense of dignity in the pursuit of dollars... Of course, I did not know just how desperate their situation there situation was. And probably, the great majority never did this. But it was like Jekyll and Hyde transformation.... I had believed that Eastern Europeans were clever people, idealistic about socialism for the most part, and lived very peaceful lives. And then suddenly every Eastern European you meet is a crook!
In exactly that vacuum, the EU started emerging on the scene as a new political power (it became a "union") and it was time for my country to join. I was active together with lots of friends at Uni. Something had to replace the ideological and power vacuum that the early 90s had created, and for many, the EU was that entity.
I am not sure what to make of the situation now. Eastern Europeans are as intelligent and hardworking as everyone else in Europe, possibly more so, in some cases. But their countries are used as cheap manufacturing locations, for outsourcing and as a source of manpower for jobs that are hard to fill in Western Europe. This is not what my friends and I envisaged at all. But at the same time it is really good that the "iron curtain" is gone and all Europeans can travel and interact freely.
Yes, I think there is no difference between the behaviour of the USA & co in the Middle East. Possibly they are worse. As stated, what happened in the Baltic States was agreed in the peace negotiations between the allies after the war, if I am not mistaken. How ethical such an agreement is, is another story though. But no country refused to acknowledge the annexation.Quote:
Почему люди считают, что старны Балтики должны быть чем-то лучше Афганистана, Ирака и Ливии? В конце концов, вхождение Прибалтики в состав СССР не противоречило международным правилам на тот момент, и было признано всеми странами, включая США. В отличие, скажем, от вторжения в Ирак, которое ООН не санкционировал.
And in the case of Latvia, I think the bases were probably ok while they were still active. It's what happened after that, that is disturbing. And the fact that they were there against the will of the locals. Similar to Afghanistan now.
I saw some families living in squalor. I would not surprise me if these places were deliberately abandoned on purpose, by everyone in power. The families still living there are probably those with nowhere else to go. It was rather sad. In Daugavpils I saw a massive EU project to do with renovating an old fortress. Next to the fortress lived a group of Russian speaking EU citizens in miserable conditions...
I don't care about renovating some fortress!! I would like to see my tax money used to have those people re-housed and in a job training program, or repatriated to Russia in a dignified way, if Latvia is not prepared to support them.
Well, the situation with that beach seems a bit unclear. I was told lots of different stories about whether the beach was closed or not. People who grew up there in Soviet times talked about having played on the beach in their childhood, so clearly some parts of it had been open, at least. I think it was only a small part of the beach that was closed off. There was a very nice park and a sanatorium located exactly where the military zone was supposed to start. Seems like a strange location.Quote:
Originally Posted by nulle
Ok back to Latvia = lots of old radar towers, and a few lookout towers to keep track of what was going on in town were still around. Plus a large military town, called "Karosta" - this was definitely closed off, all the signs of this were still visible although the town was in a very sorry state.
Here is an intersting fact. When I was in Karosta I saw a few guys out running who looked completely out of place. They looked very much like American marines although I did not hear them speak. They ran into what looked like a military complex but it has no marks to say what it was. Hm!?
The Baltic people who got asylum in Sweden during the Cold war, were mostly crooks, sadly. The first wave of people that left in 1945 were just regular farmers etc. Some were native Swedish speakers. Good people. But after that, most of the people that left were in trouble with law and didn't fancy a Soviet prison.... That was the popular opinion at that time, anyway. When they came to Sweden they could claim political asylum, and to some extent the USSR was probably happy to see them go.
At least in Latvia there were two options - spend (recklessly) as previous government (unsustainable in long term) or cut spending (austerity) to keep the debt at reasonable level.
It is understandable.Quote:
it seemed that everyone in Eastern Europe had just lost every sense of dignity in the pursuit of dollars
After a poor life in USSR - where anything imported from the West was almost idolized (plastic bags, jeans, etc...)
George Orwell coined a great term - doublethink.Quote:
I had believed that Eastern Europeans were clever people, idealistic about socialism for the most part
In public people were idealistic about socialism, but secretly they hated it.
Anyway - if you lived in SU you at least partially had to be a crook.
There were long queues and deficits in shops - many necessary goods were hard to obtain.
So friends or acquitances who worked in distribution were very valuable.
You could bribe them and get the goods you needed.
Stealing from kolkhozes also was popular (my parents did it when they worked there - their pay was not great and they could get food without standing in a long queue).
If you knew a mechanic - you also could get parts for your car much easier.
This so-called "blat" was everywhere.
So - naturally - people continued to act the same way after Soviet Union collapsed.
In capitalist economy - these actions are corruption.
In soviet socialist economy these helped people to survive.
At least in Daugavpils mostly russians are in power.Quote:
I saw some families living in squalor. I would not surprise me if these places were deliberately abandoned on purpose, by everyone in power.
And Latvian companies import even cheaper workers from Ukraine and Belarus.Quote:
and as a source of manpower for jobs that are hard to fill in Western Europe
(Latvia also is attractive for them, because they have more rights (at least compared to Belarus) and they can speak Russian here)
To get most of Russians living here to move to Russia - you need a different process called "forced deportation" :D - because they simply do not want to go there - life here is better - most of people who wanted to live in Russia are already there.Quote:
or repatriated to Russia in a dignified way
Those who want to leave - go in the opposite direction - to the EU.
(Some of Russians I know work in Ireland and UK - and they say that they are not stupid to go to Russia - EU is much better).
I've just remembered funny Soviet short film about beefy factory worker who is trying to steal an engine from his workplace and skinny schoolboy who ruins his plans: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTs4KuLTiR8
Taking part in NATO missions allows Latvia to have smaller military budget than required by NATO.Quote:
Сама Латвия участвовала в куче агрессивных войн: в Ираке, Афганистане и т. д. Или поддерживали их в НАТО. Вопрос: у них были какие-то интересы в Ираке, или они очень боялись Саддама Хусейна?
And NATO also provides security to Baltic airspace - Baltic Air Policing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia .
Better question would be - what Ukraine, Mongolia and Kazakhstan did there?
Even Switzerland participated in Afghanistan war...
I think that Nulle grew up and went to school at the exact time when hating Russia, USSR etc was practically a mandatory religion in the Baltic states. I.e. late 90s until now.
I guess they needed a few years to re-write some school books and re-educate a few teachers, but after that it was probably full speed ahead with the anti-Russia/USSR/Socialism agenda.
And in with the pro-USA/NATO/capitalism agenda.... !
Which means that it probably doesn't matter how wrong things go with capitalism, how disgustingly the US behaves etc... Because one can spend all ones time complaining about everything that was wrong in the USSR, etc, etc.
I think a broader perspective would be better. Not everything about the USSR was bad, it had some good points. It can't have been some kind of living hell to live there, just a bit restrictive and insular - although with a sense of security that is now lost.
Also - here is another interesting point: From what I gathered reading newspapers at the time, most if not all of the Baltic states had more or less ready-made governments in exile standing by to take over... these people had lived in the USA and in Sweden, perhaps also Germany during the Soviet time. One of these countries (forgotten which) got a president who was even struggling with the language.
Why would Baltic people vote for people who had grown up outside of the countries, who did not know anything about their daily struggles and who can't possibly have been known to them at all? These candidates came in with financial backing from various types "pro democracy" groups... It can't have been particularly hard to woo people who had no experience of election campaigns or cynical politicians that make promises they don't intend to keep. It really smells of rotten fish!
I personally think the Balts to some degree have been taken for a ride by Western Europe and others. But they are too busy complaining about Russia and the USSR to notice it! For example, when the IMF wanted to force their loans on the Icelandic and the Irish, the citizens in both these small countries said "P$$ off", because they realised it was cr*p and didn't want to have it.
In Latvia it seems like they just let the EU, World bank and USA tell them what to do...
That's true - many people who got power right after USSR collapse were real crooks and treated inexperienced voters like idiots. (Pretty much the same like Putin treats his voters now: "I and Medvedev just decided to switch places and I do not care what you, imbeciles, think" ).Quote:
It can't have been particularly hard to woo people who had no experience of election campaigns or cynical politicians that make promises they don't intend to keep. It really smells of rotten fish!
Also many politicians tried to get popularity using nationalistic slogans (which are still effective now, sadly :/ ).
This situation improved in recent years at least between Latvian voters. (Most of Russian voters still vote like this: "I don't care that they are crooks, at least they are Russian").
Former commies mostly took the power.Quote:
most if not all of the Baltic states had more or less ready-made governments in exile standing by to take over
IMF did not force a loan on Latvia - our government went and asked for it, because thanks to their inept actions no one else wanted to lend to Latvia - pretty much like Greece now...
At least in my school no one preached that we should hate Russia/USSR.Quote:
I guess they needed a few years to re-write some school books and re-educate a few teachers, but after that it was probably full speed ahead with the anti-Russia/USSR/Socialism agenda.
Russian language also was a mandatory subject. (at least in my school) (now it is not)
USSR itself made people hate it - with their inefficient economy and poor living conditions. (and I say "their", because it was not our country, but foreign occupying power)
And Baltic people had extra reasons - forced russification, KGB and occupation army everywhere, and privileged immigrants that treated locals as second-class citizens.
In 1940 - there were ~200 000 Russians in Latvia - Soviet Union "imported" 700 000 more during soviet times making Latvians almost minority in our own country - another reason to hate USSR.
Imagine that someone imported 4 000 000 foreigners in Sweden against wishes of Swedish people and made their language first official in Sweden.
Or imagine that in Russia someone imported 80 000 000 Chinese and made Chinese language official in Russia.
But anyway - Hanna - what are you trying to say?
That Latvia is a failed state and we cannot govern it properly?
And that we should just give up and ask Russia to incorporate us once again?
nulle, Latvia was alway a political prostitute
Look up history
XII-XVI centuries. Latvia was invaded by crusaders and ancient Germany considered Latvia as a part of their orders. Natives were turned into slaves
XIV-XVIII centuries. Latvia is a part of Poland and Sweden, divided in half
XVIII-XX centuries. Latvia is a part of Russian Empire. By that type Latvia already been Russian and Russian people considered Latvia as part of their land. Руссо-Балт
In the World War I Latvia gets occupied by Germans. Germany considered Latvia as United Baltic Duchy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The first time when Latvia actually tries to get independent is a year 1918 - Latvian War of Independence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. By that time Russia is in civil war
Imperial Russia is on Latvian side which automatically makes Latvia an enemy to new Bolshevik RSFSR government
And actually RSFSR finally agrees on Latvian independence - Latvian–Soviet Peace Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
As you probably would hate to accept, without Russia, Latvia would never have any chance to be independent
Right now Latvia is selling itself to stronger allies. I guess old habits die hard
Good response Nulle!
And no, I do not think that you "should just give up and ask Russia to incorporate us once again".
Clearly that is NOT what Baltic people want. It's good that your countries are independent. Russia should respect your independence (I think it does) and the Russian speaking minorities should accept that they are minority and have a certain historical legacy to be a bit careful with.
I just get a bit provoked by all your antiRussia comments on this Russian website. I mean, is this really the ideal place to vent your frustrations?
Also, I am saying that the Baltic states, including you for example seem a bit too suspicious and hateful towards Russia and Russians. Oppressing the current Russian minority and discriminating against their language is not ok simply because Latvians think that their country was poorly done by the USSR. That's my point.
I mean, you want to be a bit mature about the past - for example like SouthAfrica is - they decided to let bygones be bygones and look to the future instead.
I think that the Russian language in Latvia should at least be promoted to the official status within municipalities with high percentage of native Russian speakers. By doing so the authorities would show respect to the significant part of the population. Stubborn denial of any official status for the Russian language is stupid, because you just can't ignore demands of the third part of the population. But the language is just one of many integrational issues in Latvian society, alongside with non-citizens and involvement of Russian community representatives in government. Ignoring these problems alienates native Russian speakers of Latvia and makes them feel like they are the second-class people in their own country. This could lead to aggravation of tensions in Latvian society and even to civil unrest.
Interestingly, recent months saw an exacerbation of the struggle for equal rights in Latvia, particularly the collection of signatures for changing the status of the Russian language and for granting citizenship to all non-citizens unconditionally (so called "zero-option"). It's even referred to as Russian atmoda in online discussions to draw a parallel with the periods of Latvian national awakening, implying that it's now Russian Latvians' turn to awaken. They've become more vocal than ever. It's interesting what will come out of it - equal rights for everyone and integration based on mutual respect of two communities or deeper disintegration of already dysfunctional Latvian society? Frankly speaking, there are only three ways to deal with the situation in Latvia:
1) to assimilate Russians into the Latvian society, but it'll not work because they don't want to;
2) to get rid of Russians somehow, and there are just two options - either deportation (that means civil war) or encouraging them to leave, for example by offering them some money, kind of an incentive fee, but it would be too costly, because Latvian population is already shrinking and the country just can't afford to lose more taxpayers and pay for that too - it's an economical suicide;
3) to integrate Russians into the Latvian society.
I think the third alternative is the best and Latvian authorities make statements in the same vein, but their "integration efforts" are reduced to absurdity and rely mainly on repressive measures like language police slapping a fine on people for insufficient use of the Latvian language at work (yes, they really have that! o_O), institute of non-citizenship, political boycott etc. In other words, they're speaking of integration, but trying to achieve ill-conceived assimilation, and fail at both. They should change their flawed approach and take Russian Latvians into consideration to build a coherent society.