More thoughts on Victory Day
RIGA – Here’s what the previous post is not about. It’s not about whether Russians have a right to celebrate the end of World War II the way they chose. It’s not about whether Russians were liberators or occupiers. It’s not about political consequences of the Second World War. It’s not about how good integrated Russians should celebrate this day. In a way, the previous post isn’t about March 16.
But here’s what this post is about. It’s about memory of people who died in the most awful war the European continent has ever seen. Every country has a day to remember its men and women who died serving their country. Americans celebrate Memorial Day. The British celebrate the Remembrance Day on November 11.
Each of these days are tied to a particular war, of course. Americans started commemorating the Memorial Day after the Civil War. It began first as a way to commemorate those Americans who gave their lives in the Civil War and after the First World War it included all men and women who had given their lives serving their country.
The Remembrance Day commemorates the end of the World War One. But now it involves veterans from WW1, WW2, the Falklands, Kosovo, Bosnia, Northern Ireland and the ongoing conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq – some of which may or may not have been just and liberating.
Back in 1998, Latvian officials failed to explain the significance of March 16 to the international community. At that time, it’d been suggested to commemorate deaths of all fallen soldiers on November 11, the day of the Bear-slayer. However, it didn’t take place. November 11 is still largely about Latvia in 1919. And now March 16 is no longer an official day of commemoration and hardly any of the government officials attend its ceremonies.
My previous post was misinterpreted to mean that Latvians should join Russians in celebrating the Victory day. It wasn’t so. I was my dream it were so, but I realize that it’s my sick idealistic fantasy. The post was also misinterpreted to mean that any criticism of the Latvian government concerning the Second World War ultimately means the glorification of the Russian government and role of the Soviet Union in that war. This kind of black and white thinking is not what the previous post was about.
Nor was the post about politics. It was not about whether the war – any war – was just any more or any less so than wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Vietnam. Would we remember the two soldiers who died in the war in Iraq recently by pointing a finger at the government who sent them there contrary to what majority of Latvians thought? Or would we say that those soldiers who died there searching for the weapon of mass destruction were simply wasting the time and resources? How would we tell that to children and then grandchildren of those people who died in wars like that? I, for one, couldn’t do it.
But it seems that’s what we’re doing with those who died in the Second World War. For Latvia, those men and women regardless of their uniform or allegiance, or even deaths of civilians mean absolutely nothing. And I find it repugnant.
And that’s what the previous post was about.
May 11th, 2008 at 10.52
Is your RSS feeder broken? I’ve been getting an error for about a week.
May 11th, 2008 at 14.04
Alek,
Sorry. You wrote a very political piece. You can attempt to reframe it as much as you like, but it had a strong bias. Latvians can choose to remember this as they want and in no way does that change the way any other group (russian or other) can or should choose to remember that war.
The war ended and its consequences were quite obvious and real for Latvia and Latvians. That is simply true.
WWII is political here. To my wife’s family it is very easily right and wrong. Germans AND Soviets were wrong. Both killed members of my wife’s family. Do you seriously suggest that my wife’s family should celebrate the liberators who slaughtered (literally) her grandfather? It is political.
Do we “celebrate” the sacrifices of the German soldiers who fought for Hitler? There is a german war cemetery in Babite. I almost choked when I saw the soldiers buried there memorialized as “victims of the war” (that is the English used). They were agents in this. From the curious point of view you promote, the only agents (responsible people) were Hitler, Churchill, Roosevelt, Stalin etc. Wrong. Just wrong. People make choices.
May 11th, 2008 at 14.33
Tom,
Sure, it’s got a strong bias, the bias to remember those people who died and those people who survived the most violent conflict on the European continent. World War II is political in Estonia as well. However, Estonians managed to get over it by creating a veteran organization that consists of the veterans who fought during World War II on the German and the Soviet sides. It’s quite an interesting outfit. Perhaps, that’s why fewer Russians came out in Tallinn on Victory Day compared to Riga.
And this is what my post is about – finding a common ground. Yes, both sides were wrong, but people joined the Waffen SS and the Red Army for many different reasons, including protecting their occupied country. It doesn’t matter to me what day we remember fallen soldiers and those who survived. Ideally, it should be November 11, but it isn’t.
How does the Latvian government treat its veterans on both sides?
May 11th, 2008 at 15.25
Remembering the fallen, I have no problem with this, but please without the symbols. Without Nazi symbols of course, also without Soviet ones in the Baltics. And from 1939-1945. And not 1941-1945.
May 11th, 2008 at 15.28
Sure, I’ve no problems with that. However, no such day exists that encompasses all dead and living veterans from all wars.
May 11th, 2008 at 15.37
Alek,
There is no need for such a day. Nobody can or should dictate what or who is remembered and by who and how. Why in this world should the state I am a citizen of (USA) or the state that I live in (Latvia) be somehow compelled to remember people who fought to subjugate it?
That in no way impinges on the rights of their nations or families to remember them.
As an aside, some people would argue that WWI was the most horrible war in Europe in the 20th century. In the UK and France it killed off a much larger fraction of the educated classes.
May 11th, 2008 at 15.43
Tom,
I disagree. Many Russians are indeed citizens of this country, some of them fought in the war, others joined the Soviet Army for an obligatory three years of service, so what? Their opinion trumps an opinion of anyone who is not tainted with the Soviet past? I don’t think so.
If the goal of the government to consolidate the society, to create a cohesive life for all its citizens, then it ought to matter. If the goal is to divide because it’s easier to vilify the other side – whatever side that is – then it’s working.
And I’m not willing to debate which war was “more awful” - I find it repulsive and irrelevant. It’d be like saying, “Well, World war II wasn’t that bad, we’d rather talk about World War I…” I think that too diminishes lives lost in that war.
May 11th, 2008 at 15.54
“And it appears to me by making May 8 or 9 just another day, we void the sacrifices made by those who gave their lives in that banal, blind, savage, and ultimately meaningless war.”
Please explain this. How does my having a different set of emotions and thoughts about this change your perception of sacrifice. And very few people “gave their lives” they were stolen- by others. You seem to not see agency here, totally “blind” forces at work. When my uncle fought at Guadacanal, he knew what he was doing- killing Japanese. He was an actor not an observer there by accident.
What the LV govt does carries big meaning. For you it means one thing, but if they chose to acknowledge with black bunting? What would that mean? Again, to you one thing, to my wife and her family a very different thing. To me that quiet stalemate that has settled in is the best solution. Russians can’t force LVs to participate and LVs stay away. Both sides wishes respected.
May 11th, 2008 at 15.58
“the most violent conflict on the European continent.” your words.
May 11th, 2008 at 16.05
Tom,
Here’s what that means. It means that in Latvia there’s not a single day commemorating deaths of soldiers who died during the Second World War. A real day. May 8 isn’t a real day because it wasn’t marked in any special way – not even by national flags. It means that by neglecting to add it to our calendar - May 8, 9, or whatever other date - we void their sacrifices. Period.
Again, I’m not advocating for any forceful participation in any May 9 activities.
And I think by the number of lives lost it was the most violent conflict, no?
May 11th, 2008 at 17.05
We’re talking about different wars. The monuments Russians, Soviets, et al. gather around on 9 May commemorate the Great Patriotic War that started in 1941 and ended in a glorious victory in 1945 — the victory of good over evil accomplished by the Soviet/Russian people.
In fact, the war started in 1939, when Stalin and Hitler made friends and cut up Europe to their mutual liking. The war did not end in Latvia in 1945 — the Red Army’s rapists were accompanied by the occupation regime and the NKVD — those were “embedded” amongst the victorious “liberators,” directly so.
The same glorious veterans, so human, who hang out at these monuments, were the same glorious gentlemen who hung out here as occupiers for decades, cutting in front of the line at the gastronomiya and doing everything they could to destroy the rebirth of this country in the late 1980s.
They teach their children and grandchildren the same things — that they vanquished evil, “Latvian fascists” included, and that a sorry and illegitimate regime is attempting to “revise history.” In reality — they are some of the main proponents of a slick, deceitful historiography based upon lies, rekindling the triumphalist horrors they were quite comfortable with for most of their lives.
I think your “[n]or was the post about politics” idea is a fantastic attempt at re-leveraging utter sūdi, as Tom suggested. Of course it’s about politics, and you play politics when you weigh in about “lesser evils” and indulge in these strange dances. It’s almost like “friendship between peoples” — oh, hey, that must have been apolitical, too?
Most of the people celebrating 9 May detest this country and its people, and you yourself have admitted that — “hatred toward everything Latvian is enormous.”
May 11th, 2008 at 17.39
So – it must be nice to live in the world where everything is nice and dry, Peteris. It must be nice to be able to place everything in its compartment with a beautiful sticky label on it. And when something comes along that doesn’t fit into any of those labels, rather than reconsidering your labels, you try to fit them in.
So, no middle ground for you, then. It’s either glory to the Father of all Peoples Comrade Stalin, or Long Live the independent democratic Latvia, right? Any suggestion for a day to be set aside commemorating all the dead in that war – whenever it started – and those who are still barely alive is sacrilege because – Oh, my God – these people detest this country. Anyone who detests this country ought to be what? Banished? So, what’s next for them? A train to Siberia, er, sorry, Dvinsk? We’re not a tyranny. We cannot ban those people from feeling the way they do. So, pointing big fat fingers at those veterans and saying, “You don’t love this country,” somehow makes them lesser people, no? It somehow diminishes every, single thing they have ever done in their entire live - as far as the gloriously independent Republic of Latvia is concerned, no?
May 11th, 2008 at 19.01
Aleks, where is the controversy? My grandfather left Estonia cause he was Estonian and was working for the ministry of defence (war) in 1939. He left together with the Germans. Cause his wife ( mother language Russian) was of German descent. They left for Germany and settled in occupied Poland. My grandfahter was shocked, they had to live in former Polish or Polish-Jewish houses. He said: Fuck off, I don’t want to. The Germans said fuck you, make your living, go ahead. He left. Later he survived cause his wife, my grandmother, was of native Russian tongue. My aunt was not raped near Berlin cause they spoke Russian. But her friends were raped. 1945,the liberation happened. And, they were happy that the Nazis were defeated.
May 11th, 2008 at 20.01
Alek,
Actually all anyone is saying is that, no matter how you want to set it up, to memorialize this is a political act. Fair? Possibly not. But, as a society, we have made a reasonable compromise- Russians gather at the victory monument (not “end of the war” but victory) and blow off some steam and Latvians let it alone. Okay. I might add that maybe it is about time that Russians started leaving the Legionnaires alone too.
It is a tragedy and a horror that people died. But, there are people who would rather not include their dead with “our” dead and vice versa. What is the problem? Do I really need to somehow mourn the war dead who fought against me (that is a rhetorical “me”)?
Perhaps you are a better person than I, but I won’t ask my wife’s uncle to acknowledge his service in the soviet army- he doesn’t want to (unless really pressed) and I don’t feel inclined to force it. He saw his friends killed and certainly is not proud of what he did and what happened because of his service.
Acknowledging it is political, ignoring it is political- take your pick.
May 11th, 2008 at 22.13
It’s the so-called Latvian “pathological tolerance” for on-going Russian vampirism in Latvia that allows for the continued existence of the “uzvaras” monument of its occupiers in a major and prominent park in Riga. You would have thought that by now, “monstris” would be history, that it would have been “deported to Siberia” on a winter day when it was too cold to bring out the “patriotics” holding placards of Stalin and too finger-numbing to wave the Russian flags. Is there a comparable example elsewhere of such sado-masochistic accomodation?
May 11th, 2008 at 23.43
I really did not intend to create a new word - “patriotics” - but maybe a bizarre word better describes this twisted “patriotism” by Latvia’s citizens and residents for the USSR/Russia.
May 12th, 2008 at 2.44
Peteri,
“The same glorious veterans, so human, who hang out at these monuments, were the same glorious gentlemen who hung out here as occupiers for decades, cutting in front of the line at the gastronomiya and doing everything they could to destroy the rebirth of this country in the late 1980s.”
I wonder what the basis for this conclusion is. I have seen a few short interviews with Red Army veterans, and they never said they are against Latvian independence, or Latvian culture, etc. – quite the opposite. Latvia’s information space is already full of ethnic stereotypes – there is no need to develop them further.
“Most of the people celebrating 9 May detest this country and its people.”
Again, a vilifying statement with few facts to support it. I know some people who visit the monument on May 9, and I can assure you that they don’t hate this country and its people. The pictures of Comrade Stalin at the monument are disgusting, but not everyone is holding them or waving the Russian flags. Just like the fact that a few of those who participate in the public commemorations on March 16 are active Anti-Semites doesn’t mean that everyone who takes part holds these opinions.
Oh, and by the way, in a comment to another post, you wrote about May 8, 1945:
“There was no rejoicing in Rīga, for obvious reasons.”
My mother happens to know one elderly woman who lived in Riga all her life. She says she was crying with joy when the Red Army came. She was an inmate in the Riga Ghetto.
She is also a citizen of this country, Peteris. And I think her opinion counts for something.
May 12th, 2008 at 2.46
Latvia belongs to its citizens and not to ethnic Latvians exclusively. It is time to wake up and face the reality.
May 12th, 2008 at 2.49
Oh, and just to make it clear – I am not saying May 9 must be officially commemorated. All I am trying to say is that the phrase “Russian vampirism” is just as repulsive as those Stalin placards.
May 12th, 2008 at 9.10
“The pictures of Comrade Stalin at the monument are disgusting, but not everyone is holding them or waving the Russian flags. Just like the fact that a few of those who participate in the public commemorations on March 16 are active Anti-Semites doesn’t mean that everyone who takes part holds these opinions.”
I’ve never seen a portrait of Hitler held aloft on 16 March, nor a German flag being waved, nor anyone exhibiting the symbols of Nazi Germany. One sees Latvian flags, and the gathering takes place at the Freedom Monument — not at a massive, triumphalist monument that celebrates a “liberation” that didn’t take place.
I rather agree with the historian Uldis Neiburgs –
“Domāju, ka tīri cilvēcīgi mēs varam saprast un cienīt bijušos sarkanarmiešus kā indivīdus par viņu kara laikā pārdzīvoto un ieguldījumu cīņā pret nacismu. Taču pretī mēs droši vien gribētu sagaidīt izpratni, ka, ne jau pēc viņu gribas, bet reāli vienlaikus viņi bija tās armijas sastāvdaļa, kas gan atbrīvoja Latviju no nacisma un vācu okupācijas, bet tajā pašā laikā kalpoja kā instruments Staļina rokās un ar viņu palīdzību Latvija nonāca otrreizējās padomju okupācijas varas pakļautībā.
“Iespējams, ka no savulaik vienā vai otrā frontes pusē atrodošās kara laika paaudzes šādu izpratni prasīt tomēr ir neiespējami, ņemot vērā visu to, ko viņi ir pārdzīvojuši. Taču varbūt kopēju izpratni varam sasniegt mēs — daudz jaunākas paaudzes mūsdienu Latvijas sabiedrības pārstāvji. Taču, manuprāt, tas tomēr nav iespējams ar sarkaniem karogiem pulcējoties pie «Rīgas atbrīvotāju pieminekļa», kas daudziem krieviem varbūt simbolizē fašisma sagrāvi un lielo Uzvaru, taču latviešu sabiedrības acīs ir spilgtākais padomju okupācijas simbols, pie kura vēl 13 gadus pēc Latvijas neatkarības atjaunošanas pulcējas, labākajā gadījumā — padomju nostaļģijas pārņemti cilvēki, kuri nespēj atrast savu vietu posttotalitārajā sabiedrībā, bet sliktākajā — Latvijā neatkarības pretinieki.”
http://www.dialogi.lv/article.php?id=356&t=3&rub=0&print=1
May 12th, 2008 at 13.06
(my post at May 12th, 2008 at 2.46 is supposed to be addressed to Amber)
May 12th, 2008 at 13.28
“I’ve never seen a portrait of Hitler held aloft on 16 March, nor a German flag being waved, nor anyone exhibiting the symbols of Nazi Germany.”
I agree that March 16 is more subdued and perhaps less political. But let us put it into perspective. LNT likes to show close-ups of those Stalin pictures. I haven’t been at the monument but I bet that out of the tens of thousands who gather there, only a couple of people hold them.
Of course, the organizers must have asked all the participants not to display those symbols, but the fact that the organizers are mostly a bunch of irresponsible “left-wing” politicians does not mean that everyone who comes there is a Stalinist or a Russian chauvinist.
And I think many of those people would be holding Latvian flags if the mainstream society had been more open to their point of view. Or if there had been less talk of the “Russian vampirism”, as happens even here.
My point is that different people come there. Many of them behave repulsively and say repulsive things. But vilifying everyone is not only wrong – it is also counter-productive. These people will stay in Latvia, and their marginalization will not benefit anyone.
May 12th, 2008 at 16.10
Snork is right. There was only one small portrait of Stalin during the whole day. It seems it only stayed there in the morning hours when predominantly older people came to pay their respect to the monument (And yes, I’ll say pay respect). In the evening, the Stalin portrait was replaced with the Russian tricolor as young people came to the monument after a day of work or study. It seems to me self-identification with Russia by carrying a flag is perhaps a tip of an iceberg of the post-Soviet identity of the Russians living here.
But I think it’s important to understand that former Latvian citizens volunteered not only to serve in the Waffen SS, but also in the Red Army.
May 12th, 2008 at 16.17
“And I think many of those people would be holding Latvian flags if the mainstream society had been more open to their point of view.”
I think the Latvian mainstream isn’t accepting of their point of view because their point of view is fundamentally unacceptable (and though I agree that different people go there, even you are using “point of view” in the singular here…).
There was a survey not so long ago that that showed only a tiny minority of Latvia’s Russians (and a larger but still small percentage of Latvia’s other minorities) accepting the fact of occupation, for example. Much that is said at the Victory Monument is repulsive, as you say — and much of that is said by figures that are “mainstream” (e.g., the Bees are in Parliament, after all). People like Gilman, who got elected to the Dome, have spoken of Latvia’s very existence as an absolute evil akin to Nazism, suggested sending the “Canadian pensioner” home to return the Castle to the Young Pioneers, etc.
I’m quite sure that you’re right and there are very few images of Stalin being brandished by people who doubtless do have different views, as you say — but people with less revolting views could ask the lady with Comrade Stalin to put her icon away, couldn’t they? Most Latvians stay away from the 16 March brouhaha — in fact, the President invited true patriots to keep their distance. I realize that there are plenty of Latvian radicals, some of them also in Parliament — but I expect their noxious comments to be condemned, and they often are.
As Stranga wrote in the article I linked to at my blog, “Latvia will not experience true, as opposed to artificial integration if the people of Latvia, irrespective of their nationality, do not accept at least the important segments of our collective memory and experience as their own.” I strongly agree with that. That doesn’t mean there’s only “one true history,” but it does mean that the continual denial of historical fact by most Russians is an insurmountable obstacle to healing the divide in our society. I don’t see building weird artifical bridges or “reaching out” like Jurkāns did when he attended the ceremonies on 9 May, announcing that he’d transcended stereotypes, as being at all helpful.
“Latvia’s information space is already full of ethnic stereotypes – there is no need to develop them further.” It’s not exactly an ethnic stereotype — I’ve met Red Latvians, too. And again — what’s the mainstream? “Moderate” SC shares a list with Rubiks, does it not? Across the pond, a huge democracy indulges in arguing about the comments of a candidate’s pastor, and whether said candidate was too friendly with someone who was connected to extremists in the 1960s. Said candidate is asked to repudiate the views of Farrakhan, for instance, and does so. Here, some of us smile upon convicted criminals who proudly hold the views they held when they tried to cut short Latvia’s rebirth.
“She is also a citizen of this country, Peteris. And I think her opinion counts for something.” Even Gilman’s opinion counts for something — when he talks about how he detests the Legion because it slowed the Soviet advance whilst his relatives were still being killed by the Nazis, I listen with sympathy. The trouble is that I see very little sympathy for the Latvian point of view from the sorts who glorify 9 May. I haven’t been to the Rīga ceremonies, but I have been to a few here in Daugavpils. Once, when the politics got going, the priests literally fled.
Opinions count, and they’re places in different scales and weighed against other opinions. I try to take them one by one and try to understand. Heck, there are doubtless a lot of citizens who welcomed the 1940 invasion, too. Their opinions count for something also — but I shall marginalize them, and hope that they are marginalized, with no qualms whatsoever.
Here’s a recent blog post about the politics of 9 May by one Ervīns Jākobsons —
http://www.blogs.lv/raksti/58673/Pardomas–maija-sakara/
May 12th, 2008 at 19.18
“I think the Latvian mainstream isn’t accepting of their point of view because their point of view is fundamentally unacceptable”
The point of view of those who gather at the monument is quite simple: World War 2 was a horrible event, its end was a positive event, and people who fought deserve respect for their sacrifice. I really can’t see what can be unacceptable here. Now, it may be that many of these people do not accept the fact of occupation, but the 9 May celebrations have little to do with 1940.
And again, I am pretty certain that far more people would accept the fact of the occupation if the mainstream (ethnic) Latvian society had eliminated words “civil occupiers” and “colonists” from public discourse.
“Most Latvians stay away from the 16 March brouhaha”
You can’t directly compare these two days. March 16 has never been a major event. I think most people don’t even know what exactly happened on March 16. On the other hand, May 9, and the associated events of the Second World War, is a fundamental and crucial part of the modern Russian (and not just Russian) national identity. If you want to find a Latvian analogy, take the Song and Dance Festival.
“And again — what’s the mainstream? “Moderate” SC shares a list with Rubiks, does it not? Across the pond, a huge democracy indulges in arguing about the comments of a candidate’s pastor, and whether said candidate was too friendly with someone who was connected to extremists in the 1960s. Said candidate is asked to repudiate the views of Farrakhan, for instance, and does so. Here, some of us smile upon convicted criminals who proudly hold the views they held when they tried to cut short Latvia’s rebirth.”
It is not exactly fair to demand that people turn away from Rubiks because of his views. Just a few days ago, a prominent public figure from a ruling party claimed, in an interview to a major newspaper, that there is a “danger” of an ethnic Russian becoming a major of Riga. I don’t recall any reaction from any quarters to this obviously xenophobic remark.
(Try to imagine this sort of an argument used in the U.S. presidential race that you cite – “Obama nomination may put a Black into the White House!” It’s easy to guess what would happen to the political career of anyone who would say that.)
The Rubiks case is quite funny, considering the number of communist turncoats in other parties. There is Brigmanis in ZZS, Aksenoks in JL, Vaidere in that newly founded party, and of course the “radio nightingale” Tabuns from TB/LNNK. All of them are now devoted Latvian patriots who, as they now say, “fought the occupation from inside the regime”. None of them, not to mention the parties they belong to, are asked any inconvenient question. I am not a fan of Rubiks, but he at least deserves some respect for being true to his principles – he was, and remains, a communist.
“Opinions count, and they’re places in different scales and weighed against other opinions.”
I cited that lady’s opinion to show that for some – in this case, for the few surviving Jews of the Riga Ghetto – the arrival of the Red Army was indeed a moment of liberation. I think it is pretty easy to see why they would think so, isn’t it? And I see no reason why this opinion can be so easily dismissed or equated to that of a notorious radical politician.
May 12th, 2008 at 19.39
I have no problem with Russians celebrating Victory Day. I don’t particularly have a problem with Soviet nostalgia and Russian patriotism either. I just have a hard time understanding why you seem to think that these should be important to Latvians? I don’t want to keep harping on this point, but Victory Day doesn’t seem to be about the Defeat of Germany as much as about the Victory of Russia. I haven’t been to a Victory Day in many, many years, so I don’t know how people choose to celebrate, but I read your account of it.
I couldn’t understand the ubiquitousness of the Russian flags. At any time, you’d expect the Russian national anthem blast through the speakers. The organizers should have thought to promote a healthy patriotism toward the country they find their homes, Latvia, but I suspect any Latvian national anthem would have been greeted with boos from the large crowd and give more work to the police.
The anger at this country, at the apathy of the government, at prevalent corruption and theft, and – frighteningly of all – hatred toward everything Latvian is enormous. For them, the anger trumps over any other emotion. Perhaps, this anger at callous, flippant attitude of the authorities toward those who fought on the “wrong side” – politically speaking – during the war drives many, many people to remember this Victory Day by laying tulips at the feet of the monument.
I know you keep asking that politics are left out of it, but I don’t see how they can. Victory Day is already politicized. And for the most part that politicizing has been done by Russians and Russia. As Peteris alluded to earlier, Victory Day is in many ways a celebration of the myths of Russia’s Victory.
The war started in 1939.
Russia didn’t single handedly beat Germany. Many nations played a role in the defeat of Germany. Some would even argue that those other nations, individually or as a group, played a far larger role.
Russia’s victory came at an incredible cost, but much of that cost was due to Soviet ineptitude and corruption. Ill equiped troops and ineffective officers.
Anyway, the point is not to minimize Russia’s role, but just pointing out that there’s much myth in Victory Day. Again, not that there’s much wrong with that. Myth is a part of many a nation’s proudest moments. Its just that I can’t see why Russian mythology should be embraced by Latvian. Not if you also believe that: The end of the war signifies the beginning of peace. The end of that War did not signify the beginning of peace for many nations. Every inch of ground which the Soviets won they kept for nearly 50 years. So forgive us if some of us have a hard time seeing Victory day as a defeat of Germany when for us it actually signifies the beginning of Soviet conquest.
I think Latvia’s Russians have some valid gripes against Latvia’s government and the Latvian people. But, sorry, this just isn’t one of them. Not even close.
I think the respective reactions illustrate the wide gulf between the two people, but to bridge that gulf we must first define what we are trying to bridge. Define the center. And if you define the center as a celebration of Victory Day as it was celebrated last week then there isn’t a bridge wide or long enough.
May 12th, 2008 at 20.03
The end of World War Two should be important to Latvians for many reasons. One – it brought peace to Latvia (though not freedom, democracy, and independence). Two – it forced Europe to become more united than ever before and Latvians are now part of that Europe. Three - the war took away many, many lives of many people throughout the continent, including Latvians. The celebration doesn’t have to take the same tone and flavor as Russia’s Victory day. For Russians, it’s two of the largest holidays really (the other one being New Year’s).
My desire to keep politics out of it largely concerns those people who died in that war and those people who want to remember those who died. Victory Day as it was indeed politicized. Speakers ragged on the government, for example. And according to some accounts, this has been the largest May 9 celebration in recent years. Some people say they go to the monument because it’s not an official holiday and because they don’t want to forget. I saw “lest we forget” in action - a woman handed out flowers to veterans just because.
Russia’s – or Soviet victory is not a myth. At least, I don’t think so. The Soviet Union did beat the Nazi Germany. The Soviet Union was indeed one of the Allies (whether those people remember it or not is another issue). Regardless when the war started, it was important when it came to an end.
Russia’s victory came at an incredible cost, but much of that cost was due to Soviet ineptitude and corruption. I’m not sure how you can figure out how many people died because of ineptitude and corruption and how many died defending their country. Furthermore, the Soviet ineptitude and corruption does not void any of the sacrifices made in that war by the Soviet people – and Latvians.
There are myths and legends when it comes to history, yes. But there are also memories of bombings, of the Holocaust, of shells, of dead bodies. These things were real. No one is asking Latvians to subscribe to the Russian view of history, or even the Russian way of celebrating the end of the war. Latvians could find their own way – but making it just another day seems odd.
And I think this describes what I mean by the center.
May 12th, 2008 at 20.42
The end of World War II is important to Latvia. For me personally even more so. That’s not the issue. The issue is Victory Day as a celebration and as its celebrated. If Victory Day had been a celebration of the defeat of Germany then I am sure more Latvians would embrace it. If nothing else, at least on the governmental and political levels.
Regardless when the war started, it was important when it came to an end. Tell that to the Czechs, Slovaks and Poles. How many Russians would you say know that the Soviets were Germany’s allies prior to 1941? I don’t see how you can say that no one is asking Latvians to subscribe to a Russian view of history? WWII didn’t end for Latvia in 1945. It continued into the 1990s. Long after Germany was defeated.
May 12th, 2008 at 21.21
Snork wrote, “Latvia belongs to its citizens and not to ethnic Latvians exclusively. ”
Every sane country requires its citizens to swear allegiance and show loyalty. Don’t tell me that Latvia belongs to “citizens” lost in the old mindset of occupants, who are clueless that they are citizens with obligations of loyalty and allegiance to the independent Republic of Latvia and not to the Soviet Union or Russia. To hang out in Latvia, denying that they and their Russian relatives occupied and Russified Latvia for half-a-century (only 14% think Latvia was occupied!), celebrating one day of “victory” while ignoring the following fifty-years of gulags for their own Russian kin (don’t even worry about the harm to Latvians), exuberantly waving a hostile country’s flag (Russian) with nary a display of their own national Latvian flag (such a “fool” should worry about being killed), nostalgically displaying the vile USSR hammer-and-sickle/Stalin imagery just as those are proudly displayed in Russia May 9, contributing little to Latvia’s successful future as Latvia, etc. - that’s Russian vampirism in Latvia not loyal Latvian citizenship. That Latvia and any “Latvian” would tolerate this is pathological. Imagine Germans in Latvia displaying swastika/Hitler placards in remembrance of their fallen soldiers. Latvia, Russia, and the world would have a coronary. No one would indulge such offensive displays as should no one excuse the equally vile displays of USSR/Stalin paraphanelia. No one in Latvia should celebrate the triumph over Hitler without acknowledging the following imprisonment under Stalin.
May 12th, 2008 at 22.15
The issue is Victory Day as a celebration and as its celebrated.
What prevents ethnic Latvians to create their own celebration/commemoration? What prevents ethnic Latvians from commemorating it as the day of the Nazi defeat? This is why I don’t think this is the issue. I’ve said it before: Russians celebrated it the way Russians celebrate it - by signing songs, getting drunk and beating people up. Fine! But my question is about the titular nation - what prevents Latvians from creating their own celebration of the end of the war?
How many Russians would you say know that the Soviets were Germany’s allies prior to 1941?
Tons. Granted they try to justify it and explain it away. But to answer your question the way it is asked - many Russians know that the Soviets were Germany’s allies before 1941.
WWII didn’t end for Latvia in 1945.
But it did. You’ve heard the turn of phrase “the Roman peace,” right? Nations were occupied indeed, but they were not at war. I agree they were occupied, but they were not at war until 1990s, or late 1980s. The war in Europe ended the moment Germany inked its capitulation documents.
May 12th, 2008 at 22.20
Amber, some of those people were not citizens. So what? They’re exempt from freedom of speech and freedom of assembly?
May 12th, 2008 at 23.26
Amber,
“Don’t tell me that Latvia belongs to “citizens” lost in the old mindset of occupants…”
Like any other liberal democracy, Latvia belongs to its citizens, period. It does not belong exclusively to people with a certain mindset. Satversme Article 2 says: “The sovereign power of the State of Latvia shall belong to the People of Latvia” – and this is the only reasonable basis for discussion.
“[a long list of accusations] - that’s Russian vampirism in Latvia not loyal Latvian citizenship”
The problem, amber, is that these people live in Latvia legally and will stay. So the government and the “mainstream” ethnic Latvian society can either accuse them of “vampirism” (which would further radicalize them and guarantee that the red flags will continue to be flown every year), or try to be more inclusive.
“That Latvia and any “Latvian” would tolerate this is pathological”
What do you propose?
“No one would indulge such offensive displays as should no one excuse the equally vile displays of USSR/Stalin paraphanelia.”
True, but again, very few people were displaying those symbols.
May 13th, 2008 at 0.11
Aleks,
What prevents the Russians in Latvia from moving to a new page of history, to their current page of history, the one in their country - Latvia? What prevents the Russian-heritage Latvians - citizens of Latvia or residents - from creating an inclusive, modern “victory” day in their country of (supposed) allegiance and chosen residence - Latvia - without the baggage of a false Soviet history, faux Soviet victory, repugnant Stalin/hammer-and-sickle baggage, and foreign-nation (Russian) flagwaving? Why can’t the Russians in Latvia, in a show of constructive citizenship and allegiance with all Latvians and all Latvia’s residents, in a show of good faith solidarity with all victims of post-Soviet-victory imprisonment, create a celebration of “liberation” from totalitarian oppression - Nazi and Soviet?
The San Francisco Bay Area has a huge Russian population, many are U.S. citizens, but I don’t think they demand a “victory” statue in Golden Gate Park and they certainly don’t gather in large crowds waving Russian flags and Stalin placards on May 9. “Latvian” history is World History, which is not Soviet-myth history and more than Russian-glory history. If the Russian-heritage citizens of Latvia want to celebrate “Soviet/Russian history” on May 9, nothing prevents them from heading across the national Latvian border to Russia to celebrate with Putin amid military fanfare in Moscow. “Freedom of speech and freedom of assembly” are tremendous democratic rights that never existed on May 9 in the Soviet Union back then or now in Russia but they do now in free and democratic Latvia. Cherish this and don’t abuse it. Citizenship in a democracy comes with individual responsibility to be a good and loyal citizen of your own country, not the one next door.
May 13th, 2008 at 1.33
Snork,
Not just Latvia but any country deserves better citizens than the ones you are suggesting need to be tolerated as “citizens” in Latvia. Yours is a selective reading and understanding of the Latvian Constitution that grants not only rights but imposes obligations to “Latvijas Tauta.” It’s not healthy for any democracy to bear the dead-weight of recalcitrant and obstructionistic citizens and residents. I think it’s time for government intervention and an education campaign about Latvian citizenship, Latvian loyalty, and Latvian civic responsibility. It’s that or the Latvian government and the Latvian people should all be fired for failing to uphold the Constitution on behalf of Latvia. Latvia deserves far better than being inhabited by people who wish Latvia was still some part of Russia, who feed off Latvia while hoping that soon they get their Russian-flagwaving childish way to be rid of the Latvian language, Latvians, and the Latvianism they loathe. Latvia deserves to be inhabited by Latvian-loving Latvians who wave Latvian flags at Latvian days and aren’t pathologically tolerant of disloyal citizens and fifth-column residents. As a last resort, Latvia might think about importing Estonians (non-Russian) to get rid of “victory” monument or Israelis (non-Russian) to teach ethnic Latvians to say “Latvian homeland” like they meant it and to threaten Russians with being walled out of Riga and Jurmala. Snork, maybe that would radicalize the tolerant Latvians to counter your ever-more radicalized Russians. What’s your solution?
May 13th, 2008 at 2.25
“Latvia deserves far better than being inhabited by people who wish Latvia was still some part of Russia, who feed off Latvia while hoping that soon they get their Russian-flagwaving childish way to be rid of the Latvian language, Latvians, and the Latvianism they loathe.”
I wonder how many Russian Latvians you know personally. Because this vilifying description is simply not true in the majority of cases.
It is important to remember that people who wave Russian flags (not to mention Stalin pictures) are not entirely representative of the Russian Latvians as a whole. This is a rather diverse group after all, and many have no trouble deciding where their allegiance lies. Let us not forget that a very large number of ethnic Russians and members of other minorities voted for Latvia’s independence back in the 1990. Yes, it is true that many still identify themselves with Russia or the USSR, but I think this is fading away – look at how the electoral support of changed PCTVL over time. In short, I don’t think it is correct to lump all of them into the same basket.
“Latvia deserves to be inhabited by Latvian-loving Latvians who wave Latvian flags at Latvian days and aren’t pathologically tolerant of disloyal citizens and fifth-column residents.”
And how is that supposed to be achieved? By constantly reminding Russian Latvians that they are people who “who wish Latvia was still some part of Russia, who feed off Latvia…”, etc?
I agree that Russian Latvians still have some big steps to make, and that they could have been more active in distancing themselves from Stalin, the USSR, or the modern Russian government. And it is true that some Russians harbor attitudes that can only be described as anti-Latvian. But for the Russian community to make those steps, the rest of the society has to recognize that Russian Latvians have legitimate interests (like honoring their war dead) and that they are a part of the society, rather than foreign invaders or occupiers. Discussion of the Russian “vampirism” may go on forever (and some of the accusations have some truth in them), but it just isn’t very constructive – quite the opposite.
“Latvia might think about importing Estonians (non-Russian) to get rid of “victory” monument”
The hullabaloo in Tallinn was an excellent example of how the crisis is created and then completely mismanaged.
“or Israelis (non-Russian) to teach ethnic Latvians to say “Latvian homeland” like they meant it and to threaten Russians with being walled out of Riga and Jurmala.”
I feel obliged to remind you that Latvian history had a moment 67 years ago in which a large group of people was walled off in Riga based on their ethnicity and their supposed disloyalty. It didn’t end up nicely. So I think people should be careful with jokes like that (I hope it was a joke).
May 13th, 2008 at 6.50
Snork,
You need to review WWII history and refresh your memory about the occupations of Latvia by Soviet Russia/Nazi Germany/Soviet Russia. I also “feel obliged to remind you” of the evils and atrocities that were perpetrated in Latvia under occupation edicts and forces of Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia against anyone who stood in the way of the triumph of either of the two repugnant ideologies which brought their foreign nightmares into Latvia. You don’t need to remind me of anything that happened in Latvia. You must be joking.
I can’t imagine feeling any Nazi or Soviet nostalgia, unlike some writers here who are ready to indulge Soviet nostalgia. How do you feel about Nazi nostalgia? I have a problem with anyone longing for either Hitler or for Stalin and would be revolted if anyone around me carried the image of either in a public display in Latvia. If you don’t know, May 9 marked the end of one monster’s killing spree but freed the other monster to continue the insanity of murder, rape, deportation, torture, imprisonment inside and outside walls, indoors in Lubyanka and outdoors in the GUlag, inside Russia and inside Latvia. I can’t imagine anything funny unless the humor is as dark as the interior of a sealed boxcar to Siberia. I don’t feel nostalgia for Soviet collectivization, Soviet deportation, Russification, Stalin and Beria, Lenin’s statue in Riga, the hammer-and-sickle everywhere in Latvia.
I don’t tolerate victim hierarchies. I tolerate even less the glorification of war and false “victory,” especially by people - like the Russians - who so far have been unable and unwilling to sort out intelligently their own victim/victimizer role in WWII - after so many years. May 9 was the defeat of evil by evil. That’s a hard cross to bear. Yelena Bonner wrote at last year’s May 9, roughly paraphrasing, that the Russians, “we,” as she includes herself, liberated no one, not even “ourselves” the Russians. A true victory for not only Latvia but for the entire world would have been if both evils of lunatic “social engineering” of humankind had been destoyed, the end of Nazi Germany/Fascism and the end of Soviet Russia/Communism. The war did not end on May 9 for Latvians since one hated occupier enemy, Soviet Russia, remained standing and in power within Latvia. Why did the Russians not do something truly heroic and turn on the monstrous Stalin and Soviet system? Why did the Russians not liberate themselves from their Soviet abusers? Why instead did the Russians revel in occupying and Russifying Latvia (and so many other countries and people) for 50 years? Enough time has passed since the Russians were liberated from their own Soviet Russian victimization to have asked the hard questions, to have gone beyond the feel-good “victory” of May 9 into May 10 and their own continuing imprisonment in their own Russian country by their own Russian-kin, to have acknowledged and been shamed by their genocidal occupation of Latvia and Russification of Latvians for 50-plus years. The question, Snork - and Aleks, is not why the Latvians don’t celebrate May 9 as “victory” but why the Russians still do? Did Hitler and the Germans/Nazis kill more Russians or did Stalin and the the Russians/Soviets? So much for “victory” and “patriotism.”
May 13th, 2008 at 6.54
Amber,
Many things prevent Russians from becoming what you want them to become. For one, Russians are of an Imperial power. It’d be like Americans trying to integrate into the culture and the country of Puerto Rico.
Let’s get some things straight - there was one Stalin picture in the morning hours when elderly attended the event.
What makes them wave the foreign flag is their own identity crisis. And celebrating May 9 is as much part of that identity as Song Festival is for ethnic Latvians. It’s a tradition. And simply because the freedom of speech never existed in the Soviet Union it’s not the reason to deny people those rights when they do exist in Latvia. So, the debate over whether those Russians should have been allowed to do what they did is useless. In a democratic society, they ought to be able to express themselves in any way they want - even by criticizing the government and by showing disloyalty. Latvia is not the Soviet Union and you cannot subjugate those people and force them to love this country.
May 13th, 2008 at 6.59
And another thought - for some Russians hatred all things Latvian is as much part of their identity as for some Latvians hatred of all things Russian.
May 13th, 2008 at 7.28
I think some people will find this useful.
May 13th, 2008 at 9.41
I’m impressed by Giustinos idea of the Founding Brothers. Not the American ones. Imagine Latvia was a big country 1939. Conquered. The Founding Brother imprisoned or killed, the state elite gone. Imagine that happened after the American Revolution. Adams dead, no Washington.How would the Americans feel about the occupier, how does the Latvians. Do I exaggrevate, not really even by real numbers. The States had 3.5 million citizens before 1800, Latvia had 2,5 (?) million after gaining independence. But the world don’t know them, her Founding Brothers. But Hitler and Stalin that’s all what the majority knows and can talk about.
May 13th, 2008 at 9.46
I think your analogy breaks after the first four sentences - “Imagine Latvia was a big country in 1939.” The fact of the matter it wasn’t. Unlike Washington or Adams who believed in the rule of law first and foremost, Ulmanis was the man who killed the democracy in this country in 1934 – way before Hitler or Stalin came here. And we still have a fascination with Ulmanis as much as Hitler or Stalin.
May 13th, 2008 at 10.38
That is true. The deals with Soviet Russia in 1939 were done secretly without the public be informed about the major moves of the government. BUT: there was no GULAG or Concentration Camps in Latvia and the Jewish still alive. The first Jewish people died and were deported with the Soviets 1940-1941. And then along with the arrival of the Germans.
May 13th, 2008 at 11.48
Aleks,
The Russians will remain a maimed and deformed people until they do some long-neglected soul-searching and come clean about themselves and their huge role in the oppression of millions of people when they were the Soviet Union as have the the Germans who have confessed their guilt and expressed shame and remorse for destroying millions of lives when they were Nazi Germany. It’s not easy and it takes real courage but things won’t get better for Russians until they face themselves. Aleks, berating Latvians and carrying on about Ulmanis won’t fix what’s wrong with Russians. Neither Ulmanis nor Latvians occupied Russia or anyone else for that matter. Let’s get some perspective on world players and events. You should worry that Putin has “killed the democracy” for your fellow Russians in Russia.
Are you serious about Russian “disloyalty” towards Latvia being acceptable? Try being a disloyal Russian citizen in Russia. Are you serious about not being able to integrate into Latvia because it’s like integrating into Peurto Rico? Workers from the high culture, sophistication, and enlightenment of the Soviet Union? Do you really see a comparison between “celebrating” May 9 and the Song Festival or should I just give up on you and all the Russians right now? Here’s a clarification of who hates whom when:Hating one’s occupier is normal. Being an occupier and expecting to not be hated is abnormal. Not knowing how and when to stop being and acting like an occupant is hate-provoking, especially when you choose to reside in the country you once occupied amidst the people you previously abused without reforming.
May 13th, 2008 at 12.09
“The point of view of those who gather at the monument is quite simple: World War 2 was a horrible event, its end was a positive event, and people who fought deserve respect for their sacrifice. I really can’t see what can be unacceptable here. Now, it may be that many of these people do not accept the fact of occupation, but the 9 May celebrations have little to do with 1940.”
As I already pointed out, in their point of view (again — not that they all think the same), 9 May (which date is itself part of Stalin’s legacy), marks the end of the Great Patriotic War, not World War Two. We can all agree that the war was horrible and that the defeat of Nazi Germany was positive — but most Latvians (and many other East Europeans… and even some in the West) don’t see the Soviet victory as positive.
Aleks’ Point 2, for example: “it forced Europe to become more united than ever before and Latvians are now part of that Europe.” It forced Western Europe to become united, yes, consigning the other half of the continent to Soviet/Russian domination. Latvians are now part of “that Europe,” yes — but it’s not “that Europe” anymore; it’s our responsibility to add our narrative, reclaimed from the myths in which the Soviets swathed history, and that’s something we’ve been doing (e.g., in Kalniete’s efforts).
For example, the reaction of the Polish Katyn Committee in Poland to the removal of the Bronze Soldier in Tallinn was that Poland, like Estonia, “suffered from the Soviet occupation, while Soviet monuments have always been the symbol of slavery and lies, as well as Russian chauvinism.”
“Now, it may be that many of these people do not accept the fact of occupation, but the 9 May celebrations have little to do with 1940.” Precisely; the victory celebration takes the victory, and the history of the war as it affected Latvia, out of context in order to glorify the Red Army. The victory included the brutal reoccupation of Latvia; the “re-” means it is inseparable from 1940, which was made possible by the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact in the first place. It is also inseparable from the Sovietization, Russification, and –yes — colonization of Latvia, a term I do not plan to drop from my discourse because to do so would be ro distort history.
Re the woman who was liberated in the Rīga Ghetto — “And I see no reason why this opinion can be so easily dismissed…” I’m not dismissing it; that’s why I pointed out that I can understand and sympathize with even the detestable Gilman’s point re his relatives still being subject to torture and murder by the Nazis. All I am saying is that accepting a valid point doesn’t mean I have to accept other points a point may or may not come with, and the fact is that these points often come in bundles. The woman has every right and indeed a duty to be grateful to her liberators, and if that is her only point — beautiful.
The same force that liberated her took my uncle to Vorkuta and killed him, deprived my mother-in-law of the house I live in, and profoundly and perhaps even irreparably damaged this nation.
May 13th, 2008 at 12.54
Scattered responses to some other remarks, ongoing…
“It is not exactly fair to demand that people turn away from Rubiks because of his views.”
It’s not? Snork, I’ve always found the “at least he remained true to his views” argument darkly ridiculous. His views are noxious, and there’s no nobility in clinging to such views. Someone like Berklavs, with all his failings, is to be respected for realizing where his ideology was taking Latvia and renouncing it.
“Let us not forget that a very large number of ethnic Russians and members of other minorities voted for Latvia’s independence back in the 1990.”
Let us not forget… and let us also not forget that many Russians and members of other minorities voted *against* independence, and that many — very many — continue to vote for people like Rubiks and Zhdanok, who *actively* worked *against* the restoration of independence and take advantage of the democracy they tried hard to prevent.
Re the comparison of being worried about a Russian becoming mayor of Rīga to people worrying about a black in the White House — I don’t know the comment you’re referring to, but here’s why I think the comment might not be as blatantly xenophobic as you would portray it. It’s definitely an impolitic comment, but this country has not yet advanced into refined political correctness and oversensitivity, if that’s an advance. However, I suspect that the comment really refers to a mayor being from a “Russian party,” not to such a mayor’s ethnicity per se. Vladimirs Makarovs’ Russianness would matter about as much as Loskutov’s, I think — that is, even Visvaldis Lācis wouldn’t mind. It’s an unpleasantly sloppy shorthand, Snork, and I agree with you that it is counterproductive and can alienate an ethnic group — but it refers less to ethnicity than it does to nationality and perceived disloyalty. “Russian party” is an inaccurate term, too, of course — the so-called “Russian parties” are the most integrated parties in Latvia, ethnically.
Obama isn’t the candidate of a black party, and he is forced to disassociate himself from figures like Farrakhan and, finally, Wright, just to get the nomination, not to mention the presidency — this despite the fact that someone like Farrakhan was able to mobilize hundreds of thousands of Obama’s brothers for the Million Man March and that Wright rightly speaks of the traditions of the black church. But the blacks were oppressed in the US — they didn’t occupy the US and force African languages or customs upon the whites, who anyway aren’t indigenous. So the analogy is a total failure anyhow. My bringing up of Obama’s distancing himself from his mentor or the bomber dude was merely in that context — the context of how careful politicians have to be with what they associate themselves with… the situation is totally different, but I was trying to emphasize the fact that the respectable Ušakova kungs can share a f’ing list with a man who was convicted of supporting those favoring a bloodbath. Biedrs Rubiks, has he gotten his wish, would probably be the Lettish gensek in a totalitarian puppet regime.
May 13th, 2008 at 13.34
Re the song festival analogies — they made me choke, not sure whether with laughter or not. Does that mean “vodka, vobla and chastushka” are the essence of Russian culture?
To be serious, or to address what ought to be obvious — look, the song festival isn’t a militaristic celebration of the victory of a massive army commanded by a dictator over the massive army commanded by another dictator (and it would be silly to contend that 9 May isn’t militaristic — I will bet you 10 kopecks, as the clerk across the street calls santīmi, that not a few of the people disturbing my sleep with fireworks the other night tuned into the Red Square scenes and were delighted to see the return of the Topol and other phallic symbols of Russian power).
The song festival is not “purely” cultural, of course — it is intimately linked to the Latvian nation’s assertion of its existence, which had political implications. We live in a nation-state that is the flower of the Awakenings, all three of them. As Mr Anderson put it at s.c.b. long ago — without Latvians, there wouldn’t be a Latvia. Obvious, again.
“And another thought - for some Russians hatred all things Latvian is as much part of their identity as for some Latvians hatred of all things Russian.”
Though I disagree with Ambersun on many a matter, and don’t have trouble seeing why it’s so difficult for Russians to integrate (probably mostly because of where I’ve lived for fifteen years or so), this thought of yours ought to lead to some unpleasant thoughts — look, I don’t hate all things Russian (not at all, actually)… but this is Latvia, and a person living in Latvia who hates all things Latvia ought to seriously consider relocating. I don’t know any Latvians living in Russia who hate all things Russian, and I do know some Latvians in Russia. As a matter of fact, I know very few Latvians in Latvia who hate all things Russian. Ambersun is in California.
“What makes them wave the foreign flag is their own identity crisis.” Gee. And to look at America again — nobody ever worried about Latvians flying the Latvian flag, which was always flown next to the American flag. When some kids at Gaŗezers put the stars and stripes in the outhouse, camp was practically shut down whilst Latvians lectured us on respect for the country in which we lived. Few would have a problem with the Mexican flag flying at a cultural event in the States. People got pissed about the Mexican flag when Mexicans flew it at demonstrations in favor of legalizing illegal aliens, however… and the flags got put away, mostly, at the next demonstration. And Mexico didn’t occupy the US — it’s the other way around.
The Polish flag, flanking the entrance to the Polish school down Warsaw St., together with the Latvian flag, doesn’t bother me at all. I should wonder why that is?
May 13th, 2008 at 15.28
Eh, war. You know, May 9 passed here, and I barely noticed it. I am sure that for some people it was different, but let them have their holidays. I have met many Estonian Russians, almost all of whom are nice, and I don’t see why historical garbage has to poison interpersonal relations. It would be extremely stupid to fight over such things in 2008. And besides, they are stuck in Estonia, where the major holiday is February 24.
That’s the trouble about a war holiday, though. It speaks to a very contextual historical event. An independence holiday reflects an enlightened ideal — independence, self-determination, et cetera.
For an independence day, you just need to have collective communal will to improve the standards of ones country. The memory of being part of a larger empire is just a kick in the pants to do a better job of it. For a war holiday, you need to continuously recycle violence and enemies and parade weaponry around to get your point across.
I mean, who in Estonia honestly even thinks about tsarist Russia on February 24? Who wastes a moment to consider the Bolshevik coup that made them demand full independence, rather than just political autonomy? They could care less. It’s about the ideal. It exudes good feelings.
May 13th, 2008 at 15.57
Even independence days suffer from the ethnic divide. Asked what we celebrate on 4 May, 64% of Latvians had the answer, but only 32% of minorities (read: mostly Russians) did. That speaks to a contextual historical event, too.
May 13th, 2008 at 16.07
Rereading your post, Giustino, I agree even less — “you just need to have collective communal will to improve the standards of ones country.” For most Latvians, improving the standards means making Latvia more “Latvian,” I think (OK, resorting to Ambersun’s use of quotation marks…). This is something many Russians do not or cannot agree with. There are reasons for that, some valid, but the divide cannot be papered over. As to interpersonal relations — they’re fine, and they’ve always been fine. It’s the political relations that aren’t fine, and that’s very much a different demon baby.
May 13th, 2008 at 16.59
Does Russia even have an independence day?
May 13th, 2008 at 17.00
Or state-founding day?
May 13th, 2008 at 17.45
It does June 12, marking a day when Russia declared it independence from the Soviet Union. According to Wikipedia, it’s been greatly promoted to a major holiday by the second president of Russia, Vladimir Putin. However, Russians here don’t celebrate it. There’s no self-determination attached to it – besides most Russians in Russia loath 1990s.
May 13th, 2008 at 18.06
Why is it that the former slave workers from the SU, who are coming to Germany (for example to Osnabrück) are speaking up the first time about what has happened to them. They had to shut up or better hide their fate at home. It was not a good story in the SU or nowadays Belarussia. It stinks. And Giustino, it is not history, they are still living. At least some. There are enough documents showing prisoners, slave workers that where very resistant to be relocated when the Soviet agents arrived in Germany. And their feeling was right. This is only one aspect. Soviet history is distortion when not even worse.
May 13th, 2008 at 18.45
[...] December, I wrote this when Lavrov visited Rīga to sign a historical border treaty. Guistino reminded me what impact history still has here – even this online discussion alone serves as a reminder. [...]
May 13th, 2008 at 19.27
Pēteri,
“The same force that liberated her took” – look, I am sorry for your family’s tragedy. I am certainly not insisting that you have to celebrate May 9. I can well understand that on many families, Soviet occupation inflicted far more suffering than the Nazi rule. I can understand those that cheered the arrival of the German army. For many people, the Nazi regime was the lesser of the two evils. What I am saying is that for many people it was vice versa, and these people have the right to remember their dead relatives and to celebrate the end of their suffering. Different views on historical events are a norm in liberal societies. What we need is respect to the other points of view – and that is something that is lacking, on both sides.
Re the comment on the Russian mayor of Riga - Edmunds Krastiņš, a fairly prominent member of the People’s Party, said it. I cannot give you a quote right now. What I wanted to say is that, it would be somewhat unfair to say that people who were at the monument are not “good citizens” because they did not distance themselves from the Russian flag wavers did not ask that lady to remove the Stalin picture. After all, nobody attacked Krastiņš after his interview. You may be right that it was not xenophobic in its intention (although public figures should think what they are saying) but there is a plenty of other examples. Take the prominent lawyer Grūtups and his book, which claims that the trial of Jeckeln and other Nazi criminals was a Jewish “act of revenge”, that Jeckeln’s guilt is “unclear”, etc. – if even his People’s Party backers, and their voters, refuse to make a meaningful reaction, how can we expect in from the people who come to the monument?
Heck, even in this very discussion, a certain contributor has stated on more than one occasion that Latvian citizens of Russian descent are “vampires”, that they “feed on Latvia”, that they are a “dead-weight”, that “walling them out of Riga and Jurmala” is an acceptable course of action – an yet none of the supposedly well-educated, Western-oriented participants of the discussion have dared to say that these comments are outrageous, that they are reminiscent of Nazism in both content and rhetoric, that they should have no place in a liberal democracy which Latvia, for all its problems, still remains. If even here, this kind of speech is acceptable, how can anyone demand the 70+ year old Russians to push away the people with Stalin placards?
May 13th, 2008 at 19.29
By the way, Pēteri – I really dislike the use of Nazi analogies, and I especially dislike when they are arbitrarily used against Latvia by various “anti-Fascists” – you can read my discussion with Stalker on your blog. But some cases simply cross the line
May 13th, 2008 at 19.43
Snork,
The Western-leaning posters have had encounters with amber on Latvians Online forums. Most of us are done being shocked…
May 13th, 2008 at 19.46
“Does that mean “vodka, vobla and chastushka” are the essence of Russian culture?”
If Vaira Vīķe-Freiberga had spent most of her life in Latvia, rather than in Canada, she would have never made this comment, for two reasons. First, she would have known that vodka and vobla are never consumed together – vobla is eaten with beer, while the closest thing to vobla that can be eaten with vodka is herring, or “selyodka”. Ask any Russian, they would tell you.
Second, she would have known that May 9, 1945 is, in fact, a defining moment in Russian collective memory and that the Victory Day is, for Russians, one of the most important and widely celebrated holidays (together with the New Year, and, for Russian Latvians, also Līgo, although these two obviously involve no identity issues). I have to say it again – it is the analogue of the Song Festival for Russians. You may say that they are wrong, that this is an irrational militaristic celebration etc. – but the fact remains that this is a crucial element of the modern Russian culture and identity. This may be hard to understand for some people, but cultures are different, and it is equally hard for some non-Latvians to understand why songs are so important in Latvian culture. I can only repeat once again that respect is the most needed commodity in this country.
May 13th, 2008 at 22.23
“I’ve always found the “at least he remained true to his views” argument darkly ridiculous. ”
I am not among his supporters, as I have said. I was merely commenting on the fact that Rubiks is seen as a non-person while other former Party members – including those who were active in propaganda, like Tabūns – are respected politicians (and radical nationalists, more often than not) just because they changed their allegiance at the right moment.
May 14th, 2008 at 0.08
Aleks,
You can target me all you want as congenitally, incorrigibly anti-Russian (not true) and even try to summon the international friendship brigade on LOL to your aid, but it doesn’t change the comments that certain other “favored” posters address to your “wacko” assertions. As you well know, that’s not my word. Amidst all that making-nice on LOL, some serious differences of opinion about matters in Latvia between you and others, even yours, have been revealed that I would hope you would not dismiss as easily as you try to discount me. I appreciate your attempts to bridge the Latvian/Russian divide, but making false-nice on these forums will not cure it. I don’t think you convey Russian attitudes towards Latvians honestly but hide the more harsh truth which comes spilling out at times in the comments of some of your associates as you have expresssed to them. Whatever you say or want to think about me, it doesn’t change the reality that only 14% of Russians in Latvia think that Latvia was occupied. Talk to us about how this is. It is simply silly to talk about “hating” Russians or Latvians and annoying to have to take the time to constantly reject this convenient but meaningless and unhelpful answer to serious differences of opinion, feeling, experience, perception and understanding of “facts” and “truth” that should be examined without concerns of immediate ad hominem attacks.
To address the comment by Stork: It is your propagandistic-language, out-of-context distortion of some of my more “pithy” comments that is “outrageous.” You want my comments condemned for - say what?!? -”being “reminiscent of Nazism in both content and rhetoric” You should think twice about throwing around such over-the-top language and read up on “Nazism.” Instead of addressing the real horrors perpetrated under two monstrous ideologies, German Nazism and Soviet Communism, you find a way to draw your own meaning and “outrage” in order to stretch your unrelenting defense of “old people” carrying Stalin placards. How do you know that they are 70+ years? Why would that matter? Is there an age cut-off for the pass on Stalin nostalgia? Do you think 70+ year-olds should be able to carry placards of Hitler? In Uzvaras Park? In Golden Gate Park? In Hyde Park? Maybe in Moscow? I saw the hammer-and sickle displayed on May 9. Have you recently seen large displays of the swastika? I guess “Nazi nostalgia” just doesn’t work, does it? I wonder why “Soviet nostalgia” does? Why do you think? What do you think about Stalin being revived to live in Russian textbooks? Are those the books that Russia sent to Rezekne, Latvia?
I don’t think you even read what I really wrote other than tripping on “vampires” and “vampirism.” I actually got that from a contributor on LOL who used the term “vampirism” to describe Moscow Latvians feeding off other Latvians’ Latvian-energy without contributing. I believe that neither Latvians nor Russians are really vampires (I hope not) but both can be guilty of “vampirism” and “feeding off” Latvia and Latvians. If you live in Latvia but refuse to speak Latvian and feel little or no loyalty to Latvia, and wave the Russian flag and display “Soviet nostalgia” while celebrating May 9 as “victory” day while denying the Soviet occupation of Latvia, what would you call this? And about your problem with walls: walls can be real or metaphorical. I mentioned the Israelis because they built a real wall against the Palestinians as people who could possibly show Latvians how to overcome their “pathological tolerance.” (I also think the Estonians should be consulted about “deporting to Siberia” some of the offensive reminders of Soviet occupation. Again, help with Latvian “pathological tolerance.”) I guess you missed that. What takes place on May 9 in “Uzvaras” Park already exists behind the “wall of misunderstanding.” Parts of Riga and Jurmala exist behind cultural walls and in parallel universes.
Finally, what do you think about only 14% of Russians in Latvia thinking that Latvia was occupied - by them as Soviets? I would think it would be hard to do both: celebrate your Soviet victory on May 9 and then turn around and see yourself as a Soviet “occupant” in the country you just celebrated “liberating? Can this be the crux of the problem?
May 14th, 2008 at 2.48
Don’t have much time for anything else at the moment, but a quick question. I am assuming that I am one of those favored friends and member of the International Friendship Bridage? If so, all I want to know: are there discounts involved with that? I could use a skidka on my Vobla and Vodka.
P.S. I am assuming the membership cards and an explanation of the benefits are in the mail?
May 14th, 2008 at 4.00
Andrejs,
I don’t think you quite qualify for Pathologically Tolerant Latvians but I think your matrilineal line puts you with Congenital Incorrigible Latvians. Our dues require money for alcohol - melnais balzams, alus, snabis, brandijs, cabernet sauvignon, Absolut but not Stoli - we don’t care how much you pay as long as you count out the money in Latvian in front of the Russian clerk at Maxima. Another thing, you can’t bring any Soviet nostalgia to our secret meetings at Brivibas Piemineklis. We meet where the flowers are arranged in the colors of the flag. That’s the Latvian flag. We also meet at my cousin’s “Russian” safe house to elude Latvian-hating Aleks. You can smell the pelmeni from the street and hear the balalaika music. I actually love both. At the beginning we sing Daugav’s Abas Malas, dance Sudmalinas in the middle after we’ve thoroughly criticized everyone, especially Russians and Latvians, and finish with Dievs Sveti Latviju - you know the words, right? Since I’m not with the Pathologically Tolerant Latvians, you can take it or leave it.
May 14th, 2008 at 15.34
Aleks,
“The Western-leaning posters have had encounters with amber on Latvians Online forums.”
OK, I finally checked it out. You should have pointed it our right away - it would have saved a lot of space here.
May 14th, 2008 at 20.23
No skidkas then? A pity. And I am glad that you think my matrillineal line is incorrigible. Most Latvians who share your views seem to pathologically focus on my patrillineal line.
May 14th, 2008 at 22.05
Andrejs,
I daresay it is you who focuses on your patrilineal line and asserts it to the neglect of your other half. Why is that? Fight your own demons, Andrejs, and don’t impart your views to me. I have a problem with both Nazi and Soviet nostalgia, unlike you, and you could say, am pathologically “intolerant” of both. Why you don’t have a problem with Soviet nostalgia is beyond me. But that’s your Latvian problem.
May 14th, 2008 at 22.47
Snork,
It’s not about the messenger but the message.
http://www.kojinshugi.com/?p=533
Sam: “…’If you don’t like it here, then go back to Russia’ is a treasonous sentiment in the United States, because that country is built on individualism. And they have rightly won their position in the world because of this basis. But the same statement in tiny Estonia is completely sensible. Because this country, distinct from Russia, is distinct because of one thing, and one thing only - the Estonian people, outnumbered by Russians 150 to one. We welcome guests, we welcome other ethnicities, but only if they want to become part of Estonian society. If your Russian ethnicity is so important to you, then the largest country in the world is situated right on our eastern border, filled with Russians and opportunities to be a Russian. …”
Peteris C: “…It’s not that we hate Russians for their ethnicity…What I hate, personally, is that I have to speak Russian most of the time when I do my shopping - that’s an act of elementary plotesse, and I don’t hate the shopgirls. But I am sure you’ve heard the arguments. I am supposed to feel sorry for the old pharmacist who hasn’t learned the word for “eye drops” - the old lady was sent here from Vitebsk and never desired to live here, and I am abusing her with language laws, just ’cause she’s a Russkie (or Belarusian, in this case). Well, I guess the Lettish babushki she abused for so many years don’t matter? My mother-in-law, who took two nice, long vacation tours of Siberia (because the Nazis took her away and “employed” her, and when she got back she clearly was a “fascist spy”), has to ask for eye drops in Russian so as not to offend her? A children’s surgeon doesn’t need to speak Latvian becasue all Latvians speak Russian? Even when they are three years old?
This then is the crux of the Baltic emotionalism. Occupied and flooded by colonists, most of whom never bothered to learn a word of our language and many of whom happily lived in confiscated houses whilst many of us took such nice holiday in cattle cars, we chose liberal democracy and tolerance, something that is quite evident despite our many failings (more here than in Estonia). If I tell someone from the West that I look upon Russians as guests, I must be a fascist. Frankly, I do have difficulty with that term/concept - there are an awful lot of Latvian bigots, and a citizen of Latvia ought to be equal to another citizen. Are they, though? What of THEIR behavior? As far as I know, not a single Russian in Parliament voted to support Estonia. The supposedly “centrist” “Russian party” which calls itself “Harmony Center,” shares a list with gentlemen like Rubiks, who was literally drooling for a bloodbath back in 1991. Zhdanok would love to see a Macedonai here - the only Russian in the European Parliament (elected by Russophones in “fascist” Latvia), she seems to think that once the Russians go on a rampage, NATO will intervene and declare bilingualism.
And what is “bilingualism”? There were so many sour faces at an opposition meeting here in Daugavpils, when it was pointed out that official bilingualism would suggest that Russians ought to learn Latvian. …”
You can read the entire “a nation state” exchange at kojinshugi.