Of course not. But a country in which the objective of creating a national culture and identity that would transcend ethnic origin has not been completely successful. A recent sociological survey conducted under the supervision of Estonian sociologist Marju Lauristin indicates that being of Russian ethicity consistently limits horizons in today's Estonia. This conclusion is particularly disturbing, because it primarily affects young people below the age of thirty whose entire school careers were in and historical memories are of independent Estonia.
<quote> Venäläiset heikoilla Viron työmarkkinoilla [Russians in a weak position on the Estonian labor market]
Julkaistu: 21.9.2008 21:19 [Published: September 21, 2008 9.19 PM]
Kai Juvakka [By Kai juvakka]
Tallinna. Venäjänkielisen väestön asema Viron työmarkkinoilla on huomattavasti heikompi kuin virolaisten, selviää juuri julkaistusta Viron inhimillisen kehityksen raportista 2007. Alle 30-vuotiaiden ryhmässä venäjänkielisten kokonaistulot ovat vain 70 prosenttia samanikäisten virolaisten tuloista. [Tallinn. The position of the Russian-speaking popualtion on the Estonian labor market is significantly weaker than that of Estonians. This is the conclusion reached by the 2007 Human Devlopment Report for Estonia. In the under-thirty age group, total earnings for Russian speakers are only seventy per cent of what they are for Estonians.]
Raporttia koostaneen professori Marju Lauristinin mukaan tuloerot selittyvät osittain sillä, että venäläisten työpaikat keskittyvät teollisuuteen. Lisäksi venäläisillä on heikomman kielitaidon vuoksi vähemmän mahdollisuuksia työmarkkinoilla. [According to Professor Marju Lauristin, who drew up the report, the differences in income are partially to be explained by the fact that Russians primarily have jobs in industry. Additionally, Russians have fewer opportunities on the labor market due to their poorer command of Estonian.]
Suuryritykset, joista suuri osa on ulkomaisessa omistuksessa, käyttävät venäläisiä halpatyövoimana. [Large corporations, most of which are foreign owned, use Russians as a low-cost labor force.]
"Kun työntekijällä ei ole paljon valinnan mahdollisuuksia, silloin on myös mahdollista painaa heidän palkkojaan alaspäin", Lauristin arvioi. ["When workers do not have many choices available, it is possible to push their slaries down," Laristin says, assessing the situation.]
Myös korkeasti koulutettujen venäjänkielisten asema työmarkkinoilla on raportin mukaan paljon heikompi kuin virolaisten. Alle 30-vuotiaista venäjänkielisistä korkeakoulutetuista vain viidesosa työskenteli johtavassa asemassa tai asiantuntijatehtävissä. [According to the report, the position of highly educated Russian speakers on the labor market is much weaker than that of Estonians. Of Russian speakers under the age of thirty with a higher education, only one fifth was working in a supervisory position or at a job requiring expertise.]
Virolaisten keskuudessa samasta ikäryhmistä 60 prosenttia oli samassa asemassa. Alle 30-vuotiaiden korkeasti koulutettujen venäläisten keskitulot olivat vain 75 prosenttia korkeasti koulutettujen virolaisten tuloista. [Among the Estonians in the same age group, sixty per cent were in such a position. Average income of highly educated Russians in the under-thirty age group stood at only seventy-five percent of that of highly educated Estonians.]
Kielivähemmistön asema työmarkkinoilla on raportin mukaan huonompi, vaikka he osaisivat sujuvaa viroa ja heillä olisi Viron kansalaisuus. [The position of the linguistic minority on the labor market was worse on the labor market even if they spoke fluent Estonian and had Estonian citizenship.]
Yli puolet venäläisistä oli henkilökohtaisesti tuntenut työelämässä syrjintää taustansa vuoksi tai virolaisten suosimista. Erityisesti julkisella sektorilla venäläisten uramahdollisuudet ovat huomattavasti heikommat kuin virolaisten. [More than half of the Russians had personally experienced discrimination as a consequence of their background or a preference for Estonians during their working career. Particularly in the public sector, Russians have career opportunties that are far weaker than those available to Estonians.]
Työttömyys on raportin mukaan venäjänkielisen väestön keskuudessa yli kaksinkertainen virolaisiin verrattuna. Se selittyy osittain heidän sijoittumisellaan työmarkkinoille ja alueellisilla eroilla. Lauristin uskoo, että myös Viroa koettelevat talousongelmat vaikuttavat venäläisiin enemmän kuin virolaisiin. [According to the report, unemployment among Russian speakers is more than twice what it is among Estonians. This is partially a consequence of the segments they occupy on the labor market and partiallydue to regional differences. Lauristin also believes that the economic problems currently confronting Estonia affect Russians more than Estonians.] </quote>
> [According to the report, unemployment among Russian speakers is more than > twice what it is among Estonians. This is partially a consequence of the > segments they occupy on the labor market and partiallydue to regional > differences. Lauristin also believes that the economic problems currently > confronting Estonia affect Russians more than Estonians.] > </quote>
I'd say it is explained almost completely by the situation in Ida-Viru, where a Russophone population is suffering from huge industrial close-down.
> Of course not. But a country in which the objective of creating a national > culture and identity that would transcend ethnic origin has not been > completely successful. A recent sociological survey conducted under the > supervision of Estonian sociologist Marju Lauristin indicates that being > of Russian ethicity consistently limits horizons in today's Estonia. This > conclusion is particularly disturbing, because it primarily affects young > people below the age of thirty whose entire school careers were in and > historical memories are of independent Estonia.
> Tallinna. Venäjänkielisen väestön asema Viron työmarkkinoilla on > huomattavasti heikompi kuin virolaisten, selviää juuri julkaistusta Viron > inhimillisen kehityksen raportista 2007. Alle 30-vuotiaiden ryhmässä > venäjänkielisten kokonaistulot ovat vain 70 prosenttia samanikäisten > virolaisten tuloista. > [Tallinn. The position of the Russian-speaking popualtion on the Estonian > labor market is significantly weaker than that of Estonians. This is the > conclusion reached by the 2007 Human Devlopment Report for Estonia. In the > under-thirty age group, total earnings for Russian speakers are only > seventy per cent of what they are for Estonians.]
> Raporttia koostaneen professori Marju Lauristinin mukaan tuloerot > selittyvät osittain sillä, että venäläisten työpaikat keskittyvät > teollisuuteen. Lisäksi venäläisillä on heikomman kielitaidon vuoksi > vähemmän mahdollisuuksia työmarkkinoilla. > [According to Professor Marju Lauristin, who drew up the report, the > differences in income are partially to be explained by the fact that > Russians primarily have jobs in industry. Additionally, Russians have > fewer opportunities on the labor market due to their poorer command of > Estonian.]
> Suuryritykset, joista suuri osa on ulkomaisessa omistuksessa, käyttävät > venäläisiä halpatyövoimana. > [Large corporations, most of which are foreign owned, use Russians as a > low-cost labor force.]
> "Kun työntekijällä ei ole paljon valinnan mahdollisuuksia, silloin on myös > mahdollista painaa heidän palkkojaan alaspäin", Lauristin arvioi. > ["When workers do not have many choices available, it is possible to push > their slaries down," Laristin says, assessing the situation.]
> Myös korkeasti koulutettujen venäjänkielisten asema työmarkkinoilla on > raportin mukaan paljon heikompi kuin virolaisten. Alle 30-vuotiaista > venäjänkielisistä korkeakoulutetuista vain viidesosa työskenteli > johtavassa asemassa tai asiantuntijatehtävissä. > [According to the report, the position of highly educated Russian speakers > on the labor market is much weaker than that of Estonians. Of Russian > speakers under the age of thirty with a higher education, only one fifth > was working in a supervisory position or at a job requiring expertise.]
> Virolaisten keskuudessa samasta ikäryhmistä 60 prosenttia oli samassa > asemassa. Alle 30-vuotiaiden korkeasti koulutettujen venäläisten > keskitulot olivat vain 75 prosenttia korkeasti koulutettujen virolaisten > tuloista. > [Among the Estonians in the same age group, sixty per cent were in such a > position. Average income of highly educated Russians in the under-thirty > age group stood at only seventy-five percent of that of highly educated > Estonians.]
> Kielivähemmistön asema työmarkkinoilla on raportin mukaan huonompi, vaikka > he osaisivat sujuvaa viroa ja heillä olisi Viron kansalaisuus. > [The position of the linguistic minority on the labor market was worse on > the labor market even if they spoke fluent Estonian and had Estonian > citizenship.]
> Yli puolet venäläisistä oli henkilökohtaisesti tuntenut työelämässä > syrjintää taustansa vuoksi tai virolaisten suosimista. Erityisesti > julkisella sektorilla venäläisten uramahdollisuudet ovat huomattavasti > heikommat kuin virolaisten. > [More than half of the Russians had personally experienced discrimination > as a consequence of their background or a preference for Estonians during > their working career. Particularly in the public sector, Russians have > career opportunties that are far weaker than those available to > Estonians.]
> Työttömyys on raportin mukaan venäjänkielisen väestön keskuudessa yli > kaksinkertainen virolaisiin verrattuna. Se selittyy osittain heidän > sijoittumisellaan työmarkkinoille ja alueellisilla eroilla. Lauristin > uskoo, että myös Viroa koettelevat talousongelmat vaikuttavat venäläisiin > enemmän kuin virolaisiin. > [According to the report, unemployment among Russian speakers is more than > twice what it is among Estonians. This is partially a consequence of the > segments they occupy on the labor market and partiallydue to regional > differences. Lauristin also believes that the economic problems currently > confronting Estonia affect Russians more than Estonians.] > </quote>
> Regards, > Eugene Holman
It is almost universal that incomes of immigrant groups are a bit lower - you probably know it is for a lonfg time true also for finns in Sweden. It's not only language, aborigens do have more contacts in descision-making circles and they feel the pulse of society, its goods and taboos better then newcomers. All this makes it somewhat easier for locals to build up successful career. anyway, it is interesting topic. Maybe anyone knows, where to look for such a numbers for, say, france, UK and Germany - incomes and unemployment for locals v newcomers?
> It is almost universal that incomes of immigrant groups are a bit > lower - you probably know it is for a lonfg time true also for finns > in Sweden. It's not only language, aborigens do have more contacts in > descision-making circles and they feel the pulse of society, its goods > and taboos better then newcomers. All this makes it somewhat easier > for locals to build up successful career.
But this is not the problem. People born in Estonia of parents who were often born in the Estonian SSR are thus hardly newcomers, and the degree to which they are to be regarded as migrants, whether second or third generation, can also be argued. The situation bears more similarities to what we have long had in the United States, where certain people are regarded as more American than others solely on the basis of superficial characteristics such as skin color, name ("Why doesn't Barack Obama change his name to something more American, like Barry O'Beame or Altbaum?"), and religious beliefs. For a perceptive analysis of how this might influence the coming American presidential election, see Andrew Hacker's article "Obama: The Price of Being Black" at http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21771.
> anyway, it is interesting topic. Maybe anyone knows, where to look for > such a numbers for, say, france, UK and Germany - incomes and > unemployment for locals v newcomers?
Estonia is not easily compared with those countries, which have been the object of economic migration within the framework of a cpaitalist economy. A better standard for comparison would be South Africa where, as was the case in Estonia, a privileged minority had lived among a disadvantaged majority for generations, only to see their status suddenly reversed as a consequence of rapid and unexpected social change. In Estonia as in South Africa there are serious discussion about who built the country up, what their legacy should be, and how their history should be interpreted. Athough I reject the suggestion that Estonia is an apartheid state, I think that the socal tensions that presently exist between Estonians, Russians, and Russian speakers are ore more similar to those between the South African Blacks, Coloureds, and Afrikaaners than to those between immigrant and indigenous populations in countries such as the UK, France, and Germany.
> > It is almost universal that incomes of immigrant groups are a bit > > lower - you probably know it is for a lonfg time true also for finns > > in Sweden. It's not only language, aborigens do have more contacts in > > descision-making circles and they feel the pulse of society, its goods > > and taboos better then newcomers. All this makes it somewhat easier > > for locals to build up successful career.
> But this is not the problem. People born in Estonia of parents who were > often born in the Estonian SSR are thus hardly newcomers, and the degree > to which they are to be regarded as migrants, whether second or third > generation, can also be argued.
Eugene, it's not about what they "are to be regarded" - by law and practice anyone living in Estonia have the same position no matter was your father estonian, russian, swede or german. But most of russophones DO have less contacts and less understanding about society what turns out in economical results similar to situation in France, UK or Germany. A guy living in France without knowing french IS somewhat in trouble no matter is he newcomer from Morocco or very original local Celt surviving in some remote mountain valley. It's not about formal position in society, it's about ability to understand and use society for your own good.
The situation bears more similarities to
> what we have long had in the United States, where certain people are > regarded as more American than others solely on the basis of superficial > characteristics such as skin color, name ("Why doesn't Barack Obama change > his name to something more American, like Barry O'Beame or Altbaum?"), and > religious beliefs. For a perceptive analysis of how this might influence > the coming American presidential election, see Andrew Hacker's article > "Obama: The Price of Being Black" athttp://www.nybooks.com/articles/21771.
Sorry, but bullshit. Estonians count nationality, even ethnicity by language - if estonian is your first language, you ARE estonian no matter who your grandpa was.
> > anyway, it is interesting topic. Maybe anyone knows, where to look for > > such a numbers for, say, france, UK and Germany - incomes and > > unemployment for locals v newcomers?
> Estonia is not easily compared with those countries, which have been the > object of economic migration within the framework of a cpaitalist economy.
What's the difference? Problems may arise when folks from different cultures don't find way to understand each other. It's pretty irrelevant, how they appeared to be together.
> A better standard for comparison would be South Africa where, as was the > case in Estonia, a privileged minority had lived among a disadvantaged > majority for generations, only to see their status suddenly reversed as a > consequence of rapid and unexpected social change.
I can't see any parallel. SA was apartheid country, SU surely not. russification policy in SU was targeted against occupied nations with goal to annihilate them to form homogeneus soviet people based on russian language and culture, but in most cases it was not targeted against individual - if you accept that target you were relatively free to play as career of your beloved Pelshe shows :-)
In Estonia as in South
> Africa there are serious discussion about who built the country up,
Sorry, but who keeps such discussions? As a journalist I think I know a bit about public debates in last 20 years. There was millions of different opinions about how to build the country up but what you mean with that "who"?
what
> their legacy should be, and how their history should be interpreted.
Not too much people are really interested in history (despite such interest may be higher then in Finland). Also what you think with "interpretation"? Talks about was it occupation, annexation, incorporation back in 1940? For maiority of people this is the same call it by any name.
> Athough I reject the suggestion that Estonia is an apartheid state, I > think that the socal tensions that presently exist between Estonians, > Russians, and Russian speakers are ore more similar to those between the > South African Blacks, Coloureds, and Afrikaaners than to those between > immigrant and indigenous populations in countries such as the UK, France, > and Germany.
In article <2c9c1278-f8ca-49f6-a48f-ae2e66205...@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, lorad
<lorad...@cs.com> wrote: > On Sep 25, 3:23 am, hol...@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene Holman) wrote: > > Estonia An Apartheid State?
> Of course not. > So why does a russian puppet kite such canards?
> Because holeman is a nasty little russian puppet... that's why.
No, because the question has been posed in these terms by a controversial Finnish author, Johan Bäckman, in his most recent book, which was published in Estonia, and his view finds some support in a recently published extensive survey of Estonian society completed under the auspices of Estonian sociologist, Prof. Marju Lauristin. In Estonia, being of Russian ethnicity or having Russian as your first language appears to correlate with a certain degree of economic disadvantage. I myself would not call this apartheid, since that term implies that it is a matter of deliberate state policy. Nevertheless, the detailed study of Estonian society indicates that an Estonian-born person belonging to the Russian-speaking minority, even if he or she has a full mastery of Estonian, encounters various kinds of glass ceilings with respect to career advancement and access to jobs at the highest levels.
Do try to keep up with current events and topical issues in the Baltic countries.
<vellok...@hot.ee> wrote: > On Sep 25, 8:03=A0pm, hol...@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene Holman) wrote: > > In article > > <6ea5d13f-d3e8-4a3f-803f-01aa04389...@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, vell= > o > > > It is almost universal that incomes of immigrant groups are a bit > > > lower - you probably know it is for a lonfg time true also for finns > > > in Sweden. It's not only language, aborigens do have more contacts in > > > descision-making circles and they feel the pulse of society, its goods > > > and taboos better then newcomers. All this makes it somewhat easier > > > for locals to build up successful career.
> > But this is not the problem. People born in Estonia of parents who were > > often born in the Estonian SSR are thus hardly newcomers, and the degree > > to which they are to be regarded as migrants, whether second or third > > generation, can also be argued.
> Eugene, it's not about what they "are to be regarded" - by law and > practice anyone living in Estonia have the same position no matter was > your father estonian, russian, swede or german.
Prof. Lauristin's study seems to indicate that the situation is more complex, with the law stipulating an ideal situation that does not exist in practice.
> But most of > russophones DO have less contacts and less understanding about society > what turns out in economical results similar to situation in France, > UK or Germany. A guy living in France without knowing french IS > somewhat in trouble no matter is he newcomer from Morocco or very > original local Celt surviving in some remote mountain valley. It's not > about formal position in society, it's about ability to understand and > use society for your own good.
I agree with you. However, Prof.Lauristin's findings indicate that even russophones with a perfect command of Estonian seem to encounter glass ceilings. Being a member of a visible minority myself, I hardly find this surprising. I do consider it unfortunate for Estonia if highly educated Russian speakers who have also mastered Estonian are prevented by various unspoken rules and practices from realizing their full potential, this being an all too common development in many societies where minorities compete with the majority.
> The situation bears more similarities to > > what we have long had in the United States, where certain people are > > regarded as more American than others solely on the basis of superficial > > characteristics such as skin color, name ("Why doesn't Barack Obama chang= > e > > his name to something more American, like Barry O'Beame or Altbaum?"), an= > d > > religious beliefs. For a perceptive analysis of how this might influence > > the coming American presidential election, see Andrew Hacker's article > > "Obama: The Price of Being Black" athttp://www.nybooks.com/articles/21771= > .
Maybe some Estonian sociologist should write an article "The Price of Being Russophone"...
> Sorry, but bullshit. Estonians count nationality, even ethnicity by > language - if estonian is your first language, you ARE estonian no > matter who your grandpa was.
But what about if you speak perfect or almost perfect Estonian, but your first language and name are still Russian, or Latvian, or Armenian, or Azeri? These are the people who themselves face and are themselves faced with an identity crisis in today's Estonia.
Estonia has had very liberal legislation concerning citizenship, and being "Estonian" has been quite inclusive, from a legal standpoint, since independence. On the ground, though, things are more complex. In Tallinn there are restaurants, bars, and nightclubs, for example, by unwritten rule, Estonians congregate, and others where Russophones congregate. I have encountered this a few times myself. If I ask for something in Estonian, they answer sneeringly in Russian or English. If I ask in Russian, it is service with a smile. I have noticed when freqenting such places that all the customers are speaking Russian.
> > > anyway, it is interesting topic. Maybe anyone knows, where to look for > > > such a numbers for, say, france, UK and Germany - incomes and > > > unemployment for locals v newcomers?
> > Estonia is not easily compared with those countries, which have been the > > object of economic migration within the framework of a cpaitalist economy= > .
> What's the difference? Problems may arise when folks from different > cultures don't find way to understand each other. It's pretty > irrelevant, how they appeared to be together.
Here I disagree, see below.
> > A better standard for comparison would be South Africa where, as was the > > case in Estonia, a privileged minority had lived among a disadvantaged > > majority for generations, only to see their status suddenly reversed as a > > consequence of rapid and unexpected social change.
> I can't see any parallel. SA was apartheid country, SU surely not.
Agreed. However, in both SA and the SU there was a rapid reversal of social status. The minority that had long been on the top and had the power to lay down the rules according to which the minority was bound to live suddenly found the roles reversed. Russophones in Estonia were long used to a situation in which they had preferential access to the best jobs and positions, while the Estonian majority was not allowed to (e.g. airline pilots, ship captains) or did not want to have certain jobs (e.g. Leninologists, scientific communists, KGB interrogators).
> russification policy in SU was targeted against occupied nations with > goal to annihilate them to form homogeneus soviet people based on > russian language and culture,
Chnage the variables and that is exactly what Americanization policy was in the 19th century United States... Colonial empires have always tended to try to homogenize their subjects in the image of the colonizers. Sometimes, as with the French, all the better to civilize them, sometimes, as with British, all the better to exploit them.
> but in most cases it was not targeted > against individual - if you accept that target you were relatively > free to play as career of your beloved Pelshe shows :-) > In Estonia as in South > > Africa there are serious discussion about who built the country up,
> Sorry, but who keeps such discussions? As a journalist I think I know > a bit about public debates in last 20 years.
As someone who has read more than his fair share of Estonian journalism, I have seen numerous articles dealing with the issue of whether the infrastructure built in Estonia during the Soviet period was a bane or a boon. The Russophone press tends to regard oversized projects such as Lasnamäe with pride, while the Estonian press tends to which that such dinosaurs would go away.
> There was millions of > different opinions about how to build the country up but what you mean > with that "who"?
The USSR, which most Russophone Estonians identified with, invested a considerable amount of capital in Estonia in order to build gigantic projects that would serve the entire Soviet Union. Most Estonians would have preferred not to be part of the Soviet Union in the first place, and they tend to regard the oversized Soviet-era factories and attendant, often shoddily built infrastructure with scorn and disdain.
> what > > their legacy should be, and how their history should be interpreted.
> Not too much people are really interested in history (despite such > interest may be higher then in Finland). Also what you think with > "interpretation"? Talks about was it occupation, annexation, > incorporation back in 1940? For maiority of people this is the same > call it by any name.
In Estonia, history and the divergent interests of different rulers are far more visible than they are in Finland. This comes to my mind every time I visit Tallinn and see the manner in which the Alexander Nevsky Cathedral competes for attention with the architecturally totally different buildings on Toompea.
> > Athough I reject the suggestion that Estonia is an apartheid state, I > > think that the socal tensions that presently exist between Estonians, > > Russians, and Russian speakers are ore more similar to those between the > > South African Blacks, Coloureds, and Afrikaaners than to those between > > immigrant and indigenous populations in countries such as the UK, France, > > and Germany.
> Surely you may think this way but why?
Because in both countries you have once powerful minorities having to deal with situations defined by the majorities that they once ruled over and regarded as somehow culturally inferior. In neither country has a system of payback developed, but in both countries members of the ousted minorities are finding it difficult to accept that they no longer have the status and prestige that they once had, and that the natives that they once looked down upon as their inferiors are in charge. I'm sure that you have listened in on and even participated in discussions on the relative merits of Estonian vs. Russian culture: Arvo Pärt vs. Pyotr Tchaikovsky, Eduard Vilde vs. Lev Tolstoy, nõgesesupp vs. borscht, Viru Valge vs. Stolichnaya...
In article <3ba86a89-2162-4287-a950-d4184151b...@w39g2000prb.googlegroups.com>,
martin <marti...@joymail.com> wrote: > On Sep 26, 2:15 pm, hol...@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene Holman) wrote:
<deletions>
> > No, because the question has been posed in these terms by a controversial > > Finnish author, Johan B=E4ckman,
> Groan, not Johan B=E4ckman again. The guy is an A-grade self-serving nut > case.
He probably is. But that does not mean that the issues that he raises are to be simply dismissd. The detailed sociological survey conducted under the supervision of Prof. Marju Lauristin clearly indicates that two societies are emerging in Estonia, and that the relationship between them is increasingly characterized by economic tension and the perception by one societal component that it is the object of systematic and increasing discrimination. These facts will not go away. Characterizing them as "apartheid", as Bäckman does, is silly, but so is dismissing the issue as not worthy of consideration.
> In article > <3ba86a89-2162-4287-a950-d4184151b...@w39g2000prb.googlegroups.com>,
> martin <marti...@joymail.com> wrote: > > On Sep 26, 2:15 pm, hol...@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene Holman) wrote:
> <deletions>
> > > No, because the question has been posed in these terms by a controversial > > > Finnish author, Johan B=E4ckman,
> > Groan, not Johan B=E4ckman again. The guy is an A-grade self-serving nut > > case.
> He probably is. But that does not mean that the issues that he raises are > to be simply dismissd. The detailed sociological survey conducted under > the supervision of Prof. Marju Lauristin clearly indicates that two > societies are emerging in Estonia, and that the relationship between them > is increasingly characterized by economic tension and the perception by > one societal component that it is the object of systematic and increasing > discrimination. These facts will not go away. Characterizing them as > "apartheid", as Bäckman does, is silly, but so is dismissing the issue as > not worthy of consideration.
Bäckman is the David Irving of Estonian history, trying to lend him legitimacy by linking his views with Prof. Marju Lauristin doesn't enhance your own credibility.
Holman) wrote: > I think that the socal tensions that presently exist between Estonians, >> > Russians, and Russian speakers are ore more similar to those between the >> > South African Blacks, Coloureds, and Afrikaaners than to those between >> > immigrant and indigenous populations in countries such as the UK, France, >> > and Germany.
>> Surely you may think this way but why?
>Because in both countries you have once powerful minorities having to deal >with situations defined by the majorities that they once ruled over and >regarded as somehow culturally inferior. In neither country has a system >of payback developed, but in both countries members of the ousted >minorities are finding it difficult to accept that they no longer have the >status and prestige that they once had, and that the natives that they >once looked down upon as their inferiors are in charge. I'm sure that you >have listened in on and even participated in discussions on the relative >merits of Estonian vs. Russian culture: Arvo Pärt vs. Pyotr Tchaikovsky, >Eduard Vilde vs. Lev Tolstoy, nõgesesupp vs. borscht, Viru Valge vs. >Stolichnaya...
Would it not be more correct to say that the tensions that exist between Estonians, Russians and Russian-speakers are in fact less akin to those between "South African Blacks, Coloureds and Afrikaaners" than they are to tensions between people who espouse very different ideas about the nature of civil society? After all, the breakup of the Soviet Union was primarily (though not exclusively) a matter of failed ideology, and what the Russian-speaking populations of the Baltic countries, including Estonia, still hold as their identifying link with the past is the existence and reality of the Soviet Union, with all its attendant ideological and authoritarian baggage?
"Homo sovieticus" was not an ethnos, but an ethos. In its fundamentals, the split is less a cultural or ethnic one than one based on two radically different ideas and views of the world. For while there may still be some ethnic Estonians who yearn for the return of the Soviet past, they are surely a small minority. Among Russian-speakers, however, the numbers of such people are probably much higher.
In its present form, the Estonian res publica represents a deep rejection of Soviet norms and a re-establishment of values and principles that are essentially those of the free world. That's bound to alienate generations of colonists for whom the neighbouring motherland was also the birthplace and nurturing environment of the Soviet project.
> On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 08:11:20 +0300, hol...@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
> Holman) wrote: > > I think that the socal tensions that presently exist between Estonians, > >> > Russians, and Russian speakers are ore more similar to those between the > >> > South African Blacks, Coloureds, and Afrikaaners than to those between > >> > immigrant and indigenous populations in countries such as the UK, France, > >> > and Germany.
> >> Surely you may think this way but why?
> >Because in both countries you have once powerful minorities having to deal > >with situations defined by the majorities that they once ruled over and > >regarded as somehow culturally inferior. In neither country has a system > >of payback developed, but in both countries members of the ousted > >minorities are finding it difficult to accept that they no longer have the > >status and prestige that they once had, and that the natives that they > >once looked down upon as their inferiors are in charge. I'm sure that you > >have listened in on and even participated in discussions on the relative > >merits of Estonian vs. Russian culture: Arvo Pärt vs. Pyotr Tchaikovsky, > >Eduard Vilde vs. Lev Tolstoy, nõgesesupp vs. borscht, Viru Valge vs. > >Stolichnaya...
> Would it not be more correct to say that the tensions that exist > between Estonians, Russians and Russian-speakers are in fact less akin > to those between "South African Blacks, Coloureds and Afrikaaners" > than they are to tensions between people who espouse very different > ideas about the nature of civil society? After all, the breakup of the > Soviet Union was primarily (though not exclusively) a matter of failed > ideology, and what the Russian-speaking populations of the Baltic > countries, including Estonia, still hold as their identifying link > with the past is the existence and reality of the Soviet Union, with > all its attendant ideological and authoritarian baggage?
> "Homo sovieticus" was not an ethnos, but an ethos. In its > fundamentals, the split is less a cultural or ethnic one than one > based on two radically different ideas and views of the world. For > while there may still be some ethnic Estonians who yearn for the > return of the Soviet past, they are surely a small minority. Among > Russian-speakers, however, the numbers of such people are probably > much higher.
> In its present form, the Estonian res publica represents a deep > rejection of Soviet norms and a re-establishment of values and > principles that are essentially those of the free world. That's bound > to alienate generations of colonists for whom the neighbouring > motherland was also the birthplace and nurturing environment of the > Soviet project.
> Regards,
> DM
All rather obvious. What's your point? Like Holman, you slither around mouthing platitudes, but don't have the guts to unequivocally denounce the USSR (and those who still admire it) in the same way that you would unequivocally denounce Nazi Germany (and those who still admire it). Whereas you find Holocaust deniers "obnoxious", you find creeps like Bäckman "interesting".
On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 02:37:11 -0700 (PDT), tadas.bli...@lycos.es wrote: >On Sep 26, 11:49 am, David McDuff <dmcd...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 08:11:20 +0300, hol...@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
>> Holman) wrote: >> > I think that the socal tensions that presently exist between Estonians, >> >> > Russians, and Russian speakers are ore more similar to those between the >> >> > South African Blacks, Coloureds, and Afrikaaners than to those between >> >> > immigrant and indigenous populations in countries such as the UK, France, >> >> > and Germany.
>> >> Surely you may think this way but why?
>> >Because in both countries you have once powerful minorities having to deal >> >with situations defined by the majorities that they once ruled over and >> >regarded as somehow culturally inferior. In neither country has a system >> >of payback developed, but in both countries members of the ousted >> >minorities are finding it difficult to accept that they no longer have the >> >status and prestige that they once had, and that the natives that they >> >once looked down upon as their inferiors are in charge. I'm sure that you >> >have listened in on and even participated in discussions on the relative >> >merits of Estonian vs. Russian culture: Arvo Pärt vs. Pyotr Tchaikovsky, >> >Eduard Vilde vs. Lev Tolstoy, nõgesesupp vs. borscht, Viru Valge vs. >> >Stolichnaya...
>> Would it not be more correct to say that the tensions that exist >> between Estonians, Russians and Russian-speakers are in fact less akin >> to those between "South African Blacks, Coloureds and Afrikaaners" >> than they are to tensions between people who espouse very different >> ideas about the nature of civil society? After all, the breakup of the >> Soviet Union was primarily (though not exclusively) a matter of failed >> ideology, and what the Russian-speaking populations of the Baltic >> countries, including Estonia, still hold as their identifying link >> with the past is the existence and reality of the Soviet Union, with >> all its attendant ideological and authoritarian baggage?
>> "Homo sovieticus" was not an ethnos, but an ethos. In its >> fundamentals, the split is less a cultural or ethnic one than one >> based on two radically different ideas and views of the world. For >> while there may still be some ethnic Estonians who yearn for the >> return of the Soviet past, they are surely a small minority. Among >> Russian-speakers, however, the numbers of such people are probably >> much higher.
>> In its present form, the Estonian res publica represents a deep >> rejection of Soviet norms and a re-establishment of values and >> principles that are essentially those of the free world. That's bound >> to alienate generations of colonists for whom the neighbouring >> motherland was also the birthplace and nurturing environment of the >> Soviet project.
>> Regards,
>> DM
><snip> What's your point? </snip>
My point, as I already indicated, is that the split in Estonian society is not primarily an ethnic division, as Eugene Holman appears to be arguing. Rather, it's one based on ideology, and on fundamentally different views of the world. The ethnic component is more of an accident than a definer.
By the way, if you've followed this newsgroup since 1994, you will be aware that I'm no friend of the Soviet Union. :-)
> My point, as I already indicated, is that the split in Estonian > society is not primarily an ethnic division, as Eugene Holman appears > to be arguing. Rather, it's one based on ideology, and on > fundamentally different views of the world. The ethnic component is > more of an accident than a definer.
There is a third dimension beneath 'ethos' and 'ethnos'. I don't have a good word for it, but perhaps one could call it 'kratos' from ??????, meaning power, empire, influence.
I've referred to this specific mental condition before. It's easy to detect in the difference in outlook between members of small nations and members of nations with imperial ambitions or an imperial past.
Taking SCB, Holman will forever remain an American. For him it will always be easier to identify with Russia, the adversary of the USA that he has hated since he left it. Both are empires and, for him, easy to understand. Despite living in Finland for more than 40 years, he hasn't mentally become a Finn, and he will never instinctively feel at home in 'the brotherhood of the small'.
It's not entirely his own fault, because I think it's very difficult, if not impossible, for someone of 'imperial' origin to downsize his scope to the small nation level (Peeteris may have succeeded). The opposite, however, often happens, and that's why we have the likes of Bäckman, an academic who, ignored in Helsinki, moves to St. Petersburg and feels himself grow in importance when he starts promoting the Russian standpoint.
Gintas is a typical example of the opposite disposition. Regardless of where he has been living, he has retained the small nation outlook that he obviously adopted already in his parental home.
And then there are those of us, like Vello and myself, who were born into the small nation spirit and never had any difficulty identifying with it. I'm sure the same goes for almost all ethnic Balts born in the Baltics. Like you wrote, "while there may still be some ethnic Estonians who yearn for the return of the Soviet past, they are surely a small minority".
What I'm saying is that those Estonians and also most of the Russophones may be longing for the Soviet Union not for ideological reasons but because they miss being part of an empire. The Russophones never had the small nation attitude in the first place and now they are reduced to a minority inside a small nation!
<anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote: >What I'm saying is that those Estonians and also most of the Russophones may >be longing for the Soviet Union not for ideological reasons but because they >miss being part of an empire. The Russophones never had the small nation >attitude in the first place and now they are reduced to a minority inside a >small nation!
Or maybe the longing for empire is a part of the Soviet ideology that still lives on? I guess one could put it that way, too.
> > I think that the socal tensions that presently exist between Estonians, > >> > Russians, and Russian speakers are ore more similar to those between the > >> > South African Blacks, Coloureds, and Afrikaaners than to those between > >> > immigrant and indigenous populations in countries such as the UK, France, > >> > and Germany.
> >> Surely you may think this way but why?
> >Because in both countries you have once powerful minorities having to deal > >with situations defined by the majorities that they once ruled over and > >regarded as somehow culturally inferior. In neither country has a system > >of payback developed, but in both countries members of the ousted > >minorities are finding it difficult to accept that they no longer have the > >status and prestige that they once had, and that the natives that they > >once looked down upon as their inferiors are in charge. I'm sure that you > >have listened in on and even participated in discussions on the relative > >merits of Estonian vs. Russian culture: Arvo Pärt vs. Pyotr Tchaikovsky, > >Eduard Vilde vs. Lev Tolstoy, nõgesesupp vs. borscht, Viru Valge vs. > >Stolichnaya...
> Would it not be more correct to say that the tensions that exist > between Estonians, Russians and Russian-speakers are in fact less akin > to those between "South African Blacks, Coloureds and Afrikaaners" > than they are to tensions between people who espouse very different > ideas about the nature of civil society?
I don't think so. For the most part, the elements of the Russian and Russian-speaking population that longed for the Soviet Union and could not bear to even consider living in a country in which Estonians, Latvians, or Lithuanians dominated emigrated to Russia or elsewhere soon after Baltic independence was re-established. Most of the Soviet-era population that opted to remain thought that even if the system of political and economic organization changed, life would otherwise continue more or less as it had been, with status, jobs, and benefits earned during the Soviet period retaining their value. It came for many as a shock that they had to apply for citizenship (in Estonia and Latvia), that Russian lost most of its status as a public or official language, and that, after a few years of corrupt, gangster-dominated capitalism that enabled a few prominent Baltic-resident Russians and russophnes to become fabulously rich, and more than a few to be liquidated in local turf-wars, upwards social and economic mobility required mastery of a new language as well as of a new and alien historical narrative. The term that Baltic-resident Russians and russophones use to describe this is "nationalism", a word with decidedly negative associations for them when applied to the aspirations of what they consider to be minor and provincially-minded cultures.
> After all, the breakup of the > Soviet Union was primarily (though not exclusively) a matter of failed > ideology, and what the Russian-speaking populations of the Baltic > countries, including Estonia, still hold as their identifying link > with the past is the existence and reality of the Soviet Union, with > all its attendant ideological and authoritarian baggage?
Whereas I agree with what you wrote, I question how many people think in such abstract and intellectual terms. For the Russian-speakers in Estonia, the reversal in status means that many of the people who were once middle-level administrators, policemen, and party officials are now barbers, taxi-drivers, and construction workers. Some may have reverted to a longing for a Soviet past in which they had a better status than they have now, but I think that more thought that they would be able to transfer the educational and professional capital that they had acquired in the communist, multinational USSR to the capitalist, titular-nationality dominated Baltic countries with a minimum "transfer tax". As I understand it, this was the primary reason for young Russian speakers rioting in Tallinn last year. The one thing that they could call theirs, a miserable statue to a victory that not even they took pride in, was removed from its prominent position in the center of Tallinn and consigned to the military cemetery. The symbolism was all too obvious: you guys don't really belong here, your famous victory was really an infamous tragedy that lasted almost half a century, and the symbol of your potency should not be standing tall in the center of town, but rather, flower bedecked and emasculated, in the place of the dead.
My Armenian-Estonian friend, who is a Russian speaker, told me that the statue had become fetishized, since Russian speakers in Estonia consider themselves to be marginalized with little else but the statue to identify with. Although he agrees that the statue had to be removed, he did question the wisdom of the Estonian authorities having moved it when and how they did. Here in Finland, which has a far smaller Swedish-speaking minority, we celebrate a Day of Swedishness, have Swedish as a second official language, and recognize that having Swedish as one's native language is not in contradiction with being a Finn. The three Baltic countries, smaller and perhaps less self-confident, have chosen a different path. The continuing tensions between the titular and newer "squatter", to use Henry's term populations are consequences of this.
> "Homo sovieticus" was not an ethnos, but an ethos. In its > fundamentals, the split is less a cultural or ethnic one than one > based on two radically different ideas and views of the world. For > while there may still be some ethnic Estonians who yearn for the > return of the Soviet past, they are surely a small minority. Among > Russian-speakers, however, the numbers of such people are probably > much higher.
> In its present form, the Estonian res publica represents a deep > rejection of Soviet norms and a re-establishment of values and > principles that are essentially those of the free world. That's bound > to alienate generations of colonists for whom the neighbouring > motherland was also the birthplace and nurturing environment of the > Soviet project.
Still, it is surprising that the ones who seem most deeply resentful are young people who have no memory of the Soviet Union. Their mindset is becoming more like those of minority-group Americans in the pre-1965 United States who were indoctrinated since childhood with the idea that they lived in a country "with liberty and justice for all," only to find out that this was far from the truth in real life.
J. Anderson wrote: > Taking SCB, Holman will forever remain an American. For him it will always > be easier to identify with Russia, the adversary of the USA that he has > hated since he left it.
What a crap! Shame on you, Johnny. Sovok-style name calling aside you're just parroting GW's kindergarten love-hate Weltanschauung. Have you ever seen real US haters (like, say, normal South Americans)? I guess no, cuz Zhen'ka is not like them. BTW most Old Euros also hate current US regime, but they trust in post-GW USA (still).
> Despite living in Finland for more than 40 years, he hasn't mentally become > a Finn, and he will never instinctively feel at home in 'the brotherhood of > the small'. > It's not entirely his own fault
... that unlike your pathetic "brotherhood of the small" Zhen'ka can see the forest behind your Finnish trees? LOL³.
> > o > > > > It is almost universal that incomes of immigrant groups are a bit > > > > lower - you probably know it is for a lonfg time true also for finns > > > > in Sweden. It's not only language, aborigens do have more contacts in > > > > descision-making circles and they feel the pulse of society, its goods > > > > and taboos better then newcomers. All this makes it somewhat easier > > > > for locals to build up successful career.
> > > But this is not the problem. People born in Estonia of parents who were > > > often born in the Estonian SSR are thus hardly newcomers, and the degree > > > to which they are to be regarded as migrants, whether second or third > > > generation, can also be argued.
> > Eugene, it's not about what they "are to be regarded" - by law and > > practice anyone living in Estonia have the same position no matter was > > your father estonian, russian, swede or german.
> Prof. Lauristin's study seems to indicate that the situation is more > complex, with the law stipulating an ideal situation that does not exist > in practice.
No. Read your own post. He do notice the difference in incomes but that is all she say.
> > But most of > > russophones DO have less contacts and less understanding about society > > what turns out in economical results similar to situation in France, > > UK or Germany. A guy living in France without knowing french IS > > somewhat in trouble no matter is he newcomer from Morocco or very > > original local Celt surviving in some remote mountain valley. It's not > > about formal position in society, it's about ability to understand and > > use society for your own good.
> I agree with you. However, Prof.Lauristin's findings indicate that even > russophones with a perfect command of Estonian seem to encounter glass > ceilings. Being a member of a visible minority myself, I hardly find this > surprising. I do consider it unfortunate for Estonia if highly educated > Russian speakers who have also mastered Estonian are prevented by various > unspoken rules and practices from realizing their full potential, this > being an all too common development in many societies where minorities > compete with the majority.
I don't belive in glass ceilings, folks in charge in companies do take from two equal guys this one who asks less. Businessmen are not too patriotic folks, they think more in terms of profits.
> > The situation bears more similarities to > > > what we have long had in the United States, where certain people are > > > regarded as more American than others solely on the basis of superficial > > > characteristics such as skin color, name ("Why doesn't Barack Obama chang= > > e > > > his name to something more American, like Barry O'Beame or Altbaum?"), an= > > d > > > religious beliefs. For a perceptive analysis of how this might influence > > > the coming American presidential election, see Andrew Hacker's article > > > "Obama: The Price of Being Black" athttp://www.nybooks.com/articles/21771= > > .
> Maybe some Estonian sociologist should write an article "The Price of > Being Russophone"...
Being from a minority group is always a disadvantage. but differently from historical US Estonia had never divided his citizens by nation. As I say in earlier post coz estonians do count ethnicity by primar language. So if you want to go with EST-US comparison, till your English is perfect, no one is interesting about your colour or confession. But, as in Estonia, poor English is disadvantage in US for sure.
> > Sorry, but bullshit. Estonians count nationality, even ethnicity by > > language - if estonian is your first language, you ARE estonian no > > matter who your grandpa was.
> But what about if you speak perfect or almost perfect Estonian, but your > first language and name are still Russian, or Latvian, or Armenian, or > Azeri? These are the people who themselves face and are themselves faced > with an identity crisis in today's Estonia.
If you speak estonian on level others don't notice you are not native, it is just up to you, do you want to feel himself as Estonian or as a part of nation of your granddad - no one will be interested in such private things. Sure it is hard to realize that you are no more maiority in the biggest country in the World but a part of minority in a tiny one. But what can we do about that?
> Estonia has had very liberal legislation concerning citizenship, and being > "Estonian" has been quite inclusive, from a legal standpoint, since > independence. On the ground, though, things are more complex. In Tallinn > there are restaurants, bars, and nightclubs, for example, by unwritten > rule, Estonians congregate, and others where Russophones congregate. I > have encountered this a few times myself. If I ask for something in > Estonian, they answer sneeringly in Russian or English. If I ask in > Russian, it is service with a smile. I have noticed when freqenting such > places that all the customers are speaking Russian.
With you, Eugene, case was simple, girl was unhappy he can't communicate with a foreigner guest - and happy if you had as spare a language she was able to speak. I really don't know is there such strictly divided places left (I do remember from my young years that dancing places were totally separate - I have even no idea to go on "russian" party). What you call "Russian places" are in areas with mostly russian public - like Lasnamäe. But I don't think problem is in lack of will to communicate in Estonian, most probably it is just lack of skill to do so.
> > > > anyway, it is interesting topic. Maybe anyone knows, where to look for > > > > such a numbers for, say, france, UK and Germany - incomes and > > > > unemployment for locals v newcomers?
> > > Estonia is not easily compared with those countries, which have been the > > > object of economic migration within the framework of a cpaitalist economy= > > .
> > What's the difference? Problems may arise when folks from different > > cultures don't find way to understand each other. It's pretty > > irrelevant, how they appeared to be together.
> Here I disagree, see below.
I don't talk about "historical justice" about their presence, just folks with different cultural background do have more mess in communicating then people inside some cultural group.
> > > A better standard for comparison would be South Africa where, as was the > > > case in Estonia, a privileged minority had lived among a disadvantaged > > > majority for generations, only to see their status suddenly reversed as a > > > consequence of rapid and unexpected social change.
> > I can't see any parallel. SA was apartheid country, SU surely not.
> Agreed. However, in both SA and the SU there was a rapid reversal of > social status. The minority that had long been on the top and had the > power to lay down the rules according to which the minority was bound to > live suddenly found the roles reversed. Russophones in Estonia were long > used to a situation in which they had preferential access to the best jobs > and positions, while the Estonian majority was not allowed to (e.g. > airline pilots, ship captains) or did not want to have certain jobs (e.g. > Leninologists, scientific communists, KGB interrogators).
Well, as I say, commies were not too much targeted on individuals. Except few professions you already mentioned, estonians dominated on better-pay-jobs also in SU. Reason was simple - overhelming part immigrants arrive in Estonia as construction workers or workers of big machinery plants - or as miners. No russian university or scientific centre was built during soviet period.
> > russification policy in SU was targeted against occupied nations with > > goal to annihilate them to form homogeneus soviet people based on > > russian language and culture,
> Chnage the variables and that is exactly what Americanization policy was > in the 19th century United States... Colonial empires have always tended > to try to homogenize their subjects in the image of the colonizers. > Sometimes, as with the French, all the better to civilize them, sometimes, > as with British, all the better to exploit them.
> > but in most cases it was not targeted > > against individual - if you accept that target you were relatively > > free to play as career of your beloved Pelshe shows :-) > > In Estonia as in South > > > Africa there are serious discussion about who built the country up,
> > Sorry, but who keeps such discussions? As a journalist I think I know > > a bit about public debates in last 20 years.
> As someone who has read more than his fair share of Estonian journalism, I > have seen numerous articles dealing with the issue of whether the > infrastructure built in Estonia during the Soviet period was a bane or a > boon. The Russophone press tends to regard oversized projects such as > Lasnamäe with pride, while the Estonian press tends to which that such > dinosaurs would go away.
> > There was millions of > > different opinions about how to build the country up but what you mean > > with that "who"?
> The USSR, which most Russophone Estonians identified with, invested a > considerable amount of capital in Estonia in order to build gigantic > projects that would serve the entire Soviet Union. Most Estonians would > have preferred not to be part of the Soviet Union in the first place, and > they tend to regard the oversized Soviet-era factories and attendant, > often shoddily built infrastructure with scorn and disdain.
> > what > > > their legacy should be, and how their history should be interpreted.
> > Not too much people are really interested in history (despite such > > interest may be higher then in Finland). Also what you think with > > "interpretation"? Talks about was it occupation, annexation, > > incorporation back in 1940? For maiority of people this is the same > > call it
> >> Holman) wrote: > >> > I think that the socal tensions that presently exist between Estonians, > >> >> > Russians, and Russian speakers are ore more similar to those between the > >> >> > South African Blacks, Coloureds, and Afrikaaners than to those between > >> >> > immigrant and indigenous populations in countries such as the UK, France, > >> >> > and Germany.
> >> >> Surely you may think this way but why?
> >> >Because in both countries you have once powerful minorities having to deal > >> >with situations defined by the majorities that they once ruled over and > >> >regarded as somehow culturally inferior. In neither country has a system > >> >of payback developed, but in both countries members of the ousted > >> >minorities are finding it difficult to accept that they no longer have the > >> >status and prestige that they once had, and that the natives that they > >> >once looked down upon as their inferiors are in charge. I'm sure that you > >> >have listened in on and even participated in discussions on the relative > >> >merits of Estonian vs. Russian culture: Arvo Pärt vs. Pyotr Tchaikovsky, > >> >Eduard Vilde vs. Lev Tolstoy, nõgesesupp vs. borscht, Viru Valge vs. > >> >Stolichnaya...
> >> Would it not be more correct to say that the tensions that exist > >> between Estonians, Russians and Russian-speakers are in fact less akin > >> to those between "South African Blacks, Coloureds and Afrikaaners" > >> than they are to tensions between people who espouse very different > >> ideas about the nature of civil society? After all, the breakup of the > >> Soviet Union was primarily (though not exclusively) a matter of failed > >> ideology, and what the Russian-speaking populations of the Baltic > >> countries, including Estonia, still hold as their identifying link > >> with the past is the existence and reality of the Soviet Union, with > >> all its attendant ideological and authoritarian baggage?
> >> "Homo sovieticus" was not an ethnos, but an ethos. In its > >> fundamentals, the split is less a cultural or ethnic one than one > >> based on two radically different ideas and views of the world. For > >> while there may still be some ethnic Estonians who yearn for the > >> return of the Soviet past, they are surely a small minority. Among > >> Russian-speakers, however, the numbers of such people are probably > >> much higher.
> >> In its present form, the Estonian res publica represents a deep > >> rejection of Soviet norms and a re-establishment of values and > >> principles that are essentially those of the free world. That's bound > >> to alienate generations of colonists for whom the neighbouring > >> motherland was also the birthplace and nurturing environment of the > >> Soviet project.
> >> Regards,
> >> DM
> ><snip> What's your point? </snip>
> My point, as I already indicated, is that the split in Estonian > society is not primarily an ethnic division, as Eugene Holman appears > to be arguing. Rather, it's one based on ideology, and on > fundamentally different views of the world. The ethnic component is > more of an accident than a definer.
That's the point. Well, I would add that ethnic point is totally out of question, what exist is language point.
> > My point, as I already indicated, is that the split in Estonian > > society is not primarily an ethnic division, as Eugene Holman appears > > to be arguing. Rather, it's one based on ideology, and on > > fundamentally different views of the world. The ethnic component is > > more of an accident than a definer.
> There is a third dimension beneath 'ethos' and 'ethnos'. I don't have a good > word for it, but perhaps one could call it 'kratos' from ??????, meaning > power, empire, influence.
> I've referred to this specific mental condition before. It's easy to detect > in the difference in outlook between members of small nations and members of > nations with imperial ambitions or an imperial past.
> Taking SCB, Holman will forever remain an American. For him it will always > be easier to identify with Russia, the adversary of the USA that he has > hated since he left it. Both are empires and, for him, easy to understand. > Despite living in Finland for more than 40 years, he hasn't mentally become > a Finn, and he will never instinctively feel at home in 'the brotherhood of > the small'.
> It's not entirely his own fault, because I think it's very difficult, if not > impossible, for someone of 'imperial' origin to downsize his scope to the > small nation level (Peeteris may have succeeded). The opposite, however, > often happens, and that's why we have the likes of Bäckman, an academic who, > ignored in Helsinki, moves to St. Petersburg and feels himself grow in > importance when he starts promoting the Russian standpoint.
> Gintas is a typical example of the opposite disposition. Regardless of where > he has been living, he has retained the small nation outlook that he > obviously adopted already in his parental home.
> And then there are those of us, like Vello and myself, who were born into > the small nation spirit and never had any difficulty identifying with it. > I'm sure the same goes for almost all ethnic Balts born in the Baltics. Like > you wrote, "while there may still be some ethnic Estonians who yearn for the > return of the Soviet past, they are surely a small minority".
> What I'm saying is that those Estonians and also most of the Russophones may > be longing for the Soviet Union not for ideological reasons but because they > miss being part of an empire. The Russophones never had the small nation > attitude in the first place and now they are reduced to a minority inside a > small nation!
On Sep 26, 6:24 pm, David McDuff <dmcd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 15:05:10 +0300, "J. Anderson"
> <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote: > >What I'm saying is that those Estonians and also most of the Russophones may > >be longing for the Soviet Union not for ideological reasons but because they > >miss being part of an empire. The Russophones never had the small nation > >attitude in the first place and now they are reduced to a minority inside a > >small nation!
> Or maybe the longing for empire is a part of the Soviet ideology that > still lives on? I guess one could put it that way, too.
It is very hard to define the "Soviet ideology". There were utopies amoung commie leaders back in tventies but with October revolution dreaming was out of style and work to build up a strong state start to dominate. For a big part of population in Russia imperial idea is something like to be the best for a sportsman. to talk about welfare is out, to talk about sacrifice at the name of greatness of Fatherland is honourable.
On Sep 26, 9:06 pm, hol...@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene Holman) wrote: Here in Finland, which has a far smaller Swedish-speaking
> minority, we celebrate a Day of Swedishness, have Swedish as a second > official language, and recognize that having Swedish as one's native > language is not in contradiction with being a Finn. The three Baltic > countries, smaller and perhaps less self-confident, have chosen a > different path. The continuing tensions between the titular and newer > "squatter", to use Henry's term populations are consequences of this.
But those cases are incomparable. Swedes are small in numbers and have been essential part of finnish society for almost 1000 years. Without ww2 germans and german language would be in such position in Estonia (de facto German was second official language in Estonia before ww2, well, not recognized by formal law).
> > In its present form, the Estonian res publica represents a deep > > rejection of Soviet norms and a re-establishment of values and > > principles that are essentially those of the free world. That's bound > > to alienate generations of colonists for whom the neighbouring > > motherland was also the birthplace and nurturing environment of the > > Soviet project.
> Still, it is surprising that the ones who seem most deeply resentful are > young people who have no memory of the Soviet Union.
That problem is actual with immigrant groups all over Europe. First generation immigrants do realize they are in a new country, but for their kids (and for third generation) that country IS their homeland.
On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 21:06:51 +0300, hol...@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
Holman) wrote: >The term that Baltic-resident Russians and >russophones use to describe this is "nationalism", a word with decidedly >negative associations for them when applied to the aspirations of what >they consider to be minor and provincially-minded cultures.
Indeed, but once again I question whether the South African analogy is the most apt one. The nationalism concerned is hardly a matter of skin colour, though it may be one of genetic background - it is also one of perceived cultural and ideological "superiority".
What we see in Estonia is a particularly acute example of the cultural divides and barriers instanced by Samuel Huntington in his book "Clash of Civilizations" (1993). Or even of the kind that Camus portrayed in his writings on Algeria - a standoff between two fundamentally different conceptions of the world which are none the less compelled to exist within close geographic proximity of each other. Camus went so far as to compare this with the symbiotic conflict between Greece and Rome, which ended in the virtual death of Greek culture in the 7th century.
>Whereas I agree with what you wrote, I question how many people think in >such abstract and intellectual terms. For the Russian-speakers in Estonia, >the reversal in status means that many of the people who were once >middle-level administrators, policemen, and party officials are now >barbers, taxi-drivers, and construction workers.
The abstract historical processes take place in concrete physical form, in the lives of those who live the history. The fact that the historical split isn't necessarily perceived in broader terms by the majority of the population doesn't mean that it's not taking place. And, as one can see by reading the Russian press in Russia itself, extensive efforts are currently being made by the ruling elite to propagate ideas of imperial expansion and cultural superiorty.
The appointment of Ivan Demidov in February this year as head of the ideological directorate of the political department of the United Russia Party was significant. Like a number of other members of Russia's current government elite, Demidov is a convinced "neo-Eurasianist" who espouses the ideology propounded by figures like Alexander Dugin and Alexander Prokhanov - and ideology which in the words of one researcher "constitutes perhaps the most radical anti-democratic ideology that has gained acceptance within Russia’s political establishment today." (see http://www.globalpolitician.com/24333-russia).
The ideas of Dugin are particularly popular among Estonia's educated Russian-speakers.
>Still, it is surprising that the ones who seem most deeply resentful are >young people who have no memory of the Soviet Union.
I don't think it's surprising at all. These young people have read about the Soviet Union and want to resurrect it, or something akin to it. This "neo-Soviet Union" takes a form that's derived from a revisionist view of 20th century history.
As Andreas Umland writes: "In post-Soviet Russia, it is sufficient to
rhetorically dissociate oneself from the worst crimes of Nazi Germany and to refrain from blatant copying of Nazi symbols in order to avoid public stigmatization as a “fascist”. This approach would, at least, explain why, on the one hand, obviously neo-Nazi groups such as the “Russian National Unity” of Aleksandr Barkashov or skinhead gangs are being vocally suppressed by the executive and judiciary, while on the other hand ultra-nationalist writers who, in terms of their rhetoric, are no less radical are not only tolerated, but have unhindered access to public platforms and state-controlled media, and are, sometimes, allocated an active role in PR projects of the Kremlin’s political technologists." (http://www.res.ethz.ch/analysis/rad/details.cfm?lng=en&id=28223)
So in Estonia, as in other parts of the former Soviet empire, the trick performed by Moscow - via the leaders of an irredentist Russian-speaking community - is to accuse the innocent host community of "racial apartheid" and "Nazism". At the same time, Moscow exports a neo-Soviet (Eurasianist) ideology that works to support a pan-Russian nationalism which advocates the oppression and annexation of small states that neighbour Russia.
vello wrote: > On Sep 26, 3:05 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote: >> What I'm saying is that - - - most of the Russophones may >> be longing for the Soviet Union not for ideological reasons but because they >> miss being part of an empire. The Russophones never had the small nation >> attitude in the first place and now they are reduced to a minority inside a >> small nation!
>> Regards, >> John
> Amen :-)
Well, tänan, but like you see from the reactions (or rather the non-reactions), SCB's imperialists are unable to recognize or admit this trait in themselves. It has rotted their brains.
As to the inhabitants of former socialist countries, it would be interesting to know how many of them would really be prepared to go back to that system. Their houses and apartments would naturally have to be socialized again -- just as a start.
|
