Estonia. An apartheid state?
Eugene Holman
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>
Regards,
Eugene Holman
J. Anderson
"Eugene Holman" <hol...@mappi.helsinki.fi> wrote in message
news:holman-2509...@ke-hupnet79-24.hupnet.helsinki.fi...
> [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.
vello
> 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.
>
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?
Eugene Holman
<6ea5d13f-d3e8-4a3f...@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, vello
<vell...@hot.ee> wrote:
<deletions>
>
> 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.
Regards,
Eugene Holman
lorad
> 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.
vello
> In article
> <6ea5d13f-d3e8-4a3f-803f-01aa04389...@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, vello
>
> <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote:
>
> <deletions>
>
>
>
> > 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.
Surely you may think this way but why?
>
Eugene Holman
<2c9c1278-f8ca-49f6...@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, lorad
<lora...@cs.com> wrote:
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.
Regards,
Eugene Holman
martin
>
> <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,
Groan, not Johan Bäckman again. The guy is an A-grade self-serving nut
case.
Regards,
Martin
Eugene Holman
<674d9388-9e05-45c4...@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, vello
<vell...@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...
Regards,
Eugene Holman
Eugene Holman
<3ba86a89-2162-4287...@w39g2000prb.googlegroups.com>,
martin <mart...@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.
Regards,
Eugene Holman
martin
> In article
> <3ba86a89-2162-4287-a950-d4184151b...@w39g2000prb.googlegroups.com>,
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.
Regards,
Martin
David McDuff
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, nőgesesupp 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
tadas....@lycos.es
> 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,
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".
David McDuff
><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. :-)
Best,
DM
J. Anderson
"David McDuff" <dmc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:gmbpd41674ob4qd1k...@4ax.com...
> 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!
Regards,
John
David McDuff
<ander...@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.
Regards,
DM
Eugene Holman
<dmc...@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?
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.
Regards,
Eugene Holman
MTRP™
> 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.
vello
> > 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.
> Eugene Holman- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
vello
That's the point. Well, I would add that ethnic point is totally out
of question, what exist is language point.
>
vello
> "David McDuff" <dmcd...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Amen :-)
vello
> On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 15:05:10 +0300, "J. Anderson"
>
> >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.
>
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.
vello
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.
David McDuff
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.
Regards,
DM
J. Anderson
> 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.
vello
Well there would be some number of them amount older folks. Only
valuable (?) thing soviet system offers was stability - both good and
bad outcomes of your activities were out of question. So who is in
problems now may think it was good to live without real hopes but
without fear about surviving also.
Dmitry
What they didn't realise is that false economy can't sustain forever.
The late 80's had many indications. For example: "Andrius’jobs" were
still there, but the essentials such as food started to disappear. I
don't know about Tallinn, but in Riga we had "cut yourself A4 size"
coupons.
Peter
<<What they didn't realise is that false economy can't sustain forever.
The late 80's had many indications. For example: "Andrius'jobs" were
still there, but the essentials such as food started to disappear. I
don't know about Tallinn, but in Riga we had "cut yourself A4 size"
coupons. >>
Soviet Union never had good economic situation, early 60s were much
worse than late 80s. (see below) Soviet Union collapsed mostly thanks to
Gorbachev's political "reforms". If Gorbachev didn't come to power,
today SU would have 'swam' in oil, gas money.
Novocherkassk riots.
The Novocherkassk riots or massacre began on the June 2, 1962 in the
city Novocherkassk, Soviet Union (now Russia).
The riots were a direct result of shortages of food and provisions, as
well as the poor working conditions in the factory. The protest began on
June 1 in the Budenny Electric Locomotive Factory, when workers from the
foundry and forge shops stopped work after factory management refused to
hear their complaints. The strike and attendant discussions had spread
throughout the whole factory by noon.
The unrest began as a result of Nikita Khrushchev raising the prices of
meat and butter on June 1. Managers in Novocherkassk had simultaneously
raised production norms, thereby effectively reducing pay rates.[1] This
culminated in a march on the town hall and police headquarters, and the
strike spread to other enterprises after police arrested thirty workers.
Accounts of the government response are varied and often conflicting.
There is some debate over who exactly fired on the demonstrators: the
Red Army or the KGB. Some say that one army officer refused to order his
men to fire on the protesters, and that KGB warning shots fired into the
air hit children who had climbed into trees.[1]
According to one source, 87 protesters were killed by the
machine-gun-equipped[2] Red Army troops, and eighty-seven were wounded.
Three of the wounded later died. After the initial demonstrations, a
curfew was implemented in the town. However, the following morning, a
large group of several hundred demonstrators again gathered in the
square. One hundred and sixteen were arrested, of which fourteen were
tried by show trials, and seven of those received a death sentence. The
others were sentenced to prison terms of ten to fifteen years.[3]
Following the incident, the Soviet government directed extra food
supplies to the region and began an investigation. Additional arrests of
workers followed, as did court martials of military officials involved.
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn claimed that individuals wounded in the unrest
and their families were exiled to Siberia. (wikipedia)
Dmitry
> Dmitry wrote;
> <<What they didn't realise is that false economy can't sustain forever.
> The late 80's had many indications. For example: "Andrius'jobs" were
> still there, but the essentials such as food started to disappear. I
> don't know about Tallinn, but in Riga we had "cut yourself A4 size"
> coupons. >>
>
> Soviet Union never had good economic situation, early 60s were much
> worse than late 80s. (see below)
Never heard about it, this event wasn't included in school history
text book -)
> Soviet Union collapsed mostly thanks to
> Gorbachev's political "reforms".
The main political reform was an introduction of free speech - the
facility that Western Europeans have already enjoyed for very long
time.
> If Gorbachev didn't come to power,
> today SU would have 'swam' in oil, gas money.
Do you mean that the new Andropov/Chernenko would stop the cold war
and start serving US motorists?