13 What the February 18 Referendum means for Latvia.

http://www.apollo.lv/portal/news/articles/261184

The forces of stagnation in Latvia are on the campaign trail again. The head and chief supporter of a stagnant Latvian government no doubt is Arnis Cimdars, Chief of the Voting Commission.

At the time of the previous Referendum on the dismissal of the Saeima, I argued that next to “Yes” and “No”, there also ought to be a third window or box to mark with a “Not-Vote”’; in short, the voter is given the opportunity to opt out of the oligarch enclosed system that dominates Latvia.

Cimdars deemed any such suggestion as a betrayal of the system. He hardly has the smarts to perceive that the system he is supporting is a “Dead End”. The latest referendum—to be held on February 18^th—illustrates just how Dead End the current Latvian government is.

While the origin of the Referendum is the successful campaign of the Russian population to gather signatures for the recognition of the Russian language as a minority language in Latvia, the Referendum does not mention the Russian language at all.
Instead, the Referendum is now formulated in a way that does not allows for changes in the Latvian Constitution. In other words, if one votes “For” (ostensibly recognizing Russian as a minority language in Latvia), one is also voting “Against” any changes in the Constitution.

Wnile the “no changes” in the Constitution are said to affect only the first four Amendments, a vote “Against” is a vote for a Dogmatic and closed system. An “Against” vote is building a dam, behind which will build up so much silt, that an eventual bursting of the dam is inevitable. This is as dangerous to the “renewed” Latvian State as was the near exclusive Right Wing original Latvian State (there was no Left Wing to mitigate the draconian changes instituted by the Soviets).

While, on the whole, I am a supporter of the original State system of Latvia, including the Ulmanis regime (I have condemned Ulmanis for his failure to sacrifice himself for Latvia, even as he presumed to seize monopoly power over the State), the “renewed” system of the government is no less closed than, the “pre-” and “in situ-” Ulmanis governments.

Though I have said that I will wait until the time when I am in the voting booth before deciding whether I vote “For” or “Against”, at the present, I believe that the necessity for changes in the Latvian Constitution are a question of do or die for Latvia. Therefore, the tilt that the Referendum (as is) invites is:

1.     a “For” vote;

2.     also a “not-vote”, because it increases the chances for changing the Latvian Constitution, with all of the Amendments for reconsideration;

3.     An “Against” vote will create a mute and zombie-like Latvian State.

One of the reconsiderations for the Constitution which I support is opting out of the European Union (now in the process of collapsing), and the reestablishment of Latvia’s sovereignty, which the “renewed” post-Soviet Latvian government surrendered to Brussels and the banks. This ought to be part of a changed 1^st Amendment).

As for the Latvian language, I am sure it will stay the dominant language in Latvia, if only because it is also in the interests of Latvian-Russians that it remain so http://www.apollo.lv/portal/news/articles/260951 .

Incidentally, I have a new BLOGSPOT. See: http://mywealthvirus.blogspot.com/
of course the "my" is used only because "the" was unavailable.

I have a new BLOGSPOT. See: http://mywealthvirus.blogspot.com/
13 Traveling “To Be There”, but Not As A Tourist

The Romanizing virus or Wealth virus began in the West, and was also rife to spread through various other centers rife for “oligarchic civilizations”. In my previous blog, I wrote about its source as being the king’s relatives, whom the king, in order to rid himself of rivals, found “jobs” in “cultural and spiritual” institutions, which the king founded for his otherwise unemployed heirs.

Much of the naked aggression against the spiritual and cultural leaders of an earlier era has by now been covered by layers of censorship, many book burnings, many false historians. Though covered up fingerprints may on occasion be recovered by the application of certain chemical dusts or liquids, it is a tedious job. The job may also be delayed by design, by withholding funds for investigatory work. In a country like Latvia, history is a “well known unknown”. Such history of Latvia as was written during its nationalist heyday, is by now over half a century old, and history professors are by design kept political reactionaries, because the “worn out” histories they teach are kept such as they are by making a history professor’s tenure ever insecure and dependent of the largesse of oligarchs. Academics are, on the whole, intolerant of each other’s views, because the monies available to keep them in their job are scarce. If a view ever becomes established and “main-stream”, it is becomes near impossible to dislodge.
One element able to break down academic reactionism in our time is the availability of information on the internet. This permits laymen to replace the academic conformists. While never easy, such a displacement of academics is taking place today. This author, too, is happy to be bringing fresh ideas into the arena, where reactionism has been the rule for many decades. While breaking through academic resistance is no easy job, it does take place, if only because alternate theories of history and pathways that history took are as interesting as they are fresh describing new analytic possibilities of how these took place.

Because our own day is so filled with violence, it is easier to persuade people of how violence “worked” in days gone by. This state of affairs allows for the suggestion that “violence” is an artifice of oligarchies. This is why it is possible for violence to suggest that “non-violence” must play a greater role in combating violence, the violent ones then arguing with so much more energy that their doings are  “non-violent”.

It cannot be denied that the Baltic and Old Russia regions experienced a major episode of violent intimidations at about the 9^th to 11^th centuries OE. The mass graves of this experience have not been found or located, which is one reason why the present system, built on the “good news” violence claims to be bringing, escapes a direct challenge and makes possible for the establishment to argue that ill effects of such violence left no long-lasting ill effects, and that the present government is, therefore, healthy.

So what was the actual violence brought against proto-Latvians and proto-Russians like? I will go for an example of what the Real role of violence is to Central America at about the 15^th century. Because the Aztec civilization is so far from Europe, the violent elements of our own civilization are not as repressive about the information of how violence works at far-away places.

Writes David Carrasco in his book “City of Sacrifice”:

“From this campaign, 2,300 warriors were brought to Tenochtidan and, reflecting the two quotations [One here: “More can be said for the thesis that all orders and forms of authority in human society are founded on institutionalized violence.—Walter Burkertk Homo Necans.”] that opened this chapter, they were sacrificed while the king initiated the ritual killing.” (p. 76)

In short the “wealth” or “oligarch” virus marches on.

No lesser violence took place in Eastern and Central Europe, as the cousins of Aztecs from the European West mistook Byzantium for Jerusalem, and because their mythology did not recognize either Jersika or Byzantium as their imaginary Jerusalem, they could and did slaughter the people of Jersika and Byzantium at will. They only let up, when the indigenous people agreed to the removal of activist John and his replacement with passivist Jesus.

11 Traveling “To Be There”, Not To Look At It.

I had an interesting dream once. I was in Boston, Copley Square, in front of the Boston Public Library. It was night. I know the area well, having lived in close proximity to

Copley Square for fifteen or more years. I used to cross the square every day on my way to work about three or four miles in the direction of the centre of Boston.

It is possible that in the dream, I was unconsciously repeating my daily routine of days gone by. Out of the dark there emerged a man and came towards me. I was quite shocked to recognize him as my grandfather, the AB, who I mention in a number of preceding blogs. Though I know my grandfather from my childhood and the family photo album  (AB died before WW2 broke out), I had not seen him in a dream ever before; nor did my imagination of him behold him in corporeal form. Yet, here he was in Copley Square, Boston, as real as he could be.

We greeted each other as familiars, and I offered to show AB a little of Boston. He turned to me and said; “Thanks. But I have seen it already”. With that he picked up an object, which had apparently been beside us on the darkened sidewalk. I caught but a quick glimpse of what the object was. It was the upper half of an oblong clay saucer, somewhat like the half a bathtub that the Irish catholics of Boston sink into the ground before their suburban homes, then fill the hollow part with a statue of Virgin Mary or Jesus. In this instance, the saucer contained two eyes, both were protruding like >> spear points from the inner depths of the tub. AB took put his hand on the edge of the bowl, picked it up, and then walked back into the darkness whence he had come.

At this point I awoke, the dream still clear before my eyes, but I was rather puzzled about the answer I had received from my grandfather: “I have seen (Boston) already”.
I surely knew that AB had never been to Boston. So, what did the answer mean? Was it a brush-off? Or was it a statement that I needed to contemplate during my waking state?

The answer came just a few days ago, when someone at the internet portal, where I often post my blogs, wrote how impressed he was with Istanbul, Turkey. He mentioned several well known tourist attractions as especially noteworthy.

Since I, too, have been in Istanbul, and have mentioned it in a blog or two, another reader, remembering this, wrote and asked what it was that impressed me about the city. Since the question suggested (to me) that I give the reader a personal run-down of my favorite touristy sites, the answer that popped into my mind was the one AB had given me regarding Boston: “I have been here before and have seen it already. No thanks, I do not need a tour of it.”

Indeed, when I visited Istanbul http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istanbul , centuries ago known as Byzantium, which name has been immortalized (for me) in W.B. Yeats famous poem “Sailing to Byzantium http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1_MF_3U-Zc ”, this poem alone informed me that I should never find there my body in its natural form, but as an artifice of eternity.

One of the artifices of eternity may be found in “The Alexiad of Anna Comnena” http://www.amazon.com/Alexiad-Anna-Comnena-Penguin-Classics/dp/0140442154 , a book written by the daughter of Byzantine Emperor Alexius I. Anna Comnena describes in Chapter 15, under ‘The Heresy of the Bogomils’ the death of Jesus in a fiery pit, the Inquisition’s favorite manner of execution. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8034430936247174820&hl=en# .

If the reader reads the pages about the execution, he-she will note that the “crucifixion” is the result of a later rewriting or, better, revisualization of what happened. The cross “set up” by one of the two fiery pits that were lit, later serves as the cross from which Jesus-cum-Basil is hung, though if that was so, he (removed from the fiery pit) was hung there as a charred corpse.

A similar misplacement of time and events occurs in Latvian history. While Latvians have no Anna Comnena, there are enough such pretending to love the country so much, they are ready to become martyrs on Latvia’s behalf. “I love this country too much to ever really leave. Why that is—I dunno.”

Well, we shall see who the brave are. Are they of those Latvians, which their elites have driven (and are driving still) from Latvia to seek jobs abroad, or are they of the them who make declarations such as above, and put Latvia in American-Latvian care--a Romanizing tactic if there ever was one.

5 A Latvian Latvia? By Way of Mime or Alterity?

Latvians living today abroad and removed from their forebears social environment by at least two, more likely three generations,  have no idea of the life-style in Latvia a hundred years or more ago.

The basic difference in the social environment is that between life in a household and life in a family, and between a profit system based on an exchange of gifts and favors and a social system based on money.

The household based social system rests on the development of communal bonds, while the money system rests on who has more money and the skills to make more money--at whatever the social cost.

I learned of the difference between the two systems in a crash course in 1940, when as a “rich kid…” (as one cranky ex-Latvian among the responders to these blogs describes the effects of my blogs on his limited experience and ability to interpret Latvian society, he evidently knows nothing about, and apparently is too conceited to want to learn more).

With the occupation in 1940 of Latvia by the Soviets, Latvia was confronted with the final phase in the destruction of its ancient social system, which was based on the household or what Latvians call “saime”. I have not read or heard a thing about saime in the Latvian media since my return to Latvia. The 'saime', has been utterly replaced by the family or “ģimene”, and this replacement has been the subject of many of my blogs in one way or another.

I met the “Sokleni” saime, when my father, “a rich kid” due to his father’s wealth, was suddenly faced with all his means of income nationalized. In order to save his family from destitution, he removed it to the countryside, where a sister of his mother, Made Jurjans, had a farm. Thus, at the age of eight, I met my aunt Emma Melbardis, nee Jurjans.

The Jurjans were then and still are, a well known family in Latvia. Back in the days of about a hundred years ago, the family was well established in the Vidzeme hights region, specifically round about the village of Ergļi. The Brothers Jurjans continue to be recognized as musicians, who organized the first horn (pūtēju) ansemble in Latvia, and were partly responsible for the creation of the Latvian opera http://www.opera.lv/lv/par-operu/par-operu .

I am innately fascinated with names, and have since childhood been interested in their origins. Unfortunately, in Latvia, knowledge of history is not a well developed area either in academia, media, or the public at large. One may excuse this by pointing out that Latvia is a poor country, and has few and little resources available for the study and research of history’. Today, the internet makes this easier—if only people clicked their “Search” buttons more often.

As to the origins of the Jurjan tribe, the Search button, when looking for “Jurjan” will bring the reader to the southern shores of the Caspian Sea http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volga_trade_route , and a city by the name of Gorgan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorgan , in an ancient region of northwestern Persia (today Iran) known as Golestan. As the first sentence of the Wikipedia site has it: “The Volga trade route was established by the Varangian Rus who settled in Northwestern Russia in the early 9th century.”

The relationship between the name of Jurjan and Gorgan must be sought traveling the etymological route. The consonants J and G are frequently interchangeable. Moreover, in former times, not all people could readily pronounce the consonant R, thus formerly Amsteldam is today’s Amsterdam, and the Golestan region remains Golestan, even though its capital city is Gorgan or perhaps Jurjan (to those Golestanis' who became Latvians). Incidentally, the name of Jurjan is met with in many European nations as a search for that name will discover.

It is rather surprising for a Latvian to discover that his maternal lineage takes him back to Persia, and that the dark locks of hair that made my aunt and grandmother somewhat “sprogaina” may originate in the area of the Caspitan sea. So much for the Westernized Latvians’ attempts to drag me into the system of “money” that destroyed and keeps destroying through “civilization” the household traditions of Latvian saime that was the corner stone of Latvian society a century ago.

The “saime” of Sokleni, consisted of my aunt Emma, her husband Rudis (Rudolfs) Melbārdis, their two step children, uncle Rudis brother Karl, a retired sailor and man of all trades (smith, wagon maker, horse trainer, etc.), two household helpers (one from Poland), young women both, milk maids, a family of three “young farmers” (husband, wife, and daughter Valda), my own family, consisting of a mother with three children, and before he had to return to Riga and face arrest, my father, too, did his chores as a farm hand. All in all, the saime consisted of fifteen people, with Sergey, a Russian prisoner of war, joining as a trustee, in a later year.

When the war began, and the farm house (visible from the highway) was often filled with fleeing civilians and military, aunt Emma fired up the bread oven, opened the honey pots, and fed, both, the fleeing Russian and advancing German troops. The livestock of the household consisted of 25 cows and a bull, 12 horses, 35 sheep, 10 pigs, one cat, and two dogs, innumerable chickens and ducks. When let graze in the open field, the latter were in my charge. It was this social unit that went through the war as one community, not basing its economy so much on money, as on cooperation, a criss-cross of personal bonds, and the will to survive and stay alive.

Far removed from such households/ saimes as existed in centuries before it, Sokleni, nevertheless, was less an imitation of same, as an alterity, a recreation of a traditional social system. Violence and vulgar behavior was not tolerated, and was dealt with on holidays. Indeed, the famous brawls of Latvian holidays, often were not the result of drunkenness, but a ground for settling scores which it was not convenient to settle at home.

It is interesting that “the rich boy” with plenty of money in pocket and bank account, was forced to return to the traditional and still existent household system, when time came for ‘naked’ survival. Today’s urbanites have no idea whence or what the social environment of their forebears. It is a shame that urban “virtualism” reigning in Riga should dictate Latvia its future through an advertisement oriented social setting.

2 A Latvian Latvia. Par Latvisku Latviju. For whom?

“But I cannot help feeling many of the people and countries voting for the new agreement (following The British decision to veto the proposed new EU treaty) were only thinking about their financing needs in the short term, and were not fully cognisant of the fact that they were voting for a new beginning, a new type of Europe, where living standards may be lower, but the debt dynamics will be more stable. Personally I can only make sense of this in terms of Europe’s current demographics, and the challenge that is represented by maintaining health and pension systems in the face of low growth and ageing and declining workforces.” --Edward Hugh http://www.economonitor.com/edwardhugh/2011/12/11/a-deep-seated-hostility-towards-european-construction/?utm_source=contactology&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=EconoMonitor_Highlights%20-%20A%20Weekly%20Recap%20of%20some%20of%20the%20Best%20Pieces%20on%20EconoMonitor_10_27_111

As the economist and blogger Edward Hugh  above has it, many are expecting “a new type of Europe, where living standards may be lower….”

Is a Latvian Latvia one of the countries of “a new type of Europe”? The answer is “certainly not” in the sense that it was asked by the chairman of the Editorial Board of the Latvian newspaper “Larvijas Avīze”. See Blog 1 in series. Unfortunately, his vision of a Latvian Latvia leaves Latvia essentially as much “a do nothing” and “know nothing” state, a role it has played for over twenty years.

Latvians are not “a do nothing” and “know nothing” people. However, it is an undeniable that their government has put them into this unenviable position by its ““do nothing” and “know nothing” manner of governing.

The irresponsible government of Latvia pretending to represent the State of Latvia has also for a long time enjoyed the support of such daily publications as “Latvijas Avīze”. While the editors of the publication certainly are “free” to indulge themselves in blowing hot jingoist airs, it and any number of like mindsets, have acted to thwart for the Latvian people their narrative. This thwarted narrative has by now produced for the people an untenable ambivalence whether their language, Latvian, perhaps should give room to Russian as the country’s 2^nd language.

Interestingly, the untenable ambivalence was generated by the most jingoistic of political parties, the “Nationalist League”, when to boost its political standing it began a campaign to gather signatures to stop teaching Latvian Russian children in Russian—as has been the country’s tradition since its inception in 1918. The Russians countered with a signature gathering campaign that bested the Nationalist League by a ratio of 19:1. This self-invited disaster, which so obviously is the result of the false pride generated by over two decades of thwarted narrative about the future of Latvia, has, at last, awakened “some” kind of a narrative.

One of the narratives is swirling around the Latvian Russian accusation of Latvian Latvians as being fascists.

Latvians respond to this with a resounding NO WAY! On the other hand if we define fascism by the definition given it by Wikepedia (which has no pro-Russian axe to grind), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism re: “a radical authoritarian nationalist political ideology.^[1][2] Fascist ideology exalts the Nation over the individual and favors plans by the few to exclude plans by the many.^[3] Fascists seek to rejuvenate their nation based on commitment to the national community as an organic entity, in which individuals are bound together in national identity by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and blood.^[4] To achieve this, fascists purge forces, ideas, people, and systems deemed to be the cause of decadence and degeneration.^[4]

That Latvia today should have fallen into the trap of the above definition is one of the results of thwarted narrative creating out of the cobwebs an  “untenable ambivalence” that gathers about Latvia as some “anarchic rubble”. Incidentally, I have borrowed these couplets [“thwarted narrative, “untenable ambivalence”, and “anarchic rubble” from Michael Taussig’s book “Mimesis and Alterity” (Chapters 10 & 11).

The ladder out of the trap is obviously “a visionary ladder”, an object that appeared to Jacob in a dream http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob's_Ladder after Jacob had laid under his head a stone for a pillow, an excellent symbold for a “thwarted narrative”.

A merry Latvian “jandāliņšh” (yandahlins) to everyone. Come the darkest hour of the Sun’s descent, go bang your pots and pans to awaken a new day. May Latvians make Latvia “dimd!”

The Temple to Destroyed Forests Bell or Gong.

THE FOLLOWING BLOG IN LATVIAN

In the following blog, I react to former Culture Minister, Sarmite Ehlerte, statement that "A divided community is not to anyone's advantage". The statement is made with reference to the soon to arrive Referendum, whether Latvia ought to have a 2nd official language, i.e., Russian. My response points out that the issue of the Latvian language is not only an ethnic one, but may go back as far as 1209, when Crusaders destroyed a "heretic" Christian community in Jersika. The repression of "dualist" religious belief had repressive effects that in this author's opinion have lasted to this day, a time, when the Latvian government of the last twenty-one years has pretty much ignored the existence of Russians in Latvia by various repressive means, one of the means being to simply ignore their existence or perhaps better said--their reality. At the same time, the Latvian government has been extremely negligent with regard to economic development of the country by essentially siding with the oligarchal model for society (the Polish Pans* being a model for today's oligarchs that is not so far in time or space from us), a model which was unilaterally imposed by the West on Latvia after the down-fall of the Soviet Union with all the liberal neo-capitalist prejudices in full bloom. This model for serfdom, imposed in 1991, is realized and understood only in our own day, seventeen and more years after the the 2008 financial collapse of the financial markets.

The idea that the Latvian Saeima may be serving the likes of  "Polish Pans" is not so far fetched. The following articles makes the point well with other examples http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/12/06/the-baltic-tigers%E2%80%99-false-prophets-of-austerity/.

December 6, 2011

No: Sarmite Elerte
Datums: 2011. gada 5. decembris 12:52
Temats: par referendumu

Epasts ar Ģirta Zeidenberga starpniecību.Sarmīte Ēlerte, Ministru prezidenta padomniece nacionālās identitātes, pilsoniskās sabiedrības un integrācijas jautājumos

S. Ēlerte.: "Sašķelta divkopienu sabiedrība nav izdevīga nevienam."

Jaņdža (EAB) atbilde: Agresīvi dogmātisks apgalvojums. Aizņemts no katoļu ticības, ka Pops apgalvo un izlemj visus svarīgos juridiskos jautājumus pēc sava prāta. S.Ē teikums paredz nākotnēju izlemšanu ar Krusta karam līdzīgu izpalīgu. Citiem vārdiem: uzvarētājs ņem un piesavinās visu.

Latviešu sabiedrības domāšanas stagnāts sākās ar Alberta uzbrukumu Jersikai, 1209. g. Tas bija laiks, kad latvieši sāka dot zvērastu (re: boyārs Kaupo) uz rakstītā vārda pamatojuma. Ar to tika sagrauts latviešu valodā pastāvošais dualisms, kas iekšēji apgalvo, ka valoda nav valsts cietums (kurā tautu var iesēdināt tās “ierakstītā” elīte, Saeima), bet realitāti ir iespējams mainīt uz tā pamata vien, kā ja ķēniņš apstākļu spiests pieļauj citādu realitātes izpratni (divvalodību), kā 1922.g. rakstītais Satversmes pants par valodu, kēniņa Visvalža lēmums pieļauj, —īpaši, ja ir ārkārtēja situācija—ka tā darīt ir iespējams. Katoliskā iedoma par viena uzskata negrozamību ir gana agresīvs, represējošs, un naidu kurinošs, kā iekšējai (ielokā dzīvojošai) tā ārējai (ārpus ieloka dzīvojošai)  sabiedrībai.

1209, g, Krusta karš prêt Jersiku un tās ķēniņu Visvaldi, kas notika paralēli Albigensijas Krusta karam, bija katoliski domājošo [krustnešu—tā laika oligarhu un bojāru karš prêt latviešu Jāņu bērniem, kam domāšana bija “dualistiska” līdzīgi tā sauktiem Katāriem (vel šodien nicinoši devēti kā Ķeceri)].

S.Elertes apgalvojums jautājumā par latviešu un krievu valodas tiesībām Latvijā, ir tiešā pretrunā ar krievu valodu runājošo latviešu uzskatiem.  Latviešiem ir vērts atcerēties, ka latviešu valodā ieceltie dualistiskie (laicīgie un garīgie) uzskati tiek represēti gadu simtu gājumā.

A Whirlpool of a Cloud on the Horizon.

December 5, 2111

Map of the Baltic states during the Great Northern War (1700-1721): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Great_Northern_War_Part1.png

The history of Eastern and Central Europe is among the least explored histories. For practical purposes, it is an unknown history. At this time , this “known unknown history” is rather harmful to the people living in the region. The reason for this “known unknown” is attributable to the political interests, which have fought over the possession of the region over a long period of time.

Since the author was born in Riga, Latvia (1933), his interests are concerned with the fate of the Latvian people. His original knowledge of the history of the Baltic region was taught to him in Latvian schools, while he resided as a refugee in Western Germany, the history that he became familiar with is the version that traces Latvia's beginnings to the founding of the City of Riga in 1201 http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/503392/Riga by Bishop Albert, who had landed there in 1199 with 23 ships filled with [the Order of the Brothers of the Sword , whom he attached as a branch unit to the Teutonic Knights in 1237). to wage a Crusade against the (?) Eastern pagans or perhaps Christians.



The Whirlpool of a Cloud is Caught by the Rake Formed of Dead Trees.

The interpretation of the early period of Riga (and Latvia) continues to be hazy for reasons of persistent obscurantism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obscurantism , its repressive force fed by numerous religious interests to this day. The pervasive repression in the Latvian culture of religion continues to this day (affecting all sectors of society),

http://www.makslasvesture.lv/index.php/Att%C4%93ls:Baumanu_Karlis_Ligo_1874.jpg

View of the Temple Honoring Destroyed Forests from the West.

While Latvia is said to be largely under the aegis of the Lutheran Church, it must not be forgotten, that the foundation of the Lutheran Church is Catholic, and remains Catholic in its outlook to this day (the Lutheran archbishop of Riga, Vanags http://news.frut.lv/lv/ppl/107258 , recently discussed making an alliance with the Catholic Church that had once dominated in Latvia’s eastern part, which was for a long time under Polish control. One of the unanswered myseries of the attack on Jersica is whether the inhabitants of Jersika were, as those of Carcasonne in France  http://www.cathar.info/1202b_chronolgy.htm , Cathar Christians, who—like those in Languedoc—may have had Slavic roots.

The diversion of the Slavic-Baltic language connection probably goes back to this time. Indeed, the linguistic split may not have taken place until the times of the so-called “Great Schism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East%E2%80%93West_Schism ,” in which conflict the agressor, the Roman Catholic Church, appears to taken the upper hand. The Catholic background of Livonia continues to favor (even in academic circles in our day) the prejudice held by the pro-Catholics prejudice, which may explain the Latvian  prejudice that “wills the ways of the West” (facilitated by aggressive behavior) and “offs the East”.

Religious obscurantism continues to influence the way the Eastern-Central part of Europe thinks about its history to the present day. If it is true that the famous sash of Lielvarde http://baltic-crossroads.com/store/index.php?p=product&id=301 is of Cathar origin (they were known to be fabulous veawers), the mystery of who inhabited Jersika is explained.

V iew of Temple Honorings Johns from the East.



In this writer’s opinion deliberate obscuring of history begins not only to camoflage the events surrounding the arrival of the Crusaders in Riga, but their attack in 1209 against the city of Jersika (likely a native colloquialism for Jerusalem), located up-river of the Duna (?Juna). The attack on Jersika coincides with the beginning of the Albigensian Crusade, especially the siege of the Cathar city of Carcasonne in Languedoc, France. While the attacks on Riga and Jersika were led by German knights, the attack against Carcasonne http://www.cathar.info/1202b_chronolgy.htm was led by knights from Northern France. No one is known to have survived the attack on Jersika.

Of some interest is the fact that the Cathars of Languaedoc could escape east to Croatia and Serbia, where the the religious were somewhat protected from the onslaught of the Crusaders because the area was a stronghold of the Slavs, who traced their religious influence to Byzantium or Constantinople (destroyed in the (?) 4th Crusade of 1204).

The focus of political conflict in Latvia these days is the Latvian-Russian languages issue. The issue was discussed in more detail in the previous blog. Even today, the President of Latvia, Andris Berzins, said that he will resign his Presidency http://www.apollo.lv/portal/news/articles/257837 if the Russian language Is to ever get a Constitutional foothold in Latvia, that is. if Russian were to ever become the 2^nd language in Latvia. The Latvian Constitution (Satversme) states that the Latvian language is the only language of Latvia, and does this no less dogmatically than the Pope insists that he remains the ultimate authority of all matters that concern Christianity.

What if we consider the possibility that the Latvian language is not only a matter of ethnic identity for Latvians, but also performs a repressive function against all things Cathar and early Christian, that is to say, insists that it does not  perceive divinity in “dualistic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualism_(philosophy_of_mind) ” terms. In the instance of present-day Latvia, the dualistic view likely belongs to the Russian Orthodox Church.

Black John, the Victim in Situ.

It may be argued that the proto-Latvian viewpoint is “dualist”, once expressed by the congregations of the Children of Johns, a priest of who is visible in the Latvian “Līgo” flag. If prejudicial views are denied in favor of equal rights, the image of the priest who presides over the congregation, visible in the far background of the illustration, is the same as one may imagine is likely to be presented by a Russian (?or Greek) Orthodox priest http://www.makslasvesture.lv/index.php/Att%C4%93ls:Baumanu_Karlis_Ligo_1874.jpg residing with the people in the countryside. For those who wish to dispute this tie, the picture also proves that a Christian priest need not hold in his hand a crucifix, but a greening branch will do.

As for dualism, the Latvian language, too, is “dualistic” by its nature—especially when one considers the cultivated autism (the Gordian knot on the Latvian mind) fostered by the “schism” between its official language and endearing words. (See discussion in above blogs). By the way, the Russian language has no shortage of endearing words.

Volodya, at Temple Honoring Destroyed Forests: Latvia; with the apple trunks he saved.

December 3, 2111

As the host of “100.panta preses clubs” (in Latvian), Dzintris Kolāts introduced those present http://ltvzinas.lv/?n=zinas&id=4204 Šovakar „100. panta preses klubā” – diskusijā par krievu valodu Latvijā - Sandra Kalniete, Eiropas Parlamenta deputāte („Vienotība”), Nikolajs Kabanovs, Saeimas deputāts (SC), Kārlis Seržants Saeimas deputāts (ZZS) Žurnālisti: Eduards Liniņš (Latvijas Radio), Māris Antonevičs („Latvijas Avīze”), Andrejs Hotejevs, („Telegraf”) Raidījuma vadītājs – Dzintris Kolāts.

Described as a show that will discuss the place of the Russian language in Latvia (following the gathering of signatures of whether  to hold a referendum:  Whether the Russian language should be given 2^nd language status in Latvia. The guests included no academic language experts or experts of subjective opinion (writers or poets).

As always, the Latvian communications media makes no concessions to Latvian populists. In fact, strong attacks against populism were waged by EU Deputy Kalniete and Saeima deputy Serzhants. The only pro populist statements heard came from Kabanovs and Linins.

The exclusion of all who might in the past have displayed any anti-elitist views is typical of the oligarch representatives in the Latvian Saeima. This was pointed out by Linins from Latvian Radio, who also drew attention to the fact of the Latvian language and ethnicity are taboo subjects par excellence.  Linins stressed (at 9:50 min) how language and ethnicity were the subjects most avoided by Latvian politicians. Linins himself did not inhale the word, however, danced around it.

The opening up of the populist pomegrenade as a result of the exclusion of populist interests close to the Russian speaking public may not stop or be checked at this juncture. As several participants in the show pointed out, the ultimate Referendum (likely to be held sometime in April 2112) may split the population 60/40% or roughly 800,000 vs 300,000 [which = potentially 1,100,000 voters or the adult population of Latvia.]

Another reason why the opening of a populist heart-land is likely to backfire is because the questions  likely to be asked include economic questions as well. The economy may in the end be the decisive one, yet, because it is well enough known that the Oligarch representative packed Latvian Saeima has avoided the question of Latvia’s economic development with determination.

Why have the Latvian elite politicians stayed away from the economic question with such determination?

Temple Honoring Destroyed Forests:
Apple-tree-trunks have taken this corner of the  Guest Room.

The answer has been pointed to in these blogs before. One only has to look at the influence of Swedish banks on the political circles, starting from the President of Latvia Andris Berzins down to the Prime Minister Valdis Dombrovskis, who signed off on a notoriously pro-Western banking book by a Swedish neo-economist Andreas Aslund.

If Saeima deputies like Serzhants question (11:03) the source of advertising and promotion for the signature campaign by suggesting we look East and the political campaigning going on in Russia, the populists who hold dear the Russian language can with justification point to the West and the economic and deptors’ crisis in Latvia caused largely by Swedish banks through their local oligarch-controlled  affiliates.

Given that

·        the oligarch representative-dominated Latvian Saeima (banking interests among them)- was voted to be dismissed by the Latvian voters in a Referendum earlier this year (but received no satisfaction for their trouble), and the signature gathering campaign for the April Referendum is professionally waged, one would not be surprised if the vote went 300,000 for vs 800,000 against the Latvian language—a result, arguably, a disaster for the Latvians;

·        lest we forget that possibly up to a half a million Latvians have left Latvia and neither they, not their at-home relatives feel especially indebted to the their oligarch representatives in the Saeima;

Elves dancing at the Temple Honoring Melnays Jahnis, in Latvia.

Leader of the Elves, Col. Yonderman, at the Temple Honoring Destroyed Forests, Latvia.

·        could turn the neglect of the Latvian economy into a rich (1%) vs poor (99%) issue in Latvia that may be exploited by the Russian speaking Latvian public into their favor. All one needs do is point to the railroads. Currently, the West is spending lots of money advertising the North-to-South Railway (Helsinki-Warsaw) line, whereas a West-East or Riga-Moscow line is arguably to greater economic advantage to the people of Latvia.

·        one of the populist segments of the people of Latvia are the people of the region of Latgale, who have suffered during the current financial-economic crisis most. Moreover, they have been humiliated in the Saeima, by the refusal of the body's Chairwoman to accept the inflection of Latgalian as part of the Latvian language. A deputy from Latgale was forced to reread his oath, because he pronounced one of the words in the oath in the Latgalian dialect.

How a photographer makes friends with a pile of wood 1.

November 29, 2111

The subjection of the Latvian language over the past twenty years to an increasingly brutal secularization, has been gaining increasing attention lately.

The attention is a byproduct of a successful signature gathering campaign by members of the Russian population for a petition to hold a referendum (the current amount of signatures 137,500; the necessary amount 154,379) to change the Latvian Constitution so it will allow the Russian language in Latvia to acquire equal rights to the Latvian language, in effect to make such constitutional changes as are necessary to allow Russian to become the second language in Latvia.

The issue was first raised by certain Latvian jingoists parties (re Unity and All for Latvia; Vienotība and Visu Latvjai). The intent to bolster the political popularity of said parties has resulted in a counter movement by the Russian segment of the Latvia’s population.

In the face of many years of Latvian “do-nothingn politics” to reform corrupt politics or improve the country’s economic prospects, the language issue has proven itself exceedingly popular among the Russian speaking segment of the Latvian population.

Though one can sympathize with the point of view of the Latvian jingoists to some degree, such sympathy soon comes up against the fact that the ultra nationalist viewpoint turns the Latvianlanguage itself into no more than an advertising tool for the above mentioned parties.

Once one perceives the divide that forms between a secularized language and its earlier spiritualized and emotive equivalent, one (whether one is born to the Latvian or Russian language) understands that the present use of one’s language may add up to little more than that of  an advertising tool. This is when one makes the conclusion that one’s language has become a tool for advertising as such. In other words, the issue that the Latvian ultra nationalists have unintentionally raised is to focus attention on their use of the Latvian language. Needless to say, the jingoist effect of promoting themselves highlights a misuse of the language of their forebears.



How a photographer makes friends with a pile of wood 2.

 The misuse suffered by the Latvian and Russian languages is the dismissal (in toto) of their innate spiritual values.

It is not often that one hears in our day a discussion of the spiritual values imbedded within the language one speaks. An attack against such values has been a long and ongoing process, which runs parallel to the secularization and commercialization  of all Western languages and the communal values imbedded in same since their ancient past.

One may go so far as to say that the spiritual values embedded in the language one speaks goes back to the days, when implicitly and communally shared values were replaced with overt “religions”. The first such overt religion to impose itself over a native people was Western Roman Catholic Christianity. Instead of allowing the “endearing word”, which is imbedded in the use of one’s language to play an active role in community life, “religion(s)” began to deny such values as “pagan”, stressing the canonical values of “religion” instead.

It is interesting that both the Latvian and Russian languages are rich and bountiful in “endearing words”. The “endearing words” of both languages have suffered many centuries of open and surreptitious denial.

What is an “endearing word”? The academic world to this day knows these words as “diminutives http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diminutive ”. Essentially a misnomer by gramaticians, the diminutive does not diminism anything. What it does is to inflect just about any word [(it depends on the language) English being poor in such; whereas Latvian, Russian, and German languages are exceedingly rich in same].

For example, the Latvian name for “stone” is “akmens”. By adding to the word the inflection “(t)inshs”, re “akmentinsh”, one endears it. The adding of the inflection is often an involuntary and learned act of mimesis, whereby one ‘gets into’, so to say, the word. A similar effect in English is achieved when one readdresses “John” with an affectionate inflection, by which process “John” becomes “Johnny”; another trick of the English language (probably left over from days of yore) is to end the name by adding to it the inflection “-kins.” Thus, the word for  “baby” or "daddy"(arguably “endearments” and a “diminutives”, both) is sometimes heard pronounced “baby-kins” and "daddy-kins"..

By insisting that Russian is given official recognition in the Latvian Constitution, the Russian speaking public in Latvia necessarily reminds itself that Russian, too, has deeply imbedded spiritual values, which become manifest, first, in the language, second, in the behavior of those who use the language through yet further projection of mimesis.

Arguably, the root of mimetic projection is to be sought in the use of language by a mother when she is addressing or for that matter feeding her child. It is, thus, that a language acquires the meaning of being one’s “mother tongue”’. And surely there is no Constitution, written law, political party, or advertisement company  that can take from us the language that comes to us first through mother's milk and hearing.



How through a self-portrait a photographer makes friends with a pile of wood 3.