|
|
Why don't people like Russian?
Dwayne,
>>>To liberate means to give freedom, while in this case, it's clear that freedom was taken away from people of Latvia.
Yes, ablolutely, but freedom was taken away not only trom the people of Latvia, but from the people of Russia too. It was the communist system that enslaved all the nations in all the territories that commies managed to seize. It is therefore not right for Latvians to identify Russians with this enslavement or blame them for that. I think this mistaken identification (subconscious though it sometimes might be) is creating a lot of tension and friction in this whole conflict.
I havent read all the forum, possibly someone said the same...the situation described in the article is too exeggerated. Of course such thing as nationalism immediately appeared after USSR collapse, but language isnt a thing which you can forget at once, secondly Russia is still the most powerful state among all former soviet republics, so such things like business, and other contacts and simply Russian influence make its deal and most people still speak Russian, its for sure in Belaruss, Kazakhstan, some Asian states and Ukraine(here new government is for total Ukrainiazation, but this is just impossible to carry out, as most population speaks russian and people arent going to change it(east and south Ukraine).
About loans in Russian - loans, they enrich each languahe, look at english;-) and then language is alive stucture, it "knows" which words to use and we dont need to be anxious about that, if language needs this word it will stay, if not, people just wont use it, very many words disappear. and then Russian has only 10.000 foreign words while i have found a 600.000 words Russian-English-Russian dictianary:-) So i think Russian is almost pure language:)
BTW possibly people dont like Russian because its an ugly language? It s my native lang, so i have no idea, if it is beautifl or not.
Vytenis,
>>> Anyway, these two situations (viz. Russians in Latva and Hispanics in USA) would be a very interesting subject of comparatize analysis. <<<<
Yes, it would be interesting. Though some differences are quite obvious -- Latvia is a small nation, its total population smaller than population some Russian cities, and less than 60% of it are ethnically Latvian. So no wonder that some Latvians feel threatened, especially after many years without independence.
Anyway I strongly believe that people come to another country to live there should learn the language of this country, its tradition and culture; and that should be equally applied to any country whether it is Latvia, the US, or Russia.
>>> It is therefore not right for Latvians to identify Russians with this enslavement or blame them for that. <<<
You are probably right here. Sometimes I even think that Russians suffer more the communist regime, because they went through the worst years of Stalin repressions when millions were murdered and millions others were imprisoned in Gulags. Nevertheless, Russia is a great nation and as any great nation it has more influence on history and therefore it has more responsibility. In this case, Russians allowed to this inhumane terroristic regime to grow on their soil, and that regime caused a great suffering not only inside but also outside its border. So, at the very least. Russians should apologize and to say that they are very sorry for what had happened, that was a great mistake, and we do our best to not repeat it in the future. To acknowledge one's own mistake is not a sign of weakness, but wisdom and confidence in the future. A strong and decent person would not weasel with flimsy excuses where he was clearly wrong but has enough strength to apologize for that.
Linguist,
>>> the situation described in the article is too exeggerated <<<
That's exactly my point.
>>> Of course such thing as nationalism immediately appeared after USSR collapse <<<
I think we all were witnesses of what negative impact nationalism can have. Unfortunately, it was inevitable to some extend. I mean it happens everywhere when the central dictatorship that suppressed other nations for a long time has collapsed. We were fortunately enough that Russian nationalists were not strong enough to dictate the policy in Russia, otherwise we could have had a war probably even worse than in Yugoslavia. Now, when nationalists in the former soviet republics begin to calm down a bit; some people want to incite Russian national feelings and provoke national hatred, and that is a very dangerous development of events. There are people of about 200 nations living on the territory of the Russia Federation now, and it is a _homeland_ for 100 languages. In this situation an outburst of national hatred can lead Russia in madness with very devastating consequences.
Dwayne,
>>>Then you should turn your eyes to the situation in Russia. Here children of emigrants have no opportunity to study their mother tongue in state schools at all, let alone entirely education in their native language. So why do you apply so different standards here and there? <<<
I absolutely agree with you in this point. The worldwide trend we are observing now is that all the minorities begin to voice their right to speak their own languages and develop their self-identity in many other ways. It is connected to the spreading of the democracy values everywhere.
http://www.courier.com.ru/co_5/co_5/echcont.htm
Journalist: Which national schools are the largest amount?
V.G. Ushakova (Director of international, regional and national education affairs at the Educational Committee in Moscow government):
There are many schools with Georgian, Armenian, Jewish ethnocultural component.There is also multinational unique comlex building, situated in Moscow Center district. It numbers 24 national departments. The children, who study at common schools may learn the language they want in these departments after hours.
Journalist:Where can I learn Latvian language ? This is the language of my grandfather.
V.G. Ushakova:
There is no Latvian school in Moscow as no appliance for learning of Latvian has been arrived to us by now. I think the Latvian embassy has such school.
Well, at least, the situation is changing.
>>>I wonder how a sane person can believe that the Soviet Union liberated Latvia from the Nazi, when there the Soviet Union signed the pact with Germany, invaded in Latvia (in the same time when Germany invaded Poland), murdered and deported many people to Siberia, and annexed the territory<<<
I wonder how a sane person can observe former SS-troopers marching through Riga under inclined national flags in hands of youngsters.
Don't forget about the fact that Latvia was a part of Russian Empire from 1900 till 1917 and even before.(I can't find exact information, but I know it's true).
When the civil war broke out after Bolshevik revolution, Latvia got its freedom in 1921, but this freedom was along with deep economical crisis that led to sympathy to communist ideas among Latvian working class and also don't forget about imminent fascist occupation. Soviet troops entered in Latvia in June of 1940, while the war in Europe started almost a year earlier.
Dwayne,
>>>Sometimes I even think that Russians suffer more the communist regime, because they went through the worst years of Stalin repressions when millions were murdered and millions others were imprisoned in Gulags.<<<
Please, never say : "Sometimes I even think", because it's a matter of mere proportion. The Russians suffered more than any other nation in Russia as they were the majority.
>>>Nevertheless, Russia is a great nation and as any great nation it has more influence on history and therefore it has more responsibility. In this case, Russians allowed to this inhumane terroristic regime to grow on their soil, and that regime caused a great suffering not only inside but also outside its border. So, at the very least. Russians should apologize and to say that they are very sorry for what had happened, that was a great mistake, and we do our best to not repeat it in the future.<<<
I can apologize if you want (for what neither me nor my dad and grandfather have ever done) but who will apologize to many people died in swamps of Siberia and frozen dead at the north camps. Georgians? As Stalin and Beria were Georgians. This is a question of no reason . How about Napoleonic war, caused so much sufferings here? Should the Frenchmen aplogize to me too? And what about the Latvians worn the uniform of fascists who fighted with the Soviet Army?
I just want to say about my grandfather who ended his war in Czechoslovakia in 1945. Would he ever imagine when burying his battle friends in European soil that the people he was ready to die for, would look at Russians like enemies.
The history isn't a playground for kids and the West hasn't right to judge us.
Dwayne,
>>>Nevertheless, Russia is a great nation and as any great nation it has more influence on history and therefore it has more responsibility. In this case, Russians allowed to this inhumane terroristic regime to grow on their soil, and that regime caused a great suffering not only inside but also outside its border. So, at the very least. Russians should apologize and to say that they are very sorry for what had happened, that was a great mistake, and we do our best to not repeat it in the future. To acknowledge one's own mistake is not a sign of weakness, but wisdom and confidence in the future. A strong and decent person would not weasel with flimsy excuses where he was clearly wrong but has enough strength to apologize for that.
Yes, you are absolutely right. After all, that's what the Germans did after WWII
Mishka,
we are not talking about individuals appologizing for what their country did in tha past. It would be absurd, you are absolutely right.
Mischka,
>>>Don't forget about the fact that Latvia was a part of Russian Empire from 1900 till 1917 and even before.(I can't find exact information, but I know it's true).<<<
Here are key dates in Latvian history, at the Latvian Academic Information centre server:
http://www.aic.lv/HE_2002/HE_LV/factsheets/hist.htm
>>>Don't forget about the fact that Latvia was a part of Russian Empire from 1900 till 1917 and even before.(I can't find exact information, but I know it's true).
When the civil war broke out after Bolshevik revolution, Latvia got its freedom in 1921, but this freedom was along with deep economical crisis that led to sympathy to communist ideas among Latvian working class and also don't forget about imminent fascist occupation. Soviet troops entered in Latvia in June of 1940, while the war in Europe started almost a year earlier.
Mishka, no comment. I give up this discussion
Vytenis ,
Actually, I wanted to hear your version.
>>>we are not talking about individuals appologizing for what their country did in tha past. It would be absurd, you are absolutely right. <<<
Who then must apologize and to whom?
One must remember that there is a clear distinction between displaying some form of guilt, with respect to current populations besides those who were personally involved in something, and simply recognizing what had happened in the past as being so. The former implies some sort of collective responsibility which applies to people beyond those involved in something, whereas the latter is simply a matter of putting the past to rest, and recognizing it for what it is. For example, making what happened in the Soviet Union under Stalin, and what was done by the Soviet Union under him, clear and finally on paper as a whole, with no attempted justifications or like for anything, is a wholly different matter from saying that anyone around today, besides maybe some of the people left from that period who were involved in what happened than, is personally responsible in any particular manner for what had happened then.
Travis,
I appreciate your Anglo-Saxon restraint and sober-mindedness you showed, but I want to ask you some psychological and, maybe, philosophical questions, that may confuse you. (I hope they won't.)
Who was responsible for the blood and the camps in Stalin's Russia?
The people who killed and tortured others and carried out Stalin's orders were the Russians (in majority), but also the people who set the Eastern Europe free from fascism and died for this by hundreds of thousands were the Russians as well. So what's the difference? They were Russians in both cases. Even their leader was Stalin all the time.
You may answer: Well...They were fighting against conquerors second time and when they beat Germans out of their own territory, they decided to continue success.
Well, that's true.
But, why this tremendous power couldn't just sweep away Stalin and all his bloody regime?
I seem to know the answers. Maybe you guys will get them too.
Dwayne, if you don't mind my asking, I would like to know where are you from?
|