Latvia, 1918. Let us take our thoughts back to that time.
1918 has
gone down in history as the year when the First World War ended, when
the Central European Coalition was defeated, when the Constituent As-
sembly of Russia was dismissed, when Tsar Nicholas II and his family
were assassinated, and also when the three Baltic republics declared their
independence. The last event is not always recognized by recorders of
"major historical events," but this time was Latvia's moment
in the sun,
when independence was realized. This was a moment unexpected, on a
day of unforecasted, clear skies, when two unhoped-for and perhaps un-
wanted children - Latvia and Estonia - emerged for the first time on the
political map of Europe. U.S. president Woodrow Wilson's "Fourteen
Points" concerned the crumble of the Austro-Hungarian, German, and
Ottoman empires, but not the destruction of the Russian Empire. How-
ever, in odd connection with V.Lenin's populistic national declarations
of
nations' self-determination, which were to a certain extent demagogic,
yet in a way realpolitik and centered on the "world revolution"
illusion
the borderlands of the Russian Empire were allowed to gain indpendence
- independence not anticipated for these areas by the superpowers.
1918 was the year when Latvia lay devastated and dishonoured under
the hobnailed heels of Wilhelm's II's Germanized troops, when plans for
the colonization and creation of a Baltic duchy were being formulated in
Berlin. Prince Joachim of Prussia, Duke Adolf Friedrich of Mecklen-
burg, and even Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany were among those eon-
sidered for the ruler of the new duchy. The most tenacious part of the
Latvian people were sent in exile in Moscow, Petrograd, Kharkov, the
Urals, the south of Russia, or they were incorporated into the red
ritlemen ,a considerable number of which adopted communist utopian
ideals and lost their sense of orientation.
The only nationally-inclined poets with their thoughts on inde-
pendence included K.Skalbe, J.Akuraters, E.Virza and also Rainis who,
in exile, in Switzerland, voiced his pains and protests against the destruc-
tion of the nation in his poetry-book "Daugava". Those who thought
about independence for their ravaged and torn country could have been
viewed as political dreamers. Such people always emerge in time of great
transformation and either sink into oblivion or become the tribunals and
guides of the nation. As the main acting persons in November 18, 1918
there was Kārlis Ulmanis(who will always be mentioned first, Gustavs
Zemgals, Jānis Čakste, Zigfrīds Meierovics, Marģers
Skujenieks, Miķelis
Valters, and others who do not deserve to be forgotten, but even these
patriots not immediately adopt the idea of independence. In 1916-1917
they confined themselves to modest projects working for autonomy, for
example, "Free Latvia in Free Russia." The foundation of the
country of
Latvia was truly a wonder- look at the memories of Janis Seskis, Spricis
Paegle, Andrievs Niedra or Fēlikss Cielēns, read the historical
research of
A.Šilde, U.Ģērmans, H.Dopkewitsch and E.Andersons.
For all that, that was the history of the Latvian people and, in general,
in the history of Europe's minority nations, a logically determined
wonder, which was called in by the first national awakening of the Lat-
vians in Dorpat (Tartu), St.Peterburg and Riga during the 1860's and
70's, by the first general Latvian Song Festival in Riga in 1873, and by
the
foundation of the Riga Latvian Society in 1868. Kr.Valdemārs, Kr.
Barons, J.Alunāns, Auseklis, Brīvzemnieks and many others spoke
of a
united Latvia at a time when Baltic German clergyman Dr.Fedor Schmidt
wisely philosophized that Latvians are not a nation, but a fragment of
a
nation, who can - while still in existance - be called a nation in an ethnic
sense, but not a political one, in the same way the word "person"
may
designate infants or lame, blind or crippled people, as well. And much
later in 1904, the famous researcher of Latvian Dr. August Bielenstein
wrote in his autobiography " Ein Gluckliches Leben" that "the
Latvians'
career in a national sense is interdicted, but sociopolitically open. Those
who endeavour to distinguish themselves have only one choice, namely,
either to assume from generation to generation (this is not happening in
a short time) the language, customs and perhaps creed of the Russian na-
tion, or to be assimilated by the German nation."
If the favourable forecast for the history of Europe, Europe's path to
democratization, externally insured the independence of Latvia, then the
internal factors of independence were found in the tenacity, diligence,
and intelligence of the Latvian people and their ability to conserve their
identity, make ends meet, and create their own history, to assume the
hegemonic role in the Baltic province of the former Russian Empire. This
admirable phenomenon is what the prominent anthropologist and
physician Rudolf Virchow wrote about in 1877. Here the positive in-
fluence (perhaps entirely against their wishes) of the Baltic Germans
must be acknowledged in rousing the virtues of the Latvian nation.
The winning of independence during the Liberation war
(1918-1920)
was decisive for the further existence of the Latvian nation in the 2Uth
century. Let us imagine for a moment that in the year 1919 the com-
munist Pēteris Stučka and his sympathizers had won (and that
was a very
real possibility, though they failed).Perhaps the communist leaders them-
selves would have been caught in Stalin's purification mills in 1937-38
but the Latvian intelligentsia and wealthy circles, especially farmers,
would have earlier been eliminated in the 1920's, or at least in the
"ecstasy of success" of collectivization from 1929 to 1932, before
the year
of the great terror - 1937. The Baltic Germans would have already been
eliminated at this time. The rest of Latvia's people would have been
denationalized, demoralized and Russified - thin literaiy works removed
to " special collections" ("spetskhrany") and perhaps
saved only in the
study centers of the university of Helsinki or in Latvian community of
Boston. The still unstabilized Latvian orthography would have been
replaced by Curillic letters. And what about the Inflantians, whose Lat-
galish name had not had .time to be accepted? During the time of
perestroika there would not have been anyone to rise up, similar to what
happened in the cases of Karelians or other small nations inside Russia's
borders.
Without entirely idealizing the government and parliament of free
Latvia, we must acknowledge that those twenty years of independence
period allowed Latvia and the Latvians to survive two occupations and to
later regain their independence.
We say seventy - five years of the independence of Latvia. In actuality,
however, we have seen off at best only a third of them - only twenty-
five years. Is the further existance of our independence guaranteed? Not
quite, I'm afraid. Independence is not insured by beautiful declarations
or
loud words; what is needed is work, solid promises and an honest attitude
of the ruling circles toward the nation.
We talk of "Latvian Latvia" in a time when Latvians number at
most
54% of the country's inhabitants, and what, to my mind, is still more
tragic is that the average number of deaths of Latvia's inhabitants and
Latvians outnumbers the numbers of births (in 1929 4050 more Latvians
died than were born and this tendency has appeared unfortunately since
1991, when independence was formally attained).
This is the time when Latvia's famed health resorts in Ķemeri, Bal-
done and Jūrmala are falling to pieces; when health protection, as
well as
social guarantees, for the majority of the Latvian people is unsteady.
This
is the time for the realization of Latvia's intellectual potential, but
the
technocratically inclined government itself and parliament have allowed
the systematic elimination of scientific work. Even the historic;al sciences
are deprived of funding. According to the official statistics of March
1993, scientists in Latvia are in the category of lowest salaried workers,
lower than yard-keepers and farmhands, almost as low as doctors,
teachers and artists of theater. The remaining percentage of the budget
allotted to science and culture is lower than during the years of
Brezhnevs "stagnation", and the governing circles' imperceptive,
arrogant,
and snobbish attitude has given rise to cultural people's utter incom-
prehension and provoked their resignation.
In a word, what is needed in domestic policy along with stability and a
policy of well thought-out radical economic reform which would make
Latvia similar to Western or Central Europe. What is really necessary is
a
well-planned policy of education, culture and science, as well thought-
out social, demographic and national poticy, so that from a pseudo-
socialist swindle we are not thrown by storm into a primitive Chicago
racketeer capitalism. So that it will not be said about us that we hurried
so quickly to Europe that we ran past it, somewhere not far from the
"third world". Let the time pass more quickly when schools, bookstores,
museums and centers of research are closing, when only private property
is put on a pedestal - property owned by whoever, obtained however.
When corruption explodes and the refined ruling circles write their
chronicles without being disturbed by the impoverishment of the nation.
Today there are still some people caught in the euphoria
of the par-
liamentary elections of June, 1993. But a major part of the society has
its
doubts. lt wonders if the new Saeima (Latvian parliament) can solve
Latvia's problems better than the former Supreme Council.
Of course, there have not only been negative points in Latvia of this
time; much has been done wisely and correctly in order to be free from
a
legacy of totalitarianism and to gain independence. Every change is pain-
ful, and the price for the freedom and independence always is very high.
Whatever our political point of view, alongside professional politicians
we should create in Latvia an independent "sixth column", as
the artist
Mariss Vētra puts it, of social opinion. To be able to oppose the
four
columns, which struggle to gain real power (bureaucracy, commerce, na-
tional radicalism and cosmopolitan pop culture) in this country and also,
"the fifth column" the hostile superpower of here at home.
The "sixth column" could represent among other intelectuals the
his-
torians too, whose task it has been not only to research, but also to teach
- both with grand positive examples from Latvia's past and with a great
deal of national self-criticism. Why did the Roman Empire fall? Why did
the Baltic States fall in 1940? What is the future of the Baltics ? How
stable is our independence'?
Latvia's future is in democracy and culture. The future of Latvia is in
the unity of the Baltic states, well-planned cooperation with the nations
of Europe - both east and west - and not seclusion and self isolation
which vegetated, for example, Albania for many years.
Of course, the main course of history is determined by the large
countries: the future road of Russia, its relationship between the first
and
third worlds (yes, the second world is certainly lost, the third world
con-
tinues to exist and influences the world process). However, even Latvia,
the Lalvian people, have a say in their future, a future that must be care-
fully weighed, with our own rights defended and others' rights respected.
Humanities and Social Sciences Latvia,1993, 1(1), J. Stradiņš