Saturday, August 19, 2017

The Amazingly Slow Death of Populist Latvijans
By © E. Antons Benjamiņš, 2017

A definition of ‘communism’ begins from the premise that it ‘is the state of human being from the time human beings began until now.

5 Of Events That Newer Were
(Part II)

Though the Russian Revolution of 1917 brought to the fore a factory class, which the elites were creating to serve it as marionettes, the failure of intellectuals to prevent the enslavement of humankind to the sticky pornographics of capitalism, and failure to identify the true causes of human misery in our time, created a tragedy that is not yet resolved. No resolution is likely until humankind realizes that ‘consciousness’ it claims to be its crowning glory is far from being conscious. Who can assure that the virtual reality of cities can be endured for longer than three or so centuries? Today we live this intolerable reality with a vengeance: even yesterday the Polish government confirmed that it will destroy the last vestige of nature in ancient Europe and proceed with its operations of deforesting the prehistoric Biaļowieža Forest. Who would have thought that the opposition of the Populists of Nature would turn out to be the virtuous Aliens of Virtualist cities?

The centuries of repression endured by the descendants of the Dniepr Balts have resulted in a handful of post-Baltic societies in which intellectuals have been out of touch with reality for so long that they cannot conceive of community as a phenomena of Nature, but perceive it as a whim of imperialist violence, coercive law, and individuals in possession of mobile telephones.

It not that the city-zens of Gdansk, Warsaw, and other Polish cities infected by the virus of virtualism and freed of guilt by neo-Christianity and capitalist production capacity, are the only ones to dismiss Nature as a fake egalitarian phenomenon and indulge in cutesy ideas about how to ‘screw up’ life on Earth and go found ‘democratic’ colonies on Mars. In Latvija, the Virtual virus (of instability) was planted into its body politic at its foundation as a sovereign nation. There occured many events that were analogous with events at the time of the founding of Finland. What is unique about Latvija is that its founding never had a public ceremony, but that such a ceremony is only be pretended to have happened. An interesting story that*: a piece of the shreds made of humankind fated to be caught in the space between by the West and the East.

*The one photograph that is said to prove that a ceremony of Latvija’s founding occurred, has been ‘legitimized’ by fake assertions by the ‘renewed’ and fake post-soviet Latvijan government. During the first two decades of Latvijan independence (which included the K. Ulmanis regime, 1933-1940) the photograph was part of a storefront display in Rīga. Though reproduced in history books, the picture never was accorded the status of a relic in a museum. After being hid in a cellar during WW2 and the Soviet times, the photograph came to prominence some seventy years (about 1988) after Latvija’s founding, when, crazed by Virtualist propaganda and promised consumerist goodies without having to stand in line for them, became worried that there may not be physical evidence that a founding ceremony occured. The absence of such could ruin the post-Soviet governments plans to celebrate the one hundredth anniversary of Latvia (in 2018) as its own. Well, the cceremony pictured in the photograph more likely occurred in Libau-Liepāja. a harbor city that acted as a base for a British naval squadron.

The real story of the founding of Latvija needs yet to be fully researched, written, and admitted. For the time being, the fact remains that the founding ceremony of Latvia has been compromised by government propaganda. Moreover, such ceremonies as may have taken place were organized by right wing elements, not the populist instigators who—up to the ukaz of 1743 by tsarina Elizabeth against the Herrnhuters—were the REAL seekers after and introducers of liberty in what had once been the territory of Livonia Livonia. Even so, when the founding of Latvija was announced as accomplished, the Soviet Cheka, in its early days manned mostly by Latvijans (apparently populists in outlook), wanted to return to Latvija, but were not allowed by Moscow authorities (Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Dzerzhinsky, Stuchka, etc.), because it would weaken the Cheka significantly. Of course, the entente-backed provisional Latvijan government did not want them either.

A paradox occurred when Latvijan Bolshevik intelligentsia, headed by Peter Stuchka , the brother-in-law of aforementioned Latvian nationalist poet Rainis, the same who along with a few other poets, writers, playwrights sketched in the literary portrait of Latvians, and who never stopped believing that the presidency of Latvija belonged by all rights to him—never sought Latvija’s independence. As the leader of the Soviet Latvijan government of Iskolat, and the first President of the Soviet Supreme Court, Stuchka had a catholic-globalist-federalist-cityzen political perspektive, and never imagined Latvija other than part of a federated factory known as the Soviet Union.

Even with all the misplaced baggage to weigh down its community spirit, a much more sinister ideology, one rooted in the Great Schism that divides Christianity since 1054, was at the root of the foundering* sovereign Latvija. While the reasons given today for the Schism are faked**, the reasons for the continuity of lies are that these erect a globalist and elitist outlook over a populist and sovereignist (autocephalist) outlook, which bring to our attention the conflict between the virtual and actual founders of the Latvian nation. It is important to note this, because the initiators of Latvijans as a people of modern times were Populists of the countryside, not Populists or Elitists of the city. The latter became subjected to globalists, who were of the victorious WW1 entente group of capitalist nations come to Eastern Europe to found a state that would be preconditioned (by law) to have no objections in joining—at an opportune time—a federalized Empire of Europe led by anglo-saxon taxcollectors.

*The postsoviet Latvian government surrendered its sovereignty to the Eiropean Central Bank (ECB) in 2014, when it abandoned its currency, the lats, for the euro. V.Dombrovskis, the postsoviet Latvian PM responsible for the surrender of sovereignty was rewarded with a directorship at the ECB.

**Jesus, the last Sacred King and God of archaic Christianity, is not buried in Jerusalem, Israel, but at Boykoz, upper Bosphorus, on theTurkish side of the narrow. According to the Alexiad by Anna Comnena, Basil the Bogomil, aka Basil the Physician or perhaps John the Baptist—who this author believes were kaleidoscoped into one Jesus—was incinerated at the Hippodrome in Constantinople. If one takes the chronology of Western history with a grain of salt, Jesus’s death occurred only in the 11th or 12th centuries. Anatoly Fomenko is right—the Scaligerian chronology is a dysfunctional serial of events. The so-called 4th Crusade of 1204 (more likely the 1st), which gathered the herders of northwestern Europe to go on a fake rescue-revenge mission of the Sacred King cum God, occurs close to the date (1209) that Jersika/ Jerusalem of old Lithuania gets destroyed.

The Amazingly Slow Death of Populist Latvijans
By © E. Antons Benjamiņš, 2017

A definition of ‘communism’ begins from the premise that it ‘is the state of human being from the time human beings began until now.

5 Of Founding Events That Newer Were
(Part I)

Having successfully denied the Moravian Brethren their place in the history of the Latvian nation, the German oriented Lutheran clergy imagined that it would create “God’s nation” (the dream of the Moravian Brethren) by a tour de force, i.e., by making itself the nation’s religion. Such a creation was easily imagined, because as part of Imperial Russia, the Lutheran Church (following the tradition of ancient Christianity of which the Russian Orthodox Church has morphed into a perverse—i.e. Catholic—descentant) was imbedded in the structure of Russian government. The status of Lutherans as part of the nation’s body politic, though no longer de jure, was maintained in Latvia as de facto practice* until the end of WW2.

*De facto practice—most academic texts that deal with the history of Latvija, especially religious history, shy away from certain facts. Thus, the link (above) avoids mentioning the ukaz/decree issued in 1743 by tsarina Elizabeth. The ukaz was canceled only in 1817 by tsar Nicholas I, which means that oppression remained in effect for 74 years and sabotaged the Herrnhuter movement in Latvija beyond repair. Not surprisingly, the movement morphed into an underground movement known as “The Silent March” (Klusais gājiens), which in turn encouraged the advent of “The New Current” (Jaunā strāva), a blend of German and Russian Marxist elements, in which the Livonians became a bridge between the West and the East.

To cite Latvian pastors at a conference in St. Petersburg in 1916 (from above link, written by Dr. Kristbergs, published by Princeton Theological Seminary, 1996):

“The evangelical [i.e. Lutheran] church is in an undesirable state among the Latvians. The leading influence in the church was and remains German. The German spirit constantly attempts to exert its will on Latvian national sensibilities but, being foreign to Latvians, has not assimilated the Latvian spirit in itself, but rather has created and, indeed, still creates conflicts...The greatest present evil in our church affairs is the repression of the [Latvian] national spirit.”

The following is an additional observation by Dr. Kristbergs regarding the integration of the Lutheran Church into the Latvijan nation state:

This is a particular form of integration of the Latvian Lutheran church with the nation-state. The “leader” form of autocratic government which characterized the secular regime was imposed on the church resulting in a high degree of hierarchical authority vested in the person and office of archbishop. It represents, in the context of the democratization of the church, a significant departure from the tradition the of democratic and congregational principles of ecclesial governance practiced by Moravians and which, to a large extent, the Latvian Lutheran church had adopted.”

Whether the Latvian Lutheran church had indeed adopted “democratic and congregational principles” in actual practice is qustionable. Even so, Dr. Kristberg’s observation allows events, before and after 1916, to be evaluated more critically. In effect, our attention may now turn to the events of the long neglected and repressed history of the Finnish Revolutionary Movement, the Finnish Civil War (1918) that repressed it, and the Mannerheim regime that secured the country for the bourgeois from the time of the Winter War (1939-1940) to this day. The Latvian bourgeoise played a similar role in the repression of its Populists cum pagans than the Finnish bourgeoise played against its people.

During the 1905 Revolution, which radicalized many Latvijan intellectuals and students and was violently suppressed by the forces of the tsar and barrons, Latvian peasants not only destroyed many Lutheran churches, but killed 32—mostly Baltic German—pastors. The violence is attributable to the tsarist Lutheran clergy’s (albeit representing German barons and merchants) repression of the Herrnhuter Christian movement in previous two centuries. Violence of the revolutionaries was not directed against the Herrnhuters as such, though the movement did not go unscathed: it lost prestige and members when people turned away from the idea that love, Christianity, or God could be of help to them. Many educated Latvians (there were more then than there are today) turned to atheism, substituted Marxist ideology for faith in a transcendent purpose, and joined the Bolsheviks.

The neglect to examine the reasons for the failure of the 1905 Revolution by intellectual elites is as much a cause for the short comings of the 1917 Revolution as anything else imaginable. In effect, the Communist leadership (headed by Lenin) overidentified with the ideology of city bred Marx and believed its main support was from factory workers. In so far as the leaders of the Revolution did not understand that the deeper roots of the Revolution were not in worker dissatisfaction or exploitation, but in the attempt to change the countryside into a cityscape, and the removal of the human populace from ‘brutal’ countryside to ‘irresistable’ cities (by making them, as Populists of the woods called them, “dens of sin”). When the organizers of the 1905 Revolution mistakenly identified workers as ‘city-zen’ rather than ‘pa-gan’ populists, they played into the hands of the bourgeois, the heirs of former princes, barons, and an assortment of retired military and government officials, not to mention wealthy merchants.

In a few words: while city elites dream of skyskrapers and empires, and raise city-zens to leech the countryside bare, the Populist leftovers of the countryside learn to be human by television, lose their minds, and are happy to know that it does not take much practice to learn how to plant potatoes on the day the supermarket shelves become empty. For them the worst is that the forests have been cut and there will be few if any fagots to burn and keep warm when winter comes, and there are few woods to hide in when the dogs of war come shit on them for the third time in a century.

Saturday, August 12, 2017

The Amazingly Slow Death of Populist Latvijans
By © E. Antons Benjamiņš, 2017

A definition of ‘communism’ begins from the premise that it ‘is the state of human being from the time human beings began until now.

4 The Invention of ‘Pagans’

The destruction of Nature’s communist order in Livonia and Eastern Europe (including Russia) has a history about a thousand years long. Most likely it was begun by an Executive King, who at an opportune moment betrayed the Sacred King.

It had long been the practice of Sacred Kings to allow Executive Kings to take their place when the Kingdom was threatened by marauders and needed to be defended. As long as the economy was that of sustainment (the Sacred King was sustained by gifts) rather than profit, the Sacred King* and the society under his rule was  safe. This was because, gifting is voluntary and implies support from the populace. However, when the Vikings (marauders from the north) sought to replace theft (tolerated for being nature’s way of dealing with starvation) with annual tax collections, the wealth of marauders increased exponentially. It increased to such an extent, that the Executive Kings, who had fought off and survived enemy raids, were tempted after the battle not to return their posts to the Sacred King, but keep these for themselves as ‘profit’. Ghengis Khan* was one Executive King who overwhelmed trust in him with violence. The people sought God’s protection and fled either deeper into the wood or further north, where they believed the cold would protect them.

*Ghengis Khan translates into English as “John King” (or Yankie Chan or King of riders instead of herders). Before the plains of southern Russia (Khazakstan and Mongolia) had turned (like Sahara) into a desert, the people of the Orient were much closer to the West than they are today. As changes in climate accelerated desertification and herding as a means of earning a livelihood  became problematic, many herders took a lesson from the Vikings and their Executive Kings. In effect, they learned to ride hoses and turned to plunder as a way of earning a living (mere theft becomes order of government by fascisms). Thus, war became ‘normal’ and replaced peaceful (self-sacrificial) economies.

Taxation was resented. The marauders did not only take from the people along riverbanks foodstuffs, but demanded that the people kill and turn over to them pelts of their domesticated and wild animal herds—such as bears, wolves, reindeer, bison, beavers, mink, squirrels, rabbits, moles, and more. The furs of these animals were then sold by the marauders downriver for great profit. This turn of events is evidence that trade did not begin as ‘free enterprise’, but by way of establishing an early form of secular (and consciously unholy) government of strangers over peaceful natives who wished to have nothing to do with trade. Subsequently everywhere the heretofore peaceful landscape became wracked by violence. Mass migrations began. The Balts left the Dniepr River water basin* and scattered in all heavenly directions. Some of them came to lands that became known as Belorussia, Lithuania, Livonia, Poland, and Prussia. Some, having no place to go, stayed in Ukraine.

*According to Lithuanian anthropologist Marija Gimbutas, the Balts had been residing in the Dniepr watershed for a very long time.

A theme that anthropologists are reluctant to touch is religion, especially when it comes to the Catholic (aka globalist) and secular elitist led neo-Christian movements. This is one reason why all ‘religion’ before two thousand years is said to be of ‘pagans’. But a closer look at the word proves that ‘pagans’ are none other than herders. In Latvijan the word for herder is ‘gans’ /jānis and in Lithuanian it is ‘ganytoyas’ (f. gender). The prefix ‘pa’ is a linguistic device that tends to diminish or soften the word that follows, re: pa+gans=he is not a herder but is of herders*.

*One of the first ‘pa+gans’ known to anthropologists is John the Baptist. Psalm 23:2 , refers to John, both, as shepherd and a Sacred King. To say that John the Baptist is a precursor of Jesus makes it clear that a rewriting of history took place in order to siminish the role of John.

One of the trading post for Viking marauders was Līga, a city now called Riga and the capital of Latvija. The city became a full fledged trading port after the Bishop of Riga, one Albert (a neo-Christian marauder from Bremen), organized a raid from Riga against an ancient Baltic settlement cum Sacred City known as Jersika, which is also a colloquial name for Jerusalem*. Jersika was located on the Daugava River some 90 miles east of Riga. It was on the left bank of the river, while between it and the opposite (north) shore stood an island. The island enabled the Sacred King to block off the farthest branch, thereby forcing boats to come by the nearest narrow branch and past the castle, where he collected customs. As was customary at the time, to make sure that he was not cheated of his fair share, the king reserved for himself the right to seize and buy the entire boat if he suspected its captain was underestimating the value of the goods in his hold.

Bishop Albert was a man of the New World Order of the day. He surprised and captured the king of Jersika (who may not have been aware of the Viking take-over in northwest Europe), and in 1209 put an end to the last kingdom of the Balts in a territory meant to become (by the world planners of the day) Anglo-Saxon Livonia.

*Jerusalem is a ubiquitous name for ancient sacred cities or sites. The current Jerusalem in Israel is a purely fictitious creation of a Catholic-globalist imagination, and was established in Palestine after Napoleon invaded it (1799-1801). Originally, Jerusalem may have been pronounced Yaroslav, which is an old Slavic or Baltic name originating in two names Yaro=yehrs=lamb + slav=glory=fame; i.e. City of the Sacred Lamb.

Surprise! Surprise! The year 1209 is also the year Pope Innocent III begins the Albigensian Crusade in southern France, the Lanquedoc region, against the early Christians known as Cathars. Do the Cathars have something to do with the Livonians, the Balts in particular?

There are hints and coincident events that make one suspicious and suggest further investigations are in order if the question is to be answered with certainty.

The word ‘cathar’ forms part of a word that spells ‘cathedral’, which word means seat, chair, bench, or throne. Indeed, the Cathars made their living not only as crafts -men and -women (such as weavers. makers of clay pots and bowls), but were also carpenters of chairs and benches. Craftsmen who specialized in making chairs used to live in eastern part of Livonia known as Latgale. This suggests that Languaedoc and Livonia, had established links between them and were not islands of barbarians usurping Catholic lands as academic historians insist. Unfortunately, this is a subject avoided and shirked by academics, who live in an expensive boutique called “University”, which is filled with fake facts and manned by fake experts.

Saturday, August 5, 2017

The Amazingly Slow Death of Populist Latvijans
By © E. Antons Benjamiņš, 2017

A definition of ‘communism’ begins from the premise that it ‘is the state of human being from the time human beings began until now.

3A The Sunrise of Kapitalism in Latvija

This author has spent considerable effort in trying to prove that though the Latvian language has existed for a long time (it is part of the Baltic language group that shows signs of having been a close neighbor of Slavic languages for a long time), Latvian self-consciousness (evidently after many centuries of repression) did not reappear until 1739. It was that year that the Herrnhuters, a Moravian sect of Christians, established in then Russian territory of Livonia, the first Latvian congregation of Moravian brethren. It was this congregation, which (with the inadvertent aid—or perhaps not so inadvertent—of the Russian Tsarina Catherine I*) established the first Latvian school for not only Latvian teachers of the Moravian faith, but, as it turned out, Latvian self-consciousness of modern times. Apparently the Latvians had been asleep (nobody knew why) and were about to awaken.

*The German baroness, Generalin Magdalena von Halerte of Valmiera, who helped finance the school for Latvian teachers, was able to do so, because she was the recipient of her late husband’s (General Nicholas von Hallert, held in high esteem by the St. Petersburg court) pension, which Catherine I let pass to her after the general’s death. The birthplace  of tsarina Catherine I is unclear. Some say that her father was a Latvian named ‘Krauklis’ (Raven). If this is so, she may have been underhandedly supportive of the people whence her origin. I will have more to say about the difficult circumstances of upwardly mobile men and women of past centuries in a future chapter.

The unique aspect of the Moravian Church, said to be one of the oldest of Protestant faiths*, has in fact a more controversial past than allowed it, if one contradicts the fake news put about by the Neo-Christian faith of Catholicism and the propertied class of the day. A contrarian perspective has few obstacles (other than minds stuck in old ruts) in discovering that Christianity has prehistoric roots. True, there are not many who as yet favor this perspective, nevertheless, fakery always stands on thin ice, few facts, and trusts that intimidation, once put to effect, will remain effective always. One source of doubt comes from books published by the Russian mathematician Anatoly Fomenko and his team of collaborators. While Fomenko concentrates on questioning the reliability of chronology of history, it is a short step to seeing similar problems manifest when looking at old maps of the stars, or world, or the mind.

*When the fake history of our time has prevailed as long as it has and there is nearly universal acceptance of falsehood as the norm in the past qnd present, all that one who is so informed can write is half-truths that advance argument by means of pareidolia. This must be at least until the damage of fake history becomes universally challenged. In this author’s mind, the origin of false history in the West began from its beginning, from the time its princes killed the last Sacred Kings (John and Jesus) and created neo-Christianity to forgive itself the crime.

Catholic Christian ideology succeeded only after Bogomil and Cathar Christian faiths, which represented the last strands of ancient Christianity in Europe were intimidated into silence and then physically destroyed. The new ruling class, which had created and then chosen the  globalist oriented Catholic Church to preach its lies throughout the worlds, made haste to build monasteries and cathedrals. The latter were not for a congregation to listen to sermons, but to stage grandiose coronations for fake kings and queens. It is no secret that the Catholic Church came to power by means of violence, Inquisition, taxation, privatization of property, money manipulation, and most recently by exceptionalist establishmentarianism come to replace the Court of God in Heaven. It is a kind of Bully Pulpit exeptionalism never imagined by, for example, the founders of the United States, which for all their good intentions they were unable to avoid. Perhaps it is because it is one of most difficult lessons to learn: As the great Irish poet William Yeats put it: “Things fall apart; the centre CANNOT hold.”(my caps)

In the process of ‘modernization’, aka regime change, not all ArchChristians (renamed ‘heretics’ by the Catholics) were killed. Some survived, went underground, and kept challenging catholic sectarianism. The Lutheran Church emerged from a group of reformist minded Catholic priests, but failed to “hold the line” and soon reverted to Catholic ideology and the practice of lies and oppression of old Christian faiths. Even so, some of the heretics had become encouraged, and after the Religious Wars reemerged in public life. The Husites and Moravians were of these.

The Lutherans repressed Moravian Christians (descendants of the John Wycliffe and Jan Hus movements) with particular vigour. When the Moravians came (in 1729) to war ravaged Livonia, the Lutheran clergy spread false rumours about them immediately and appealed to the Russian tsarina Elizabeth to put an end to the movement. Fourteen years after the arrival of the first Brethren in Livonia and four years after the establishment of the first Latvijan congregation (1743), the tsarina issued an order (called ukaz) that suspended the activities of the movement in all of Russia. Even so, the energies the movement unleashed caused its Livonian beneficiaries to emerge from universal illiteracy. The first books written by Latvians (pietist drivel some will say) were handwritten and (because the current post-Soviet Latvijan government continues to be repressive and practices deliberate disinterest) lie unread in a museum at Hernhut in Germany. The first Latvijan poet was a member of the Moravian Church. The first choirs of Latvijan singers were organized by Herrnhuter brethren.

3B Another Kind of Soviet
Though the word ‘soviet’ in the Russian language means ‘council’ (of workers, peasants, and soldiers), one may argue that the prototype of such councils first emerged from the Latvijan countryside choirs organized by the Moravians. The purpose of these choirs (more often of women than men) was to call and bring together countryside peasants and have them develop a sense of community through song. Such choirs were often spontaneous among women who spun yarn and wove cloth in a common room (saimes istaba) in winter. The first assembly of Latvian choral soviets  occurred in 1864. The success of these gatherings was so great that their popularity increased year by year, and by 1873 became part of a national movement*. The song (”God bless Latvija”) that was to become the Latvijan anthem was first sung at the 1873 song festival—44 years after the opening of the Latvian language teachers’ school.

*As the Lithuanian tradition of sutartines proves, singing in choirs was not a new tradition for the Baltic people. Nevertheless, in Livonia the sutartines had been repressed by the neo-Christian Churches. As a result of changes in the workplace environment (kitchen-workroom or ‘saimes istaba’ to factory floor). Latvians no longer sing or even know what sutartines are.

The popular festivals were moved from village to small town, and soon ended up in Riga, a city under the control of Germans, the German Lutheran Church, and urbanized Latvians. Though Riga eventually became the capital of Latvija, the democracy that prevailed in the countryside could not be repeated there. No one understood why* this was so, and, therefore, the ideology of democracy, believed to be more perfect in the city (because of the laws and the ability to rigidly enforce them there), was of the city, and was made to prevail** over that of the more flexible customs of the countryside.

It was this difference in democratic environments, that caused city people to ridicule the people from the countryside and call them “pagani” from a thousand and more years ago. Over time, worse names were imagined. For example, one popular gathering place of Herrnhuters in Riga came to be called the Coo Coos Nest (Dzegužkalns). A deliberate silence or change of subject about the cultural history of the hill prevails to this day.

*In the countryside behavior is generally speaking of customs and oral laws, which are flexible, whereas in the city the laws are written and are considered to be letter perfect. Needless to say, over a longer period of time, the inflexibility of written laws and rules will drive people crazy and lead to hysteria.

**The ‘democratic ideology’ of the city (London, for example) was not created by the inhabitants of the city, who were mostly working people, but were written by the lords and barons whose residences remained in countryside manors.

Needless to say, any association of choral singing with political activity (albeit on a subconscious level), let alone as a precursor of Saimes-Soviets, is denied by post-Soviet Latvijans, because government run schools do not permit any such ideas to arise. Today’s post-soviet government stay in power by means of NATO propaganda, because it is Nato which ‘renewed’ post-soviet Latvija. Instead Latvijans are encouraged to believe that they renewed their nation ‘at the barricades’ and by singing in the streets. Which is not to say that there is not some truth to it and that there was no popular will to become a sovereign nation again*.

*For all the enthusiasm of the people, the Baltic communities were completely unprepared to take government into their own hands. Through the intermediacy of the U.S. and NATO, power was turned over to select former Soviet officials, who had no idea what the renewed nations were or were to become. It is not surprising that a kind of Soviet ideology of nationhood (transferred by a hop-skip-and-a-jump to the EU, which was then and is now trying to eliminate nations as communities) is cultivated to this day. The NATO warparty is whooping up centralization for all it isworth.

The optimism, that was generated by the Herrnhuters (now more than 250 years ago) has been reversed today 360 degrees. All the blame for a dysfunctioning community, not to mention wrongs of Stalinist era, is blamed by the media and government on Russia. The obtuseness of NATO and Latvija’s government bureaucracy and the paralyzing effect of these institutions on the small national community it purports to protect and govern (less than 1,5 million people) goes unnoticed. The reign of irresponsibility is a fact. Had the post-soviet Latvian government not agreed to follow economic policies instigated by a CIA controlled Harvard University professor and driven a half million Latvians to find work in foreign countries, there may well have occurred an uprising by now.