Monday, January 31, 2011

The following blogspots center on a variety of subjects, which I have initiated. You are invited to look and respond. Not-Violence main subject Temple of Janis (John) site Arguments for systems change Sacrificial crisis in Latvia

I suggest you look at the links imbedded in these blogs or at the end of the blog as an integral part of my argument.  * text between [ ] is not part of quote.
The 4th Awakening

40 John to be Mocked Again? (2)
© Eso Anton Benjamins

For over twenty years now Latvia has endured a failed statist government disguised as a parliamentary democracy. In the preceding blogs I have traced some of the cultural and social mechanisms that have been contradicted by the current statist model, which has necessarily resulted in a schizophrenic and thus sick and failing state.

One of the chief hindrances to cooperation between the state and the citizens has been the surreptitious destruction by the state of the rural habitat of the nation in favor of one or at most a few urban centers.

The mass exodus of Latvians in search of jobs elsewhere not only illustrates the abandonment of the traditional “land” of the people, but the Latvian statist government at work. While on the one hand the government has painted itself as a supporter of Latvia for Latvians by exclusionary activity against those who cannot pass a test that proves that they can speak the Latvian language, which spells the government as jingoist, said jingoism has serves the government as a tool in the consolidation of its urbanite orientation.

The loss of possibly half a million people in twenty years [I am counting not only the 300,000+ emigrants, but the demographic loss due to dramatically lowered birth rates (1990=38,000 vs 2010=19,000) and increasing number of pensioners] has virtually guaranteed that by 2050 the total population of Latvia (baring an influx of ‘guest’ workers) will be 1.3 million or less in place of the current 2.2 million inhabitants.
One frequently hears that about a hundred years ago, Riga, the current capital of Latvia, was the third largest city in tsarist Russia. This statistic is brought out by many as if to forecast the future of the now dilapidated and shrinking Riga. True, this glorious past of the city was not brought up (as far as this writer knows) at the extremely boring “foreign policy debate” at the Latvian Saeima a few days ago (27/1/2011). On the other hand, no one suggested that growth is something that Riga could expect. At best, a former Prime Minister Shkhehle (Šķēle) argued for a federalized Europe. No one brought up the possibility that in the future, Riga could be the capital of the European Union instead of Brussels—if the EU were to include Russia.
In short, the statist (and static) government of Latvia is preparing the future of Latvia by imagining itself as the periphery of Europe rather than its centre. To bring its policy of failure to its abysmal conclusion, the Latvian people have to be in effect destroyed. The Latvian government—incidentally with the cooperation of Brussels—is rather successful from this point of view.

How can Latvians overcome the fears instilled in them by their statist government and forge themselves another, a more creative future?

In my previous blog, I spoke of Karlis Ulmanis failure to close the “sacrificial crisis” brought to Latvia with the occupation of Latvia by the Soviet Union. [The earlier sacrificial crisis was closed by the sacrifices of Latvia’s soldiers during WW1.] I suggested that President Ulmanis failure to sacrifice himself in protest of the Soviet occupation failed Latvians not only seventy years ago, but failed to look into the future which is now. Now Latvia has lost its sovereignty in a financial sense, the people in the countryside are preparing themselves for yet another mass exodus (if the rest of the European economy holds up), the country is demoralized to the point where policemen are turning robbers and shooting other policemen dead, debates in government circles are a safe bet to be duds, and people have been ‘dumbed down’ to trust a parliament that in its myriad self-contradictions is both statist and inert.

The ongoing “sacrificial crisis” (failure to lead by example among others) may of course be seen as an opportunity. If such an opportunity is to become real, there has to occur a major earthquake within the statist government. How is this to be done, when the parliamentary Saeima, the popularly unelected ministers and president, all appear to be of the belief that government is modeled on now proven failures, re: Plato’s “earthborn” ruling class, the boyars of the countryside seizing the city for themselves; or Aristotle’s kinship originated State by way of family to community to State. Neither of the two philosophers suggests that the State is the result of freedom in a state of chaos (libertarian?) brought together into a community by self-sacrifice, what I have argued to be not-violent self-sacrifice [see esos chronicles].

The failed presidency of Karlis Ulmanis, which left behind a demoralized people, nevertheless points the way to the solution, because the failure of self-sacrifice by the president is as evident as are evident the horrific consequences to the Latvian people and the State.

In other words, the piece of coal in the pie that in the days of old chose the one who would sacrifice appears to point at the milquetoast president of Latvia today. When Karlis Ulmanis seized the reigns of Latvia by coup de tat in 1934, he took upon himself all the consequences of that deed. His failure to meet all of the demands of his Presidency (which from a theoretical point of view may also, paradoxically, be called the rule of a Monarch, not impossibly a Sacred Monarch) now rests with the head of the Latvian State. That is to say, the saying “One for All and All for One” today rests with said One. The alternative is that of a federalized state, an administrative periphery of the EU, stripped of its identity much the way it is stripping itself of its citizenry.

The Story of Crazy Jane and Clever John, Part 3
(…story begins at blog 15)

Clever John fell for a long time it seemed. He finally fell on a large sandy dune by the sea. He was quite knocked out. However, wouldn’t you know it; he had fallen right on top on a large hoard of gold. Moreover, his fall had dug a large crater, which is why the gold was there all shiny and bright for his eyes—as soon as he woke up.

How did the gold get there?

(To be continued.)

Asterisks & Links of Interest

* text between [ ] is not part of quote.

Unchanged Feature: What is reality, what is myth?

Changing Feature: In the preceding posts, I started a compilation of video clips, which when seen as a linear sequence tell a story in a context which I hope will become apparent. No, I do not yet know where it is going to lead. This is a story with no end. If it began in the past (it must have), it is now moving parallel to the day we live in. Watching the film may or may not contribute to your understanding of my meaning. Put this clip as a tail to your communication so others may see. The origin of this post is at 

No comments:

Post a Comment