Re: The History of Latvia

The Black Monk wrote:
> On May 1, 2:36 pm, Pçteris Cedriòð (Peteris Cedrins)
> <cedr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On 1 Maijs, 18:19, MTRP(tm) <Mir.Topol...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>> It does. Still earlier Mr Latvia licked German and both Bolshi and
>>> Nazi asses. That's what your cartoon was all about and why I asked
>>> about Mr Latvia's new white massa. Even his ex-Prezidentsha was
>>> imported from massa's (Canadian) harem ...
>> I guess you don't realize how comments like this weaken your case to
>> the point of absurdity? Tell me, please, how Latvia _ever_ licked
>> German ass. Latvia even declared war on Germany, in November 1919.
>>
>> Licked Bolshie ass? You should watch the cartoon again -- it must have
>> been too subtle for you. Letts were quite Bolshevik, yes -- for good
>> reason.
> 
> Claiming someone as being pro-Bolshevik "for good reason" is
> comparable to claiming someone is a Nazi, or a child molestor, or a
> murderer "for good reason."

To say something like that is equivalent to believe in the original sin 
-  and see no causality in the events.
First, Bolsheviks neither Nazis came out of Blue - people were pushed in 
this dark corner. Secondly, neither Bolsheviks nor Nazis in the 
beginning told people what is expecting them in the end of the tunnel.
And the last - if you inquire in the psychiatric history of child 
molesters you will find that they were molested themselves. Like father 
like son.

So, despite I think that Cedrins at least sometimes - expresses himself 
- if not thinks like neocon, he has a point here - Latvians did have a 
very good reason to make a deal with Bolsheviks, mabe be not well 
thought reasoning, but who did one? Half of the world was on fire.

Otherwise what you say is another accusation which sounds like "Original 
Sin". Which is of course a crap invented by a bitter socialite few 
hundreds years after "Christ" to justify his sleeping around and 
uncontrolled drinking.

And the last - the big nations may go murderous and the next morning all 
they have to say - "oh shit", the small one usually pay the full price. 
If not become a footnote in the history books.

VM.



> 
>> The 1917 election results indicate more support for Bolshevism
>> in Livonia than almost anywhere in Russia proper. I don't see how
>> that's licking ass -- or are you disputing the basic Russian line that
>> "Bolshevism was Jewish brains and Latvian muscles"? Do you think it's
>> weird that a massive but rather educated underclass and large numbers
>> of the landless supported a revolutionary movement? I don't.
> 
> Sure, but in Latvia this movement was Bolshevik, particularly.  In
> Ukraine the masses supported anti-Bolshevik Petliura, various
> warlords, the anarchist Makhno, etc. and in Russia the masses weren't
> pro-Bolshevik either.
> 
>> It's more interesting to discuss what happened to that movement here
>> -- how quickly it lost popularity after it had to put its money where
>> its mouth was. Destroying the Russian Empire, in my opinion, was a
>> lovely thing. The Czar deserved it.
> 
> What about the democratic government?  The Bolsheviks didn't overthrow
> the czar, you know.  They just murdered him and his family.
> 
> Was the Provisional government so awful that Russia deserved to have
> the Bolshevik regime replace it?
> 
>> Akuraters wrote a fine book about the Red Riflemen, in which he asked
>> how they would face their mothers. But they -- Akuraters included --
>> did do that, you see, and built a rather nice country in the bargain.
> 
> Sure, the Latvians forced a regime on the Russian and Ukrainian people
> that was far, far worse, than what had ever been done to their own
> people, and washed their hands of it, living happily for about 20
> years.  Unfortunately the consequences of that crime came back to them
> and their people.
> 
> regards,
> 
> BM
> 
> 
>