A couple of events coincided and made me want to write
something about the state of society in Latvia. The latest demographic
statistics show that Latvia has lost some 340 000 inhabitants in the past 12
years, of which more than 211 000 emigrated and some 128 000 represented
“negative natural increase”, a bizarre way of saying that, in fact, the Latvian
population is slowly dying out.
Last year 30 380 persons, most of them of prime working
age (including more than 4 000 children) left the country to move abroad more
or less permanently. Net migration was just over 23 000, since some 7 000
immigrants (or repatriated emigrants) arrived in Latvia. Nonetheless, the
emigration statistics show that precisely the part of the population that
should be having children in Latvia and diminishing “negative natural increase”
is the one that is leaving the country. As a total percentage of a population
of perhaps two million, 30 000 may not sound like much (even though it is equal
to all of Rēzekne packing up and leaving), but it is a larger percentage of the
productive and fertile segment of the population – call it the life blood of a
nation.
Why is Latvia bleeding out? I have discussed the issue
before – and the reason is a complex set of circumstance that, at the end of
the day, tell the mobile and ambitious part of the population that nothing is
likely to change in the deep governance of society in the foreseeable future.
By deep governance, I mean not only the behavior of government, but also the
ability of society to self-organize and the way it has done so hitherto. In
short, Latvia has failed to launch from being a wounded post-soviet society to
becoming a modern, self-confident, educated democratic community.
The
stubborn death of trust
Community requires trust and there has been little in the
track record of those running Latvia to cause any trust in institutions (polls
show that there has only been a slight bounce-back from levels of trust in
socio-political institutions that could only be called a kind of pernicious
anarchism). Meanwhile, as I believe I have written before, Latvia’s joining the
European Union, coupled with cheap airlines and the capability of rich and
frequent communication via the internet, have led to hundreds of thousands of
Latvians exercising their choice of governance by emigrating, but still
retaining physical and virtual ties with friends and family in the
“fatherland”.
Indeed, some recent videos I saw of Latvians celebrating
the midsummer Jāņi festival in the United Kingdom were eerily like my childhood
as a child of political emigres in the US. Back in the 50s, Latvians in the
Boston area who had been in the US for about as many years (4 or 5) as those
working in the UK celebrated Jāņi
by gathering at a farmstead with a large field and arriving, often, in the
first cars they had bought once settled in. The videos of Latvians gathering at
a rented farm field somewhere in the UK were almost the same thing – just some
of the vans and cars looked like prosperity had come a bit more quickly to the
Brit-Lats. And like my parents generation in the 1950s, they were young
families with kids and an aura around them that, henceforth, this is what
“being Latvian” will have to be. Unlike in the 1950s and 1960s, when Latvia was
a Soviet occupied country, visits to Latvia from the UK or Ireland are no
problem at all, which does not change the fact that these people are starting
to form semi-permanent communities in their countries of emigration.
The
easy growth of emigration 2.0
The interesting thing about the communities that formed
in the post-war exile was that they could not really grow by adding new members
from Latvia and many of them, due to processes of assimilation and aging, are
at a tipping point of starting the slide toward extinction of their identities
(the people aren’t going anywhere, there will be fourth and fifth generation
kids with “strange” names and some
inkling of why). The new emigrant communities are being fed by a constant flow
of new arrivals from Latvia, giving them a different dynamic that the handful
of 90-somethings gathering to celebrate 65 years of the Pigbridge Latvian
Welfare Society (Pigbridža was a fictitious American town with a big Latvian
community that came up in some satirical Latvian emigre writing).
Fundraisers
will always be among us
As to what is happening back in Latvia , the Riga City
Council has banned individual and small-scale fundraising starting August 1.
There was a noticeable drop in the number of fundraisers around the Riga
Central Station, a favorite gathering place for both mendicants and moochers,
with the latter taking the upper hand. The daily dog encampment, grown to three
animals and a variable crew of up to three misery marketers, was gone.
Hippety-Hop, the young otherwise able-bodied below-the-knee amputee has not
been seen for a while. One pathetic looking old lady (a station-area regular)
was seen talking with her handlers...er..marketing consultants, but not
actively soliciting donations. The municipal police have been firmly herding
the fundraisers away, but only to have them return once backs are turned.
This is an insoluable problem and probably a waste of
police time and legislative effort, since fundraisers would not be doing their
job if they were had the means to pay fines and for the true supplicants, jail
(showers, food, a bed) could be a blessing. The fundraisers who are backed by a
crew (who can enforce getting their cut far better than the police can enforce
a fine) will be temporarily harassed and scattered, as well they should be, but
there the core crime isn’t fundraising (which really shouldn’t be a crime), but
rather a domestic form of human trafficking. Here, I would be perfectly
comfortable with some knees getting busted (but not the ones bent in
supplication, rather, the knees and heads of those emptying the mendicant’s cup
at the end of the day). Aggresive fundraising should also be punishable – two
stern refusals by the prospect and the fundraiser/moocher deserves a kick in
the teeth.
Broadly speaking, the fundraising is one minor symptom of
the failure of Latvia to launch and of the discrepancy between macro-economic
statistics and street-level reality (against the background of ongoing
emigration). Beggary, to finally call it by its politically incorrect name,
will always be with us in every kind of society or social order, if only
because there is a small percentage of humanity who simply blow off the open
cars as the train of history races
on, and they cannot be gathered back.
Finally, I have seen the macro argument made by Edward
Lucas that Eastern Europe should be dropped as a description or a concept, and
most of his arguments are...logical. So why, in defiance of that logic, do I
see Eastern Europe every day here in
some aspect of Latvian life. More on that in later posts...
5 comments:
I seldom see the problems Latvia faces linked with it’s two neighbors of Estonia and Lithuania and I think that is short sighted. While Latvia has seen the largest drop in population, all three Baltic states are trending the same. That Baltic citizens think nothing will change at home and the grass is greener elsewhere shows a long view that can only be described as realistic. There is no trust in the Baltic's because of the unaddressed incompetence and corruption. The proposed LNG re-gassification terminal should be built in Latvia because it has the storage facilities at Inculkans and the distribution network all of which requires upgrade but at least it’s a healthy start. It will not happen because Estonia & Lithuania do not trust the influence of Gazprom in Latvijas gās AS (34 percent owned by Gazprom) which has an exclusive contract to use the Inculkans facility until 2017 and agreements on natural gas storage until 2030, so ridiculous proposals like a floating LNG terminal stationed in Lithuania but available to Latvia and Estonia are proposed while the actual decision is punted over to the EU for arbitration. The decommissioning of the Ignalina nuclear plant in Lithuania is behind schedule and so riddled with incompetent management and corruption, half the funds are gone but the work is not half complete, that the EU has again expressed their deep concern. This will delay the completion of the new plant to the point that Russia will have one up and running in Belarus and another in Kaliningrad with the express purpose of retaining it’s control of the electrical energy consumed in the Baltic's. This goes hand in hand with their control of gas and oil. And Latvians vote the criminal and Communist apparatchik Alvars Lembergs as the most popular politican in the land because Ventspils is so “clean” and “nice looking.” No wonder the youngest and brightest are leaving!
Having a russian-latvian girlfriend I found this blog very interesting in getting to know the society she is from. I of course see Latvia with different eyes but about the trust issue I can tell this: it is very common in multi-national states.If Latvia would have been homogenus as Lithuania and of more protestant heritage like Estonia it would have been a different story. Faith is hope and like it or not I do think that if one wants hope for Latvia, some US-evangelism would be good for birth rates, trust and work ethics.
/Michael
Thank you for sharing your perspective. I am interested in how the changing global economy could help stimulate Latvia. I have a few questions I would like to ask you. If you follow through to my website you can contact me there (I do not see a way to contact you here yet). The main question I always like to ask is, "How can I help?"
The data are worse. I am registered in Latvia, but I do not live there.
It's true, Latvian community abroad now feeds of new arrivals, but the internal situation in Latvia is subjectively far worse than the 1950s and 1960s. Then Latvia was a leading country in the USSR, its demography and economy were growing, we had pride of being Latvian. Obviously there were many problems, among them the demographic ones with the arrival of thousands of Russians, but Latvians quantitatively were growing up (not relatively). Today the situation is relatively growing, but quantitatively decreasing... and the country is getting empty in the middle of a society with inferiority complex and unwilling to fight for a national collective project in our land.
"Fundraising" sounds un-Kaza like. Cut to the chase and call them beggars. The word has served us well for centuries, why be coy?
Post a Comment