From: tammet@cs.chalmers.se (Tanel Tammet)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.soviet,soc.culture.europe,talk.politics.soviet
Subject: Re: Estonia 13
Date: 13 Dec 92 18:15:40 GMT
Organization: Dept. of CS, Chalmers, Sweden

In article <12023@sorley.ed.ac.uk> alexei@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Alexei Moiseyev) writes:
>Mr.Hietaniemi writes:
>In article <11950@sorley.ed.ac.uk>, alexei@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Alexei Moiseyev) 
>writes:
>
>
>>Exactly. And this is what Estonia is clearly doing. The success of
>                                                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>it will be evaluated in the near future by the United Nations
>>Human Rights monitoring group. 
>
>Isn't it prejudjing things a bit?

At least the CSCE human rights group could find nothing violating
human rights in Estonia.
 
>
>>Don't you think that Russia should also invite such visitors?
>
>I wouldn't mind.  But this is not necessary.  No allegations have been
>made concerning Human rights abuses in Russia today.

Estonia probably soon will. The case is that Russia is conducting
(exactly as USSR) an active policy of Russification of
fenno-ugric people living in Russia (Russia is a federation of several
republics, some of them being fenno-ugric), making it harder and harder
to use their own language or their own names (yes, they are supposed
to use Russian names) in the territories they have lived for thousands
of years.
  
>>The "40 anniversary" of the Estonian Socialist Soviet Republic
>>(R.I.P.) in 1980 was conducted solely in Russian. After couple
>>of decades of stark Soviet rule the Estonian culture might
>>have perished.
>
>And Russian culture perished by the end the early 1930-ies.  With
>raskulachivanie and systematic eradication of "Russian" element from
>the "proletarian culture".  The Russian language lost it's Russianness
>on becoming the language of inter-ethnic communication.  

It is still the language Russians speak.

>
>>> First I am more concerned with freedom than
>>> with some abstract *independence*.  

Me too. For Estonian citizens freedom presupposes the absence of
any, especially Russian, foreign occupation.

>>But the commands to establish dictatorship in Estonia were given in 
>>Russian. The Soviet leaders of many ethnic origins (some were even Finnish
>>like Otto-Ville Kuusinen) used Russian as their common language.
>
>So it is about language after all?  
>But surely the language was completely incidental to what was
>happening.  The orders might have been given in Latin or Esperanto and
>that would not have changed anything.

It is supposed to be a common knowledge that the mystics of Communism
was a substitute for the mystics of Russian Orthodox Church and
the main aims in foreign policy were the same for Tsarist Russia,
Soviet Russia and USSR. Expanding the empire and its influence.

>>Those people that committed injustices did not come from outer
>>space, most of them grew up in your Rodina, unfortunately.
>
>This does not make Russia a guilty nation.  The criminals who came to
>power in Russia were not democratically elected with the full support
>of population, unlike in some other countries.  To this extent what
>they did is no reflection on the Russian nation at large.

I agree. Nations are not supposed to be guilty. As German nation is
not guilty, so is Russian. The difference is that Russians still
do not seem to have come to terms with their past.

You say above that "The criminals who came to
power in Russia were not democratically elected with the full support
of population, unlike in some other countries". This is fully true.
In Russia people fought for the Communists with arms. How did it
happen that Communists won the civil war?

What definitely was the problem with the Russian nation at large
was that they silently agreed, mostly due to carelessness and
unwillingness to think unpleasant thoughts, to occupation, 
annexation and military control of foreign countries.
I do not say that all Russians agreed - but I am pretty sure
the majority did.

Regards,
	Tanel Tammet