From: avg@rodan.UU.NET (Vadim Antonov)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.soviet
Subject: Re: "democratic" Estonia
Date: 9 Sep 1992 15:34:13 -0400
Organization: Berkeley Software Design
NNTP-Posting-Host: rodan.uu.net

In article <1992Sep9.112106.26815@nntp.hut.fi> f33012l@puukko.hut.fi (Janne Kivel{) writes:
>Are you saying that Russians have no problems worth mentioning in
>Central Asia or Caucasus compared to their huge suffering under 
>'fascist' Estonian and Latvian governments?

There are NO government-conducted violations of rights of ethnic
minorities relating to Russians and other Slavic nationals in Caucasus
and Central Asia. Unlike Estonia. So far they granted citizenship to
all residents.

BTW, yesterday Yeltsin and Landsbergis agreed to speed up withdrawal of
the remnants of Soviet military from Lithuania. Now talk about the
lack of good will.

>Do you think it's only natural that alleged human rights violations in 
>the Baltics get so much attention?

I think it's natural that human rights violations draw attention
everywhere in the world. Did it ever appear to you that the lack of
attention to "alleged human rights violations" relative to Central
Asian and Caucasian Russian residents.

>>Nice example of the unbiased Finnish press.
>
>Nobody has claimed Finnish press is more unbiased than press in Russia.
>You, on the other hand, boldly stated that "Russian media are generally
>more unbiased than western media" in one of your postings. This claim
>was based only on your observations and your feelings.

As i already said i had a lot of chances to compare. Unlike you.

>Newspaper articles or TV reports rarely capture the whole story, but
>Jarmo Ryyti provided some sources for his claims unlike you.

My primary sources are my own observations. I trust my eyes more than
all newspapers in the world. I do not own a TV set for i have no
need to consume the pureed shit it offers.

>A country with Islamic fundamentalist leaders does not worry Russians
>a bit. You must be joking.

Islamic fundamentalism is a reality which cannot be eliminated by
cursing it. And Russia traditionally had rather good relationships
with Muslim countries.

>Kazakhstan is heavily dependent on Russia in many ways. It's hardly 
>surprising they don't try to aggravate Russians too much.

Yuck. Russians ARE a majority in Kazakhstan. The poor guy did not
his homework.

>It seems you really can't see the difference between Russian and English
>in these cases. Yes, Russian is a beautiful language and useful means
>of communication. Yet I understand the people in Hungary or Czecho-Slovakia
>who don't want to speak Russian even though they could. Years of forced
>friendship and forced learning have left their mark (this isn't the fault
>of the Russians though).

But it's the fault of reasoning of those who reject using an already
accepted language simply because it was introduced by force. Need i
to remind that ALL "international" languages were forcefully introduced
-- ever heard of Alexander the Great, Caezars or of the British Empire?
It still does not make it less stupid to reject speaking English (or
Russian).

>There is a clear difference between American and Russian 'cultural 
>imperialism'.

Yep. American "cultural imperialism" has succeed in killing the
culture worldwide.

>Quality of teaching has a lot to improve but still it's a good thing that
>Russians start learning other languages.

C'mon. Major European languages were taught in Russian schools for
hundreds of years. Sez "start". Russian linguists have designed
written languages for at least a dozen of small nations and taught them
to write in their own language, FYI. The local broadcasting and newspapers
in my native city always were in three languages (Russian, Kabardin and
Balkar). The "suppression of the national cultures" is totally out
of reality; though the suppression of the culture (and the Russian culture
the first) by communist regime is a reality. In fact, local language
cultures were less vulnerable simply because the cenzors were quite
troubled to read in unfamiliar languages.

>The Russians in Estonia might
>also find that learning Estonian is actually useful and not so hard
>as it seems. By saying this I don't mean that Estonian citizenship law
>is totally fair.

I'd say the learning of a particular language as a condition to
obtaining citizenship (and as a cause for denying rights to posess 
property) is totally outrageous and constitue a gross violation
of basic human rights. Yes, someone needed to know Russian to be able
to run an enterprise (as well as in the US you need to speak English to
be able to get some something more well-paid than sweeping floors). But
nobody is and was threatened to get expelled for failing to learn.

--vadim