From: tammet@cs.chalmers.se (Tanel Tammet)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet,soc.culture.soviet,soc.culture.nordic
Subject: Re: soc.culture.baltic/balticum
Date: 13 Dec 92 18:33:32 GMT
Organization: Dept. of CS, Chalmers, Sweden

In article <1992Dec12.174601.1@cc.helsinki.fi> thietaniemi@cc.helsinki.fi writes:
>In article <1gacd1INNltk@rodan.UU.NET>, sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog)
>writes:
>
>> This is a request for discussion of creating of the newsgroup
>> soc.culture.baltic, which I think is long overdue.
>
>After last week's heated discussion, I think I second the motion!

Me too :-)   

>> The group would be unmoderated.
>
>Don't you think there might be some need of moderation?

Why? The amount of messages is quite certainly not going to be
larger than the moderation capabilities of individual readers.

>> The group would be devoted to the countries Estonia, Latvia and
>> Lithuania, often lumped together under the label "The Baltic states".
>
>
>This creates some problems.
>Finland is a Nordic and a Baltic state, the majority of population
>of which consist of Baltic Finns (most of them Eastern Balts).
[deleted]
>What unites the "Baltics" (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania) is the
>Soviet occupation. This is a sign of NEGATIVE identity.
>
>Estonia - perhaps even Latvia - belongs to the Nordic countries.
>And Finland and Estonia are twin nations in the same manner
>as Latvians and Lithuanians are. And Lithuanians have more things
>in common with Poland than with Estonia, I suppose!
>
>Should we continue to hold this NEGATIVE IDENTITY of Baltic
>countries or create a new definition instead?
>
>Of course, we could start "re-thinking" Baltic as a cluster
>of states and cultures (even some Polish and Danish affairs
>concern us, Sweden and St.Petersburg).

Certainly. Concerning, say, privatization, etc, Polish and
late east German affairs are fairly important for Estonian,
Latvian and Lithuanian politics.
 
>
>Why not call the group soc.culture.balticum?
>
>Today, the Baltic sea unites our cultures and economies,
>when the iron curtain does not exist any more! This might
>denote a new POSITIVE identity.

>> Despite the existance of BALT-L, I think there is a need for s.c.baltic.
>> If nothing else, a lot of the material in
>>talk.politics.soviet,  once
>> you filtered away Mutlu/Arigc, concerns the Baltic countries.
>
>
>Still, unfortunately, the "Baltic" discussion belongs to the "Soviet"
>group as long as Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are occupied
>by the Russian army, against their will. This is a shadow from
>the past, which we should get rid of as soon as possible.

You are slightly incorrect here - the discussion in t.p.s
concerning, say, Estonia, is exclusively about Estonian-Russian
relations, not about any other sphere connected to Estonia.
 
>I support soc.culture.balticum - let us work (and chat) for the future!

My support goes for soc.culture.balticum. I would support talk.politics.
baltics, but not soc.culture.baltic.

There is NO such thing as a "baltic" culture, when you speak about
Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Although there are many things in common,
the bare fact that Lithuania is a Catholic country whereas Estonia
and Latvia have been almost exclusively in the Lutheran Protestant
area from the rise of protestantism, creates principal differences.
And then there is the obvious language thing, grouping together
Latvian and Lithuanian, Estonian and Finnish.

Regards,
	Tanel Tammet
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet,soc.culture.soviet,soc.culture.europe