The Ills of Babylonian Vilnius
Go to the most popular Lithuanian news site, delfi.lt, and glance at the comment section below any politically charged article. You will most definitely see how Lithuanian residents of major local ethnicities – Lithuanians, Russians, Poles, Belarusians – verbally battle one another. And what a heated debate that is! The sad thing is that this arguing is not resorted to politics, tastes, preferences, etc.; it is way distant from a polite conversation. It often crosses into the realm of culture battles where the ethnic groups recall the battles of old: Polish occupation, disfranchisement of minority groups, Lithuanization of Vilnius, Belarusian claims for Vilnius…
The historical argument is heated by the modern-day nationalism spearheaded by differing traditions of historiography in Poland, Belarus, and Lithuania and channeled through national and diasporal media, education, and politics. Everyone is a historian here, everyone is preoccupied arguing who Vilnius belonged to in the past, whose it should be now, and whether true Lithuanians were of Slavic or Baltic origin. It almost seems as if Lithuanian modernity was nonexistent. The discourse is so much history-related that even current political status quo is weighed in vis-à-vis “the historical truth,” which is always different depending on who you ask.
The nationalism in Lithuania, maybe not as dismal as in Latvia, Estonia, or even Poland, is still so much of a mainstream weltanschauung. And it is sad to see how it traumatizes Lithuanian youth and leaves Lithuania far behind its Western European counterparts as it comes to cross-cultural understanding and mutual respect.
Here are just few examples. Two days ago Lithuanian patriotic youth celebrated the 70th anniversary of liberation of Vilnius from Polish occupation. Some 200 young nationalists – many clad in military – marched through Vilnius center chanting patriotic songs and carrying torches. Boy, that creepy site truly reminded of Nazifying Berlin in 1939.
Another event dedicated to this date was an exhibition of children’s paintings about the liberation of Vilnius from Polish occupants. Just think how screwed up the minds of those kids get when they are raised to hate a large minority group in their own country.
What Lithuanian history books teach Lithuanian kids? Russians, Poles, Germans are bad because they occupied us; Belarusians are bad because they also dreamt to tear off Vilnius from Lithuania. The world around is a scary place, isn’t it? And then here’s a positive message: our country was once huge, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania expanded from sea to sea. So, yeah, there’s something we can pride ourselves into. But doesn’t it make us despise our neighbors even more?
Yeah, any nation-state is pretty much like that. The same kind of scaremongering, history entwined with geopolitics, etc. Local minorities are heated up by their national and diasporal media, Internet blogs, and nationalistic politicians. So, no, it’s not just Lithuanian nationalism causing dissent from minorities, it’s also nationalism from Russians, Belarusians, and Poles, as well, adding to the clash of differences in Babylonian Vilnius.
Something has to be done to appease these dangerous trends for the sake of all. Maybe the state itself needs to be more welcoming towards the minorities. For instance, the language law could be made more liberal so as to reflect the historical diversity of Vilnius. Maybe the Card of the Pole should not be seen as a threat to the national security, or maybe this card itself is a mere effort to bring back the ideas from the XIX century. I don’t know what the cure could be from nationalistic rhetoric, as it is so deeply rooted in our national identities. But if we want to get better, we might want to start looking for commonalities, not differences.
An interesting and thought-provoking post. Could a solution for this state of affairs be found in Lithuania’s own history?
Since Grand Duchy days, the essense of Lithuania has been multi-ethnic, multi-religious, and polyglot. In the 16th century, “Lithuanians” were not just the currrent Baltic speakers, but also Orthodox Slavs (what we would now call Belarusians) and Polish-speaking nobles. The official language of the GDL was Ruthenian (sometimes known as “Old Belarusian”). There’s a useful analogy with Austria - another multi-ethnic state that collapsed, leaving its name to a single, “core” nationality.
So it seems to me that a confident Lithuanian identity must incorporate aspects of the country’s deep-rooted multicultural history. A mono-ethnic Lithuania is a contradiction in terms.
Comment by Tristan da Cunha — November 4, 2009 @ 8:20 am
Yep, I agree with you entirely.
Comment by Andrei — November 4, 2009 @ 8:39 am
Andrei, on reflection, I have a few questions on your post.
1. You cite Internet commenters as leading the nationalistic battles. But how much can this be applied to real life? I always thought the internet was full of kooks and provocateurs; it’s not necessarily an expression of real people’s feelings. I would think the ordinary Lithuanian has more pressing concerns than re-fighting ancient battles (like keeping the country’s economy from going down the toilet) - especially when the country is in the EU and there is no threat its borders will be changed again. And my impression is that ethnic relations in Lithuania are better than in Estonia or Latvia - do you agree with that?
2. Just an aside: did the people celebrating liberation of Vilnius from Poland mention that it was the Soviet Red Army that accomplished this?
Comment by Tristan da Cunha — November 4, 2009 @ 9:25 am
>>You cite Internet commenters as leading the nationalistic battles. But how much can this be applied to real life?
In a way. I guess it boils down to the question whom to blame for the current status quo, but many resort to history as if to underpin the longevity of overarching historical issues with their opponents. Nationalistic Lithuanians would accuse Russians for being torn out of the European context; disfranchised Russians would resort to angry harangues about the minusculity of Lithuanian state, Poles would delve into the Vilnius problem, Belarusians launch into tirades about the “true” Lithuanian identity or something of the sort. But, yeah, the true meaning of this is generally dissatisfaction with the current state of things. It’s just different groups accentuate different trigger points.
>>And my impression is that ethnic relations in Lithuania are better than in Estonia or Latvia - do you agree with that?
Indeed, nationalism is far less of a problem in Lithuania than in Latvia or Estonia. I guess it’s because, unlike in those states, Lithuanian government cleverly granted citizenship to all of Lithuania’s residents after the country had freed itself from USSR. Thus minorities felt kind of welcomed and not disfranchised by the newly reborn Lithuanian state. Yes, this state would become ethnocentric in nature but less nationalistic if compared to the northern neighbors.
Another appeasing factor might be that minorities in Lithuania were less numerous and less vocal than Russians in Latvia and Estonia. So maybe the government did not feel threat from Poles, Belarusians and Russians who hardly agreed between one another on many an issue.
>>Just an aside: did the people celebrating liberation of Vilnius from Poland mention that it was the Soviet Red Army that accomplished this?
I guess they forgot about it
Comment by Andrei — November 4, 2009 @ 11:33 am
“…did the people celebrating liberation of Vilnius from Poland mention that it was the Soviet Red Army that accomplished this?
I guess they forgot about it…”
What did they forget? To mention? Everybody know that, if someone needed to refresh the memory it was enough just to turn TV on. What the sense of “mentioning”? There are many things people know perfectly without any mentionings. But in this particular case “they” didn’t forget, if it’s “important” for someone, or something.
Comment by Tad — November 6, 2009 @ 8:48 am
OK, Tad. And so? My point is that this whole Polish-Lithuanian-Belarusian “historical” hostility is baseless. Congruently, these anti-Polish sentiments, nurtured by national educators and media (i.e., Voruta newspaper), are quite harmful for contemporary Lithuanians, given the current European political context.
Comment by Administrator — November 6, 2009 @ 9:54 am
Well, nothing
. It was just a simple reaction to that question about the mentioning “that it was the Soviet Red Army that accomplished this”…. OK they did, or OK thay didn’t, and so? Nothing.
.
As for “these anti-Polish sentiments” - these are sentiments. Some people have some sentiments. Could be worse. And some people are much worse, indeed.
As for the hostility - of course i agree with you. Actually I don’t see much hostility anywhere in LT, but when i was a kid i went to soviet school and there indeed was “historical” and “class” hostility throughout. I’m able to compare. Present hostility is ridiculous. I’s not serious. It’s like a game of individuals who have overgrown egos. The fact of overgrown ego is much worse than its form of expression. But examples of ego of our beloved, sorry, so called “westerners”, at least judging by “their” blogs and comments on the internet are, to be honest, plane rasist. At least they (westerners) love this word. That’s regarding “the current European political context”. I.e. western so called civilization isn’t a subject of admiration anymore, and thanks to those “westerners” themselves. So given this or that of European context, I’d say that hostility toward westerners will increase. And mostly because of the attitude of westerners them selves.
Now back to “anti-Polish sentiments”. Does it means that anti-Lithuanian, anti-Jewish, anti-Russian, anti-Belarusian sentiments doesn’t exist? Or someone forgot to mention it? If yes then why? If not - then why either? I personaly don’t care, these are sort of rhetorical questions and i’m pretty sure that it is a complex phenomenon as any phenomenon in universe. I’m just trying to nip a bit
As for “national educators and media”, they are not national educators, and media is just media. And “Voruta” - come on, it’s oldfashioned “folk” newspaper, sometimes interesting to read, maybe. To be honest i once read only some recipes in Voruta, so can’t seriously comment. But it is not serious newspaper. And what newspaper can be “serious” today? Nobody read them in Lithuania.
OK, my point is that the obvious trend is that quarrels between lithuanians and their neighbors in and around Lithuania will diminish, and the hostility between glorious west and dirty eastern europe will continue to increase. And it’s not about economy or politics - it’s about ego of each member of society. Good example of such ego is those comments on Delfi you’ve mentioned in your post. It’s an example of stupidity, incivility, impatience on one hand and freedom of expression on the other hand. What’s wrong with that? It’s a pretext for improvement, i’d think. Perfect society is utopia, as everybody know, and as a point of evolution of our society it is just normal, neither good nor bad.
Comment by Tad — November 6, 2009 @ 2:39 pm
Well, quite a philosophical reply… You can look at this from this point of view or you can look at this from that point of view. No one is perfect, let’s move forward
Indeed. If you say that hostility between our nations will diminish, I’ll drink to that, pal. I AM ALL FOR IT! I can say more – I am in favor of some regional unity of former countries of the Grand Duchy and Rzechpospolita.
But I wouldn’t say I am in favor of Eastern Europe going AWOL as it comes to internal European integration and homogenization after Lisbon. And that presupposes mending bridges with former enemies and rivals and not making new ones further west.
Comment by Administrator — November 6, 2009 @ 3:21 pm
Tad:
To clarify, I mentioned the Red Army just because I thought it was a good illustration of the “inconvenience” of history - i.e. somebody you don’t like doing a favor for you, and the kind of cognitive dissonance this situation creates among nationalists and similar types.
Could you explain something? You talk about “Westerners,” and resentment toward them. Do you not see Lithuania as being “West,” despite its membership in the major Western organizations?
Comment by Tristan da Cunha — November 7, 2009 @ 8:16 pm
#8 - Yeah, I agree now. With everything.
. And the fact that Vilnius was recived from the hands of Red Army (and already during WWII) is, well, regrettable or something. I.e. the “action” was not “clean”. So what? It’s not a subject of celebration. And there are much more aspects i didn’t mention. In any case it’s not a secrect, anyone can find any information if truly interested.
#9 - This fact is not ‘that’ inconvenient. It is inconvenient because it is sort of 2 different events at the same time, or, say, two different aspects. Celebrating liberation of Vilnius from Poland is one aspect which is actual subject of the celebration (though it is more ‘mentioning’ than celebration), and another aspect is not a subject of celebration. Judging by all the reports and programmes over TV it was a good pretext and oppurtunity to overlook all these events in all details and aspects. One of such aspects involves, of course, the reason why poles desided to take Wilno and how and why it happened, and it leads to the ideas of Juzef Pilsudsky, generally totaly unknown in LT (because of the fact of that war with Poland)- I mean ideas, not Pilsudski himself - and it continue to lead to discovery that his ideas at some point could be entirely acceptable for lithuanians and if there could be some “if” in history, Pilsudsky would be a hero of all lithuanians and Lithuania, and then everything could be different, or, maybe could be not
As for whether i could explain - i can’t explain for a very simple reason: my pidgin english is too limited because i didn’t learn english. I see Lithuania wishful to be a part of europe and not a part of Russia or its satelite. But LT is not in the west of europe and never was there. And judging by the attitude of the modern westerners at all levels, they (westerners) don’t and won’t allow us to be the equal member of the “club”. Not because of our politics or economy, but because of their mind setting.
Comment by Tad — November 9, 2009 @ 8:44 am