To Elizabete

Since the group was only founded on Sunday, and the first board meeting is this week, and new members are invited to join, the agenda is in the process of being worked out. We gathered together on general principles but now must start working on the details. I joined this group because I have immense respect for people like Talis Tisenkopfs, Ugis Rotbergs, Lolita Cigana, Anna Zigure, Sarmite Elerte and others, and welcomed the opportunity to hear their views and exchange ideas with them. They are (in my opinion) intelligent, honest, patriotic and constructive. They are also forward-looking, not embedded in the past. (Some of the young people who are getting involved weren’t around for the Atmoda.) They are all concerned about the future of Latvia. You never know what will happen when you bring people like this together. Maybe we will agree on nothing. But I think the possibility that we could produce something worthwhile and constructive to the political dialogue is worth my investment of time and effort. Creating anything new carries with it the risk of failure. But if you don’t try, you guarantee an absence of success.

In my view, the public debate (the intelligent one from people with names and reputations) about the role and purpose of the MB is healthy in and of itself. One of our goals was to get people involved and talking about issues - the political system, civic participation, policy and future planning. That has already begun. The MB will be both criticized and praised. That’s good. That means people are thinking.

Elerte was a catalyst. Her future choices are up to her and those who wish to support her. The future of the MB is up to those who join and help build the Society’s agenda in the coming weeks and months. The skeptics can speculate all they want, for that is what skeptics do. Skeptics rarely create anything new and are usually preoccupied with doubting the ability and motives of those who are willing to try. In addition to all our other goals, proving the skeptics wrong is at the top of the list.

To Peteris,

To me, national unity is not a pretense, just a goal. Don’t know whether it will be reached in my lifetime, or ever. I agree that little is being done to bring it about. But that doesn’t mean that responsible people aren’t thinking and talking about it and trying to find solutions.

As for the LI, we are now down to 4 people. But one of my best former staffers was half Russian, and one of our recent student internees is a Russian girl who was part of our Nakamie 90 project back in 2008. (In fact, many of these Next 90 were Russian kids from Latgale and elsewhere. One continues to send me his patriotic poems about Latvia.)

The Foreign Ministry is very interested in translating all our Factsheets, weekly Latvia in Review and my commentaries in Russian (there have been many requests) but present budget constraints make that problematic. 

Everything is process.

Sveiks, Ojar!

“In addition to all our other goals, proving the skeptics wrong is at the top of the list.”

Lai Jums veicas!

I’m very eagerly waiting to hear what new national policies this organization is planning to introduce !  Though my own experience is that people who have common goals come together and work out their differences & present a jointly agreed-upon agenda, perhaps people with no goal other than good intentions can also have an effect on the body politic.

Visu labu,

Elizabete

Elizabete -

I think that intelligent skepticism is always welcome…. to a point. And that point is where leads to paralysis.

Eva was invited into this process several months ago when motives were somewhat unclear. Maybe Ēlerte herself was unclear as to what she wanted. The Meierovics group (from what I know) has its genesis in a series of policy discussion groups organised by Ēlerte. Eva was involved in the education group, as were people from IZM, Ispejama misija, pilsetas and lauku skolas, LU and many others. One very positive side was that expertise was sought and people were fairly free to invite in others. Eva invited a colleague/student of mine who has been researching the continuing influence of soviet era education in today’s system.

We (Eva and I) have not always been happy with the consensus of the group, but see that it is always an informed consensus. One does not have to love the outcome to see that the process is quite open. Another plus is that it is much more data and research driven (at least in education) than are other groups.

When Eva was asked to join the founding group we talked at some length about it. One concern was what the “real” reasons are behind Ēlertes involvement are. Given our experience with our own group we realized that, ultimately, this group will take on a life separate from that of its founder. If you want some examples, look at how JL has unmoored itself from Repše.

I believe in this group and the process that it has undertaken. I, also, would like it to take on some more ground level workers to make the Ēlertes (and others) of the world realize the hard, gunting work that needs to be done. If M only makes policy suggestions or recommendations, it is doomed to irrelevance. To effect change in LV means changing not only policy but in forcing that change through the unchanged culture of the civil service bureaucracy in nearly every ministry, pašvaldiba and govt agency in LV.

One of my favourite illustrative stories is being at a govt meeting where they heard story after story of children with learning disabilities who were effectively being denied their right to education (under both LV and EU law) and someone from the Human Rights protection agency said, “but, we have one of the best legislative frameworks in Europe.” Quite possibly true, but that framework (which actually also had regulatory support) had not been translated into any understanding or action by those expected to make it real. If M is to lead to change, it needs to realize that policy/legislative change is not enough. That is what we are pushing for in our involvement.

As I said, we/I/they may not always agree, but if the goal is a LV that is open to and realizes change, then this is a good development.

sveiks everybody, the first thing that needs to be done in Latvija is to get rid of all the politicians who are lining their own pockets, corruption is the very evil of all governments, once a body is in place in Latvija that will work for the people of and the country of Latvija then and only then will things change for the better.

Karli~ i would like to tell you that Latvia doesn’t have a government,
but JK does it better…......

http://thoughtsfromlatvia.blogspot.com/2009_02_01_archive.html

Then you should read Jaņdžs’ thread, hoot and holler and beg some perfect John to come solve your problems. Everything is politics. Nowhere to go.

/P

true Peteri, but there must be people in Latvija that can do a better job than those that are in power now ? What I am trying to say is that at this moment in time there is no stabilisation in those that are in power. I don,t know how long a term a government spends in power in Latvija but they are not fit to govern from what I read in the Baltic Times.

Karli -

There may well be some people who could do a much better job (I know some), but that leads to:
1. Who precisely are they?
2. How do we get a significant proportion of people to vote for them?
3. How do we get the powers-that-be to cede power?

Some (for example Mr JK) are willing to concede that the system is pretty darn messed up, but think it is too late. Some (like, well, me) concede that the system is pretty darn messed up, but think that it is not too late. Some just don’t much care. The JDMC may well represent the majority. But, we need everybody, all of those groups, to pitch in if anything is to work.

Any suggestions?

Sveiks Tom, answer me this please, how do the members do their canvassing for votes? do they do as they do here in England or is it just a television party political broadcast?

Karli - We have every kind of campaigning known to mankind. During campaign season, it is hard to go to most any public event without tripping over a politician or a party representative.

Please remember that we do not have a riding/district system here. We have a proportional representation system. The threshold is 5%. Any party with more than 5% vote gets seats in Saeima. That is a bit of a simplification but not too much.

maybe they should change the system, and have the poiticians go round canvassing every householder as they do here then they could have discussion forums at local town halls to see what the people of Latvija want them to do and what policies they want implemented then have a party discussion on the issues raised by the voters to see if the policies can be implemented into government legislation.

Don,t forget the government in Latvija can only work if the whole government is pulling as one in the same direction.

Maybe socialism is a solution. For everybody, not just the unwashed masses…..............

But socialism needs leeadership too. So, we come to that.

A leadership vacuum.

Karli - you are spouting simplistic slogans.
You make two huge assumptions:
1. That govt is pulling in the RIGHT direction (or, at least that it can),
2. We have politicians who are interested in what people think.

I personally think that Dombrovskis is one who cares and is pulling in the right direction.