|
Post by therealriga on Oct 2, 2022 15:45:39 GMT
No, absolutely not. In the population there are 24.4% Russians and 3.1% Belarusians who would be the main market for Russophones. However those in the "Latvian non-citizenship passport" who are basically older Russians who haven't passed language tests, make up 9.6% of the population and can't vote. Last time Saskana (Harmony) and the Latvian Russian Union got 23.14%. This time those two plus Stability and Sovereign Power Suverēnā vara got 18.4%. If anything it looks like the overwhelming majority of Russophones voted for those parties both last time and this time, but Latvian speakers who voted for those parties switched. The latter group includes people who voted for Harmony because they had a more left of centre economic policy and older Latvians who grew up mainly in the USSR are suspicious of the west and buy into the idea that the Ukraine situation is all the fault of the US/NATO. Looking at turnout, on the contrary Russophones seem to have turned more than last time. In more ethnically Russian towns turnout increased from 51.6% to 67% in Rezekne, 41.7% to 57% in Daugavpils and 41.9% to 53.7% in Ludza county. Many of those who changed from the Russophone parties will have switched, paradoxically as it sounds, to Latvia First, as their leader Ainars Slesers previously worked in coalition with Harmony on Riga council and spent much of the previous term positioning himself with anti-vaxxers, a tendency favoured by Russians here more than Latvians. 10% of the population - and that would be a higher proportion of the electorate - cannot vote. Sounds like they have effectively been made stateless.It's really hard to look upon this as democratic, in the same way that Ukraine is at best an emerging democracy. They have, but then again, the path to citizenship is an easy one: learn the state language, pass the test and they have full citizenship and can vote. Many of them chose not to do that since Russia allows Latvian non-citizens to visit there without a visa. The group is dying off so it's less of an issue at each election.
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Oct 2, 2022 15:49:38 GMT
If Development/For! (A/P) fail to get back, which now looks likely, that will mean the 4 largest parties from the previous 2018 election, who received 60% of the vote and won 68 of 100 seats, have lost all their seats. It's hard to think of anywhere else where that's happened or any other country which sees such exceptional volatility as Latvia, especially without major events as a catalyst. (Ukraine and the cost of living problems don't seem to be the main factors.)
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,154
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Oct 2, 2022 15:56:40 GMT
10% of the population - and that would be a higher proportion of the electorate - cannot vote. Sounds like they have effectively been made stateless.It's really hard to look upon this as democratic, in the same way that Ukraine is at best an emerging democracy. They have, but then again, the path to citizenship is an easy one: learn the state language, pass the test and they have full citizenship and can vote. Many of them chose not to do that since Russia allows Latvian non-citizens to visit there without a visa. The group is dying off so it's less of an issue at each election. Forcing people to learn a language when their own has always been perfectly acceptable? Pretend democracy. Like Ukraine who elected an actor because all the predecessors were so corrupt. Of course he's now been made ahero by the West but I'm not convinced.
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Oct 2, 2022 16:08:20 GMT
They have, but then again, the path to citizenship is an easy one: learn the state language, pass the test and they have full citizenship and can vote. Many of them chose not to do that since Russia allows Latvian non-citizens to visit there without a visa. The group is dying off so it's less of an issue at each election. Forcing people to learn a language when their own has always been perfectly acceptable? Pretend democracy. Like Ukraine who elected an actor because all the predecessors were so corrupt. Of course he's now been made ahero by the West but I'm not convinced. It hasn't, especially when that language was imposed in the last 80 years through armed conquest and has not had official status for 3 decades, which is more than enough time for anyone to learn it.
|
|
|
Post by rcronald on Oct 2, 2022 16:10:35 GMT
Does this mean that a plurality of Russian speakers probably chose non-Russophone parties? No, absolutely not. In the population there are 24.4% Russians and 3.1% Belarusians who would be the main market for Russophones. However those in the "Latvian non-citizenship passport" who are basically older Russians who haven't passed language tests, make up 9.6% of the population and can't vote. Last time Saskana (Harmony) and the Latvian Russian Union got 23.14%. This time those two plus Stability and Sovereign Power Suverēnā vara got 18.4%. If anything it looks like the overwhelming majority of Russophones voted for those parties both last time and this time, but Latvian speakers who voted for those parties switched. The latter group includes people who voted for Harmony because they had a more left of centre economic policy and older Latvians who grew up mainly in the USSR are suspicious of the west and buy into the idea that the Ukraine situation is all the fault of the US/NATO. Looking at turnout, on the contrary Russophones seem to have turned out more than last time. In more ethnically Russian towns turnout increased from 51.6% to 67% in Rezekne, 41.7% to 57% in Daugavpils and 41.9% to 53.7% in Ludza county. Many of those who changed from the Russophone parties will have switched, paradoxically as it sounds, to Latvia First, as their leader Ainars Slesers previously worked in coalition with Harmony on Riga council and spent much of the previous term positioning himself with anti-vaxxers, a tendency favoured by Russians here more than Latvians. I assume that the left leaning Latvian Harmony voters migrated to the Progressives?
|
|
|
Post by aargauer on Oct 2, 2022 16:14:40 GMT
They have, but then again, the path to citizenship is an easy one: learn the state language, pass the test and they have full citizenship and can vote. Many of them chose not to do that since Russia allows Latvian non-citizens to visit there without a visa. The group is dying off so it's less of an issue at each election. Forcing people to learn a language when their own has always been perfectly acceptable? Pretend democracy. Like Ukraine who elected an actor because all the predecessors were so corrupt. Of course he's now been made ahero by the West but I'm not convinced. Um no. Im an immigrant and wouldn't expect to get a passport unless I can converse with natives in their own language reasonably well. That is true of pretty much every democracy, including the UK.
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Oct 2, 2022 16:14:52 GMT
No, absolutely not. In the population there are 24.4% Russians and 3.1% Belarusians who would be the main market for Russophones. However those in the "Latvian non-citizenship passport" who are basically older Russians who haven't passed language tests, make up 9.6% of the population and can't vote. Last time Saskana (Harmony) and the Latvian Russian Union got 23.14%. This time those two plus Stability and Sovereign Power Suverēnā vara got 18.4%. If anything it looks like the overwhelming majority of Russophones voted for those parties both last time and this time, but Latvian speakers who voted for those parties switched. The latter group includes people who voted for Harmony because they had a more left of centre economic policy and older Latvians who grew up mainly in the USSR are suspicious of the west and buy into the idea that the Ukraine situation is all the fault of the US/NATO. Looking at turnout, on the contrary Russophones seem to have turned out more than last time. In more ethnically Russian towns turnout increased from 51.6% to 67% in Rezekne, 41.7% to 57% in Daugavpils and 41.9% to 53.7% in Ludza county. Many of those who changed from the Russophone parties will have switched, paradoxically as it sounds, to Latvia First, as their leader Ainars Slesers previously worked in coalition with Harmony on Riga council and spent much of the previous term positioning himself with anti-vaxxers, a tendency favoured by Russians here more than Latvians. I assume that the left leaning Latvian Harmony voters migrated to the Progressives? More likely split between Harmony and Stability with a few leaking to Progressives.
|
|
|
Post by rcronald on Oct 2, 2022 16:21:17 GMT
I assume that the left leaning Latvian Harmony voters migrated to the Progressives? More likely split between Harmony and Stability with a few leaking to Progressives. I’m talking about the ethnic Latvian voters who left Harmony
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Oct 2, 2022 16:24:39 GMT
More likely split between Harmony and Stability with a few leaking to Progressives. I’m talking about the ethnic Latvian voters who left Harmony Oh. Yes, most likely since the Progressives did well in Riga where Harmony had a big decline.
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Oct 2, 2022 16:52:34 GMT
Forcing people to learn a language when their own has always been perfectly acceptable? Pretend democracy. Like Ukraine who elected an actor because all the predecessors were so corrupt. Of course he's now been made ahero by the West but I'm not convinced. It hasn't, especially when that language was imposed in the last 80 years through armed conquest and has not had official status for 3 decades, which is more than enough time for anyone to learn it. In Tashkent, Bishkek, and Almaty there are many Russian speakers who don’t speak the official language (not to speak of southern Siberia where almost no-one speaks Kazakh). These states do not deprive Russian speakers of the right to vote, let alone citizenship. There are of course advantages to learning the now official languages, and many younger people make the effort.
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,154
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Oct 2, 2022 17:00:45 GMT
Forcing people to learn a language when their own has always been perfectly acceptable? Pretend democracy. Like Ukraine who elected an actor because all the predecessors were so corrupt. Of course he's now been made ahero by the West but I'm not convinced. Um no. Im an immigrant and wouldn't expect to get a passport unless I can converse with natives in their own language reasonably well. That is true of pretty much every democracy, including the UK. This is the language they have always spoken. Indeed, in some areas Russian speaking was in the majority. Because criticism of the Baltic States seems beyond the pale, the fact is they spoke their own language and they are natives. Pretend democracy.
|
|
|
Post by aargauer on Oct 2, 2022 17:16:36 GMT
Um no. Im an immigrant and wouldn't expect to get a passport unless I can converse with natives in their own language reasonably well. That is true of pretty much every democracy, including the UK. This is the language they have always spoken. Indeed, in some areas Russian speaking was in the majority. Because criticism of the Baltic States seems beyond the pale, the fact is they spoke their own language and they are natives. Pretend democracy. The large majority of ethnic Russians in Latvia derive from 20th century migration from Russia. Anyone with a descendant in Latvia pre-1940 has citizenship rights. I don't understand why someone who is, or who is descended from a recent migrant who isn't linguistically integrated should get a passport. I also don't understand why Russian speaking parents aren't ensuring their kids learn Latvian, even if they themselves aren't picking it up.
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Oct 2, 2022 17:27:46 GMT
It hasn't, especially when that language was imposed in the last 80 years through armed conquest and has not had official status for 3 decades, which is more than enough time for anyone to learn it. In Tashkent, Bishkek, and Almaty there are many Russian speakers who don’t speak the official language (not to speak of southern Siberia where almost no-one speaks Kazakh). These states do not deprive Russian speakers of the right to vote, let alone citizenship. There are of course advantages to learning the now official languages, and many younger people make the effort. Russian *IS* an official language in Bishkek and Almaty and semi-official in Tashkent so by definition, they do speak the official language. It isn't in Riga and hasn't been for 3 decades so the situation isn't the same.
|
|
|
Post by ibfc on Oct 2, 2022 17:30:59 GMT
In Tashkent, Bishkek, and Almaty there are many Russian speakers who don’t speak the official language (not to speak of southern Siberia where almost no-one speaks Kazakh). These states do not deprive Russian speakers of the right to vote, let alone citizenship. There are of course advantages to learning the now official languages, and many younger people make the effort. Russian *IS* an official language in Bishkek and Almaty and semi-official in Tashkent so by definition, they do speak the official language. It isn't in Riga and hasn't been for 3 decades so the situation isn't the same. Well, since these were all former SSRs, maybe the situation should be the same.
|
|
|
Post by rcronald on Oct 2, 2022 17:40:06 GMT
therealriga What's the most likely coalition? JV+NA+AS?
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,154
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Oct 2, 2022 17:42:04 GMT
In Tashkent, Bishkek, and Almaty there are many Russian speakers who don’t speak the official language (not to speak of southern Siberia where almost no-one speaks Kazakh). These states do not deprive Russian speakers of the right to vote, let alone citizenship. There are of course advantages to learning the now official languages, and many younger people make the effort. Russian *IS* an official language in Bishkek and Almaty and semi-official in Tashkent so by definition, they do speak the official language. It isn't in Riga and hasn't been for 3 decades so the situation isn't the same. And it is that decision which was not acceptable.
|
|
|
Post by aargauer on Oct 2, 2022 17:44:34 GMT
Russian *IS* an official language in Bishkek and Almaty and semi-official in Tashkent so by definition, they do speak the official language. It isn't in Riga and hasn't been for 3 decades so the situation isn't the same. Well, since these were all former SSRs, maybe the situation should be the same. That's like saying all ex British colonies should have English enforced on them. It'll make sense for some, either as a main language (Carribean), or a common language (India), and not for others (Iraq).
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Oct 2, 2022 17:47:43 GMT
Russian *IS* an official language in Bishkek and Almaty and semi-official in Tashkent so by definition, they do speak the official language. It isn't in Riga and hasn't been for 3 decades so the situation isn't the same. Well, since these were all former SSRs, maybe the situation should be the same. Why? They broke away precisely because they didn't want to be the same. Why should being a former anything mean standardisation of vastly culturally different societies? Should Algeria, Syria and Vietnam as former French colonies all follow each other?
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,154
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Oct 2, 2022 17:49:39 GMT
Well, since these were all former SSRs, maybe the situation should be the same. Why? They broke away precisely because they didn't want to be the same. Why should being a former anything mean standardisation of vastly culturally different societies? Should Algeria, Syria and Vietnam as former French colonies all follow each other? Latvian nationalism is an unpleasant beast....and they have the nerve to criticize the Russians
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Oct 2, 2022 17:54:44 GMT
Russian *IS* an official language in Bishkek and Almaty and semi-official in Tashkent so by definition, they do speak the official language. It isn't in Riga and hasn't been for 3 decades so the situation isn't the same. And it is that decision which was not acceptable. It's the decision of the Russians to invade, deport and murder anyone who opposed them, then spend a half century trying to impose their culture which is what was not acceptable. The civil societies in the Baltics decided to reverse that and take a course away from Russia. The Uzbeks, Kazakhs and Kyrgyz chose to maintain closer links with Moscow. From where I'm sitting the first group of three countries are doing infinitely better as a result of that choice than the latter three. And if we're to talk about human rights, the rights and freedoms of ethnic Russians in the Baltics is infinitely better than it is in Central Asia.
|
|