Joe Siegerist knew way back in 1995 but he never told anybody.

Tarmo the Nordic {sic} a.k.a. Gelge W. Twigg {sic} a.k.a. El Subcommandante {sic} a.k.a. You Heathen Rabbi {sic}

Thanks, Ivar for the informative article.

But this is what I was specifically referring to:

“In order to achieve the aim of the excavation, archive information is needed that might narrow down the place of burial to an area of approximately 10 m2.”

This may well go the way of Raoul Wallenberg—lots of witnesses, partial records, but if I’m not mistaken, the key archival records were never discovered.

ak

Listen.......what the man says...........

http://www.historia.lv/alfabets/U/ul/ulmanis/dok/piezimes.htm

ps. to AK: From what i have gleaned, his captors have
been circumspect about the circumstances of KU death
and place of rest............

And here I thought the Vadonis’ bones were in Turkmenistan, Ivar—is that Mother Russia in your eyes?

It was an effort to stem dirty politics in Latvia which some like to call democratic, while others saw it merely as a façade.

Yeah, sure. Are you really so daft? Democratic means democratic—you have democratic institutions, maybe an independent judiciary, all that cool stuff… and, in a Republic, you elect people to represent you. It’s pretty simple, in principle, no matter how rugged the mechanics may get. A façade? If the gorgeous and angelic Lettish people so loved Ulmanis, don’t you think they could have elected the God-given leader? Unfortunately, the facts are that the Vadonis was slipping in popularity to the point where he could barely get into Parliament, much less legally get control of the country.

His politics were clean, perhaps? Excuse me, but the funny, funky thing about dictators is that they’re not responsible to anybody and don’t hold real elections. In fact, they’re not especially receptive to public opinion, except at pep rallies.

Vysu lobu,
/P

Like usual Cedrins is quick to jump to conclusions. They didn’t find his bones in Turkmenistan. Secondly, don’t fall for the commie lies. It’s propaganda. Ulmanis could well be stashed away in some secret vault in mother Russia. Until it is known for sure do not discount the ‘what ifs’ and other possibilities that may be uncovered.

Of course it was a façade. It wasn’t working despite the pretence. It’s the same way with Putins democratic Russia today. He calls it a different democratic model from EU and USA – as Cedrins says, “democratic means democratic!” It is no wonder the Russian nation is tickled pink or should it be called red.

Electioneering in Latvia did not work. I do not believe that Latvians were able to “… elect the God-given leader,” they had too many different gods. Hence, one god has to step up at the plate and take his turn at the bat. There was no meeting of the minds, as all the parties were grasping for the straws of power. The country was at a stand still. It was not only Vadonis who was slipping in popularity but the entire so called democratic government was sinking in popularity.

It is not at all that Ulmanis politics were clean, as you like to iterate. I’m sure that he knew how to hit below the belt as the best that Social democratic party had to offer. If Ulmanis had not taken the reigns the other parties were eager to step into the void and you would merely have another name to poopoo.

Just when the fun is beginning I have to zip …

Cheers, Ivars

Let me be quick to jump to the conclusion that you are out of your mind, my dear Rozīnīte. Yes, we have different gods. When I say a democracy is a democracy, etc., I mean to say that I realize that we could never agree, but we have structures in which we can constructively disagree. You can’t run my country. This is not a ball game—it’s our choice of how we create our everyday reality and look to and plan for the future, and neither you nor I have the right to destroy these structures, usurp power and make it a dictatorship.

There is zero evidence to suggest that anybody other than Ulmanītis would destroy democracy. Your contention that the country was at a standstill is a ludicrous meme—it’s the same thing as saying “and now for something completely different” in a Python skit… the country was doing quite well, and any decent historian could tell you that. The tauta can tell you that—you need only look at the stats, which show that voter turnout was very high and voters were increasingly turning towards the center.

You compare a fractious, ornery democracy to Putin’s Russia? There could be no worse comparison—Ulmanis’ rule is much, much closer to Putin’s Russia than “the good years” of parliamentary democracy. A façade, Ivar? The thing is that Ulmanis didn’t even bother with a façade—unlike in the classic dictatorships of his time, there wasn’t even a rubber-stamp Parliament. There was nothing. Just a megalomaniac on kvass. Dubultģēnijs. The greatest statesman in Europe!

Your constant resort to metaphors like “taking the reins” is unutterably pathetic. I can forgive this sort of nihilistic hero-worship in people who grew up under totalitarianism, but it is unforgivable when it comes from people who spent their entire lives in a flourishing democracy, like you have. Fine, Ivar—let a few “strong leaders” “take the reins”! Not only was there no dissent in Ulmanis’ Latvia—there was no consent.

When the shithouse was about to come down, many of his friends and co-conspirators tried to urge him to restore some legitimacy to the Republic. He not only refused—he silenced them, drunk on power. So it is that we are left with his lovely invitation—the Soviet armed forces enter our country with our consent… you stay in your places, I’ll stay in mine. Many a wag, asked what should be sculpted on his lovely monument, suggested exactly those words. They are the most enduring words he ever said, you know. Everything else was just for show. 

I think his place is in Turkmenistan.

Vysu lobu,
/P

Ulmanis was heavy handed--but this level of diatribe is exactly the kind of talk which justifies all sorts of people hanging everything from Nazi fascist killers of Jews to Holocaust deniers to insulters of the Great Patriotic War on the Baltics. You paint Ulmanis as fascist as Hitler and Mussolini. You talk about breaking into homes the same way the Soviets carted people off to Siberia.

I realize it’s popular today to paint Ulmanis as “softening” the Latvians for the totalitarianism to come. But that’s not the story my mother tells—and she was an adult back then, so first hand from her adult experiences.

We look at authoritarianism with 20:20 vision. Recall the other Baltics had already gone authoritarian. Even FDR was offered authoritarian rule over the U.S.--authoritarianism was, in many ways, admired. You condemn the past without putting it in context.

And exactly how many thousands did Ulmanis kill?

according to ambersuns:

ambersun - 16 May 2007 11:01 AM

Robert, you identified your LOL INTERESTS as “Taisneiba, Baltiesu tautu vienibas veicinasana.” So far you are batting 0, as we say here in the U.S.,

Funny, you have NOTHING listed for your interests.  That sort of makes you less than zero, don’t it?  At least I’m in the game.

ambersun - 16 May 2007 11:01 AM

...here in the U.S., land of slave-holding national heroes like Jefferson, concentration camps for U.S. (Japanese) citizens, segregation (before, during, and after the Ulmanis years) , banned books in 2007, the death penalty, home of Comander-and-Chief (Varonis) Bush (friend of Comrade-Varonis Putin). I hope this brief page from American history helps give you a more-balanced perspective on Latvian history and Ulmanis.

ambersuns, you fail to make clear what these snippets from American history have to do with Kārlis Ulmanis and his fascist putsch.  Curse Jefferson for promoting representational democracy, seperation of Church and State, anti-Federalism, the Bill of Rights, Freedom of Speech, et al.  Ulmanis clearly had no need for any of that!

Criticising the Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt for detaining the Nisei is an interesting tactic.  However, the United States government apologised for this action, returned whatever property it seized and compensated those people and their descendants.  To date, the government of Latvia has not apologized or compensated people for Ulmanis’ crimes.

The Death Penalty?  I share your sense of outrage that the Republic of Latvia put Ansis Kaupēns to death.  Bush?  He was **LEGALLY** elected.  Twice.  Can’t say that about Kārlis Ulmanis’ presidency.  Putin?  Can’t hold a candle to Stalin, whom **Ulmanis invited** into Latvia.

ambersun - 16 May 2007 11:01 AM

I do not want to further debate the Ulmanis Legacy with you since your eagerness for “battle” is palatable and alarming. I see many more worthy “battles” to wage on behalf of Latvian and Latvia’s interests. I don’t think you wrote your “critique” of Ulmanis with a desire to enlighten and further Latvian unity but to provoke.

If this is the best you can come up with, ambersuns, I don’t blame you for giving up.  Sorry you don’t like the facts.  You might have been better served waxing nostalgic on the other thread.  Countering a litany of Ulmanis’ crimes with dirt roads, Jefferson’s negroes, and Bush-bashing is sort of pathetic.  You could have at least TRIED to dispute some facts.  At least make a case for the commander of the Daugavpils garrison, who resisted Ulmanis’ coup.

ambersun - 16 May 2007 11:01 AM

I injected my comments because you did provoke me. You have further provoked me with your flip response to “muddy roads in Latgale.” You wrote: “Laying down the black tar macadam to every chicken shack betwixt Kraslava and Rozovka won’t accomplish squat.”

It’s Rogovka, ambersun, ROGOVKA.  If you are going to quote me, at least quote me properly.  If you don’t know the significance of Rogovka, I doubt we could have an intelligent discourse about Latgale.  Andrievs Jurdžs, Pīters Miglinīks, Pēteris Jurciņš… any of these guys ring a bell?

ambersun - 16 May 2007 11:01 AM

While you and the “good old boys” high-fiving in your LOL posts cruise around Latgale in the “French four-banger” maybe you could take one of those unpaved, ungraded, overgrown, dirt-two-tracks to my elderly relatives “chicken shack(s)” and share with them your wisdom about Ulmanis, Latvian unity, and what Latgale really needs.

Andrejs might have a thing or two to say about being included in my “Good Old Boy” company, but Pēteris’ and I have taken several road trips down the dirt-two-tracks of Māras Zeme.  I’ve spoken with a great many “lauķi” as well as many Dvinsk city-slickers.  Where exactly did you say that Granny and Gramps Ambersuņi hail from?  I’ll look them up next time I’m down that way, even converse with them in their native tongue—the very language Ulmanis tried to stomp out of existence.

/R

As I recall, Ulmanis & government were still corresponding with Moscow after the initial invasion seeking a diplomatic route. Realistically, had the Baltics resisted the way Finland chose to, they would have been crushed--and it would have been 0% Latvians and 100% Russians. (If we need a precedent, when Peter the Great got finished taking Latvia, there were only 90,000 people left alive in Latvia--including Riga.)

Latvians staying in their place saved the Latvian for another day. As for Ulmanis’ “I will stay in mine,” there are those who took it not as an invitation but as his commitment not to flee. A commitment which he paid for with his life.

Really, all those who hang everything that went wrong on Ulmanis give him far too much credit.

Labrīt, Pēter!

Stranga compares Lithuania to prove that “nothing could have altered the circumstances of Latvia’s occupation and annexation” (there, Smetona refused to sign any documents dictated by the occupiers and fled). Nonetheless, Stranga says that Ulmanis’ “decision not to offer even diplomatic protest was without doubt wrong and deserves severe criticism.” I’m not playing what-if to suggest that Latvia should have resisted, though the cynic in me would point out that many of the men who would have died by fiercely defending our Republic were either deported or died in the uniforms of the Third Reich instead, many of their wives and children perishing. I’m considering what actually happened rather than speculating about what could have happened—as I’ve said before, my problem with playing what-if is that if you move one card the whole house of history falls down; had Ulmanis not been dictator, Munters likely wouldn’t have been Foreign Minister, our foreign policy may have been different (as Valters urged), etc.

As to taking his famous speech “not as an invitation but as his commitment not to flee”—one would really have to employ the most bizarre pseudo-postmodernist interpretation to read it that way.

Mūsu zemē kopš šī rīta ienāk padomju kaŗaspēks. Tas notiek ar valdības ziņu un piekrišanu, kas savukārt izriet no pastāvošām draudzīgām attiecībām starp Latviju un Padomju Savienību. Es tādēļ vēlos, ka arī mūsu zemes iedzīvotāji ienākošās kaŗaspēka daļas uzlūko ar draudzību…

http://www.historia.lv/alfabets/L/la/okupac/prese/1940.06.17.ulmanis.htm

Roberts goes further than I do in painting Ulmanis’ régime black, perhaps, but in my opinion that’s better than trying to avoid the word “dictatorship” or whitewash what was beyond doubt an illegitimate government in which the people had no voice. The left didn’t shy away from clear language… and neither did the press attaché at Fascist Italy’s Embassy in Rīga. Bruno Kalniņš:

Valdības propaganda sistēmatiski apkaŗoja un noniecināja demokratiju. Nevis demokratijas trūkumus ieteica novērst, bet to vispār apzīmēja par nederīgu iekārtu. Demokratijas vietā valdības propaganda sludināja “autoritāru iekārtu”. Latvijas skolu jaunatni audzināja naidā un ignorancē pret demokratiju vispār un lielajām rietumu demokratijām sevišķi. Tāpēc saprotams, ka toreizējais fašistiskās Italijas sūtniecības preses atašejs Rīgā V. Foskīni par Ulmaņa režīmu rakstīja:

Fašistisks bija 15. maija apvērsums, un fašisms pēc būtības ir tas gars, kuŗš vada latviešu patriotus, kas tagad beidzot apvienoti vienā vienīgā Fascio.

Ulmaņa režīms pēc sava polītiskā rakstura bija nacionāla diktātūra, kas galvenām kārtām bazējās uz bijušo Zemnieku savienības aprindām. Tā stipri līdzinājās Dolfusa diktātūrai Austrijā. 1934.-1938. g. Ulmaņa diktātūra nebija tik smaga kā Hitlera, Musolīni un Staļina diktātūras, un tai nebija totalitārs raksturs, bet tā bija smagāka par Igaunijas, Lietuvas, Polijas un Rumānijas trīsdesmito gadu diktātūrām. Ulmaņa režīms bija arī daudz nebrīvāks par cariskās patvaldības polītiskajiem apstākļiem pēc 1905. gada revolūcijas.

http://www.briviba.lv/LSDSP 50 gadi/SATURS.htm

To put it in context, Pēter—yes, Fascist Italy (and indeed Nazi Germany) had many admirers at the time, including in the great democracies… but not all democracies died or got snuffed, and some democrats survived and retained their principles even in the dictatorships (and in exile, where some of Latvia’s democrats ended up). To try to whitewash Ulmanis’ dictatorship is to disrespect them.

It is unrealistic to fantasize about fighting instead of saying “welcome, Soviet friends!”—but there’s plenty to suggest that Ulmanis was not really in the real world in 1939/40. How realistic was it to “correspond with Moscow seeking a diplomatic route” in June 1940?

Is the idea that Ulmanis’ régime “softened” Latvians for the totalitarianism to come merely “popular today,” or fashionable, as you suggest? What about the flood of disinformation that continued to flow until the flood of Soviet and then Nazi disinformation replaced it? You’ve probably seen the Atpūta in which portraits of the two brotherly vadoņi, Ulmanis and Stalin, appear en face. Ulmanis hid the horrors of the Soviet Union from his people—the genocide of 1937/38 was practically a taboo subject, and the 13 October 1939 headline of Jaunākās Ziņas loudly proclaimed that “our state is internally and externally independent and free and will remain so.” That was a Goebbelsian lie, of course, and some people knew that—Valters heard the rumblings of the tauta from afar and begged his friend to restore democracy and shift the course of Munters’ well nigh treasonous diplomacy.

Blood under the bridge… but what about the lasting effects of a generation raised “naidā un ignorancē pret demokratiju vispār un lielajām rietumu demokratijām sevišķi”—effects we still see today, with 54% of the population yearning for “a strong hand” and Raivītis and his friends gathering at Ulmanis’ statue on 15 May? What about the deep effects on the national psyche, especially the trimda? The practical effects on our historiography? The fact that telling the truth back then would mean that you wouldn’t be compelled to spend hours trying to Wiki-prove that Latvia was occupied, which it was, because there wouldn’t be a question about whether we were or not if we’d had a legitimate government that formally protested? What about people who might have fled had they known what horrors to expect, or at least not gathered for “maneuvers”? What about the damage the régime did to inter-ethnic relations in Latvia?

Ar cieņu,
/P

Guess who killed J.R. ?

Nothing is to be gained either by whitewashing what clearly was a dictatorship, and a dictatorship that responded incompetently to the Soviet takeover--or on the other hand by exaggerating the evils of the regime. Russian friends here have been getting a heavy dose of misinformation; it’s comical to hear them carrying on about the fascist dictatorship in Latvia when one considers the Soviet Union of that period--or for that matter a number of far worse governments in many parts of Europe. I don’t think, for example, that we get very far with the observation that “vadonis” is equivalent to “Führer”; that’s true, but if KU was imitating anyone, it was not Adolf H. but Il Duce--so the relevant comparison is with Italian, not German. Discussing these things with the misguided krievi, I find myself in the odd and uncomfortable position of having to defend KU, but when it becomes clear that they have been given to understand that KU was responsible for the holocaust, well, it’s time to come to his defense.

Entre nous, I think it would help if there were more factual information available: how many were put in the concentration camp, for how long, etc. There was some sort of forced labor camp, but I have never been able to discover any real information about it. Given the “Baltic fascist” canard now peddled by Mosow, I would avoid the adjective; political science has never come up with an agreed definition for “fascism,” so there is no real point in arguing whether and to what extent it fits, but the images it conjures up in most minds do not describe Latvia even in 1939. KU belongs to a group of authoritarian dictators who were no friends of freedom and democracy but no murderous monsters either; he was a tad worse than Päts, two tads worse than Mannerheim, essentially in the same category as they, Smetona, Metaxis--the May coup is kauns un negods no doubt, but when I hear Russians carrying on about the fascist dicatator in Riga I have something of the same reaction as when, decades ago, a friend from India went into a tirade about racism in America (did anyone catch the National Geographic article a couple of years on go on the conditions of the “dalits” in India half a century after independence?)—God knows I don’t want to whitewash the racism that continues to plague the USA, but when the pot calls the kettle black a bit of perspective is needed.

And speaking of kauns un negods, democratic Latvia is not gathering honor by its reaction to the current Russian campaign against Estonia, is it?

Stephen

No need to be a politruk to look up fasces..........

Antiquity

“With one hand he returns the fasces, symbol of power as appointed dictator of Rome. His other hand holds the plow, as he resumes the life of a citizen and farmer.” — A statue of Cincinnatus in Cincinnati, Ohio.The fasces lictoriae ("bundles of the lictors") (in Italian, fascio littorio) symbolised power and authority (imperium) in ancient Rome. A corps of apparitores (subordinate officials) called lictors each carried fasces as a sort of staff of office before a magistrate, in a number corresponding to his rank, in public ceremonies and inspections, and bearers of fasces preceded praetors, propraetors, consuls, proconsuls, Masters of the Horse, dictators, and Caesars. During triumphs (public celebrations held in Rome after a military conquest) heroic soldiers — those who had suffered injury in battle — carried fasces in procession.

Roman historians recalled that twelve lictors had ceremoniously accompanied the Etruscan kings of Rome in the distant past, and sought to account for the number and to provide etymologies for the name lictor.

Believed to date from Etruscan times, the symbolism of the fasces at one level suggested strength through unity. The bundle of rods bound together symbolizes the strength which a single rod lacks. The axe symbolized the state’s power and authority. The rods symbolized the state’s obligation to exercise restraint in the exercising of that power. The highest magistrates would have their lictors unbind the fasces they carried as a warning if approaching the limits of restraint.

The Romans adopted the symbol of the fasces from the Etruscans. It may have an earlier link to the eastern Mediterranean — such as to the labrys, the Anatolian and Minoan double-headed axe, later incorporated into the praetorial fasces.

Traditionally, fasces carried within the Pomerium — the limits of the sacred inner City of Rome — had their axe blades removed. This signified that under normal political circumstances, the imperium-bearing magistrates did not have the judicial power of life and death; that power rested, within the city, with the people through the assemblies. However, during times of emergencies when the Roman Republic declared a dictatorship (dictatura), lictors attending to the dictator kept the axe-blades even inside the Pomerium — a sign that the dictator had the ultimate power in his own hands. But in 48 BC, guards holding bladed fasces guided Vatia Isauricus to the tribunal of Marcus Caelius, and Vatia Isauricus used one to destroy Caelius’s magisterial chair (sella curulis).

As far as the numbers of KU political prisoners, i have
found a reference of several hundred retained briefly.
The “Konzlager” in Liepaja was an old navy installation.

Peteris Cedrins et al.,

“....Re the Great Depression—Latvia was recovering before Ulmanis took over.........

You mean Latvia was recovering during the time Ulmanis, eight times elected prime minister, was the head of the government. ?

”................ In essence, Ulmanis barked about various non-existrent threats.............

“.......... Ulmanis hid the horrors of the Soviet Union from his people—the genocide of 1937/38 was practically a taboo subject, and the 13 October 1939 headline of Jaunākās Ziņas loudly proclaimed that “our state is internally and externally independent “.

At least be consistant, which is it ?  “ Ulmanis barked about non-existant threats” or “ Ulmanis hid horrors from his people”.

Ulmanis was first among the founders of the Republic of Latvia, or do you dispute that too?

Ulmanis was the leading political figure in Latvia from the start of independence to its demise.  And the name Ulmanis figured prominently in the rebirth of the nation.

K. Ulmanis could have put a statue of himself on top of the Freedom Monument and the people would have cheered.  But he did not.

Ulmanis and his government had the good sense to issue extraordinary powers to embassies, and salt the gold reserves, in London and Washington and not in nazi Berlin or fascist Rome.  History later proved that had been the right thing to do.

Visu labu,

Good old boys? My favorite Randy Newman album.

Rednecks

Last night I saw Lester Maddox on a TV show
With some smart-ass New York Jew
And the Jew laughed at Lester Maddox
And the audience laughed at Lester Maddox too
Well, he may be a fool but he’s our fool
If they think they’re better than him they’re wrong
So I went to the park and I took some paper along
And that’s where I made this song

We talk real funny down here
We drink too much and we laugh too loud
We’re too dumb to make it in no Northern town
Keepin’ the niggers down

We got no-necked oilmen from Texas
And good ol’ boys from Tennessee
And college men from LSU
Went in dumb - come out dumb too
Hustlin’ ‘round Atlanta in their alligator shoes
Gettin’ drunk every weekend at the barbecues
Keepin’ the niggers down

We’re rednecks, we’re rednecks
We don’t know our ass from a hole in the ground
We’re rednecks, we’re rednecks
We’re keeping the niggers down

Now your northern ######’s a Negro
You see he’s got his dignity
Down here we’re too ignorant to realize
That the North has set the ###### free

Yes he’s free to be put in a cage
In Harlem in New York City
And he’s free to be put in a cage in the South-Side of Chicago, the West-Side
And he’s free to be put in a cage in Hough in Cleveland
And he’s free to be put in a cage in East St. Louis
And he’s free to be put in a cage in Fillmore in San Francisco
And he’s free to be put in a cage in Roxbury in Boston
They’re gatherin’ ‘em up from miles around
Keepin’ the niggers down

We’re rednecks, we’re rednecks
And we don’t know our ass from a hole in the ground
We’re rednecks, we’re rednecks
We’re keeping the niggers down

We are keeping the niggers down

(P.S. for the PC contingent. Randy is parodying racism. Not advocating it.)

As to Ulmanis. Sorry, but democracy is about mechanics. I stopped believing in Benevolent Dictators right around the time I gave up on Santa Claus. An argument can certainly be made that Ulmanis did the “right” thing, but it is undeniable that he killed democracy in Latvia. The concequences are still evident today.The question isn’t really about whether or not Ulmanis was good for Latvia. The question should be whether or not Dictatorship is good for Latvia. Considering the mythical status Ulmanis enjoys to this day I think any “attack” on that image is a good thing. The alternative frankly frightens me. There are far too many Latvians who would gladly trade away democracy for a Vadonis.  It wasn’t that long ago that Ivars G and others on this forum were advocating giving Vadonis like powers to Repse. Bad, bad idea.
It is also undeniable that Ulmanis failed. Latvia was crushed and ceased to exist for 50 years. It always fascinates that Ulmanis enjoys this mythical status when ultimately he failed. Is Latvian history that bereft of worthy role models?
Whether or not a “democratic” government would have made a difference is again debatable.

And something sure to cheer Roberts.

News Corp. buys Latvian TV networks

http://latviansonline.com/index.php/news/article/2857/

Andrejs, off to London and then to the land of good old boys in French four-bangers