Today is Karlis (and Spodris) name-day.  It is traditionally a day to give a small gift to all your friends with that name.  When Karlis Ulmanis was president, he envisioned something better.  He asked that, instead of sending him a gift, to please make a gift to your first school; be it books, musical instruments or just money.  Since then, this invitation to donate something to your first school has come to be known as “Draudzigais aicinajums” (friendly invitation). 

So donate to your schools today!

Apsveicu visus Karlus & Spodrus!

Thank you, Ilze, for posting this.  We had these regularly at the Latvian School in Rockville (DC) and I obviously never got the idea.  Now I feel terribly guilty thinking of it… Well, in any case, now I know!
S

What He envisioned, of course, was removing “dangerous” books from libraries and replacing them with heroic ones.

But I wouldn’t wanna spoil anybody’s party.

Vysu lobu,
/P

Heh - was wondering if you’d let this pass, Peteri!

Nonetheless, despite its… ambiguous… roots, the tradition has evolved into something entirely positive.

Thanks, Ilze of the ‘vardiena’ a day ago, I never knew why it was on that date. And prieciigu! Kaspars

Cedrin - I didn’t know that (about removing the books..) !!  Thank you. 
And thank you Kaspar!  I had a lovely vaarda-diena.  Went to the movies, saw ‘Juno’.

Get a grip, Peteri, about Ulmanis removing “dangerous books.” It’s happening today right here in the “sophisticated” and “progressive” U.S. and I’ll bet you in Latvia and most certainly in Russia. How about some comments on that to rouse you out of your contempt for Latvia’s “glorious past” and obsession with bad Ulmanis.  Give Ulmanis a break since he was a far more complex and interesting man than some of the straight, male-chauvinist, terminally-corrupt egomaniacs inhabiting today’s Latvian political life who appear to care less what books are in Latvia’s libraries as long as porn is available in Vecriga.

ambersun, Peteris speaks of history.  Perhaps not the history that you would like to talk about, but Ulmanis’ removal of thousands of volumes from schools and libraries is historical fact.  Most certainly worse things followed, perhaps worse things occur today, but that doesn’t matter.  What Peteris said is nonetheless true.  I could understand your snarling at misrepresentations, but what Peteris said was not a misrepresentation.

How about this, instead - true, Ulmanis removed volumes, but, in response to his Draudzigais Aicinajums, was there a net benefit?  i.e., the schools received… what?  You claim to be a historian… if you think Peteris’ statements were unfairly one-sided, look it up, and present the other side.  Rebut him not with “DON’T TALK ABOUT THAT!!!” but with the benefits.  (I’ll add - several years ago I addressed the local Saturday school on this very topic.  The numbers are out there, and not very hard to find)

One of my relatives was a teacher in Latvia in its independence days in the 1920s and 1930s. He was from Latgale and wrote several school maths textbooks using the Latgale dialect. I don’t remember the precise details, but after Ulmanis came to power he lost his job or was demoted or something to that effect. My father has little doubt that this was because he fell foul of the Ulmanists for using the Latgale dialect which I hear they weren’t too keen on.

Everyone may have a different opinion of Kārlis Ulmanis as a person, however no one should question the legacy that he left behind, specifically the Draudzīgais Aicinājums.This past Sunday we had the 58th consecutive Draudzīgais Aicinājums remembrance in Boston. The featured speaker was a graduate of Boston Latvian School, mācītājs Andris Grots, now a Lutheran Minister in Sigulda. The musical performance was by two talented young students. Why do I mention this? Each year at the Draudzīgais Aicinājums celebration, the Latvian community donates money to the Scholarship Fund, this year a total of over $13,000. The scholarships are awarded to young Boston Latvian students to attend Garezers, Sveika Latvija and similar events. For this, we can thank Kārlis Ulmanis, who in 1935 started the Draudzīgais Aicinājums.

Lauris

/Politruk spewd:

What He envisioned, of course, was removing “dangerous” books from libraries and replacing them with heroic ones.
But I wouldn’t wanna spoil anybody’s party.
Vysu lobu,
/P

For one, I do not remember any books removed from our school library before June 1940.  On the contrary, there were so many books donated, that there was not enough space to display them, many had to be kept in back-rooms and stacks had to be rotated.

/Politruk as usual makes a statement that, like some of courlander’s, amounts to a slogan, and nothing more. 

It would be nice if /Politruk would show us an official document, in proper time frame, listing book titles ordered to be removed by Latvian national government.

Ambersun made an excellent rebuff.  To bad that “majority people of Dvinsk” like /Politruk, do not have enough brains to understand the concept of free Latvian homeland for ethnic Latvians.

And /Politruk’s interspersion of some Lettgallian words is simply pathetic.

Mr. L. L.

Mr, LL, what happened to you leaving the forum? Go!

KasParTo -

Pray tell us when and where did I say I shall leave the Forum?

Mr. L. L.

I gave more information on this some time ago. According to Alfrēds Bērzinš (one of the principal Ulmanists and a chief ideologue of the régime), 1 677 167 volumes had been donated by 1939—but 1 270 374 volumes had been taken out of circulation.

Dunsdorfs writes that as a consequence, readership at libraries actually declined, as a form of silent protest, from 164 422 in 1935 to 139 422 in 1939.

Edgars Dunsdorfs’ biography, which Aivars Stranga calls one of the most notable 20th C achievements in the field of Latvian history, discusses these matters in detail. One would think that those of you devoted to sanitizing the dictator’s memory would possess the book, which is the sole thorough biography.

I agree with Anita—it has evolved into a fine tradition. It’s not my intention to deny that plenty was done for schools during the dictatorship, either. This is precisely why one should never forget or dismiss the darker aspects of what Knuts Skujenieks called a prelude to Soviet totalitarianism.

I’m currently working on a review of Edward Lucas’ forthcoming book, The New Cold War. Lucas observes how Putin consciously or unconsciously echoes the “what about” of Soviet propagandists—mention Afghanistan, and the response was “what about Vietnam.” Bring up the plight of Soviet Jews and get “treacly sincerity” about blacks in the US. Everybody who has ever been to s.c.b. knows when it’s time to drag out the Injuns…

I can’t help but see a parallel with Ambersun’s technique. I don’t see how pointing to Russia at every opportunity is anything but distraction and evasion.

Lucas, in his extended account of the dangers Russia now poses, doesn’t avoid unpleasant truths about the “ill-governed, tetchy, and intolerant countries” of “New Europe.”

In my view, whitewashing Latvia’s “glorious” history and venerating a dictator is unutterably vile, and Ulmanis’ legacy includes numerous poisonous morsels.

Vysu lobu,
/P

Mr. L. L. asked a simple favor:

It would be nice if /Politruk would show us an official document, in proper time frame, listing book titles ordered to be removed by Latvian national government.

Mr. L. L. is not surprised about /Politruk blowing soap bubbles because of his inability to answer direct question.  Apparently conception of “truth” has been smoked out of his brains.

Mr.  L. L.

I don’t know if such a document exists.

Vēstures avotu par cenzūru, tās darbības formām un metodēm Latvijā autoritārā režīma laikā (daļēji tas attiecas arī uz iepriekšējo periodu) ir maz. Tā kā presei šī tēma no 1934. līdz 1940.gadam saprotamu iemeslu dēļ bija absolūts tabu, zināmu ieskatu, tā teikt, cenzūras virtuvē, sniedz vienīgi Latvijas Valsts vēstures arhīva materiāli, kuri tomēr ir fragmentāri.

Dr. hab. Rihards Treijs, “Pie saknēm”

Prof. Treijs’ brief look into Ulmanis’ “kitchen of censorship” reveals something akin to the “socialist realism” practiced by “engineers of the soul"…

Likumā bija noteikts, ka periodiskā izdevumā nav atļauts ievietot materiālus, kuros nicinoši izsakās par valsti, tautu, valsts iekārtu, valsts galvu, tiesu, karaspēku, aizsargiem, policiju utt. Kas jāsaprot ar vārdu “nicinoši”, likumā nebija paskaidrots, bet katram žurnālistam bija skaidrs, ka kritizēt vairs varēja tikai sētnieku vai pārmijnieku.

I had a detailed article on censorship in the period, but it was published before the Diena digital archives begin. Even a bus schedule was censored (to excise Slavic toponyms).

Again, I would direct you to Dunsdorfs’ biography, where you can read about staging a Blaumanis play in a way that wouldn’t affect the exaltation of the sainted peasant. “Tādi laiki, tādi tikumi.”

Vysu lobu,
/P