Features
Recent features
Latvians again dot North American hockey
Čikāgas piecīši has secure spot in diaspora’s history
Latvian hockey, and Latvian hockey fans, come to Ireland
Latvia’s hockey juniors make their mark in Canada
Iļģi marks 25 years of pushing folk’s boundaries
The coalition is dead; long live the coalition
Latvian voters worldwide head to ballot box
Party Web sites improve, but could be better
Blogger: don’t vote, but push for change
Blogger: don’t vote, but push for change


Eso Antons Benjamiņš has begun a blog, Change for Latvia, to push for political change in his homeland.
For more information
Change for Latvia
Eso Antons Benjamiņš uses his blog to call on voters to not cast ballots in the Oct. 7 parliamentary election, a move he suggest might lead to a new constitution. EN
September 11, 2006
Nearly a quarter of voters in Latvia said in mid-August that they did not know for which one of 19 parties to cast their ballot come the Oct. 7 parliamentary election, according to the Rīga-based survey research firm SKDS.
Another 12 percent said they had no intention to vote. If they are looking for a voice, Eso Antons Benjamiņš might be their man.
Benjamiņš, grandson of the famous Latvian newspaper publisher Antons Benjamiņš (1860-1939), recently began a blog called Change for Latvia in which he calls on voters to ignore the ballot box on Oct. 7. Instead, he suggests that a low turnout might force the Saeima to rewrite the constitution to provide for more representative government.
“As my blog indicates,” Benjamiņš writes in his blog’s profile, “I observe a cynical political elite, without perspective, all status quo and empty rhetoric, all defused by Big Brother sitting in Brussels giving out enough euros to keep their mouths shut and stultify their increasingly orthodox thought.”
Benjamiņš was born in Latvia, but spent most of his life in exile in the United States. He returned to Latvia 12 years ago and now lives near Valmiera.
In an e-mail exchange, Benjamiņš answered questions about his blog and his ideas.
What encouraged you to create the blog Change for Latvia?
It is not possible to live in Latvia and not be aware of the overall poverty of the people, the lack of education about the nature of the modern world, and government corruption. I mention government corruption last, because that appears to be the fate of all modern governments. For sure, corruption in high places is not a new phenomenon, except that in our times, it comes when the problems that beset the world (an unsustainable population, pollution of the environment, a water crisis, climate change, deforestation, desertification, poverty, informal employment, slums, energy crisis—you name it) bring a more than usual awareness of the role of government in the creation of same. The Latvian government attracts special attention, because it was created by the people when they broke away from the Soviet Union and voted their will by gathering “on the barricades” in Riga in 1991. Ever since, the government has done what it can to exploit that trust, first by taking payoffs (kukuļus and, in the end, like most modern capitalist countries, becoming subject to business interests. In 1993, Adolfs Bučis protested against corruption in government and killed himself in an act of extreme protest and self-sacrifice at the foot of the Freedom Monument in Riga. He was ignored as a man who had lost his mind. Today we have (from what I read and hear in the Latvian media) nearly 700 millionaires and no less than 700,000 poor. It makes one take notice, especially because the 700,000 are part of the body on behalf of which an independent Latvia came, ostensibly, into being.
To answer your answer specifically, however, recently I finished writing a book that took me a number of years to do. My time is freed up for a while, and as they say: “If nothing is happening, just wait a while.” I am concerned over the loss of authority that 17 years of corruption have brought the Latvian government. At the top, government appears to have become subject to business interests; at a lower end, the people cuss it helplessly because all political parties are subject to the same corrupting influences and there seems no way out. At the level of the precinct (pagasts) where I have my summer domicile, I was signatory to a letter asking for an investigation regarding money that seems to have disappeared following the harvesting of several local government forest properties. Letters were written and an investigation by the authorities was launched, but more than a year later little has happened. The investigation does not seem to go forward, and one is tempted to conclude that this is not by accident.
The theme of your blog is that one should not vote in the election of 9th Saeima. Will you perhaps vote, nevertheless?
I will not vote for the 9th Saeima, because my objective is not to encourage not voting, but because a no vote can constitute political action. Alas, the philosopher kings in and out of government do not see it that way. Latvians Online, for example, has a poll question that asks what party the site visitor will vote for, but no space for the customary “other” of most questionnaires. My absence from the ballot box is precisely because such an “other” is not available for those who do not care to choose from any of the parties. Of course, were such provisions available, I would visit the polling station.
If your vote were to be the one that decides which party comes to power, would you not vote then as well?
My personal sympathies are with people who vote for what is known in central and western Europe as the Greens—the Green Party. A long time ago, in the 1970s, I was an active participant in the protests in New England (in the United States) against the building of nuclear power stations. But I see no such energy in the Greens of Latvia. I cannot imagine any leader of the Green Party climbing a tree to protest on behalf of saving the beachfront in Jūrmala. I cannot imagine myself voting for the Greens (standing in the election as part of the Union of Greens and Farmers, or Zaļo un Zemnieku Savienība) even though my personal sentiment tends in their direction.
It is not clear to me how by not voting the voters of Latvia will create a situation that will force the lawmakers to write a new Constitution. Will you explain in greater detail how, according to you, this might happen?
I am asking for a massive no vote, one that approaches 70 percent of the electorate. If in the previous election over 70 percent of the electorate voted, I believe that an obvious reversal in voter sentiment will send a signal to the authorities that their charisma and authority is at a most critical level, but can be likely corrected by writing a new constitution (satversme). The overall political situation in Europe, what with the defeat of the constitution of the European Union, also encourages attention to the voices coming from the periphery. I believe that Latvia can be in the political limelight of Europe if the public were to make a dramatic reversal in its voting pattern. This may encourage a change in the political education of Latvians and perhaps elsewhere in Europe, albeit the process will necessarily take a few years. It is likely to encourage the airing of such arguments as could result in a new constitution.
Contrary to your arguments, President Vaira Vīķe-Freiberga recently said in an interview on Latvian State Radio that compulsory participation in elections should be adopted in Latvia (as, for example, in Belgium). What do you say concerning the suggestion?
I am sympathetic to the president’s suggestion, provided the “other,” the vote for “none of the above,” is included. An active life in politics is to be encouraged, but only when balloting is fair to all perceptions of reality.
Why did you choose a blog to publicize your opinions? Will there be other opportunities, for example, a letter to a newspaper, a public protest, and so on?
The blog and the Internet in general expand democracy. In the democracy of the 20th century (as in Latvia to this day), the news media had a high degree of control over what was reported in the news and, thus, what was to be the opinion of the world. Today the Internet makes democracy available (theoretically at least), to everyone with a computer logged in on the Web. This is why I chose to speak through the medium of the blog. It allows me to ask Latvians Online to include in its voting preference questionnaire a window for voting “none of the above,” “a write-in suggestion” and “a new constitution.”
Would you want to be a candidate for the Saeima yourself sometime in the future?
I wonder if I would then have time left for writing and reading, work that is not only a lifelong habit for me, but brings pleasure and often a better perspective of what is really happening and why.
Andris Straumanis is editor of Latvians Online.
What's new
News
11 May 2008
First ambassador to Brazil gets accreditation
Latvia’s first ambassador to Brazil—home to about 200 Latvian citizens and many more persons who claim at least…
News
11 May 2008
Latvia nips Norway, edges closer to hockey quarters
Latvia’s outlook for getting into the quarterfinals of the 2008 International Ice Hockey Federation World Championship has improved…
Columns
11 May 2008
Apple re-emerges in the Baltics
With Apple’s percentage share of the worldwide computer market now approaching double digits, things are now finally starting…
In the forums
Vaira Vike-Freiberga - extraordinary Latvian voice featured in "Extraordinary Voices" lecture series in SF May 14 posted by ambersun on 11 May 2008
About Rezekne posted by Aussie Latvian on 07 May 2008
Latvian Birth Certificate posted by Skye on 05 May 2008
Happy May Day, fellow proletarians................ posted by peter B on 01 May 2008
There is no need for Republic of Latvia whatsoever posted by Mr L L on 28 Apr 2008
Advertise with Latvians Online! Click here



Comments about this article
Raimonds Meikša
Varu plašāk pastāstīt par trim, manuprāt, galvenajām problēmām, kas līdz šim kavējušas Latvijas valsts labāku attīstību. Pirmā ir mūsu valsts ierēdņu un politiķu nekompetence. Kā piemērus šim apgalvojumam varu minēt aplamu Bankas Baltija uzraugu izvēlēšanos, kas izmaksāja vairāk kā 150 miljonus, 1995.gada izlgītības reformu, kas atļāva nemācīties fiziku, ķīmiju, matemātiku tiem, kas to spēj, bet jaunības pieredzes trūkuma dēļ izdarīja nepareizu izvēli, kas arī izmaksā un turpmāk izmaksās miljardus, kā arī dažādas sīkas ierēdņu un politiķu pārteikšanās un nezināšanas enerģētikas krīzes laikā, sajaucot megavatus ar kilovatiem , valsts šīs nozares plānošanā pieļaujot tūkstoškārtīgas kļūdas ( žurnāls -Enerģētika un Pasaule, Enerģētiķu biedrības prezidenta pārdomas) un citi piemēri, kurus pats varat atrast šim apgalvojumam par labu. Šīs problēmas ir novēršamas ar labāku kritēriju un līgumu ierēdņiem un plašu informatīvo darbu, tās ir speciālistiem labi zināmas problēmas, kuru risinājumi ir zināmi, bet nezin kāpēc Latvijā nav pat apspriesti. Otrā problēma ir augstas pievienotas vērtības ražošana, kas tiešām dod nodokļu masu, ar kuru valsts darboties. Trešā problēma ir gudri cilvēki, kas 1. Savlaicīgi tiks pamanīti un izglītoti. 2. Tiks piesaistīti lēmumu pieņemšanā. 3. Paliks Latvijā vai atgriezīsies, ieguvuši pieredzi. Masu mēdijos kā galvenās valsts problēmas figurē praids, vēstniecības darbinieka piedzīvojumi, lemberga tiesāšana vai kratīšana un citas bezgala valsts nākotnei būtiskas problēmas. Tajā pašā laikā tas pats NAP tiek apspriests bezgala vēgi, arī Eiropas naudu ieguldījumi izglītībā un zinātnē. Tātad, lai gan labākas dzīves iespējas ir gudri cilvēki, kas pārvalda labi izglītotu valsti, kas ražo pieprasītas preces, kurās ir daudz intelektuālā darba, patiesībā tauta un politiķi rīko dančus, melno PR un apspriež dzeltenus tematus.
14 Sep 2006 (Latvia)
Guntis Smidchens
See a contrasting view in a 1994 speech by Vaira Vike-Freiberga, "That's Just How We Are And There's Nothing We Can Do About It." (in Ausma Cimdina, In The Name of Freedom: President of Latvia Vaira Vike Freiberga. Riga: Jumava, 2003), pp. 110-121. "If the writer is so squeaky-clean that he cannot participate in the political processes he considers so dirty, when who will be those dirty enough to take his place?"
14 Sep 2006 (United States)
Janis Prikulis
I live in Latvia and my point of view is that going to elections is necessary, because there are pro-Moskovian parties, that are not loyal to local inhabitants. If Latvians will not vote, then one of the non loyal partys could take the place. The constitution says, power over Latvia belongs to people, so the people themselves should think about changing Satversme.
16 Sep 2006 (Latvia)
Elizabete
According to LV's parliament home page, 89.90% of the electorate participated in the 5th Saeima's election in 1993, 71.90% in the 6th & 7th election (respectively, in 1995 and 1998), and 71.5% in the 8th Saeima elections in 2002. In light of the fact that at least 10% (if not more!) of vote-eligible citizens have left LV for western Europe since 2002, will Benjamiņš declare a 'victory' for his half-cocked theory when considerably less than 70% of vote-eligible citizens participate in the upcoming elections on October 7? Btw – how will we be able to distinguish Benjamins' cherished 'movement's' self-defined 'no vote' from those nigh 30% of the electorate who in the last 3 elections have been apolitical, whether through personal choice or physical/psychic debility? LOL would do its readers a great service were it to dig deeper & understand the options that the current election law already offers to those who desire to vote 'other.' It exists.
16 Sep 2006 (Latvia)
Edgars Kariks
If you don't vote ...it will never be registered as a protest...if you wish to protest. If you vote INFORMAL ...then your protest is registered and maybe a crisis will eventuate in the voting commission ... a recognised crisis...and, a crisis is good because it means that something should be done. Explosive Silence is better than a Whimper of a silence... REGISTER YOUR VOTE ...with your conscience. If you don't ...that is also a choice, but a bad one.
21 Sep 2006 (Latvia)