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.

The Kids First Fund, a U.S.-based not-for-profit organization aimed at helping abused and abandoned children in Latvia, has been granted special consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations, the fund announced Sept. 6.

“This designation opens the door for the Kids First Fund to help contribute to the creation of policy on issues related to children’s rights worldwide,” fund President Jay Sorensen said in a press release. “The United Nations also may engage the Kids First Fund in supporting the action plans and declarations adopted by the United Nations.”

The status allows the fund to designate official representatives to the United Nations headquarters in New York and to U.N. offices in Geneva and Vienna. Board members John DeGregorio, Rogers Grigulis, Irma Kalniņa and Sorensen will be the designated Kids First Fund representatives.

The Kids First Fund, as an organization under the special category of consultative status, may circulate position statements at Economic and Social Council meetings. Organizations granted status also may attend General Assembly special sessions and international conferences called by the United Nations. More than 2,700 nongovernmental organizations have consultative status with the Economic and Social Council.

With less than two weeks to go before the Sept. 15 deadline, only 200 Latvian citizens living abroad have requested absentee ballots for next month’s parliamentary election, according to the Central Election Commission in Rīga.

Of those, 80 requests (40 percent) have been from Latvian citizens living in the United States, according to data tallied Sept. 4 from 38 election districts abroad.

Citizens living abroad have until Sept. 15 to mail their requests to a designated embassy or consulate. If they don’t vote by mail, they may still cast a ballot on Oct. 7 at one of the 53 designated polling stations abroad.

Germany had the next highest number of absentee ballot requests—32.

Australia was third with 19, three of which were submitted to the honorary consulate in Adelaide.

“I would have expected about 10,” said Valdis Tomanis, Latvia’s honorary consul in Southern Australia, “but some leave this until the last moment.”

Canada, which in the Toronto metropolitan area boasts the largest Latvian community abroad, had recorded just eight requests.

Some locations have had no requests for absentee ballots. In Brazil, where 108 Latvian citizens voted in the 2002 election, Honorary Consul Jānis Grimbergs was still waiting for applications.

“I hope things change in the next days,” he said by e-mail from San Paulo.

Likewise no applications had been received at Latvia’s embassy in Tallinn, Estonia, but that did not surprise Second Secretary Nora Labonovska. No one from Estonia voted by mail in 2002, but a total of 247 ballots were cast in person, according to Central Election Commission data.

Just because requests for absentee ballots are lagging does not necessarily mean that voter activity abroad will be less than four years ago. Ireland, with an estimated 20,000 or more Latvian citizens now living and working there, reported just 10 requests as of Sept. 4, according to the election commission.

“That in Ireland only 10 have requested to vote by mail does not surprise me,” Jānis Kārgins, head of the Latvian Society in Ireland, said via e-mail. “But without a doubt the number of voters this year is expected to be higher than last time.”

That may not be a hard goal to reach: In the last two Saeima elections, 1998 and 2002, no Latvian citizens in Ireland cast ballots, according to election commission data. This year, two polling stations will be in operation on Oct. 7, one each in Dublin and Cork, Kārgins noted.

“Information about the polling stations and their hours of operation has been distributed to many people,” he said. “All that remains is to wait for results and then it will be possible to judge people’s attitude toward Latvia’s future.”

Representatives of at least two Latvian political parties also have traveled to Ireland in recent weeks to talk to voters.

If they turn out, Ireland’s thousands may have an effect on the number of votes cast abroad, a number that has dropped each election even as the number of polling stations has increased.

In 1993, voting for the 5th Saeima (the first parliamentary election after Latvia regained independence), only 16 polling stations were established outside the homeland, but a total of 17,888 votes were recorded abroad, said Kristīne Bērziņa, head of the information section for the election commission. By 2002, in voting for the 8th Saeima, the number of polling stations had increased to 29, but the number of votes abroad was only 7,371.

“For the 9th Saeima election there are now 53 polling stations,” Bērziņa said, “but if that will give positive results we will be able to judge only after the election.”

The slow pace of absentee ballot requests may be explained by the inconvenience the process requires of citizens living abroad. Bērziņa added. To register, the citizen’s passport must be submitted so that a notation can be made in it. For voters in Latvia, they can appear at any polling station on election day.

That sentiment was echoed by Mārtiņš Duhms, chair of the American Latvian Association.

“People do not want send their passports by mail,” he said in an e-mail from Rīga. “Some fear they might get lost. For others, the process if too complicated.”

That’s why the ALA pushed the Central Election Commission for more polling stations in the United States and was rewarded with nine for the 2006 election. And now the association will campaign to get more voters out on Oct. 7, sending e-mails to about 1,600 Latvians in the United States, discussing the political parties in the next issue of its journal Latvian Dimensions and advertising in the Latvian-American weekly newspaper Laiks.

The ALA also recommends the Latvian government in future create a register of voters, similar to what is used in the United States, to ease the voting process.

Further information, in Latvian, about how to apply for an absentee ballot is available from the Central Election Commission’s Web site.