More fights over Vilnius space: nationalists are kosher?
As I wrote earlier, the municipality of Vilnius did not allow the Baltic Pride demonstration (against the discrimination and stereotyping of homosexuals), planned in May, to take place in the new premises where most protests will be pushed to, presumably because it is the territory of an ancient Jewish cemetery. However, Delfi writes that the municipality allowed the 'patriotic' march, which happens already the third time on the Independence Day, without any discussion with the Department of Cultural Heritage. One thing that may explain a part of it is the fact that it was a parliament member, Kazimieras Uoka from the Conservative-Christian Democratic faction, who asked the municipality for the permission to organise the march and assumed responsibility for it.
In 2008, LIthuanians and foreigners were in shock to see how the 'patriotic' march, at the time on Gedimino ave., turned into a neo-nazi demonstration, with anti-Russian and anti-Semitic slogans. The police filmed the participants, but was reluctant to arrest them in the beginning. The next year, in 2009, the website patriotai.lt (a discussion forum popular among the far right and some 'patriotic' moderates) asked the participants of the march for "no sympathy to the ideologies of communism and nazism" and "no hate incitement in posters, slogans and flags". The right-wing demonstration went peacefully and without incitement of hate, yet the parallel anti-nationalist demonstration "the funeral of democracy" was met with rather aggressive resistance, and quite soon patriotai.lt invited its participants to identify the participants of that demonstration. In a few days, one of the participants of the anti-nationalist demonstration was beaten up.
This year (it's the third year that I'm not in the country on the Independence Day, so I have to rely on testimonies) there was no hate incitement, yet the participants shouted (see video), "Lithuania for Lithuanians!" Mr. Uoka only found this slogan 'monotonous', while the Human Rights Monitoring Istitute expressed concern over the agitation for a mono-ethnic state. Personally, I think that the 'patriotic' march is an obvious attempt to monopolise the term 'patriot' and 'patriotism', and 'steal' the Independence Day from the non-right-wing population. Unlike many other national holidays (the crowning of King Mindaugas, the Zalgiris battle, and even the first Independence Day), this day is a celebration of the modern Lithuanian democracy and resistance to the oppressive Soviet regime, so it is also important for moderates and left-wing people. However, the increasingly radical right would prefer to see these people as not belonging neither to Lithuania nor to this day. The way to achieve it is, of course, monopolising March 11th, taking control of public spaces that day, pushing all the alternative voices to the shade, and normalising ethno-nationalist skinhead demonstrations as a true expression of patriotism. When an MP patronises over a demonstration with skinheads and ethno-nationalist slogans, while pro-democratic groups cannot get a permission to demonstrate at all (in 2009, they didn't get a premission to organise a demonstration of more than 9 people), soon enough moderates and left-wingers will feel anything but at home in the city on this important day. In the struggle over public space, the municipal government clearly prioritises one lifestyle over others.
So how about the former cemetery? I think with the two demonstrations as points of comparison, I don't even have to bother to spell H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y...
For comparison: far-right demonstration in Budapest.
15.5% unemployment, diaspora: Lithuanians try luck elsewhere
Polish people: 'united in diversity' in Vilnius
Catalonia vs bulls: prohibition of Spanishness?
Far right Bulgarian is youngest MEP
Belgium elections: rise of radical Flemish nationalist party, N-VA
Dieudonné Kabongo: lethal comedy
Comments
I think comparing the pride event and the nationalist protest a is wrong because the two events are as different as night and day.
The pride people were trying to organize a demonstration/rally legally, with all the required safety and environmental concerns. To have a "nice" time about it.
The nationalist/"neo-nazi" event was not legal. Not because of whatever message they had, or how mean they looked, but because it seemed spontaneous. The marchers were kept on the sidewalk. I saw some of the hurried walk they took on Gedimino, and have seen similar looking groups go from the park near the cathedral towards Gedimino, also.
Really, I wish the pride people would be as "spontaneous" as these other people. Quick, 15 minue "flash mob" style things that are highly visible, then vanish. Imagine several over a few nice spring days.
Between pride or nationalism, I'll admit that the Hare Krishnas seem to be louder and more disruptive as they go down Pilies and elsewhere in the center.I notice no one bothers them, either.
I, for one, wish the lgbt movement in Lithuania would do something, and soon. How can so many people be convinced to think they hate their sons, daughters, brothers and sisters? How can people let the petty people at seimas and savivaldybes continue to push this?
Mark: I don't agree. Whatever the nature of the demonstrations, in bureaucratic terms they are two equal applications for peaceful assembly of more than 9 people - two claims for the right to present their cause in public space with adequate protection. This is the only concern of my comparison. Second, the 'patriotic' march was legal, even though many people could have joined spontaneously. There was an application to organise it, and a permission was granted by the municipality. Third, the Baltic Pride is not for 'a good time', it's a serious anti-discrimination rally, which also encourages LGBT people to 'come out' and not remain silent. Fourth, as good as spontaneous flasmobs for LGBT rights can be, there are not enough people who could openly demonstrate for this cause in Lithuania. A small group of demonstrators would be under a heavy security risk, while a group of 10 or more people, which applied for a right to demonstrate in advance, can get police escort, just like you see in the video.
What is wrong about mono-ethnic states?
Haven't you ever heard about Japan? It way more mono-ethnic than Lithuania.
The problem I have with mono-ethnic states is that they don't exist, and trying to create them causes tension and oppression. As you can see from my blog, not only I have 'heard' of Japan, I lived there. Japan is ethnically homogeneous, but nonetheless far from mono-ethnic. And even its homogeneity had to be produced. Many naturalised Koreans were pushed to change their names and melt into the Japanese society. Many Chinese immigrants are undocumented. Japanese ethnicity is readily available to children of mixed marriages. It is not the case in some other countries.
People have always moved for various reasons (better opportunities, more comfortable life, family reasons...) and always will. As much as some try to force some general scheme (including nationalism) upon social reality, social reality keeps running away from them.