Untitled

Sigma Ankrava. Pçckoloniâlais sindroms un identitâtes krîze Latvijâ
up more space in the world as necessary; the balance of positive and negative forces
in nature and in the human soul” 7 . Out of this approach there grows the tradition of
onkeeping one’s environment in order and protecting it. The farmer’s way of life has
created monogamous relationships that encourage consequent partnership and mutual
respect between man and woman in all aspects of life.
The psychology of the cattle–breeders is quite different. For cattle–breeders it is
important to take up and use as much space as possible, and then move on with their
flock. Consequently, much attention is given to the comfort of the dwelling place, whereas
the environment is more or less neglected. Cattle breeders could afford more than one
wife and more children than farmers, because cattle–breeding provides people with food
more solidly than farming. Women were less engaged in cattle breeding than men, and
were accordingly treated as less important members of the society.
Psychologically this demarcation line between the West and the East runs
through Latvia right up to the present day. It can be traced in the present discussion
about the relations between the individual and the state. Some people in this country
believe that there should be a kind of “social contract” between the state and the
people, with clearly defined duties and rights on both sides, whereas other people
are more concerned with their own rights. Actually, there is a debate whethera Latvia
should remain a country of Parliamentary democracy or should become a Presidential
democracy. In the latter case the President would be elected by the people and would
become a powerful executive. Thus in a country without a well–functioning lasting
democratic tradition the President would have the potential of becoming despot. The
fact that this issue has been raised speaks for itself. It may mean 1) that the people of
Latvia do not trust the representatives they have elected to Parliament themselves (a
TV poll quiz after the last elections in October 2002 when the results of the elections
were not yet known showed that only 1:10 of the population believes that the recently
elected MPs are not going to pursue selfish goals in their new post); 2) they
believe that everybody is corrupt and if elected to MP themselves they would pursue
selfish goals. 3) It may mean that under totalitarian/authoritarian regimes people can
turn into a mob and then long for someone to take care of and be responsible for
them.. Ha-ving been deprived of participation in policy making for a long period of
time, they have lost all confidence belief that they could ever affect and shape it.
This is the worst thing that totalitarian /authoritarian regimes do to people, but it is
far from new; the same problem has been depicted by Shakespeare in “Julius Caesar”
and “ Henry VIII” in its full complexity.
The relations between the individual and the state have a lot to do within
the role of the church and its tradition. In the West, historically speaking, in the
course of time the Church has defended the principles of humanity against the interests
of separate states. Later the idea of free choice and individual responsibility
emerged, leading to the formation of the principles of fraternity, equality and liberty.
It is important to note that these principles are arranged exactly in this order, because
that is how they still shape contemporary democracy. Freedom is impossible without
equality.
The Christian Orthodox Church developed along a different lines in Eastern Europe.
There it was shaped and developed in the form of national churches. It created
31