Baltic Diary II: Obsession vs. Common Sense

As I said in the previous post, people in Eastern Europe – specifically the Baltic States – are unabashed and unapologetic about their gender, unlike many Americans who are constantly either apologizing for their DNA or expending titanic efforts to be, or become, something they are not, and can never be. The women are women (and, more importantly, female and not male) and the men are men (likewise, male and not female) -- in other words, there is an aura of self-acceptance in Europe that we are notably lacking – and I suspect that what lies behind our discontent is a distorted concept of “democracy” and “equality”. For us, the idea of democracy more and more implies –- demands, even -- uniformity, i.e. of opinion, world view, and so on – despite all of our pretensions about “diversity”. The American fixation on “diversity” is limited to the most superficial features – color, clothing, hair styles, etc. -- along with a pathetic remnant of “folk life” that survives only as long as all the real ethnic “soul” is extirpated – because, let's face it, “ethnicity” nearly always implies a sense of the superiority of one's own group over all others – and, by implication, the superiority of one's own race and creed over all others. So true ethnicity in this sense is strictly forbidden and suppressed by the Regime; only the most superficial features are allowed to survive, and then only in carefully-controlled settings (think: “folk festivals”, and “ethnic days” at Kennywood). I mean, even some of the foods most favored by certain ethnic groups have become borderline hate crimes (think: Polish ham at Easter).

So if “democracy” translates into “diversity”, which is – paradoxically -- thinly-disguised uniformity, then what do we make of “equality”? The “civil rights” and “equal opportunity” and “affirmative action” pushers have an answer for that – equal outcomes, of course. Which means, in practical terms, that any outcome that is not readily available to everyone has to be made _unavailable_ to everyone. For proof of this, just consider the way the teachers' unions fight like demons against faith-based schools, home schooling, charter schools, and target schools. And this too is based on a gross misreading of our founding documents; if “all men are created equal” then it's up to the government to insure that they stay that way – no matter who has to suffer as a result. Well, to begin with, let's parse that key sentence a bit. While it does say “all men”, we may assume that it meant “mankind” rather than only those of the male gender – although if you had asked any of the Founding Fathers whether they meant that women were, or should be, equal to men in every respect, they would have looked at you like you were insane (which, by the standards of that time, you would have been). But then there's that little word “created” -- which our secularists conveniently overlook every time. “Created” implies a “creator”, does it not? And – again, according to the typical (if not unanimous) thinking of the time – a “creator” who cares what we do and how we do it – i.e. a creator whose will should form the basis for our own wills, in the process of building up a moral system. So does God care if everyone is equal in the material sense? Are those absolute values? I should think not. When we say “all men are created equal”, it is hoped that we mean “equal in absolute worth” as well as “morally equal”, i.e. equally capable of developing good will and distinguishing right from wrong. But these, of course, are the very qualities that are not only ignored but positively discouraged by the secular state – it is not up to us to decide what is right or wrong, it is up to the government. All that is required of us is obedience -- not thought. And as to absolute worth – well, if you ignore the plight of the unborn we do seem to have a legal system that at least gives lip service to “blind justice” -- although the exceptions are right in front of us on a daily basis. But again, when collectivists talk about “justice” they aren't talking about something based on morality; they are talking about a grotesque offspring of politics. “Justice” as they perceive it has nothing to do with equality – au contraire! It has to do with getting even... payback... “it's our turn”... and so on. And mainly with “leveling the playing field” and doling out equal pieces of the mythical “pie”, so that – once again – anything that not all can achieve is forbidden to everyone (except the controlling elite, of course).

Thus, the discontents of “democracy” and “equality” -- but the Eastern Europeans seem to have much more child-like simplicity about these things. As to democracy, it's a perfectly satisfactory system for electing leaders and representatives. But does it imply absolute tyranny of the majority over the minority? And does it demand uniformity of opinion? I daresay not – although I understand that, especially in Estonia, the Russians feel like a somewhat discriminated-against minority now that they are no longer running the show. So the “payback” and “it's our turn” concept is not entirely lacking over there – and sure enough, in Tallinn the Russians tend to be confined to the shabby Soviet-era apartment buildings out on the edge of town, whereas the picturesque old town is the turf of the ethnic Estonians. This would strike some as poetic justice – and I guess it is, although I doubt whether too many of the current Russian apartment dwellers could be held responsible for the 50 years of abuse under the Soviet regime – so call it karma, if you like.

And as to “equality”, well... the victims of Soviet oppression have seen the bottom line of “equality” run amok, and they know that the result is mainly misery. They know that any regime with the term “people's” in its title is anything but – that it is simply another buzzword that conceals tyranny. So, with a healthy appreciation of individual differences in talent, aptitude, motivation, and the rest of it, they are forging ahead in a non-delusional way. They have put the madness and abuses of rampant socialism behind them, and are seeking their own way – conditioned by ancient ethnic and religious attitudes – to, not necessarily the monstrosity we mistakenly call “capitalism”, but to something that is compatible with their own identity as a people. And while they are moving steadfastly in that direction, we are rushing headlong in just the opposite direction – becoming more collectivized, more socialistic, more ruled by an unaccountable elite, and less truly “diverse” with each passing day. While Lincoln Steffens -- possibly the greatest “useful idiot” of all time – viewed the Soviet system and said “I have seen the future, and it works” -- the Baltic peoples saw that “future” first-hand, when it became their “present” -- and not only did it not “work”, but it succeeded in annihilating huge numbers of them and putting their cultures on ice for 50 years. So they have been successfully inoculated against the delusions of socialism for – let's hope – many lifetimes, whereas we're just getting up to speed again with Obama's new New Deal. We haven't learned from our own history, and we seem equally incapable of learning from anyone else's history either. Such a waste...

But how did this whole discussion start? It was about gender – and, I must say, gender is on display in the streets of Vilnius in a way that might almost be called unique. Take the women, for starters. They start at 5' 9” and go up from there – and I daresay a good half of them, if not more, could get jobs as runway models anywhere in the fashion world. They stand up straight, and they walk like they know the whole world is watching – none of this shuffling, scuffing, slouching, and clod-hopping we see from our “young ladies” over here. And they do “tall” right – I mean, their proportions do not change as they go up -- they don't start looking like horses, in other words. No one looks “too tall”; they all look “just right”. Now, the men, on the other hand, tend to be medium height and on the wiry side – so it is not at all unusual to see dating couples where the woman is appreciably taller than her partner, and no one seems to think there is anything the least bit wrong with this. But I also have to comment that, whereas the young women are on the tall side, the next-older generation (their mothers) are average height, and the next-older generation (their grandmothers) are generally quite short. Talk about nature vs. nurture! The answer, of course, is nutrition – and whereas the young women grew up in the post-Soviet era, their mothers grew up in the late Soviet era, and their grandmothers got their start during World War II, when everyone was starving. Well, we've seen much the same thing in Japan, but here it is in Lithuania also, right in plain sight. And what's the evolutionary significance of having tall, blond, stunning, Amazon-like, Wagnerian women paired with quite average looking men? You tell me (once you finish planning your own visit, that is).

Oh, and – speaking of physical features – I should mention that no one in the Baltic States is fat. And I don't mean “few” -- I mean ** NO ONE **. (The first fat people I saw on the entire trip were sitting at the gate in Frankfurt waiting to get on the plane to the U.S. -- yep, they were Americans.) But guess what, their diet is quite rich in starches (bread, potatoes, pancakes, pastries, etc.), solid fats (from red meat and sausage), dairy products (cheese and sour cream in particular), beer, and vodka – not unlike the diet in Pittsburgh, where the average person is – not to put too fine a point on it – a big fat slob. So what's the difference? DNA? Well... Pittsburgh is full of Lithuanians too. My theory is that, among other things, people in that part of the world walk. A lot. They don't all own cars, and the ones that do don't use them just to get down to the corner grocery. Plus the places they live have sidewalks -- and schools, work places, and shops within walking distance. And they walk in all kinds of weather. And the food that they eat is perfectly suited to the climate – and the serving sizes are not huge, like over here. Plus – as I've implied already – they care about their looks. And their clothes fit. Plus – the “fat” foods are balanced out, to some extent, by plenty of fish (both fresh and cured) and decent amounts of vegetables (albeit they tend to be boiled and a bit bland) and fruits. And besides walking in all kinds of weather, they eat outside (sidewalk tables) in all kinds of weather. In fact, many cafes and restaurants have outdoor heaters and blankets (!) available for the clientele. Now those are people who enjoy the outdoors! (Unlike our own AC-addicted populace.)

OK, so now we've discussed democracy, equality, and gender... and food. Not bad for one post. Please stay tuned -- there is more to come.