BallardRex t1_iybahcm wrote
This has little to do with ethnic animus and everything to do with recognizing Russia’s playbook, which involves claiming all Russian-speaking people as theirs… sometimes with military force. Often with military force.
Jud1_n t1_iyca9jl wrote
Lithuania has began phasing out russian years ago. At this point this has little to do with russian playbook and is just an excuse to finally finish the job.
​
That being said, you are right about Russian playbook. Which is why Lithuania refused Kaliningrad when it was offered it. Really don't want your population to jump from less than 8% ethnic russians to around 30% in one go.
Kastrenzo t1_iycvsb9 wrote
Language is a weapon of war for Russia. It's used as a scapegoat to excuse imperialism, at the same time, Ukraine has a very signifigant Russian speaking, and often Russian ethnic population who have absolutely no loyalties to Russia. who reject Russia's ethnostate bullshit.
Russia found that out the hard way when they tried to Waltz troops into Kharkiv, and got obliterated.
siglezmus t1_iycel8x wrote
Now show this to dumb fucks from Ukraine who can’t comprehend this. Bruh mayor of Kharkiv recently got fine for not speaking Ukrainian… And it’s Ukraine having war and especially Kharkiv being one of frontline cities, not Lithuania.
lbktort t1_iybaraz wrote
The US bans on German in WW1 were also sold using national security rhetoric.
BallardRex t1_iybbc4b wrote
The US didn’t share a border with the belligerent in question, I think that comparison is more or less worthless. The US didn’t have a plausible national security concern, Lithuania certainly does, and in fact has history of being annexed by said belligerent.
lbktort t1_iybeie8 wrote
The US and German example is just one, but I think it is relevant. WW1 era Americans certainly felt there was a genuine threat and were not quite as cool about their own situation as you are in retrospect.
BallardRex t1_iybfk8e wrote
Do you know why the US felt that the German language was somehow dangerous to them? It wasn’t like countries bordering Russia, a country that has used language as a pretext for invasion. Here’s a great article on the subject, and it has this to say:
> Legal historian Paul Finkelman says in 1915 about 25 percent of all high school students in America studied German. But by the end of the World War I that had changed dramatically. German had become so stigmatized that only 1 percent of high schools even taught it.
> "During the war, there is an argument that if you learn German, you will become the 'Hun,' " Finkelman says, using the pejorative term for anyone from Germany. "And there was this notion that language was somehow organic to your soul. So if you spoke German, you would think like a German, you would become a totalitarian in favor of the kaiser."
> When members of minority groups spoke against entering the war in support of Britain, including some, but not all German-Americans, their patriotism was questioned. They were disparaged as "hyphenated Americans."
> After President Woodrow Wilson took the country into war he said, "Any man who carries a hyphen about with him, carries a dagger that he is ready to plunge into the vitals of this Republic when he gets ready."
> Schade says this anti-German sentiment extended to internment.
Let’s be real, it was bigotry and nothing more.
Not exactly a national security argument, and not a rational argument based on precedent either.
MissPandaSloth t1_iyc2g3z wrote
No one is banning anything. This is 2nd language option in schools. Russian already has been an useless historical leftover. Almost everyone had to learn Russian because we only had Russian teachers and no other options. Absolutely no one uses it past their school (it's 99.9% English).
Looking at where people go to study for their degree, it's Scandinavia, Germany, Netherlands, so any of those languages would make more sense.
Even French would make more sense that Russiam considering that it is still commonly used as diplomacy language.
Dziedotdzimu t1_iyczp6f wrote
The Russians complaining about this are like Americans who complain about the locals in Cancun not knowing English and then yelling at the taxi driver and calling it discrimination against English speakers.
mondeir t1_iyc5b3k wrote
Lithuania is not banning it lol. You can always learn on your own.
Time_Yam301 t1_iybeyx2 wrote
Lithuanian people aren't Russian-speaking any more than anyone who learns to read Leo Tolstoy natively. I think they are probably more concerned with the Russian exclave that abuts their lands, and is a real sticking point in this growing global conflict.
Russia has no real need for what's left of East Prussia, and giving it to whomever in NATO probably would make it a pretty solid bargaining chip.
Language discrimination is just a bad idea. It never works.
Full_Change_3890 t1_iybpmug wrote
5% of Lithuania is ethnic Russian. Smaller than the other Baltic states but still significant.
Not teaching a language in public schools is not discrimination, and a sensible choice for any country with a significant Russian minority as history has shown that having a Russian speaking minority makes you a target for Russian aggression.
MissPandaSloth t1_iyc238h wrote
The discrimination has been other way around, Russian was de-facto 2nd foreign language just because of abundance of Russian teachers from Soviet times. If you wanted any other option you are either completely out of luck, or lucky enough to go to some special school that had German or French as an option. Something like Spanish of Mandarin is completely out of equation.
No one from my generation (gen Z) who weren't Russian speaking to begin with can do anything with Russian beyond saying basics. It's just not used anymore.
And when it comes to education options, I am also yet to hear anyone studying in Russia, Belarus, Ukraine or any other Russian speaking country to warrant it. Most people go to US, Germany, France, South Korea, Denmark, Netherlands (statistics), so that Russian language is just a leftover that doesn't really practically help.
Even in business, we actually have projects right now with Ukrainian company, before that a Belarusian... We all communicate in English. All tools and documentation are in English, it would be akward to speak about those terms and have to make some weird Russian-English words so even that comes organically (tech company).
keymone t1_iybrtom wrote
Where do you see discrimination?
mondeir t1_iyc56um wrote
In school I took russian language because of rumour that it's easier to pass. Kinda regret that now because... well... it just useless now (I don't even plan to travel there because they tend to grab people for political theatre). Other options were german and very rarely french (not all schools had that).
Cr33py07dGuy t1_iyc6wfp wrote
Best is English. Sure Germany and France are big part of the EU, but realistically, not just in Europe but everywhere stuff done between nations mostly gets done in English.
Remember all those ministers in a train to Kyiv; from Iceland, Latvia, Estonia, Finland, Sweden, Lithuania and Norway? Many of their languages are “cousin” languages, but I bet my ass that they were speaking English on that train-ride.
Jud1_n t1_iyccado wrote
Well duh, Lithuanian and LAtvian are of the same baltic family but languages are so differen't, it is impossible to communicate. A russian and Polish have better understanding of each other language than Two Baltics. Add in, a bunch of nordics and you must speak english out of politness.
[deleted] t1_iyce0xa wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iyf3skv wrote
[removed]
NocKme t1_iycu5lt wrote
For me its different. I took English and then German ( remember 0 German) but I work in logistics in Sweden and the amount off times Im sent to communicate with truck drivers with my extremely limited russian is insane. I wish I actually studied it. The amount of Ukrainian, Belarusian, Estonian, Latvian drivers are crazy, even the older Polish ones.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments