Lithuania is supposed to fare much better now that the country is a European Union member-state, but does it? Well, consider. When Lithuania was a member-state of the Soviet Union, it was regarded by all union citizens from all the other fourteen republics as one of the most developed nations, a piece of the West inside the Union. At present the country ranks as one of the poorest in the new Union, which is by far not the worst that could afflict it. The worst phenomenon is that while before joining the EU Lithuania had a vibrant population, now this population has significantly shrunk, at least by a third. No need to add that it is the young people who have left and for good. Generally, when people leave, they leave for good. Now consider without prejudice (can you shake prejudice off? I somehow guess you can’t, for the words that follow are hard to stomach): when was the time when the Lithuanian nation flourished biologically i.e. that it grew or at least did not shrink rapidly? You know, economic backwardness is reversible, the biological collapse – barely or hardly so.
Demographics of Lithuania, Wikipedia.
Consider Ukraine. It numbered roughly fifty million inhabitants before it left the Soviet Union, it was the second largest country in Europe as regards area and it had a well-developed industry of all kinds, heavy industry including. What happened to Ukraine after three decades of independence, imitating the West and doing every bid from Washington and Brussels? One may wonder if at present the overall population of Ukraine stands at at least 35 million plus the country barely has any industry while the territorial losses are huge.
Demographics of Ukraine, Wikipedia.
Sure, the Western states “welcome the refugees” from Ukraine or emigrants from Lithuania: after all they are known to keep saying that diversity is their strength and that they become enriched by all the people that flock to them. Yes, that may be so, but then if State A becomes enriched through accepting, attracting, alluring, enticing, seducing people from State B, then conversely by the same token State B becomes impoverished during this process. In other words State A robs State B in broad daylight under the pretext of all those international agreements about “the free flow of people” and “human rights to relocate”. How does that square with all the noble slogans of caring for the “sustainable” and “even” and “stable” development of all the nations around the globe?
Think of it! A million of old, elderly, sick, sickly or otherwise (by reason of age) helpless Lithuanians have been left to their own devices by a million of their young, healthy, entrepreneurial, professionally active compatriots. How does that square with all those human rights, with social justice, social solidarity, empathy and compassion that is preached in Western universities day in, day out? How does that square with all those noble caring oh so humane ideals preached by UN High Commissioners for this or that benefit that they are oh so intent on dispensing?
I dare you to consider these things.
Coming back to Lithuania: Julius Caesar is credited to have said: “I would rather be first in that little village than second in Rome.” How does that relate to Lithuania? The country stopped being among the first in the former Union in order to become one of the last – not even the second! – in the current Union. Some deal did the Lithuanians make!
Ah, but people in Lithuania are free at present while they used to be enslaved in the past! Very well, but why then do they not want to stay in their free – liberated – country? Is it because they do not see a promising and secure future? Can it be true that they do not see a promising and secure future with Lithuania being a member-state of the European Union?! This thought alone is a blasphemy, is it not?
