After a period of sharpening of the international relations at the end of the 1950s (the emergence of the so-called “national communists”, the fact that the CC of the CP of Latvia was “canceled” thanks to the large effort of the Presidium of the CC of PCUS, by using administrative measures and by appointing certain cadres, in the second half of 1959), then a calm period began. Amongst certain leading cadres of the Communist Party this action created a false illusion that the problems had been resolved while others were trying to embellish the whole situation, aiming to promote their personal careers. Some of them, while remained secret supporters of the nationalist ideology, they were appearing as convinced internationalists, at the same time as they were searching amongst the leading cadres for those who supported the slogan “Latvia is for Latvians!”. On the basis of these principles, they were attempting to create a reserve group of cadres as well as to take the management of specific sectors in their own hands. Special importance was given in the sector of education and culture.
A special issue was the choice of personnel involved in mass media, which played an important role afterwards in supporting the propaganda in favour of the victory of the counter-revolution. Besides that, it is surprising the fact that the majority of the mass media were the publications of the Communist Party (!) and Komsomol of Latvia. During the intense period of the conflict of 1989-1991, most workers involved in these publications, along with the radio and TV stations, adopted anti-socialist and nationalist positions. Those workers, who remained loyal to internationalism and to the socialist ideals, ended up being a minority. They lost their job, and were forced to create printed media anew (or they were forced to create anew the material base for publications that managed to retain their historical names.
On the outside, the above could seem a bit paradox, since Latvia has always been heterogeneous on the national level throughout its history. At the time of the Proclamation of Independence (1991) the proportions between the Latvian ethnic group and the other ethnic groups residing in the Republic were nearly equal: 52% Latvians and 47% other nationalities (Russians. Ukrainians, Poles, Hebrews and other ethnic groups of different descent that were classified as Russian-speaking people due to the language of communication they were using). Even now, 30 years after the independence, the percentage of Latvians in relation to the total population does not exceed the 62%.
However, the secret activity of the national-oriented activists brought the desired result after 1985, when the infamous “Perestroika” was proclaimed in the USSR. As it turned out, a broad and well-organised base for the development of nationalist and anti-socialist processes had been prepared in Latvia: An ideological and material base, including working cadres. Typically, the so-called “Popular front of Latvia” was born on the basis of a wave of political activism that concerned a wide range of issues, from ecology to history.
An example of such an activity was the strong social campaign against the construction of the Daugavpils hydroelectric power station and the Riga metro. Preliminary works for the construction of the power plant had already begun in the late 1970s and by the mid-1980s a significant part of it had been completed. However, in 1986, journalist Denis Ivans, in an article in Literatura un Maksla ("Literature and Art"), called for construction to be stopped in order to prevent flooding in the protected river valley and to preserve its rare species of plants and animals.
In the case of the construction of the Riga metro, the "rare animals and plants" could not be harmed in any way. It is obvious that this issue was just a pretext to cover one of the most important factors of psychological incitement to protest - ethnic xenophobia. In meetings with his supporters and in private propaganda discussions, he cited as main cause of the opposition to the large-scale economic plans the arrival of a large number of experts and workers from other parts of the country, some of whom the nationalists believed they would remain in Latvia after the end of the construction works and would change the ethnic composition of the population.
The call to stop the construction of the project had many supporters. The collection of signatures for the termination of the project started. A total of more than 30 thousand signatures were collected, an impressive number for that time (in terms of comparison: today a referendum requires the collection of 150 thousand notarized (!) Signatures) and in the summer of 1987 the union leadership agreed to stop the project construction. The success in the fulfillment of this goal not only inspired the protagonists of that protest, but also allowed them to gain prestige and a large number of supporters, which led to the emergence of anti-Soviet organizational structures that promoted increasingly radical, initially economic or cultural and later political goals.
However this is the result. What are the reasons that nationalism remained present for a long time wearing ostentatiously the mask of legitimacy and even ostentatious internationalism? It seems that one of the main reasons was the absence of a truly scientific, research project in the field of mass psychology and especially on the phenomenon of the peculiarity of ethnic consciousness . The existing works had an openly dogmatic character and consisted in the repetition of the well-known theories that nations arose under capitalism while in socialism the national (ethnic) peculiarity consisted of a culture "national in form, socialist in content". Although, as it turned out, in the USSR there were state formations that were socialist in form but national in content…
The Great Patriotic War is considered a particular historical-psychological milestone in the European territory of the former USSR. This is happening to such an extent that due to the debate it causes until today (!), it does not weaken the strong counter-propaganda by the part of the imperialist, anti-communist and nationalist forces. In former USSR republics, such as Latvia or Ukraine, the relationship between modern state nationalism and the wartime Nazis is quite obvious and open. A typical example thereof is the fact that in practically all the countries of the former USSR, where nationalism is used as the official ideology, the local collaborators of the SS and the quislings are declared as "national heroes".
At the same time, we have to admit the unpleasant fact that the foundation for such a political revision was already prepared, albeit unintentionally, in the post-war socialism building period. Incredible as it may seem, one of the causes of concealed nationalism was also an overestimation of the socialist system’s power, both due to the existence of a conclusion that the balance of power on the world stage had turned in favour of the forces of socialism, and due to the misplaced belief that socialism in the USSR was developed to the degree that it was impossible to overthrow it. This situation led to a loss of vigilance in relation to the concealed nationalism, expressed in such an unexpected outbreak in the late 1980s that is the most vivid example of the lack of an appropriate level of denazification policy after the end of the war.
Due to the misinterpreted principle of internationalism and the assessment of the temporary situation, that part of the population that actively collaborated with the Nazis was practically released from the burden of moral guilt for what it had committed. For all the atrocities committed in the territory of the republic during the war years, exclusively the "German fascist occupiers" were accused. This sinister formulation pervaded everything, from textbooks to inscriptions on the monuments to the victims of the genocide. Although legally German occupation authorities undoubtedly bear the main responsibility for what happened in the occupied territories, a significant part of the crimes were committed by their local accomplices.
The fact that more than 115.000 Latvians, primarily communists, fought heroically against the Nazis through the lines of the Red Army, the Partizan sections and in illegal organizations, should not be a pardon for the responsibilities of those tens of thousands of compatriots thereof who voluntarily served in the SS and police battalions and became for the occupiers a relentless tool of extermination of the local population.
Certainly, the mood in favor of Soviet power in Latvia immediately after the end of the war was not homogeneous. Many among the population waited for the Red Army mainly because they hated the Nazi occupiers while the issue of the political system at that time was not of fundamental importance to them. At the same time, according to information gathered and analyzed by the leaders of the Latvian Partisan movement, the successes of the Red Army made the people's sympathy for the Soviet power grow.
There were anti-Soviet sentiments in the section of the population (nationalist strata of the cities and the villages) who wished the restoration of "old Latvia" and hoped that after the Allies would exhaust their power in the conflict with Hitler, Sweden would guarantee Latvia's independence. 
In this very social stratum of the population the former collaborators of the Germans and their descendants were hidden, constituting the support of the external forces during the "Cold War" in the magnification of the myth of "second occupation" of Latvia in 1944-1945. In fact, this was nothing more than an attempt to regain their right to manage Latvia’s post-war destiny.
Of course, if we compare the situation with what was happening in the area of Germany under Anglo-American occupation, the local population was subjected to a serious psychological "treatment", through mandatory "visits" to concentration camps, being used for burial and exhumation in mass graves of victims of the Hitler regime. At the same time, in the midst of the shock that was naturally caused by the sight of the hundreds of victims’ corpses, they were informed in the crudest way that this was done by their husbands, brothers and fathers. In some Western European countries, which had been liberated by Allied troops, the mass extermination on the streets of local quislings was permitted. As a result, German collaborators appeared nowhere in post-war Europe and could not emerge from positions similar to those of Latvian nationalists as this inevitably led to de-Nazification and marginalization.
Therefore, the descendants of those forced by British- American soldiers to carry corpses of concentration camp prisoners see the United States and Britain as liberators of Europe, and NATO as the guarantor of peace. At the same time, descendants of the quislings, diligently released from the feelings of guilt for the actions of their ancestors, residents of the former USSR and Eastern European countries of socialism, demolish the monuments of Soviet soldiers and honor former SS collaborators. Practice has clearly shown which method of anti-Nazi propaganda is the most effective ...