Suchergebnisse

Collective memory is a necessary attribute to every modern political community. In recent years, never-ceasing "wars of memory" in Lithuania and especially in Latvia and Estonia determine the importance of understanding the policy of history and memory. The trajectories of consolidation of political elite at the beginning of transformation period and traditions of historical consciousness became the fundamental factors which underlie the guidelines of the policy of memory in the three Baltic States. In this article the tendencies of politics of memory in the Baltic States are compared and generalized. By doing this those tendencies are distinguished into two different, although partly complementary spheres: the actualization of soviet memory and the tensions of national narrative that are caused by the processes of "liberalization" of history. Politics of memory are much more liberalized in Lithuania than in Latvia and Estonia. Part of the reason is the successful transformation of former communist party which reinforced the discourse of rehabilitation of soviet memory as stable, industrializing and modernizing period in Lithuania's history. The "liberalization" could also be felt in terms of deconstruction of national narrative. The most important role is appointed for Grand Duchy of Lithuania as tolerant and legalistic state and the rejection of searching of ethnic attributes of Duchy. In Latvia and Estonia the assertive rejection to partly rehabilitate the Soviet memory still dominates. This was influenced by the absence of sound ex-communist party and tradition of political elite to seclude the parties of Russian minority from ruling coalitions. Soviet history is depicted as an enslavement of titular nations and this depiction consistently supplements the traditional national narrative.

Collective memory is a necessary attribute to every modern political community. In recent years, never-ceasing "wars of memory" in Lithuania and especially in Latvia and Estonia determine the importance of understanding the policy of history and memory. The trajectories of consolidation of political elite at the beginning of transformation period and traditions of historical consciousness became the fundamental factors which underlie the guidelines of the policy of memory in the three Baltic States. In this article the tendencies of politics of memory in the Baltic States are compared and generalized. By doing this those tendencies are distinguished into two different, although partly complementary spheres: the actualization of soviet memory and the tensions of national narrative that are caused by the processes of "liberalization" of history. Politics of memory are much more liberalized in Lithuania than in Latvia and Estonia. Part of the reason is the successful transformation of former communist party which reinforced the discourse of rehabilitation of soviet memory as stable, industrializing and modernizing period in Lithuania's history. The "liberalization" could also be felt in terms of deconstruction of national narrative. The most important role is appointed for Grand Duchy of Lithuania as tolerant and legalistic state and the rejection of searching of ethnic attributes of Duchy. In Latvia and Estonia the assertive rejection to partly rehabilitate the Soviet memory still dominates. This was influenced by the absence of sound ex-communist party and tradition of political elite to seclude the parties of Russian minority from ruling coalitions. Soviet history is depicted as an enslavement of titular nations and this depiction consistently supplements the traditional national narrative.

Collective memory is a necessary attribute to every modern political community. In recent years, never-ceasing "wars of memory" in Lithuania and especially in Latvia and Estonia determine the importance of understanding the policy of history and memory. The trajectories of consolidation of political elite at the beginning of transformation period and traditions of historical consciousness became the fundamental factors which underlie the guidelines of the policy of memory in the three Baltic States. In this article the tendencies of politics of memory in the Baltic States are compared and generalized. By doing this those tendencies are distinguished into two different, although partly complementary spheres: the actualization of soviet memory and the tensions of national narrative that are caused by the processes of "liberalization" of history. Politics of memory are much more liberalized in Lithuania than in Latvia and Estonia. Part of the reason is the successful transformation of former communist party which reinforced the discourse of rehabilitation of soviet memory as stable, industrializing and modernizing period in Lithuania's history. The "liberalization" could also be felt in terms of deconstruction of national narrative. The most important role is appointed for Grand Duchy of Lithuania as tolerant and legalistic state and the rejection of searching of ethnic attributes of Duchy. In Latvia and Estonia the assertive rejection to partly rehabilitate the Soviet memory still dominates. This was influenced by the absence of sound ex-communist party and tradition of political elite to seclude the parties of Russian minority from ruling coalitions. Soviet history is depicted as an enslavement of titular nations and this depiction consistently supplements the traditional national narrative.

Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia are nation-states that have all of the essential attributes of modern statehood. At first they had established themselves as ethnocultural nation-states, later lost their independence and then reemerged straight into the world which was hardly influenced by globalization and regional integration. The principle of "one nation, one language, one culture, one state" was already ideologically obsolete in modern discourse, however this was the basic principle on which the Baltic States were created. The nation-state in this thesis will be understood not only as territorial-political entity, but also as a social actor which puts efforts in political community building and reproducing it. In order to achieve these goals nation-state uses various institutional mechanisms; invokes legal remedies and arguments of inward values. Constructivist approach can help to investigate the processes of political community building in the Baltic States and to identify substantial fields of politics that determine the perception of political community. This also allows comparing them in a broader perspective – with "ideal types" of nation-state that appeared in the West. History, language and citizenship – these are the attributes that provide the political communities of the Baltic States with content and form; therefore the comparison of the policies towards those attributes indicates differences which determine different models of political community-shaping in the Baltic States. Latvian and Estonian models resemble the "German" type of nation-state, while Lithuanian model seems to go through the transformation – recedes from historically closest "German" model and approaches "French" type of nation-state. Such tendencies are determined by cultural experiences, ethnic composition and by giving importance to a particular historical heritage.