Dominating discourse of the nation, territory and state in the Lithuanian press in 1988–1991

Straipsnio objektas – instituciškai (žiniasklaidos) konstruojamas dominuojantis priklausymo nacijai ir valstybei diskursas. Straipsnio tikslas – panagrinėti žiniasklaidoje išryškėjusias etniškumo, nacionalumo, priklausymo valstybei ir teritorijai sampratas 1988–1991 m. periodikoje. Metodas – kokybinė teksto analizė. Išvados: straipsnyje parodomos skirtingai konstruojamos priklausymo nacijai, valstybei ir tautai sampratos. Šie skirtumai dažniausiai išreiškia dviejų nagrinėjamų grupių – „išeivijos“ ir Lietuvos lenkų – laikysenas atsikuriančios Lietuvos valstybės atžvilgiu bei valstybės požiūrį į šias grupes minėtu laikotarpiu.The article focuses on the concepts of ethnicity, nationhood, and belonging to the state constructed in the Lithuanian national press in 1988–1991. A close analysis of the dominating discourse in the Lithuanian press in 1988–1991 revealed that there were two groups of people who were actively involved in defining national belonging. The first one was Lithuanians in exile (political exiles who left Lithuania before the Soviet occupation) and the Lithuanian Poles (from the Vilnius region). Other groups were not as prominent. Lithuanians in exile constructed their (non)belonging to the nation based on concepts of a non territorial or a de-territorialised nation emphasising their national belonging based on the origin. Thus, Lithuanians in exile dismissed territory as a central element constituting the nation and concentrated instead on criteria such as the language, common aspects of selfidentity and the Lithuanian origin which they saw as the criteria according to which the nation scattered around the world would reunite. Such a non-territorial nation (Lithuanians in exile) argued for their national and state belonging despite the fact that they (the exiles) did not live in Lithuania and sought Lithuanian citizenship as it was their country of origin. Conversely, the Lithuanian Poles argued their national belonging using territorial arguments of both the nation and the origin. They considered themselves the autochthons of the land and argued their belonging to the nation(s) using their location as on the margins of the state, where national identity was largely constructed through state influence (at present and in the past) as well as their ethnicity that brought together the people and the territory. This suggests that although in the dominant discourse Lithuanian Poles did associated themselves with their residential territory, the changing borders altered their perception of national belonging