Formation of collective identity in USSR and EU: impact of economic factor

Šio magistrinio darbo pavadinimas „Kolektyvinės tapatybės formavimas SSRS ir ES: ekonominio veiksnio įtaka“. Istorinės ribos apima laikotarpį nuo SSRS susikūrimo iki šių dienų aktualijų, žodis \"formavimas\" nurodo analizuojamo proceso t��stinumą. Pagrindinė darbo analizės ašis – kolektyvinė tapatybė. Darbo pagrindinis tikslas yra įvertinti ES kolektyvinio tapatumo formavimo perspektyvumą, remiantis Sovietų Sąjungos patirtimi ir nustatyti ekonominio veiksnio ryšį su kolektyvinio tapatumo formavimo procesu. Siekiant užsibrėžtų tikslų, reikia atlikti šiuos išsikeltus uždavinius: visų pirma, reikia išsiaiškinti kaip yra konstruojamas kolektyvinis tapatumas, kokie veiksniai tai lemia ir kokia yra ekonominio veiksnio reikšmė kolektyvinio tapatumo formavimui; antra, reikia išanalizuoti SSRS kolektyvinio tapatumo formavimo trūkumus; trečia, reikia išanalizuoti ES kolektyvinio tapatumo formavimo ypatumus bei į perspektyvą nukreiptą formavimo politiką, įvertinant ekonominio veiksnio svarbą; ketvirtą, reikia palyginti ES ir Sovietų Sąjungos kolektyvinio tapatumo formavimo specifiką, remiantis gautais duomenimis, padaryti išvadas. Darbe yra keliamos šios hipotezės: 1. ekonominis veiksnys yra svarbus kolektyvinio tapatumo formavimo procese; 2. kolektyvinio tapatumo formavimo specifika SSRS ir ES turi sąryšio taškų, tai yra - juos įtakoja tie patys veiksniai; 3. ES turi daugiau perspektyvų suformuoti kolektyvinį tapatumą nei SSRS. Darbe taikomi tyrimo metodai: analitinis – aprašomasis ir lyginamasis. Pirmosios trys darbo dalys paremtos analitiniu - aprašomuoju metodu,o ketvirtojoje darbo dalyje atliekama lyginamoji analizė. Darbe derinami kokybiniai ir kiekybiniai medžiagos analizės metodai. Pagrindinės tyrimo išvados yra šios: Kolektyvinė tapatybė yra sukonstruota ir ją konstruoja šie veiksniai: politinis, socialinis, kultūrinis ir etninis, ekologinis bei ekonominis. Šiuos veiksnius sudaro elementai. Svarbiausias kolektybinę tapatybę konstruojantis elementas yra vertybės, konkrečiau- vertybės susiformavusios kultūriniu pagrindu. Ekonominis veiksnys įtakoja kolektyvinės tapatybės formavimą. SSRS skyrė per mažai dėmesio etniškumo klausimams spręsti bei kolektybinės tapatybės formavimo procesui, Europos Sąjunga šiam procesui skiria labai daug dėmesio. Didžiausias skirtumas tarp SSRS ir ES kolektyvinio tapatumo formavimo procese yra vykdoma politika: SSRS siekė tautinę kolektyvinę tapatybę pakeiti sąjungos tapatybe, tuo tarpu ES siekia šaliu tautinės kolektyvinės tapatybės lygmenį papildyti aukštesniu viršnacionaliniu europiniu tapatumu.The title of this master thesis is “Formation of Collective Identity in USSR and EU: Impact of Economic Factor“. It defines historical period from USSR foundation till nowadays. The main aspect according to which these multinational blocks are analyzed is collective identity. Special efforts are given to analyze factors which have impact to collective identity formation, but the biggest attention is paid to analyze importance of economic factor. Identity – the sense of dependence. This concept at one time contains as the connective as also separative elements. This is a result of identification process which helps to define human or group exceptional indications. As individual or collective identity formation problems are widely discussed in today’s society discourses. Its importance is comprehensible as to the individual as also to the communities behavior motivation. The perception of identity allows to know better your historical or cultural roots, and also to know yourself and others better. But the concept of identity is so wide and variant, that it leaves a lot of place to the following discussions. This work appoints a lot of attention to collective identity forming and it’s specific. Actuality of the topic remains also in today’s political discourses undisputed – if we clear, how to construct common identity it would emerge a possibility to evaluate, what main mistakes in it forming maid USSR and what perspectives in common identity constructing has EU. This information is very important for the member states of EU (also for Lithuania), as also for the states which have a status of an applicant and also the neighbor states of EU. Additionally, the having of a future vision allows making more rationale and farseeing decisions, which are common to the politics of EU or its up-and-coming in the future. Determination and analysis of factors, which have influence to the forming of collective identity, would help to make assumptions about the perspectives of multinational combinations. Considering in to the USSR’s breaking reasons, it is important to define a connection between the beginnings of nationalism and collective identity. What conditions are forming the revival of nationalism? The nationalism starts when a specific form of resistance, which”comes up from the sense of alienation and displeasure about unfair disjuncture – political, economical, social. “ Political, cultural and ethnical, social economical and also ecological – all those fields are closely related and influencing the forming of collective identity. It’s difficult to say in which field the disjuncture factor is the main and critical and can cause such radical reactions of a community as nationalism. A lot of nationalism analytics affirm that especially the cultural disjuncture causes the biggest complaining on the ethnical base. They motivate, that social movement are caused by the differences in the level of worth. But the level of worth isn’t related only to the field of culture. It includes also all of the earlier mentioned factors and is forming on the base of earlier mentioned fields. The main attention in this work is shown to the worth’s which have formed on the base of economics. The EU different as USSR shows a big meaning to the politics of collective identity and muster, as it appears, different methods to form this politics. But will it be enough to solve the nationality question in EU? The main objective of this work is to evaluate EU’s perspectives of collective identity forming. And in using the experience of USSR define the cohesion of economical factor with the process of forming the collective identity. In seeking the main points of the study, is necessary to make further tasks: firs of all we need to clear how is the collective identity constructed, which factors determine it and what is the meaning of the economical factor in the forming of collective identity; second, we need to analyze USSR’s lacks of the forming the collective identity; third, we need to analyze EU’s peculiarity of forming the collective identity and the perspectives pointed to the forming of it, valuating the meaning of economical factor; fourth, we need to compare EU’s and USSR’s particularity of forming collective identity. Accordant to the forthcoming information, will be made conclusions. There are made three main Hypotheses in this work: 1. Economical factor is important for collective identity construction process; 2. The particularity of collective identity formation in USSR and EU has coherent points, it means – the same factors impact the collective identity formation process. 3. EU has more possibilities to construct collective identity than USSA. The actuality of the work. To the analysis of identity is shown a great attention, but it is difficult to say exactly which factors are creating it, that is why the plenty of opinions are useful. There is a lack of information about the meaning of economical factor to the process of collective identity formation and motivation of the individuals and society. This work is interesting while its attempt to show, what influence in the forming of the collective identity and also starting of nationalism, has the economical factor, because it is mentioned but not further discussed in the works of other authors. A lot of authors, who analyze this topic, say, that the uprising of nationalism in the Baltic states isn’t based only on patriotic feelings, but is based on the model of rational choice, which is orientated to the reforms of M. Gorbachiov. The Baltic States could also seek better economical conditions, because the centralized planning of USSR failed. This also could promote the rise of nationalism, because, like the economical indexes show, Baltic States could feel more productive and superior in the sense of production quality. That why it is meaningful to analyze from the beginning the value system of an individual and the society, the factors which are motivating them and show more attention to the economical interests. To this situation we can look enlarged through the A. Maslow’s phiramid hierarchical requirements , which shows, that first of all the instinctive – physiological needs of persons (in this case also societies) , which are closely related to the economical factor, must be satisfied, only then we can talk about the cultural and self-expression needs. Not effectiveness of the USSR gradually carried to the states deficit in products, there were not fully satisfied peoples demands and also the response from the West countries said that there are better alternatives. Considering that our community is turning to a more consumer society, it is important to clear if the meaning of economical factor in the future will be bigger. Such tendentious we can see in the beginning of EU and the politics of the states which are trying to get in to EU. At this time it is rightly to state, that EU’s establishment and the interests of the states which trying to access the EU is based on the economical interests, and states which economically are getting stronger again are seeking an independence from EU. From there we can say, that with gratifying the lowest – economical interests of the society, and EU in trying to life further must to go in to a higher level: EU must effectively create an European identity, what it already makes through the citizenship politics, stimulation of democracy, but if it will be successful – the time will show. We can presume, that the example of USSR, how different it would be, allows making some assumptions about the perceptiveness of EU. At this time Lithuania belongs to the multinational block of EU, that why it is from a relevance to know the priorities of EU and to see further in to the tendentious of the EU politics. EU works on other principles then USSR: first of all the status of the states is different. Member states joint EU freely. Double citizenship determines the possibility of the double identity, which can be the most important to secure for the further functioning of EU. We must acknowledge, that a presumption, that if EU will be successfully in implementing the politic of higher needs of man and society, it will successfully work in the future, because the lower – economical needs will be granted. Research methods which are applied in the work: analytical – describable and comparable. First three parts of this work are based on analytical – describable method, and in the fourth part of the work a comparable analysis is made. In the work are matching qualitative and quantitative analysis methods. Research source base: the identity problematic analysis is based on M. Casttels, S. Karniauskienės, G.H.Sabine, G.D. Myers and other authors. The situation of USSR’s identity is based on periodical publications, such as “Nationalities papers”, “Soviet Studies” and others topics which are related to the Gorbachiv’s politics effects and to the nationalism reawakening in the Baltic states. The situation of EU is analyzed on K. Manioko (Europos Sąjungos plėtra ir europeizacija: Vidurio ir Rytų Europos valstybių įsijungimas į ES) M. Taljūnaitės and other works, also Eurobarometer information was analyzed. The structural base of the paper. The paper concludes the time from the beginning of the USSR till the now a days of EU. But it needs to be said, that this paper didn’t analyze the politics of USSR’s heads. It is more orientated to the USSR’s collapse moment and to the factors which could influence Gorbachiov’s reforms and the collective identities situation on the eve of reforms. Talking about EU it’s from need to point, that also here is deepening in to the topics of collective identity. The lack of statistical information has made the task difficult, because the information could not be effectively compared between multinational blocks. If we talk about the specific of writing this paper, it’s from need to mention, that the thoughts of otherVytauto Didžiojo universiteta