Typically apathetic

This year's federal elections will take place on November 3rd, that is, on the Sunday before St. Mitar's Day - traditionally a day for settling accounts, closing new business deals and paying the rent. St. Mitar's Day is also known as the "Lads' day", when in villages lads looking after the sheep received their salary. All in all, quite symbolic.

These elections are quite funny since no one is interested in its outcome and no one questions whether the state for which the elections are being organized functions properly. No one wonders who will count the votes, but primarily, who will vote.

When announcing the elections, President Zoran Lilic mentioned the concern of the state to facilitate the voting process by ensuring favorable weather conditions on the polling day. One ought to believe that the authorities changed the date of the elections because such a move is likely to increase the turnout and enable the elderly, who are known to be loyal to the Socialist Party, to take part in the elections before the annual flu outbreak.

On average, between 7% and 8% of the electorate (similar to data obtained in the UK) does not vote due to illness, urgent business or absence from the election registry.

This year opinion polls suggested indecisiveness on behalf of the electorate that was on the verge of despondency. According to some estimates up to 60% of the electorate is likely to abstain from voting. This is probably an exaggeration, but it still reflects the rising tendency of people to give up any interest in politics and in everything else.

According to Srecko Mihajlovic, a study carried out by the Institute for Social Sciences in May this year on a sample of 2,000 respondents shows that in 1996, the electorate is unstable. Around 38% of the electorate claim to have taken part in elections in the past and will continue to do so in the future, while 6% claim they never voted and never will. This means that 44% of the electorate behaves in a consistent manner. However, as many as 56% of voters do not behave in a stable way: 32% are undecided, claiming that they voted in the past but are not sure whether they will do so in the future; 17% admit that they abstained but are now undecided; 4% voted in the past but will not vote again and finally 3% abstained in the past, and will continue to do so.

Srecko Mihajlovic, an experienced and respectable researcher, estimates that in Serbia (without Kosovo) most probably between 25% and 30% of the electorate will abstain from voting. The abstention rate might reach 27%, as predicted by the opinion poll, although only 6% of respondents were confident that they will abstain. If we add to this estimate the abstention in Kosovo it becomes clear that the crowd around the ballot box will be smaller than in 1993, when out of 7 million registered voters, 4.3 million actually voted (61%), while in Montenegro 69% of the 430,000 registered voters came out to vote.

This is a continuation of a decrease in voting activity. In 1990, out of 7 million registered voters, 5 million voted -that is, 71.4% of the electorate. This suggests that between the two elections, 10 % of the electorate, or 700,000 people, became politically passive. In the 1993 elections for the Serbian parliament, the abstention rate was 38%, a quarter higher than in 1990, when the same rate was 28.5% (This figure includes the organized boycott by the Albanian minority in Kosovo).

During the 1945 elections, the turnout in Serbia was 77.16%, considerably less than in other republics (Kosovo 97.68% , Montenegro 96.13% , Croatia 97.97%).

At the first parliamentary elections in 1990, the turnout was 71.5%, again lower compared to other former Yugoslav republics (Montenegro 75%, Bosnia-Herzegovina 77%, Slovenia 84%, Croatia and Macedonia 85%) or other East European countries (Czechoslovakia 96%, Bulgaria 90%). In Yugoslavia between 1974 and 1986 in the elections for the representatives in the national assembly, the turnout varied between 82.5% and 92% and was always lower than in other Eastern European states.

In 1990, the establishment in Serbia called an election after considerable hesitation and failed to give the opposition parties equal campaigning conditions. Opposition parties tried to force the authorities into improving these conditions by threatening to boycott the elections, which added to the uncertainty as to whether the elections will take place at all. This uncertainty certainly contributed to the extent of the abstention rate. Every election since then has been marked by an inequality of opposition parties both in real terms and in terms of media coverage, by conflicts within the opposition, creation of phantom parties, crises of political ideas, and pre-election campaigns which resembled a festival of weirdoes. One of the ruling party's constant strategies was to make the dissatisfaction of the electorate manifest itself through abstention.

On the other hand, part of the opposition's campaigning activity in all the elections up to date revolved around the boycotting of elections, which must have contributed to the abstention of voters.

Srecko Mihajlovic is also trying to refute a widespread belief about the lack of political interest amongst the young. He says that older voters are, on average, less interested in voting than the young, but are more stable, so the increase in abstention rate is mostly the result of the behaviour of younger voters.

Results of analyses suggest that abstinence is spreading in sections of society that are not traditional supporters of the Socialist Party. Although it may seem logical for the ruling party to be punished for the consequences of its own policies, because of a complicated social paradox it is the opposition who pays for all the inadequacies of the current government.

In principle, the increased abstinence amongst the voters suits the authorities since it increases the importance of the proportion of the voters who always vote for the government. However, it seems that like in the case of inflation, there is some kind of a threshold, after which things begin to turn against the government. This year, in terms of the media, the authorities tried to keep politics out of public life. It tried to cool down public opinion by organizing parties, but then again it expressed concern about the abstention of voters. It directed its so-called campaign of seduction mostly towards the young. This means that the reserves of old voters are no longer enough.

Besides the state monopoly over the media, an obvious reason why a substantial number of voters might decide to stay at home is due to an election campaign that resembles a circus in addition an overall rise in apathy. Don't people in cities hit by an earthquake just sit and stare at the ruins?

Psychologist Dr. Zarko Korac says that the images of Skoplje stricken by an earthquake suggests a state of shock, while what we are facing is something different -it is the apathy of the unhappy. We are a country full of unhappy people. A period of absolute emptiness always follows an outbreak of anger. Mr. Korac describes the current state of our society as a society of stagnation and apathy. He sees the causes of abstinence in the fact that those who lead their people into misery now pretend to be peacemakers, in the fact that a fall in living standards always leads to a fall in interests including the interest in politics, in the fact that opportunities have been wasted, in the corruption, in the disunity of the opposition and the lack of alternatives to the present situation. Amongst the important causes he also mentions the fact that the fate of the federal state has been doubted by and alienated from the people, leading to a weak identification of the citizens with the federal state.

From the perspective of those who support the authorities, and according to the official verdict on the matter, the issue of apathy has no real meaning. They probably believe that their behaviour is optimal since they understand that they are not the real participants in the events but only the wise leaders..