Political Activism in Serbia

Types and Modalities of Political Activism

We find many attempts in the literature to classify the various types of political activism. Sydney Verba and Norman Nie come to mind again as the proponents of one of the first typologies. They drew distinctions among four forms of participation, identifying voting, campaigning—primarily through membership of political parties and donating money for their activities—contacting of public officials, and being active locally. ^[16]

In the West, as representative democracy matured and suffrage extended, from the late 1940s to the mid-1960s various types of electoral behaviour emerged, among them voting, membership of political parties, participation in political campaigns, and direct contact with politicians. Such participation is still referred to as ‘conventional participation’ and is characterised by engagement with the existing political system using the legal means designed for the purpose. However, the typology of forms of political action has expanded significantly since Verba and Nie. With the rise of new social movements in the late 1960s and early 1970s, political activism took on a dimension of conflict as protest became one of the modes of public participation in politics. Because protest did not follow the norms of the day, such activities came to be known as ‘unconventional participation’, a qualification which, though somewhat out-dated, remains in use in the literature even today.

During the 1980s, with the steady advance of neoliberalism the concept of the welfare state became weakened, with the result that various civil society associations took over provision of a significant number of social services. A form of ‘civic’ activism therefore developed, requiring primarily the engagement of volunteers for humanitarian and charitable work. The 1990s were then characterised by a surge in new forms of individualised collective action and the profusion of lifestyle politics, ^[17] which, in the 21^st century, colonised the world of online social media where they took on new forms, such as ‘connective action’. ^[18] Also unfolding, in parallel with the gradual growth of the repertoire of civic engagement, was a process that saw the political sphere itself expanding. It was now possible for all dimensions of social reality to become politicised, so that the concept of political activism can no longer be confined to the narrowly understood space of institutionalised politics. With an eye on the plethora of forms of civic action, Jan W. van Deth has highlighted the problem of demarcation—that is, determining what is and what is not political activism—in an attempt to develop a set of criteria to prevent the study of political activism becoming a ‘theory of everything’ (Table 1). ^[19]

For social scientists these latest, non-institutionalised and informal forms of political action are difficult to pin down conceptually, particularly if they try to rely on the standard apparatus of political participation theory. This chapter therefore seeks to shed fresh light on the new forms of political activism that have been taking shape to change civic participation in politics in Serbia, as elsewhere.

Factors Affecting Political Participation and Activism

Scholarship to date recognises the importance of various factors to explain why individuals become involved in politics. Certain of those factors are psychological and stem from feelings of deprivation, discontent and frustration, others are structural and stem from the economic, social, educational or organisational resources possessed by individuals or groups; while the third group of factors pertain to the life courses of individuals and are linked to the age group in which they find themselves.

The topic of discontent as a driver of political activism has been extensively covered in the literature, from classical theories of collective behaviour ^[20] to more recent social movement theory. ^[21] The scholarship shows that a one trigger for political protest activity is discontent resulting from relative deprivation— that is the perception rather than any objective measurement of being worse off than before either in comparison to others or to one’s expectations. ^[22] On the other hand, resource mobilisation theory (RMT) highlights the importance of possessing various resources that offer the wherewithal to initiate collective action. ^[23] This is not to say that the RMT approach negates the relevance of discontent but that it highlights the structural conditions that facilitate or hinder its expression. Proponents of RTM infer that possession of the relevant resources is essential for political activity, which means among other things that those social groups who possess the fewest resources and are objectively most likely to have reason to be dissatisfied are also the worst placed to take steps to realise their goals. ^[24] The political opportunity approach developed as something of an upgrade to the resource mobility theory, which focused on the internal resources available to actors. Unlike RMT, the political opportunity approach stresses external factors, the socio-political characteristics of the system itself, and the opportunities for and barriers to action it engenders. ^[25] The structure of political opportunity comprises a specific configuration of resources, institutional arrangements and historical preconditions for social mobilisation that, in certain cases, ease the emergence of collective action while in others hinder it. ^[26]

The structure of political opportunity should be understood as a specific landscape in which political activism is realised. The final outcome of initiated actions also depends heavily on the characteristics of that landscape. According to the proponents of the political opportunity approach, the more open are political institutions to extra-institutional actors and their demands, the more likely their actors will be successful. ^[27] Despite differences in how various models of democratic political order respond to activism, it is indisputable that compared to undemocratic political systems a democratic milieu offers greater opportunities to express political views and interests, mobilise support and act through conventional political channels. Democratic rules enable a relatively free exchange of ideas and imply the existence of institutional mechanisms by which criticism of established politics may be expressed.

Exploring civic action at the micro level, scholars of political participation have drawn attention to the impact of the socio-economic status of individuals, known as the SES model. ^[28] Socio-economic status is said to be one of the key factors influencing variation in the degree of political participation, in that individuals with access to greater socio-economic resources, in the forms of education as well as income, are more likely to participate in the political process. ^[29] Individuals of higher social standing are more likely to engage in political life because they have developed skills which enable them to understand the political arena and navigate within it. They also have better access to the economic resources necessary for sustained engagement in the political sphere. Other scholars point out the importance of factors such as an interest in politics, political efficacy, trust of institutions, civic responsibility, democratic values. ^[30] In other words, political activism does not attract the people who are the least satisfied and objectively the most vulnerable, but rather those who have the means needed for it.

Age emerged as an important factor in political activism, emerging as relevant in two ways to political activism, first as a generation-specific component and secondly as it affects political practice. By that we mean that certain activities are typical of certain age groups. For example, young people are less likely to become involved in politics through conventional channels, such as voting or working for labour unions, but are more likely to engage through flexible and informal forms such as, say, protests or sit-ins. ^[31] In the second case, we mean that, because of the specific sociohistorical context in which they grew up, members of any particular generation develop different practices from those of preceding generations. People born in or who grew up during the internet age are more present in the virtual sphere. They more readily opt for unconventional forms of political expression and are less likely to be involved in traditional political organisations like political parties and trade unions. They are also less likely to be ideologically steadfast. ^[32] However, it should be noted that the significance of generational experience in politics depends greatly on social context, so caution is imperative in interpreting findings.

Forms of Political Activism in Serbia

Existing forms of political activism in Serbia can be classified into two groups. First there are the conventional types, including things like voting, directly contacting politicians, donating money to political causes, membership of or volunteering for political parties, and union membership. Then there are the unconventional types, activities which seek to redirect elites. This second type of activity implies membership of civic organisation, enthusiasm for signing petitions, participation in protests and occupation of public spaces. ^[44] As a separate subcategory of the new unconventional activism, this study also explores various forms of ethical/political consumption, such as goods boycotts, and their spiritual counterpart, buycotts—consumption of goods chosen deliberately for political and ethical reasons. These are forms of activity taking place primarily in the economic sphere but which have political implications.

The prevalence of various conventional forms of political activity in Serbia is shown in Figure 1. On the basis of these data it can be shown that of these older more conventional forms of activism the most prevalent among citizens of Serbia are membership of political parties and, to a similar degree, direct contacting of politicians. Approximately 7 % of respondents participated in the more traditional practice of joining trade unions, while donation to political causes remains relatively underdeveloped.

Figure 1

Conventional Activism (Participation) in percent

Certain unconventional forms of political action are more common than various conventional forms–signing petitions for example (Figure 2). In the three years preceding the study 20 % of the citizens of Serbia surveyed had signed at least one petitions. That so relatively a high proportion of citizens had signed petitions can in part be explained by the recent rapid rise in online petitions presented on social media platforms, which obviously require very little time or effort to sign.

Figure 2

Unconventional Activism in percent

Serbian citizens are also relatively active in the boycotting of certain goods and deliberate consumption of others. One in four of the respondents had boycotted at least one product in the three years prior to the survey, either because of its country of origin or because it was not produced in accordance with environmental standards. Almost a third of respondents had in at least one instance purchased a product for expressly environmental reasons, while nearly half (46.7 %) had made a purchase because a particular product had been produced in Serbia. Nearly one in five of the respondents had purchased or declined to purchase items for ethical reasons (Figures 3a and 3b).

Figure 3a

Consumer Boycott

The question was: ‘How many times over the past three years have you boycotted (declined or avoided to use or buy) a particular product: 1. because it represented values with which you do not agree; 2. because of mistreatment of workers by the producer; 3. because of how it was marketed; 4. because of its country of origin; 5. because it was not produced in an environmentally friendly manner?

Figure 3b

Buycott

The question was: Have you, in the past three years, purchased a product: 1. because it expressed your values; 2. because it was made in a particular country (other than Serbia); 3. because it was made in Serbia; 4. because you wanted to support that particular producer; 5. because the producer is known for treating their workers well; 6. because it is produced in an environmentally friendly manner?

The findings suggest little trust in institutions, organizations or activities that could be used to articulate citizens’ interests, and, as such, constitute inputs for the political system and mediate political field.

However, beyond political consumption, forms of unconventional activism, although with the exception of petition-signing, are not particularly widespread. For example, in the three years prior to the survey 3.3 % of respondents were members of an environmental organisation, 5 % were members of other kinds of non-governmental organisation, 3.6 % had participated in a sit-in or occupation of public space, while 7.7 % had participated in a protest. In other words, activities that take place in the private sphere but have political implications are the commonest form of political activism in Serbia, while activities requiring time, significant financial resources or commitment to more direct physical forms of confrontation are less common.

Factors Affecting Political Activism and Participation

On the basis of the theoretical elaborations explained above, we tested the following hypotheses:

1. Conventional politics is associated with socio-economic status (SES) and age, in that activism increases as available resources increase, making activism more widespread among the older generations;

2. Unconventional politics is associated with SES and age, in that activism increases as available resources (including education) increase and is more widespread among younger people;

3. Boycott and buycott are associated with SES, in that both increase as resources increase and are more common among younger age groups.

For the purposes of this analysis, we generated the following composite indices of political participation and activism:

1. The Participation in Conventional Politics Index, compiled on the basis of the following variables:

   1. Contacting politicians,

   2. Donating money to political parties,

   3. Membership of a political party,

   4. Membership of a trade union;

2. The Participation in Unconventional Activism Index, compiled on the basis of the following variables:

   1. Membership of civic organisations,

   2. Activity in environmental initiatives,

   3. Signing petitions,

   4. Participation in protests, and

   5. Participation in occupations of public space;

3. The Boycott Index, compiled on the basis of whether the respondents had declined to purchase a product in the last three years because:

   1. It is a symbol of values of which they disapprove,

   2. The company producing it mistreats its workers,

   3. The respondent disapproved of how the product was marketed,

   4. It was made in a particular country, and

   5. It was not produced in an environmentally friendly manner;

4. The Buycott Index, compiled on the basis of deliberate consumption of a product in the past three years because:

   1. It expresses the respondent’s values,

   2. It was produced in Serbia,

   3. The respondent wishes to support that particular producer,

   4. The producer is known to treat their workers well, and

   5. It was produced in an environmentally friendly manner.

On that basis we formed four models to test our hypotheses. In all four models the dependent variables are composed of participation in various forms of political action. In the first two models the dependent variables represent the level of participation in conventional and unconventional politics, while in the second two they represent the level of participation in boycotts and buycotts of certain products. The independent variables used were:

1. Gender;

2. Rural or urban habitation;

3. Economic status (a composite index derived from wealth, income and consumption);

4. Education (a three-level scale, with higher education used as the reference category);

5. Age group (which we divided into young people aged 18 to 29 as the reference category, and older people aged 30–44, 45–64, and 65 or over).

For conventional politics the results show that men are more engaged than women, which is to say that men are more likely to participate in traditional politics. With increasing economic resources there is a corresponding increase in participation in conventional political activities. Respondents who had completed further education were more likely to participate than respondents who had completed only primary or secondary education. Age groups 30–44 and 45–64 stand out as noticeably more active in conventional politics than those aged 18–29 (Table 2). Therefore, our first hypothesis was proved correct, that conventional politics is associated with socio-economic status and that activism increases as available resources increase and as people age; this form of participation is more common among older generations.

The second model points to the association between the characteristics of individuals and their participation in unconventional forms of politics. Differences between men and women are on the verge of statistical significance, leaving the question of gender differences unanswered. Urban locations stand out as the places where participation in unconventional politics is likeliest, indicating the significance of an urban milieu for non-traditional forms of political feeling. Respondents’ economic status too is associated with their level of unconventional activism, as is their level of education. Easier access to economic and educational resources leads to a corresponding rise in the level of activism, but the key difference here is generational. People under 30 are more active than any of the older age groups, which indicates the specificity of the younger generations, who are more likely to practise new forms of politics (Table 2). Our second hypothesis too was therefore proved correct, that unconventional politics is associated both with SES and age, in that activism increases as available resources increase—both economic and in the sense of cultural capital—and is more widespread among younger people.

The following two models reveal associations between the degree to which people are ready to participate in boycots or buycots of certain goods and their socio-demographic or SES standing (Table 3). Gender diferences proved irrelevant, while place of residence appears relevant only for boycotts of goods, in that urban dwellers are more likely to resort to boycoting. Economic status and educational atainment are linked to these practices in the sense that an increase in both corresponds with an increase in these forms of activism.

Our findings here highlight the importance of resources but are equally revealing of atitudes to these forms of activism, which correspond to higher levels of education. However, the relationship between age and ethical or political consumption raises the question of how to interpret diferences. Namely, only those aged 45–64 difered significantly from the youngest age group in that they were more likely to boycot certain types of goods. For buycots, a disparity is evident between the youngest age group (18–29) and the next two (30–44 and 45–64), with the older generations more likely to choose that method to express their political values and preferences. Bearing in mind that the younger generations are still moving from education to employment and that their consumer habits are constrained by their level of disposable income, it seems reasonable to conclude that only stabilisation of income ofers opportunities for this form of activism. Our third hypothesis too is therefore proved sound, since both boycot and buycot are associated with SES, in that these forms of activism increase as financial and cultural capital increase and are more common among the older people.