On a cold and cloudy morning in late January 2013, demonstrators were gathering in one of the main squares in Ljubljana as part of a one-day national strike of public sector workers. Similar gatherings were taking place elsewhere in the city – notebaly at university campusues – as well as in other urban areas of the small (pop. two million) country of Slovenia. The strike was part of a larger, growing protest movement against the government, specially the prime minister, that had been growing in size and intesity since the autumn of the previous year, though largely beyond the coverage of the international news media. Slovenia had been the most prosperous republic within former Yugoslavia ; its transition to an independent state in June 1991 had proceeded with minimal bloodshed. Since independence, its economy flourished ; it joined both the EU and the eurozone.
However, there has been a spiraling economic crisis since 2008, and the recent EU-driven austerity measures were not only further paralaysing the country, but also making many private companies vulnerable to global finance speculators. This developments clearly served to mobilise many people, yet these citizens were protesting more than the dire economic situation and the cuts in the public sector. They were also angered by verified patterns of corruption among political elites generally and the degradation of the judicial system. The oppositonal parties in the parliament, for example, were largely perceived as part of the overall problem rather than offering any real alternatives.
One of the key figures in the coordination of the protest actions explained to me on that morning that the phrase, ‘the stolen state’ had taken root among demonstrators. Many citizens had become enraged by what appeared to be a plundering of society’s common assets, whereby politicians would sell off state-owned properties and holdings to others within the power elite networks. Such business transactions, often lacking in transparency, were done under the banner of neoliberal privatisation. Many demonstrators were thus calling for a whole new set of representatives; talk of establishing new parties was in the air.
Modern, post-communist Slovenia does not have a strong tradition of protest – which may correlate with its economic success story – but has had a viable democratic culture, including a wide array of civil society organisations, not least labour unions. Polling statistics (http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?CountryCode=SI) show that voter turnout in parliamentary elections was impressively high at 85.9 percent in the first election held in 1992, yet remained high at 65.6 percent in 2011 (while voting in the EU parliamentary elections in 2004 and 2009 was low, at 28.3 percent both times).
Interestingly, many new, spontaneous groups were now being formed to help facilitate the protest actions ; these were collectives with rather flat and fluid organisational structures. Coordination throughout the country was effective; the protests were growing in size, and I was told that opinion polls showed massive support for the demonstrators, ca. 80 pecent (REF ?), while 16 percent of the population had already participated in at least one action (REF. ?).
Organisers at this demonstration spoke of the challenge of getting people onto the street, yet were happy with the results so far, noting especially the atmosphere of solidarity. In fact, some commented that the word had become very important within the movement, as the mobilisation was porceeding. The activists felt that the government had not only not engaged in any real serous dialogue since the protests began, but had been trying to discredit the protesters in crude ways. Top officials were in fact using Twitter a good deal to do this. Initial attempts to intmidate the protesters with police violence failed and only served to reinforce their resolve. The mobilistion was using Facebook a good deal for discussion and strategy oordination;; e-mail was also much in use, especially for discussion groups, and cell phones were also much in use.
Academic colleagues underscored for me that the dominant mass media and its journalistic activities were perceived to be doing a reasonably good professional job – indirectly confirmed, perhaps, by the government’s frequent expressions of displeasuret with the coverage. It was understood that theprotection of journlism was important to the movement. A number of figures, some established public intellectuals, others representing some newer voices, were being seen and heard in the mass media, while online there was a growing intensity of discussion and debate, with a few voices taking on some prominence in particular contexts or within certain groups. Along with the discussions there was also much affective expression of political views, including a good deal of satire and other forms of humour.
How the political crisis in Slovenia will be resolved remains uncertain at the time of writing. Moreover, it is one particular case and we should avoid drawing major, gneraliseable conclusions. Yet these snapshots capture a number of important themes that I will be discussing in the chapters ahead. These have to do with the frustration and anger citizens feel towards the established political system and its representatives, and how they are finding alternative paths to democracy. Another theme has to do with the forms and character of political participation, as well as the conditions that faclitate it. Moreover, we can see here also the question of people’s identities as political agents, how they emerge, and how they are reinforced ; the social character of political activity thus becomes a significant motif as well. Also looming large in these snapshots is the specific role and use of various media inthe political process. The situation in Slovenia will continue to be shaped by the interplay of many different factors, and the future is definitely not pre-ordained. However, from the standpoint of democracy there was much that was both encouraging and analytically interesting on that chilly January morning.
Peter Dahlgren: The political web – Media Participation and Alternative Democracy, Palgrave Macmillan, London, New York