Tired of Democracy

When it comes to giving presents to children, I admit I often behave like that old fart who begins every sentence with “When I was your age.” It is not that I begrudge young people their joy; it is more the sadness of realizing that there is much less of that joy than back then—you know, when I was their age. We live in an age that expects instant gratification, with very short attention spans and quick boredom. We Slovenians have a similar attitude to democracy and Europe, at least judging by the recent European Parliament elections. And by a series of elections before them. As if we were already tired of everything. We treat such important historical achievements as the ability to freely choose our political representatives and membership of the European Union like someone who spends a fortune on a new car and then can’t be bothered to maintain it. Twenty-eight years after the proclamation of an independent Slovenia and fifteen years after joining the EU, Slovenian democracy is driving towards a bright future with a seized-up engine and bald tires.

This statement is not related to the results of the last European elections. There is nothing wrong with them, and I will not comment on them either, as I avoid party-political positions in my writing. Nevertheless, I can’t help expressing my satisfaction that some people were not elected after all—the brown leaguers, for example, or the expert on trickery who has already left a lasting, if not the best, impression on parliamentary Europe.

The turnout was dismal. Despite the few percentage points gained compared with the elections five years ago, it is extremely worrying that almost three-quarters of voters could not be bothered to walk to the polling station, or at least to a mailbox.

Of course, we must ask who is to blame for such a dismally low turnout. The classic answer is the candidates, who were not convincing enough in their appearances and programs. This time, that is more an excuse than an answer. I am not trying to diminish the responsibility of politics for people’s growing distrust of politics, but I think that in these European elections Slovenian voters had a perfectly decent choice of names and candidates, among whom anyone could have found someone to put a circle around.

The second common answer, specific to European elections, is that Slovenian representatives in the European Parliament have no influence. This argument cannot simply be waved away with “people have no idea,” since it is an impression created partly by the media and some more or less expert commentary. Such an attitude to the importance of the European Parliament for Slovenia is not serious. On the one hand, it is true that an individual’s influence in a body of 751 members does not come by itself, but it is far from true that someone with exceptional qualities, knowledge and political experience cannot become visible in the European Parliament and build influence and alliances that can be useful to the voters they represent and the country they come from. The fact that Slovenia is among the smaller countries and has only eight members is an objective handicap, but not an insurmountable obstacle. No one can make us as small as we know how to make ourselves small and insignificant.

We Slovenians also don’t like politicians who are already in politics, but we must be aware of the consequences that an obsession with new faces could have for Slovenia’s influence in the European Parliament. Criticizing Fajon or Zver just because they have stood several times makes no sense. Influence in such a large and complex body is not built overnight; it takes several terms. This is not, of course, blanket support for those who have already been MEPs or criticism of those starting their first term. A closed political space is like an open fridge: it doesn’t take long for things to start to stink. On the other hand, it is also true that we cannot improve our influence if we send only new people every five years. At least in this respect, we can conclude that this year’s choice, as far as the mix of experience and freshness goes, is not bad.

Slovenian representatives in the European Parliament are often criticized for a lack of unity. That is why in this year’s campaign the candidates swore one after another that things would be different from now on. In principle there is nothing wrong with that, at least as far as key issues are concerned: the arbitration ruling, environmental protection, the values of human rights, the rule of law and the welfare state, which we Slovenians protected in the Constitution, as well as the response to historical revisionism and the revival of ideas that in the past brought Slovenians and other Europeans so much grief. But it is one thing to talk about unity in televised debates and another to assert it on the European stage. The problem is not so much the lack of unity among MEPs in Strasbourg and Brussels as the fact that we have no consensus on these issues at home.

Part of the responsibility for the low turnout must also be attributed to the media. Although in my view reporting on European affairs has improved in recent years, mainly thanks to good correspondents in Brussels, the media never manage to cover the campaign properly. Tabloid sensationalism is pushed, more concerned with how much MEPs earn than with what they do there. It is not that MEPs’ spending doesn’t deserve media attention—quite the opposite—but cheaply feeding Slovenian envy is not, and cannot be, journalism. The so-called fact-checking was also at times rather amateurish, ranging from setting juvenile traps and a subjective understanding of truth to lumping together completely insignificant slips with deliberate manipulation and lies.

Finally, we must also think critically about the attitude of voters. Despite all the justified reasons for disappointment with politics, you can’t fix democracy by giving it the middle finger and going to the pub to rant about how everything is going to the dogs instead of going to vote. No voters, no elections; no elections, no democracy; no democracy, no freedom; no freedom, and we’re screwed. All of us. Society cannot change only from the top down. Each of us has the opportunity to start changing things in ourselves and around us. Mutual back-patting among the like-minded on social networks is no substitute for social engagement and civic responsibility. You can tweet until you drop, but if you don’t vote, don’t complain about the consequences. Democracy is like oxygen. It is too late if we only realize its importance when it is gone.