Political absenteeism: causes, types, problems, consequences, examples

The term political absenteeism appeared in the first half of the 20th century. American scientists began to use it, describing the reluctance of citizens to participate in the political life of the country, and primarily in elections. Studies of the phenomenon of political absenteeism have spawned many theories and hypotheses that explain its causes and consequences.

The concept of

According to political science, political absenteeism is self-elimination of voters from participation in any voting. Modern democratic countries are a clear demonstration of this phenomenon. According to statistics, in many states where elections are held, more than half of citizens who have the right to vote do not participate in the electoral process .

Political absenteeism has many forms and shades. A person who does not attend elections is not at all isolated from relations with the authorities completely. Regardless of his political position, he remains a citizen and a taxpayer. Non-participation in such cases extends only to those activities in which a person can manifest himself as an active person, for example, determine his own attitude towards the party or candidates for the post of deputy.

Features of political absenteeism

Electoral passivity can exist only in states where there is no external compulsion for political activity. It is excluded in totalitarian societies, where, as a rule, participation in sham elections is mandatory. In such countries, the leading party is the only party that re-aligns the electoral system . Political absenteeism under a democratic system occurs when a person loses his or her duties and receives rights. Disposing them, he may not participate in elections.

Political absenteeism distorts the results of the vote, because in the end the elections demonstrate the point of view of only those who came to polling stations. For many, passivity is a form of protest. For the most part, citizens who ignore elections show their lack of confidence in the system by their behavior. In all democracies, the view is widespread that elections are a tool of manipulation. People do not go for them because they are convinced that in any case their votes will be considered bypassing the legal procedure or the result will be distorted in some other less obvious way. Conversely, in totalitarian states, where there is a semblance of elections, almost all voters visit polling stations. This pattern is a paradox only at first glance.

Absenteeism and Extremism

In some cases, the consequences of political absenteeism can turn into political extremism. Although voters with such behavior do not go to vote, this does not mean that they do not care what happens in their country. Once absenteeism is a mild form of protest, then this protest can grow into something more. Alienation of voters from the system is a fertile ground for further growth of discontent.

Because of the silence of the "passive" citizens there may be a feeling that there are not so many of them. However, when these disaffected people reach the extreme point of their rejection of power, they go to active action to change the situation in the state. It is at this point that you can clearly see how many such citizens in the country. Different types of political absenteeism unite completely different people. Many of them do not at all deny politics as a phenomenon, but only oppose the existing system.

Abuse of passivity of citizens

The scale and danger of political absenteeism depends on many factors: the maturity of the state system, the national mentality, customs and traditions of a particular society. Some theorists explain this phenomenon as a limited electoral participation. However, this idea contradicts the basic democratic principles. Any state power in such a system is legitimized through referendums and elections. These tools allow citizens to manage their own state.

Limited electoral participation is the exclusion of certain segments of the population from political life. Such a principle can lead to a meritocracy or an oligarchy, when only "best" and "elite" get access to government. Such consequences of political absenteeism completely obviate democracy. Elections as a way of forming the will of the statistical majority stop working.

Absenteeism in Russia

In the 1990s, political absenteeism in Russia manifested itself in all its glory. Many residents of the country refused to participate in public life. They were disappointed with loud political slogans and empty counters in stores across the street from the house.

In domestic science, several points of view on absenteeism were formed. In Russia, this phenomenon is a peculiar behavior, manifested in evasion from participation in elections and other political actions. In addition, this is an apathetic and indifferent attitude. Absenteeism can also be called inaction, but it is not always dictated by indifferent views. If we consider this behavior as a manifestation of the will of citizens, it can even be called one of the signs of the development of democracy. This judgment will be true if we reject the cases when a state using a similar attitude of citizens changing the political system without regard to "passive" voters.

Legitimacy of power

The most important problem of political absenteeism is the fact that in the case of voting by a small part of society it is impossible to talk about a truly popular vote. At the same time, in all democracies from a social point of view, the structure of visitors to polling stations is very different from the structure of society as a whole. This leads to discrimination against entire groups of the population and infringement of their interests.

The increase in the number of voters participating in the elections gives the authorities greater legitimacy. Often, candidates for deputies, presidents, etc., try to find additional support precisely among the passive population, which has not yet decided on its choice. The politicians who manage to make such citizens their supporters, as a rule, win elections.

Factors influencing absenteeism

The activity of citizens in elections may fluctuate depending on the type of elections, regional characteristics, level of education, type of settlement. Each country has its own political culture - a set of social norms relating to the electoral process.

In addition, each campaign has its own individual characteristics. Statistics show that in states with a proportional electoral system, voter activity is higher than in those where a majority-proportional or simply majority system is established.

Electoral behavior

The exclusion from political life often comes from the frustration of the authorities. This pattern is especially evident at the regional level. The number of passive voters is increasing when the municipal authorities continue to ignore the interests of citizens in each political cycle.

The rejection of politics comes after officials do not solve the problems that worry residents of their city in everyday everyday life. Comparing the market economy and the political process, some scholars have identified the following pattern. Electoral behavior becomes active when a person realizes that from his actions he himself will receive some income. If the economy is about money, then voters want to see tangible changes in their lives for the better. If they do not come, then there is apathy and unwillingness to communicate with politics.

History of the study of phenomenon

The interpretation of the phenomenon, which is an absenteeism, began in the late XIX - early XX century. The first studies were conducted at the Chicago School of Political Science by scientists Charles Edward Merriam and Gossner. In 1924 they conducted a sociological survey of ordinary Americans. The experiment was conducted in order to determine the motives of voters who evaded elections.

Further study of the topic was continued by Paul Lazarsfeld, Bernard Berelson and other sociologists. In 1954, in his book "The Elector makes a decision", Angus Campbell analyzed the results of his predecessors' work and built his own theory. The researcher realized that participation or non-participation in elections is determined by a number of factors, which together form a system. By the end of the twentieth century, several hypotheses appeared that explained the problems of political absenteeism and the reasons for its appearance.

Theory of Social Capital

This theory came about thanks to the book "Foundations of Social Theory" written by James Coleman. In it, the author introduced the concept of "social capital" into broad use. The term describes the totality of collective relations in a society that operates according to the market economic principle. Therefore, the author called it "capital."

Coleman's theory originally had nothing to do with what has already become known as "political absenteeism." Examples of the use of the ideas of the scientist appeared in the joint work of Neil Carlson, John Bram and Wendy Rahn. With the help of this term they explained the pattern of citizens' participation in elections.

Scientists compared electoral campaigns of politicians with the fulfillment of obligations to ordinary residents of the country. Citizens have this answer in the form of an election visit. Only in the interaction of these two groups is democracy born. Elections are a "ritual of solidarity" for the values of free societies with an open political system. The more confidence between voters and candidates, the more ballots will be dropped into the ballot box. Coming to the site, the individual is not only involved in the political and social process, but also expands his own sphere of interest. At the same time, every citizen has a growing circle of acquaintances, with whom he has to argue or seek a compromise. All this develops the skills necessary to participate in elections.

The influence of society

With an increase in the proportion of citizens interested in the electoral process, social capital also grows. This theory does not explain what political absenteeism can lead to, but shows its nature and genesis. An excellent example for this hypothesis is Italy, which can be divided into two regions. In the north of the country, horizontally integrated social ties between people of the same class, prosperity, way of life, etc. are developed. It is easier for them to interact with each other and to find common points of contact. From this pattern, social capital and a solid positive attitude toward elections are growing.

The situation is different in the south of Italy, where there are many rich landowners and poor citizens. Between them lies a whole gulf. Such a vertical social connection does not promote cooperation among residents. People who find themselves in the lowest social strata lose their faith in politics, and are less interested in election campaigns. In this region, political absenteeism is much more common. The reasons for the differences in the north and south of Italy are the heterogeneous social structure of society.