Discussing the character of a nation is as complicated as describing a species of insects from prehistoric times. How can one enumerate its features? How can one analyze its morphology? How can one categorize its behavior? Any large-scale analysis will in fact reduce the capacity to provide a clear image of the species. Any synthesis will fail, being untruthful. Talking about the character of Romanians as a Romanian is as unsettling as it is stimulating: what can you say about your own species? To what extent do you resemble the individuals of this species? In other words: are you a good Romanian?In this case, an ideal Romanian type must be identified: an all-purpose profile. Nothing comes out of it? Was the drawer's hand trembling? Did sight fail him? Hasn't he found the adequate instruments?As it doesn't work out, I'll try a brief description of the Romanians' behavior in a concrete, precise situation: elections. Furthermore, I'll restrict the area to a specific way of participating in the elections: non-participation.The term of political apathy is more and more often used when discussing Romanians' attitude toward politics: they are ignorant, insensible, indifferent, incapable of reacting rationally and in an adequate manner to what is going on in the political world. Many of them do not even know the main candidates or parties on the lists. What is paradoxical about Romanians is that, during the communist period, when voting was a civil obligation, they reacted in a positive way, whereas today, when voting is a right, they are increasingly skeptical about being able to change anything through free elections. In opinion polls, many answer that "the country is heading in the wrong direction", but never associate this remark with their own electoral lethargy.We may draw a line here between absenteeism and abstention. The absent have no rational motivation, not even a circumstantial one. Their absence is tantamount to lack of concern and ignorance. The abstaining voters – we may speak of voters in this case – participate in an active way. They do not express reserve about a specific candidate, nor do they disapprove of democratic values; instead, they deny the political capacity of the groups and candidates going in for the elections. It is a univocal, whole rejection of all. Absenteeism, a sort of electoral sloth, is a flaw of the citizens, while abstention points to deficiencies of the electoral supply. Both types of behavior (in my opinion, to the same extent) characterize the Romanians who do not express themselves within the formal framework of the elections.Another distinction that may be made concerns local elections versus general elections: the Romanian specificity consists in the (much) lower participation in local than in general elections. The weaker interest in matters closer to the citizen, which involve him directly and immediately (local administration), denotes a mentality that is still indebted to the former regime, in which everything was being decided at the center, by the highest ranks in the hierarchy. This way of perceiving authority as something abstract, with far-reaching competencies all over public life, influences today's political behavior to a very high degree.What has it all got to do with the insect species I mentioned at the beginning? A recent piece of news from a daily newspaper with wide circulation says that British researchers demonstrated that various insect species take important decisions related to migration, acquiring food, and reproduction by voting. Things begin to fall into place…
by Matei Martin
