Page 78 - Šolsko polje, XXIX, 2018, no. 5-6: Radicalization, Violent Extremism and Conflicting Diversity, eds. Mitja Sardoč and Tomaž Deželan
P. 78
šolsko polje, letnik xxix, številka 5–6
support, they also see as radical, because, as one respondent said, “that is
a little bit too premature for our state”. Not only should the importance
of context be emphasised here, but also what Schmid (2013) argues that
no single ideology or position is universally radical, and that one can be
a radical democrat in an authoritarian regime or a radical anti-democrat
in a democratic regime; an extremist, a terrorist, or a defender of human
rights (2013). Moreover, Onnerfors & Steiner (2018) find that mainstream
and radical positions are mutually co-determined and can shift, which
means that today’s “radicals” can be tomorrow’s “regulars”. In line with
this notion our respondents provided an example of women rights activ-
ists who were identified as radicals at the time, while today young people
in Croatia see as radicals those who offend women’s rights.
Secondly, our findings revealed the presence of a corrosive apathy
among Croatian youth. Young people described a typical young person in
Croatia using negative terms, captured in the negativity and problems of
the entirety of society. While one could expect that this could be fertile
ground for radicals to bring change or a “shift from the status quo”, this
does not happen. Surprisingly, both mainstream and radical young people
are described as equally negative. Although young participants in our re-
search claimed that radicalism is not necessarily a negative term and that
it depends on the context and content, obviously the “terminological ‘bag-
gage’” (Khalil, 2014: p. 199) was heavier and the negative connotation of
the term prevailed.
Feeling helpless in the chains of numerous problems in the state,
young people in Croatia have fallen into corrosive apathy. Only single-is-
sue problems and personal involvement in a particular thing can motivate
them to stand up and try to change what bothers them. But, most of the
time, they feel deprived and abandoned by society, and yet, they are not
ready to do anything to change that. It seems they just want to fit into ex-
isting norms and structures, and be part of the “status quo”. However,
that would be perfectly understandable if they did not describe that same
status quo as corrupted, lazy, missing cultural norms, poor, etc. Their ap-
athy is obviously strongly correlated with state affairs, because, on the
one hand they are ready to leave the country and change their lives from
the roots, whereas on the other hand, while in Croatia, they are not even
ready to vote in elections.
Thirdly, describing a radical young person as enthralled, exclu-
sive, as a public attention seeker, as someone who has a specific set of
values, someone who is in solidarity with one’s group, and who favours
Machiavellianism, and giving examples of radicals who do not use vio-
lence to achieve their goals, young people in Croatia confirmed that
76
support, they also see as radical, because, as one respondent said, “that is
a little bit too premature for our state”. Not only should the importance
of context be emphasised here, but also what Schmid (2013) argues that
no single ideology or position is universally radical, and that one can be
a radical democrat in an authoritarian regime or a radical anti-democrat
in a democratic regime; an extremist, a terrorist, or a defender of human
rights (2013). Moreover, Onnerfors & Steiner (2018) find that mainstream
and radical positions are mutually co-determined and can shift, which
means that today’s “radicals” can be tomorrow’s “regulars”. In line with
this notion our respondents provided an example of women rights activ-
ists who were identified as radicals at the time, while today young people
in Croatia see as radicals those who offend women’s rights.
Secondly, our findings revealed the presence of a corrosive apathy
among Croatian youth. Young people described a typical young person in
Croatia using negative terms, captured in the negativity and problems of
the entirety of society. While one could expect that this could be fertile
ground for radicals to bring change or a “shift from the status quo”, this
does not happen. Surprisingly, both mainstream and radical young people
are described as equally negative. Although young participants in our re-
search claimed that radicalism is not necessarily a negative term and that
it depends on the context and content, obviously the “terminological ‘bag-
gage’” (Khalil, 2014: p. 199) was heavier and the negative connotation of
the term prevailed.
Feeling helpless in the chains of numerous problems in the state,
young people in Croatia have fallen into corrosive apathy. Only single-is-
sue problems and personal involvement in a particular thing can motivate
them to stand up and try to change what bothers them. But, most of the
time, they feel deprived and abandoned by society, and yet, they are not
ready to do anything to change that. It seems they just want to fit into ex-
isting norms and structures, and be part of the “status quo”. However,
that would be perfectly understandable if they did not describe that same
status quo as corrupted, lazy, missing cultural norms, poor, etc. Their ap-
athy is obviously strongly correlated with state affairs, because, on the
one hand they are ready to leave the country and change their lives from
the roots, whereas on the other hand, while in Croatia, they are not even
ready to vote in elections.
Thirdly, describing a radical young person as enthralled, exclu-
sive, as a public attention seeker, as someone who has a specific set of
values, someone who is in solidarity with one’s group, and who favours
Machiavellianism, and giving examples of radicals who do not use vio-
lence to achieve their goals, young people in Croatia confirmed that
76
