The article “The Apathy Syndrome: How We Are Trained Not to Care about Politics” examines the cultural and emotional influences that lead to political apathy. The article’s primary focus is on a study of 60 young people in two Russian cities and how cultural norms affect political indifference. According to the author, cultural expectations of propriety and emotional expression can either lessen or heighten the feelings associated with political mobilization and demobilization.
The author then details political apathy, a phenomenon in which people lose passion for politics but turn to cynicism, skepticism, and frustration as a means of dealing with their concerns. According to the writer, cultural norms that discourage political debate lead to apathy, which is not a natural condition but rather the product of individuals’ and groups’ efforts on the micro-social level (Zhelnina, 2019, p.359). Being “political” and “not political” have symbolic bounds that result from social actors’ conceptual categorizations. She contends that one of the settings fostering political indifference is the public realm, where the relevant standards for various discussion contexts disapprove of political discussions as being suitable.
The claim that political apathy results from cultural norms and values are supported by two studies, one by Eliasoph (1998) and another by Norgaard (2011). Eliasoph claims that participants in political discourse choose issues and situations that are deserving of public discourse and steer clear of ones that are viewed as being out of their reach (Zhelnina, 2019, p.359). According to Norgaard, people employ a cultural toolkit of denial and disregard to manage how they express themselves, which is why indifference is ingrained in cultural norms and values and can also be intentional (Zhelnina, 2019, p.360). Emotional norms that support people in denying dangers and upholding a normative view of themselves are part of the cultural toolkit. She claims that political indifference’s normative and strategic mechanisms cooperate in tamping down mobilizing emotions and transforming short-term disappointing political experiences into longer-term political sentiments like skepticism, cynicism, and suspicion. Political socialization and memory transmission in families and educational institutions, which can spread unpartisan attitudes based on mistrust of the government, create the normative aspect of indifference.
The author cites research on the importance of emotions in social change and political involvement. Studies suggest that emotions are observed during many stages of the growth of social movements, such as mobilization, maintenance, decision-making, and decline. People get involved in politics by generating emotions like anger, disgust, and hope (Zhelnina, 2019, p.361). Demobilizing feelings, such as cynicism, despair, guilt, and a sense of helplessness, on the other hand, deter people from taking part. Movements must empower participants with a sense of their agency and assist them in overcoming debilitating emotions if they are to be effective.
Both activists and opponents can control people’s emotional reactions. For instance, the promotion of public events by the Russian government has propagated debilitating feelings like melancholy, grief, and panic, resulting in political indifference. The social context impacts the connection underlying emotions and conduct, which is only sometimes clear-cut. She adds that a society’s emotional habits might affect political involvement. The political outlook of society is impacted by emotional habitus, which is a socially constructed concept of sentiments, and it influences the encouragement or disapproval of different types of activism (Zhelnina, 2019, p.361-362). A cross-cultural study on emotions indicates that cultural beliefs and conventions affect how emotions are expressed, suppressed, and behaved. According to the research, feelings matter a lot when it comes to social movements and political engagement. Radicalizing emotions discourages involvement, whereas mobilizing feelings encourages it. To better comprehend the causes and effects of political indifference, it is vital to understand the emotional dynamics at play.
The author provides a historical context for the pivotal year of 2011 in Russia when protests were in many of the country’s main cities. The data used in the research was gathered throughout 2011 and 2012 in two locations, St. Petersburg and Vyborg, as part of the MYPLACE project, and it comprised 60 interviews with young people (16 to 25 years old). The interviews, which took place between October 2012 and April 2013, documented how many respondents had fallen back into apathy after becoming interested in politics during the protests (Zhelnina, 2019, p.363). Through private semi-structured interviews that concentrated on their opinions on politics and history but also asked broad questions about their lives, families, and cultural biases, the respondents were randomly selected from a group of 1200 participants. The Atlas. ti software was used to evaluate the data collected, emphasizing verbal indicators of emotion (Zhelnina, 2019, p.363). Considering the setting within which the indicators emerged, the transcripts were coded for emotionally intense passages. The evaluation was appropriately integrated into the interview and the theme sequence rather than being carried out automatically. Indicators comprised both overt expressions of emotion as well as emotive words used to characterize things and people.
The study’s findings demonstrated that the majority of demonstrators did not exhibit apathy but rather “cynical pessimism” as a result of political unfairness, fraud, and the influence of the state (Zhelnina, 2019, p.364). Many participants discussed their interactions with the government and dissatisfaction with governmental and political institutions. The anger and indignation they experience can be a motivating feeling, but when they are accompanied by mistrust and dread, they can produce apathy. Some protestors experienced moral feelings that lasted longer, such as rejection, which is based on the belief that political action is pointless as a result of their disappointment.
According to the study, men and women process political emotions in distinct ways, with women being more expressive and expressing themselves emotionally than males. Young men in the study presented a quieter and self-assured image, whereas young women indicated feelings like fear and anxiousness. Young women feared physical harm from “others,” like criminals and terrorists, with fear of politics and society being the overriding emotion (Zhelnina, 2019, p.367). They were unable to take part in street demonstrations because of this anxiety. According to the resurgence of traditional gender norms, the survey also discovered that young males occasionally accompanied their girlfriends to protests in order to protect them.
People who are aware of the problems in their society but feel helpless to alter them frequently utilize dissociation as a coping method. It enables individuals to control their emotions and steer clear of unfavorable feelings related to politics. This study’s respondents avoided politics as much as they could because they believed it to be fraught with unwarranted negativity. They focus their attention and concerns solely on themselves and their intimate relationships since they see these to be secure and under their control. They tend to be wary of anyone outside of their immediate group, especially politicians and other people, and they steer clear of the unpleasant feelings that come with participating in politics. The cultural expectation of being calm and reasonable also influences attitudes toward politics.
Lastly, some of the key terms that were utilized in the article are political apathy, apathy syndrome, emotions, emotional systems, and political avoidance. Political avoidance is a type of psychological defense mechanism in which people deliberately or unconsciously avoid discussing or reading about political problems. Events or stimuli can cause emotions, which are mental and physiological sensations. Emotions are handled or controlled by psychological processes known as emotional mechanisms. Lack of passion, motivation and interest in social and political matters are the hallmarks of the psychological illness known as apathy syndrome. Political apathy refers to a lack of interest in, involvement in, or concern with political issues. It is a particular manifestation of apathetic syndrome.
In conclusion, the article examines the emotional and cultural factors contributing to political apathy among 60 young people in two Russian cities. The author argues that cultural norms that suppress political conversations and emotional expression can lead to political apathy, which is a combination of emotional mechanisms such as frustration, cynicism, disbelief in collective action, and social mistrust. The study found that political apathy is not a natural state but rather the result of cultural norms and values, and the public sphere is one of the arenas that produces it. Emotions play a significant role in political participation and social movements, with mobilizing emotions driving individuals to participate and demobilizing emotions discouraging it. The author concludes that a deeper understanding of the emotional mechanisms involved in political apathy is necessary to explain its production and maintenance better.
References
Zhelnina, A. (2019). The Apathy Syndrome: How We Are Trained Not to Care about Politics. Social Problems, 67(2), 358–378. https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spz019
write