Polyparty-ism - Search for Common Ground

forces on the other.
2. Three numerical indicators
The dry-as-dust language of statistics
always stimulates radical disagreement
and humorous remarks.
The classic example says that,
according to statistics, a man with
one hand in the oven and the other in
the refrigerator will experience the
average ideal temperature!
Nevertheless the numbers tell us
something that is empirically tangible,
a fact that could be verified at
least in its own context, if not applicable
outside of it.
The organization PEV
Makedonija (Project for a Common
Vision of Macedonia) in 2002 performed
extensive field surveys
throughout Macedonia, dissected the
country into 15 parts for the convenience
of this study. One of the central
hypotheses was interethnic relations
(primary along the line ethnic
Macedonians vs. ethnic Albanians)
are the most important factor for the
birth of the conflict the year before.
SURPRISING ANSWERS
From the long list of factors, three
seem most important in this instance.
Using them, the intensity of the ethnic
distance, that is to say, the force
of mutual trust, was estimated. Here
are the questions we asked:
1. Do you believe that after the
conflict trust between ethnic
Macedonians and ethnic Albanians
will return?
2. Do you think that the ethnic
Macedonians and ethnic Albanians
have a common future in the
Republic of Macedonia?
3. Do the citizens have power?
The answers for the whole of the
population were: 1. YES - 71%; 2.
YES 81%; 3. YES - 63%.
3. Interpretation, controversies,
logical context:
The interpretation of those
responses is the most interesting part,
as is always the case with statistics.
Some people considered these numbers
highly optimistic, and in
essence, very probable; to others they
seemed highly optimistic and not
very probable; some considered them
pessimistic but probable; and finally
there was a group who considered
them pessimistic and improbable.
The questions tended to contrast with
the personal experience that some
people brought with them, and they
considered these results not very
probable, whether they read them
with an optimistic or a pessimistic
slant.
But what exactly do these results
say? This not very rhetorical question
has a simple aim, to define what the
statistical data realistically means,
and to what extent we can estimate
the situation in a given segment of
public life based on them. The fact
that there are those who see these
affirmative and positive percentages
as too high, namely not harmonized
with their perception, should be carefully
analyzed. Individual perception,
as a rule, notwithstanding how precise
and concrete it is, is always more
restricted and limited in comparison
with a survey conducted on a huge
territory. In general, the citizens who
will read this article should understand
that their personal opinion,
even if it does match the mentioned
results, basically does not correspond
with them.
Then there is no actual debate.
Simply, there is direct incongruence
in dimension. The quarrels in this
case, notwithstanding how productive
they can be, are an example of
shooting the wrong guy. If a citizen
claims that in his or her area the
results are, let's say, just the opposite,
and that the greatest number of people
with whom he or she communicates
would answer "no" to these
questions where we got "yes," then
the member of PEV Makedonija who
would contest that would make a
mistake. The mistake would be as
great as one made by someone who
would contest the results of the study
based on personal experience which
does not subsume more varied social,
ethnic, educational etc. contexts.
THE MAJORITY DETER-
MINES THE DIRECTION
Let's make things clear! There is
no real controversy, because we have
two very disparate bodies of information
for which there is no logical precondition
for valid comparison. The
participants in this quasi-conflict are
blind to the fact that both sides could
really unqualifiedly be right, without
questioning the truthfulness of each
of the facts. If 70 per cent of, let's say,
2 million people answer "yes" for
something, at the same time it means
that 30 per cent say "no" for the same
thing. And 30 per cent of two million
is 600,000 people! Therefore, from
the perspective of those who are
skeptical about the above results,
considering them too high, it is quite
possible that there are those from
environments where the negative
answer comprises 90%.
Theoretically, it is possible to get 100
per cent negative answers on all three
questions when surveying 600,000
people in the Republic of Macedonia
if by chance you reach only those 30
per cent who hold this negative position!
On the other hand, 70 per cent of
the same two million people equals
1,400,000 people who said "yes."
Theoretically it is possible to get 100
per cent positive answers if you surveyed
that two thirds of the population
of the Republic of Macedonia.
Put into their logical context,
these indicators have meaning only
when they are interpreted numerically.
The statistics in this case reflect
the overall distribution of positive
feelings in relation to the extremely
sensitive problem of interethnic relations.
It suggests that the citizens in
general, closely to the given proportions,
also believe in a common country,
and also in the possibility and
feasibility of mutual trust. That is,
they believe in the possibility for citizens,
through their own efforts, with
their own work and strength, to
become the most important factor in
the creation of a long-term strategy
127
Two years of the ohrid agreement, August 2003