Polyparty-ism - Search for Common Ground

6
tioning of the government and in
effecting legislative and executive
power, the collective one-dimensional
interest easily dominates,
while the civil pluralism of the
individual interests expressed hardly
comes to the fore.
THE INDIVIDUAL
IS ASSIMILATED INTO
THE ETHNIC COLLECTIVE
The ideas of pluralism and
alternativism, which is neglected in
our multiparty system, penetrates
neither in the wider structuring of
the community nor does it successfully
promote the civic ideal as a
basis for the new political system.
The individual is still assimilated
into the ethnic collective, which
limits the flexibility of associating
according to interests of policy.
This is one of the main obstacles in
the actual system of pluralism in
the Republic of Macedonia.
Namely, diversity is manifested
above all collectively (by the
group) while its promotion and protection
is sought through the work
of the political party. This on one
hand boils down the overall diversity
first of all to ethnic diversity
alone, which unifies the group and
prevents the manifestation of other
forms of plurality and dissent, provided
it is not according to ethnic
differentiation or it goes beyond the
rubrik of ethnic differentiation.
On the other hand, such an
approach gives a monolithic facade
and the apparent absence of plurality
within particular ethnic groups.
When the pluralism in the group
runs up against the need of the
group to display a homogenous and
unanimous structure, the pluralism
disappears, becomes subdued or
even violently destroys itself. The
example of the latest turbulent relations
between the two largest
"Albanian" parties in the Republic
of Macedonia highlights this problem
significantly. In such circumstances
the ideals of democracy and
civic behaviour are implied. They
are reduced to the values of multiparty
systems and multiplicity in
ethnic affiliation, the roads to individualization
become closed, and a
favourable climate is created for
directives replacing alternatives.
In the absence of actual plurality,
the notion of flexibility of civic
connections is especially endangered.
People are condemned to
experience a certain petrifaction of
ethnic affiliations and they are
restricted in their choice of common
interests only under the shelter
of ethnic affiliation.
This results in another illusory
plurality, which appears within
civil society and civic organizing
among people. Namely, there are
around 2,000 citizens associations
registered in the Republic of
Macedonia. However, this multiplicity
(very similar to the party
structuring) is not at all a reflection
of the diversity of comprised interests
and manifested differences, but
largely due to a very specific and
unproductive practice of establishing
non-governmental organizations
which are ethnically defined.
Each and every non-governmental
organization occurs in several variants
depending on the ethnic affiliation
of its members. (For example:
Organization of Macedonian
Women, Organization of Albanian
Women, Roma women, Turkish,
Vlachs and Serb women.) This kind
of multiplicity once more delimits
and unifies the differences based on
ethnic affiliation. The most terrifying
aspect perhaps is the fact that
the activists thus create an illusion
that they are doing something
"important and justified" and that
they contribute to building a democratic
society. Seldom do we talk
about exhausting ourselves or
being captured within the vicious
circle of mutual denial while the
actual results from the project of
creation, multiplication or
improvement of citizens' social
opportunity disappear from the
horizon. More remarkable is the
fact that, apart from the shifts in
this ethnic-party and ethnic-NGO
pluralism, there are no visible
changes in the presentations of
actual situations, relations and
processes tied to this versatility. In
the domains where versatility
should appear in order to create a
clear picture of the issues, or to act
accordingly and to apply the most
appropriate mechanisms, this versatility
is denied or consciously
neglected. This refers especially to
all statistical data, but also to all
forms of representation of the
Republic of Macedonia abroad.
With this development of quasipluralism
instead of real diversity,
the Republic of Macedonia loses
one of its greatest advantages and
one of its eminent characteristics.
Macedonia loses the characteristics
of a real multicultural, multinational
and multiconfessional community
which, by its own structure and
its own way of being, is oriented
towards respecting differences and
nourishing pluralism at all levels of
its own structuring. At this point it
starts to lag behind in the field of
global individualization, which is
the basis of the concept of human
rights and freedom. Having in mind
that the socialist self-management
did not allow the conceptual individual
to develop consciously, or at
least, declaring that sit was doing it
for "noble reasons"-it would be too
much of a luxury should Macedonia
repeat that history-and this time
for other reasons, assuredly noble
again.
(The author is a senior
research fellow at the Institute
for Social, Political
and Juridical Research)
Ten years of pluralism, December 2000