[ad_1]
At the request of the Office of the President, the Vilmorus Market Research and Public Opinion Center conducted a public survey on various topics that generated much discussion. One of them is the legalization of companies.
19.5% responded positively or rather positively to the Association Law, which would expand the civil rights of same-sex couples. of those surveyed, more than 70 percent. respondents have a negative opinion of the association.
Residents were also asked about the ratification of the Istanbul Convention. This is supported or rather supported by 22.1%. of those surveyed, 48.8 percent. say those who are against, and almost 30% assured those who have no opinion.
The chairman of the Seimas Human Rights Committee, Tomas Vytautas Raskevičius, also responded to public opinion polls ordered by the Presidency.
“Since when have human rights issues been addressed through public investigations?” He asked.
Are the presidential polls reminiscent of Putin and Lukashenko’s methods?
“The political struggle, the manipulation here, I would say, is not a very decent game,” Bernaras Ivanovas, associate professor and political scientist at Vytautas Magnus University (VMU), told the news portal tv3.lt.
According to him, these types of surveys and similar ones are often carried out by politicians and parties, but are not published in the media. According to Ivanov, in such polls, parties usually look at which areas to focus on before elections.
“It just came to our attention then. But this is not part of public demagogy. In this case, it is used purely as rhetoric, I would say cheap rhetoric, piaro measure. Alone piarintis it doesn’t come out in other ways. <...> Unfortunately, our esteemed president does not find meaning in other ways, which is why such cheap tricks are used, ”said B. Ivanov.
The political scientist said that the publicity of such polls is common in the authoritarian regimes of Russia and Belarus.
“Lukashenko likes to carry out this kind of polls, Putin likes to campaign when he supports him and things like that.” An instrument of such government patriotism, mobilization in conditions of dictatorships and authoritarianism, “the interlocutor critically commented on the initiative. of the presidency.
Saulius Spurga, associate professor and political scientist at the Mykolas Romeris University (MRU), agreed that many parties are conducting private polls, but publishing their results is a political action, although, according to the interlocutor, it is strange.
“It just came to our attention then. It is unknown where it came from. [apklausos], there was no press conference, no announcement on the website of the presidency, somehow the journalists found out. That is the most interesting thing here, and thus such reflections and questions from journalists arose.
It was not the fact that public opinion was known, but the announcement itself and the issues thus formulated, which meant that the presidency sent a signal that these issues must be addressed in one way or another ”, explained S. Spurga .
Not all issues need to be addressed by the majority
However, according to the interlocutors, not all questions should be guided by the beliefs of the majority. According to S. Spurga, the answers to the questions in the survey commissioned by the presidency were obvious.
“We know that public opinion, we can intuit it, but it would hardly be an argument that politicians should not consider it, because many similar issues are valued in the same way in society, but politicians have the opportunity and the right to decide otherwise. way, “said the political scientist.
According to him, politicians should not only listen to the majority, but also be leaders.
“If we define democracy in a very simple way, which is only the rule of the majority, it will not be democracy. The best definition of democracy is that democracy is when the rights of minorities are well defended.
<...> Of course, you can not ignore public opinion when adopting certain issues, but you can also force the absurd to ask whether to raise or lower taxes, most would say that these taxes are not necessary at all. That majority argument may be distorted, ”reasoned S. Spurga.
Ivanov also agreed that one of the most important conditions for a liberal democracy was respect for minorities, be they social, national, sexual or otherwise.
Both interlocutors cited the abolition of the death penalty as an example where politicians did not rely on the opinion of the majority. Ivanov noted that in the UK, polls showed an 80% increase in the abolition of the death penalty. public support for it, but later positive attitudes towards the death penalty declined.
“It is impossible to get to the point of ignorance and darkness of society. That is what Mussolini did in his time, Hitler, so hateful dictators. “They used to manipulate and interpret in so many different ways, one nation, one leader, all together, must be the dictatorship of the majority,” said B. Ivanov.
According to him, the only country where an absolute majority opinion is possible is Switzerland, whose population holds referendums on the most important state affairs very frequently.
“But Switzerland sometimes outperforms other countries in terms of civic maturity, participation, involvement and quality.
If the participation in Lithuania, the political systems and the citizenship criteria were similar to those in Switzerland, I would not say anything. But sadly, there is no other country that meets those criteria. Therefore, here there is no appeal going, there is some case. No way.
<...> Now let’s ask people if they want a thousand euro annuity. Let’s do a survey of this type. Or something to override, some policy. Here is an absolutely naked populism, and yet a moralizing one. At this point, I would say there is no need to moralize, “said B. Ivanov.
Compared to a man in a futliare
According to S. Spurga, the leaked data from the survey show that it is a political action by the president in search of arguments for the solution of issues that generate much discussion in society. According to the political scientist, G. Nausėda can argue that he made one decision or another, because that is public opinion.
“I’m not entirely convinced with that argument, but the president can accept such statements. We have to wait a bit and we will find out if he can make valuable and uncomfortable statements for his qualifications, or if the president always just wants to be on the side of the majority, thus choosing its own popularity points and simply going downwind. It seems that this is the second case “, considered S. Spurga.
B. Ivanov G. Nausėda compared him to the hero of the story “The Man from Futliare” by Anton Chekhov.
“It just came to our notice then. As if that hero said almost anything bad would happen, that he had nothing to do with it. Just sad and grainy to look at, that shouldn’t be the case.
The president must take a clear moral position, have his own opinion, must moderate public opinion. <...> If that opinion demonstrates cave nationalism, primitivism, which is very present in the post-Soviet states, must be seen as a problem. It is impossible to reach such a cavernous state of mind in a part of society “, is convinced B. Ivanov.
The news portal tv3.lt wrote a little earlier that it is possible that in the near future President Gitanas Nausėda will no longer be the most popular politician in Lithuania. According to sociologist Vladas Gaidis, if he remains associated not with the party he leads, but with the position of spokesperson for the Seimas, Viktorija Čmilytė-Nielsen will surpass the president in popularity.
[ad_2]
