The story about us

To express myself in a somewhat forgotten sport, that is. in boxing terminology. It wasn't exactly a classic knockout, but it was much more than a "normal" knockdown. In any case, it was far better than what the opposition-minded observers expected, i.e., much worse than what the regime had hoped for and for which it "pumped" through its media and "experts" for weeks how the elections in To Kosjerić i Zajecaru to be a real litmus, test and crowning indicator that the months-long protests in Serbia have not left a mark on the rating and that Vučić and SNS are standing in a "canoe gorge", against the rocks of which the feeble attempts of "blockaders" and opposition haters ("which the people will not") to hinder the progress and development of Serbia will break.

When it, however. Instead of the already written and triumphantly announced by the "president of all citizens" ("You'll see what will happen on Sunday"), the list backed by the entire governing structure concentrated on two cities and literally all the regime and state resources "won" (I guess?) with a few tens of votes in Kosjerić and with barely 47 percent of the percentage won in Zaječar. And I believe that not only Aleksandar Vučić, but everyone at the SNS headquarters in Belgrade on that Sunday evening was quite clear about what that meant and what would happen in the eventual parliamentary elections.

Vučić will not get over it easily, nor will that wound heal easily - and quite possibly not at all. And which way or strategy he will try to repair, or at least mitigate the damage, could be seen already in the first days and hours that followed. Namely, that strategy consists of the already seen mix of denial of reality ("What do you want? We won." "Everything is fine and everything is under control") and media-political spin twisted to the point of madness and absurdity.

But the primary topic of this text, as the title suggests, this time is not the SNS regime, its inaction and tactics of prolonging its stay in power (which, to be honest, it should not have come to), about which we have already said a lot on these and other pages and hardly anything new can be added. Rather, this is a "story about us" - where the topic is neither the famous Hollywood hit with Bruce Willis and Michelle Pfeiffer, nor the folk song of the same name from the last century, but an attempt to systematically say and point out in one place what are the potential hindering factors in the already too difficult fight against this hybrid regime.

It's not like it's not talked about. And especially the parliamentary opposition and its action or inaction is a frequent topic and target of harsh comments and more or less lucid, sometimes unfair criticism. But here I want, if possible, to go a step further than the usual (unfortunately, correct) remark: They argue, they don't agree, etc.

LIMITS OF PRINCIPLE

...

Some of my friends, both personal and political, boycotted these last elections (although they did not lead an active boycott campaign). And they (NDSS, POKS) were "essentially" and formally right ("We said there is no choice until the conditions are improved. The conditions have not been improved, on the contrary. Therefore, there is no way out. Period"). But, alas, in politics the substance is often less important than the appearance, psychological impression and atmosphere, and that impression and atmosphere, regardless of the arguments, this time were on the side of those who were in favor of leaving. Just like, in my opinion, when it comes to the next coming (in the fall) local elections in Negotin and Mionica, that probably won't be the case. But until then, as they say, "who is alive, who is dead".

So that there is no misunderstanding. Consistency and principle are political and human virtues. And one should not succumb to the general trend of trivializing them. But in a political fight, especially with such a "dirty" and unscrupulous opponent, flexibility, the art of tactical adaptation and adequate reactions in changed circumstances are equally important - if not even more important. Therefore, speaking of the aforementioned virtues, it is perhaps better to demonstrate principledness in consistent and sharp opposition to this current, by all possible parameters, bad and harmful government, than to rigidly persist in certain decisions and conclusions.

FROM EUPHORIA TO DESPAIR AND BACK

"It's done!" I know that in politics, as, after all, in sports and life, motivation is an important thing, that you should believe, think positively, etc. But if this optimism is overdone, it can easily become counterproductive. No matter how much we want to, we won't go through a concrete wall, we won't fight a serious illness with mere faith in success, etc. And in our case, this means that the slogans "it's over", "it's irrelevant", "Kosjerić (Zaječar) is free", "he's lost, it's just that they haven't told him yet" and the like turn from a motivational factor into its opposite, and uncritical euphoria is easily replaced by depression and despondency. And not only that. However, in the described euphoric atmosphere, various potentially relevant proposals (for example, about sending requests for elections when the protests are at their peak, a technical government, or, God forbid, a conversation with the representatives of the authorities) are met with a knife and rejected as "defeatism", and maybe even "complicity" with the regime.

RADICALISM WITHOUT COVERAGE

An integral and inseparable companion of the described excessive and premature optimism is superficial radicalism without cover. It manifests itself especially on social networks, but it has long since broken into the very heart and captured the mainstream of Serbian opposition politics, and has been causing considerable damage for a long time. Instead of a rational analysis of benefits and harms, i.e. pluses and minuses for certain decisions, we have a kind of race in extremism and a competition in the most radical theses and moves. And increasing intolerance, bigotry, and even aggression towards everyone who is suspected of having deviated from the "charted" course, or of not being sufficiently zealous on it.

"WHAT WILL YOU DO IN THE ASSEMBLY?? "

...

The question "What will you do in the Assembly?" it is one of the most current and disastrous implications of the phenomenon described above (ie excessive optimism combined with superficial radicalism) and illustrates the attitude of a good part of the opposition public towards the Parliament and the parliamentary struggle. "What are you going to do inside?", "Go out among the people", "They are only sitting there because of the salaries and wages (and the parliamentary restaurant)"... How many times in various places and in various situations we could hear such and similar remarks against the opposition presence in the Parliament and accusations that they are, in fact, "giving legitimacy" and even "helping Vučić". And again: in principle, there are many serious and justified reasons for boycotting this and such an Assembly, under the "management" of the SNS. And the massive violation of the rules of procedure and the Constitution, along with the accompanying systematic insulting of opposition MPs and violation of their rights, are only part of that long list. I can personally testify to that, among other things. But, on the other hand, not counting social networks and two cable TV channels, that Assembly is practically the only place where the opposition can have a say and - even if muted - reach about two thirds of Serbian citizens who otherwise don't have the opportunity to see them. And that is not a small resource. When you look at the list of the best-rated opposition MPs in the Parliament, you can see that he, more or less, coincides with the most popular opposition members, and that's not entirely accidental. People like to watch the Assembly, especially when something interesting is happening in it - which, again, doesn't necessarily have to be just some fuss and calculation - and that doesn't apply only to "housewives and pensioners", as the public opinion on Twitter represents. But I admit that even for me, somewhat misled by the atmosphere on the networks, it was a surprising fact that as many as 76,4 percent of the respondents who declared themselves oppositional ("against the government") believe that the opposition should participate in the work of the National Assembly. After all, colleagues who upload the performances of opposition members on their channels say that videos from the Assembly are usually among the most watched.

EXAGGERATION OF FOREIGN INFLUENCE

...

"Well, there's no way he'll leave until those outside let him down." In politics, half-truths are worse and more dangerous than outright lies. Because, of course, the foreign factor has a serious influence in countries like Serbia. But reducing everything to just that - "they brought him in", "they took him away", "they let him down" - is wrong and exaggerated. And at the same time, it easily becomes the perfect alibi and excuse for one's own opportunism and inaction, that is, sitting and waiting for "someone" to "take someone down" or "let them down the drain".

Vučić's regime is really heading towards its inevitable end. The damage it has done in almost all spheres of society - from national politics to borrowing, the rule of law, the collapse of all institutions and the establishment of a freakish value system - is great and difficult to repair. And it will be greater the more the final departure is delayed and prolonged. Exactly what that end will be like and what it will look like (violent? peaceful? abrupt? with stretching and crushing?) no one can predict with certainty. But it can be said with a lot of certainty that, if this "our" opposition party, i.e. the anti-regime side managed to get rid of at least some of the pains listed and analyzed here, that departure must have been faster and more certain.

The author is the editor-in-chief of NSPM