VALUES AND CONNOTATIONS
OF DEMOCRACY IN LITHUANIA:
ORDINARY CITIZENS VS. LOCAL ELITES
Matonytc Irmina, Institute for Social Research
Raulcikas Rimantas, Kaunas University of Technology
Introduction
Not only cultures and societies may have specific nuances in the mean­
ings ol seemingly universal social and political concepts but also, within one
single society, there may be different, if not competing meanings attached
to the same concept. Moreover, these diverse meanings are apt to change,
and change quite substantially in the case of rapid p o s t - c o m m u n i s t develop­
m e n t s (Miller, 1 lesli, Reisinger 1 9 9 7 , Marcus, Mease, O t t e m o c l l c r 2 0 0 1 ) .
'l be term democracy
falls into the class of political cognitions or „ m c m -
ory representations and the mental processes involved in political u n d e r ­
standing and interaction" (van Dijk 2 0 0 2 : 2 0 7 ) . It refers to sociopolitical
attitudes and k n o w l e d g e (Luskin 1 9 8 7 ) . A n s w e r s to an o p e n - e n d e d ques­
tion which asks respondents to describe the m e a n i n g of an abstract politi­
cal concept can be grouped by s o m e meaningful analytical dimensions, i.e.
size and extent (of political i n f o r m a t i o n ) and coherence (of political k n o w l ­
edge). S t a n d a r d s derived from political ( d e m o c r a t i c ) t h e o r y w o u l d allow
us to assess these a n s w e r s as representative of o n e o r a n o t h e r tradition of
political thought.
A n o t h e r way to analyze such descriptive a n s w e r s is to typify their c o n ­
tents in t e r m s of the images of d e m o c r a c y they display (for instance, par-
162
Matonytė Irmina, Rauleckas Rimantas
ticipatory vs. representative, based on m a j o r i t y rule vs. inclusive regime,
etc.). However, t o o m a n y c o n f i g u r a t i o n s m i g h t a p p e a r and t o o many o f
t h e m might not fit into o n e image o r t r a d i t i o n o f d e m o c r a t i c thought. A
viable a l t e r n a t i v e is not to deal with the w h o l e a n s w e r (not to examine
w h a t the o v e r a r c h i n g i d e o l o g y of a r e s p o n d e n t is), but to d i v i d e the data
into several m e a n i n g f u l categories and to c o m p o s e a m a p of democratic
t h o u g h t in a given society at a given p o i n t of time. A n y definition of the
abstract political c o n c e p t democracy
m a y refer n o t o n l y to such funda­
m e n t a l values as f r e e d o m , s o l i d a r i t y a n d equality, but also to s o m e m o r e
p r o c e d u r a l values as m a j o r i t y r u l e , free elections, the responsibility of state
officials, t r a n s p a r e n c y o f g o v e r n a n c e , etc. 'these c o n n o t a t i o n s are politi­
cal values, objectified a n d p r e f e r r e d o n e o v e r a n o t h e r in the practice of
d e m o c r a c y , internalized d u r i n g i n d i v i d u a l socialization, a n d / o r transmit­
ted/ i m p o s e d t h r o u g h m a s s - m e d i a . It is debatable if the interconnectedness o f e l e m e n t s in these definitions is conscious, o r w h e t h e r e n u m e r a t e d
m e a n i n g s are not simply k i n d s o f n o n - a t t i t u d e s o r m i m i c r y taken from the
mass m e d i a and e v e r y d a y social experiences. Despite the s h o r t c o m i n g s of
the i m p e r f e c t m e a s u r e s e m p l o y e d , such t o p o g r a p h i c research on political
o r i e n t a t i o n s a n d t h e i r sophistication a p p e a r s to be fruitful (Luskin 1 9 8 7 :
885-889).
D i m e n s i o n s in the m e a n i n g s o f d e m o c r a c y
A s has been indicated above, o n e f r a m e w o r k to analyze a v a r i e t y of
definitions o f democracy
is to use political p h i l o s o p h y and to categorize
definitions according to the basic elements o f d e m o c r a c y that are widely
discussed in political theory, such as liberty, f r e e d o m ( s ) , rights, equality,
tolerance, rule o f law, order, etc. A n o t h e r way is to refer to different tradi­
tions of d e m o c r a c y , such as p r o c e d u r a l ( f o r m a l ) d e m o c r a c y emphasizing
elections, elected representatives, and m a j o r i t y decisions versus participa­
t o r y d e m o c r a c y , emphasizing a broad participation o f citizens, multi-fac­
e t e d d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g , etc.' In the following analysis, we c o n c e n t r a t e on
abstract principles and adjectives connected with d e m o c r a c y , and exclude
o t h e r types o f meanings (negative c o m m e n t s on d e m o c r a c y , elements of
^nationalism o r e c o n o m i c interests).
1
littp://www.ssc.upciin.cdu/dl(;/i]ucs_ciiglisli.litnil
Values a n d C o n n o t a t i o n s o f D e m o c r a c y in L i t h u a n i a : O r d i n a r y Citizens v s . Local Elites
Hie concept ot d e m o c r a c y is a rather elusive concept so that m a n y em­
pirically oriented social scientists concentrate on s o m e aspects instead o f
trying to p r o v i d e an extensive interpretation. 'Ihe most w i d e l y accepted
is the liberal-representative u n d e r s t a n d i n g of democracy, u n d e r l y i n g its
minimal and procedural features (Dahl, I'ennock, Bobbio). Alternatively,
substantive d e m o c r a t i c thought advocates direct, c o m m u n i t a r i a n , participatory'(I'atcman) and deliberative (Fishkin, Habermas) d e m o c r a c y and
emphasizes the direct and active participation of citizens, the p r o m o t i o n of
reasoned public debates. A l o n g with the issue of political equality and the
rule of law, it also includes c o n c e r n s about social and e c o n o m i c equality,
equality, of o p p o r t u n i t i e s and results, etc. W e have selected values or ele­
ments of both interpretations of democracy. W e emphasize categories o f
order (rule of law) and freedom(s), as representatives o f t w o generalized
dimensions of political d e m o c r a c y (for instance, liberal d e m o c r a c y "might
Бе defined as the extent to which a political system allows political liberties
and d e m o c r a t i c rule" (Hollen 1 9 9 3 : 1 2 0 8 ) .
O u r working definition of democracy dwells on these two generalized di­
mensions in the definitions of liberal (or political) democracy. These dimen­
sions are meaningful in various theoretical contexts: for example, post-mate­
rialist and materialist values (for instance, Inglehart ( 1 9 9 0 ) in his measures of
post-material and material values uses indicators o f maintaining order in soci­
ety and giving m o r e say to people); liberal and conservative modes of thinking
(usually, conservatism vs. liberalism are defined in terms of universal values
such as justice, order, balance, and moderation (Huntington 1 9 5 7 : 4 5 5 ) , see
also (Wilson I960)); and broader reflections on personal autonomy and social
control (first and foremost exercised through laws (Meier 1982: 43)).
After reviewing the word frequencies in the s u r v e y s u n d e r analysis, we
have identified ten viable categories:
1. Freedom: f r e e d o m , free, liberty.
2. Rights: rights, right (singular of rights).
3. Equality: equal, equally, equality, equal against the law.
4. O r d e r and laws: not anarchy, discipline, frames o f law, order, orderly,
law, and laws.
5. Constitution: C o n s t i t u t i o n , constitutional.
6. Flections: votes, voters, voting, multiparty, elect, elected, elections.
7. Majority rule: majority, m a j o r i t y rule.
8. Responsibility: responsibly, responsible, responsibility, responsibili­
ties, duty, obligation.
164
Matonytė Irmina, Rauleckas Rimantas
9. Openness: transparency, transparent, public, publicly, open, o p e n l y
1 0 . Tolerance: tolerance, pluralism, tolerant, tolerate, and diversity.
Social context and meanings
Diversity in the m e a n i n g o f d e m o c r a c y might arise for v a r i o u s reasons:
societies are influenced by specific cultural, political o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e tra­
ditions; v a r i o u s collective life experiences are possible, and cognitive dif­
ferences are p e r t i n e n t for diverse social strata. Here we shall focus on the
latter aspect and will d e m o n s t r a t e a n o t - s o - h o m o g e n o u s
u n d e r s t a n d i n g of
d e m o c r a c y in the case of Lithuanian society, which m a y to s o m e degree be
typical o f p o s t - c o m m u n i s t societies in general.
In the last decade Lithuania has u n d e r g o n e all k i n d s of societal trans­
f o r m a t i o n s . Because o f Soviet political practices (lack of political i n f o r m a ­
tion and discourse) and the real absence o f d e m o c r a t i c accountability and
representation in Soviet political culture, we can find incoherent and un­
sophisticated d e m o c r a t i c beliefs (Miller, Hesli, Reisinger 1 9 9 7 : 1 6 0 , 1 5 8 ) .
C a r m a g h a n ( 2 0 0 1 : 3 6 1 ) finds that d e m o c r a c y is u n d e r s t o o d by the Russian
public m o r e and m o r e in t e r m s o f law, w h e n the experience o f d e m o c r a t i c
practices extends, c o m p a r e d to the earlier findings of Miller et al. ( 1 9 9 7 ) .
A n u m b e r o f studies d e m o n s t r a t e that the divide between
ordinary
citizens and elites reflects itself in differences o f political attitudes (Miller,
Hesli, Reisinger 1 9 9 5 : 3 - 4 ) . Differences in attitudes and definitions o f de­
m o c r a c y between elites and o r d i n a r y citizens m a y be treated as a sign of the
absence of a shared political culture (Reisinger, Miller, Hesli 1 9 9 5 , Miller,
Hesli, Reisinger 1 9 9 7 : 1 5 8 ) . W e should also see if any convergence of the
m e a n i n g s of d e m o c r a c y o c c u r s as d e m o c r a t i c experience grows. 'Ihe hy­
pothesis is that, with time, m o r e s t r u c t u r e d (coherent) definitions of de­
m o c r a c y would d o m i n a t e inside political-affiliation groups. However, even
though these articulated patterns m a y appear for all political groupings,
they m a y be not distinct a m o n g them; in this scenario, political affiliation
and the cognitive processes behind them are superseded by time variables
(experience with d e m o c r a c y ) . A n o t h e r scenario is possible: across the p o ­
litical s p e c t r u m , there are apparent differences in meanings, but n o change
o v e r time. In a third possible scenario, botli t i m e and political affiliation
matter: meanings are changing o r / a n d they are regrouped systematically by
reemcrging political affiliations.
Values and Connotations of Democracy in Lithuania: Ordinary Citizens vs. Local Elites
Thus we concentrate on several selected variables: personal political
affiliation, the divide between the elite and general public (this divide is
highly significant in political attitude constraint differences, see e.g. C o n ­
verse 1 9 6 1 ) and time (since time in a transitional society m a r k s important
social t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s and increasing experience with democracy, subjec­
tive definition of d e m o c r a c y should be constantly updated in the course o f
these experiences, similar to the lifetime learning model of regime support,
Mishler, Rose 2 0 0 2 ) .
Sample
W e analyzed the answers to an open-ended question "There is consider­
able argument concerning the meaning of democracy. W h a t does d e m o c r a c y
2
mean to y o u ? " The question was used in three consecutive surveys of lo­
cal political and administrative elites in 2 0 Lithuanian local municipalities in
1991 (n=289), 1 9 9 8 ( n = 3 0 8 ) and 2 0 0 1 (n=322) conducted by the Institute for
Social Research in Vilnius under the international comparative project "De­
mocracy and local governance". The same question was also used in the mass
survey "Public participation in Kaunas region" in 2 0 0 3 (n=859), conducted
by Public Policy Research Center (Kaunas University of Technology).
Responses v a r y from not giving an a n s w e r at all to answering the ques­
tion in several sentences. For instance, o r d e r was defined either briefly, e.g.,
„ Л strong hand in all spheres" o r with additional referents to o t h e r d e m o ­
cratic principles, e.g., „ A s order, justice and responsibility"; „Л certain o r ­
der, resting upon laws, which are passed by representatives, elected directly
by a majority". The same holds for the term freedom, that was defined as
„Freedom of speech"; „Personal freedom and rights to live h o w e v e r you
want" o r longer explanations with m a n y o t h e r meanings. In m a n y cases,
both freedoms and o r d e r arc placed next to each other: ..Universally ac­
knowledged order, freedom to act without violation o f the law" o r „Free­
d o m within the limits of laws".
;
Another way to discuss the meanings of democracy is lo underline that democracy consists not
only nfahsliact principles and values, but lo apply them via certain collective actors and actions.
"I litis it is meaningful lo look at how these actors/actions are qualified: society and state (free, ec­
onomically developed), authorities, parliament, government (representative, accountable, clleclivc), politicians and officers (honest, responsive, responsible), parties (inclusive, competing),
piess (independent), civil society groups (inllucntial, widespread, active), people, individuals or
volets (free, active, responsible).
166 Matonytė Irmina, Rauleckas Rimantas
'Ihe percentage o f "don't know" answers shows that there is not much
difference between local elites and o r d i n a r y citizens, in so far as missing
a n s w e r s might be interpreted as a reflection o f a lack of a mental image of
the "democracy" concept. In 1 9 9 8 , 3 7 % of local elites did not a n s w e r the
question, w h i l e the percentage was 3 1 % in 2 0 0 1 . In the mass s u r v e y 2 7 % of
r e s p o n d e n t s did not a n s w e r this question. Thus in fact we see the reverse
to the picture that was expected: o r d i n a r y citizens seem to be able to define
d e m o c r a c y at the same, if not a higher level than local elites. O f course, this
difference might be due to factors such as different content, length and ap­
p r o a c h to i n t e r v i e w i n g in different questionnaires. However, the local elites'
quality o f definition is m u c h higher, as local elites use m o r e key concepts
per r e s p o n d e n t (mean 1.5 for local elites in 2 0 0 1 and 1.1 for o r d i n a r y citi­
zens, the difference being statistically significant at 0 . 9 5 level).
Differences in the meaning of democracy for local elites and
ordinary citizens
In
general,
ordinary
citizens
see
democracy
more
in
terms
of
f r e e d o m ( s ) ; t h e y s e l d o m m e n t i o n order, a d h e r e n c e to o r the functional­
ity o f laws (Table 1 ) . Local elites just as f r e q u e n t l y m e n t i o n f r e e d o m s and
1
o r d e r ( w h i l e o r d e r is o n l y in the 4' ' position for o r d i n a r y citizens). Clearly,
Table 1. Ranks of key-concepts in local elites' and ordinary citizens' definitions ol'democracy
Local elites (2001)
Ordinary citizens (2003)
Ranks
Percentages*
Ranks
Percentages*
Freedom(s)
1
20%
1
38%
Order and laws
1
20%
3
6%
Rights
3
10%
2
9%
Majority rule
3
10%
6
3%
Elections
5
8%
3
6%
Responsibility
5
8%
7
2%
Equality
7
7%
5
5%
Openness
8
7%
7
2%
Constitution
9
5%
9
1%
Tolerance
10
2%
9
1%
* the percentages reflected the ratio of the number of respondents who named the category compared
to the total number of respondents (including those who did not answer). Several or no category could
be identified in a respondent's definition ol democracy, so that percentages across categories do not
add up to 100 percent.
Values and Connotations of Democracy in Lithuania: Ordinary Citizens vs. Local Elites
v a r i o u s kinds of f r e e d o m is at the core of d e m o c r a c y for both local elites
and public, but o r d i n a r y citizens stress them m u c h strongly.
All ten o f the categories selected but freedom is m o r e frequent in the
local elites notions of democracy, which shows their richer political under­
standing. In terms of percentages (which reflect saliency), local elites differ
from o r d i n a r y citizens in giving less i m p o r t a n c e to freedom and m o r e im­
p o r t a n c e to order, m a j o r i t y rule, responsibility, and openness. In terms of
relative i m p o r t a n c e (the rankings reflect the relative i m p o r t a n c e of differ­
ent elements of definition) o f different meanings, o r d i n a r y citizens stress
elections and equality, while the local elite emphasizes order, m a j o r i t y rule
and responsibility. This emphasis on order, m a j o r i t y rule and responsibility
is surely the local elites distinctive features.
Different kinds of freedom for o r d i n a r y citizens stand out in absolute
terms, interpreted as high awareness and expectations about democracy,
but local elites also acknowledge freedom to be at the core of democracy.
From this analysis of rankings and absolute measures, we conclude that
local elites have richer and m o r e balanced v i e w of d e m o c r a c y ; in t e r m s of
both higher saliency and relative i m p o r t a n c e , local elites tend to stress o r ­
der, majority rule and responsibility, while o r d i n a r y citizens conceive of de­
m o c r a c y in terms of freedom and rights. The stress on freedom by o r d i n a r y
citizens is u n i q u e in the context of the lack of saliency o f o t h e r elements in
definitions of d e m o c r a c y , w h i l e for local elites, o r d e r and f r e e d o m are of the
same relative i m p o r t a n c e .
The 'ruling' and the 'ruled' have different approaches about h o w to m a x ­
imize their public p o w e r o r democracy. O r d i n a r y citizens are in favor of
b o t t o m - u p influence: emphasis on freedom and rights suggests their eager­
ness to increase their a u t o n o m y o f action and to assure n o n - i n t e r f e r e n c e by
the state and o t h e r collective actors; fair and free elections refer to securing
equal influence and p o w e r as o p p o s e d to an unequal distribution o f power.
W h i l e rights and freedom are at the core o f the concept of democracy, the
meanings of order, m a j o r i t y rule and responsibility are also rather well ac­
knowledged and important (not in percentage only, but in rankings as well)
in the case of local elites, which suggests that elites might tend to maximize
p o w e r a n d / o r p r o m o t e d e m o c r a c y by the d e m o c r a t i c rule, flowing from
top to bottom through the responsible b e h a v i o r of leaders, procedures of
majority rule and effective implementation o f decisions. O n the o t h e r hand,
if o n e looks at the three top rankings, the o r d i n a r y citizens' definition of
d e m o c r a c y rely on v i r t u e s of a u t o n o m y (freedoms, rights) and procedures
168
Matonytė Irmina, Rauleckas Rimantas
that are available for o r d i n a r y citizens (elections). Local elites are different
in that they emphasize o r d e r / l a w s , m a j o r i t y rule and responsibility, which
are related to control and rule.
W h a t are the generating processes behind these distinctive findings?
M i l l e r et al. ( 1 9 9 7 : 1 6 9 ) say that elites emphasize the rule o f law, because
they are "directly involved in creating laws and institutions that p r o v i d e
the r u l e o f law". In o t h e r w o r d s , the character of their professional activities
e n h a n c e s the elite's concept o f a social reality which needs to be regulated
t h r o u g h collective decisions and legal acts. O n the o t h e r hand, if o n e inter­
prets it in a "political culture" way, a u t h o r i t a r i a n attitudes stressing o r d e r
as social control which stem from Soviet political culture m a y be evoked
(Miller et al. 1 9 9 7 : 1 7 0 ) . It seems, however, that, in general, o r d i n a r y citi­
zens tend to stress f r e e d o m s in all societies, not only in post-Soviet coun­
tries ( M a r c u s , Mease, O t t e m o e l l e r 2 0 0 1 : 1 1 5 ) . Such a universal emphasis
on f r e e d o m and rights favors a n o n - c u l t u r a l intra-societal (structural)
explanation. A distinct functional place in society and specific s e c o n d a r y
political socialization explain w h y local elites u n d e r l i n e the element of the
rule o f law in their definition of d e m o c r a c y as opposed to the definition of
d e m o c r a c y which is p r o v i d e d by o r d i n a r y citizens.
Definitions of democracy in a time perspective
Political cultures are rather stable (Inglehatt 1 9 8 8 , Putnam, Leonardi,
Nanetti 1 9 9 3 ) so that in the post-communist context, one would expect to find
legacies of Soviet political culture (e.g., Fleron 1 9 9 6 ) . S o m e soviet or socialist
ideals might be reflected in social beliefs in general (Schwartz, Uardi 1997),
and in the meanings attached to democracy in particular, i.e., equality, state
protection, subordinate citizen, and so on (Miller, Hesli, Reisinger 1997).
O u r data p e r m i t us to look at differences across t i m e in definitions of
d e m o c r a c y offered by local elites (Table 2 ) . Statistically-significant trends
in the increase o r decrease o f the i m p o r t a n c e of key concepts o f d e m o c r a c y
w o u l d indicate changes.
Local elites initially (at the beginning of the 1 9 9 0 s ) tended to mostly
define d e m o c r a c y in t e r m s of freedom(s) and order. A s Table 2 shows, o r ­
der and f r e e d o m as key features b e c o m e less p r o m i n e n t but still d o m i n a n t
in the local elites' u n d e r s t a n d i n g of d e m o c r a c y up to 2 0 0 1 . W h i l e s o m e
Values and Connotations of Democracy in Lithuania: Ordinary Citizens vs. Local Elites
Table 2. Rankings of Ihe concepts in local elites' definitions of democracy
Local elites
1991
1998
2001
Rank
Percent
Rank
Percent
Rank
Percent
•10%
1
27%
1
20%
Order and laws
1
2
33%
2
22%
1*
20%
Rights
3
17%
3
12%
3
10%
Flections
•l'
M%
•1
8%
5
8%
Majority rule
<1
U%
7
5%
3*
10%
freedom
Equality
6
9%
V
5%
7
7%
Constitution
7
6%
T
5%
9
5%
Responsibility
8
5%
5
6%
5
8%
Openness
9*
3%
5*
6%
7*
7%
Tolerance
9
3%
10
1%
10
" 'I he same rank is given to several categories, because their percentages arc the same.
2%
major meanings of freedom and o r d e r decline in time (although they stay
in the top positions), s o m e meanings that w e r e m i n o r in 1 9 9 1 , such as re­
sponsibility o r openness acquire higher a ranking with the passage of time.
Similarly, equality and the constitution are ranked l o w e r o v e r the course
o f time. In t e r m s o f rankings, there is little change in m a j o r meanings, just
changes at the l o w e r part of Table 2.
Thus, in conclusion, the saliency of major meanings of d e m o c r a c y de­
creases o v e r time, and s o m e m i n o r increases and decreases o c c u r in the
p e r i p h e r y of the meanings. A r e these changes meaningful? A m o n g local
elites, the meanings of d e m o c r a c y seem to have a rather stable structure, al­
though o v e r time, the saliency of the major d e m o c r a t i c values of freedoms
and o r d e r decreases. This might be interpreted as the decrease of classical
meanings and the increasing saliency o f n e w features related to openness
and responsibility, representing a higher emphasis on standards o f d e m o ­
cratic g o v e r n a n c e . It can also be an indication of the increasing profession­
alism and specific ethics of local elites.
Converging meanings of democracy for local elites: fading
political divisions, 1991-2001
It is widely assumed that political concepts are clustered and c o m b i n a ­
tions ol meanings are grouped by political affiliations and political pref-
170
Matonytė Irmina, Rauleckas Rimantas
ereiices. D o clusters and c o m b i n a t i o n s of m e a n i n g s of d e m o c r a c y change
across the political s p e c t r u m as d e m o c r a t i c experience grows? O u r h y p o t h ­
esis is that diffused, undifferentiated, incoherent and uncritical notions o f
d e m o c r a c y (high levels of acceptance of the abstract principles of political
democracy, but low levels o f m o r e specific application of these principles
( R o h r s c h n e i d e r 1 9 9 6 ) ) at the beginning o f the p o s t - c o m m u n i s t transition
w o u l d later b e c o m e m o r e coherent and m o r e differentiated a m o n g rightwing, center and left-wing g r o u p s of local elites. Again, o u r data p e r m i t us
to test this assumption in the case o f local elites at three points in time and
in the case of o r d i n a r y citizens in 2 0 0 3 .
It is possible to distinguish the key concepts held by political groups
distinct f r o m o n e a n o t h e r in each s u r v e y :
•
1 9 9 1 : left-wing local elites emphasize o r d e r rather weakly, while
right w i n g elites e m p h a s i z e it m o r e .
•
1 9 9 8 : leftist parties a d h e r e m o r e to f r e e d o m s than to o p e n n e s s
( t r a n s p a r e n c y ) , and center and r i g h t - w i n g parties as political blocs d o not
have any distinctive v o c a b u l a r y .
•
2 0 0 1 : left-wing local elites avoid m e n t i o n i n g responsibility, the
center parties skip f r e e d o m ( s ) , and the right defines d e m o c r a c y mostly in
t e r m s of o r d e r and the constitution.
2 0 0 3 : a m o n g o r d i n a r y citizens, the r i g h t - w i n g self-identification is
related to concepts o f order, openness, rights and responsibility, while the
centrists emphasize o p e n n e s s and tolerance. 'Ihe left-wing s u p p o r t e r s do
not have any distinct v o c a b u l a r y of democracy.
The r i g h t - w i n g local elites and o r d i n a r y citizens are distinct from
o t h e r g r o u p s in their emphasis on o r d e r / l a w and openness. 'Ihe left-wing
definitions are coherent in that they tend to ignore o r d e r and emphasize
f r e e d o m s and equality in their definitions of d e m o c r a c y . This coherence is
an internal one, in the sense that, although the s a m e distinct features d o not
appear in all s u r v e y s , on the w h o l e these distinct meanings or lack of them
is consistent with the generalized image of the left w o r l d v i e w : the leftists
highlight equality a n d m a j o r i t y rule, and are in contrast to the right, so far
as o r d e r and f r e e d o m s are c o n c e r n e d . However, these patterns of meanings
are diffuse. The r i g h t - w i n g affiliation g r o u p seems to express m o r e coherent
definitions of d e m o c r a c y across time. The political right in p o s t - c o m m u ­
nist Lithuania seems to craft m o r e coherent definitions of d e m o c r a c y than
o t h e r g r o u p s o v e r the c o u r s e of the last decades. This coherent a r g u m e n t is
relevant for both r i g h t - w i n g local elites and o r d i n a r y citizens.
Values a n d C o n n o t a t i o n s of D e m o c r a c y in L i t h u a n i a : O r d i n a r y Citizens v s . Local Elites
Conclusions
Diflcrcnccs between o r d i n a r y citizens and local elites are the most o b v i ­
ous along lines of control and autonomy, i.e., the general public emphasizes
f r e e d o m ( v a r i o u s f r e e d o m s ) , but not so m u c h o r d e r and rule of the law,
while local elites see o r d e r and law as key concepts of democracy. A n o t h e r
difference between the 'ruling' and 'ruled' is the increasing i m p o r t a n c e of
o p e n n e s s and responsibility as a feature o f d e m o c r a c y for elites and the lack
t h e r e o f for o r d i n a r y citizens.
Certainly, time is an i m p o r t a n t factor here, which shapes interpreta­
tions of d e m o c r a c y in p o s t - c o m m u n i s t
societies. A m o n g local political
elites o v e r time, f r e e d o m , rights, order, and s o m e p r o c e d u r a l n o t i o n s of de­
m o c r a c y (elections) as key meanings seem to lose their weight. O n the con­
trary, responsibility and t r a n s p a r e n c y / o p e n n e s s b e c o m e m o r e p r o n o u n c e d ,
reflecting n e w d e m a n d s o f daily political practices.
A s for clusters of meanings of d e m o c r a c y along political affiliations,
there is a lack o f a clear pattern of distinct m e a n i n g s being c o h e r e n t l y r e ­
flected o n the left, center o r right in the local elites o r o r d i n a r y citizens' defi­
nitions of d e m o c r a c y . In fact, o n l y the r i g h t - w i n g local elites and o r d i n a r y
citizens to s o m e degree systematically diverge f r o m other groups, as they
emphasize o r d e r / l a w and openness. The left-wing definitions are c o h e r e n t
in that they ignore o r d e r and emphasize f r e e d o m s in their definition of
d e m o c r a c y . In general, political groupings are m o r e similar than distinct in
their definitions of d e m o c r a c y , and changes in definitions o f d e m o c r a c y in
time are similar within all political groupings (e.g., invariant decrease in the
usage of f r e e d o m s and o r d e r in definitions of d e m o c r a c y ) . The c o h e r e n c e of
m e a n i n g s of d e m o c r a c y along political or p a r t y self-identification lines is
not increasing, but it exists in a s o m e w h a t m o r e attenuated version, w h o s e
interpretation requires o t h e r m e t h o d s than those e m p l o y e d in this study.
References
Möllen, К. Л. 1993. I.iher.nl Democracy: Validity and Method Factors in Cross-National
Measures. American loitrimt of Political Science 37 (-1): 1 2 0 7 - 1 2 3 0 .
O r n a g h a n , U. 2001. 'lhittking about Democracy: Interviews with Russian Citizens. Sfcivtr
/ t o w n ' 6 0 (2): 3 3 6 - 3 6 6 .
Converse, l'. V.. 1961. 'Ihe nature of belief systems in mass publics. In Ideology ami discontent,
D. Apler (ed.), 2 0 2 - 2 6 1 . New York: Wiley.
Ileum. К ). 1996. Post-Soviet Political Culture in Russia: An Assessment of Recent l-iupirical
Investigations, l-uivpc Asia Studies -IK (2): 2 2 5 - 2 6 0 .
171
Matonytė Irmina, Rauleckas Rimantas
Gibson, J. L., Duch, R. M. and Tedin, K. 1,. 19У2. Cultural Values and the 'transformation of
the Soviet Union, journal of Politics (54): 3 2 9 - 7 1 .
Huntington, S. P. 1957. Conservatism as an Ideology. 7/ie American Political Science llcvicw
51 (2): 4 5 4 - 4 7 3 .
Inglehart, R. 1У88.'1Ье Renaissance of Political Culture. 7/ie American Political Science Review
82 (4): 1 2 0 3 - 1 2 3 0 .
Inglehart, R. 1 9 9 0 . Culture shift in advanced
University Press.
industrial
society. Princeton, N.J., Princeton
Luskin, R. C. 1 9 8 7 . Measuring Political Sophistication. American journal of Political Science
31 (4): 8 5 6 - 8 9 9 .
Marcus, R. It., Mease, K. and Ottenioeller, U. 2U01. Popular Definitions of Democracy from
Uganda, Madagascar, and Florida, U.S.A. Journal of Asian and African Studies 3 6 (1):
113-132.
Meier, R. F. 1 9 8 2 . Perspective on the concept of social control. Annual Review of Sociology
8: 3 5 - 5 5 .
Miller, A. H., Hesli, V. L. and Reisinger, W. M. 1995. Comparing Citi/en and Klile Ilelief
Systems in Post-Soviet Russia and Ukraine. Public Opinion Quarterly 59 (1): 1 - 4 0 .
Miller, A. H., Hesli, V. L. and Reisinger, W. M. 1УУ7. Conceptions of Democracy Among Mass
and Elite in Post-Soviet Societies, british Journal of Political Science 27 (2): 1 7 5 - 1У0.
Mishler, W. and Rose, R. 2002. Learning and re-learning regime support: 'Ilie dynamics ol
post-communist regimes. European Journal of Political Research (41): 5 - 3 6 .
Putnam, R. D., Leonard;, R. and Nanetti, R. Y. 1УУЗ. Making democracy work: civic traditions
in modern Italy. Princeton, N. J: Princeton University Press.
Reisinger, W. M., Miller, A. H. and Hesli, V. L. 1995. Political Norms in Rural Russia: evidence
from Public Attitudes. Europe Asia Studies 47: 1 0 2 5 - 4 2 .
Rohrschneider, R. 1996. Institutional Learning versus Value Dillusioit: 'Ihe Fvolulion ol"
Democratic Values among Parliamentarians in Lastern and Western Germany, 'lite
Journal of Politics 58 (2): 4 2 2 - 4 4 6 .
Rokeach, M. 1 9 6 8 - 1 9 6 9 . '1 lie Role of Values in Public Opinion Research. 1'hWiV Opinion
Quarterly 32 (4): 5 4 7 - 5 5 9 .
Schwartz, S. II. and liardi, A. 1997. Inllueuces of Adaptation to Cuinimiiii.st Rule on Value
Priorities in Hasten) F.urope. Political Psychology 18 (2): 3 8 5 - 1 1 0 .
van Dijk.T. A. 2002. Political discourse and Political Cognition. In Politics as Text and Talk.
Analytic approaches to political discourse, P. Chilton (ed.), 2 0 3 - 2 3 7 . Philadelphia PA: John
Benjamins Publishing Company.
Wilson, F. G. 1У60. 'Ihe Anatomy of Conservatives. Elides 70 (4): 2 6 5 - 2 8 1 .