Don't Vote for Them: The Effects of the Spanish Indignant Movement on Attitudes about Voting

Abstract

This article investigates the recent so-called Spanish Revolution of 2011 with a view to understanding what it reveals about the current relationship between protest and electoral modes of participation. Theories of “disaffeccted radicalism” that grew up following the 1960s period of civil unrest strongly advocated the view that protest activity boosted electoral abstention. More recent work on protest, however, has pointed to its “normalization” and linkage to more conventional modes of participation. The Spanish case of 15M constitutes a useful new test of the two theories given that it mixed an explicit rejection of the choices voters faced with a criticism of political apathy. I examine the validity of each argument using a four-wave online panel survey and fixed-effects model to unravel how engagement in the 15M protest activity affected Spaniards' attitudes towards voting. The results provide fresh support for the normalization argument about a convergence of electoral and non-electoral types of activity. What is more, protest here seems to have a socialization effect that leads people to look at elections in a more positive manner.

Notes

1 In Greece we see a drop from 71% (2009) to 62.5% (May and June 2012 elections averaged). In Italy the evolution was from 80.5% (2008) to 75.2% (2013).

2 According to some analysts, the Spanish protest may have triggered and led the Occupy movement. See Castañeda (2012) and the BBC article “Spain's ‘Indignant’ lead international protest day”, available at <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15315270>.

3 Anduiza et al. (2011) compared Madrid 15M demonstrators with those who attended eight other demonstrations held in Spain between January 2010 and May 2011, noticing that the Indignant were significantly younger and less likely to be members of organizations.

4 Diario Vasco, 20 May 2011. Other examples include: “Most of the associations that have publicly supported this movement … come from the radical, anti-system left … Perhaps aware of that, and since their abstention could worsen the bad picture already drawn by surveys regarding the 22-M, the leaders of the PSOE, have already said that the ‘Indignant’ are right”. ABC, 20 May 2011. “The Indignant from Barcelona are torn between abstention and voting. The opinion of the Indignant from Plaza Catalunya is divided with regards whether or not to vote. While some reject the vote, arguing that there is no political force to represent them, others claim that voting is a right and an obligation.” Qué, 22 May 2011; “Its immediate message – ‘don't vote for any of them’ – is not being taken as a joke by Spain's major parties, especially by the traditional left, including the Socialist Party (PSOE), currently in government.” The Irish Times, 21 May 2011.

5 “In the next election we are called to exercise our main democratic right: voting … We do not ask you to vote by any particular party or ideology, but to check for alternative parties that might better represent your ideas” <http://www.nolesvotes.com/>

6 “Some of us consider ourselves progressive, others conservative. Some of us are believers, some not. Some of us have clearly defined ideologies, others are apolitical, but we are all concerned and angry about the political, economic, and social outlook which we see around us: corruption among politicians, businessmen, bankers, leaving us helpless, without a voice”, available at <http://www.democraciarealya.es/manifiesto-comun/manifesto-english/>. See also their urgent communiqué of 22 May: “we need to clarify before citizenship that our movement has never asked to abstain or vote blank or cast null votes, or vote for any party in particular. DRY encourages people to report and decide for themselves who to give their vote to according to their ideology … Our goal is to improve the current electoral system, but until that model changes, we believe that everyone should participate as you see fit”, available at <http://madrid.democraciarealya.es/2011/05/22/comunicado-de-prensa-urgente/>.

7 The Spanish translation of the title (¡Indignaos!, an imperative form of the verb “to outrage”) is believed to have inspired one of the names of the movement as well as some of its demands and actions.

8 The turnout is similar to the 68% reached in 2003 local elections, a year of exceptional civic mobilization against the Iraq war.

9 Key words were a combination of (The Indignant + Movement + Spain) and “For a Real Democracy Now”.

10 Two examples are agorabcn, mainly composed of anarchist organizations from Barcelona, and some local assemblies such as Rota's.

11 Another announcement in the same vein: “The only thing that we are going to ask of people is that they make an informed and judicious choice … Each and every citizen must make those decisions according to conscience.” Klaudia Alvarez, spokesperson for 15M member group Real Democracy Now (DRY) for the online newspaper Green Left (16 October), available at <http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/49110>.

12 Spanish scholars themselves did not agree when the press asked them what had been the impact of the social movement on the election. Among the six academics interviewed by a Spanish newspaper four days after the election, only two identified negative consequences either through an increase in political disaffection or directly by triggering abstention. Eva Anduiza and Raimundo Viejo emphasize the plausible effects of the Indignant on party fragmentation and the increase of null votes. Available at <http://www.lavanguardia.com/politica/20111124/54239243801/indignados-voto-elecciones-generales.html>.

13 The survey (CIS 2855) was sponsored and funded by the Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas (CIS) and the Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona (UAB) research group “Democracy, Elections and Citizenship” (P.I. Eva Anduiza). The survey is the cornerstone the POLAT (CSO2010-18534) project, a research funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation. The panelists were recruited following different strategies (i.e. website banners) that avoid profesionalization of the respondents.

14 The CIS 2847 survey, conducted in December 2009, shows that 83% of those under 45 years old have used the Internet at least once in the past 12 months.

15 2100 individuals entered the panel in wave 1. Six months later, 287 withdrew and 620 were freshly enrolled. In the fourth wave, 1322 individuals from the original sample remained and 395 from the refreshment. That makes a total of 2720 different people that at some time entered the survey and were asked about their civic duty and their probabilities to vote.

16 This variable takes value 0 for everybody in waves 1 and 2.

17 The CIS 2920 survey reveals that 90% of the respondents over 18 years old knew about the movement and 11% had been involved in their actions. Those percentages increased to 95% awareness and 15% direct involvement if respondents were restricted to those under 45 years of age.

18 Unfortunately, the probabilities of voting in local elections were not asked in this survey.

19 The question was “Different people feel differently about voting. For some, voting is a duty. They feel that they should vote in every election regardless of their feelings about the candidates and parties. For others, voting is a choice. They feel free to vote or not to vote in an election depending on how they feel about the candidates and parties. For you, the respondent, in your personal opinion voting is first and foremost a:1 Duty 2 Choice.” If respondents chose “Duty”, they were then asked “How strongly” with options very much, somewhat and not very. After recodification, the variable takes values from 0 (“choice”) to 3 (“duty, very strongly”).

20 On this respect, the authors say: “The challenge, then, is to make it easy for people to admit that they do not have a sense of duty. Our approach is write a new duty question, offering a non-duty option that is as attractive and socially appropriate as possible” (Blais & Achen, 2010: 6).

21 Wave dummies have not been included in the models because they would absorb all contextual effects, including the elections in time 2 and 3 and the activity of the 15M itself, which are at the heart of this study. These models are, therefore, one-way fixed-effects.

22 See the appendix for the full descriptives of these variables.