This research explores how individuals construct the formation and change of political attitudes within the post-transitional Slovenian context. Political attitudes are understood from a philosophical social constructionist perspective as socially shared evaluations of political situations, events, and actors. They are both forms of political cognition, reflected in opinions on socio-economic issues, and social cognition, shaped by experiences, group belonging, and media discourse. Additionally, cognitive consistency theories help explain how individuals select and rationalize political information to form or change political attitudes. The study also examines how ideological discourse and economic structures shape everyday political subjectivity.
Slovenian transition involved stages from post-socialist gradualism, to liberalisation through rapid privatization, social democratic decline, austerity, and precarious labor conditions. In Slovenia, the ideological divide and political discourse were historically revolved around (currently hegemonic) liberalism, conservatism, and socialism. Moreover, economic libertarianism was detected as a specific ideological narrative.
The aim of the research was to understand how political attitudes are ideologically formed, changed and argued and how the process of change is constructed within the post-transitional Slovenian society. The research involved 10 interviews with Slovenian citizens (2 female), aged 21 to 44, analyzed using a two-part approach: first, a descriptive thematic analysis with elements of critical discourse analysis identified ideological shifts; second, a reflexive thematic analysis with elements of discursive psychology explored how participants justified and constructed the process of change.
Findings from the first analysis revealed that they constructed an entrepreneurial self, that internalizes market logic of entrepreneurial individualism, agency, and flexibility to market demands. Yet, this shift was not absolute. Participants retained strong communitarian ideals, particularly on local level. Additionally, they expressed reduced tolerance for migrants, which was partly shaped by Slovenian and European media narratives. Most participants had shifted from socialist/social democratic ideological framework on the level of economics and social liberalism at the level of social/cultural questions toward neoliberal conservatism, supporting free markets, liberalisation of welfare institutions, and liberalisation of the work environment.
The second analysis showed how participants justified their political attitude change through two main narratives: deliberate information-seeking and organic transformation through lived experience. These were combined to present a rational, coherent self. Furthermore the formation of new attitudes was contrary to research found to be individualised in a form of mass self-communication. Interestingly, while participants saw themselves as adaptable in daily life, they described their minds as stable and resistant to change, constructing a paradoxical subjectivity shaped by neoliberal norms. This aligns with Foucaultian biopolitical governmentality, where individuals are expected to remain flexible in behavior yet inwardly consistent and rational to conform to ideals of productivity and growth.
The study ultimately highlights the need for greater reflexivity in ‘mind and body’ sciences to avoid reinforcing dualistic and individualistic neoliberal models of subjectivity. Instead, it calls for approaches that acknowledge the socially constructed, embodied, and dynamic nature of all mind-body phenomena.
|
