Keywords

1 Introduction

At 53%, about half of Czech citizens have a positive image of the EU. This places the Czech Republic above the EU average. The image of the EU is even more favourable among younger people. Up to 82% of Czechs aged between 15 and 25 report having a positive image of the EU (ČTK 2022). On the other hand, only 8% of the Czech citizens say that their image of the EU has improved over the last year, whereas 28% report that it got worse. Furthermore, Czech citizens do not feel that their voices count. There is a tendency of 51% to disagree and of 10% to totally disagree with the statement that the Czech Republic’s voice matters in the EU (European Parliament 2021).

In line with this negative perception of the input channels of the EU, the turnout in elections to the European Parliament has been repeatedly very low. Only around 28% in 2004, 2009, and 2019 and 18.20% in 2014 went to the ballot box. By contrast, turnout in national elections is higher and increased visibly in 2021.Footnote 1 The participation of young people aged between 18 and 34 was equally high, with 63% casting their vote (Prokop et al. 2021).

2 Towns, Schools, and Discussion Participants

Within the research programme of the Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence, group discussions with young people were conducted in the towns of Sokolov and Chrudim. Sokolov is located in the Karlovy Vary region in the west of the country, on the border with Germany. One of the most important industries is the Uhelná coal power plant. The town is well connected with the highway D6, which runs from the state border to Karlovy Vary. The E48 motorway connects it with Prague and Plzeň. The town has a clean centre with some houses in need of renovation, a few restaurants, pubs, stores and service shops on a small old market square with a church.

At 19.9%, voter turnout in the elections for the European Parliament in 2019 in Sokolov was lower than the national average (iROZHLAS 2022a). Looking at the parties that crossed the 5% threshold, 48.8% of voters cast their vote for parties that can be classified as pro-European (ANO, Piráti, STAN/TOP09), whereas 32.5% voted for some form of Eurosceptic party (SPD, ODS, KSČM).Footnote 2 In the elections for the Chamber of Deputies in 2021, 65.6% of the votes were cast for pro-European parties (ANO, Spolu, Piráti/STAN), and 14.2% for a Eurosceptic party (SPD) (iROZHLAS 2022c).

Chrudim is located inland in Eastern Bohemia, about 11 km south of the larger town of Pardubice. The whole Pardubice region, to which Chrudim belongs, is characterised by industries such as electrical and mechanical engineering, chemical production, manufacturing, the agricultural and food industries, as well as commercial and public services (Eures 2022a). Chrudim is connected to Pardubice by route I/37. It has a well-preserved and renovated town centre with several historic buildings and landmarks. In the elections for the European Parliament in 2019, the election results and turnout rates differed from the ones in Sokolov. The voter turnout was 29.4%, thus close to the national average (iROZHLAS 2022b). Looking at the parties that crossed the 5% threshold, 52.8% of voters cast their vote for a pro-European party (ANO, Piráti, STAN/TOP09, KDU-ČSL), whereas 33.0% voted for some form of Eurosceptic party (ODS, SPD, KSČM). In the elections for the Chamber of Deputies in 2021, 72.4% of voters cast their vote for pro-European parties (Spolu, ANO, Piráti/STAN) and 8.3% for a Eurosceptic party (SPD) (iROZHLAS 2022d).

In both towns, the group discussions were organised in one vocational school and one secondary school. The schools in Sokolov were easily accessible. The vocational school, Integrovaná střední škola technická a ekonomická Sokolov, is centrally located in a renovated building with a modern interior. It has 750 students and offers business-oriented subjects such as “economics and entrepreneurship” and “public administration” as well as “electrical engineering and computer science”. The secondary school, Gymnázium Sokolov, is also easy to reach, lying close to the town centre in an open space with adjoining residential neighbourhoods. It is a building complex and gives the impression that it is well-kept.

The schools in Chrudim are located just outside the town centre, on a small hill. The vocational school, Střední odborná škola a Střední odborné učiliště obchodu a služeb, is housed in a well-preserved late Art Nouveau building, surrounded by a park with a fountain in front. It is modernly furnished and well-equipped (with beamers, whiteboards, etc.). Altogether, 480 students attend the school, which is specialised in the hotel business, gastronomy, and information technology. The secondary school, Gymnázium Josefa Ressela, is located nearby. The historic school building, surrounded by a park, is also well-preserved, modernly furnished, and well-equipped. About 500 students attend this school.

The group discussions took place immediately before the Chamber of Deputies elections on October 8 and 9, 2021, which needs to be taken into account when analysing the topics discussed. In each of the four schools, eight students (four male and four female) were randomly selected. All teachers were supportive throughout the organisation process but were not present during the discussions.

3 The Situation of the Young People and Their Self-image as Citizens

To start the group discussions, students were asked to talk about the qualities and problems of their town and to explain who they thought was responsible for them. Across the different towns and school types, students mentioned public transportation as a problem. In their opinion, politicians at the local level are responsible for addressing these problems. Despite problems, they mostly wished to stay in the region or return later. Students talked about their EU citizenship in an abstract way and related it more to the collective state level. Nevertheless, they reflected through the discussion on the fact that they take their EU citizenship for granted. They then associated core values such as freedom of movement, peace, and security with it, and stated clearly that leaving the EU would have negative consequences. The Euro was a strong dividing topic.

Regarding their town, the students of the vocational school in Sokolov perceived drug addicts and homeless people as a problem.Footnote 3 Projects concerning the transportation infrastructure were irritating to them, and they saw the town government as being responsible for it. The students of the secondary school in Sokolov complained about the poor transport connections, e.g. to Prague, as well as the high unemployment rate in the Karlovy Vary region (the highest in the Czech Republic).Footnote 4 They criticised the slow pace of the local politicians. The fact that there was no bookstore was given as a negative example. As possible future places to live, the students of both schools named the region itself, Plzeň, Prague, and foreign countries or foreign cities, e.g. Copenhagen.

In the Chrudim vocational school, many students came from small places around Chrudim or from Pardubice, the next largest town. Problems related to their villages and towns concern facilities, the landscape, and the education system. According to the students, envy and resentment prevail among citizens. By contrast, Chrudim was generally viewed positively (having a better infrastructure, being clean, and having enough shopping facilities and green areas). As in Sokolov, the students revealed that they see local politicians, more specifically the mayors, as responsible for the things not working. As possible future places of residence, they mentioned foreign countries (England, Germany, and outside of Europe). For the Chrudim secondary school students, the big problems were also the dysfunctional transport infrastructure and too many construction sites. Nevertheless, they recognised that the larger towns are very well connected to each other, e.g. Jihlava and Chrudim. The students not only saw the town but also included companies and the country as responsible for tackling regional problems. Many students wanted to stay in Pardubice or the region or go abroad (USA, Europe) and return to their families after a few years. Prague and Brno were also named as possible places to live.

Asked about their perceptions of their EU citizenship, the students of the vocational school in Sokolov talked about the EU in an abstract way. They positively mentioned the freedom of movement and emphasised that the member states do help each other. The EU’s position on same-sex marriage, in contrast, was seen as negative, and the adoption of the Euro polarised the group. The students of the secondary school in Sokolov also mentioned the freedom of movement and the Schengen Agreement as something positive. Besides this, they explained that they see the benefits of the EU as something that can only be appreciated when it is no longer there. They found Brexit to be a negative example. The discussion furthermore revealed that they primarily perceive an economic and political connection to the EU, rather than a conscious personal connection. In general, the students stressed that they identify themselves as Czechs rather than Europeans.

When talking about their perception of their EU citizenship, the students of the Chrudim vocational school pointed out that EU topics are not discussed at school or with their parents. They repeatedly expressed the wish for more information and discussions on the EU. For them, the EU mainly stood for peace and security, and they said that countries would support each other in an emergency (e.g. a war). They therefore rejected a withdrawal from the EU and cited Brexit as a negative example. In a similar vein, the students of the Chrudim secondary school remarked that they take the EU for granted, but without the EU, there would be negative consequences. They positively mentioned the mutual security promises and peace, as well as the fact that there are no severe customs restrictions inside the EU. Similar to the secondary school in Sokolov, Brexit was perceived negatively, and the students had a polarising discussion on the Euro. The students saw the Czech Republic’s relationship with the EU as a “give and take relationship”. They reported that they felt like EU citizens, but that it would seem abstract and difficult to describe. Besides that, they viewed the EU as having a non-transparent environment.

4 Perceptions of the EU and EU Rights

When asked to rank the policies and liberties provided by the EU, all four groups agreed that peace, the right to vote, and the right to healthcare are central (the latter possibly due to the Corona pandemic). This shows that the students regard the overall goals of the EU, its democratic features, as well as essential rights in certain policy areas, as very important. Besides this, three out of four groups additionally considered access to clean drinking water as a crucial feature.

Opinions were more heterogenous regarding the right to documents and consumer protection, which was ranked as central by some groups and considered something that could be discarded by others. Similarly, the freedom of movement was sustained as being central by two groups and as less important by the other two groups.

All four groups agreed that the absence of roaming charges is a right connected to the EU that could be discarded. The Erasmus exchange programme was discarded in three groups. As the group discussion in the secondary school in Sokolov revealed, this does not necessarily mean that students consider these rights useless but rather that they would find the restriction of these rights to be less drastic. An important criterion in the discussion was whether some rights are essential for survival or whether one could get by without them. Apart from the roaming charges and the Erasmus exchanges, there was no consensus among the groups as to which rights could be discarded. The students of the vocational school in Sokolov agreed that access to documents, Erasmus exchanges, and the right to have a European citizens’ initiative/petition were the least important to them. The students of the secondary school chose the right to protest, data protection, and access to clean drinking water. Students of both schools agreed that access to an independent judiciary is a right they could do without. The results in Chrudim were equally diverse, with the vocational school students agreeing on data protection, access to documents, and non-discrimination, while the secondary school students agreed on consumer protection, the right to protest, EU funding for structurally weak regions, and reconstruction activities after the Corona pandemic.

The task of ranking EU and EU rights led to discussions that were very diverse in terms of subject matter, revealing that students in the rural areas of the Czech Republic have very different ideas about what the key achievements of the EU are. Among the students of the Sokolov vocational school, consumer protection was a polarising topic. Furthermore, they debated the importance of freedom of movement. Regarding EU subsidies, they criticised that they do not arrive in the region anyway, which might be a reason why this right was not considered a central right by most groups. The discussion in the Sokolov secondary school revealed uncertainties regarding the meaning of some rights. Regarding clean drinking water, students were not sure whether the Czech Republic would have clean drinking water without the EU guaranteeing it. Moreover, there were questions about consumer protection, e.g. what it actually is and how the EU helps in this matter. Discussions in the Chrudim vocational school centered around the freedom of movement. The students hinted at the importance of free movement with regard to the coronavirus and how stuck and confined they felt not being able to move freely. They further discussed the right to protest, acknowledging the importance of protesting but refusing the violence that often comes along with it. The students in the Chrudim secondary school heatedly discussed, whether healthcare is too state-regulated in the Czech Republic and whether it should be more similar to the healthcare system in the USA. In some students’ perceptions, doctors do not get enough recognition for their work in the Czech Republic compared to other countries like Germany.

In line with this, the answers to the question of what the EU should do to make students feel more like EU citizens differed considerably, and they also reflected more critical stances. Students of the Sokolov vocational school suggested exchange visits but saw the financial affordability as problematic. Moreover, they mentioned that the EU should address discrimination against LGBTQ people and that Czech MEPs should better represent the regions. Students in the Sokolov secondary school questioned whether one even wants to feel like a citizen of the EU. A student said that he is comfortable being Czech and does not need an emotional relationship with the EU. In general, longer EU membership was suggested as a condition for a stronger European identity. In the Chrudim vocational school, students revealed that they found it difficult to talk about the EU because the topic seemed abstract and they claimed to have too little knowledge about the EU. Some students in the Chrudim secondary school suggested that the Czech Republic should accept the Euro, which was followed by a heated debate. The students expressed their wish for more freedom, as the EU was seen as “dictating” from above. In addition, they called for a guarantee of democracy in the member states.

5 The Right to Vote and EU Elections

The discussions about (non-)voting in the European Parliament elections revealed that the students overall considered it a missed opportunity when people do not cast their vote. Still, students of both schools in Chrudim argued that voting would be challenging for them as it would be difficult to decide which party would make their future better or worse and which candidate would support their interests. Besides this, some of the students revealed doubts about whether voting really matters. Students in the vocational school in Chrudim disagreed with each other about whether “every vote counts”, and the secondary school students argued that voters’ interests are disregarded, referring to political compromises at the national level. Despite the above-mentioned difficulties and doubts, students of all but one group argued that non-voters should not complain about the EU.

As potential reasons for non-voting, the students discussed a lack of knowledge and awareness. The students of the Sokolov vocational school were at odds with the question of whether one vote can affect the outcomes of elections, even in the smallest percentages. Non-voters were described as lacking an opinion of their own. If the students had the chance to vote themselves, some said they would base their own political opinions on the views of their parents. Still, impartial teachers were important to them. Several students of the Sokolov secondary school reported that they had not known about the EU elections at all, and the students of the group agreed that young people are generally not interested in elections, which is also related to the fact that parties primarily support the interests of older generations. Besides this, they agreed that they see too little advertising for the EU elections and that misinformation and populism are problematic. Similarly, Chrudim secondary school students noted that people have little knowledge about elections and many ignore them. They criticised the absence of political education at school, saying that a voluntary interest in EU issues does not suffice for having profound knowledge about them.

Based on these considerations, the students suggested that voter turnout could be increased by providing more information about EU issues. This should be accomplished by schools, the media, and public campaigns or debates. The Sokolov vocational school students requested more informative campaigns and efforts to fight misinformation; they emphasised the role of the media and suggested more advertising for elections on TV, via Instagram, on the radio, or via Spotify. Instagram would be a good way to reach the younger generation, they remarked. The discussion among the Chrudim secondary school students also touched upon getting information about politics through the media, mainly through the influencers on YouTube. According to the students, most journalists write in an overly technical and inaccessible way, or topics are inflated, which obscures the facts. They therefore suggested that famous Czech people could act as “EU ambassadors”, who would inform the population and act as language mediators since English is not easily accessible but a lot of EU-related information is in English. Besides this, they suggested Instagram for election advertising.

The second important channel for EU-related information mentioned by students was schools. In Chrudim, the students of the secondary school remarked that political topics were not sufficiently addressed at school, while the students of the vocational school said that it would be important to stir an interest in the EU at a young age and to promote political education at schools more. Also, in the Sokolov secondary school, the students addressed the topic of political education in schools, as well as the question of whether a teacher should express a political opinion and pass it on. They particularly expressed the wish for more education on European law, the tasks of an MEP, and EU elections.

In addition, the students of the Sokolov secondary school suggested to increase voter turnout with larger campaigns and motivations to vote, but they also noted that it is more rewarding for parties to spend money on campaigns for national elections than for EU elections. Students of the Chrudim secondary school demanded more comprehensible public discussions about the EU elections. To them, the EU seemed complicated and inaccessible, and they said that they would like to see more transparency on the influence of the elections on them as individuals.

Last but not least, when talking about increasing voter turnout, the students of both schools in Sokolov and the Chrudim vocational school suggested material incentives. They jokingly mentioned doughnuts, shoes and iPhones as a type of motivation, ironically referring to the 2013 election campaign of the Czech entrepreneur and billionaire Andrej Babiš and his populist political party ANO, during which Babiš was handing out doughnuts to people in the streets. Although these were not serious suggestions, they showed that students do follow and critically reflect on political events at the national level.

In sum, the students considered the lack of information about EU-related issues to be the central obstacle to a higher voter turnout in the elections to the European Parliament. Most of their suggestions, therefore, aimed at providing information on complex EU issues via different channels and in a form also suitable for young audiences.

6 Conclusion

The students viewed the social and infrastructural problems as the pressing issues of their towns and villages and gave responsibility for them mostly to the local politicians. Despite obvious problems, they mostly envisaged staying in their region or going abroad and returning later.

While students were eager to discuss their EU citizenship, they struggled to find a direct link between EU citizenship and their everyday reality. Nevertheless, the discussions revealed that they related it to such core values as freedom of movement or peace and security. These values were often considered an absolute natural part of their lives and, hence, personally important, although the students do not practice them or reflect on them consciously in their everyday lives. This was underpinned by a resolute rejection of leaving the EU, often referring to the negative example of Brexit.

When asked to rank EU rights and achievements, peace, the right to vote, health care, and clean water were the top priorities for all students. Compared with these “more existential rights”, the freedom of movement was considered less important by students in two groups, thus suggesting that they were not aware of the protection of these existential rights through the EU.

Talking about the elections to the European Parliament, the students criticised the lack of factual information about European politics, a fact-bound public discussion, and an absence of discussion about the EU at schools, and signaled that they wished to discuss more about the EU.

Overall, the findings suggest that EU citizenship is reminiscent of an anchor in the daily lives of the students. It is associated with core values and gives stability but is largely invisible and taken for granted by young people in the peripheral areas of the Czech Republic.