Replication data for: The Apathetic Democrat and Other Non-Activists: University Students in Post-Soviet Transition

During critical moments of political uncertainty, university students are traditionally a dynamic force in society. Why, then, have university students been politically inactive during the period of sweeping political and economic transformation across the former Soviet republics? Two factors account for student passivity: the behavior of the state and the political attitudes of students. In Russia, the state acted first with extreme coercion and then with extreme permissiveness and did not provoke students by alternately liberalizing and cracking down. The students, for their part, generally supported the leadership-initiated transition to a democratic political system and market economy. Most large-scale student protests of the magnitude of the Tiananmen Square, Czechoslovak, or other protests were preempted by swift and extensive reform that corresponded with student preferenc es. In Central Asia, states balanced liberalism and repression more precariously, but like in Russia, their reform policies generally corresponded with student preferences. Student protests were uncommon because both the students and governments of Central Asia shared a reluctance to reform. These findings do not support theories of protest which focus on psychological motivations, resources, and economic opportunities. Instead, the findings suggest that attitudes play a critical role in determining political behavior, specifically, in their link with the macro-political situation. Pro-reform attitudes in Russia nurture political apathy. Pro-reform attitudes in Central Asia nurture quite the opposite. I provide evidence from an original survey of over 2,000 students chos en at random from the physics, economics, history, and philology departments of state universities in Russia (Novosibirsk, Kazan, Moscow), Ukraine (Kiev, Kharkiv, Lviv), and Central Asia (Bishkek, Almaty, Dushanbe).

在政治不确定性凸显的关键历史节点，大学生历来是社会中极具活力的推动力量。那么，在前苏联加盟共和国经历全面政治与经济转型的时期，大学生为何在政治上表现得消极被动？学生群体的政治冷漠主要由两大因素所致：国家的治理行为与大学生自身的政治态度。

在俄罗斯，国家治理先是采取极端强制手段，随后转向极度宽松放任，并未通过交替放宽管制与严厉镇压的方式激化学生情绪。而就学生群体而言，他们普遍支持领导层主导的向民主政治体制与市场经济的转型进程。绝大多数规模堪比天安门广场（Tiananmen Square）抗议、捷克斯洛伐克抗议或其他同类抗议活动的大规模学生抗议，均因契合学生诉求的快速全面改革而被预先化解。

在中亚地区，各国在自由主义政策与压制手段间的平衡更为脆弱，但与俄罗斯的情况类似，其改革政策总体上也契合学生群体的诉求。学生抗议活动因此较为罕见，原因在于中亚地区的学生与各国政府均不愿推进改革。

本次研究结论并不支持那些以心理动机、资源条件与经济机遇为核心的抗议活动相关理论。相反，研究结果表明，政治态度在决定个体政治行为的过程中发挥着关键作用，具体体现在其与宏观政治环境的关联之中。在俄罗斯，支持改革的政治态度催生了政治冷漠；而在中亚地区，支持改革的政治态度则催生了截然相反的政治行为。

本研究的实证数据来源于一项原创性调研：我们从俄罗斯（新西伯利亚、喀山、莫斯科）、乌克兰（基辅、哈尔科夫、利沃夫）以及中亚地区（比什凯克、阿拉木图、杜尚别）的国立大学物理学、经济学、历史学与语文学系中随机抽取了2000余名学生参与调研。