Serbia: documented application of the same framework
Academic research base
Why can everyone be dissatisfied yet still believe they are in the minority and do nothing?
If everyone hides dissatisfaction, no one can know for sure how many others think the same. One sees public praise, lack of protest and silence of colleagues, and concludes that in case of resistance he would remain alone and bear the whole price. Others make the same assessment, which is why everyone continues to remain silent and thus confirm each other’s wrong image.
A visible event a bold public outburst, a large rally, an election result or a division in power can suddenly reveal that the dissatisfied have much more than previously thought. Then the behavior changes quickly and the system that seemed solid becomes vulnerable. However, the knowledge that we are not alone is not enough if the risk, repression or organizational obstacles are still too high.
If every dissatisfied person sees mostly pro-government media, silent colleagues and full organized gatherings, he can conclude that he is alone even when a lot of others privately think the same. In Serbia, mass protests in 2024 and 2025 have for the first time publicly shown some people the magnitude of dissatisfaction and support for students. Gathering is not just pressure on the authorities; it reveals to people each other and changes the assessment of how safe it is to act.
How the finding is separated in the matrix
Media monitoring confirms the poor visibility of critical attitudes, and representative research and mass mobilizations in 2025 show considerable support for protest requests.
A common misconception persists while private attitudes are invisible. A public, verifiable signal a poll, signature, rally, or election result can shatter it abruptly.
Yes to the visibility mechanism; we cannot prove that every participant previously mistakenly believed that they were in the minority.
The number of people at the protest and support for the request are not the same as support for one party or a solution. The public opinion assessment requires representative measurements and a clear formulation of the question.
This explains why change can be sudden, but it does not say when it will happen. People can know that they are not alone and still reasonably estimate that the risk is too high.
Works supporting this answer, with their evidence type and an explanation of how they relate to the claim.
Explain how the system works
Kuran, T. (1991), „Now Out of Never: The Element of Surprise in the East European Revolution of 1989“, World Politics 44(1): 7–48.
- Contribution to this answer
- The Koran shows how there can be an illusion of stability just when many people privately dislike the existing system: since each individual sees the mostly public behavior of others, they all underestimate how much opposition really exists. That is why a major change may seem impossible just before the public opposition suddenly explodes.
review more research
Kuran, T. (1995), Private Truths, Public Lies: The Social Consequences of Preference Falsification, Harvard University Press.
- Contribution to this answer
- A broader explanation is the vicious cycle of falsifying preferences: I hide what I think because I believe I am lonely; others because of my silence conclude the same; our silence then gives everyone an even stronger reason to keep quiet.
review more research
Miller, D. T. (2023), „A Century of Pluralistic Ignorance: What We Have Learned About Its Origins, Forms, and Consequences“, Frontiers in Social Psychology 1.
- Contribution to this answer
- Miller gives this phenomenon a psychological name pluralistic ignorance: members of the group systematically misjudge other people’s private views. Therefore, the norm can seem widely accepted even when a large number of people do not support it privately.
Historical data and comparison
Michel, J., Miller, M. K. i Peters, M. E. (2023), „How Authoritarian Governments Decide Who Emigrates: Evidence from East Germany“, International Organization 77(3): 527–563.
Michel, J., Miller, M. K. i Peters, M. E. (2023), “How Authoritarian Governments Decide Who Emigrates: Evidence from East Germany,” International Organization 77(3): 527–563.
- Contribution to this answer
- Michel, Miller and Peters show another way in which discontent can disappear from domestic politics: authoritarian government can selectively allow the most active opponents to emigrate and thus reduce opposition at home, while retaining citizens who are important to its economy or security. This does not explain why people think they are a minority, but why real discontent does not have to remain organized within the country.
data from a large number of countries
Beissinger, M. R. (2022), The Revolutionary City: Urbanization and the Global Transformation of Rebellion, Princeton University Press.
- Contribution to this answer
- Beissinger shows why cities can suddenly change this calculation: the concentration of a large number of people in a public space makes opposition visible, accelerates the flow of information and allows individuals to understand very quickly that they are not alone. But such rapid mass gatherings simultaneously create uncertain and often very heterogeneous coalitions.
Sources supporting the Serbia example, with the claim they support and their limitations.
Domestic NGOs systematic media monitoring - Verified 21.08.2026
CRTA. 2025. Media Monitoring of Political Pluralism: Government in Focus, Opposition Almost Invisible. Beograd: CRTA.
- What the source records
- Monitoring finds that more than half of the time intended for political actors went to the president, who had 354 live television broadcasts and almost exclusively neutral or positive treatment.
- Claim it supports
- The claim that poor visibility of criticism can make dissatisfaction invisible, and polls and mass gatherings can change people’s assessment of how many there are.
- Source limitation
- The sample includes the central news of five national TV stations, but does not measure all media, the entire program offer, the audience or the direct impact of such reporting on voting.
Domestic NGOs representative public opinion - Verified 21.08.2026
CRTA i Democracy Action Lab. 2026. Veruju u demokratiju, ne veruju u vlast: istraživanje javnog mnjenja u Srbiji. Beograd: CRTA.
CRTA and Democracy Action Lab. 2026. They believe in democracy, they do not believe in government: public opinion research in Serbia. Belgrade: CRTA.
- What the source records
- Six out of ten citizens consider democracy the best system, but the same share estimates that democracy in Serbia does not work; trust in the main political institutions is about one-third.
- Claim it supports
- The claim that poor visibility of criticism can make dissatisfaction invisible, and polls and mass gatherings can change people’s assessment of how many there are.
- Source limitation
- The survey measures attitudes at a time of great political mobilization and cannot explain on its own why people support different, sometimes contradictory values at the same time.
Domestic NGOs representative public opinion - Verified 21.08.2026
CRTA. 2025. Raste nezadovoljstvo vlašću; natpolovična podrška studentima. Beograd: CRTA.
CRTA. 2025. Growing dissatisfaction with the government; above-half support for students. Belgrade: CRTA.
- What the source records
- After five months of protests, 59% of respondents continued to support students and protests, showing broad support that cannot be reduced to the core of opposition parties.
- Claim it supports
- The claim that poor visibility of criticism can make dissatisfaction invisible, and polls and mass gatherings can change people’s assessment of how many there are.
- Source limitation
- One poll does not measure the organizational capacity of the protest, nor does it predict whether support will produce institutional or electoral change.
Domestic NGOs analysis of the political crisis - Verified 21.08.2026
Belgrade Centre for Security Policy. 2025. Political and Institutional Crisis in Serbia: Possible Scenarios. Belgrade: BCSP.
- What the source records
- The analysis describes mass mobilization and growing repression, but concludes that the size of the protests does not alone address the issue of organization, choice and division within the government.
- Claim it supports
- The claim that poor visibility of criticism can make dissatisfaction invisible, and polls and mass gatherings can change people’s assessment of how many there are.
- Source limitation
- Scenario analysis is time-sensitive and does not predict the future; it is based on information available until November 2025.
Is a relevant source missing? Send it to us.
Suggest a source or report an error in this answer →