My generation is one of those who are generally skeptical of party-organized expressions of feelings because they have memories of congress broadcasts of the BKP, the mandatory demonstrations and the parading with posters, hoops and other equipment of young people in tank tops and shorts in front of the stands of the communist gerontocracy. This indelible memory makes the enthusiasm of Americans at their party conventions, for example, partly incomprehensible.
At the Democratic convention in Chicago, which officially nominated Kamala Harris as a presidential candidate, there were teary eyes, and inspired speeches, and true examples of oratory skills that literally blew up the audience. All this, which is not unusual in an American context, would cause a spontaneous response among the majority of Bulgarians: “Well, that's all.“
Why Bulgarian cynicism is excessive
Moderate cynicism is useful and morally justified. It is a defense against the herd feeling that can lead to crowds following their leader in the most sinister directions. In our history, this has happened, that's why steam porridge blows. But unfortunately, the current Bulgarian cynicism is not moderate, but excessive, and there are a number of reasons for this.
The first and most prosaic is that our politics is full of non-politicians – dependent people whose only reason for being in high office seems to be that someone is keeping them with something. The story of Kalin Stoyanov, who went from being a minister in the government of Academician Denkov to being Delyan Peevski's man at one point, is a good illustration of the topic. If anyone can come up with political or ideological arguments for this metamorphosis, please share them. But the attempts so far have been unsuccessful, which shows that non-political regularities and dependencies are the explanation for the case study.
Ivan Geshev's rise to the level of chief prosecutor and his sudden fall from it are also due to similar (albeit not so hidden) addictions. They made him career wings at the cost of turning a blind eye to “DP“ in the testimony of the KTB case. However, these addictions also melted the wax on his wings and left him in the skies without feathers, just as he became inconvenient for the “DP“ and Borisov. And he was urgently replaced with his “right hand”. She, in the form of Borislav Sarafov, turned out to have been a frequent guest at the establishment of Petyo Evroto - the universally recognized master in crafting exalting and degrading addictions in Bulgarian politics and magistracy. A kind of Bulgarian Daedalus.
The list of native Icarians of the dependent variety is very long and not worth enumerating here. His latest addition – Mrs. Gorica Grancharova-Kozhareva – perhaps it deserves a mention because she too, within two days, went from being a skeptic of Kalin Stoyanov's irreplaceability to becoming a fanatical supporter of it and sacrificing her prime ministership on the altar of this obviously controversial idea. Not only politics, but also religion cannot explain such victims.
Playing with people's fears
Excessive cynicism has another, deeper reason, which goes beyond Bulgarian corruption features and affects the entire West. President Obama, who is arguably the best speaker among the Democrats and imposed a high rhetorical style on everyone before Trump broke through with the power of grunts and angry rants, outlined this reason very clearly:
„The other side knows that it is easier to play with people's fears and cynicism. They will tell you that the government is corrupt; that self-sacrifice and generosity are for the unfortunate; and that since the game is rigged, it's okay to take what you want and mind your own business. That's the easy way. We have another task. Our job is to convince people that democracy really can work. And we cannot simply point to what we have already achieved or rely only on the ideas of the past. We must chart a new path forward to meet the challenges of today.“
Indeed, with the rise of conservative populism (not to be confused with the conservatism of Burke* or Adenauer**), cynicism about collective action through public authority became a central argument in politics. At the supranational level, all collective structures such as the EU and NATO are questioned and it is argued that individual states can go it alone. The curious thing is that this statement is made regardless of whether it is the USA, Germany, Hungary or Bulgaria.
At the national level, the argument is “take your own” and let others think for him. This leads to aggressive majoritarianism, where the majority tries to take what it can from the minorities – from resources to rights.
Where does the complexity come from in Bulgaria
The drama of Bulgaria is that the protection of free democracy goes both through the exposure of the corrupt dependencies in the system (which are an indisputable fact) and through convincing people that this system, reformed and changed, will be able to change the lives of all for the better. The first part of the task – the exposure – is generally over and no one doubts who the dependents are.
Although there are also more ambivalent cases. The most interesting is the case study "Boyko Borisov". To Peevski, he behaves like a dependent, and his big moves seem to be closely coordinated with him: the collapse of the rotation management, for example. At the same time, Borisov benefits from the dependencies managed by Peevski and gives him a “political back”: a mutually-beneficial partnership that is unlikely to break because of Kalin Stoyanov.
And there's only one thing left – to defame others
The biggest damage that addicts in politics do is the total cynicism they enforce. They know that no one believes in their integrity and never will. No matter how much they “wash” such people, there is no way to reach any moral brilliance. What remains is to defame others: to disguise themselves, and if possible to hang on to some of the chains of addictions.
The question is why the educated people of Bulgaria allow the imposition of this excessive cynicism without giving it the necessary battle. Now, when due to the crisis in the DPS the chains of dependencies are shining and starting to fall apart, it is actually the moment for a great democratic breakthrough.
Michelle Obama – the only speaker better than Barack Obama (which happens in other families too) – said in Chicago something that may be valid in the Bulgarian context as well:
...We cannot be our own worst enemies. No, the moment something goes wrong, the moment a lie is established, we cannot start wringing our hands. We can't get the Goldilocks complex if everything is just right…We can't give in to our worries...
"There is no time for such nonsense"
The Bulgarian democratic community likes to indulge in its worries and doubts like Goldilocks from the well-known fairy tale, who made sure that the mess of the three bears was absolutely exactly what it should be – neither too hot nor too cold. Driven by a similar drive for precision, and Zhaltopavetko does not accept anything less than perfect for good. Leaders are never right for him – one is too contemplative and deep-thinking, the other is smart but stares, the third is pretty but talks a lot and sometimes incoherently…
Barack Obama said something else, also valid for Bulgaria – there is no time for such nonsense.