Comment by Evgeniy Dainov:
There are arenas of human activity where things develop forward and upward, following the classical model of the Enlightenment: industry, technology, science and even morality. Politics is not among these arenas. In it we have that cycle that was noticed by Plato and Aristotle: what is to come has already been; what has already been will be again.
This - in connection with the increasing concerns that democracy has been exhausted and that we need to invent something new and unprecedented. In the grand scheme of politics, there is nothing new or unprecedented; everything has been known since Socrates, i.e. for over 2,400 years. No one had heard of Christ (and Buddha was still a rising star) when things were described clearly enough.
To replace the rule of law with the rule of force
Take the current situation in the world. Kim, Lukashenko, Putin, Xi, Orbán, Trump (and all their imitators, such as the "kopeks" and "newcomers" in Bulgaria) set themselves the goal of replacing the rule of law with the rule of force. How new is that?
In 380 BC, the Greek philosopher Plato published his most important book, "The Republic." It begins with a conversation between Socrates and (basically) Thrasymachus, who controls the port. Everyone starts with the agreement that a state, in order to be a state, must be based on justice. But what is justice? For Thrasymachus, the answer is simple: "justice is nothing other than the interest of the stronger".
Sound familiar and modern? This is the fashion today, which has returned again after being first described 2405 years ago. Vladimir Putin, for example, says: "It is in my interest to take over Ukraine, and I will do this because I am the strongest. It is fair." Donald Trump, on the principle of the frog watching the horse being shod, agrees: "I want Panama, Greenland, Gaza and Canada. It is fair, because I am the strongest".
Ultimately, the arguers in "The State" agree that the whims of the strong cannot be the embodiment of justice. It, justice, turns out to be: to return what is due; to do good to friends; to do bad things to enemies.
They want to weaken the state
For Plato, "friends" in this case means the citizens of a given state: they could not live and work together if they were not bound by friendly feelings. The enemies are, respectively, those who try to ruin this friendship and, therefore, – the state. And there is nothing new here: Putin, Trump, Vucic, Lukashenko, Orban and the like sow discord between citizens in order to kill the friendship between them, to weaken the state and to take it over for their own purposes.
Aristotle, in turn a student of Plato, builds on this. He comes to the conclusion that the justice described in "The Republic" must be enshrined in law. Because if people rule, no matter how just they are, they are still exposed to human weaknesses and passions. The law is not a person and has no passions. Therefore, it is better than any person at maintaining justice and therefore - the state. This very concept today we call "the rule of law".
And this is what we can and must oppose to the onslaught of the "strong" today. There is no need to look for something new and unprecedented. In order for the strong not to harass and rob us, we must put the straitjacket of law on them.
What happens if we fail to do it? It was described by Augustine the Blessed about 1625 years ago: "A state in which there is no justice is in no way different from a gang of armed robbers". And this is familiar to us in Bulgaria. After all, we lived (and if we don't get our act together, we will again) in a "gang" regime for about 12 years – and that's just in this century.
How to stop the "strong"?
Here too, the solution is obvious and has long been known: in order for there to be no gangs, it is imperative to restore justice, clothed in law. What is new here? What is unknown? What is so complicated that it is incomprehensible to anyone?
It is clear what needs to be done to stop the tide of the "strong" with their "justice". The question is: Who? How? When?
Who? It is clear who: the citizens who have gathered together, who have managed to restore friendship among themselves and oppose it to the intrigues and violence of the "strong". How? This is also clear: the imposition of the concentrated in one direction civil will on the "strong". This is already happening in Georgia, Serbia, Hungary and even in Russian bandit enclaves such as Transnistria and Abkhazia. In the USA, since they do not have the relevant historical experience there, Trump's victims are currently watching as if hypnotized; but there too, some kind of, however timid, civil resistance has begun these days.
And when? However, there is a ticking time bomb in this question. Over a thousand years pass between the moment when Augustine noted the transformation of the Roman state into a gang and the moment when the legal order based on Plato's concept of justice was restored. It's good to pull ourselves together this time and not wander for a whole millennium, lost in what Kant calls "the immaturity we have inflicted on ourselves".