Daniel Smilov's comment:
In recent days, the world has been busy wondering what President Donald Trump is aiming for in terms of the "new world order". And this is a very important question, because it is not clear what this order will be and who will be the winner in it. For now, only Vladimir Putin and his supporters are happy because Russia is no longer isolated from the united West and its leader receives daily compliments from Trump. And he has also started to share some of the key Russian propaganda theses - for example, that Zelensky is a "dictator" and that Ukraine started the war against itself.
The well-intentioned commentators towards Donald Trump call for a wait and see and with a wink hint that what we are seeing is the "art of the deal" in action. Many probably hope that Trump will flatter the Russians with compliments, protect Ukraine, take its resources and shift the burden of its restoration onto Europe. "Hurray!" shouts this "plan" even European Trumpists, for some unknown reason.
"Realists" - as they call themselves - also have an explanation for the actions of the American president, which is in essence deeply ideological and downright religious. They believe that the world is originally anarchic and sinful, and human nature is wild and selfish. The bigger dog wants and has the right to take the whole bone, and that's what you need to know about international relations.
Why does the US president act and speak like this?
From this perspective, Trump and the US have a serious height and evolutionary advantage, and it is normal to expect decisions that are in America's interest globally. But even if we accept this ideological paradigm, it is still not clear why Trump is quite generous towards Russia, which is not in his league by almost any criterion. (Except for the nuclear one, which only a crazy suicide would use, and for that reason it should rather be excluded from more sober calculations.)
Geostrategists are trying to justify the US administration's policy with a brilliant move a la Kissinger: Trump may be attracting Russia to his side for a possible conflict with China. But this theory also has its deep cracks, because there are at least two key differences between the current situation and the 1970s, when Nixon went to China and won it over to his side against the USSR. First, this happened after a real military conflict between China and the USSR, and now relations between China and Russia are at an excellent level. In fact, without China's help for Russia, the war in Ukraine would have ended long ago. Second, Nixon's overtures to Beijing were not at the expense of the US's European allies, and currently Trump's policy is openly directed against the stability of both the EU and NATO, and key countries in Europe - such as Germany and even Britain. After all, if Russia gets Ukraine with the help of the US, what guarantee will there be that in a future conflict between the US and China, Putin will take the American side? This is a rhetorical question - the guarantee is exactly zero.
In the global Gankovo Café, the wondering and scratching of heads over all these questions continues, but in fact the more urgent question may turn out to be something else: what is the vision of democracy and governance that lies behind all these American maneuvers? Because Trump's actions can be relatively well explained as a response to the expectations of his voters. The world may be shocked by his actions, but if they bring him popularity and support at home, the American president may well be "justified", following his own, and not the opinion of the rest of the free world.
Here, supporters of dictatorship have nothing to rejoice about. Whatever Trump is, whatever crypto-fascists have managed to sneak into the MAGA movement, his vision is still generally democratic. The problem, however, is that Trump stands behind a rather radical vision of democracy, which we can euphemistically call "majoritarian": the majority rules without regard to constitutional, legal, altruistic or other restrictions coming from international law, for example. The native political genius has already articulated this vision of democracy through the formula: "if the majority says that we will all wear green pants, we will all wear green pants".
The profound, albeit paradoxical democratism of this play is that leader Trump must constantly prove that he is capable of overcoming any restrictions in defense of the will of the majority. From this point of view, majoritarian democracy is by definition transgressive – it must almost daily prove that it goes beyond the accepted, the decent, the familiar, the established, the right. That it is beyond the rules.
The three victims of Trump's policy
From here - quite logically - follow the apparent delusions of the majoritarian politician, who must convince his followers that he will follow their will, whatever it may be:
The first victim of transgression is of course "political correctness" - the accepted rules of communication and treatment of others, as well as respect for their private sphere. The majority has the right and will determine all these issues - including intimate and sexual issues - at its own discretion;
International commitments are the second victim, which must be brutalized daily. "America First" in this sense is a call for an international "order" without rules and commitments. If there are any commitments, they must constantly change in view of the changing interests of the individual players, their appetites and the resources they have at their disposal to please themselves. Canada – from this point of view – is a very possible goal, not to mention Greenland or Panama. Or the Ukrainian underground riches;
However, the most important victim of the transgression of the majoritarian leader is another – and that is the truth. Truth is a matter of point of view and can be safely abandoned if it does not benefit the majority, or it does not like it. Truth is actually the most painful limitation for the majoritarian leader – if it existed, he would not be able to follow the will of the majority everywhere. Simply because this will could lead him into false and illusory territory.
The lies of Trump and his people
In fact, what most worries democracy-conscious observers of the actions of the new American administration is its desire and consistency in transgressing beyond the truth. Statements such as:
"Alternative for Germany" is the salvation for Germany:
Zelensky is a "dictator" with a 4% rating;
Ukraine started the war on its own territory;
Gaza will be liberated from the Palestinians and made into a Mediterranean Riviera;
Europe is undemocratic because it prohibits freedom of speech…
should not be read as foreign policy requests, but as a transgression beyond the truth. The ability to disregard even the obvious is a demonstration of strength by a majoritarian politician. After such a demonstration, he has proven to his electorate that he can follow him anywhere, can take him anywhere.
In the end, even the truth becomes a matter of partisan loyalty in a majoritarian democracy: it is important to defeat the opponent, and the truth is only a tool in this struggle. If it's not on your side, so much the worse for it.
The Bulgarian battle for truth
Bulgarian democracy actually had a problem with transgression beyond the truth long before Trump. The most prominent of these problems was with regard to corruption and the "other point of view" about it. Yes, certain leaders may be corrupt, but they are ours and it is better to win the political battle with them than to give victory to others. Moreover, we will also expose the others who are supposedly just as corrupt, we will present them as lawbreakers, so that against this background "ours" become more acceptable.
The Bulgarian battle for democracy in recent decades was and is actually a battle for truth. And truth consists of verifiable statements. For example, that it is not the same whether you stole 500 million from the treasury or signed something for a non-functioning NGO. That it is not OK to have gone bankrupt and looted Corpbank. That it is not good to blackmail magistrates and politicians through euros and notaries. That it is not OK to remove a democratically elected mayor of a district in Sofia with fabricated arguments. The transgression of majoritarian leaders consists in convincing that they can function beyond the truth, beyond the rules. But their power comes from the citizens who decide that it is more important for them that their party is ahead than that the truth and the rules are protected.
The Trump administration is currently giving wings to majoritarian democracy around the world, and it is precisely this ideological program of its that is perhaps its most worrying part. But the battle for the truth is not lost. The bewilderment that the above-mentioned statements by Trump's team are causing around the world is a sign of some resistance and resilience of reason. And long-term entrenched majoritarian politicians - like Orban and Vucic - cannot feel safe from public reaction. After all, societies seem to have some limit to functioning beyond the truth and a hidden ability - with protests or elections - to return to it.
This should also be valid for Bulgaria.