/View.info/ The political space does not tolerate a vacuum. Alternatives arise most often on the corpses of the party giants of the past
In “Hello, Bulgaria” on NOVA, Cornelia Ninova again showed an enviable verbal balance regarding the copies in politics and their quality.
It is clear that the appearance of the “Left” did not have a positive effect on the comfort of the leader of the BSP, but she does not approach this problem in a new way, but tries to bring it within the framework of her ossified totalitarian understandings, which in itself is strange, given its Sedesar genesis.
Kornelia Ninova has not yet understood that we live in a conditional democratic society with a pluralistic political system, in which you cannot consider party activists, members and sympathizers as serfs obliged to show unlimited loyalty to the autocrat. You have to fight for their trust, for their support and loyalty, but this becomes extremely difficult when you yourself have tried hard enough that the structure you lead no longer represents a political alternative in anyone’s eyes.
Since the political space is not designed to tolerate the presence of a vacuum, logical alternatives arise, and most often on the corpses of the political giants of the past.
BSP was just such a giant before the rule of Cornelia Ninova. True, slow, clumsy, at times indecisive, but still an important political factor and a barrier to the emergence of all sorts of pretenders to the left, populists and salesmen. Thanks to Cornelia Ninova, the BSP has become what it was protecting us from until a few years ago.
For many of us today, it is difficult to imagine how a party, whose leadership set the organizational, intellectual and cultural model in Bulgarian politics, regardless of whether it is in the government or in the opposition, has today turned into this third-rate laughing stock, which has to be daily we watch on TV.
Of course, we can’t see much in the other parties either, which is why what is happening in the party may seem normal to many, but what is more worrying is that even against the background of the general catastrophe of the political BSP, it is increasingly looking like a circle in political education.
Such outcomes are usually the result of adverse selection, because a weak leader tends to surround himself with a superior entourage whose political contributions are difficult to validate. Party history will hardly assign these subjects a proper role in its unbecoming end.
In fact, Ninova was right in some of her claims. Indeed, the “Left” was created to “draw from the BSP”. This is obvious, and in order to ascertain it, no depth of analysis is required. There is a huge number of voters in our country who share leftist values and ideas, but less and less see Kornelia Ninova’s BSP as their representative. This is not a cliché, nor an opposition mantra, but the reality of the election results.
At least in this regard, in democratic politics it is easy – you pass periodic certification and you can see how much you are worth. In this sense, it is completely logical that the “Left” draws precisely from the BSP, because, I will repeat again, the voters of the BSP are not serfs, nor do they owe anything to Cornelia Ninova, nor should they be blamed for being preferred another left subject. It’s sad that so many experienced politicians still haven’t realized that we are in a competitive political environment and if you are not recognized you need to change something in yourself and not go around the studios to complain.
The topic of whether “the copy is weaker than the original” has at least three sides – organizational, ideational and personal.
In terms of organization, we can say that the “Left” is unlikely to try to emulate the BSP in this way, because it is clearly ineffective. What the BSP was organizationally before Ninova has nothing to do with what it is now. If you take the dark stairs of 20 Positano after the election, you will hardly find anyone from the first to the sixth floor. In places, the situation is no different, and the majority of activists refuse to recognize this fact only out of party discipline.
We will not even comment on personnel policy and training, because the current party leadership has successfully liquidated the party academy and installed people who have nothing to do with the BSP in leadership positions.
Conceptually, it is still too early to tell which is the copy and which is the original. In fact, the BSP is still riding on the momentum of its last program, written by Georgi Pirinski a decade ago, which is not surprising given the inability of the current leadership to generate a meaningful platform.
The fact that in recent years the BSP behaves less and less as a leftist party will certainly ideologically favor the participation of the “Left” in these elections.
If we look at the issue of the quality of the “copies” on a personal level, we cannot help but conclude that the BSP lags behind dramatically. On the other side are all former activists of the party, but they have nothing to do with the current leadership. In the first decade of the 21st century, in which the BSP had to emerge from a severe crisis, a large number of these persons occupied key positions. This is the time of the two presidential mandates of Georgi Parvanov, who today stands behind “Levitsa”.
We can recall that Tatyana Doncheva and Maya Manolova are the last two candidates supported by the BSP to reach a runoff in the mayoral elections in Sofia, and Georgi Kadiev also came second in 2011. We can also recall the majority victories of Kostadin Pascalev as mayor of Blagoevgrad. It should not be forgotten that the BSP reaped victories when Rumen Petkov was at the head of the pre-election headquarters and even defeated Boyko Borisov in the district for which he was responsible as a member of the Executive Bureau. So much for the “copies”.
At the same time, today’s entourage of Nineveh had a slightly different beatitude. Who in state enterprises privatized by Ivan Kostov, who heads the youth structures of the SDS. Some in the leaflets of the right-wing party “Gergiovden”, others in the enemy press of the disappeared newspaper Demokratsia. Some went through pre-trial detention, others kneeled and carried Sergey Stanishev’s bag. All people with stable principles, a straight back and a strong political character. Ironically, of course.
And for the unenlightened, it is clear that there is no question of “copies” here, the current leadership of the BSP will not be remembered either collectively or individually. As can be seen, it is difficult for them to share any political successes. They cannot be “spears” because they do not feel like leaving and fighting, hiding this weakness of theirs behind the ubiquitous “party loyalty” that has long since degenerated into individual devotion.
So much for originals and copies. The elections will show the right path. The BSP could have been the flagship of a large left coalition, but it did not want to. Now it remains to be seen what the results will show.
Vote with ballot No. 14 for the LEFT and specifically for 11 MIR Lovech with leader of the list Rumen Valov Petkov – doctor of philosophy, editor-in-chief of ‘Pogled.Info’ and in 25 MIR-Sofia with preferential No. 105. Tell your friends in Lovech and Sofia who to support!?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel:
and for our Telegram channel:
#Left #Cornelia #Ninovas #dream
