Антоний Тодоров

The article examines the results of the European Parliament elections in Bul- garia in the general context of other European countries. It is argued that these are not key elections, but a symptom of a major change in the political attitudes of European citizens. In Bulgaria, the elections seem to confirm a new trend, beginning with the 2016 presidential election, of a political split not between the supporters of the two major parties but between those who voted for the winner and those who did not vote at all. The hypothesis is that a new political cleavage is emerging.

The article raises a classic question – about the compatibility of capitalism with democracy. Numerous studies and political thinkers have been drawn upon to critically comment on the presumed immanent relationship between capitalism and democracy. The thesis argues that the market economy is fun- damental to democracies as a regime of complete civil equality, then capitalism is not synonymous with the market economy but a particular transformation of it that deepens inequalities. The conclusion is that contemporary global cor- porate capitalism undermines the democratic order by reinforcing inequalities.

The parliamentary elections in April and July 2021 are unprecedented in Bulgaria since 1989. The incapacity to form a government causes new elections, which reinforce some trends from the last 2-3 years. The two main system parties experience serious crisis: GERB is beginning to lose its political hegemony, the BSP is now in third place in terms of influence. New populist party (“There is such a people”) appears in parliament, new coalition of well known parties “Democratic Bulgaria” increases its support. The question is whether these changes will be lasting, which is the topic of the article.

The article considers populism as a democratic element, not as a phenomenon outside of modern democracy. The arguments of the critics of populism remain on the same rational ground as the populist ideas because they imply a clear and undeniable distinction between the elites and the masses, between the lead- ers and the governed, between the professionals and the ordinary people. The suggestion made is that national populism should not be identified as populism because it is anti-democratic, but as a manifestation of primordial-fascism.

The presidential elections of 2016 produced a new situation in Bulgarian politics, but did not change substantially the Bulgarian party system. The victory of the non-partisan candidate proposed by the BSP and the failure of the candidate of the ruling party was unexpected and was significant for the “depolitization” of the society. Citizens in Bulgaria expressed their limited support for the main parties, looking for a candidate who has not previous partisan career. This seems to be a sign for more serious civic disaffection from the existing parties.

Модерното време в международните отношения започва с Вестфалския конгрес, поставил края на Тридесетгодишната война през 1648 г. Тогава за първи път в международното право се утвърждава принципът на уважение на суверенитета на държавите. Оттогава насетне историята на международните отношения е история на взаимодействието на суверенни държави, които се признават взаимно, независимо дали поддържат мирни отношения, или са в състояние на война. Също така модерните държави следват своите интереси и могат да не се съобразяват с интересите на другите държави. Това означава, че суверенитетът ще е съпътстван и от висока конфликтност.

Популизмът сe използва днес единствено като етикет за политическо заклеймяване. Той сe използва за етикетирането на политическа партия или лидер, които се обвиняват, че дават неизпълними обещания, че подлъгват избирателите, че привличат гласоподаватели с нечестни методи, че не са надеждни политически актьори, на които може да се има доверие и с които може да се преговаря. “Популистки” е синоним сега за много неща: лъжовен, подвеждащ, евтин, параден, елементарен, опростителски. Все повече напоследък “популистки” се използва за обозначаването на крайните, екстремистките политически стратегии, които апелират към “народа” и го противопоставят на “елита”, “политиците”, “партиите” 1. В някакъв смисъл днес “популизъм” се използва в България със същата цел да се дискредитира политическият противник, както след 1945 се е използвал етикетът “фашист”, а след 1989 г. – етикетът “комунист”.