/ world at the moment information/ On the event of the article “Humorous cry, as a substitute of a program in BSP” by Stefan Gaidarski
This text “Humorous cry, as a substitute of a program within the BSP” was lately printed within the newspaper “Duma”, within the problem of October 29. Its writer is Stefan Gaidarski, a reputation unknown to me in at the moment’s journalism. The article is written sharply, so to talk, revealing! It thunders the interior occasion enemies, retrogrades and conservatives, throws fireplace and brimstone on the “laborious core” of the BSP. And most significantly, he grumbled angrily and mockingly, within the spirit of a “humorous cry”, towards the “marginal subjects” which have taken over the BSP. And the marginal subjects, it’s emphasised verbatim, are: “anti-fascism, Bulgarian-Soviet friendship and the sensible management of Comrade Zhivkov”(?!). On this regard, Gaidarski praises “Imaginative and prescient for Bulgaria” that such marginal points “didn’t discover a place” in its textual content. On the similar time, you urged that the chairperson Kornelia Ninova is being pursued by a swarm of occasion goons, Gaidarski swears to the final breath to defend her honor, her position because the savior of the BSP.
I supply one other opinion,
not so pathetic and radical. Earlier than that, I’ll categorical my shock that Gaidarski permits factual omissions. Just a few examples.
At first of the textual content, Gaidarski notes: “If a brand new venture had appeared, with new faces and new concepts,” Bulgaria might have “returned again to the household of parliamentary republics. Legally or simply sadly, nothing like that occurred. As an alternative , most potential restorers of constitutional order within the state additionally refused to be political events.”
It’s hardly acceptable to elucidate to a physician of legislation that Bulgaria after the Third Bulgarian Kingdom by no means left the “household of parliamentary republics” and that the “new venture, with new faces and new concepts” doesn’t stipulate the participation of the states, together with Bulgaria , within the “household of parliamentary republics”(?)! And that the republic as a type of state authorities may very well be charged each with “new concepts”, with democratic or totalitarian kinds, and embody extraordinarily retrograde units. It is usually not clear what Gaidarski means by “potential restorers of the constitutional order”, who’re they and what sort of dough are they concerned in? And which ones extra exactly refused to be a “occasion”(?)! If Gaidarski is probably referring to the formations that made the transition from November 10, 1989, aren’t they events that retain their standing even once they enter right into a coalition with different political entities?
To strengthen his declare concerning the participation of random and unfit people within the Nationwide Council of the BSP, Gaidarski concludes: “By irony of the ridiculous understanding of intra-party democracy, the identical ones shaped half of the composition of the present Nationwide Council, which nominated Ninova as chief”. Regardless of how uncomfortable I’m, I’ll add that in accordance with the statute and in follow, Cornelia Ninova was nominated and elected as chairman not by the Nationwide Council, however by the delegates of the BSP Congress. It’s a pity that the writer of the textual content on this case didn’t put together his homework!
Gaidarski states unequivocally: “Ninova selected an impartial basic with the potential to unify the nation.” It’s about Ninova’s participation within the choice of the gene. Radev for president of the nation. The reality is completely different.
It was not the final who was chosen by Nineveh,
and the BSP, chaired by Ninova, joined/included within the composition of the impartial committee that nominated Rumen Radev for president. Let me remind you that at one level Ninova expressed her hesitation as as to if the candidate was not from the BSP, after which she took the proper place and supported the impartial presidential candidate Rumen Radev.
Gaidarski always sees “enemies” contained in the occasion who “crush and spit on” Ninova, “losers, troublemakers and “intriguers”. They stalk Ninova from behind an ambush, slander her, simply to stay a knife in her physique of his blind hatred. In my view, these conclusions of Gaidarsky are a product of his extremely suspicious creativeness, set to serve the parable of the darkish and vile factions that purpose on the political and human destruction of Nineveh. So far as it may be at the moment to speak about intra-party opposition within the BSP, it’s on the degree of uttered traces, it’s disjointed, weak, rickety and incapable of efficient motion.
There shall be little question that Ninova regained the electoral affect of the BSP over the past parliamentary elections, that she rightly rejected the Istanbul Conference, that within the “Imaginative and prescient” she denies the method “the state is a nasty supervisor”, created by occasion officers, that already refers extra maturely to the financial and social conquests of the Hungarian Viktor Orbán. However would not it want suggestions and criticisms in relation to the well timed and competent preparation of real looking administration packages – in view of the upcoming municipal and parliamentary elections; with the enlargement of the areas of democracy and dialogue within the occasion; with the best way through which a radical answer to a failed coalition coverage shall be sought, an Achilles’ heel within the work of our occasion management; with the necessity for the occasion to not go to elections divided and conflicted, and many others., and many others.?
Nevertheless we calculate, the present electoral affect of the BSP is over 20%, in complete, 1,000,000 voters. However such has been our electoral base since 1996, with none specific modifications. Within the coming years, I don’t see any prospects for a pointy enhance within the electoral knowledge. I, like many occasion members, am of the opinion that the additional absence of the BSP from energy can have
extraordinarily extreme penalties
each for the nation and for the very existence of the BSP! Even when we win the parliamentary elections, we should be out of the state as a result of lack of coalition companions. Let’s not be fooled. After the Nationwide Meeting elections, its configuration won’t bear vital modifications. Apparently, Ninova ought to understand – in a brief time period – a major change in our coalition coverage.
The division that Gaidarski makes between a hard-left citizens, a left “impartial voter” and the “right-oriented potential voters of the BSP” additionally sounds too misunderstood. It’s pointless to dwell in additional element on his conclusion that the “previous of the occasion”, “anti-fascism, Bulgarian-Soviet friendship, the management of Comrade Todor Zhivkov” are marginal, “sideways”, outlived, emptied of content material and which means. So apparent is the impossibility of such claims! His phrases alone match the mentality of a contemporary Ham.
It’s tough for me to think about how it’s attainable for a Bulgarian mental, and one with left-wing understandings, to contemplate that the thought of anti-fascism, the feat of the tens of hundreds of Bulgarians killed by Bulgarian fascism, the self-sacrifice of Geo Milev, Joseph Herbst, Georgi Sheitanov, Sergey Rumyantsev , Nikola Vaptsarov, Adalbert Antonov – Malchika, Yordanka Chankova, Liliana Dimitrova, Mati Rubenova, Hristo Karpachev, is the youngsters from Yastrebino some marginalized episode from the occasion’s previous, uninteresting to our compatriots within the coming yr 2018? And at the moment, when fascism is rearing its head once more in Europe! And what made the identical Gaidarski joke so foolishly with the Bulgarian-Soviet friendship, with the interval of socialism, which coated your complete Bulgarian house from the second half of the twentieth century?!
Then again, Gaidarski’s “programmatic workout routines” remind me of the “Thessalonica 4” of twenty years in the past, when Alexander Tomov and Nikolai Kamov tried to implement their new left initiatives for events that rejected the BKP’s previous.
They had been a complete failure!
And Georgi Parvanov, who adopted the liberal-social mannequin, needed to “dissolve” the large occasion into its microscopic quasi-partners, equally pushing into the background the unique values of the BKP, whose successor the BSP declared itself after 1989.
To appease the writer of the article “Humorous cry, as a substitute of a program within the BSP”, I’ll say that his preferences, right here and there, on the high of the BSP, nonetheless discover events for initiatives.
After November 10, 1989, the primary to underestimate the occasion’s previous had been its distinguished functionaries. They did the identical with regard to socialism in our nation, to socialist development. Let’s not neglect that on the backside of the authorized course of after November 10, 1989 towards Todor Zhivkov had been the brand new leaders of the BSP.
As for the “Bulgarian-Soviet friendship” mockingly talked about by Gaidarski within the BSP, some “progress” has been noticed on this vector as properly. The BSP is the occasion that decisively helps Bulgaria’s membership within the North Atlantic Treaty, aimed primarily towards Russia. The President of Ukraine Alexander Turchynov, who got here to energy by means of an anti-Russian and anti-state coup in 2014, was first legitimized by our socialist minister, member of the IB and secretary of the BSP. The doc on the ultimate suspension of the development of the South Stream fuel pipeline was lastly signed by a socialist minister, a member of the IB. Being in opposition, the BSP management modified its place on Crimea, saying “no” to EU sanctions towards the Russian Federation, however with out clarifying whether or not the Kremlin annexed the peninsula or not.
Let’s hope comrade Kornelia Ninova finds the energy in herself to tell apart herself from the slanderous incantations and assessments of topics like Gaidarski, who venture (and thru such articles) the creation of a brand new left occasion. A brand new left occasion with a brand new program, which – having denied main values of the BSP, together with the previous of the BKP – intends to make use of the residual vitality of the older generations of socialists as constructing materials through the “catastrophic “reformation”/obsession of the BSP.
#marginal #subjects #intriguer
