/ world today news/ Sincerity always wins – this is the big problem with Cornelia, and she doesn’t seem sincere
The scandal with the privatization of “Technoimpex” and the participation of Cornelia Ninova impresses me as a citizen, not so much as a psychologist. It is obvious that the transaction was carried out according to familiar patterns that I have encountered floating in the public space as “criminal”, but more as immoral. I am almost Ninova’s age, and during those years when she was becoming a privatizer and capitalist, I was with the mindset of a young, optimistic person, relatively poor, relying only on myself. In those years, I did not have the horizon and the opportunity to delve so deeply and in detail into the possibilities or “schemes” that the then political environment provided from an economic and legal point of view. Probably not because I’m more stupid (although Ms. Ninova pointed out somewhere how good an expert she was back then, despite her tender age), but maybe because I’ve been away from this “important” information. Among my peers, I hardly know anyone who has had such a chance for business as Ninova. And we were all enterprising, we had ideas, but entering the privatization of a state-owned enterprise in this way means having inside information. Such “expert” knowledge, at that time, at that age, a person could hardly get on his own, if he did not have more experienced mentors and acquaintances to introduce him to it. Tales that she was very talented are also not sufficient grounds for “privatization success” and high “trust”. Mrs. Ninova’s problem is that with her appeal around this story she is trying to make a moral balancing act, to send strong moral messages, but in fact, this type of behavior and her past reveal rather a
moral bankruptcy
It is difficult for the audience to believe and bet everything on her qualities, skills, talents and abilities. This is largely a non-issue at the moment, in terms of the psychology of impact. The logic of the methods by which she tries to answer the questions surrounding this deal may work in the short term, and in front of a very supportive audience. But in the long run, this legacy will prove to be a moral burden. Rather, these are appeals to people who are inclined to believe her. However, this behavior of hers will not gain the trust of the public, which is dissatisfied with GERB and is eager to recognize a new, ideologically and morally committed leader. That is, people who have preserved criticality and reason regarding their political choices. Despite the morally “contaminated” political environment, a significant part of society is looking for a new ethical code of political representation. Ninova’s efforts to show a new face, including through the internal party struggles and the new faces around her, are greatly compromised by her actions regarding the privatization case in question. That’s her problem, that she can rather
hardens the traditional supporters of the BSP,
who “yearn” for a moral and emotional resuscitation of their traumatic past than to attract people who would believe that this is a new model of morality and thinking “left” and in general.
The problem with leadership in Bulgaria is very serious. If I allow myself to make some comparison with Boyko Borisov and the leadership-structured party GERB, then he covers a traditional model of leadership – a patriarchal-authoritarian type – strong, autocratic, but popular, who cares for everyone. This model is archaic, but working for the moment in Bulgaria. We saw in a recent public opinion survey about values, and not only that, that we still have this type of understanding as a nation and mentality. We are far from modern leadership models, even in the private sector where I have direct observations. These patterns are expressed more in mediation, moderating processes, mentoring, consultative behavior, developing independence and initiative. But also openness, sincerity and flexibility, but with good integrity. We still, at least a significant part of the people, prefer the directive style and the authoritarian model, where responsibility and power are concentrated, cunning and immorality are seen as virtues. It is no coincidence that a significant part of society likes the leadership prototype of Vladimir Putin. In recent years, we see that most such leaders have managed to stay on the political scene in the post-Soviet countries.
When someone comes with the request to present another modern leadership model, he cannot carry a moral burden, as outlined in the case of Cornelia Ninova. And for that reason, it will be difficult to convince even people who share some socialist thinking and ideas that this is a new model and a new morality. Although she has surrounded herself with young people, they will hardly be able to believe that in such a pernicious moral equilibrium, her moral compass is directed to the future and not to the past.
The process of transforming Cornelia Ninova is also interesting to observe
from a young capitalist to a young socialist
Here, too, the allusion is undoubtedly to flexibility, but again with the “smell” of immorality, which in this case hints at a lack of free will, and not so much at an ideological transformation of her political creed. So I say she has a problem with leadership and convincing the audience that she is a new and modern left leader. Discussion of the topic deepens doubts about the well-known “appointed leadership”. As I like to say when I conduct trainings and consult managers – in Bulgaria there are many superiors and few leaders! This thesis is as funny as it is true, because for a long time we lived with the idea that in order to be on top, you have to be appointed! When you are appointed, or are perceived as such, it is difficult to convince the audience that you have your independence and self-reliance.
In the case study with Mrs. Ninova, we seem to be convinced once again that we do not have an autonomous and authentic leadership. Logically, it cannot be perceived as modern, but rather as dependent, or “attached” to the “threads” of the past. In such cases we always assume a shadow of a group of gray cardinals moving their puppet representatives. Puppetry as a model of leadership in Bulgaria is very popular in the mass consciousness. When you convince people that you are the new leader of the BSP, you need a very strong differentiation from this stereotype. For example, under Stanishev, despite modern styling and polished manners, and an intellectual air, suspicions of puppet leadership were not overcome. There was rather one
perfidy than authentic modernity
Yes, he seems to be a modern man, but he still had doubts that he was installed, not independent and heavily tied to influential circles. Borisov is also weighed down by similar doubts about commitment, which continue to periodically compromise him in front of the so-called peripheral right-wing and left-wing voters. At Ninova, there was and still is a youth-brigadier fervor, there is a nostalgic feeling for the brigadier days, that this is an energetic, popular leader who started from a small settlement, rushed upwards, climbing the ladder of the party hierarchy with intelligence and morals. But here, these details of the biography cast doubt on this authenticity, and again we are talking about another model of puppet leadership, not intelligent, authentic and independent. This is a key issue for Nineveh. It is not important just what documents will now be produced for her deal. But in these cases the problem is not so much criminal as moral. When you want to rule the country, people somehow strongly feel, even subconsciously look for signals of authenticity and sincerity. The difference between honesty and sincerity is huge, although it is not realized by people. You can hate someone sincerely, but you honestly haven’t shared anything about your feelings. Which is more important? The real feelings or the formal honest behavior that you didn’t express them? The same thing happens with Ninova – in practice, she cannot sincerely convince anyone that she is an independent, autonomous and modern person who wants to lead a modern left party. The problem is not that she was close to the SDS, or that she brought flowers to the Zhivkov monument, but that she is not independent and with authentic representation. There are also doubts that, at this young age, she was involved in the privatization of a serious foreign trade enterprise, with a carousel of capital and compensators.
Sincerity always wins – that’s the big problem with Ninova, and she doesn’t seem sincere.
__________________
* The position of the editors of world today news does not necessarily coincide entirely with the opinion of the author.
#Ninova #product #puppetry #leadership #model
