ON PRIDE AND PREJUDICE

The recent 30.75 M pounds transfer of Bulgaria’s most famous football striker, Dimitar Berbatov, to his ‘dream-team’, Manchester United, caused a wave of national pride that swept across the small Balkan country and raised many questions about the average person’s self-identification as a member of the nation. The psychological reasons behind this phenomenon may be a key to understanding the character of the Bulgarian and may help illuminate a few of his/hers already outstanding features.

Bulgaria Lacks Heroes

There are no positive characters in today’s Bulgarian social existence. In all media, a heavy accent is laid predominantly on negative characters and announcements containing information about crime, accidents, misery. Few news broadcasters launched “good news” sections in their airtimes, newspapers, news emissions; these, however, have generally failed to win popularity. In a hero-void age, the average Bulgarian has continually been seeking self-identification with various characters, less from history and more from contemporary times, who would serve to intensify the feeling of national-belonging. Notably, during the past 18 years of modern history, the only such successful and perceivably popular identification has been the one with Bulgarian national football team players.

Fourth in the World

In the 1994 US-held world football championship, Bulgaria’s representative kickers climbed up to number four, snatching the bronze underneath the nose of perspective teams such as Argentina, Mexico, and Germany. The names of footballers easily recognizable by almost everyone even today were shouted out loud on the streets of every Bulgarian town and city, national banners were flown and fireworks shot, the nation rejoiced as hardly ever before, fascinated by the football dream.

Love and Hate

Those same names the people praised one day were sent to hell and damnation on the other, all their female relatives referred to explicitly, when the “Bulgari yu-na-tsi!” performed poorly in the following years. Less than a hundredth of those numbers gathered together in early 1997 when the country saw mass protests against a Socialist government that had led the state over the edge and down to an abyss of national catastrophe.

Protests, Anyone?

Very few people actually make it into the street to voice their disgruntlement with those in power nowadays, while hardly anyone will ever say they are satisfied. The little number of demonstrations there have been during the past 8-9 years were always strictly-same-branch attended, ‘united’ hardly a good word to describe them. Employees in other sectors would most often 1. Grumble and complain about the discomfort the protests were creating, 2. Be openly jealous, saying “they already get salaries big enough, what’s the matter with them asking even more!” and not rarely resort to abusing (verbally and sometimes physically) the protesters, and 3. Be rarely sympathetic, hardly ever supportive.

Those in Power

Hardly anyone would want to identify him or herself with the figures in power. Although elected with their votes, Bulgarians normally never say a good word about their politicians. The politicians, in their turn, seem to forget what they have been elected for and whence they came from as soon as they set foot in the Parliament’s chambers. The ‘people’s representatives’ appear to quickly develop into beings who believe they are always above the law who can, for instance, threaten to fire a policeman for telling them off for bad parking “like that”. This was most clearly demonstrated by a recent PM Stanishev comment that “the tripartite coalition were the only ones working for the good of Bulgaria, while the whole population was working against it.”

The Opposition

Bulgaria’s opposition is huge in street comments, news forums, occasional newspaper articles. It is, however, miniature, when there is real need for it. In fact, the whole of Bulgaria is an opposition, whose only occupation is to relentlessly criticize everyone and everything. A fact worth mentioning is that the current political opposition in the country is mostly comprised of people who were previously in power. Interestingly enough, those in power start having good ideas and solutions to all sorts of problems as soon as they step down and become opposition, while miraculously failing to conceive even one appropriate measure while in power.

The Voters

Perhaps exhausted by the great disillusionment with the prospects of change of the early 1990s that came to stay, the people nowadays can hardly be bothered to vote. In the past decade, parliamentary, presidential or MEP polls hardly managed to lure more than 40% of eligible voters to the ballot rooms, with the tendency clearly on the downslope. Elections in Bulgaria are strictly won by those parties who have a hardcore electorate who always vote as instructed, even though they sometimes cannot read the text on the ballot (the correct choice marked or announced for them before they enter the ballot room). These are people who rarely have a completed secondary education, are not too often bothered to read a newspaper, and at best can get reception of two or three TV channels, but usually only watch one. A not an insignificant number of these are dead, in the real meaning of the word: every time there are elections, thousands of names mysteriously appear on the eligible voters lists that can otherwise be only read on a tombstone somewhere. The majority of people – those who could vote and could elect good politicians or could become united over the removal of those failed ones – they only shrug shoulders saying “all politicians are the same”.

The Role Models

The most successful role model in Bulgaria is the tough bully that drives a shiny and powerful car, has lots of dough, many friends in key positions, and occasionally smashes the head of an accidental passer-by for the sheer fun of it. If you ask teenagers, the majority of them would prefer brawn and a muscle car to learning school stuff and getting excellent marks. Probably because they all know too well that marks and diplomas can be bought just like you buy bread at the store.

For the few that are occasionally suffering from pangs of consciousness, the best role model, for the time being, is Boyko Borissov. BB is tough and demonstrates his well-built figure before the paparazzi with pleasure, and his tongue is as sharp as an official’s tongue can ever be, and sometimes even more. BB is going to fight crime in no time, and he is going to kick the sorry asses of the three wimps that rule the country the moment he manages to find some time off of the millions of problems he has to deal with because of them.

The Slavi Show

Perhaps the only medium that the people clearly perceive as being “on their side” is the show that still ranks in the top TV programmes, the Slavi Show. Its host, a two-meter-tall bully with clean-shaven skull, and his team, broadcast material that openly criticizes, ridicules, and attacks the politicians in power almost on a daily basis, their most recent shows clearly calling for “removal” of those political figures. Indeed, it was, broadly speaking, those same people who in 1996-7 started the “January Revolution” with their anti-establishment appeals. They called themselves “hushove”, after the rebellious intellectuals and workers who in the 1860-70s lived in Romania and helped organize uprisings against the Turks. Slavi’s show’s popularity has, however, been decreasing in the past year, a few of his editors and actors quitting.

Stoichkov, Hristo Stoichkov

The famous 1990s striker who brought many victories to Bulgaria and to Barcelona was admired by many, if not by most. People would easily forgive him his ill tongue that produced more curses, sore oaths and swear words for the exchange of the brilliant goals he netted, making the name of Bulgaria known for one more reason, albeit one accompanied by a pile of unpleasant mutter and squint looks. When Stoichkov’s play deteriorated and his coaching skills were manifested to everyone as somewhere between the nill and the zero, whereupon his tongue's sharpness stood out more prominently, most of his fans, previously convinced that he was doing his country a favour, glorifying the name of Bulgaria, now stood up against him and sent him back to Spain with even more curses that he could produce.

Berbatov, Dimitar Berbatov

To watch how thousands reveled in admiration for the success of Berbatov, who finally made his dream to play in a world-famous team come true, was a daunting experience. Awesome, because for once I could see Bulgarians being happy about and proud of someone’s success, instead of groveling before the omnipotent Bulgarian trait of character best illustrated in the saying “Better my neighbour be doing bad than me be doing fine.” Intimidating, because in this year alone there were many dozens of occasions when the superiority of the Bulgarian genius in fields such as Mathematics and Programming was demonstrated on a worldwide level, and yet these did not even make it into the news…

THE SYMBOL OF BULGARIA

A month after the national campaign to appoint the official symbol of Bulgaria ended, in which a historical monument was elected that the majority of foreign visitors have little or no idea of, discussions about the actual symbol of this small Balkan country continue with even more fervour than during the ten months of collecting voters’ preferences and recommendations. As our colleagues from Vagabond attempted to introduce, to both foreigners and English-speaking Bulgarians, their selection of would-be-symbols, amongst which are featured a few outstanding negativisms of Bulgaria, many publications in foreign and local media have once again posed the question of the ‘real’ symbol of Bulgaria.

The issue of ‘real’ and ‘reality’ itself will inevitably start us into a ceaseless philosophical argument of whose the authority to appoint what is to be regarded as the ‘real thing’ – a few distinguished individuals or the ‘democratic’ masses – hence the essence of the ongoing heated debate relating to ‘the right the English have to meddle with our symbols.’ Whether or not those alien to Bulgarian culture should be allowed to appoint its symbol is a question that borders the narrowness of nationalism on the one side and the broad-mindedness of the cosmopolitan on the other. Whichever side one is to take, they are always set to receive the harsh criticism of the opponents, perhaps more so from the nationalistic-minded than from those with an inclination to the overall grasping of notions and ideas.

Scanning various Bulgarian forums (because sure you can read the English-language ones yourselves), we came upon a variety of opinions on the issue, from the enraged to the apathetic.

“A good idea [to elect a symbol]. But why don’t they make it in the UK? Obviously the warm welcome they get here in Bulgaria is not enough, and now they are mocking us! Let them hit the road and stop ridiculing our reality. Is everything there perfect? They robbed half the world and now everything is easy for them! They must go away!”

“I do not understand why Bulgaria’s national symbol should be discussed by foreigners!? This is our own national issue!”

“If they don’t like it, why do they come to Bulgaria to live? Go away they must! We don’t like a lot of things in their country but we don’t make fun of that. Do me a favour!”

“I am going to start a lawsuit against this Vagabond, for insulting my national pride; we [Bulgarians] may be anything, but this is not a question to be answered by foreigners who came to live in Bulgaria. I can’t understand why they stay in Bulgaria if they don’t like it.”

“You people, have you not got national pride?! They haven't got a perfect world, do they, but they hide their dirty linen, while all we do is expose ours. Why don't you give it a thought? What Bulgarians are you?!”

“Oh, you are all so stupid failing to understand what the symbol of Bulgaria is! For those who didn’t get it, I will say it again: it is Cunning Peter, smoking a cigar in his AMG with a red rose on his ear, a wad of 20 leva bills in hand buying gypsy votes in the neighbourhood. A pit-bull with a golden leash on its neck is sitting on the front seat next to him.”

“The headless horseman is the symbol that best fits Bulgaria – the state is tearing downhill beheaded by the Communists down towards the swamps.”

This could, naturally, go on for ages. There are hundreds, thousands even of similar opinions. But what is more important, they will never agree with each other. It is a trait most outstanding in the character of your average Bulgarian that he will never back out; he will never admit he was wrong. And he will never say “I’m sorry.” The best you could hope for is a muttered “Opa-a” which is Bulgarian for “Oops”. We can put this exclamation of awkwardness right next to the “Ey sega” [in a while, very soon] choice of our colleagues; both can be heard equally frequently if you deal with almost any of the representatives of a nation, most of whose members will be normally guided by the motto of “Who are you to teach me?! I know better!”

Personally I can see no point in electing the Madara Rider, a rock carving that is 1300 years old and is the proud symbol of a state that once stood powerful spanning the greater part of the Balkans, reaching as far north as Belorussia, a state that had Byzantium paying taxes for centuries. The might and glory of that distant past are long gone now. Today this is a country where the average young man knows little or nothing of its national heroes (by the way the only handful of men who stood out from a mass of submissive and treacherous individuals), and the average politician does all sort of dirty deeds right under the stern looks of Levski and Botev, whose pictures hang forlorn and unheeded on the walls of ministerial offices. But I can’t see any point in electing any symbol at all, because there is never one single feature that can be deemed recognizable by many or by all.

It is a tough choice to make: sex bombs walking down the street, trying to attract the attention of bullies riding in their BMWs, Porsches or Lamborghini’s, while talking on a phone they have no idea what the gazillion features of mean; stray dogs or stray people tumbling in the darkness of a bright future that will never come; donkey and horse carts or the insane drivers who are so self-conceited that they run people over while bedazzled by their own power. Or Nature, whose bountiful resources 95% of the people would gladly swap for a handful of cash.

I do not know which of these, or which of the remains of a proud past that turned into dust under the feet of its own people, is more worthy of representing Bulgaria before the world.

Or wait, I think I know… My personal choice falls on the 5-village mega luxurious “first ecological” complex in Bulgaria, the Black Sea Gardens that our dear Prime Minister’s brother is going to build, investing 1 billion euros, that is 1,000,000,000 euros, meanwhile destroying one of the few remaining virgin pieces of coastland in Bulgaria, which most accidentally falls inside the Natura 2000 network. No questions asked. This is the symbol of Bulgaria.

THE INADVERTENT DAM(N)

As time goes by, mistakes that everyone thought were neatly buried in the past tend to resurface, their reverberations much stronger than expected. In Bulgaria, one particular type of mistake that actually crept in a few times in the past has now come to the attention of the public, bringing about the bitter realization of a gaffe that will now cost everyone a lot.

In the late 1990s Bulgaria went through a somewhat rushed process of privatization of state owned assets, mostly production units and companies, and, it appears, an occasional dam. According to Bulgarian legislation, all water basins, including rivers, lakes, dams and reservoirs, are public state property and can not be sold or transformed into private property under any circumstances. However, a few dams in the country were ‘mistakenly’ sold to private enterprises.

One such dam is now stirring up public interest as some regions begin to experience water supply shortages. According to experts, the Indzhe Voyvoda dam, located close to Bourgas, is crucial for the Sothern Black Sea coastline that is already suffering from a serious water deficit, threatening to assume the shape of water supply restrictions in the following years. Especially for resorts and holiday villages and towns.

‘Inadvertently’, the Indzhe Voyvoda dam, which is still under construction, was sold in 1999 to Neva Holding as part of the ‘Promet-Debelt’ state-owned steel plant. The ‘legal paradox’ that occurred through the negligence of some officers of the state who were then in charge of the privatization of the steel plant, referred by some government offices today as ‘an annoying technical mistake’, is apparently going to cost the tax payer a minimum of 10,000,000 euros.

Nearly 10 years after the deal was signed, it appears that the buyer, Ukrainian billionaire Rinat Ahmetov, who was also interested in taking over the Kremikovtsi steel plant, is going to make an unexpected and very quick profit. Bulgaria will have to buy back its mistakenly privatized dam as this is the only solution to the impending water crisis in the region, Minister of Regional Development and Public Works Assen Gagauzov said in mid July. Although officially a state secret, information about the price of the 1999 deal has already leaked into the public – the steel production line together with the incomplete dam were sold at 1,800,000 euros.

The construction of the Indzhe Voyvoda dam that has a planned capacity of 20 million cubic meters began in the early 1980s, and was solely intended to provide for the water supply needs of the steel factory. Nowadays, however, the project, which was abandoned at 30% realization in the end of the 1980s when the effects of the severe economic crisis experienced by Bulgarian industry were felt, needs to be resumed. Serious overbuilding along the southern coastline that boasts superb holiday locations and nearly perfect weather conditions has already severely burdened water supplies in the Bourgas region as the existing network, built more than 40 years ago, is not capable of covering for such excessive consumption.

20 million cubic meters of water more are going to satisfy the needs of the whole of the south-of-Bourgas region. But the dam must be bought back and its construction finalized. At the expense of the tax payer, although there is another way out of the situation, as legal experts say. Addressing the issue in proper legal terms, the state is entitled to declare the privatization deal void in its part for the ownership of the Indzhe Voyvoda dam. However, the court proceedings required by the law in order to expropriate the water reservoir would take years, which is a luxury the state and the region can now not afford as crisis is going to hit much sooner. Irreversibly. Of course, just as we see too often nowadays, no one is going to be persecuted for this inadvertent ‘mistake’.