 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
eastchance.com essays feature
Author: Albena Petkova
The ideological confrontation between the communism and other political ideas in Bulgaria and its effect on the history and the contemporary politics as well
“Making a sociological omelette, requires breaking a few historic eggs”.
Ronald Dorr
Transformation from one social system to another usually includes the rejection of what the party in power is proclaiming and taking exactly the opposite position. In that kind of situation political violence can occur inside the country which can be defined as an internal ideological war.
The mentioned above is typical for the Bulgarian political scene. In this essay I take into consideration the period up to 1944 in the context of the WWII and the ideological confrontation between the communist parties and the other political fractions in Bulgaria. (period full of irredentist wars and internal political turmoil) First I provide a short historic background for the developments in the country in that period and the way it was thought to the postwar generation. Then I propose an alternative view for the clash of the ideologies and make some assumptions for the implications on the contemporary politics these suggestions may have.
Upon the outbreak of World War II the Bulgarian government declared neutrality. But faced with choosing between military confrontation with Germany and accession to the Axis powers, the monarch and his government had Bulgaria join the fascist bloc on 1 March 1941. At the end of 1941, however, Bulgaria declared a 'token' war on the USA and Britain. The country's economy was set to work only for the German machinery of war. The Soviet Union and the United States put an end to all doubt as to the issue of the world conflict. At this distressing historical juncture the BCP (Bulgarian Communist Party), put forward the Comintern idea of 1935 of a united front (in Bulgaria it was called Fatherland front). It was meant to unite all democratic forces fighting against the government, which had committed the country to nazi Germany. In August 1944 BCP (Bulgarian Communist Party) made a decision to rise an armed revolt and a new government, composed of might-wing agrarians, democrats and populists was appointed. Soviet Union declared war on Bulgaria and the Red army invaded the territory of Bulgaria. The Bulgarian army had been ordered to offer no resistance and the Russians occupied the northeastern end of the country .
The government that came into power proclaimed all the previous ruling parties for fascist and started a massive propaganda to convince the Bulgarian nation of their ideals for the progressiveness, equality, justice and democratic values of the socialist regimes. The Bulgarian society welcomed the red army as liberators and in the memory of the post-war generation the communist regime was the “right” social system and the capitalism was “wrong” , the democratic parties that forced the country into the WWII were fascists and the communist leaders were the protectors of the people. That kind of speculations formed a romantic and idealized view for the soviet occupation in the minds of the postwar generation and this created the story of Soviet “brothers” that parents were telling to their children.
However a different narrative can be delivered as well. World War II brought Soviet occupation, the end of the monarchy, and forty-one years of unbroken communist rule. During that entire period, Bulgaria was the closest East European imitator of Soviet internal and foreign policy. This was time of collectivization, heavy industrialization, drastic restriction of human rights, and close adherence to Soviet policy.During that time, all aspects of life that a totalitarian government could control were redrawn according to the Soviet model--from overemphasis on heavy industry to the content of works of literature. When the totalitarian era ended in 1989, it left behind many of the rigid structures and stereotypes formed by such imitation. Because many teachers and textbooks remained from the era when only the party line was acceptable, however, transition efforts encountered stubborn resistance in some quarters.
The parties that govern Bulgaria before the communist can not be labelled as fascists, because they consisted of liberals, radicals , democrats etc. In their lines there were masons, jews and even cionists ( an it is well known the attitude of the fascism toward these groups ) . There were no unification of the “party” with the “country”, there were no repressions and they abide by the Constitution. The so-called fascists decided to ally with Germany, because of the promised territorial benefits and because at that time the Germans were in friendly relations with the Soviet Union, which Bulgaria always has been treating as a savour.
The historical aspects of the speculations revolves around the aim the actions of the communists ( the coup d’etat) to be presented in a different way , to justify their undemocratic and terrorist deeds ; to be presented these actions not only for “idealistic” , but also for happening because of the internal situation in Bulgaria. That is why the fact that this “revolution” was undertaken by foreign interests, is omitted (regrettable the majority of the Bulgarians were deceived by the propaganda and weren’t realizing that) “ to be justified the long-term propaganda and the “consistent” position of “important figures” on these matters, who are still cherished as “idols” of various organizations and fractions “; to be presented the invasion and occupation of Bulgaria from foreign troops as a “liberation” , not as an intervention , that brought totalitarian regime , destruction of the Bulgarian intelligentsia and the aversion of the country from the right way of economic development.
All these fabrications were created on an ideological and political basis but they affected the minds of the nations and allowed the politician to manipulate the public opinion and to justify every political mistake with the presence of the “fascists”. The people believed in the superior character of the communists system and become hostile to all other ideologies. This allowed the communists to rule for four decades without having to deal with disobedience within the country or any serious treats from inside.
One may ask what will happen if the history changes and the idealistic story is substituted by the realistic one. As an important fact I would like to mention that the present government in Bulgaria is with communist leaders who are very interested in not allowing this because are favoured of the “good” version of the communist coup and years of restrictions. If people start looking at the communist actions as terrorist and if the nation realizes all the negative consequences of the Soviet occupation and domination that was proclaimed as the “right choice” then a big wave of criticism toward the leader will arise. May be even there will be even chasing of the still alive participants in these actions. This will lead to discredit and criticism towards the still active propagandists.
The political fractions which are the followers of a specific organizations from the past will be forbidden or at least they will no longer have the support of the nation and probably will be accused of crimes against the people .Their “bright” ideals will be seen from a different aspect – as a just another way to control the behaviour of the people in order the communist rule to be supported. A lot a question will arise and people will start looking for somebody connected with past to answer them. Unluckily that somebody is standing on the top of the government right now.
So what I suggest is that if all these things happen this will have a disruptive effect on the political system and may be there will be even violent outbreaks. People who have been so long years in disillusion will lose their ideal , they have lived with for whole their lives and this will cause frustration. This will again lead to destabilization in the political rows and nobody wants that. The parents still tell their children the romantic story but the difference now is that the alternative narrative is present and if the new generation don’t agree with at least has the chance to read it and consider it on their own.
To sum up, the way the history is presented often depends on people who have political and ideological views they want to make popular. Outbreaks of political violence and confrontation are covered with the idea of the fight between the protectors of the nation and the their enemies. Mentioning the label “enemy” often recalls in the memory of the post-war generation the figures of the opposition of the communist ideas .The history can not be easily changed or seen from more than one point of view from people who have lived with the “bright” ideals of the totalitarian regime for all their lives but there are other stories that need to be told and the new generation is ready to listen.
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
| If you found this page interesting and would like to discuss it in the forum, please log-in. |
|
|
| If you would like to receive updates from eastchance.com on scholarships, summer courses, international events or jobs, please join our community. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
