“Every state needs its own Balkan”

With this words philosopher Slavoj Žižek started his lecture on ideology and the fall of state borders. The lecture was given in Italian Gorizia which was until 2007 a border town with Slovenia and is a well known habitat of Italians and Slovenes. From this point of view, the place for discussing such a topic could not be better. Žižek, “the superstar” appeared in front of the fully packed theatre in his typical, a bit nervous manner and made us think about today’s presence of borders. Having in mind a Europe without boundaries, he pointed towards the difference between the physical and mental presence of borders. The latter is more difficult to remove and is usually transferred from one generation to another in a process known as mental mapping . ‘Balkan’ in the European mental perception presents ‘the other’. However, ‘Balkan’ is nowhere, if we approach it from the position that no one wants to belong to it. But at the same time every state needs its own ‘Balkan’ for dividing itself from the others.

The geographical category has been even more intensively labeled as a scapegoat after the last conflicts, often wrongly presented as perpetual, unforgettable clashes between different ethnic groups. The situation was in a false way presented in Kusturica’s Underground, where the former state is shown as a place of passions, alcohol and sexual desires. The place where memories rule and ancient hatreds exist. Žižek negates this with the idea that people that were involved in a conflict were also able to forget about past events and continue to trade and exchange goods regardless of the crimes committed. He claims that the reasons for the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia should be sought in a crisis of legitimacy of leading party nomenclature after the death of Tito and not in a hypocritical apolitical plot of the Underground and its picturesque simplifications of the carnival state. However, the time for the carnival arose latter, with the rule of Milošević which, under a totalitarian surface established a situation in which everything was allowed.

Slavoj Žižek

Žižek claims: “What we need today is not more understanding, but more distance.” Physical borders fell too fast and societies have not been culturally prepared for such a proximity which can result in clashes and reactions. In this sense, he negates a liberal idea of multiculturalism and he rather advocated his position with the image of “the house with many floors in which people live together but not necessarily interact”.

The lecture was concluded in a rather worrying tone. Under the illusion that the borders are disappearing, they are actually rapidly growing. State of emergencies keep appearing in political discourses (e.g. Italy in July 2008) and this should be taken into consideration very carefully. The globe is more dangerous than ever before. Not in a typical old way, but with the presence of biotechnology, ecological catastrophies and similar issues, more sensibility is needed if we don’t want to live in a total misery in the next 30 or 50 years.

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
Estragon: If we parted? It might be better for us.

The central right SDS was the main force of the political scene after the elections in 2004, despite being in a coalition with the NSi (New Slovenia), SLS (Slovenian People’s Party) and Desus (Democratic Party of Pensioners of Slovenia). Four years later, the NSi did not manage to get into parliament (the party gathered only 3,40 % of the electoral votes), while the SLS lost voters and struggles with an internal crisis. In this perspective the shift from the right to the left (but be careful, always seen from the “centre”) seems to be reasonable.

SD, the party which is led by the new prime minister and former MEP Borut Pahor, formed a coalition with two other parties: LDS (Liberal Democrats of Slovenia) and ZARES (made up by deputies who in 2007 left LDS).

However, the coalition of the so called “trojček” (triplet) was agreed before the elections and thus the three parties campaigned with the promise to form a coalition government. In this sense, the votes of SD, ZARES and LDS were votes for a “liberal, more left – center” coalition that altogether got 45,03 % of the votes.

Based on this short analysis it is possible to conclude that people expressed their wish for change (popular theme these days…) and the expectations of “different politics” can be seen as the mandate of the new government.

Vladimir: Well? Shall we go?
Estragon: Yes, let’s go. (They do not move)

Last week the prime minister was finally appointed and also negotiations about the cabinet seem to be coming to an end. The coalition which will be made up of the “triplet” and DESUS, has already promised “changes”. The central aim is to overcome simple political polarization between “us” and “them” and appoint personnel according to professional capabilities. Another improvement can be seen in the inclusion of women in the new government. At the moment, five women and seven non-party members have been appointed to ministerial positions. The new government also promises more transparency and less interference into the public sector, especially regarding state owned companies. Their message to the voters is that the “tsunami” of appointing public servants according to the political line is now history.

In the end the main question concerns the quality and the content of the policies and whether any “change” can be achieved. But I am afraid that most voters do not know much about the program and also that the show element in general is more appealing. The new coalition agreed on the vague directions which in fact do not say much about real performance of particular policies. However, more will be known after the appointment of the government and its ministers.

Vladimir: The same lot as usual?
Estragon: The same? I don’t know.

Nevertheless, it is better to stay attentive and see what the so-called fresh political wind can contribute to further development of the a relatively new democracy. And we should not forget that the previous government also promised more transparency, professionalism and less political interference in the public…But ended up acting in a totally opposite way. So, what shall we expect in a near future? I would say: let’s hope for the best and be ready for the worst….

Estragon: Charming spot. Inspiring prospects. Let’s go.
Vladimir: We can’t.
Estragon: Why not?
Vladimir: We’re waiting for Godot.
Estragon: (despairingly) Ah!

Quotes in italic are taken from “Waiting for Godot” by Samuel Beckett (Part 1 and Part 2)