Daniel Smilov's comment:
The vote of no confidence turned out to be extremely meaningful: through it, the big "D" of the state shone. The motives and debates on the vote did half the job - the rational-discursive one. This vote, unlike the previous ones, touched on the real problem of governance in Bulgaria. This problem is the control of institutions by certain parties and individuals - mostly around GERB and the New Beginning, who use them for their own partisan and personal goals. The metaphor "conquered state" summarizes these practices, which in the Bulgarian case are many and diverse. They range from the important - the use of repressive bodies as an umbrella over the rulers and as a stick against their opponents, to the symbolic - the transformation of services into personal guards and drivers of politicians.
"Captured state": what is the problem of the state with a capital "D"
The concept of "capture" of institutions comes from the analyses of new institutionalism and administrative law in the Anglo-Saxon scientific tradition. The term "captured state" gained popularity from World Bank reports more than 20 years ago. Daniel Kaufman and his team, who were the drivers of this scientific paradigm, also developed an index of capture, from which it is clear that Bulgarian values are significantly higher than those of EU countries (with the exception of Hungary). That is, and objective science confirms the motives for the vote of no confidence.
It is true that this is a long trend, but over the last 15 years, during which GERB-DPS have mainly governed (the index data is up to 2022), Bulgarian indicators have been quite visibly and significantly deteriorating. The problem of GERB, DPS and their partners in government is that they deny reality and thus do two things. First, they expose themselves as the main beneficiaries of the conquest of the state. Second, they declare that they will continue in this direction.
It is precisely this arrogance that is the big "D" of the state at the moment, which Mr. Delyan Peevski decided to talentedly portray in an incredibly ugly scene in front of the entrance to the National Assembly. Annoyed by symbolic protest actions of the opposition from the PP, he unleashed an impressive cartwheeling language, through which (and through eloquent grimaces and body movements) he made it clear that he was taking over the state and through it the opposition would end.
This was the non-discursive and figurative proof of the thesis of the "conquered state". From now on, there is nothing more to argue about: it is both scientifically proven and theatrically illustrated by one of the main protagonists of the conquest. The performance was so impressive that even the journalists covering it live on air froze for a moment with their mouths open.
The problem of the state with a capital "D" is not only in the conquest of individual institutions, but also in the autocratic and dictatorial tendencies that are observed. The imprisonment of political opponents on fabricated and controversial charges occurs in dictatorships or countries that have embarked on an autocratic path. It is no coincidence that Bulgarian opposition mayors are persecuted on the model of the mayor of Istanbul. The Bulgarian big "D" is clearly learning from the world's big "D".
The strategy of GERB and MRF regarding the vote was to belittle it. They managed to do it to some extent in the hall, by concentrating on the "distracting" argument that the PP-DB wants to take over the country.
Even if it is true (which it actually is not), this does not change the finding that it is now taken over by GERB and MRF - and has been for more than a decade. There are actually no facts of a takeover by the PP-DB - the only "fact" repeatedly cited is a recording in which it is heard that the PP would prefer "elections with our Ministry of Interior". In contrast to these desires - real or imaginary, it is an indisputable fact that in elections with a Ministry of Interior of GERB and MRF there is vote manipulation, already registered in a decision of the Constitutional Court. The state with a capital "G" does not even register this problem, let alone have a strategy for dealing with it.
In general, the main argument of GERB and MRF was actually self-revealing. They practically claimed - in one way or another, that the state cannot be governed in any other way. The institutions will always be conquered, they will always be used by certain people for their own purposes. Therefore, it is better for those who have become professionals in "conquering" to govern. And according to the research of Kaufman's team, these are GERB and DPS over the past 15 years.
In other words, the state with a capital "D" is the state of professional institutional grabbers, those who permanently control the structures and skillfully use them to stay in power. They offer "stability" and this is a serious argument that should not be underestimated.
Boyko Borisov, who is aware of the political vulnerability of this thesis, likes to throw candy to the opposition from the PP-DB: why don't you join too, we will give you a small piece too or at least we will not prosecute you.
It must be said, however, that the "stability" that the professional state usurpers create is illusory and at a very high price. One part of the price is the autocratic and dictatorial tendencies that have already been mentioned. At some point, they lead either to a dictatorship or to an outburst of popular anger and discontent, as in 2013 and 2020. The other part of the price is fiscal: state resources are directed inefficiently to ensure the obedience of services and police and are distributed through clientelistic networks. Giving money to loyal clientele leads to highways that do not exist or are 25 centimeters narrower on both sides. And thinner. Finally, the state with a capital "D" has short and thin highways.
The question before the Bulgarians
The real question is why GERB and DPS pretend that these problems do not exist. And most importantly - why do they not propose anything to eliminate them. In fact, they are doing exactly the opposite, such as the proposal to elect the heads of the services by a majority in parliament. This will enable the current majority to control the state apparatus even more firmly and permanently. The division of power between different institutions is one of the tools against the establishment of a "conquered state". The concentration of power in the majority in parliament and the government is a recipe for entrenching the power grabbers.
The vote of no confidence asked a clear and uncomfortable question to the Bulgarians. Do you really think that the country can be governed only and solely by conquering the institutions? The problem for those in power is that the answer they would like dramatically underestimates Bulgarians.