Karbovsky appeared on national airwaves, not just on national airwaves, but on national television.
I behave like Karbovsky, the way I remember him for many years, and the way I have been following him /although not pedantically/ since he was on the other airwaves.
There are an awful lot of topics on which I disagree with him.
There are several topics on which I categorically disagree with him, and even one or two on which I am ready to fight with him.
At the same time, there are entire "philosophies" of his that I completely agree with. I agree.
I will never forget when about a year ago I tried to say in a conversation with him that the Russophobia of the yellow vests, which is also hysterical, is one of the reasons why the Bulgarian people are gradually falling in love with Russia even more. And I said that instead of hating Putin, they hate… and here I tried to find the right words, but with his nimble brain Karbovsky found them for me and said: “They hate Russian ballet.“
This was one of the phrases that made not my day, but my year.
But there are many topics that I disagree with Karbovsky on and on which, if we were to have a dialogue, we would probably /quite probably/ come to blows.
Some of them touch on my life credo, which I am able to defend to the end.
But I would and will defend Karbovsky's right to have his own /sometimes quite strange/ opinion on all issues, to express it, to defend it, including on national airwaves.
Because Karbovsky, whether we like it or not, is a phenomenon that has been proven by his numerous audience /regardless of whether we like it or not/.
And that's why I thought about it.
Oh, shit. On national airwaves, people are constantly "walking around" who are not only biased, not only almost hysterical in their bias, but are downright something like party functionaries, party oracles, party offshoots, and they, without any shame and without ever even saying the words "I am biased because I work, serve, believe or whatever for a political force", have acquired the right to judge on national airwaves what is good and what is evil.
For them, there is only one point of view - that of their party, in whose democratic forum they are present, I don't know if it's completely free, and they have the right to ridicule on national airwaves everything that is not theirs. Even the Russian ballet /according to Karbovsky/.
This is a galaxy of scoundrels, usually dressed in trousers, who crush any dissenter on national airwaves, armed with their holiness and unattainability, because, as is known, only they and only they are always right.
These people walk around with impunity on national airwaves and no one /except to fry them/ disputes their /only/ right to be there.
And now, when Karbovsky has broken into the national airwaves after how many, probably more than 20 years of absence, this is considered an event that has changed the airwaves.
And the crying begins: but why weren't others from off-air invited, why Karbovsky, why was he left in a monologue /yes, he almost was, but it's hard to interrupt Karbovsky, I've tried, it didn't work easy/.
And I know my stuff – on many issues I don't agree with Karbovsky at all, on others I don't agree at all, on some I'm ready to fight with him, but I will support and defend his right to air precisely because I don't agree with him.
And I will never understand how people like Karbovsky, who have hundreds of thousands of followers and are somehow fighting tooth and nail to survive on private airwaves, have to cause a stir with their appearance on national airwaves, while those party functionaries who constantly roam the national airwaves and express their greasy party and quite often completely unacceptable positions are a given.
But the audience, they know... ignores some and follows others.
Because in the end, in this dispute, there is someone to judge – the audience.
And if Karbovsky "manipulates" her better or she is simply more on Karbovsky's side, then this is by no means Karbovsky's problem.
Period