By: Dr Stane Granda
Years have passed, if not decades, since the word, or rather the label, “pathetic” was something young people commonly used. I never used it. To me, it did not describe only someone’s mental rather than physical state, but also a person who urgently needs social, and above all psychological, help. Physical protection. A pathetic person, in my view, is not capable of taking care of themselves. They are like an old machine without a power source, something that could collapse into itself at any moment and fall apart.
We get the impression of total and all‑encompassing misery when we observe the current opposition. What they do, and especially what they say, contradicts itself. When they were making noise about drug testing, we wondered why no coalition MP thought to demand that they take an intelligence test to prove they are capable of following parliamentary work. A problematic, though honest and well‑intentioned thought crossed our minds: that the National Assembly hall should from now on include a special cabinet with straitjackets and three trained strongmen who would put the unfortunate ill ones into the garment and take them to a place where only the Virgin Mary from the nearby parish church could help them. Chemotherapy, in such cases, would be only a sedative, not a cure. But in parliament we need a healthy and responsible opposition, because that is a precondition for democracy.
We are most surprised and disappointed by the communists. All our lives we were, on the one hand, afraid of them, and on the other, we respected them. Their ranks contained all sorts of people. We will never forget their members, pure idealists, a kind of red Franciscans, as well as top intellectuals on one side and criminals, ruthless obsessive violent types on the other. They were a party with which you needed courage and integrity to publicly disagree. We were shaken by how incapable they were of theoretical and moral progress. A not‑so‑small part sank ever deeper into economic crime, run as a parallel economy by Niko Kavčič, while another part sank into obsessive lust for power mixed with social criminality; this is also how Kučan directs it, having expelled the party’s academic intellectual wing, Lukšič, Pertinač and others, out of fear for his own political future. We feel sorry for the good‑natured Han, who, when discussing the role of capital, thinks mainly about his own company. And what is his young vice‑president doing, the one who does not belong on the scrap heap of history? Is he a “man” or not? How can he agree to abandoning a party identity more than 100 years old in favour of the stray youngsters of the left? Has sport, as with so many others, drained his reason? What the two coalition partner parties have been doing to them was not slicing salami, but grinding garbage before throwing it into the incinerator.
I follow the Left with great attention. Not because I value it, but because in it I recognise the morals and worldview of a former university colleague who guides “comrade” Mesec. He is a striking example of how good Christian‑social upbringing, when combined with a hunger for Bolshevik power, can merge into a threatening future of totalitarianism. How brilliantly he cut off Katič in order to save himself! He would be the greatest threat to Slovenia’s political future if young people did not reject him. In reality, he was the one running the government, while the finance minister and Han merely serviced him.
Golob: nomen est omen. He defiles both his own house and his family. He is almost pathologically unable to distinguish between lies and truth. He was not even capable of forming a party. The screaming and primitiveness of Janja Sluga, Tamara Vonta, Lena Grgurevič, and their prima donna, mag. Urška Klakočar Zupančič, behaviour unknown in any European parliament, are a difficult‑to‑refute argument for those who question women’s active voting rights. They have turned the temple of democracy into a pigsty of mother sows. They have likely discovered a non‑existent bottom of political and parliamentary culture. And such a man is supposed to lead the opposition?
Democracy in Slovenia is truly endangered. We do not have a dignified and respectable opposition, which is its primary precondition. The governing position has no other choice but, for the sake of its own political health, stamina, and hygiene, to choose and define its own opposition, one worthy of parliament, that will offer the necessary, well‑reasoned criticism, the only thing that gives democracy added value. Unusual, yes, but everything happens for the first time.