By: Gašper Blažič
You probably all know the saying that democracy is a poor system, but no one has yet invented a better one.
In a democracy, at least in theory, power lies with the people, who are the main sovereign in the state, and they exercise that power regularly through elections (representative democracy). But because the outcome of elections depends on an increasing number of factors, including media ownership and the misuse of institutions, democracy becomes an even more fragile system and can very quickly develop into a democrature, to use the now rather popular expression coined by Drago Jančar. A democrature, whose very form echoes the word dictatorship, can be described as a state of formal democracy in which the people merely “bless” what the authorities force upon them. A typical example is the Russian Federation, where Vladimir Putin has been an untouchable supreme oligarch for nearly three decades, yet always “democratically elected.”
It is clear that political elites who have run the country into the ground repeatedly try to present Potemkin villages, as the saying goes, creating an atmosphere of a seemingly successful government. But this has its limits. When these elites sense nervousness before elections because of an approaching failure, their behaviour becomes increasingly reckless and impulsive. This is the psychological concept of a “bunker mentality”: a defensive, paranoid state in which a politician or regime feels besieged by enemies (real or imagined), leading to (self‑)isolation, black‑and‑white thinking, and irrational decisions aimed at preserving power. Instead of facing reality, they spiral into a series of bad decisions, from propaganda and populist handouts to various forms of suppressing the opposition. And this is precisely the state we can observe in the final months of the current government’s term. The whole situation strongly resembles the behaviour of the LDS party and its then‑leader Anton Rop in 2004, just before their electoral defeat and departure from power.
How can we judge when a politician (or party, political elite, etc.) has crossed the line between normal behaviour and the “bunker”? Let’s look at an example. At the end of 2025, Golob’s coalition pushed through a law mandating a Christmas bonus (a winter allowance) for everyone. It was a completely slapdash measure that put many public institutions in serious financial difficulty, as they had not budgeted for such an expense. In reality, it was a typical example of a “consolation prize”, something like a robber taking a hundred euros from you and then returning twenty as consolation, so that you end up feeling grateful he did not take everything. These kinds of populist gestures, with which the government counts on a grateful public response (from people who do not care where the money comes from as long as they get it), are essentially a way of soothing the symptoms of their own arrogance and greed. But there is a big difference between treating the causes of an illness and treating its symptoms.
“Desperanto,” as the language of desperation is often called, appears between the lines in many places. Not only in Golob’s substantively empty speeches for Independence and Unity Day or in his New Year’s address, but above all in his actions. It is strange, for example, that after losing the referendum, during which harsh words about the Church were plentiful, Golob now presents himself as some sort of practical Catholic, even though his government still pursues a hostile policy toward believers. On the other hand, we have a fine selection of “the emperor’s new clothes.” For instance, the main newspaper Delo, at a time when its owner received a new hundred‑million‑euro contract from the state, managed to do two things: publish sycophantic praise of Slovenia’s foreign policy work in the UN Security Council, and include Tina Gaber Golob among its columnists. A typical act of desperation. Just like distributing taxpayers’ money to major media outlets, sending them a clear signal not to bite the hand that feeds them. Meanwhile, the government tries to break opposition‑leaning media. And the closer the elections get, the more desperate the coalition’s moves will become. And in their own way, also more amusing.