Ruzha Smilova | Sofia University "St. Kliment Ohridski" (original) (raw)

Papers by Ruzha Smilova

Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG eBooks, 2024

CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Nov 2, 2022

Резюме: Задълбочаващата се криза на либералната демокрация провокира мнозина да търсят обяснения.... more Резюме: Задълбочаващата се криза на либералната демокрация провокира мнозина да търсят обяснения. Особено интригуващи са обясненията, които свързват тази криза с възхода и доминацията през последните години на меритокрацията-идеала за подреждане на обществото, който определя успеха и разпределя мястото на всеки човек в обществото според неговите собствени "заслуги"индивидуален талант и усилия. Връзката между доминацията на меритократичния идеал и кризата на либералната демокрация може да се открие в диагнозата на Колин Крауч, че съвременните развити демокрации са се превърнали в "пост-демокрации", където институциите се превръщат във формална черупка. Социалните практики, които меритократичният идеал въвежда-както за рекрутиране на управляващите елити, така и за цялостно структуриране на обществото-може да бъдат разглеждани като задвижили и задълбочили именно такива процеси на изпразване на демократичните институции от тяхното демократично съдържание. Въпросът, който разглеждам в този текст, е дали има ясни свидетелства за тясна връзка между господството на меритократичния идеал, от една страна, и кризата на либералната демокрация, задълбочаването на процесите на постдемокрация и глобалния възход на популизма, от друга? Ключови думи: криза на либералната демокрация, пост-демокрация, меритокрация, криза на представителността, причинно-следствени механизми, обяснителни модели за възхода на популизма

Democratic Crisis Revisited

In the rapid changes brought about by the transition to liberal democracy in Bulgaria in the 1990... more In the rapid changes brought about by the transition to liberal democracy in Bulgaria in the 1990s, media policy as such was not among the priorities of the main political and other players. Rather, the developments in this sphere were a result of a general drive for liberalization and less regulation, considered to be the proper way for the realization of the values of freedom of expression and access to information, crucial for building democratic society. The account of the early developments of media regulation in Bulgaria suggests that it was pretty much at the centre of politics during the transition period, without ever becoming a dominant or an exclusive focus. Throughout the 1990s media regulation was a part of the struggle for domination of political actors: the ex-communists and the pro-reform democrats. At the start of the new millennium the political parties in Bulgaria went through a process of crisis, which led to a marked relaxation of the political pressure on the media. Open partisanship disappeared and was replaced by more subtle ways of political influence; the private media market was already quite developed, which took to the fore other concerns: the conflict between corporate interest and the quality of journalism. As a result of these processes, at present the Bulgarian media regulation is at a loss in terms of guiding principles. All agree on the importance of issues as freedom of speech and media independence, but there are strikingly different visions of what these abstract concepts mean. On the one hand, there is the pressure group of the commercial media, which press essentially either for less regulation, or for regulation which maximizes their profits, especially in the advertising market. One top priority of this group is the reduction of the public support for the public media, be it in the form of a reduction of the subsidy that funds the public media, or in the elimination for the public broadcasters to attract commercial ads. On the other hand, still there is a public interest oriented group of journalists, professors and NGO actors, who defend the role of the state in the media market both through regulation, and through direct forms of support for the public media. Politicians and political parties still maintain close links with the media, yet the direction of the influence is changing: there is a growing trend of mediatization of Bulgarian politics, with PR and media presentation having to a large extent replaced the need for extensive party membership or local structures for the parties. Thus, after twenty years of transition from communism, the Bulgarian media environment is currently in a state of normative confusion. There are different competing visions and interpretations of common ground concepts such as media independence and freedom of speech. Therefore, civil society is gradually losing orientation in the complex battles between different special groups and purely commercial interests in this field. Unfortunately, European regulation does not provide the normative grounding necessary for this area – it is also torn apart among various priorities and normative goals. In the absence of clear normative standards, it is no surprise that the media is increasingly seen as an extension of either partisan or corporate strategies.

In March 2019 Plovdiv court ruled that calling (on FB) a public officer “gender” is libel. Taking... more In March 2019 Plovdiv court ruled that calling (on FB) a public officer “gender” is libel. Taking as its starting point this curious decision, the public debates in Bulgaria on the so-called ‘gender ideology’ are analyzed. They started in early 2018 with the introduction in Bulgarian Parliament of the ratification bill for the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (known as Istanbul convention) and peaked with the decision of the Bulgarian Constitutional Court to declare this Convention un-constitutional. Detailed analysis of the reasoning of the Court in this landmark decision provides the background against which important debates in Bulgarian society on the scope and content of civic rights and their relation to democracy are presented. It is argued that this decision exemplifies an important shift in the paradigm of democratization in post-communist Bulgaria: the diligent students of “West”-imported values (democracy, rights, rule-of-law, etc.) from the transition period , turn in the populist era into self-assured sovereignists, not afraid of getting lost in the translation of yet new concepts and values.

Page 1. Central European University Political Science Department A Reason-based Justification for... more Page 1. Central European University Political Science Department A Reason-based Justification for Liberal-Democratic Authority Ruzha Smilova A Dissertation submitted to the Political Science Department of the Central European ...

SSRN Electronic Journal, 2010

... This background information report deals with the media system and regulatory framework inCro... more ... This background information report deals with the media system and regulatory framework inCroatia. It analyses the historical development of the media system, the media market (press, broadcasting, online and social media), media literacy, media policy and regulatory ...

Political Studies Review

Review of the book by Maria Dimova-Cookson, Rethinking Positive and Negative Liberty. Routledge 2019

Routledge Handbook of Illiberalism, 2021

The chapter argues that the theory and practice of illiberalism is evolving into a new composite ... more The chapter argues that the theory and practice of illiberalism is evolving into a new composite ideology designed for our democratic age. This ideology purports to offer a new model for the social and political order without breaking free from the master legitimating frame of our age: popular sovereignty as the ultimate source of state authority. Exploiting its normative appeal, contemporary illiberalism builds on the democratic ideal yet stretches it to the extreme. The chapter argues that to the extent illiberalism is a serious threat to constitutional democracy today, it is when illiberalism grows within such a framework: only there it is viable enough to subvert even well-established democratic regimes and achieve its ultimate goal of dismantling the liberal institutions and substituting liberal rights and freedoms with illiberal values.

The chapter first surveys the multiple theoretical sources of illiberalism – from the ideological extremes of radical left and conservative right critiques of liberalism. It then outlines how illiberal regimes turn these theoretical critiques into practices of gradual erosion of liberal democratic institutions and values. After a critical take on the debates around the “illiberal democracy” concept, in the main body of the chapter the ideational core of “democratic illiberalism” is spelt out.

Southeastern Europe, 2021

Critical Essays on Human Rights Criticism, ed. by András Sajó and Renáta Uitz, 2020

The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Bulgaria (henceforth the Court) has proven itself to ... more The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Bulgaria (henceforth the Court) has proven itself to be an important player in the process of building and consolidating the democratic institutions in post-communist Bulgaria, establishing itself as an effective and respected guardian of the Constitution, “energetically reacting against the encroachments of parliamentary majorities” during the turbulent times of the country’s transition to liberal democracy. Despite its many achievements, however, it would be difficult to argue that the Court played the role of a potent vehicle for human rights revolution in Bulgaria during the transition and pre-EU accession period (1991-2006). In the post-accession period the Court has arguably played such a role even less. Its landmark 2018 decision declared the Council of Europe’s (CoE) Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and DomesticViolence (Istanbul Convention) in violation of Bulgaria’sConstitution and signals a radical turn in its human rights jurisprudence. I will argue in this chapter that in this decision the Court moved away from its practice of cautiously interpreting rights by strictly following the text of the Constitution, towards taking an ideologically-laden activist position in defense of ‘traditional values’, which prompted it to depart from the text of the Constitution and engage in ‘creative’ jurisprudence.After a brief introduction to theCourt’s beginnings and aspects of its human rights jurisprudence in Part 2, Part 3 will present the political background – the rise of illiberal national populists – against which the Court took its decision. The central part of the chapter is a critical analysis of Court’s reasoning in this decision, marking this ideological turn.

"Новите млади и новите медии", Ивайло Дичев и Орлин Спасов (съставители), 2009

Задачата на настоящия текст е да даде типологизация на различните младежки партийни организации, ... more Задачата на настоящия текст е да даде типологизация на различните младежки партийни организации, да опише успешните и недотам успешни модели на политическа социализация и мобилизация на младежите. Най-общата методологическа рамка, използвана тук, е тезата на Мансър Олсън за „селективните стимули“ (Olson 1965), които мотивират членовете на една организация да я изграждат и поддържат и така да преодоляват вътрешноприсъщите за нея „проблеми на колективното действие.“ Изводът ми е, че успешни са тези модели на функциониране на младежките партийни организации, при които се осигуряват достатъчно атрактивни селективни стимули не само за младежките лидери и функционери, а и за по-широки кръгове от активната членска маса. Ключово важно за успеха е „употребата“ на такива младежки политически организации да е от взаимна изгода за всички преки участници – както стимулираните, така и стимулиращите. Последните получават лоялен (поне докато осигуряват навременен и достатъчно обилен приток на нужните стимули), мотивиран да работи лидерски екип и мобилизирана масова електорална подкрепа.

сп. Политически анализи бр. 4, 2018

Until recently, liberal democracy was seen as the only game in town. Yet in the wake of recent de... more Until recently, liberal democracy was seen as the only game in town. Yet in the wake of recent developments in Europe (the Brexit vote in UK) and in the US (the election of Trump as President, something considered unthinkable until the day it was happening) it has become almost a cliché to claim that the liberal order is dying. In this short text, I first ask whether the liberal order is really dying, as its critics claim today. The liberal order I am discussing here is understood as the dominant, until recently universally preferred political regime, i.e. as liberal democracy. While arguing that the news for its death is grossly overstated, I admit that there is decline in popular support for this type of political regime. This leads me to the second question addressed in this text, which is, what/who is to blame for its decline?

сп. Политически изследвания, 2017

The main thesis of the text is that populist actors often voice legitimate critiques of the rulin... more The main thesis of the text is that populist actors often voice legitimate critiques of the ruling elites in liberal democracies. The alternatives they offer, however, are worse than the illness they claim to cure. There is some merit in their central critique – the global meritocratic elites have betrayed their respective peoples, as the governing elites in liberal democracies are often too distant from the citizens who elected them to govern. The alternative that the above mentioned critics offer – nationally responsible leadership, claiming to be the unique voice of the authentic will and interests of the people – sounds attractive. Yet it is not credible and moreover, undermines political pluralism – the fundamental presupposition of a well-working liberal democracy. The better alternative, it is argued in the text, are responsive to their citizens, meritocratic pluralistic governing elites.

The text is a critical examination of three interpretations of the 2013 Student occupation that ... more The text is a critical examination of three interpretations of the 2013 Student occupation that took place in Sofia University and other universities. The first positions it within the framework of the so called “summer protests”, triggered by the appointment of a controversial media mogul as chief of national security, though it also develops its own messages and practices. The second interprets the Occupation as a critique of that same protest, while the third rationalizes it as a relatively successful attempt to build an “autonomous student republic”, with little to do with the wave of protests that hit the country in 2013. The text is mostly devoted to the last two interpretations, as the author finds the first well supported by the events. The second, it is argued, piggybacks on influential critiques of the wave of protests that hit the world after 2008, so the strategy of the author here is to criticize it by deflating those influential critiques. The third is critically appreciated on its own merits. It offers an ex post facto rationalization of the events with “ontological” claims, reducing the multifaceted character of the Student occupation to fit a highly ideological construct – autonomism, as its single meaning. The autonomism thesis is criticized as depraving the events of their vital context, as misinterpreting the organization and character of the autonomous decision-making of collective bodies and as attributing single ideology to a diverse student body, with diverse motivations and ideological commitments.

Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG eBooks, 2024

CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Nov 2, 2022

Democratic Crisis Revisited

SSRN Electronic Journal, 2010

Political Studies Review

Review of the book by Maria Dimova-Cookson, Rethinking Positive and Negative Liberty. Routledge 2019

Routledge Handbook of Illiberalism, 2021

Southeastern Europe, 2021

Critical Essays on Human Rights Criticism, ed. by András Sajó and Renáta Uitz, 2020

"Новите млади и новите медии", Ивайло Дичев и Орлин Спасов (съставители), 2009

сп. Политически анализи бр. 4, 2018

сп. Политически изследвания, 2017

НОВИ МЕДИИ – НОВИ МОБИЛИЗАЦИИ, Ивайло Дичев и Орлин Спасов (съставители), 2011

В този текст правя опит за систематизиране на някои от основните ранни приноси към дебата за отно... more В този текст правя опит за систематизиране на някои от основните ранни приноси към дебата за отношението между нови медии и политика, като се фокусирам върху ефекта на новите технологии върху качеството на демокрацията в установените демокрации. Разделям следващите размишления според три от основните измерения на демокрацията – информация, дискусия и участие. Качествена демокрация не можем да мислим без информирани граждани, участващи в публични дискусии и готови да се ангажират в политически действия. Трите основни типа нормативна демократична теория – съответно либералната, делиберативната и партиципативната, отдават приоритет на едно от измеренията, но нито една от тях не оспорва значимостта и на трите. По отношение и на трите се твърди, че интернет и новите технологии по-общо им оказват значителновлияние. След близо 20 години оживени теоретични дискусии, подкрепени в последните десетина години във все по-голяма степен и с емпирични изследвания и данни, има достатъчно натрупани аргументи, за да е оправдана една скромна равносметка.

In the rapid changes brought about by the transition to liberal democracy in Bulgaria in the 1990... more In the rapid changes brought about by the transition to liberal democracy in Bulgaria in the 1990s, media policy as such was not among the priorities of the main political and other players. Rather, the developments in this sphere were a result of a general drive for liberalisation and less regulation, considered to be the proper way for the realisation of the values of freedom of expression and access to information, crucial for building democratic society. The account of the early developments of media regulation in Bulgaria suggests that
it was pretty much at the centre of politics during the transition period, without ever becoming a dominant or an exclusive focus. Throughout the 1990s media regulation was a part of the struggle for domination of political actors: the ex-communists and the pro-reform democrats. At the start of the new millennium the political parties in Bulgaria went through a
process of crisis, which led to a marked relaxation of the political pressure on the media. Open partisanship disappeared and was replaced by more subtle ways of political influence;
the private media market was already quite developed, which took to the fore other concerns: the conflict between corporate interest and the quality of journalism. As a result of these
processes, at present the Bulgarian media regulation is at a loss in terms of guiding principles. All agree on the importance of issues as freedom of speech and media independence, but
there are strikingly different visions of what these abstract concepts mean. On the one hand, there is the pressure group of the commercial media, which press essentially either for less
regulation, or for regulation which maximises their profits, especially in the advertising market. One top priority of this group is the reduction of the public support for the public
media, be it in the form of a reduction of the subsidy that funds the public media, or in the elimination for the public broadcasters to attract commercial ads. On the other hand, still
there is a public interest oriented group of journalists, professors and NGO actors, who defend the role of the state in the media market both through regulation, and through direct
forms of support for the public media. Politicians and political parties still maintain close links with the media, yet the direction of the influence is changing: there is a growing trend of mediatisation of Bulgarian politics, with PR and media presentation having to a large extent replaced the need for extensive party membership or local structures for the parties.
Thus, after twenty years of transition from communism, the Bulgarian media environment is currently in a state of normative confusion. There are different competing visions and
interpretations of common ground concepts such as media independence and freedom of speech. Therefore, civil society is gradually losing orientation in the complex battles between
different special groups and purely commercial interests in this field. Unfortunately, European regulation does not provide the normative grounding necessary for this area – it is also torn apart among various priorities and normative goals. In the absence of clear normative standards, it is no surprise that the media is increasingly seen as an extension of either partisan or corporate strategies.

Media policies and regulatory practices in a selected set of European countries, the EU and the Council of Europe. Background information report, 2010

The report starts with an overview of the Bulgarian media landscape. Then it explores the normati... more The report starts with an overview of the Bulgarian media landscape. Then it explores the normative framework, the regulatory bodies and the constitutional debates on media independence in the country. The goal is to place Bulgarian media policy in a political and social context and assess its relevance for democratic politics.

Media Policies Revisited: The Challenge for Media Freedom and Independence, Palgrave, 2014

A well-known problem with the media in Bulgaria is that most of the commercial media barely survi... more A well-known problem with the media in Bulgaria is that most of the commercial media barely survive on purely market terms but rather operate as publicity and influence-generating devices of primarily domestic business groups. Instead of serving the citizens by promoting the values of freedom of speech and the freedom of information in a functioning democracy, the media in Bulgaria tend to engage in trading-in-influence practices, often serving other, non-media-related business interests of their owners. A brief overview of the characteristics of the Bulgarian media system (Hallin and Mancini, 2004) constitutes an optimum introduction to this key problem, exemplifying how the ‘business’ models in use have transformed the media into publicity departments of (often under-cover) business and political interests.

Understanding Media Policies. A European Perspective. ed. by Psychogiopoulou, Palgrave, 2012

The media environment in post-communist Bulgaria has been profoundly affected by the processes of... more The media environment in post-communist Bulgaria has been profoundly affected by the processes of transition from a communist society to liberal democracy, market economy, and European Union (EU) membership. After the fall of the regime in late 1989, the state-owned media went through a swift transformation of ownership and organisation, initially in the print press and radio broadcasting, and at the end of the 1990s in terrestrial television broadcasting as well. The joint forces of democratisation and economic liberalisation strengthened media diversity and independence, and created conditions for the media’s independence from state interference and control.

Media and Politics in New Democracies. Europe in a Comparative Perspective, ed. by Jan Zeilonka, Oxford University Press, 2015

The chapter discusses informality: the failure of formal rules to regulate existing practices. T... more The chapter discusses informality: the failure of formal rules to regulate existing practices. Two major types of informality are relevant for media and democracy : one caused by the weakness of institutions, and another caused by the fusion between the media and politics. The blurring of borderlines between the media and politics makes existing formal rules inadequate, as well as helps the creation and spread of new informal practices. These circumstances are felt stronger with the advent of the Internet and social networks which make traditional forms of political representation ever more obsolete.In Bulgaria we observed a successive emergence of party-media fusions: political structures piggy-backing on media companies, and vice versa. Media presenters, or simply media-friendly personalities using the resources of media outlets, have become dominant political players. Our argument is that these are not defects or omissions of legal regulatory regimes of specific countries: rather, these are the circumstances of contemporary democratic politics.

Constitution and the Classics: Patterns of Constitutional Thought from Fortescue to Bentham, 2014

In this chapter I look at the constitutional features of Rousseau’s "association of the general w... more In this chapter I look at the constitutional features of Rousseau’s "association of the general will" and address the question whether and how is the tension between popular sovereignty and limited government resolved there. First I provide an account of Rousseau’s arguments for popular sovereignty and outline the main features of his "Association of the General will". Then, I look at the issue of constitutional beginning: (1) how is the sovereign constituted: how a mere aggregate of individuals becomes an association of the general will with the above properties; and (2) how is its general will shaped. The godly Legislator as Rousseau’s controversial solution to the problem of constitutional beginning is the focus of the second part. The last part is organized around the more strictly “constitutional” features of Rousseau’s project. What role does Rousseau envisage for constitutional safeguards of individual freedom within the association of the general will? I discuss in detail here his doctrine of limited government as involving supremacy and separation of the sovereign from its government. Rousseau’s account of the rule of law, as well as the related controversy over the purported limits on the general will are next addressed. Rousseau’s understanding of individual rights protection and his likely response to the charge of tyrannical majorities within the association of the General will are the foci of the concluding section of this text.

ПРЕДИЗВИКАТЕЛСТВА ПРЕД ПРЕДСТАВИТЕЛНАТА ДЕМОКРАЦИЯ В БЪЛГАРИЯ Доклади от Годишната национална конференция на Българската асоциация по политически науки Велико Търново, 2016

Стандартният отговор на въпроса „Какво е политическо задължение“ в политическата философия от Пла... more Стандартният отговор на въпроса „Какво е политическо задължение“ в политическата философия от Платон (в диалога “Критон” ) до днес е: морално задължение да се подчиняваш на законите на твоята държава. Съвременният дебат за политическото задължение също е фокусиран върху темата за всеобхватното общо задължение за подчинение на законите. В настоящия текст изследвам на пръв поглед контра-интуитивната хипотеза, че политическото задължение може да бъде по-добре разбрано като задължение за управление, а не за подчинение. Тази хипотеза – с нейните нормативни и политически предимства - е разгледана в светлината на кризата на управляемостта, характерна за състоянието на политическото днес.

The Requirements of Equal Citizenship: What Recognition?, 2019

The article discusses the requirements of equal citizenship in contemporary pluralist societies a... more The article discusses the requirements of equal citizenship in contemporary pluralist societies and addresses the question of whether toleration is sufficient for equal citizenship or some form of recognition of the different – of the members of cultural minorities – is also necessary. The main thesis of the author is that equal citizenship requires equal recognition towards all members of the political community, which in contemporary pluralist societies also means recognition of the right to one's own culture to members of cultural minority groups. Lastly, the popular thesis that politics of recognition and multiculturalism more generally are an incoherent form of value relativism is discussed and refuted.

Статията разглежда изискванията на равното гражданство в съвременните плуралистични общества и дискутира въпроса дали равното гражданство изисква само толерантост или и някаква форма на признаване на различните – членове на културни малцинства. Основната теза на автора е, че равното гражданство изисква равно уважение към всички членове на политическата общност, което в съвременните плуралистични общества означава и признаване на правото на собствена култура на членовете на малцинствени културни групи. Критично разгледана и отхвърлена е и популярната теза, че политиките на признаване и мултикултурализма по-общо са вътрешнопротиворечиви форми на ценностен релативизъм.

Episztemikus proceduralizmus Megoldás a demokrácia autoritás-igényének dilemmájára? (in Hungarian... more Episztemikus proceduralizmus Megoldás a demokrácia autoritás-igényének dilemmájára? (in Hungarian. Title in English: Epistemic Proceduralism: A Solution to the Authority of Democracy Dilemma?)

The dilemma at the heart of contemporary debates on the authority of democracy is the following: to be the preferred form of government, democracy should be able to guarantee good government, yet the impartial procedures, which are for many the essence of democracy, do not by themselves guarantee such result, though may “accidentally” produce it. In the text I briefly summarize the main theses and the weaknesses of the two major camps within this debate – those of the proceduralists and the instrumentalists. Against their background I provide a brief reconstruction of the original contribution to this debate – the “epistemic proceduralism” of David Estlund. I outline a series of possible critiques against this “hybrid” conception that may come from the two opposite extremes in the debate. I also identify a major, in my view, challenge for such a theory: to provide a non-arbitrary, principled way of limiting the circle of citizens, whose consent is necessary for legitimacy of government, without entirely dispensing with consent as a condition for legitimacy yet also without turning all into hostages of the capricious few, refusing (with no reason) to grant their consent. The problems with Estlund's criterion - Qualified acceptability Requirement (QAR), and with determining the group of “the qualified” in particular, which are part of Estlund’s response to this challenge, indicate the limits of his “epistemic proceduralism”. It fails as a fully adequate analysis of the authority and legitimacy of democratic government, since it seems to violate a fundamental normative assumption of democratic government – citizen equality.

Разум, 2005

This is an interview with Joseph Raz. taken during his visit to Sofia in November 2005. It is pu... more This is an interview with Joseph Raz. taken during his visit to Sofia in November 2005. It is published both in Bulgarian and in English in the Bulgarian journal for politics and culture Разум (Reason) in 2005.
The interview is published here in English.

Българската политология пред предизвикателствата на времето. Сборник в чест на 60 годишнината на професор Георги Карасимеонов

Статията формулира дилемата, която движи съвременния дебат за авторитета на демокрацията: за да б... more Статията формулира дилемата, която движи съвременния дебат за авторитета на демокрацията: за да бъде предпочитаната форма на управление, демокрацията трябва да може да гарантира добро управление. Но безпристрастните процедури, които за мнозина са същността на демокрацията, сами по себе си не гарантират подобен резултат, макар и да могат случайно да го произведат.
В този текст анализирам двете страни на тази дилема, представени в "процедуралисткия егалитаризъм" на Джеръми Уолдрън и "инструменталистката защита на демокрацията" на Ричард Арнесън. Статията завършва с кратко представяна на основните тези на "епистемичния процедурализъм" на Дейвид Естлънд, оригинален опит за разрешаване на "дилемата на демокрацията."

The article discusses the requirements of equal citizenship in contemporary pluralist societies ... more The article discusses the requirements of equal citizenship in contemporary pluralist societies and addresses the question of whether toleration is sufficient for equal citizenship or some form of recognition of the different – of the members of cultural minorities – is also necessary. The main thesis of the author is that equal citizenship requires equal recognition towards all members of the political community, which in contemporary pluralist societies also means recognition of the right to one's own culture to members of cultural minority groups. Lastly, the popular thesis that politics of recognition and multiculturalism more generally are an incoherent form of value relativism is discussed and refuted.

Freedom and its enemies: the tragedy of liberty, edited by Renata Uitz, 2015

In a series of papers Jeremy Waldron has offered an original account of human dignity as based on... more In a series of papers Jeremy Waldron has offered an original account of human dignity as based on the extension of rank or high status to all humans. He has also advanced a novel understanding of some of our important rights and their relation to social responsibility, identifying a special class of “responsibility-rights”. While being duties themselves, these rights are genuinely empowering. At the same time they are “a way of connecting rights with socially important functions, not just seeing them as an individualist limit on the ambit of social functions” (Waldron 2010a/2012: 28). Waldron connects in fruitful ways this novel notion of rights with ‘dignity’, on his ‘universalized rank” interpretation of that concept. The responsibility-rights idea has the ambition to throw light on how status-dignity may both be the ground and the content of some of our important rights.
The question I am addressing in my paper is whether Waldron’s novel way of thinking about dignity as the ground of rights and his concept of responsibility-rights provides a prospect for responding to the “tragedy of liberty” a major challenge to the contemporary constitutional legal systems. One of the causes of the tragedy of liberty is that due to its inherent lack of responsibilities, the consistent application of liberty may lead to self-destruction. The passion for liberty, accordingly, gives way to other concerns: dignity, equality, equal respect, leaving little space for liberty itself.
It is in view of these concerns for the place and value of liberty, that an analysis of Waldron’s account is provided. The “leveling up”, “universalized rank” understanding of human dignity as the ground and content of rights seems to invite ever expanding, inflated right-claims, leading to clashes with fundamental liberties and liberal rights. Ultimately, this expansionist picture of rights seems self-defeating. The concept of responsibility-rights, advanced by Waldron, looks like a welcome limit on this expansion.
The more concrete questions I address in this article are, firstly, whether Waldron’s ‘high equal status’ conception of dignity is open to the objection that it invites an expansionist, ultimately self-defeating picture of rights, and, secondly, whether the concept of responsibility-rights he advances is plausible and can furnish an apt response to this objection of expansionism and self-defeat of rights.

Constitutions and the Classics: Patterns of Constitutional Thought from Fortescue to Bentham, ed. by Denis Galligan, Oxford University Press, 2014

In this chapter I look at the constitutional features of Rousseau’s "association of the general w... more In this chapter I look at the constitutional features of Rousseau’s "association of the general will" and address the question whether and how is the tension between popular sovereignty and limited government resolved there. First I provide an account of Rousseau’s arguments for popular sovereignty and outline the main features of his "Association of the General will". Then, I look at the issue of constitutional beginning: (1) how is the sovereign constituted: how a mere aggregate of individuals becomes an association of the general will with the above properties; and (2) how is its general will shaped. The godly Legislator as Rousseau’s controversial solution to the problem of constitutional beginning is the focus of the second part. The last part is organized around the more strictly “constitutional” features of Rousseau’s project. What role does Rousseau envisage for constitutional safeguards of individual freedom within the association of the general will?
I discuss in detail here his doctrine of limited government as involving supremacy and separation of the sovereign from its government. Rousseau’s account of the rule of law, as well as the related controversy over the purported limits on the general will are next addressed. Rousseau’s understanding of individual rights protection and his likely response to the charge of tyrannical majorities within the association of the General will are the foci of the concluding section of this text.

*****
This book features a collection of writings that emerged from a programme of workshops that took place at Oxford University between 2008 and 2012. The aim of the programme was to examine from a constitutional perspective the writings of a selection of authors who may justly be considered to have provided the classics of legal and political theory in the British, French, and American contexts. The emphasis is on the British, beginning with John Fortescue in the fifteenth century and ending with Jeremy Bentham in the nineteenth. In light of the constitutional ferment in the United States and France in the later eighteenth century, the interconnections with the British system, and the enduring influence of the ideas that emerged, a selection of French and American writers from that time have been included. Some of the authors were deliberately constitutional theorists, while for others whose aims were different it is a matter of drawing out the constitutional aspects.

Разум, 2008

Въпросът за задължението за подчинение на закона традиционно се определя като въпрос за това дали... more Въпросът за задължението за подчинение на закона традиционно се определя като въпрос за това дали има морални основания да се спазват задължителните за всички изисквания на един всеобхватен, морално погрешим и институционализиран политически авторитет. Този въпрос е обратната страна на друг извечен въпрос на политическата философия: дали има легитимни политически авторитети с право да управляват своите подчинени. Отговорът, който т.нар. философски анархисти дават, е като цяло отрицателен: няма легитимни политически авторитети и съответно - няма и общо морално задължение да им се подчиняваме, а дори и да имаше легитимни политически авторитети, от това не следва автоматично, че попадащите в тяхната юрисдикция имат и общо морално задължение да им се подчиняват. Детайлното разглеждане на тези позиции изисква специално внимание.
В настоящия текст ще разгледам само един от опитите да се отговори на предизвикателството на философските анархисти. Това е опитът да се изведе общо морално задължение за подчинение на закона от т.нар. задължение за честната игра, първоначално предложено от Хърбърт Харт и Джон Ролс и доразвито от редица съвременни политически философи, най-вече Джордж Клоско.
За да оценя успеха на такъв тип теория, първо ще анализирам аргументите на Робърт Нозик и Джон Симънс, които от волунтаристки позиции атакуват извеждането на общо задължение за подчинение от принципа за честна игра. Ще разгледам и дам оценка на опитите на Ричард Арнесън и Джордж Клоско да предложат базирано на честната игра задължение за подчинение, устойчиво на подобни волунтаристки атаки. Ще покажа, че теорията на Клоско за "презумптивните" публични блага като основа на задължението за подчинение на закона, макар и донякъде успешно да отговаря на тези предизвикателства, пренебрегва един не маловажен проблем. Това е проблемът, идентифициран от Ролс като "проблем с гаранциите" (assurance problem)", че достатъчно други хора също ще се подчиняват на закона, за да е жизнена схемата на съвместно сътрудничество и потенциалните участници действително да имат задължения да се включат в нея. Задълженията за честна игра са от класа "условни" задължения: те са валидни задължения, само ако условието "достатъчен брой други хора да ги спазват" е удовлетворено. Типичен пример за такива "условни" задължения са някои правни задължения, като задължението да се спазват ограниченията на скоростта на движение, задължението да не се замърсява околната среда и т.н. Имаме морално задължение да ги спазваме, само ако има достатъчно общо ниво на спазване от страна на другите на тези задължения. Ще твърдя, че това "условие за достатъчното спазване на правилата от другите" (или compliance condition, както го нарича Едмъндсън") поставя сериозно предизвикателство пред теориите за задължението за подчинение като задължение на честната игра, което все още не е адекватно адресирано от съвременните участници в този дебат.

Демокрацията в България през 21 век. Българска асоциация за политически науки и Европейски информационен център, 2010

Основният проблем, който разглеждам в този текст, е как можем да обясним задълбочаващата се криза... more Основният проблем, който разглеждам в този текст, е как можем да обясним задълбочаващата се криза на колективното действие в България. Моята хипотеза е, че ниски (и продължаващи да спадат) нива на хоризонтално социално доверие, са основното обяснение за проблемите на колективното действие в България.
Хипотезата е тествана с анализ на широкоразпространената в България практика на неплащане на сметки за топлоенергия (казусът Топлофикация).

Blog of Oxford Human Rights Hub (OxHRH), 2018

On July 27 Bulgaria's Constitutional Court ruled that the Council of Europe Convention on prevent... more On July 27 Bulgaria's Constitutional Court ruled that the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (often called the "Istanbul Convention") contravenes the Bulgarian Constitution. In early 2018, the Convention ratification bill met strong opposition from nationalist parties in government, major opposition from the Socialist party, the President of the Republic, and the Bulgarian Orthodox Church, among other places. Manipulative campaigning, deliberately fanning people's fears (of the 'third sex', of 'gender-ideology', of same-sex marriage) fueled negative popular reactions, prompting the government to withdraw the Bill. Prior to its withdrawal, 75 MPs asked the Court to review the constitutionality of ratifying the Convention.

Centre for Liberal Strategies Report , 2016

The recent waves of protests affecting many countries in the world create the impression of risin... more The recent waves of protests affecting many countries in the world create the impression of rising levels of civic activism. The people vent their frustration with the performance of governments, parliaments and political parties. Trust in representative democratic institutions is very low both in established democracies and in countries in transition. New forms of political representation – like social movements, social networks-based
organizations, politicized media, etc. compete with the political parties for the mandate to “represent the people”. At present, there is no coherent, fully-fledged alternative political model of governance different from representative liberal democracy. But still, experiments are taking place, and political actors who claim to be an alternative – like Syriza and
Podemos – do exceptionally well in elections.
How to make sense of these developments? Do they signal a greater potential for civic activism and public participation in politics? Or are these phenomena a negative reaction, a simple show of desperation and frustration with the inefficiency of the current state of democratic government?
The Centre for Liberal Strategies, Sofia has addressed these questions in some depth by carrying out comparative research on three forms of civic activism – setting up novel forms of political representation; involvement in NGOs; and self-organization and self-structuring through social networks, the blogosphere, etc. – in countries affected by massive protests.
The results of the research are collected in this publication. It comprises
six case studies (including a case study Bulgaria), their comparative analysis and a set of policy recommendations regarding the three spheres of interest.

PhD Thesis

Can a reason-based justification for political authority in a liberal-democratic political order ... more Can a reason-based justification for political authority in a liberal-democratic political order be offered? This was the question that prompted my journey into theories of authority. The focus of my present theoretical interests is the reason-based account of practical authority advanced by Joseph Raz. My answer to the question: does Raz’s account of authority provide a fully adequate account of the legitimacy of a liberal-democratic type of authority, is negative. There are problems with this account of legitimacy already at the general level. The exclusively instrumentalist in character legitimacy test it advances is not perfectly congruent with the common-sense understanding of legitimate authority correlated with a duty to obey. Nor does it deliver on its promise to provide an unambiguous solution to the latent in our concept of authority rationality paradox: namely, authority is either wrong or superfluous, so obeying it is never rational. There are also specific problems with it as an account of the legitimacy of political authorities. I do recognise, however, the need to accommodate its sound points within a non-instrumentalist reason-based account of the justification for a liberal-democratic type of authority.

Political Studies Review , 2022

Review of the book by Maria Dimova-Cookson, Rethinking Positive and Negative Liberty. Routledge 2019