KoalaOnTheJuice
8744
561
4
REUTERS: "The protests began in late November when Zhelyazkov's government, composed of three parties, proposed a draft budget that included an increase in social security contributions and taxes on dividends to finance higher state spending.
Some of that spending was earmarked for police, security services and the judiciary - the very bodies that many Bulgarians have grown to despise over years that have seen Bulgaria ranked as one of the EU's most corrupt countries. The budget was withdrawn, but popular anger has persisted.
Many were already upset by other government actions, including a perceived crackdown on the liberal, pro-EU opposition that saw Blagomir Kotsev, mayor of the coastal resort of Varna, jailed for months on allegations of corruption, which he strongly denies.
The protests swelled and by Wednesday tens of thousands of people were on the streets of cities and towns across Bulgaria calling for the government to step down.
They represented some of the biggest anti-government gatherings since the protests that ended communism in 1989."
https://www.reuters.com/world/bulgaria-faces-turmoil-after-protests-topple-government-eve-euro-entry-2025-12-11/
[deleted]
[deleted]
Bowtie8bit
That's so weird - why didn't the military just shoot them all like they would here in the USA?
swedeonamoose
Actually had to scroll past news of another shooting before i saw news of this on my normal news site =_=
YouCantSpellSlaughterWithoutLaughter
Come on, US. Get your shit together.
jimmythehat1
must be nice
MrPappagiorgioFromYuma
Dear lord, I see what you have done for others and I want that for myself.
MeestowKitty
Wow. It's almost like a non-ending demonstration is way more effective then just showing up every few weeks, on schedule, and following all the rules the cops lay down.
ozmantic
Why didn't they use the energy wepon to control the masses like they did in that other county. They have EMF rays that can microwave or send sounds to your mind.
funnyguy10
Canada needs this in the worst way
morninggloryshade777
America: heed the example. FORCE THE FASCISTS OUT. ARREST, PROSECUTE, SENTENCE.
awholelotofnothin
"Many tens of thousands protested" in Bulgaria, population 6 million, beginning in November after decades of corruption. In the US, population 300 million, over 7 million people and demonstrators have been protesting since January of 2025. Differences: The sudden attack of the govt on the people, the support of the government's corruption by 1/3 of the country, the destruction of the White House was by the govt,not protestors, and lack of sustained protesting because of survival in capitalism.
awholelotofnothin
Until 1/3 of the country stops supporting fascism, and until protesters can sustain a continual effort for multiple months in a concentrated area like Washington DC without being shot or bombed by the US military, and the corruption reaches a boiling point, I don't think anyone is resigning because they are stealing billions of dollars from US citizens.
NonstopRampage
Like... the WHOLE government?
Meltemi
I'm not sure what you're imagining, so I'm not sure if I can confirm or deny. Bulgaria is a parliamentary democracy like the UK. People can vote for a president who represents Bulgaria and can exercise veto power (which can be overridden). The government, however, is formed in parliament. People vote for parties or coalitions, and seats are allocated by vote to representatives. Parties get together and decide upon a prime minister who forms a government to exercise political power. If this ①
Meltemi
government no longer enjoys the support of a majority of parliament members, either due to a new election or because some withdraw from supporting it, the government "falls": it is no longer considered able to exercise power and a new working coalition must be created, or new elections held if a new government cannot be formed.
This is not to be confused with a revolution where the Constitution ends up used as tissue paper. ②
johnnyunlikely
Where was Fox News when the Bulgarian government needed them!?!?!
TrueLegateDamar
Where was Fox News when the Westfold fell?!
Neednoggle
Other countries still clinging to their last shreds of democracy should be taking notes here.
KatInTheCorner
I'm definitely not trying to dismiss your very valid point about other countries needing to take notes. It's just that... the current US government will institute martial law and start mowing down civilians in drone strikes looong before they would ever resign.
A government with politicians that would resign is still a civil society. The people seeking absolute power here believe they're on a LITERAL "mission from God", they'll kill anyone who gets in their way.
GeneralAnubis
It's unfortunately also significantly harder for the US to protest like this. Maybe in some cities, maybe in some states, but the population density is so low in the US that it's not nearly as effective because you end up with an easily ignored crowd limited to a few small areas, even with "mass" protests.
KatInTheCorner
Precisely this! I genuinely cannot tell you how many Europeans I have had to explain the size of the United States.
Why didn't I go to a protest in DC? Because I'm only in Ohio, which is still considered the east side of the country, and it's STILL 7 hours to drive there. Then I would have to pay for parking, a place to stay, gas there and back...
We aren't one country. We are 50 countries in a trench coat. Protesting a state capital doesn't do shit, as the No Kings protests proved.
Beardedgeek72
...Fun fact: Revolutions are the final stage of dictatorship.
Or to make a longer point: You might be right, but I never understand what the "They will proclaim martial law" people's alternative is? If you do not protest because you fear martial law, you are already under martial law.
KatInTheCorner
Sorry for the double post, I just want to clarify. Right now we are at the "If I fight back, I don't know if the people around me will protect me, and I'll be taken to prison or worse, and my child will be put into foster care" phase because everyone else is worried about the same thing. A lot of people are going to have to lose a lot more for a significant enough chunk of the population to risk their life for more than their family and immediate community.
KatInTheCorner
Perhaps it would be better if I phrased it like this:
Shit needs to happen, it's the only way to make it stop. But the only way people are motivated to risk not only themselves, but their family, their children, is to feel like they have very little left to lose.
I don't want things to get any worse, but historically they have to get worse before enough people are motivated to risk violence or death. Especially when up against a trigger happy police and military.
ripstripsart
If they had the power to truly subjugate us, they would have already done it. The US government is using terrorist tactics because they know a true military coup will fail. Too much area to cover, number of citizens is to high, many of them are armed and have access to communication systems medical resources. I’m not saying a conflict wouldn’t be bloody. I’m not saying we wouldn’t lose more than them. I’m saying they’re are too many of us to actually control. Fear is our only cage.
KatInTheCorner
Sorry for the double post, but I think it's important to reiterate. A platitude about fear will not make a parent risk their child unless it's the very last choice. These people know if they get arrested, their child gets put in the foster care system. Or worse.
I know what ultimately needs to happen to stop the progression of this nightmare, but I absolutely understand why people aren't jumping the gun.
KatInTheCorner
I absolutely agree with you that we would ultimately be able to win if it came down to a Civil War. But they would certainly try and the most disenfranchised people would be first to the slaughter.
Saying "fear is our only cage" greatly minimizes what you are asking folks to do. Fear of what, exactly?
Losing their children. Not being able to provide for their family. Dying. People have not lost enough to risk what little they have. Yet.
ripstripsart
People have a lot of reasons for staying in the cage, I know I do. It doesn’t change what the bars are made of. What I am trying to express to anybody who’s listening is that the idea that we are helpless is a lie that is perpetrated by the enemy. If you’re willing to sacrifice, this can end. But many aren’t. That is the way of things.
KatInTheCorner
I absolutely agree with you 100% on that. I just extend empathy to the people who aren't there yet because I'm tired of people asking why a group of propagandized, desperate people who literally don't have health care, can't take a day off work, have no social support systems...why they can't fight? Often from countries that have all of those things AND got those rights from fights that happened generations before them.
Sielas
Bulgarian here, the protests were really dumb and aimless. I don't know why people protested the budget because of a dividend tax that doesn't affect 99% of people. People wanted a budget with more spending, less tax revenue and no deficit spending, which if anyone thinks about for 2 seconds is impossible. Keep in mind half of the people protesting are Euro-skeptics/Pro-Putin protesting the budget because we're adopting the Euro. This instability only helps the ongoing Far Right takeover.
meagain2021
I was wondering.
Sielas
Ultimately it's another in a long series of protests and government shutdowns aimed at a vague nebulous "Mafia" which is used like MAGA uses "Deep State".
ReaperCDN
>People wanted a budget with more spending, less tax revenue and no deficit spending, which if anyone thinks about for 2 seconds is impossible.
Please think about this for longer than 2 seconds. You don't need to generate revenue through taxes alone. You can have publicly owned assets that are revenue generators, like the LCBO in Ontario as an example. So it's entirely feasible to have more spending, more revenue, and less taxes. It just means you have to also have public ownership.
Sielas
How are you going to increase public ownership without additional spending? Nationalization is probably one of the biggest hot button issues for corruption here.
ReaperCDN
"********more spending********, more revenue, and less taxes. It just means you have to also have public ownership."
In the USA, just about everything is privately owned, including your politicians, and corruption is absolutely through the roof. So clearly nationalization has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that corruption is going to exist.
Salpinus
I don't know what the LCBO is, but public ownership of natural resources can be good (like Norway), but Bulgaria isn't exactly rich in natural resources last I checked. And for some countries there's natural resources in eg forests that need to be protected, where it's usually not a good idea to have a state owned company doing harvesting, since the state then stops acting as a regulating body and instead act as an Investor.
ReaperCDN
The LCBO is the Liquor Control Board of Ontario. If you want hard liquor, thats where you go buy it. Profits are revenue for the province.
Salpinus
Oh, like the wine monopoly in Norway then! Anything above 5% you have to get there.
ricpaul
Systembolaget? Or however you write it in Norsk? (Was eyeopening to learn this was a thing in Sweden for Dutch guy, but haven't seen one in almost 3 decades so excuse possible misspelling).
Helixninja333
The US really needs to take note.
AtmaDarkwolf
Hate to be that guy to tell ya, but... ya.. American politicians are NOT the type to be like 'oh snap, I'm in the wrong? Well SHUCKS I shall step down and let someone more able and moral take my place!' - Nope. 'Mericano Politics seem to favor and cater to the most corrupt among our society. They must be dug out like a cancerous tumor. Including all the new nodes that spring up elsewhere once u get enough corruption in place. (as with how u going to have to deal with it soon)
iamdeathandthisismyvalley
Should, but won't.
Helixninja333
Sorry, new policy dictates that I downvote anyone saying it can't happen. Apathy is their weapon, and we shall not use it.
jasondeslin
It's a problem that doesn't respond well to increases in scale.
Our government is too decentralized, and a week or more of travel to get to DC is outside the budget of most people.
If the leaders in these countries that's governments have collapsed moved to another building, the protests would have followed. Here, if Shitler couldn't crack down on DC, he could just hop to a military base in say Idaho, and government control would stay in his hands. The protestors couldn't easily follow.
KoalaOnTheJuice
Trumpists managed just fine on Jan 6th.
jasondeslin
They accomplished nothing, and weren't even treated as a threat. If any government agency had mobilized to stop them, they would have scattered like pigeons.
The only reason they did ANY damage is because Shitler wanted them to, and tied the hands of everyone that could have stopped them.
Do you really think he would let anyone on the left pull that?
Think hard.
KoalaOnTheJuice
Maybe, but they made it to DC at least. They found the courage to act just fine, the time off work just fine, and the energy to organize just fine. Why do you think that is?
Makes me wonder what's holding back the left from at least making an attempt as they did. The trumpists' attempt failed as you say, but many governments have fallen to determined organised crowds, including regimes more brutal and totalitarian than this one. What is it that the Trumpists had that real Americans don't?
jasondeslin
You do remember that Charlie Kirk and other rich cunts PAID for that trip right?
And they still didn't have enough numbers to do shit if EVERYONE wasn't ordered to stand down.
Dipshit.
clonedeeznuts
They're too busy checking bathrooms and deporting newborns
ouchietruthie
Too busy chasing distractions.
NaughtButOne
Those aren't the people who need to be doing the protesting.
clonedeeznuts
They're the ones going to prevent everyone else from doing it
NaughtButOne
TheTojo15
Yea, violence isn’t always the best option but it might be the only viable one we have. And I don’t necessarily mean violence against people but those folks in Nepal did burn down their govt buildings
pgdave
Violence will lead to a civil war. It's possible that after the war things are better, it's possible their worse, but during the war millions of people will die, be starved, lose access to basic services, be raped and tortured, become refugees. I'm not saying it's never worth it, but who are you willing to sacrifice to make life better?
euphoricopportunity
It might, it might not. "Violence" is a very, very broad category of responses. If I thought civil war would actually produce a guaranteed "good" government I would be more willing to go for it. The real fight is cultural change, either way.
TheTojo15
Myself at this point.
SinStar87
Im glad and wish you the best luck and aim in your endeavors, and am deeply sorry I'm not strong enough to join you.
MeestowKitty
It doesn't have to lead to a civil war. If enough of the blue state governor's refuse to keep with the nonsense the DNC is pumping out, and simply start bankrupting the fed by not sending any funds that they would normally control, direct their people to stop paying taxes, provide them with support/relief/protection, and found State Guards to oppose the Nat Guard and Federal LEOs, then we wouldn't need a war. They'd collapse.
pgdave
Yes, that would lead to a civil war, without a doubt. That would be the blue states in open rebellion, and the State Guards opposing would be literally at war with the national guard and federal LEOs. You've literally described the beginnings of a civil war.
And why would you think that the blue states would have bigger pockets than the federal government? They have bigger incomes, not bigger war chests.
MeestowKitty
And there is a difference between a hot war and a cold war. Threatening, blocking, impeding, etc aren't "war." So long as shots aren't being fired, fighting hasn't really started. Posturing can be effective, so long as you're willing to back it up. The fed knows that the nation in civil war would destroy them. Their is no negotiating if it came to that. Just gallows. They will try and avoid war. They want to claim war, so they can use the insurrection act. They don't want real war.
mindstorm8191
Dude; this picture in Bulgaria? That is millions of people. There is NO army in the world who can fight against a mass of people that size.
If this administration is going to begin openly assaulting civilians with military hardware on the grounds of 'civil war', we'll be going to the streets, surrounding every capital with millions of people, and bringing the whole nation to the ground.
It is The People who have the ultimate power here; governments are right to fear them
MeestowKitty
The Blue States are basically all that funds the fed. The fed takes in money from the blues, and sends it back to the reds. The red states would collapse. The fed would collapse. Chris Christie, when he was gov of NJ, did this to some degree after the big hurricane that hit NJ, NY, etc. He got together with the states that got hit, that FEMA wasn't doing enough for, and threatened to withhold money for the fed. Boom, suddenly they got taken care of. Not a Christie fan, btw, just from there.