The Bulgarian government recruits an unlikely ally

Dear anonymous author
why so much venom about a few bones?
If you had taken the trouble to read a few Bulgarian papers you would know that no serious scientist or intellectual considered the connection between tourism and those bones worthwhile. What was said "on site" when the bones were put in that church was just part of the discourse of showing off which, I agree, is much favoured by some of our current leaders. But people of culture are aware that religion has never been our strong side, with or without those bones. Luckily, we don't need bones to attract tourists. Tourists just come and they come by the million to enjoy our mountains and our seaside, to indulge in our tasty food and good wines and to lie on the sand, SAND, dear author, not pebbles, not rocks, not wooden crates, but WARM SOFT SAND of our beaches.
I know that a lot of writers of questionable talent have found it challenging to make a career at the expense of my country. However, there is a world of difference between writing a story and writing a GOOD story and you, I am sorry to say, still have a long way to go to reach the top of the scale. For a start, next time try to be less sarcastic

This is by far one of the most ludicrous articles I have ever read. And this is the last time I am actually bothered to read something posted here.
Dear Economist, this is not journalism, this resembles a script from a poor and biased political talk show, the product of an ignorant taking a piss. I don't care if the topic was religion, politics or Bulgaria in particular (I am neither a religious man, nor a strong patriot and I certainly can't care less about politics), it is the WAY that this article was written that's simply appalling. Good enough for a personal blog, but far away from material for any serious media.

Thumbs up @Diva Rosa.

Great article, truthfully describing the real situation. Mr. Dimitrov used both "fucking colleagues" and "fucking people", regarding his own people, in one sentence. I guess having his name printed in the Economist would be the greatest achievement of this bizarre character. Having in mind the great scenery and real historical monuments in Bulgaria, I wonder how some people can hope that it would be some bones that will attract a large number of tourists to the country.

I don't see why all newspapers are critisizing Bulgaria so much

Many countries have developed "religious tourism" on the back of "someone's bones". In the Middle Ages England was well known for the shrine of St. Thomas of Canterbury. Nowadays its visiting Princess Diana's shrine.
"Catholic" countries such as Italy, Ireland, Poland, Portugal, Spain and even France all have well developed "Shrine tourism" businesses. As does Israel. So why not Bulgaria???

The intellectuals and pretty much every man (or woman for that matter) with any brains remaining abdicated from their holly right - to vote. Well, to be exact, there surely were a few doing it by mistake, but forget about them - think about the holly things and of those who don't care about them. A bone in a box, a tooth under a pillow or a ballot-paper in a dark room it is the same for most Bulgarians, who by the way are not stupid people by nature (as far as I can tell). Yet, if you get away the smarter ones from any nation what you get is a bunch of morons who may well believe in miracles and tooth fairies. So, don't blame Bulgaria, blame its "children" who abandoned their own fate and left it in the hands of the rest - some emigrated, some just ignore the politics, some just got stupid, because "everybody is doing it".

Bulgaria is a strange place, in other countries you will see most of the young people going abroad and sending money back to their relatives, in others you will see mafias moving spreading through the world, but keeping together ... you can see all kinds of things, but never anything like Bulgaria. They just don't believe they can change their own country, when they go away, they go away for good. When they stay, they just ignore everything around them and feel like aliens in their own land. What remains are the others, the inevitable mediocrity that any nation has and the new generations growing under the songs and wisdoms of the latter. There is nothing unusual if they choose to be ruled (yes in Bulgaria the government is elected to rule not to serve) by people like them. The actually won - not against the hated thievish communists (as they say), but against anybody smarter than them (in their eyes). They finally put in power a dream government - one that speaks on the national TV the same things about which the small people rumble in the tavern. In this respect believing in bones and teeth is nothing, many truly believe that the old communist functionaries (The PM, the very same professor Dimitrov and most of the rest of the cabinet) "will tell the sly and thievish communists". I don't know what is there to be told (to the communists), but I suppose I am just too ignorant to understand. Looking at the numbers it is more puzzling - they had over million party members and twice more candidates in waiting with a population a little over 7 million. It looks like self-hatred ...

So, Bulgaria became a laughing matter, but don't be foolish - they are people like everyone else, they just left their home under the rule of the roaches. I've always wondered what is so different about the Bulgarians, looking around you can see much less educated nations coping much better, you can see nations with similar history and similar problems, but you will never see a nation electing government after government with mandate for a miracle then the next one with mandate for a vengeance and doing it again and again and again. Actually there is a simple explanation - unlike the other former communist states the Bulgarians liked it. They got used to what they had, they were docile and never saw Russian tanks (except on TV I suppose) ... they just got by and liked the calm and the security of the Mother Party. Find a Bulgarian at least 40 years old and try to have a long and open conversation about the past and you will see my point. If they rumble against the communists today, they are actually crying for their lost mother - the one who may not have given them much, but was always there. Without an enterprising spirit to balance the things those who remain active just wait for the good old times to return. Anybody stupid enough to try something else, like offering more freedom, will be labeled communist, because the "government must take care".

It is sad, but truth, if you don't believe me go and find out for yourself, just be patient and look under the veil of the cliche. It is a silent tragedy we allowed to happen in Europe, while we were concerned about the noisy ones. The culture in Bulgaria closes on itself, the majority of the Bulgarians still living there becomes more detached from the rest of the world every day, don't fool yourself if you know a Bulgarian who speaks dozen languages and reads all the time, think for the rest. Unfortunately it becomes a culture where the intellectuals, the educated engineers and scientists are becoming foreigners and the rest indulge themselves in local folk clubs with Engrish names, they are founding new universities (so that everyone can get a diploma and become "a master"), they are sending their children to English schools where English is used only before an inspector, watching the local news and even the young ones who "are in the Internet all the time" rarely look for news somewhere else. Don't believe me? Before spending time to learn more just count the commenter after an article about Bulgaria and compare them with the rest.

The test is very simple: if the relics are true, they will work miracles. If not, they won't.

Some have Octopus Paul, others have St John’s relics.
Now, with the Graal in its posession, Bulgaria shall win the next football world cup
Still, if the tourists show up in large numbers, would that qualify for a miracle?

I am also quite disgruntled with the Economist's constant negativity about Bulgaria but let's not forget that there was much hope about the country's direction after Borisov's election and yet everybody is dissatisfied with the pace of reforms and the mixed signals the government sends abroad. And so is the Economist
Our country's treachorous position with regards to Moscow also isn't helping. And I suspect these are the main reasons for Economist's ire. It sometimes makes me question the objectivity of the newspaper. Yet time and again the Economist have proved right every time I doubted it.
Bulgaria both economically and strategically tries to sit somewhere in between, instead of making a firm chocie and then sticking to its guns. It looks as if it tries to win the best of two worlds and usually ends up woth the worst of both.
Are we making an economic reform so we can grow or are we trying to keep the tobacco producers happy? Are we going for the euro with a balanced budget or are we trying to keep labour unions happy? Are we making a reform in the health sector or are we trying to keep the doctors happy? Are we a NATO country or a "trojan horse" that tries to make its energy sector even more dependent on Russia than it already is?
I keep my view postive and repeat myself that when (mind you not if) the Economist have a good reason to publish positive articles for Bulgaria, then the weight of these articles will be much bigger.
Besides the country, which is a great unknown for most foreginers, has been constantly seen in negative light for almost a century - we can't seriously expect this view to change because of a few events of questionable value

@Doe, they call it also a fertilizer. I like to exaggerate a bit, but only to point out some traits we/you like to forget. Anyway, how do you see a man who strives NOT to be like those who represent better his environment, but lives there, feeds there, depends on it? I call him part of the picture. There are surely many people in Bulgaria who are becoming detached elements of the society (who knows they may become the seed of a new culture one day), but the society/culture with which they are tearing their connection is not just a homogeneous substance of obvious negative examples. On the contrary - any group, society and culture as whole consists of types that balance each other, but what makes them something that deserves a name is the fact that they keep together. So, it may look like an overstatement or even bullshit just because what I said points to the pivotal elements of that culture which have their counterparts rotating around them, feeding their self-respect on their expressed differences. It is the same anywhere with people - we are just built that way. I guess you are being too punctual in your perceptions, but my advise is - look at the system, at the parts defined by the internal balance they possess on their own not at the traits exposed separately and you may find yourself feeling differently about great many things including yourself. And the "tearing the links with the predominant culture" I spoke about is not so obvious, not popular, it isn't noisy - it just can't be, but it is there and as far as I am concerned it is probably the only hope for your country in the long run.

>The box bore an inscription with John’s name and presumed date of >birth.

In what language was the incription written, and in what calendar was the date of birth expressed?

I doubt the Communist directed, political assassination of a lone dissident on a London street over 30 years ago would be the reasoning behind any large scale 'negative attitudes' toward Bulgaria today...

Though I doubt that queues of scarf adorned, little old ladies crawling on their hands and knees in superstitious pilgrimage, through the streets, to kiss a box full of old bones will go very far in reversing any negative attitudes that do exist.

Another emerging "bone-nomics".. in another "bonestan"?

The article is actually very good. The positive/negative articles dichotomy is something which has never existed. An article is either good or bad. This particular piece is fully documented and follows the usual sarcastic pattern that anonymous Economist reporters have been using about many a country such as France, etc. These reporters are neither historians nor politcal scientists. They are mere reporters, but very professional reporters.

Åh, and the the minister did not say "fucking colleagues", he said "fucking people"

It is true that the Economist (and most of the UK press) has been consistently snarky towards Bulgaria. It is also unfortunately true that such attitude has been more than justified by many of the country's corrupt and inept politicians through the years.

Take Mr. Bozhidar Dimitrov who has had his foot firmly planted in his mouth. He clearly needs to go or be let go. Why wouldn't PM Borisov do the right thing?

Mr. Borisov hired competent and respected people like Simeon Djankov. Why tolerate a liability like Dimitrov?

The same story is true for Bulgaria's candidacy for EU commissioner where Borisov tried the ditsy Jeleva before coming to his senses and appointing the solid World Banker Georgieva.

The picture is Bulgaria is nuanced (or murky) as usual but it is not all bad. It would be good if the Economist gave some tips of the hat along with all the finger wags.

Religious turism may not be such a great ideea since these turists don't spend much. They are more concerned with the afterlife and less concerned with what this life has to offer.

@ Winner's Curse. You make several claims about Bulgaria's and Bulgarians' "culture" - excessive pride, corruption. One has to be careful, however, as "culture" is a notoriously unhelpful way of explaining behavior. I can say that past corruption was a consequence of shortages during communism and today's corruption is motivated rent seeking aided by a week judiciary. Nobody bribes dentists these days when you can just walk in and pay.

I would also predict that GERB will be reelected because for all their faults they are showing some resolve in tackling selectively corrupt officials and organized crime. Voters are not as irrational as you suggest.

do you have no understaning of passive and active participles? B. Dimitrov said 'fucken people', 'fucken' colleagues. There is a difference - not fucking!

@MacAllister. Thank you for your interest in our country. I mean that sincerely. Of course we know our problems ( especially true for your audience here) it's really not worth your effort to explain them to us (if you are trying to have a reasonable conversation and not just troll, that is). Again, thank you for your interest.