Maybe the most significant expression the unnecessary prohibitions find in the area of secrecy. The author has no intentions to announce "state secrets" citing here various examples of pseudo-secrecy, because each one of us could have given a number of such cases. However illogical this may seem but in the most cases is applied the rule that all, what shows our
backwardness
, as in the area of economy, so also in the social and political spheres, is a state secret, which can discredit the system.
2.
Another more serious category of
examples
are those
related with personal initiative
.
Many times we have discussed the question about the personal involvement in performing of some useful for the society activity, and the corresponding material and moral stimuluses. In spite of this, there are many examples of unsatisfactory decisions, when for equal in quantity and quality labor people receive entirely different payments, and there even happen that for a greater work is paid less. The common sense struggles to accept why a health nurse must receive for 6 hours of work in the polyclinic, say, 10 levs
**
, where for one injection at home — 5 levs; nor why for one hour of instruction a teacher receives 3 levs, where for private lesson — from 5 to 10 levs; similarly also with the building workers, auto-mechanics, and so on, and so on. Practically this leads to arising of personal disinterestedness in performing of the main work.
[ ** A Lev is the Bulgarian currency, also meaning a lion, which in those concluding totalitarian years, around 1988, was officially still equal to one US dollar, but unofficially was about five times weaker. ]
The wish to advance in professional hierarchy, called sometimes unjustified careerism, has also its meaning for the initiative of the worker. It is logical that that one, who works more conscientiously and effectively, will move faster upward. Alas, very often decisive, if not the single one, happens to be the criterion for political activity and ideological consciousness — i.e. ranging on the scale of "our man".
It is clear that the youth is the most revolutionary and initiative part of the population in each society. In this sense there should have been shown aid and support for increasing of self-dependence and feeling of responsibility of the young people before the society. Our system, however, hinders in all possible ways similar efforts of the youth — with the financial mechanism, with problems with the lodging, with the singleness of our youth organization, with the system of distributing of young professionals, and so on. In result of this the initiative of the young ones is restrained and they continue to want to have everything ready, as when they were little.
The initiative is constrained not only in regard of various persons, but also in regard of whole enterprises. No matter that there were many talks about the independence of companies and the competition between them, nothing of this is shown in practice. Let us not discuss here the relation between the competition, market mechanism, deficiency, and socialism. It suffices to say that without competition there is no space for the initiative of the people and companies, there is no possibility for adaptive development of the economy.
Related with the above-mentioned and sufficiently important for to dwell on it is the problem with the fight against monopolies. We not only don't have legal basis for such fight, but we think that this is fight against the social order (probably because in our conditions the state is the single monopolist). The common sense, however, requires that the bigger one producer is, the more was taken from him or it (where in Bulgaria the petrol is still sold cheaper to the state, and more expensive to the citizens or small companies).
3.
Let us now look for
examples
for contradiction to the common sense in questions
related with the property
In recent times in Bulgaria have begun to speak about equalizing of different forms of ownership: state's, cooperative, of group of people, private, shareholding. This is entirely in accordance with the normal human logic. But the problem is that for the moment we just speak about this (as also about the equality before the law, yet in many cases is needed the opinion of party or Komsomol organization confirming this "equality"). And, really, in Bulgaria the number plates on cars are different in colour (and the petrol is sold by different prices), depending on the form of ownership. We have wholesale and retail prices, but in practice these are prices by which is sold to different
kinds
of owners, where usually is applied the contradictory to the common sense rule: the bigger owner buys cheapen, and the common citizen — on most expensive prices. It is true that in this way is proved the advantage of the bigger owner, but it is also true that if it is based on this only tendentious price mechanism, then, surely, it is base on nothing!
In defining of personal property the socialism goes out of the rule for elimination of exploitation of human by human. This is logical. Bad are only various deformations of this rule leading to exploitation of the common citizen by the state or by some different persons in the party or state apparatus. In usual practice it happens so that, even if one has enough money to buy himself a home, then he can't have
