What's missing is a leader and a script.
The righteous indignation over the current situation in Czech politics is probably logical. On the one hand, the propaganda of the current establishment spews out information that we are the sixth safest country in the world, that we are the best off in our modern history, and that the government has increased pensions by CZK 900 again. Not to mention discounts on train travel and other things. On the other hand, the truth is a little different. The Czech Republic is currently the tenth, not the sixth, safest country. Not so much by its own merit, but mainly thanks to its position in the middle of the overall very safe European Union (see: GPI 2019). In a ranking mapping quality of life (see Quality of Life Index), we ranked twenty-sixth. However, it should be obvious to anyone who looks closely at the calculation methodology that ten positions up or down is just a matter of a minor change in the assignment. The increase in pensions by the announced average of CZK 900 must also be corrected, because the statutory indexation (according to the CSO) is at least CZK 707 for 2020. In other words, we are talking about a maximum of two hundred, which is being added to pensioners, however, thanks to Minister Maláčová rather than anyone else. However, it is not only these "slightly" adjusted figures that should shake the more perceptive from their lethargy, but also the current milieu, which is showing alarming signs. The person of the Minister of Culture, presented as the centrepiece of current political events, is a mere decoy covering up the negotiating practices of our highest representatives, which are heading in a completely different direction. The artfully dramatized fight (read fajt, Czech for fight) over Jiří Fajt and Michal Soukup is a perfect fog in which the real reason for these actions is lost. This is the effort to upset the hitherto acceptable balance of the tripod of executive, legislative and judicial power. A one-way swing, following the example of some neighbouring countries, is both a challenge for easily recognisable constitutional officials and a necessary condition for continued political existence. It is probably not difficult to decipher all this. The problem is that right now no one at all can conceive of a vision that a hitherto relatively passive public can identify with. Just what's next, though? Not even a billion moments for anything can make up for the absence of a visible leader who can present a plan, in a few clear, charismatic paragraphs, for how to get out of the moral quagmire, how to put a kind and understandable face on everyday politics, and how to police the economic parameters so that we are not in intractable trouble in the near future.