Apart from the in principle non-electable Yes movement, which focuses on the nationwide obtuse manipulation of the socio-economically weaker inhabitants of the capital, this applies to all relevant actors who are currently represented in the Prague-wide council.
Regardless of whether it is the opposition or the coalition.
The level of willingness of all at least slightly elected parties to paralyze dialogue and solutions both with visible disputes and behind-the-scenes, often quite insidious methods of hogging, exceeds other motivations and intentions, and thus makes Prague politics an endless series of frog battles, in which they run far away from reality and necessities.
This includes a sometimes absurdly rigid office with an inadequate appetite for power, which gives every important event an arbitrary spin, and thus an unpredictable direction of development.
It doesn’t matter that something makes sense. If a constellation does not occur in which the intention fits into some political shop and at the same time passes through the bureaucratic time-space grid, which transforms anything into the language of internal directives and internal moods (often infinitely stupid), then there is no chance for recognition. It’s just not detected at all.
The success of life in this dimension is based on the ability to constantly update attitudes, which at the same time can be diametrically different depending on who you are talking to.
Now, if the goal of such political life in Prague is to prosper, it is impossible to remain coherent, because what is understandable and acceptable to person A is completely incomprehensible and unacceptable to person B.
Compromises, which are undoubtedly necessary for politics, thus go too far, and where one would expect at least some solid point, one usually finds only limitless jelly.
But to be specific: I ignore the already mentioned Yes and all the variations of populism that have sprung up in the form of various bizarre, purposeful groupings. I focus only on the parties that are in the current parliament, or those that have the potential for some serious political negotiations and solutions.
The coalition together is expected to win. I cannot vote for ODS candidates, because I have not met (at the level of Prague) anyone who would act seriously, predictably and with a non-ideological orientation to the cause itself.
My experience with Prague’s KDU-ČSL is limited, but not good, my experience with TOP09 is significantly greater and very different from the style of ODS, through technocratic short-sightedness to solid and matter-of-fact actions.
It’s the same with Pirates and Prague, with a better ratio, but also with other types of shortcomings.
Paradoxically, Prague’s STAN has the most balanced score in this sense, despite the Dosimeter criminal case.
For a truly representative ratio, it is good to think about the presence of the left, which is concentrated only in the Solidarita coalition, in which, among others, the ČSSD and the Greens meet. So you can choose from this – still relatively large – flower bed, but it is worth spending some time on the selection and evaluating the individual nominees.
From my point of view, each of the mentioned (optional) parties offers candidates who are worth it, as well as those who will continue in the style described above for the next period, whether they have previous experience or are yet to absorb it.
The order is not decisive, however, that must also be taken into account.
If only because the ends of the candidates are often filled with people who do not really want to enter politics and therefore do not have the necessary motivation. It’s not a general rule, but then you really need to know the person.
I confess that it is also important for me to trust that the person in question can really understand the often complex material and political context behind the important plans that will be decided upon, for which people with education, beyond their activities and experience are simply more qualified.
In order to illustrate with very specific cases who I evaluate as eligible candidates, based on my own experience of dealing with them, I will list Jan Lacina, Jan Konvalinka or Michael Šebek for STAN, Ondřej Vykoukal, Jaromír Beránek or Dan Mazur from Pirátů, Hana Marvanová from TOP09, Pavle Vyhnánek or Hana Šišková from Prahy Sobě, Anna Šabatová from Solidarity (these are candidates for city councils and the capital city).
This is certainly not a completely representative or final selection, and undoubtedly even among these people we can talk about differences that are important for a politician, however, for me, they are people who meet the parameters of sufficient correctness, intellectual level and political competence.
Not always to the executive, but definitely to a representative role. In particular, it is about trying to create a mix that is sufficiently resistant to the intoxication of the environment into which it enters, and the ability not to gradually degenerate under this influence to the level of empty, small-town political pomp, which is too much for my taste in Prague.