On the albanian society and current government

Il passato non è passato, ma esso è custodito

e rimane per sempre, ma noi lo dimentichiamo

e ci allontaniamo da esso. Tuttavia, in seguito,

lungo il susseguirsi imprevedibile delle circostanze,

esso riappare di nuovo come un eterno presente.

Non dimenticatemi. Lettere da un gulag - Pavel. A. Florenskij

The Albanians have been attempting to distance themselves from a difficult past

for 26 years. They endured one of the most ferocious dictatorships of twentieth-

century Europe. The lack of every basic political, religious or cultural right

determined the life of almost three million people. The shift from an isolating

system to a civilisation clearly and greedily oriented to the Western world brought

about a deep and painful split in the conscience of the albanians, whose

economy, society and culture were still heavily underdeveloped.

Imagine you underwent eye surgery. If you were able to unwind the blind fold

slowly, trying to ration the quantity of light which hits your pupils, then you

would recover slowly but accordingly to the rules of science and in absolute

compliance with your normal medical progress. You would then be able to see

the world around you again and you should be ready to take your life back

actively and peacefully. Now imagine that after the same surgery your blind fold

gets unwrapped under a blinding beam of light. Not only would your recovery be

longer but you would also risk losing any benefit coming from the surgery; the

progress would be long and painful and, obviously, getting back to a normal life

would not be as you thought it would.

I used this metaphor intentionally to speak about what happened in Albania

during the '90s, which may be comparable to a painful surgery. The country

experienced a complete national isolation and then a sudden openness to the

modern-open-interconnected world, without filters and without having a proper

political and intellectual ruling class. This historical leap brought about a split

in terms of tradition and within the society, and in my opinion, many years will

be needed in order to rebuild a universally known and accepted national identity.

This period can be divided into three stages.

During the first stage (1990-1994), the Albanians, mainly men, poured into the

world with every means available, searching for the western dream of the future.

Those who stayed could not quite get the relevance of the events that would

happened later. Then, during the second stage (1994-1999), the Albanians

scattered around the world set up the opposite trend and started to take back

into their country the concept of life they saw abroad. Consequently, along with

the media - mainly TV and music, cinema and goods coming from abroad, a new

idea of a life emerged in Albania, but it was still too different and distant from

what was normal there. In any case, those who lived inside the country could

easily go out and absorbe new trends and ideas that could get them closer to the

West, always shining herald of wealth. Only after the third stage (2000 still

today) though, Information Technology, a faster communication and a wider

modernisation of society became the cornerstones of the most important leap

between the past and the present, especially among the young. The unraveling

traditions that in the past had been a strong suit and had been used as a social

bond were a consequence of a process of modernisation of some of the basic

values of the Albanian society. Those are some of the positive factors determining

what an external observer would call contradictions. However, I believe that this

new culture has been developing without really thinking about the opportunity

to fill the life with some old and new ethical values, in order to generate the same

life conditions of the West and distinguish themselves from their superficiality,

consumerism, strong individualization and a progressive loss of moral depth.

So far, the social and political stakeholders are still excessively characterised by

separatist trends, causing endless fractures. In so doing, they hamper a

fundamental process of cultural, economic and political unification, which is the

cornerstone of popular sovereignity and nation. The lack of a whole political

vision, which could materialize a real cooperation of the parts, the abandonment

of a ferocious and useless division between right and left wings, the population's

lack of trust towards the past political models, as well as the absence of an

institutional arrangement able to ensure a fast approval of the policies needed,

are to be added to an already problematic situation.

Undoubtledly, as far as Albania is concerned, it is still too soon to speak about a

real democratic system"tout-court". It is rather an extended proto-democracy

(Bogdani M., J. Loughlin, 2007). First of all, they lack of all fundamental

elements that should belong to a full democracy. Free and fair elections ought to

get rid of collateral interferences by their political powers, which work in the

shadows to buy votes. The entire economic and political ruling class has been

subjected to this pervasive corruption and still hasn't recovered from it. The

welfare-state is not able to allocate the proper commodities and the government

cannot suffocate the still existing social differences (think about the split between

cities and countryside). Albania is still waiting for a proper reform of the public

administration, while suffering from an extremely active clientelism that prevents

the young from entering the job market. The ability to intrude in the right

environments - not the merit or skills - is the key to success. What is also clear

is the lack of a proper judicial power, which should be able to function properly

and in compliance with the law and its equity. Nevertheless, it seems impossible

to separate it from its marking corruption. Today, I believe that this is one of the

most important reasons which are causing a lack of trust and a deep

debasement. Even towards those who deeply feel their identity as citizens and

who, as human beings, try to change their society starting from the bottom. In

my opinion, the most difficult gaps to be filled are that of social justice, the equity

among rights and duties of all Albanian people before the law, society and life.

The art of ruling is an extremely difficult one. The government has to think first

of all of the citizen as human beings with inalienable rights and as a social

creature in need of a basic system of working istitutions, able to fairly distribute

fundamental social goods and to limit injustice and inequalities (Popper 1992;

Rawls 1999). In this way, the citizens who live fully their own rights will then

respect their duties too, as a consequence of being part of a society.

Hence, what does a good government do?

I agree with Karl Popper when he says that "every government has the duty to set

up the rule of law [...] and the rule of law lies on the ability to prevent any kind

of violence (Popper 1992).

As a consequence of the anarchic regime in Albania, non-registered weapons

continue to enter the country, supporting a crime underworld that operates on

different levels, that is also aknowledged in Europe and that seems extremely

hard to eradicate, despite the endless efforts of Rama's government. Why? First

of all the rule of law needs a judicial system which cannot be corrupted or chosen

on political basis; it rather needs a free and independent system, resting on a

constitution and on laws; a system which stands for every human right which is

fundamental, before and against the state and its own members (Amnesty

International, 2015/2016). Imagine that I am victim of an abuse and decide to

expose it. Imagine that my oppressor is a representative of the organised crime,

or a political figure able to corrupt the authorities. This hardly happens in the

western world and clearly that is not the rule. In Albania it is. Therefore, how

can I, a citizen whose rights and identity were offended, solve my problem? How

can I give my trust to a government that is not able to uphold my basic human

rights? Is it possible to support a different concept of justice? Many years ago,

Kant (1966) already spoked about the creation of «a constitution aimed at

obtaining a greater human freedom in compliance with the law, in order to ensure

a peaceful coexistence»; a rule of law that preserves «the dignity of people».

Before him, Rousseau (2004) maintained that politicians cannot divide the rule

of law from ethics, otherwise they risk misinterpreting both. The most important

lesson has to be learnt by respecting the freedom of the single person, since he

will perceive himself as an active and essential part of the society and he will be

able to plan his existence accordingly to the ideas of respect and sharing.

Subsequently, the freedom of one will extend to a community and, finally, to the

whole society (Rawls 1999). According Bello (2001), i believe that it is

fundamental for the single citizen to understand and absorbe the basic-rule of

coexistence and respect, which means that my freedom must not interfere with

that of another. That is another important lesson which needs an aware and

greater comprehension on behalf of the Albanian society, or at least the part that

tends to show violence more easily or to use illegal methods to reach their targets.

Therefore, if the society could support from the bottom the adoption of the already

announced reforms by Rama's government, that could be the real turning point

towards a fair system which satisfies every human freedom. That same system

should also guide and manage those liberties in order to prevent them from going

back to what they were in the past.

In addition to what I just said I cannot avoid speaking about another specific gap

which has been emerged in Albania since 1990. Once again, the lack of national

regulations and a general social laziness have produced some conflicting results.

That clearly depends on the sudden transformation without filters or cultural

and ethical mediation that went from an isolating system to a totally open one,

as I already mentioned. The country is still paying - and will continue to do so -

the consequences. In the larger cities, which are connected and open to the world,

a striving society is rising. The countryside is still attached to tradition, which

prevails with some difficulties - only due to a cultural and economic gap, not to

an aware choice. I personally believe that what is modern is not wrong,

especially if it means assimilating trends and attitudes that can replace those

moral and social values unable to satisfy the needs of people. I am rather sceptic

about the complete acceptance of the others without taking into consideration

the need for a responsible mediation between the things you are leaving behind

and the ones you are assimilating (Galimberti 2007). The western world already

completed its passage from tradition to utilitarianism and hedonism by

continuously making choices, but also speaking clearly about the values which

were to be safeguarded or analysing new phenomena step by step, mostly

through the media. In Albania this happened in a very short time and it was not

completed properly, thus bringing about a considerable generational gap and a

lack of certainty in the youngest generations, still searching for their identity.

The role models offered by the Albanian society are not clear and they are not

enough, while the western ones are still far from reaching their real potential,

especially economic. The final product of this kind of process is a division among

those who evade from the world and those who look for a full life through several

attempts of idealistic getaway. Those people follow some apparently functional

examples, that in the end do nothing but sharpen the split between a traditional

system, linked to the past, and a current model of the west, always better and

diverse.

What is the role of society and what is the role of the government?

A society which believes in real and practical future targets, cooperating with

institutions, is one society that took the right path towards progress. Without a

proactive participation in the already launched processes, it will lose all its

effectiveness, despite a government that tries to adopt reforms and a renovation

of social and economic policies (Rousseau, 2001). On the other hand, a society

which takes the path of anarchy and insubordination, as happened many times

in Albania between 1990 and 2009, still meets with difficulties in trying to follow

the example of the advanced western countries. The latter have a history full of

struggles and social participation in governmental decisions, but also in the

definition of issues directly affecting different aspects of social life.

The Albanians, with their student activist movements and 1990's strikes, were

able to obtain liberties and rights that did not exist 30 years ago, like the freedom

of speech, of belief and of expression. But I believe, in accordance with Popper

(1992), that freedom, without a proper surveillance made of an aware use of rules

and moral principles, may actually be a danger. Where could they take that

nourishment, that factor which may boost the economic system and which

operates in sectors so distant from the economy? I agree with Sandel (2012) when

says that there are goods that cannot and must not follow the rules of the market

and one of those is the ethical foundation on which an organised society lies. I

stressed the importance of the adoption of ethical rules more than once, not

because I think that Albanian society does not have them, but because the fight

to adopt them was considerable. And it takes place between a part of society

which lives in compliance with very important rules and principles, and another

that is violent, presumptuous and sly and tries to accumulate wealth in any way

possible. That way is often illegal and damages the entire community. This

fracture cannot be healed until the entire society embraces together a proper

vision. And if they do not do it, the economic and social gap among them will only

widen. Custom dictates that the oldest generations label the youngest as

superficial and incompetent, but the young do not come alone into this world,

nor they complete their education by themselves. To better explain this idea I

would now like to introduce you to an example of a situation still existing at the

moment.

Imagine that I am a mother. A mother that does not think about giving her

children a proper education because the shortest path is also the simpler. So I

decide to spend my money to buy them university degrees, because that is what

the system offers and the community does not consider it immoral. Obviously, I

would be proud to have a doctor, a lawyer and a university professor as my sons.

But they would also have to deal with the lives of other people - in a hospital, in

their office or at university - on a daily basis. Therefore, not only would I teach

my children to skip the regular processes, telling them that it is correct to do so,

but I would also damage the entire society. Is it ethical? And in whose name am

I doing it? Unfortunately this system still exists in Albania, although the

government is trying to find alternatives.

Now imagine that I am a mother who wants her children to study and to follow

the correct path. Let's say that I want them to be independent and perfectly able

to use their own judgement to build their lives. Let's say that I want them to be

prepared properly because deep down I know that saving human lives in a

hospital is truly important, and noble. Deep down I know that a lawyer who

studied and works honestly in his field is socially important and gives

satisfaction. Deep down I know that doing research and properly teaching entire

generations within the walls of a university is a task worthy of a special mention.

Would I be proud of my children? To which extent? But, mostly, what the lesson

would I teach them? Therefore, to avoid criticizing the young, I believe that trying

to understand and to find out who is the real responsible would be wiser.

Another question: who will pay the consequences? Only the young? No, an entire

society which will discover itself deprived of all the generations that could have

grown not only with a proper education, but also according to fair ethics.

The most advanced countries are those that give greater value to the culture and

proper education of their youngest generations. Money is not negative in itself,

but putting the entire social system on it could deprive life of its very fundamental

meaning, erasing the values which represent a good tradition, knowledge and

competence.

The ethical foundation of a society passes through those mechanisms too,

especially if the main characters are the young people, who in turn will bring

other future generations into the world. Now, I know that Albanian government

has put into place a series of measures, like closing private universities which

would sell diplomas and degrees or modify qualifications, especially for teachers

and doctors.

What I would like to ask is: who will be able to replace those who are not qualified

enough?

I think that a real U turn is the only possible solution, to be implemented only

through the reform of the education sector, in order to provide it with the proper

tools to feed curiosity, knowledge and competence. In a society which Thomas

Piketty (2014) defined «the society of knowledge», one of the most important

elements lies in the ability of the country to spread and support on a large scale

an endless process of access to knowledge, so that the existing social differences

can gradually disappear. Investing in education, in a serious and thoughtful way,

in the cities and in the countryside, educating new generations properly can

make a difference in the definition of the new ruling classes of doctors, lawyers,

historians, geographers, architects etc. They will then have the possibility to

contribute significantly to the productivity, but also to the education of a new

society, which is finally aware of its role and its goals (Piketty 2014). According

Galimberti (2007), i believe that what is essential now is to clear the way towards

a proactive awareness for the youngest generations, in order to ensure their

future and direct participation in the job market, with a different perspective.

Fighting to eliminate social disparities, supporting a governmental system aimed

at creating a country which respects the western criteria and implementing the

necessary institutional reforms. Those are only few of the crucial elements which

will bring about some long-term solutions in Albania. I shall conclude my essay

by quoting Heraclitus, who stated: «if one does not hope, one will not find out the

unhoped, since it is pathless and undiscoverable» (Salucci 1968).

Referees

Beck, U., 2000, I rischi della libertà. L’individuo nell’epoca della globalizzazione,

Bologna: 39-130.

Bello, A. A., 2011, Conflitti di identità, in I fondamentalismi nell’era della

globalizzazione, Roma: 134-141.

Bogdani, M., J. Loughlin, 2007, Albania and the European Union. The tumultuous

journey towards integration and accession, New York: 30-38.

Florenskij, P. A., 2015, Non dimenticatemi. Le lettere dal gulag del grande

matematico, filosofo e sacerdote russo, Milano:173.

Galimberti, U., 2007, L’ospite inquietante. Il nichilismo e i giovani, Milano.

Kant, I., Critica della ragion pura, vol. 2, Bari: 301.

Kelly, C., 2001, Rousseau’s confessions, in The Cambridge Companion’s to

Rousseau, London-New York: 324.

Piketty, T., 2014, Il capitale nel XXI secolo, Milano: 23.

Popper, K., 1992, La lezione di questo secolo, Venezia: 30-80.

Rawls, J., A theory of justice. Revised edition, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Rousseau, J. J., 2005, Scritti politici 1, Roma-Bari.

Salucci, B., 1968, Eraclito. Tutti i frammenti, Firenze: 209.

Sandel, M.,2013, Quello che i soldi non possono comprare. I limiti morali del

mercato, Milano.