FLASH
Shkruar nga Irena Beqiraj
Under these conditions, it doesn't matter what Elisa thinks, but what matters is how she thinks and how she articulates what has happened and will happen next.
In eighteenth-century London, for a penny you could secure a seat in a coffeehouse, a cup of coffee, and a chat at a table where you knew no one. Those tables often became important spaces for debate. Scholars, merchants, pamphleteers, and citizens debated politics, commerce, science, and philosophy late into the night. Such spaces, known as "penny universities," were open to a wide range of social classes, so much so that Charles II tried to ban them. These coffeehouses became the centers of the social and intellectual life of the Enlightenment. Indeed, the ideas that reshaped the modern world were born in the conversations of these coffeehouses, not in the solitude of scholars. The Enlightenment was not the voice of a single thinker, but the chorus of ideas of many.
New ideas are developed, shared, encouraged, or discouraged using collectively generated and curated structures and norms. This is why Émile Durkheim considered ideas to be part of the "collective consciousness" and not simply thoughts within individual minds. They are part of the "common mental life" that is shaped through institutions, traditions, and relationships.
Today, the media are like the "penny cafes" of old London, but unfortunately they produce propaganda, populism, and polarization more than ideas.
"Revolution" was the name of Elisha's two statuses on one of the television screens, killing and burying with cheers, seven feet under the ground, her act of disobedience. The "good intentions" arguments served to remind us that in the scorched earth and occupied by contemporary political violence, populism, polarization and propaganda, any act of disobedience can be mistakenly equated with heroism.
Comparing disobedience to the Revolution is oppressive as it does not allow us to argue, oppose, shape, and elaborate on the problems that Elisa is trying to raise today, but instead, unfairly places them in the light of cynicism and revenge.
If this approach continues, it will leave us without an answer as to whether there are elements in her reaction to be appreciated or supported. This approach prevents the creation of a clear idea of what bridges need to be built and what walls need to be destroyed by ordinary socialists regarding her positions.
Moreover, Elisa is not a simple member of the Socialist Party, on the contrary, until yesterday she served as the most significant political mechanism (after Edi Rama) for shaping and spreading propaganda. And a pure propaganda that not only tended to influence our opinions, but it worked to create apathy, to create anger, to distance people from the political system, and even to make them skeptical of everything.
Under these conditions, it doesn't matter what Elisa thinks, but what matters is how she thinks and how she articulates what has happened and will happen next.
For the most extreme, the pure spectacle of "distancing" with which this act of disobedience began is nothing more than a mechanism of conscience to feel "right" while avoiding responsibility.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Attitudes, ideas, acts of disobedience are not assets in themselves, or gain value from the force to mobilize as many people around them as possible.
So whoever truly appreciates Elisha's stances, because ultimately better late than never, cannot exercise upon them the superficial judgment of a spectator seeking to see the revolution.
No one, least of all Siropali, can shape revolutions. But everyone, especially Spiropali, has the opportunity to begin a process of honest and public reflection that requires, first of all, a confrontation with the truth.
Today, Spiropali does not need heroic protagonism, but many friends.
Give Spiropal a chance, don't put him on a pedestal to quickly bring him down!
T'i lyeje e llustroje turinjte ne c'te doje fshatarka po fshatarke mbetet e asgjekundi do perfundoje.