FLASH
Shkruar nga Andi Bushati
The manner of decision-making, the manipulations that preceded it and the farce through which it was served to the public speak volumes. They highlight the features necessary to outline the face of a regime...
Whoever dares to go back to the not-so-beautiful memories of the time of Covid surely remembers an act, as crazy as it is funny. In the feverish battle to fight the virus, our prime minister decided to take out the armored cars on the boulevards of the capital. Together with the measures and schedules that he announced from the test tower in Surrel, when pensioners should leave the house, when mothers with children and when teenagers, Edi Rama imposed the illusion that he could defeat the virus with the mouth of tanks.
This very absurdity of the time of isolation is very similar to the last order from the sky, to close Tik Tok in Albania for a year. What the war has in common, both against the health virus and the one against the social one, is the dictatorial mentality of facing them.
This should also be the angle to look at this absurd measure. Although topics are being debated in our public arena on the effect of the Chinese platform on the mental health of young people; although many oppositionists raise their finger to denounce, that the promoter of the culture of violence with the elected in the parliament and municipality, cannot even have the medicine to cure it; although some others see this act as an electoral maneuver; the essence of what is happening is the appearance of Edi Rama's autocratic face.
To understand this, it is enough to summarize some simple truths. Albania will become the only country in the democratic world where it claims to belong, that has completely closed an important social platform. The moral arguments that Edi Rama is putting on the market, to do this, are similar to those that the Taliban used to eradicate Tik Tok, after their return to power in Afghanistan. The fact that such a thing is happening by abusively connecting it with the tragic death of Martin Cami, while it has been proven that neither the victim nor the killer were connected to this social network, raises questions about an arbitrary action. The travesty that was used for public consultation with parents, to justify a decision taken in advance, is a farce that only happens in anti-democratic regimes.
The extreme and not at all proportional measure of closure, without first going through the intermediate steps like, putting filters, or age restrictions, is typical of the way these regimes operate.
Aligning all this, it must be admitted that the debate on the closure or not of Tik-Tok is not just a quarrel of our small province. He has divided into pros and cons even a much more democratic society than ours. Thus, in the USA, during the first Trump presidency, the latter requested such a thing. But wait, don't rush to say: "look, it's an American idea". The arguments had nothing in common with the moral denunciations of the "neighborhood street". The debate revolved around the threat to national security, the possibility of spying on American citizens by a platform based in China, and the theft and use of their personal data.
But, although in the USA the clash was not about moral scruples, but about state reasons, in that democratic country the cause of those who fought for rights and freedoms won before security.
In their arguments, it was mentioned that Tik Tok was a penalized network that could limit free speech, could kill the right to express the millions of people who communicate with each other and create content. They raised the alarm that such an act could create a dangerous precedent of repeating this extreme sanction for other platforms as well.
This is the reason that no member of the euro altantic orbit has taken this step.
While we are doing it, through the magic wand of a single man, who decides to kill the virus with tanks and to enter or leave the open Balkans and to donate the sovereignty of the state by setting up Italian immigrant camps.
Therefore, first of all, rather than a debate related to the mental health of children, to the fight against the culture of violence, to the electoral maneuvers of the moment, in the act of closing Tik Tok we must reveal the tools and weapons that are used in this battle. The manner of decision-making, the manipulations that preceded it and the farce through which it was served to the public speak volumes. They highlight the features necessary to sketch the face of a regime. They prove that this decision is an illustration of the autocratic essence of Edi Rama's power. Where this is leading us does not need much elaboration. At the end of the 60s, Albania became the only country in the world that banned religion by law. The record is being repeated today by opposing an almost spiritual belief of this new century, the numerical religion./ ©Lapsi.al
Lini një Përgjigje