The bridge between the West and the East

Albania

PS and PD at the Start of the Campaign: A Display of Power vs. A Ritual of Legitimacy

As the political landscape heats up for the May 11th elections, the opening of the campaigns by the Socialist Party (PS) and the Democratic Party (PD) offers a striking contrast in approach. On one side, Edi Rama and the PS present a well-orchestrated display of power, aiming to solidify their unchallenged dominance. On the other, the PD, fragmented and weakened, struggles to craft a narrative of moral legitimacy in a desperate attempt to remain relevant. These contrasting approaches are not merely about politics; they represent two competing visions of Albania’s future – one rooted in stability and continuity, the other in resistance and defiance. As the campaigns unfold, it becomes clear that the May 11th elections are not just about choosing between candidates or policies, but about deciding which narrative the nation will embrace in the years to come.

PS: More Than a Campaign – A Ritual of Stability

When Edi Rama steps onto a gargantuan stage, surrounded by meticulously choreographed sequences, the leading figures of municipalities lined up in lockstep, and speeches echoing the mantra “there is no alternative,“; he is not merely asking for votes. He is staging a performance, one that enacts the very essence of stability itself. In this grand spectacle, Rama is not just presenting policies; he is presenting a vision of Albania`s future, a future that he and his party have crafted. ``This is the Albania we have built,“; he declares, “and you, the citizen, are an indispensable part of this vision.“ There is no room for fear, no trace of haste, and certainly no sign of panic.

Politically, this is a masterstroke: when the opposition is weak, why bother attacking it when you can simply erase it from the narrative altogether? Rama, in his infinite savvy, minimizes the opposition not through direct confrontation, but by pretending it doesn`t even exist. He doesn`t address the PD, he speaks directly to the people, not as a mere party contender, but as a unifying figure, a state-builder. This is not a contest of equals; this is the demonstration of a system in total control.

PD: A Campaign to Defend What Little Is Left

On the other hand, the PD did not embark on a campaign with the aim of securing victory. Rather, they began this struggle with the sole intention of preventing total collapse. Their goal is not to reclaim local power; it is to salvage what remains of their legitimacy. The strategic use of Berisha`s image from a distance, the inflammatory rhetoric of “war” and “liberation,” and the choice of a modest venue like “Millennium“ are all integral components of a strategy rooted in victimhood and a palpable sense of injustice.

This is an age-old political manoeuvre: when you lack the resources to offer a tangible alternative, position yourself as the moral conscience of the nation. Berisha has embraced this role with dramatic flair, wielding language that fuels outrage rather than hope. His rhetoric doesn’t inspire the masses – it incites them, appealing to their deepest frustrations and the undeniable sense of betrayal that the opposition has suffered.

Aesthetics and Perception: Who Does Each Side Speak To?

Aesthetically, the PS speaks directly to the pragmatic citizen – the one who seeks stability, certainty, and progress in the form of roads, infrastructure, and jobs. The grand scale of their campaign is not simply visual; it is an ideological statement. Everything is meticulously polished, organized, and executed with the precision of a well-oiled machine. The message to the ordinary citizen is clear: “Your life is your own, and we will keep it free of surprise, free of disruption, free of uncertainty.“ The PS speaks to the masses in a language of reassurance, a promise of a predictable and secure future.

In stark contrast, the PD speaks to the disillusioned and betrayed citizen, the one who has lost faith in institutions, in justice, and in the very integrity of the electoral
process. For this citizen, the political battle is no longer about platforms or policies; it is about defending the country`s moral soul. The PD’s message is one of defiance against a corrupt system, but it is also one of existential crisis. This is a strategy that may not mobilize the numbers, but it does mobilize those with a fervent, almost desperate belief in their cause.

PS as the Architect of the System, PD as the Recalcitrant Opposition

The PS behaves as the unquestioned owner of the system, conducting the campaign with the cold efficiency of someone overseeing a well-rehearsed routine. There is no sense of urgency, no sense of challenge – only the steady hand of a system that commands obedience. The PD, on the other hand, plays the role of the irreconcilable adversary, one determined to erode the legitimacy of the process by invoking symbols of crisis and exclusion. The narrative they present is one of struggle – not for power, but for a moral victory that reaffirms their existence as the lone moral opposition.

Ultimately, the citizen will be faced not with a choice between policies, but with a choice between two divergent realities: the security offered by the status quo, and the moral rebellion against it. This is no longer a battle for votes – it is a battle for political trust, for the very soul of the nation. And in this battle, it is not the strongest who will necessarily prevail, but the one whose narrative aligns most closely with the fears and desires of the people.

Written by our correspondent A.T.