Servants of imaginary beings

Uncle Hamlet had killed his father king, taking his crown, and once taking his mother, the queen, as wife. Hamlet finds out about this from his own father, who is a ghost. And here it makes sense, the internal dilemma in which he falls: “being or not being”. The “to be” meant, not a simple organic existence, but an individual existence, a rejection of social duty. He chose not to be. He chose to perform that social duty and to kill his uncle, King Claudius. But this choice does not matter much in the case. What matters is the dilemma itself. Consisting what is presented as natural and invulnerable. When someone killed your father, who was supposed to be king, you had to take revenge. As we can see from the analysis of the Foucacule of that period, the king was embedded in each individual in his kingdom. People were personified with him, and he was personified with them. This is also the explanation for horroral spectacles of the public murders of criminals and of those who violated public order at that meal. Killing an individual was like killing the king himself. And vice versa: killing the king was like killing every individual in society.

Hamlet would have been unfair had he not rebelled. In fact, he was just so sad about his hesitation. Father's ghost doesn't appear only to him if you haven't forgotten. It is originally presented to Horat. And this neʹta makes us realize that that ghost is nothing more than a collective construction, used as a weapon to overthrow an unwanted king. Hamlet, as a skeptic in the use of that weapon, with its spiritual drama, is among the first symptoms of the disease that developed with cogitoCatharian: modernism and individualism. He is among the first individuals in history. Among the first to dispute what has been revealed and to be understood as inconsistent. And I think you know that the only major character that escapes that tragedy is the ghostfucker, Horat. I mean, the only one who takes advantage of all that work is the society that gets her revenge. Society has always been master, despite human political systems and individual aspirations. Making politics, even wrong, translates into service to society.

Shit.

The rhetoric of the international institutions which established the economic-political system in Kosovo has repeatedly condemned corruption Bitton. In fact, two former American ambassadors in Kosovo, Dell and Jacobson, did not suffice to accuse political powers as corrupt. For corruption, they accused our entire society. And they protected the liberal internationalism system that they had established themselves. So, not their system, but our corruption.

In fact, anti-corruption rhetoric is used by the citizens of our country for corruption. In the notion of corruption, there are strange things that change: not just moral incompatibility, or a disregard of the system but also bad aesthetic, ugly, habit and ignorance. This concept could be the remains of communist time in Albania [imported to Kosovo through literature and films produced in abundance where] any kind of corruption was seen as an ontological evil. Unlike Yugoslavia, where we were, there was much corruption, as a natural result of a much more liberal order.

Because yes, it should be said that liberalisation is closely linked to corruption. As Zizek says very rightly, capitalist order has succeeded in becoming stronger and stronger, following any major crisis that he experienced. And these crises, including that of 2008, for some of the neoliberal economists were the consequences of corruption in the system, or said more correctly, consequences of state intervention in the free market, making it unfree.

The way we see corruption is actually wrong. The corrupt politicians are not the problem. The problem, at least if we talk about the economic-political system, are uncorrupted politicians. Politicians who interfere in the chaotic manner often through which the market self-regulates. But, master in our ugly Kosovo, it's impossibly unpowerful. Kosovo society does not have a cohesion that keeps it organicly united. There is no religion, no immorality to which it obeys, and there is no single projection for how you see yourself in the future. This central society, moreover, did not build the political system to which it is partly subject today. So we get to the third point of this opinion.

Shit.

Politicians can be corrupted. They can steal. They can take the country to war. Or, on some other dead end. After all, though, they are ministers, just as they say when they have to convince people to vote. Even servants can do the job wrong, can steal, and so on. But they're essentially functional towards certain rhetoric that attempts to serve society.

And those whom you associate with Allah in His Divinity are the losers. The collective mind functions very weak and it's not lazy. It does not make any sense for itself. She thinks she's perfect. Great. Skilled creatures. Etj. The cause of its stupidity and laziness is simplified and the meanings of politicians narrow down. Because of this lazyness, associations take inexorable steps behind them. They fall into deep ideological pits. They fall for all kinds of shit. And they die for a sad living in comfort.

Recall what German society did in the 1930 ' s. Further, recall what Catalon did a few weeks ago. Or Albania in the time of communism, and even in the last few years, he was involved in drugs. Yes, some things really change in the best interests of society. But, says Nicya, the world does not differ from inventors of new screams who gather the crowd but from inventors of new values who do the job quietly.

And no, dear imaginary beings. You didn't get your name yesterday, nor did you make your choices a month ago. It doesn't matter who's in charge. Not even what they'll do. Even what they won't do. Such elections are part of a trivial party scheme of unfulfilled people. The choices of those who serve you make them sick. I repeat, they can steal and do wrong unconsciously, the cause of a moral vacuum and awareness of themselves as individuals, but they are ultimately functional as ministers. You will remain on a daily basis, because of your evil deeds. Elections away from the polls. Because, as with inventions, even the most important choices are made without any noise in your inside, and are constantly determined. After all, it will not form Shpend Ahmeti, nor will it form Arba Abrashi. But you would be formed if you were ever out of amorphacy, yourself. Your everydayity. From rainy and sunny days, where nothing happens on TV, and where you are alone and free, thinking of something. And what you think will be worth more than any political speech you choose.

Shpend won for-a little. The PDK lost many municipalities. The VV did three. The AAK did seven. The LDK won mostly from Albanian parties. The Serbian list won ten, or mostly from Kosovo parties. Arban. Agim Bahtiri. Etj.

Think seriously about all this stuff. See how futile it is to receive it incompatible for something important. But you may not want new values. You want new screams. You want better public services. Life without any worries. Comfort. A clock-like system, tick-tuck. Spectacular drama with your will as citizens. A system with no movement. You don't want any form of corruption. You want to be part of a system that will form you. Since you don't have that opportunity. Since, in the spaces you need to fill with breath, you are afraid to tread.

You're just an illusion. Since you fear, much fear, breathe and face the small physical size that you personally possess. Because of this fear of losing in the vast universe, you create a small, unfunctioning subterranean technology that keeps them warm with illusions.

O you who do not believe in anything, rejoice in the servants.