LDK example for democracy: Except by violence, it makes sense in Kosovo

In 2006, the LDK suffered a major trauma with President Rugova's death. Being the largest party in the country, with enormous power, political ambitions took its toll and in that post-traumatic period culminated in an ugly physical clash between groups supporting two party chairmanial candidates. Today, both of the then candidates, Daci and Sejdiu, are consumed figures and of no importance on the political scene. Sejdiu took over Daci, and later Mustafa took the place of Sejdiu. But in the background, a large space was opened for other developments.

The framework of physical clashes, or chair shooting in the LDK, I think is the healthiest democratic event that has happened to a political party in Kosovo. Political ambitions surfaced openly, people lined up openly, and political warfare culminated in physical clashes. The physical clash is the only element that indicates that we are in a habitat. That we're not counterfeiting the performance, the show.

Without physical clashes, as a clear demonstration of ambitions, in an environment contaminated by conspiracy and serialism, it is difficult to take domestic democracy seriously in political parties in Kosovo. A sharp confrontation occurred last months in the Vetevendosje Movement. In a fragile democracy that still led to its first steps, the most sophisticated power wars cannot be fought. Prudence of primitiveity floats in the polluted air of public space, and naturally the same is true of political parties. But that must be accepted, as we should accept our weather conditions. They're beyond us.

In PDK and AAK there has never been physical clashes, and for flow, never political war. At the PDK, Jakup Krasniqi and Fatmir Limaj left the party without war. Other evacuations took place this way too, thus demonstrating a serious illness within the parties. And the evil of both is that they have no political programme and they work through a brutal governing methodology that attempts to create a vast, strong clientist network. Which is then translated into power and dominant reports.

In the PDK and AAK, there is only silence and political slumber. What they're looking at is only economic interests, and the fight that's fought in the party is just about getting economically and getting a better social position. For the flow, the war only takes over to get as good a position as the servile. A better position to serve heads/head. But not to take his place.

In the LDK, however, there is war. Rugova's death, which was viewed as immune, gave breath to its internal democracy. Because, except Rugova, each one of them was incompatible, replaceable and weak. Democratic procedures have often proved to serve only as coverage of the undemocratic forms of government. Democratic procedures thus only serve as a farce for the good of authoritarian leaders. Much of the time spent in opposition at central level has served The LDK will also increase the internal political struggle. And exactly the war, permanent and dangerous, has cured the LDK trauma.

But the question is, Whom does this political party serve? What political programme does it offer? And here we see the frailties of its democracy. Furthermore, there is not enough ambition and enough war for power to pass to the level of software creation, the difference in programmes, a sofism of this war. There is still no attempt to convince people within the party with the shackles of ideas, and this poses the risk of the power struggle not being shifted to the level of ideas, as it should, but remain on the physical level, in violence and clashes.

Of course, the LDK would offer better governance than the PDK and the AAK. The first because there are more competent people within the party, the second because it has dimmed the element of tribalism and clientlorism simply by being in opposition and third, because there is no blindest member of the leader, that is, there is war, democracy.

However, the LDK will not offer essentially different ruling alternatives, a essentially different political programme, such as which desperately missed Kosovo. Neither of the potential candidates to take the party leader is known for offering any different political programme, for delivering a new course, nor for a corresponding criticism of the current course. The LDK, will not open an investigation into privatisations, tolerate corruption and a host of bad phenomena, create jobs and not increase the functionality of state mechanisms. The only good thing I can do is not to mix as much as the PDK in the country's economic development, which happens regardless of what appears on the political scene. So, the LDK just needs to not prevent it. But, the inner democracy of this party, even though to a satisfying extent [for our] functional circumstances, it becomes completely useless in this way.

Political ambitions are very important in politics. People who enter politics must accept them openly and only in this way, jointly mold the rules of war for power. And as part of this power struggle, an important weapon wouldn't be the political program, a detailedly designed program presented with simplicity. A program for which it would be worth throwing a chair over the enemy's head. But so far, weapons of democratic war in the party led by Ise Mustafa are unappreciated. It's not enough: “I've won without a run-off, I've run well” and the blah alike blah. That's not enough. And being all weak, say equally weak, that makes democracy itself a bad thing. So, then, what needs to be done is to take a big conscious hope and accept war as an inevitable one. And on this basis, to set a certain set of standards that would have its functioning.