As published in “Democratization on the Road of the Party,” General Sector of the Staff of the Central Committee of the Albanian Party of Labor, Tirana, 1990.
(p. 8)
Ramiz Alia: First, I would like to point out that the situation, on the international level and in our country as well, has recently undergone important changes. Within less than a year a real upheaval has taken place all over Eastern Europe. We wouldn’t exaggerate if we say that in the Soviet Union, and in all other counties of its former block, power has been seized by reactionary forces. Eventually, socialism has formally been substituted by capitalism.
(p. 9)
We can say that the attempt against socialism as a system, and against the communist party, is nowadays more aggressive than ever. Throughout this struggle of the reaction, the major slogans are multiparty system, human rights, privatization of state property and restoration of a market economy.
(p. 10)
Now the attack of the reaction is focused on us. According to the logic of the bourgeoisie, in as much as socialism has been overthrown in Eastern Europe, there is no reason to go on existing in Albania. That’s why its attempt against our country is so fierce. What is demanded is not about “petty” changes and “cosmetic” modifications in the economic and social spheres. The aim of the anti-communist reaction and the anti-Albanian forces is the overthrow of the people’s power in our country, the annihilation of the socialist system and of the Party of Labor.
(p. 11)
As it can be seen, the international reactionary forces are trying to achieve their goal without directly intervening, even less by aggression, but by instigating the people to be unsatisfied with the existing reality, and by trying to discredit our power, its organisms and the party. In short, the bourgeoisie wants to overthrow socialism without using its armies, and by creating their battalions of mercenaries inside the country. This tactic is clearly visible in all the events that have happened in Europe.
(p. 12)
Our party, over 50 years of its existence, has engaged in great battles, heroic ones indeed. The battle against Titoist revisionism and afterwards against Soviet revisionism were very difficult and full of peril. Neither were easy, the battle against inner enemies.
… But the characteristic of those battles is that the leadership was on the frontline, that they were led from the party. The bases, the common people, expressed their solidarity with the party’s line.
… However, the masses had only to be confronted with the second wave of fighting.
Presently, we can see the opposite, as the enemy is acting on the bases, in direct contact with people, in their workplaces and institutions.
(p. 13)
The outside enemies, in their struggle against our party, have found support inside the country. … Its work becomes easier due to some truly existing flaws and to certain errors and faults that might have appeared during our development.
What are those inner forces in which the external enemy is basing its hopes?
First, support for the enemy’s activity is a conglomerate of disorientated people, who are dreaming to have a paradise existence, like in the advertisements on TV screens. Among this category are some unemployment people, some immature youth, some idle individuals, even some former prisoners, some adventurists and so on. Such a contingent does not have any declared or conscious program against the party and power. Among them there are plenty of nihilistic people, generally unsatisfied, who have a negative mania which makes them see everything through black glasses; there are people who, from morning to night, don’t do anything but complain: “why is the sidewalk not fixed”, “why did X person become a director” etc. True, these strata, as I already mentioned, don’t have any program, but their opposition to the party line and activity, even if unconscious, is dangerous. It produces gossip and disinformation. From these strata come the main contingent of those who entered the embassies; these were the protagonists of the events that took place in Tirana, Kavaja, Shkodra and elsewhere.
Secondly, there is the group of declassed enemies, which is compounded by people who had been prisoners for political reasons. These are firmly anti-communists. I’m not saying that they are organized, because we don’t have evidence, but we have information that precisely some of these people have contacted foreigners and have been transmitters of the instructions coming from the German, Yugoslav and French embassies, and have directly instigated the individuals who entered the embassies. There are people from this category who are inclined to terrorism.
Would it be possible for the reaction to achieve its maximum aims by relying on these forces? I think it will not. Of course, it might create incidents, as it already did, and it might create much ado, or provoke some demonstrations, but not more than that.
I believe it is clear to all of us that the events of the beginning of July were aiming for much more.
The reaction did not expect such a contingent, was not looking for such a clientele. Besides, its calculations turned out to be wrong in the supposition that this question was not going to be resolved quickly, but on the contrary, that it would last the same as the Popaj case did, so that the embassies would be transformed in refugee camps.
The enemies thought that, in this way, they were going to create a reserve army inside the embassies. You can imagine what a dangerous abscess it would have been to have 5,000 individuals inside the embassies. Behind them, there were 5,000 families, which would have gone to visit them every day, not to mention their friends. If that situation would have lasted, at least 50,000 people would have been going back and forth around the embassies in Tirana, which, no doubt, would have created a ferment with threatening effects for our society, as well as the conditions for an extension of the subversive activity.
The quick response of our government paralyzed the foreign hostile forces, it frustrated their plans.
For this reason, the reaction is obliged to change the tactics; presently it is seeking to corrupt, make unsatisfied and involve a more qualified clientele, with more authority, such as officers and educated people, the intelligentsia, the students, i.e. the intellectual potential of the country. To put it metaphorically, the enemy is in need to find commanders and generals. Its aim is to find a leadership to the unsatisfied and unsteady individuals, to create a headquarters for them, which can lead them to concrete actions against the Party and the Power. That is to say, it is looking for the homologues of those which were found in Czechoslovakia, Hungary and elsewhere. Such people – from the ranks of the intelligentsia – might give a program to the disoriented masses, which practically do not know what to demand and why it is fighting. Like that, the dissatisfaction of the masses would turn into a political hostility.
The outside reactionary forces did not find such generals in our country, because our intelligentsia is closely bound with the people, with the fates of the fatherland and the construction of socialism. We have underlined these characteristics several times, but we should underline it again, as a firm victory which has been thoroughly verified by the recent events.
The task of the party, of us, of everybody, is to preserve such a value, to keep always the intelligentsia as pure as it is, and not to permit it to become a victim of fraud, a victim of intellectualism or political snobbery.
Especially great attention should be dedicated to the intellectuals and student youth. It’s here, where the party’s task must be more intensive, more active, more skilful.
(p. 30)
Comrades, these were the questions I wanted to highlight in order to have a view about the preoccupations of the party and of our country. I wish that you also express your opinions about these questions. The party needs to know how its decisions are judged by the intelligentsia.
(p. 38)
Sali Berisha: In my opinion, the information should above all be truthful, but there are many flaws in this regard. I will give an example. In the communication about the event of July 2 it was said that there were slightly injured people on both sides, whereas in fact a 16-year-old boy was agonizing in the Hospital No. 2, and, as it is known, he died. Diplomats from the German embassy were on guard for two days running. You can tell the staff of my clinic as much as you like that there has only been slight injuries, but they won’t believe it. And there are 600 persons working there who will speak out.
Ramiz Alia: Did you personally take care of the wounded person?
Sali Berisha: To tell the truth, it was not me who had to take care of him, but I’m saying what I was told.
Ramiz Alia: In essence, you are now disinforming us, you are telling us something untrue. You were right in saying that information should be accurate. But you also must be accurate. Indeed, I’m sorry to tell you, but you are not accurate at all about this concrete case. First, the wounded youngster didn’t come to you the day that the communication was made, but after he had stayed for three days in the German embassy. Second, when the communication was issued, that youngster was still alive, and perhaps he would have survived if medical assistance had been provided in time.
Ramiz Alia: You are right in saying that the information must be more realistic, swifter and more up to date. But to claim that everything must appear in the press, this doesn’t make sense. It was said that some persons were wounded, and the TV gave images of the dramatic situation of people inside the embassies and of their relatives. Many other measures were taken. We immediately discharged the director of police in the interior ministry because he opened fire on July 2, and this measure is known by everybody.
Ismail Kadare: There are people saying that he was discharged not because he opened fire, but because he behaved very mildly. It’s them who are spreading such versions.
Ramiz Alia: And what about the two deputy ministers of interior who were discharged: are there such rumors even for them?
Ismail Kadare: But neither is there any official information saying that they were discharged because they transgressed their competences, no explanation was given about that.
Ramiz Alia: I agree with you. The preoccupation concerning information is right. But the examples you all are giving are not accurate, on the one hand, and, on the other, they don’t signify what is typical, for which we should be worried. Why is it not said that one individual was wounded while entering the embassy? Do we have to make a hero out of an individual who was abandoning his fatherland like a thief and fleeing; out of one who was showing more trust towards a foreign diplomat than to the laws of his own government? Do we have to send consolations to his family? The sound opinion condemns such people, although on the other hand the policeman should not have used the gun. But what is the real truth of this question? The car with a youngster who was wounded afterwards was attacking the policeman directly, putting his life in danger.
… What should one demand pity for him, who, even wounded, preferred to stay with the German than to go to the hospital of his own country? On what kind of morality does this stand this?
… I want to say I understand your request about information, and I assure you that I have the same preoccupation. But I’m inclined to the kind of information that is useful to the people, and not that our efforts become a megaphone of our enemy.
Luan Omari: You gave us here a full and convincing clarification of the events of the embassies. The truth is that we learned many things only today, from your mouth. I am not claiming that the press should write about everything, but at least the information inside the party must be thorough. For me, the wounding of that youngster in the embassy is neither to be consoled nor lauded, whereas his act is, at the very least, immoral.
… The problem consists in clarifying to the people and thereby to cut the path of gossips. Of course, there will be still individuals spreading gossip because the hostile activity does not rest, but the trust of people in the party’s words should be reinforced.
(p. 43)
Sali Berisha: Comrade Ramiz, there are two sources of information: our own, and there is the information of those who are against us, which should be outweighed by our information. If it is not us who give complete information about everything happening in our country, including, above all, the meetings of the Central Committee, it will be given, then, by the foreign radios.
Ramiz Alia: Comrade Berisha, I don’t agree with what you are saying. What the foreign radios are broadcasting is not an information but a disinformation. If you trust them, it is your own business, but there is no logic in believing the lie when truth is lacking.
Sali Berisha: That’s why, since the beginning, I pointed out the need for truthful information, because in this case we must deal with competition in which the accurate and truthful information wins. Therefore, we must be very vigilant.
Ramiz Alia: Once more you are not presenting problem correctly. First, it is out of place here to speak about competition, because we are not engaged in an information race. Second, I don’t consider fair your remark concerning information about the meetings of the Central Committee. The documents of the Plenary 11th session of the Central Committee were broadcast part by part, the first and second day, due to a new concept on information, for a more open one.
Sali Berisha: I would better take another example. As far as we know, in Shkodra something has happened, and the people should have been informed.
Ramiz Alia: Nothing has happened in Shkodra recently. In January, indeed, there was a frustrated attempt to organize a demonstration, but nothing more than that. Should we have said in the press that according to some internal information a demonstration might or was expected to take place? It is good to talk about information, but we should not diverge from reality. You might say that there were events in Kavaja too. There were, and maybe something should have been said about it. But I think it is a loss of time for all of you if I start explaining one by one the internal and external reasons why it was not mentioned.
(p. 48)
Luan Omari: As far as I can notice and hear, sometimes we are given the impression that we took decisions under the pressure of international events. There are comments that the decision to increase the low salaries was taken under pressure of the events of Kavaja. It is very dangerous that measures which are favourable for the workers and peasants as individuals are interpreted as concessions, because this creates the opinion, inside and outside the country, that our social system is so weak that it can tumble with a nudge. Our party and its leadership do have a clear program for the future. Therefore, we should not take, so to say, delayed decisions, or arguably delayed.
Ramiz Alia: After the meeting of the Presidency of the People’s Assembly, we declared we are going to create an electoral commission, as well as another commission that will deliberate over the necessity of changes to the constitution, and one of the reasons to declare it immediately was because of what you are saying, i.e. not to give chances for interpretations alleging that we are doing so because of being obliged by someone else. By the way, I also wanted to underline this: that many of the pertinent ideas expressed in this meeting coincide with the acts of our party and our government.
Luan Omari: I might illustrate this with the process of changes that were made to the penal code. Those were also gradually prepared. But it was a closed discussion, and this gave people the chance to say that the modifications were produced because there is much ado about human rights.
(p. 62)
Ismail Kadare: Many valuable things were said here. And your view was even more valuable, being very clear and understandable for all of us.
It is absolutely true that the Albanian intelligentsia is committed to the freedom and independence of our country and to the existing government, to its stability. It must be admitted, though, that there are people in Albania who think the contrary, some of them because of ignorance, but sometimes due to an inborn malevolence, in keeping with the old pattern, according to which the intelligentsia is quite suspicious. When problems come about, there arises also the question: Where do we have to find the cause? We find it in the intelligentsia. This is an old propensity, since many centuries.
The history of our country, both before and during these 45 years, has demonstrated how interested our intelligentsia is for our fatherland’s cause.
… If it demands changes, evolutions, developments, it is only in the name of prosperity.
Recently, some disorienting acts have appeared.
… This disorientation comes either from outside influences – keeping up with foreign radios and TV stations – or because of gossip, or even due to the way some of our officials are speaking. It seems to me that their contradictory and irresponsible way of speaking has often brought confusion, has been supporting these waves of gossip we are talking about and which have been circulating throughout the country like an ominous wind.
The irresponsible way of speaking has certain causes. Some of the officials are acting like this in order to display an ultrarevolutionary self-image, thereby causing a lot of harm. We discussed certain things during the break, too; a process of mistrust towards the party’s program on democratic measures was incited by words that were spread with regards to the visit of Perez de Cuéllar
Ramiz Alia: Is it really accurate what you are saying, that about Perez de Cuéllar has frequently been refuted?
Ismail Kadare: This is well known by everybody. The audience here present should have heard, too.
Luan Omari: The Comrade Muho Asllani in Durres has publicly spoken in that way.
Ismail Kadare: The bad thing is that there are still contradictory instructions. For example, precisely in the heyday of the process of democratization, of debate, of pluralism of opinions, it is demanded to Drita newspaper to stop the debate. And what kind of debate is the matter? About Albanian literature of the Middle Ages.
Ramiz Alia: I don’t believe such an instruction has been given.
Ismail Kadare: That’s what I was told. Here is the editor-in-chief of the newspaper.
Bardhyl Londo: I was told not to go on for two or three weeks.
Ramiz Alia: But this doesn’t mean there is any order to stop it… Go on Ismail, probably, there is a misunderstanding here.
Ismail Kadare: What I wanted to underline is that all peoples, but especially the Albanian people, are very sensitive towards justice. Therefore, if it is demanded to punish the responsible persons of the events of July, this has nothing to do with revenge or masculinity. Those people, whether directly responsible or not, must be punished, because this creates satisfaction for people, creates security, creates tranquillity. Whereas the opposite creates aggravation.
… Treating the problems in the press realistically, as it was already mentioned, only reenforces the stability of the situation. I neither advocate giving sensational news, nor for satisfying the pathological curiosity of people, but the press must contain necessary information.
… There is a lack of understanding by the officials, which sometimes contaminates also those who complain – a lack of human feeling by their side.
… I don’t know if the municipalities have seen the people who come from other cities and sleep in the parks. I suppose yes. Those people are Albanians, are citizens of this country. There are others too with whom nobody is dealing, not a bit, they don’t figure in any law, in any paper, they are marginal people. But is it possible that there are so many marginal people in our society?
I have the firm belief that our people – despite a certain dynamic and nervous character shown by some individuals who lack patience – essentially is wisely patient. The Albanian people do not have a pathologic impatience, I don’t think it has, I only think that one should find the language of agreement with it, the language of dialogue.
… If excesses and dissatisfactions are created, this happens because of a disfunction of the agreement between the administration and the people.
… As we are in the stage of preparation of the electoral law, I consider it an important one, which will play a special role in a deeper development of the already initiated processes. The perspective of our society will depend very much on the success of this law, on whether it will conceived with due seriousness. This law will play an extremely important role in our life.
Sali Berisha: I would like to add here only a personal message for the comrades of the interior ministry: each illegal beating must be a burden on their conscience and must be condemned. There have been many beatings. I have seen them myself, at the railway station, while waiting for the bus. I will say only this: that each illegal beating is a beating to all of us. Every Albanian, from wherever he or she comes, is part of the social and national conscience. If the policemen beat people without any reason, they have maltreated us all. This is how we must perceive all of these acts. I also feel offended because they have come to violate the orders and the law.
I don’t know what the foreign secret services do, but the principal mechanism of the events that have happened was the existence of a mistrust on the seriousness of the measures stipulated by the party, which, as a matter of fact, has done so much.
… I have a remark concerning the party itself. The party has brought about a lot of changes in recent times. I think it is a Marxist attitude that, by changing the reality, it should change itself too, in certain respects. For example, concerning the freedom of thought. I consider indispensable the pluralism of opinions.
Ramiz Alia: The pluralism of thought or the multiparty system? To open a parenthesis: the pluralism of thought is being demanded and led by the party itself. What do you think about the question I just put forward? There is nothing wrong in discussing such problems, too.
Sali Berisha: To tell the truth, I cannot imagine how a multiparty system could be now, in the present period, when the pluralism of thought is still lacking. In this phase, at this stage, I consider the pluralism of thought indispensable. Our society will lose nothing from the pluralism of thought; on the contrary, those disciplines and sciences that have deprived themselves of pluralism of thought have faded and did not prosper. Whereas the disciplines and sciences which have used it have advanced and have made great contributions.
How can the pluralism of thought be initiated? I think a good step in this regard might be the creation of independent associations, NGOs, such as an association of physicians, for example. Because when we tell our colleagues abroad that we depend on the ministry of health, they take distance from us. Which country, in the course of the history of humanity, has lost anything because of professional associations? No one. The Writers’ Association is almost that kind of association.
Ramiz Alia: It’s true that some organisms or pre-governmetal or nongovernmental associations are bound somewhere and are treated almost as governmental ones. But this is because of a bureaucratic mentality; I do not think there is any political agenda behind this.
Sali Berisha: I’m saying that the independent associations might make a great contribution to the development of the country. I don’t believe that, by being dependent on ministries, they can prosper or make any significant contribution, and I think indeed that like this they cannot comply with the principles on which they were founded.
The pluralism of thought must exist not only in meetings, but also in the press and in the mass media in general. What should be done? Zëri i Popullit is the newspaper of the Central Committee of the Party. In my personal opinion, Zëri i Popullit can be the newspaper of the Party of Labor of Albania. In fact, if I would be asked as a party member, I would advocate for this option.
Ramiz Alia: I consider the problem deeper than what you are putting forward. I think you are simplifying the question. In my opinion, qualifying Zëri i Popullit the daily of the Central Committee or the daily of the party is something formal. Our line is only one, both for the Central Committee and for mass of the party members. Either you are wrongly explaining your idea, or you have some obsession to make an analogy with Eastern countries.
Sali Berisha: By saying “we are the newspaper of the Central Committee,” they are putting restrictions on certain useful opinions. It would be different if it is called the newspaper of the party.
(p. 75)
Ramiz Alia: I think you are not so much worried about why this or that member of the Central Committee did not write in the newspaper. You are putting forward the question: would it be possible to express in this newspaper ideas which are not in agreement with the party’s line?
Sali Berisha: I was rather speaking about a wider range.
(p. 77)
Ramiz Alia: Ismail told us that there is a certain disorientation, the others did too. But – I’m speaking from the position of the head of this meeting – isn’t it our own fault too, of every one of us, that there is disorientation?
… Perhaps, we also have to draw a conclusion: that all of us must be more active, that we must react, and not get confused because of some shallow words, slogans and gossip that gets spread by the enemy. When we judge certain phenomena, we shouldn’t go so far as to see the national conscience offended because a policeman has beaten two persons, as Sali said. This is a correct concern, but not so much as to upset the national conscience.
… In this respect, our main preoccupation must be about what Luan said: why our secret police is so clumsy, so incapable? Why its officials showed themselves to be so weak, so incapable, so ignorant? By the fugitives in Germany, France, Italy etc., we are learning now how the scheme of the July events has been prepared, how the German, Czech, French, Yugoslav, or Italian diplomats have acted, how they came into contact with our people.
…This activity of the enemy should have been discovered and struck before the events took place.
(p. 83)
Ismail Kadare: In 1972, Comrade Enver said that the party does not have unlimited rights. This idea has never been fully developed.
Ramiz Alia: This idea has to do with relations between the leading party and the power, the party and the people, the communists and the masses, with relations between the party and mass organizations. This is a question which must be treated more deeply. There is no doubt that this question needs to be elaborated. I’m not able today to tell you anything concrete, but the necessity to discuss it has already appeared.
Sali Berisha: It is about the law that declares the party as the hegemonic leading force, which is included in the constitution.
Ramiz Alia: I understand that is your concern. We cannot decide anything here, but if the leading role of the party is denied, this will suppose the existence of other parties. Are you advocating this idea? The political pluralism, the multiparty system?
Sali Berisha: … (hesitates to respond).
Ramiz Alia: Come on, you are a highlander, be direct, tell us openly the idea you have in your mind.
Sali Berisha: I’m convinced that for the moment the people are not prepared for a multiparty system.
Ramiz Alia: After all, you are not telling us what’s the point. Don’t speak about preparation. You are a physician: when you make an operation, you know what you are going to find out. I mean, if you accept an idea, you must see the consequences.
Sali Berisha: I’m advocating that the leading role of the party should not be sanctioned in the constitution. The party will demonstrate by its own acts what its place in the society is, and it should not rely on what the law provides.
Luan Omari: In reference to the multiparty system, there is the well known thesis of Stalin that the party of the working class doesn’t share the power with any other party. This is a very general thesis, so it cannot be a rule for every country or people which enters the route of socialism. After all, there is also an earlier thesis, which is in the Manifesto of the Communist Party, where Marx and Engels say that the communist party is one of the parties of the working class.
These are theoretical premises. Personally, I think that the unique party system corresponds better to the conditions of our country. In our country the Party of Labor has a very high prestige, it is bound to the people more organically than the parties of the Eastern countries, which were often imported from Moscow. Besides, in our country, there is no multiparty system tradition. There is no opposition in our country, not even oppressed, as there have been in Bulgaria, Rumania and elsewhere. Considering the inner conditions, I think that the pluralism of thought is indispensable and must be deepened, whereas political pluralism is not a question imposed by reality as a necessity.
Meanwhile, there is the external aspect to the question that cannot be neglected. As you said, presently the world is demanding of us not a cosmetic modification, but the overthrow of the people’s power. They can put forward the multiparty system or religious freedom as conditions for the participation of Albania in the Helsinki Process or with regard to relations with the European Common Market. In such a case, we shall be confronted with problems.
Ramiz Alia: Here is the problem. How to disarm the adversaries? How can we deprive them of these arguments?
Napolon Roshi: The creation of parties should not be forbidden by law.
Luan Omari: By law it is not forbidden now, either.
Napolon Roshi: After all, there would have been nothing wrong with the creation of an ecologist organisation.
Ramiz Alia: I don’t know what Ismail thinks about this. How can we harmonize these two aspects?
Ismail Kadare: I don’t consider the question of religion a serious one. In practice, we have officially permitted religion. Whereas the prohibition would have been something in vain.
Ramiz Alia: I think that Luan was speaking about religious institutions rather than the religious conscience.
Ismail Kadare: If we pose the question in this way, I as a writer wouldn’t be against the construction of a church in a village of Dropulli, if this is demanded by its people. We have already said that we cannot forbid it to them.
Before speaking about what Luan was arguing, I would underline, in relation to the party, that sometimes, on the whole of our propaganda, it is treated as a metaphysical entity in Albanian life. The construction of factories, the granting of pensions, etc., all of these are said to be a gift from the party. It seems that the people and the party are distinct. The party provides goods to the people, and the people takes and enjoys them. As a first step, one must put an end to this. It seems that we think we can avoid a multiparty system by intensifying a banal propaganda for the party, which is something meaningless.
(pg 88)
… As for the meaning of pluralism, this problem is not enough clear to me from the juridical point of view, I don’t understand its status.
Ramiz Alia: Nobody is going to believe that you don’t understand what pluralism means. If it was said by anybody else, yes, perhaps it might be acceptable, but is it you who doesn’t understand it?! You understand it, yes you do.
Ismail Kadare: It is not very clear to me what this means for our country.
Ramiz Alia: I’m going to explain it to you, since you have not understood it yet. A multiparty system means to have, besides the Party of Labor of Albania, one or several other parties, social democrats, republicans, liberals, greens or ecologists, as it was already mentioned here. This is the idea of a multiparty system.
Ismail Kadare: Presently, this is a very hard question to be considered because it involves many political connotations.
Ramiz Alia: There are political connotations, and this is a thoroughly political issue. Therefore, it is a very delicate issue. Practically we shouldn’t permit a multiparty system. As to how we can avoid the attack of foreign propaganda, this is something to be thought about and reflected upon.
There are people saying that there is no danger to allow other parties, because there is no party that can compete with the Party of Labor. This is true, I also firmly believe that there is no other party that can compete with our party, but the reactionary forces are insisting on this point, just because they know this might be the first great gap in the national unity.
… What we call pluralism of thought is something different. The social opinion must be elaborated as deeply as possible. And I think that even the electoral law that is being prepared should, in a way, express and reflect the question of pluralism.
Nowadays, the question of permitting different political parties is becoming, indeed, the principal weapon of the bourgeoisie against socialism, against Albania, and for that reason we must be consistent in defending our attitudes.
Without any doubt, the multiparty system would amount to overthrowing the people’s power.
… Somebody here mentioned also the question of Stalin, which is all the same rather complex, therefore we must act prudently.
… The important thing is that we are not Stalinists, in the sense this term is used by the bourgeoisie and the reactionary forces.
(p. 91)
Sali Berisha: In Kosovo too there is a different view about Stalinism.
Ramiz Alia: Comrade Berisha, the question of Kosovo is a separate question, which must be treated very cautiously.
(p. 94)
… Well, since it seems you have nothing more to say, I’m going to add a few words.
(p. 95)
… One can draw a parallel between the present day and that of the war. What other choice did our people have at that time? Either to fight, or to disappear as a nation. There was no other way. The first one was very difficult, and moreover, by that time, we didn’t see the end quite clearly. But what other choice could we follow? To leave the fate of our country in the hands of the occupier? The people chose to die while fighting and not to be subdued, and it made sacrifices and ended up a winner.
Nowadays we have the same situation. If we take the wrong path, if we succumb to the pressure of foreigners, to the attack of enemies, then we will lose the freedom and the independence of our fatherland, not to speak of socialism. The freedom and independence can be lost not only by accepting to host military bases, not only by classical occupations either. They can be lost also if we leave our economy, our national sovereignty in the hands of others.