Power has an end, shame has no mandate!

By Irena Beqiraj

In 1966, U.S. Senator J. William Fulbright published "The Arrogance of Power," a scathing critique of American foreign policy and the culture of political conformity that had helped escalate the Vietnam War.

But his warning went far beyond Vietnam: "unchecked power, especially when it demands unconditional loyalty and punishes dissent, threatens not only democracy but the very foundations of a nation."

Fulbright was a Democrat. The president he opposed, Lyndon Johnson, was also a Democrat. However, for Fulbright, party affiliation could never be more important than responsibility to his country. He paid a political price for his stances. But history does not remember him for his party loyalty. It remembers him for his courage to disagree with power.

I brought up the Fulbright story for two reasons.

First, because his name is given to prestigious scholarships that have benefited many Albanian intellectuals. I hope that they have learned from them not only how to become better professionals, but also that knowledge without independence of thought risks becoming a sophisticated instrument of servility.

And secondly, because his story helps us understand how power can become destructive and why responsibility does not lie solely with the person who leads it.
In studies of destructive leadership, there is a concept known as the "toxic triangle of power."

It consists of three elements that feed each other:

1. The destructive leader, who aims to concentrate power, seeks personal obedience, treats criticism as hostility, and uses control, manipulation, or intimidation to maintain authority.

2. Submissive followers and collaborators, who support the leader out of fear, interest, ambition, privilege, or the need to belong; where some are silent because they fear losing something, others are proactive because they hope to gain something.

3. The enabling environment, when institutions weaken, control mechanisms lose effectiveness, the media does not always exercise its critical role, and an opposition that fails to inspire creates space for relativizing abuses of power.

History leaves no room for hope. Majorities that have built power on fear, servility, and the weakening of institutions are transformed into violent gangs that lose their dignity long before they lose power, leaving the latter in shame.

I still want to believe that in the Socialist Party and its parliamentary group there are people who have not surrendered their conscience in exchange for a mandate.

I want to believe that among them there are those who studied under the Fulbright name and who have not confused education with career, nor career with character. I want to believe that there may be even a minority who have not been finally buried by the virtue of dissent, living as worthless beings.

Obedience is not unity. Silence is not responsibility. Democracy is not built to function without opposition. On the contrary, it relies on friction between powers, mutual control, and the obligation to distance oneself from power without violence.

Dissent is one of the mechanisms that protects democracy and the nation from arbitrariness. The toxic triangle of power is destined to disintegrate. But the responsibility will remain as an act of betrayal to all of you.

And to avoid getting to that point, it doesn't require heroism. It requires conscience, clarity, and courage to say in time: Enough!