As we stand against power, we must clearly show that we are not dealing with a failing leftist model, but with the very betrayal of the ideals of equality.
Wake up Hyseni
The slogan used by the Government in the fight against the unions is sounding so clear that it is natural. The same is being accepted by everyone. Even those who are in defense of the union do not dispute this phrase from the point of view of truth.
Whoever does not work does not get paid – this is a weapon that is hitting well because it is leaving us without protection. What makes this weapon effective within the ideological war? Of course, the way in which the statement is accepted. It comes to us as natural, accurate and ahistorical. The message is internalized, the call is not coming from outside. It seems as if we learned something that has long been our experience of being. Accurate as a mathematical problem with proof; natural as the laws of physics; ahistorical because that is how we know this work since the beginning of the world.
All that can be suspected here is an excessive behavior of the Government in difficult social conditions, but never the phrase itself. The phrase-weapon inside the trench has closed its eyes to see the ideological terrain.
Analyses and concepts are simplified and condensed into slogans to guide people in political processes. But each call has behind it the ideological traces of implicit premises.
Who works gets paid, who doesn't work doesn't get paid! Where did Kurti get the gun? From what terrain? We can start by examining the implicit premise. This formulation presupposes fair and equal relations within a system that gives everyone their due. Thus, those who have billions have worked so hard and so well, may their work be halal. These in the suburbs have nothing because they don't even know their own names. The "illiterates" therefore reap the credit.
The entire political struggle of the last two centuries is described by the fact that there is a real contradiction and a conceptual disagreement between work and wages. The entire process of capital accumulation is created by the fact that the worker is not paid according to his work, he creates surplus value that is turned against him. Trade unions exist precisely because there is no equality between work and wages. What are these differences?
The right attributes economic differences to the courage of the entrepreneurial spirit that some have, and others do not. Therefore, the poor (illiterate) deserve their condition. The left position sees inequalities of origin and reproductive instruments of exploitation that all they do is expand contradictions towards unequal development. Depending on these ideological premises, the political response also comes. When they see development through capital, they remove taxes from it and open the doors to it. The political edge of this position goes as far as fighting unions. It has now become customary to mention Thatcher and Reagan. The left, meanwhile, starts from the belief that everything that creates new value comes from the exchange of value with another power that creates more value, a constant quantity is transformed into a variable one. This value is labor power. This analysis guides other worldviews and policies. The orientation is towards cooperation with unions. Many parties have those parts of decision-making. Even centrist parties, when they propose progressive taxes, take this structural inequality for granted.
We must admit, Kurti has been coherent lately. His premise is the equality between work and salary. If this is the premise, then the logical conclusion is not progressive taxation. Progressive taxation is an instrument – a response to structural inequality. It redistributes wealth so that the social gap does not take the form of social conflict.
Let's ask the question: how does the threat "whoever doesn't work doesn't get paid!" affect labor-capital relations? When the "left" government does this to workers, what will the oligarchs do elsewhere?! Will this unprecedented war encourage unionism and strikes, or the whip of discipline?!
According to Eurostat, Kosovo has the highest level of inequality in Europe, if we look at the gap between those at the top of the pyramid of social structure, and those at the bottom and on the margins. What redistributive policies has the Government undertaken? How many privatizations have been reviewed? How many new taxes have been installed? What tax rates have been increased? Bureau with tassel, maintenance of resentment.
This weapon is manufactured from the raw materials and semi-finished products of liberal economic doctrine. Its filling is being used against workers, on behalf of capital, and of course, the prime minister's own authority.
The damage caused is truly great. It is current and extended in time. The current damage is certainly the disciplinary effect on concrete union demands, but also on the spirit of unionism in the future. Large private corporations have been given the green light by the precedent set with the treatment of workers in the public sector. The difficulty of the future is political. Social progress through the left has suffered a severe blow. All people see is lynching and accusations. No inspiration, no love, no joint effort. A gloom of nihilism that is beginning to be seen must not be allowed. The confrontation is twofold: while we stand against power, we must show without a doubt that we are not dealing with a failing left model, but with the very betrayal of the ideals of equality.
edition
t7 live
