By Ben Andoni
There is no greater confusion or uncertainty for the political battles awaiting a party than when its own structures remain unclear. This is exactly the situation of today’s Democratic Party—a phenomenon unfolding almost naturally, especially since Berisha launched the “Foltorja,” but also because of the petty maneuvers of his tight entourage, who managed to secure themselves places on the Safe Lists.
Sadly, many others failed to make it through the Open Lists in the Socialists’ difficult and rule-bending contest, while yet another group now watches the DP with nostalgia but without any desire for identification.
Time and again, commentators and writers refer to democratic canons and compare experiences between the DP and the SP. Yet politics in Albania today makes clear that it remains the domain of party leaders and their narrow circles—entrenched at the top, pulling all the strings. Berisha’s case, and the submission of even his opponents before him, shows that the DP is a political machine—one that can be manipulated and profited from. The Socialist Party, by contrast, is little more than a voting technology, a structure that no other formation has been able to rival.
But for this DP machine to keep running, it must be fueled by Berisha—and everyone knows it. For those who try to seek alternative fuel, there is no chance—or rather, only confusion. The DP has produced endless factions, traitors, discontents, and opportunists, because no one can orient themselves in the turbulence that Berisha and his people have long manufactured. Some justify this with Rama’s battles and games against them, but it is far more about Berisha’s own need to maintain power over this formation—even when he was supposedly distant from the party.
So why is he allowed this? And how does the historic DP leader manage to hold such power, deliberately keeping his party in turmoil? Here we must turn to the literature.
There are several types of authority in the world. The sociologist Max Weber, when writing about how societies maintain order, defined three: Traditional Authority—rooted in customs and traditions, often embodied by a monarch or elder; Charismatic Authority—derived from the extraordinary personal qualities of a leader, seen almost as a prophet or revolutionary figure; and Legal-Rational Authority—linked to modern societies, based on laws, rules, and established procedures, where legitimacy attaches more to the office than to the person.
Berisha, within Weber’s century-old framework, embodies a fusion of the first two—but with a distinctly local flavor and an intimate grasp of Albanian anthropology. And he has succeeded brilliantly: the murkier the DP, the less visible what truly happens (though reports of collusion frequently surface), and the greater the adoration for Berisha in a party that seems almost to enjoy losing to its opponent—an opponent with whom it shares a game played by rules of their own making!