“Government transparency” No matter how far away we may be, the localisms of the communist school can still be found today with pleasure. As in a televised promise from a government that has decided to pretend it is governing. Every day it appears on screen, speaks in a dry language of optimism, and makes us understand that coal is politics and politics is price. Instead of being told the truth about the market, about rising costs, poverty, and the lack of alternatives, an artificial calm is being propagated. The JANCET of the time, automatically, diligent to the point of monotony, repeat this refrain. As soon as a question is raised about bread, energy, rent, or transport, the answer turns to “reforms,” to “sacrifices,” to the “transition period.” And the ordinary citizen, the one who pays every day with devalued lek, feels on his back not only the crisis, but also the mockery of empty words. In the processes of unemployment against in ideas and against specialists in wages and specialists in payments, in their entirety, according to a long experience of propaganda, the impression is created that responsibility is always somewhere else. As if there were no names, no offices, no institutions. As if coal, electricity, prices, and the market were blind forces, not the consequences of concrete political decisions. The proofs of “transparency” cannot be hanging charts, frozen statements, or television soundbites. Transparency requires balance sheets, responsibility, figures, deadlines, and above all respect for the public. When this is missing, the price of politics becomes heavier than the price of coal. Faced with this spectacle, the public not only doubts, but grows tired. If politics wants to regain trust, it must abandon old tricks. It must speak clearly about rising prices, about the energy crisis, about the winners and losers of reform. Otherwise, we will continue to have not governance, but the government’s empty transparency.