The Role of Patents in Monopolies

One of the lesser-known reasons behind M&A and consolidation of markets (aka less competition) is the role of patents. Even if a small company has great ideas, at some point, to get access to the broader market, they will need licenses. Over time, the cost of such licenses may become prohibitive, encouraging consolidation. This is why open source is so important, but it's also why governments have lost credibility over time.

Rather than address the causes of needlessly prohibitive barriers, governments have attempted to deal only with the results of an increasingly unwieldy legal framework, which merely adds to its complexity--and which generates even more contempt for the elites who benefit from it. 

Let's take a couple of recent examples: Uber/Waymo and Fitbit/Jawbone. They've sued each other, a process that is supposed to create a check and balance protecting innovation. Problematically, it's impossible to know whether any party actually committed legal violations or trade secret theft without each side spending millions of dollars in legal fees that do nothing to promote innovation. In some cases, companies have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars arguing about superficial similarities in mobile phone design, down to the curves and grooves in a mobile phone's case (e.g., Apple vs. Samsung). 

If you are a small company threatening the market share of a larger company, the larger company has an asymmetrical payoff in suing you early and often--even if its case has little merit. The smaller company then has to raise funding for non-innovative purposes or become more dependent on outsiders to survive. As such, the status quo biases winners and losers based on which innovators have access to the best or most powerful venture capitalists and lawyers, many of whom are connected to the existing political establishment, especially in states where judges run for election. 

Worse, governments cannot unilaterally reform the patent development or certification process, partly because the procedures are often based on subjective interpretation and therefore the random assignment of a particular government employee. (e.g., is Amazon's "one-click" technology truly deserving of a patent? If so, which parts?) 

Meanwhile, laws and regulations relating to interpretation continue to expand to resolve increasingly complex or new issues, frustrating even sincere government employees who may not have recent technological expertise or who may be receiving such expertise secondhand from biased experts. Absent wholesale removal of patent application screeners who disagree with the executive branch's interpretation of truly non-innovative or innovative patents--a definition that may change every four years--lawyers once again take the helm. Compounding problems, as law school tuition has increased, legal fees have risen, making experienced (and even inexperienced) lawyers less accessible for smaller companies.

Conclusion: every system of any kind, once it achieves stability (often misconstrued for success), has three choices: bar newcomers, which increases social tension, reduces consumer choice, and renders diversity impossible; make competition outside the established system affordable and feasible, which often increases segregation while creating more entrenched interests; or adapt and suffer sacrifice. The primary cause of almost all problems in the developed world today is the inability of all parties--both public and private--to choose the third option.

Bonus: from Peter Thiel's From Zero to One: 

Bonus II: Much of globalization's discontents is merely new or freshly made capital moving from developed countries (that have not chosen to adequately reform existing legal systems) and into developing countries which lack similar barriers--exactly as one would expect new capital to behave in a rigged system.

Bonus III: Peter Thiel's ideas are not entirely new. See Elliott Sclar's words from 2001. 

A Primer on Modern History

The study of modern history is needlessly complicated. Unfortunately, most history teachers and professors spent their lives in a few countries or studied only a single subject, rendering them unable to provide the context students so desperately need. I have tried below to provide a straightforward framework acceptable to everyone. Without such a framework, historical understanding will fracture, and humanity will continue to repeat the same mistakes.

Since 1945, every single government and military has been focused on attaining or preventing others from attaining nuclear weapons. After the United States dropped bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, ending WWII, politicians and military leaders realized existing defense/protection paradigms no longer applied. A country with the most skilled troops, superior munitions, most efficient supply chains, best hygiene (to prevent disease, which often killed more soldiers than active combat), and even superior strategy would not necessarily prevail. Now, only three things mattered: technology and the ability and willingness to use it. Developing brawn had given way to developing brains and gaining (accurate) information.

Military budgets prioritized R&D and began to emphasize covert operations. As governments continued competing for the moral high ground, questions became more complex. When was a first strike politically acceptable? How could one determine whether a recruit would keep secrets? How could countries identify the best minds in the world and entice them to relocate? (e.g., Operation Paperclip) 

Such a shift required a mix of intrigue, psychology, persuasion, media influence, and propaganda. Intelligence communities realized they would be key players in the new paradigm and, in an era prior to CCTVs and ubiquitous technological surveillance, reliable human assets and agents would be the difference between victory and defeat. Furthermore, where soft power and persuasion would not work, assassinations and abductions would--preferably through a third party ally. [Evidence: Operation Damocles; Anwar al-Awlaki and his 16 years-old son; Israel assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists Masoud Alimohammadi, Majid Shahriar, Darioush Rezaeinejad, Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, and possibly Ardeshir Hassanpour, mimicking USA's strategy against Germany.] 

Such tactics were not enough for military and intelligence units, which also resorted to false flag operations or coups on a much wider scale. [e.g., Gulf of Tonkin, Lavon Affair/Operation Susannah, Operation Ajax (1953), Operation Musketeer (1956)] Facing potential conflicts between civilian and military objectives, democratic regimes sought to limit international interference with domestic governance, causing ideological splits regarding the balance of law, order, and dissent. As domestic resistance increased, it had the potential to upend military alliances post-WWII, which involved important economic treaties and investments. (See “most favored nation” clause, which used USA's stronger currency to tilt trade in its favor: “The American workman, by 1960, had the highest standard of living in the world, and all due to what they genteelly called ‘the most favored nation’ clause in every commercial transaction with the East.” – Philip K. Dick) 

The failure of Western governments to foresee strong domestic resistance to international policies led to more secrecy in the name of national security, both at home and abroad. The private security industry, not subject to invasive government oversight, began its ascent. British-based Securicor is one example. In 1953, it specialized in delivery and logistics, eventually making its way into the telecom (aka surveillance and data-gathering) business. Today, it is part of G4S, the world's largest security company. With 585,000 employees, G4S is the world's third largest private sector employer and the largest in Europe and Africa. (See the film Logan (2017) for a dystopian view of the possible evolution of private security firms.) 

Returning to the 1960s, covert operations and violations of territorial sovereignty (Operation Menu) became more accepted within governments as the United States began to realize its superior armaments were not enough in Vietnam. As nuclear energy and more lethal weapons accelerated the risks of being outside established alliances, countries and military leaders were forced into one of two camps: pro-Soviet Union (which in practice often meant pro-China) and pro-American. Meanwhile, existing and aspiring world leaders learned that favorable (or in the case of Vietnam, unfavorable) media coverage and asymmetrical warfare—later used by Osama bin Laden—could defeat larger powers or at least convince them to leave. Like private security firms, the general media industries--in this case, television and radio--began their steady ascent. 

Its ability to influence world affairs now jeopardized by increasing Chinese and Soviet influence in Asia and Eastern Europe as well as domestic turmoil, America began addressing matters under its direct control more forcefully. American police started using the same tactics as the military and intelligence communities on their own people. (Potential lesson: once the military uses a particular strategy successfully, it is only a matter of time before the civilian government deploys similar strategies.) 

Surveillance, infiltration, and financially-debilitating lawsuits were used against antiwar groups and activists from MLK to Muhammad Ali to John Lennon. The term “law and order” became a justification for a proxy war against protesters, later morphing into President Reagan’s "War on Drugs." Ironically, countervailing forces that bolstered social change came partly from the military, which had relied on greater female participation in the private workforce during wartime as well as soldiers of color, including but not limited to Jackie Robinson. 

Politicians like America's Joseph McCarthy had used the media to blacklist anyone deemed an adversarial nonconformist in the 1950s at the same time the Soviet Union and its satellite forces were blacklisting and jailing dissidents.As power-hungry politicians gained more power, propaganda against dissenters became more widespread, with police officers in some jurisdictions ordered to attack nonviolent protestors while federal agencies (J. Edgar Hoover) spied on civil rights leaders. As lines between international and domestic operations blurred, the Watergate scandal was a natural and inevitable result. (See The Most Dangerous Man in America (2009).) 

Were it not for the courageous work of American whistleblowers and journalists (e.g., All the President’s Men (1976)), who often ignored conservative legal advice from their employers, secretive operations would have continued without abatement. Unfortunately, civilian resistance movements against the Eastern Establishment were not as strong as ones in the West, thus preserving the East's status quo--a status quo that would later prove to be unsustainable, essentially bankrupting the Soviet Union and ending its petro-military-industrial economic model. 

In the West, where the status quo was fraying, greater diversity flourished, both strengthening and weakening authoritarian impulses. Taking advantage of distractions in Southeast Asia and Central/South America, some countries decided to cooperate outside U.S. or Soviet-led alliances, much in the same way China would later exploit America’s failure to “pivot to Asia” after the costly and counterproductive 2003 Iraq War. [Examples: creation of ASEAN in 1967; “mid-level” countries like Argentina and Iran working to resume nuclear cooperation, only to see outside events interfere with their relationships, such as the Buenos Aires 1992 embassy bombing, in which neither Argentina nor Iran strangely derived any benefit.]

In 1973, the OPEC embargo added yet another disruptor to the existing world order, namely the integrity of the oil supply chain, which formed the underlying basis of U.S. dollar strength and numerous economic treaties. Post-Nixon and the cessation of active armed conflict between West and East, economic statecraft became the way forward, with America’s mighty Navy and more developed financial markets giving the West a clear advantage. Trade, oil, weapons development, and continued control of nuclear energy would dominate international relations until the birth of the internet in the 1990s. The formal dissolution of the Soviet Union on December 26, 1991 provided America with the opportunity to create what President George Bush, formerly the CIA's Director, called a “new world order” on September 11, 1990, a period lasting until September 11, 2001. America's 2003 invasion of Iraq, driven by falsified pretenses, shattered America's reputation, allowing other countries to vie for global dominance. And here we are. 

© Matthew Mehdi Rafat (2017)

Bonus: another historical pattern is that when two countries enter into a treaty—whether to avoid war or after a conflict—often only one party intends on upholding the terms. The other party uses the break in tensions to disarm—both literally and figuratively—the other signatory, eventually invading the former enemy and prevailing through political chicanery.

Bonus: when we hear the term, "divide and conquer," we typically understand the term absent historical context. After WWII, the British, despite prevailing, were in debt and could not maintain their empire, which once spanned a quarter of the globe. They attempted to break up or partition several areas in order to more easily manage them and to allow Western powers to maintain naval supremacy. Singapore's break from Malaysia is one example--keep the port, leave the land. Divide and conquer. Yet, even with lesser security obligations, European powers, particularly the British and the French, could not afford empire status. By the time of the Vietnam War, Europe had effectively handed off empire duties and corresponding security--both for Westerners living abroad as well as Western-owned businesses--to the United States. 

Bonus: from Allison J. Truitt's Dreaming of Money in Ho Chi Minh City (2013): "The United States' massive military expenditures in Southeast Asia led to the collapse of its ability to maintain the dollar's fixed value relative to gold. When the US government put an end to the dollar's convertibility in 1971, it ushered in a new era of more flexible and more volatile exchange rates." 

Bonus: counterpoint from Singapore's Kishore Mahbubani's Has the West Lost It? (2018)

Bonus: if you enjoyed this post, you may also like this one: Ports, Finance, Power, and Free Trade. 

Bonus: "History... is not merely something to be read... On the contrary, the great force of history comes from the fact that we carry it within us, are unconsciously controlled by it in many ways, and history is literally present in all that we do.  It could scarcely be otherwise, since it is to history that we owe our frames of reference, our identities, and our aspirations." -- James Baldwin, USA (1965) 

Auron Tare: Albania's Bill Bradley

Auron Tare is that rare, almost extinct breed of politician who answers his own emails, gives direct answers, and inspires respect. I met him—all 6’4’’ inches, in a still athletic frame—for the first time on a rainy December Monday in a cafe. Tare came in jeans, a North Face jacket, and hiking shoes. Throughout the conversation (edited below for clarity and space), two themes arose: be authentic and differentiate yourself through excellent service.

On Travel and Tourism

Tare: With tourism, it is how you present it to the public, and how well you present it publicly.

Me: Has Albania done a good job attracting tourists?

Tare: The foreign market has done a great job discovering us. We don’t have a large tourism budget and have not engaged in widespread marketing. We need to be more niche-oriented and not seek to attend all the larger fairs. Attracting the right kind of the market is the key to developing something different. 

Me: What can Albania do better?

Tare: Many things, but to start, we should focus on incremental improvements, which are very important. First, good professional guiding [aka tour guides]. Second, train the taxi drivers. When I go to London or America, I know I am not going to be cheated. The first contact for visitors when they arrive should be a professional experience.

Me: How do you change the culture, which tilts towards inertia or short-term thinking? And how do you compete for the same tourist dollars as much larger countries?

Tare: Simple. Get a program of 30 people. Explain the program. Install good customer service. Explain the concept: the better you are, the more business you are going to get. Don’t cheat the tourists. Put on some cologne, perfume. Speak some English. Say a few nice words. When the passenger hails a taxi, get out of the car, take the bags, open the door, close the door, and so on. Here, some airport taxis tried charging 50 USD when 20 USD is normal fare to the city centre. When you arrive, the taxi is usually your first impression, and we want your first impression to be good and we want you to feel welcome. It’s a simple thing. [That 30 USD gap, is it worth destroying the tourist’s first impression of us?]

[Remember] Where are we? We are surrounded by Turkey, Greece, Italy. We are a small country. How can we compete? We have to improve the product. We have to have nice signs, nice guides.  We have to make people feel good. We want a more authentic feeling. That is how we are going to compete. 

Me: It’s interesting you mention tour guides. I went to a travel agency, and they only had packages for foreign destinations like Montenegro. I could not find anything for Shkroda or Gjirokaster.

Tare: [shakes his head] Tour guides and tourism itself need a lot of attention. Tourism can be one of the possibilities for economic development for a country like Albania. People here think tourism is something that happens [only] in June, July, August. No one thinks you have to work in the winter to prepare yourself for the summer.

Me: What do you think about Uber?

Tare: I think nothing. I see a general approach in raising the level of taxi drivers.

Me: Like you said, you are a small country. Uber won’t come by itself because it’s not cost-effective. I believe the UAE, probably the world’s best marketer in tourism, created its own taxi hailing app before allowing Uber. As a tourist, I feel much more comfortable if there is a ride-hailing app.

Tare: [nods acknowledgment]

On UNESCO and His Work with UNESCO

Tare: Albania has three UNESCO sites. One I created: Butrint National Park. The others are Gjirokaster and Berat, both of which have castles. Berat has an interesting combination of Ottoman and Byzantine influence in one place.

Me: How can I get there from Tirana?

Tare: Get a cab, bus, or minibus. I can send you the info.

Me: Please do. What is the process for designating a UNESCO site?

Tare: It is a long process, a very bureaucratic process. We approach it from different angles.

Me: How long does it take create one [a UNESCO site]?

Tare: A few years. You don’t “create” a site—the main reason for UNESCO is to try to protect the site. If it has universal value, then you approach UNESCO. The idea is to protect and save the place.

Me: What are the benefits of UNESCO? Do you provide experts? Funding?

Tare: Yes, the UN gives experts. A delegation comes. UNESCO provides professional expertise. You might get some money but that’s not the point. You need to do a great job yourself and make the site work well. Don’t depend on UNESCO, because the most important goal is to be self-sustaining. That is the ultimate goal: the site is to be self-sustaining.

Me: How do you make a site sustainable? So many so-called tourist spots have inadequate signs or background about a place, even in popular destinations like Turkey.

Tare: It’s management. Turkey has some nice sites. In fact, it has a lot. Money is not enough. I work very hard to make a site independent so a site works without any state-funded budget. We want a situation where you don’t care about UN or UNESCO because it functions well.

Me: But doesn’t a restoration cost a lot of money?

Tare: [In many cases,] It is not necessary to restore. What you do is preserve it. We conserve it. We present it. We make it a delightful experience. The moment you start putting too much restoration, you lose the charm, you lose the authenticity. Have you been to Niagara Falls?

Me: Yes, the Canadian side. I loved it. It’s one of my favorite travel experiences, breathing in the air.

Tare: It is disgusting.

Me: Wait, the Falls itself, or what is around the Falls?

Tare: The stores around it, the tourist center. It is cheesy. It is all for money. It’s disgusting.

Me: Ah, you mean the generic stores and kitsch a few blocks from the Falls. Yes, I agree.

Tare: Mass tourism destroys the beauty of nature. There’s a casino there—it is disgusting. Everyone falls into this trap. Everyone wants to imitate.

Me: How do you prevent the tourist trap?

Tare: There is big difference between traveling and tourism. Either you are a tourist or you are a traveler. If you are a traveler, you go to a place for the experience, to enrich yourself. Unfortunately, in the last half of the 20^th century, mass tourism happened. In mass tourism, no one goes to eat local food, to meet local people or local tribes. Now what you do, you go, you stay in the same Sheraton hotel. Tourism and traveling are different concepts.

Me: Interesting statement from a man who said tourism could be the driver for economic development, but you are right. Everywhere I go, I see the same block signs with the city name, the same kiosks, the same food trucks… those Christmas kiosks out there? I just saw the same concept in Vienna, but on a larger scale.

Tare: I’m a romantic. I know it’s not going to happen, that we only get travelers here. Even so, we have to be careful in not making the same mistakes with tourism as other countries. Mass tourism has destroyed Greece, it has destroyed many cities, and it will destroy here as well.

Me: How do you stop mass tourism from destroying a country and how do you get travelers to come?

Tare: There are not that many travelers left. That is why we have to focus on tourism. The challenge is how to improve the tourism experience. People who go somewhere without understanding where they are, they are tourists—it’s not done in the traveling sense. There’s no spiritual experience. People in Michigan can go to Florida and then go to Europe, and they’ll have no idea they’ve left the USA. They travel in a bubble. They pay with the same Visa, stay at a Sheraton, eat at a McDonald’s. They are attached to it because it is safe, it is like home. How did it get this way? It is the centralization created by mass tourism.

Mass tourism has destroyed the environment, the culture. It is not easy to do it [travel] right. I like the Scandinavian model: fewer people, better quality.

Me: Wait, Iceland is drowning in tourists. They went with a cheap airfare strategy, and they are getting many, many tourists.

Tare: Norway is holding out for fewer [but higher quality] people. With cheap travel, you get hordes of people. These people still think they are in England when they visit Greece, for example. They drink the same beer, they watch the same football matches.

From Rachael Weiss' Me, Myself & Prague (2008)

They don’t manage to get the experience. Tourism is corrupting the soul, destroying the environment. It is very important to create a balance. You cannot sell a country because it is cheap. You cannot say, “Come to my country because it is cheap.” Cheap means sh*t.

Me: But one of the reasons we have “tourism” is because people, especially young people, can only afford to visit a place for two or three days. The more expensive a place, the fewer days most people can stay.

Tare: I’ve stayed in tents, I’ve hitchhiked. I had 60 bucks in my pocket and I visited 5 countries. You have to promote a country as a niche experience. Go for the experience—who cares what is the next destination? I once took a bus in Iran for 10 hours and ended up somewhere I didn’t know. I woke up the next morning and had no idea where I was. Nobody spoke English but I was fine. They thought I was American, but I was not. They are very pro-American, by the way. Turns out I was near a mine and had slept with local workers all night. 

Me: When was this? [Expecting it to be when he was much younger.]

Tare: 7 years ago. Take the bus and go somewhere. Have you ever been on a Greyhound in the U.S.? I don’t use apps. I just go wherever.

Me: Yes, but I grew up without much disposable income. I wouldn’t recommend Greyhound to anyone coming to California because the experience with each station varies greatly, and America is too spread out to make travel solely by buses viable for first-time travelers. Once the bus drops you off, you usually can’t walk somewhere. It’s not like Europe, which is much more compact. We have not invested in infrastructure in America. The buses are often from 20 or 30 years ago.

Tare: Ok.

On Politics

Me: Do you think Albania should continue to be part of NATO?

Tare: I think if you join the club, you have to pay. You can’t even join a book club these days without paying a membership fee.

Me: I saw Basha, the opposition leader, speaking against the incumbent politician on TV, and it was a spirited discussion. It makes me optimistic about Albania, to see that kind of peaceful opposition. Basha is young and he seems to have good ideas.

Tare: Young? His ideas are old.

Me: Wait, isn’t Lulzim Basha the younger politician [from Democratic Party of Albania, in the opposition since 2013], and Edi Rama the older incumbent [and current Prime Minister, affiliated with the Socialist Party]?

From Melody Warnick's This is Where You Belong (2016)

Tare: [Sighs] You are right—Basha is the younger one. He has a young face, but his ideas are old. This is the problem with TV—it projects false perceptions, even unintentionally.

Me: What has Basha or the opposition done that you disagree with?

Tare: They had power for eight years. People are not stupid. They see politicians with fancy cars, fancy watches, and these politicians do not have other jobs.

Me: I notice wherever I go, I get a receipt for services immediately, which includes the VAT. Is that new?

Tare: The law was there 20 years ago, but compliance began only 3 years ago. VAT has finally become standard. Since three years ago, we [the current majority] have made things much tighter.

Me: From what I’ve heard, power outages are a big problem here. Even coming to the city center from the airport, all the street lights were off.

Tare: Yes, I know this issue. The municipality is responsible for the power. It was not receiving sufficient funding.

Me: But this is happening under your party.

Tare: Yes, but it will be fixed. Electricity is provided through a public-private entity. It was an issue with collecting taxes and getting it to the municipality. Now that we are actively collecting taxes, we can better fund infrastructure. The problem is that the local entity is not receiving the taxes. This is a local issue where the taxes are being collected by the federal entity but not making its way down to the local entity efficiently.

Me: How did you change the culture with respect to VAT and other issues?

Tare: Let me give you an example. A while ago, I went with a representative to see the process for issuing birth and death certificates. There was a long line of people. When you reached the front of the kiosk, you gave your money to an outstretched hand, and then in a few weeks, you’d return to get your certificate. The representative told me that even if he is the most honest person, he cannot fix this [i.e., he could not stop corruption from happening eventually].

So the former mayor of Albania set up an office. It was a nice environment, and employees dressed well. We made sure the process was a one-stop shop with online facilities, online payment, and so on. The lines disappeared, and the process is now an excellent statement that proper service can improve the citizen’s life. The overall idea is that we must provide better service.

This place? [motions around the Bazaar we are sitting in.] It used to be a dump. My kids came here recently and said it is much nicer now. People are not stupid. They notice changes. They notice better service. 

Me: What is the Albanian Dream?

Tare: We are a small country. We have lots of energy here, and we need to channel the energy properly. We are now two generations away from Communism [over 25 years have passed since the fall of Communism in Albania]. We need to build technology. How did Malaysia and Singapore do it? The key is to channel the energy we have into proper outlets, and once we do that, we can see what the young citizens want.

Me: Do you want foreign capital?

Tare: We are actively trying to attract foreign capital outside of tourism, but we are a small market, and it is not easy.

Me: What is the role of public sector in attracting capital and businesses?

Tare: [chuckles] We don’t have one now. We see the private sector going after opportunities on its own.

Roberto M. Unger, Free Trade Reimagined (2007)

On Basketball

Me: What sports did you play?

Tare: I played basketball. I was a forward and played both small and power positions. I played for Albania’s national team.

Me: What was that like in the old days, playing for the national team?

Tare: You will not understand those days. A person who hasn’t lived under Communism cannot fully understand, even if I explain it. My wife, who is from Michigan, even she does not understand when I tell her about life under Communism. You cannot understand unless you were there.

Me: I’m more optimistic than you on this issue. Give it a shot.

Tare: [sighs] It was a big deal for us. Sports are a big deal for a country. The state took care of you as much as they could. They looked after you. We grew up with sports. The Russians can understand me immediately but not Americans. The upbringing is so different.

Me: We have problems now in America with parents pressuring their children to compete and hiring private coaches, leading to burned-out kids.

Tare: The Communist system [modeled on the Soviet system] was genius in creating structure. Take away the ideology, take away the propaganda, and leave just the basics—what they did here was genius. [Note: comment refers only to the specific system created by the Communists for different parts of life, i.e., art, culture, sport, community base, etc.]

Each school had a chain system—a regular academic school attached to another school that specialized in one particular sport or activity. [Note: this sounds similar to some charter schools in the U.S., especially in Las Vegas.] This meant that one school specialized in basketball, another school specialized in another sport. A lot of schools were at different levels and in a natural way.

Me: So I actually know a little bit about this because I admire perhaps the greatest Soviet/Lithuanian basketball player of all time, Arvydas Sabonis. He talked about this system before.

Tare: My dad was an athlete, too, so of course he directed me into sports. They direct you, but the chain was natural. I didn’t feel pressure. You didn’t pay anything [which is different from the United States, where expensive private coaches are becoming more common]. We had a Pioneers Club, sometimes called the House of Pioneers. You go there and you learn the basics. It could be sports, it could be handicrafts. It was a house where you discovered talents and promoted them.

People [today] don’t meet anymore in a coordinated way that builds community. The Communists had meetings for propaganda purposes, but take away the propaganda, and there was more community building. Now, TV has taken over. People sit in their houses and don’t go out. People in the same neighborhood don’t meet each other anymore in a substantive way. Before, under Communism, for propaganda reasons, every weekend, we would all meet together. For example, a cultural center for a specific region, every weekend, would take equipment into the mountains by mules and show a movie. 

[Note: I didn’t follow until I realized that the majority of people in Albania, even today, live in villages or the mountains. The Communists, when they were in charge, had to contend with bringing together vast stretches of people who didn’t necessarily have much in common and who didn’t even have access to TV, much less the internet. How do you unite a people who lack basic access to information or what their government is doing for them? It is difficult to imagine what it was like in the past when you are in a major city filled with young people, but Tare sheds light into how sports was used to unite an entire nation, and why it was so important for the Soviets/Communists to win, especially in the Olympics. This also explains why the Soviet Union kept its star athletes like Sabonis for so long rather than allow them to earn much more money abroad.]

They [the Communists] would take equipment to the mountain every week. People lived in the mountains, so they don’t know what is going on. The government was bringing movies up to the mountains. Yes, it was a part of propaganda, but what I’ve discovered now is that apart from propaganda, it was the best way for people to come together and talk. Everyone now stays home and watches TV. They’re more isolated than they used to be! Today, Albania gives concerts in the villages. 60% of Albanians still live in villages or mountains. We have brought in violinists from China and we hold similar events to bring people together.  

In the past, people were more spread out, but social interaction and collaboration was not based on money. Despite the propaganda, the Soviet Union’s Communist system, which was copied by many countries, attracted talent and brought people together in a natural way.

Me: What are your projects here in Albania?

Tare: First, we are building an underwater museum. People can go down into the water and breathe through diving equipment. There’s already one in Mexico. Second, we are also connecting coastline and mountain areas so people can experience remote areas.

Me: Isn’t that extremely difficult to do? You have to pave new roads, use cement…

Tare: No, in the old days people used paths. The paths are there. We need to put signs up, use navigation apps, and work with what we have so people can stay with villagers. There’s an article in WaPo about this project. [Link: http://invest-in-albania.org/washington-post-writes-mountain-tourism-albania/]

2007-2008 was the end of the era of the travelers in Albania. Mass tourism took over after 2008. The private sector has been aggressive in promoting fairs and other events. Of course, the state puts money in advertisements, but not as much as the private sector’s efforts. The difficulty is implementing concepts. The word sustainable is used everywhere, but how sustainable is it really?

Me: Can tourism promote economic development, especially in rural areas?

Tare: Yes, but it needs experienced guides. It takes time, it takes a special model. Right now, the model is this: whoever has the money wants to make the returns.

I have three kids that need to be picked up from school. I have to go now.

Me: Thank you.

Disclosures: I wanted to take Mr. Tare to a seafood restaurant next to the café, and we went to the quieter location to talk, but he only eats fruits and vegetables. I gave him some tea from a pot I’d ordered for myself and the only “benefit” to Tare was a glass of still water. Mr. Tare is a man intent on changing Albania’s perception in the world, and the last politician I’d expect to be caught in any corruption scandal.