[authorbox authorid=”85″ title=”The Author”]
Has been defined the longest “government crisis” of republican history, but what we have witnessed in these last three months is nothing but a litmus test of how far it is nothing but a game for amateurs to make a government.
Italy is an anomalous country, it is good to remember it. The great part of his ruling class “is outside” from the logic of political partys. We have more excellent technicians than non-parliamentarians at least adequate to their role.
This means that more often it is hard to find in the parliamentary arch not so much a Mattei, a Di Vittorio, but also an Almirante, an Andreaotti, a Berlinguer … as someone who has an acceptable curriculum and who knows the use of the subjunctive.
Hence the need for the same Salvini and Di Maio to find someone third outside the two branches of parliament, which also count over a thousand elected and cost us over three billion euros a year.
What we witnessed was the saga of the amateurs in jeopardy, which had as a direct consequence putting an entire country to the brunt, in economic, political and financial uncertainty. And this condition is without appeal and without excuses or extenuating circumstances.
If there was a slightly more serious responsibility than the misunderstood “political responsibility” they would come out responsible, if only for their absolute irresponsibility (before inadequacy and inability).
They range from the total ignorance of constitutional principles, to political a-culture, to the incapacity of mediation, to the total and constant anteposizone of interests that are not as personal as their personal image and communication, as well as the formation of their own government.
Because these three months are substantially passed between dictat, peremptory deadlines, ultimatum, illegal contracts, facebook directs, all aimed at the self-celebration of their alleged personal image of the leaders.
There was not a single political step or a vaguely substantial act.
Coming to the paradox of naming a man as premier – useful only not to overshadow Di Maio and Salvini and give a semblance of technicality and expertise to a parterre that had less of the smell – and insist as “capricious children” on the only name that the President of the Republic had already said he did not like it ten days ago.
Because it should be remembered – for those who also ignore how to tie a tie the company will be titanic – that ministers appoint them the President of the Republic on the proposal of the Prime Minister.
Well, who wants to make a government seriously, who puts this purpose before himself, a step back on a name for another non-political could and should do it. In a country that is flooded with economists often critical even to the bitter end (or often only for television purposes).
What is more evident, however, is the true strategy of these gentlemen. Continue in a permanent electoral campaign, increasingly maximalist and extremist. And to do it, you need your hands free from any real responsibility of true government.
Because the grooming wears slogans, requires responsibility, different declination of politics and times, requires work, mediation … all characteristics very far from Di Maio and Salvini.
And then – as in a new Weimar republic – better to say always and only no and proceed to steps to “new” and always other elections … in the hope of having an “absolute majority” and be able to do what you want from only.
A bit like those asocial children unable to be with others and always repeat that the fault is not theirs, that are the other bad, who do not accept them, or that they are better and want to be alone.
In general, the typical childhood of dictators and serial killers, all little misunderstood genes, but who never assumed any real responsibility in their lives, having only their own image at heart, and as the only concern that nothing is obscured.
But let’s go in order and explain the government crisis to those who were absent.
Salvini and Di Maio are the two media winners of the 4 March elections.
Media because although contending for the same electorate – populist, eurosceptic, antisystem – neither of them wins seriously, and because they do not come from an electoral alliance.
Di Maio’s true aim was to be the premier. The true purpose of Salvini to make a totalitarian bid on the center-right.
If we start from these two goals, all personal and in which the good of the country evidently has nothing to do with it, then we can understand “how things really went” in these three months.
From the comments of the day after to the negotiations for the “government contract” the only clear purpose was to accredit and claim leadership and a victory. Claim issues as if you were still in the election campaign, manage the dictates at the media level.
We saw it with Salvini, whose priority was the electoral alliance; we saw him with Di Maio, ready to do the government with anyone (from pd to the league without distinctions of any kind) as long as he was the one to excel.
Salvini did not want to form this government. Opponents and allies (Forza Italia) are very weak, and knows that going to the elections would be full (I do not exclude even gnawing at the same 5stars).
Politically it proved very good, the best in using the means of communication.
Di Maio probably missed the chance of life. Perhaps that was what most of all really wanted to do a government. But the next round for how things got really could touch Di Battista, the only one in this scenario that can compete with the tones of Salvini.
Salvini and Di Maio accuse the President of the Republic of having prevented the formation of the government of change.
It would have been enough to make another name, other times in the past it happened that presidents did not accept a name, and this is why we never got to talk about putting the President in a state of accusation.
The point clearly is not the prof. Savona.
Mattarella could have accepted that name, but the question is the aut aut Salvini and Di Maio have placed “this or nothing”, thus bringing the issue to another level, that of the institutional clash. A blackmail in other words: either you accept or you will be listed as the person responsible for the failure to train the government.
Simply because without a clearly monochromatic majority – which is likely to remain so in the event of an election, since there is probably no way to change the electoral law – it is convenient to keep repeating the clans of all time.
In the coming months they will tell us how everyone is against them, who are the only possible saviors of the country, that Europe wants to decide instead of the Italians. That they are the only ones to have opposed the blackmail of the troika, the powers, the banks, the decisions of Merkel, and any kind of backstory.
All on the shoulders of the country. A country that deserves more and better, but that must take note that the public debt is his, it is not a usury of Europe. That the cost of high life is all ours, and it is not the fault of the Euro. That our system in plaster, closed in little balls that prevent new occupations and the growth of young people has nothing to do with Brussels. That immigration does not manage it with naval blocks. But all these are complex issues for those who have chosen the easy way to give – always – the fault to a “far enemy”.
For those who have no memory I remember a League for which the fault of the northern ills were the Southerners, then the Albanians, then the Chinese … now Brussels.
Italy – very clearly – needs more Europe, to defrost from its own immobility and its instability, but above all to a more serious ruling class and less in the search for easy voting, gaining in fear and fueling the ghosts of unlikely plots. .
But perhaps a more serious ruling class – which, if anything, even knows the subjunctive – would not really represent us.