In questi giorni sulla testa di Berlusconi si è scatenato ogni genere di scandali: divorzio chiesto dalla moglie, ennesimo processo (il caso Mills) finito con forti e gravi implicazioni per il cosiddetto premier, monnezza a Palermo come se piovesse (che si tratti di una manovra per prendere distanze da Lombardo, che sta facendo il diavolo a quattro per staccarsi dal PdL?), Repubblica incattivita e tosta come non mai, bilanci impietosi dai giornali esteri, gaffe sui terremotati e via dicendo. Ma soprattutto, tanto, tanto sesso. Dopo la tragicomica vicenda su Noemi e papi Silvio (è la figlia illegittima? Non lo è? Se la tromba?) shocking details emerge on the parties in Berlusconi's villa. Scenarios worthy of Caligula, party with hundreds of young girls topless, Apicella opening procession of tissue playing guitar after being transported to flying status and so on and so forth. Berlusconi is why I became interested in politics. I've never been a militant, and I do not like the idea of \u200b\u200bmarrying an ideology. Would adopt a party line, and then stick to a dominant culture, even when it is ancient. Many movements, especially the left, they did that end: Bertinotti, Diliberto, Ferrero and in general all the left parties as it still must maximalist recover from the shock of having lost a staggering amount of consensus in favor of the League, even in regions such as Umbria. They can not conceive that the world has just left the post, now the categories are no longer capitalism and communism, which the company has adopted a set of concepts (immigration, globalization, and so on) within which it is almost impossible to decline the traditional ideological doctrines. They have not really been able to renew itself, so much so that today Berlusconi (a boss, according to the old distinctions) is devoted almost from the industrial workers.
So I have always had only civilian positions, not political ones. Positions that have done nine times out ten coincide with similar positions on the left, and that's why my vote has always gone in that direction. What I mean is that though I am not prejudiced against the right. Provided they are not fascists or the League, boh, I have big problems to admit a policy of civil right. Especially in a country like Italy where they carved up the words, so incredibly terms like "freedom" is dominated by the left and "legality" of the right (when they should be part of the common heritage, non-partisan).
Berlusconi has practically forced me to take a stand. I always found it puzzling that a man with a past so little pulito, con un'esistenza che è l'emblema del contrario di una vita davvero civile, fosse alla guida di un paese. In altre parole: sono antiberlusconiano, e me ne vanto. E d'altra parte credo di essere in buona compagnia: sono convinto che la stragrande maggioranza delle persone che hanno votato prima Ulivo e dopo PD non lo abbiano fatto per motivi ideologici, ma meramente, appunto, civili (il che spiega la disomogeneità della sua base... Dagli universitari senza lavoro, ai cattolici disgustati per la mancanza di etica del Cavaliere ai postcomunisti). La battaglia fra berlusconiani ed antiberlusconiani si è sempre svolta sulla base di filosofie di vita opposte e pressocchè inconciliabili, proprio a livello quotidiano, non di fedi ideologiche or interpretations of philosophical writings.
In this sense, to be frank, I find even more baffling that virtually none of the voters Berlusconi never take a clear and definitive position against him, or put it into question. To the left of the doubts on the leaders are never missed, the masses in question arrived at the edge of masochism. On the other hand, wonders if people like d'Alema, with a straight face the limits of the incredible, really are incompatible - as I would like - with the Knight. I do not like the grillismo, I find many of the positions of the National Cricket ferocious and violent and useless, whatever is unconstructive. But it is significant that so many people recognize themselves in a movement that takes aim in the same way the left and right political parties.
However, one needs to take a position and though it was often my choice for the "lesser evil", I've never been ashamed of the votes that I gave. Repentant maybe they are: when I was recently forced to vote for candidates (Rutelli, brr), or which have proved a disappointment after the elections (Veltroni, Bertinotti ... No, Prodi has not disappointed me). But never ashamed. I've always made the choice that I considered more ethically correct between the two movements, however, showed that the profound differences between them, and I think in future I can look back without having to blush for voting for only the second interest, especially if this interest ran counter to constitutional principles.
Just to be clear, I am absolutely convinced that almost all the charges against Berlusconi, the famous relationships with those Mangano, other with Naomi Letizia are absolutely true and justified.
And anyway, we are at the end? Who knows. In many years I heard screaming at the end of Berlusconi's political career many times, almost always inappropriately. There was a moment toward the end of his second government, when it seemed that he could only dig the hole and hide inside. Yet he came back, perhaps because its opponents (as well as its allies, in a sense), I've never really been able to understand the gist of sua politica, del consenso di massa che riesce a riscuotere: un misto di pragmatismo cinico, desiderio di emulazione e populismo.
Però... Mah. Negli ultimi tempi mi sono spesso sorpreso a ridimensionare il personaggio. In quindici anni lo si è ritratto in tutti i modi: abile imprenditore, squalo cinico e furbissimo in grado di aspettare per mesi che gli avversari cadano in fallo, e così via. Ma è poi vero? Gli scenari imbarazzanti che lo hanno visto protagonista ultimamente, dalle gaffe a questi patetici corteggiamenti satireschi, mi hanno fatto pensare se dopotutto non lo abbiamo sopravvalutato. Non a livello di impatto sulla gente o sulla politica italiana (il suo resta sempre un movimento di potenza devastante, che lascerà - Alas - the sign for decades), but just in person. Perhaps it has never been a kind of evil villain Blofeld in 007 type, but simply a man of a certain age, rough, and with a (purely practical) good but not exceptional and plagued by a huge megalomania vassals and courtiers have indulged interest. Its strength was in the quantity, not in quality: that is the fact that his messages (rather crude) were endlessly repeated millions of times and have a lot of dazed, too many people. But it is as if Italy in the last twenty years has been a bus without really no one to drive, nor Berlusconi (in addition to being too busy to look after his Nor has the business acumen to a guide, not negative as it can be that of a Pinochet), nor his acolytes. In short, most recently associate increasingly Berlusconi to Peter Ustinov's Nero, Quo Vadis.
And in the end, incredibly enough, all this will end. Even if truly his consent remains unchanged forever, even Berlusconi will have to die or become too old to govern. I believe that one day we'll wake up with the feeling of having lived at least fifteen years of collective madness, definitely a devastating level of social and cultural policies, but it's been. Going well is physiological. Then and only then (and with the understanding that difficult exist in the future a second Berlusconi, paro paro him) will begin to digest Berlusconi, it behind them and look at it in a more subdued. I'm not saying there will be a new species of the Risorgimento, or rather to tell the truth I doubt it, it seems more likely a return to a situation in the First Republic, with two or three dominant parties (but not as strong as it was the PDL, with television, newspapers and media subservient). But it will still be some sort of standardization than now. Where has failed the ethics and politics, can the time. Just wait.
0 comments:
Post a Comment