The deputy dem after the words of the leader of FdI at the end of the event: “Meloni confirms the gloomy sectarianism of a right that bets only on the division of Italy. Salvini and Berlusconi will have to demonstrate the ability to emancipate the Italian right “
Atreju ends with a Giorgia Meloni flamboyant and more resolute than ever in wanting a patriot at the Quirinale. “Berlusconi it is, ”said the leader of the Brothers of Italy. “Draghi I do not know”. Yet, the event had opened with the secretary of the Democratic Party Enrico Letta which had opened to the involvement of the Melonians in the discussion to designate the next tenant of the Colle. Now, after the blow of the saber, the picture must be recomposed seeking a mediation between right, left and pentastellati. To take stock of the situation is Andrea Romano, deputy of the Pd.
In Atreju, but also in other locations publicly, Enrico Letta opens at FdI for the choice of the next tenant of the Colle. What signal did the secretary want to give?
A sign of responsibility and wise openness to all political forces, including those of the opposition, as it is essential to do to ensure that in the next seven years a personality capable of guaranteeing the maximum unity of the Nation sits at the Colle, avoiding the risk of an election. quirinalizia by majority. Personally I believe that Sergio Mattarella has embodied that unity in an excellent way and with great balance. And I would be happy to indicate his name once again on the form for the choice of the President of the Republic, as I already did in 2015.
At the end of the event, the leader of FdI said that a patriot will have to go to the Quirinale, alluding to Silvio Berlusconi. But leaving a window open for Mario Draghi. Is this a way of saying that there is no room for negotiation?
If Letta’s signal was marked by responsibility and openness, Meloni’s response confirms the gloomy sectarianism of a right that bets only on the division of Italy. Behind the attempt at embezzlement of the word “patriot” by the Brothers of Italy, in particular, there is all the hypocrisy of a party which in reality is very far from patriotism and, if anything, a prisoner of an anti-European nationalism that preaches isolation of Italy from community and multilateral contexts and in fact hopes for the ruin of the nation. And who knows how a great French patriot like Charles De Gaulle would have responded to Meloni’s word games, according to whom “le patriotisme, c’est aimer son pays; le nationalisme, c’est détester celui des autres. ” (“Patriotism is love for one’s country, nationalism is hatred for other countries”). After that Meloni’s unfortunate joke also reveals an unacceptable prejudice towards Sergio Mattarella, whom the FdI leader did not vote in 2015 and whose seven-year exemplar evidently does not consider founded on a patriotic spirit. The truth is that Meloni hopes for a quirinal party election: an eventuality that would place the next presidency on a fragile basis, just when Italy will need maximum unity and sharing.
In what way, with these assumptions, will it be possible to find a mediation with the center-right?
The choice is up to Salvini and Berlusconi, who will have to demonstrate the ability to emancipate the Italian right from the sectarianism of Meloni. The Democratic Party, as Letta reiterated, will play its part in terms of responsibility and therefore the search for maximum unity.
What kind of feedback do you expect from the centrist sides of Italia Viva and Action on this front?
The weight of Action is completely irrelevant, net of Calenda’s communicative faculty and his daily diktats towards the Democratic Party. As for Italia Viva, the hope is that in this decisive match for the future of Italy Renzi will want to play a constructive role without being captured by the sirens of tactics and the temptation of an agreement with Salvini.
For the construction of the large camp, it will be essential for the dem to strengthen the ranks even with the centrists. How to create common ground between Renzians, Calendians and Grillini?
In politics the real common grounds, the solid and resistant ones, are built precisely on political bases and not on the obligations deriving from feigned majority electoral laws such as the Rosatellum. A new proportional electoral law, with a balanced threshold of 5%, would be used above all by Italy to restore full representation and full governance to parliamentary institutions. On the other hand, these years have taught us, in fact, that true bipolarism is what is born in Parliament by sharing political agendas and concrete objectives after the vote rather than by signing forced electoral pacts before the vote that are regularly destined to fall apart the day after the elections. . This applies to both the right and the left, where the construction of the wide field will be more solid if based on the ability of each party to weigh itself in the polls within the common sharing of a political horizon. As for the Five Stars, for example, who can deny that that Movement today shares the European and solidarity horizon which it has reached thanks to the government alliance with the Democratic Party? And if our two parties are free to “run” each on their own, thanks to a proportional electoral law, the government alliance that will be born after the vote will be more solid than the one we would be forced to sign before the vote by negotiating single colleges or single desistances. As far as the so-called “center” is concerned, I am very pessimistic: rather than a moderate and liberal force I see the crowding of small personal parties, all dominated by forms of “centrist populism”, all fighting each other and all animated by a furious hostility towards the Democratic Party. In this sense, Action and Italia Viva remind me of the Pdup and Proletarian Democracy: sectarian parties animated by great self-esteem, very little relevant in the real vote of the Italians and whose only raison d’etre was always and only the controversy against the PCI.