Sapelli: either Berlusconi or caos.E 'game in the moral tenor of the country. Wednesday, October 7, 2009
The country waits with bated breath the ruling of consultation on the immunity law, to know what will the fate of the government majority. The policy has stopped, paralyzed by the possible unknowns that open scenari concern for Who knows how long, as the former president Cossiga who sees the horizon the rejection of the award. The rest was the same head of government told his followers, at the last meeting of Arcore: "we are sailing in the dark, and anything can happen."
Ilsussidiario.net spoke with Giulio Sapelli, an economist. On the basis not by trying to decipher the guidelines prevailing in court, nor the possible counter-moves of Berlusconi, but a thought expressed by Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco, president of the CEI, at the opening of the Permanent Council on 21 September.
Bagnasco spoke of an Italy "crossed by a malaise as tough as it is mysterious, that makes a nation entirely peaceful at home, it was crossed by radical opposition and resentment. " In light of recent events in the country, it seems an assessment based?
Absolutely. I think that is a definition measured, dramatically measured. Balanced as you would expect from a pastor of the Church. I would have been much more trenchant, without fear of exaggeration. Bagnasco speaks of sickness, I have spoken many times of illness. Our businesses are sick: sick sense of loss of employment. Italy itself is a great nation ill. I wonder, but not too provocative, if we were never really a nation.
And to think that we are preparing to celebrate the sesquicentennial anniversary of the unification of Italy.
Sometimes I think something terrible in some ways, that we were just a nation at war. I came up with this during my recent trip to Australia. The massacre dall'Anzac suffered during the First World War on the peninsula of Gallipoli, the Dardanelles, gave the country a new sensibility. Since then, Australia asked to leave the Commonwealth. In war, willingly or not, the Italians were the nation.
you really believe that? But it seems to live in a permanent September 8.
We, unlike so many others, we have not internalized the citizenship through the formation of a rule of law. In our post-war industrialization is not even twenty years time, we buried the old company to enter quickly into a post-industrial service companies. We have become the nation through the consumption and acquisition of large incomes. This phenomenon, however, for ten years has stopped, indeed was reversed because the resources are increasingly scarce. Social cohesion has been weakened, frayed.
there really a subversive plan to get rid of Berlusconi?
Talk about subversive plan, and therefore aware of a project, it seems excessive and rule that out. But there are great pressures, especially of an international nature, on our institutions and our political class. Just open today (Sunday, ed.), The Financial Times: Berlusconi and the award Mondadori, with related charges of corruption, are in first and second page. But to say, as the Knight, that this book is to the left does not make sense. Represents the orientation of the establishment of an international party, yes.
There are areas of the left and our financial establishment who dream of a shoulder. Who are they and do they have in mind?
a minute. The establishment is a group of people who think, and so are often in fact, be those that best interpret the common good of their nation rather than particular interest. There is an establishment in the Anglo-Saxon, French and German, but not in Italy. In our group there is no economic or intellectual or politician who wants to represent national interests. Italy did not succeed but says Machiavelli Guicciardini: the cult of "particular" who presides over the struggle of the parties. Just because there is no establishment in Italy, it triggers the fight against Berlusconi.
It remains a bitter political struggle centered on the figure of Berlusconi. How do you explain that?
Why Berlusconi is the alien. It was alien to the power groups who ruled Italy when he went to power in '94 and so is now. But it is not in power because he is rich. Berlusconi is not a super rich as is commonly believed: it is a medium rich but with a boundless ego. There are people in Italy much richer and more powerful than Berlusconi, but do not appear. Berlusconi has been able to interpret and represent the country. Gianni Agnelli '94 meeting of industrialists Spadolini ran for president of the Senate, but was buried by trips whistles. The most powerful man in Italy had never happened, something had changed. There he realized that the great hegemonic groups that ruled the country had more control. Berlusconi won the election because was an outsider.
So if there is no establishment in the classic sense, in Italy today, what is it?
On the one hand there is a power in a gaseous state, amorphous, polycentric. Many people who are fighting against each other, do not they will agree and are reset each other. Secondly there are the banks, which currently are the real power of this country.
not the press?
But no, those who read the newspapers? The press is at best a counter-power, and at worst an amplifier of politics as garbage.
Today we are the final act of "referendum" for or against Berlusconi, who has Locate and mark the political life?
We can not say. Berlusconi is an innovative, first in Italy has created a centrist party that looks right. But it remains an alien: first, an alien with respect to the rule of law, it still continues to be a conflict of interest. I've never had too much sympathy for the lawyer Agnelli, but Agnelli and Pirelli have always had the great merit of not get in politics. Entrepreneurs can direct it, of course, to lobby, but do not make direct policy.
right. But Berlusconi has had the votes of a majority of the country.
There is no doubt. And the achievements of his government over last Prodi government are certainly better. Do not get me wrong: Since Michael Bloomberg became mayor of New York, everything worked better. But in my opinion is better than big businessmen do not make policy. It happens only in South American countries, which have an institutional development among the best in the world, I think, but not in Europe. In the classical liberal concept of separation of powers not only separates the legislative from the judicial and executive, but also the political wealth. If not
pluralism runs the risk?
Yes, but for our poor country is only true in theory. After the decision of the Prosecutor of Milan Mondadori award, I challenge anyone to say that in Italy, pluralism is at risk and that there is a dictatorship.
In our country, whatever be the decision of the Consulta, it takes an immunity law or not?
I do not think. It would be a ploy to avoid exasperation level of conflict. The policy is now reduced to a safari where you shoot, inside and outside the country, about Berlusconi. De Benedetti will not shoot up, you have not made up Cecchi Gori, you have not done with Romano Prodi, although Prometeia Nomisma and economic activities were of the highest profit. This is the anomaly. A true growth of the country require to overcome and resolve the reasons for the clash. There is now an alternative
real politics of Berlusconi?
If Berlusconi fell for extra-parliamentary crisis the country would enter into a state of confusion and "convulsionale" that could be fatal: for its economy and its own moral stability. With the real economic crisis, namely employment, just begun, with thousands of companies that have reopened in September, with international terrorism outside Afghanistan and a decision to make, where to go would be a grave mistake? No, the country would be in confusion and may want to just irresponsible.
Better vote at that point?
Better the vote, of course. With the only condition that the electoral campaign was not also a slaughterhouse. This should be asked first to Berlusconi, because he is the prime minister and who is higher has more responsibility than others.
"An executive who looks to the good of Italy, a government of the president, not political but institutional," as he said Rutelli?
please be joking. Where a figure in excess of the parties? This country no longer has the Bucciarelli Ducci and Merzagora, the era of the grand committee of the state - real ones - is long over. Any transitional government would be risky. Berlusconi immunity law legitimate or illegitimate, should finish the term. This is the only condition not to plunge the country into chaos.
If the majority has shown great conflict within it, the opposition is no better. What do you think of the situation in the house of the Democratic Party?
The PD is in a state of confusion. A party made up of members in which to make the final decision are those who are not registered, is a monstrosity. Say they learned from the U.S., not knowing that the American parties are groups of opinion and are not enrolled. Then a party where a candidate is elected with 56 per cent, as in the case of Bersani, is in fact a party split. The Democratic Party seems a clear case of miseducation to democracy. Parties or are a community of political fate or not I am nothing.
Professor, seemed very pessimistic in tone and topic pages. In the confusion of today, however, the political landscape will evolve, an Italian who or what you should look not to remain at the mercy of events? There are points?
It must first look at the Church. In these circumstances have a faith, and rely on the hope that any true faith brings with it, is crucial. Today more than ever we need trust in providence, to Manzoni. Speaking of politics seems a message of touch with reality, but I am convinced to the contrary. Who is Catholic look at the Catholic church, where a Muslim is to go in his mosque. It is the religion first factor that change man, change the rest. Then you look at the areas where people are committed with greater fervor and more generosity.
What are you thinking in particular?
the world of nonprofits. He has outstanding human resources and I always hope that these people, someday, they also want to do politics. They are able to teach others what it means to build the common good. Then another and do not seem crazy, I have confidence in young people. I look at them, many are different. There is a growing minority of young people involved, more educated, not fanatics, much richer than the ideals of those of twenty years ago. There are more potential in the young than we think, but to develop them are good teachers.
(from "The sussidiario.net)
