[ad_1]
Gianluca Veneziani
It has long since lost the support of the citizens and the productive categories, but now the lack of support from the intellectuals also hurts the government a lot. A painful setback, both because some of those thinkers revolve around the left and in theory it should be the best pillar for the Giallorossi executive; and because many of these critical voices come from the academic world, that is, from the same environment of which Prime Minister Conte is the son. A double “betrayal”, fully legitimized by the facts. The arrows focus in particular on the way the government is handling the second wave and the scant steps taken to prevent it, despite reassuring announcements and promises. The philosopher Massimo Cacciari, one of the most lucid protesters of the Conte gang, defined “a series of sensational mistakes and manifest lack of preparation, the way in which he faced the end of the first and then the second wave” and called himself a “provisions and standards”. in bulk “and” inapplicable and uncontrollable absurdities “the urgent decrees of the Prime Minister, finally exploding in a liberating cry:” Enough, enough! Enough of this absurd normativist delusion, with this senseless controlism! ». Even faces known as Ferruccio de Bortoli and Mario Adinolfi, among the first signatories of a petition that reproached the government for “inefficiency, disorganization, lack of information and assistance” and “improvisation” in handling the emergency. The manifesto, signed by intellectuals of very different political orientations, from Marco Taradash to Alessandro Campi, from Franco Debenedetti to Alberto Mingardi, from Isabella Loiodice to Carlo Stagnaro, they attacked Conte & Co. for “not having fulfilled the promises of the flu vaccine”, for ” not having doubled the intensive care “, for” the few tampons “, for” the useless Immune app “and for having” abandoned follow-up. “Hence the drastic conclusion:” Now we no longer trust. “
End of illusions – Similar complaints had already advanced another manifesto, promoted by Lettera150 and the Hume Foundation, and signed by liberal intellectuals such as Giovanni Orsina and Dino Cofrancesco, and writers, scholars and editors certainly not suspected of sovereign sympathies such as Lidia Ravera, Susanna Tamaro, Elisabetta Sgarbi . and Renato Mannheimer, who listed “the ten things the government did not do” in handling the epidemic, see Covid hotels, mass swabs and distancing on public transport. And they singled out the executive for “the mistakes made”, “the hesitations” and “the distractions”, with which he had ignored “studies and documents that at the time indicated what was really happening.” All of this revealed how the Italian management of Covid was not a model at all, no matter what the executive said. This was pointed out by the correspondent of the Republic Federico Rampini, for whom “Italy spent the summer falling asleep in the illusion of being” a model “, instead of studying real models”, which are Asians. And so Pierluigi Battista recalled in the Corriere della Sera who, after having listed Conte’s failed measures, from hiring more doctors and nurses to a greater number of rapid tests, ironically: “And they even allow themselves to fantasize about ours” . Italian model “”. If the government did something, it was only to have created a situation of suspended democracy, worthy of a health dictatorship, as other intellectuals and writers intolerant of Covid’s ongoing management consider it. For the philosopher Giorgio Agamben, in the In recent months we have witnessed an “unprecedented manipulation of the freedoms of all” and a “gigantic operation to falsify the truth.” Harder still was the leftist writer Aldo Nove who spoke of “a dictatorship in which, if not you agree, they make you the Tso, “of” a social engineering operation that they are launching to completely stone people. “And perhaps hope to remain in command longer and with exceptional, if unproductive powers. the writer Antonella Boralevi, according to which “the central power has kept us for a year, like a South American regime, in a state of emergency”, without having the capacity to “put the country in conditions to contain the virus “. But showing itself only capable of creating panic in the population and psychological terrorism. The sociologist Luca Ricolfi is convinced of this, for whom “the government only has the weapon to terrorize us and convince us to stay at home.” Or at most intervene with improvised, irrational and useless measures. Such as the prohibition of moving between municipalities at Christmas that former magistrate Carlo Nordio, in Libero’s notebooks, included in the list of “absurdities” raised by the government, of those “ill-thought-out measures” made “with emotion or worse. with bureaucratic prejudices ». All aggravated by a schizophrenic communicative approach, which has only generated confusion among citizens: the prime minister, warned psychiatrist Paolo Crepet,” has a nightmare communication: one day he says one thing and another day he says another ” These factors, instead of protecting Conte, have paralyzed him, showing his inadequacy and political inconsistency. Recently, in two sharp editorials, Ernesto Galli della Loggia in Corriere della Sera and Ezio Mauro in Repubblica denounced him. The first pointed out how ” the government’s decision-making capacity has become completely evanescent “also because of its leader, who” does not have a strong political stature but tries to achieve it, at the cost of forcing, coup s of hand, personalism, production of speeches and documents as long as they are insignificant, which have the effect of upsetting the management of the country ». The second highlighted the widespread sentiment of a “weakening of the government. His control over the country is loosened. Their decision-making capacity is reduced ”. From the series: Conte is accused of being a despot, but he is actually very weak.
“Just improvisation” – As well as its economic strategy is weak. Commenting on the 2021 financial maneuver, some university professors, members of the Lettera150 think tank, namely Fabrizio Antolini, Alessandro Boscati, Giampio Bracchi, Iacopo Cavallini, Mario Comba, Francesco Manfredi, Giuseppe Marino, Aldo Rustichini and Claudio Zucchelli, gave to light a document in which they define the budget bill as “a missed opportunity”, as “highly inadequate to support the structural reactivation of the economy”: the signatories identify its criticalities especially in the “fragmentation of the huge deployed resources “that” responds with the objective of establishing a broad base of consensus “, but with an” ideological approach that burns billions of citizens in a completely useless way to achieve the objective of saving the Italian economy from bankruptcy ” . A similar argument could be made for the university world in which, says Marina Brambilla, vice-chancellor of the Milan State University, “the government has not addressed the structural problems: extraordinary contributions are hardly necessary for the emergency.” Or for the school world: “The government” warns prof. Giuseppe Bertagna, Professor of General Pedagogy at the University of Bergamo, “continues to live. He spent money in debt on emergency interventions, such as banks on wheels, which only ended up aggravating the structural problems of the sector. To summarize prof. Giuseppe Valditara, coordinator of Lettera150: «If the government cannot make an effective vaccine plan and contain the third wave, it will have to resign. But now, in my opinion, he should go home, because he has shown, faced with a dramatic situation, that he is guided by improvisation, without strategic vision and incapable of making the reforms that the country needs ”. . In short, the lawyer for the Italians lost the case before the court of intellectuals. Professor Giuseppi was rejected by his own colleagues. Even for this, Conte now has his days numbered.
[ad_2]
