[ad_1]
What does the little news of the national secretary of a large union who is trying to broadcast on Facebook, more or less clandestinely, the meeting that begins with the government at a dramatic moment for the country mean for everyone? It means in the first place that some time has passed and that it has passed in vain.
Since March 27, 2013, when the secretary of the main Italian party at the time agreed to hold a streaming political meeting with representatives of the Five Star Movement, many things on the Italian political scene have inevitably changed: we have observed the rise to the right. , the collapse of the M5S, the political end of Silvio Berlusconi, the faltering survival of the Democratic Party itself. The only thing that seems to have remained and that in fact seems to have spread like wildfire in all political spectra, and at this point also union, is the elementary and crude idea of transparency of politics that Beppe Grillo has known how to spread through all holes . of the parliamentary arch. A wrong, dangerous and ultimately reactionary idea.
The useful policy for the community, the one capable of making society progress while protecting the interest if not of all at least of the majority of citizens, is the search for balance between the different ideas, it is the refinement of the angles, it is Willingness to relegate on certain principles. keep others firm. None of this can be done in front of a camera. The very idea of the camera in which what is happening is transmitted to all citizens, so that they can “form their own opinion”, is a wrong idea, based on the cliché of the crystal cathedral: an idea of absolute transparency to which, if we believe what they tell us, no villain will finally escape. A misconception and consoling idea, as if streaming were magically capable of canceling, for example, any other form of earlier or later underground encounter or concert. As if that work was not, in reality, a representation.
At the base of all this love for live broadcasting is another idea, that of electronic democracy, that Gianroberto Casaleggio suggested many years ago to the M5S: another elementary thought that already at the time of its Italian conception, behind computer networks, had made technically possible many things, it had disappeared almost everywhere. The idea according to which citizens could and should deal directly with political decisions, through a system of continuous questioning: a platform (or an operating system as the grillini called it with the scant sense of the limit that has always distinguished them) that would allow voters to decide directly on any important issue.
A kind of telematic agora whose idea, meanwhile, had rapidly decayed around the world (like many other progressive dreams linked to the Internet) and that perhaps only of us could assume the naive contours that it assumed then: perhaps only of us the credulity about the potential of the digital universe could be as broad and persistent, at least as broad as the mistrust we felt for such environments.
The definitive victory of that reactionary thinking is not only seen in the silly idea of a union leader to broadcast a political meeting at the highest level to anyone who wants it on Facebook, but it can also be recognized in the words of the Prime Minister that , when informed of the live broadcast, he wants to immediately inform the interlocutors and viewers that he, mind you, has nothing to hide.
I have nothing to hide It is the other element of the automatic social reaction to the interference of the controller, be it the State or the administration or the tax authorities or any other possible gendarme, that faces in such cases. Pure frugate“I have nothing to hide,” both the victim and the executioner often say in the theater of suspicion that unfolds inside the crystal cathedral. As if it had nothing to hide was a value On the other hand, good politics, as well as the good life of every honest citizen, always has something to hide, because that hidden space is natural and necessary for the correct implementation of any social relationship. Having definitively degraded the place of intimacy and private thought, trivializing it as the place of crime and sin, it was perhaps the most important effect that grillismo has caused on Italian politics in the last decade. A disaster now recognizable everywhere.
[ad_2]
