The need for a renewal of the left after the end of Berlusconi. The end of the great ideals. The error to dig into the past as a symptom of the lack of interest in the present. Europe built on an idea that today no longer match in the lives of its citizens. The risk of the disintegration of the old continent. Carlo De Benedetti said in an interview with the Director of the sheet Claudio Cerasa how the Copernican revolution to obtain consent to rule.
“The more I observe the changes of recent history and the more I realize that often is talked about the transformation of our world without understanding a crucial point. In recent years the radical metamorphosis that there has been in the relationship between the individual and technology has led to a cultural revolution invisible yet apparent. And this transformation has meant that, in the dichotomy between ideal and interest, the interest today is to drive both society and politics. Who does not focus on this concept it is hard to understand how it is changing the world. It does not surprise me that the political forces that are in greatest difficulty today are those clinging to an old and generic idea of left forces that for too long have been concerned not the transformation of the modern world but the utopian ideal of a transfer to ‘inside the company. ” Carlo De Benedetti, entrepreneur and publisher of the Espresso Group, agreed to talk with the sheet to try to decipher one of the key themes of this new political phase, not only Italian. The thin line that separates the concept of right and from left. The transformation of the relationship between parties and voters. The reason why, in Italy and beyond, those in politics should accept the fact that to win votes – and then rule – you have to start from two points that, as named by De Benedetti, the effect is zero and the effect company.
“I say this without wanting to give a value judgment but only to frame this phenomenon. When I say that the political ideals and thinking too little to the interests of citizens is a political loser is not to say that politics should be without ideals. I mean that the policy must understand that voters now feel represented only by those who can care to the individual, to his life. And vice versa voters feel very distant from those who is guided by an ideology to represent the company. Those who use religious language of politics, using old ideals as if they were sacred texts and inviolable, must now realize that the traditional political evangelism is dead, because there is an incredible new language son of an era of great technological transformations . I think the social network but of course not only those. It often happens that what you share today is literally what it is worth to be shared, even on the network. And a battle or an issue that is not acceptable is an issue that usually does not have a big impact in people’s lives. This is because the technology has brought each of us to take care and pay more attention to concrete things related to issues that directly affect our lives more than our consciences. The ethical issues because they are passionate about our existence, not our ideals. The daily operation of our city we are interested not in our heads because there is a specific plan of how it should work a subway but simply because if a subway is not working is a problem of everyday life. In the US, a country with low intensity ideological, the phenomenon has been going on for a long time, it has matured with several years ahead of Europe and one of the reasons why the figures can emerge Trump has a close link with this new right. Let me explain: it is not only to speak to the belly of the people, as is the custom and tradition of the pioneers of anti politics, but it is to intercept a new language that personally, to keep Trump case, I find it horrendous that a her pelvis and that is not right or the left but simply reflects a specific contemporary “.
We ask De Benedetti why his argument seems to be a more mature reflection on the left than on the right ‘engineer says you have to start from here to understand what is happening not only in Italy but also in the rest of Europe. “Historically, the left has always prided itself on having a clear set of values, as opposed to the right set of values that he never claimed. And in a society where ideals have less than once for the reasons we have described it is understood that an ideological left can no longer be taken on voters. Consider the case Tsipras. I do not know how it will be elections next Sunday, but think about it in this concept around what Tsipras today can aggregate its potential voters? Until recently the model Tsipras worked because it was a variation of the counter. It was against Merkel. It was against austerity. It was against a precise way of interpreting Europe. Against the stranglehold of the Germans against Greece. And to do this, the classical section of the ideological left, Tsipras motivated his people relying on the past. Remember the request for damages of war on Germany? Today that setting, with Tsipras forced to deal with the context of government, where count the interests of citizens and not the ideals, can not function. And the same Tsipras will not find it hard to understand that his strengths are friable. And that is why his opponents, representing more than the interests of individuals that ancient ideologies, have a chance to be successful. ” If the policy says against, engineer, we can also think about how the left, in Italy, has built its identity in recent years against another ideal: Berlusconi.
“We must not be the scientists of policy to understand that since Berlusconi is no longer present as it was once the left has remained literally without ideals. For many it was a defeat: what are we without Berlusconi? And above all: what to interpret? And how do we aggregarci and be together without the great aggregator? This is a problem that concerns the political, and not those who provide information, and I claim with pride to be leading to a publishing group that has consistently had the merit to oppose seriously and decisively to Berlusconi and a negative ideal as Berlusconi . But a policy that wants to intercept modernity must realize that entrench itself in the past means neglect the present. And when you chase ideals that are gone, it is obvious that it is hard even to chase a voter “.
Renzi but you can not say that falls under the category of the left built around the ideal of Berlusconi no thanks. “Renzi is the son of modernity and is an expression of the innovations that I have described. It is neither right nor left, in my view, is a new policy that does not know whether it will succeed but that he played better than anyone this part of this: focus more on the interests of the people on their ideals. And he did, Renzi, including through new forms of association would say in some ways totally blasphemous to the left. We always start by Berlusconi. He realized what he has done? While some of his predecessors, I think for example to D’Alema, have tried to cooperate with Berlusconi describing it always with a demonic character, Renzi has done something completely different: Berlusconi has treated as if it were a politician any, making agreements not because Berlusconi as you did before, but as the head of a party whose votes could have come in handy to the Democratic Party. Point. Practically, Renzi has demythologized Berlusconi, knowing full well that today the voters think, as I explained earlier, more to their lives than ideal Berlusconi. Let me give you another example. “
” Remember – continues Carlo De Benedetti – when Renzi, Rimini, has equated anti Berlusconi and Berlusconi? Obviously I can not share that statement, and I understand those who consider rightly scandalous, but how did our country it is understandable that those who do not read newspapers and has a different way to inquire see that statement in a completely innocent. E ‘Italy that changes, and it is also the same Italy that has matured and that cricket is no longer differences between left and right. You can love or not to love but still must come to terms. ” One might say that no accident today’s Europe is a Europe in which the sinister ideological struggle to establish and govern where they get the chance. “From one point of view is that, although I’d be careful to define the right leaders such as Cameron and Merkel. Merkel is a strange character, is the best interpreter of the fumes of the German breweries more than the thoughts of the right, and for her the best definition to frame it is that one day I offered my friend Frank Steinmeier, Merkel is unbeatable because he intuition. Perfect. In England, however, I think the reasoning is even more different. I’d say: what is the difference between Cameron and Blair? Really we can consider Blair left or right Cameron? I say more: unlike Blair, Cameron showed greater independence from the United States and a strong autonomy. I wonder, be independent from America’s right or left? Mind you – concluded CDB – are not abstract discourses but are natural consequences of a new phase of globalization in which being able to interpret the modern means place in society according to the trends of the same company. Flexible means making more intelligent than the changing world. It means understanding that the world is changing so fast that the quality of your brain has to be the adaptability to change. And ‘the reason is that the foundations of the disconnect between voters and parties is the same as trivially is the basis of the gap between citizens and Europe. ” How so?
“Here we are faced with a dramatic risk of disintegration. And we are faced with this risk because Europe was built around an ideal that today does not have a direct reflection in the interests of individuals. A united Europe was conceived by Spinelli and Adenauer and that ideal had a correspondence with the interests of the Europeans to the extent that Europe offered something specific to the individual. In this case the interest, among others, was that of free movement, the idea of going from one country to another without proud passport. Today borders, by chance, are often viewed as a source of danger. And if you do not find a way to match again the ideal of Europe with that of its citizens, this scheme can not hold much longer. It ‘a general concept that covers everything. Europe. Left. Policy. Governments. Today we are in a society of interest when voters hear the politician if the politician is his interest and did not respect its ideals. It ‘a Copernican revolution. And if you do not intercept this revolution and did not understand and no one understands it is likely to remain, culturally and politically, in an era that simply does not exist today, and that no one, of course, would dream to share even in a social network “.
No comments:
Post a Comment