Raniero La Valle (from www.sinistracristiana.net)
With the great celebrations for Craxi, ten years after his death in absentia in Hammamet, the right wing Berlusconi has claimed his true ancestry, dispelling the misunderstandings that may have been engendered by previous announcements, or rather from earlier boasts. The true precursors of Berlusconi are not Sturzo - he went into exile but not as a fugitive from justice - neither De Gasperi - but he also tried and convicted by a court fascist - let alone that Aldo Moro sacrificial victim and martyr of the policy was indeed, the true beginning of the Berlusconi was Craxi.
I was in a material sense, because without the decree by which the socialist president said the power of television to Fininvest, Mr Berlusconi could not have the fame and money to pursue his political journey, and it has been in a political sense, because without the demolition of the large mass parties, the DC and PCI, doggedly pursued by Craxi (who loved instead Proudhon ) without the decisive defeat
inflicted on workers by abolishing the scala mobile, without the reform in accordance with its Decision of parliamentary rules, and without the precedent of a party-show, with his court, as satirized Formica , in which there were fewer political dancers, a phenomenon such as Italy and force a government like the one we would not have been possible.
is clear that the motive for the posthumous glorification of Craxi (speeches, the streets, the celebration of TV) and everything was immediately political: it was the first to exile in Hammamet unjustified fall victim to the blows of a judiciary out of subjection to political power ; it was to claim the immunity of the power, just like Craxi had made two speeches in the House, which had denied the crimes, but she had turned into political problems, it was claiming the right for political career escape in every way - with the fugitive, with such failure, with short processes, or not celebrated - opinion of the judges interpret the law but not elected by the people.
To do this it was necessary to fit the news media of an unjustly persecuted Craxi, gloss over the convictions he incurred as a regular process, and ignore the facts attributed to him were not only those in the illegal financing of political parties, but also corruption and private profit. There was therefore no apology to make, so that even the consolation offered by Napolitano in his letter to the widow of Craxi, that the weight of responsibility for the degenerative phenomena of the political system had fallen on him "with unprecedented harshness" seemed excessive.
It has been argued however that, apart from the question of judicial and the sad ending, Craxi has to be remembered for his work as a statesman. Of course there have been at this, and was told, lights and shadows. Light was the defense of national sovereignty that he did against the Americans in Sigonella, but the night was his stubborn decision to install nuclear missiles in Comiso. Act with Italy to the demon nuclear married, and became potentially genocidal (the objective assigned to it, if there was war, it was Hungary).
He praised that his choice, without him the missiles in Sicily there would be no, and no missiles in Comiso there were not even the Pershing 2 in Germany for, as he has able, Germany, had been alone, he would not be welcomed.
Maybe, as many say, that if those missiles were not made, the Soviet economy would not have been overwhelmed by the failure for the costs of the arms race, the USSR would not have collapsed and the Cold War would not end.
But it was really the only way in which the Cold War would end?
They had not started, in those years, different and more civilized ways to get out of the juxtaposition of the blocks?
was not sighted as possible, peace in a world without nuclear weapons and non-violent, "as Gorbachev?
And the world who succeeded in what was then ended, this present world without Cold War but with real and endless perpetual wars, a world without Marx but also without Proudhon, is indeed a better world?
Maybe, as many say, that if those missiles were not made, the Soviet economy would not have been overwhelmed by the failure for the costs of the arms race, the USSR would not have collapsed and the Cold War would not end.
But it was really the only way in which the Cold War would end?
They had not started, in those years, different and more civilized ways to get out of the juxtaposition of the blocks?
was not sighted as possible, peace in a world without nuclear weapons and non-violent, "as Gorbachev?
And the world who succeeded in what was then ended, this present world without Cold War but with real and endless perpetual wars, a world without Marx but also without Proudhon, is indeed a better world?
Raniero La Valle
0 comments:
Post a Comment