Saturday, March 12, 2011
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Samaire Armstrong Singing
Better without the hypocrisy 150th anniversary of Italy. Who really has the right to celebrate
On the occasion of the 150th anniversary of the Unification of Italy, almost fearfully celebrated, it is worth asking what, if anything there is to celebrate, and who has the right to do so. And, when you think you do a comparison between the current leadership (political and otherwise) and what a century and a half ago, led the unified process, one can not but be struck from the abyss that passes, in terms of breadth of views of conceptual rigor, the ability to look beyond the Alps, between the then and now.
For the first time in Italy had been gradually established a ruling class that was able to set a national policy, not national and not provincial, based on a revolutionary reformism traits, clearly placing the national question not only in terms of unification and independence, but also in terms of modernization, relations with Europe, and termination of cultural and political links with the ancien regime and society postfeudale. Because the process
Italian unit, agreed that today is reviled by the new trinariciuti prealpine neoborbonici from the South, and the nostalgia of Francis Joseph and Großdeutschland, was characterized only partially, and not essential as a phenomenon of territorial unification ( or to conquer, as some say today).
Prior to that, and its assumptions, it was a process of liberalization and modernization, without which no unification would have been possible if not as a dynastic or military annexation or federation in the form of theocratic and extended to the entire peninsula by Gioberti advocated: however, in terms that do not transform the structure postfeudali pre-unification Italy. Piedmont had opened the road to modernization in previous years the unit, credited as its cultural and political leadership, even before the military and dynastic: the state had begun to separate and balance the powers and to ensure that spaces of freedom and participation, economic reforms of Cavour, inspired by the empirical models of British liberalism had begun to modernize the agricultural world, the Siccardi laws (1850-51) e Rattazzi (1855) avevano abolito i privilegi della Chiesa come ordine separato; la legge Casati (1859-60) aveva introdotto il principio della Scuola pubblica di Stato e sottratta al monopolio eccclesiastico; l’esercito costituiva una forza militare capace di combattere e non solo di parate e di operazioni di polizia; l’uso appropriato ed oculato del denaro pubblico, non destinato unicamente alla rappresentanza dei fasti della Capitale consentiva un più equilibrato rapporto tra centro e periferia e la creazione di infrastrutture e vie di comunicazione avveniristiche (la ferrovia dei Giovi venne inaugurata nel 1854, ed i lavori del traforo del Frèjus iniziarono nel 1857). Nel giro di pochi anni vennero create le premesse culturali, policies and materials of a modern state, and we were able to cut ties with a tradition going back to the Counter.
And, last but not least, and even more significant fact, especially when viewed by Italians today, who see the logic of tribal politics and make their way into popular culture, the Parliament of Savoy, and was able to be already pre-unification National Parliament, seeing the number of admissions of refugees other states pre-unification of the peninsula.
Looking at this stage of our history, and seek treatment in relation to lead subsequent developments, it seems significant that the ruling class was formed around a few basic ideas, not all fully developed yet, but from which are derived in 150 anni successivi, tutte le manifestazioni di sviluppo economico e di progresso civile e sociale; ed il cui venir meno ha per contro improntato fasi e fenomeni di stagnazione ed arretramento. E si tratta di: concezione europea, etica pubblica, predominio della legge, Stato laico, visione unitaria e non provinciale delle questioni del Paese, istruzione pubblica e diffusione della conoscenza, estensione e generalizzazione progressiva, nonostante contrasti e resistenze, di diritti e libertà, lotta alle corporazioni ed ai privilegi. Indirizzi che poi, quasi cent’anni dopo, hanno trovato una più compiuta formulazione nella nostra Costituzione Repubblicana.
Osservando l’Italia di oggi, non possiamo non constatare come questa si sia deeply moved away from those basic ideas, and how the current leadership has nothing amplitude of views which marked the start of the process unit.
Today we are ruled by a majority that stands out and stands on barter between the interests of those who do not hesitate to distort the rule of law, law and the judiciary in trying to tame their impunity, and those who do not hesitate to deride and undermine territorial cohesion of the country trying to protect the interests of a party to the detriment of others. And, underlying these upheavals, there is a basic concept that conflicts with those guiding ideas: just remember that today are considered public ethics, the principle of separation of powers, the austerity of shapes and budgets, the secular concept of the state, public education, international relations and European construction and lived with discomfort enough.
No wonder then the anniversary of the 150 anniversary of the unification of the country appears to most of our leaders to be celebrated as a day without too much emphasis, too gruesome confrontation between Cavour and Papi green handkerchief, and too embarrassing confrontation between the openness of mind, quell'ampiezza of views, the ability to gain a European vision, and mental distress and provincial policies and politics of a committed anti-democratic nella propria autoriproduzione e nel servilismo nei confronti di un leader dedito prioritariamente alla tutela dei propri piaceri, dei propri interessi, della propria impunità, del proprio potere sovrano.
E non c’è da stupirsi se quei ministri leghisti che tolgono i finanziamenti ai malati di cancro per non far pagare le multe sulle quote latte agli allevatori disonesti dei loro collegi, e che impongono un simulacro di federalismo distruttivo come prezzo del loro sostegno, pur avendo giurato fedeltà alla Costituzione, non trovino nulla da festeggiare il 17 marzo.
E’ giusto che sia così, è giusto che questa gente si senta estranea o distante da questi festeggiamenti; non ne hanno il diritto: le loro parole assomiglierebbero troppo a quelle di Hitler in occasione dei funerali di Rommel. Quel che non è giusto, e che l’Italia onesta non merita, è di esser governata da gente simile.
Lasciamo allora che questa data sia celebrata da chi è coerente con il processo che ebbe avvio in quegli anni.
GIM CASSANO 
On the occasion of the 150th anniversary of the Unification of Italy, almost fearfully celebrated, it is worth asking what, if anything there is to celebrate, and who has the right to do so. And, when you think you do a comparison between the current leadership (political and otherwise) and what a century and a half ago, led the unified process, one can not but be struck from the abyss that passes, in terms of breadth of views of conceptual rigor, the ability to look beyond the Alps, between the then and now.
For the first time in Italy had been gradually established a ruling class that was able to set a national policy, not national and not provincial, based on a revolutionary reformism traits, clearly placing the national question not only in terms of unification and independence, but also in terms of modernization, relations with Europe, and termination of cultural and political links with the ancien regime and society postfeudale. Because the process
Italian unit, agreed that today is reviled by the new trinariciuti prealpine neoborbonici from the South, and the nostalgia of Francis Joseph and Großdeutschland, was characterized only partially, and not essential as a phenomenon of territorial unification ( or to conquer, as some say today).
Prior to that, and its assumptions, it was a process of liberalization and modernization, without which no unification would have been possible if not as a dynastic or military annexation or federation in the form of theocratic and extended to the entire peninsula by Gioberti advocated: however, in terms that do not transform the structure postfeudali pre-unification Italy. Piedmont had opened the road to modernization in previous years the unit, credited as its cultural and political leadership, even before the military and dynastic: the state had begun to separate and balance the powers and to ensure that spaces of freedom and participation, economic reforms of Cavour, inspired by the empirical models of British liberalism had begun to modernize the agricultural world, the Siccardi laws (1850-51) e Rattazzi (1855) avevano abolito i privilegi della Chiesa come ordine separato; la legge Casati (1859-60) aveva introdotto il principio della Scuola pubblica di Stato e sottratta al monopolio eccclesiastico; l’esercito costituiva una forza militare capace di combattere e non solo di parate e di operazioni di polizia; l’uso appropriato ed oculato del denaro pubblico, non destinato unicamente alla rappresentanza dei fasti della Capitale consentiva un più equilibrato rapporto tra centro e periferia e la creazione di infrastrutture e vie di comunicazione avveniristiche (la ferrovia dei Giovi venne inaugurata nel 1854, ed i lavori del traforo del Frèjus iniziarono nel 1857). Nel giro di pochi anni vennero create le premesse culturali, policies and materials of a modern state, and we were able to cut ties with a tradition going back to the Counter.
And, last but not least, and even more significant fact, especially when viewed by Italians today, who see the logic of tribal politics and make their way into popular culture, the Parliament of Savoy, and was able to be already pre-unification National Parliament, seeing the number of admissions of refugees other states pre-unification of the peninsula.
Looking at this stage of our history, and seek treatment in relation to lead subsequent developments, it seems significant that the ruling class was formed around a few basic ideas, not all fully developed yet, but from which are derived in 150 anni successivi, tutte le manifestazioni di sviluppo economico e di progresso civile e sociale; ed il cui venir meno ha per contro improntato fasi e fenomeni di stagnazione ed arretramento. E si tratta di: concezione europea, etica pubblica, predominio della legge, Stato laico, visione unitaria e non provinciale delle questioni del Paese, istruzione pubblica e diffusione della conoscenza, estensione e generalizzazione progressiva, nonostante contrasti e resistenze, di diritti e libertà, lotta alle corporazioni ed ai privilegi. Indirizzi che poi, quasi cent’anni dopo, hanno trovato una più compiuta formulazione nella nostra Costituzione Repubblicana.
Osservando l’Italia di oggi, non possiamo non constatare come questa si sia deeply moved away from those basic ideas, and how the current leadership has nothing amplitude of views which marked the start of the process unit.
Today we are ruled by a majority that stands out and stands on barter between the interests of those who do not hesitate to distort the rule of law, law and the judiciary in trying to tame their impunity, and those who do not hesitate to deride and undermine territorial cohesion of the country trying to protect the interests of a party to the detriment of others. And, underlying these upheavals, there is a basic concept that conflicts with those guiding ideas: just remember that today are considered public ethics, the principle of separation of powers, the austerity of shapes and budgets, the secular concept of the state, public education, international relations and European construction and lived with discomfort enough.
No wonder then the anniversary of the 150 anniversary of the unification of the country appears to most of our leaders to be celebrated as a day without too much emphasis, too gruesome confrontation between Cavour and Papi green handkerchief, and too embarrassing confrontation between the openness of mind, quell'ampiezza of views, the ability to gain a European vision, and mental distress and provincial policies and politics of a committed anti-democratic nella propria autoriproduzione e nel servilismo nei confronti di un leader dedito prioritariamente alla tutela dei propri piaceri, dei propri interessi, della propria impunità, del proprio potere sovrano.
E non c’è da stupirsi se quei ministri leghisti che tolgono i finanziamenti ai malati di cancro per non far pagare le multe sulle quote latte agli allevatori disonesti dei loro collegi, e che impongono un simulacro di federalismo distruttivo come prezzo del loro sostegno, pur avendo giurato fedeltà alla Costituzione, non trovino nulla da festeggiare il 17 marzo.
E’ giusto che sia così, è giusto che questa gente si senta estranea o distante da questi festeggiamenti; non ne hanno il diritto: le loro parole assomiglierebbero troppo a quelle di Hitler in occasione dei funerali di Rommel. Quel che non è giusto, e che l’Italia onesta non merita, è di esser governata da gente simile.
Lasciamo allora che questa data sia celebrata da chi è coerente con il processo che ebbe avvio in quegli anni.
GIM CASSANO
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)