telespallabob

Discussions are endless when they focus on certain topics. I was talking about the degeneration of the discussion not at the levels of TV programs like "Ballarò," but degeneration in the sense that one concentrates on a useless and endless theme (that is, trying to see the worst and the best of the political class, a tiring and pointless search). The episode you’re referring to (the one about Lombardo) is wrong, but to say that someone commits suicide over a statement seems strange to me; there is also the fact that the judiciary investigated the carabinieri who arrested Riina, for elements that seemed odd (like the failure to search his lodging). So starting from elements of a certain seriousness, false accusations were then launched, and that's wrong, but your conclusions seem forced to me. The fact that he was a sworn enemy of Falcone is a clear exaggeration; let’s remember that he fought important civil rights battles in Palermo during those years, taking a clear stance; moreover, he is often invited to speak on these issues outside of Italy. So it seems difficult to me that someone like Leoluca Orlando, who has never had doubts about the mafia issue and publicly sided with legality, could be an enemy of Falcone. Anyway, I am not from Livorno.

@Panapp, thank you. @Pixies, the parties we have today are closer than one might think. They recycle words, but in the end, the underlying concepts are quite similar. Personally, I also see a lot of anger pulsing throughout the country, and it's something healthy and interesting; however, these are often actions and movements driven by a specific situation and not a genuine movement of opinion, and in any case, they are minority views. Nevertheless, it’s unfair that any critical movement is suppressed with clubs by the riot police; this acts as a deterrent to dissenting action. The last elections? A protest vote? Stoney articulated this very well regarding voting, and I find myself in agreement with his words: people vote for what annoys them the least. Rarely do they vote for ideas or ideals. I want to dwell a bit on dictatorship. Many compare this crisis to that of 1929; the nation that was most affected by that crisis was Weimar Germany. Which political movement rode the economic crisis and rose to power? The answer is obvious. Certain regimes emerge and gain strength in times of crisis by presenting themselves as parties of order and guarantees, illusorily ensuring those "certainties" I mentioned earlier. So, in response to your final question, I answer: it could be; history teaches us similar cases.

What a shame, the discussion has deteriorated to focusing on the finger rather than the moon. Here too, the focus is on politicians and their honesty, their statements and contradictions. Anyway, if you want, I’ll indulge you. Orlando, slanderer of Falcone? That’s news to me. I don't even know who Antonino Lombardo is, so I won’t comment on that. “Quello li lo Sfascio”? As a phrase, it's unfortunate, I won't deny it. It should also be noted that Di Pietro likely said it in relation to a series of elements that the Pool di Mani Pulite had gathered at the time about Berlusconi, and there would be much to say about that too. Unfortunately, if we start listing the faults and wrong attitudes of Italian politicians, we’ll never get out of it. Now let me ask you: should we continue this pointless spiral, or should we finally start to understand why these characters exist and why everything is justified in this country? I’ll quote myself: "There's no need to look for a clear banner or a great moralizer, what’s needed is to truly understand ourselves.". Let’s reflect on ourselves because nothing happens by chance. We must be the first to change and become better people, starting to debunk false and biased ideas. You see, this country won’t improve with primaries, with "Italian Obamas," and posters soaked in "Hope" and "Change." Let’s start with wise self-criticism and reflect on who we really are.

Now the responses are also coming, calmly. @Pixies (sorry Stoney): when has it been like this? Look, the Italian left has always convinced itself of being superior in everything: in values, in manners, and above all it believed it held cultural hegemony. It might be a coincidence, but even today the right-wing identity culture (which I do not share) has no right to express itself because it is considered inferior by pundits who have political opinions opposite to theirs. Regarding Berluska’s TV channels, what you say is true, but, who knows why, it often happens that people say: "I don’t vote for Berlusconi, but I liked his programs and his way of doing TV," not understanding the insidious game behind his style of television. Now let’s move on to the criticisms you’ve raised. Those initiatives are commendable, which I appreciate a lot and support, but they represent a small and weak minority. You can’t deny this. Don’t you think they are aware of the fact that they are Don Quixotes fighting against the opinion of a mass that thinks exactly in the way I described earlier? I understand being idealists, but let’s not become foolish all at once. The people matter because they should be outraged by something like this, and instead they applaud because there are people convinced that the judiciary is the one that accused Enzo Tortora. When I think of the judiciary, I think of Rocco Chinnici, the Anti-Mafia pool, judges killed by the mafias, Giorgio Ambrosoli; this is the kind of people I think of. It’s a system that has many problems, but saying what Bubi said is despicable! @Bubi, now I’ll address you. Assuming that I wholeheartedly agree with what Larrok said, I ask you: do you understand the meaning of the words? A Hero? A Mafia member? These two words are oxymorons; the mafia cannot have anything heroic about it. The mafia strangles entire regions, beautiful places where wonderful people live. Those who choose the mafia path are mistaken; they can turn back and admit their mistakes, but I wouldn’t call a repentant a hero (and Mangano is not, make that clear). At home, I was taught that heroes are others, people with a sense of the State, people who died defending it. I mention journalists (Beppe Alfano), priests (Pino Puglisi), ordinary people (Graziella Campagna), police officers (Boris Giuliano), and we can go on further.

@Stoney, what you say is absolutely correct, but these are matters that go beyond political ideologies. It's not that there are parties that are immune or characters that are neat and perfect. Often, many on the left vote out of moralism, still caught up in the moral question raised by Berlinguer. The political class does not arise from nothing; it is not amorphous. Many say it is far from reality, but in truth, it is closer than one might think because it becomes the mirror and amplifier of its voters. It encapsulates all the vices of Italians which, incredibly, become virtues. The ability to take advantage of others, to screw over the next person becomes a sign of intelligence and skill; there are countless examples of this. Here, I connect with the discussion about intellectuals. Bubi first asks me, "Are you an intellectual?" as if it were a title to be belittled. I don’t know if I deserve such a charge, but I took the liberty of praising a category that is often mistreated for the reasons you mention. Unfortunately, thinking has become, in the collective imagination, something useless and even harmful. Instead, we should learn to do it, and I have a suggestion for you: watch Blob, if you can. In my opinion, it's better than any news program because it tells reality better than all, without needing to seek out news or having to speak. Where is its message? In the titles of the episodes, in the montages. These are all subtleties that you would never notice with a mindless view of television. P.S. Don’t you think someone who chose the nickname "telespallabob" would reference the "Simpsons"? Come on, let’s not kid ourselves.

@Bubi, well yes. I say it without any problems; the problem is the Italians and for a very simple reason: the Italian as a national citizen does not exist. Usually, in the classic style of Renaissance studies, D'Azeglio is quoted: "After making Italy, we must make Italians." That could also be correct, but you haven't even made Italy; before you can realize Italians, a lot is needed. We cannot compare ourselves to the nations of Northern Europe, where they have a sense of national unity. Italy, as an idea, is still stuck at Machiavelli: obsessive localism and conflicts between small territorial areas. This country unites, an absurd common notion, but prove me wrong, in very few spontaneous events (including the successes of the Men's National Football Team). So one could ask: has there ever been a historical period in which a strong national identity was sought? Yes, fascism. Coincidentally, during this period, the great myth of the "brava Gente" (good people) of Italy was born. A people who help the Allies, save the Jews, and so on and so forth. A totally unfounded myth that is hard to chip away at (a myth that has been overturned with incredible historiographical analysis by Angelo del Boca, a historian of fascism, and by other colleagues). The Italian is an opportunist, dishonest, and cunning, so when he found a character of such stature (Mr. B), he recognized himself. Is it anti-establishment? I wouldn't say so. Who has made a law that cannot be judged? Who has defined a mafioso as a hero? Who has committed gaffe after gaffe in the exercise of his institutional role? Who has defined the judiciary as "a metastasis of democracy"? Who dares to preach about marriage and such matters and then remarried, with one of his newspapers putting him in poses with some ladies and writing "Berlusconi's Harem," and made advances to a woman he appointed as a Minister of the Republic? These are all shameful things for a person who should govern; at least that’s how it is in other countries, but not in Italy. And do you know why? Because the Italians would like to be like him: rich, powerful, indifferent, and an abuser of his power for his own convenience. People without a conscience or remorse. You might tell me: these are intellectual discussions, what do I care about intellectuals? You should care about intellectuals because they represent the critical and thinking conscience of humanity. Look at The Simpsons: it's an imperfect world where ignoble characters (Burns), schemers (Homer), or people who abuse their public power (Winchester, Quimby) prevail. Who is the only one who consistently gets outraged? Lisa, and I wouldn’t want to be mistaken, but she is often labeled as an intellectual. The conclusions are yours.

Dario, let’s face it: if even the Isis are off their game, it’s not a good year. Unless you can come up with someone else who can turn things around. The issue with this album is the attitude, almost a sense of comfort, of staying at a minimum level to avoid completely dropping the ball.

As a reviewer of the "6", I can't refrain from commenting (even though I admit that my review didn't come out too well). A monumental work that still suffers from its density, in fact, the sound will need to be refined quite a bit more. The best will come with time with the "6" and especially with the "8".

@Franci, as I see it, the answer to what you're saying is all in the first words of "Destra-Sinistra" by Gaber: "We all blame history, but I say the fault lies with us. It’s evident that people are not serious when they talk about the left or the right," I don’t know why, but the evident truth Mr. G speaks of seems to be noticed by him alone. Look at the discussion above: we’re talking about those two little words, about communism as an utopia. Where's the concreteness? Where's the world? I'm afraid he’s made a leap upward and we all have fallen behind. Then you won’t catch up even if you become Coppi or Indurain.

@Omaha, I’m referring to plain and simple vote trading. You vote for a certain politician, and in return, they offer you a favor. Very simple. @Franci, regarding Berluska, I want to make a small note (because I reiterate, the real problem is not him but the other 60 million inhabitants of Italy): it’s true that the living cliché exists, but behind it lies a whole series of behaviors and ways that are absolutely immoral (the list is known even by the stones) and these things are real and tangible. It’s often said "in a normal country, his political career would have been over a long time ago," which may be true, but this does not happen because Italians are the problem (whatever the word Italians might mean). On this point, there is really a lot to reflect on. The moment you center the discourse solely on a detail, you play the same game of the finger and the moon. We need to start looking at the moon and also going there, digging into the ground, and understanding what it is made of. That moon is us, people who populate a nation that has all those behaviors I mentioned above. Unfortunately, an incredible idea of the Italian persists (perhaps because all these people have never read Angelo del Boca in their lives) that needs to be taken down with a pickaxe, like the Berlin Wall. Many believe they want to change this country, convinced that with different names and a renewal of the political class, the problem will be solved. It’s not like that. I don’t even believe there is a solution for Italy (whatever that might mean), but if there were one, it would have to be sought elsewhere. There’s no need to look for a clear banner or a great moralizer; we need to truly know ourselves.