Stay in government or get out of it in good order? This is the question that seems to be stirring among the ranks of the Five Star Movement led by the professor and lawyer, former President of the Council of Ministers, Giuseppe Conte. Whatever one might think of it, the circumstance, which appeared immediately in all its relevance, represents a real "seismic shock" at the parliamentary level since, in the hypothesis of its verification, the current Prime Minister would suddenly lose his its majority, and therefore the very source of its legitimacy.

But does this eventuality really represent a "vulnus" for the country of Italy, or the long-awaited salvation with respect to adhering to policies of an internal and international nature that are not very much shared at a social level and not at all respectful of the wishes of the majority of citizens? Let's think about it even for a single moment. They would like to lead us to believe that it is necessary to guarantee the operation of this Government of (dis) National Unity until its natural expiration, almost out of a sense of due responsibility. They would like to instill in us the idea that the "change" of the country must necessarily pass through a horizon of planned and shared reforms presupposing huge investments, as this is required of us, once again, by the European Union. They would still like to impose on us a teleologically as well as asphyxiatedly self-utilitarian political vision, based on the mixture of the "different" as an alternative to a fallacious bipolarism, hitherto a constant element of government, as it is overcome by the "evidence" of a condition of alleged ungovernability emerging from birth and from contextual decline of the two governments yellow-green first and yellow-red then, escaping from miserable palace agreements in the name of principles and mechanisms that are however constitutionally guaranteed. As if to mean, and clumsily I would say, that, instead, the current executive is not the result of a superior agreement of opportunism for having been wanted by none other than Sergio Mattarella. They would still like to direct us in the sense of considering, almost like a blessing, the great fortune of having a solid guide (such would be Mario Draghi) and authoritative at an international level, in reality considered as such only when he flattens himself to the diktats and calibrated directives on the sole needs of the highest European and American systems.

In short, everyone would like, but we, the Italian people, crushed under the weight of an economic crisis, food as well as pandemic, what do we want? Have we asked ourselves this, or do we expect that the "System", the political one, wants to change itself almost by "grace received" under the banner of an "industrious repentance" as long awaited as it is utopian in its possibilities of realization? We are really sure that this is the correct narrative of the flow of events (punctuated by the surreal rhythms of a conflict that does not belong to us in any way) and does not represent, rather, the winning trick to save "ass and armchairs" of those who are still make it legitimate, albeit deployed in different "political and party formation" of circumstances, to continue to lead a country even in the ignorance, it would seem, of useful strategies to do so in the best common interest, and without ever sharing fully, not even in the sense also abstractly solidaristic, the “discomfort” of ordinary people for having wanted to continue to keep their privileges and their wallets intact?

Let's face it all the way: the goal of this government "heap" seems to be only and solely to arrive unscathed until the first months of next year in order to be able to favor, once the budget law has been passed, admitted and not granted that it is possible to approve a new electoral law, always in a proportional sense (given the unspoken but hoped-for need to preserve the "chair" of most) in such a way as to be able to get to the vote before next summer, guaranteeing Mario Draghi, otherwise devoid of an operational Parliament for having, in any case, almost self-suppressed on the purely decision-making level, to continue to lead the agenda in the name of achieving the objectives of the infamous Pnrr.

But then: is it really a sense of responsibility? Why can a President of the Council of Ministers represent the country who, in the face of the unease of his own people, the only answer he can sketch out is expressed by a further question with a gruesome consistency in its meaning ("Do you prefer peace or the air conditioner on ")? Yet they had deluded us that they could act as a "hinge" of conjunction between the Franco-German axis and the Mediterranean, and they had still told us that Italy was, and would continue to be, a true protagonist in the context of the Atlantic Alliance . Even wanting to concede everything, evidently, this was not the case and this is not the case. One has the impression of being only a crutch country following those who in wanting and being able to better decide for themselves also decide for others (including Italy), in full awareness of the non-existence of strong institutions within it capable of opposing the domination of the great world powers.

It seems that the inalienable prerogative of Italy has become, over time, that of finding shelter "under the umbrella" of someone else for never having had one of their own, and of owing to that other gratitude and reverence "in secula seculorum ”: it matters little at what price. Would this be the solidity that Mario Draghi should have guaranteed us? If these are the premises for the Europe to come, then give us back Giuseppe Conte as Prime Minister and the lopsided and imperfect bi-polarism within which Parliament still had a role. It seems clear that if you really have to choose between two evils, then you try to choose the lesser one, however the result of the consolidated mechanisms of democracy correctly understood. Or, even better, allow the people, through early voting, to express their will. And do not say that having deserted the polls in the last municipal elections is the clear signal of the Italians' disinterest in exercising their right only to have the pretext of not allowing it to be exercised. Because even the "non-vote" is a signal of protest: citizens probably seem to be the only way to shout loudly that through the usual palace games, those who govern for their own gain in any case end up canceling the results ( the yellow-green, yellow-red and national unity governments are the perfect example, as well as, in many cases, the results of the referendum which were then disregarded after many years).

And then it would not be the case to ask ourselves how could a new government be without Mario Draghi and the real fruit of the will of the people because they are willing to make it the best interest? Well. To begin with, it could be a government willing to engage in bold face-to-face confrontation with NATO leaders to impose a position of neutrality devoted to the pursuit of peace. Also to begin with, it could be a government that keeps the bar straight, beyond any necessary reverence, on the claim of finding appreciable economic solutions to face the speculatory effects of the pandemic and the Russian-Ukrainian conflict by abandoning the instrumental dialectic that wants to see a aggressor and an attacked where, perhaps, there are no true innocents except for the peoples directly and respectively involved in spite of themselves. And again, to begin with, it could be a government that is finally a strong and decisive expression of the will of the people, well capable of being part of Europe by truly assuming a leading role in being the direct expression of a proudly founding country. But do we want to continue with the "ifs" and "buts"? The future looks like a gigantic unknown and we will probably find ourselves relying on the oppositional force of anyone who opposes this new-old "System" of Government. Will the M5S once again take on this role?

Giuseppina Di Salvatore

(Lawyer - Nuoro)

© Riproduzione riservata