In recent days, the Democratic Party, through the mouth of its secretary Enrico Letta, has repeatedly exercised its expressive potential in inviting any voters, or more simply its direct and probable sympathizers, to the expression of the so-called "useful vote" , as “generic” on the linguistic level, as “illusory” on the phenomenal level of reference, represented, indeed, by an electoral base as evanescent as the Parisian salons of its immediate origin. In short: a “radical chic” invitation with an incurable and vicious conceptual ambiguity.

But, if we think about it, what does the phrase "useful vote" mean? What is Enrico Letta really asking? Is there perhaps a "useless datur" vote? And what would it be?

Well. The level of confrontation would seem to be precisely that of the “Mysteries of Faith”: a mystical and inevitably radical level. However, and perhaps more likely, the Secretary of the Democratic Party might want to invoke the "miracle" since, if he wants to reflect differently, and to want to stick to the meaning of the expression in the so-called "politichese" language (in the context of which that unfortunate syntagm, in finding its own matrix within a majority-type electoral system, therefore very different from the current one, would mean the "vote" given to the candidate who believes himself to be the winner rather than the most popular one), they could also be led to believe that, after all, Enrico Letta is indirectly exhorting the voters to express themselves in favor of his "beloved rival" (cit.) Giorgia Meloni, undisputed and indisputable leader of the Brothers of Italy, who , according to the most accredited polls, it would seem to be at an all-time high.

Certainly, and it would be idle to think seriously, this would not seem to be the goal of the "not very serene" and aristocratic Enrico, but also to want to go beyond the terms of an altogether elementary reasoning, the ontological nature of the question that is intended to be presented to the People of Voters, and above all to the growing Party of Abstention, fueling their motivations, would seem to appear on the horizon in a rather worrying way. What does that invitation really mean? What is hidden behind that apparently harmless exhortation, not to say "naive" on the level of immediate practical perception, but very conditioning on the purely subliminal level? Nor could it be otherwise, since that reference to the "useful vote", if ever it was not understood, and unlike what one would be led to believe, far from being addressed to the generality of voters, it would seem rather to refer directly to ' address of the traditional center-left voter against the imminent danger (or rather presented as such) of the return of a "fascism (this time) in a skirt" , according to a figurative schematism not only non-existent on a naturalistic level due to the evident extemporaneousness of the circumstance, but even strongly anti-democratic and discriminatory to be aimed at the image in and of itself considered of the Woman in Power.

Let's understand each other once and for all: the invitation to the "useful vote" without ifs and buts would seem to be blamed at least as much as the invitation to the People of Marie Antoinette of Habsburg-Lorraine to eat "brioche" if they no longer had "bread" . And it would also seem completely wrong on a strictly conceptual level, since the same would make sense within a solely "bi-polaristic" logic, but not within a framework, such as the current one, where the comparison is based on four poles (Cdx, Csx, Terzo Polo and M5S).

In the absence of highly representative political identities, we are faced with an uncontrollable democratic danger that everyone complains but no one would seem to want to remedy by finding it more comfortable and appropriate to let oneself be lulled by the illusion of an alternation of government fueled by the systemic exasperation of maxi-coalitions existing and distinct only in their nomenclature but, all in all, too identical in their aims to have sufficient “vis attractiva”.

The real problem that Enrico Letta should decide to face, if he really wanted to be recognized as the undisputed and captivating Leader of a Left that is no longer Left, is rather that of recovering the consent of that large band of citizens determined not to express their vote, as devastated by the social unrest that has become, over the years, the real tip of the iceberg on which the various Titanic (parties) of the government context have repeatedly broken ruinously.

If most Italians survive in conditions of extreme poverty, if workers cannot enjoy decent wages or, worse still, job stability, constantly being victims without protection from the prevailing precariousness, if pensioners cannot take advantage of pensions to guarantee themselves self-sufficiency in food finances, what has politics and all of its and its representatives served up to now? From the end of the First Republic to today, what would have been, more generally, the usefulness of the vote expressed by all those who decided to place their trust in this or that other party? This, indeed, is the main question to which some brave, if any, should deign to answer with a sense of humility and self-denial. Regardless of the results, which to date would seem even obvious, to be truly certain is that next September 25 could be a decisive watershed , a real turnaround with respect to practices and "customs" that up to now have negatively affected the path of democratic growth, as well as the functional effectiveness of government action.

To say it all, the progressive loss of identity of the Italian left is the only determining condition of the turn to the right , to the extreme right, of Italian politics and it is certainly not the heartfelt appeal to the "useful vote" that can reverse the trend.

If a Meloni-powered government will be useful, we will find out in the coming months. The problem is that the actors are always the same and there has been no replacement of a failing ruling class as a whole which, while still wanting to impose itself on power, continues to want to persist in error. This is the only real problem. The only knot that we probably would have liked to do without.

Giuseppina Di Salvatore - Lawyer, Nuoro

© Riproduzione riservata