Let's proceed by logic: to choose a guide, the right one of course, it is first necessary to know the future and the ontology of the assembly that that guide will be called upon to direct, otherwise one cannot help but stumble upon the creation of one of the usual pure party pseudo-formations and simple expression of his subjective identification, and therefore necessarily "current" and "divisive". In short, one would end up stumbling into the usual "trap" of wanting to change everything, at least pretending to do so, by not wanting to change anything in order to be able to conceal, albeit in a slightly clumsy way, one's transformative incapacity.

Currently, the Democratic Party finds itself engaged not only in a complex restructuring operation whose perimeters and contents do not appear to be clear , but also in the choice of a Secretary who can constitute a strong and authoritative guide for this new creature. Let's be clear however: the operation is not simple, but to be successful, it would primarily be necessary to remember (this is the impression for the external observer) under what circumstances that Party saw the light and implanted the very reason for its current existence, and therefore, it would be necessary to remember its own political history: if you don't remember who you are, how can you hope to know what you want to become.

Well. If it is true, as it would seem to be true, that the Democratic Party, as a political subject, was born from the fusion of two very distinct souls, namely that of the Democrats of the Left and that of the Margherita, then it would seem to be equally true that even on that occasion, although the intention was to undertake a transformation on an organizational level, the operation was not really "successful", for not having been able, that then brand new party creature, to complete the process of innovation inherent in the manners and forms of participation active politics. The Primaries alone could not, and cannot today, be the only solution to the evil of an entire system.

In short: the Democratic Party, the one we all know today, in its complex subjective component, has never managed, from the moment of its formation to today, to abandon the primordial institutional setting of the so-called "mass bureaucratic party" addressing, above all, if not exclusively, to his electorate? And if the answer were positive, what would have been, and/or would be today, your reference electorate? Who did the Democratic Party turn to in the past, who does it turn to today, and who will it want to turn to in the near future? What could ever be the objective of the "nascenda" (if really a different one will be born) new political formation (because it is humbly believed that something new will have to be born), if not that of adapting and improving social conditions by relating them to the transformations of society and the economies of the European continent? Will that new creature be able to do it without falling into the usual trap of the propaganda mechanisms of the subtle game of the empty attraction of the vote?

These questions still all seem to lack certain answers, with all consequences on the level of the pure and simple "presentation" of an announced "transformation" of very difficult qualification. Yet, despite this, we are strongly intrigued by the "gentle dispute" between several potential candidates for the Secretariat of a Party still to be defined . The circumstance is anything but to be underestimated, given that the choice of alliances will depend on the subjective expression of his "guide" (even if it would seem wrong to put the proverbial "cart before the horse)" and before that, the choice of systematic placement of the new political formation in the Italian party scene. And the real paradox, at least this would seem to be possible, would seem to be that which identifies the very young Elly Schlein as the only and true "ideological spring" of reference, as the only "interpreter" of a Left which never denying its deep roots, would seem willing to follow the path of a cautious and meditated progressivism.

The authentic keystone of a Democratic Party seriously intent on renewing itself would seem to be personified, in a nutshell, by Stefano Bonaccini's audacious deputy. The ideological freshness and expressive spontaneity against any other static experiential form and, for this very reason, incapable of offering a real drive for renewal. The outcome of the "(apparently) polite dispute" will depend solely on the will that the various subjective components of the Party will want to make themselves available to express. Otherwise, the epilogue of the entire affair can only be the division of the current assembly with all that may derive from it in terms of ideological and ontological disorder.

Stefano Bonaccini is an administrator of excellence, but choosing him at the Secretariat of the Democratic Party could perhaps mean (and we are always on the level of pure and simple impressions, which, however, even on a subliminal level end up affecting the choices) a return to the Renzian past which not everyone would be willing to accept. Paola De Micheli, also a highly appreciable expression of the Party, would appear not to have, all things considered, the necessary "vis attractiva". Gianni Cuperlo, with his reassuring experience and his institutional firmness represents instead the classic face of what has been and will never be able to be again, the only one to have understood, from the top of his competence, that a congress that seems wanting to start one's own transformation starting from its potential and future subjective expressions probably doesn't make too much sense to exist.

Saying it otherwise, and to clarify the point: if the Democratic Party really wants to be reborn to new life, then, when it really fails regardless of the prior identification of a Secretary, it will only be able to make its choice by opting between Elly Shlein and Gianni Cuperlo, without, however, depriving oneself of the contribution of the one or the other who should not "prevail" as an indispensable support resource. The only certain thing is that Italy needs a Left that can place itself in realistic competition with the current governing Right, which, even regardless of the electoral victory at the polls on 25 September, also needs serious renewal . But that's another story.

Josephine Di Salvatore

(lawyer – Nuoro)

© Riproduzione riservata