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 , 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.
