Between history and calendar.
The whole diatribe between "fascists" and "anti-fascists" leads me to repeat one thing: Italian politics does not have problems with history, but with the calendar. And there is not even a subtle difference between the two things: if anything, the fact that no one asks why we are talking about 1945 in 2024 shows how politicians have not yet understood, precisely, what their role is.
Let's go step by step.
If I asked you what the biggest problems the government should take care of today are (environment, Russia, China, Unemployment, Debt, Poverty, etc.), what you will do is – like it or not – look at the calendar. At least with your mind: if I ask you what the problems are today, but precisely today, you cannot answer without thinking that today we are in 2024.
If I ask you for a summary of the problem between fascists and anti-fascists, you have to go back at least to the moment of the Matteotti murder, the prison for Gramsci, etc. Because the partisans died from fighting on the field, but Matteotti wasn't bursting with health either.
This is therefore a historical approach. Of course, we can restrict the struggle between fascists and anti-fascists to the moment of liberation, but on a historical level, leaving out those persecuted by the fascist regime in a discussion between fascists and anti-fascists is simply wrong. And always on a historical level, we must continue with history, also including the history of the country, up to today, given that the struggle and violence, even if to a lesser extent, have continued and continue.
So we have two concepts: chronology and historiography.
If we talk about chronology, we can ask questions like this:
- What were the big problems of the Italian government in 1945?
- What are the big problems for the Italian government in 2024?
The difference is evident: in 1945 there was no mention of Palestinians involved in the Liberation, and the "Jewish Brigade" was a body of the English army made up mainly of Zionist settlers from the Middle East.
In 2024, however, those of the Jewish brigade have become Italian partisans like everyone else, and the Palestinians, whose role in the liberation is not known to historians, also march in the square. (but I am convinced that the politicians will soon remedy this, and Italy will find itself the famous "Arafat Brigade" on April 25th)
It is clear that there is at least a problem with the calendar, while historiography is more honest, showing at least some historically verified facts.
This difference is important for two reasons. The first is clear if we ask ourselves "but has Italy come to terms with history?". The answer is that if today we are still discussing who were the good guys and who were the bad guys, then no, Italy has not yet come to terms with its history. The good news, however, is that he is doing them, and all this (useless) hubbub proves it.
To understand the reason for that "uselessness" it would be enough to compare the (Italian) government problems of 1945 with those of 2024.
Let's even suppose we "prove" that the partisans were a gang of bandits: what would change the agenda of today's government? Does it change the PnRR? Is youth unemployment changing? Does the birth rate change? Does the collapse of Italian healthcare change? Does the disappearance of justice change? What changes, exactly? Does the conflict in the Middle East change? Will the Russia/Ukraine conflict change?
No. The problems of the Italian government in 1945 and those of 2024 are so different that dealing with history has a symbolic, perhaps moral, certainly philosophical, exquisitely political but certainly not practical or concrete meaning.
So, is Italy coming to terms with its history? It would seem like good news, but in the way it is being done it is not: and here the calendar returns. It's true that the events of 1945 laid the foundations for today's country, but Charlemagne isn't joking either. Yet we don't go to the streets at Christmas to protest against the crusades against the pagan Saxons, or against the fact that that Christmas in 19th century in Rome there were more soldiers of Charlemagne, around 50,000 with the rear, than inhabitants , around 30,000. Who knows why the Pope was convinced to make him Emperor and then a saint. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that the last invasion of the Goths in Rome left around 500 inhabitants in Rome.
But I was saying, the fact that past events laid the foundations for the present does not allow us to say that the Bologna massacre was the fault of the Goths. While we have no problem saying that "the fascists" had something to do with it, even though Mussolini had been dead for decades.
No, Italy is NOT dealing with history. He is stretching the events of 1945 to use them as a blanket, a long blanket that becomes thinner and thinner, but prevents Italians from talking SERIOUSLY about the problems between 1945 and 2024.
BUT I mentioned that politics has its faults, and that it doesn't go along with the calendar. Real.
You will have heard of Almirante's MSI, the "grandfather" of the current neo-fascists. And you will have heard that the Constitution (later reflected in the law) prohibits the reconstruction of the dissolved fascist party. Put like this, it implies that no other fascist party should be born, and if it is born it will be dissolved.
Well. But how is it done, exactly? For small neo-fascist movements, Digos is usually activated, material is found, a complaint is filed and the small groups are dissolved. But how do you dissolve a party that is in Parliament and offers no real "evidence" but only clear indications of fascism?
When we talked about dissolving MSI, we talked about two possible methods.
-
Parliament would approve a law which clearly states that MSI should be considered the reconstruction of the fascist party. If it is approved by both houses AND THEN signed by the president, then the party is fascist. The arrests (at least) of the managers begin the next day.
-
Parliament would approve a law which clearly states that MSI should be considered the reconstruction of the dissolved fascist party. It is approved by both chambers, then the President signs it, and then dissolves the chambers. In this way it avoids a hole of empty chairs, because the elections will be re-run without MSI.
why was it never done? Why did the bill NEVER even arrive?
Various forces opposed it.
-
the USA. It was very difficult for them to get the idea across American newspapers that the PCI and PSI (communists and socialists) had passed a law to ban a party. The difficult part for the American was not “they banned a party”, but “socialists and communists”.
-
The PCI but also PSDI, PDULP and I don't know how many other "social democrats" feared that that scant 5% of votes would end up in the DC, and would inflate the area of Scelba, Fanfani, and then Cossiga.
-
The PSI, which had no problems with Scelba first and then Cossiga, but feared that a DC on the right would have made the five-party system impossible.
-
the extreme Area. “Autonomous people beating up fascists” at the time passed as “the Freaks Circo Burzum”, or “Pisquani Clash” for the moderate masses, but “Autonomous people beating up Christian Democrats” would have had a very different aspect. They too feared that the MSI would go over to the DC.
-
the DC would therefore have been in favor.
Thus there was never a bill in parliament to ban MSI. Instead, a kind of convent was created to exclude, for which:
- MSI could not be part of a government
- MSI had no power in RAI
- MSI could have had the crumbs by splitting up CONI and ISEF. (sport, in short).
The problem, therefore, was not historical, it was calendar-related: historically speaking, fascism cannot exist in Italy, but if we go into practice, what do I know in 1955, or in 1978 or in 1985, there were elections to win, and the problem was that the schedule was more important than the story.
Imagine today. Imagine that with a Decree from the President of the Republic it was decided that FdI is a fascist party. The president could then file a complaint with the Presidency, and the arrests would begin. But who exactly would FdI's votes go to?
That is the question. That everyone is in the streets against fascism, everyone is there to remind the fascists that their party is illegal and unconstitutional, that is, subversive, but from 1945 to today, despite countless opportunities to dissolve MSI, no one has done so.
did you expect them to dissolve on their own, or what?
And with what courage, today, one comes to say that that party is illegitimate and that it is unconstitutional and that it would be forbidden to reconstruct fascism, today, only those who say it know.
So, in fact, history is what it is, but the electoral calendar says otherwise.
And it is the calendar that has kept the whole comedy going so far.
Uriel Fanelli
The blog is visible from Fediverso by following:
Contacts:
- Fediverse: @ uriel@fedi.keinpfusch.net
- MATRIX: @uriel:mtrx.keinpfusch.net
- GNU JAMI: Ufanelli