Letters
Letters to the Editor •
When it comes to anti-fascism today, those of the past have a lot to learn
Who has written to the editor-in-chief, Claudio Cerasa
4 SEP 26
Translated by AI
Photo: ANSA
To the Editor – I do not say this lightly, but I never would have expected, this year, to have to announce my resignation from the National Association of Italian Partisans (ANPI). There are many reasons for this: over time, positions have been adopted that have widened the divide and deepened misunderstandings, both regarding institutional reforms and geopolitical events. I cannot accept positions of false pacifism on the Ukrainian issue; our own Resistance was aided by the Allies, and the Ukrainian people, too, have the sacrosanct right to resist. I recall, in particular, a gentleman who distinguished himself on this front: Carlo Smuraglia. At the same time, pro-Castro and pro-Chavist tendencies see the ANPI aligning itself with some of the worst regimes in the world, responsible for human rights violations. I am also deeply distressed by the stance taken on the Israeli-Palestinian issue, starting with the wholehearted acceptance of the ‘Greater Israel’ conspiracy theory. It is unacceptable to welcome organised anti-Semitic groups into the 25 April marches whilst, conversely, obstructing the participation of the Jewish community and the Jewish Brigade, not to mention the opposition to the Anti-Semitism Bill and the exclusion of other reform-minded political forces. There is also a serious tendency to relativise the rights of certain peoples, such as the Iranian people. The association has furthermore shown a stubborn obstinacy in opposing the constitutional and institutional reforms that the country urgently needs, preferring to support the status quo; a closed-mindedness that was also clearly evident during the last referendum. Personally, I cannot stand alongside those who align themselves with the National Magistrates’ Association. I remain fully committed to the values of freedom and anti-fascism, and I will continue to advance these objectives as a private citizen.
Gabri Zammillo
When it comes to anti-fascism today, the anti-fascists of the past still have a great deal to learn. Thank you and well done for your courage.
To the editor – Prediction: Ranucci will be the Vannacci of the broad coalition.
Andrea Minuz
As the saying goes: first the programme (“Report”), then the candidate (from “Report”).
To the Editor – We entrepreneurs know that stability and consistency of direction are essential conditions for achieving anything worthwhile and useful, in business and beyond. That is why, five years ago, together with dozens of other entrepreneurs, constitutional experts and citizens, we founded ioCambio, a non-partisan movement that promotes governmental stability through the necessary institutional reforms. The electoral law currently under discussion, which aims to stabilise governments, certainly does not have the scope of a more far-reaching institutional reform, but it could be a step in the right direction. However, for it to be effective, a run-off vote must be introduced, as has been under discussion for the past few days. First and foremost, the run-off vote appeals to the public because it guarantees stability, averts the risk of ad hoc and disparate majorities (as Pera points out), weakens the most extreme political forces and ensures transparency and decision-making power for voters. It is also welcomed by the business community, which thrives on stability. Finally—an extremely rare coincidence in politics—it could be useful to the majority in curbing Vannacci, and even to the left, which has always supported the two-round system and is therefore a champion of the current electoral system for mayors. In practice, it kills four birds with one stone: citizens, businesses, the majority and the opposition. On 15 September, with the vote in the Chamber on the electoral law, this extremely rare opportunity will arise. For once, let us not squander it.
Nicola Drago
Vice-President of De Agostini
founder of ioCambio
A run-off would be no bad thing, but how can one rely on an electoral law that came about almost by chance, which has divided the very coalition that proposed it, which has caused the very MPs who voted for it to turn on one another, which has torn apart the very leadership that devised it, and which changes every day as if it were a lottery draw? There is considerable goodwill on the issue, but unfortunately very little credibility.
To the Editor – On 26 July 1990, five ministers from the sixth Andreotti government (including Sergio Mattarella, Minister for Education), all members of the left-wing Christian Democrats, resigned en masse in protest against the Mammì Law, which they regarded as a ‘gift’ to Silvio Berlusconi’s Fininvest, sponsored by Bettino Craxi. Andreotti wasted no time; within a few hours – in agreement with Francesco Cossiga, then Head of State – he carried out a cabinet reshuffle, replacing those who had resigned. The law was passed on 1 August. What will the top management of Rai (a broadcaster employing 1,760 journalists) do in the face of the threat of resignation by the editorial team of ‘Report’?
Giuliano Cazzola