Letters
Letters to the Editor •
The left only takes notice of anti-Semitism when it comes from the right
Who has written to the editor-in-chief, Claudio Cerasa
1 OCT 26
Translated by AI
Photo: Ansa
To the Editor – Having read about Bardella’s alleged statements, steeped in the most trite anti-Semitism, I put myself in the shoes of a French Jew in the run-up to a possible run-off in spring 2027 between the Rassemblement National and La France insoumise. The thought that today, unlike in the 1930s, there is a Jewish state reassured me.
Giulio Franchi
It’s all true. With one paradoxical element. Perhaps out of cunning, perhaps out of expediency, perhaps out of realism – certainly not for idealistic reasons – anti-Semitism today finds more support amongst the far left than amongst the far right. There is one difference, however, as Maurizio Crippa writes today: the left only takes notice of anti-Semitism when it comes from the right, not when it lurks on the left.
* * *
To the Editor – Your article yesterday on the Garlasco case was excellent, but perhaps it lacks one point of reflection that is particularly relevant to our ailing judicial system. Do you not think that this trial too – with two acquittals overturned on appeal – clearly demonstrates that the bar for judicial certainty ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ is set far too low in the Italian criminal justice system? Stasi should not have been convicted, not because he was innocent, but because the doubt regarding his guilt was reasonable – more so than the conviction itself. From what little can be gleaned from the media circus surrounding it, the Sempio trial, too, appears to lack a solid evidential basis. We should learn to accept that doing justice also means failing to secure sufficient evidence to deprive a person of their personal liberty – after, of course, having done everything possible to the best of our ability.
Gaetano Giannì
I agree. The Stasi trial is a farce because anyone who has been acquitted twice cannot be convicted beyond a reasonable doubt. However, once the anomaly of the Stasi trial has been acknowledged, it would be useful to realise that, in order to denounce a trial that struggles to stand up to scrutiny, it is not necessary to use the same summary trial method against the other suspects that was used against Stasi over the years.
* * *
To the Editor – Professor Gaetano Azzariti is firmly convinced that the draft bill against antisemitism is capable of stifling dissent, which is why, when interviewed by La Repubblica, he took a clear stand against the ‘real risk of a curtailment of freedom of expression’. Well, everyone is entitled to their own opinion; who are we to judge, and so on and so forth. However, when asked about the undeniable resurgence of anti-Semitism, the constitutional expert gave the answer one might not expect (or perhaps one would): “There is a resurgence of generalised racism, yes. Against Jewish citizens, against Muslims. I’d be tempted to say against ‘those who are different’ in general.” This echoes remarks made by Whoopi Goldberg (“the Holocaust isn’t about race; it’s about the inhumanity of one man towards another; it’s not about race because they’re two groups of white people”), if not, indeed, Francesca Albanese. That was before the “sincere apologies,” of course.
Luca Rocca
* * *
To the Editor – I have had confirmation, Editor, that in life one should never say never. I would never have thought it possible to appreciate and agree with the words of Donatella Di Cesare. But when the philosopher states that ‘Palestinianism’ (a perfect definition) has become a totalitarian religion, I can only agree. And ask where I can sign up.
Giuliano Cazzola