Outside the political camps, sooner or later we will have to choose which side to take

To the Editor – Dear Cerasa, the general election is drawing nearer and, with it, cross-party calls for a ‘tactical vote’ are resurfacing. It’s an old story: one must be realistic, one must not play into the hands of the opposing camp, one must hold one’s nose and choose the lesser of two evils. The argument is not without its appeal. Indeed, forces of liberal and Christian-democratic persuasion are about to form alliances – or have already done so – with both the centre-right and centre-left coalitions. At this stage, only Carlo Calenda’s Azione and his fellow campaigners remain to represent those who regard both as ‘greater evils’. I confess to belonging to this school of thought. Because no vote is wasted. Voters can mark their ballot paper not only to decide who will govern for the next five years, but also to give visibility to ideas, projects and proposals that would otherwise risk remaining on the fringes of public debate. This is a good reason to hope that neither of the two coalitions reaches 42 per cent of the vote in the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate (pending the Constitutional Court’s ruling). With a proportional allocation of seats, a whole new game would begin. It is a highly unlikely scenario, I know. But, as a line by Eugenio Montale puts it, ‘an unexpected turn of events is our only hope’.

Dear Magno, I understand your reasoning, but figures are figures. To prevent either coalition from reaching 42 per cent, there would need to be a consensus, outside the two main blocs, of around 19–20 per cent. Outside the two main blocs are Calenda and Vannacci, but it does not seem to me (unfortunately in one case, fortunately in the other) that the conditions exist for such a scenario to materialise. And given that the scenario is likely to be bipolar, centrifugal forces from the parties outside the coalitions will be a natural consequence. Choosing which side to take will inevitably become an issue that needs to be addressed.

To the editor – We thought it was Nvidia, but it turned out to be nothing more than lust.

To the Editor – I join in the outcry over the ‘storico’ text published by Laterza (a glorious publisher, but one that has now, too, sold out to prevailing ideology). My question, however, is a different one. Is a history text a work of history or current affairs? And besides, when, in the programme actually delivered, does it ever reach the present day? At best, it says something about the Second World War. I would like to know whether the tens of millions of deaths in communist states are also discussed.

To the Editor – Recently, P. Valente, writing in the weekly Vita Trentina, reported on the original and courageous initiative by the Dean of Merano to cover his head with a Jewish kippah as a sign of solidarity with ‘our elder brothers’ and, in particular, with those (few in number) who form part of Merano’s Jewish community. A symbolic and potentially risky gesture, given the high state of alert that the police must maintain even in this tourist town on the banks of the Passirio; a town itself monopolised and dominated by a monolithic, one-sided pro-Palestine and pro-flotilla mindset. Instead of publishing expressions of solidarity, in its next issue the diocesan weekly devoted ample space to a counter-view from a reader who criticised the gesture of solidarity in favour of the Jews, drawing on the full media arsenal that has been all the rage and has pervaded the ‘free press’ since at least 7 October 2023, with rare exceptions. Starting from axioms that are indisputable, though unproven – such as the alleged illegitimacy of the Israeli government, an impostor that uses gratuitous violence against the so-called Palestinians – it goes on to deny at its very root the legitimate presence of Jews in the East (which has never ceased, not even after Tito) within their own free democratic state (and the recent elections at the end of October provided further proof of this). This stance is maintained solely because they defend, tooth and nail, the spaces of freedom they themselves have built and acquired (purchased, not stolen!), in accordance with a United Nations resolution passed immediately after the Second World War. What is most disheartening is to perceive such a deep and widespread hostility not only towards Israel as a state, but towards all Jews (who are also ‘guilty’ of siding with that nation-state). In my view, for those who profess to be Christian, such an attitude appears particularly grave because it denies the religious, theological and familial kinship and common heritage with the Jews, so well summarised by Wojtyla and reaffirmed by Ratzinger in the apt description of them as our elder brothers in the faith! By forgetting a significant part of the teaching of the great popes, it seems we prefer spineless submission to our ‘cousins’ who follow Muhammad, rather than remembering Christ, the son of David. May the Lord never cease to bless us and shake us out of our sloth. Thank you for your hospitality.

Long live the doyen of Merano!

To the Editor – Maurizio Crippa is right to condemn the viciousness of the comments following the granting of house arrest to Mauro Moretti. But the real problem lies with the judiciary, which – instead of administering justice – did not hesitate to convict an innocent man in order to satisfy a desire for revenge.

To the Editor – An article of yours published today reminds me of the meeting with representatives of the opposition parties on Italian foreign policy. I would like to clarify that I was invited by Ernesto Ruffini and Franco Gabrielli to provide a purely technical and factual contribution, given my expertise in international politics and economics. This was a contribution made in a personal capacity. Kind regards, and all the best with your work.