There is a plan to bring the anti-fascist license to Parliament. The PD group in the Chamber has presented a motion, which will be voted on tomorrow, to make access to the press room and other spaces in Montecitorio conditional on a declaration whereby those entering commit to “respect the Constitution and its fundamental principles.” No “demonstrations contrary to the principles of the democratic order” can take place in the Palace, reads the rationale.
For heaven’s sake, I have nothing against defending constitutional rights; on the contrary, I champion them. However, I wonder if self-certification is an effective tool, given that the Islamic attacker at the Berlin gay pride yesterday was expected at the center against radicalization, where he had made an appointment on his own initiative. It is clear that the motion signed by the Democrats is the typical spot rule that, based on the values of the Charter, actually distorts them because it implicitly attributes them to only one side. To the detriment of Article 21 of the Constitution itself, which by enshrining freedom of the press implicitly also contains freedom of the press room, and of the history of Parliament, where in these eighty years at least two or three hundred very fascist deputies have landed by default.
NO MUSSOLINIAN
Fascism was an execrable regime, no difficulty in reiterating that. But there is no trace of fascists among the 450 para-terrorists who last Saturday wreaked havoc in the Susa Valley, engaging in guerrilla warfare with the police forces, who did not respond to avoid being accused of being authoritarian, and in return had over one hundred and twenty officers injured. There is no trace of fascists either among the far-left antagonists in Bologna, who a week ago attacked the police under the pretext of the death of Abderrahim Fakir.
Even less fascist is Vincenzo Fullone, the Flotilla activist who wrote a sorrowful and sympathetic remembrance of Abdul Ballout, the aspiring mass murderer of participants in the German LGBTQ+ demonstration. “I wish that, instead of ISIS, he had encountered a culture less founded on white supremacy,” are his words in memory of the terrorist. In short, it almost seems that for this gentleman the Nazi skinheads bear more responsibility for the attack than the Islamic fundamentalists.
It is true that the wind of the right blows throughout Europe, and that some right-wing groups have an extremist aftertaste where certain leftists have the direct flavor. However, looking at the facts, one must ask what is the greater danger to democracy, the community, the West, and its values. Do the scattered nostalgics of the Twenty Years do more damage, or the armed arms of social centers, with operational connections to the black blocs and the No Tav, to whom part of our Parliament and more than one city council provide embarrassing political cover and dispense public sympathies and solidarity? A tally of the damage recently caused by one or the other favors the answer.
SHORT CIRCUIT
So perhaps, when asking for the anti-fascist license, the PD group in the Chamber should also ask for the anti-NoTav license, the anti-social center antagonists license, and the anti-Hamas license. Unless it is considered a democratic expression to wreak havoc in the country. Certainly, there would be an inconvenience. Given the current composition of Parliament, asking for an anti-terrorist declaration, whether Palestinian, valley-based, or Bolognese terrorism, risks emptying the Chambers more than the Five Star referendum that reduced deputies by 33% did.
How many on the left would find themselves in doubt between not signing and immediately losing their seat, or signing and losing their voters, and thus their seat, in a year? Beware, this is neither a provocation nor an exaggeration. Half of Parliament supports the Flotilla, Flotilla members mourn the Berlin terrorist and understand Hamas terrorists. More or less the same happens with the No Tav and the autonomists, condemned in words when they attack the police and devastate cities but never truly opposed in practice or politically fought. Ergo, half of Parliament is not aligned with defending the principles of the Constitution. So the anti-fascist license is good. That’s how times go, even if somewhat off track.
Moreover, today to be the head coach of the National football team, the anti-Putin license seems to count more than the coaching license issued by the Federation. However, all the more reason, the anti-red-violence license is also welcome. At least this way some clarity is made, things are called by their name, and the left frees itself from the embarrassment of having to label as “fascist” every anti-democratic behavior that arises within it and for which it does not want to take responsibility.
