People don’t want complications
(… here I have always welcomed your cries of pain, I have always tried to share your bitterness, your exhaustion, without claiming to show you a solution, to offer you a remedy, but with the humility of someone who even before having placed at the service of the country, he saw your suffering as his failure and your impotence as a burning reproach. I chose to expose myself, and I have never escaped the consequences of this exposure, since well before it was formalized by an elective office, and whoever was there knows it. So let's give the floor to Laura… )
Laura Di Lucia left a new comment on your post " “Once upon a time there was the Republic!” ":
Prof, I have always felt at home here.
Ever since "the bailouts" that didn't save us.
Many times I have found ideas to rework what everyday life put before me.
Today, however, at the age of 48, I find myself with nothing in my hands and I cannot understand (accept) why we were sacrificed like this.
A company that failed due to its poor management of pandemic disease.
I lost everything: everything I had worked for, everything I was building.
Like me, many other small entrepreneurs.
Collaterals, right? Never mind if there are people, families behind it.
It's war, baby!
We were the cleanup "of the inefficiency invoked by the good one".
This is not about grilling (anymore), Prof.
How can anyone believe that those who caused so much harm can still be the solution?
It is not a personal attack, nor against the party, I would like to make it clear.
I understood the reasons for certain choices and, even if I don't agree with them, I understand it couldn't have been done otherwise.
At this point, if it really isn't possible to put the plan back in balance, why are we worrying so much?
In 2008 Lehman Brothers, in 2020 the pandemic, the continuous political-economic instability that prevents any long-term planning. I no longer have tools and like me many other people.
Then when you talk to a policeman quoting the sources of law and he looks at you as if you were a monkey in the zoo, you understand that the useful idiot placed in the right places does more damage than the H bomb.
Our society is full of useful idiots: in the institutions, in the armed forces, in the municipalities… among the citizens stoned by Netflix.
Prof, there have always been more than one, two or three. The question I ask myself is why we can't go further.
The point is that people don't want complications and that's why they will have them (and inflict them on others).
Lack of foresight, not seeing beyond one's nose, wanting a comfortable life. But how did humanity become this shapeless mass of brains in formalin? When did (we) stop asking ourselves the why of things?
How do you get out of it? Simple: there's no way out unless there's a nice total reset. It's not a question of political colors, it's really more of a general, underlying, cultural question.
I'm sorry to have come back to leave such a defeatist comment, it's not like me.
It will pass because I don't know how to sit still and feel sorry for myself but I confess that I'm struggling a lot this time.
In the meantime, I enrolled in the Faculty of Law (physical university), the rest will be seen.
I apologize for the scattered thoughts and return to being a spectator.
"Each one plays, dances and sings,
the heart burns with sweetness:
no effort, no pain!
What has to be, must be.
Whoever wants to be happy, let him be:
There's no certainty about tomorrow."
Laura
Published by Laura Di Lucia on Goofynomics on 26 Oct 2023, 2.46pm
So.
A few days ago I was having dinner in a very exclusive and exclusionary gathering, which, considering that inclusiveness is the flag of piddini, made me feel relatively at ease. Incidentally, a high, very high official of the Republic spoke about his experience with the management of pandemic in Spain, in particular in Madrid. With a left-wing, therefore hypochondriac, government, the President of the Community of Madrid, Isabel Diaz Ayuso , not being left-wing, as is known, had decided to adopt a non-hypochondriac line. It's not that strange, I would say (cit.): ideology exists and it helps! If the left is a hypochondriac (and even more so if you know and understand why it is or declares itself to be so: to legitimize strategies for controlling dissent), and you are not a leftist, it should come quite naturally to you not to be a hypochondriac! The high, indeed very high, official remarked that this less hypochondriac line had saved many businesses from bankruptcy, preventing Madrid from being reduced to the same level as other Spanish capitals, where the GDP had collapsed. To my question, he brings sine dolo, almost modo genitus infans , and with an accent of naive, sincere curiosity: "But wasn't mortality higher?" the answer, which out of politeness and so as not to arouse suspicion, I received with appropriate amazement, was: "Absolutely not, you can't see any differences in the data."
Needless to say, the answer didn't surprise me.
On Tuesday 4 May 2021, at Claudio's invitation, I had a video conference with Ioannidis ( this ). We are not talking about one of those idiots without art and with too much of a role, without qualifications and scientific production, which comrade Boldrini, when she presided over the lower house (and with her the lowest one) had legitimized as guardians of the revolution, and which we still find ourselves among the idiots with the high-sounding name of "independent fact-checkers"! We are talking about one of the most successful researchers in the epidemiological field. What the high, eminent public official told me with a certain satisfaction, as counterintuitive or at least surprising evidence, for me was the quintessence of the obvious, and I don't think I ever hid it.
"But then you knew everything and you sacrificed usooooh! You betrayedoooh!" and so on…
I hear this intonation in Laura's words, together with a certain "tuttismo", the most Grillina of Grillina ideologies, and I'm sorry.
I'm sorry because the efforts we have made to bring a bit of common sense into the Italian debate have not all been exercised behind the scenes: some even on prime time television, like this:
(… it was May 25, 2021: at the time the PD's aspiring political parasitologist posed as an independent expert. The fact is that twenty-one days before this broadcast we had spoken to someone who had an h-index equal to three times and half his, and therefore we had an idea of the reliability of the aspiring parliamentarian, before certain aspirations became apparent …)
Do you remember this , Laura?
Because if you don't remember it, maybe you should check it out. While if you remember it you shouldn't, as you do, lump everything together.
"We were sacrificed"…
From who?
Who was in government?
Who was trying to say words of common sense?
Who instead was desperately trying to drown out his voice?
In order: Conte and Speranza sacrificed you. Conte was in government with the PD. Claudio, and in my small way I too, tried to bring forward a voice of common sense (Claudio on the topic of lockdowns , me on that of home therapies and side effects). Formigli & friends have tried to stifle our and other voices with a media campaign of squadrism that is not without precedent (if you have really been here since the days of the "bailouts that won't save us", then perhaps you should remember the squadrism of which they were and are the victim the "noeuro"…).
To your heartfelt question "How can anyone believe that those who caused so much harm can still be the solution?" I have nothing else to answer except that I have never told you, nor have I ever asked you to believe, that Conte, Speranza, or Formigli could be the solution. Because they were the cause, and our opposition to them and their congeners is sufficiently documented, so much so that, with all due respect, I also got annoyed at having to take out the shorthand and videos of that period every time to clarify what I said and did, as well as having to take out the abacus to explain that in a democracy you don't vote in the minority.
If in 2020 there was an orthopter in the Government, it is not my fault and probably not even yours, but, conversely, if what happened happened, the fault certainly lies with those who ensured that in 2020 there was an orthopter in the Government and not an Ayuso.
Full stop.
That the philosophy of "shaking the tree to make the bad apples fall", the philosophy of bringing the individual closer " to direct contact with the harshness of living ", was and is the political philosophy of the PD, and that of this philosophy the European project was the instrument, whoever wanted it learned it here. You should know that this philosophy met with all my contempt: I would not have brought it to your attention if I had not considered it execrable and socially dangerous because it was destabilizing.
Am I telling you that in my party this awareness is unanimously shared and is always taken to its logical consequences?
No, I'm not telling you that.
But I'm telling you that if on the one hand there is a party (the one in which I am honored to serve) which has its own internal debate, and in which I also belong because its leader wanted me on board (which is not trivial), on the other hand it is absolutely clear that whoever wanted to crush you was the PD, which is also the one that could crush you because it was in government. So the first "cultural reset" that you ask others to do, I fear, must be done by you: understanding that we are not all the same. Understand that having the "Veritah" is not enough to convince others to follow you. Understanding that political direction is exercised (illegally), who has control of the media, and who has the power to jail politicians.
These are data.
“People don't want complications,” you say.
And, consistently, you are the first to simplify: you sacrificed us, #aaaaabolidiga sacrificed us, #nonvivotopiuuuuh, and so on. People are right not to want complications! The world should work like this. The complications should be managed and intermediated by intermediate bodies, including the parties. A world in which every voter (but also every elected representative) must be a virologist, epidemiologist, nuclear engineer, astrophysicist, etc. is not conceivable. And a police officer, believe it or not, must not be a constitutionalist goal, and perhaps it is even a good thing that it isn't, considering that constitutionalist goals are mostly semantic idiots incapable of distinguishing between two such concepts as distant as that of limitation and transfer! All the Army agents I know (not to mention the non-commissioned officers and officers) are culturally much more advantaged than the ordinary constitutional law median, my dear, and understand certain dynamics much better than information operators. But even if this were not the case, you understand that the world cannot work like this, that the rhetoric of disintermediation and its bastard cousin, the rhetoric of competence, have a common purpose: to sabotage representative democracy. There is nothing unhealthy about not wanting "complications". What is objectively unhealthy is having undermined the mechanism of representation and the system of intermediate bodies. Many intermediate bodies have given ample proof in recent years and decades that they are not completely reliable, having failed in their declared results, or having demonstrated that they are pursuing undeclarable objectives: trade unions, professional associations, the cooperative system, the media, NGOs… But of all the categories of intermediate bodies, one and only one has been on the gridiron for thirty years: the party system. Why? Because that is what in theory should select and express your representatives. Hitting it, defunding it, denigrating it only serves to weaken its role. And all of you, all of us, have allowed our representatives to be undermined, believing that this would make us stronger.
How could we be so stupid?
This is a matter for historians.
Our problem is getting back on top.
Deciding whether to count is up to us. And if we want to count for something we must assign responsibilities correctly and present the bill at the right time, which is always the election.
Anyone who tells you "they're all the same" wants to fuck you. I have always told you and demonstrated it (I warned you about the grillini eight years before their management of pandemic opened the eyes of many sleeping beauties…). This is not about defeatism. I understand that you are embittered, prostrate, defeated, and I suffer for it with you, as I have suffered with all those who have shared their stories with me, who have sought listening and human understanding here.
But we are not all the same.
Your class enemy, the one that has the extermination of the kulaks in its DNA, is the PD.
Point.
The climb back up starts from here. There are endless testimonies of the PD's contempt for the system of small and medium-sized enterprises, for traders, for artisans, for those they call "shopkeepers" and their allies "takers", seen as a burden, seen and described like a parasitic class.
So that's enough: it's up to us to make the clash an unequal one. If on the left they nominate any object for any position, those on the left go to vote and vote for it. Works? No! Just look at what's happening in Rome! But if, as you say, and as is actually true, the problem is cultural before political, then you must create the conditions so that whoever first posed and brought the cultural problem to your attention (i.e. me, Claudio, Antonio and a few others) can solve it.
The pandemic has shown how dangerous it is to have the wrong people in the wrong place at the wrong time. So, in your opinion, would the solution be to send only those who vote for the wrong people to vote? Do you mean this? Are you sure this is your answer? Or am I the one who misunderstood?
We're here to talk about it…
This is a machine translation of a post (in Italian) written by Alberto Bagnai and published on Goofynomics at the URL https://goofynomics.blogspot.com/2023/11/la-gente-non-vuole-complicazioni.html on Tue, 31 Oct 2023 23:28:00 +0000. Some rights reserved under CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 license.