by Marcello Veneziani

The allegorical floats of eurocracy parade united against the national-sovereign danger and its true and presumed mythological references. Napolitano, Study Program, Monti, Moscovici, the Newspaper Directors Collective in unison with the local Euro-Constitutional Arch, they mobilized against the Imminent Danger, sovereignism at home and sovereignism abroad. The alarm is not justified by the threat of a coup or an armed revolution - even if the sovereignists are decorated with old Nazi-fascist friezes - but arises from the terror that the European people, in freedom, peaceful and democratic elections, decide on a turning point.
I don't know if the sovereignists will really have the numbers to overturn the power structures of Europe; I don't know if they will be able to find a broad point of convergence, despite their national differences and whether they will find allies along the way or in parliament. And I still don't know if the sovereignists will be able to change - and for the better - this asphyxiated and torn Europe that we find ourselves in.. I don't even know if they will have strategies and not just slogans, whether they will have statesmen or only tribunes of the discontented plebs; in short, whether they will be up to the challenge. I do not know, and maybe we should test them on the road before rejecting them in the living room.

But what can be said with certainty is that thanks to that breath of sovereignism, of national and popular identities that blows around the world, in Europe and here, democracy is back in motion, let's finally go and vote with the choice between two models, two visions, two different paths. Think about what had happened in the last twenty-plus years. Communism fell, the current techno-financial structure has become dominant, the politically correct ideological model has become hegemonic, we had no choice but within the same framework. It was the New World Order that was taking hold, it merged with global capitalism and allowed no escape. They called it by an acronym T.I.N.A. ossia there is not alternative, there is no alternative. In the background, the danger of Islamic terrorism, the threat of rogue states, the expansive unknown of Chinese trade, cracked this uniform horizon. But in our Euro-Western world everything was within that system, you could choose between liberal or radical, between popular or social democratic, but in full compliance with that Structure and that Code.
Instead, the field has opened up a few years ago, a decisive turning point is underway. New leaderships emerge in the world and go in the opposite direction to the Preestablished Canon, voters surprisingly choose outsiders, consolidated structures and undisputed catechisms are brought back into play. Finally we have the possibility to choose between two paths, two priorities, two paradigms and not just within a single set of prescriptions. Freedom grows with its spaces, improves the tenor of democracy, inclusions and options expand. The risks are also growing? Maybe, but they are the risks of an open democracy. It is the first time this has happened in a United Europe, the first time after Maastricht, indeed since the birth of the European Parliament. Two opposing ideas of Europe face each other and not in the square or in the trenches, but at the polls and in the debates.
So why should we shout about the sovereignist danger? Even those who are not supporters, follower or sympathizer of sovereignism should consider this world innovation as a positive factor. The comparison forces us to rethink, to question themselves again, to improve. And it gives the sovereign people the opportunity to make important choices, not routine; fundamental choices and not just lateral or marginal ones. Since when has there been the possibility of adopting the path of national and popular sovereignty, the scene came alive, democracy is more alive, the debate is more fervent. On the borders, on identities, on civil and economic protection networks, on families and societies, Two ideas are compared on migratory flows and not only one canon applies. And not only that: opening up the real possibility of a change towards Europe, to use a Renzian slogan, the potential for intolerance and dissent that smolders in the deep bowels of society can finally be channeled into a constructive outlet, democratic and civil. That is, it may not stop at the seething stage of resentment and invective, until subversion, because he can try his hand at electoral competition with a concrete possibility of establishing himself.
This is why thanks to the presence of a sovereignist alternative, which is in government in half the world, our democracy today, the European political system, it can become more participatory and more inclusive. The boundaries of the political struggle are widening, excluded forces come into play, circulation of the ruling classes is created, challenges are opening up that can free us from that perception of automatism and oligarchic domination that we had until now.
I return to the allegorical floats in defense of the status quo, or to the enemies of the sovereignist front (what to call it, underbelly front?): because we should consider it a misfortune to have two options instead of a single and obligatory path? And I say this even if on balance I considered the current arrangements preferable to the possible ones. We were heading and spiraling down a slope of depression and decadence; this shock, however you evaluate it and whatever effect it has, revitalizes a dull vote of an Italy and a Europe in decline. Call it freedom, call it competition, call it adrenaline, but politics only makes sense if it involves the choice between two truly divergent fields. Come on people, run to the polls.
MV, panorama n. 20 2019