Of Marcello Veneziani

Source: Marcello Veneziani
Salesmen vs populists
They want us to believe that the issue of the day is fascists versus anti-fascists, or in the alternative, the re-emergence of opposing extremisms. And instead the derby being played in Italy is different: it's touts against populists.
The four main forces that divide the political and electoral field are in fact two asymmetrical pairs.
On one side there are the populists, the grillini and Salvini. And there are two formidable salesmen against them, Berlusconi and Renzi. Then there are their soft stunt doubles like Gentiloni, Di Maio, To Tajani (Salvini is not equipped with prosthetics).
If populists fan on people's discomfort and on anti-political or anti-immigrant protests, the salesmen carry out their propaganda door to door, they aim to offer admirable personal rather than social advantages. Money here, pensions there, TV license fees pardoned, prodigious relief, miraculous rebates, dentures, food for dogs and cats, horses and canaries are neglected.
This is the disheartening spectacle before us.
For salesmen, the number one danger is populists, but then you hear what they shoot and you realize that the worst side of populism compares them to their own enemies. The theory of extremes that meet or of opposing extremisms could be applied without a shot being fired to the electoral derby between salesmen and populists.
Renzi has been grilling for a while now, Berlusconi, already pop, curiously he is against the populists but then allies himself with Salvini and Meloni, who is half populist and not for reasons of height.
Rossi vs Neri
What can we say about the resurfaced episodes of red and black extremism? That violence must be harshly condemned without any ifs or buts, wherever it comes from. Agree.
But we still need to understand and distinguish some things.
At first. The crimes of the fascists are above all symbolic, and sometimes they are not even considered as such, like the Roman greetings in commemorations, and the forbidden reference to fascism. The crimes of the reds – antagonists, social centers, anarcho-insurrectionists, neo- communists – they are above all physicists, real, about people and things.
When reds show, blacks do not take to the streets to prevent it, nor do they ask to ban their demonstrations.
Instead when blacks demonstrate, the reds ask to prevent it and try to do it themselves, by force. Consequentially, the reds clash with the police and attack them; blacks much less.
Then, specifically: the two black movements most accused by the media and the streets, namely CasaPound and Forza nuova, they stood for election, they aspire to hold rallies and campaign and a wise democracy should encourage radical groups seeking to be included in parliamentary democracy.
On the other hand, the red social centers do not stand for elections, they don't seek consensus, they don't want to enter parliament, but they want to remain wild, extra-parliamentary.
And then. The latest sensational episodes of violence show that the acts committed by blacks are above all the work of deranged individuals, instead the actions carried out by the reds are always collective, by organized groups.
In the end, the violence of the fascists is shouted on the front page, persecuted and deprecated by the institutions, with great emphasis. And even if carried out by individuals, it is traced back to moral and political instigators, traced back to centre-right political forces, labeled as fascist, racist.
Instead, the violence of the Reds is less trumpeted in the media, screened behind sociological analyses, diverted into marginal contexts, never brought to account, subversive plans, moral and political principals present in the system, never defined as communist and anti-fascist even when she declares herself as such, presented with anodyne titles that already prefigure the "revenge" of the fascists; never labeled, with the excuse that violence has no color - as la Repubblica wrote which until the day before gave it a black-fascist color but when violence is red "it has no colour".
Radical color blindness.
If Saviano and Manconi's idiotic theorem on the moral instigator of the Macerata shooting were always applied, then we should say that the moral instigators of the bloody ambush in Palermo were Boldrini, the Empire, the left, the Republic, Saviano and Manconi themselves…
At the origins there is a cultural and political indulgence towards violence in the name of anti-fascism compared to violence in the name of fascism.
And the ancient and Manichean distinction between the two forms of violence theorized by Gramsci in Parliament in controversy with Mussolini remains: we condemn fascist violence because it is regressive but we defend communist violence because it is progressive. That is, ours is for the good of humanity, in the sense of history, not yours.

Who decides it? The communists themselves, who are players, referees and judges. One hundred years later we are still there.