THE QUESTIONS WE ALL ASK OURSELVES IN VIEW OF THE EUROPEANS

The first: where the social right ended up? There are conspicuous traces of national right-wingers, above all because the positions of the Brothers of Italy and the Salvinian League on migratory flows and the diktats of Europe are known. But there is no trace of that social right which was the peculiarity of the right and its line of distinction from liberalism and the liberal right. It must have been Berlusconi's washing machine, it will have been the unfortunate outcome of Finian and the current of the same name, but today the social right is not seen, not even under any other name.
Second question: but the right as national is anti-European, in favor of italexit or not? The right from which we started has always been national but has never been anti-European, if anything it has become so since Europe was reduced to the EU. He believed in a Europe as a nation or accepted De Gaulle's idea of ​​a Europe of Homelands, but he no longer thought in terms of introverted and closed nationalism. The strong theme for a right of the future will be to save Europe from pro-Europeans; the technicians, eurocrati, the most European. A true right must advocate for national sovereignty within European sovereignty, recall Europe as a civilization and as a response to the globalized world.
Third dilemma: where it fits into such a Europe in the European scenario, which family should you feel closest to?? The novelty of recent times is the conservative choice of Fratelli d'Italia. A choice compatible with the history and vocation of the right, even if the characteristic of the Italian national and social right has always been rather that of representing the conservative revolution and not a conservative party tout court. Knowing that the conservatives, at least as they are outlined in the Anglo-Saxon world, they are liberals and patriots, liberalists and traditionalists. But the choice works, at least to carve out a "third" space for FdI among the popular ones, in which Orban is still badly tolerated and there is also Berlusconi, beyond Merkel and centrist company, and the populist-sovereignist group in which the League will be the driving force. Proposing yourself as a link between the two areas is the right choice. Even knowing that the conservative option does not interpret the deep soul and political history of the Italian right, I would like to say: we had a strong and reliable conservative movement in Italy, with figures of reference and quality and incisive battles to preserve the identity and tradition of a civilization and respond with the active realism of conservatives to the emergencies of our time...
But here we enter another dilemma, the fourth, closely linked to the third party: the relationship between this conservative choice and the world leadership of Donald Trump. As is known, at the conservative world congress held under Trumpian aegis in the States, Meloni went there, who proudly flaunted that she was the only Italian exponent to participate. But the right can recognize itself in Trump (o in Bolsonaro, if we talk about Latin America)? We like Trump by denial: that is, because it is the bête noire of the politically correct establishment, and we appreciate some aspects of his national and protectionist policy. But it's a long way from here to making him the leader of the world right. We don't like her figure, his path, his way of behaving, its foreign policy, while recognizing the great results in the economy.
Instead, a more radical option is spreading in the world coming from the right: And the Putin option, who is the greatest statesman to arise in the Third Millennium and presents himself as the defender of a Tradition, of an identity and sovereignty. Here too, some reservations must be made about Putin's provenance, on his unscrupulous power as an autocrat, on the conspicuous traces of Soviet imperialism, on the inevitable differences between Russia and us Mediterraneans, Italians and Europeans. But it is also true that it is a Eurasian geopolitical choice, as Alexander Dugin draws it, it is certainly no more alienating than an Atlantic option. Even more so since today our geostrategic and economic interests are severely penalized by American diktats, from their sanctions on countries like Russia itself, Iran and other minors. And they are more compatible with Russian ones. And Putin is perhaps the most lucid statesman in this historical phase.
I understand how difficult it is to explain, with the denigrating and alarmist campaign that would immediately start, an opening to Putin's Russia rather than Trump's America. But it is the strongest vocation in the deep soul of the social right, traditional, national and popular or its legacy. Even on a cultural and spiritual level, the encounter with the Greek-Russian and Orthodox world is more compatible than with the Anglo-American Protestant and Quaker world. Just as it is more compatible in the name of spiritual vision, the meeting with Shiite Iran rather than with Saudi and Sunni Arabia, closer to Trump (e a Daesh, all’Isis).
In this context, Salvini pragmatically oscillates between closeness to Putin - denounced as a scandal and a betrayal by the press and the left - and alignment with Trump and Israel. Regarding Israel, a curiosity should be noted: nationalism and sovereignism are deprecated everywhere by the global establishment except in the most nationalist and sovereignist country on the face of the earth, which is precisely Israel, and even more so the Israel of Netanyau.
In the end we leave you with a Marzulle-like question: but the right exists even if it does not appear or the right only appears but no longer exists?
MV, The Bourgeois, March 2019
source – http://www.marcelloveneziani.com/articoli/dove-si-e-cacciata-la-destra/