In 2008, at the beginning of the crisis and in the following years, most economists and commentators stated that "it is not possible to predict when and how it will be possible to get out of it, but one thing is certain: the economic model will have to be profoundly different from that of the recent past which caused the crisis itself".
Giavazzi, more than Monti, does not seem to believe this statement and he proves that he never believed in it, along with a few other 'hard-core liberals'. His clarity and sincerity should be appreciated, since he never mince words, but if it is true that he is a "born polemicist" who "with his adrenaline has revitalized Italian economic journalism" (as De Vico affirms in the Corriere della Sera of the 18 March), it is equally true that whatever the topic is, the conclusion is easily predictable and is always the same. All problems will be solved with liberalisation, privatization and with more markets, but it never enters into the substance of what kind of market you are talking about.
That of the "Sacred texts" based on rational choices when for some years the markets have instead been extremely volatile and highly sensitive to emotion and the herd effect? What developed in the Western world together with liberal-type democracies? What is fast destroying the middle class in the United States, in Europe and the Western World and does it not allow, or allow the middle class to grow very slowly in emerging countries? What, by acting in synergy with corrupt regimes, has not allowed many countries to take the path of economic growth and social development? The one that strengthened China's political power and that in the future is destined to strengthen its military power? That of the Arab countries in which the economy Is it the hand of sovereigns and their more or less close relatives?
For his part Monti, which according to Vico represents “the Bocconi of government dueling with the Bocconi of struggle”, being engaged in the operations evocatively defined as "Save Italy", “Grow Italy”, “Simplify Italy”, “Strengthen Europe”, he certainly does not have the time to try his hand at the new economic model which should arise as a result of the Shumpeterian creative destruction, caused by the crisis.
However, this does not mean that other scholars should not think about it, elaborating, if they are capable, innovative proposals.
In conclusion, one could say that not only "caution" on the part of those who govern or frontal attacks on the part of those who would like the government to have more courage in changing everything, or a lot, and must immediately experience the confrontation between economists, between scholars of managerial and business disciplines, between sociologists of economics and organizations, between political scientists and between commentators of all backgrounds. This comparison should also live on the ability of those who study and propose solutions to "step into the shoes" of tens of millions, hundreds of millions, sometimes billions of people who suffer, hope or lose hope in the future, are motivated or demotivated by choices made by politics (nationally and internationally), which seem to look only to short-term consensus, by the choices of entrepreneurs and managers sitting in control rooms ordering the closure and opening of factories, the exit or entry from certain markets, dismissals or hirings, on the basis of their own particular interests, from unions that are sometimes unable to rethink their role, from researchers more busy refining their models than understanding reality .
If it is true that politics, especially in Italy, now seems to be at a stellar distance from real society, it is equally true that many of the actors mentioned above also seem to be increasingly distant from it. Just surf on social networks to realize it. More than this or that derby, Italians should be interested in the result of the championship, in which the competition of ideas, the recognition of professionalism and merit, the coherence of behaviour, the collaboration which gives strength to the competition, tolerance towards the ideals of all, allow the country, and its various components, to remain in the Champions League of economic development and human, social, political progress and fundamental values for the person and society.
