''A government of truce is what is needed to certify their failure (of the League and of the M5S, ed) and to be able to start convincing citizens that the votes given to extremist groups are not only useless, but above all harmful to democracy because they are based on promises that are impossible to keep. Certainly the truce should serve the other political forces, and in particular the PD, to clarify what it wants to be in perspective and what it means today to want to be "leftist". This is a piece of a recent article by Ernesto Auci on FIRSTonline.
This consideration of his - like so many others contained in the quoted text - was entirely acceptable and, for a few hours, everything led to believe that the course of the crisis was proceeding along that road. The statements of President Mattarella, at the conclusion of the consultations, were carved in bronze. The Quirinale had carried out every possible check to create a majority and a government, while reiterating the constraints to be followed: 1) no ''political'' government would have been allowed the adventure of going in search of a majority, not pre-established, in Parliament; 2) the executive presided over by Paolo Gentiloni could not have remained in office because it was voted by a Parliament other than the one elected on 4 March; 3) it would not have been correct to give the job to Matteo Salvini because in the event that he had not obtained the trust he would have had to manage the early elections anyway, without having the characteristics of a government of truce (in this passage Mattarella has surpassed himself ).
Then the turning point: Di Maio and Salvini are renewed their "amorous senses" thanks to the (announced) benevolent abstention of Forza Italia. We can see that Berlusconi has made Groucho Marx's joke his own, relaunched by Woody Allen: ''I would never join a club that had people like me among its members''. It may therefore be that when this article will be kindly hosted by FIRSTonline, it will be announced that the agreement for the government of cold, hunger and fear has been reached. I therefore take advantage of these last moments of freedom to express all my indignation towards the multitudes of parliamentarians of every color, commentators, entrepreneurs, ''beautiful souls'', who have done everything to avoid early voting, up to recommend yourself to the former Cav (who will have his advantage, but is wrong to trust the promises of the ''new barbarians'').
Sure, a miracle can still happen. In the meantime, however, I owe you an apology. The experience gained during a decidedly long life has taught me that it is right and honest to acknowledge one's mistakes and admit them. In 2015, I left the NCD (I have never regretted it) because its MPs had helped elect Sergio Mattarella to the highest office in the state. I was convinced that the new president would be an ''executor'' of the decisions of Matteo Renzi who had managed, with great skill, to bring him to the Quirinale.
Instead, in recent years, Mattarella, in all the delicate political passages, has made choices that seem to me to be correct, just and appropriate. This was the case after the crisis of 4 December, when the president wanted to ensure the continuity of the legislature by appointing Paolo Gentiloni, whose government wasted no time at all, but proceeded to mend relations with the EU and with the European and international partners and identified, in the field of social policies, solutions capable of providing answers to real problems and difficulties, without dismantling the reforms of the labor market and pensions, despite the indecorous dog unleashed by the opposition.
However, it was the management of the political framework that emerged after the vote on March 4 that highlighted Sergio Mattarella's statesmanship. The president conducted the consultations for the formation of a majority and a government flawlessly, as if he imagined that the parties, self-styled winners in the polls, would wrap themselves up. The idea of promoting the establishment of a ''neutral'' executive (actually ''technical'', even if this has become a forbidden adjective) would have removed from power forces dangerous for the stability of public finances and for traditional obligations European and international of our country. Maybe it would have only been a matter of months (which in politics, however, can mean a lot): but for all this time we would have never heard of the abolition of the Fornero law and the jobs act, the institution of the basic income and the flat tax (made by Salvini-Borghi), new laws against corruption or anything else that filled open-air landfills during the electoral campaign.
The talk shows, which have advocated the surrender of the Democratic Party to the M5S, have begun to argue that the probable increase in VAT from 2019 would be very serious damage to Italian families, in the event that it were not possible to guarantee the sterilization of the relative clauses . Far more serious and negative, on the other hand, will be the economic and social disasters of a super-populist executive, compared to which an increase in the cost of living (in an era in which everything has been done to create artificial inflation) is comparable to a common cold compared to bronchopneumonia.
But in bringing the crisis to a conclusion, Mattarella's most important contribution was another: having demonstrated that when the institutions exercise their legitimate powers, representative democracy is stronger than its enemies. For too many years, Italian politics has let itself be subjected to the media-judicial-populist pillory, outside of any rule of the rule of law; the hysteria of a cheap moralism has turned into an obsessive regime.
The Presidency of the Republic is a monocratic body; whoever performs that function, in essence, decides for himself according to the fundamental law of the Republic (and without consulting anyone through the Rousseau platform). If the Quirinale's operation had gone through, even those flaunting 11 million votes would have had to take note of it. Unfortunately, it seems that the ''sfascists'' are able to score in the Cesarini area. In the end, I'm curious to know who will be the ''third'' person who will make the great acceptance of leading such an executive ''out of cowardice''. Once upon a time these characters were referred to as ''Quislings'' (collaborators).
