In politics is it more important to define the objectives to be achieved and then look for alliances to achieve them or the other way around? Content first or deployment first? And therefore: forward alone or together with a coalition? Reduced to the bone, this seems to be the crossroads facing the Democratic Party after the defeat in Sunday's ballots for the election of the mayor in many important Italian municipalities. But it's a red herring. No serious confrontation on the future of the Democratic Party and the center-left can be so clumsy as to start from the rear, as if deciding whether to take the lead alone or in company in the next political elections was more important than establishing where you want to go and to do what.
Before choosing Matteo Renzi's hands-free policy or that of preventive alliances (that is, before and not after the vote) invoked by the minority of the Democratic Party but also by the secessionists of Bersani and D'Alema and above all by Giuliano Pisapia, it would perhaps be wiser clarify what the ultimate goal of independence or alliances is, i.e. what idea one has of the future of Italy and Europe and what tools (starting from the electoral law) can make it possible not in an ideal political scenario but in the current Parliament , which is the only one who can approve or reject new electoral laws. Unless the current discussion is not based on stacked cards and hides many other second thoughts such as that of defenestrating Renzi regardless of his success in the primaries of the Democratic Party or that, on the contrary, of booking Renzi's return to Palazzo Chigi, at the cost of that what cost.
Therefore: for what idea of Italy does Renzi nominate the Democratic Party to lead the country, knowing right now that he will not reach 51% on his own and that before or after the vote he will have to seek alliances and make reasonable compromises - which are not a crime but the halls of politics – and what projects of Italy do the Pisapias or the Bersanis or the Orlandos have instead?
Someone could easily object that it is discriminating to demand clarity on the political project for which candidates are candidates for leadership of the country only from the Democratic Party and the centre-left and not also from the 5 Star Movement or the centre-right, but if the focus is on the Democratic Party and the quarreling neighbors of home there is some reason. The first is that, in most cases, the voters who vote for the Five Stars cast a protest vote and are not that interested in knowing who will be the grillini if they go to the government. The second reason is that asking for clarity from the center-right would be a Sisyphean effort, both because Forza Italia and the Lega remain divided on strategic issues that only electoral opportunism could hide, and because the center-right prefers not to reveal itself too much and play the back-and-forth.
Today, therefore, the crucial point of the future of the political system and of Italy, while respecting the minor formations that populate the centre, lies with the Democratic Party and the centre-left, which must decide to implement projects (not a program which can only be flexible, as Emmanuel Macron well explained in his essay "Revolution"), whose watershed is already very clear and goes beyond the laudable, even if sometimes botched, Renzian reforms or their rejection advocated by the Berssanians, which also they voted in Parliament. A profound transformation of Italy or the preservation of the status quo? More growth but with more competitiveness, more productivity, more meritocracy, more protection and more social justice but without welfare or the defense of positional rents, monopolies and public and private privileges which condemn the Italian economy to stagnation and the new generations to a future worse than the present? This is the point and "The inclined field", the latest book by Romano Prodi, can offer interesting ideas in this regard.
On the great options of the future there is no room for semantic cunning: here or there. Only then does it make sense to ask how to reach or at least get close to a new project for Italy and wonder if today a system of alliances can really help win elections but above all govern without repeating the scandalous harakiri that led to Ulivo's own goals in the past.
The discussion is open but it cannot avoid the second issue on the table: to implement a project of great transformation which is the most suitable electoral law but above all which is possible in this Parliament? If everyone prefers proportionality to cultivate their own backyard, it will be better not to get too many illusions of change. If instead you prefer the majority system, someone will have to convince Berlusconi and Beppe Grillo. Good luck.
