There are those who say that the referendum on the constitutional reform of 4 December has the same political value for Italy as the 46 referendum on monarchy or republic. For those who have not directly experienced that referendum campaign, just as fiery as the current one, it will be better to leave the judgment to the historians.
Once again there were low blows and lapses in style, but it must be recognized that the referendum campaign was an occasion of high emotional intensity and great democratic participation, which had the advantage of bringing to light two different visions of the Italy: that of those who try to renew the country in practice and that of those who are afraid and always find an excuse to never change.
Two things, however, are already certain. The first is that the referendum of 4 December is really a decisive crossroads for the life of the country which, in one case or another, will leave its mark for a long time. The second is that, faced with events of this magnitude, one cannot hide one's head in the sand and a newspaper, paper or online, either has a soul or it doesn't. But if he has it, he must have the courage to reveal it.
Feigned neutrality, the hypocrisy of circle botting and the mask of impossible objectivity, which are quite different from the strict rules of reliability and professional correctness, are not in FIRSTonline's DNA. Our identity is completely different and is based on independent judgement, the unconventionality of reason and the passion for the modernization of Italy, in the daily search for excellence and quality information at the service of readers.
This is why we cannot remain indifferent in the face of the referendum and that is why pointing out at least four reasons which recommend voting YES is for us a testimony of clear civil commitment and dutiful editorial transparency.
1) YES TO A GOOD REFORM AGAINST INCONCLUSIVE PERFECTICISM
The first reason that leads to choosing the YES rests on the very contents of the constitutional reform, which are the heart of the referendum. It may also be true that the reform could have been written better, but it is on the substance and not on the style of the text that one votes and on the substance one cannot avoid a couple of crucial points, which, going straight to the bone, are these: A) it is Is the current equal bicameralism better with the useless duplication of the functions of the two Chambers or is it better to overcome it with the transformation of the Senate and the streamlining of the decision-making process of Parliament as proposed by the reform? B) on issues of national interest (such as energy, infrastructure or the rules of public employment: think of the rules against smart card cheaters) it is right that the State returns to decide or the right of veto must be left to the Regions as foreseen the current Title V that the reform wants to overcome?
Of course, in a less bizarre Parliament than the current one, we could have done better (and perhaps we will be able to do it in the future legislature), but let us get rid of the false idea once and for all that there is a perfect constitutional reform, which instead does not exist. it is and there will never be, because everyone has their own idea of perfect reform which is different from that of the others. Let us therefore beware of constitutional perfectionism, which is a close relative of the inconclusiveness which for thirty years has made us discuss profound reforms without ever implementing one before now.
2) YES TO THE MOTHER OF ALL REFORMS NOT TO STOP THE TRAIN OF CHANGE
Voting YES in the referendum does not mean only approving a constitutional reform that goes in the right direction, but approving the mother of all reforms that are still missing to modernize the country and to respond to the social malaise that arises from poor economic growth and unjust distribution of incomes and opportunities between social classes and above all between different generations. Confirming the reform with the popular vote means signaling that Italians really want change and it means strengthening the whole strategy of reforms, both institutional and economic, against the positional rents and against the privileges that plaster the country. Here is the proof: if the NO wins, which political forces could realistically re-propose institutional reforms that the people have shown they do not like? The train of change passes now or who knows in how many decades.
3) YES TO GOVERNMENT STABILITY AGAINST THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE PAST
Sunday's referendum question concerns the contents of the constitutional reform and it is on these that we vote, but we cannot be so naïve as to ignore the general political effects of the reform. A YES unquestionably gives stability to the Government (which does not exclude the change of some ministers who have proved inadequate), a NO inevitably leads to the resignation of the Prime Minister and his Government. This also happened in Great Britain after Brexit and it could not be otherwise. Not because of Matteo Renzi's bizarreness but because, faced with the rejection of his reforms by his mother, the prime minister could only draw the conclusions, because otherwise he would demonstrate that he wants to remain attached to his seat in spite of the popular pronouncement: unthinkable. But if Renzi and the Democratic Party stay out of the government, it is completely illusory to believe that a solid alternative majority could be born, because the NO front, which is united only by the obsessive desire for revenge against Renzi, is divided on everything. A small government would therefore be born as in the past or, as a last resort and at the invitation of the Head of State, a new but enormously weakened Renzi government, with lots of goodbyes to the reforms and with inevitable adverse effects on the markets. Naturally, everyone can have the ideas they believe in, but is this what Italy needs in such a difficult international economic phase?
4) YES TO ECONOMIC STABILITY AGAINST THE SIRENS OF POPULISM IN ITALY AND IN THE WORLD
If it is true that, starting from the contents of the constitutional reform, we cannot close our eyes to the general political effects of the referendum, even less can we ignore the international context in which the Italian consultation takes place. And it's not a good context. From Brexit to Trump's victory in the US up to the elections in Austria, Holland, France and Germany, the fears of globalisation, immigration and the economic crisis are filling the sails of the protest, which for convenience we will call populist and which, sometimes with accents racist and xenophobic but always anti-European and demagogic like the one that unites Salvini and Beppe Grillo in Italy, proposes simplistic and often unsustainable solutions to very complex epochal problems.
Making the YES win does not only mean demonstrating that, in moments of maximum difficulty, Italy knows how to reject the sleep of reason that swells the rising indiscriminate protest of the entire West but that our country knows how to get to the heart of social malaise by pushing the accelerator on real reforms. Reforms that often divide and which perhaps do not distribute an immediate dividend to those who make them, but which are the only way to restart economic growth, whose weakness is the main source of protest but also of the assaults of the wildest speculation that , in the event of uncertainty and political instability, they will not fail to target the stock exchange, banks, government bonds and the spread of our country.
If No won, the Apocalypse would not come, but the bill to pay would be salty, very salty. You can't pretend you don't know. But trouble can still be avoided. Just vote with your head.
