Pur avendola successivamente affogata in un panegirico berlusconiano, la castroneria di Rocco Buttiglione, relativa al parallelismo Schimtt-Berlusconi, ha fatto emergere la sottile ma netta discriminante tra il berlusconismo e il democristianesimo. Con la sua maldestra citazione il presidente dell’Udc ha inconsapevolmente messo il dito infatti su quello che è un retaggio ancora vivissimo nei vertici del suo partito e che va sotto il nome di inciucio.
Intendiamoci la grossolana lettura schimttiana da parte di un filosofo prestato alla politica un po’ ci delude. Più che filosofo politico Carl Schimtt è un giurista e il suo concetto politico amico-nemico discende da un analisi empirica che lo porta ad individuare in questa contrapposizione la sintesi della politica. Quella di Schimtt è una definizione concettuale autonoma dal campo della morale, dell’estetica o dell’economia. Non v'è bisogno, scrive infatti Schimtt*, che il nemico politico sia moralmente cattivo, o esteticamente brutto; egli non deve necessariamente presentarsi come concorrente economico e forse può anche apparire vantaggioso concludere affari con lui. Il nemico è quindi semplicemente l’altro e questo essere altro da sé, dall’amico, giustifica nella visione schmittiana il ricorso anche allo scontro violento che non è peraltro in Schimtt un esito scontato del confronto. Quanto possa essere azzardato oggi riprendere questo pensiero politico maturato nella Germania degli anni ’20 appare comunque evidente. Lo stesso Schimtt ** as out of the rest of the definition before the fact that modern warfare was now dissolved by the State, the defense of a territory, a community and had become an ideological war against a private enemy, but no more so inimicus hostis. Yet beyond
dell'inappropriatezza the quote, the speech of Mr Buttiglione is a clear symptom of pulsations consociational that ferment in his party. The contrast between the two lines that have developed within the CDL is not fact, as the president of the UDC, between hawks and doves, between those who want at all costs to attack the Union and the advocates of dialogue. The comparison is between those who want remain faithful to the popular mandate of a hard and firm opposition and who, nostalgic for the First Republic, wants to resume a dialogue subsidiary not in the national interest but in the interests of his party to power . Yet he knows that Buttiglione Italy Forza D'Alema government supported the mission in Kosovo. He knows that in the CDL Defence Committee voted for the involvement in Lebanon. He knows that his allies in other words not retreat from responsibility to support positive choices for Italy. Not only that. Buttiglione has also fully aware of what the current majority has responded spades looking for constructive dialogue proposed by the CDL. So it was for the highest state offices, so it is still with the refusal to acknowledge, even to the polls closed, the smallest on the previous government, both on the public accounts - despite the increase in tax revenues - both with the foreign policy distinctions with continuing the mission in Iraq. So here we Buttiglione dear voters of the center - of Fi Alliance, the League and as you also know the UDC - it's hard not to see the malice in his reasoning of those who would prepare the ground for future jumps. We struggle to understand why she does not see what is under everybody's eyes and that is that it is the left that since November of '93 has turned Silvio Berlusconi in a private enemy (inimicus) to destroy. If today Schimtt can maintain their own news is that the concept of recovering its political enemy as something other than itself, with which to confront and do not necessarily clash but not mess. Keep the CDL on a precise boundary, defined and marked by no means aspire to destroy the enemy but to the strengthening of our identity - and therefore of the bipolar - which will be stronger, the more we can be something different from this center.
* The political concept (1927) **
Theory of the Partisan (1963)
0 comments:
Post a Comment