Recovering From Shingles Breast

Us against the law (Umberto Eco)

is known the definition of democracy as a flawed system but which has not yet found anything better. From this it follows reasonable assumption, for most people, the mistaken belief that democracy (the best or the least worst system of government) is that for which the majority is always right. Nothing could be further from the truth. Democracy is the system which, since it is difficult to define in terms of quality who has more reason than others, it uses a low quantity, but objectively verifiable: in a democracy governs who gets more support. And if anyone believes that the majority is wrong, worse for him if he accepted the principles that democratic governments must accept a majority that is wrong.

One of the functions of the opposition is to demonstrate that the majority was wrong. And if you can not do it? Then we have, in addition to poor majority, even a bad opposition. How many times the majority can be wrong? For millennia, the majority of men believed that the sun revolved around the earth (and, considering the vast areas of low literacy in the world, and the fact that opinion polls in more advanced countries have shown that many Westerners still believe that the sun turns) here a good case in which the majority is not only wrong but you are wrong again. The majority were wrong to believe Beethoven or Picasso unlistenable unwatchable, the majority Jerusalem is wrong to prefer Barabbas to Jesus, the majority of Americans are wrong to believe that two eggs and bacon every morning and a nice steak meal is no guarantee of good health, the majority was wrong to prefer bears to Terence and (perhaps ) is still wrong to prefer "The pupa and the geek" to Sophocles. For centuries the majority of people felt that there were witches and that it was right to burn it, in the seventeenth century the majority of the Milanese believed that the plague was caused by the spreaders, the vast majority of Westerners, including Voltaire, considered legitimate and natural slavery, the majority of Europeans believed that it was noble and sacred colonize Africa. In politics

Hitler came to power by a coup but was elected by the majority, Mussolini established the dictatorship after the assassination of Matteotti but first enjoyed a parliamentary majority, even if that room despised "dull and gray." It would be unfair play of paradoxes and therefore say that the majority is the one that's always wrong, but certainly not always right. In the appeal to the political will of the people only have legal force ("I have a right to govern because I received more votes") but does not allow quantitative data be drawn from this theoretical and ethical consequences ("I have the majority of the votes and therefore are better ").

In some areas of Sicily and Campania the Mafia and the Camorra have a majority of the vote but it would be difficult to conclude that they are therefore represented the best of those noble people. Recently I read a journalist government (but was not the only use for that matter) that the case nell'ironizzare Santoro (now happily bipartisan target), said that he had the curious belief that the majority of Italians were bent willingly to be sodomized by Berlusconi. Now I do not think that Berlusconi has never sodomized anyone, but it is certain that a substantial amount of Italian allows him without realizing that their favorite is slowly eroding their freedoms. Erode the freedom of a country usually means putting act in a violent coup and establish a dictatorship. If this happens, voters will notice it and, although they are not under tion coup that has changed with him. The coup was replaced by the rustle of State. The idea of \u200b\u200ba transformation of structures of government through violent action Berlusconi's genius was and is to be implemented very slowly, little step by little step, in an extremely lubricated.

Think of unnecessary violence with which fascism, to silence the voice of Matteotti uncomfortable, he had to kill him. Things to medieval times. It would not be enough to pay him a good exit megagalattico (and incidentally, not with government money but with those of citizens paying the fee)? Mussolini was really a man rozzissimo. When a transformation of the institutions of the country takes place step by step, ie for small doses, it is difficult to say that each, taken by itself could create a dictatorship - and in fact he does is when some cassandra sbertucciata. The fact is that for a new populism media dictatorship is the same antiquated system that serves no purpose. You can change the structures of the state at will and according to their own interest without initiating any dictatorship.

We can say that the immunity law prefigures a tyranny? Nonsense. And moderation interceptions really careful to freedom of information? But come on, if someone has murder everyone will know the case to trial, and avoid speaking in advance of the alleged crimes only respects the privacy of where ever each of us. Would you like to go in the newspapers that your conversation with her lover, so it came to know your lady? No, of course. And if the price is that the conversation is not intercepted or corrupted by a powerful mafia in the permanent service of a real, well, our privacy will be a good price. Do you think fascism reduce funding for public schools? But we have to save all, and one needs to set an example by starting with the collective costs. And if this country over to private schools? It will not be the end of the world, there are very good. You Stalinism unwatchable make the news public networks? No, if ever the old dictatorships did everything to make the radio very affectionate. But if this goes in favor of private networks? Well, it appears that Stalin had never favored the private television?

Here, the function of creeping coups is that the constitutional changes are hardly perceived, or are perceived as irrelevant. And where the amount of product will not the second but the third Republic, it will be too late. Not because you could not go back, but because the majority will have absorbed the changes as natural and you will, so to speak, mitridatizzata. A new Malaparte could write a treatise on superb this new technique rustle of State. Even in the face of it because each and every protest and complaint challenging loses value seems that those who complain about giving the body the shadows.

Pessimism global, then? No, trust in benign weather and its continued erosion. A transformation of the institutions that small steps may not have time to take place at all, may be halfway smandrappamenti, fatigue, power failures, mishaps. It is a bit like the joke about the difference between hell and hell German Italian. In both the morning dip in the hot gas, electric chair at noon, rendering the evening. Except that one day in hell Italian petrol does not arrive, another power plant is on strike, and another patient was given the Executioner ... Cut the head of the king or occupy the Winter Palace is something that is done in five minutes. Poison someone with small doses of arsenic in the soup takes a long time, and in the meantime who knows who will live. For now, resist, resist, resist. (L'Espresso, 27 May 2010)