For the sake of summary, I will focus on some of the nodes placed in the report of the Secretary. The first node
regard to the adequacy of our initiative. It 'true that the precondition for the revival of our role is the ability to enable and support of social conflict, and it is equally true that at this level have many limitations, especially in the ability to extend our assistance. Some signs of recovery are there, but not enough. We must therefore equip themselves to strengthen our social initiative. I wonder, however, whether this commitment will automatically solve the problem of consensus-building, that is, our standing in a vast area of \u200b\u200bpublic opinion on the left.
I have my doubts in this regard. The limit, in fact, that I feel is not only to insufficient social initiative, but also the capacity to give breath to the same general political, connecting it with the battle against the government, reducing it to a proposal for ending the crisis that is included in mass and to enable us to compete with other political forces. This connection between the fight social and political struggle must be carried out. Some possibilities are there. I want to give just one example. In a few months we will have a fundamental event: the regional elections. I think before we speak of formulas of the alliances we need to identify some key content, taking them as parameters of our choices. In this respect, I think we should put in the programs a key demand: that the regions should adopt real "jobs and plans to defend against the effects of the crisis." I think of a coherent set of proposals that spazino the Protection of jobs, protection of income, measures of ecological reconversion of the economy. This proposal defines a set of goals Qualifying socially, but also allows you to connect the local with regional disputes. If, then, such a proposal were to be practiced in ways that would allow widespread participation - for example by popular petitions - might provide an opportunity for a broad mobilization of the party and for its visibility.
A second node that would like to address is the policy proposal that is submitted by the Secretary, namely: the 'democratic alliance' for a limited time a government institution that proposes to launch a new proportional electoral law as well as to country's democratic consolidation. This is a proposal that one merit: it tries to answer a question that exists at ground level and that is how to build the conditions to beat Berlusconi. At the same time, it is proposed to overcome the bipolar. The proposal, however, has its limitations: it is still vague and should be punctuated with its many implications, but above all it is projected on a future scenario in the aftermath of the fall of Berlusconi. I wonder: this fall is imminent? And if - as I think - it's not, what remains of the proposal? It seems to me that there is only one chance to be able to advance with a minimum of coherence: From now on the "issue of democracy" (from the fight against security package) must enter the agenda of the Battle of opposition, growing a body of opinion that can gather a cross-party consensus. In this lies the question of electoral law. The battle for the proportion to be built immediately, if you want to speculate on a future electoral alliance, and with tools that allow for extensive mobilization and that are shared by a broad range of forces. In this respect, I think we should take the suggestion of a law of popular initiative for reintroduction of a proportional electoral system from the proposal that a working group which includes, apart from us, other political forces and a significant number of experts is working. The third node regard to the adequacy of our initiative. It 'true that the precondition for the revival of our role is the ability to enable and support of social conflict, and it is equally true that at this level have many limitations, especially in the ability to extend our assistance. Some signs of recovery are there, but not enough. We must therefore equip themselves to strengthen our social initiative. I wonder, however, whether this commitment will automatically solve the problem of consensus-building, that is, our standing in a vast area of \u200b\u200bpublic opinion on the left.
I have my doubts in this regard. The limit, in fact, that I feel is not only to insufficient social initiative, but also the capacity to give breath to the same general political, connecting it with the battle against the government, reducing it to a proposal for ending the crisis that is included in mass and to enable us to compete with other political forces. This connection between the fight social and political struggle must be carried out. Some possibilities are there. I want to give just one example. In a few months we will have a fundamental event: the regional elections. I think before we speak of formulas of the alliances we need to identify some key content, taking them as parameters of our choices. In this respect, I think we should put in the programs a key demand: that the regions should adopt real "jobs and plans to defend against the effects of the crisis." I think of a coherent set of proposals that spazino the Protection of jobs, protection of income, measures of ecological reconversion of the economy. This proposal defines a set of goals Qualifying socially, but also allows you to connect the local with regional disputes. If, then, such a proposal were to be practiced in ways that would allow widespread participation - for example by popular petitions - might provide an opportunity for a broad mobilization of the party and for its visibility.
I would like to address is the federation. That there is a need for the construction of an alternative pole of the left there is no doubt, but how to build and open question. A first risk is the possibility, very concrete, that the federation is seen as a simple container and as such is not very attractive. Nor do I believe that all point the need for unity on the left and the illusion that because of what the Fed can achieve consensus is sufficient. After the experience of the Rainbow, there is no unity when it does not take that communicates values, if not take a profile convincing. The strength of a left alternative can only be to embody a demand for change interpreter and to be consistent, primarily acting in support of social conflict. If there is the ability to take that point of view, the results will come. The worrying factor is that the opposite is happening in the territories of what would be necessary. The federation is presented as an Politic, no characterization significant than that of the intrinsic value of the combination. And 'I am convinced that if the Fed does not show right away its social utility - for example taking as the central crisis intervention - the risk of bankruptcy are very real. 
The main problem is the proposal of the federation, however, the system is compatible with the development of our party. That there is this compatibility is not certain. Depends on the rules that the federation will be given and so far we have not had an opportunity to deepen. In the case of a transfer of sovereignty would be too large for the party to lose its raison d'être, but also depends on how strong a commitment to revitalizing the party. I refer not only to research on the subject of communism, but also an extraordinary intervention on the membership, to support for the social circles, the training of executives and so on. This commitment - we have to recognize - and now there is the risk that the party tent to wear is real. Some might think that, given the weakness suffered by the party, there is but one chance: to stake everything on the federation. A calculation would be very shortsighted. A federation without a strong Communist Party in it is not destined to last, not to mention the fact that the weakening of the party eventually moved to the federation by making it a small thing. In all honesty, I must say that at this point in the debate revealed many ambiguities and silences.
And I'm the last node, the management unit. As I had several opportunities to reiterate, I believe deeply in the value of pluralism and therefore the involvement in gestione del partito di tutte le mozioni. Per questo sono favorevole alla proposta di allargamento della segreteria ai compagni della mozione 2, ma proprio in nome dello stesso principio di pluralismo è necessario che tale allargamento venga rappresentato per quello che è. Per farla breve, si tratta di dar vita ad una segreteria collegiale in cui vi è condivisione su alcune scelte, ma in cui permango differenze sul piano strategico. Da questo punto di vista, alcuni interventi dei compagni della mozione 2 sono stati, a tale riguardo, assai espliciti, marcando differenze di non poco conto sul giudizio sulla linea di Chianciano e sulla stessa idea di unità a sinistra. Allora, laicamente riconosciamo che tutti hanno il diritto a concorrere alla gestione del party, an exchange of ideas is always better than one part of management as homogeneous, but we do not deny the differences, recognizing them for what they are, especially if they are relevant. The main problem is the proposal of the federation, however, the system is compatible with the development of our party. That there is this compatibility is not certain. Depends on the rules that the federation will be given and so far we have not had an opportunity to deepen. In the case of a transfer of sovereignty would be too large for the party to lose its raison d'être, but also depends on how strong a commitment to revitalizing the party. I refer not only to research on the subject of communism, but also an extraordinary intervention on the membership, to support for the social circles, the training of executives and so on. This commitment - we have to recognize - and now there is the risk that the party tent to wear is real. Some might think that, given the weakness suffered by the party, there is but one chance: to stake everything on the federation. A calculation would be very shortsighted. A federation without a strong Communist Party in it is not destined to last, not to mention the fact that the weakening of the party eventually moved to the federation by making it a small thing. In all honesty, I must say that at this point in the debate revealed many ambiguities and silences. 
0 comments:
Post a Comment