ABSTRACT: After the victory on the law on divorce, a numerical enlargement of the Radical Party became urgent in order to face the new tasks and the new deadlines which precisely that victory called for.

This is the context in which we should read this article by Pannella, who already belongs to the climate of the congress of Rome of November 1971, which decided the party's political and organizational commitment. The article - whose title contains a polemic note vis-à-vis the rising populism of the protest of 1968 - summarizes the sense and the perspective of the Radical battles past and future.

(Radical News - July 1971 from "Marco Pannella - Works and speeches - 1959-1980", Gammalibri, January 1982).

In a climate of unrest, moral decay, alarm, scepticism, anger or resignation, while others in the Left choose fields and methods of battle that presume and cause more victims (or martyrs or heroes, capable, perhaps, of endowing tragedies of greater and more classical dignity to us compared to the mortifying squalor of this parochial pageant we have witnessed) against the intellectual and political corruption of a State which upholds inequality, privileges, disorder, we, with patience and humbleness, shall continue to promote our proposal and our battles as Radical Party. We are comforted by a certain number of things in this task.

First of all, we think we can say that quite a few people, in Italy, harbour some hope, some trust, some expectations vis-à-vis the Radical Party, and often even feel affection for us. We are considered "different" compared to the others; if ever, we are accused of behaving as a "minor" or marginal movement, which is incorrect. We simply act as a responsible and conscious minority. But often these people do not know how to help us, how to be one of us, they lack self-confidence.

Whenever we succeed in overcoming the conspiracy of silence which has been created to opposed any peaceful and democratic minority, whenever the gigantic system of the control and of the manipulation of information is forced to leave us some margins of space, we are submerged with consents and encouragements. It is as if many women, many men, knowing us, recognize us and identify themselves in what we are doing, in what we are trying to achieve. A greater awareness of the fundamental characteristic of these "political" twenty years is gradually emerging: that is, the fundamental continuity of functions and values that characterizes the fascist regime and the Christian Democrat regime. The Christian Democrat Party, the clerical world, are nothing but the "great Right" of a country which could not repropose the rigid totalitarian structures of the National Fascist Party in the stage of its industrial take-off and of its Europeanization. The Christian Democrat interclassism and corporativism, the populism and t

he gigantic mystifying and capitalist machine of the Church, the campaigns with Bonomi; the cities with the real estate firms, the schools, the kindergartens, the hospitals with the charitable institutions, the religious institutions, the welfare agencies, the spare time structures with the ecclesiastic seizure of the assets of the former GIL (1), of the public areas in the cities and in the villages and the monopoly of the parishes; the information with the RAI-TV of Bernabei; the public industry and finance of Cefis (2), of Girotti, of Petrilli; the government with the Christian Democrat apparatus, with the police and judicial apparatus, have provided historical structures of dominion, of repression and exploitation which have made the republican Constitution, democratic and lay, no longer the fundamental law that justifies the respect of the social pact, but the deception of a "promised constitution", alibi and mirage, donation and liberality controlled by a power group which has set itself above any subs

tantial legality.

The political thesis which has characterized and isolated the Radical Party for ten years is by now a common feeling of increasingly extended masses of citizens.

A country can even endure the rule of a conservative, backward, class-discriminating and clerical force such as the Christian Democrat Party, it can control it, hinder it, overthrow it - provided the lay, democratic and socialist progressivist forces unite into an alternative and an opposition; provided they develop alternative programs, they choose with clarity and determination ideals and interests, objectives and methods that are reformative and unitary.

On the other hand, if everyone, from the communists to the liberals, each on their own, aim at a cooperation with the Christian Democrat Party, at carrying out reforms with the Christian Democrat Party, at achieving the laicization and democratization with the Christian Democrat Party, they themselves make it into a regime party, and discredit themselves as subsidiary and subordinated forces. This is precisely what is happening now.

The current leading classes of the parties of the traditional Left have lost any force of opposition, and despite all their miserable "realism" they cannot even hope to be a governmental force. Thus, they end up by enabling those who have historically expressed themselves in the Christian Democratic and clerical regime to attempt an occupation of the field of the "opposition" as well, which is almost inhabited, with the askaris of Almirante. In order to avoid anticlerical battles they have stopped being lay. In order to avoid anti-militarist battles, they have stopped operating for peace. In order to avoid liberal battles, they have stopped being socialists. In order to avoid libertarian battles, they have nationalized and nationalize even the democratic and workers' parties.

Alternative to the Christian Democrat Party, renewal and unity of the Left by means of a radical development and civil rights policy, uncompromising battle between the "great Right" and the "great Left": this is the only correct and feasible parliamentary, democratic battle. This is the thesis of the Radical Party. Who can state today, in 1971, that we are isolated and far removed from the feelings of the masses, and deny that those are are really isolated are Berlinguer (3), De Martino (4), Malagodi (5) and La Malfa (6)? The "radicalizations" we are so often accused of implicitly pursuing in our program originate precisely when democratic physiology is suffocated, when opportunist and governmental opportunism leaves no hopes for an alternative and contains no trace of opposition. With the Christian Democrat Party alone in power, Almirante (7) would appear as nothing but a second-rater. With the Christian Democrat Party alone in power, the desperate and violent extremists who shatter our political life more

and more from the base could change into a hope and a commitment for a unitarian alternative. If we look back for a moment, and recall the day in which we were a dozen of people, the eldest of us barely over thirty, we inherited the remnants of the Radical Party, and we were alone, absolutely alone, in talking about civil rights, divorce, conscientious objection, liberation and libertarian policy, of direct actions from the base, of a country far better than its political leading class, if we think that the words anticlericalism, antimilitarism, libertarianism themselves had disappeared from the political dictionary decades before; now if we look at the reality of the leagues, of the League for Divorce, with its magnificent battle, with its achievements; the League for the Abrogation of the Concordat, with the prestigious, unprecedented front which it foreshadows and partly expresses; of the Movement for Womens' Liberation, so serious and humble and yet so explosive and necessary; if, after the testimony and

the battle of rare effectiveness and cohesion which we conducted with the solitary and courageous Loris Fortuna (8), now we see the battle of Gianmario Albani grow stronger and stronger every day; if we meet again with old companions like Scalfari and can greet the courageous gesture of a man and of a communist such as Fausto Gullo; if in Rome, after the battle for divorce, a daily newspaper such as "Il Messaggero" resumes ancient bourgeois battles which are a fearful contradiction for the squalid clerical-moderate heirs that rule the city - together with the State (and the passionate defence of the candidacy of Basso to the Constitutional Court is a symptom which should not be underestimated); if we think of all this, then we ought to conclude that perhaps this venture of ours, which some defined reckless, was worth something after all. There is no political formation of our kind, in Italy, to have lived for more than a few seasons without being overwhelmed, suffocated and absorbed. This is what reassures

us, ultimately. But the party cannot continue protracting this example of resistance and force for many years or even months, without new contributions and adhesions.

We are saying it quote frankly. We are ordinary people, who deal with politics because it is the only way in which we know that we can try to defend and consolidate our hopes and our deepest wishes, and spare other sufferances and sordid and mortifying defeats. We have no particular "message" to transmit; no one has charged us with a significant testimony; we don't believe "power" is important, and therefore we are not interested in it; we want to live in a freer and happier way than we would with inertia and irresponsibility, we want to live as responsible and tolerant people. We hate "sacrifices", ours as much as other people's. We owe others - and they owe us - nothing but life and serenity; we dislike all that is obtained with blood or even with "the sweat of one's brow", by hurting oneself or hurting others. If we remain alone, if those who know us, read us, approve of us, hope with us, as we hope with them, will not become radicals of the Radical Party they too, then the Radical Party itself can got to

hell. We belong to no church, no sect, no flag. We are neither "bosses" nor "leaders", and we don't fell like "serving" anyone except the "people". We are servants to no one.

Here, everyone can and should participate, and "join" the party. We are not afraid of "double memberships", which our statute authorizes. At least in politics, at least in the Radical Party, we are neither monogamous nor do we have "indissoluble" relations. We have no dogmas, no ideologies, nor juridical disciplines. In our party there are no disciplinary councils, nor is the possibility of expelling people included in our statute. In fact, thousands of citizens, of socialists, of communists, of pro-divorce activists, have belonged to the Radical Party.

But now this commitment should become more responsible and explicit. Otherwise, we can't go on ideally, politically and economically. Our responsibilities become greater and greater every day. With the lay Movement, we must guarantee the propulsion and the coordination of a historical battle, such as the abrogation of the Concordat for 1974, by means of a popular referendum; the alternative, the renewal, the unity of the Left and the expulsion of the Christian Democrat Party from the government, the support to those forces which, in the milieu of the believers and in the communist milieu and in the Socialist Party more than anywhere else, are starting to act in a libertarian, lay, progressivist sense, coherently with us.

Is the Radical Party useful, is it irreplaceable for this purpose? Each reader of this appeal should know that, in one way or the other, he will give us his answer (which we will take heed of) either with silence or with other demonstrations of his opinion.

In the meanwhile, we will assume that our battle continues. From from here to autumn, we must take the decision of closing the party or relaunching it. This is the problem. Lastly, we ask the comrades radicals, especially those who have joined us and supported us with their commitment and force in Reggio Emilia, in Cuneo, in Trieste, in Genua, to mobilize immediately to ensure the success of the Congress of Rome.

Translator's notes

(1) GIL: Fascist youth organization created in 1937.

(2) Eugenio Cefis: President of the ENI (National Hydrocarbon Corporation) from 1967 to 1971 and of the Montedison (major chemical industry) from 1971 to 1977.

(3) Enrico Berlinguer (1922-1984): Italian politician. Secretary of the Communist youth federation (1949-56), deputy since 1968, Secretary-General of the Communist Party from 1972 to 1984.

(4) Francesco De Martino (1907): Italian politician. Secretary of the Socialist Party from 1964-66 and from '72-76 (joint secretary of the unified Socialist Party, '66-70); Vice Prime Minister ('68-72).

(5) Giovanni Malagodi (1904-1991): Italian politician. National secretary of the Liberal Party (1954-72).

(6) Ugo La Malfa (1903-1979): Italian politician. Among the founders of the Partito d'Azione (1942), he then joined the Republican Party (1948), which he was Secretary ('65-75) and President of. Minister of Transport ('45), of Foreign Trade ('46; '51-53), of Budget ('62-63), of Treasury ('73-74), Vice Prime Minister ('74-76).

(7) Giorgio Almirante (1914-1988): Italian politician. Secretary of the MSI from 1969 to 1987.

(8) Loris Fortuna Exponent of the Socialist Party, one of the promoters of the law for the legalization of divorce.