ABSTRACT: An essay on the nature and historical roots of the new Radicalism and a debate on the Radical problem with contributions from: Contributions by Gianni Baget-Bozzo, Giorgio Galli; Francesco Ciafaloni; Domenico Tarizzo; Ernesto Galli della Loggia; Brice Lalonde; Ugoberto Alfassio Grimaldi; Giuseppe Are; Alberto Asor Rosa; Silverio Corvisieri; Ruggero Orfei; Sergio Cotta; Federico Stame; Paolo Ungari; Giuliano Amato; Fabio Mussi; Giulio Savelli

(SAVELLI Publishers, October 1978)

Introduction (1375)

PART ONE

I. Politics and Society

II. The Accusations Against the Radicals (1377)

III. The Radicals As A Two-Front Party (1378)

IV. Radicalism And Socialism (1379)

V. Radicalism Or Marxism, Co-existence Or Techno-Fascism (1380)

PART TWO

A Debate On The Radical Problem (1381 - 1397)

For A Party Of The Bourgeoisie

By Giuseppe Are

(<>, no.5, December 1977 - January 1978)

No party in the history of the Italian Republic has managed to combine within itself two such contradictory characteristics as the Radical Party. Its presence is the most original and dynamic in all the ranks of Italian politics. At the same time, however, its methods are questionable, and what is more, its strategies are nebulous and dangerously incapable of assuring the consolidation of its successes and the expansion of its mass influence and winning for it the place it deserves among Italian parties. Its dynamism and originality have been amply demonstrated by its capacity for civil mobilisation which none of the other parties, big or small, had thought to be useful or necessary.

And yet this party, whose campaigns correspond objectively to the most deep-felt needs of the most modern, European, tolerant and civil part of this country, has a minimal electoral following and continues to be surrounded by resistance, doubts and diffidence that do no not in the least hold promise for much future growth. The fault of the meagreness of the social groups capable of understanding and supporting their actions? I say it is not. The potential electoral terrain of a political line revolving around the demand for a more modern conception of society and customs, and the rebellion against the narcotic effect of party strategies is, according to me, illustrated by the pro-divorce majority of 1974. It is not true, after all, that the Italians are a herd of incurable conformists. It is the philosophies and the political apparatuses of the major parties that tend to turn them into such. But if that is how things stand, it is clear that there is something wrong with the methods and strategies of the

Radical Party.

First of all one must ask if they really intend to become a mass party as they have every right and duty to be. If this is what they propose, one cannot see what purpose it serves for them to indulge in foolish permissiveness (marijuana, etc.) which is not favourable to libertarian ideals, if only for its irrationality, and because it is one of the extreme forms of moral disintegration that often nourishes modern consumerism. One cannot on the one hand support extreme permissiveness and, on the other, fight against nuclear power plants. A society that limits its growth out of respect for future generations is not a society that is irresponsibly permissive towards hippies and people who reject the discipline of work: it is a severe society without necessarily being intolerant. I do not mean at all that the PR must reject the outsiders and the diverse of all kinds. I say that it cannot make this the criterion of its own political action, if only because the possible supporters of the many battles for libe

rty that the party wages are far more numerous than all the militant homosexuals in this country. (But I want to make it clear that I have nothing against homosexuals.)

I also find unwise the PR's insistence on an alternative of the left. If an alternative of the left were to take place in our country in a situation like the present one, it would see not the hegemony but the dictatorship of the PCI, and this dictatorship would crush everything that the PR wants and stands for in twenty four hours. A certain realism is also required to indicate the medium-term goals if one doesn't want to give rise to ambiguities and incompatibilities that end by compromising the development of a political force.

I do not accept the objection, which might be made, that the PR would lose its reason for existing if it were to renounce the peculiar and extravagant characteristics which have, however, brought it to the forefront, and above all if it were to renounce the proposal of a leftist alternative government. I do not accept it because I believe that the essential problem, in the supreme emergency in which the country presently finds itself, is to break up the current Italian political scene and its balances. This is only possible with an intermediary force capable of aggregating and unifying very quickly whatever is left of the smaller lay parties, not only in order to make of them a force to oppose the historic compromise (1), but also to attract voters from outside this area. It is essential to make the DC lose its majority: only then can the game of politics in Italy begin to be played with new players on a new scene. But such a rupture could only make room for something positive if between the centre and

the left, alongside the Socialist Party, even if independent and critical of it, there were to form a force sufficiently ample to be the point of reference for the more modern part of the Italian middle class, and not only a mixture of outsiders of all kinds. But this group would have to be strong enough to oppose the moves of the overbearing Communist power which would at that moment become truly dangerous.

All of this means that the PR has the duty to become adult. I am not certain whether this will cost it the loss of some part of the lunatic fringe. But I am sure that whoever would take on the job of really representing those Italians who have had more than enough of the regime which is consolidating its position would have the possibility of putting together a much more influential party in Parliament and among the people than what the PR today has achieved.

----------------------------------------------------------------

TRANSLATOR'S NOTES

* Qualunquisti/qualunquismo - a much-used term in Italian political parlance referring to an attitude of mistrust towards political parties and the party system in general.

1) Historic compromise - The decision of the Communist Party (PCI) to collaborate with the Christian Democrats (DC).