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)

In The Name Of Charisma Against The "Regime"

By Silverio Corvisieri

("Paese Sera" January 27, 1978)

So Pannella has retracted his resignation from the Chamber of Deputies as Emma Bonino did before him. The "heaping up of the parties" to use an expression dear to him, this time worked in favour of his plan - with the exception of the PCI and the PDUP-Manifesto - (1) : champions of visceral anti-Communism like Costamagna (not to mention the two Fascist groups) and figures like the Social Democrat Reggiani, famous as a strenuous defender of Tanassi (2), functioned as a chorus of approval for the speech of the president of the Chrfistian Democratic group Piccoli entirely tensed for the action of a DC committed to defending everyone's rights against a PCI (he didn't say it, but it was there between the lines) ready to cheat the minorities. On few other occasions have we seen the benches of Montecitorio [the site of the Chamber of Deputies, ed.] so filled with Christian Democrats: it happened when they tried to reject the abortion law and to save Tanassi and Gui.

Furthermore, in his letter of resignation addressed to Pietro Ingrao , the Radical "leader", alongside an understandable for the extra-parliamentary character of the government crisis was critical not of the DC and its government, but against "the imperfect party monopoly". In this way he forgot and concealed two things, both of them unpleasant to the majority party:

1) In a certain sense the extra-parliamentary aspect of the crisis was in this case a positive factor because it was not connected with the maneuverings of this or that party but to December 2, that great day for the workers' struggle and to the proclamation of a general strike by the confederation of unions (as is well known, the DC insists on speaking of the "dark crisis desired by the PCI");

2) the "party monopoly", however imperfect, of which Pannella speaks, was damaged precisely by the decision of the traditional left to retract its confidence from the Andreotti government.

More generally, it seems to me that all of Pannella's political action begins from the premise that it no longer makes sense to refer to the line of demarcation between Fascism and anti-Fascism and, within the bounds of Fascism itself, to the practical Fascism of the workers' movement and the formal kind of the conservative parties. The scheme which appears to inspire the Radical "leader" is that which sees in the parties of the constitutional range (3) not an alliance, however much open to criticism, but an anti-democratic block opposed to all of the "diverse", which is to say all those excluded from the block, hence including the Plebes and the Almirantes (4). More than once he has compared the present regime to the Fascist one and the Parliament to a mere cover organisation for the Fascist chamber and the corporations of Mussolini's twenty-year regime.

The entire heritage of culture, organisation, fighting capacity, and the ability for management that the workers' movement accumulated before the Resistance, then in the fight against centralism and, finally, in the great era which began in 1968 does not count, does not exist for Pannella. At most he refers to the "true Socialists" or the "true Communists" who would be in reality unconscious Radicals and who for some mysterious reason are still not aware of it. Levelling this reality in that proverbial night when all cows are grey, he ends by underestimating the true characteristics of the DC and even in negating the absolute necessity of isolating the neo-Fascists.

This is the starting point of a chain of errors that turn Pannella's projects into political realities that the DC, and in particular the right-wing of the DC can use to strengthen its positions. The most sensational case is perhaps that of the referendums which, proposed in bunches and on the most diverse issues, have become a card in Moro's and Zaccagnini's (5) hand for compelling the left to be more accommodating or to suffer the consequences of a confused, contradictory and thus a losing battle.

What worries us most, however, are not the single episodes of Radical politics and not even their interpretation of the Italian political scene, but rather their general conception of democracy and thus the long-range historical prospects for which to aim. Pannella's battles, even the ones whose aims are just, were based on the request to trust them to a charismatic leader, or, at best, to a limited group of militants. The masses were asked to sign petitions or to give their vote. Whether it was a question of hunger strikes or street demonstrations in the Anglo-Saxon style, whether it was a matter of resignations (from Parliament, from party offices, or others) or of television "performances", there was always a clear, undeclared understanding: there is no need of great popular parties, labour unions serve little purpose, and what is the point of such strenuous efforts to keep alive a network of associated organisations or to bend before the infinite needs of the popular masses with their different leve

ls of awareness and readiness to be mobilised? I will take care of it with my hunger strike, we the courageous and enlightened few will take care of things.

I am certainly not the man to underestimate the role of the avant-garde minorities. But this role is important only if it is constantly inspired by the need of ceasing to be a minority as soon as possible; if it places all its bets on the mobilisation, the organisation, creating the conscience of the great mass of workers, of women, of young people.

The principle objection I made against the Radicals' request to sign the eight referendums petition was not, as commonly stated, that there were too many of them, but that as they were conceived they did not make it possible for significant sectors of the people to wage a serious personal battle against the laws to be abrogated.

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

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) PDUP-Manifesto - Partito di Unità Proletaria, a far left wing party which converged with the Manifesto movement until the latter became independent.

2) Mario Tanassi - A leader of the Social Democratic and later the Socialist party, minister of defense from '68 - '74, condemned in 1974 for corruption in the Lockheed scandal regarding kickbacks made to government officials for aircraft orders.

3) Parties of the constitutional range - the name given to parties that participated in drawing up the present Italian Constitution after the fall of Fascism.

4) Plebe and Almirante - Giorgio Almirante (1914-1988) secretary of the neo-Fascist MSI from 1969 -1987. Plebe was a Fascist party member who expressed an interest in joining the Radical Party thus setting off a schism in the PR between those who considered such a request totally inadmissible and those who felt the PR had no choice but to accept the request if it should become official since the PR accepts members from other parties and has no legal mechanisms for denying membership to anyone.

5) Aldo Moro and Benigno Zaccagnini, two top DC leaders.