Emma Bonino

ABSTRACT: The objective of reaching 5,000 memberships by February has been missed. A mere 2,250 people have chosen to trust themselves. At stake is not the survival of an apparatus, but "simply" the survival and the continuation of the struggles and ideals which only the radical party can promote in our society. At stake is "only" the possibility of winning a little more democracy, freedom and tolerance for politics. We are literally asking for help - something which is given to those who are in danger - to the knowing few. We need oxygen to allow this living body, the radical party, to resist as long as it needs to be known and judged. We believe that once the transnational and cross-party initiative, and the proposal to reform politics we are carrying out will be given the opportunity to be known, people will be able and capable to recognize themselves and acquire confidence in their common hopes, and will deem it urgent to mobilize.

How many of the "lucky" few who will receive this paper will choose solidarity and courage instead of silence?

(Notizie Radicali n.51, March 2nd, 1990)

With the resolution passed by the federal council in early January in Rome, the Radical party has once again appealed to the public opinion to ensure the survival of this unique organization in the international political scene.

But in contrast to what occurred three years ago, when we appealed to the public opinion to obtain at least 10,000 memberships to avoid closing the radical party, today we must instead promote a new transnational and cross-party political subject which has shown extraordinary vitality from the very beginning. We need only think of the enthusiasm with which radical groups have been formed in Moscow, in Prague, in Yugoslavia and generally speaking in the countries that are reconquering democracy.

Nonetheless, this is too huge a task for a few hundred people in the world. Thus, the objective of 50,000 memberships by the end of the year, established by the Federal Council of Rome, represents the oxygen and the blood allowing this fragile, anomalous and delicate body, highly exposed to the most serious disease of real democracy--citizens' impossibility of knowing and therefore of judging--to resist as long as it takes to develop the "drug" that is necessary to conquer, with an act of intelligence and political will, the possibility of being known and judged.

Yes, we are firmly convinced that only "ignorance", i.e. literally the non-knowledge of the radical party's proposals, are preventing the transnational project, the proposal of a reform of politics, from advancing and convincing people to have faith and mobilize.

But in the meanwhile...In the meanwhile it seems almost impossible that there are not fifty thousand people, of different political views, with a liking for difficult political ventures, with the strength to oppose mainstream society as for divorce, justice, the struggle against world hunger and totalitarianism.

It seems impossible to us that there are not 20,000 comrades among the 1,500,000 members of the Italian communist party who choose to join this new non-violent and federalist International with an act of generosity or of political interest. Are they so introverted that they fail to see that the opportunity to succeed in their attempt to relinquish all communist ideological references and in their project of transforming it into a democratic party "tour court", should be sought essentially outside their traditional political environment?

We have set a timetable, obviously arbitrary but essential to allow ourselves and others to assess the quantity of oxygen, consent and resources which the radical party needs every day: 1,000 members by January 21, 5,000 by February, 10,000 by March and...50,000 by the end of the year.

The first objective--reaching 1,000 members--has been reached by a hair's breadth. The second stage for the month of February has instead not been reached.

A number of comrades and friends obviously fail to realize what is at stake. They tell us we have been threatening to close the party for too long, that we have increased the membership fees.

It is true. The radical "corporation" has no income, no positions of power; as in any sound and uncorrupted family or corporation, it must constantly reckon with the money in the cash, with the need for democracy that comes from the public opinion, with the consent of the recipients of its policy, who are neither courtesans nor subjects, but free citizens. The first time was in 1971, when we established, during the congress, that the minimum threshold to guarantee the existence and functioning of the radical party was 1,000 members.

The reasoning was simple. Today, however, we can appreciate its coherence: the radical party, and the radical party alone, faces tasks and battles that are by far greater than its forces. The question was defending the bill on divorce, obtained from reluctant lay parties, and which was put in question not only by the catholic referendum, but especially by the softness of the parties that had voted it. They were willing to accept anything provided they could avoid a political clash with the "catholics". The question then was starting a campaign for the legalization of abortion.

One thousand people joined the radical party, which was thus given the strength to steer the country towards the greatest pro-divorce victory of 13 May 1974 and to impose a discussion on abortion.

Nineteen years later, those same considerations would be extremely up-to-date and immediately understandable if only they were heeded. As then, the agenda is filled with initiatives. As then, there is a huge gap between the radical party's meagre resources and the objectives which the radical party--and the radical party alone--can achieve: the struggle for the reform of politics and of the electoral system in Italy, the transnational battle against the new totalitarianism which is masked behind prohibition on drugs, the actual creation of a federalist and non-violent International, capable of giving affirmative answers to the new problems of eastern Europe and the old problems of the starving South...

Are these utopian and unrealistic aims? We are accustomed to this judgment, ever since a few of us opened a season of civil rights battles in Italy, started the practice of non-violence and the clash against party power. But also since the radical language has become common use, no one has had the strength to recognize their short-sightedness. Today they are more cautious towards the two key words of the radical challenge: transnational and transparty. The "reasonable" folly, of refounding the party as a subject free from the traditional patterns of national and party politics, is regarded with greater wariness by those who realize, increasingly, that democracy will be more and more unfeasible in Italy without challenging the electoral system and the very form of the party; that the process of internationalization of the political decisions and of the decay of the national parliaments can no longer be a merely defensive answer. In other words, it is necessary to give the new supranational institutions all th

e mechanisms of control and parliamentary guarantee if we want to avoid power being transferred to dangerously anti-democratic institutions. But despite these acknowledgments, it seems that these battles, and this stubborn defence of the values of democracy and rule of law and of life are not worth 182.500 lire, the cost of the radical membership card. What is in question is not, obviously, the cost of the membership card. For many people, 182,500 lire really represent less than a subscription to the theatre, the gym or a few sessions at the hairdresser's. Only those who must make a sacrifice, i.e, pensioners or students, recognize the value of the radical membership card, of this sort of insurance against the theft of democracy, of hope in the possibility to change and improve the quality of everyone's life.

As in 1972 and in 1987, we will remind the enlightened few that the radical party is luckily not a semi-public organization that survives regardless of the its usefulness and consent. Unlike the other parties, we do not have, and do not want, hundreds of thousands of civil servants in the municipalities, provinces, regions, health units, ministries or, generally speaking, in the public institutions, who must, by hook or by crook, ensure the survival of the party thanks to which they have a job. No regional or regional councillor would lose his job just because the party closed. Six comrades, which are the minimum required to guarantee the functioning of the administration, are the only "workers" employed by the party. We are therefore in a position to close the party without sending anyone to the poorhouse. At any rate, we will take care of these six comrades, using our personal resources is necessary.

What is at stake is not, therefore, the survival of anyone, but "only" of the party's ideals and struggles. The value at stake is "only" the opportunity to win more democracy, more freedom and more tolerance for politics. Does this mean anything for you? Is it worth 182.500 lire?

Dear comrades, in 1972 the objective was achieved. One thousand people answered our appeal. And in 1990? Once again, it is from you and with you, who have the privilege of knowing and the responsibility of making known, that we expect answers on how to carry on.

How many of those who receive this newspaper, how many of the enlightened few, will choose solidarity instead of silence?