ABSTRACT: The Radical Party, the international which we invite you to set up and bring to life with us, at least for this year, is called a Party precisely in order to challenge the Parties in "partycratic" systems or in dictatorships, and to challenge their right to the name or the term itself.In order not to allow them to appropriate the term. Because "Parties" are inherent to the democratic organization of society and of the State. And of the world, in our opinion. The evidence is as clear as day-light. And we hope that the current situation will not continue.

(The Party New, n.3, August 1991)

Joining the Radical Party is just like buying a season ticket for the underground, or for the bus. You can "journey" with us for a year. And no one is obliged to stay on until the end of the line.

The Radical Party is an instrument, a means and a way. It is neither father, mother, family, Church, sect, or army; nor does it "represent" its members. What it certainly does represent is a place for discussion before any decisions are taken, where the very few rules we have set ourselves are law. It is simply an Association, just like any other. Anyone can join the Radical Party, regardless of sex, race, age, or language, regardless of personal circumstances (prisoners and free citizens can join), regardless of personal past, ideas, moral outlook - or absence of moral outlook - and regardless of other party affiliations.

No one can be refused membership for any reason. No one can be expelled, once inscribed in the Radical Party, censured or morally judged by any individual. A unique, exclusive transaction occurs when the applicant enrols in the Party. At that point, the relationship begins. In a certain way, the new member becomes a "shareholder" in our "company" and therefore shares in all the annual projects which are defined yearly. He - or she - acquires the "corporate" rights and exercises them - or chooses not to - according to the "articles of association". The relationship between party member and Party is purely political, and it is the former who decides on its duration.

The Radical Party does not have an ideology, its own particular "vision" of the world. Neither does it measure itself by, or is it interested in, those of other parties. It does not uphold particular moral values or ideals, but rather sets itself political objectives as above, which are confirmed at Congresses held on fixed dates established by the Statute, to prevent the Executive Committee's choosing dates that are convenient merely to them. Certainly, when yearly objectives and resolutions are taken together it is possible, during the course of years or decades, to obtain a connotation of the Party contrary to that given by either the Statute or the resolutions passed at a Congress. These, however, are historical connotations open to free interpretation, and not statutory connotations of which the "party leaders" would become the "guardians".

This is what a "new" and "libertarian" Party means to us.

And at the 35th Radical Party Congress, held in Budapest from 22-29 April 1989, it was decided that in no instance could the Party as such participate in any form of elections, or the administration of any institution.

Direct Membership

As the Radical Party does not (now) compete with other Parties, or the Internationals of other Parties, either on an electoral or institutional level, it can more easily function as a "meeting place" for members of other Parties, traditionalist or otherwise, at all levels. Thus it happens that the Federal Council of the Radical Party includes deputies, senators and influential political leaders from many different parties, some of whom are in conflict by belonging to both Government and Opposition, namely: Liberals, Social Democrats, Socialists, Greens, European Federalists, Autonomists, members of the PDS (formerly the Italian Communist Party), Antiprohibitionists and Independants.

In the past, many parties were intollerant of what they called the "double allegiance" of members who joined the Radical Party which was, in fact, a rival in the electoral and institutional sense. In other words, they did not recognize their members' right to possess ideals that were possibly in conflict. Now, almost everyone acknowledges the Radical Party as having the

characteristics of an International which offers direct membership to activists; which requires that its members act with maximum freedom and independence, both in a statutory and political sense; and that no longer competes with any of the national Parties or existing Internationals.

About thirty years ago, when it was decided to experiment with a similar kind of party structure in Italy, everyone maintained that it would not work because it gave party members too much freedom. One might also add that the Radical Party's annual minimum membership fee has always been considered very high (it amounts to the total cost of a year's supply of daily cups of coffee, in actual fact), simply because we have always made it a rule to be self-sufficient.

However, no other political "project", no other political force, has been able to boast - after thirty years' activity - such a high degree of creativity and productivity in the political field; no other Party has had the same historical significance as the "Italian" Radical Party!

With our 3,000 members a year, and a budget which is a hundredth - or less - of that allotted to the important official Parties (with their millions of members and possibility of using institutional power, television and the other mass media of the State), the Radical Party has brought about reforms that involved the entire country in impassioned and dramatic confrontations. Reforms of divorce, abortion, civil rights, and referendums to abolish Fascist laws, which were sustained at length by Parties of the "anti-fascist" "partycracy".

Thanks to our rigorous practice of nonviolence, the Radical Party has often found itself absolutely alone, without any support from either majority or minority groups. For example, a referendum to end government financing of political parties, which all agreed to support, failed to win more than 43 percent of the vote; while another referendum, to close nuclear power stations, passed with 80 percent of the vote.

The Radical Party's libertarian policy, upheld in a situation of "real democracy" and "partycracy", is fully expressed and confirmed by the following: full disclosure of party financing; non-conformist battles conducted in spite of our being ostracized by the mass media; the presence (uncontested and legitimate) of Radical Party members in rival lists; victims of unjust trials being proposed as candidates, who were in prison during the election campaign, and then actually elected and pronounced innocent at an Appeal; continual nonviolent protests; dramatic hunger strikes; arrests; thousands and thousands of trials, and victims. Not to mention our always being on the point of having to disband, because we did not want to risk becoming the showpiece of a "partycracy"; our unrelenting opposition to any kind of political collaboration with countries run by dictatorships; our parliamentary filibustering in defence of the Constitution and the regulations of the Chambers; and our unpopular but unwavering defence of

Israel against the totalitarian regimes of the Middle East. And all this with just a handful of members, including Nobel Prize winners and people serving prison sentences for common crimes.

"A Right to Life and a Life of Rights"

In order for a political force with the same intellectual honesty as individual people to uphold "a right to life and a life of rights", to protect the environment, and resolve every other important, vital and crucial problem of our time, it cannot limit itself to acting within a "national" and, above all, "state" framework. The framework within which it operates must be as transnational as possible in its structure, and not a "mystic entity", a "communion of saints", or a mere "concept": it must be able to function at full strength, to plan and programme, but without imposing, or accepting, any kind of system or global policy.

The rift between thought, science and knowledge, on the one hand, and the government, world power and individual territories, on the other, is absolutely typical of the times we live in.

The (re)constitution of Parties that are almost lay, and almost national-democratic, can only produce results that are even more disastrous. The very concept of a political party, and its theoretical and pratical structure, has to be turned upside-down: it must no longer entail sacrificing one's freedom to defend society but organizing that freedom to strengthen society.

But beware! Freedom and independence are confused also at a semantic, and on a private, level. Being free, and desiring total freedom for oneself and therefore for others, and vice versa, means knowing how to choose one's "interdependencies", and not imposing a condition of complete self-sufficiency - autarky - on oneself, or on one's country. Generally speaking, any person or any State that claims to be "independent" succeeds only in being "dependent", and not free.

This not only holds good for politics, but also for culture, science and art itself.

Being Interdependent

All over the world, one hears people saying: "I would never join a political party"; "I joined one once, and that was enough"; "I'll only join when I'm one hundred percent convinced"; "I haven't got the time to go through all that rigmarole of becoming a member, I'd rather be free".

This makes joining a Party, or any other association for that matter, sound like taking a vow! And people who take this attitude, only reinforce the "sacral", conglomerative, image-conscious, militarist-bureaucratic aspect of the "Party". The Radical Party, the "International" we are proposing that you build, and experience with us, at least for a year, calls itself a "Party" in order to be able to oppose the "Parties" of the "partycracies" and dictatorships, which are Parties in name only; to remain faithful to the concept of a Party.

"The Party" is inherent in democracy, at both a social and State level, and also at a world level - in our opinion, at least.

The situation could not be more clear. Let's hope somebody does something to change it!