The official self-congratulation because they are always mystifying at times to appear "lived" and "popular" institutions of social life are petrification, concretions of bureaucracies that overlap with it in an attempt to dominate and govern the contradictions.
especially mystifying apparatus will therefore be self-celebration of the apparatus, namely the State: the mystification here coincides with the representation of the state-form as a fetish that absorbs and freezes the actual historical experience, which returns in a form from which the contradictions are expunged or neutralized.
The self-congratulation that the unification of Italy takes place these days is mystifying in its very conception and description.
What happened March 17, 1861 was by no means the completion of Italian unification, but the promulgation of the law which made the king of Italy Vittorio Emanuele (Law, approved Feb. 26 by Senate and the House March 14). This is the birth of the Kingdom of Italy, set up after the plebiscite and the annexations that over the eighteen months before, had gradually extended the kingdom of the Savoy family to include the Lombardy Lazio in central Italy except the South.
But, without neglecting what artificial or conventional or mythical lurks in the definition of a national entity, the completion of the unification of Italy was still missing, the Veneto, and especially the Roma and Lazio . No genuine patriot, nor between the monarchists and liberals and the Democrats let alone Italian (and European), considered as completed the unification of Italy without Rome . Even the liberal Cavour or the first of the great "transformation" Italians, Urbano Rattazzi: the "Roman Question" was left wide open in 1861. Garibaldi tried to open so that, after the Declaring a 'unit', two operations for the liberation of Rome.
The first in August 1862, when he was stopped and beaten by soldiers of the newborn Kingdom of Italy Aspromonte: that was a civil war in miniature, which was not more serious outcomes imposed only because the General to his troops , outnumbered but well-attested, to cease fire.
The second attempt was in October 1867, when Garibaldi invaded Lazio with about 7,000 volunteers, but had to withdraw due to the failure of the insurrection in Rome, only to be defeated by a Franco-papal Mentana and crossed the boundary, again to be arrested by soldiers of the state and regional "unified." Among the many who died in Rome remember the brothers Henry and John Cairoli, Arquati Francis, his extraordinary wife Judith Tavani, daughter of a patriot fighting the Roman Republic in 1848, and their twelve year old son Francis, killed in the papal in a mill where they had holed up. We must also remember Joseph Monti Gaetano Tognetti, who blew up a barracks pope: they were catholic guillotined the following year.
Finally, the question of Rome ended when, taking advantage of the fall of Napoleon III by the German troops and the City Paris, the troops of the Kingdom of Italy invaded what remained of the dominions of the Pope-king in Rome and broke through the famous Porta Pia, 20 September 1870. The tyrant opposed papal weak military strength, just to show Italians and the world that he did not give in peacefully and Christian his temporal power. However, there were cannons and rifles, with deaths (68 in total) and injuries.
one thing one must take note: that the Liberals of 1870, as royalists and moderates, dared action of this magnitude the equivalent here in terms of legislation and is ideal for our politicians 'secular' contemporaries, so ready to kneel and kiss, pure fantastoria.
Thus, the completion of Italian unification in 1870 and gave it, not too figuratively "re-shooting the Pope." These, in turn, though dethroned, arrogantly confirmed the ban on Catholics to participate in the political life of the new state, a ban which remained formally in force for another half century.
It seems a paradox that the Republic celebrate the proclamation of the Kingdom.
But perhaps not this.
What institutions and the media spectacle is really celebrate the continuity of the State-form . Why, through the kingdom, then fascism, then the Republic, there is a real continuity, which is precisely the domain of the state and ruling classes on Italian dominated classes. is the fetish of the state is celebrated, and with it, the continuity of class power through various transformations of the form of political regime .
In fetishistic celebration resounds the invocation to the "shared values" that finally make Italy a country "normal". This is an attempt, expressed as intake regulation, neutralization of the contradictions that contraddistinsero beginning the process of political unification.
Remember 1870 and the fall of the papal tyranny certainly not facilitate the distillation of these "shared values": if only because then consistency would like it to put an end to all the material privileges and even "ideal" that the Church was able to maintain and enhance, the Guarantees of the Kingdom of the Concordat with fascism, to the Republican Constitution.
The proclamation of 17 March 1861 was a result of the absence of a sanction and popular revolution, Jacobin and democratic-bourgeois, in Italy. In fact, the era of the "bourgeois revolution" was already set long ago in Italy and the likelihood was strong that a coherent line 'Jacobin' was overtaken by a motorbike, "sans-culottes" even more radical. This was one of the strongest arguments of Cavour's foreign policy, seeking to gain the support of France and the benevolent neutrality of England, a task complementary to that of co-opting of much of the party of action in view of the unit as enlargement of the State of Savoy.
fact is that the proclamation of the Kingdom can be taken not as an event that requires the elaboration of alleged "shared values" banner italianity but on the contrary, as the crucial moment of a process preceding and following 1861, which created problems irreducible difficult to relegate the well Black forgetfulness for the simple fact that they are still present and alive before our eyes, to distinguish the peculiarities of the history and transformation of Italy, directed, fascist, republican, bourgeois, and always, and necessarily have to share. Indeed, the fact is that this policy there is divided fairly. One can only groped to neutralize abstracting from a given context.
but two glaring issues, whose genesis is rooted in the way of the unification process and management of the State by the United forwards.
The first is the "southern question." The Italian is unique among European countries to present a socio-economic split in two parts, not in individual areas, the area (the joint in more "Italy" does not substantially alter the given country). The most relevant comparison could perhaps do with the United Kingdom when it also included all of Ireland. But Ireland was in effect another country, which opposed a fierce resistance.
The case of the Italian Mezzogiorno was different. There the people are not hearing all the Bourbon Kingdom and indeed, did his best to bring it down to coincide with the landing and operations of Garibaldi. The point is that the popular movement, urban and rural, was contained and stifled because a revolution "Jacobin" and "sans-culottes" was obviously incompatible with the union to the Kingdom of Sardinia. That was the political basis for the formation of a functional and structural link between modernization, concentrated in certain areas of the North, and its data retention of social relations in the South, where a state of siege and the connivance of 'hats' and 'honest' with Mafia and Camorra, old and new, are not strangers. With a loan from the dependency theory, the state and capitalism Italians still eat of a dialectic between development and the (relative) underdevelopment, not to be construed as immobility or lack of any capitalist development.
so strongly regionalised The contrast between capitalist modernization and inequality of the rhythms and modes is one of the reasons for the perennial talk about the "TARE" Italian, the inadequate modernization of the pension on weight (less than before, to tell the true), the "free-riding public," lawlessness, family and so forth until the so-called 'Populism' Berlusconi. An endless and inconclusive debate because what you can not digest is that this is exactly the form of existence of the Italian State, since 1861, and the way it is made is made in Italy and the capitalist modernization . That anywhere, let alone in the world, is something linear and homogenizing: the reproduction of the differential development (capitalist) and differences in political regime (liberal parliamentary system here, there's military dictatorship, elsewhere the "democradura) is the form and substance of capitalist modernization.
The second issue is that of political transformation and the Leopard. Even this is exclusive of Italy, but in its history has an exceptional weight, so as to justify the international use of Italian terms. Again it is easy to trace the events of the Risorgimento, the marriage between Cavour and the combination of Cavour and the Centre of Urban Rattazzi, the National Society and the motto "Italy and Victor Emmanuel" echoed by much of the old Left. The Trickster, a relative of consociativismo, is one of the ways through which you can stop in Italy, when the a priori exclusion can not hold more, the persistence of opposition policy that is worthy of the name, ideally qualified and programmatically.
Well, this one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the proclamation of the kingdom of Italy falls into the stage where transformation and ocelots Italic reached unparalleled levels of diffusion and of moral and political cynicism. The claims of this anniversary regional patriotic Republican are an example.
0 comments:
Post a Comment