THE CRISIS IN ITALY: The Vatican and the end of the Berlusconi Era.

Dramatic developments in the world of finance have finally forced Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi out of his self-imposed silence. In one of his rare appearances in Parliament a few days ago, he delivered a speech which was generally deemed disappointing, laying the blame for the crisis on everyone’s doorstep but his own.
Whatever the immediate political developments in Italy, it is safe to assume that the end of the Berlusconi era is upon us, and many questions need to be raised about Italy’s political future.
One of these certainly concerns the Roman Catholic Church, especially in view of the fundamental conflict between pragmatism and dogmatism which has always characterized its attitude particularly, though not exclusively, in relation to the Italian political scene.
The evils of “relativism” constitute one of the mainstays of the current Pope’s ideological make up, and he has been repeating his warnings on the subject since well before his election. There is, indeed, a growing tendency within the Church to return to a more dogmatic attitude, especially in its approach to politics, in reaction to what some consider the “aberration” of the Vatican II Council..
The question has deep roots and subtle implications non lastly for the fact that it continues to be raised, from the highest possible Ecclesiastical authorities, in apparent contrast to the principles of tolerance and Ecumenism enunciated about half a century ago by the Vatican II Council and never explicitly disavowed by the Church.
In the genuine enthusiasm raised by the Council, a basic principle, ever present in the history of religions and ideologies, seemed to have been forgotten, viz. that an indication of tolerance more often represents a sign of organisational and ideological weakness and not necessarily of moral strength. This consideration keeps re-emerging as the Church backslides into older, essentially dogmatic and more familiar patterns of thought and behaviour, while outwardly paying lip service to concepts, such as tolerance and ecumenism, which, in fact, are alien to its fundamental tenets.
In the context of the Catholic Church’s perennial invasive presence in the Italian political spectrum, this dualism poses interesting questions on the policies which have allowed “the Vatican”, as it is often superficially and somewhat erroneously called, to keep a virtually uninterrupted grip on Italian affairs since the early years of the Holy Roman Empire.
The matter acquires even greater significance in view of the manifest fragility of the Italian political system. A political and institutional void is coming into being, and the more responsible elements of Italian civil society appear to be in desperate search for alternatives. This has created the type of situation which most ideally suits the Holy See’s political tactics.
The debacle suffered by both Government and Opposition parties in last May’s electoral results (local elections and referenda) has only deepened the sense of malaise, and induced large sectors of the Opposition, as well as formerly unreliable allies to prefer giving grudging support to the government rather than face the incognita of general elections. In this state of confusion – certainly not helped by the constantly threatened financial upheavals – it is very interesting to observe how the Church is modifying its stance from a highly pragmatic, or “relativistic” approach, to one of greater dogmatic severity, especially concerning the errant private life of the Prime Minister. Until now, in exchange for considerable benefits, the Church had adopted a remarkably benevolent, paternal “boys will be boys” attitude, with just occasional, almost playful slaps on the wrists.
This stance is visibly changing, partly because the Catholic rank and file had started questioning it, and partly because of the visible hostility shown to Berlusconi’s Government by the electorate – including Catholic voters – in the recent electoral results. All the main political parties, right, centre and left, have lost touch with their electorate, but it is unclear to whose advantage. Into this kind of chaos the Church is stepping with much greater assurance than any political party can muster, and the first to feel the sting, of course, has been the governing majority.

The Church, for example, through the extremely influential “Italian Bishop’s Conference” or CEI, has, for example, already expressed deep reservations about the bulk of the drastic and greatly unpopular economic and financial measures taken or planned by the Government to overcome the current crisis

These appear to be merely warning shots, for the state of confusion is remarkable even by Italian standards, and it is difficult to foresee what developments to expect. The main political parties, especially those in the governing majority, are torn by internal dissent, and their leaders (Berlusconi and Umberto Bossi, founder of the “Northern League”) appear to be losing their charismatic hold on the party faithful. The Northern League could well be the key to future developments, because the very vociferous base would like to abandon Berlusconi to his fate, while the leadership feels that a Government crisis, at this stage, would only benefit the Opposition, particularly the Left.

There is a possibility that, perhaps after the summer vacations, the façade will crack, leaving little alternative except for early elections, unless a “technical Government” can be formed to reach the end of the legislature and allow the political parties to nurse their wounds.

Should early elections be called, there will be a scramble to obtain the approval, however indirect, from the Church authorities (particularly the CEI ), and it is safe to assume that words of approval or support will bear their price, thus ensuring an even more invasive role of the Church in Italy’s future..

Carlo Ungaro

August 14, 2011

THE AMERICAN DREAM: THEN AND NOW

THE AMERICAN DREAM: THEN AND NOW

My early childhood memory of Americans coincided with the immediate post-war reopening of Italy as a destination for ostensibly wealthy tourists, and the great majority of these, at the time, were American.
The impression they then gave was that they came not from another Country, but from another planet. They appeared taller, straighter, prouder than the rest of us. Their clothes were always immaculately pressed, their teeth a brilliant white, their hair glossier than ours, their pockets bulging with treasures, such as chewing gum, which, for us, were almost unattainable. They seemed cheerfully immune to extremes of climate or fatigue, their brow never marred by a drop of perspiration, their smile always ready and cordial, their generous and affable concern ever ready to surface. Left wing Europeans feigned contempt for them (in France a heavily sarcastic movie short called “le Beaujolais des Americains” – i.e. Coca Cola - was instantly successful), but deep down viewed them with respect and more than a touch of envy. They exuded benevolent power for theirs was the “righteous empire”. Their music, their movies, their sporting prowess were conquering the world just as their armies had done only a few years earlier.
In the history of the world, political and social dreams have abounded, and some, such as the Roman Republic, prospered for many centuries while others, such as the French and Soviet Revolutions, though relatively short-lived, cast a very long shadow on the destinies of the world.
The United States of America is only infrequently referred to as a “revolutionary” society, but the fact is that the American Revolution, almost two and a half centuries on, still has its institutional significance and is still capable of directly spreading its message to a large part of the world.
The “American Dream”, is a term closely associated with the American revolution, and the idea survived even the worst of the Great Depression. It was certainly very much alive when, at the impressionable age of 12, I first set foot in the United States, taken there by my father who had been appointed Italian Consul in Los Angeles.
Life, as I experienced it in Southern California, was extremely close to the image of that dream, at least partially inspired by the movies. Cracks did show however, and we were shocked when, having been invited to an exclusive “Country Club” we had to declare, solemnly, that we were “not Jewish”, as, indeed, we gazed in wonder at the emerging McCarthy phenomenon. Incidents all too reminiscent of the recently defeated European regimes. But the dream, at least for large sectors of the population – particularly white and middle class - seemed to have a solid existence.
It certainly lived in the hearts and minds of the many Italian-American families who had settled in Southern California. In spite of the recent hostilities, which had placed many of them under suspicion, and in spite of an often outspoken admiration for Mussolini and Italy’s Fascist regime, Southern California’s Italian Americans were prime examples of successful migration stories. Their attachment to the heir new country had roots well beyond the economic success which would have been absolutely unachievable in early twentieth century Italy. They, above all, savoured the liberty which had been denied them by the Mother country.
Some of the older members of the Italian American community had crossed the Atlantic half a century earlier, and had never thought of going back, keeping, however, in their hearts, a strong, almost romantic nostalgia for the town or village of their origin.



Thus, as young teen-ager in Southern California, I came to understand and believe in the “American Dream”, although, I have to admit, I was too young to be aware of its ethnic and racial limits which, at the time were seldom, if ever, mentioned.

I wonder nowadays, some sixty years on, whether it is still realistic to speak of an “American Dream”, or whether we are now witnessing its waning years, with a much less innocent society continuing to go through the motions, pretending, often in good faith, that “Over the Rainbow” (an American rainbow, to be sure), skies indeed are blue, just as Roman Emperors fuelled the pretence that they still represented and defended Republican values and principles.
To what extent was the “American Dream” a reality, and when, if ever, did it start to founder are questions which appear interesting at a time when the United States, as well as most of the Western Democracies, are in the throes of one of recent history’s greatest economic emergencies, and seem unable to extricate themselves from military conflicts of dubious moral, or even strategic value which grow ever more unpopular at home.