by Giuseppe Verdi for The Saker Blog
Nationalism is dead. Its stinking corpse is laying in front of Palazzo Montecitorio, home to the Italian Parliament (its increasingly peripheral power centre). People start to notice it, people start to smell its awful stench. What is left of the brief Italian nationalist experience has finally shown its true, cowardly face, bowing to the international globalist elite and rejecting its truly revolutionary potential. This is the story of how Italian nationalism has been co-opted by the establishment to serve its wicked agenda.
Liliana Segre and her security detail
In November 2019, the news that an 89-year old Italian Holocaust survivor was being put under police protection after she had received multiple death threats made international headlines. Liliana Segre, an Italian-Jewish activist who was nominated senator-for-life early last year for “social merits” (but really as a political move from the President to appease a certain part of the intelligentsia) was allegedly receiving two hundred hate messages per day (sic!). As a precaution, she was even assigned a security details consisting of two police officers. Predictably, indignation came loud and clear from mainstream media outlets and every major political figure, in a race to show empathy and support after such inexplicable attacks. Then, some days later the story was quietly retracted. Not only was the number of threats grossly exaggerated, there was also no reliable evidence that those (few) violent messages could be followed up by actual violence. So why would the media and the elites concoct such a masterful display of fake outrage and condemnation? Why would national news stations and talk shows spend hours (!) each day debating about something which clearly had no solid foundations to begin with? More crucially, what is the relationship between this now apparently irrelevant news and our initial diagnosis about the state of Italian nationalism?
In this brief essay, I will develop a nexus between the two, starting with a summary of Italian nationalist politics of the past two years. I will analyse the role Matteo Salvini’s League played in devising a nationalist discourse tailored on immigration and Italian identity, what has been said about it and what has been misunderstood. I will also take a look at the supposed “opposition” parties, comparing their ideological background and their social bases. I will argue that the rise of the League and its potential for the international anti-globalist movement has been just a façade, an elaborate project of controlled opposition put in place to mop up votes on the centre-right-to-far-right spectrum, thus crippling truer and more dangerous political movements. The aftermath of the Segre affair and Salvini’s flirting with the Zionist elites will be shown to be a clear testament to this.
Much has been written about the “rise of the far right” and anti-establishment politics in Italy throughout 2018 and 2019. For some time, we enjoyed major coverage on famous neoliberal newspapers such as The Economist and Time Magazine and even a few concerned articles on The Guardian. This will therefore be nothing new. Unfortunately, however, the work of foreign correspondents often tends to be grossly biased, mainly due to linguistic/cultural barriers and political prejudice. On the other hand, when Italians write about Italian politics on foreign media, they tend to oversimplify matters. This makes it impossible to draw meaningful comparisons and to identify the common trends we share with the rest of Europe. Therefore, we will try to fix these problems by providing a background on Italy’s three main political parties and their most recent history, together with an analysis of the geopolitical struggles reflected in Italian politics.
(2019) Matteo Salvini addressing his supporters during the yearly Party meeting in Pontida
The League is the leader of the centre-right coalition, despite having a relatively short history. That said, everyone agrees on one point, namely that in speaking about the League we must speak of two eras, the one before and the one after Matteo Salvini. From 1995 up until 2013 (when Salvini took over as Secretary), the League was an independentist party, which campaigned mainly on the promise to make Northern Italy (Padania) a federalist entity with special regulatory powers (exploiting some ethnic and cultural differences between the highly industrialised, hard-working North and the less developed, mainly agricultural and “lazy” South). After several experiences as supporting party in coalition governments led by Silvio Berlusconi, the League could rightly be described as an “establishment conservative” party. From conservative tax reforms to support for Atlantist interventions in Libya and Syria (the former going quite explicitly against national interest by unleashing a never-ending stream of illegal immigration across the Mediterranean), the League constructed an image of herself as a fully domesticated and complying conservative party. There were (and still are) a few outrageous voices within the party. These are the ones gathering a disproportionate amount of hostile coverage from the MSM, the ones being smeared as “racists”, “xenophobes” and the like. However, these are fringe voices, perhaps used by the very elites to keep the party’s leadership in check. As we already mentioned, after the 2013 Party Congress Salvini took over and decided to shift the narrative. First, he dropped any reference to Northern independence and federalism (which made the League understandably unpopular in the South), switching to a more internationally codified opposition to the European Union and its bureaucracy. Moreover, he also decided to adopt the “clash of civilizations” trope, becoming the champion of anti-immigration politics, the one issue which still brings him the most consensus among voters. On the other hand, he made sure to maintain two aspects of the previous leadership, namely the appeal to cultural/ethnic Italian values and the unchallenged support for the NATO alliance and the US imperialist project. Salvini is the embodiment (although he does not like to be portrayed as such) of the politician-by-profession. An activist since he was 17, then a degree in History and Politics interrupted one semester before graduation due to party commitments, he has devoted his life to the party, being able to turn the League from a catalyst of Northern dissatisfaction into a magnet for unfulfilled nationalist sentiments. The key of his success was foreseeing the nationalist wave of 2015-2016 and skilfully riding it, thus bringing the League from lurking in the fringes (8% in its first general elections) to being the first Italian party (with a consensus estimated at 35% according to the most recent polls [January 2020]).
Beppe Grillo (left), the founder of M5S with Luigi Di Maio (right), the current leader
The Democratic Party (PD), on the other hand, is your typical neoliberal party. Over the years, the PD has become deeply entangled in the shady workings of regional and local politics, effectively being identified (and quite rightly) with “the establishment”. PD is usually described as “centre-left” even though the party has followed a trajectory which will be very familiar to the politics reader and kind of embodies the general decay of the modern left. From full-fledged Communist Party (founded by Antonio Gramsci in 1921), its leadership decided to undergo a complex plastic surgery procedure, renaming it Democratic Party of the Left in 1991, then Democrats of the Left in 1998 (with the party logo finally (?) getting rid of the hammer and sickle symbol), and eventually just Democratic Party in 2007. Together with the aesthetics, they made sure to also gradually adjust the party ideology. From militant communist to socialist, then to moderately reformist and finally to overtly neoliberal after Renzi (an outspoken admirer of Tony Blair) took over the role of Secretary from 2013 to 2017. Now even its staunch supporters are having troubles finding a trace of progressive economic policy, and when party members claim to be “on the side of the workers” it is always in passing, merely paying lip service to their onerous legacy. Indeed, they surely have had access to state-of-the-art data analysis tools, discovering that Italian workers are not their key demographic reference anymore. Now, as
Matteo Renzi (right), the mastermind of PD’s globalist transformation and Nicola Zingaretti (left), the current Party Secretary
with most of the Western Left, their ideology has been poisoned by neoliberal globalism, focusing on race and gender issues rather than class conflict or vulture capitalism, championing the business of mass immigration and “human rights” in the hope that this new cheap labour force will constitute a rich source of “progressive” voters.
The Five Star Movement (M5S) has been one of the biggest revelations in recent Italian politics. The youngest among the major parties (founded in 2009), it is also the most mysterious in terms of its ideological basis. Born out of the visionary minds of comedian Beppe Grillo and entrepreneur Davide Casaleggio, the movement (which strongly refuses the denomination party) is (or should we say was) centred around its five stars, namely Water, Transport, Development, Connectivity, Environment, the pillars of its early-day activism. It does, at first glance, look like some sort of techno-libertarian conglomerate of activists, like other anti-establishment movements in Europe (one may mention Podemos in Spain or Piratenpartei in Germany). However, the crucial difference is that M5S activists came from the most diverse political experiences (from Communists and Greens, to Fascists and Christian Democrats), thus creating a highly unpredictable mix of ideas and voices. What united them was the resentment towards a political system perceived as corrupt, slow and infiltrated by organised crime. To the old system they were opposing a new, clean alternative, far from the nepotistic workings of Italian politics and against the neoliberal logic to which other parties had been enslaved since the late 1990s. Currently headed by Luigi Di Maio, a young Law School dropout with no prior experience in politics, the party has missed a huge chance of becoming the nationalist/identitarian vanguard, mainly because of a substantial lack of a shared political philosophy. What made the movement exciting and uncontrollable also turned out to be its major weakness. M5S leadership was not able to exploit the ideology vacuum and fill it with a coherent political strategy. Eurasianism (or even a milder form of geopolitical consciousness), could have very well constituted the perfect foundation for this new populist force, thus bringing together voices from very different backgrounds and uniting them in one clear goal, the rejection of the neoliberal globalist dogmas and the advancement of the multipolar world order. However, this did not (and at this point will not) happen. The Five Star Movement remains a blank canvas of MPs and Senators, so far cleverly exploited by both the League and the Democratic Party to advance their agendas.
Now this last statement requires some further explanation, which will come in the form of a brief political chronology of the past two years. After the March 2018 elections, Italian politics reached an impasse. Luigi Di Maio’s M5S (running alone) obtained an impressive 35.9% share of the votes. The centre-right coalition managed to gather a 41.5%, with the League leading at 19.6%. The Democratic Party and its centre-left coalition reached about 20%, although this marked its worst performance since the birth of the party. Since the Five Star Movement obtained the highest number of votes but not enough to govern alone, the President of the Republic tasked Di Maio with finding a suitable partner. After three months of intense debates and negotiations, the M5S formed a controversial coalition government with the League, based on a shared “government contract”, a list of programmatic points and legislative proposals agreed upon in advance by both parties. Ministries and appointments were therefore divided between the two, with Salvini becoming Minister of the Interior and Di Maio heading the Ministry of Economic Development. Giuseppe Conte, a lawyer and academic from the University of Rome, was appointed Prime Minister jointly by the two forces, while Salvini and Di Maio assigned themselves the purely nominal role of Deputy Prime Ministers. In the following year, Salvini skilfully managed to suck up an enormous amount of consensus from the M5S by leading a personal crusade against illegal immigration. Going routinely on Facebook rants against the degradation of Italian peripheries and being hosted every other day on talk shows to debate braindead leftists, he made sure to gain a lot of popularity. Popularity which was not even remotely matched by the M5S, entangled since the very start in a severely flawed and controversial proposal to institute a lighter version of universal basic income, clearly unpopular among all working Italians. Then, after a mere thirteen months, Salvini put through a motion of no confidence to his own PM, citing a hostile climate between the League and M5S as a reason. Analysts believe this was his plan all along. After having drained the Five Star Movement of all its consensus by attributing all the delays and shortcomings to its coalition partners, the League would come out of new elections as the leading party. It appears, however, that while in university Salvini did not take enough Constitutional Law classes. Indeed, after the motion was passed, the President gave PM Conte a mandate to form a new government, completely sidestepping the League. Predictably, the M5S quickly ran to the Democratic Party, its sworn enemy, to build a new majority. Both of them (fearing new elections and a likely League victory), quickly agreed to form a government. As of now (January 2020), the two forces are currently in power, while the centre-right coalition is confined to the opposition and is raking up an even bigger consensus (not just in the polls but also in local elections, the most recent of which saw the League candidate win with an unprecedented 57% of the preferences). Only time will tell whether the current majority will hold until the end of the legislature (2023) or if the Italian people will be asked to vote again before this time. What is clear is that both M5S and the Democratic Party fear Salvini’s consensus (the only reason why they agreed to form a government). Hence, unless a very serious crisis erupts or the two leaderships feel confident enough to challenge Salvini at the polls, we should expect this project to continue.
Now let us get back to the beginning. It appears now at first glance that nationalism (embodied by the first coalition government) is finally dead, killed by cunning politicians with the help of legal subterfuges. Once we give a closer look, however, we come to the conclusion that nationalism was never alive in the first place. That the League was not going to be the true catalyst of European nationalist forces (as pundits in The Guardian feared) was already quite clear. The first doubts surfaced when the League was one of the very first (and few) to join The Movement, the (neoconservative) nationalist international led by Steve Bannon. Right after the European elections of 2018, Bannon toured Europe to export the American (and Zionist) character of Trumpian nationalism to emerging European nationalist parties. Needless to say, the League was the most prominent members of this new group, with Bannon endorsing the Italian nationalist project and declaring Salvini a “world-class leader”. Other notable yet less known red flags include Salvini’s unwarranted remarks about Hezbollah during a visit to Jerusalem in late 2018, and his ground-breaking discovery of Israel being “a bastion of democracy in the Middle East” (source). Moreover, during a hostile televised debate with one of Italy’s most renowned globalist media outlet, while smearing Iran as a “global danger”, he made it perfectly clear that “neither I nor my government will engage with those who want to erase a state and a people with violence” (source). A few well-informed commentators have highlighted these contradictions, also drawing interesting parallels with the well-known brand of Trumpian nationalism and, crucially, Israeli nationalism [see an example here (Italian)].
Matteo Salvini (centre) meeting Steve Bannon (left) in Rome
[Addendum: In light of recent developments in the Near East, we shall point out one positive outcome of this government transition. Despite Italy’s diplomatic weight being irrelevant on the world stage at this time, it comes as positive news that the government has decided to keep extremely quiet in this first stage of US-Iran clashes, joining other EU countries in the call for a peaceful solution. On the other hand, Salvini was quick to side with President Trump and to label Commander Soleymani a “terrorist”. One may only wonder what would have happened if the League and its Zionist leadership were still in power and what effects it could have had on other European countries].
That said, it should now be clear that the international globalist elite cannot be afraid of Salvini trying to destabilise the Leviathan’s stronghold in the Near East. What about his open and vocal support of Russia and President Putin (for which he has received much condemnation from the MSM)? Once again, we need to look at this issue from the broader perspective of the Anglo-European nationalist project (or souverainisme as the media likes to label it with veiled irony). As a very informative article has already pointed out, Salvini and the new nationalists view Russia not as an instrumental ally in bringing about the multipolar world order, but rather as a means to weaken the opposition to the Empire in the East. By drawing Russia closer, they seek to hinder her alliances with strategic partners in the Near and Middle East, with the ultimate goal of pushing China away. As one Eurasian analyst put it, the Western nationalists’ real aim behind their love story with Russia is “breaking the Moscow-Teheran-Damascus axis” (Perra, 2019, see the above article) and therefore strengthening the unipolar balance of power described by Charles Krauthammer. Since the elections of 2018, it has become painfully clear that the League is nothing more than an elaborate project of controlled opposition. A party removed from its original federalist context and projected into the international arena. A party which has been used by the elites to promote a vanilla version of right-wing 21st Century politics, drawing consensus away from more unpredictable fringe political forces such as the M5S, Casa Pound Italia (CPI) or the Italian Communist Party, so far the only ones daring to speak critically of the American military occupation of Italy and to question the neoliberal project and its globalist elites. Indeed, the overwhelming support the League enjoys is mainly rooted in its attitude towards immigration (which has been greatly exaggerated by an insanely biased media coverage) and stems from the hope that, with someone like him in power, Italy will not go down the same road as France or England. Moreover, Salvini’s consensus also crucially hinges on the deep-seated Italian Catholic identity, which makes nearly everyone instinctively resonate with Salvini’s anti-degeneracy rants (such as his vocal opposition to adoption for homosexual couples) and his (at least for now) opposition to the homosexual agenda. Apart from these crucial features, there is very little difference between say, the League’s economic policies and those of some LSE-educated technocrats from the Democratic Party. As always under the globalist world order, questioning neoliberal dogmas has become the new original sin, and none of the Italian mainstream political parties is willing to commit it.
With all of this said, however, we can still hold a reasonable doubt about the League’s true intentions. After all, one might think Salvini would be wise enough to fake his support for the Zionist elite in order to get ahead in the polls, while at the same time being secretly against the Atlantist project. Indeed, this is exactly what the elites fear. This is why the MSM has been engaged in a ferocious campaign to smear Salvini and the League’s leadership, in an effort to find out his truest intentions. This is also why Salvini is currently being subjected to several (political) prosecutions by distinguished members of the judiciary, with the spectre of prison constantly haunting him. And this is where the Segre affaire comes into play.
The supposed “incident” happened in the aftermath of a vote instituting a “hate speech” Commission inside the Senate. The bill, which ultimately passed without the votes of the League’s senators, was spearheaded by Segre herself. Indeed, in an interview from 2018, she went as far as suggesting that her appointment as senator made her think that she could use it to push for this legislation to go through (the interview can be found here). The “Segre Commission” (as the media labelled it) is going to be a special Senate Commission tasked with identifying instances of
“intolerance, racism, antisemitism, incitement to hate and violence towards individuals or social groups on the basis of certain characteristics such as ethnicity, religion, origin, sexual orientation, gender, or other physical and psychological conditions” [full text in Italian here]
Moreover, it will be able to produce papers and suggestion to Parliament, including those concerning legislation intended to curb such phenomena. Those who have followed any political debate in the past three years will surely be familiar with this kind of jargon and its origin. Lawfare has become more and more prominent in contemporary politics, being used by the ruling class not only to silence opposition (without losing the very much inflated democratic label) but also to socially engineer our societies, implicitly teaching what is and what is not appropriate. Now, it is obviously difficult to predict to what extent, if any, this Commission will be weaponised against political leaders or controversial intellectuals. Indeed, in an era where the media is at the same time judge jury and executioner when it comes to political and social matters, perhaps such a Commission would appear redundant. What is likely to happen, however, is that the Commission (the more we write it the more it begins to sound Orwellian) will use its powers to single out controversial figures (and we do not mean fringe, internet-based controlled opposition, but rather sound, educated voices with dissenting opinions on globalist dogmas) and force them into silence (with the full weight of the law).
Matteo Salvini
Liliana Segre
At this time, however, we are not particularly interested in the Commission per se, but rather in the media coverage that followed the Senate vote. Tellingly enough, the media narrative focused on centre-right senators not casting their vote. The spotlight has been on the League, whose members were apparently “told” to abstain, citing the quite evident risk of an infringement on free speech. Naturally, most of the blame was cast on Salvini, who was “forced” by the media to endure days of public shaming on virtually every news network, until he finally agreed to entertain a meeting with Liliana Segre in her private apartment in Rome. Salvini later declined to disclose the subject of the meeting. Nonetheless, the fact that Segre had received a letter from none other than Israeli President Rivlin expressing “horror and disgust” for what had happened, is enough to interpret this as a symbolic investiture of the Senator by the Zionist elite. It is now clear that the meeting was some sort of official warning to Salvini, a way of telling him (using the most harmless of messengers) that the Zionist elite is watching his every step. A clear reminder that those who put him where he is now will not tolerate any delay to their plans. It is also not unreasonable to predict new pro-Zionist legislation proposals coming from League members in an effort to signal increased support. Salvini himself has recently suggested (in a brief interlude during a talk show), that the League will be devising legislation akin to the anti-BDS laws of North America, perhaps going as far as labelling criticism of Israel and Zionism as “anti-Semitic”. If you want to remain relevant and out of trouble, you must kowtow to the right people.
To sum up this brief overview of Italian nationalist politics, we have tried to make sense of a rather complex environment and visualise the international equilibria reflecting into the three main Italian parties. The League is gaining consensus at an unprecedented rate, being now the leading party according to the polls. What drives this consensus is mainly Salvini’s anti-immigration rhetoric (which has so far been only partially followed up by actual policy). Aside from immigration and a mild social conservatism, the League is no more a nationalist movement than your average European establishment conservative party. From neoliberal economic policies to the loud and clear support for Israel and US occupation in the Near East, Salvini skilfully managed to construct and maintain the image of a Zionist-friendly party. Although the Democratic Party (with its utter detachment from the working class, the shameless support for mass immigration and the global homosexual cabal) is still the elites’ favourite, the two have been (secretly) working together with the same goal, namely eliminating any potential threat to the system. The Five Star Movement, with its lack of a coherent ideological basis, has been the most distinguished casualty in this campaign. Therefore, the League, once heralded by European nationalists as the one true hope for the radical identitarian right (or at least as an alley in which to channel those sentiments), is now fully part of the neoliberal establishment. As the elites wait for its leadership to abandon even the last tokens of real Conservatism and Tradition, the League’s fate seems to be already written. It is no longer a matter of if, but of when.
GV
Salvini’s mistake is that he missed the opportunity to use the popular support
to fight of the zionazi-neocon-neolibs. With masses of ppl behind him, they wouldn’t dare touch him.
Same as Trump. But then again, Trump is there just to keep the pindo reality show going – he is the drama generator.
They did dare to kill Qassem Soleimani. By comparison, Trump, Salvini and other assorted Euro-trash anount to little more than dung-beetles.
“They did dare to kill Qassem Soleimani.”
yes, and it was a strategic miscalculation… pindos r now done in the ME
Sad commentary, indeed. But the current dilemma of political expediency seems to be everywhere these days: Well-intentioned leaders are either bent, blackmailed, or threatened into compliance. Or else Arkancided. It is sobering to realize, for example, what happened to Omar Torrijos of Panama when he tried to refuse.
I think Salvini is relatively sincere and trying to work for his country’s future. How far he can go with the current constraints remains to be seen.
Italy enjoyed a short period of prosperity during the Anglo-American ”golden age”; to wit in the second half of the 20th century. It was an era when Italy exported cars, pop music, and computers. And Italy was also a country with very combative trade unions.
Neoliberalism has achieved the same results in Italy as in, most notably, Eastern Europe. The entire fabric of society is falling apart with deindustrialization (in the North), consolidation of Mafia rule (in the South), and abysmal birth stats (throughout the country). I don’t agree with the ghost ”Giuseppe Verdi” that some incredibly convoluted plan is driving the illegal immigration to Italy (progressives in search of a revolutionary proletariat). If anything, it was Italy’s gung-ho imperialist politicians and the Mafias in charge of southern Italy’s agrobusiness that were the beneficiaries of Libya’s destruction. And if Italy’s birth stats don’t improve drastically, there will be no more ’true Italians’, whether the self-pitying sheeple understand it or not.
I think you raised many good points here, appreciated.
The Mafia has no doubt benefited from illegal immigration. Caporalato (hiring desperate people under illegal arrangements in quasi-slavery conditions) is a widespread phenomenon in the agribusiness, targeting mainly African and Eastern European migrants, as you rightly pointed out. My bad for not mentioning this. However, I think it is a mistake to reduce the motives to this. We must remember that it is not in the Mafia’s interest to keep such a never-ending stream of migration flowing. Just take a look at the recent emergence of new cells of Nigerian mafia all over Italy. The “locally sourced” Mafia is lamenting the harsh “competition” the Nigerians are bringing to the criminal world, noting that they are hard to control, potentially dangerous and disrupting to business. I attach a link to a nice short documentary made two years ago which covers most of these issues. Not the best source, I admit, but still very informative.
On the other hand, I think there is sufficient amount of evidence to claim that progressives and globalists (and I don’t mean to sound conspiratorial) have benefited the most from these migration waves. Just look at the many NGOs rescuing migrant boats at sea who have reportedly been organising the trade with human traffickers. This is just the most famous example, but more have been reported. Or look at the countless business “cooperatives” (mostly run by businessmen close to the Left and PD in particular) managing the racket of migrant housing. They used to receive 35€ (now down to 20 after the brief Salvini interlude) each day for each person from public funding, most of which was not spent on housing, food or clothing but ended up in their pockets. A few books have been written on the subject, this one comes to mind (unfortunately I am not aware of an English translation).
I totally agree with you on the birth rate issue, it is probably the current biggest national emergency (to be honest most European countries face the same problem). However, given the very problems we have just mentioned, it has become increasingly difficult to raise a family. Now both parents need to work to have a decent income and more often than not young people are stuck for years (!) in low paid internships which are obviously more convenient to employers who can fire with a much shorter notice (both PD and M5S are to blame for accelerating these neoliberal reforms). Under these conditions, how can low (or even middle) class families sustain more than one or two children? To get above replacement level, I believe, the right economic conditions need to be set in place first.
There’s enough for another essay here, forgive the long reply.
Thank you Verdi for a most inspiring reply; it was well worth reading in one fell swoop.
I wasn’t aware that Italy’s domestic organized crime was under ’foreign competitive pressure’ but, just like the squeezing of the deluded middle classes, this was fairly predictable. Neoliberalism is unapologetically and utterly elitist, and it cuts both ways, wreaking havoc in the First World and Third World alike. Sweden’s political parties, especially those belonging in the reactionary gutter, are led by similar specimina which you mentioned with regard to Italy. They used to make noises about the perils of immigration, but now they have discovered how to fleece the taxpayer by providing sub-standard accommodation of immigrants at very hefty prices. Entrepreneurship doesn’t focus on honesty, after all. Mafiosi prove this point superbly. 🙂
I really can’t see how Italy’s demographics can be fixed without immigration. As you say, when affordable housing and the jobs needed to sustain the costs of living are missing, this seriously constrains nativity.
All the best,
/Nussiminen
Hey Nussiminen, you are welcome, and thanks for the interesting addendum.
Very interesting. We may have found a pattern here. I agree with you about Neoliberalism, it is damaging countries across the board. One aspect that is often overlooked is indeed the economic and social damage inflicted on the many (far from healthy) African countries affected by this massive emigration. There are many African economists/politicians who ironically share many European nationalists’ views on the subject
The demographics issue deserves a much more detailed exposition, I will just write down a few ideas. I have been researching and debating immigration for quite a while now, and in my experience you rarely get anything valuable out of it. I would say that it all boils down to what people believe nation-states to be. If we think they are an organic expression of a people, its culture and its historical trajectory, then resorting to immigration to fix the demographics problem is only a temporary solution, and it brings more problems of identity and social cohesion in the long run. If, however, we conceive nation-states in a more legalistic and pragmatic way (as an entity with immediate economic and military needs, whose influence and power are crucially determined by its numbers), then immigration, even mass immigration, is perfectly fine both in the short and long run. I would consider myself kind of in the middle, although leaning more towards the first definition. There are obviously urgent material needs, but if a people loses its identity and social cohesion (a process that it’s already well underway) then it becomes nothing more than a stranded, atomised entity, unable to oppose the neoliberal status quo
Verdi,
Indeed, there are quite a few striking similarities between the societal deterioration and decomposition processes going on in Sweden and Italy, including in their ”parliaments”. At bottom, It’s EU driven corruption, and the You’re_a_Peon Union doesn’t promote anything but LGBTQ and full-blown corporatocracy everywhere. Interestingly, one conspicuous difference between Europe’s north and south is that while the EU has inflicted most pain and suffering in the south, there is a significantly greater acceptance of the EU there, including in Greece. It would be wrong to call this a manifestation of ’Stockholm syndrome’ (sic) — a truer metaphor would be ’Syriza syndrome’.
Africa has been — and is still — suffering horribly at the hands of Western imperialism as Libya keeps showing us. But now that the Chinese are investing in the south of that Continent, there is a way ahead that should be plain for all to see.
I may add, being italian myself, a couple of more reasons why Italy, especially in the recent past, has been so pro-EU (even though these reasons may be not so true anymore, due to all the EU failures in the last years):
1) Total disillusion about internal politics. Italians have hoped in the 1990s and 2000s that being led by foreigners could be better than by the national ruling class, which consists of robbers, liars, selfish enterpreneurs and Mafia representatives. (This is repeating constantly through history, alternating with breaks of nationalism as in the 1860s or in the 1930s).
2) The hope that EU may become a world geopolitic power (that could compete with US, Russia and China), together with a complete ignorance of how EU was born (namely: heavily sponsored by the americans and thus corrupted from the very beginning).
Then just add heavy US-like propaganda, widespreaded for half a century… and there you have it.
Salvini just knows that a rant against US or Israel would mean his total obliteration from the italian politics, achieved with the means of character murder via corrupted media (which he, on the contrary of mr. Berlusoni, do not own) and deluded leftist propaganda.
Cheers.
“but if a people loses its identity and social cohesion (a process that it’s already well underway) then it becomes nothing more than a stranded, atomised entity, unable to oppose the neoliberal status quo”
In other words our global PSYCHOCRACY wants all countries to become like USA:
an awkward mix of people where everybody is scared of everybody else, and no one trusts anyone – ready to be fully divided and conquered with minimal effort.
No meaningful identity whatsoever – they are ready to turn into domesticated animals basically
“(and I don’t mean to sound conspiratorial)”
Giuseppe, take it easy: Italy is probably the only country where conspiracies outnumber conspiracy theories….
P.S.: sorry, probably the Vatican is ahead of Italy
Hahaha you are right Luca, we sure like to keep our secrets. And as they say, “three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead”…
Yes Giuseppe, without self irony we wouldn’t be “real” Italians… Like your wise comment about three keeping a secret.
The “God Father”, the “Son” and the “Holy Spirit”: guess which one of the three Mr. Calvi saw while being suicided at the London’s Friars Bridge, along with the other two…
And $piritual geography seems to link the rivers Thames and the Tevere, regardless of Henry VIII and the Counter Reform ( And “MI6 sponsored” Mazzini – passed away 1872 -, before the Banca Romana scandal in 1892 that egregiously anticipated Goldman Sachs, while HSBC was getting born thanks to the Opium Wars… )
Excellent overview of current Italpol!
As I recall, it was the PD with Renzi as PM who enacted the Jobs Act (with its removal of Article 18 protecting the workers from easy firing) and the MV5, in opposition at the time, was vociferously AGAINST Renzi’s reforms. All the more opprobrious coming from the so-called ‘Party of the Workers’ the PD betraying their own rank and file.
The Reddito di Cittadinanza was WAY more left than anything Renzi did for workers during his regime.
Mr. Verdi,
Thank you for this extensive overview of the Italian political scene. An incredibly well sourced and objective analysis. Too bad the League, led by Salvini, has morphed into such a blatant servant of the AngloZionists and their subversion of people’s desire for sovereignty.
The excellent question posed, whether Salvini is merely temporary placating the masters, or has been their creation all along, will determine Italy’s future. Unfortunately, Salvini is looking more and more like the Italian version of the Orange charlatan.
It’s truly frightening how quickly they are able to subvert any popular movement that aims to prevent their globalist agendas and serve the interest of the everyday Joe or Giuseppe. Same evil prevails, be it guided by Neoliberal filth or the Neoconservative variety filth.
Kudos to you. Can’t wait to read the next installment.
The Saker has managed to attract some talented Italians here (Jimmie Moglia remains the top). It is an excellent article and shows that all 3 big parties are puppets. Some time ago there was another italian article (perhaps not as well written, but equally incisive) that named names and places, and pointed out that Renzi’s US contact was Ledeen, while Grillo was present at the meeting to privatize the large Italian state conglomerates. With the thorough description of Salvini’s predicament, the political landscape is completely described.
There is no real politician out there looking out for Italy, and the few who tried in the recent past met untimely deaths. But these things go a long way back, Mazzini was a freemason and he is (justly) much more popular in the UK than in Italy.
A little historical correction: Mazzini was one of the few italian nationalists of that time who was NOT a freemason, on the contrary of mr. Garibaldi.
Unless you want to count the Carboneria as a sort of freemasonry, which would be a quite difficult argument to endorse.
The family is expanding, thanks saker.
We’re seeing here that getting rid of these scum the nice way ain’t gonna cut it
An excellent analysis of the sorry state of affairs in Italy today … and by a great composer at that! :-)
Italy’s continuing love affair with neoliberal demagogues, right-wing demagogues and outright fascists is hard to understand in view of the country’s history. Where are all those Italians who mourned Enrico Berlinguer’s death in 1984? Where are all those millions who attended his funeral service in Rome today? Switched sides? Out of their minds?
To me it sometimes seems that there are not many left on either side of the Atlantic who are in their right minds today. Whacked out by relentless propaganda, most of the post 1960s generations have, in fact, never been in their right minds and many of the older generations have been out of their minds since decades. While the majority of Western populations now unquestioningly accept the status quo as the best of all possible worlds (with some minor improvements still outstanding), the memory of times, not too long ago, when most people had much better lives, is rapidly vanishing. Western Europeans who voted for Olof Palme, Bruno Kreisky, Willy Brandt, Enrico Berlinguer or Georges Marchais wouldn’t have understood today’s dumbed down masses cheering Merkel, Macron*, Johnson, Biden or Trump. And yet, many of the same (now older) people are doing exactly that today! What has happened to them and to the generations since the 1960s is a propaganda induced deadening of the brain which has lead to a distorted perception of reality and to a shift in values. While Kennedy, Johnson or even Nixon would have never got away with the abolition of the 4th amendment, imprisonment without trial, the use of torture and targeted assassinations as openly declared policies, the majority of today’s electorates accept and even applaud such excesses of their leaders … on both sides of the Atlantic!
So, how did we get here and why are most people d’accord with what their (still elected) leaders are doing to them and to the rest of the world? My simple answer is: Propaganda via TV! No newspaper, magazine or even radio broadcast is as powerful a tool in the hands of devious manipulators as is 24/7 Live TV and the mendacious blather of news pundits who manage to come across as competent, truthful, caring etc. Nothing does greater harm to an average person’s conscience and to their perception of the world.
*) Regarding Macron: I have a lot of sympathy for the cause of the yellow vests in France but sometimes I’m wondering how many of them actually fell for Macron’s clever campaign and voted for him in 2017? I wouldn’t be surprised if it was a significant percentage. This is what TV does to people these days.
“Where are all those Italians who mourned Enrico Berlinguer’s death in 1984?”
Some suggestions:
1) Dead.
2) Old and tired.
3) Old and brainwashed by propaganda.
4) Alone and unheard.
5) Completely coopted into modern capitalism by the means of survival convenience and material comforts. In other words, they’ve become their nemesis: the bourgeois. (This is the largest group).
“5) Completely coopted into modern capitalism by the means of survival convenience and material comforts. In other words, they’ve become their nemesis: the bourgeois. (This is the largest group).”
Yes Gab, sadly right. And Massimo D’Alema, former Italian Communist Youth ( FIGC ) “leader” bombing Yugoslavia. And by the way, I can’t find the link yet, last year D’Alema I seem to remember went to Kosovo to celebrate democracy… Anyway, here’s another D’Alema’s link https://www.voltairenet.org/article205841.html
And another chapter should analyse Napolitano’s shameful presidency ( for non-Italians: Napolitano, former president of the “Italian” republic, and obviously a former communist, another Goldman Sachs sponsor, bringing Mario Monti – Goldman Sachs of course – to “power”… )
Sorry, I forgot: the Voltairenet link I attached refers to Manlio Dinucci’s writing, not to “Il Manifesto”, the paper printing his writings. Il Manifesto was already a capitalist Atlanticist paper in the 70s
Good article about the country I was born and raised in, but that I hesitate to still fully call my country after over 30 years of emigration. There is however a crucial point that I think has to be underscored: From a geopolitical standpoint The League is a Steve Bannon asset and Bannon functions like an Anglo Trojan Horse to keep those sovereignty seeking people tied to Anglo-balization. The result is the The League talks the talk of sovereignty, but when the chips are down it will not walk the walk of sovereignty which consists of getting out of Nato, recovering national economic sovereignty and snapping out of Anglo cultural colonialism.
There cannot be any real sovereignty of nations, all the nations of Eurasia, not just Italy, within Anglo-balization.
Kick-a$$ comment. I think we’d do well to examine Mr. Bannon’s activities (strewn all over the bar, so to speak), then move on to question who exactly he works for.
All this focus on Italy is really interesting, shining a light on similar stuff going on in the rest of what used to be “Bella Europa”.
There’s a nexus where the old gladio and the former Congress for Cultural Freedom and similar entities meet, maybe it should be placed in Brussles, i.e. the modern day, above-ground “European Union”. I suppose they’re the guys and gals making sour faces on TV during Nigel Farage’s speeches a few years ago.
The long process of the capitulation of Italy to the Zio Mafia initiated (at least) by the Masono-Carbonaro-‘Risorgimento’, was formalized in ‘Nostra Aetate’ (the ‘Declaration on the Relation of the Church with Non-Christian Religions’) promulgated on 28 October 1965 by Pope Paul VI at the accursed Vatican II pseudo-Council.
The ‘commedia dell’arte’ that is the Italian political life is there to distract the attention of the ‘Il Popolo d’Italia’.
correct. I mentioned Mazzini above. Italy was created from the get go to weaken the Augsburg empire. It was a globalist project, similar to the Russian revolution or 1968. The French and British provided all sorts of help to the Savoia, specially for the various battles with the Austro-Hungaric in Lombardy and Veneto, 1861-1865. In return, Italy fought WWI on the globalists side.
And this explains why ultimately italian nationalism was defeated. The Risorgimento and subsequent history went over most people’s heads, and nationalism never developed the deep roots it needed to succeed. In the South, among other things, the Piemontese were quite brutal with their occupation (besides taking all the gold from Naples). Italy was a temporary arrangement for external geopolitical goals, and now after a suitable depopulation period lasting 2 or 3 generations it will be absorbed in other political entities.
Poor Italian people, prisoners of the globalists
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1JkhNOcXGo
Beppe Grillo, Globalism’s sockpuppet…
‘’The emergence of a populist like Beppe Grillo and his “5 Star Movement”, in 2013 in the Italian political arena, made us believe in the arrival of a fresh wind. Advocating participatory democracy for citizens in the management of public affairs, digital democracy (e-democracy), the use of social networks, degrowth in connection with strong environmentalism, anti-productivism and anti-consumerism, this movement is defined outside of the left-right divide. In short, all the ingredients seem to come together to frighten the oligarchy of Italy, Europe, Goldman Sachs and others. The reality is quite different.
Indeed, we must note the name of the co-founder of the “M5S”, true eminence grise, Gianroberto Casaleggio (Davide’s father). After various activities in communication (Olivetti), he founded in 2005 “Casaleggio Associati”, dealing and managing blogs and producing “homemade” Internet videos whose philosophy is perfectly in keeping with the spirit of globalism.
As the “M5S” cries out its horror of the capitalist world, this vast program receives the full support of senior officials from the oligarchic world. From 2004 to 2012, Casaleggio Associati had the support of the influential Enrico Sassoon. The latter belongs to the gotha of the oligarchic world.
The oligarchy is a world of networks and Enrico Sassoon is only one more visible element than the others in the promotion of Beppe Grillo and his mentor Gianroberto Casaleggio.’’
I just translated and summarized an article published by Pierre Hillard on the Boulevard Voltaire website on November 18 2013.
https://www.bvoltaire.fr/beppe-grillo-faux-nez-du-systeme/
The M5S movement captured and “froze” 25% of the italian electorate for several years doing nothing with it and, thus, accomplished its purpose.
Reading your article we understand, now, exactly what Salvini is all about.
Marion Maréchal (Le Pen) is his French counterpart. She is a zionist ; her father was a journalist and a Mossad agent.
Mélanchon, on the left, is a high ranked freemason and he is pro-immigration ; hopeless too !
Poor Europe, vassal of the United States of America, it is being sucked dry by parasites at the top and at the bottom ; it will not survive the 21st century.
There one important factor missing in your analysis :
The famous meeting on the Britannia – June 1992 – where all the elites of Italy and of the financial word were present.
To this meetings on the Britannia participated also Beppe Grillo ( founder of 5 stars movement ) ,
Salvini obviously was not there ( too young).
After this meeting the demise of the political class started with the “mani pulite” period where a lot of politicians where accused ( and prosecuted ) for corruption ( the vast majority of them was later proved innocent, but in the mean time their careers where destroyed )
The new political class is the one that brought Italy to the present disaster .
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMY_Britannia_(1953) ( sorry it is in Italian I could not find it in English )
Sea, here /italys-worst-enemies-domestic-as-always/
Yes, the point is that Grillo was on the Britannia , not Salvini.
There is absolutely no ” lack of a coherent ideological basis” for M5S , on the contrary , it is just acting as programmed long ago .
Salvini’s party has grown a lot and very quickly and there are differences among the political ideas of its members , we shall see how they will behave when and if they will come back to government .
I actually did not know Grillo took part in the meeting on the Britannia, thanks for pointing this out to me. I may have been too indulgent with the Five Star Movement then, it won’t happen again.
However, I believe my broader point still stands. When the Movement first assembled, it was not under a clear political ideology (as I wrote, this was supposed to be their strength in the short run). Even if there was a hidden agenda behind the creation of the Movement (which we cannot exclude), the variety of MPs and Senators has led to the birth of a few dissenting branches of the Movement. These branches are likely to start a schism very soon, as the resignation of Fioramonti (strange enough, a vocal supporter of BDS) seemed to predict.
This is the same logic you rightly applied to the League. There are most definitely several competing worldviews within Salvini’s party, and only time will tell if any of them will grow strong enough to impose a new direction to its members.
Right now, however, neither the M5S still headed by Grillo nor the League under Matteo “Israel-bastion-of-democracy” Salvini are suitable candidates to lead a nationalist anti-globalist crusade.
For sure the whole question of Liliana Segre is only a gimmick used to put in trouble Salvini, but the Italian nationalism is no question.
After the world war II, in Italian politics there was no space at all for nationalism. The ruinous defeat in the world war II has transformed Italy in a vassal state of U.S. without any capacity of an autonomous foreign policy (the mentioned events that have seen protagonists like Mattei, Moro, Craxi, Berlusconi are only episodic and do not indicate at all any will to free the country by the overbearing American influence). Indeed in the last seventy years Italian leadership has always conceived his country (above all in matters like industrial policy and military policy) fully dependent by American system.
Now Italy is a totally corrupt and dysfunctional country and, in addition, burdened by an enormous public debt (a simple negative outlook by a single Credit rating agency has devastating effects on the public budget). The economy is heavily weighted by very low productivity, backwardness in high-tech productions, a very bad public administration and, in addition, by a massive population decline. In these conditions no political party is capable of finding a credible way out, in the meantime, people is more and more hungry due to the deterioration of living conditions. Populism is the only way to gain ephemeral electoral consensus. In this context Salvini’s political twist happen: there is no strategic vision for the future of the country only small tactical gimmicks of short duration.
After all also the Bannon’s assessments are only tactical gimmicks to weaken and put pressure on E.U. and, finally, on Germany (the only European country that might have economic strength to free itself by America).
There is a long list of Jewish ‘Italian’ politicians. To name a few: Giuseppe Finzi ((1815-1886), Isaac Artom (secretary of Cavour, ambassador, senator), Alessandro Fortis (1842 – 1909) Italy’s first Jewish Prime-Minister (1905-1909, Luigi Luzzati (1841-1927), second Jewish Prime Minister (1910-1911), Sidney Costantino, Baron Sonnino (1847 – 1922) Prime-Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs during the First World War, representing Italy at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference, Ernesto Nathan ( 1848 – 1921), mayor of Rome (1907 -1913). (Sonnino and Nathan were not even born in Italy).
Don’t forget the ‘Muses’ of Benito Mussolini, Margherita Sarfatti and Anjelika Balabanova (Russian-Jewish-Italian communist!). “The Fascist regime also helped, at the request of Vladimir Jabotinski, the establishment in 1934 of a navy officer training camp in Civitavecchia for Mandatory Palestine Jews, laying the foundations of the Israeli Navy. By helping the Zionist cause, Mussolini hoped to gain influence in the Middle East at the expense of the British Empire”.
And General Roberto Segre.
Actually we lack space to enumerate even a small percentage of ’eminent’ Jews.
And we don’t even mention the Church.
Exactly! To be honest, Mussolini has always been kind of ambiguous on the subject, on the one hand endorsing Islam and trying to entertain good relations with Arab countries (you can find a very good Italian article here), while on the other supporting the creation of a Jewish state and Zionism. He has been reported as saying:
“Ma voi dovete creare uno Stato Ebraico. Io sono sionista, io. […] Voi dovete avere un vero stato e non il ridicolo Focolare Nazionale che vi hanno offerto gli inglesi. Io vi aiuterò a creare uno Stato Ebraico”
(“You need to create a Jewish State. I am a Zionist. You must have a true state, not the “national home [for the Jewish people] the English offered you. I will help you build a Jewish state”)
As you rightly said, this behaviour was dictated by Mussolini’s strategy to increase his influence and undermine the British in the Near East, and perhaps even get credit in Europe and the US for supporting the Zionist project.
Indeed! Not to mention the previous and current members of the Italian Stock Exchange’s Board of Directors
UBI IUS BELLI, IBI IUS USURAE
Salvini and the new nationalists view Russia not as an instrumental ally in bringing about the multipolar world order, but rather as a means to weaken the opposition to the Empire in the East. By drawing Russia closer, they seek to hinder her alliances with strategic partners in the Near and Middle East, with the ultimate goal of pushing China away.
Are the Russian and Chinese elites aware of the possibility of being betrayed by Italy? Ask the Germans and the Austrians about the reliability of Italy as an ally:
Triple Alliance (1882)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_Alliance_(1882)
Tripartite Pact (1940)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripartite_Pact
If Italy also participated with the Nazis in invading several European countries and also the Soviet Union, does Italy owe Russia reparations? Why were Germany and Austria the only countries that had to pay after the war?
I had always thought that Italian society and government structures were designed after WW II to be as hopelessly chaotic and disorganized as found in an African country – thus making Italy easier for the Anglo-American globalists to manipulate. Why else do governments in Italy change so often?
What does Italy have to offer Russia and China? Clothes? Art? Wine? Cheese? Why buy Italian when you can buy superior Japanese or German manufactured goods. Items manufactured in Italy are known for low quality. Who would want to drive an Italian car if a Japanese option were available?
The “Segre Commission” (as the media labelled it) is going to be a special Senate Commission tasked with identifying instances of
“intolerance, racism, antisemitism, incitement to hate and violence towards individuals or social groups on the basis of certain characteristics such as ethnicity, religion, origin, sexual orientation, gender, or other physical and psychological conditions”
There you go. Italy is establishing a privileged class – as found in the USA, Canada, and in the UK. Say goodbye to traditional family values.
That would be a good start wouldn’t it? Jokes aside, this is a very serious question. I do not think we should approach this problem merely from the perspective of trade (although Italy is also known for its high quality manufacturing products and food, and a good variety of them).
Italy was home to one of the greatest civilisations ever created, the Roman Empire, the basis of modern statecraft. Many of the greatest world philosophers, artists, literati, statesmen, scientists and theologians were Italian. Indeed, if there is something we can “offer”, or better that our allies can benefit from, is the Italian genius.
If you want to keep it more realistic, although Italy does not have nuclear power, its military is among the best in Europe (with the highly trained special forces being the most experienced and versatile you can find)
You are right here. Electoral laws have been changed many times over the years, never in the direction of granting the highest achieving party/list a full majority.
Spot on. Indeed, that is the sad future awaiting our country.
Italy has already offered Russia very much and very significant. Can you imagine the Moscow Kremlin without Ridolfo ‘Aristotele’ Fioravanti, Sankt Pietersburg without Francesco Bartolomeo Rastrelli and Carlo Bartolomeo Rastrelli, the Bolshoi Theater without Joseph Bove? Isn’t one of the loveliest pieces of Tchaikovski the ‘Capriccio Italian’?
Well Wanderer, I am not sure whether Italy or Japan have had more government changes since WW2, but it doesn’t matter: in different degrees both countries are colonies of the same masters. But I very much appreciate and admire the Japanese for kicking out the Jesuits in the 17th century ( today they call this “due diligence”).
About what Italy has to offer to China and Russia, this is not Lamborghini or Barolo, but geography ( aka geopolitics ) like at the time of Marco Polo. Which at present implies being a colony of the current colonialists; you might recall that Mussolini was “dismissed” a few days after Patton and Montgomery landed in Sicily, thanks to Mafia, Vatican, the Savoia etc… A real headache for the German “allies”, and poor Otto Skorzeny after the war had to go find a job in South America, for the same new bosses.
And about war alliances: Italy is dealing with alliances the same way as Italian men deal with women ( and vice versa, of course ). Never ending a war with the first allied power, unless having switched sides twice – at least twice -. Have a nice weekend Wanderer
Please, always keep in mind that an Italian prime minister has already been assassined in the past (Aldo Moro), together with the president of Italian national petrol company (Enrico Mattei of ENI) and the two main figures of the then leading Italian IT technology (Adriano Olivetti and Mario Tchou of Olivetti). Another key Italian political figure died in exile after the ’90s coup (Bettino Craxi).
Any Italian politicians willing to oppose the globalist agenda is aware of that.
not to mention the sudden and unexplained death of Enrico Berlinguer.
Well Furio, I am not aware of any Italian politician willing to oppose the globalist agenda.
Prodi: Goldman Sachs. Draghi: Goldman Sachs. Monti: Goldman Sachs. Letta: Goldman Sachs. Renzi: JP Morgan. Emma Bonino: Soros ( with Gentiloni, ex “Movimento Studentesco” ). Grillo: Britannia Yacht with Draghi and Bonino. The first Italian “communist” prime minister, Massimo D’Alema, helped NATO bomb Jugoslavia, and by the way as I remember, the Secretary of Defence was today’s president Mattarella. And the list could continue for terabites… Yes, Moro and Mattei have been assassinated, but how about the hundreds of citizens killed by Gladio, whose “public servants” are still sitting in ministries, “defence”… etc…
” Any Italian politicians willing to SUPPORT the globalist agenda is aware of that ”
No hard feelings Furio, I understand your misgivings, ciao
that’s exactly my point.
A couple of years ago Luciana Bohne wrote an excellent piece about the convoluted background of Aldo Moro’s death and the many open questions his murder leaves to this day. The article delves deep into the gutter of post-war Italian politics and although I do not know too much about Italy, I’m quite familiar with the gutter of post-war West-German politics which underwent the same manipulations and distortions at the hands of the occupiers. The pathologically anti-communist, nazi-loving planners in Washington made sure both countries never had a chance to develop into popular democracies.
The Long Ides of March of Aldo Moro (Lusiana Bohne):
https://www.counterpunch.org/2015/03/27/the-long-ides-of-march-of-aldo-moro/print/
Few years ago a prominent Italian journalist interviewed Steve Pieczenik,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Pieczenik
who was sent from the US government as a mediator to “help” the then Interior Minister Francesco Cossiga, dealing with the kidnapping of Aldo Moro by Brigate Rosse. In the interview Pieczenik said that it was him who made possible, through the influece he exerted on the Interior Minister, the killing of Aldo Moro, because that was the task he has been assigned by the US agencies.
Very interesting, thanks! The Wikipedia article contains a reference to an interview with Pieczenik, where he spills the beans. Here’s a (slightly imperfect:-) Yandex translation of the interview …
https://z5h64q92x9.net/tr-start?lang=it-en&ui=en&url=www.ilsole24ore.com/art/commenti-e-idee/2013-10-01/come-manipolammo-caso-moro-064524.shtml
After posting the link to Luciana Bohne’s article last night I found yet another very revealing article from 2008, which seems to have served as a template for Ms. Bohnes text. This one is by Judith Harris, an American who has been living in Rome for most of her life and who was on the spot when Moro’s body was found. In it she draws parallels between the abduction of Francesco De Martino’s son and the murder of Aldo Moro …
Of Emperors, Murders and the Ides of March (Judith Harris):
http://www.iitaly.org/magazine/focus/facts-stories/article/emperors-murders-and-ides-march-ghosts-haunt-italys-elections
Just like “America First,” the idea of “Italian nationalism” in reality is just another mask for the Anglo-American-Zionist Empire.
So-called Italian nationalism was subverted decades ago during the Cold War by NATO and the Anglo-Americans with events like the (covert) state-sponsored assassination of Aldo Moro and broader programs like Operation Gladio.
NATO’s Secret Armies. Operation GLADIO and the Strategy of Tension
https://www.globalresearch.ca/natos-secret-armies-operation-gladio-and-the-strategy-of-tension/5500132?print=1
Italian far-right leader Salvini says he’d move embassy to Jerusalem if elected
In interview with Israeli daily, head of popular right-wing euroskeptic party lashes the left for what
he says is anti-Israel and anti-Semitic bias
By Toi Staff – January 19, 2020
https://www.timesofisrael.com/italian-far-right-leader-salvini-says-hed-move-embassy-to-jerusalem-if-elected/