Right before starting to write, on a (supposedly) prestigious social-web-network it occurred to my eyes to stumble on an unpleasant sight. Commenting on the results of the Italian general elections held in the last two days, a sincerely pitiful Swedish lady (or at least, one with a name that sounded like Swedish) expressed her genuine scarcity of understanding for the last choice of the Italians - which has been to give a quite vast majority to Mr. Berlusconi and his conservative party. Among the elegant words of the lady in question it was possible to perceive a slight sense of disappointment, like if all the Italians had just chosen a terrible tie to be put over their splendid suit. An unforgivable mismatch.

For the sake of transparency, let’s say that such believed ‘mismatch’ happened without my help. Perhaps driven by superficial reasons, I decided I couldn’t help a 72-years-old sir (despite ‘technically immortal’, as his doctor once said) reaching the button-rooms for his third time. Reasoning was simple enough: everyone has his own time in the history; yours is over since quite a while, for me at least.
Such ‘for me at least’ turned out almost to be a ‘for me and some other friends only’, since vote went down quite differently.
Besides the aging-matter, I wasn’t very interested in this whole electoral campaign: once acknowledged that the real economical power has left the country a while ago to land in some office in Brussels, and that most of the rules that are of direct concern of the private citizen are originated by local sources (such as regional or city councils), not much interest remained for those things that cannot be make properly up because of lack of funds (i.e. the pension system) or those others that none of the contenders showed a will of change for (as, for instance, university or health care).
Thus, I assisted to the present elections with a fairly ‘detached’ mood. Good news for me, as said, was that one of the two main contenders was closer to have lived half a century rather than an entire one. Another good news was the simplification of the composition of the so-called ‘parliamentary arch’, being reduced the political parties admitted in it (from around 30 to something like 5). Perhaps this will also mean, sometime in the future (go figure!), a drop of the astonishing number of MP we actually have (around a thousand) and a consistent withdrawal of their - mostly indecent - privileges, which would also be a quite good news.
Of course all these eventual ‘good news’ do not counterbalance much of the economical situation of the country - fairly unhappy, despite not ‘disastrous’ as many picture it.
Anyhow, I do feel such sense of necessary hope that sees the elections’ champ in love enough with the big country that chose him to try turning the ‘unhappy trend’ upside down, with all his efforts.

That is what I think is worth believing in when talking about the elections of your country, no matter the winner.

Beyond the personal approach to the whole election-thing, I was instead somewhat surprised by the posts and replies found on the thread inaugurated by the perhaps-Swedish-lady. Actually, not much by what declared by her; much more instead by the debate that followed.
Some Italians, bees captured by the honey of self-pity, started ‘crying on themselves’ complaining that yes, this was an awful choice that put in ridiculous the whole country (?). Till here, nothing unusual - beside the slight sense of irritation provoked by a reasoning that admits something as ‘normal’ only if it is in line with the ‘what I think’ personal sonata.
What resulted instead quite out of the line was a comment of an English guy (or, at least, someone with a name that sounded like English), which I’m delighted to share here:
‘It is a very sad moment. What is wrong with this country? I am astounded and appalled this criminal is voted in again? When Italy is finally kicked out of the EU maybe the Italian citizens will care about who governs them‘.
I won’t say I was ‘astounded and appalled’ for such idiocy at least in the same way the preference for Mr. Berlusconi of the Italian voters left this guy. Still, what had me quite perplexed was the deep ignorance such bunch of ungrammatical words expressed. 36, to be precise. A couple of lines, 162 characters and a smashing hit of 5 concepts of respect and democratic values to the waste, sacrificed to the altar of the ‘freedom of the expression’. Synthetically said, a good lost chance to keep the mouth shut.
Who instead might have opened his, replying to such absurdity, stayed shut.
That’s why I’m opening mine now, in their name (even if not requested, nor eventually invited to do so). I just need to propose a normalizing view of something that has been pictured so abnormal in the time now many think it is for real. Without realizing that, most of the times, it would be worth remembering first that good jingle ‘nothing bad has happened in your neighboring country that has not been done in yours already’.

First of all, limiting the analysis of the elections of an important western country to ‘sad moment’ and ‘what’s wrong with this country’ says more of the teller than of the supposedly analyzed country. Italian citizens do care of who governs them in a manner that, numerically speaking, almost double the care showed by any northern European democracy: over the 80 per cent of those who had the right to vote decided to exercise it (something that somewhere else, in the north, happens in percentages that do not hit the number 45).
Then again, even without being a Mr. Berlusconi-hooligan, I am still the first to believe that there is no reason in pointing fingers where there is nothing to point at. Mr. Berlusconi is not a criminal: never it has been condemned for any sort of ‘crime’, nor in the legal neither in the broad definition of the word. There have been, in Mr. Berlusconi’s history, charges for corruption of MPs, judges and other relevant administrative figures - plus some financial investigations - all prior to his political career. Despite this does definitely not seem close to the CV of a nun, it is also necessary to see things from a global perspective. This ‘self-picturing-evergreen-guy’ created a huge economical empire rotating over the axis of the media industry in the last 20 years, a period in which nothing else of comparable dimension has been created in any other economic sector of the country (besides banks aggregation). Such period is also the one in which the economic performance of Italy has been much less brilliant than the thirty-years-term of miracle preceding it, and where political immorality started being that pervasive illness that brought then to the ‘fall of the first republic’ (year 1992) under the hammering punches of the judges. The scandals of corruption and bribery out of this Pandora-investigative-vase were thousands. Let’s then be practical: would you really expect that anyone who’s building up an international media enterprise would not ‘accommodate’ into any corrupted system if ‘helpful’ to his interest? If your answer is ‘no’, here’s the reply: I agree with you, but that’s probably why no other industrial giant rose in this time. If your answers is ‘yes’, then I have to admit that is such ‘pragmatic approach’ what most likely made the fortune of Mr. Berlusconi’s entrepreneurial career and his media giant, Fininvest. Anyhow, point is that he didn’t act as the only evil among masses of angels.

In conclusion the Italians - perhaps according also to their supposedly creative nature - privileged a man who pictures himself standing aside the principle of ‘doing’ (even if accompanied with some - say - wide interpretation of the rules) than a younger guy whose working experience outside the political context is somewhat close to zero.
The choice of the Italians, which I do accept as both Italian and democratic, shall be respected also because there’s almost no country, in Europe and abroad, that hasn’t had an even ‘blacker sheep’ than a media tycoon at the main rudder of its political institutions.
In the best cases, even those rare ‘whiter sheep’ had their ‘black moments’. I still remember a hopelessly bold Mrs. Thatcher - just to stick with that apparently-English-guy comment - hypothesizing, out of the blue, not to release anymore the Hong Kong colony back to the Chinese republic, after having resolved the Falkland crisis (basically a bunch of rock-cliffs close to Argentina) with a magnificent parade of the Royal Navy in the middle of the Atlantic sea.
Of course she had to re-state her words a few moments later, with a much different tone.
Vive la real politik.