Indieoma

MW: In your role as co-director of European Alternatives, as a writer and as a political campaigner, ‘freedom of speech’ has been a central theme. Many people in the West take their freedom of speech for granted, yet the nature of that ‘freedom’ is now questionable in many of the countries that have in the past held themselves to be beacons of such freedoms. You campaign particularly in reference to lack of press freedom in Italy. Tell me, to what extent is lack of press freedom now a worldwide problem, and what is the specific nature of Italy’s problem?


LM: A free and pluralistic media is the necessary precondition to democracy. Without it, one of the basic premises of our societies – and namely that political power is an expression of the free choice of citizens – is suddenly destroyed. The situation in Italy today is critical. On the one hand, the space given to political discussion is being drastically cut. The evening news seem to merely read out agency flashes and official communiques, and the Italian State television corporation ‘RAI’ have now even come to the decision of suspending political shows a month before the regional elections. On the other hand, the political space that remains is increasingly occupied by the governing party. With the exception of RAI3, the leading organs of the public channels (indirectly but heavily controlled by Berlusconi as prime minister) and private channels (directly owed by him) have been filled with nominees of the prime minister. The main evening news, TG1, recently went so far as to falsify a leading evening story involving Berlusconi’s trials. This is bad news for Italy, but it is also bad news for Europe. Letting one of the funding members of the European Union get away with such a retreat of fundamental liberties poses a direct threat to liberty of expression throughout Europe, puts in jeopardy progress in former Soviet countries admitted into the Union, and limits the authority of any European condemnation of censorship in the rest of the world. This is why at European Alternatives we launched a European campaign for media freedom.


MW: Italy clearly has many problems, let’s not say more than in the UK, or France, to take two examples, but, nonetheless, the problems it does have as a nation are of a distinctly worrying kind. Race hatred, lack of tolerance for gays, a poor record for women in the workplace, lack of stable jobs, corruption, lack of social mobility; these are all problems that shoot at the heart of democracy. Yet one might argue that there is one central problem here. A lack of basic tolerance for people who are different, coupled with a selfish desire to protect what is ‘known’, what is ‘safe’ – the family, the community, the nation. Insularity, in a word. How would this observation fit with your experience of Italy?


LM: For the social problems you mention, I would resist the temptation of focussing exclusively on Italy. The country seems to me to be an overblown, even farcical representation of a much deeper European malaise, as the recent victory of the xenophobic right in the Netherlands testifies. Europe is assailed by economic crisis and rising unemployment. And this increases the temptation of retrenchment, blaming the ‘other’ and the ‘different’ for our problems, raising barriers to mobility and retreating into the national, comunitarian sphere. But this is a strategy doomed to failure, increasing, if anything, the current social and econmic malaise. This is the strategy preferred by populist parties, and the one carried out by the current right-wing regime in Italy. What I find most scandalous is that the Berlusconi government, and especially the party of the Lega Nord, are not only playing up to the most regressive animal elements of the country – but they are actually creating a sense of hostility, of xenophobia and intolerance, that was not there before. This is a criminal tactic, one that trades short-term electoral success for a long-term mutation of national sentiments. But this is the tactic we need to fight against all over Europe. A crucial element of this fight is a reppraisal of the role of migrants in our societies, and initiatives such as the recent ‘migrant strike’ in Italy, France, and other European countries are to be lauded. At the same time, we must refuse the temptation to safeguard national employment by accusing other European countries, and particularly those of the East, of ‘stealing’ jobs. This strategy only leads to a war between the poor, fought along national lines between trade unions and social movements tragically unable to play at the same level that economic power already occupies, matching the transnational rule of capital with a renwed commitment to transnational solidarity.


MW: It must also be countered that Italy has much to be proud of, and local pride throughout the wider EU and the world is integral to freedom. Italy’s defence of its culinary, artistic, printing and clothing traditions, and its rejection, often, of globalisation, sets a positive example. A sense of tolerance and non-aggressivityon a personal level, if not on a social one, serves to make Italy, blessed witha great landscape and architectural heritage, a charming nation. How does Italy then combine these factors with its role as a strong EU power, whilst welcoming visitors, without losing its heritage? These days there is a real push for Italians to learn the ‘International language’, and this push is working. Kids are speaking English better than their parents. Yet as a nation rich in dialects, which has regional difference as a unique characteristic of its nationhood, one sees a contradiction. Speakers of the Sicilian dialect, who might balk at speaking the standardised (Tuscan) Italian dialect might well choose to learn English. On the other hand, English may be rejected as a language of ‘conquerors’. How do you see such contradictions coming together in the expression of a what it is to be Italian?


LM: I don’t think safeguarding Italy’s – or, for that matter, France’s, Great Britain’s, or Poland’s – richness and internal differences is in any contradiction with a greater cultural and linguistic integration and interaction. I think we must refuse the conservative logic that sees culture and tradition as something to be merely ‘protected’. Culture is an active, never-ending process, and creating a new, twenty-first century manner of being an Italian, European, or world citizen is as important as safeguarding renainassance painting or regional dialects. I don’t think English should be the only language of international communication – but this does not mean that our children should only speak Italian or Sicilian. What it means is that we need to start building a school system that allows all graduates to speak, at least, three languages fluently. This is the normal case for a high school graduate in India – why can Europe not do the same?


MW: There are distinctive patterns in the development of multiculturalism within a nation, it seems. One may recall in the UK the growing acceptance of people of African heritage on the national football team… Similarly there was a time in the 80’s when it seemed that most of the UK’s news anchors were coloured. Such a move was crucial in guiding the UK towards an acceptance of racial diversity. That is not say that multiculturalism has been without its problems though, and other iconic moments in the history of race relations in the UK include the Battle of Cable Street, the Brixton and Toxteth race riots, the murder of Damilola Taylor, and many grim episodes besides. France has a similar history. Where do you see Italy in this? Does it need to follow a similar path? How, returning to where we started, does press freedom relate to these issues?


LM: Migration is a relatively recent phenomenon in Italy when compared to Britain or France. And suddenly here the increase in the presence of foreign-born citizens over the last ten – fifteen years has been much more drastic than in either of the older colonial powers. In the 80s, while the UK pushed its black anchormen, you would have been hard pressed to even see a black man in many Italian cities. This goes a long way towards explaining the sudden outburst of intolerance in the public sphere. But you hit a crucial point when mentioning the importance of integrating new citizens in the cultural and mediatic sphere of the country. In Italy a migrant is still essentially perceived as a poor person – in need of aid, for some, or in need of being sent back home, for others. But migrants play an increasingly central role in the cultural and political life of the country, and it is the fault of our parochial and controlled media system – and our fossilised cultural sphere – if they are denied representation there. And here the same argument applies for women, gays, intellectuals, non-commercial artists, etc.. The representation and creation of the national imaginery, today mostly played out in the sphere of the media, and especially TV, is increasingly in the hands of a narrow group of old, white Italian men directly or indirectly selected by Berlusconi and his allies. Out of the 34 board members and news editors fo the state television RAI—there are only two women. Can we say it, in Italy we are in need of a cultural revolution…


European Alternatives is a civil society organisation devoted to exploring the potential for transnational politics and culture. We believe that today the challenges of democratic participation, social equality, and cultural innovation cannot be effectively understood and addressed at the nation state level. Amongst our activities the publication of an online and printed magazine in three languages, a Festival in four countries, seminars across Europe, and several campaigns. Find out all about us: www.euroalter.com