The 2017 is theyear electoralis. We are looking for a glimpse of the inexorable decline of the current model of continental union, already launched along the channels of economic policy and cultural self-preservation.
It was enough for the Dutch Rutte to survive to revive the ambitions of a system that most European citizens no longer want. A survival to tell the truth made possible by the hard line adopted against Erdogan's Turkey, more instrumental to the vote than consistent with the principles Liberal dear to the Dutch Europeans.
Even if the elections in the Netherlands show a disastrous picture for the historical parties, the pro-Brussels circles have however resumed vigor and the helm of the conformist media has remained on the same course with renewed conviction: anyone is only suspected of not being aligned with the single thought euroglobal, ends up behind the blackboard.
The measures taken by publishers in these cases shift the communication axis from information to propaganda.
The process is not new but undergoes accelerations in conjunction with serious political shocks. A net leap in the contents of the communication was made for example in the November 9, when Trump became President but at the same time also Beelzebub.
A review focused on the Italian, European and American press of the last 5 months borders on comedians: except for rare occasions, there has been no time of day when the tycoon New Yorker has not been put to shame. Since the middle of March, even thousands of civilians killed by US bombings in Syria have begun to appear. On those of the previous six years, obviously absolute silence.
The accusations against Trump are many, you know. To endear it is the endogenous machismo, the passion for the walls, the ecological indifference, the political ducism, the haircut, the bona wife, the absence of immediate vegan prospects, the bank account, etc. etc.
Everything, however, is part of the good Europeanist's bag of indignation, more willing to get angry for a hand on a woman's ass than for funding a jihadist Salafi group.
Although outraged to death, the conscientious pro-European statesman is concerned instead with Trump's choices in foreign policy, in the sights already at the time of the electoral campaign. Having cheered Brexit and wink at all the Eurosceptic forces, theentourage of Brussels did not just forgive him. Ça va sans dire or as they say in Paris: "and we will miss them as well ..."
The accusation of anti-Europeanism is the link between Trump and Russian President Putin. The two have never met before, but the mere idea that they could one day tell each other jokes about the European Union sends the high-pinned poppies on a rampage.
Putin has never entered into the graces of the intelligentsia in power in Europe, it must be said. With some distinction, what a certain political-intellectual class of ours thinks of Trump holds for him. Compared to his counterpart, in the collective imagination he is only given more Machiavellian ability and less potential in a possible burping competition.
Already at the time of his return to the position of President in the 2012, being openly Christian, heterosexual and white had prevented him from being part of the "nice by default" at the salons that matter.
But now the situation has fallen. With the defeat of Hillary Clinton in the US presidential elections, an adjustment maneuver was expected in Brussels, against any forecast taken between two fires: on the one hand Washington in the hands of a chauvinist peasant; on the other, Moscow, in the hands of the villain, which cannot be more evil. Nothing to do instead: the first signs of Russophilia of the Trump staff (the resignation of Michael Flynn) and the simple rumors of a possible rethinking of sanctions against Russia, the Union responded by renewing them for another six months and raising even more the tone.
In political debates the official role of the Russian president is now that of anti-Brussels (Antonio Padellaro on La7 the 26 March). No way out: the European elites and their media voices remain linked toestablishment defeated in America on November 9.
The need to survive in a decisive year (French elections, German elections) has pushed the Europeanist fronts to tighten the ranks even more in a game of recovery. If first Putin was the "strong man" who does not like the ultras of the feel-good democracy, today he is openly considered an enemy of the European Union and a supporter of every Eurosceptic party that moves in the galaxy. After the accusations of hacking in favor of Trump, those of support to certain political circles with the specific purpose of destabilizing the European Union have arrived. As if the European Union itself were not enough to destabilize itself ...
The accusation is taken from the Telegraph the 16 last January (later also reported by theEconomist) and cites sources ofintelligence American. Putin would be funding everyone a little: da Golden sunrise a Tsipras, From Alloy al 5Stelle movement, from the Hungarians of Jobbik atUKIP British. Obviously not missing Front National by Marie Le Pen, which makes more noise than everyone due to its size and upcoming elections. Missing only Mickey mouse, then there are practically everyone.
Hysteria is skyrocketing. Just make a short press review here too. The Navalny case (which is not the case ...) is making more noise than the so-called Russian opposition could have imagined. Bernard Guetta on International he even launched an analysis of Putin's loss of consensus in the middle class. Obviously we cannot miss the all-consuming Saviano, who from the height of his incompetence takes the opportunity to frame some common place on democracy.
For the record, Navalny is not the leader of any numerically relevant opposition; Sunday's arrests in Moscow were made on the basis of a failed authorization to demonstrate, circumvented specifically to have a sounding board (and financing) from the anti-Russian West.
Independent pollsters give the Russian president over the 60% of the votes, but nobody talks about it. On the main Italian newspapers vice versa, in 48 alone we have counted 34 articles (data Online Defense) that talk about Putin as a tyrant in disgrace, dangerous for Europe. Evidently the Kremlin finances the wrong people, or around it they say a bunch of bales designed ad hoc.
A matter of numbers or simply common sense. Speaking of democracy and consensus it is worth stopping for a moment: perhaps in Europe, understood as a family of peoples living under the institutional roof of Brussels, more attention should be paid to internal mechanisms than to those of others. It would be nice to know for example with what transparency opinion maker like Saviano end up occupying strategic positions in the media. Or to stay with the fundamental ganglia of democracy, what popular investiture the voices that often speak on behalf of entire nations have.
While we stop to think about who is elected by whom and who you represent, we could then also think about a long-term perspective, trying to imagine also a future geopolitical horizon.
For those who really love Europe, it would already be very much.
