This time I will use the space allotted for " sparigliare cards" as they say. In 'speech last week, talking about the level of politics in our city, I wrote: "When readers read these lines, we will know the outcome of the referendum on the silos of Piazza Vittorio Emanuele. We will be in full battle and confusion, because, make no mistake, whatever happens there will be only winners and no loser. will be unhappy all again against each other armed . "Not that I need special skills to understand the prophetic, but the confirmation that the comments before, and the City Council Tuesday, 27 then gave those statements, throwing into turmoil .
Starting from the results: the total number of claimants was slightly more than 60,000 people, with a quorum of 33%. They voted for the referendum in 5695, accounting for 8, 69. The "yes" were 662, the "no" 5019. The press has obviously flop, the magnitude of unexpected defeat, some brilliant journalist pointed out that if three thousand signatures were collected in his time to promote this referendum, probably not even the family members were persuaded to participate, not to mention friends and acquaintances!
Eminent citizens have spoken in favor of voting, especially for the 'no'. The majority, let's face it, he seemed in a state of confusion: some people asked to vote yes, someone to vote no ... Without the necessary exception of the Latta links with Youth Action, which took a firm stand for the abstention by clear arguments.
As far as we are concerned, the official position of the Democratic Party has been well defined and without fear, " not vote: majority inefficient referendum items."
Viewed what happened, the words that summed up to a referendum occurred objectively and without too many twists in the situation we have to be read by Youth Action, "The rules were clear from the outset: there is a quorum to be overcome and there are three options to vote for, against and abstaining. According to someone there who has lost and who won in our opinion there is only one winner: Busto Arsizio. Agree more.
But no. On board we have heard the proponents of the referendum - Audio Porphyry, Marta Tosi, Antonello Corrado - "Brand" in various ways, the 5019 voting "no" if they had acquired some alleged hegemony. Those back home, according to our, or were uninformed or, at best, uninterested in democracy.
What then have democratically decided to do what they thought was appropriate, wisely and deliberately, as it should be, is that even touches un'dea the losers. And we repeat: the soundly defeated! addition, it is not the responsibility of the defeat of those who have exercised conscientiously their right to abstain, in which a referendum is as good as an explanation of vote, do not touch them at all.
Someone should sooner or later, with tact and kindness, explain to them that if citizens do not follow you, do not vote, they are not to be fools; opponents are not even to be in bad faith: you not to be convincing. A did not follow!
who thinks so high that it can not be wrong so abysmal, "said a philosopher. Conversely, those who think incorrectly, that can not be wrong ... so grotesque .
It is now clear what we meant by the opening sentence, "sparigliare cards": Do not close the enclosure of the "we" and "you", do not think that we can not share an opinion about a problem with the city who is politically away from us, and instead go to the substance of the facts and behavior.
This is all the more necessary because in the future implementation the project must include several steps yet in committee, and at least two in the municipal council. He must carefully evaluate certain aspects, to understand their implementation. Now a serious debate on this should be a must for political forces that are called upon to express themselves in decision-making bodies. We would hope that much can happen, with the optimism of the will. Busto, if nothing else.
We would like, even if the pessimism of reason tells us more.
Perhaps, as he said Giampiero Rossi, has lost his taste for politics because you are no longer capable of doing politics. In the sense of what the community called " Truh Well Told", the truth that good. Where is truth to the idea, value, maybe the solution to the problems with its implementation time and financial considerations. And if that is good for rejection of rhetoric and platitudes, the refusal of shortcuts and innovative communications capabilities.
Fine words, but that has to do with much of the ruling class of bust?
0 comments:
Post a Comment