A Single Demarchyan Party of Transitory Good People

In my last post, I concluded that Italy needs to drastically change its political system and remove all current politicians if it has any chance of reversing its current downfall trend. A spiral of decay driven by 3 main problems:

1. High costs
: public debt has been higher than GDP for years and at 118.1% in 2010 ranks 8th highest in the world. Public spending has to be reduced drastically as it has more structural costs than those related to services provided to citizens.
2. Unworthy people in power
: the individuals who represent the political class and the public administration are for the vast majority guilty of corruption and incompetence.
3. An outdated system
: that is too bureaucratic, slow, complicated, and rigid. Its most noticeable manifestations are:
• slowness of the judiciary system (la Magistratura)
• malfunction of the public services (la Pubblica Amministrazione)

In this post, I want to move one step forward and explore how a different form of government would perhaps work better in Italy today. But, if the Parliamentary Republic of Italy was to change its political system, which new direction should it take? The world of today is giving us the following alternatives to examine:

• Full Presidential Republic (e.g. USA)
• Presidential Republic with the role of the president and prime minister combined (e.g. South Africa)
• Semi-Presidential Republic (e.g. Russia)
• Parliamentary Constitutional Monarchy in which the monarch does not personally exercise power (e.g. Australia)
• Parliamentary Constitutional Monarchy in which the monarch personally exercises power often alongside a weak parliament (e.g. Morocco)
• Absolute Monarchy (e.g. Saudi Arabia)
• Single-Party State (e.g. China)
• Military Dictatorships (e.g. Myanmar)

While I agree with the theoretical benefits attached to a working Federal Republic (the direction taken since 2001), I don't see Italy in a solid enough position to yet contemplate such a change. Instead I propose looking east, at China, for a general mold. Please try to be open-minded and not thinking Communism straight away!

A single party would mean a U-turn from the current situation in which no one Italian party has ever gained power alone since 1948 and thus parties must – in theory – work with each other (and not against) to form coalition governments. Italy, at present, counts 34 parties (plus a bunch of regional parties). However, such a variety does not imply significant differences of thought and a healthy debate. It only translates into pitiful discussions over every small little issue, with consequently no results!!!

With regard to the important challenges faced by the Nation, we are witnessing all major Italian parties using the same keywords to brand themselves in a way that – they believe – should appeal to young generations and promote the ideas of change and forward thinking. But in reality they are all the same old ‘thing’ just wearing different masks. Their names and slogans are marketing scams that people have become way too familiar with. There is nothing new in what they say, they are led by old farts with old ideas, and their young followers are lobotomized YES MEN destined to become clones of what we already hate.

The almost inexistent variety of thought among parties is testified by the increasing number of politicians changing flags every year to seek higher positions or better pays. Therefore, my suggestion is to eliminate all parties hence eradicating corruption from the roots. This transition would also end disputes among parties aimed purely at fuelling 'political' games and divert the attention away from parties and place it back on the individuals, whose nomination and election should be based on principles of:

• Merit: an individual’s intelligence, wisdom, credentials, and education, should determine the suitability of the person and the assigned responsibilities.
• Technical knowledge: decision makers would be selected based upon how knowledgeable and experienced they are in their fields (strategy, management, engineering, science, health, and others) rather than how much political capital they hold.

The ultimate aim would be having a country governed by a few (i.e. the best in the Nation) who work together for the good of all citizens. An oligarchy whose members would periodically rotate and get randomly selected out of a broadly inclusive pool of eligible citizens (i.e. Demarchy) chosen by the wider population. Eligibility for appointments would be based on personal qualities such as sincerity, honesty, cooperativeness, kindness, and open-mindedness, rather than just age and the usual sarcasm, ambition, persuasiveness, resourcefulness, etc.

Once decided to vote politicians based of their human qualities and technical expertise, the next step would be to define a system capable of properly running nominations/elections and monitoring actions. As previously stated, the Chinese-model would only represent the general mold. From there, it would be great to witness the development of an untried political system that would partly rely on principles and institutions that we already possess as a Nation, and partly open to adopt new ways of operationalizing things. For example, we could maintain:

1. The overarching principles of the Italian State and the values ​​that underpin the Italian Constitution. Namely:
   • popular sovereignty
   • unity and indivisibility of the State
2. The 5 primary constitutional bodies (President of the Republic, Parliament, Government, Judiciary, and Constitutional Court).
3. The same allocation of legislative, executive, and judicial powers.
4. Perfect bicameralism: this structure could change in the future, but for the moment has prevented many times the total manipulation of the system by the Prime Minister.
5. CSM (Superior Council of Magistrates), which is arguably working better than any other Italian institution.

On the other hand, many other things are not functioning as they should and will require substantial changes. A list of what clearly isn’t working and some initial ideas on how to structure a theoretically new political system will be discussed in the next post.

A New Italy

The Italian political scene has often been dubbed “a joke” by the media, following accusations of association with organized crime, prostitution, corruption, etc. But even though the majority of Italian politicians appear in fact to possess low morals and lack the skills or will necessary to positively guide the Nation, I consider the fundamental problem laying in the nature of the political system itself and its laws, rather than in individual members of the Parliament.

It is my belief that the Italian government today is not performing much worse than it did one, two, or three decades ago. The real difference is that back then the economy was striving. Today instead, mainly due to global systemic changes that are beyond the control of any politician, party, or even country – such as the growth of developing nations, globalization, terrorism, natural disasters, introduction of the Euro, etc. – Italy is gradually falling behind in the world ranking and its people are becoming increasingly angry and frustrated.

From a cultural viewpoint, it is realistic to expect most Italians turning a blind eye on fuzzy facts, when things go well, because apparently the system seems to be working regardless. However, when the mechanism breaks and enjoying a comfortable life gets difficult, people wake up and expect changes and improvements to occur. The trouble is that by the time problems are widely recognized, it is already too late to find a cure; the system is sick beyond recovery because repeatedly infected on so many levels and for so many times. It is impossible to fix the broken toy and the only solution is to start again working on a newly cut piece of wood.

So if there is no one to fight against, what can we do? It would surely be much simpler if there was a tyrant to dethrone as it is happening in most North African countries, but instead the enemy is invisible and we have all contributed to create it and strengthen it with our silence and opportunistic behaviour for so long.

With these words, it is not my intention to defend the members of the Italian Parliament or Regional Councillors, who are getting the country deeper into suffering while caring only about their own sake and pockets. In fact one of the central conditions for real changes to occur would be for all politicians and their parties ceasing to exist at once. A peaceful revolution with no going back is required if we are to witness a rebirth of Italy. People have to accept big sacrifices and be willing to live on bread and water if necessary, but also manifest a strong desire to rebuild a great nation based on values different than the ones we have become accustomed to.

Lonely Planet

Over my last two years of travelling, I have witnessed ‘backpackers’ harshly changing their perspective towards the use of the previously so much appreciated Lonely Planet. Why is that?

Their argument is that by following advices from the Lonely Planet, they all end up in the same places, hence losing that sense of adventure and exploration that more and more often is the reason to travel. In particular, they accuse those travellers who focus their trips on the highlights and the suggested itineraries of the Lonely Planet.

Instead, they travel without a guidebook and rely primarily on other travellers’ feedbacks. The problem with this approach is that they still inevitably end up in exactly the same places (including hostels) as the people who base their travels on the Lonely Planet. The reason is quite simple: the Lonely Planet is written based on travellers’ experiences and the highlights are must see places!

I have a few thoughts to share in this regard. The first one follows the observation that backpacking is becoming more than an holiday trend; it is a modern subculture, just like the punks, emos, new age, or bikers. Consequently, relatively remote places that used to be visited by just a handful of ’real’ backpackers every month, receive now hundreds of visitors per week.

However, solitary backpacking is still very much possible and I would argue that it is much more likely to occur if you travel with a Lonely Planet in your hand rather than constantly asking other travellers where to go. Here are my suggestions:

1. Only a fool would not visit Unesco world heritage sites because they are listed as highlights by the Lonely Planet or because they attract many visitors. You can spend a few days there without ruining your trip. In the end remember that you are also a tourist, so do not think too high of yourself.

2. Mix it up! Embrace the country as a whole. Explore the cuisine, talk to locals, buy food at the markets. You will find that upon your departure, the most profound memories will relate to these moments (tastes, people expressions, situations, misunderstandings, etc.) rather than what you saw at Unesco sites.

3. Pretty much every country has its high and low seasons. Sometimes it is good to travel in low season when, unbelievably, all tourists disappear.

4. There are countries that are still not considered major backpacking destinations. Every year there are HOT picks where everyone has to go to, leaving other countries hardly visited.

5. Alternate hostels with cheap motels/hotels. You will hardly find tourists there, even if they appear on the Lonely Planet…

The Lonely Planet remains a great tool for solitary travellers. The maps are fantastic and if you go beyond the highlights you can find rich information about very remote places hardly visited and the journey to get there is often unique. Of course, do not be restricted by what your guidebook says. It is just a tool, and as such it can be used effectively or poorly!