BETTINI INSISTS, HE MOVES WITHIN THE COMMUNIST TRADITION WITH THE FATIGUE OF “GOING BEYOND” HIS OWN FIELD.

Goffredo Bettini’s reflection in La Repubblica yesterday, January 16, almost always has three phases: a starting point, a high expectation of reflection and a concrete fallout. The starting point is the matrix of curiosity, I would say originally from Ingra, towards what is “beyond” the borders. Moreover, Bettini practiced this all his life, going down in history also for having “searched” … in Rome (certainly not the periphery of the world), outside the communist citadel, for example the Francesco Rutellis and many (but not all) those who have since then participated in the political struggle on the left and in the centre-left; with the spirit, evidently, of widening the boundaries of the citadel, too narrow even culturally. And then, the walls and perhaps the red citadel itself fell, to save a story and a path that had had to deal with defeats and disappointments. It is not a novelty in both the strategic and tactical history of the PCI and of its better men, who have adapted to the times. And yet with strong cultural and ideological distinctions, which in the twentieth century had very distant appearances from each other. The “independent leftists” for example, were a prestigious and culturally free group (including parliamentary ones): certainly many of them, even if they voted for the PCI, would never have joined communism as an ideology.

Franco Rodano, for his part, thought of an ideological and moral palingenesis with his non-Marxist communism, capable of cooperating with the lesson of political Catholicism, realizing it. We could say that he dealt with “communist theology”. While many were authorized (for example the left-wing independents or the more shrewd and capable federation secretaries) to weave contacts and relationships mostly on the basis of practical conduct… a sort of communist “pastoral”. Ingrao, on the other hand, was… the “Protestant” and therefore prone to heresy. And Goffredo Bettini actually starts from there (although his reading of Ingrao’s “broad understandings”, with Conte inside, seems more like a parody frankly, and does not do justice to Lenola’s politician-poet). But I don’t see Rhodanian theological influences because over the years Bettini has been one of the best interpreters of the post-communist “pastoral” approach: open, curious, creative, concrete what is needed (sometimes a lot is needed and he didn’t have to say it twice) .

Some are surprised by the flight of fancy towards Maritain (deduced from a book on the relationship with Alinsky however, certainly not from Integral Humanism) but this is part of the high reflection and of his natural leaning towards the “others”, in this case the democratic Catholics founders of the Democratic Party in which – I remember – Bettini performed the duties of Coordinator of the National Secretariat at his birth and at the moment of Walter Veltroni’s Lingotto speech….not exactly a speech for the taking of the Winter Palace. Thus, Bettini, raising the level of a truly rarefied debate, grasps a theme, instinctively rather than scientifically: Castagnetti and many popular who have chosen the Democratic Party, contest not their personal precariousness, but the fact that at stake is the essence of the meeting of cultures in the Democratic Party, therefore the origin of the Democratic Party itself. And here Goffredo reaches the third point, the concrete fallout: those who come from a communist and socialist culture and democratic Catholics must return to meet politically as soon as possible. However, shortly after, the presentation of the latest book – as we know – On the left. From the beginning, with part of the former left Pd, which supports Elly Schlein (the less maneuverable one actually continues to support Cuperlo).

The impression is that Goffredo has noticed that something is wrong: the representatives of other political cultures have ability and pride and are not easily “unpacked”; and above all that when he explains things, his old friends (like Nicola Zingaretti) don’t get there or don’t care… and therefore he needs to widen the audience again. The problem is that the excess of pastoral care actually consumes the solutions, which from solutions become loopholes; and even the encounters, once so modern, then taste stale if one does not agree to bring into play – for once – one’s capacity for cultural hegemony, which cannot exist, neither in politics nor in history, once and for all forever.

BETTINI INSISTS, HE MOVES WITHIN THE COMMUNIST TRADITION WITH THE FATIGUE OF “GOING BEYOND” HIS OWN FIELD.