The PD campaign is not bad, it is a liar

Perhaps not being communication experts we should not judge the new PD campaign, but it is also true that saying “communication expert” is a bit like saying “economist”: if the West is at the present intersection between Weimar and Babylon, perhaps recently these two highly accredited categories have not exactly hit all of them.

We come then to the Democratic Party and its campaign with black and red panels, which I believe involuntarily recall the flag of the CNT, the anarchist union of the Spanish Civil War. In the black field there is something very bad written, attributed to the wishes or practices of the opponents of the PD: discrimination, underpaid work. In the red field there is the positive opposite – rights, minimum wage – and Enrico Letta’s big face with his lips drawn in a quite convincing imitation of a human smile.

Some people liked the campaign, especially those of the PD, and many others regretted it. To some it seemed simplistic and moralizing, to others simply ridiculous. Almost everyone found it irritating the attempt of the same promoters to memorize it or to make it “viral” (moreover with the air and the naturalness of those who have just searched on Google what it means), with Enrico Letta who shared the variant with pancetta on his profile and pillow, and you know what laughter. (And indeed there is something truly sinister in the now widespread practice of trying to swallow the liberating and spontaneous language of parody into the authoritarian one of advertising).

This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

Those who know a lot, as always the most numerous, have instead grinned that a campaign over which you fight is by definition a successful campaign, because it matters nothing but visibility and hostility generates more engagement than membership, then they are back I think I suck cocaine from the armpits of an escort.

It seems to me that this campaign, with which the PD presents itself as the party of strong ideas and unappealable field choices, is more than anything else awkwardly lying, and revealing the opposite of what it claims, in the manner of children with fingers. dirty with jam or the culprit who wanders around the crime scene suggesting false leads to the police, because he unconsciously wants to be caught.

Even children, in fact, know that the PD is not in no way the party of clarity and clear choices of the field, of red against black: it is instead the party that claims the Draghi agenda but wants to overcome it, it is the party that can ally itself with Calenda, with Renzi, with the 5 Stars, with the left or with a piece of Forza Italia. it is the party that is not against citizenship income but wants to change it, which is not in favor of patrimonial but could think about it.

The ambivalence of these positions has its good reasons, and however countercultural it is according to the polls it is understood and appreciated by almost 25% of voters, convinced that as Fitzgerald wrote “the test of first-rate intelligence is the ability to keep two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and, at the same time, to retain the ability to function “. Why is the PD ashamed of it?

The contradiction is not only evident from the outside, but defuses the countryside from the inside. The polarizing graphics are in fact contradicted by liquid, transparent words, taken from the traditional Veltronian language that suggests the illusion of handling with sterile gloves a reality that is seething with toxic passions: “ideas”, “environment”, “rights”.

Often the clumsy communication tells us more interesting things than the successful one: those of the PD with this campaign argue that the elections of 25 September will be a sort of final confrontation between two opposing and irreconcilable worldviews, but fundamentally they do not believe it either. They do it perhaps out of subordination to the polarizing narrative of the right, but so instead of claiming the difficult and often generous choices of the last ten years they end up reluctantly embodying an exhausted synthesis. Perhaps the PD is cured of the self-hatred that had generated the Renzian paradox, but not of the dysmorphophobia that from birth leads him to be often loyal to the country, almost never to himself.

Wanting to look for the glass half full, the fact that now we are fighting over this campaign is still a step forward from the point of view of the political agenda: always better than when, no more than two weeks ago, they let themselves be asphalted by the neo-fascists on the anti-Semitism.

The PD campaign is not bad, it is a liar