The Berlusconi-Hitler analogy established by Umberto Eco has given birth to what I see, a lot of controversy, but I think these controversies stem from a fundamental confusion and the inability of many to pay attention to the precise extent and the context of the statements of Echo, which incidentally was clear, as always.
What Eco is not a case of moral, nor has it said that Berlusconi has a mustache like Hitler - because in this case you might well say: no, it does not hold.
Eco said, rather, that Berlusconi should not be compared to North African dictators, as he has got the power to a democratic path, but just to Hitler, even as the German dictator came to power democratically (as opposed to fascism, which implements a coup d'etat) but then turn against democracy itself. What things have gone well, it is known to anyone with a minimum of interest and knowledge of historical facts and there is no dispute about this as possible.
This is the sense of analogy and there is nothing too surprising (even on the pages of this blog have repeatedly used the same analogy, and with the same meaning in this context, for example here and here ). It refers to a specific aspect of the definition of democracy, the relationship with the consent and emphasizes the fact that the consensus is certainly a necessary but not sufficient for a democracy is this. In this sense, the juxtaposition of Nazism and Berlusconi is not only correct: it is by the book, expresses a certain "technical". However, there is nothing strange, once thematized is rather obvious, however, that Eco does well to repeat, thanks to its authority, even as a majority of illiberal government continues to repeat obsessively not surprisingly, the litany of those elected by the people.
0 comments:
Post a Comment