courtesy; yahoo.com
The fate of the Euro and by connection that of the health of the European's community economy might very well lie in the hands of the Italian electorate.
On Sunday, millions of Italian will vote, nearly in desperation, to see the future of their country righted.
But the EU community is holding its breath. Many of the candidates have a shady or spotty past, some seem inept, some seem like aging and stale bureaucrats, and some others like the comedian Grillo, look like erstwhile revolutionaries who are nonetheless clueless to the complicated needs of the ailing nation. In the latter case, the population have adopted a candidate with no proven record, but one who has promised to rid the country of all of its stale bureaucracy, albeit without offering a clear and rational path to achieve such a gigantic goal.
What has brought the Italian population to such division and apprehension? After the much reviled premier Berlusconi was ousted, a savy and experienced financial expert took his place. But his efforts, which are seen as draconian by many, have shifted the burden of Italy's salvation onto the middle and lower classes, and in so doing seems to have failed in the eyes of the people.
But let's look at what happened in Monti's governing of the chaotic country.
They answer may lie more in what Monti's government has not done, than in what he has done. In effect, many have accused Monti of being too tentative and to not forward a complete and bold agenda, and to have in effect buckled under the demands of a labyrynthine and some say, parasitic bureaucracy.
At the onset, Monti tried to govern by consensus and began with the idea of including opposing parties into his programme. But then, opposing forces began to eat at his program like pack of wild dogs.
What is seen as more troubling is the fact that the people have reacted to Monti's steering of the ship, as it may, with outright hostility. A reaction often seen and heard in the streets is one that wishes to return to a pre-austerity program, and that is confusing if not dangerous, since the people who were governing before Monti were the ones who caused the country to slip into the dangerous slope it is on to begin with.
The key word then is change. People want change, but they also don't want change.
They call for an elimination of the current parliamentary system, but then balk at reforms that call for cuts across the board. They want jobs, but fail to make a case, and bring it to the streets, on how to do it.
The anxiety at what change could be, or is, politically speaking is made worse by a fractured political picture, in which the choices are as numerous as they are colorful.
The other problem is that the old bureaucracy is not just composed of the thousands of civil servants and politicians, but by its very nature, it is connected financially and otherwise to a large class of professionals, who make their living through its bureaucracy.
For example, one of Monti's target was equal opportunity. That was in the end, the equivalent of a fiasco. The Vatican's influence on the political body and the population has completely blocked an initiative in favor of gay unions.
And a lot of people like it that way. The morals of Italy have been shaped for decades by a party that was closely affiliated with, and some say an arm of, the Vatican itself. For as many who see Italy as a retrograde country, just as many want those stringent moral values to stay in place.
But the real woes of Italy's bureaucracy are corruption, organized crime and the incredible financial burden such a large parliament and state office and agencies pose on the country's budget.
It remains to be seen then, if Italy makes a choice of a leader who will be strong enough to confront these daunting problems, of if the choice instead will be to try to return to a status quo that could be a harbinger of a real financial crisis.
Partial sourcing: The Indipendent. 2.23.13
No comments:
Post a Comment