More useless than the protests against Roccella are the protests against the protests
Having clarified the disagreement with the demonstrators for not letting the minister speak, the other side does not have to make it so long: what happened in Turin is one of the most normal things that can happen in a democracy
There is a time for protest, and a time for proposal. Now we are evidently in extra time: protests are being protested. More useless than the objections to Minister Roccella at the Turin Book Fair (and he wanted it) were the objections to the protesters; with the umpteenth, cloying and very Italian race to call each other fascists – in Italy "fascist" is an insult so devoid of meaning that even the fascists use it to insult those who don't think like them. I immediately clarify my position: like a famous post-1968 writing, I "am Marxist, Groucho tendency". Who - Groucho Marx, I say - in the film "Horse Feathers" (in Italy with the title "The Marx Brothers in College") sings the programmatic lines "Whatever It Is, I'm Against It", whatever it is, I am against. So for me: I am against the ideas and work of Minister Roccella, but I am also disappointed to see such an important dissent as the one in defense of the right to abortion and the law 194 manifested in a crude and useless way, if not even counterproductive. We must always let the ProLifes do the talking, as they are the best arguments in favor of abortion: as soon as a pregnant woman hears Minister Roccella speak, she runs to have an abortion for fear that her daughter might become like Roccella.
Having clarified my disagreement with those demonstrators for not letting the minister speak, I invite the other side not to make it so long: what happened in Turin is the protest against a minister, that is, one of the most normal things that can happen in democracy. Was the minister unable to speak on that occasion? Sorry, but also sticazzi. We live precisely in a democracy, where the opportunities to express oneself (analogically, digitally, in the case of Roccella even legislatively) are certainly not lacking. In my opinion, a minimum of impediment to freedom of speech is sometimes needed, for everyone: it helps us to remind ourselves that it is a precious and not taken for granted right, to always be cultivated and renewed. Barriers to free speech can also sharpen the expressive wit; what, in fact, seems to have numb protesters from all over the world (the last generation exception should be mentioned, who just yesterday had mud poured on themselves in front of the Senate to raise awareness of hydrogeological instability: I don't know how "useful" it is, but respect previous boomerangs is a big step forward).
Protesting is a right; but it should be a duty to find the effective way to do it, for the good of the cause and not just the likes. Instead, it has been years since one's dissent has been manifesting itself in an old or ridiculous way: how long has it been since a demonstration has not obtained what it asks for? The protests against Roccella at the Salone had the only effect of promoting the minister's book: before, not everyone knew that Roccella had published a book (I myself wasn't aware of it); now however, after the dispute in Turin, even fetuses less than 90 days old know it. Marketing is the only one that thanks. The protest crisis is one of the most serious that our poor West is going through; and it affects us all. To get out of it we would need a collective effort, an open debate, precisely proposals. But mostly we've come down to protesting protests: at this rate we'll have protesters interrupting protesters, climate change deniers throwing paint at environmental activists, marches against marches. I cry not to laugh.