Three parties, one pole. Follow the Danish model of marching divided and then striking united

[ad_1]

To the director – Dear Oscar Giannino, I’m responding to your piece yesterday by giving my contribution to the debate on the future of the Liberal Democratic Pole (let’s stop calling it Third, come on). Given that I leave the commentary on the historical parallels to the leaders you mentioned – and I know there is at least one who would have a blast – I decided to start from the last of your reflections, namely the one on positioning and travel companions. The Liberal Democrats have their home in Renew Europe and anyone running for or militating with us should embrace this project. This is why I believe that, if someone feels popular, it is right that they run as candidates within lists that support the European People’s Party (EPP); ditto for the socialists, ça va sans dire. It is unthinkable that in order to overcome the barrier, subjects anchored to ideologies from which they are not yet genuinely ready to detach themselves embark. It would not be fair to our voters, to our European allies and above all to all those who have committed themselves in recent years: whether they are young beginners, of whom Action is full, or long-standing liberal dreamers, like the many who I met at your LibDem congress.

Then there is the question of the methodological approach, which you have raised on several points. It is true, the campaign for the Roman municipal councils was a success precisely because good candidates and ideas were accompanied by an excellent technique, which allowed the Calenda Sindaco list to dictate the agenda, frame and (also through an effective negative campaign) making Carlo the only breaking element. All things to which we are giving little weight, racked by a debate about who our interlocutors are and in the throes of a proactive bulimia which – however full of valid ideas – ends up confusing, if it is not accompanied by clear slogans. And it is from here that we should start again, substantiating our positioning with a few simple and identifying proposals, which characterize us not only as those who do things “seriously” but also as those who have different ideas. And on closer inspection, these 30 years of right-left alternation have left us with some political outstanding issues that we could deal with: stagnant productivity and wages, flight of human capital and lack of workforce, decline in the health and education systems, public unbalanced and ineffective, energy mix inadequate for today’s challenges, up to our own battle for competition and liberalization (taxi and seaside resorts above all). And if we have doubts – you’re right – let’s rely on the data to figure out who to turn to and look within ourselves to build solutions for that slice of the electorate who doesn’t like either Meloni’s or Schlein’s.

Let’s try to intercept that 40 percent of Italians, some already active in associations, others disillusioned, who have problems and desires like the remaining 60 percent who go to the polls. People who have already in part approached us by making their voices heard at the assemblies and work tables promoted by our parties (above all I am thinking of the thematic Action groups that I know closely). They are not people who speak out of turn and we leaders should listen to them more if we want them to stay and grow politically. Finally, no more nagging each other about alliances, breakups and mends. Instead of going to war with each other, let’s take sides and convince those who don’t yet vote for us of the validity of our ideas; next to each other. After all, in Denmark there are three liberal parties that coexist happily with a total of 30% of the vote! Why not try it in Italy too?

Julia Shepherdess he is vice president of Action.

[ad_2]

Source link