Monday, July 02, 2007

What’s wrong with Italy? Blame it on the Vatican (Contribution)

THE most extreme diagnosis of Italy’s problem was offered by journalist Peter Popham in the Independent.

He blamed it all on the Vatican: “Imagine that Hitler did not die in his bunker in 1945 but instead cut a deal with the new West German government, giving him continued sovereignty over a small patch of Berlin — and continued intellectual hegemony over the millions he had brainwashed during the previous decade ... Italy’s Vatican problem is a lot like that, with the difference that the Church has been wielding its mind-control for nearly two millennia.”

The trigger for this extraordinary outburst was the week-long political crisis that nearly brought down Prime Minister Romano Prodi’s centre-left government, Italy’s 61st since World War II.

Yet Popham is not anti-Catholic.

It’s just that, like most people who spend a lot of time in Italy, he has simultaneously fallen in love with the country and utterly lost patience with it.

It’s an affliction he shares with a great many Italians: no country except Argentina spends more time debating what is wrong with it.

He blamed the Vatican on this occasion because the crisis was provoked by a government plan to legalise “civil unions” (marriages by another name) even for gays, which greatly annoyed the Catholic Church.

But it’s more complicated than that.

The vote that Prodi’s Government lost was actually on a proposal to leave 1900 Italian troops in Afghanistan until 2011 and to double the size of a US military base outside Vicenza.

Both projects are very unpopular in Italy, but they were part of the deal that created the nine-party coalition behind Prodi’s Government, and only two senators from the far left defected in the key vote on 21 February.

The Government would still have won the vote if senator-for-life Giulio Andreotti had not unexpectedly voted against it.

But Andreotti, 87, seven times prime minister and often known as the “Prince of Darkness”, is a strong supporter of NATO and the US alliance, so why would he vote against that bill?

Because it was going to be so close that his surprise “no” vote could bring Prodi’s Government down.

Why would he want to do that? Andreotti has always been very close to both the Catholic Church and the Mafia, but on this occasion it was the former tie that mattered.

The Vatican wanted to kill the “civil union” proposal, which required killing Prodi’s Government.

It worked, too: a week later Prodi managed to revive his coalition Government, but this time its agreed program does not include the “civil union” project.

Most Italians would agree that there is something wrong with their country, but it’s not the Church that bothers them.

The stagnant economy makes matters worse but there is an underlying sense of frustration that permeates Italian life.

For almost 40 years after 1945, while the rest of Europe was growing and changing very fast, Italy grew but didn’t change, because politics and all of society were frozen in a deeply conservative and profoundly corrupt pattern.

To keep the huge Communist party from winning power and taking Italy out of NATO, the Christian Democratic party had to be kept in power permanently — and it was, thanks to foreign money and foreign intelligence services, to its alliance with the Catholic Church, and its alliance with the Mafia.

That system ended 15 years ago when the Christian Democrats imploded in a blizzard of corruption scandals and Communism went out of fashion, but Italians have a lot of lost time to make up.

But that is about what you’d expect at this stage of the process of modernisation.

Spain is about 30 years into a similar process, dating from the death of Franco and the end of fascism, and it is thriving.

Italy is 15 years in, and feeling the strain. But it will get there.


No responsibility or liability shall attach itself to either myself or to the blogspot ‘Clerical Whispers’ for any or all of the articles placed here.

The placing of an article hereupon does not necessarily imply that I agree or accept the contents of the article as being necessarily factual in theology, dogma or otherwise.

Sotto Voce