THE UNEDITED

Free space for free expression in english & italian

I predict Hillary Clinton will become the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee at the July 2020 DNC convention. However, Trump will ultimately win re-election in November.

            The most important thing to know when analyzing national elections in the United States is that there is an “establishment” wing of the Democratic Party and a “grassroots” wing. This dichotomy is true of the Republican Party as well. The generally successful strategy for candidates is to hold extreme policy positions during the primary season to generate grassroots support, then shift to a moderate policy platform in the general election to attract independent voters. Candidates have to appear credible to both constituencies (establishment and grassroots) while managing the policy shift from extreme-to-moderate.

The candidates

Elizabeth Warren had a dramatic surge in the polls during the Fall of 2019. She was drawing crowds of over 10,000 people to her campaign events. Warren’s main platform is economic populism, which she articulates very well and which resonates powerfully with the Democratic base. The problem? Elizabeth Warren’s brand of economic populism does not resonate with the Party’s donor class, the “establishment”. Even as her popularity surged among the party’s base, the large donors and corporate elite, who would not benefit under Warren’s policies, withheld support. Warren lost momentum and she has fallen in the polls ever since.

            Bernie Sanders has had a consistently popular democratic socialist platform and his poll numbers are challenging the frontrunner, Joe Biden. Bernie does not have the support of the donor class, but unlike Warren, he does not need it. In the last 3 months of 2019, Bernie Sanders raised $34 million from 1.8 million donations, with the average donation being $18. The donor class does not like his anti-capital positions and many in the Democratic Party do not believe (perhaps mistakenly) that he can win in the general election due to his democratic socialist platform. Most importantly, Sanders is 78 years old, and his health is an issue - he had a heart attack on October 1, 2019.

Joe Biden is often considered the perfect candidate. He is beloved by the grassroots for his “folksy” manner and by the donor class alike. He has a long political history and is therefore a predictable choice for the establishment. However, his cognitive abilities have severely deteriorated. He has clear neurological problems and is struggling. It really begs the question, why is the Democratic Party running a 77 year old man with clear cognitive impairments as its frontrunner? More on this later.

            The other candidates are interesting but not likely to gain meaningful traction. Bloomberg is notable for his business prowess and deep financial reserves and relationships. However, after spending $300 million on advertising, his poll numbers barely improved. He simply does not have the charisma to run a successful national campaign. Some analysts have surmised that he is running to insert Gun Control more prominently into the national debate. Regardless, for our purposes, he is not relevant. If he pre-announces a vice presidential running mate with charisma, he could possibly create a compelling candidacy.

Buttigieg is well-liked among the younger generation of the donor class (Silicon Valley) but he struggles with the base. He has a peculiar establishment background (Harvard, naval intelligence, Mckinsey, etc.) and his father founded the International Gramsci Society. It is an interesting plot line and could gain traction given his powerful allies, but probably not relevant to the final election outcome. Tulsi Gabbard is notable as a veteran and for her anti-war platform which resonates with the base, but the establishment is adamantly against her platform and independent streak. Andrew Yang is a highly intelligent and independent candidate, which is interesting in terms of what his candidacy says about the base, but he is most likely irrelevant for the 2020 final outcome.

“Super Delegates”

The Democratic Party has a primary system that includes “super delegates”. Voters in the Democratic primaries cast their vote at polling locations throughout their state. The state Democratic Party then awards state delegates to the candidates proportionally, according to how many votes they received. The state Party sends those delegates to the national Democratic Party convention where they are “pledged” to vote according to the state vote tallies for each candidate. Super delegates also represent the state at the national convention but they are unpledged delegates, i.e. not bound by the results of the state’s primary voting. Super delegates can vote for any candidate they choose at the national convention.

For instance, in the 2016 Iowa caucuses, 704 local delegates (representing primary voters at the state level) voted for Hillary Clinton while 700 local delegates voted for Bernie Sanders. This resulted in Clinton having 23 pledged state delegates from Iowa for the DNC national convention and Bernie Sanders having 21 pledged delegates. However, 6 “super delegates” sided with Clinton giving her a total of 29 delegates from Iowa for the national convention. In 2016, 85 percent of super delegates supported Hillary Clinton.

In 2016, Debbie Wasserman Schultzs, chair of the Democratic National Committee (the governing organization of the Democratic Party), actually stated in an interview, “Unpledged delegates exist to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don't have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists.” Due to broad anger in the Democratic Party’s base about what was perceived as a bias in the establishment’s favor, the Party changed the rules such that super delegates only come into play if the national convention becomes a “brokered convention”.

A “brokered convention”

A “brokered convention” simply means that if no candidate has a clear majority of votes after the first ballot at the DNC national convention in July, there is a second round of voting. For a candidate to win the Democratic Party nomination during the first round of voting, they have to receive 1,919 delegate votes. With at least three strong contenders (Biden, Sanders, Warren) and others rising, there is a real possibility of no candidate receiving that minimum number of delegates.

After heavy criticism over the role of super delegates in the 2016 election, the DNC changed its rules in 2018 such that super delegates can only play a role in a second round of voting at the national convention. So conceivably, no current candidate wins on the first round of voting. At that point, it becomes a brokered convention, and all delegates that were previously pledged to one candidate are “released” and can vote for whomever they choose. In the second round of voting, an entirely new candidate can enter the race.

Such an unstable scenario allows Hillary Clinton to enter the field as a “savior” from the chaos. Hillary still has a strong grip on the DNC and is actively participating in meetings, according to sources that have been on DNC conference calls. Tulsi Gabbard called this out in October, “From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a campaign to destroy my reputation. We wondered who was behind it, and now we know… I challenge her [Clinton] to come out from behind her proxies and powerful allies in the corporate media, and face me directly.” Hillary Clinton went so far as to state that Russia is “grooming” Gabbard as a third party candidate and said, “She [Tulsi] is the favorite of the Russians.” More recently, Hillary Clinton has been attacking Bernie Sanders in the press. So Clinton has been shaping the race from the beginning.

The benefit of a brokered convention for Hillary Clinton is that it looks organic and she can avoid the accusation of 2016 - that she rigged the nomination process against Bernie Sanders. Also, if nominated in July, her candidacy would be only 3 months long. Much of the negative press that plagued her public life would not have sufficient time to gather speed. Also, such a short period would be much easier on her health which was called into question during the 2016 race.

The fact that the Democratic Party and its media allies continue to push Biden as the frontrunner is conspicuous. It is an interesting question as to whether Biden was placed in the primaries intentionally to split the vote and allow for a brokered convention. Hillary understands how unpopular she is among American voters and by having Biden represent the establishment throughout the primaries, she keeps Bernie Sanders from getting the required 1,919 delegates at the convention and effectively bypasses all of the drama and close examination of the primary season.

The Clinton strategy

            Hillary Clinton will use the next 6 months to shape her image as someone who can act as a “savior” from the chaos and beat Donald Trump. The line will be, “you may not like me, but I’m effective”. Her DNC and media allies will be pushing a message of “anyone but Trump”.

        For her savior image to work, she will need a voting base that is (a) destabilized via the brokered convention and (b) desperate for a savior that can defeat Trump. Over the next months, she will try to avoid the appearance that she is preparing to enter the race at the convention, but it will be difficult. She will also try to balance support for the frontrunners (currently Biden, Sanders, Warren), using her corporate media allies, so that no candidate gets a majority at the convention in July. That will primarily entail her and her allies attacking Bernie Sanders who is the clear frontrunner for grassroots voters.

Then, if Hillary Clinton becomes the candidate in July, she will utilize her allies in the mainstream press to keep the attention on Trump. The mainstream media is already a massive echo chamber with 93% of news being negative toward Trump. Hillary will run on an “anything but Trump” platform and will limit the news flow about herself or her campaign. She will utilize her allies in Silicon Valley and the mainstream press to actively shape the news flow.

There is a new documentary coming out about Hillary Clinton in March, and the first look reveals an honest message of “yes, I am a divisive leader, and I know it’s hard to like me”. So in this first stage, she will acknowledge the problems of her past candidacy and public life. In the next stage, that vulnerability and honest assessment will be followed with a “So what? The Party is in disarray and it needs me.” The tone and presence of her “stealth” candidacy will become more strong and ruthless as we approach the July convention. Her strategic goal is for strength to be more important than likability at the convention.

The prediction

I predict that Hillary Clinton will become the Democratic nominee, but Trump will win again in the November 2020 election. The support among his base has only increased since 2016. Tens of thousands of voters are still flocking to his rallies, sometimes waiting 20 hours in freezing temperatures to get inside.

The attacks on him so far have been unsuccessful. “Russia Gate” - accusations that Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election - led nowhere. In the wake of the November impeachment hearings over dealings with Ukraine, Trump’s approval numbers actually increased. The public’s reaction to the impeachment was largely indifference, despite the mainstream press and Democratic leadership trumpeting that “the fate of our democracy hinges on this moment”. Currently, the Senate is holding a trial after receiving articles of impeachment from the House of Representatives. Trump’s approval rating rose 3 points during the trial’s first week.

            The US public is experiencing “Trump fatigue” and shrugs off every controversy the Democratic party tries to pin on Trump. The establishment wing/ Clinton team would like to believe that 2020 is different, but the public will simply see a Clinton versus Trump matchup in the exact same light as 2016. In addition, Bernie Sanders supporters will be even more enraged in 2020 and even less likely to vote for Hillary Clinton in November.

How Trump could lose

There is one main scenario where Trump loses and that is if the United States enters recession prior to the election in 2020. That currently appears unlikely, although there are signs that we are nearing the end of this business cycle. For instance, the unemployment rate is at a record low. We have a robust economy with no slack in the labor market. At the same time, consumer debt defaults are rising. Historically, there is a significant lead time from when consumer defaults start rising and the unemployment rate turns up again leading into a recession so it appears unlikely in 2020.

            The economic environment seems similar to the wage-push inflationary environment of the mid-1960s. Inflation was just starting to pick up, but no one knew it or felt it. Trump voters may be losing ground due to this burgeoning inflationary environment, but they don’t recognize it. Inflation starts out as a stealth problem. Ironically, that is helpful for Trump who only needs voters to feel good for the next 10 months.

            There will be other attempts to stop Trump - accusations of sexual misconduct, corrupt business dealings, abuse of executive power - but none of these have worked so far. If Trump’s actions in Ukraine and Iran are any indication, he has so far been effective at thwarting geopolitical sabotage efforts (i.e. Kerry back-channeling with Iran).

            There is one other outlier that has to be considered. Voter fraud and outright election fraud are very real problems. Consider the fact that some California counties reported more votes than there are registered voters. So Trump could be defeated with an orchestrated and targeted Election Fraud strategy - whether via the electronic voting machines or through actual physical voting. In several key swing states, he only won by several thousand votes so it is a real possibility. There is also the impact of Silicon Valley’s grip on social media. The prominent research psychologist Dr. Robert Epstein has estimated that Google was able to shift between 3 and 10 million votes to Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election via manipulating search results.

The fight for the American Empire

            There is a loose constellation of corporate and political interest groups that protect the American Empire’s structure, which allows for leveraging American financial and military power globally to establish advantageous trade regimes and political unions. This worked for awhile, but now the American public can no longer bear the burden of the Empire.

      In the course of setting up and defending this structure, many “globalist” agents set up what are essentially toll booths along the frontier of the empire. If foreign partners want into the imperial core, or internal actors want outside, they have to pay the toll to these globalist operatives. Over time, the loyalty of these operatives to the United States has come into question. Trump is part of a group that is loyal to the United States and trying to rebalance the American Empire. These “toll keepers” are not happy about it.

         For instance, he boasts of Saudi Arabia paying $1 Billion for more troops. He wants countries to pay to host American troops and bases. He wants NATO members to pay more. He wants to renegotiate trade agreements. He wants Europe to buy American energy. Every foreign policy initiative by Trump can be reduced to this rebalancing effort.

The American public doesn’t fully understand this strategic shift, but they intuitively grasp that Trump is trying to do something different than the “globalist” status quo and so they vote for him, even if they don’t like him as a person. There are many different “deep states” and “globalists” in the US. Trump represents a nationalist brand with its own military, intelligence, corporate and financial assets. The group working with Trump has no choice but to exercise all available resources to ensure he wins the 2020 election.

In January 2016, I predicted that Trump would win because he presented the most compelling case for rebalancing the American Empire. I predict he will win again.

Sunday May 30th on a train to Zurich

I spent a weekend in Milan, since the life in Zurich is astoundingly lonely. The fashionable ladies I used to attend are now deceased. I cannot even trace the burial of many of them. I recollect few faces, sometimes by strolling alone around the town and spotting the name of a friend on a street placard. Most of them called writers, artists, painters or even philanthropists. They looked to me all the same, untalented privileged people who enjoyed my entertaining conversation. They perhaps also felt guilty for the sums lavishly employed by their husbands to compliment them with expensive jewelry and cars. Not really seriously, they would have otherwise financed my revolutionary purposes or I should have not accepted the Kaiser’s support to come back to Russia.

Someone told me that in Milan I would have more easily found the understanding of the local authorities, they would have allowed me to openly proclaim the revolution in exchange of that few thousands of francs needed to find an accommodation. I am not impressed by the XXI century figures. I used to spend the same amounts, back in 1917, without taking in account the inflation that occurred along the years. I always had an elegant taste, the finest among my revolutionary circle, and it was really expensive to satisfy it. I did not even consider a compromise the idea to mix up with the so hatred bourgeoisie. In the end that is my milieu and I would not find myself so much at easy with the lowest social classes. That is perhaps the reason why I never totally trusted Stalin. He was such a plebeian, someone who had to become a seminarist in order to get some free education. Not even of the best level. Stalin was however brilliant, I am collecting more information about his extraordinary success and I would have had no doubt. He had the instinct of a killer, he was ruthless, he had all the energy to achieve the greatest goals. I felt the same when I spoke in front of the people, when I had to fight against the other members of the central committee. When I was alone, and had to meditate about the revolution, I most of the time enjoyed a cup of tea with honey and milk. As well as some pastries.

Sunday May 30th A train from Milan to Frankfurt

What a busy days I had in Milan, and I still need to go back to Frankfurt by train because of a really needed stop in Basel. I am feeling art fairs fatigue, but how else could I get acquainted to new customers? There are some fashionable social networks, but the more exclusive they pretend to be, the higher is the chance to meet up with fake profiles. They just pretend to have money to spend or be interested in my field of business, they do not want anything else than my WhatsApp and a date. That sometimes I am however happy to concede, despite I am aware that it will have no follow up. I just need to be sure not to arrange anything with students, who just disappear when the waiter comes with the bill. That I find really outrageous, because I cannot really stand men who are not generous and want to split the bill. I can even less tolerate those who do just want to get a free dinner. There are many other ways to obtain that, the best one it is by attend Art Basel, in Basel, Miami or wherever. Just by being invited to the parties, it is a good way to spare on the expenses. Especially when the expenses are not backed by a main institution. When I left the village, I had to learn how to survive a University Campus. The tactics I learn there, helped me to survive when I was not anymore eligible for students benefits and rent a studio apartment in one of the most expensive financial capitals. Also Milan was not cheap, and I cannot figure out how most of the so called professionals with the proletarian Italian-Income can manage to have a decent life. Perhaps they just invest most of their money in few fashionable clothes, carefully hold the same mojito for a whole night and pretend to have spent holidays in some fashionable resorts. That sort of a metropolis has become one of the worst places where to do business. If someone shows up to not to have the money, even after having signed a formal contract, it is almost impossible to claim any right. Luckily even lawyers are in desperate need and they usually work cheap. Especially if you are a gorgeous blondie and you exploit their sexist ego. I am not so dissatisfied by the inadequate leftist ruling class either. They selected the perfect combination of laws to asfissiate the art market and still let some holes open to export the most interesting devaluated artworks. If I were an old widow, who hoped to guarantee her rent with the beautiful paintings she had at home, I would be extremely angry, but I am a young and brilliant foreigner who knows how to exploit these circumstances at my advantage. My contact in Basel shall help me, it is such a shame that I cannot do everything alone and need to split the cake.

Sunday May 30th 2021 On a train from Milan to Lugano

I luckily managed to get the full expenses for the weekend I spent in Zurich, and the one I spent in Geneva. I exceeded my budget far more than expected. Perhaps it was also due to a couple of über art collectors I dined with. I do not like that word über, that Americans find so fashionable, yet I need to follow the trends also with my writings. Perhaps I will end up with a strange relationship with some acquaintance met in an Assouline store. A place that I also detest, I do not like those kind of fashionable art editions printed to allow affluent Chinese and Arab customers to justify some expenses in culture. If I were free to choose, I would wonder around Cologne, looking for the shop of a local printer. Cologne has already developed a couple of international well sounded successes in the matter of art editions. I do not doubt that something more shall come out soon, during the next few years. I am reading here and there about these NFTs art editions, art totally virtualized, to enhance the meaning of art as a unique creation. It is just a piety that I cannot adopt NFTs as pieces of interior design. Unless I shall set up some multimedia installation, a work of art by itself I will also contribute to. Perhaps it is the only way to me to truly express myself while providing a client with my service. Most of the time I need to give a look at expensive objects on 1stDibs, take in consideration the given budget, add to that between 20 and 50%, and make my proposal. The increased budget is just something that the client does not expect, but that makes him, or in most of the cases her, happy. They feel empowered to lavishly spend on something unnecessary, with the additional illusion that they are doing a brilliant investment. By the time they shall be dead, most of the objects they have purchased will just be out fashioned or in such a bad condition that shall hardly be accepted by a self respecting auction house. Just few possess the skill to anticipate the market. I could try to influence them, but they would just be left unsatisfied and I would loose my client, as well as my reputation. The train has moved faster than I expected and I have not been bothered by the borders control. It is time to move on.

Utilizzo la metafora come segno di riferimento alla cultura tradizionale cinese, modalità ripresa anche nelle espressioni tipiche delle dottrine maoista e successive.

La durata della pandemia e le conseguenze nella società e nella economia sono oggetto di plurime analisi.
L’approccio UE e italiano ha mostrato fallacie nascoste ai soli occhi di chi attinga esclusivamente ai media dominanti in Italia.
Altri approcci di tipo empirico (UK e USA) sono stati criticati ma non si sono rivelati meno efficienti.
In Italia i media dominanti hanno concentrato quasi esclusivamente l’attenzione sulla evoluzione nel tempo dei dati pandemici, scartando punti di vista minoritari ma sempre presenti di osservatori economici fondati (Musso, Marsonet).
In questo sistema rituale si è inoltre sacrificato il complesso delle libertà individuali a un interesse collettivo determinato probabilisticamente ma asserito come assoluto.

Lascio questi aspetti, che condivido per formazione culturale, e mi concentro su una ricaduta economica.
Posta la condivisione del pensiero di Tremonti, che da tempo ci vede Nazione manifatturiera senza dominante vocazione finanziaria, rilevo quanto segue:

1) il calcolo del PIL appare basato su fattori irrealistici, là dove la produzione di reddito viene simulata da una circolazione aumentata del reddito prodotto lungo filiere di servizi il cui valore aggiunto è dubitabile;
2) la contrazione da pandemia del PIL effettivo (beni prodotti, esportati, aumento del valore aggiunto) è verosimilmente superiore a quanto proposto;
3) un singolo settore economico di nuova comparsa è invece esploso a seguito della pandemia.

A fronte di un indebolimento strutturale interno e nelle relazioni esterne della Nazione, ben nascosto dalla ovvietà del sistema pandemico, è rigoglioso un sistema economico parallelo correlato alla pandemia.

Vaccini, tamponi reiterati in ogni occasione di viaggio, ripresa lavorativa, rappresentano costi sostenuti e, di conseguenza, guadagni.
I vantaggi sono distribuiti tra
a) produttori e distributori del materiale;
b) enti effettuatori dei controlli, pubblici e privati;
c) personale delegato a effettuazione, trascrizione e consegna dei risultati;
d) spazi, strutture, personale e dispositivi (meccanici/informatici) di gestione del flusso di persone controllate.
Sono inoltre da considerare i dispositivi di protezione individuale (mascherine, guanti) e di disinfezione. Anche questi intesi come produzione, distribuzione e vendita.
Questo complesso può essere definito con denominazione inclusiva “Economia Pandemica”.

Se si considera la pandemia come un fattore di aggravamento di costi (chiusure lavorative, limitazione della mobilità), si può obiettare che i costi della Economia Pandemica sono finalizzati alla riattivazione del ciclo economico.
Questa finalizzazione non ha comunque valore positivo, si tratta unicamente di aggravio di costi di beni prodotti/utilizzati e di persone impiegabili altrimenti in attività produttive.

La similitudine è con la economia delle guerre civili, che non costituisce affatto un elemento di crescita ma di semplice predazione di quanto già esistente (K. Imai, J. Weinstein. Measuring the Economic Impact of Civil War – Working Paper No. 51, June 2000 , Center for International Development at Harvard University. Cambridge, MA).
La differenza delle guerre civili con le guerre istituzionali concluse è che nelle seconde le innovazioni tecnologiche indotte e i fenomeni di ricostruzione tendenzialmente hanno dato benefici sebbene a qualche anno dalla conclusione degli eventi.

La economia pandemica ha dimostrato vantaggi per produttori e distributori di vaccini, tamponi, mascherine e i loro dipendenti (occupati attivamente).
Paradossalmente e in una società post-eroica (E. Luttwak), coloro che si avvantaggiano hanno un ruolo che, senza lettura pregiudiziale, assomiglia a quello dei Signori della Guerra.
(N. Cooper – 2002 – Warlords and Logo Warrriors. The Political Economy of Postmodern Conflict. In: J. Brauer, J.P. Dunne eds, Arming the South, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
S. Skaperdas – 2002 – Warlord Competition. Dept. of Economics , Univeristy of California, Irvine, CA).

In ulteriore metafora, è come se le predazioni sui profughi dell’Atamano Semenov in Siberia nella guerra civile russa potessero essere anche marginalmente interpretate come fenomeno positivo.

Non vale la pena chiedersi se l’approccio alla pandemia universalmente e falsamente attribuito a Boris Johnson (falsità documentata da M. Bolondi in Atlantico Quotidiano, 03 aprile 2020) richieda un approccio adogmatico (cioè empirico) ai benefici per pochi indotti dalla pandemia e dalla sua gestione a fronte di una fragilità sbalorditiva del sistema Europa e del sistema Italia (al netto del pervenimento di risorse finanziarie comunitarie, non ancora visibili e da restituire anche poco palesemente)?

Cioè, è come se nella siccità un allevatore delegasse due delle sue settecento mucche a svuotare la sola pozzanghera residua e si dicesse soddisfatto del “lavoro” svolto.

Lascio ad altri argomentazioni catastrofiste-pauperiste, che non mi pertengono.

Italy remains the least governable and most unstable member of Nato, not to mention the UE. Despite being one of the original six Founding Members and one of the principal financial supporters of the UE, Italy does not carry the political weight one would expect of the EU’s second major manufacturing Power. A question of leaders and leadership?

Fourteen months ago, despite an electoral law hastily redesigned to encourage multi-party politics as opposed to the bi-party politics of the Berlusconi “era," Italian voters, clearly sending a message to their leaders side-stepped the traditional parties and voted resoundingly for two up-starts known as the M5S and Lega parties. These two parties subsequently formed the first two-party coalition government in the history of the Republic. Known as the “Government for Change," that government was put into sudden-death overtime by Matteo Salvini, leader of the Lega on August 8, 2019. 

After a little more than one year, Italians stand aghast as Italy’s leaders once again seem intent on playing “craps” with the lives of their fellow citizens. Naturally, for the good of all Italians, but most of all for the good of the Country’s numerous and highly paid bureaucrats and, of course, for the thousands of MPs and politicians required to represent a shrinking Italian electorate now down to about 50 million people.

No one on the right or left of the political spectrum can deny Italy needs “a better mouse trap”. In the age of real-time communications, smart phones, computers and broad-band internet connections, Italy needs a political machinery that    is democratic, quick to decide and cost effective.

The present Constitution and Institutions do not seem to guarantee any of the above. What to do?

1. Reduce the number of MPs. It makes little sense for Italians to pay for 1000 legislators when half would be more than enough to adequately represent Italy’s decreasing eligible voter population of some 50 million. An example? Italian Representatives represent 80,000 people each compared with 733,000 people each by their American counterparts. Italian Senators, which are less than half in number, represent 200,000 people each. However, in the US Senators represent the individual States and no comparisons are possible.
2. Cut the outrageously high cost of Italian politics. Italian MPs earn more than € 190,000.00 per year. They are the highest paid politicians in Europe or the Americas. The cost of running Italy’s Quirinal Palace (where Pres. Mattarella and retinue live and work) is five times that of Buckingham Palace and twice that of the White House! For most Italians, politicians are not worth the money they get, especially in these times of diminishing returns. Something must be done to stop the gouging of taxpayers.
3. Encourage the formation of a manageable two / three party system by rethinking voter districts, raising thresholds for winning seats in parliament and adopting a first-past the-post majority electoral system. The error is believing that more parties in Parliament equals more democracy. In the Italian case the proliferation of parties has brought nothing but confusion and hegemony often by parties representing but a majority only marginally superior to their own.
4. Neutralize the Italian Magistrature’s bid for political power by constitutional amendment where possible and/or by making the Magistratura accessible to lawyers and Notaries in private practice; the present closed system does nobody any good; civil servants and bureaucrats become more responsive to the needs of society when challenged by competition from the private sector.  

All systems are self-preserving and naturally Italian politicians believe the answer lies not in the above suggestions but in going even more proportional (in efforts to stop the “populist right” from spoiling their well-remunerated fun). For the good of Italy and to make sure it is “never again” for the likes of Salvini.

Come Tuesday, August 27, should Mattarella not send everybody to the polls sometime this fall, Italians risk falling back into the hands of the old cold-war leadership that nearly bankrupted the Country. If that were allowed to happen, self-determination could become the North’s only option. Caveat emptor!

Quando alla fine dell’agosto 2021 il Governo Cinese, tramite gli organi di informazione ufficiali, annunciò l’introduzione di nuove misure restrittive nel campo dei videogiochi online nel tentativo di fermarne la dipendenza, tutti i giornali riportarono la notizia con molta enfasi dimenticando che, che già alla fine del 2017, l'Organizzazione mondiale della sanità (OMS) aveva annunciato che nell’ undicesima revisione dell’ edizione  della Classificazione internazionale delle malattie (ICD-11) che entrerà in vigore il primo gennaio 2022, il disturbo da gioco sarebbe stato identificato come un nuovo disturbo e che la stretta del Governo Cinese era già iniziata nel 2019 quando aveva vietato l’utilizzo agli utenti di età inferiore ai 18 anni di giocare ai videogiochi tra le 22 e le 8 del mattino e, comunque, per non più di 90 minuti nei giorni feriali. Quello che Pechino chiede alle aziende che offrono videogiochi online è però adesso qualcosa di più drastico, ovvero di attuare controlli più accurati su chi utilizza le loro piattaforme attraverso delle verifiche più rigorose che prevedono l’utilizzo di dati reali degli utenti e del riconoscimento facciale per poter accedere e utilizzare i servizi di queste ultime.
Secondo alcuni analisti la decisione del Governo Cinese è vista come una nuova fase della guerra “Hi-Tech” tra Pechino e Washington, (dato che la maggior parte dei giochi online sono creati da software house USA) mentre per altri rappresenta un nuovo modo che il regime cinese ha per controllare i propri cittadini.

Ma i video giochi ed in special modo quelli online portano davvero alla dipendenza?
A memoria di chi scrive questa diatriba tra chi sostiene la dipendenza e chi no è sempre esistita, tanto da ricordare che alla fine degli anni ’80 avevo letto un articolo che difendeva i videogiochi (purtroppo non  ricordo il nome della rivista) dove l’autore sosteneva che giocare ai videogiochi – n.d.r. delle sale giochi – non solo non era pericoloso ma addirittura aiutava la coordinazione tra occhio e mani.
Da allora sono passati ormai quasi quarant’anni ma regolarmente quest’idea della dipendenza da gioco continua a comparire.
Uno studio pubblicato sull'American Journal of Psychiatry nel marzo 2017⁽¹⁾ ha cercato di esaminare la validità e l'affidabilità dei criteri per il disturbo da gioco su Internet, confrontarlo con la ricerca sulla dipendenza dal gioco online e stimarne l'impatto sulla salute fisica, sociale e mentale. Lo studio ha rilevato che tra coloro che hanno giocato ai videogame, la maggior parte non ha riportato alcun sintomo del disturbo da gioco online e la percentuale di persone che potrebbero qualificarsi per l’Internet Gaming Disorder è estremamente piccola.
La ricerca che ha coinvolto diversi studi su adulti negli Stati Uniti, nel Regno Unito, in Canada e in Germania ha evidenziato che tra gli individui che hanno manifestato il disturbo da gioco su Internet tutti avevano una salute emotiva, fisica e mentale indebolita rispetto a quelli che non l’ hanno manifestato.
Scrivendo in un commento sullo studio sull'American Journal of Psychiatry, Patrick M. Markey (professore del Dipartimento di Psicologia di Villanova University College of Liberal Arts and Sciences)  , e Christopher J. Ferguson (dottore in psicologia clinica presso l'University of Central Florida MS, psicologia dello sviluppo, Florida International University BA, psicologia presso Stetson University), hanno concluso che lo studio suggerisce che "la dipendenza da videogiochi potrebbe essere una cosa reale, ma non è l'epidemia che alcuni hanno immaginato essere".

Sicuramente i videogiochi di oggi, che fanno uso di internet per creare coinvolgimenti con altri utenti, sono fatti per creare situazioni nelle quali chi gioca è invogliato a continuare a giocare tramite l’acquisizione di crediti in base ai livelli che superano oppure comprandoli direttamente. Molte volte (soprattutto per i giochi che si svolgono sui dispositivi mobili) tra un livello e l’altro compaiono schermate pubblicitarie che invitano a comperare crediti o bonus per agevolare il superamento del livello successivo o dello stesso.
Una simile struttura di gioco se risulta pericolosa per un adulto sicuramente per un minore può essere distruttiva. Consideriamo poi che il recente periodo di Lockdown dovuto al Covid-19 ha portato molte persone a rimanere chiuse in casa ed a usufruire di servizi di intrattenimento online alternativi come i giochi.

Ma come si manifesta disturbo da videogioco? Secondo quanto riportato dall’ OMS nell’ IDC-11², con una serie di comportamenti persistenti o ricorrenti legati al gioco, sia online che offline, consistenti in: un controllo alterato sul gioco; una sempre maggiore priorità data al gioco tale che quest’ultimo diventa attività prioritaria nella vita rispetto ad altre attività quotidiane e rispetto agli interessi; una continua escalation del giocare a scapito di relazioni personali, familiari, sociali, educazionali, occupazionali. Per finire affinché venga considerato patologico il comportamento si deve reiterare per 12 mesi.
Da quanto riporta l’OMS sembra che non vi siano moltissime differenze tra la dipendenza da videogiochi e altre dipendenze e l’aggiunta dei videogiochi all'elenco delle dipendenze comportamentali riconosciute potrebbe aiutare milioni di persone bisognose, ma, allo stesso tempo, potrebbe anche “patologizzare”  un comportamento normale e creare un nuovo stigma, un marchio, da apporre a chiunque passi troppo tempo a giocare per il puro divertimento.

Le misure che prende il governo cinese, seppur eccessive vanno viste nell’ottica di un governo che ha comunque una struttura di regime che, vorrebbe “moralizzare” i suoi cittadini. I governi liberali occidentali dovrebbero comunque considerare di varare a breve delle misure che impongano delle misure di contenimento per quanto riguarda il tempo che minori e pre-adolescenti passano a giocare online.
Il mondo cambia velocemente e la società gli va a ruota ma non sempre la politica si muove alla stessa velocità!

¹Internet Gaming Disorder: Investigating the Clinical Relevance of a New Phenomenon, 4 novembre 2016
²  WHO, Addictive 2018 behaviours: Gaming disorder, 14 settembre

Bibliografia:
https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.ajp.2016.16020224
(Ultima consultazione settembre 2021)

https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/addictive-behaviours-gaming-disorder
(Ultima consultazione settembre 2021)

E’ tempo per il capitale di valutare investimenti sulla biocibernetica o non ancora, in particolare su endo-protesi di potenziamento del cervello? L’avvento di un’Età della “biocibernazione” – nome creato da chi scrive negli anni ’80 - è stato profetizzato già da tempo. Nel 2000 Bill Joe, direttore scientifico di Sun Microsystems, scrisse: nel 2030 le tecnologie dell’informazione, bio e nano si fonderanno generando una speciazione post-umana. Ancor prima Kurzweil lanciò programmi di potenziamento tecnologico delle facoltà umane e di discontinuità evoluzionistica: la “singolarità”. Ma le aziende pronte a mettere sul mercato biochip cerebrali rinunciarono per timore di dissensi che avrebbero compromesso la capitalizzazione iniziale in Borsa. Così come Google interruppe, per problemi di vulnerabilità legale in materia di privacy, la vendita di occhiali costruiti come protesi di potenziamento delle funzioni visive-informative del cervello. L’intento dichiarato da Musk di costruire chip da impiantare nel cervello segnala che ora i tempi sono maturi?
Il potenziale tecnologico c’è. Nei sistemi autoritari la ricerca è più avanzata per l’assenza di problemi di consenso, ma è scarsa la vera libertà di impresa. L’innovazione, infatti, richiede o la guerra o una relazione amplificante tra libertà, tecnologia e capitale e in questi la prima non c’è. Nelle democrazie c’è, ma manca il consenso a causa del conflitto tra tecnica e morale. Chi scrive invocò un gizmo nella testa quando quattordicenne nel 1965 giocava a scacchi ad occhi bendati nel Caffè San Marco di Trieste, all’ombra della più grande sinagoga d’Europa. I limiti del cervello umano, forzati, erano evidenti e frustranti. Nell’evoluzione, infatti, ha avuto successo, finora, la cooperazione tra individui e non il supercervello illimitato. Tuttavia, la complessità crescente dei compiti cognitivi ha bisogno di un secondo cervello ausiliario, un “metagolem”. Ma ciò genera orrore nei più. A meno che non sia capace di salvare, disse allo scrivente un vecchio rabbi di passaggio. Tale battuta mostra la via: trasformazioni della configurazione umana naturale sono accettabili solo se chiaramente salvatrici. Per esempio, controllo di Alzheimer e Parkinson, ripristino di vista e udito, autoriparazioni in generale. In sintesi, si può ipotizzare che i biochip cerebrali possano ottenere consenso solo se chiaramente finalizzati a salvazioni mediche. A tale condizione l’investimento è valutabile in un orizzonte di 10-15 anni. Aperta questa porta poi, come accade da secoli, la morale si adeguerà alla tecnica.

To the early and less enduring snow of late autumn, that year followed abundant precipitations that soon covered with a white mantle the mountains around Munich. It could have been the landscape printed on a Christmas card or the atmosphere depicted by Thomas Mann in many of his novels. Perhaps even Hitler would have taken inspiration for a watercolour. It could have for sure promoted the sale of the frame, although soon to be replaced with some work of better quality. I was getting stressed on the workplace, because of the requests I received by the far too many stakeholders I had interaction with. By the tone and the feasibility of the targets, they also reminded me of Hitler, while shouting unintelligible orders to his generals. They also had the tune of a DDR hymn, so deeply impregnated by optimistic propaganda. We will complete the plan within the next five days, employing a team of four people, two of which on vacation and the other two new hires who have not already received their laptops. Of course I had to be stressed, but I had also to consider that I was paid because of my well renown soft skills, i.e. negotiation and stress management. I actually felt quite unprepared with both of them, but that was not what I wrote on my resumée under the direct supervision of my career advisor. On a wednesday night, after having got home at 1 a.m. because of an extenuating meeting with the whole management of my area, I decided to break the piggy bank and take part to a guided tour on the snowshoes. The local section of the DAV, the German Alpine Club, organized many excursions during the week ends. Unfortunately most of trips were often cancelled due to the most disparate reasons. It was so frustrating that I had already abandoned the idea to become a proficient mountaineer. I had however to try. My good friend Cristoph was away for a long mission related to his job and I also had enough to spend most of my time reading on the web edition of the local newspapers alarming reports about the presence of radical Islam in Bavaria. If I had been a young Pioneer in the DDR times, my supervisors would have for sure approved
such a proof of bravery defying the decadent entertainment of the Western countries. Actually, without a good income, I would have ever hardly been available to buy the necessary equipment and the efficiency of the Warsaw Pact would have made the roads to the mountains quite impracticable if not for an highly sophisticated military vehicle. Perhaps available only to the NATO. I did not want to take care of the opinion of high paid professionals, but just to stay away from the town for a short while. I prepared my backpack carefully, not to be stuck in an unknown place without the essential equipment. Relying on technology, it was not necessary to carry a voluminous luggage. The iPad is good enough to contain all the entertainment I need for several years. While selecting the food and handling a pocket of dried fruit, I realised how such a tendency to condense all the necessary resources for survival has started centuries ago. A long road to innovation, should add the commentary of a boring video on the human evolution. I also felt that my thought lack of ingenuousness. Perhaps I was not reading intensively enough and I was looking for new ideas. Like those you easily pick up from the best renowned magazines and, by quoting, you can easily assert to belong to a restricted elite of intellectuals. I also doubted whether I should acquire my information from alternative resources. The only conclusion was to adhere to any plot theory available on the web. I then realized how honest intellectuals should have felt under the DDR. The choice to believe to the carefully manipulated scientific publications of the University of Lipsia or the option to nourish your brain with not verified notions, partially developed by the mind of an uneducated political prisoner. For the following two days, in the comfort of a wooden building, immersed in a white world, I made a truce with my troubles.