“That guy had been accused of fruadulent bankruptcy, now he’s going to be convicted of homicide. If this is your type of hero, then you are to be rather pitied as human-beings”. “These are actions that are a result of the despair of helpless people, against a state that is insensitive and merciless”. These are but two amongst a myriad of contrasting comments htat have inundated social networks a few hours following the massacre at the High Court in Milan, and which would be worth spending a moment of thought. Let us start off with the presumption that killing cannot be considered as being legittimate. We have often stressed this each and every time we tackled the issue on capital punishment, which is a soft soft fo rthe whole of mankind: the definition of rapist and assassin may tickle our fancy for revenge which often ends up with the request for capital punishment. And yet, it is not adding violence to violence death with death that the ills of the world can be solved-on the contrary.
Nor can we pardon however serious the effects of the economic crisis be, such atrocious actions. It is not to be done out of respect to many Italians who are suffering, who are tightening their belts to make ends meet at the end of the month (even halfway through for that matter) and always stay honest, of the highest integrity, they would never dream of harming anyone to avenge themselves. The mecchanism with which we justify those who kill, in the name of a falsified concept of the state that oppresses and is injust, is a logical and improper automatism the truly real victims are those who, on the contrary, represent that part of Italy who wake up every morning to go and fulfil their duty, each having his own competence. And who at night, once the doors of the court or legal studio have been closed, continue to fulfil their duty as father, husband, brother or son in the families, who are bereaved of those who are most dear to them by criminal hands, which we donot and donot wish to define as being folly.
This in fact is the adjective which should be avoided, for the reason that culprits should not be excused for having abused of the “right” to take someone else’s life; there was no folly in the action, it was all carried out in cold blood, having prepared false documents for the fraudulent winding-up, non c’era pazzia ma lucidità nel preparare le carte per un fallimento fraudolento, neither could we speak of a cloudy mind the moment the killer entered the court with a loaded pistol in his pocket. He, like many others like him who consciously hurt and bring death to others. They are not to be pardoned, whether they are acclaimed terrorists or so-called “normal” persons.
Hence, to be firmly condemned. However, there is need to ask some questions not as to ‘why’ some arrive at such levels of violence, but for the justifications that too many citizens give for the tragic act; the sense of hostility which towards every institution, every represetative of the state, is almost tangible. Politicians and magistrates, police-force and public civil servants are cosidered as being “enemies”, like someone to lash out against and hurt, as though they were not part of the same population but wee on the other side o fan imaginary barricade. Often the same corporations themselves forment this short circuit mistrusting each other: the clash between politicians and magistrates in some sense is emblematic.
A sinuous civil war, which is brooding under resentment, which every now and again finds in the armed hand of a Preiti or a Giardiello, his visible climax. We need to immdiately resort to taking measures, without ever even thinking of a Police-state. Rather a state by rule of law, as far as the term be defined as respect for rules but also respect for human dignity: work, education and health are a top priority. And yet today, we are still far from this objective.
Translation provided by Marina Stronati