150 ITALY: THE ART OF COMPROMISE 
propose again an article that appeared last September on Isolanews We talk a lot, maybe too much, the 150th anniversary of the Unification of Italy. Talk about his values, his virtues, its faults, the need to celebrate it or not, in a crescendo of controversy ends in themselves, certainly not help us better understand our history unit today. The question is: what is the common thread that binds this century and a half? The answer is one: the propensity of Italian, both as a political class that as a people, to compromise, and just briefly run through our history to notice.
The first case is before the unit, but we consider it a kind of rehearsal: the union. By 1850, to continue its efforts to reform state Piemontese Cavour Minister proposes to representatives of the moderate left, led Urbano Rattazzi, to put aside divisions and support along with a series of reforms to modernize the country. Excluding the extreme wings of the Piedmontese parliament - radicals and reactionaries - Cavour able to carry through reforms and lead Italy imported independence.
In 1876, after the unification, and after fifteen years of rule by the so-called historical right, led by the successors of Cavour, the government came to the Left. Despite an innovative program and reformer than the right - that would probably open the way for the government policy of alternating between different forces - the Left softened his will to reform seeking the support of the opposition a more liberal and open in attempt to provide greater stability. Other
compromise, albeit in different form, you may encounter during the governments of Giolitti, in the first fifteen years of '900. With its openness to trade unions, which recognized the right to protest, and maintaining a neutral stance in social struggles, Giolitti obtained the support of radicals entering the majority and cautious support of the Socialists, who was offered a ministry. After World War I, several liberal governments maintained an attitude of compromise with the Fascist movement: social tensions and fears of a communist-style revolution led many liberal leaders to turn a blind eye to the violence squad, considered a necessary tool to restore order . In the elections of 1921 the Liberals did not hesitate to organize joint lists with the fascists. Even
fascism, albeit with different characteristics, it is possible to consider a compromise: while subtracting freedom to the Italian people, fascism was able to implicate him in the draft of a new social-political order. The loss of freedom was bearable for the average Italian, because when he had a bad liberal democracy, fascism also opened the doors of the small and middle-class.
With the war, the end of the dictatorship and the birth of the republic, the Constituent Assembly worked on drafting the new constitution, which came into force in 1948, which is good to remember one of its features: "Arbitration.", Ie a pact between the various political forces.
In the early '60s, encouraged by the transformations of the economic boom matured the process of enlargement of the parliamentary majority: that was the center-left box. Moro in 1962 pushed through by the majority of the DC opening the Socialist Party, with which it was agreed on a reform program (middle school only, nationalization and implementation of the regions, tax on tax equity, land reform) but remained partially workable for the divisions within the majority.
In the following years, especially after the crisis of the early '70s, the formula of the center-left could not give power to governments. E 'in this context that the initiative came from the Secretary of PCI, Enrico Berlinguer as "historic compromise", a program agreement between the mass parties (DC, PSI, PCI) to give impetus to a share reform plan. With the governments of National Solidarity, born in the 70s and who enjoyed the support of the Communist Party fought terrorism and economic crisis.
So it seems that in 150 years of history united the "noble art of compromise" is one of the characteristics of our political, social and cultural. Mind you, it's not a bad thing per se, is a tool. And like all tools, if it all depends on your use. And if each occurrence is more that unites to remember that what divides, not hide: the compromise is that unites us. Maybe not for anyone to judge, but by analyzing our history we can not help but take notice.
(from 'Echo of Bg) 
