Salvini rise ends Triumvirate

Anna van Densky OPINION Italian Prime minister Giuseppe Conte resigned anticipating non-confidence vote, prepared by the Lega party leader Matteo  Salvini, who blamed the government coalition partner Five Star Movement policies blocking the economic development of the country. Conte presented his resignation letter to the President of the  Italian Republic Sergio Matarella the same day, after the announcement of his decision, however he will stay in office in charge of current affairs until the governmental crisis is resolved.

In his resignation speech to the Senate Conte blasted Salvini for his decision to ruin the coalition, heading to to the snap elections, caused by the obvious rise of Lega popularity, harvested in 2019 European elections, when he won more than a third of votes. Conte claimed that the arguments around Turin-Lyon speed railroad were just a pretext for Salvini to end coalition government, and precipitate towards snap elections. Indeed the Triumvirate Salvini-Conte-Di Mayo ended due to fall from favor of Five Star Movement among Italian electorate.

Conte (independent, but close to 5SM) blaming Salini an ambition to become Prime Minister of Italy based on the democratic vote, is a startling example of an absurd attempt of keeping alive the unnatural coalition between two opposing left and right forces of political spectrum, as much viable as the mythological Centaurus create half-man, and half-horse. Anyway the experiment is over, and now the left is preparing for a new battle on preventing the election to happen, because the fair elections will ensure  Salvini’s ascendance to leadership. What to do?..

The prognostic of political strategies in a global world has never been easier, because all the major trends are fabricated in the US, and the cliches are exported worldwide as a fast-food chain. To understand how globalists will fight against Salvini‘s ascendance to power is sufficient to look at their ways of waging information wars against President Trump. Although the mechanics is rather elaborate, some conceptual methods are obvious: blame of “foreign interference” in the elections process (remember “Russians did it” of Hillary Clinton), and use the social networks for manipulation.

Facebook and Twitter will turn against Salvini, so will be all the European left, rising their voice to crescendo. It is not for nothing that the Members of European Parliament  have ignored the fact that the second time in a raw an Italian is elected as the speaker, the Socialist David Sassoli. The maneuvre is clearl designed to signal to Italians voters – Brussels is in opposition to Salvini, and they will do everything in their power to bloc his ascendance.

Hopefully the big battle between globalists and souverenists will not glide into barbarism Italy has known, and the “corpses” will be only allegorical, political. However, if I were Salvini, I would pay serious attention to his security. Especially after the episode of with a Roma woman, who called on national TV to kill him with a “bullet in head”. The Italian mass media focused on Salvini‘s answer, naming the women “gypsy“, without any attention to her message of assassination of the politician. The purpose is clear: to create climate favorable to growth of criminal ideas in minds of psychologically unstable individuals. Those who are not able to win over Salvini intellectually, are doomed to do it in Stone Age way…

 

Zuckerberg promotes Facebook in Brussels

As bright as he his,  Mr. Zuckerberg appeared in the European Parliament Brussels for a short address, representing a mixture of advertising for his company and benefits it brings to the EU, and his intentions for future cooperation. Unlike any other CEO of a telecom company he has competences  to provide service and powers to decide if we are good enough to use it. A  very innovative approach, we have never experienced before: is post office allowed to inspect the content of our letters, before sending them? Are telecom operators encouraged to listen to our conversation and decide if we are entitled to remain the clients?…

But in case of the Facebook the MEPs encouraged Mr.Zuckerberg to filter content, banning the “fakenews” in spite of the absence of a legal definition, monitor the exchanges to define if it does not contain a threat.

Mr.Zuckerberg came to European Parliament with an aura of the Emperor of the World, who can make, and overthrow kings: he apologised for Analytica, but accepted the mission of filtering the Facebook content. Who is the judge? Mr.Zuckerberg himself?..

We do not expect the same people to construct the roads, maintain them and monitor those, who use them – ‘unbundling’ is the word for the policy requiring the division of powers. But in case of Mr.Zuckerberg it does not work: he is the one who provides the communication service, monitors the content, bans those, who he thinks are not entitled. Is the Facebook a modern service provider or an old-fashioned monopoly?

Imagine you are coming to a post office, where an agent is opening your envelope, reading a letter, and denying a further service, sending it into trash! That is what Mr.Zuckerberg does: he provides service, monitors the users, and bans those unwanted upon his own subjective criteria. The most striking  element of the entire endeavor is, that it is accepted by the otherwise democratic societies. Where is the division of powers? In case of Facebook, it goes a beggar.