The rule of the seafaring is that, especially in storms, he guides the commander.
The need to make a chain, in a chain of command not devoured by furious quarrels and backward controversies, usually allows us to adjust and adapt choices with realism. Which also means the usefulness of a possible mutual internal listening.
The supply chain of a slightly vertical system like the Italian onein general, however, it introduces many variations. So that the "public debate" - or the general representation, with all the subjects, converging or conflicting, in the field - it presents, in the month of the outbreak of the coronavirus crisis, quite a few variations to the rule of the seafaring. But he also eventually presented one perceptive and behavioral cohesion to which both the protagonists of the debate and the citizens have adhered. The relationship between seafaring rule e rule of our individualism it is more or less 7 to 3, according to current demoscopy.
Let's say that this is a step forward compared to habits and a step forward, here the truth is necessary, compared to the first fifteen days of crisis in which between the solution “Red area"Widespread and the"flexible solutions" the decision-making conflict has probably triggered the most dramatic cases, such as Bergamo and Brescia, with heavy repercussions on the entire regional health system.
It then avoided radicalizing il health / economy conflict. Obviously it arose. Obviously he had a right of representation. Obviously the two crises existed and exist side by side.
Here a certain system intelligence, which has also chosen the priority "health", has however avoided delegitimizing the inventory of a growing collective fear: the economic caporetto and the occupational ax. A situation room he tried to make the healthcare (clinical and infrastructural) machine work (not all well, you know). Another worked - between territories and Europe (also here with big question marks) - not to postpone the examination of emergencies to "dead father" (non-virtual expression).
Let me be clear: the “Italian model is not being praised without shadows".
The thought is not omitted that within the two weeks of conflict and confusion, there is not an important part of that excess of deaths that the Italian case presents today, a month later, 12.428 out of 51.149 on the planet, that is, a quarter of the deaths of the whole world. The displacement of the system found a way at some point. And the experience that Italy has gained has also served many other countries that have done worse in the first part of March: underestimating, ironic, scornful, not taking seriously the glocal, extremely mobile, mercurial character of this cursed virus. "Do as in Italy”, At some point, it became a rather widespread password.
It is within this framework that - among many things that must be assessed - is also placed the reputational budget of our country, which each then declines in its own territories and which we all decline also as a European budget. It did not seem appropriate to anticipate this game too much. The right time for this synthesis has yet to mature. But it is in this context (if you do not want to make censorship about circulating research opinions) that, beyond the "humorous" praises and anathemas that have concerned us, two different recent episodes and for various reasons to the opposites.
- One is the decision of the President of Albania - neighboring country but almost unknown to the Italians even if it was part of the Kingdom of Italy at some point in the dramatic 900s - to send 30 doctors and nurses, removed to their front of contrast, for the memory of solidarity that Italy ( country of migrants) has expressed in recent history to Albania (country of migrants). A moving speech, which puts on the agenda the rethinking of the word "fatherland" in the context of the hybridization processes of this age of migration.
- The other is the study which - at the antipodes of the world's geo-economy, compared to Albania - la Harvard Business Review, at the hands of scholars of Italian origin (sometimes abroad taken by flogging) who on March 27 dedicated 17 thousand printed characters) to report to American decision-makers and in general from the Anglo-Saxon world, "not to repeat the mistakes made by the Italians","di learn from Italy's mistakes","to understand the explanations of our failure", etc.
What faults? Immediate misunderstanding of the scale of the crisis. Visceral reactions from politicians and scarce immediate listening to competence. Partiality of the measures before reaching overall decisions. Follow and not prevent the spread of the virus. Differentiated testing policy between territories. Structural inadequacy of the hospital system with respect to pandemics. Insufficient micro and macro data. The reference to the text allows the reader to ascertain the arguments.
Frankly, we have no science to measure all these findings, despite having personal criticisms of this text. But in the university context in which the writer acts, with a well-activated Observatory on this crisis, this must be subjected to judgment. We are collecting authoritative ones: indignant, disappointed, partially inclined. Calmly and in the appropriate forms, we will give an account.