If people of considerable lucidity and rationality, in dealing with Silvia Romano's return to Italy, they feel the need to premise passionate, reverberating phrases on the priceless, incomparable and immeasurable Value of Life (in parentheses: gift of God) compared to each other human phenomenon (and this, before mentioning shyly the political and sociological aspects of the event) means that the Bel Paese has come to fruit and that it will not be saved even with the farewell of the current rulers.
The irrational humus, in this religious case, is so dominant on the territory of the boot that the news of a Roman apostolic Catholic converting to Islamic fundamentalism moves the followers of Middle Eastern monotheism to tears, all embraced in a single context. For the feel-gooders of our house, moving from the adoration of the Pope of Santa Marta to that of the chiefs of Al shabbab (Al quaide branch) only means moving from one room to another of the large building built by the three impostors listed by Spinoza; just as in Henckel's beautiful film (Opera without author), changing the Nazi uniform with that of the pro-Bolshevik Communist of East Germany means continuing to wallow in the ideological irrationalism of post-Hegelian philosophy.
I also realize that writing a book like "PRAISE OF FREE THOUGHT" was a necessary and vital experience for me, but perhaps completely useless in the Italian cultural situation too compromised by irrationality (Catholic, Communist or Fascist) to address a theme philosophical which is not just terminology.
Some regular readers of book titles only asked me why I had written such a large volume on "freedom of thought" on which literature was certainly not scarce.
When I replied that I wanted to talk about a very different thing, I caught some signs of wonder and amazement.
In reality, writing about an absolutely free and unconditional thought is not the same thing as talking about "freedom of thought".
The solemn proclamation of the latter, including not only the metaphysical and imaginatively dualistic but also the religious thought, does very little to the need to have a free thought. Rather. It is worth summarizing the thesis exposed in the book.
My idea is that a people can save themselves:
a) if he manages to have a thought free from religious or ideological conditions;
b) if he / she knows how to look empirically and without false mental or emotional screens on the concreteness of the problems that afflict it;
c) if it knows how to place itself on the substantially secular line that it was, in the antiquity of the Greco-Roman civilization, that of accepting a cheerful and open paganism as a bearable evil; and in the Anglo-Saxon world that of relegating the Anglican-Calvinist religion to a subordinate role (which, moreover, according to William Somerset Maugham, is "I believe" that "does not believe" almost anything of Christianity except, unfortunately, for the sins of the flesh) .
It is only free thinking that guarantees enviable living conditions for freedom-loving individuals.
Let's see why.
The rule of wisdom that freedom extends to where one does not want to jeopardize the equal freedom of others has even become commonplace.
Question: Can one be sure that a religious "believer" or a political "fanatic" sets such a limit, without feeling "traitor" to the postulates and imperatives of his faith or ideology?
I guess not. To guarantee freedom of worship, article 19 of the Italian Constitution protects the right to freely profess one's religion, in any form, individually or in association, to propagate it or to exercise its cult in private or in public, provided that it is not of rites contrary to morality (obviously, given the psychosis of the sins of the flesh).
The formulation, even in its grantless impeccability, cannot prevent that if religious thought is very rigorous in men invested with power, it is possible to reach a still conceivable fundamentalism that jeopardizes the freedom of others.
All this is not the result of only logical reasoning. It is also and above all derived from the experience of history which is full of events in which thinking differently from others has meant for many human beings to lose freedom and life (destruction of the library of Alexandria, annihilation of the pagans, Crusades, extermination of Maya and Aztecs, Inquisition, Patiboli of the Pope King, to say nothing else).
It is not the protection of the rights of freedom that creates optimal conditions for the life of human beings. In fact, it also guarantees the thought of religious fundamentalists, the nostalgics of Nazism and communism (Article XII of the Transitional and Final Provisions only prohibits, with practical activities of any form, the reorganization of the dissolved fascist party, not the manifestation of thought and propaganda of the idea).
Here, because in weaving the eulogy of free thought I took the necessary "conceptual" distances from freedom of thought.
It will not be easy for anyone to escape the reproaches on the social networks of people of high and monotheistic Middle Eastern religiosity (after the discovery that Judaism, Christianity and Islamism are one and that every conversion is still a point in favor of the irrationality from which they are dominated ) to express a deeply and exclusively secular vision of the case of Silvia (now Aisha) Romano.
Yet it is necessary to take care, with the necessary detachment, not so much of the religious aspects (conversions, electrocutions on the streets of Damascus and the surrounding areas and sudden vocations that are of little interest to the laity) as much as of the political implications of the story.
It is certainly a political problem to establish whether the amount (which is wanted to be significant) of the amount paid with the taxpayers' money for the ransom cannot be substantially used by Islamic jiahdists to finance their "holy war" against the Judaic West- Christian. Paying for the war against oneself is certainly an act of generosity but not when the money is not one's own.
If we add to this the purpose explicitly stated by the young Aisha Romano of wanting to return to Kenya, it becomes even more worrying. According to the precedent, terrorists would already know the way forward. Easily practicable, moreover, because there is no rule in Italy of the type of blackmail made, for kidnappings, by Italian crime.
The presence of the President of the Council of Ministers and the Minister of Foreign Affairs at the "pomp" ceremony prepared for the reception of a woman who could have, even if only hypothetically, the task of strengthening terrorism in " field of Agramante ". And this in consideration of the fact that the girl was converted to Islam by a nucleus armed with fighters of the "holy war" and not by falasafifa, only given to the call of the faithful for prayer or by Muslim family fathers, perhaps in slippers .
Nor should we underestimate the opportunity of a "staging" under the flash of photographers and cineriprese television operators in a particularly delicate moment in which in Italy (and in the world that looks at us) deaths are counted with dizzying figures and not one at a time.
First Question: what will the barista fined with a sum of 400 euros think for having delivered three coffees to three carabinieri, in front of the hugs (and kisses albeit with a mask) of Silvia-Aidha with her very close relatives in addition, close to two highest state authorities?
For the measures in force in Italy, husband and wives, fathers and sons, brothers and sisters must always remain "separated" in public places at a distance of two meters. Now it was neither "beautiful nor instructive" (as Giovannino Guareschi would have said) to show citizens that the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister were pleased (and moved?) In an open and blatant med violation of the dpcm that afflicts many Italian.
Second Question: If the Italian politicians did not "shine" for their absence in the places of the national health disaster, certainly because of their considerable commitments at the moment, they could not invoke this widely justifying circumstance to escape the presence of Ciampino?