Delirium of De Gregorio: I died worse than the Red Brigades

One thing is certain: there is no lack of ambition on the left. No one better than them would be able to elaborate the most abstruse theories to support disarming theses. How, for example, to ennoble terrorism .

Well yes. As difficult as it may seem to believe, this is what happens on the frequencies of La 7, the TV megaphone of radical progressivism, that ideology capable of defending the condemned , who would like to erase political opponents and never misses an opportunity to show themselves as a champion of double standards. An explosive mix, which can create Kafkaesque situations like the one staged at In Onda , the program conducted by David Parenzo and Concita De Gregorio , in which, speaking of the case Morisi , of Salvini’s “Beast” and of political hatred, the hosts may decide to accompany guests with a red handkerchief in pocket like the journalist Marianna Aprile and the philosopher Umberto Galimberti , on the day of electoral silence, to make a trial without contradiction to the League and its leader.

With a truly incredible approach. The former director of the Unit , in order to discredit Morisi and his work, comes to re-evaluate the Red Brigades and the Years of Lead : “In hand-to-hand combat, whatever it is, you play on equal terms, or you learn since one is armed and one is not. Even the terrorist who shoots, even if he shoots, risks dying. I don’t know how say … it’s like a battle in which the bodies face each other. The aggression that comes from the anonymous web is a bit like the drone, the group doesn’t risk anything … “.

Yes, in terrorist actions the bodies face each other. But those of criminals armed to the teeth against those of innocent, helpless and unaware. A truly equal challenge, which De Gregorio considers more “honorable” since the terrorist would in turn risk dying. But only when he is not too busy placing bombs here and there operated with very risky remote commands or launching psychologically manipulated human bombs at his own targets.

Actually, De Gregorio only reinforces the assist provided in the first instance by Galimberti , who introduces the topic like this: “I don’t justify the seventies, but they had an ideology behind them and, however execrable, they had a support of thought, or something that resembled us “. The philosopher immediately received the approval of Aprile: “Not to belittle the Years of Lead, but there it was about criminal actions with a defined time and place, with authors who were prosecuted. Today this apparent randomness of hatred and violence hides a pervasiveness in everyday life that is difficult to encapsulate “.

In this surreal, disrespectful, dangerous apology for subversion (obviously only red), the protagonists of the discussion forget a couple of points. First of all that Luca Morisi has a name and a surname, he is therefore not a dangerous fugitive forced to disguise himself to escape capture, who does not commit any type of crime other than to carry out a profession that is based on the ability to reach an audience, the social one, often not at all orthodox. And it must therefore resort to dedicated communication methods. A bit like those of those who speak to their ultra-ideological share using terrorism as a model of “honorable confrontation”. Secondly, that the uprising of the social masses against the political enemy is not the prerogative of the League alone nor was it invented by Morisi’s “Beast”.

And there is is a last question, the most important: that in order to condemn the alleged (virtual) violence with this deplorable comparison they have ennobled other (real) violence.