The issue of "citizenship" really dates back to the dawn of time. Just
think that only in 49 BC did the inhabitants of the regions in the northof the Italian peninsula have the right to consider themselves "Roman
citizens" recognized by law. And over the course of these two thousand
years, citizenship laws have changed according to the interests of the
elites in power since it is a political right. As demonstrated by the
fact that the laws that regulate it are not the same in all countries of
the world even if, in most cases, they refer to "ius soli" or "ius
sanguinis".
This minimal premise is to contextualize one of the five referendums
scheduled for the first week of next June. The question, illegible as in
most cases, asks voters whether they want some parts of Law 5 February
1992, n. 91 "New norms on citizenship" to be repealed. In practice,
those who proposed the Referendum want the time of legal residence
required to request citizenship to be reduced from 10 to 5 years. One of
the many things that shows the extreme instrumentality of the concept of
"citizenship" is that during the twenty years of fascism only 5 years of
residence were enough, a period that doubled in 1992 during the
Andreotti Government (VII) formed by DC, PSI, PSDI and PLI.
The issues related to citizenship continue to be extremely current, just
think that last March a Legislative Decree made some restrictive changes
to the requests that come from the descendants, born and resident
abroad, of Italian emigrants.
The positions of the parliamentary parties see on one side PD and AVS,
who are in favor of the reduction, to which are added +Europa, IdV and
Azione while instead the M5S has chosen to leave "freedom of vote" to
its electorate. Yet another demonstration of the contradictions and
ambiguities that have always constituted the political positions of this
formation. The others, namely those who support the current government,
have more or less openly taken a position in favor of abstention in
order to prevent the quorum from being reached and therefore make the
consultation useless. A move clearly dictated by racism which is an
important part of their ideology. It should be noted that it seems
difficult to organize the classic televised debates between the
supporters of the "YES" and the "NO", as it is almost impossible to find
someone who supports the reasons of the latter.
Taking the continuous polls as valid and basing ourselves on the latest
election results, it is easy to do the math: the coalition in favor of
the repeal has little hope of winning. It is therefore a referendum that
is probably lost from the start. Someone might ask what advantages the
PD would gain from an announced defeat and the answer is obvious: to
demonstrate that it "fights" for civil rights, to present itself as the
only opposition force by attributing to itself all the votes that the
"YES" will obtain, to keep the currents of internal minorities at bay.
There is no need to hope for the advent of an anarchic society to
consider all existing laws on citizenship an enormous shame, useful only
to fuel discrimination and harmful ideas of "national identities", to
favor the exploitation of illegal immigrants, to prevent the poorest
from organizing without worrying about the color of their skin, the
language they speak or the country where they were born. In other words,
they are rules that function for the State and for the maintenance of
the system of exploitation called Capitalism.
Certainly, faced with the spread of racist, xenophobic and fascist
ideas, the impulse to go and vote "YES" could be strong. A reasoning of
this kind, that of the lesser evil, could be done in other cases, as has
been done. But the memory of the end that other consultations have had
should be equally strong, even those that were "won", such as the one
against nuclear power and against the privatization of water. Not to
forget the continuous attempts to cancel the "victory" of the Referendum
on the voluntary interruption of pregnancy. Moreover, one of the battle
horses of the supporters of "remigration" is to allow the revocation of
citizenship to immigrants, so, in the face of such programs, 5 or 10
years would be the same.
The fight for the freedom of movement of all people is a fight
complementary to that for the abolition of all borders, of all the
farces called nations or homelands, all obstacles that stand in the way
of building a free society. A fight that has always belonged to
anarchists: "Our homeland is the entire world...".
Pepsy
https://umanitanova.org/referendum-cittadinanza-nostra-patria-e-il-mondo-intero-ancora/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten