It's not the first, and it likely won't be the last. The Meloni government's new security decree is part of a continuing series of measures that, under the slogan of "security," extend control, repression, and administrative powers. ---- The mechanism is always the same: intervention occurs before the crime occurs, based on presumed danger. But what crime are we talking about? Are workplace murders prevented? Are employers' crimes against workers targeted? Are racism, fascism, exploitation, and gender-based violence countered?
No. The crimes this government is targeting are always the same: those related to marginalization, poverty, and social conflict. It doesn't address power relations, but those who suffer from them or challenge them.
Prefects and police chiefs have seen their tools strengthened: they can identify "sensitive" urban areas and order the removal of people deemed disruptive or potentially dangerous. A conviction isn't necessary, nor is a specific fact. An assessment is sufficient.
A trial isn't necessary, nor is a considered judgment. There's no need for proven responsibility. An administrative decision is sufficient.
It's the logic of suspicion that becomes the norm.
And then we recall past experiences. As May Day approached, under Fascism, preventive detention was systematically triggered: the most notorious anti-fascists were arrested in advance, to prevent them from organizing or participating in demonstrations. It is in light of this mechanism that we better understand Emanuele Gualano's state of mind on the night of April 30, 1934, when the police were preparing to round up "subversives."
"...they had mobilized in full war gear to proceed that very night with the arrest of all known 'anti-fascist subversives'... I... was leaving the country under the watchful and eager gaze of spies so that I wouldn't escape this roundup..."
It's not a distant story. It's the same system: strike first, based on a presumed dangerousness. Back then, it was called preventive detention; today, it takes on different forms, but the logic remains the same.
And when suspicion becomes law, the boundary shifts: the police officer is no longer an enforcer of the law, but someone who effectively decides who can stay and who must leave, often protected by the immunity granted by the power of the day. He becomes a cop!
The so-called urban DASPO (detention order) is thus extended and normalized. Entire spaces of the city become selective: accessible to some, closed to others. Those targeted are especially the socially vulnerable-young, marginalized, poor-who become a public order problem.
Alongside prevention, repression also increases. The decree expands the possibility of deferred arrest, including on the basis of images collected during public demonstrations. Thus, forms of social conflict are targeted, extending the power of punishment over time, making participation riskier, and increasing sanctions disproportionately. One word too many can cost months of work.
But repression isn't enough. We also need to reward those who repress and construct a narrative that legitimizes their actions. On the one hand, power is strengthened; on the other, an aura of legitimacy is constructed around those who wield it, presented as guarantors of order.
"Security for whom?" Government officials themselves provide the answer. Undersecretary of the Interior Wanda Ferro says it clearly: we must defend "true freedoms, those of respectable citizens."
Here's the point. On one side, the "respectable," on the other, everyone else: those who protest, those who are poor, those who are foreign, those who don't conform. It is within this division that today's security is built.
On the immigration front, the picture is even clearer. Detention centers are being strengthened, expulsions are being sped up, and accelerated border procedures are being extended. Immigration is definitively treated as a security issue, to be managed with coercive tools, rewarding with hard cash anyone who cooperates in the repatriation process.
The result is a system in which guarantees are reduced and control is expanded. It is not security that grows, but the power to control.
A security that does not protect, but selects. That does not liberate, but excludes.
To the "good people," we respond: "You good people, what peace do you seek? Peace to do what you want..."
Totò Caggese
https://umanitanova.org/sicurezza-per-chi-ancora-un-decreto-contro-le-liberta/
_________________________________________
Source: A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten