I (an atheist) and Don Gallo

Dear Paolo, A-rivista,
I am pleased to tell you about a great experience in our Ogliastra that happened a not too hot Saturday in August.
Thanks to a friend anarchist, Giancarlo Biffi, who "directs" a theater company, I was "suggested" as a musician for the show Angelically Anarchist that Don Gallo held in Sardinia. Of course, I sang and played Faber (The fisherman, River Sand Creek, The Song of drug and variations on the theme of Creuza de ma).

Don Andrea Gallo and Nicola Pisu

Emotions, politics, friendship, partisans, condoms, masturbation, moral, whores, true and false Christians, cigars, anarchism, hypocrisy, humanity, liberty, Emergency, Roma, cannonau Jerzu, songs, books, reeds, rejected, rejections, laughter and I do not know what else have dressed an intense weekend in the company of Don Gallo and staff.
During the "cognitive" lunch I gave the summer issue of A to Don Gallo, but he explained that he gets the magazine, that number has only turned it on hold for a few days waiting for a quiet moment to read it thoroughly.
It is curious that a priest has spoken out of line in front of five hundred people of anarchy and anarchists, explaining that the anarchists are not those of the bombs, but are very consistent people, who would like a better, freer, more just and united world. Exactly like the one that "preaches" the same Gallo, maybe even close to that of his "superior" Jesus Christ ...
I am an atheist, convinced but willing to change my mind on the day that I will personally test the existence of God.
For now, I'm pleased to say that Saturday, August 7th I had the proof that Don Gallo is an anarchist. A Christian anarchist.
A fraternal embrace from an island unique in the world, as described by Gallo, looted since the days of the Savoy, but that further demonstrates the importance of the eleventh commandment, that, according to Gallo, should be added to the ten canons: respect mother nature.
I enclose a photo, unfortunately, a matter purely angle not seen the other musicians, Andrea too.

Nicola Pisu
(Serrenti – VS)
 Translation by Enrico Massetti ("The other Fabrizio")

D'Addario victim? / 1

I read the article ("The Other") by Monica Giorgi in the last issue, I am sincere, I did own endeavor, however, his hypothesis seems a bit 'risky, although it is certainly stimulating.
I do not want to appear presumptuous, but it seems that D'Addario is a bit overrated, as far as goals and intentions.
I state that I do not have any kind of discomfort with the profession of escort, if we want to call it that, because it's fashionable, indeed, feminist talking about when it is undertaken with awareness on the whole it seems a conscious way to affirm their femininity, a way if we want to declare its extreme freedom and liberation. Precisely for this reason I am surprised a bit of the ingenuity with which the D'Addario has entered the world of high politics, believing really to solve her problems.
I think it will too much skill and cunning to reverse their position on women as objects, to manipulative woman. She did not know who she was dealing with??
Certainly there is to recognize that she did not much exploit her image, because among other things, apart AnnoZero, I do not know how many other programs or newspapers would have given her space.
Most are just who she accused, the others are subservient, and self-censorship then also wanted to use their story I do not think we would have done.
Well on this victim did not convince me. I do not think either the victim of a patriarchal system of power-or male victim of a power system in general, or not particularly. It seems very naive and maybe a little bit overrated. I do not know the details of her history, but you should get that in those rounds to resolve the history of residence??

Valentina Galasso
(Trento)
 Translation by Enrico Massetti ("The other Fabrizio")

D'Addario victim? / 2

Dear Editor of "A",
reading the article in the number 356 on Patrizia D'Addario, I could not help but think how many controversies an article like this could cause.
I too, actually I must admit, do not agree with this unusual sight of a woman undisputed star of the gossip scene last year. I do not believe in fact that Patrizia D'Addario is an example of generosity, courage and distinction, "Giorgi the gifts that Monica gives in his article, but I think it's easy to assume epithets attributed to this woman in the " right-thinking" world, while not acceptable that the same is true in a world of ideas which should be "our", that not only would challenge the dominant culture, but rather destroy it and deny it and, above all in the name of a growing freedom of thought.
The judgments about who or what did Patrick D'Addario, as well as uninteresting, also risks being hypocritical, but not so much in their formulation for the transport which are accompanied by emotional.
Why so much scandal for a woman "and vaccinated adult" decided such a miserable life for herself and no blame has been leveled so vehemently against his "partner"? Easy answer: "It's Berlusca, what do you expect?". But it is precisely this idea, consider this normal nonsense that should not be in our imagination (of course I do not intend to review the Berlusca), who make sure that not only do these episodes, and many others much worse, continue to access, but that spending a lot of words and energy on such matters that would be more helpful to save for something else.
I close my apologies for the tone and make the point that my speech would not be a sterile critical to the work done by someone else. But I think this story is a useful example to show how, today more than ever, it is necessary to question the mechanisms of power and imagination, which, as Foucault teaches is not only external and repressive but also part of our thinking produced, although critical of that dominant culture that would break down.

E.V.
(Milano)
 Translation by Enrico Massetti ("The other Fabrizio")

About Pensions

When you come across on television on fine economists, fine unionists (no matter which abbreviation) excellent industrialists, excellent politicians from the extreme right to the extreme left, whose faces frowning, serious, stentorian voices will be the side dish stressing substantive agreement between them, but suffered, you can be sure of one thing: they talk about retirement! even the terrible problem that will see our young people without the hope of one day to have their retirement!
Some of them do not hesitate to give to the fathers, if not the grandparents of those poor young people the blame for what happens, but others will be silent ... But what's the problem? Do not believe it, but the problem is the significant increase in life expectancy.
Let me digress. Some time ago, also on television, I came across a debate (sic) in which a certain gentleman who had to have said that the current crisis induced poverty, arguing that another answer to whether or not people were poor and then if it was good or bad, should not take on values related to the economy, but to more precisely and to longevity. He claimed that in 1945 people lived on average 55 years (I think) and today, however the average duration was 75 years. Ergo you are well today and that this was the value that should be taken out. Of course the feeling an affirmation of this kind led me to immediately change the channel. After I am sorry. I wanted to learn more and above all I wanted to know if that distinguished gentleman would explain how to make these statistics on the lifespan or if someone would ask. Because I know it seems not at all negligible as these are the statistics on life expectancy. Only count those who die naturally of old age and diseases associated with it or, for example, we are in, to make media, also the died babies, along with their young mothers for the loving care of our health facilities, died on the job, the road deaths, the war dead on a peace mission, the dead of all ages as a result of landslides, earthquakes etc.. End of digression.
According to those very serious people and cross above, the evidence of increased life expectancy should induce each worker to be very happy if the charismatic (I like that word) economic authorities, government, labor, business, the Agreement on behalf of the workers themselves, to increase the age at which you can retire, or rather, the age at which you may receive the pension. This is very important. Every one after forty years of work may request to retire. But if he started working at 18, perhaps because he was poor, would have 58 years on that fateful day. And it is good that this villain who treacherously began work so early, receives a pension at age 58 while others who have patriotically appropriate to the social duty of not finding work before age 30, must have 70? Restoring Justice: the villain aspects that age to feel what he believes to be due.
This leads us to judge with sympathy the attention of our society to ensure that increasing the years through university, in precarious work and so on. young people begin to have an occupation that can (theoretically) to let them have a pension of not less than 30/35 years.
From a logical point of view, the mechanistic assumption: increased life increases the age at which work is founded. But we have to passively accept this assumption? Would not it be our duty to seek and want a different solution? Such, for example, could be set as a logical, moral, practical, rational, certain types of work (such as nature would often places) within specific age ranges?
Today all the jobs that are offered only rarely, are connected at the age of those who must execute them. The work is and is paid a certain amount. To run it, whatever your personal circumstances, nobody cares. You can be young, old, man, woman and child living 100 meters or 1000 kilometers, have children or parents are healthy or sick does not concern anyone. And when I say does not concern anyone, I just can not respect anyone, even its victims. That does not work if I take it, she'll take another. (This is the value of the exciting racing) What is talk? Indeed, if the boss knows that I pose these problems, we will deduct or which are not competitive or have a dangerous subversive and so I assume.
But this starting point, not taking into account the factors mentioned above, and then the person need only to those who are only interested to get rich by exploiting others? And in general terms, it makes sense to accept and share this point of departure? It is rational that sixty to climb on scaffolding typical building, they dive as divers, to bind to the assembly line, etc.? And it is equally criminal to be a young man of twenty with eight hours sitting behind a desk or post office with a headset over his ears to speak on the phone of a call center? That rationality is in this and what of the much vaunted productivity?
It seems to me rather natural to assume as a value that does not define morality, but technically, if you want intelligent and rational, the decision in relation to work, to put certain types of work within precise but not very strict age ranges. It seems to me appropriate that the work was organized in which boundaries of age, depending on the typicality of the work, the organizational needs but also the desires and interests of individuals, you can get the best of both the participation of the membership of people overall project.
It is disgusting that, because of pensions, the lengthening of life is seen as a mess, a disaster, almost to a fault. The same people who are indignant in front of abortion or euthanasia are those who do not hesitate to reduce costs, to be considered appropriate, if not holy, forcing older people, and rightly so tired, to continue the same job for forty years that they now consider to be inappropriate, stupid, repetitive, and above all without alienating any hope.

Angelo Tirrito
(Palermo)
 Translation by Enrico Massetti ("The other Fabrizio")