to the readers

what debAte

“Est modus in rebus”, there is a measure of things - says a Latin motto. And we try to keep this in mind as we open ourselves and urge the debate in the pages of this magazine. Take, for example, the figure of Vittorio Arrigoni. In the summer issue of our staff Francesco Codello the opinions expressed about him that raise numerous criticisms: there are four readers of "A" we write about their opinions and find space, all in the next issue of October, in rubric of the letters. No "censorship", only the invitation (accepted) to one of the writers to moderate the language in a couple of steps, where the critical (always legitimate) you let go to offensive considerations. It's our way of working, our conception of what a libertarian newspaper should be. Maximum openness to different opinions, but rejection of the "receive and publish" if it means allowing the tone of the debate to decrease and consequently insults, prejudice, frontal attacks will take up space. Open yes, but not to uncontrolled outbursts and fights from the squalor of the gallery. Another example, more complex than the debate in course from some time on "A" on veganism & the surrounding area. We have already spoken in this same section of dialogue with readers, two numbers ago. In order to clarify that not only we're not vegan, but not even share the claims of vegan anarchists about the necessary inseparability of the two options. Plainly put, we believe it may well be without espousing anarchist ideas and vegan practices. That said, we asked vegans to intervene in the pages of "A" to present their views and thus to further the debate. Confirming that even on this topic our goal isn't to define "the" anarchist position on the subject, but much more modestly (and useful) to encourage free expression of thoughts and positions, so everyone has more elements to the end to decide. The publication, in the last issue of comics by Cossi & Nuvolotti “Nostra patria è il mondo intero”, 5 pages of harsh denunciation of the decision to also feed on meat, has attracted criticism from those who, not being vegan, they told us to feel offended and disturbed by the violent images of the comic and the "Taliban" message and criminalization against those who is not vegan. One of the criticisms (verbally) the preparation is to have one given to a comic book violence and intolerance that would never be accepted in the face of a hand-written setting. This would not be an intervention in the debate, but the assertion of an intolerant and unproblematic truth with "V" capitalized. Therefore, unacceptable. We do not intend, here and now, to draw conclusions or even to express our opinion editorial, which has already been expressed precisely in its general outlines two issues ago. It seems interesting to point out the importance of methodological issues related to "management" of the debate. These may seem like small things, but sometimes matters of "futile", while something else happens in the world, every day and often without our review found that the way to deal with it. But it is not, in our opinion. And we are convinced that the preparation often matters of form have to do with the substance that lies behind (or below). And it is important that the criteria with which it is "compiled" a magazine as "A" should, wherever possible, be a collective heritage of the community of friends, supporters and readers of "A". The pipe dream that animates us must also consist of small but meaningful daily behavior. And our opposition to the state of things must occur with some rigor and determination, but also with a style and subsequent behavior. From explain and discuss openly, in broad daylight. Just as we are doing. "Est modus in rebus", indeed.