Berlusconi Understood America
Our Michael Ledeen has done it again. In an article just published at PJ Media, he defended the indefensible: Silvio Berlusconi, the new political piñata of Europe’s left.
Berlusconi did indeed commit inexcusable crimes in the eyes of the leftists. He broke the bureaucratic monopoly of Italy’s state-owned TV by creating vivid private stations — which, as Ledeen correctly put it, are full of anti-Berlusconi journalists as well. The conservative Berlusconi has also been cherished by a majority of Italians, who made him the longest serving post-WWII prime minister. To top it all, Berlusconi spared no effort to publicize his gratitude to the United States for freeing Italy from Mussolini’s clutches, and for transforming that fascist-run, dilapidated country into a prosperous democracy. Berlusconi stated during a 2003 visit to Washington D.C.:
We will never forget that we owe our freedom — our freedom — and our wealth to the United States of America. And our democracy. And we also will never forget there have been many American young lives that were lost and sacrificed themselves for us. So, for us the United States is not only our friend, but they are the guarantee of our democracy and our freedom. … Every time I see the U.S. flag, I don’t see the flag only as representative of a country, but I see it as a symbol of democracy and of freedom.
I spent fifty years of my life in Europe, and I know that many people in that Old Continent are, like Berlusconi, deeply grateful to the United States because in 1945, when the war ended, it did not abandon Europe — as we are now abandoning Iraq. The United States spent seven more years democratizing Western Europe, and opening an unprecedented technological explosion there. That has made Western Europe the true measure of what separates the men from the boys among the nations of the world.
In the 1950s, when I was deputy chief of Romania’s Mission in West Germany, I often heard people there say that the “Amis” (the West German nickname for American GIs) made the difference between day and night for them. “Night” meant East Germany, of course, where their former fellow citizens were scraping along under economic privation and Stasi brutality.
A couple of days after September 11, 2001, my wife and I landed in Berlin. We were having lunch with friends at the enormous KaDeWe department store, and I wandered off to get some food for dinner. The manager, noticing the American flag on my lapel, came up to me and asked if I was an American. “Champagne for everyone,” he ordered, when I told him I had just flown over from the U.S. “Without America and the Airlift, we would be speaking Russian now,” he explained.
First of all, Michael Ledeen did not defend Signor Berlusconi: if you read his article carefully, Ledeen gave the impression of defending Mr.B, while taking care to keep his distance from him; and did not mention any concrete political achievement of Berlusconi (other than political survival).
In this respect, Dr. Ledeen was wise, no doubt thanks to his acquaintance with Machiavelli. He was less careful when he said that in an election now, Mr.B would easily win: the fact is that Mr.B has never won re-election as an incumbent, and is now less popular than ever.
Second, Mr.B did not become the longest-serving Italian PM after Mussolini because of the support of Italians. Undoubtedly he had the (temporary) support of Italians when the so-called “left” made fools of themselves (i.e. every time “the left” was in power); but the reason he was the longest serving post-ww2 PM is that he, unlike all other PMs “left” and “right”, knew how to keep a coalition together.
Then he lost the subsequent election anyway.
Third, it is misleading to say that Italian state TV was a “monopoly” before Mr.B: unlike in the UK or Sweden, Italian state TV had 3 channels controlled by the 3 main parties (one of those parties was very close to Mr.B). It would be as though, in the US, the Republicans and the Democrats each had its own state-financed TV station. Not an ideal arrangement, but not a government-financed but “independent” (i.e. run by statist ideologues) monopoly like the BBC.
Finally, I’d think that somebody who has had 2 death sentences handed to him for his loyalty to America, would demand something more than a 800-word letter to the editor as proof of loyalty to America.
Hey Snorri, Get a grip brah… If it’s so important for you to get your facts out there and editorialize, I have a suggestion for you. Start your own online magazine!
You sound like a frustrated and constipated teacher
You have the freedom of speech, however that doesn’t mean anyone must listen.
I beg your pardon: I thought that this was a serious article, so I thought it worthwhile to point out that everything it says about Mr.B is plain wrong.
But obviously, unlike you, I do not have enough sense of humor to see that it was supposed to be a joke.
(However, you do not have to “listen” to what I say, so you might as well stop complaining.)
“In 2005, when our own Democratic Party focused almost exclusively on condemning the U.S. for its war in Iraq, Berlusconi published an 800-word letter in the highbrow conservative daily newspaper Il Foglio calling for Italy to remain a “loyal and respectful ally” of the United States.”
Pity Obama and Hillary Clinton did not read the letter. When Iraq starts falling apart in the next few months, we will not have to look far for the answer on “Who Lost Iraq?” The blame will fall squarely on the shoulders of Obama and Clinton. We worked so hard in Iraq and sacrificed so much blood and treasure, only to have it thrown away by the ultra-liberal who now inhabits the White House. At this point, I don’t know if Iraq will be able to hold on until a Republican is elected in 2012. But if it does not, we will have the “pleasure” of being forced to invade Iraq once again to save it from the Iranians. That is, of course, unless Obama and Clinton really don’t mind Iraq being taken over by the Iranians.
Dear Mr. Pacepa,
You state: “Do not abandon your allies.”
Isn’t that what we just did with Gaddafi? Isn’t that what Berlusconi just did?
It was quite easy for many conservatives to be “conflicted” about Gaddafi, it was also quite stupid.
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v33/n22/hugh-roberts/who-said-gaddafi-had-to-go
“Isn’t that what we just did with Gaddafi?”
We? Did Barry submit that to Congress for a vote after his 60 days were up? Oh he didn’t.
It’s quite easy for pigressives to be conflicted about the facts as they don’t seem to grasp them.
Yes “We,” US, you, unless you want to renounce your American citizenship here and now. I didn’t say the Libyan intervention was legal but without American participation Gaddafi and the people who had started working and relying on the West, specifically the US would still be there. What’s more if our intel and dippy diplomats had a clue they would have leveraged Gaddafi’ activities in sub Sahara Africa and North Africa to our benefit and not to the jihadists. Or how about using Libyans to infiltrate Islamic enclaves in Europe? The blowback from this botched affair will be with us for years.
“Yes “We,” US, you, unless you want to renounce your American citizenship here and now.”
You are mistaken sir. We are not countrymen. You are an occupier.
“I didn’t say the Libyan intervention was legal but without American participation Gaddafi and the people who had started working and relying on the West, specifically the US would still be there.”
Your messiah wanted it and own’s it.
“Or how about using Libyans to infiltrate Islamic enclaves in Europe? The blowback from this botched affair will be with us for years.”
“Using” Libyans to infiltrate islamic enlcaves in Europe? You’re a moron.
Buckeye Abroad – Run away, run away!
“Moron” doesn’t have quite the bite when it comes from someone with such obviously weak reading comprehension skills.
@Doug
“Moron” doesn’t have quite the bite when it comes from someone with such obviously weak reading comprehension skills.”
Feel free to point the weaknesses out Doug. But do elaborate how “we” are to “use” Libyans to infiltrate islamic enlcaves in Europe. Take your time. Heh.
@Buckeye
Take my time? I don’t need time. I don’t need time to think about how to put one foot in front of another either.
Manchester.
If United popped into your head, instead of what was a target of Libyan intelligence officers under Gaddafi, then you really are out of your league on this thread.
Isn’t it interesting that even though Gaddafi made his peace and amends with the West that the latter still dredged up the old acquisitions to justify his overthrow, and again, as several times before, the West supports the Muslim Brotherhood (and in the case of Libya, even Al Qaeda) taking control. The West looks clinically insane, on its long death march into dhimmitude.
Well, Leftism is a mental disorder.
Snorri is right in saying that Berlusconi was never re-elected as an incumbent. This may seem a detail but it is a significant one, because it is indicative of the fact that Italian voters were not enamoured of Berlusconi for himself, but rushed back to him in droves when they experienced what it means to have the Leftists in power. Which, btw, is something uncannily similar to what you are seeing with Mr Obama’s administration.
One perhaps less significant detail: Berlusconi is NOT the Italian prime minister who has lasted longest in power. Not just Mussolini but also De Gasperi beat him, although by a small margin.
Your comment about De Gasperi shows that you know Italian politics better than I do, but I am puzzled by this remark:
“(…) Italian voters were not enamoured of Berlusconi for himself, but rushed back to him in droves when they experienced what it means to have the Leftists in power.
Which, btw, is something uncannily similar to what you are seeing with Mr Obama’s administration.”
First, there is the issue of the very different meanings of “left” in Italy and the USA: I dare say that, AT THIS MOMENT, they are almost opposites, in the sense that in Italy it has been mostly the “left” that (since 1992) has cut spending, achieved a primary surplus, privatized, and deregulated. (But I might be wrong on this, and I invite your feedback.)
As a consequence, I believe that Italian voters were disappointed with the Italian “left” for reasons very different from those driving American voters away from Obama Democrats. I believe Italian voters were angered by the utter inability of the “left” to keep a coalition together, while American voters are angered by what the Democrat coalition is actually doing, and wished that the coalition did NOT hold together.
I am Italian.
It wasn’t just the inability to keep an coalition together, it was that they had no bloody plan beyond getting Berlusconi out of office. Everything would be magically fixed the moment he stepped down. Needless to say, it wasn’t.
And that’s just part of the problem. The truth is, the Italian left is pretty much the old Communist party and boy, does it show!
Recently, Bersani (the head of the opposition) criticized the mayor of Florence for “speaking against the Party” and having ideas “that belong to the 80s”.
Renzi’s ideas might belong to the 80ies, but the whole Italian Left is stuck in 1968 and still salivating at the thought of a Proletarian revolution.
Berlusconi is no saint. I am disappointed by his recent lack of action. I still doubt the Italian Left will do any better as they still don’t seem to have a plan.
“It wasn’t just the inability to keep an coalition together, it was that they had no bloody plan beyond getting Berlusconi out of office.”
You are talking about the 2006 election, I suppose? If so, you are probably right.
“the whole Italian Left is stuck in 1968 and still salivating at the thought of a Proletarian revolution.”
Sorry, but there is a couple of facts contradicting your assertion:
economic freedom increased in Italy from 1995 to 2001 (under governments of the “left”);
and remained about the same from 2001 to 2006 (under Berlusconi).
Source:
http://www.freetheworld.com/2011/reports/world/EFW2011_chap1.pdf
page 17
“Berlusconi is no saint. I am disappointed by his recent lack of action.”
It’s not “recent”.
It’s true that at least Mr.B did not bring Italy back to socialism (in spite of his former association with the Socialist Craxi), but given the situation it was not enough to do nothing: he should have started free-market reforms in 2001. There was no time to lose.
PS: this is a reply to Lilya, of course.
“He [Berlusconi] should have started free-market reforms in 2001. There was no time to lose.”
lol
Well, first, you’re right. But this is Italy, there is no such a thing like “making reforms”. Italians may be quite pro-american, but they love their Welfare state and their “cradle to grave” entitlements and “rights”. Really, they may protest the taxes but as soon as they understand a tax reform would take the welfare away, they go quiet, tutti zitti. They don’t want home schooling, they don’t want free enterprise, they want all private inititive banned for they think it is dangerous or might possibly, eventually, who knows! be dangerous. For whatever thing you propose, there exists a ecologist group, or left wing union who will protest.
People get tired of that, that’s why Berluconi (and even the far-right Lega Nord) gets more votes, because they seem to have clear ideas. But they won’t change anything. Italian system is pretty much heavy and highly inertial, nothing will change easily.
Of course, the left is worst. They oppose everything, when they get the power they don’t know what to do. Or better, they know, but they only thing they know is “Tax, tax, tax. Regulate, regulate, regulate”.
“Well, first, you’re right. But this is Italy, there is no such a thing like “making reforms”.
[...]
Italian system is pretty much heavy and highly inertial, nothing will change easily.”
Since I visit Italy every 1 or 2 years, I have heard this argument ad nauseam.
What Italians forget, is that this very argument was made in Britain before Thatcher, and in the USA before Reagan, and again in the USA before “the end of welfare as Americans knew it”. And don’t forget the free market reforms in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, The Netherlands, Scandinavia … many of them initiated under a “left-wing” government.
All of these reforms were supposed to be impossible because “this is Britain”, “this is Australia”, “this is Sweden”, etc.
And in Italy, there were the Prodi reforms. It was supposed to be impossible for the lira to regain ground against the D-mark, because “this is Italy”. But it happened … under a “left-wing” government.
“Of course, the left is worst. They oppose everything, when they get the power they don’t know what to do. Or better, they know, but they only thing they know is “Tax, tax, tax. Regulate, regulate, regulate”.
You should follow the link I provided before spouting fantasies.