Italian Referendum

If somebody asked me, in 2016, why I still consider myself to be on the Left, then I would undoubtedly start from my thoughts about the historical shift that occurred with the atomic bombings of two Japanese cities on 6th and 9th August 1945. Yet I would be the first to admit that the question of these weapons of mass destruction (and other such weapons) transcends the traditional spectrum of political ideologies, including those of the Left and of the Right.

The reform, which intended to eliminate the model known as ‘perfect bicameralism’ and reduce the amount of members of the Senate, among other things, didn’t reach the majority of votes, and therefore Renzi, at midnight in Italy, announced on TV that he will officially submit his resignation to the President of the Republic. ‘The Italian people have spoken unequivocally (…) I lost and I will leave my seat. My experience in government has come to an end’, the Prime Minister said in press round filled with journalists. Renzi expressed the need to make reforms in Italy, and called to keep on fighting.

This election is great news. A lesson in democracy. In Trump's program, there are such theses as putting an end to wars and the export of democracy around the whole world, revising NATO and the UN’s roles, and pursuing friendly relations with Russia. Great attention is also paid to what is happening in the United States: the war against illegal immigration and the introduction of proportional taxation (a flat tax).

It is important both because of its content as well as for the symbolic meaning it has assumed. The strokes of the counter reform against the constitution fall very hard. The newly conceived Senate (Upper House), for instance, retains important powers (such as on constitutional questions, in the relations with the EU, about local authorities, the election of the president, etc.), but should no longer be elected. The Senate was thus not abolished, as