The refugee crisis that reached Europe by the summer of 2015 is no stranger to anyone now, and the effects are now strongly echoing in Europe’s political climate, including the friendly, and at least until recently, very internationally minded nation of Italy. There exists significant literature concerning the relationship between the rise of the right wing in France and Spain and both nations’ acceptance of a considerable amount of refugees. This is a component of the larger discussion surrounding whether Europe, and the whole world, is headed toward a return to the traditional nation state order with distinctive national differences, little to no interaction amongst states, and absence of international institutions. Given that concerns about globalization are on the rise in many major countries, events such as Brexit and withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement confirm suspicions. Slaughter interestingly points out in her article for The Financial Times that, after the meeting between President Trump and President Putin at the Helsinki Summit this past summer, it is not inconceivable to see the world in which there is emphasis on “rule in the name of tradition, nationalism, and ethnic purity” given that both major presidential figures displayed support of more limited bilateral and international cooperation, agreeing that they will be ‘friends’ on some and ‘foes’ on other issues. Trends such as these seem to suggest that globalization, especially in the cultural sense, has exhausted its power and is now becoming a negative force leaving nations in fear for their own self-preservation. Furthermore, to make matters worse, the praise of a globalized, connected world is not only weakening, but triggering isolationist and nationalist movements to counter advancements in connectedness and blurring of the borders and cultures achieved through globalization thus far. These movements are openly supporting discrimination through their emphasis on national exceptionalism and moving the world into another extreme. Italy’s political change is following the same pattern of isolationism and exceptionalism with its, although still small, very innovative and persistent parties, increasingly attractive to the public worried about the influx of refugees and erasure of the Italian culture. This is challenging the future of the liberal international order previously seen as key to preventing another world war and promoting progress, stability, and protection of people around the globe.
Globalization did not prevent expression of positive, non-discriminating national feelings. However, history of the previous century gives clear warnings of nationalism’s potency to become a major threat to security, leading to discrimination and horrifically escalating into fascism and genocide, which is why more caution is taken with how nationalist tendencies are expressed. Europe, being the epicenter of both world wars, is no stranger to outbreaks of violent nationalist movements, which is why, as The New York Times points out, Germany went on to install laws restricting one’s freedoms of speech and expression when they are used to incite nationalistic violence and support neo-nazism, making events such as Charlottesville in the US unthinkable. Similarly, as ANSA outlines, Italy has been strictly reinforcing Muncino law since 1993, which served to dismantle continuous attempts of resurgence made by neo-fascists following Mussolini’s agenda by permitting persecution for “incitement of violence” and using symbols of hate. While Germany’s conservative Alternative for Germany (AfD) gets a lot of attention, an interesting resurgence of Italy’s right wing more often goes unnoticed. Italy’s last major formal far right political party was Alleanza Nacionale (National Alliance). National Alliance never reached the political organization and parliamentary strength of Germany’s AfD, but the party membership steadily grew with the influx of foreigners, mostly from war-stricken areas of the Balkans and the Middle East. Although National Alliance dismantled, due to mostly internal power struggles, the party still actively supported departure from the EU, emphasis on sovereignty, closing Italy’s borders, and even fought to repeal the anti-fascist Mucino law thus being the first major hint at modern resurgence of neo-fascism in Italy. Rise to power of parties such as these represents a danger to democracy and stability of international relations, and it can have devastating effects on refugees who would face nothing but more persecution and conflict that they are running from in the absence of internationally accepted laws to protect them.
Given the events of this decade and a change in migration flow, especially with the refugee crisis in 2015, some Italians are very actively and zealously returning to nationalist, conservative ideals, and some are joining CasaPound Italy-CPI. The party was formed in 2003 in Rome’s neighborhood of Esquilino. It remains situated in just a handful neighborhoods, mostly surrounding Rome, but it gives a platform to neo-fascists given that its members openly and proudly identify themselves as fascists. CPI and National Alliance both show support for sovereignty, Italian social programs (when centered around Italians), and Italian religious institutions. Many members also emphasize that their agenda matches that of the Third Position, which is political ideology that originated in France and Italy in the latter half of previous century. It is neither communist nor capitalist in nature, but rather looking for midground. This means that they themselves do not recognize classic definitions of right and left and thus do not self-identify as radical right, though their anti-immigration, anti-Zionist, and pro-sovereignty policies suggest they belong further right on the spectrum. Their persistent arguments claiming that they do assume this mid-position make their campaign misleading and draw attention of more people that then get radicalized and begin not only protecting Italian territory and unique cultural identity, but also displaying open hatred, intolerance and violence towards refugees.
CasaPound used to be under the wing of Tricolour Flame or Flamma Tricolore until it got separated in 2008 with its 6000 members. Tricolour Flame has, unsurprisingly, nationalist and neo-fascist, agenda, similar to that of CasaPound. CasaPound has only 6000 members, while Tricolour Flame has 5000, and, unlike National Alliance, neither has any seats in the Parliament,. However, both parties are embodiment of an ongoing social movement storming through Italy and finding recruits in the youth. Additional appeal comes through the passion of these groups to improve failing social program, providing public kitchens and free medical care. CasaPound has 23 families squatting in a state-owned building, owning a “fascist hostel” which provides medical and nutritional services underneath Mussolini’s fascist party flags and national symbols, as reported by Channel 4. However, it is necessary for all aid recipients to prove loyalty to Italy and Italian culture. The party also has its merchandise, but remains committed to its anti-capitalist, communist-leaning goals, though claiming additionally to be better at providing social service than the Communist Party. All of this is making the party even more attractive to young individuals looking for alternative approaches to make a better world. Were this party’s rhetoric and platform to become more dominant, or to find a way to integrate at least some of its agenda into the general public’s mindset, the effects on the marginalized would be unthinkable.
Although not strong enough to gain the 3% of the vote necessary to get into the parliament, a party such as CasaPound can still thrive within Italian provincial offices, holding a seat in Ostia council since 2017, gathering thousands of people to support it and continuously working on spreading its appeal to the youth, thus making it, provided the global trend of returning to similar isolationist right wing movements continues, a potential parliamentary active party of the future. How long will the international institutions (such as the UN, UNESCO, G20, G7) be able to sustain themselves with the pillar countries such as the US, France, and now Italy leaving the international peace and collaboration agenda? What will the world without these systems to mitigate effects of war and poverty look like and who would protect the vulnerable? Are nationalistic parties such as CasaPound really a solution to national and global problems? After all, globalization leads to deterioration of cultural norms and for some people too rapid mixing and even disappearance of cultures, thus becoming a problem and making some nationalistic concerns expressed through these parties very viable. Additionally, providing such effective social services as CasaPound does is truly admirable, as well as being innovative in regards to how resources are allocated not fully adopting either of the two economic extremes. However, it is hard to believe that a world where empathy is exclusively limited to Italians, or any specific nationality, is the key to salvation. It may be best to point out to bright, young individuals, who are willing to do such noble things as committing their valuable time and energy to help fellow party members so extensively, that they might find people worth saving outside of their conventional bubble, that it may be best for them, and their country, to consider alternatives and recognize that hopeful, young, respectful people, not so much unlike them, are willing to work on making Italy stronger together despite of having been born elsewhere.