LUCIANO CANFORA smonta il MITO della DEMOCRAZIA LIBERALE

Overview

Luciano Canfora argues that what is often presented as “liberal democracy” is not a stable, self-correcting system. Instead, it can move toward authoritarian—and even fascist—solutions when crises threaten the ruling economic order. He also claims that both “left” and “right” intellectual currents have failed to confront this dynamic seriously, largely due to ideological choices and selective forgetting.

Intellectual and cultural shift after the USSR collapse

Canfora suggests that after the Soviet Union’s fall, parts of the former left (he cites the PD, noting the removal of “left” from the party name) distanced themselves from foundational analyses linked to Gramsci and Marx. In parallel, they increasingly turned toward Nietzsche.

• This shift, he argues, encourages a politics centered on “will to power.”
• The effect is to reduce critical awareness, making moral and political blindness easier.

Democracy as “mastery” rather than equality (colonial logic)

Using the example of the massacre in Palestine, Canfora claims that many in the political class fail to recognize such events as a collapse of “reason.” In his account:

• Violence is dehumanized.
• It is treated differently depending on where it occurs.

He argues this reveals an anti-egalitarian core:

• Mass violence in “colonial lands” is treated as accidental or secondary.
• Violence in Europe is framed as a major crime.

He attributes this inconsistency to a racist worldview.

Historical continuity between colonial racism and fascism

Canfora challenges the idea that fascist racism began only with the 1938 racial laws targeting Italian Jews. Instead, he argues that fascist racism had earlier roots in colonial ideology.

He points to examples such as:

• Censorship of a book describing interracial love between a white woman and a Black man.
• Colonial subjects portrayed as subhuman or destined for auxiliary roles (e.g., askaris).

He extends the argument to other European colonial powers and concludes that fascisms share a basic premise of structural/genetic hierarchy between rulers and dominated peoples.

Nietzsche’s influence and the “Will to Power” claim

The discussion notes that “The Will to Power” is often treated as Nietzsche’s work. Canfora emphasizes that it is largely:

• a construction by later editors (likened to a “terrible sister” figure),
• even if Nietzsche’s pages nonetheless point toward a pessimistic and violent worldview.

He ties Nietzschean ideas of hierarchy and slavery to later ideological uses, including theorization of slavery in the American Civil War.

Modern slavery and capitalism

Canfora argues that slavery has not disappeared; it has instead been camouflaged. For example:

• language about migrants being “enslaved” (or worse),

He claims slavery is reborn in forms compatible with capitalist production. Historically, he argues:

• capitalism required slavery to sustain profits,
• and provided limited “well-being” for segments of the working class.

In this view, such arrangements reflect racism embedded in economic structures.

Rightward authoritarian turn as a systemic response to crisis

On politics, the interlocutor argues—and Canfora affirms—that the authoritarian/right shift is not an accident. It is a:

• strategy liberal systems adopt when crises threaten the mode of production and social order.

The discussion also links this to the idea that democracy is increasingly managed by oligarchs, including institutional proposals (such as mention of the “premiership prize”) intended to:

• weaken Parliament,
• flatten genuine political debate.

Engels and historical parallels to Italy

Canfora invokes a late-1895 Engels passage: liberals claim they won’t use violence, but if they cannot control events, they will resort to other methods.

He compares this mechanism to Italy in 1822, describing how ruling elites ultimately back a “Caesarist” solution—an authoritarian strongman turn that liquidates liberal institutions even if it begins from liberal claims.

Electoral manipulation and constitutional weakening in Europe

The summary cites historical examples of undermining democratic outcomes when right-wing forces cannot win electorally, including:

• rigging electoral laws.

It also references:

• Italy’s 1952–53 controversy over a rigged law,
• a statement attributed to Christian Democrat leader Gonella (1951): “the Constitution is not the Koran,” implying openness to weakening constitutional guarantees,
• the short lifespan of the Fourth French Republic,
• the 1958 Algiers coup, which enabled de Gaulle to shift electoral rules and move toward presidentialism.

Outcome: concentration of executive power and persistence of class struggle

The discussion concludes that institutional redesigns (including the “premiership”) aim to:

• grant more power to the executive,
• reduce Parliament and oversight bodies.

Finally, it rejects the claim that class struggle has ended. Canfora cites Luciano Gallino: elites may have “won a round,” but conflict persists and continues over time.

---

Presenters / contributors

• Luciano Canfora
• (Unnamed speaker/interlocutor) who asks questions and summarizes points (e.g., about the shift to the right, democracy crisis, “premiership prize”)
• Luciano Gallino (mentioned)