If we were to posit a rough definition of what constitutes a “normal” major West European political party, we would probably say that it should not be the offspring of Communism, Fascism, or any other extreme militant movement; it should have been rooted, over many years, in a strong network of local and regional organizations in a pyramid leading up to the national leadership; it s

hould have been organizationally and ideologically coherent over a number of years and it should have long since accepted both the constitutional arrangements and the territorial map of today’s nation.
By this definition—and minus a little shuffling and renaming on the French Center-Right—all of the biggest parties in France, England, and Germany are “normal” parties and none of Italy’s biggest parties are “normal” parties. This means that we must understand the particular shape, behavior and possibilities of the unique beasts that roam the Italian political forest. And we have focused on the trek and evolution of the Communists because of the unique size and importance of that party in post-War Western Europe (the Catholic trail will be traced later), in order to see, among other novelties, why Italy’s PCI/PDS/DS has frequently needed (and still needs) non-party “fig leaf” candidates, even when all the numbers were on its side. When the Communists were finally, after years of local struggle, in a position to choose the new mayor of Rome, they had to turn away from the party leadership to an art history professor at the university. They still look to the Rutellis and Prodis (although Massimo D’Alema did have his brief interesting moment in Palazzo Chigi).
Meanwhile, back in the present, the question of the institutional pillars of Italian democracy exploded with the few-holds-barred warfare between Berlusconi and the magistrates. The two paths, the current institutional issues and the Communist saga can now converge in one emblematic figure who, while never making headlines, is crucial to an understanding of today’s political culture.
So we will continue, briefly, weeding in the unruly garden of the Italian Communist and post-Communist peninsula, and then start building the connecting bridges—some flimsy, some bizarre, some blown up and destroyed, some so strong that they may support a new era of Italian politics—over to the other shore of the political spectrum. But at this moment of institutional warfare, we must consider the puzzling figure of Giorgio Napolitano if we are to grasp both the third, parliamentary sector of the institutional triad and comprehend the route traveled by the Marxist Left and its potential next steps.
When we attempt, next week, an analysis of Napolitano’s politics, his role within the party and on the international scene, his very particular posture during Mani pulite and his special antagonism to Silvio Berlusconi, we will move the Parliament to center stage.

“Protected” from the Italian Elections?
The State Department has got it right. It has issued a warning to Americans about the danger of traveling in Italy during the election period. Obviously, the danger is not from street violence by gangs of angry Comunisti. Nor is the danger of waving an American flag any greater than in any other country right now, because that’s about Iraq, not Italy. So one must deduce the real reason and thank the Department for its astute protection. It is obviously worried about Americans becoming infected, during this particular Italian election, with the diseases of bad manners, inflated rhetoric, near-hysterical politicians’ anger, misuse of television talk shows, rude violation of platform-speakers’ time limits, and general unsavory political behavior. These evils are truly dangerous and I for one appreciate the Department’s protection.