Referendum, the No won: who speaks to whom

A shouted No, which perhaps transcends the merits of the question that was posed, given the wide margin between the two sides. A mass vote and not among a few insiders, a return to the polls that is a temporal buoy for the Country, clearly marking the boundary between a before and an after the referendum.

Because there will be residues on the path of the center-right majority, beyond unlikely immediate shocks in the government and instead possible rebalancing within the majority and the individual parties that are part of it. And because it imposes on the broad field to accelerate not so much on the consolidation of alliances but on drafting a real program and on designing the identikit of a potential leader for all, if it still wants to celebrate in the autumn of 2027 or already in the next spring: the seasons of politics are as crazy as the weather these days.

The firm points of this vote, therefore.

It had been said that the chances of success for the Yes were directly proportional to the turnout data, instead the exact opposite happened: the more people went to vote, the more the wave of No grew, until it became an avalanche. This time it is not the fault of the pollsters, not just them, but especially of those who did not perceive that the citizens are the true guardians of the Constitution, who do not want it to be touched with a machete, much less by a political class that is light-years away from the credibility of the founding fathers. And it should also be emphasized that the age group most sensitive on this point has been the youngest, who may know little about the founding values of the Republic but evidently do not follow the lexicon of those in power. That a reform of Justice is needed, that there cannot be impermeable enclaves to scandals and mistakes, this is another matter. Second incontrovertible point: the vote reflects a two-faced Sicily because in light of the black jersey on turnout, it follows the “red regions” on the vote, with Bulgarian peaks of No in Palermo, second only to Naples.

And this happens for a possible summation: the strength of memory, because here judges are killed and it is certainly difficult to imagine them as a "firing squad" (cit.); the weakness of those who waved the reasons for the Yes, speaking only to the camel troops, not reaching the varied world that does not move in the corridors of the Palaces and in the comfort zone of the secretariats. It should serve as a warning in Palermo as well as in Rome, where the electoral law reform will touch another raw nerve.

Finally, the data concerning those who won, the No front: they sing “Bella Ciao”, they evoke the Resistance, but, as mentioned, one thing is a referendum where the gut also has a specific weight, another is an election, where one measures up on programs, lists, and names. And then: does the broad field or whatever it will be called know who it is addressing? Does it know that in the peripheries turnout has not surged as it does when they become the realm of the runners and the Caf where promises are distributed in equal measure to shopping vouchers? This is why only the first half of the game has been played on Justice. We will see, after the very brief intermission, who will change formation or tactics.