The wedding of Jeff Bezos they are finished. The long Venetian weekend of the Amazon owner has certainly created some disturbances to citizens but what the city has earned are hundreds of millions left in the economic fabric and a huge return of image. Any other city would have paid to frame a media event of this reach then, of course, any other city is not Venice, it does not have its history and does not have its fame. But also Venice, despite being Venice, cannot disdain a showcase like this and a flywheel like this. As he explained Daniela SantanéTourism Minister, “According to an estimate of the statistical office of the Ministry of Tourism, processed on JFC data and the statistical office of the Veneto Region, the marriage could generate an overall economic impact of approx 957.3 million eurosequal to almost the 68% of the annual tourist turnover city“.
Despite this, for three days the usual note of the antagonist environments have tried to show off and to get a little free advertising by demonstrating those who brought wealth to Venice. They also added to them Ilaria Salis who spoke of class struggle and other communist slogans, forgetting that his book is also on sale on Amazon and that if he really wants to make war on the “masters” he should start applying consistency in everyday life. Just 7 years ago, even if they seem many more, there was a marriage in Italy that catalyzed all the attention of public opinion: that of Fedez and Chiara Ferragni in Noto. At the time, the Sicilian city was subjected to particularly stringent safety and management of traffic, which in fact “armored” it for several days. The arrival of numerous guests and global media attention created a remarkable logistical and visual impact. All without such an economic return.
Yet the protest voices similar to those addressed to Bezos were not there. Perhaps well known deserves less attention than Venice, in the eyes of the activists? Or perhaps known it can become a “Playground for rich”as was said for Ferragni, while Venice right? This marked double -self -exposure raises questions about the consistency of the action and criticism of certain movements. It is not a question of denying the relevance of the debate on the impact of luxury tourism or on the management of great events. Rather, it is a question of questioning why indignation is so selective. The answers are already known, given the acronyms that participated in the events: the target is not chosen on the basis of the actual impact of an event, but rather to its ability to embody a “Ideological enemy” predefined. Jeff Bezos, as an emblem of capitalism, hated by these movements, has become the perfect catalyst.
Yet even Ferragni at the time was a symbol of capitalism, of immense wealth. Is the goal of activism really promote real change and greater sustainability? The logic of the two weights and two measures suggests the opposite.