Dear Director Feltri,
I believe that General Vannacci has now taken on the role of provocateur regardless and this makes him quite unpleasant, even to me who used to appreciate him. In fact, I don’t understand why he had to reiterate, on such an important occasion as the conquest of gold by the Italian team at the Olympics, that the black Italian volleyball player, Egonu, does not have the physical features of the majority of Italians. He would have done better to keep quiet this time. Why doesn’t he keep his mouth shut?
Vincenzo Crea
Dear Vincenzo,
the right question to ask is not why MEP Vannacci said what he has already written in his famous book, but why, in your opinion and that of others, he should remain silent and not talk about a fact that should not cause scandal or uproar: the volleyball player Paola Egonu is Italian, she has Italian citizenship, none of us, much less Vannacci, declares that Egonu does not have the right to be considered Italian or that her citizenship should be revoked, however it is irrefutable, undeniable, evident that her somatic characteristics are not those typical of Indo-European and Italian somatics. This, let it be clear, does not represent a problem, a defect, a handicap, a deficit, and yet it seems that it cannot be established that Egonu is a black Italian. Must we say that she is white so as not to be considered fascists? Must we say that she is the typical inhabitant of the peninsula, that she is the best representative of Italian aesthetics and genetics in the world? I find this controversy stupid and vain. This is proof that it is true: racism is prevalent in Italy, but it does not reside in the soul and mind of the general, rather it resides in those who consider having black skin so degrading that they are not willing to accept this being pointed out, without there being any insulting intent, not even a vague one, on the part of those who point it out.
But, in this case, I remind the wise men of anti-fascism and anti-racism, that a ruling has already been issued to establish, beyond any doubt, that Vannacci’s words do not constitute harmful conduct towards the athlete, who had dragged him to court precisely because of the incriminating phrases contained in the book of the highly decorated soldier. In short, there is no crime. There is no damage. There is no offense. There is no slander. There is no defamation. There is no violence. There is not even racism.
So, I’m the one asking you: what the hell are we talking about?
Thank you.