Makers of Italy? Giolitti, Mussolini, De Gasperi, Berlusconi

Silvio Berlusconi (born in 1936) is the fourth and last character of our investigation. He appears to be the most complicated and controversial figure to examine. As a matter of fact, the parameters that have been employed for the analysis of the other characters do not fit him very well. This is mainly due to the fact that the historical context in which he operated was totally different from the other ones and that he truly changed the way of doing politics. He had the possibility to be temporarily linked to both Mussolini and De Gasperi, since, when these last ones were in power, Silvio was only a child. It may have been possible that his youth was influenced by their actions and that his first reflections on the political field were linked to their figures.

Berlusconi entered the political arena in a moment of economic stability, social change and spreading of liberal principles. In those years, it can be said that the mental ouverture of the Italian population was making a step forward. At the same time, the political leadership needed to adapt to the changes of the society.
Firstly, Berlusconi came into the public domain as an entrepreneur. He will enter politics due to his strong friendship with Bettino Craxi, which he considerably supported through his television channels. When the scandal of Tangentopoli occurred in 1993, many vacancies were left in the Italian political arena. This is when Berlusconi decided to expose himself in first person to the political life.

In 1994, he founded Forza Italia. This name aimed at pushing the Italian national team in soccer. The party was representing the centre-right concepts, in order to give voice to the slice of the electorate opposing the centre-left beliefs, which were significantly taking pace at the time. The path that he followed towards the 1994 elections has been called discesa in campo. This Italian expression refers to the language used in the football field that indicates when a player stands up from the bench and starts his match.

Secondly, his political era, which lasted officially from 1994 to 2011, is known under the name of Berlusconismo. This last one has been portrayed by many contemporary authors, which have tried to explain it or even just to narrate the dynamics of Berlusconi's career. In particular, Giovanni Orsina in his work Il Berlusconismo nella storia d'Italia, highlights some very interesting peculiarities of his political ideology and method.

Our starting point is his conception of Italy. In fact, he was the first one among the four characters that affirmed that Italy and Italians were great in the way they already were. This appeared to be really revolutionary as a concept and attired the positive reaction of public opinion. He was the only one putting the blame of the deficiencies of the State on the ruling élite instead of on the population. Conversely to what Giolitti believed in his theory of the political man as an experienced tailor, Berlusconi was the first one in asking: "What can be done in order to peacefully replace an incompetent and unproductive leading class?".

As a matter of fact, Berlusconi's predecessors were all deeply convinced of the fact that the backwardness and inefficiency of the Italian system was due to problems residing in the mentality of the population as a whole and the still fragmented nature of the country. The Cavaliere did not agree with this ideal and he chose to challenge it. Moreover, he wanted to ward off the country from the centre-left ideals. These last ones had taken pace during the Cold War and seemed to be unable to straighten or modernise the country. So, he strained for gathering masses towards a common idea.

Thirdly, his success also resides in his deployment on behalf of the civic society. In this way, he managed to appear as a member of the population, and not as an alienated political representant. Berlusconismo is defined by Orsina as the hybrid result coming from the union between populism and liberalism. On the one hand, it manages to arrive directly into people's houses and minds (due to communication means that the other leaders of our research could not count on, most importantly television). On the other hand, he is able to reawaken the spirit of all those that did not identify themselves in communism nor centre-left ideals in general.

By citing the other differences that detached him for the rest of our analysis we can mention his commitment in public works. His entrepreneurial approach gave him the possibility of launching lots of important investments for further modernization and development of the country. At the same time, the decrees and laws that were introduced during his mandates mostly concerned financial assets to ameliorate the conditions of the working class and public structures.

His relationship with the Church represents another interesting aspect. While talking about the connection between Berlusconi and the Holy See, people often cite the figure of Cardinal Camillo Ruini. During the years of Ruini's operate, which coincided with Berlusconi's mandates, many milestones of the Catholic Church were put into discussion by the progression of society. The Cavaliere had always been tightly close to the Vatican and he did not endorse such changes. Among these topics there were artificial fecundation, bioethics in general, education and the importance of the household.

All the aspects mentioned above will be further discussed in the upcoming pages and chapters of the research. We had the possibility to see that this last character takes a different inclination from his predecessors. In fact, it is still difficult to draw conclusions on his political career since he is still present in the Italian diplomatic scenario.

Furthermore, the vast majority of written documents about him come from newspapers, that may contain biased opinions. On the other hand, Orsina's work starts by citing: "This book does not talk about Silvio Berlusconi. It does not ask which goals he has fulfilled nor has the intention of judging his way of governing. […] The only way to try to understand what has happened during the twenty years of his strong influence is by replacing the explanations founded on the scarce intelligence, morality and rationality of the Cavaliere's electors and by trying to overcome it".

This passage may give us a proof of the great sense of objectivity and unbiased information that can help us in setting apart the numerous scandals in which Berlusconi was involved and for which he was hardly criticised. In this way, it will be possible to further fit him in the arrangement of the research and to make him useful too in order to draw our conclusions. [...]