Manifesto Against Draghi-ism

Politics Should Be Left to Politicians

I swear I intended to make this second newsletter about a positive topic—if we can call it that—not against any electoral list or individual. Spoiler: that attempt failed.

Yes, as you might have guessed from the title, we’re talking about Mario Draghi. Not about him personally, but about what he represents.

An important disclaimer: maximum respect for the former Prime Minister, a man with unparalleled competence in Europe and an institutional demeanor that stirs a certain nostalgia for the First Republic, at least for me.

Currently, he’s in the spotlight as he’s being proposed by several sources as the next President of the European Council or the European Commission. Draghi is drafting the “Report on the Future of European Competitiveness,” which he’ll present in June. On Tuesday, he gave a sneak peek.

Quoting his exact words: “We must achieve a transformation of the European economy; we need to be able to rely on a decarbonized, reliable energy system, integrated European defense, domestic production in the most innovative sectors, and a leading position in technology production.” In other words, this is about securing our future.

It’s clear that Draghi understands innovative and radical solutions. First, the “bazooka,” and now his proposals for the EU’s transformation.

But one thing needs to be made clear: technocrats should stick to their expertise, and politicians should stick to politics.

By this, I mean that Draghi shouldn’t serve as President of the European Council or the Commission, even though he has the credentials as a former prime minister, because he’s never been a candidate and never will be.

Politics is “blood and guts”, as Rino Formica once said, and to hold key positions, you need to put yourself out there and face the electorate. I understand that names are often floated due to a lack of alternatives or to prevent certain people from rising, and perhaps that’s the case here. But using technocrats in this way reflects poorly on the political standard.

And it’s obvious that no one wants to put themselves on the line at this moment. Take the case of Von der Leyen, the official Spitzenkandidat of the EPP. Certainly, the President has her share of faults, but as soon as she announced her candidacy, she was overwhelmed with scandals and controversies (search for PfizerGate and PieperGate if you’re interested). Needless to say, her reappointment currently seems uncertain.

All of Draghi’s proposed solutions are broadly acceptable. And the blame for his expected candidacy doesn’t lie with him but with those who propose him or who see technocrats as the answer when politics can’t find one. The trend of discrediting politics in favor of technocracy is unpleasant, and we’re bombarded by it daily.

To have a coherent vision for the future and make decisions in that direction, you need an underlying ideology, which should be clear but, above all, voted on (even indirectly). In short, one must choose a side. Hiding behind the veil of technocracy will only distance citizens from politics or, conversely, give greater visibility to those with clear ideas, even if those ideas are overly backward-looking.

Now, we all agree that technically, the Presidents of the Commission or Council aren’t elected by citizens but appointed (to vastly simplify the process). Still, in my humble opinion, political legitimacy and party affiliation are necessary.

At this point, I can’t help but wonder: who do you think Draghi would vote for?

I hope you enjoyed this newsletter; see you next time!