Grillo breaks his silence and slams the Five Star Movement: “They had to change politics, but politics…

The Five Star Movement has lost its identity and, above all, the “diversity” that made it unique. It was born to change politics, but then politics changed the Movement. It should have listened to citizens, and it began listening to the polls. It should have concerned itself with the future, and it ended up concerning itself with positions. But the questions that gave rise to it are still here. With these words, Beppe Grillo breaks a long political silence and dedicates a detailed and harsh reflection to his blog.

The Attack on the Five Star Movement

Questions, answers, a program, and the “Palazzo,” a historic metaphor for politics. Beppe Grillo emerges from a long silence, at least on directly political issues, and it is around those guiding words that he develops a reflection, published on his blog, which once again puts the M5S in the crosshairs, of which he was a co-founder and, until the traumatic split, its Guarantor.

“The Five Star Movement has lost its identity, and above all, it has lost its ‘diversity,'” Grillo then attacks—preserving the capitalized V, the symbol of the “Vaffa Day” of his early days—and continues: “Observing the anthropological transformation of its protagonists is of little use; it’s the same old story: the new becomes old, the revolutionaries discovering the palaces and intentions that pave the road to hell, with a toll, too.”

“And yet,” he continues, “something must be remembered: the Movement was born from a popular sentiment that continues to exist, even if those who should have represented it have stopped listening…”

Grillo develops a detailed analysis of “the way we were” and seems to outline a path forward, emphasizing that “the questions remain, the answers have disappeared.” He reiterates that “the Movement was born to address all these questions, then it began to address itself. But the questions,” he reiterates, “have not disappeared; they are still outside the buildings, waiting for someone to try to answer them.”

“If we believe the Western model must be defended, we must make it credible. To do so, we must return to listening to citizens, before fear consigns them to authoritarian models. When democracy stops responding, someone comes along who promises to do so in its place, sometimes wearing a uniform, other times controlling an algorithm,” warns Grillo, who also evokes the other guiding principle when he proposes that “the program should start here, from listening.”

The Crisis of the Western Model and Immigration

“They’ve gotten it all to their heads without reading the instructions” is the title of Beppe Grillo’s controversial blog post, marking his return to politics. It features a series of critical remarks about his now-former Five Star Movement (M5S), but also a reading of the times we live in that seems like a hint of a program, perhaps even an electoral one.

“We,” he claims, “had tried to implement some of these: distribute income, change the ruling class, involve citizens in decisions, and plan for the future instead of administering the next election. We called them basic income, a two-term limit, restitutions, direct democracy, and ecological transition; proposals that, over time, became slogans to be uttered at conferences and forgotten after the buffet. Today, the crisis of the Western model is deeper; the system is being consumed from within and put under pressure from without; even the unease surrounding immigration, when flows are left without governance and integration, is the symptom of a disease that politics prefers to exploit rather than cure. On one side, there are cries of invasion, on the other, people pretend the problem doesn’t exist, and in the middle, citizens and immigrants are left, within a divided society.”

“If we believe the Western model must be defended, we must make it credible. To do this, we need to listen to citizens again, before fear turns them into authoritarian models. When democracy stops responding—Grillo warns—someone comes along who promises to do it in its place, sometimes—he points out—wearing a uniform, other times controlling an algorithm.”