Donatella Di Cesare doesn’t give up. Yesterday I posted a black star
We dealt with it yesterday case of La Sapienza philosophy professor Donatella Di Cesare. But the volcanic teacher doesn’t stop and doubles, or rather triples. We remember that in recent days a strong controversy has erupted over the fact that Di Cesare had put up a scandalizing post on X: “Your revolution was mine too. Different paths do not erase ideas. With melancholy a farewell to my partner Luna #barbarabalzerani”.
The rector of La Sapienza, Antonella Polimeni, immediately distanced herself: “On behalf of the entire academic community I remember the very high tribute of blood paid by Sapienza University in the season of terrorism, confirms the firm condemnation of all forms of violence and distances itself from any declaration of sharing or closeness to ideas, facts and people who do not respect or have respected the laws of the Republic and the democratic principles expressed by the Constitution”.
Meanwhile, the journalist Massimo Gramellini yesterday in his column “Il caffè”, had wisely pointed it out with an article entitled “Donatella and the Moon”, referring to Balzerani’s nom de guerre when she fought in the Red Brigades. At the same time she had also taken it out on her colleague from Corriere della Sera, Maria Egizia Fiaschetti, guilty of having written an article on her return to the classroom and had put in the headline that “La Sapienza evaluates measures”.
Donatella Di Cesare, the words of Massimo Cacciari
“And freedom of teaching? The autonomy of the university? Contents of my lesson filmed by journalists present without my knowledge inside the classroom and reported (with unauthorized photos) in a national newspaper”, this is her angry response post on Facebook, but not before thanking the philosopher of the lagoon, Massimo Cacciari who had words of comfort for her. But today you have done more and published in its entirety an article by the scholar of weak thought, entitled “Of Cesare, Balzerani and an unhappy country that forgets the masters from Croce to Gramsci”.
Cacciari shares his praise of Di Cesare, “a philosopher of international importance, trained in schools of absolute scientific and ethical rigor”. Cacciari, his grace, speaks at least of an “extemporaneous note” on Balzarani, which would have been interpreted by the media without “contextualising” the fact that the teacher is famous and knows what she is saying. But if this interpretation by Cacciari were true it would be even worse because it comes from a well-known and acclaimed philosopher and the text of the post leaves little doubt as to how Di Cesare thinks.
In the meantime, between the post of the lesson and that of Cacciari, the tireless professor had once again jumped into trend for another of her interventions, again on Facebook, accompanied by a poster attached to a wall that says: “Against state censorship. Freedom of expression in universities! Solidarity with Professor Di Cesare”, no signature but in exchange there was a disturbing black five-pointed star on display which seems to refer to an anarchist symbol. Oh God, it’s still better than the red one that raged in universities during the years of terrorism, but it’s still disturbing. Better to leave the stars in politics, both the red and the black ones. The professor, however, does not limit herself to posting but also responds: “I thank the students of the Philosophy Department for their solidarity.”
New controversies over whether Donatella Di Cesare should remain teaching
At this point, a new avalanche of controversy over whether Di Cesare should continue to teach at the University, in a role not only of knowledge but also of training. In fact, both the post about the terrorist Balzerani and the one of an apparent anarchist nature pose problems. The Red Brigades wanted to destroy the bourgeois State and then rebuild the mythical proletarian State while the anarchists just want to destroy the State. Now, the University is an institution of the very State that they want to overthrow with revolutionary violence. Is it therefore appropriate for the State to pay a large salary to those who contest it so violently?
The answer comes by itself.