In accordance with what is stated in the document “Wings to Freedom” which clearly states that “Our struggles are rooted in democratic and liberal thought and are expressed in a culture that is radical in content and reformist in its methods of action but, above all, autonomous from attempts to subordinate the freedom of individuals and human and civil rights to other priorities.”
And that:
“"The principle of the autonomy of our actions and the rights we represent will continue to guide us in our social action, our political alliances, and our electoral behavior: we will never side with anyone who doesn't side with us, we will never hand over blank cheques to political parties, we will never call on our community to cast its vote for anyone who hasn't clearly and decisively committed to promoting our rights and freedoms."”
In accordance with these statements, which constitute the founding pillars of our actions.
In accordance with some concepts such as:
The dynamics with which claims are implemented influence the results achieved. They are not merely a means of emergence, but must translate into exemplification of the principles asserted.
the fundamental rights of the person are in no way negotiable,
We are free people and no culture and no institution can make us believe otherwise,
and taking into account that:
the choice of a coherent claim dynamic starts from:
– correct analysis of the social mechanisms that determine and convey discrimination
– complete identification of the homophobic cultural imprints present in our personal education
– coherent search for tools shared by those fighting for liberation from discriminatory and liberticidal mechanisms.
– correct identification of the targets on which to focus our action
It turns out that some claims dynamics, although apparently in line with these principles, can ultimately lead to a different result than expected.
The National Council is therefore asked to promote, within our associations and in all relevant cultural institutions, in collaboration with all members of the movement, a series of debates aimed at clarifying the correct strategies for pursuing our objectives.
We ask the National Council to promote the dissemination of this information within the Community so that these analyses become a shared heritage and a tool for unity between the Community and the Movement.
Some examples of this:
1) The Community's common will is to demand a secular state. To demand, while fully respecting everyone's religious beliefs, that religious thought be excluded from the definition/determination of fundamental human rights. Therefore, the decision to dismiss the dialectical presence of religious entities such as the "Vatican" in these areas seems obvious. But mechanisms exist that effectively nullify this desire: engaging with parties whose actions support religious "directives" means allowing the Vatican to be indirectly present. Therefore, choosing a truly secular interlocutor is essential, and certain political transversality is inconceivable.
2) The text "Wings to Freedom" states: "The issue of a radical liberation of individuals from machismo and heterosexism cannot be subordinated to this or that political priority." If we pursue the wonderful meaning of these words, we understand that it is inconceivable to have our rights recognized by political spheres founded on these principles. Strategic compromise and targeted mediation with these parties, as well as the pursuit of a hypothetical transversality, only leads to a compromise of the intrinsic meaning of our demands, our principles, our paths, and our lives. The "radicality" affirmed in the text "Wings to Freedom" must also be pursued with the conviction that not everyone can be our interlocutors.
3) Asking a male-dominated and oppressive system to recognize the rights of a minority through a "power struggle or lobbying" or through any form of pressure or blackmail, thus using the same strategies on which the system is based, ultimately entails compliance with the system and the perpetuation of discriminatory dynamics.
4) Taking action to "include" groups of discriminated people into a society that does not "culturally embrace" them is ineffective unless the "mental schemas" that sustain them are eliminated, for example, those present with respect to sexual orientation and gender identity.
When we protect a category, even through verbal acts, and do not fight the principle that generates their differentiation and their exclusion from society, we reaffirm both the separation and the principle that implements the separation.
5) The state's "control" over citizens is expressed primarily through the management of individual freedom and sexuality. Many homophobic and discriminatory aspects of our society stem from this necessity. Likewise, the extreme hierarchization of social structures, an expression more of a desire for control than of functional organization, must be abjured and excluded from our associative organizational plans. These, instead, must be founded and constructed, as stated in the text "Wings to Freedom," "with our bodies and our lives even before our political actions and our organizational forms.".
Fabio Pellegatta
Paul Epis
Pier Cesare Notaro
Arcigay CIG Club – Milan