Chiara Ferragni, be careful when talking about “criminal design”
Time, as an ally of envy, needs a river and a comfortable bank where the expectations of other people's corpses can be accommodated.
The rivers are full of water in this period and on the banks I see touts for front row seats…
Because in these times there is no better spectacle than the end and there is no worse end than the fall, more than dying itself. In front of which many have lost sensitivity and compassion, overwhelmed by the supporters of the ruin of others.
I will call Mrs. Chiara Ferragni with the simple name of Chiara and not out of confidence – which isn't there – or out of affectation. Because Chiara is her name and not her brand.
There is a point in Chiara's story that is not 'clear' even if it is clear.
We obviously leave it to the judiciary to evaluate, to the lawyers to do their job and to consumers to be indignant and report. For the judges to judge.
The point, the question, the profound question is another. Are we sure he really did harm?
He pays and will pay his responsibilities, of course. The responsibilities linked to his role and his duties.
But if I were the PM I would avoid talking about criminal design. Let's try not to exaggerate, there is a huge difference between crime and crime, given the intention.
Because it's one thing to say that he 'objectively' did something wrong, a mistake – and there's no doubt about that. It's another to say that he did something'bad'.
Well… let's talk frankly now and with what remains of 'thinking about the truth'.
A Pilatesque and fearful wave turned on moral washing machines on this woman.
What do we condemn about her? Or rather, why do we condemn it?
His opportunism? The money he collected?
Try to think about it for a moment, think about how many instincts are unleashed when seeing a young woman accused of cheating. Is the scam or the woman the trigger?
I'm talking about anthropology, not about prejudices or culture,
Anthropology. The question is an invitation to reflection. I don't allow myself to give an answer.
But would it be necessary to investigate what lies behind this 'iconoclastic' fury?
Is it more the pleasure of buying that ticket to sit on the bank of the river waiting for it to pass or is it really the sense of justice so rooted in our country…?
Forget it.
Evaluating whether a person has done good or bad is not a question of legal objectivity but concerns our idea or criterion of good and evil. The judges must judge the fact, the crime. Nothing else.
Chiara made mistakes and pays for them like any entrepreneur.
It's the law of responsibility: he earns more than everyone else from his business when it goes well and pays more than everyone else for his business when it goes badly.
But he didn't of evil. Maybe sometimes he even did some good, in fact he is sure and proven.
Because, absurdly, one can really think that a person like her, after having experienced all the narrative about 'love' for the last 10 years, however saccharine, however cloying to the most snobbish palates of this country, someone who has sought legitimation of the bourgeois triumph in the temple-city of the enlightened bourgeoisie which only lacked a stage at La Scala, a woman who was admitted to the boards of directors of protagonists of the industrial and financial scene developed and perpetrated a criminal plan on 'charity…'?
I could understand it about taxes perhaps, about inflated prices. But not on a topic on which she personally spent her time on what, according to her, would have been her civic or civil commitment page.
And then, did he have to risk all this for figures that were negligible compared to his turnover?
And no. You can't think it or you couldn't 'think it', you choose
I would also ask judges to evaluate crimes but to abstain from moral evaluations
Because they would turn into cheap moralism for the jaws of a multitude who have lost their wings and alibi from public opinion.
As for the existential aspect of this story, it would be time to hear another wind.
In life, mistakes or doing badly (not 'doing evil') are made right.
Maybe it's time for this young mother and entrepreneur to react, to embrace a golden rule in everything: “Extra Omnes, everyone out”.
Haters, profiteers, all those who perhaps you would be ready to define with greater delicacy as 'no-lovers' rather than haters.
Here… send them all out. Make sure that what matters remains, who matters to you and for whom you matter.
Paying too, certainly paying. Even with everything you have. But without any discounts to anyone. Nor to one's 'collaborators', consultants, friends or anything else.
Nor to the companies so ready to wash their hands when a few months ago they marched like eagles on social media, in posts on the web and on TV.
Will they remain only lovers? It doesn't matter, it will be like this for the whole category from now on
Will she be alone?
Welcome, the loneliness of the leader will be the last conquest of the Woman.
Even in the fall. Because we get back up.
Teach it to your children and pass it on to everyone who has always liked you (and there are many).
It's a question of strength and honesty. Because one is honest not only when one does not commit any crime but also when one has the dignity to pay the consequences.
And I'm with Chiara.
#I39m #Chiara #Ferragni