My writings








COVID-19. WHY OUR PEOPLE HAVE LOST THEIR SENSE OF LIFE | back to top

I have never feared death because I cannot fear the inevitable. My only concern is to leave my loved ones a record of my thoughts. I have always loved life because I have never feared life. I have always loved Nature because I have never feared Nature. Nature is the mother of everything: how could I ever fear her? She gives us life and takes it away. That is her law. And I do not fear her Laws; I trust Nature. Nature did not give us life so that we humans could subject her to our Laws, but so that we could adapt as well as possible to hers. That is how we managed to adapt to nature far better than any other living species and, over millions of years, reach the top. Once there, however, we slowly and inexorably began to develop the sense of omnipotence that now makes us crave to subject Nature to our Laws, without understanding that this is fatal. The more a People craves this, the sooner it will become extinct. Nature makes no concessions. Nature may accommodate our efforts to live and survive, but she does not forgive us when we cross the boundary she herself has set.

Some peoples have lost their sense of life.

Nature brings us into the world, makes us grow, makes us adults and lets us live. We are the energy she has given us, more to some and less to others: energy that can become extraordinary when we grow up in an environment rich in positive stimuli. For many years we carry this energy with us, imagining we will never lose it. Then, slowly and inevitably, Nature begins to take it away. Our backs bend, we lose our steady stride, we become uncertain, and what our eyes see seems increasingly blurred each day, whether too far away or too close. Bacteria and viruses begin to get the better of us, and we fall ill with ever weaker resistance. Day by day, our bodies are no longer what they were. They change, disappoint us and surrender, as though called by Mother Earth’s gravitational pull, saying: come here, I am waiting for you, it is time, your time is up.

Yet we have learnt not to listen to this call. We refuse. It is our craving to subjugate Nature. At her first calls, we say to the Earth, “Wait a little, I am not ready yet”, and rush to ease our pain and take care of ourselves. At the next calls we reply, “Wait, wait, I will come later”, and again rush to ease our pain and care for ourselves. At the final calls we reply, “Sorry, I will come late, very late, indeed as late as possible”, and once again try to ease our pain and care for ourselves, with even more frantic determination, if that is possible.

“Wait a little, I am not ready yet” is fair. Nature should wait; she must be patient. We have earned a longer life through the superhuman efforts we have made to survive over these millions of years.

“Wait, wait, I will come later” is also fair. After all the sacrifices we have made over recent millennia to improve our lives, Nature should make at least one more effort and accommodate us with renewed patience.

“Sorry, I will come late, very late, indeed as late as possible” is not fair. In this case, Nature does not forgive. We have crossed the boundary she herself has set. Nature created us to LIVE consciously, NOT TO SURVIVE half-conscious in a body worn down by the years, with an eroded mind, confined to a bed swallowing pills and surrounded by drips and oxygen.

For decades now, our People has learnt to cry out to Nature, “Sorry, I will come late, very late, indeed as late as possible”. We cry this even when we barely recognise our children or ourselves, even when our voices are little more than faint moans, even when we are no longer capable of producing one of life’s finest fruits: teaching our loved ones and those willing to listen about life, through our experience and knowledge.

Our People is increasingly bent, uncertain and clouded. It is old. And it clings ever more to a white coat, an intravenous drip and a white bed from which it rises less and less often.

Our People has learnt to show profound respect for those who remember their youth as though they had lived it yesterday. But in showing such deep respect, it has gone further. Too far. There is no such thing as too much in Nature, because there is always a limit, a boundary. Even the Universe has its boundaries.

Our People does not have children because there is no room for our children, no room for our young people. That space is now occupied by the elderly. Our People knows this, has understood it for years and accepts it. Pensions matter; healthcare largely devoted to older people matters: healthcare intent on keeping alive, whatever the cost, those who have a past but no future. These are the things that really matter to our Country, as whichever Politician is in office likes to repeat. He repeats it so often that the People has ended up believing him. Our blanket has always been short, indeed very short, and the politician of the day has always chosen to pull it to one side, because what interests him most is the 14 million voters aged over 65. It matters little that there are too few nurseries, crumbling schools, universities without resources, inadequate sports facilities, phantom internships, young researchers going abroad, and derisory funding for start-ups and businesses creating new jobs for young people. These things can take second place. Our People has come to terms with it. And does not have children.

Our People listens to the Politician saying, “Let us protect our grandparents” from Covid-19 and applauds him. That is right; he is right. All our television channels and newspapers applaud him too. It matters little if, to save our grandparents, we stop the Country, risk an unprecedented economic crisis and jeopardise our jobs, our families, our children and our future. It matters little: saving the grandparents comes first. And we applaud.

Our People hears that there is a worldwide pandemic of the virus: the WHO says so, the world’s most authoritative voice on health says so. So it applauds our politician even more, together with television and newspapers. Then it looks at other Countries and the Americans, and cannot explain why all foreign politicians do not follow the strict measures adopted by our much-applauded politician. It simply cannot explain it. Some Countries close schools, universities and stadiums, offer advice on washing hands, distancing and possibly wearing masks. But essentially nothing more: nothing beyond what our People saw years ago with other contagious viruses. Our People cannot explain why the number of deaths recorded in other Countries is markedly lower, far lower, as a percentage of the population. And when it hears a foreign Leader speak of courage and say that his people will face the virus without fear, it does not understand. It cannot understand because the virus frightens it, frightens it too much; it is terrified. And when it hears the British Prime Minister say, “I will be honest with you: many families will lose their elderly loved ones”, our People is horrified. It does not understand, cannot understand, why some Countries seem not to worry so much about this virus, their grandparents, the extremely frail or those already very ill; it wonders why they do not protect them from Covid-19 as our applauded politician has done: with draconian resolve and firmness, drastic measures, red zones, a ban on leaving home and a total shutdown of the economy.

All this while Nature watches, watches and lets things happen. She knows that the fate of a People is already sealed if it does not respect the Laws she has laid down. Laws that a people should always remember, never forget. And among the most important of these Laws is the role Nature has assigned us at each age, including the role of taking our leave of life when the time has come. Overturning this Law by giving priority to the third (and fourth) age over the others is fatal. It means extinction. And our People has long been overturning this Law with clear-eyed, stubborn obsession.

Anselmo Petraroli






WHY I AM HERE IN THIS WORLD | back to top

I am here to try to make this world better, starting with my own world. My world consists of those who work with me, the people close to me, my family and friends, my acquaintances, clients, suppliers and everyone I have the opportunity to meet, even for just an hour. This is my world.

So every day I try to help those who want to improve themselves or turn their lives around. I reward merit, praise proactive people and those who, in difficulty, honestly and loyally strive, even at great sacrifice, to find a better life for themselves and the others in their world. These are the deserving. I can give a deserving person the best of myself, devoting, whenever I can, the time and energy they deserve.

Every day I also fight to exclude the parasite, the inept, the schemer or the person enslaved by their own mediocrity. The liar, the false, the disloyal, the cowardly, the slyly envious and the arrogant know-it-all are also my sworn enemies. I dislike the greedy as much as the miserly, and those who think only of their own advantage. All these petty people drain others’ resources and energy, harming them. They undermine the group they belong to and, more broadly, humanity. That is why I exclude them without too many scruples and, when necessary, with pure cynicism: life is too short to waste time and vital energy on them. That time and energy should instead be spent on the deserving. Helping and trying to redeem one petty person takes as much energy as helping and redeeming ten deserving people in difficulty. For the good of the world and my world, it is best to devote ourselves only to the deserving, leaving the petty to their fate.

Today all human knowledge is on the Internet: a click and a visit to the right websites are enough. It takes little to acquire knowledge without boundaries. The ignorant therefore no longer have any excuse.

I despise stupid people, capable as they are of harming themselves and others. I find the uneducated person who presumes to know unbearable. I have little tolerance for those who do not apply themselves tenaciously and give up at the first difficulty. I disdain those who constantly draw attention to themselves to justify their existence. I detest hypochondriacs, those who wallow in self-pity, those who distrust others on principle, those who have a pessimistic view of life without reacting, those who distort and manipulate everyday and historical truths, those who believe in conspiracies and those who seek refuge in alcohol or drugs. Instead, I support the law that rules in nature: natural selection of the best. For the human species, the best is not necessarily the person who excels, but the one who, with confidence and optimism, makes the greatest effort and does good for themselves and others.

I admire successful people. By success I do not mean the sham of popularity. Successful people love their work and do it with dedication and passion; they have reached a financial position that gives them the freedom to choose their lives each day; and they love and respect the people in their world, who love and respect them in return.

I help anyone or fight anyone, never making distinctions of blood, skin or social class. I can help a deserving stranger; I can leave my own flesh and blood to their fate if necessary. And I do so for the good of all my fellow human beings. This world will improve only if we stop favouring the ineptitude or mediocrity of the undeserving, even if they are our own children. We must uphold meritocracy and reward only the deserving, whether strangers, relatives or acquaintances: it makes no difference. It is the deserving who make this world better.


Anselmo 2019






ADVICE FOR LIFE | back to top

A.M. once told me: “I always feel happy, and do you know why? Because I expect nothing from anyone.”
Expecting things from others only hurts. Problems always have a solution; the only thing without a remedy is death, and it is wrong to consider it a problem. Do not let anyone insult you, humiliate you or lower your self-esteem. Shouting and insults are the tools of the poor in spirit and those unable to reason. We will always meet people who blame us for their troubles, but the truth is that, almost always, each of us receives from others what we deserve. We must be strong and pick ourselves up after life’s falls, because after a dark, lonely tunnel, beautiful things arrive if we have managed to rise again. By rising, we turn bad into good. Enjoy life because it is short; love it, live it intensely, smile at others with confidence and remember:

Before arguing... Breathe
Before speaking... Listen
Before criticising... Examine yourself
Before writing... Think
Before hurting... Feel
Before giving up... Try
Before dying... LIVE!!

The best relationship is not one with a perfect person, but one in which each learns to live with the other’s faults while admiring their qualities. Try to be as sincere and loyal as possible, because when we lose credibility, our world collapses around us. Those who do not value what they have will one day lament losing it, and those who do harm will one day receive what they deserve. We spend our days denying ourselves the pleasure of giving, believing that life is about taking, being given things and taking again, without considering that we are building our future on sand. If you want to be happy, make someone happy; if you want to receive, give a little or a lot of yourself, surround yourself with positive people and be one yourself. Remember: sometimes, when you least expect it, someone will give you beautiful, unforgettable experiences! Everyone can change and improve, but only those who firmly decide to change their lives for the better can do so, beginning by listening to those who can help. If you really want to help someone, do not make the mistake of giving them a fish every day: teach them to fish. Never ruin your present, because it is through the present that you build your future. Never be ashamed of your mistakes; we all make them. But once you realise you have made a mistake, do not repeat it, because then you really should be ashamed of yourself.
If it is true that anyone who uses drugs, soft or hard, occasionally or regularly, would NEVER offer drugs to their children for their own good, then you will understand why you must immediately distance yourself from anyone who offers you drugs: that person does not want what is best for you.
Do not take drugs, because drugs are insidious: they make you lose control of your life without realising it, and when you understand, it will be too late. Have a drink occasionally if you like, but avoid getting drunk, because alcohol is as insidious as drugs and, like drugs, will drive the best people away from you while drawing the worst closer. Always care equally for your mind and body. Have fun, but keep your life in order.
Remember that a strong person, even with tears in their eyes, gathers themselves to say with a smile, “I am fine.” Angels exist and are among us: Angels who are simply human beings who have made their lives a mission. At least one of them, if you recognise them and take these suggestions to heart, will protect you. I am sure of it.

Please note: This text was inspired partly by thoughts sent to me by friends, and partly consists of my own original ideas.

Anselmo 2013






LIES NO LONGER HAVE SHORT LEGS | back to top

Lies once had short legs; now they have lost their legs altogether.
Life is hard, very hard, for liars, who are now cornered and risk seeing their lives become hell. Yes, because the arrival of technology and new mass communication tools is seriously threatening their very social survival. We live in a new era, marked by communication tools unknown just a few years ago: the Internet, social networks, computers, smartphones, tablets, webcams and invisible miniature recording systems. We communicate through text messages, emails, voice messages, photos, videos, posts and much else. Moreover, a telephone conversation can not only be intercepted by the competent authorities, but can now easily be recorded on a smartphone by either the caller or the recipient. An indelible trace of all this remains, even if we scramble to delete as many communications as possible. Nor should we forget that, even if we delete inconvenient communications from our device, they remain stored by the other person, who could misuse them when the occasion arises. And if your partner, parent or closest friend is technologically knowledgeable, goodnight: you risk having no secrets from them, even if you set fire to your smartphone, tablet or computer! They may already have recorded and archived all your communications in real time using special software. But that is not all.
Today social networks have become extraordinary vehicles for information and constantly undermine our privacy, paradoxically even when we are not members. For example, although I am not on Facebook, some time ago a friend called and asked what I had gone to Brescia for. Since I had not told him about it, I asked how he knew I had been there. He told me that a mutual friend, also passing through Brescia, had glimpsed me there but, being with a client, had not had the chance or time to stop and greet me. He then wrote about it on Facebook to the friend who told me. Clearly I had nothing to hide, since I was in Brescia for work, but this episode says a great deal about how information travels at the speed of light on the Internet. Considering how often social network users write all sorts of information and news about acquaintances, or find themselves answering some friends’ questions with lies while answering others honestly, it is easy to see how many messes they can get into. Staying with the Internet, I habitually look for information about people applying to work at my Company. For a targeted search on anyone, I suggest entering into Google, always in quotation marks, first their first name and surname, for example “Mario Rossi”, and then surname and first name, “Rossi Mario”, carefully checking for people with the same name. The CVs we receive are always spotless, yet I have found information online about two candidates who had been convicted of aggravated fraud.
Also consider the multitude of people who love meddling in other people’s affairs — people who, to put it bluntly, do not mind their own fucking business — these people revel in the new communication tools, which let them pursue their passion with sly skill, using any means available. It is no coincidence that years ago I personally received an anonymous email containing detailed information, which unfortunately proved entirely reliable and true, warning me about someone I trusted blindly. Looking more broadly, reports like those now produced by Le Iene, exposing crooks and rogues through new technology involving virtually invisible recording systems, would have been impossible a few decades ago. Technology has also made it possible to study people’s body language systematically and how they behave when lying.
So what should I do? If I tell lies, must I distrust everyone and try to adopt possible countermeasures? NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT: first because it would be pointless, and second because you would live in utter unhappiness anyway. THERE IS ONLY ONE SOLUTION, WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT: TODAY MORE THAN EVER, YOU SHOULD BEHAVE WELL AND STRIVE TO BE AS SINCERE AND TRANSPARENT AS POSSIBLE.
Our credibility is the pillar supporting our human relationships, and if we lose it, our world is destined to collapse around us. God’s eye has truly materialised through new technology, and we would do well to acknowledge it. If you want to keep telling lies, be aware that you should prepare for a life of Hell. BE SURE OF IT.

Anselmo 2013






DAD, WHY ARE THERE BAD PEOPLE? | back to top

This is the question my five-year-old son Tullio Aurelio asked me. “Good question!!!” I exclaimed. At the end of this piece, I will tell you how I answered him.
I must begin with a clarification to avoid any misunderstanding: I am a man of heart and common sense who abhors wars and human atrocities, but who stubbornly fights human wickedness — unfortunately with little success.
With that said, why are there bad people?
First, I should clarify that by bad people I particularly mean those who commit criminal acts, and all those who break the law and harm others while gaining a tangible advantage. This needs clarifying because human wickedness wears infinitely many masks.
So do bad people exist because Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, or because there may be a deity called Satan opposed to God, as many believe?
I am sorry, but the answer is much more ordinary, much simpler and much less imaginative.
To explain my modest theory, which I will call “CAIN BY NECESSITY”, let us start with a few considerations.
Imagine that bad people had never existed. Imagine that Hitler, Stalin, Napoleon and Genghis Khan, to name just the best-known, or even a common criminal such as the “Monster of Florence”, had never existed. Go further. Imagine that human history contained not a single war, battle, skirmish or murder.
Imagine.
Imagine, and now ask yourself a question. If humans had never killed their fellow humans over the millennia, how many billions of people would occupy the Earth today? Twenty, fifty, eighty, a hundred billion? Humans have also shown that they can survive remarkably well through every famine, catastrophe or plague Mother Nature has brought us over the millennia. I therefore leave the difficult computation to mathematicians willing to calculate how many of us there would be today. Would there perhaps be too many? Would we have multiplied indiscriminately? Would our planet have had, and does it have, the necessary and sufficient resources to support impossible numbers of human beings, also considering the increase in average lifespan?
Humans may have been the first living beings to become aware that they were stronger and more cunning than all other living beings. But that was not enough. Humans were certainly the only living beings to realise that they could defend themselves against nature’s dangers better than anyone else, becoming the first to harness the resources and means that nature itself offered. In practice, by somehow managing to defend themselves against natural phenomena and to overpower and “dominate” other living beings, humans no longer had natural enemies or obstacles to unlimited population growth. When humans became aware of this, one of the mechanisms that seeks to regulate nature’s balances, however changing and precarious, must have been triggered. Who could stop this mad rush to invade planet Earth indiscriminately, which would inevitably disrupt the ecosystem’s balance, if not humans themselves, by becoming extremely aggressive towards their own kind?
For this reason, humans became “CAIN BY NECESSITY”, neither better nor worse than other living beings. Whenever someone tells me that animals are certainly not capable of wickedness like humans, I smile. For better or worse, animals face very different survival problems: they struggle daily with other species to stay alive and must also defend themselves strenuously against natural phenomena.
Bad people are therefore among the factors moderating indiscriminate growth of the human population. BUT THAT IS NOT ALL.
Now imagine that the “Holy Spirit”, if one exists, fills the souls of every human being, absolutely everyone, and that, as if by magic, everyone becomes good, very good indeed, and therefore utterly honest.
Imagine.
Imagine how wonderful it would be to trust anyone and know that no one could hurt or harm us!
Imagine...
Well, then you should know that soldiers, judges, lawyers, security guards, prison officers, security staff and inspectors would all be at home unemployed. Manufacturers and retailers of security devices, alarms and surveillance systems would go bankrupt. Television news would be reduced to one daily edition, or even a weekly one, for lack of... bad news. Many journalists would have little to write or discuss, and many film scripts would go into the bin. Church proclamations would be scrapped, video game designers would be gasping for air, antivirus systems would go unsold, many insurance policies would now be useless, and manufacturers of personal defence devices would shut up shop. Finally, millions upon millions of people would be laid off from arms factories. These are only a few examples.
The problem is that a world without bad people today would be an economic catastrophe on an unimaginable scale.
I want to tell you about an incredible experience I had when I was young. I was twenty-one, and an enjoyable evening at a nightclub was suddenly interrupted by a fight between young men. They were beating each other mercilessly and continued until the police arrived. The most frenzied young man was forcibly restrained by an officer who recognised him because he was already known to the police. As the officer dragged him away, hands behind his back, the young man growled in broad dialect: “Treat me well and with respect, because without someone like me you would be unemployed.” Extraordinary! It was a revelation to me!
It also helped me understand, when buying my fourth car stereo after three thefts, that by buying the same product four times in a short period — because I could afford it, unlike someone stealing because they could not afford a stereo — and then installing an alarm that cost me a full 800,000 lire in 1983, I was actually developing... the economy by distributing wealth! Paradoxical, is it not?
So do good people need bad people? It is hard to admit, indeed impossible to admit: no, no, it cannot be so, but... it is. Moreover, sometimes it seems that some good people are excessively tolerant of bad people, perhaps because of factors linked to the collective unconscious. They feed them, let them graze and pardon them excessively so that they can continue their role as a vital resource for the good people themselves. This is not the place to explore such a delicate subject, however, also because, economically, we would need to revisit certain market rules and their already precarious balances.
Let us instead return to the fact that bad people are, or at least have been, among the factors moderating indiscriminate human population growth.
Fortunately, bad people today seem to have less demographic impact than in the past. Major wars are now an outdated tool for resolving human population growth. The last two world wars demonstrate this: aside from representing unspeakable atrocities, they drove new technology and medicine, particularly surgery. Thus, although in 1945 the human species found itself with millions upon millions fewer individuals, those two wars subsequently helped to “strengthen” humanity, giving people even more powerful tools to defend themselves against nature, improve technology and quality of life, and populate the planet even further.
So what then? We must seriously address human population growth and raise a moralquestion. Yes, moral. But what is this blessed morality about which so much, perhaps too much, has been written?
To me, quite simply, morality means respecting the rules for a group’s survival and development . Yes, a group, but which group are we talking about? For example, we can consider the citizens of Florence a group. In that case, Florentines should respect the rules for their own group’s survival and development, perhaps even at another group’s expense, such as the citizens of Pisa. We can likewise extend the concept to residents of Tuscany or Italians; European citizens can also be considered a group, and so on. I prefer to consider the entire world population a Group, without distinction of any kind.
From time to time I am amused, though not very much, to read those who insist on writing “Italians, have children”, treating Italians as a group. Worse still, I have to endure the anathemas of the Catholic Church and other religions opposed to contraception: they consider it appropriate to promote fertility and indiscriminate reproduction. We could ignore them, were it not for the fact that they are seriously dangerous.
To those urging Italians to have children, I would point out that an “Italian group” can exist, just as a “French group” can exist, provided they are regarded as groups fully integrated into the Group of humanity. In this context we may speak of an “Italian group”, characterised by a shared culture, upbringing, language, history and traditions unique in the world, but on one condition: the “Italian group” must be a Subset of the Set of Humanity. If the so-called “Italians” do not wish to have children, that is welcome for the good of the Group of Humanity, and if immigrants have children, it matters little. Our duty as Italians should be to instil and pass on our culture and values to immigrants, values that must be defended strenuously. In this way, even a child of Nigerian parents, black as ebony, born, raised and educated in Italy will be 100% Italian.
To those promoting indiscriminate reproduction, I would point out that humanity cannot grow indefinitely without disrupting natural balances and the ecosystem, given that the planet’s resources are not infinite but very limited. However much we use renewable sources, which are absolutely essential, how many human beings can the planet really support? Are there already too many of us? Or can we become ten, twenty, fifty or a hundred billion? What is the limit? A limit exists, because the universe itself is limited, not infinite.
As already stated, nature has not managed, and cannot manage, to stop uncontrolled human growth. Of course, nature defends herself. She has tried, and continues trying, to defend herself in every possible way, to preserve her ecosystem and balance. Hence plagues and new widespread diseases such as cancer, or viral diseases such as AIDS, hence homosexual people — yes, Catholic gentlemen, homosexuality is a natural factor!— hence infertility, and hence the spread through the collective unconscious of a lack of desire to have children, especially in more developed countries, or the practice of abortion. But all this is far from enough: the human population is growing exponentially and therefore, sooner or later, unsustainably.
Today I consider the Chinese Government absolutely moral for imposing precise restrictions and a ceiling on its people’s population growth, benefiting the entire world, while I consider the Catholic Church absolutely amoral for promoting uncontrolled reproduction.
Many people, myself included, would like all humanity to enjoy acceptable and dignified living conditions. But that would mean billions upon billions of individuals beginning to consume like a European, American or Vatican citizen.
I would like to know, for example, how much water is consumed per person in the Vatican. I really would. In Italy, we know we consume about 250 litres of water per day, against a European average of about 170 litres; the United States consumes over 350 litres per person per day. Consider that the ongoing war between China and Tibet is over water resources. Without Tibet’s water, China would die of thirst. Did you know that? Leaving aside history’s bad people, such as Hitler and Stalin, who massacred millions through their lust for power, I do not feel able to judge the Chinese as “bad”.
Researchers should seriously undertake rigorous calculations to determine how many living beings can populate the Earth. These calculations should be strictly scientific, but based on simple relationships. For example, one or more parameters could be drawn from the resources nature offers, including water. By quantifying the water resources of a territory or nation, and using the UN parameter of at least forty litres of water per person per day, we could calculate how many people could inhabit that territory or nation in a balanced way. But water alone is not enough; it is only indicative. Other parameters should be considered, such as the production capacity of essential agricultural or food products, for example wheat, raw materials and others. I leave researchers in the field to exercise their intellect on the question. Clearly, all these data, initially developed territorially, could then be expanded globally, also considering possible trade.
I understand that the theory of “CAIN BY NECESSITY” is difficult to accept and digest, partly because it opposes many religious dogmas, but simply becoming aware of it would suffice for humanity’s good.
The time has therefore come for all people, without further delay, to address the moral question of global human population growth. We must address respect for the rules of the group’s survival and development. Survival and development do not mean the greatest possible number of humans inhabiting the planet, but the quality of life of a group consisting of an appropriate number of people living in harmony with the environment and ecosystem, and therefore in balance with nature. By Group, I mean the entire world population. If we cannot do this, while wishing to avert a third world war which, as already stated, would solve the problem only temporarily, we risk triggering a hundred, five hundred or a thousand wars, increasingly caused by the search for and supply of natural resources: wars like those between China and Tibet, the United States and Iraq, and the many others under way that no one talks about.
“Dad, why are there bad people?” The question left me bewildered, partly because little stories about tempting devils are now light-years away from me.
“Good question, Tullio, a really good question!” In truth, I did not know what to answer and was buying time.
“So Dad, will you tell me why there are bad people?” he pressed.
What could I possibly tell a five-year-old? “Dear Tullio, who are the bad people you know?” “Lots: there are bad guys on the PlayStation, and there are always bad guys in cartoons too.”
“You see, bad guys are there for playing games, but children and people are good.”
He replied, “Then why are my friends Michael and Alberto bad and always hitting people?”
“Because they do not listen to their mum, dad or teacher; they are disobedient, and children who behave like that become bad!”
“And why do Michael and Alberto not listen to their mum and dad?”
I was in deep trouble. “Listen, Tullio, why do you listen to Mum and me, even if... not quite always?”
He looked at me for a moment, almost lost. “Because...” Then his face lit up. “Because we always give each other lots of kisses.”
“There, you see: perhaps Michael and Alberto do not listen to their mum and dad because they do not give each other lots of kisses. That is why they are a little... naughty.”
Then he looked at me with his wonderfully sweet eyes and asked, “I am good, aren’t I, Dad?”
“You are good, Tullio; in fact, you are a very good boy.” And I kissed him.

Sometimes answering a five-year-old is harder than writing these pages.

Anselmo Petraroli

“Life is not what people tell you it is, but how you interpret their story”






MAN AND THE MICE THAT GO FOR THE CHEESE | back to top

Human beings truly are an extraordinary animal species. For example, the human species is the only one capable of assimilating and incorporating the behaviour of different animal species over its evolution spanning several million years. Among humans we find the dominant and submissive, the bold and timid, the hardworking and lazy, the productive and parasitic, the proactive and opportunistic, the vain and retiring. It may seem obvious, but when we mock someone by saying they are “as vain as a peacock”, “live like a parasite” or “are a real vulture”, or praise them because they have “saved like an ant” or “never let go of the bone”, we are simply stating a truth rooted in anthropology. Although it may seem a bold claim, all individuals, from dominant to submissive, productive to parasitic and so on, have served a function in human development, just as all different species in nature complement one another and are essential to the balance of nature or an ecosystem. Furthermore, humans have developed entirely different individual abilities. Some have a talent for manual work and actually creating things, or for physical activity and bodily coordination. Others are inclined towards logic and mathematical calculations, designing things, creativity and ingenuity, or towards thought and action for the collective good. When someone combines all these latter virtues, we call them a genius; conversely, a good-for-nothing possesses none of the abilities described above. Last but not least, humans have developed the seed of so-called “evil”: among us are the “bad people” who, today as in the past, remain essential to humankind — see “Dad, why are there bad people?” Yes, those bad people who horrify us when we read certain news stories, whose wickedness often wears different masks. For example, we are horrified when nursery or primary school teachers are discovered inflicting extraordinary violence on innocent children. We recoil when we discover a paedophile priest, or one who has abused someone weak and defenceless. We find it inexplicable when a firefighter is caught setting a woodland fire, and cannot believe it when a nurse is discovered committing deliberate, premeditated murders of helpless patients. It is certain that evil has countless faces and masks, including those just mentioned, but one kind of evil is often underestimated by most people while being extremely dangerous to society: I mean the evil of politics. An evil that, to remain within our own borders, many Italian politicians — CLEARLY NOT ALL — have spread over the last thirty years. How was it possible that people who should have set an example to all citizens in ethics, morality, honesty, hard work, values and principles, people who should have been of the highest calibre in every respect, so often proved incapable, inept, opportunistic, parasitic or dishonest rogues? How was it possible in Italy for an extraordinary mass of people of the lowest calibre to invade politics, from Parliament to the Senate, from regions to provinces, from municipalities to public-sector companies?
The answer is simple, very simple, and rooted in human nature. It applies to all the masks of evil described above.
Unfortunately, a human being with a parasitic disposition, a disturbed personality or unspeakable perversions will do everything possible to act on them. If a job or profession enables this, they will choose and pursue it without hesitation. That is why we should not be surprised by news stories involving teachers, priests, firefighters or nurses, nor by our politicians’ misdeeds. THEY ARE ALL MICE GOING FOR THE CHEESE.
Is there a remedy for this devastation? Of course there is, thanks also to God’s eye, as I like to call new technology and computing; through them, we can create almost insurmountable obstacles for people choosing a profession or activity to practise their deviance or parasitism. For example, if someone wanting to become a nursery teacher while harbouring violent and aggressive instincts towards children knew that schools had cameras everywhere recording everything, would they still choose that profession?
If an Italian politician were required to lay themselves “bare”, before elections and during their term, agreeing to comprehensive scrutiny and putting even their private life on the line, how many would choose a political career? The aggravating factor is that Italian politics has attracted a mob of people of such low calibre because, besides allowing them to practise their parasitism or see their ineptitude and incompetence rewarded, it can let them do so with impunity.
BUT IF WE WAIT FOR SOLUTIONS FROM THOSE WHO ARE THE PROBLEM, WE WILL BE WAITING UNTIL NIGHTFALL!

Humanity’s tragedy is not that bad people or parasites exist. Like it or not, they are “natural” and “functional” parts of the system, and we must learn, despite ourselves, to live with and contain them. THE REAL HUMAN TRAGEDY IS WHEN THE “BAD PEOPLE”, THE PARASITES, THE INCAPABLE AND THE INEPT COME TO POWER. BECAUSE, AS HUMAN HISTORY TEACHES US, WHEN SUCH INDIVIDUALS COME TO POWER, DARKNESS FALLS. ALWAYS.

Anselmo 2012






THE NEW HEROES* | back to top

When I was a boy, heroes and superheroes were called Tex, Zagor, Superman, Spider-Man, Daredevil, the Fantastic Four, Batman and Robin, all popular again today. I collected their comics, and every purchase brought another exciting adventure.
Today, at forty-five, I have realised that real heroes are very different, bearing no resemblance to those who populated my childhood.
The new heroes are apparently ordinary people doing apparently ordinary things. Apparently.
The new heroes can work hard, really hard, with selfless dedication, because they know they are doing it not only for themselves but for the common good.
The higher the office or role they hold, the more capable they are of building genuine, authentic relationships with their colleagues, with humanity and humility, while dealing with the powerful without any reverential fear.
The new heroes can endure, today more than ever, immeasurable numbers of indoctrinated incompetents, knowing that the difficult thing is not knowing, but knowing how to use what one knows.
The new heroes witness the daily devastation caused by an entirely inept and incapable political class, yet each day find the strength to ask what they themselves can do to change this country for the better.
They do not resort to shortcuts or petty tricks to achieve a purpose or goal. They know the road is often rough and full of obstacles, but that their courage and willpower will help them travel it.
The new heroes set an example of loyalty and dignity for their children, spouses and everyone. They remain upright and honest among the dishonest and abhor slander, considering it one of humanity’s worst acts.
The new heroes, with silent and profound pain, decide to give up what they themselves created and cherished as life itself, because they no longer recognise themselves in it. If this burns them to ashes, they rise again like the Phoenix, more beautiful and stronger than before.
When they set themselves an ambitious goal, the new heroes give blood, sweat and passion, doing everything, more, far more and still more to achieve it. If they succeed, they rejoice without boasting. But when, exhausted, they fail, they have the strength and courage to change their goal and set another, different and even more ambitious one.
The new heroes do not need luck, because they know that building upon it means building on sand.
The new heroes sometimes save one or more people, but can proudly say that no one has ever been their salvation, because they can look after themselves and others.
You rarely see the new heroes on magazine covers or newspaper front pages. They do not need it. They find fulfilment in the recognition and esteem of those who live, work, suffer, struggle, hope and rejoice alongside them. This is what makes them true, great heroes.
Anselmo 07

* Published in the monthly magazine FOCUS - July 2007






MEN, LITTLE MEN AND EMPTY TALKERS | back to top

My grandfather Umberto, a retired army officer, often spoke to me of the theory of the great actor and playwright Edoardo De Filippo, according to which men essentially fell into three categories: Men, Little Men and Empty Talkers.

Leaving aside the last two categories, I would now like to consider what it means to be a Man and the virtues that might characterise him.

Is a Man’s fundamental virtue perhaps the ability to face and solve problems with great determination and rock-solid resolve?

Or is it the ability to combine heart and passion in harmony with reason?

O r perhaps loyalty and intellectual honesty: the ability always to treat others with respect, and the courage to confront even difficult issues openly, firmly and forcefully if necessary, without ever hiding behind excuses?

A nd is a Man’s virtue perhaps to consider taking on responsibilities with the greatest care, knowing that once accepted, backing out is cowardly?

O r perhaps a Man’s virtue is the strength of spirit to numb his emotions and inner life for the sake of commitments undertaken, as Edoardo De Filippo himself did when, in the morning, he saw his beloved mother die in his arms and, that evening, broken-hearted, gave his finest performance on stage, delivering a comic play in a performance worthy of preservation in a film archive?

Or is the essential virtue keeping one’s commitments and one’s word, so that a Man is willing to scale inaccessible peaks to honour them?

Last but not least, is the primary virtue perhaps proactivity, enabling a Man, when difficulties arise, not to wait for others to do something for him, but to do something himself for his own sake and for others?

I believe a Man should possess all or most of these virtues. These simple virtues make the difference between a Man, a true Man, and Little Men and Empty Talkers.

Anselmo Petraroli






WHY WE SEEK CERTAIN VIRTUES | back to top

Have you ever wondered why, in love, the universal desire seems to be to find a partner with many virtues: ideally attractive, intelligent, witty, wealthy and, if a man is seeking a woman, young too? An apparently obvious question, yet far from obvious; certainly too many obvious remarks on the subject are steeped in clichés. If a woman seeks a wealthy man, she is called a whore; if an older man seeks a young woman, he is called a dirty old man; if someone seeks physical beauty, they are called superficial and materialistic. In practice, these are all judgements born of ignorance. What primarily characterises all living beings, including the human species, is the survival instinct. This instinct is certainly not limited to ourselves as individuals, but extends inseparably to our lineage, that is, our offspring.
For this reason, whether you want children or already have them, whether you do not want them or can no longer have them, nature has indelibly instilled in each of us, until death, a survival instinct inseparable from the instinct to reproduce: this instinct governs everything in relations between the two sexes. It is therefore natural to seek an attractive person because we will probably produce attractive offspring, children who will be more socially sought after. It is natural to seek someone intelligent or witty because we will probably produce offspring better able to manage in life. It is natural to seek slim or normal-weight people, or better still athletic ones, because this indicates physical wellbeing and we presume the offspring will be healthy. It is natural for a woman to seek a wealthy man because this may provide security for her children and stability for the family. It is natural for even an older man to seek a young woman because she offers fertility for many more years. It is likewise natural to feel strongly attracted to popular or famous people, because offspring would gain enormous benefits. All this is natural, part of creation, biology and anthropology. Yet too many refuse to accept these simple laws of nature, disputing them and talking nonsense.
Clearly, our environment, upbringing and cultural factors support and determine our preferences for one or more virtues we instinctively seek. If we were born into a very poor environment and suffered hardship, we will probably seek a wealthy partner. If our upbringing instilled a taste for beauty and aesthetics, we will probably seek an attractive partner. If we were born into an environment that valued intellect or intellectual pursuits, we will probably seek someone educated and intelligent. But environmental and cultural factors merely support what is a natural instinct.
In the end, the vast majority fall in love with people possessing only one of the virtues described above, usually because they themselves have only one to offer. Those with no virtues will often have to settle for someone like themselves. But someone with more than one virtue could, indeed should, aspire to an equally virtuous partner. In any case, a sublime love story will always be possible. But please, let us steer clear of clichés and ignorance.

An aside: the question of homosexuality. Quite apart from genuine sexual deviance, which, it should be made clear, concerns both heterosexual and gay people, homosexuality is a natural factor, absolutely natural. Homosexual people fulfil an important natural and vital function because, by not having children, nature has assigned them to moderate indiscriminate population growth of the human race. From this perspective, given the serious risk of overpopulating an Earth with limited resources, homosexuality will naturally become increasingly widespread. It will therefore be necessary to recognise homosexual people’s rights worldwide as soon as possible. What does a homosexual person prioritise when seeking a partner? The survival instinct is dominant in them too, certainly more directed towards themselves as individuals, but no less natural or noble than that of heterosexual people: because, as already stated, homosexuality benefits all humanity.

Anselmo Petraroli






LETTER TO LITTLE TOMMY | back to top

Tommy, Tommy,

My darling, Daddy’s darling.

You know, I loved you as though you were my son from the very first time I saw you, with those big eyes of a little angel.

You know, Tommy, I loved you like that immediately because I am a father who loves. A father who loves his child, a father who loves children. A father who loves them utterly because nothing in the world is more helpless, defenceless or vulnerable than a child.

I trembled for you, worried about you and felt indescribable pain, asking myself a thousand times a thousand and a thousand more how anyone could have taken you away.

Yet I kept telling myself you would come home, that such a monstrous thing was impossible, that your mum and dad would soon hold you in their arms again.

But I am the same old foolish, naïve, unworldly, idealistic optimist. When the news came, a storm struck down my heart. I cried, Tommy, as I do not think I had ever cried in forty-five years. You should know, dear Tommy, that I do not cry easily. Perhaps the last time I cried like that was when so many innocent people were killed in the attack on the Twin Towers, and when other innocent children were massacred in the Russian school.

I sobbed uncontrollably, and as I cried a devastating rage grew inside me, a murderous hatred for your killers. Give them to me, I thought, give them to me, I will deal with them, give them to me and I will tear out their hearts. Yes, Tommy, yes: at that moment I wanted to tear out their hearts with my bare hands. Yes, Tommy, I wanted to do that — me, of all people, with my gentle heart.

Tommy, Tommy, how could all this happen? How could they kill a little angel like you? A little angel crying desperately, frightened, lost and terrified of those horrible monsters.

I cried so much, Tommy. But now that I have finished crying, now that the pain has fallen silent without becoming any less intense, now that my anger and hatred are clear-eyed, I have to hear and listen to a chorus of stupidities and banalities.
I have heard talk of the death penalty. That is idiotic, Tommy. I oppose the death penalty, but for principles very different from those of Catholics. You know, Tommy, I am an atheist, and for me this is the only life. So I would let your murderous monsters rot in prison for life, certain that prison officers and other inmates would make their lives impossible, indeed a hell.

I have heard talk of forgiveness. Another idiocy. Forgiveness in such cases is amoral. Yes, Tommy, anyone who forgives your murderous monsters is amoral. Anyone, even the Pope. Anyone who says we must always forgive, whatever happens, is amoral. Anyone who forgives and allows the forgiven person to offend again and harm others is amoral. Anyone who forgives such a vile act is amoral.

Dear Tommy, amid this chorus of stupidities and clichés, I am sure at least you would have understood, when grown up, that morality is simply a set of rules to respect for the survival and development of a group and, more broadly, all humanity. Unfortunately, my sweet little Tommy, although morality is such a simple concept, too many people do not respect these rules. And they are not only criminals.

You see, dear Tommy, you are a victim, as unfortunately are many others, not only of murderous monsters but also of other amoral people. The politician and legislator who prescribe inadequate penalties for extremely serious crimes are amoral, especially when they allow a cunning lawyer, equally immoral, to find a legal loophole benefiting their criminal clients. The judge who misapplies the law is amoral. The law enforcement officer who fails to do their duty properly is amoral. So too, dear Tommy, is the person moved by a film or brought to tears by nothing, yet barely saddened by life’s real tragedies, or indifferent to them altogether. And I too am amoral, watching this devastation and doing little or nothing to prevent it.

Forgive me, forgive us all, dear Tommy.

A kiss for ever, with immense love.

Daddy Anselmo