Arrrr, me hearties, let them eat cake.
For one reason or another, our common historical knowledge is full of half-truths and misconceptions, all believed to be hard facts. While in reality, Vikings had no horned helmets and Napoleon was not short.
Pirates never used pirate speech.
Marie Antoinette never said, ‘Let them eat cake’.
And no partisan fighting against the occupying Nazi troops and their Fascists buddies ever sang Bella Ciao.
It is more than telling, probably, that proving their ignorance of the history of the movement they claim to look up on, the “progressive” MEPs sitting in the European Parliament chose a song that has nothing to do with Italian anti-fascist resistance, except for popular culture.
Born as a 19th century folk song, sung by exhausted workers on paddy fields, it has not been linked to the partisans until much later. Popularized by a French, Yves Montard in 1963, Bella Ciao quickly became a favorite of musicians and left-wing movements all around the world with its catchy melody and tragic lyrics, as its roots got quickly forgotten. It mostly faded out of usage with the demise of the Soviet Union.
It (re)gained worldwide popularity not thanks to the renewed interest in anti-fascism, but thanks to La Casa de Papel (Money Heist), the Spanish series featuring “El Profesor”, who single-handedly organizes and manages the greatest robbery of Spain, directing his unruly bunch of criminals from behind the scenes. Completely on his own, as he is “the man with The Plan”, earning the admiration of his gang … and of millions of viewers worldwide. Any similarities with the personality cults around leftist authoritarian rulers are purely accidental.
Just like Bella Ciao, La Casa de Papel also easily drew in a large fanbase, thanks to its great portrayal of complex characters, spectacular scenes, and anti-establishment message (because, of course, illegally printing money or robbing a bank for your own personal gain, then fleeing to an exotic private island is a form of revolution).
A modernized anti-capitalist Robin Hood story, involving hostage taking, the killing of several police officers (portrayed as the bad boys against whom every means of fight are acceptable, proving the ideological bias and blind spot of the left leaning thinkers) and, at least in the first season, the printing of money.
The latter falls in line with progressive “money printing” policies, after all.
But singing Bella Ciao in response to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s speech was a misplaced show-of-opposition, for more than just the historical inaccuracies and the controversial popular culture associated with it.
Parliaments are expected to be places of decorum and respectful debate, where a minimal drama is usually accepted as part of the process (think the opposition walking out or refusing to vote on a controversial issue), but where chaotic scenes or theatrical gestures shouldn’t happen, especially not by the respectable deputies themselves.
Green Co-Chair Terry Reintke has warned beforehand that “the debate would get emotional” and that various groups were planning stunts.
In response, European Parliamentary President Roberta Metsola had asked MEPs already before the session to refrain from rowdy acts and respect the European Parliament as the “house of democracy”, where “the rule of law and freedom of expression are sacrosanct, we may not always agree, but we will always give space for the respectful sharing of views”.
Not everybody agreed with her, Terry Reintke for example declared that the Hungarian prime minister was not welcome in the European Parliament.
Then, when the progressive MEPs started to sing, Metsola tried to call to order, reminding them that the parliament was “not the Eurovision”.
The stunt was somewhat similar to the Ancient Roman practice of panem et circensem (bread and circus), providing bread and public entertainment to people, to distract them from their problems. If you have no real arguments or solutions, at least put up a good show.
Dramatic stunts and brawls, including egg throwing or actual fights are rather unusual in parliaments and are mostly unheard of in (European) democracies, as these actions serve more as public entertainment or as instruments to channel the heated emotions into, than meaningful tools and logical arguments pushing a debate forward.
Notorious examples are the Taiwanese, Turkish and South African parliaments – and now the European Parliament has also joined this group with questionable reputations.
