Talk:Forza Italia (2013)

Tajani's charge in Forza Italia

@Checco I don't understand why you want to question the party's official sources and how Tajani presents himself on social networks (Linkedin or Twitter, for example): I am astonished that you want to know Tajani more than the party or Tajani himself, seriously. Scia Della Cometa (talk) 21:06, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

I am not that confident of FI's website. On the other side, there are several sources, including recent ones, presenting Tajani as both vice president and coordinator of the party. I understand it is not easy, but it is safer to leave Tajani as vice president. Otherwise, when did Tajani cease to be FI's vice president? --Checco (talk) 21:54, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't know when Tajani ceased to be vice president of FI, there are no sources on that. But all official sources currently describe him only as a coordinator, so I have no reason to doubt them. I think that if Tajani was still vice president of Forza Italia, he would also present himself as vice president and not just as coordinator.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 22:30, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

But, most third-party sources continue to describe Tajani as the party's vice president. --Checco (talk) 11:27, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

@Checco: Some third-party sources may continue to describe Tajani as vice-president, but since:

• the party's website only describes him as a coordinator,
• Tajani himself introduces himself only as the coordinator of FI,
• Giorgio Mulè (another prominent member of Forza Italia) has asked for Tajani's resignation from the position of coordinator (without making any mention of the office of vice president of the party),

I think that these people (including the Tajani himself) and the same party know much better than some journalists or users if Tajani is still vice president of Forza Italia or not.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 20:46, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

In the absence of third-party sources on Tajani's demise as vice president, the only thing I can imagine is that Mulè wants Tajani to step down only from the office of coordinator, a more operative one, while continuing to be the patrty's vice president. --Checco (talk) 15:08, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

@Checco Official sources state that Tajani is no currently vice-president of the party, but if you think the opposite of what was established by objectively more informed sources, I will ask for a third opinion o for a rfc, I am not willing to let it go.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 21:44, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

You never let things go, for sure! Anyway, third-party sources are not on your side. --Checco (talk) 14:18, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

I will wait a few more days, if the situation does not move I will start an RFC.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 17:07, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Ok, no problem. --Checco (talk) 14:18, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

I have requested for a Third opinion.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 16:01, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Ideology (2)

I suggest changing "Liberalism" in infobox to "Conservative liberalism" or removing it. Because Forza Italia is socially conservative, it cannot be seen as comprehensive liberalism even in the European context. Mureungdowon (talk) 05:07, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Liberalism is backed up by a source, conservative liberalism isn't. Vacant0 (talk) 11:24, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

# Here's a 2020 source describing Forza Italia as a conservative liberal party. Mureungdowon (talk) 11:44, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

in my opinion we should leave liberal out, since the party is not socially liberal at all (they aren't even economically like on pensions fully liberal) Braganza (talk) 22:08, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Braganza and Mureungdowon: in this case, "Liberal" is more of a self-definition than an appropriate ideology for this party, which can be more effectively described as "liberal conservative" (personally I see few differences between "Liberal conservatism" and "Conservative liberalism"). --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 17:04, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, conservative liberalism could be an accuarate description of the PLI part of Forza Italia Braganza (talk) 17:11, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Actually, the party is not socially conservative and several of its members hold social liberal poisitions. Liberalism is one of the main ideologies of the party. I would avoid "conservative liberalism", by the way: it is not particularly accurate for this party, as FI's liberalism is of the centrist kind. --Checco (talk) 14:16, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Of course, the party is more cultural liberal than the left-liberals in Korea. But the question is whether the party's mainstream is liberal. Shouldn't "Liberalism" be removed from the info-box because "Liberal conservatism" includes liberal elements? The German CDU is more culturally liberal than the FI, but there is no "Liberalism" in the info-box of the CDU article. Mureungdowon (talk) 21:12, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

I actually object the fact that the CDU is more culturally liberal than FI, which is 2/3 CDU and 1/3 FDP, not to mention large swathes of former Socialists. I would say that FI is definitely a liberal-conservative party, including both Christian democrats and full-fledged liberals. --Checco (talk) 17:14, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Same-sex marriage is not legal in Italy yet, but same-sex marriage is legal in Germany. Although Merkel opposed same-sex marriage, she eventually accepted it. Mureungdowon (talk) 21:31, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

If you have to put "liberalism" in the infobox of the FI, you have to put "social liberalism" in the infobox of the Democratic Party (of Italy). Mureungdowon (talk) 21:33, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Sorry to intervene, but we are not going to do comparative analysis here by ourselves (see WP:OR). We should stick to what a good number of reliable sources state (in this case I would look for academic sources). Does anyone here actually have RS backing their position? Yakme (talk) 08:57, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

but tbh there is not much proof in total that FI is actually liberal, not even the italian wikipedia claims that and they are usually very specific as you can see on their pretty long description of PD Braganza (talk) 22:16, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

@User:Mureungdowon: Indeed, the PD article's infobox contains "social liberalism"! What about having "liberalism" and "Christian democracy" here as factions?--Checco (talk) 07:10, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

It could be a solution: Forza Italia describes itself as a liberal, but Liberalism in the strict sense is not an ideology that which objectively qualifies the entire party and it doesn't seem easy to find third party sources on this ideology about Forza Italia.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 11:18, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

If it's poorly sourced or if it contradicts another ideology, just remove liberalism from the infobox and move it to the text instead. The infobox is supposed to be a summary, which means only including ideologies that the party is mainly associated with. Vacant0 (talk) 20:40, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

fully agree Braganza (talk) 22:29, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

A summary of FI's ideology without liberalism would be weak and incomplete. Liberalism is one of the core tenets of FI's ideology. I hope we can have at least consistency with the PD. --Checco (talk) 07:10, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

That's up to sources. If it is due, it can stay. Vacant0 (talk) 07:19, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

@User:Checco maybe we can add a note which states that FI stands in the tradition of PLI and has social conservative views Braganza (talk) 07:25, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Surely, FI counts several liberals, including some former PLI members, while the party has not social conservative views...--Checco (talk) 07:38, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

really? which socially liberal policies do they have? Braganza (talk) 08:23, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

The party is broadly centrist on social issues. It includes both conservatives / Christian democrats and liberals. By the way, several FI liberals are not in the PLI tradition, but are former Socialists of the PSI, notably including Bettino Craxi's daughter, while minister Gilberto Pichetto Fratin hails from the PRI. --Checco (talk) 21:09, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

yeah i heard of NPSI Braganza (talk) 22:29, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

@Checco: Liberal conservatism already implicitly includes liberalism as an ideology.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 15:50, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

also we have an "Ideology and factions" section Braganza (talk) 17:24, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Let's try to be unbiased and consistent. Most political parties in Italy have in their infoboxes several ideologies, some even misplaced or minority ones. Liberal conservatism does not include liberalism. My simple proposal is to take example from the PD article's infobox and have "Liberal conservatism" as main ideology, plus "Factions: Christian democracy; Liberalism". It looks to me as an obvious compromise. --Checco (talk) 21:34, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

I agree. I'll edit it this way Mureungdowon (talk) 21:38, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

I'll repeat again: "If it's poorly sourced or if it contradicts another ideology, just remove liberalism from the infobox and move it to the text instead. The infobox is supposed to be a summary, which means only including ideologies that the party is mainly associated with."

We follow what reliable sources say. Creating factions is not a compromise, this is, for now, original research. Present your sources here. Vacant0 (talk) 21:45, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

I won't revert anything for now, even though the two users that are in favor have boldly implemented this into the article. We need sources that actually verify this, otherwise, if there are not any that back up your proposal, it'll be justifiable to revert it to how it used to be a few hours ago. Vacant0 (talk) 22:48, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

I reverted it for now. Mureungdowon (talk) 23:08, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

I think that having "liberal conservatism" as main ideology and "Christian democracy", "liberalism" and "populism" are factional ideologies, consistently with Democratic Party (Italy), would be an improvement in the direction of those who are not convinced about "liberalism". I would like to re-instate "factions", but, for now, I am going to simply re-add two sources that were removed. --Checco (talk) 06:54, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Checco, read what I've said above. Vacant0 (talk) 11:54, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

This is a different argument, how about changing infobox "Populism" to "Berlusconism"? Mureungdowon (talk) 21:50, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

"Populism" is contentious and, at best, a factional ideology. "Berlusconism" is not at all an ideology, thus I would not include it. --Checco (talk) 21:54, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

I absolutely agree with Mureungdowon to replace populism with Berlusconism (given the highly personal nature of the party), in line with parties of other countries: Erdoğanism for Justice and Development Party, Lulism for Workers' Party, Chavismo for the United Socialist Party of Venezuela. However, I think that a specific discussion would be needed for this matter.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 21:29, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Chavismo is a different level though Braganza (talk) 15:05, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I strongly oppose in the clearest term listing “Berlusconism” as an ideology in this article, as I do any ‘personalised’ ideology for any political party article. I have issues with listing populism (that denotes a floating ideological status, when we already have copious references for specific ideologies), when at least that is a recognisable ideological label. Autospark (talk) 15:18, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I agree with User:Autospark. I am quite opposed to personalist ideologies (the only possible exception is "Gaullism" for Gaullist-conservative parties in France). I also have reservations on "populism", as FI is not particularly populist in the Italian context, but I can live with it as fourth ideology listed in the infobox. --Checco (talk) 20:35, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Ideology (3)

It seems to me that in the previous discussion it wasn't reached an agreement on the ideologies to include in the infobox, particularly about the liberalism. In my view, for example, Forza Italia has little to do with the ideology described in the article on Liberalism, instead it seems to me that it can be described as a economic liberal and conservative liberal party. Could we start an Rfc as already done with the Free Democratic Party (Germany)? Scia Della Cometa (talk) 12:14, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi SDC. Do we really need an RFC? Let’s think this through and discuss it further. Adding “economic liberalism” to the Infobox is a needless redundancy if “liberalism” and “liberal conservatism” are already listed, seeing as those are ideologies which both comprise economic liberalism. Would you accept removing “liberalism” from the Infobox as a compromise? That is something I would also accept.-- Autospark (talk) 14:13, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Autospark, mine was a proposal in lack of agreement; in any case, I would surely accept your compromise, that it is common sense (even in the infobox of Brothers of Italy was included Nationalism between the ideologies, but only National conservatism). Scia Della Cometa (talk) 14:58, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

This discussion is much welcome. The party is undoubtely a liberal-conservative party with liberal and Christian-democratic factions. I would be in favour of listing "liberal conservatism" as the party's sole ideology in the infobox. However, until a new consensus is reached, I oppose removing "liberalism". --Checco (talk) 07:44, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

We can list "Liberal conservatism" as main ideology and Christian democracy and liberalism as factions, but liberalism would already be included into "liberal conservatism". IMHO, the most sensible solution, is having Liberal conservatism as main ideology and Christian democracy as faction. Scia Della Cometa (talk) 20:11, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

I do agree with Scia Della Cometa, no need to indicate “liberalism” as it is not a liberal party (or very partly). Arorae (talk) 21:18, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Are there any sources that support the fact that Christian democracy and Liberalism are only factions inside the party? Vacant0 (talk) 21:19, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Here ([1]), for example, there is an accurate description of Forza Italia: it states that is mainly a liberal conservative party with a Christian democratic faction (led by Scaojola at that time). Scia Della Cometa (talk) 07:43, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

This said, it seems like we already have a consensus on "liberal conservatism". What about having "liberal conservatism" as the only ideology mentioned in the infobox? In my view, there is no need to have factions, even though FI undoubtely has Christian-democratic, liberal and social-democratic inner tendencies. --Checco (talk) 17:38, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

I’d prefer Liberal conservatism and Christian democracy, but could live with a single ideology solution of listing liberal conservatism.— Autospark (talk) 18:18, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Like Autospark: I'd prefer Liberal conservatism and Christian democracy (FI has a strong Christian democratic component), but I could live with listing just liberal conservatism.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 19:18, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

No big deal. I also can live with the new consensus: "liberal conservatism" and "Christian democracy". Thanks, --Checco (talk) 20:01, 31 May 2023 (UTC)