Reflections on the citizenship question in the abrogative referendum
The initiative for the abrogative referendum to change the law on granting citizenship is a young one, which has found strong support on social media, because the traditional channels—mainly frequented by the older people in this country—perhaps allowed such urgency to go unnoticed. After all, why should they care about what they perceive as “giving citizenship to foreigners”? I think I can say something about the history of this initiative because on November 20, 2007, I was there handing a letter to then-President of the Republic Giorgio Napolitano on the occasion of the National Day for the Rights of Children and Adolescents at the Quirinale Palace, since at that time I was not an Italian citizen and represented the G2 Second Generations Network. It feels like another era. Gianfranco Fini was calling his government allies “assholes.” Roberto Maroni shrugged his shoulders alongside Silvio Berlusconi, and they claimed that the reform wasn’t part of the People of Freedom party's agenda. I remember the Sarubbi-Granata bill, a joint initiative between the PD and the PDL. I remember the discussions at the Ministry of Social Solidarity led by Paolo Ferrero, who had summoned the association. I was there on October 13, 2015, when the Chamber of Deputies passed the citizenship reform bill in a first reading with a broad majority. I was there when, in 2017, thanks to the PD, just before Christmas, this proposal was not scheduled in the Senate, causing it to sink. I was there when a popular initiative bill was drafted with ASGI, Save the Children, the G2 Second Generations Network, and many other third-sector organizations, to mark the 150th anniversary of Italian unification. I’m still here. Little has changed. I was 17 in 2007. Today I’m 34. What has changed? More importantly: does the law work, or not? Isn’t Italy the country that grants the most citizenships in Europe? So what’s the problem?
Over time, the Italian law on citizenship has been modified by amendments and administrative practices that have made it, at least in part, more inclusive. This is also thanks to the work of the G2 – Second Generations Network, born in 2005, when talking about “second generations” or children of immigrants was still more taboo than a novelty. In 2006, minors born or raised in Italy by foreign parents numbered around 491,000 and, despite their ties to the country, they were considered foreigners in every respect. Many of them, once they turned 18, found themselves forced to navigate between residence permits for study or work, relying on implementing decrees and ministerial circulars, living in a paradoxical condition: feeling like “foreigners at home.” I was one of them. In 2006, these “foreigners” born or reunited in Italy were now adults. They lived, studied, and worked—facing daily the challenges linked to the absence of status civitatis, or citizenship. From this reality, the G2 – Second Generations movement was born, founded by the children of immigration. Some of them were denied citizenship for income reasons; others, even though they had the right, didn’t apply out of fear of being rejected.
Despite wages having stagnated for over thirty years (1), and despite the rhetoric labeling them “spoiled kids,” many of those young people were building their future. Today, however, the truth is that many Italians under 35 can’t cover the cost of living on work income alone and are forced to resort to economic survival strategies. Tying civil and political rights to income may be just and sensible—but only in an economy where you actually have the opportunity to increase that income. Otherwise, such a requirement becomes a form of harassment. Even more absurd is realising that this situation has persisted for twenty years and has even worsened.
As idealistic as it may sound—though firmly grounded—G2 has always believed that Italian citizenship for those born and raised in Italy should not be a lottery, a matter of luck, tied arbitrarily to wealth, or a pawn in shameful political games.
Citizenship certainly works for all those descended from Italians: you can find YouTube videos of Brazilian, American, and Argentine citizens (2), and a booming business with advertisements and discounts on how to get Italian citizenship. They are fully entitled to it—it's the law. Unfortunately, among those communities, there are often blatantly racist and intolerant groups. And among all citizenship grants, ius sanguinis (by bloodline) contributes the most. In Italy, the foreign communities that receive citizenship the most are Albanian, Moroccan, and Romanian. Sub-Saharan African communities don’t even make the list—they’re a minority of a minority. And this creates a discrepancy in the public imagination. When we talk about “foreigners,” people automatically think of Africans—only and always as undocumented immigrants. Fascism was buried, but the imaginary it shaped is still alive for those who were born and raised under the racist and colonialist propaganda of the era. In the minds of some Italians, Africans still represent the perfect “Other,” not only because they’re thought of as needier and more defenseless—thus in need of help from the Italiani brava gente (literally, “Italians, good people”)—but a good number of Italians are convinced that the presence of these individuals in the area amounts to an invasion. While Afro-descendants are not numerically and statistically representative of the foreign population in Italy; however, they are exploited, even by other immigrant communities, to advance their own causes without taking personal risks—pulled by the toxic, hypocritical do-gooderism of the left and the provincial, sometimes racist, stupidity of the right.
This leads us to the cultural component tied to the idea of citizenship. The term “global village” is now outdated. There has been apocalyptic talk about “the end of the white race,” that Italy will become a melting pot like the U.S., and so on. As we know, races do not exist—though many people still like to believe otherwise. It’s true that territory shapes the characteristics of humans and all living beings. Human communities, and Italy is no exception, have always been in contact with the rest of humanity. Culture has always dominated the sense of belonging in these groups. We should return to this ideal vision.
But this vision doesn’t work well in Italy today, and the reason is very simple: it’s tied to the country’s demographics. For a significant segment of old, gray-haired Italians, it’s not a priority that all Italians have the same rights and duties. They say: You’re not Italian. You’re a foreigner. Because citizenship is still perceived through 19th-century racial categories. Just think of Bertolaso talking about the “Italic race,” or Attilio Fontana about the “white race.” (3) In a country where the white hair holds enormous political, social, economic, and retirement power, their idea of nation has triumphed—and it’s the only one. They’ve taken ownership of it, mortgaging the future. Everything that is—or isn’t—Italian is measured against what they say. The nation, a term hijacked by the right, is a 1930s concept. Fascism claimed to fulfill the dream of the Risorgimento and gave us the only model we have of being a nation—one that some still cherish. The cult of ancient Rome and the imperialist militarism that spread through Europe in those years (and in the 150 years prior). The Resistance freed us from Fascism, and it was also a nationalist movement, but for the left, “nation” is a negative idea—attached to some vague, transnational, shapeless concept in which Italy becomes a community without a nation, without an ideal horizon, forced to copy more advanced Western nations or follow Europe’s lead. The right has a strong idea of nation—but one rooted in an ahistorical past in which it wallows in a caricatured, self-congratulatory way.
We must reclaim the idea of the Nation as an ideal horizon, alternative to both the right and the left. Where Nation means, first and foremost, culture—what a people shares. And the first thing is language. The idea proposed by Vannacci, Bertolaso, Fontana (and many others like them) is simply out of place, inadequate, and unfit for the challenges our Nation faces. It’s an idea of Italy that will die with them, leaving nothing behind. It’s not a fertile idea. There’s nothing inspiring about it—nothing worth dedicating your best efforts or those of others to. It’s an exhausted idea with no forward projection. It’s an old idea that doesn’t work because it’s about power and defending privileges. Why, after all, should I recognize someone as a citizen who could compete with my son or grandson? Why should the children of my caregiver be allowed to work in the civil service and potentially become wealthier than my children?
They’ll tell you that the Roman Empire fell because of uncontrolled immigration—mixing things up entirely—without realizing that their cognitive dissonance signals a vague sense of decline. Why does it matter that there’s an entire economy around Americans who claim an Italian great-great-grandfather and spend a fortune to get an Italian passport, vote, and move freely in Italy? Why should it matter if, in absolute numbers, ius sanguinis claims far exceed naturalization grants? The issue is not cultural—it’s a racist worldview.
Those born and raised in Italy are not parasites. Nor are their parents. It’s not a crime to be born into a family dreaming of a better future for themselves and future generations. Italy still clings to a 1930s idea of the country, where 1950 feels closer than 2050. It’s simply time to dust off the mothballs and rediscover the spirit of the Risorgimento—not misquoting Julius Caesar out of context, but thinking of an Italy shaped by Cristina Trivulzio di Belgiojoso, the Bandiera brothers, Giuseppe Mazzini, Giuseppe Garibaldi, Carlo Cattaneo, Count Cavour, Alessandro de’ Medici, Saint Benedict of San Fratello, Saint Augustine, Apuleius, Nicola Porpora, Pope Leo XIII, Luisa Spagnoli, Giorgio Marincola, Margherita Hack, Rita Levi Montalcini, Vanessa Ferrari, Fiona May, Jannik Sinner, Jasmine Paolini, Mario Balotelli, Marcell Jacobs, and many others.
So ultimately: What makes us Italian? You are Italian when you take part in the social, cultural, and economic life of the country. You are Italian when you strive for a better Italy that transcends the mistakes of our fathers and mothers, rather than blindly worshipping their ashes. Culture is everything a people shares and passes on. Culture is the outcome of what past generations held most dear.
You are Italian not when you think only of ham or the Mediterranean diet, but when you believe that Italy is unmatched in aerospace, music, education, research, solidarity, justice, accountability, work ethic—always aiming higher and correcting errors.
That’s why we must rally those who hold these values—because they are Italians: those who use the shared experiences of other Italians to rise to these goals, values, and dreams.
The first article of the Constitution helps us: It doesn’t mean, as the common view of the last 40 years would have it, that everyone has a right to a job. Italy used to be a monarchy where your social status was determined by your wealth. To say that the Republic is founded on labor means that your work determines your position in society. (4) And that’s a beautiful vision—one I’m glad to admire again thanks to this referendum.
A referendum that, however, offers much less than the many proposals made in the last 15 years. Also, if you’re 30, 70% of Italians are older than you (and this percentage increases the younger the sample is). A good portion of these people hold old, stagnant ideas—and their children and grandchildren will rarely vote differently, also because parents are much wealthier than their kids—not because they simply lived longer, but because today it’s almost impossible to be wealthier than your parents through work alone. This dependency culture has distorted the democratic process, making older generations and their values dominant—hegemonic.
The paradox where work is taxed more than wealth has even stripped people of autonomy, making many adults unaccountable. Combine that with the fact that young adults are an absolute minority, and it becomes nearly impossible for them to counterbalance the interests of an old society—they lack the resources and numbers to make choices that go against the majority.
We can only hope that someone at the top gains a “troubled conscience” in the Hegelian sense and stops believing in conspiracy theories and the Kalergi plan. And that someone at the bottom puts down their Spritz and uses the privileges of a rich country like Italy to stir things up.
In short, I don’t see the referendum question on citizenship as real progress—perhaps marginally so, with the reduction of the residency period currently set at 10 years for non-EU foreigners. But the signatures gathered by these Italians in under 30 days, the push to bring attention to this long-standing issue—they tell us that there is another Italy, one that demands its place in history. There isn’t just one Italy. And that, in itself, is good news. Maybe this way, we’ll finally regain control of our future.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
(1) Prendete e incazzatevi tuttiIn Italia gli stipendi sono bassi, ma nessuno se ne occupa
https://www.linkiesta.it/2025/03/stipendi-bassi-italia-sindacati/
(2) Cittadinanza vendesi - PresaDiretta 09/03/2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oYTK1F03Gg
(3) Lombardia, Fontana: troppi immigrati, razza bianca a rischio. Poi rettifica: lapsus
https://www.ilsole24ore.com/art/lombardia-fontana-troppi-immigrati-razza-bianca-rischio-poi-rettifica-lapsus-AEjiOwiD?refresh_ce=1
(4) "This is how our text was born, also accepted by other colleagues from groups different from ours, a text that states: 'Italy is a democratic Republic founded on labour.'
In this formulation, the term democratic is meant to indicate the traditional characteristics, the foundations of freedom and equality, without which there is no democracy. But within this same expression, the phrase founded on labour is intended to convey the new character that the Italian State, as we have envisioned it, should assume.
By stating that the Republic is founded on labour, it is excluded that it can be based on privilege, on hereditary nobility, on the toil of others. Rather, it affirms that it is based on duty — which is also a right — of every individual to find, in their free effort, their ability to exist and to contribute to the well-being of the national community.
So, not a mere glorification of physical toil, as might be superficially assumed, of pure physical effort; but rather an affirmation of the duty of every person to become what each can, in proportion to their natural talents, so that the greatest flourishing of this popular community can only be achieved when every person has realized, in the fullness of their being, the maximum contribution to the common prosperity.
The expression founded on labour thus marks the commitment, the theme of our entire Constitution, as can be easily demonstrated by referring even to the current formulation of the content of Articles 6 and 7, and even more so of Articles 30 to 44, that is, those articles that make up Title Three of the first part of our draft."
https://www.nascitacostituzione.it/01principi/001/index.htm