I have also addressed pluralism issues in the following articles:

Pluralismo e innovazione [Pluralism and innovation], Il Sole 24 Ore, 15 febbraio 1978

Excerpt: «The concept of pluralism focuses not on the protection of civil liberties and rights (negative freedom) nor participation (positive freedom); by now, these are dimensions that have been acquired by the praxis and political thought of modern Western societies. Instead, the concept of pluralism underlines that modern society is articulated and restructured into a set of groups and subgroups, each of which seeks to diversify because it carries on an autonomous cultural discourse of its own in a more or less specific sector. Therefore, pluralism is not a question of mere participation but of what could be called the “need for self-government of participation.”

The latter is perhaps the most evident connotation of post-industrial societies, where participation and protection of civil liberties and rights merge into a dimension that no longer has the individual as the central element of social dynamics, but the group. A society in which individuals singly demanded guaranties and democratic participation has been replaced by a society in which groups meet and clash to manage social problems.

It should be clear, at this point, that all the old theories on democracy, political mandate, indirect participation, and freedom from and through the state are undermined. Many of the misunderstandings of modern society, which also characterize the current analyses and disputes on the concept of pluralism, arise because attempts are made to clarify this concept using outdated interpretative schemata, valid for the old reality but inadequate for the new.» IT

Egemonia o pluralismo? [Hegemony or pluralism?], Il Sole 24 Ore, 4 marzo 1978

Excerpt: «Pluralism is a rule of the game that rests: (a) on competition between groups through innovation, governed by the majority principle; (b) on the alternation of competing groups in the exercise of power (time limit in the governance of public functions); (c) on the autonomy and non-cumulation of institutional public functions.

This concept of pluralism can be accepted or not accepted; undeniably, however, on a level of logical abstraction, it sums up all the constants that characterize the type of social system to which one usually refers when speaking of “democracy in the Western sense.” It is also undeniable that it is incompatible with the Marxist and Gramscian concepts of hegemony.

Referring to the coexistence of several competing classes entails that none of them consider its own values as hegemonic with respect to those of any other class but that each of them obtains a limited and temporary leading position, based on the majority of the consent that the class can acquire, under the rules of the game.» IT

Definiamo il pluralismo [On the definition of pluralism], Il Sole 24 Ore, 22 marzo 1978

Excerpt: «We can now raise the question: does pluralism, as it has been realized in Italy in recent decades, reflect this hypothesis, and to what extent? It soon becomes clear that only the first of the three limitations, which is the one relating to the majority principle, has been implemented in our system. The other two limitations did not have a way to be implemented or have been implemented only in an anomalous and partial way.

There has been no time limit to governance because, in our system, there has never been an alternation of conflicting groups to exercise power. Here, I am not further going to examine the causes of this fact; it suffices to acknowledge this first severe dysfunction of the pluralistic system. The limitation to the cumulation of governed public functions has not been observed; on the contrary, the phenomenon of the appropriation-expropriation of public functions by political groups, economic groups, social categories, and pressure groups has occurred and has become more accentuated in recent years. This fact has created a profound state of degradation of the system, culminating in the most anomalous and dysfunctional phenomenon regarding pluralism: the so-called parceling out, namely the acceptance of the method of appropriation-expropriation of functions as a generalized political method.» IT

In questa repubblica non c’è pluralismo [A republic without pluralism], La Repubblica, 10-11 giugno 1979

Excerpt: «Six fundamental parameters must characterize a perfect pluralistic society: (1) political groups competing for establishing social projects; (2) market firms competing for innovations; (3) a political group only governing when reaching a majority of consent; (4) periodic check of the majority of consent; (5) mutual autonomy of social functions; (6) no social group bearing ideologies contrary to the listed principles.

It is plain to notice that some of these principles have been embodied by parliamentary democracies, but not all of them. Any parliamentary democracy can also rely only on the third and fourth principles. The fifth principle is not implemented actually by any existing parliamentary democracy. In many social systems, such as the Italian one, the sixth principle is violated. In all social systems in which the fifth and sixth principles are violated, the first is also violated.» IT