Le narrazioni della pandemia. Comunicazione giuridica e regolamentazione dell’emergenza: il caso italiano

Abstract

The article addresses some aspects of special relevance for the legal-political theory, as they emerged during the pandemic period (2020-2021) in Italy. In particular, our choice has been determined by the way in which the public communication of the measures taken by the Italian government was carried out; by its narrative and logical-argumentative schemes; by the reaction which aroused in social media; by the language used; by the epistemological profile of the justifications; by their implications in the field of fundamental rights, democratic exercise, the rule of law and the theory of sources. In the first part of the article (paragraphs 2-5), observations are formulated on the novelties highlighted by public communication during the most acute phases of the emergency, such as the intensive use of visual argumentation, the polarization of public debate, the “militarization” of language and a set of arguments that can be classified as fallacies and cognitive biases. Paragraph 6 explores the question of expert opinions and the role of science, stressing in the prevailing narratives the re-emergence of a sort of old positivistic scientism that was believed to have dissolved in the post-modern age. The second part (paragraphs 7-8) addresses the issue of the friction between the rule of law and the limitation of fundamental rights caused by the state of exception, in turn justified by the health emergency, putting forward the hypothesis of the fragility of contemporary democracies as a contributing cause of such phenomenon. Paragraphs 1 and 9 are respectively an introduction and a concise conclusion to the discussion.