Il Mulino2013-07-16Editorial Il Mulino 3/2013"One must know in order to decide", as an old saying suggests. It could be broken down into two meanings: one must know in order to choose a general policy orientation; one must know in order to translate it into specific and effective policies. This is our journal's first aim, as shown, in this issue, by Paolo Pombeni's opening essay. An institutional culture in crisis addresses democratic theory, party transformation, and constitutional arrangements capable of constraining -- within the limits of a decent democracy -- current representation tendencies. The essay starts in a general comparative way, but political passion soon leads the author to the case of Italy. The text offers several insights; we highlight just two of them, which lead into other articles featured in this issue.The first insight can be summarised in a straightforward question: what ever happened to the common good? Political parties, as Pombeni describes them (and as they actually, and unfortunately, are), are concerned exclusively with hanging on to their constituencies, exacerbating the differences between their brands, and promoting obtuse identities (just as advertisements do) -- well aware that consumers/voters are never going to check. They always appeal to ideological-emotional affiliation, talking to people's bellies rather than their heads. Under such conditions, it is quite difficult to pursue the common good through a rational dialogue: for a "faithful" elector any form of compromise is only a dirty deal. And, unless they are forced to, parties do not seek out reasonable agreement: "our people wouldn't understand ". Maybe not, but if constituencies do not understand it is also, perhaps mostly, due to the fact that parties don't even try to offer them an explanation. Weak public opinion -- based on low levels of education and meagre use of critical reasoning fuelled by superficial, emotional, and biased media -- completes the picture. Both "big" politics and specific policies are a complex matter, and public administration and government rarely adopt an analytical and rational approach: the articles by Sabino Cassese and by Tito Bianchi and Paolo Severati are clear on this point. Why should we expect voters to be discriminating and sensible when their rulers and administrators aren't? The second part of Pombeni's essay provides a links with this issue's "Our president" section (especially as regards Mauro Calise's article), which stem from papers delivered during a Mulino conference which took place on 8 April. Pombeni convincingly asserts the need for constitutional reform that recognizes and regulates major transformations affecting parties, representation and government. He also calls for a drafting committee of experts -- not just constitutional legal scholars, heaven forbid -- featuring ability and independence of judgement, even if they subscribe to ideological systems associated with parties. In light of his previous comments expressing scepticism about parties' motives, this conclusion is almost inevitable. Yet the greatest constitutional reforms throughout history have always been achieved in times of upheaval, interrupting the continuity of previous regimes. This was the case for De Gaulle's reforms, which appear to inspire a considerable part of our political world. In objective terms, Italian political and economic system is undergoing an exceedingly serious crisis, which both political parties and public opinion seem to take too lightly. The previous order remains strong, and in the current government -- featuring distrustful cohabitation among forces holding opposing views -- there is no leader with enough prestige and actual power to impose reforms that look to the future instead of the past. We often think about a well-known parable by Bertolt Brecht, quite suitable for the Italian situation. Buddha's disciples run to him and cry: "Master, a house is on fire, but its inhabitants refuse to leave. Some of them say that it's too cold outside. Others do not want to leave their possessions. What should we do?". "Nothing" -- says the Buddha -- "Whoever refuses to deal with an obvious danger deserves to die". Sad, but appropriate. The full table of contents of Il Mulino 3/2013