Monday, December 05, 2016
Voting to keep things the way they are now is not "smashing the traditional political structure" or in any way "anti-establishment". Rather, the opposite. "NO" was the vote for political stability, and "YES" the vote for political instability. Hence the NYT article is complete BS. It's true Italian banks may fall into crisis, but it has nothing to do with this vote that I can tell. A "yes" vote would not have helped banking in any way that I can see.
All the news in English that I see about it falls into the "horse-race" category, with nothing of substance about the actual terms of the proposed legislation. See this Guardian piece for an example of content-free reporting.
One site admits: "The vote is not about any financial or economic issue, but its timing and its potential implication for political stability are such that a negative outcome could trigger some financial instability."
So, while the vote has nothing to do with finance, all media sites seem to be SAYING it "could trigger financial instability", and by saying so they contribute to it becoming a *faît accompli"
It also has nothing to do with "populism".
NYTimes | In a strategic blunder that echoed David Cameron’s call for a “Brexit” referendum, Mr. Renzi had tied his government’s tenure to Sunday’s vote when he was flying high in the polls.
But his support eroded, and world leaders anxiously watched the vote in Italy, the fourth-largest economy in Europe, as a referendum on Mr. Renzi’s centrist government and as a barometer of the strength of anti-establishment winds blowing across both sides of the Atlantic.
Financial analysts have warned that instability caused by Mr. Renzi’s premature departure could result in a renewed and possibly contagious financial crisis in Italy, where banks are saddled with bad loans, and where desperately needed investors are turned off by the return of Italian instability.
Some world leaders, seeing in Mr. Renzi a critical defense against populism’s rising tide, had urged him to stay. President Obama, speaking at the White House during Mr. Renzi’s visit in October, said he hoped Mr. Renzi would “hang around for a while no matter what.”
The incoming administration of President-elect Donald J. Trump was less eager to see him remain. Members of Mr. Trump’s inner circle have closely watched, and rooted for, the surging populism in Europe.
What was clear, said Stefano Stefanini, who served as a diplomatic adviser to Giorgio Napolitano, a former Italian president, was that the vote was “a test of strength of the anti-Europe and anti-establishment forces in Italy.”