One step more beyond the "trolleys on wheels "as school desks in Italian schools. A modest swiftian proposal.

The ineffable Italian rulers, who really care about the school (so much so that as soon as it was discovered that Covid 19 mainly affected the elderly, they immediately deprived young people of the right to education by closing all schools and universities), thave rightly foreseen, in the same logic and common sense,the security measures to reopen them. The proposal of wheeled benches is truly the ultimate proof of the seriousness, commitment and not least of the imagination of these rulers in seeking solutions to the problems ... that they themselves have created.

Trolleys on wheels are indeed a wonderful idea, they could become an export item "made in I(dio)taly", an idea that normal minds could not have conceived. Certainly somebody  may remarque that the proposal is incomplete: in fact there are no "teacher's chairs on wheels", indeed necessary and very useful for the ever more frequent rotation of teachers from one chair to another. It would be more convenient in fact to allow e.g. to the religious teacher, who was engaged by bishop's intercession, and who asks for the transfer of the another chair, to move directly together with the first-named chair, thanks to the wheels.

In this context, however, a certain shyness of the rulers must be pointed out, in taking the necessary and rigorous measures to contain the pandemia. Transparent plastic screens and masks (in preparation of muzzles?) are good but not enough. This is clearly a good step forward but still insufficient to ensure that even the last vagabond and weakened virus does not infect some pupils.

I therefore allow myself on the basis of my experience (not only that of teacher and schoo master) to make a more radical and definitive proposal.

When I studied languages ​​at the institute for interpreters , I spent hours in the glass cabin practicing simultaneous translation (in the headphones I listened to one language and in the microphone I translated into the other simultaneously).

So instead of roller counters, which would require maintenance and constant repairs (if tires are foreseen, there will be inevitable flat tires) why not provide individual cabins to each pupil? It would also solve the problem of the jammers, the teachers could turn to individual students without disturbing the rest, it would finally be an individualized teaching not plus ultra.

Certainly the social dimension would be lacking, communication between students would be very reduced. But this dimension is no longer necessary in the modern world: the comparison of opinions and socialization are things of the past that in a neoliberal economy only hold back development without any advantage for investors.

Chancellor Angela Merkel was recently decreed "Mother of Europe": the Fathers of Europe would probably not be enthusiastic but rather horrified at the thought of having given birth to the Brussels Minotaurus with this novel Pasif.  It is probable that the real father is not the mythological bull but another animal that ,out of respect ,I do not name, one of those in which Pasife's sister Circe loved to transform men according to their specific character.

But here I must disagree in the most energetic way: no, the mother of Europe is not Merkel, it is  Mrs. Thacher, yes, she, "the witch" as the miners called to her on the pavement by her neoliberistic policies called her.

In fact, the motto that guides the European Union came out of Ms. Thacher's mouth: "There is no such thing as a society, but only individuals". This supreme ideal rightly gives absolute priority to individual differences, starting from gender, and therefore guarantees all individual freedoms while denying social freedoms (a logical consequence, given that society does not exist).

On the other hand, what the use of social competences in a world where individuals are raised to the new and supreme role of the human species: "producers and consumers". The final stage of human civilization, the "end of history" (which Francis Fukuyama rightly declared ended with the advent of neoliberism) sees citizens finally free from social constraints, from the limitations of belonging to a "community". And therefore also the end of each tradition, since what history and which traditions can have individuals reduced to "producers and consumers"?

Finally, we must not forget the practical aspect of the cabins: privacy would be guaranteed, there would be less "group attacks against individuals" ("mobbing"), and also the possibility of receiving targeted advertising according to individual interests: there is  in fact no sensible reason to exclude the insertion of advertising during lessons, if the school has to prepare for life it is essential that it also have the accustoming to the continuous advertising hammering among its pedagogical tasks, so that young people do not find themselves confronted with this essential aspect of individual life only outside the cabin ... pardon school.

And last but not least: allowing advertising during individual lessons would also improve the budgets of educational institutions, it is not excluded that the cabins, in exchange for advertising rights, cannot be provided free of charge by philanthropists, "patrons in search of profit" commongly known as  "sponsors". 

It would be the "all winners" solution: an increasingly used formula but probably out of modesty in the "win-win" form, since from a logical-conservative point of view it seems impossible that there are only winners and no losers: the "Principle of Vilfrido Pareto" foresees such an eventuality, but the advantages of the "all winners "are certainly not identical for each one.

But even this antiquated logical legacy will end up disappearing, a new logic is in fact under construction to explain to individuals that neoliberism only brings advantages, being this, as already Leibniz already in 1710 had rightly guessed, the best of all possible worlds.