It is sad to read in some newspapers that, of his "Nazi sympathies", one should have noticed from before, as Castrucci was a passionate scholar of Carl Schmitt. It is sad because not only a "witch hunt" climate is re-proposed for which anyone who studies authors who, in life, have adhered – albeit momentarily, and sometimes with reluctance – to Nazism, is itself suspect. Carlo Galli has written a monograph of almost a thousand pages on Schmitt: is he a Nazi? Gianni Vattimo dedicated his life to Heidegger: is he a Nazi? Here, these are the nonsense of which the press lives, and which contribute to destroying a man. Because the point is this.
Castrucci published on Twitter unacceptable messages, which I am the first not to share. The University will take the measures it deems appropriate, and on which I do not intend to discuss here (if the things it has written are also criminally relevant, it is not for me to say – nor is it for journalists, the Rector of the University of Siena or the Minister ). But it is one thing to condemn Castrucci for what he did, for what he has written on twitter; another is destroy his reputation as a scholar, which has nothing to do with it. What I fear most – as often happens in these cases – is the logical mistake of considering that a person who has certain personal opinions cannot automatically be a good scholar and a good professor. Ridiculous are the comments I read that shout to the scandal because "we let one teach our children this way". As if Castrucci, in the classroom, did not behave like the serious professor he has always been, as if he were teaching freely about his personal opinions on National Socialism or Jewish culture. It is obvious that this is not the case – anyone should know, and not just those who work and attend University. Castrucci will have to answer for the publication of those twitters, certainly. But destroying his reputation as a scholar has nothing to do with this.
by Paolo Becchi