Massimo Bugani e la piattaforma Rousseau: un esperimento democratico

Welcome to another episode of the podcast Democrasy Innovators.

We welcome Max Massimo Bugani, who was one founders of the Russian First of wanted to thank you for your time.

Thank you.

I several questions about this...

How many years ago this?

The platform...

As for Rousseau it 2016.

A few weeks after the death of Roberto Casaletto, we published it.

And then we went on until 2021, when then...

movement of the satellite was decided not to the V-Scope.

Before you told me that your part was not the related to the technical but more a part of the...

I know how you it.

I became a partner of Davide Casalejo, after working for years with both, with Elisa Roberto and Davide.

In the construction of the Russian the of the stock in the situation was basically to

suggestions and indications for the political use of the So, the promotion of the platform explaining all the components of the 5-star movement of that time, explaining the

importance, the efficiency and the need to use it.

it.

And then, the that was the so there was Davide Casaleggio, there was Davide Correlli, and we started thinking about how to build it from point of view

of

learning, uh

already done and decline it only for the municipality itself.

The call to action, how to people to do activities, to themselves in the territory.

Then there was the part of voting on topics, the part of proposals of law.

Instead, the voting of the registered, that not valid

But it oh was...

because obviously on that the political of the 5-star and in any case it was engaged in all the most important So there was a life of the platform, let's say, act constantly

throughout the year that provided political support to a political force that did have seats, did have secretaries of

He didn't have sponsors, didn't have circles, so he gave that support at every moment.

In addition, were the moments that became more important on a media level, were of the choices and the votes on various topics.

I want you to point out the two questions that have been and what not worked.

I regret not seeing the platform in action with Roberto Casaleggio in life.

because the self-reliance of the person who had fundamentally the 5-star and its action mode, which could not be the participation of the citizens, was fundamental to guarantee

a...

a vision and a high share the within the He was such authoritative, recognized and cultured that he had...

From 2005 when Meetup until 2016 when he left us, he had a fundamental and had built a path that was based on his credibility and strength in matters of the subscribers, the

voters and his presence.

So when you what didn't work, Rousseau goes into function, becomes a support for a force

and two years later he to government, in a moment in which, within the 5-star were already various movements, discussions, tensions on many topics, and a cultural and political of

choices and visions that was defined.

this context, is also Russo, so many

I to the money, I didn't like to have finance because I didn't have any public I have any private The platform was also behind the donations that the voters made, little bit and

that the subscribers made.

but also the figure of San Roberto, these fibrillations in the movement also to discussions on Rousseau simply due to fact of who chose to be the senator to take the

course of learning on Rousseau for a particular act, explain how the regional and

So if they me and they don't call me, I don't pay.

I don't finance it.

So in my the fragility.

In the sense that we didn't the internal we thought we had.

Because for years the net, direct of the citizens, the proposals of the citizens were the fulcrum.

And most of all, once get to government, this thing was seen by many as annoying.

And there was no more of that said this is the road of the movement and if you follow the principles of the movement, this is one of the first things to accept.

Instead, the thing that worked for me a which was the first great international

in which citizens, the writings of a political force, have really focused on fundamental of the political force.

How to whether to participate or not...

in some governments that were created.

Those were the most outstanding but all the other votes were always to make fundamental for the movement, which did not take them, by in a room with the party with four...

as we always say, magic four components of the magic circle of the party who decide, having heard little of territorial references, which way to take.

There was discussion, physical discussion in presence and on the platform, and then voting and done.

something extraordinary and that had to be absolutely hot and sponsored and increasingly used.

The were obvious because the register felt really responsible, felt really engaged.

I still the first who made free that we voted for.

I remember the first time, it seems to proposals of law that came from free citizens.

I remember the first one, who then met the parliamentarians, the Senate Chamber and who deposited a draft of law, a proposal, which was then voted by...

from the Parliament, from the Senate from the two chambers, and you could not believe it.

And the path was to choose between these 98 proposals, which one should have the priority, which one you think is most important, there were five choose between these five the that

has to first, the one first.

and me, in those moments, they were exciting.

It was truly the crowning of a dream, mine, but I felt like keeping mind the thought of Gian Roberto Casaleggio and to show that we could do it, that we could have a real would

make lists, candidates, that would make political by voting for the inscriptions.

absolutely revolutionary and extraordinary

and extraordinary.

There were many, there were some critics because they said that were few compared to the stars, but they were a considerable considering that the civic participation often find

themselves to have few.

Absolutely, there were many who were immediately afraid of...

95,000, 110,000 voters.

It was an incomprehensible That's they're criticizing.

But the movement has a million votes and they only 110,000.

I said all the other parties have 7-8 million votes and they chose three.

If we want to put 100,000 or something that seems that this can make the decision

criticized me.

Think about there are 170,000 subscribers and they only voted 5,000

54,000 voted for those who knew the subject and wanted to They wanted to in that specific Or the critics wanted more than two hours to vote.

When, first, we had a vote without having to codes, 54,000 Many tried to vote as soon as it opened.

The platforms were bit crowded.

Think about the sites that sell tickets for concerts, that go on the when they have sell 50,000 tickets, which are 50,000 identical tickets, while we had the territorial so there

were voting stations that multiplied the complexity of the voting because maybe you had vote for the regional you the vote that day and they were on 6.

seven reasons why people in the various municipalities had vote only for that section, for that circumscription, for the residence that could only in their area.

So level of computer complexity, I'm not a computer, but anyone was huge, but also the ticket for the party or the concert, are blocked when is influx, but if you comfortably

I in the on the couch and you will again later.

Instead, they took this as...

Think how they manipulating us!

They took more than two hours to vote and they made me smile.

They me understand that there was a of distrust but also lot of naivety and ignorance.

Being the first to use these means,

We that even in Buona Fede there were many people, who to the work of the politics of journalism, who didn't anything and who criticized without understanding what was

happening.

Sure.

I was thinking, the 5Sell Corrosso was a great international I wondering...

em

I think that in the next few if someone were to this experiment, I've seen that there have been some AI parties, in Denmark, in Japan, in Brazil, where have attempted to different.

Mm-hmm.

red but the same time similar because they based on a platform of participation so I was wondering if now the times could be little more mature

In from a technical, technological cultural are much more mature.

From a political of view, I don't know.

I it like in sense that for me, that now for example I am part of the Democratic it would be fundamental for a party so structured, organized as the Democratic Party...

I push lot internally, hope to be able to break it down to have a platform with such with the experience I have made in these 20 years, now 21 years,

I realize that probably, in the 5-star of that time, was a of network and therefore some weights, some counterweights and, how can say, a force, a territorial force that would

have very important to support the platform.

The started with circles, sections, secretaries, democratic for the selection of the president of the circle, district secretary, the city secretary, the provincial secretary,

the regional In my opinion, there is a of a platform.

We should have the two things.

I think that both things are together the goal of a good 2030 let's say.

because you need radicalism, need physical contact, need trusted people, who have proven to be to the pressures, the tensions, be able to live the complexity of politics, which

the movement didn't have, because almost everyone didn't have any political experience, vast majority of people who entered, and so was very difficult to these networks beyond

of meetings that were held on the territories but with a more brainstorming general, more than an organized m

And instead, seeing structured parties, in my opinion, need moments when the citizens feel so engaged, part of a community, listened to and voting.

So that national of ten people that need to put in the circle

I them, I contributed to choose them, so they were not decided within a room with a real secretary and a mayor.

I think we should wait there to win back the to bring back the vote people who don't vote anymore because they feel useful only when the party needs them and then completely

unheard of.

In now thinking about this thing that says related to the territory, several times I asked myself

are technological that we witnessing, they can also be an that the and may have changes in the future.

I have asked several times, they the existing that will adapt to the platform, or will they new parties, as it could be 5 stars, almost 15 years ago.

There is this thing between the new that arrives a little bit,

I can't tell hope that important, structured with great history, with cultural perimeter, choose to undertake a path of platforms and support.

I don't believe in new experiments anymore.

Because I've had 20 years of experience in complex Very complex To it as a simple thing, even when it said...

I the platforms people who don't know anything what they vote was ridiculous.

Because in reality, through the platform, you gave the information that allowed a person to for the choices that the party was going make.

You gave them the information and then they went to

In the parties that don't use platforms, in all the today, including the 5-star basically ask your party to vote when there are official, political and administrative But...

and for another type of never engaged in other moments, he never listened.

So, in my opinion, wherever you have a structure with circles that do that work of information that we did only with the platform, however, especially with the platform,

radical, give him the opportunity to express himself, which is an even more conspicuous in my

I would like to in the other political forces who would want to express themselves, to be to their own on certain choices, on...

I don't know, the good school of Renzi, for example, comes to mind now.

There were other very and which the matches were without listening to their own basis.

So yes, tell us that maybe you voting for little bit people who unconscious, but don't tell us that it wouldn't be nice to listen to your comments on the decisions you make.

Sure.

In fact, I about another interview with Tiago Pessotto.

He was about the budgets, the participants of the budgets.

and he said that there are many positive for example, where people can actually decide where money people feel more involved, at the same time he also things like reduction of

infant mortality, things that are very important, then said that politicians who act politically like this

there is more chance of being re-read because it is appreciated by the citizens.

the same time, is not such widespread I think that participation are undoubtedly beneficial, but at the same time...

Exactly.

eeeemmmm

My is that...

He of the game's I saw how Conte decided to get rid Rousseau and he did because he felt his decision-making But for me it was a loss, a sign of weakness.

Casaleggio was recognized by everyone as the leader of the movement, as the visionary, the philosopher of the movement, and therefore the point of reference of the movement.

Some people criticized this, but nobody doubted it, yet it made express themselves

Sometimes even if you a minor, but when you have a political force that does good job of information, that explains the choices you would like to make, or you are a little bit

lazy, not realizing that people are too far from that choice, or you find your own people, your own community, attached to that

I find hooked and she participates, so engaged, even more eager to go and tell to her and friends about the job and explain why that choice was made, why she participated.

I see as an extraordinary

that he wanted to sing at the level of the 5-star but at level of the national parties.

to to command, to want to more free within the party.

Instead, my experience is that the more you get the more you make people feel part of something, really.

To say, even simply a video to a simple citizen, not a councilman, not senator, not a minister, who makes a video that is a complaint,

a provocation, a suggestion, a request that goes first on the blog of Grillo, then on the platform, the learning or sharing, so it is launched on the platform, what this Mr.

Mario Rossi this lady, Giorgia Bianchi, and we it to everyone.

That person there says, but I ended up there, really, without having to walk the stairs, without having to climb

First of all, try to better, because I want to better the next time I something.

But then I others a desire to emulate, to do the same thing, to propose something effective, to be visible, be visible, to be heard.

This was a process that became a flagellum and brought a lot of people to feel represented, engaged by the movement.

and 5-star Even if you very different inside, I am one who politically, leaving the platform aside, I have for years, until I left, especially when the right in Italy, that

should be as a cultural of reference with more clarity, so as to be in the of too strong

People who went from extreme right to extreme left.

So, apart from the income of anti-corruption you or less kept everyone together, on the other topics you had too many divisions.

And so for me, to probably to dry the electoral but to have a more defined would have allowed us to be more effective with the platform.

Because you would have had a...

a more homogeneous tension and less rifts.

For me, platform would have even more useful.

uh

I about this tension, the one hand, who is in power, if they use platforms for participation, the other hand, one is also giving up power of some choices to citizenship.

I wonder how to this tension.

if it is possible, if there is simply a for a generational think of what you before, don't know, maybe, that as a result, even in course of other episodes of the podcast, that not

always, as the political class, is updated on the different systems related to participation.

So maybe they can't even imagine a different from the current ones.

True, true, what I

my because I felt it changing inside of me, this thing I'm about tell you, is...

It's also important to intermediate I'll explain.

The criticism of the 5-star is a person who a senator with 100 clicks, without any experience, because he had created a network of friends, because he had made relatives

Correct because in some cases it actually happened that way.

So you had in of you...

one person, who is passionate about politics, always very active, present in all physical present in online meetings, very studious, excellent dialectic who was chosen because the

platform made him emerge, so he was voted because he of high level.

Maybe the person who didn't any particular talent or particular talent was unemployed and had made 100 friends to vote.

And then, from that experience, think that a structured could say, well, secretaries should make a list of 11 people for the list of Bologna for the

The Bologna has 11 the regional has 11 people.

The party secretary meets and selects between non-improvised not with enrolment of 100 friends, but known on the territory, 50 people who are put in voting.

In fact, Roberto was lot about this before he left.

These 50 people are voted by the vote of the network that selects the 11 that go in the which are then voted by the vote of the who should vote for the regional council.

and so for certain political uh Why do you proposals from someone who is as current as the engineer who deals with that topic?

Well, I choose ten engineers, three philosophers, two intellectuals who are involved in that

and I vote for the ideas that these 10 people

and the community chooses which the 15 proposals is the most effective.

Or the community of that political force wants to move forward.

In my opinion, is in the intermediate stages that could find much more strength, much more solidity.

So the experiment was extraordinary, but it was the first and had fragility.

But in my opinion, it incredible

I'm extremely proud to have been part I'm that we didn't work on it.

At some point we didn't want to think about how to going and improve it.

There were all the possibilities to do it.

Sure, but then I thought...

I'll close this door, I'll go in.

I already it at beginning of our chat.

For me, to be effective, can't be a platform without structured and eradicated and a structured and eradicated match without the help of a platform.

Because for me, in end, ends up, as is today, all matches, they end up talking fundamentally only to the same people.

and they don't make their feel part of a community.

It's a dynamic that I write and participate in and I hope to have read.

But the extraordinary strength...

positive and that of I because I feel stronger, feel right, I feel good, I feel less alone, being part of this community and I proud to be part it.

But I care to be elected by anyone, or maybe I do, but I out that I doing it is not my goal.

Instead I risk a little that in the circles of the political forces and in various meetings there are people with a clear

and a career.

I was thinking about importance of experimenting because there is this technological that is fast.

The person who updates the struggles to keep up with all the news.

And think that some way it is also a change that is precisely

if you on same with these, from a technological and therefore understand also how to them precisely to make people how say it can also be a sort of almost a paradigm now there are

two games or sometimes three games as a system while there maybe we could talk more about maybe or individual issues or precisely as

Yes, I do a program.

I do a program for regional and national elections.

I a program, I the electoral campaign with those points, I get the vote.

In the world, European, national, regional and municipal

In reality, the reality of everyday life, are 1020 people who isolate themselves from what is their program.

And whoever is an administrator or a parliamentary of opposition must make decisions on things that were not in their program.

Or that were in their program but had unexpected contingencies, such as a flood, an earthquake, war, a pandemic.

the can be discussed.

Why not that point, I don't ask my community what they think.

For me, the revolutionary and it still there.

Because the program is not enough.

I hear it more often.

We did this because it in our program.

But your program it wasn't written that there would have been a pandemic.

In your program it wasn't written that there would have been a war, that there would have been some taxes.

So, since the program but today there have been some taxes, there is a war, or there is a pandemic, or has been a flood, so your regional your municipal balance, your national

balance...

It's You think it the same way.

Another thing What do citizens What do citizens think of your political

that you are not listening anymore and you ask him something faithful.

Well, I have chosen him and I trust him, but you know anymore if your voters, your subscribers are following you in that choice you are making at that moment, because that

not in the program, or it was in the program with the improvised that have been verified and that citizens are suffering.

So I dream of world where I can do this work uh

I don't want my reasoning to go against the dermed I don't know what 20 years ago.

I'm just a spokesperson.

I don't need the parties, the unions, the associations, the intermedia I need anymore because I've known the complexity and the effort.

So need people who study, who are straight, who prove themselves.

honest and credible, even in front of the mistakes that they and that they make this sacrifice that is very complex.

Everything except easy, anyone who a citizen can do politics and I think anymore.

Anyone who a citizen passionate and who wants to study, to work hard, to suffer, to live tensions, to understand their own gaps, to try to fill them and can do it.

Not every citizen can it.

But in this path, the people inside have the duty to try to inform the people outside.

and to consult them as they make decisions.

Because the citizen may not be an of a specific of the rich, but he knows that they have away 100 euros in cash for some reason, or that he will not have a...

a public that will have pay for because something has And would like to say that it's good for that you are making his life difficult while maybe you are financing private that

requires insurance.

This is one of the many examples I could give.

No, I was thinking about this thing of...

Well, participation is the point.

that it's like there's a feeling of powerlessness, of not voting, what difference does Sometimes there are things that one sees a problem in the neighborhood that one could send

an email to the advisor or report to a certain association

something but on the hand I don't know if there is precisely I don't do it because it doesn't change anything or because because maybe one doesn't even know how to do it often

maybe even so and then I reflected on how maybe even platforms of participation can somehow make you feel that the citizens have a power that can also simply be sending an

email or signaling something

Absolutely.

The citizens have much more power than they think they have.

problem is that they don't unite to make it worth it.

And if in the post-war period and until the 80s they joined the universities, factories, party unions for...

to get track.

From a certain point, this thing has weakened, has been out and has lost value and has lost strength.

So in my opinion, computer tools would be useful instead to restore this strength and to bring back personal votes.

I believe that in that moment when the 5-star takes 11 million votes, it for the wave of the people of that period.

that perhaps would have been intercepted years after the Sardines, to say, in Italy, there was a favorable so it wasn't just our of Grillo Casaleggio, of all of us.

We were also in the right at right There is a component of chance and luck that played in our we have made many sacrifices and great achievements.

put a lot of into But in my opinion, the use of the REE, and stopping using the platforms, on the part of that political force that had brought 11 million people to the vote, that

maybe wouldn't have voted back then.

It's a hard blow for those who have been for years about not voting anymore, they don't want heard anymore, that they only me when I have go to the dinner of the Italian or the

Pd's It was very important to me.

And hope that the future someone...

embrace it I have the same problem with the magnet, was not as strong as we it, but...

and some experiments, small internal on small choices and evaluate the results.

I really focus on this, to say that in the circles here in Bologna we are doing on my questionnaires.

We compile questions from on various topics to have the sentiment in of choice

the in front of important on citizenship, that give you a report of this has put us in difficulty, this we like a this has put us in difficulty but we in a is the case for of

the workplaces of the tram that are now in Bologna and you listen to and they give you...

They you feedback on how you are moving.

Maybe they vote for you even if they have a But if they for you joy, the work they do to spread what you doing is much more positive.

So think we absolutely to try again.

Right the right-wing are using the computer systems and the network a lot to control social media, politics and messages.

So it's all opposite.

They're using the network in an oppressive dark

So doing a structured, expensive to crush and convince people to in a certain Instead, network, in my opinion, should be to open.

I do the comparison with free I with free in the 70s and it's...

The greatest moment of music from 1965 to the early 90s, free free voices, that spread information and knowledge, bring new things that people Then the free sponsors the K in,

the multinational in, the oppression

and Radio Libera becomes a radio that gives messages of market, constructions and oppressive, or that leads to investments in music, also in purchase of materials, goods,

given by advertising and investments of the colossus.

And so Radio Libera fails.

And right now we're risking losing it, having it the hands of the Nascos the organized that use it to oppress the Diconecta.

question for if it's short answer, if there are people who are doing prototypes, developing tools for participation, they are working on this, if it's a message for them?

No, many many.

We are now coming to Miglia Romagna, we have made the day of participation, and it a great day, because we here different regions Miglia Romagna, we believe in and we push this

theme

My suggestion is that unite, that unite the flows, that the efforts, because the message must reach those in positions of power, of command, both at the government level and at

the individual parties, because otherwise will have elections with 30 % of the rights that will be and that is no longer democracy, and that no

participation we need them, them, we need them, is clear that every company, every association, every...

Startup tries to say that my product is better than everyone else, take mine, buy mine, others suck.

They don't help much but I understand it, it's the law of the market and survival.

But in my opinion we need moments where everyone together, as it here in the day of participation, but that's a day, where everyone together to tell politicians, or

understand that you to lower the crest and open

open your heart and listen to the citizens, or you are condemned to be elected by people who don't listen to anymore and who will not follow you anymore.

So be risk not so far, clashes, road tensions, tensions, it's too maybe not too civil

you abandon yourself, you move away, you close yourself in moments where you can open and share.

Or even worse, if you oppress with messages given by great multinationals, billionaires, who impose a single message, the consequence is usually not distributed tension and chaos.

Not well-being.

I was thinking about this paper, the agentic state, that I worked on, also Pessootto and another guy I interviewed on the podcast, Simone, Mario Parazzoli, where he said a lot of

things about how the world has become extremely

Absolutely, yes.

As an administrator, I've for many years it's true that bureaucracy, regulations...

Now I don't want to on privacy it's very hot right now.

but they don't help.

They don't help with these regulations, which, clearly, from is tension, but from the other side you to the institution the thousand rules, the thousand regulations that ingest

it, while at the same time the citizen...

all his data, all his movements, his choices every day, to private companies, who use So why can't use a municipality to improve services, to make economy and that point have more

resources for the disability or those in difficulty, or improve public transport or a region, improve health, using data that is in possession but cannot be aggregated?

can't analyze, can't use to make politics, when instead they use platforms to send me the advertising of what buy, to eat the sandwich or what video watch on social media.

This, in my is a challenge that ...

that if there were people enlightened at this time in government, but even if there was a Ministry of Innovation, it would be a step forward.

In 2026 Italy does have a Ministry of Technology

and there were people the it would be very necessary to so.

And I add that if were people in the light, the command posts, about innovation at this moment, or in the governments, we would about how to in qualified data collections,

updated, and on their correct analysis, and not only of artificial intelligence

the supercomputer.

Because, as I've for the supercomputer, the algorithm is the that does thousands of operations in a time, billions of operations in a time, but if the fridge is empty, the

ingredients are empty, the eggs are empty, the butter is in place of the cheese,

and then you attack the kitchen but it's not the kitchen that made mistake.

It's like you filled the fridge, it's like you data, and this there is an Italian ignorance of a high level, in my

Fantastic.

No, just Anyway, thank you very It was a pleasure.

uh