Good morning. My name is Fabio Loscerbo, I am an Italian attorney, and this is a new episode of the podcast Integrazione o ReImmigrazione.
Today I want to talk about an issue that is increasingly shaping public debate in Italy: youth violence, so-called baby gangs, the phenomenon often labelled as “maranza,” and the constant reference to second generations. It is a heated and emotional debate, one in which words and narratives often take precedence over responsibility and solutions.
The first mistake that is repeatedly made is hiding behind labels. Baby gangs, maranza, second generations — these terms create the illusion of explanation, while in reality they allow us to avoid the real issue. The problem is not how we name these phenomena. The problem is that violent, repeated, and often group-based behavior exists, and it directly affects public safety and social cohesion.
A significant part of the public discourse explains these episodes as the result of social hardship, marginalization, or denied identity. This kind of analysis may help describe certain contexts, but it becomes dangerous when it turns into an implicit justification. In a society governed by the rule of law, violence is never a legitimate reaction. Rules are not negotiable based on personal background or lived experience. Individual responsibility remains the cornerstone of civil coexistence.
A second, opposite mistake is to minimize the problem by claiming that baby gangs do not exist as a legal category. That is technically true. But the law does not need media labels in order to act. The law addresses conduct. When a group — whether organized or informal — commits assaults, robberies, or intimidation, that conduct is legally relevant regardless of how it is described. Debating terminology often becomes a convenient way to postpone difficult decisions.
At the core of this debate lies a deeply flawed understanding of integration. Integration is frequently portrayed as an emotional process, as a sense of belonging that should naturally emerge if society is inclusive enough. From a legal perspective, this is simply wrong. Integration is not a feeling. It is a condition. It is a process defined by concrete obligations: respect for the law, real participation in education, recognition of public authority, and rejection of violence as a form of social interaction.
When these elements are missing, we are not facing incomplete integration. We are facing failed integration. And this is where the paradigm Integrazione o ReImmigrazione comes into play. Not as a slogan, not as provocation, but as a serious framework for governing migration and social stability.
The logic is simple and traditional. Anyone who lives permanently in Italy does so within a legal and civic pact. That pact includes rights, but also duties. Integration is not automatic and not unconditional. It must be verified over time. When the process works, the State has a duty to support and strengthen it. When it fails repeatedly and structurally, the State must have the courage to draw the necessary consequences.
ReImmigrazione is not moral punishment, and it is not social revenge. It is the legal consequence of failing to meet the conditions of residence. It is a tool that restores credibility to public institutions by making clear that rules are not optional and that coexistence cannot be based on permanent excuses.
This paradigm also has a crucial advantage. It avoids both sociological absolution and ethnic generalization. It does not target origin, identity, or background. It targets conduct. It rewards those who respect the rules and intervenes when the rules are systematically violated.
From this perspective, security and integration are not opposing concepts. Security is the condition for integration. And successful integration is the foundation of long-term social stability. Treating them as separate or conflicting ideas leads only to endless debate and no solutions.
The phenomenon currently labelled as maranza or baby gangs should neither be denied nor sensationalized. It must be governed. Because what can be governed can be solved. But governance requires clear rules, enforceable obligations, and real consequences.
My name is Fabio Loscerbo, and this was a new episode of the podcast Integrazione o ReImmigrazione.
Thank you for listening.
Lascia un commento