Quale pacifismo? Norberto Bobbio e Danilo Zolo a confronto

This essay uses a historiographic method to reconstruct the pacifist ideas of Norberto Bobbio and Danilo Zolo in light of the theories of Hans Kelsen and Carl Schmitt. Bobbio strongly advocated for a monistic world order and the establishment of a global government, consistent with the Kelsenian principle of ‘Peace through Law’. Zolo, conversely, argued that international multilateralism, which supports cooperation among States, should be preserved – a position he saw affirmed by the contemporary Epistemology of Complexity. Drawing upon Schmitt’s theory of International Law, Zolo’s critique targeted so-called Western globalists and strongly opposed the US New World Order, which Bobbio, a staunch opponent of sectarian anti-Americanism, had instead approved. The essay ultimately demonstrates that while Zolo’s beliefs culminated in an apology of Mediterranean Europe as a defence against excessive Atlanticism, this divergence never damaged his consistently respectful friendship with Bobbio.