The value of political mediation seems currently to be experiencing a crisis, probably ascribable to a marked preponderance of the economy over politics. Primarily it is indispensable and urgent to interpret and organise the economy acknowledging its importance and limitations. There is no question that the economy is important within a real historical context.

It is in fact through the economy that concrete progress can be achieved, at times with small steps forward, necessary however for achieving values that appear more urgent and necessary (see O.A).

What however is indispensable in addition to the necessary valorisation of the economy is to repropose and experience the "primacy of politics". Within this framework, it is necessary to re-establish mediation between the economy and politics, currently often weakened or inexistent.

Simultaneously it is necessary to go beyond the economy itself and bear well in mind that politics surpass the economy, politics understood as work for the common good, called upon to achieve the highest and most complete forms of justice. One must therefore operate the move from economy to politics, convinced that in the social and economic sector as well as in the national and international scenario, the final decision concerns political mediation (see O. A. 46). The difficulties, mistakes, or even the injustices, at times deeply-rooted in management that is in a sense wild or even only sectorial or apportioned and short sighted, can all be avoided and overcome only if one is capable of governing the economy itself within the framework of a broader and global project for social and civilised cohabitation. The implementation of this working provision is precisely the responsibility of politics, exercised not in a centralised manner but rather so as to achieve a sort of not only economic and social but also political polycentrism, directly involving various autonomous but inter-dependent actors, hence individuals, families, intermediate institutions, local institutions, the state and also international and super-national bodies. There are in fact sufficient elements for suspecting that economy dominates politics, thereby throwing the shadow of doubt over the meaning of true democracy.

It is the concept and the implementation of true democracy that needs rediscovering today Therefore, there is a need for researching the meaning of true democracy, of participation, of the anthropology that inspires the dominant model for liberal democracy, of respect for minorities all to often alienated, oppressed, exploited or even risk annihilation (see. CA 44), of the State’s role today apparently reduced to creating and defending the conditions necessary for operating a free market. The Teachings of the Church have always positively assessed the principle of the division of power within the framework of a State, considering this principle a guarantee for freedom. It is undeniable that the democratic system encourages the participation of citizens, but to correctly express its potential, this presupposes a "rule of law" guided by appropriate anthropological values mediated by politics.

A mistake increasingly acknowledged nowadays is that of surrogating democracy into "ethical relativism" incapable of recognising, promoting and defending the dignity of the human person. An authentic democracy cannot be limited to a mere and apparent formal respect for the law. Political institutions forget too quickly that the very heart of every democracy, even before becoming a specific political organisation, is a fundamental ethical option in favour of the dignity of the person, with his rights and freedom, duties and responsibilities, in which all forms of human cohabitation and social organisation find support and legitimacy. Democracy’s first ethical value, which coincides with the assumption that supports and nourishes it, is to acknowledge that God has provided human beings with a dignity that nothing and no one can violate. One has the duty to always turn to these fundamental principles which are also the specific values of correct political mediation, when political institutions are tempted to forget their roots as the "rule of law", distorting their commitments or making do with rules that can only nominally be defined democratic. The effective, aware and responsible participation of citizens in public life cannot be limited to formal declarations, but instead requires continuous action so that these proclaimed rights are really exercised. This involves a determined commitment in favour of the person’s fundamental rights, solidarity, aid and the achievement of the common good.

I shall close with a few words written by John Paul II: "Democracy cannot be idolized to the point of making it a substitute for morality or a panacea for immorality. Fundamentally, democracy is a "system" and as such is a means and not an end. Its "moral" value is not automatic, but depends on conformity to the moral law to which it, like every other form of human behaviour, must be subject: in other words, its morality depends on the morality of the ends which it pursues and of the means which it employs. If today we see an almost universal consensus with regard to the value of democracy, this is to be considered a positive "sign of the times", as the Church's Magisterium has frequently noted. But the value of democracy stands or falls with the values which it embodies and promotes". ( Evangelium Vitae, no. 70)