Italian politics between Totò's "Honorables" and the eternal vice of taking water to one's own mill.

There are films that never get old. The posters, the parties, the slogans, and even the way voters communicate change, but certain dynamics remain the same. This is the case with Gli Onorevoli , the film directed by Sergio Corbucci and starring Totò, Peppino De Filippo, Gino Cervi, Mario Castellani, and other greats of Italian comedy.

Watching it today, one gets the sense that Totò wasn't just describing the politics of his time. He was also describing, well ahead of his time, the politics of today.

In the film, through the various candidates and their political alignments, the vices of Italian politics as a whole are brought to light: opportunism, electoral promises, ideological contradictions, language constructed to confuse and the ability to change positions according to convenience.

It's not a satire against one side. It's a satire against all sides, when politics ceases to be a vision and becomes merely a tool for getting somewhere.

Each of the protagonists appears to be advancing an idea, defending a principle, representing a segment of the country. But beneath the surface of the words, slogans, and solemn declarations, the same aspiration emerges: to gain consensus, secure a position, protect one's own space, and bring grist to one's mill.

This is precisely the film's bitterest point. Politicians appear divided on everything, yet surprisingly united when it comes to defending their own interests.

Since then, symbols, party names, and the means of communication have changed. Once upon a time, there were rallies in the squares, posters on walls, and flyers distributed on street corners. Today, there are social networks, short videos, live broadcasts, posts designed to go viral, and statements consisting of a single phrase to be broadcast on the news.

But the mechanism has often remained the same.

Everything is promised to everyone. There's talk of people, of change, of justice, of renewal. Then, once consensus has been achieved, exceptions, compromises, distinctions, and justifications begin. What was previously presented as an inalienable principle suddenly becomes negotiable.

Italian politics seems to exist in a constant state of contradiction. On the one hand, it proclaims its desire to change everything; on the other, it fears actually changing the very things that guarantee balance, privileges, and established positions.

And so even the fiercest adversaries, those who during election campaigns portray each other as incompatible, sometimes end up resembling each other. They fight in front of the cameras, accuse each other, exchange harsh words. But when they enter the palaces, they often learn the same grammar of power.

Totò, with his sense of humor, could expose the absurd without the need for proclamations. A gesture, a joke, an exaggerated promise, or a blatant contradiction were enough to reveal an entire system.

The great merit of The Honorables is precisely that it doesn't stop at caricaturing individual politicians. The film depicts a deeper illness: the transformation of politics into a performance, in which each candidate plays the character they think voters will like best.

The problem, however, isn't just about those who ask for votes. It also concerns those who grant them, often choosing not what they truly believe, but what's convenient for them at the time.

In this sense, Totò's comedy is less innocent than it seems. It's hilarious, but while you laugh, it forces you to recognize yourself. In the politicians who make promises, but also in the citizens who demand one thing and then vote for another. In those who are outraged by corruption, but look for shortcuts when they need them. In those who denounce privileges, as long as they aren't their own.

Politics, in fact, isn't just about palaces. It's also a reflection of society. If certain vices persist for decades, it's because they find fertile ground in everyday opportunism, resignation, and the belief that "everyone is the same."

That seemingly innocuous phrase is perhaps one of the most dangerous. Because when you say everyone is the same, you often end up absolving everyone. And if everyone is guilty, no one really is.

Yet they're not all the same. They weren't in the movie, and they aren't today. There are still people who enter politics out of conviction, who truly believe in an idea, a community, a battle. People who may make mistakes, who don't have the answers to everything, but who don't consider politics simply a career.

These are, perhaps, the naive people most easily mocked. Those who still believe in hard and pure politics, in consistency, in the ability to defend a principle even when it's convenient to do the opposite. In a system accustomed to permanent compromise, they are often treated as naive.

Yet, in the end, they are the only ones who did the right thing.

Because politics can be compromise, but it can't become merely expedient. It can seek consensus, but it can't be reduced to a consensus-gathering machine. It can change its mind, but it can't change its mind every time the wind changes.

The real lesson of The Honorables isn't that politics always sucks. It's that politics, when it loses touch with reality and its own conscience, becomes a farce. A farce capable of making people laugh, at least until the consequences of its decisions impact people's lives.

Totò and the other protagonists showcased the monsters, vices, and contradictions of politics as a whole. Not just one side. They depicted a world in which everyone was trying to get their own way, while voters outside the palace continued to wait for answers.

Even after so many years, those scenes still make us smile. But it's a bitter smile, because we recognize something terribly timely in that comedy.

Perhaps the difference between then and now is only this: in the film, the contradictions were so evident they became comical. Today, however, they are often presented as normal.

And in a political system where everything seems justified, the only truly out of place are those who continue to believe that the word "politics" must still mean service, responsibility, and consistency.