I have difficulty accepting MacDonald's and Snowden's actions as a suspension of democracy, especially from an Italian viewpoint. After all the collapse of Prodi's government was simply due to MPs that had a price tag attached. In November 2010 after Fini left the Berlusconi coalition, a confidence vote was postponed for three weeks. During that time Berlusconi's emissaries bought opposition MPs and created an ex-novo party with the hilarious name "The Responsables' Party," somewhat funnier than MacDonald's "New Labour". Nor was it the only spontaneously generated party in parliament. Despite continuous calls by the President of the Republic to verify his mandate in parliament, Berlusconi dragged along an entire year without producing relevant legislation or policy.

The WSJ ignores this and misrepresents it as a sort of timed cryptic message launched by Napolitano so as to neatly package their cause-effect scenario. Napolitano was simply repeating himself. After all, with all these new parties Berlusconi was creating to keep himself in power, perhaps a little verification in parliament was in order.

If this meme on suspended democracy is to continue, just exactly when and by whom was it "suspended?"

And also to Monti's choice by Napolitano (who IIRC got phone calls) and his approval by parliament. Pressure coming both from politicians and markets. If the Monti government still has a high approval rate, then the majority or of the population either ignores the government's policies thinking that Monti is still better than Berlu or the other idiots, or must have been shocked to think that austerity and market reforms are the way out of crisis. I disagree, but, at least, Italy having significant exports (IIRC), maybe austerity won't be a complete disaster like in Greece or Portugal.

_{*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

Deepening Crisis Over Euro Pits Leader Against Leader - WSJ.com

When the market rout worsened on Aug. 3, Mr. Berlusconi gave a defiant speech before parliament declaring that his policies "have been judged adequate by Europe."

Two days later, the ECB contradicted him in a secret letter. Italy's deficit-cutting plan was "not sufficient," ECB President Jean-Claude Trichet and his anointed successor, Mario Draghi, wrote to Mr. Berlusconi. The letter said Italy needed extensive economic overhaul to boost growth, and it set out detailed demands including greater competition, labor-market deregulation, reduced pension largess, a slimmer bureaucracy and deeper public spending cuts.

The implicit message: These reforms were the conditions for ECB intervention in the bond market.

Note that the ECB didn't just say that the planned budget-related measures aren't enough, but was dictating a specific set of policies which know no alternatives and go way beyond deficit reduction (policies Monti would then go on to implement). IMHO Italy, like Hungary, was between a rock and a hard place with Berlusconi and foreign economic blackmail.

_{*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.}