An interweaving of voices, experiences and responsibilities: the annual meeting of Rebirth/Terzo Paradiso ambassadors, held on Saturday 20 and Sunday 21 December in Biella, was first and foremost a moment of exchange. Two days — as reported in a previous article — conceived as an opportunity for listening, dialogue and experimentation, in which the trinamical symbol was addressed not only as a sign, but as an active principle, capable of orienting behaviours, decisions and projectual visions across the different spheres of contemporary life.
Following the morning session of the first day, already explored in a previous article, we now turn our attention to what emerged during the afternoon.

The Passage to Statodellarte: An Epochal Framework
The afternoon session of the Ambassadors’ meeting opened with a broad and programmatic intervention by Paolo Naldini, Director of Cittadellarte, who immediately invited those present to enter a phase of crossing: a true conceptual and practical migration “towards, or within, Statodellarte”. This was not a simple introduction to the proceedings, but an act of reframing. Naldini constructed a historical, theoretical and political framework within which the concrete experiences narrated in the following hours would find meaning, strength and continuity.

To render the passage to Statodellarte intelligible, Naldini proposed a concise yet dense chronology spanning over half a century of artistic and civic research. From the Mirror Paintings he moved to the Zoo, to the return of art into the real space of cities — streets, relationships, lived contexts. This was followed by the Progetto Arte manifesto of 1994 and the founding of Cittadellarte in the 1990s, conceived from the outset as a place where art would situate itself “between” sectors, building bridges both within and beyond the art system.

This trajectory led to the birth of the Terzo Paradiso in 2003, the Rebirth ambassadors in 2010, the concept of Demopraxia in 2012, and the first concrete experimentation of the Opera Demopratica in Havana in 2015. A path that reached a turning point in 2019, when Biella was recognised as a UNESCO Creative City: “Not because it is more deserving than other cities,” Naldini emphasised, “but because today urban creativity takes shape precisely through the modalities proposed by Terzo Paradiso and demopraxia.” From here emerged one of the first sparks of Statodellarte.

For Naldini, the city of Biella — now an institutional extension of Cittadellarte — appears to realise that dream of a “civilisation of art” evoked by Michelangelo Pistoletto since his arrival in Biella in 2000. From this awareness arose, almost provocatively, a question: why not imagine a Statodellarte?

Pistoletto and Naldini immediately took up the challenge. With the Italian Constitution in hand, they decided to establish Statodellarte. Thus began a long collective exercise, developed together with Luca Bergamo and a plural working group, leading to the definition of Statodellarte as a frame-framework: a symbolic and operative structure capable of welcoming, strengthening and making legible all existing practices. “The painting is what we already do,” Naldini clarified, “but the frame gives it strength, ambition, an epochal breath.”

A frame that only art — and specifically Pistoletto’s art — can sustain, because it enters art history while simultaneously assuming the responsibility of proposing a new Renaissance, founded on a pact with society, on demopraxia and on Terzo Paradiso.

Within this frame, Naldini identified four major layers, symbolically referred to as the “Uffizi” of Cittadellarte: politics, economy, spirituality and peace. Politics is no longer understood as the exclusive domain of governmental institutions, but as a diffuse practice: “All organisations — schools, businesses, hospitals — are micro-governments.” Economy emerges as a second fundamental layer, as enterprises represent, for Naldini, the most powerful and pervasive communities of practice on a global level. Alongside this stands the spiritual dimension, approached not as dogma but as a space of creation capable of traversing religions. Finally, peace — not as an abstract ideal but as a concrete practice, exemplified even through sport, which makes visible the real possibility of non-violent competition.

The theoretical core of the intervention then focused on two dynamic equilibria. The first is that between automaton and author, a central theme of Naldini’s forthcoming essay From the Society of Automata to the Society of Authors. In an era marked by the advance of artificial intelligence and increasing automation of life, art becomes the most powerful antidote: “The author does not eliminate the automaton; they consciously assume it.” Creation, understood as a force of the spirit, allows habits, fears and automatic mechanisms to be counterbalanced, restoring freedom and responsibility.

The second equilibrium is that between feeling and reason. Naldini denounced the exclusion of feeling from the public sphere as a structural error of contemporary societies: “We have lost the muscle of feeling; we are anaesthetised.” Without empathy, compassion and a sense of justice, it becomes possible to tolerate horror — explicitly referencing the ongoing genocide in Gaza — because feeling no longer finds collective space for expression. In this vacuum, only fear and anger remain, easily instrumentalised by power. “Art, drawing on Martha Nussbaum’s Political Emotions, is instead what allows us to see the world through the eyes of the other,” reconstructing a social glue irreducible to pure calculation.

From here, Naldini returned to the operational dimension. The Democratic Works already active around the world are democracy-building sites, different from one another yet sharing a common script: forums, mappings, construction sites, and an underlying philosophy that prepares the birth of a transnational state. “Not separate cases,” Naldini stated, “but organs of a single organism.”

This passage also entails a profound transformation of Cittadellarte’s governance. From individual artistic direction, sovereignty shifts towards shared governance entrusted to a group of figures appointed by Cittadellarte, as established by statute. With Statodellarte, this governance will expand further — gradually — addressing the economic, legal and administrative complexities of an entity that does not replicate existing models, but invents them.

Finally, Naldini introduced the concept of inter-autonomous economy: embassies and democratic works are economically autonomous yet connected like an archipelago. There are no relations of dependency, but relations of investment, support and responsibility. A model that mirrors the very structure of Statodellarte: independent, plural and cooperative.

The intervention concluded with a powerful image: that of political agriculture, understood as the cultivation of fields between sectors — education, agriculture, medicine, art — and as a necessarily plural practice of co-creation. “One never creates alone,” Naldini reminded the audience, pointing to Statodellarte not as an abstract project, but as “a great collective work” already in progress.

From Demopractic Works to the European Space: Seoul, Geneva and the Right to Food
Following the dense theoretical framework outlined by Paolo Naldini, the afternoon progressively moved into the heart of practice, demonstrating how Statodellarte is not an abstraction but a reality already operating through the Democratic Works.

This transition was guided by Francesco Saverio Teruzzi, coordinator of the Rebirth ambassadors, who introduced the screening of a documentary dedicated to the Seoul experience — a highly symbolic site for Demopraxia, located within the demilitarised zone between South and North Korea. Teruzzi clarified that the intervention took place on the South Korean side, but this did not diminish the political and human significance of the context: a border space, marked by separation, suspension and the memory of conflict.

After the screening, Paolo Naldini briefly intervened to highlight a decisive yet often invisible aspect: the economic and educational sustainability of such experiences. The Seoul operation, supported by the Italian Institute of Culture, not only fully covered costs, but also generated a virtuous outcome: “It created a small fund for a scholarship for a Korean artist at our Unidee Academy.” A concrete example of how democratic works do not consume resources, but regenerate them, nurturing new opportunities for training, exchange and mutual growth.

Taking the floor again, Saverio Teruzzi broadened the horizon further, illustrating how demopractic works can generate unexpected effects and open entirely new fields of action. This is the case of food, which has emerged as one of the most surprising developments of the Terzo Paradiso journey.

The origins of this trajectory date back to the 2023 Forum in Geneva, initially dedicated to territorial reflection on the canton. Here an emblematic episode occurred, which Teruzzi described as an emotional and political turning point: “During a meeting, a man living in poverty — an evening guest of the Refettorio run by ambassador Walter El Nagar — recognised among the participants a candidate for mayor of Geneva and burst into tears, suddenly leaving the room. Only later did it emerge that the two had been schoolmates, reunited at the same table under completely different life conditions.” A moment that revealed how food is not merely nourishment, but dignity, relationship and recognition.

From this context emerged a manifesto on food and its quality, which found fertile ground in Geneva. Despite a Swiss federal referendum having rejected stricter criteria, the Canton of Geneva decided to enshrine in its Constitution the obligation that at least 70% of food distributed and served be sustainable — an exceptionally high threshold, never reached before, representing a true political and cultural act.

The next step was decisive. A group of lawyers — “eight, from eight different points of view” — analysed Constitutions, the Charter of Human Rights and major international legal instruments, uncovering a glaring absence: “Food is a great missing element.” Not merely as what is on the plate, but as the entire supply chain, from seed to table, from animal to distribution, from agricultural labour to social justice.

This awareness led, in May 2024, to a second European-level forum and ultimately to a strategic decision: transforming the manifesto into a European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI). Teruzzi clearly explained the scope and complexity of this little-known yet powerful instrument. Out of 143 initiatives presented in Europe, only 11 have succeeded. Yet on food, no comparable proposal existed. On 8 July 2025, the ECI was officially accepted.

From that moment, the challenge of collecting signatures began: one million across Europe, distributed across at least seven countries, respecting specific national proportions. From 7 January — as reported in a previous article — the campaign officially launched, featuring a simplified and digital signing procedure, accessible also to younger citizens depending on national regulations.

If the one million signatures are reached, the initiative will automatically become a European legislative proposal. Its approval in its original form is not guaranteed, but the advocacy process that would follow already represents a profound transformation of public debate. As Teruzzi reminded us: “Why should someone who lacks money be unable to eat quality food? Why should an animal be mistreated? Why should agricultural labour be underpaid?”

At this point, Teruzzi opened the third movement of the afternoon, announcing entry into the core discourse on Statodellarte.

Luca Bergamo: Statodellarte as a Historical Turning Point and Politico-Cultural Innovation
With the intervention of Luca Bergamo, advisor to Cittadellarte’s Office of Politics, the Saturday afternoon reached a moment of particularly high conceptual density. Following the narration of concrete demopractic experiences and the emergence of operational trajectories already underway, Bergamo guided the assembly into the theoretical and institutional heart of Statodellarte, restoring its meaning, motivations and architecture.

Luca began by recalling the nature and complexity of the work undertaken: the drafting of a true Constitution — not merely symbolic, but formally structured as a state constitution. “It is a Constitution in every respect, with an introduction, a preamble gathering the main concepts, and then a series of 92 articles.” A long, intense and at times complex process that produced — he emphasised — a transformative effect first and foremost on those involved in its creation.

Looking back from the outside, Luca acknowledged how traces of the journey, corrections, shifts and growing awareness are visible in today’s narrative.

The central question of his intervention, however, concerned necessity: why such a transformation is not only desirable but necessary today. Bergamo recalled Angelo Riva’s morning reflections on the risk of a new techno-feudalism, exacerbated by social fragmentation: “How can one counter a techno-feudalism when everyone is scattered?” For Luca, the answer begins with recognising the historical moment we are living through.

He cited a phrase by Pope Francis that he considers particularly lucid: “This is not an era of change, but a change of era.” What is at stake is not only technology or geopolitics, but the end of a world order built after World War II, founded on multilateralism and the primacy of law over force. That phase, he stated clearly, is over, and today’s forces pose concrete risks of alienating the very meaning of the human person.

Within this context, Luca reread the thirty-year trajectory of Cittadellarte, rooted in the Mirror Painting and the transformation of the relationship between artist, artwork and audience. “The relationship between the artist, the artwork and those who engage with it changes. It changes with the Mirror Painting.” From that first conceptual shift unfolds a series of deliberate ‘curves’ leading inexorably to a necessary passage: the stellar model — in which everything returns to a single centre — is no longer sustainable. What is needed are structured networks capable of multiplying individual action through organised relational systems.

Here Statodellarte emerges as a collective artwork: “It is a work of art, but also an enormous innovation.”

One of the most powerful moments of the intervention concerned the reversal of common sense about art. Traditionally perceived as invention, free creation or even ornament, in Statodellarte the opposite occurs: “It is precisely the artistic principle that becomes a structuring element of a collective organisation.” The formula of creation — the heart of Cittadellarte’s artistic approach — becomes not merely symbolic inspiration but a normative foundation. A shift of enormous scope, with few historical precedents.

Bergamo then addressed the theoretical innovation of Statodellarte: demopraxia is grounded in recognising the governing function of people acting together. From this follows a reversal of the principle of representation: no longer the people as a sum of individuals, but representation as integration within a system of relations. What might seem abstract becomes, in the Constitution, a set of highly precise constructs regulating organisational functioning.

Thus Statodellarte explicitly defines itself as a civic-political organisation — but in a radically new form: “a civic-political organisation in which politics becomes the art of coexistence.”

Bergamo revisited the principles running through the Constitution: the trinamical formula as the generation of a creative space; the Terzo Paradiso as its concrete application; preventive peace, understood as a continuous intention to avoid conflict in every act (“Preventive means recognising that peace is the exercise of a continuous intention”).

Statodellarte is defined as a borderless, non-profit entity, with citizenship not tied to territory and a universal responsibility grounded in human rights.

Considerable attention was devoted to describing Statodellarte’s bodies. At the base lies the demopractic work, articulated through forums and construction sites. The forum is the space of encounter and discussion, activatable by an ambassador or by Cittadellarte; the construction site ensures operational continuity, beginning with territorial mapping. These structures elect an autonomous coordination, forming the foundation of the Statodellarte Chamber.

To this Chamber, Fondazione Pistoletto progressively transfers real responsibilities: strategic programming, rules of operation and resource management. Decisions are made through the method of consensus: “It’s not that everyone agrees. If there is no opposition, it is approved; if there is opposition, discussion reopens.”

Alongside the Chamber operate the Presidency (executive function) and the College of Guarantors, comparable to a constitutional court. The Constitution also foresees significant powers, from creating non-speculative funds to issuing supplementary currency, subject to consent from the competent bodies.

An important passage concerns embassies, no longer tied to individuals but conceived as functions. Embassies form their own college, which enters the Statodellarte Chamber by right, ensuring continuity beyond individual vocations.

Bergamo concluded by illustrating the formal structure of the Constitution: an incipit, a philosophical preamble, normative foundations, sections dedicated to tasks, functioning, resources and transitional provisions. He stressed that Statodellarte is not the sum of what already exists, but a genuine organisational innovation that constructs unprecedented relationships and processes.

It is a project destined to mature over time, yet one that enables Cittadellarte to move beyond the territorial perimeter of Biella and speak to the world coherently with its trajectory. “It is a political innovation,” he concluded, “because it seeks to transform the culture of power, not to seize it.”

From the Architecture of Statodellarte to the Test of Responsibility
The final part of Saturday afternoon marked a decisive passage. After the theoretical and constitutional elaboration of Statodellarte, attention shifted to operativity, shared responsibility and the concrete implications of this new configuration for the ambassadors’ network.

Francesco Saverio Teruzzi reopened the circle by inviting ambassador Davide Carnevale and refocusing attention on a crucial node: the change in the status of embassies, which are not abolished but incorporated into a broader structure. Carnevale clarified through an effective parallel how Love Difference gradually flowed into Terzo Paradiso, and how both now find a new shared container in Statodellarte — not an addition, but an integration that redesigns the overall meaning of the journey.

Saverio then read and commented on the definition of a Statodellarte embassy, emphasising its primary objective: contributing to producing and inspiring a responsible transformation of society by disseminating creative ideas and projects in relation to socio-cultural contexts. This introduces a significant novelty: the embassy is no longer necessarily a physical place, but a functional one — an active presence that can coexist with others in the same territory, without hierarchy or exclusivity.

This made clear the need for a coordination structure. The College of Embassies was presented as the body responsible for coordinating activities globally and representing them within the Statodellarte Chamber. Saverio did not conceal the complexity of this transition, nor the difficulty of immediately grasping all its implications. On the contrary, he stressed that this very complexity made the meeting necessary: not to impose a predefined system from above, but to test it through dialogue and collective work.

The methodological heart of this moment was the exercise-game proposed at the end of the day: ambassadors were divided into groups, each tasked with addressing realistic scenarios, often drawn from situations already experienced in previous years. Saverio emphasised a crucial point: the Constitution may not yet contain all answers. Some cases were unforeseen; others will require adjustments. Participants were therefore asked to take notes, critically observe the text and contribute to its improvement, while recognising that a Constitution remains, by nature, a ‘rigid’ form, even when open to evolution.

The transition has not been — and will not be — painless. Saverio stated this clearly: this is no longer a movement based solely on individual vocation, but a structure that must protect itself, including legally and economically.

In this context, Emanuele Ramella Pralungo, President of the Province of Biella, intervened with an external yet deeply engaged perspective. Ramella acknowledged the value of the experience, referencing his legal background and emphasising that every Constitution — including the Italian one, with its 139 articles — remains necessarily general, finding meaning through concrete application.

For him, the experience of Biella Città Arcipelago was emblematic: public administrators gathered around a table, post-it notes in hand, “forced” to truly confront one another. An exercise far from obvious, revealing how dialogue among administrators is not at all habitual, yet can become generative when supported by method.

Ramella invited ambassadors not to fear expressing themselves, recalling that during the Italian Constituent Assembly “all sorts of things were said,” and that it was precisely from such intense confrontation that foundational articles emerged. From group work, he reiterated, a fundamental part of the future path can arise.

The day concluded, as anticipated, with the Statodellarte Game and the animated discussions imagined by Ramella himself. A shared awareness was confirmed: Statodellarte is neither an abstraction nor a mere organisational device. It is a concrete attempt to give form to a shared responsibility — one capable of holding together vision, practice and care for the world.