The author discusses the opposition to a referendum in Italy, particularly from those advocating 'No' which they claim lacks substantive ideas but expresses strong emotional responses. Critics argue that a victory for 'Yes' would jeopardize judicial independence, suggesting that it would lead to government control over judges. However, the article cites Antonio di Pietro, a prominent figure, who argues that the current judicial structure is already compromised, being dominated by a select few within the Anm and Csm councils where decisions are made behind closed doors.

The writing emphasizes the historical importance of referendums in Italy, suggesting that without them, civil rights advancements, especially those achieved in the 1970s, would not have been possible. The article also highlights a culture of impunity within the judiciary, noting that even severe errors can lead to promotions rather than accountability. It questions the judiciary's commitment to justice and examines how the fear of such referendums is being weaponized by the opposition, branding the very idea as subversive.

In conclusion, the article paints a critical picture of the judicial establishment's resistance to change, depicting it as an entrenched 'caste' more interested in protecting its power than in upholding justice or democratic processes. The implications of this ongoing debate touch upon broader themes of civic engagement and the role of referendums in shaping rights and societal norms in Italy.