Isabella Brianza, 43, married to Sergio and mother of Anna and Jacopo.
Raised in a church environment (educational ministry), since 2015 she has been studying and promoting the themes of integral ecology and Laudato Si’ together with a small group of brothers and sisters from the Fraternità Evangelii Gaudium.
Professionally, she works in human resources; since 2021, she has been a Councilor for Circumscription 1 in Turin.
Interview
INTERVIEWER:
First of all: when did your desire to engage in civic and social life begin? What motivated you and why?
ISABELLA:
Sure, feel free to guide me. I mean, keep it concise, and then you can filter what you think is useful.
My background is strongly rooted in a Christian formation, specifically in Catholic Action. Being part of the faith and seeing people freely committed to educational work and to the growth of others has always been very inspiring to me.
Then, during adolescence, I started wondering what professional path I could take to serve society. I chose economics. After graduating, I had my first experience in the field of cooperation with the CISV association in Mali, then I did national civil service abroad, and later I had the opportunity to work at Permicro, a company focused on microcredit and financial inclusion through social inclusion.
In the following years, also thanks to the Fraternity, to the encyclical Laudato si’ from 2015, and to my discussions with Sergio, with whom I share this passion, we realized how interconnected these issues were. My original passion for people and for the environment, initially experienced somewhat separately, gradually expanded. The environment, understood both in its scientific sense and as “creation,” became a broader dimension connected to the social, cultural, and environmental crisis, and to the consequences on a planet that is increasingly mistreated.
INTERVIEWER:
So from there, what kind of concrete engagement was born?
ISABELLA:
Two main forms of commitment emerged. On one hand, within the Fraternity, we focused on these themes: self-education, and where possible, evangelization in parishes or contexts where we could bring different kinds of content. We dealt with topics such as fast fashion, food, technology, and other areas we studied and then shared.
On the other hand, in 2021, my political engagement began. I am now a district councilor, working at the municipal level—small, but meaningful. One thing that makes me very happy is seeing how many connections exist: a lot of civil society activity that needs to be encouraged and networked. Of course, important coordination is needed.
But I still keep a seed of trust: there are many people who are engaged. It often seems like everyone is indifferent, and young people are said not to care, but that is not true.
For example, I organized a talk with under-30 speakers on a referendum, one in favor and one against, and there were 60 young people present without even needing promotion.
INTERVIEWER:
Indeed, research also suggests that young people are less visible rather than less present…
ISABELLA:
Yes, exactly. They are probably less represented by the media and have fewer opportunities for visibility, but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist.
What I see in our age group, around the 40s, is an important “bridge” role: creating opportunities and connections. It is essential not to operate in silos, not even age-based ones.
INTERVIEWER:
All of this happened before Covid. When it arrived, how did it impact your engagement?
ISABELLA:
We were very fortunate that the Fraternity had started, in November 2019, a series of meetings on Laudato si’. With Covid, we had to decide whether to continue.
We fairly naturally moved online, although with the fear of dispersing. In reality, we discovered a huge thirst—not only for content but also for connection and companionship.
So it actually became a strengthening: a way to continue using different means. We also created a new format called “Per un’altra via” (“For Another Way”), starting from the chapter of Laudato si’ on “human roots,” where Pope Francis addresses political issues such as the technocratic paradigm and the throwaway culture.
We did work that, probably, we would not have done without Covid. In that sense, we felt fortunate: we didn’t give up, we adapted.
It reminds me of theatre: I used to do improvisation, and during Covid we moved classes online. It seemed impossible, but we worked a lot on voice and reading—things we would never have explored in person.
INTERVIEWER:
So did new themes or paths emerge that might otherwise have remained hidden?
ISABELLA:
Yes, I would say so. Even though, I must admit, there was a general regression afterwards, both in the Fraternity, in politics, and in society.
Many initiatives became smaller, more micro-level, and less focused on “big-picture” issues. Covid had pushed us to look at those broader systems, but then, with the recovery, everything went back to normal flow.
Today there is a risk that even Laudato si’ becomes just one topic among many, whereas it should become culture, education, and daily practice—not an accessory.
INTERVIEWER:
How do you feel you have changed in your engagement?
ISABELLA:
My motivation has remained very strong, in fact it has been renewed. I increasingly believe that everything is connected: people, the environment, and future generations.
What has changed is a greater willingness to engage with complexity. To understand that people can feel overwhelmed both by everyday life and by a very strong individualistic culture.
It is not right to reduce everything to “selfishness”: there are also social conditions that push in that direction.
INTERVIEWER:
What impact do you see artificial intelligence having on your activism?
ISABELLA:
I see it partially. The negative aspect is that we have somewhat lost the practice of manual summarization, such as writing meeting minutes, which are now often automated.
That is a shame, because the process of summarizing was also a way to reread and better understand what had emerged.
In politics, I also see AI being used mainly in communication, especially on social media. That is not always a positive example.
Rather than as a source, I would say it mainly affects content production.
There is also a risk of an “oracle effect”: people tend to trust it too much, a bit like Google, but perhaps even more, because it feels like a conversational partner.