> I was in agreement with the general premise of the article but this wild claim written as a fact makes me question all the other claims that I lack the knowledge to challenge.
I think that's a good reaction, the "questioning" - now go verify them (the other claims) maybe? Also, maybe temper expectations, too -- I read a lot of stuff in which I find myself agreeing and disagreeing in various places, or seeing correct and incorrect things all at once. But I try to resist the instinct to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I don't mean to pile on but I see a lot of this sort of reaction to things these days and I'm curious about it.
> wild claim written as a fact
How should the author have written it instead? "I believe that Italian elites are desperate to remain part of the euro, and I also believe that the Euro subjects it to penury and destroys its future" ? In my mind that's not that different. It's an essay -- it's understood that the entire thing is a "claim", often a wild one.