THE FASCIST STATE AND THE FUTURE
Amid the innovations and experiments of the new Fascist civilization,
there is one which is of interest to the whole world; it is the
corporative organization of the state.
Let me assert at once that before we reached this form of state
organization, one which I now consider rounded out, the steps we
took were long, and our research, analysis and discussion have been
exhaustive. Both the experience and the tests have been full of lessons.
Practical reality itself has been the navigator. First of all, we
must remember that the corporative organization was not born from a
desire to create mere juridical institutions; in my opinion, it grew
out of the special necessities of the Italian situation in particular,
and out of those necessities which would be general in any situation
where there is economic restriction, and where traditions of work and
production have not yet been developed by experience and time. Italy,
in its first half-century of united political renaissance, has seen
classes armed one against the other, not only because of the desire
of one to master the other in political control but also because of
the struggle for the limited resources that our surface soil and what
was beneath it might be put at the disposition of those who were
interested in work and production.
Opposed to the directing middle class, there was another class which I
will call, for more easy reference, proletarian. It was influenced by
Socialists and anarchists, in an eternal and never-ending struggle with
the directing class.
Every year there was a general strike; every year the fertile Po
Valley, for instance, was subjected to recurring agitations which
imperiled crops and all production. Opposed to that humane sense of
harmony which should be a duty upon citizens of the same Fatherland,
there was a chronic struggle of interests, egged on by the professional
Socialists, the syndicalist organizers, a struggle against a middle
class which, in turn, persisted in its position of negation and of
expectation of a messiah. Civil life did not move a decisive step
forward on the way toward betterment.
A country like ours, which has no rich resources in the earth, which
has mountains for half of its area, cannot have great economic
possibilities. If, then, the citizens become naturally quarrelsome,
if classes have a tendency to strive to annihilate each other, civil
life can have none of that rhythm necessary for developing a modern
people. The Liberal and Democratic state, in spite of upheavals,
recurrent every year, and even at every season, held to a noncommital
stand, selecting a characteristic slogan: “Neither reaction, nor
revolution,”—as if that phrase had a precise or, indeed, any meaning
whatsoever!
It was necessary to emerge from the base, clannish habit of
class competition and to put aside hates and enmities. After the war,
especially following the subversive propaganda of Lenin, ill-will had
reached perilous proportions. Agitations and strikes usually were
accompanied by fights, with dead and wounded men as the result. The
people went back to work with souls full of hate against the class of
the masters, which, rightly or wrongly, was considered so idiotically
lacking in vision as to surpass in this regard any other middle class
in the world. Between the peasants and the rising industry of the urban
centres there were also the phenomena of unmistakable misunderstanding.
All of our life was dominated by demagogy. Every one was disposed to
tolerate, to pretend to understand, to make concessions to the violence
of the crowd. But after every incident of disorder, some new situation
promised another and even more difficult problem of conflict.
It was necessary, in my opinion, to create a political atmosphere which
would allow men in government to have some degree of courage, to speak
harsh truths, to affirm rights, only after having exacted duties, and,
if necessary, imposing these duties. Liberalism and Democracy were
only attempted remedies of milk-and-water character; they exhausted
their energies in the halls of parliament. Leading that agitation
were employees of the state, railroad men and postmen and troublesome
elements. The authority of the state was a kitten handled to death. In
such a situation, mere pity and tolerance would have been criminal.
Liberalism and Democracy, which had abdicated their duty at every
turn, failed utterly to appraise and adjust the rights and duties of
the various classes in Italian life. Fascism has done it!
The fact is that five years of harmonious work have transformed in its
very essentials the economic life and, in consequence, the political
and moral life of Italy. Let me add that the discipline that I have
imposed is not a forced discipline; it is not born from preconceived
ideas, does not obey the selfish interests of groups and of classes.
Our discipline has one vision and one end—the welfare and the good name
of the Italian nation.
The discipline that I have imposed is enlightened discipline. The
humble classes, because they are more numerous and perhaps more
deserving of solicitude, are nearest to my heart as a responsible
leader. I have seen the men from the countryside in the trenches,
and I have understood how much the nation owes to the healthy people
of calloused hands. On the other hand, our industrial workers have
qualities of sobriety, geniality, stamina, which feed the pride of
one who must rule and lead a people. The middle Italian class, too,
including the rural class, is much better than its reputation. Our
problems arise from a variety and diversity among the various economic
interests, which makes difficult the formation of great national groups
of producers. None of the Italian producing groups, however, can be
rated as “vampires,” as they were rated in the superficial terminology
of the old Socialist demagogy. The state is no longer ignorant when it
confronts facts and the interests of the various classes. Not only
does it obviate strife—it tries to find out the origins of clashes and
conflicts. By statistics and the help of studious men, we now are able
to define what will be the great issues of to-morrow. In the meantime,
with the aid not only of the government, but of the bodies locally
organized for consultation, we can know precisely what are to be the
outlines of the productive programmes of to-morrow.
I have wanted the Fascist government, above all, to give great care
to the social legislation needed to carry out our part of agreed
international programmes for industry and for those who bear the future
of industry. I think that Italy is advanced beyond all the European
nations; in fact, it has ratified the laws for the eight-hour day, for
obligatory insurance, for regulation of the work of women and children,
for assistance and benefit, for after-work diversion and adult
education, and finally for obligatory insurance against tuberculosis.
All this shows how, in every detail in the field of labor, I stand by
the Italian working classes. All that it was possible to do without
working an injury to the principle of solidity in our economy I have
set out to do, from the minimum wage to the continuity of employment,
from insurance against accidents to indemnity against illness, from
old age pensions to the proper regulation of military service. There
is little which social welfare research has adjudged practical to
national economy or wise for social happiness which has not already
been advanced by me. I want to give to every man and woman so generous
an opportunity that work will be not a painful necessity but a joy
of life. But even such a complex programme cannot be said to equal the
creation of the corporative system. Nor can the latter equal something
even larger. Beyond the corporative system, beyond the state’s labors,
is Fascism, harmonizer and dominator of Italian life, standing ever as
its inspiration.
In 1923, some months after the march on Rome, I insisted on the
ratification of the law for an eight-hour day. All the masses which had
seen a friend in the legislative policy of Fascism gave their approval
to national syndicalism. Instead of the old professional syndicates we
substituted Fascist corporations. In a meeting of December 19, 1923,
I had occasion to affirm that: “Peace within is primarily a task of
government. The government has a clear outline of conduct. Public
order must never be troubled for any reason whatsoever. That is the
political side. But there is also the economic side; it is one of
collaboration. There are other problems, such as that of exportation. I
remind Italian industry of these principles. Until now it has been too
individualistic. The old system and old ways must be abandoned.”
A little further on I said: “Over all conflicts of human and legitimate
interests, there is the authority of the government; the government
alone is in the right position to see things from the point of view
of the general welfare. This government is not at the disposition of
this man or that man; it is over everybody, because it takes to itself
not only the juridical conscience of the nation in the present,
but also all that the nation represents for the future. The government
has shown that it values at the highest the productive strength of the
nation. A government which follows these principles has the right to
be listened to by every one. It has a task to fulfill. It will do it.
It will do it inexorably for the defense of the moral and material
interests of the nation.”
Little by little, the old labor structure and associations were
abandoned. We were directed more and more toward the corporative
conception of the state. I did not want to take away from labor one of
its holidays, and so, instead of the first of May, which had foreign
origins and the imprint of Socialist internationalism, I fixed on a gay
and glorious date in Italian life, April 21st, the birthday of Rome.
Rome is the city which has given legislation to the world. The Roman
law is still the text which governs the relations of civil life. To
celebrate a Labor Day, I could not have selected a more suggestive and
worthy date.
To bring into being, in a precise co-ordination, all the measures that
I had undertaken and that Fascism and the Corporations had brought
about, in all their complexity, I had the Grand Council approve
a document. I do not hesitate to declare it to be of historical
character: it is the Labor Charter.
It is composed of thirty paragraphs, each of which contains a
fundamental truth. From the paramount necessity for production arises
the need of an equitable sharing of products, the need of the judgment
of tribunals in case of discord, and, finally, the need of
protective legislation.
That document has been welcomed by all the classes of Italy. The labor
magistracy represents, in its consecration to duty, something worthy
of a strong state, in contrast to the cloudy aspirations in the misty
realms of high-sounding Liberalism, Democracy and communistic fantasy.
The framing and realization were the tasks of Fascism. Old men of the
socialist and syndicalist poses and postures were amazed and perplexed
at the daring new reform. Another legend fell: Fascism was not the
protector of any one class, but a supreme regulator of the relations
between all citizens of a state. The Labor Charter found interpreters
and attracted the attention of the studious in every part of the world.
It became a formidable pillar of the new constitution of the Fascist
State.
As a logical consequence of the Charter of Labor and of all the social
legislation and of the magistracy of labor, came the necessity of
instituting the Corporations. In this institution are concentrated
all the branches of national production. Work in all its complex
manifestations and in all its breadth, whether of manual or of
intellectual nature, requires equally protection and nourishment. The
citizen in the Fascist State is no longer a selfish individual who has
the anti-social right of rebelling against any law of the Collectivity.
The Fascist State with its corporative conception puts men and their
possibilities into productive work and interprets for them the duties
they have to fulfil.
In this new conception, which has found its logical expression
in our representative forms, the citizen is valuable because of his
productivity, his work and his thought, and not merely because he is
twenty-one years old and has the right to vote!
In the corporative state all national activities are reflected. It was
logical that syndicalistic organizations should become a part also of
the new representative institutions. From this need, imposed by a new
political and social reality, arose the reform of national political
representation. Not only does the new political directorate select its
candidates with regard for their capabilities and for the number of
citizens represented, but it is complemented by the work of selection
and valuation devoted by the Grand Fascist Council to the task of
creating the best, the most stable, the most truly representative and
the most expert national board of directors.
We have solved a series of problems of no little extent and importance;
we have abolished all those perennial troubles and disorders and
doubts that poisoned our national soul. We have given rhythm, law, and
protection to Work: we have found in the co-operation of classes the
evidence of our possibilities, of our future power. We do not waste
time in brawls and strikes, which, while they vex the spirit, imperil
our strength and the solidity of our economy. We regard strife as a
luxury for the rich. We must conserve our strength. We have exalted
work as productive strength; therefore we have the majority of these
elements represented in the legislative body, and this body is a
more worthy and a stronger helmsman for Italian life.
And Capital is not exiled, as in the Russian communistic dream; we
consider it an increasingly important actor in the drama of production.
* * * * *
In this, my Autobiography, I have emphasized more than once the fact
that I have always tried to weave an organic and coherent character
into all the fabric of my political work. I have not confined myself to
giving merely an outward veneer or contour to Italian life; I wished
to influence the very depths of its spirit. I founded my work on facts
and on the real conditions of the Italian people; from such realistic
activity I drew valuable lessons. I have been able to bring about
useful, immediate results looking toward a new future for our country.
One of the reforms which I have promoted and have closely followed in
all its successive developments is the reorganization of the schools.
This has been called the Gentile Reform, after the name of the Minister
of Public Instruction, whom I appointed immediately following the March
on Rome. The gravity and importance of school problems cannot escape
the attention of any modern statesman mindful of the destiny of his
people. The School must be considered in all its complete expression.
Public schools, Intermediate schools, University institutions, all
exercise a profound influence on the trend—both moral and economic—of
the life of any nation. From the beginning this has been ever in my
mind. Perhaps my early experience as a school teacher increased
an unvarying interest in youth and its development. In Italy there
were traditions of higher culture, but the public schools had become
degraded because of lack of means and, above all, because of lack of
spiritual vision.
Although the percentage of illiteracy tended to diminish and even to
disappear in certain regions, particularly in Piedmont, the citizens
nevertheless were not getting from the school world those broad
educational foundations—physical, intellectual and moral—that are
possible and humane. The intermediate schools were too crowded because
everybody was admitted, even those without merit, through endless
sessions of examinations which were reduced often to a spiritless
formality. We lacked intelligent systems of selection and vocational
and educational valuation of individuals. The mill ground on and on,
turning out stock patterns of human beings who ended for the most part
by taking tasks in bureaucracy. They lowered the function of the public
service by dead and not living personnel. Universities created other
puppets in the so-called “free arts,” such as law and medicine.
I t was time that the delicate machinery which was of such consequence
in the spiritual life of the nation be renewed in a precise, definite,
organic form. We had to crowd out from the intermediate schools the
negative and supercilious elements. We were determined to infuse into
the public schools those broad humanistic currents in which our history
and our traditions are so rich. Finally, it was indispensable to
impose a new discipline in education—a discipline to which every one
must submit, the teachers themselves first of all!
To be sure, teachers draw a very modest wage in Italy, and this is a
problem that I am resolved to face and solve as soon as the condition
of the budget will allow. Nevertheless, I cannot permit a limited,
pinch-penny treatment of education. The niggardly policy is of old
and typically Liberal and Democratic origin. It furnished teachers
with a good pretext for performing their duties indifferently and for
abandoning themselves to subversive thought, even against the state
itself. This condition reached its climax in the humiliating fact that
many teachers deserted their posts. We had had clamorous examples of
such a tendency, not only in the elementary schools, but also in some
of the universities.
Fascism put a stop to all this by making discipline supreme, discipline
both for the high and for the low, particularly for those who had the
high duty of teaching order and discipline and of maintaining the
highest concepts of human service in the various schools of the régime.
We had an old school law which took its name from Minister Casati, a
law that had been enacted in 1859 and had remained the fundamental law
even after the successive retouching of Ministers Coppino, Daneo, and
Credaro. We had to renew and refashion it, through the ardent will of
our Party; we had to give it a broad didactic and moral vision; we
had to infuse into it a spirit of vital rebirth which would appeal to
the new Italy. Great ideas and great revolutions always create
the right hour for the solution of many problems. The school problem,
which had dragged on for many decades, has finally found its solution
in the Gentile Reform. This is not the place to explain the reform in
detail. I want to indicate, however, those fundamental principles which
I myself discussed and settled in a few compact discussions with the
Minister of Public Instruction. They can be summarized by the following
points:
1st—The state provides schooling only for those who deserve it because
of their merits and leaves to other initiatives students who are not
entitled to a place in the state’s schools.
This throws on the scrap heap the democratic concept which considered
a state school as an institution for every one—a basket into which
treasure and waste were piled together. The middle class had regarded
the school as at its service and therefore did not respect it. They
demanded only the greatest possible indulgence in order to achieve as
quickly as they could their purely utilitarian aims, such as a degree
or a perfunctory passing to promotions.
2nd—The students of the state schools and of the independent schools
find themselves under equal conditions when taking the state
examinations, before committees appointed by the government.
Thus is encouraged the régime of independent schools analogous to those
of England. This régime is advantageous for the Catholics, owners of
many schools, but displeases the anti-clericals of the old style.
It allows me a free development of scholastic initiative outside of the
conventional lines.
3rd—The state watches over the independent schools and promotes a
rivalry between independent and state schools which raises the cultural
level and the general atmosphere of all schools.
The state does not see its jurisdiction diminished because of the
independent schools; on the contrary, it extends its watchfulness over
all schools.
4th—Admission to the intermediate schools is now possible only through
examinations. The schools are directed toward a broad humanistic
culture, but with a standard of scholarship which has eliminated
forever the disorder and the easy-going ways of the old democratic
schools.
By means of these and other reforms the elementary school comes to have
two distinct but co-ordinated purposes. One is that of preparation for
the intermediate schools, and the other is a high type of broad popular
education complete in itself.
The intermediate schools were broadened by means of the following
institutions:
(a) _Complementary schools._ The abolished technical school, complete
in itself, was revived along new lines.
(b) _Technical institutes_ of higher specialization.
(c) _Scientific Lyceum_, still higher, taking the place of the
abolished “Modern Lyceum” and of the Physico-Mathematical departments
of the Technical Institute, and preparing the students for the
scientific branches of the University.
(d) _Teachers’ Institute_, a purely humanistic and philosophical
school taking the place of the abolished complementary and normal
schools.
(e) _Women’s Lyceum_, a general culture school, complete in itself.
(f) _Classical Lyceum_, unchanged in its essential lines, but
augmented by the humanistic character of the studies; to it the task
of preparing for most university branches has been assigned. To enter
the universities, entrance examinations have been instituted. The
final examinations of the intermediate schools, of the Classical and
the Scientific Lyceum, have been termed Maturity Examinations; all the
curricula have been renewed, fitting them for a more modern culture.
Latin has been restored in all schools except in the Complementary and
Religious Departments of the elementary and intermediate schools.
For all these different types of institutions, one essential
rule has been put into practice, that is, every school must be a
_unit organism_, with a set number of classes and students; the
candidates may enter through a graduated classification, based on the
examinations; those who are not admitted must go to independent schools.
The application of this reform, which overthrew the old interests, the
old ideas and especially the utilitarian spirit of the population,
aroused an unavoidable spirit of ill-feeling. It was used by the
opposition press, especially by the _Corriere della Sera_, for
controversial purposes; but the reform has been put through with energy
under my direction and has marked the beginning of a real rebirth
of the Italian schools and of the Italian culture.
The reform of the universities has been co-ordinated with the reforms
in the primary and intermediate schools. Its purpose is to divide
the university students into different organic institutions, without
useless overlapping. The rule of state examinations is imposed also
for the universities, to which both the students of the state and
independent schools can be admitted. The Institute of “Libera Docenza,”
authorities independently attached to certain faculties of the
universities, has also been reformed, appointment no longer being made
by the individual departments but by central committees in Rome.
On the occasion of a visit by the delegations of the Fascist university
groups, I had the opportunity of declaring that the Gentile Reform
“is the most revolutionary of all the reforms which we have voted on,
because it has completely transformed a state of affairs which had
lasted since 1859.”
I was the son of a school-mistress; I myself was taught in the
elementary and secondary schools. I knew, therefore, the school
problem. Because of that, I had wanted to bring it to a concrete
conclusion. The Italian school again will take its deserved place in
the world. From our university chairs, true scientists and poets will
again illuminate Italian thought, while the secondary schools will
provide technical and executive elements for our population, and the
public schools will create a background of civic education and
collective virtue in the masses.
I have willed that, in collaboration with the universities, departments
of Fascist economics, of corporative law, and a whole series of
fruitful institutes of Fascist culture, should be created. Thus a
purely scholastic and academic world is being permeated by Fascism,
which is creating a new culture through the fervid and complex activity
of real, of theoretical and of spiritual experiences.
But, even closer to my heart than the Institutes of Fascist
universities, is a new institution which has all the original marks of
the Fascist revolution. It is the National Organization of Balilla.
Under the name of a legendary little Genoese hero the new generation
of children and of youth was organized. These no longer depend, as in
the past, upon various playground associations, scattered political
schools and accessory institutions, but are trained through rigid but
gay discipline in gymnastic exercises and in the general rules of a
well-ordered national life. They are accustomed to obedience and they
are made to see a sure vision of the future.
To show the importance that educational revival has in my mind, I
myself gave a lecture at the University of Perugia. It has been
pronounced by scholars as a broadening of the world’s concept of its
duty to youth.
Finally, to pay a tribute to culture and to higher culture, and to
every one who, in the field of science, art, and letters, has held
high the name of Italy, I have created an Italian Academy, with a
membership of “immortals.”
* * * * *
The armed forces of the state had fallen into degradation in the
years 1919, 1920, 1921. The flower of our race had been spurned and
humiliated.
Conditions even reached a point where the Minister of War in those
“liberal” days had a circular distributed advising officers not to
appear in uniform in public, and to refrain from carrying arms, in
order not to be subjected to the challenges of gangsters and hoodlums.
This aberration, which it is better to pass over quickly for the sake
of one’s country, was destined to find its avenger in Fascism. It was
one of the factors which created an atmosphere passionately eager for
change. To-day, the spirit of the country is much different; to-day the
armed forces of the state are justly considered the secure and worthy
and honored defense of the nation.
I had a very clear and decisive programme, when, in 1922, at the moment
of the March on Rome, I selected as my collaborators the best leaders
of the Victory of 1918. General Armando Diaz, who after Vittorio Veneto
had remained aloof in silence, overwhelmed by the difficulty of the
moment, and who had issued and had been able to voice an indignant
protest in the Senate against the policies of Nitti’s Cabinet, had been
selected by me as Minister of War. I ♦appointed Admiral Thaon de Revel,
the greatest leader of our war on the sea, as Minister of the Navy. On
January 5, 1923, General Diaz presented a complete programme of
reform for the army to the Council of Ministers. That was an historic
meeting; fundamental decisions for the renewal of the armed forces
were taken; and we were able to announce to the country in solemn and
explicit fashion that, with that meeting, the army had been given new
life, to “accomplish the high mission that had been intrusted to it, in
the supreme interests of the nation.”
♦ “appoined” replaced with “appointed”
I had fulfilled the first promise I had made to myself and to the
Italian people. Immediately after that I dedicated myself to a
reorganization of aviation, which had been abandoned to utter decay
by the former administrations. The task was not easy; everything
had to be done again. The landing fields, the machines, the pilots,
the organizers and the technicians all were restored. A feeling of
abandonment, of dejection and mistrust had been diffused in Italy by
the enemies of aviation; this new type of armed force, many people
thought, should be developed only as a sport. Into this situation I
put my energy—I gave it personal attention, personal devotion. I have
succeeded in my purpose: the successes of De Pinedo, of Maddalena,
the flights in squadrons, the great manœuvers, have demonstrated that
Italian aviation has recently acquired great expertness and prestige,
not only in Italy, but wherever there is air to fly in.
The same can be said of the navy, which has reordered its formation,
bettered its units, completed its fleet, and made its discipline
efficient. Fourth, but not least, because of its spirit of emulation
and daring, comes the Voluntary Militia for the Safety of the Nation,
divided into 160 Legions, commanded by distinguished officers and by
enthusiastic Fascists. These are magnificent shock troops.
Finally our barracks and our ships can be said to be, in the true sense
of the word, refuges of peace and strength; the officers devote their
activities to the physical and educational betterment of the men; the
training conforms to the modern technic of war. The army is no longer
distracted from its functions, as happened too often under the old
governments, in order to assume ordinary duties of public order which
were exhausting and humiliating, and to which entire Divisions were
assigned. I changed all this. For the last five years, the army has
left its barracks for its tactical manœuvers and for no other reason.
After some time, General Diaz had been obliged to resign on account of
the condition of his health. General Di Giorgio commanded _ad interim_.
But later I saw clearly the necessity of gathering all the armed
forces of the state under one direction. I assumed the portfolios of
War, Navy and Aeronautics. Thanks to this programme, I have created a
commander-in-chief of all general staffs, who has the task of shaping,
with a complete vision of ensemble, all the plans of the various
branches of our forces toward one end: Victory. Our military spirit is
lively; it is not aggressive, but it will not be taken by surprise. It
is a peaceful spirit, but it is watchful.
* * * * *
To complete the Fascist revival, it was necessary to keep in mind
also several lesser problems which, for the sake of the dignity
and strength of the life of the nation, were in need of an immediate
solution.
The retired employees of the government, who received very small
pensions before the war, had seen with alarm the value of their already
meager resources diminish because of the successive depreciations of
the currency. I had to make a provision of some exceptional nature
for their protection, by making their pensions adequate to the
necessities of the day and to the current value of money. I made a
provision favoring the clergy also; it was a question of a just and
necessary disposition. This would have been inconceivable in the days
of the Masonic demagogy and social democracy, which was dominated by
a superficial and wrathful anti-clericalism. Our clergy number about
60,000 in Italy. They are extraneous to the controversy, which I may
call historical, between State and Church. They accomplish a wise
task and assist the Italian people in all their religious practices,
without meddling with political questions, especially since the rise of
Fascism. They are reluctant to debase the spiritual character of their
mission. The intriguing priest, of course, has to be fought. Instead,
the priest who accomplishes his task according to the wise rules of the
Gospel and shows the people the great humane and divine truths, will be
helped and assisted. Because many of them were living in poverty, we
took general measures to better the conditions of their existence.
* * * * *
The policy in regard to public works in Italy had always had an
electoral tinge; public works to be done were decided upon
here and there, not according to an organic plan or to any plain
necessity, but to give sporadic satisfaction to this or that group
of voters. I stopped this legalized favoritism. I instituted Bureaus
of Public Works, intrusting them to persons in whom I have complete
confidence, who obey only the central power of the state, and are
immune from pressure by local interests. In this way I was able to
better appreciably the conditions of the roads of the South; I mapped
out a programme for aqueducts, railroads and ports. All that is just
finds in the Italian bureaucracy an immediate comprehension. All the
offices of governmental character have received a new impulse and new
prestige. The great public utilities of the state, railroads, mails,
telegraph, telephone, the monopolies, function again. Certain persons
are even sarcastic about the new regularity. And this is easily
explained: we should not forget that the Italian people has been for
many years rebellious against any discipline; it was accustomed to
use its easy-to-hand and clamorous complaints against the work and
activity of the government. Some vestiges of the mental attitudes of
bygone days still come to the surface. There is even whining because
there is efficiency and order in the world. Certain individualistic
ambitions would like to slap at our strong achievements of discipline
and regularity. But to-day the state is not an abstract and unknowing
entity; the government is present everywhere, every day. He who lives
in the ambit of the state or outside the state feels in every way the
majesty of law. It is not a thing of small moment that all public
utilities are conducted with an efficiency which I might call American,
and that the Italian bureaucracy, proverbially slow, has become eager
and agile.
I have given particular attention to the Capital. Rome is a universal
city, dear to the heart of Italians and of the whole world. It was
great in the time of the Roman Empire and has conserved a universal
light. It was the historical seat and the centre of diffusion of
Christianity. Rome is first of all a city with the aura of destiny
and history. It is the Capital of the New Italy. It is the seat of
Christianity. It has taught and will continue to teach law and art to
the whole world.
I could not refuse the resources necessary to make this magnificent
capital a city æsthetically beautiful, politically ordered, and
disciplined by a governor. With its natural port of Ostia, with its
new roads, it will become one of the most orderly and clean cities
of Europe. By isolating the monuments of ancient Rome, the relation
between the ancient Romans and the Italians is made more beautiful and
suggestive. This work of revaluation—almost recreation—of the capital
was not carried on to the detriment of other Italian cities. Each one
of them has the typical character of an ancient capital. They are
cities like Perugia, Milan, Naples, Florence, Palermo, Bologna, Turin,
Genoa, which have had a sovereign history worthy of high respect; but
none of them thinks now to contest with Rome and its eternal glory.
* * * * *
Some writers who, as keen observers, have followed point by point
the vicissitudes of our political life at a certain moment raised an
interesting question. Why did not the National Fascist Party decree its
own disbandment or slip into disorganization after the revolutionary
victory of October, 1922?
In order to answer this question it is necessary to bring into relief
certain essential points. History teaches us that, normally, a
revolutionary movement can be channelled into legality only by means of
forceful provisions, directed, if necessary, against even the personnel
of the movement. Every revolution assumes unforeseen and complex
aspects; in certain historical hours, the sacrifice of those who were
the well-deserving lieutenants of yesterday might become indispensable
for the supreme interest of to-morrow. Nevertheless, in my own life I
have never deliberately desired the sacrifice of any one; therefore
I have made use of the high influence which I have always had over
my followers to stop stagnation or heresies, personal interests and
contentions; I have preferred to prevent rather than to repress.
But, when it has been necessary, I have shown myself to be inexorable.
In fact, I had to keep in mind that, when one party has shouldered
the responsibility of entire power, it has to know how to perform
surgery—and major operations, too—against secession. Because of my
personal situation, having created the Party, I have always dominated
it. The sporadic cases of secession, due not to differences of method
but to personal temperament, usually withered under the general
loss of esteem and interest, and after the disclosure of selfish
ends.
This consciousness of my incontestable domination has given me the
ability to make the Party live on. But other considerations also were
opposed to the disbandment of the Party. First of all, a sentimental
motif had stamped itself upon my soul and upon the grateful spirit of
the nation. The Fascisti, particularly the young, had followed me with
blind, absolute, and profound devotion. I had led them through the most
dramatic vicissitudes, taking them away from universities, from jobs,
from factories. The young men had not hesitated when confronted by
danger. They had known how to risk their future positions together with
their lives and fortunes. I owed and still owe to the militiamen of
previous days my strongest gratitude; to disband the Party and retire
would have been first of all an act of utter ingratitude.
There was in the end a much more important reason. I considered
the formulation of a new Italian method of government as one of
the principal duties of Fascism. It was to be created by the vigor
of labor, through a well-tested process of selection, without the
risky creation of too many improvised military leaders. It was the
Party’s right to offer me men of our own régime to assume positions
of responsibility. In that sense the Party was side by side with the
government in the ruling of the new régime. It had to abandon the
programme of violent struggle and yet preserve intact its character
of proud political intransigentism. Many obvious signs made me
understand that it was not possible to patch the old with the new
world. I had therefore need of reserves of men for the future. The
Chief of the government could very well be the Chief of the Party, just
as in every country of the world a representative chief is always the
exponent of an aristocracy of wills.
In the meantime, to mark a point fundamental for the public order, my
government, in December, 1922, issued an admonition to the Fascists
themselves. It was in the following terms:
“Every Fascist must be a guardian of order. Every disturber is an enemy
even if he carries in his pocket the identification card of the Party.”
Thus, in a few words, were the position and the duty of the Party in
the life of the Fascist régime indicated.
We encountered plenty of pitfalls and snares in 1922. The Party had
reached a peculiar sensitiveness, through its intense experience. In
the moment of its hardest test, it had shown itself to be equipped to
guide the interests of the country as a whole. The revolution had not
had long, bloody consequences, as in other revolutions, except for the
moment of battle. Violence, as I have said before, had been controlled
by my will.
Nevertheless, the position of some opposing newspapers was strange
indeed. Those of the _Corriere della Sera_, of Liberal-Democratic
coloring, and that of the _Avanti_, Socialist, agreed—strange
bed-fellows!—in harshly criticising the simultaneous and violent
action of Fascism, while they were wishing in their hearts and
writing that the Fascist experiment would soon be finished.
According to these political diagnosticians, it was a matter of an
experiment of short duration, in which Fascism would be destroyed
either on the parliamentary rocks or by an obvious inadequacy to direct
the complexities of Italian life. We saw later the wretched end of
these prophets; but to attain results it had been necessary for me,
particularly in the first year, continually to watch the Party. It had
always to remain in perfect efficiency, superior to opposing critics
and to snares, ready for orders and commands.
One grave danger was threatening the Party: it was the too free
admission of new elements. Our small handfuls in the warlike beginnings
were now growing to excess, so much so that it was necessary to put a
padlock on the door to prevent the influx of further membership. Once
the solidity of Fascism had been proved, all the old world wanted to
rush into its ranks. If this had happened, we would have come back
to the old mentality, the old defects, by overhasty adulteration
instead of keeping our growth selective through education and
devotion. Otherwise the Party, augmented by all the opportunists of
the eleventh hour, would have lost its vibrating and original soul. A
check had to be placed upon the old world. It could go and wait with
its bed-slippers on, without spoiling a movement of young people for
Italian rebirth.
After I had closed, in 1926, the registration in the Party, I used
all my force, care and means for the selection and the education
of Youth. The Avanguardia was then created, together with the
Opera Nazionale Balilla, the organization for boys and girls which,
because of its numerous merits and the high value of its educational
activities, I have chosen even recently to term “The invaluable pupil
of the Fascist Régime.”
This programme brought forth unparalleled results; as a result of it
the Party has never encountered a really serious crisis. I believe that
I can count among my qualities the ability to act in good season and
to strike at the right moment without false sentimentality where the
shadow of a weakness or of a trap is hidden.
In this watchful work of prevention, I have always had at my side good
secretaries of the Party who have helped me immeasurably. Michele
Bianchi had already ably led the Party until the March on Rome. He had
been able to balance the particularly violent character of the movement
against the demands of political situations which had reality and which
must be handled with wisdom. Michele Bianchi has been an excellent
political secretary because of this very reason, and to-day he is still
with the government, as my greatly appreciated collaborator in internal
politics. He has a political mind of the first order, a reflective
mind; he is faithful at every hour. The régime can count on him every
time.
The Honorable Sansanelli, a courageous participant in the late war,
and to-day president of the International Federation of World War
Veterans, took his place. The Hon. Sansanelli has been able to face
vague secessionist movements, which revealed an origin undoubtedly in
the peculiar, pre-Fascist, Italian political Masonry.
There was in that period a reprisal by anti-Fascist forces. The
old Liberal world, defeated, but tolerated by the generosity of the
régime, was not exactly aware of the new order of things. It regained
its wonted haughtiness; Italian Masonry was still developing, with its
infinite and uncontrollable tentacles, its practices of corruption
and of dissolution. These forces of negation even armed the Communist
remnants in the obscurity of ambushes and cellars. A new “direttorio,”
presided over by the Secretary Hon. Giunta until September, 1924,
was formed after the elections. I have already spoken of the Fascist
activity of the Hon. Giunta. In the second half of that year, the
anti-Fascist movement, aroused by obscure national and international
forces, showed itself in growing intensity on all fronts. I threw it
down on its nose with my speech of January 3, 1925. But also, following
that, I determined that a line of more combatively intransigent nature
should be imposed by our party: and with this duty in mind, on February
12, 1925, I appointed the Hon. Roberto Farinacci General Secretary of
the Party.
Farinacci knew how to show himself worthy of the task with which I had
intrusted him. His accomplishments, considered in their entirety and
in the light of the results attained, were those of a well-deserving
Secretary. He broke up the residues of the “aventinismo” which had
remained here and there in the country; he gave a tone of high and
cutting intransigentism, not only political but also moral, to the
whole Party, invoked against offenders and plotters those exceptional
laws which I had promulgated after four attempted assassinations
had demonstrated the criminality of anti-Fascism. I was closely
following this movement of vigorous reprisal by the Party and had
prepared in time the necessary provisions. The Hon. Farinacci is one of
the founders of Italian Fascism. He has followed me faithfully since
1914.
After his task had been accomplished, the Hon. Farinacci left the
position of General Secretary to the Hon. Augusto Turati, a courageous
veteran of the World War, a man of clear mind and aristocratic
temperament, who has been able to give the Party the style of the new
times and the consciousness of the new needs. The Hon. Turati has
accomplished a great and indispensable work of educational improvement
with the Fascist masses. Besides these precious elements in the high
positions of the Party of to-day, I must mention the Hon. Renato Ricci
for the organization of the “Balilla,” Melchiorri for the Militia,
Marinelli, a courageous administrative secretary, Starrace, a valorous
veteran, and Arpinati, a faithful Black Shirt since March, 1919, and a
founder of Fascism in Bologna.
The Party has yielded me new prefects for Fascist Italy, elements for
syndicalist organization, and consuls, while various deputies have been
appointed Ministers and Under-Secretaries. Little by little, proceeding
by degrees, I have given an ever more integral and intransigent line
to the whole world of government. Almost all positions of command have
to-day been intrusted to Fascist elements. Thus after four years of the
régime we have given actuality to the formula: “All the Power to
all-Fascism” which I enunciated in June, 1925, at a Fascist meeting in
Rome.
I have controlled my impatience. I have avoided leaps into darkness.
I do not sleep my way to conclusions, I have blended the pre-existing
needs with the formation of a future. Naturally, giving to the state a
completely Fascist character and filling all the ganglia of national
life with the vitality and newer force of faithful Black Shirts, I not
only did not detract from, but constantly added to the importance of
the National Fascist Party as the force of the régime. This transfer
from political organization to the permanent organization of a state
guarantees in the most solid manner the future of the régime. I have
laid, with my own hands, the corner-stone of representative reform,
based on the interests of Italian unity and the Italian cosmos, and
I have arranged that the Grand Fascist Council became a definite
constitutional organ for the constancy of the state. Thus the Fascist
Party, while remaining independent, is bound by ties of steel to the
very essence of the new Fascist state.
* * * * *
A subject that is always interesting and is often misunderstood both
by Italians and foreigners is that of the relations between State
and Church in Italy. The Law of the Guarantees in 1870, by which the
question was believed to be solved, remains a form of relationship
which since the rise of Fascism has not caused friction of any great
significance. To be sure, the Holy See renews, once in a while,
protestations for the supposed rights usurped in Rome by the
Italian state, but there are no substantial reasons for apprehension,
nor profound differences.
This serenity of relations is a tribute to the Fascist régime. In the
past a legend had blossomed around dissensions of historical character
tending to foment partisan hatreds; an anti-clerical activity had been
developed for a long time in various forms, and it served, through
many sections of the so-called “Free thought” groups, to augment the
nefarious political influence of our form of Masonry. The idea was
diffused that religion was a “private affair,” and religion was not
admitted in any sort of public act.
If, however, anti-clericalism was superficial and coarse, on the other
hand, the Church, with its lack of comprehension of the new Italy, with
its tenacity in its intransigent position, had only exasperated its
opponents. Anti-Church forces even went so far as to ban every Catholic
symbol and even Christian doctrine from the schools. These were periods
of Socialist-Masonic audacity. It was necessary that ideas should be
clarified. We had to differentiate and separate the principles of
political clericalism from the vital essence of the Catholic faith.
The situation as it had stood caused, in Italy, dangerous deviations,
which ranged from the policy of “abstention” between 1870 and 1900, to
the Popular party of baleful memory which was destined to degenerate
little by little until in 1925 it took a form of clerical bolshevism
which I resolutely liquidated and put into political and intellectual
bankruptcy.
This troubled atmosphere, so infested by misunderstandings and
superficialities, has been relieved by Fascism. I did not deceive
myself as to the seriousness of the crisis which is always opening
between State and Church; I had not fooled myself into thinking that
I would be able to cure a dissension which involves the highest
interests and principles, but I had made a deep study of those lines
of set directions and inflexible temperaments which, if softened,
were destined to make the principles of religious faith, religious
observance, and respect for the forms of worship bloom again,
independent of political controversies. They are, in fact, the
essential factors of the moral and civic development of a country which
is renewing itself.
To be sincere, I must add that high circles of the Vatican have not
always been known to appreciate my work, possibly for political
reasons, and have not helped me in the steps which appeared wise for
all. My labor had not been easy nor light; our Masonry had spun a most
intricate net of anti-religious activity; it dominated the currents
of thought; it exercised its influence over publishing houses, over
teaching, over the administration of justice and even over certain
dominant sections of the armed forces.
To give an idea of how far things had gone, this significant example
is sufficient. When, in parliament, I delivered my first speech
of November 16, 1922, after the Fascist revolution, I concluded
by invoking the assistance of God in my difficult task. Well,
this sentence of mine seemed to be out of place! In the Italian
parliament, a field of action for Italian Masonry, the name of
God had been banned for a long time. Not even the Popular party—the
so-called Catholic party—had ever thought of speaking of God. In
Italy, a political man did not even turn his thoughts to the Divinity.
And, even if he had ever thought of doing so, political opportunism
and cowardice would have deterred him, particularly in a legislative
assembly. It remained for me to make this bold innovation! And in an
intense period of revolution! What is the truth? It is that a faith
openly professed is a sign of strength.
I have seen the religious spirit bloom again; churches once more are
crowded, the ministers of God are themselves invested with new respect.
Fascism has done and is doing its duty.
Some ecclesiastical circles have not shown, as I have said, ability to
evaluate and understand in all its importance the political and moral
rebirth of new Italy.
One of the first symptoms of such lack of comprehension was exhibited
at the beginning of Fascist rule: at first the so-called Catholic party
wanted to collaborate by having some members in the government, in the
new régime. This collaboration, however, began to lead us through a
series of reticences and misunderstandings, and after six months I was
forced to show the door to the ministers belonging to that party.
I have seen the Popular party allied with Masonry. But when parties
have not clashed on the Italian political scene, the troubles between
State and Church have been reflected in international politics.
The Roman Question has been once more under discussion. Both
historical forces have strengthened their concepts. Journalistic
controversies and objective discussions have demonstrated that the
problem is not ripe and may be insoluble. Perhaps two mentalities and
two worlds are confronting each other in a century-old historic and
impracticable opposition. One has its roots in the religion of the
fathers and lives by the ethical forces of the Civis Romanus; the other
has the universal character of equality of brothers in God.
To-day, with the highest loyalty, Fascism understands and values
the Church and its strength: such is the duty of every Catholic
citizen. But politics, the defense of national interests, the battles
over ourselves and others, must be the work of the modern Fascist
Italians who want to see the immortal and irreplaceable Church of
Saint Peter respected, and do not wish ever to confound themselves
with any political force which has no disclosed outline and knows no
patriotism. Whatever the errors of its representatives may be, nobody
thinks of taking away from the Church its universal character, but
everybody is right in complaining about certain disavowals of some
Italian Catholics, and may justly resent political approval of certain
middle-European currents, upon which Italy places even now her most
ample reservations. Faith in Italy has been strengthened. Fascism gives
impulse and vigor to the religion of the country. But it will never be
able for any reason to renounce the sovereign rights of the state and
of the functions of the state.