3,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: Edizioni Savine
- Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
- Sprache: Englisch
- Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2019
I do not think — and the Hon. Mussolini agreed with me in one of the conversations I had with him — that people abroad, especially in England and the United States, know much about Fascismo. It had been diagnosed as a sporadic revolutionary movement, which sooner or later would be put down by drastic measures. Not many have realised that in this after-war period there is no more important historical phenomenon than Fascismo. (1923 - Barone Bernardo Quaranta di San Severino)
Das E-Book können Sie in Legimi-Apps oder einer beliebigen App lesen, die das folgende Format unterstützen:
Ähnliche
MUSSOLINI
AS REVEALED IN HIS POLITICAL SPEECHES
(November 1914—August 1923)
SELECTED, TRANSLATED AND EDITED BY BARONE BERNARDO QUARANTA di SAN SEVERINO
To the President of the Italian Senate
TOMMASO TITTONI
NOTE: The most limpid waters in the world appear turbid when compared to the purity of the waters of the Lethe.
Digital edition of:
"MUSSOLINI as revealed in his political speeches"
by Barone Bernardo Quaranta di San Severino
© 1923 by J.M. DENT & SONS LTD.
Copyright © 2019 - Edizioni Savine
All Rights Reserved
Strada provinciale 1 del Tronto
64010 – Ancarano (TE) – Italy
email: [email protected]
web: www.edizionisavine.it
ISBN 978-88-99914-45-5
INTRODUCTION
A NOTE ON ITALIAN FASCISMO
In an interesting article published last year in our Press, Ettore Ciccotti shows that Italian Fascismo does not represent an absolutely new political event, but is part of the general historic development of nations. In the first years of its appearance it was compared to the "krypteia” of Sparta, to the “ eterie ” of Athens, and to similar phenomena, which are repeated as a manifestation of self-defence of strong and active groups or classes, uniting and forming centres of resistance; exercising thus, by their extended action, general functions of State in a period in which its protection is weak or inefficient, and shows signs of disintegration or degeneration. Other examples of this phenomenon can be found in the history of the Church and in the Italian Communes, in England, Germany, in the Clubs of the French Revolution, and in the rest of Europe. When in a nation which shows such signs this form of vitality does not exist, we witness the general collapse of that nation, as in Russia at this moment, where only the radical uprooting of Bolshevism might lead to the general resurrection of the country.
The after-war period in Italy, as elsewhere, had caused complete apathy, slackness and disorder in Parliamentary State functions, characterised by many elaborate programmes, but few facts. The Italian working classes, moreover, had been hypnotised by the nefarious gospel of Lenin, which had powerfully contributed to bring about the grave state of affairs in Italy in 1920, when the Communist peril had reached its acute stage. The continued strikes in all industries had caused prices to rise at a tremendous pace; the production of commodities had been reduced to a minimum; the enormous deficit in the railway and postal departments, the debt and the general budget of the State were alarming, while foreign exchanges had reached fantastic figures. The arrogance of the Communist elements had become unbearable, and officers at times were obliged to dress in plain clothes in order not to be attacked by Bolshevists, while soldiers, Carabineers and Guardie Regie were frequently insulted and in some instances even killed by Communists.
But the gallant fighters of the Trentino, of the Carso and of the Grappa, the volunteers who had saved Italy and arrested the advance of the enemy on the Piave could not reconcile themselves to this state of affairs, to the idea of watching with folded arms the complete loss of the fruits of victory for which half a million men had left their lives on the battlefields. These brave youths, with an indomitable courage, ready to face all, full of the purest ideals and passionate love for our country, representing a new force and a new Italy, had already in April 1919 grouped themselves together in a “fascio” (bundle), as the “Fascio Nazionale dei Combattenti” (National Fasces of Combatants), under the leadership of Benito Mussolini, who was the inspirer and organiser of the movement and had himself been their comrade at the front.
They became stronger every day and dealt the initial blow to Communism in 1921, when the first encounter took place between Fascisti and Communists at Bologna, which marks the waning of Bolshevism and the rise of Fascismo.
But it was not an easy matter for the new movement to make its way, as in its laborious progress it met with endless difficulties, and above all had to fight the apathy of the people and the general scepticism regarding it.
Fascismo had to deal with peculiar mentalities, to fight various organisations, including the State, which felt itself being undermined by this new political group, while its chief enemy, the Bolshevist faction, had made endless victims among its rank and file during the past.
It was not possible, however, for the Fascisti to deal with the Communists otherwise than by using violence, as normal means would have been entirely inadequate against the seditious elements (made all the more arrogant by the manifest impotence of the State and the laisser faire attitude of public opinion), in view of the daily increasing number of crimes committed against property and peaceful individuals.
Fascisti, moreover, started a strong movement against the composition of the Chamber, maintaining that it no longer represented the nation, that it had grown prematurely old and must, therefore, be quickly dissolved and a new appeal to the electors be made as soon as possible. They had been deeply concerned, on the other hand, with the Italian economic crisis, which, according to Edmondo Rossoni, the able organiser and Secretary-General of the Syndicalist Corporations, could not be overcome without an increase in the production of commodities to be obtained by a more rigorous discipline in the labour question; thus an economic victory followed the victory on the battlefields. The masses of the working classes, many of them previously Socialists and Communists, enrolled themselves among the Fascisti syndicates scattered all over Italy and were able to settle various important disputes.
The alleged dissension between Fascismo and the Italian Monarchy had always been a favourite weapon in the hands of the anti-Fascisti elements. The Hon. Mussolini, in his speech at the great Fascista Mass Meeting at Naples on 24th October of last year, clearly manifested his party feeling in the matter, as can be gathered by his own words uttered there (see Part IV. page 171, of this collection). The attitude of Fascismo towards Monarchy clearly defined by its leader was very opportune, and contributed to the greater popularity of the movement throughout the country, where this institution rests on a solid base, represents Italian unity, and is to-day associated with its illustrious representative, King Victor Emmanuel III., an example of domestic virtue in private life, one of the most cultured men of our times, beloved by all classes, who at the front proved himself the first soldier among soldiers and gained the popularity of the whole nation.
The Army was secretly or openly greatly in favour of Fascismo, the successful efforts of which to save the country from the Social-Communist factions it could not forget. The soldiers could, therefore, never have marched against the Fascisti—who represented Italian patriotism. The very generals of the regular Army, such as Generals Fara, Ceccherini, Graziani, de Bono, and others, in black shirts, themselves directed the famous “March to Rome.”
With reference to religion, Mussolini’s Government promised to respect all creeds, especially Catholicism. At Ouchy he said to the Press: “ My spirit is deeply religious. Religion is a formidable force which must be respected and defended. I am, therefore, against anti-clerical and atheistic democracy, which represents an old and useless toy. I maintain that Catholicism is a great spiritual power, and I trust that the relations between Church and State will henceforward be more friendly.” And while the Minister for Public Instruction, Senator Gentile, has introduced compulsory religious instruction in the elementary public schools, the Under-Secretary of the same Ministry, Hon. Dario Lupi, one of Mussolini’s closest friends, issued, as one of his first acts, a timely and peremptory order to the school authorities requesting the immediate replacement of the Crucifix and the picture of the King.
Fascismo, which during the last months of 1922 had seen its membership increasing by leaps and bounds, finally won with a note of fanaticism the very heart of the country from the Alps to the southern shores of Sicily. Latterly it had exercised the functions of State almost undisturbed, and did not spare either institutions or individuals in the pursuit of its end. It had demanded and successfully obtained the dismissal of the Pangermanist Mayor of Bolzano, Herr Perathoner; it had occupied the Giunta Provinciale of Trento, causing the removal of the Italian Governor, maintaining that he had been too weak in his attitude towards arrogant Pangermanists in that region; and had acted successfully as arbitrator in the labour dispute between Cantiere Orlando of Leghorn and the Government itself. It was no wonder, then, if after the big October meeting of last year at Naples and the “March to Rome” with the famous Quadrumvirate formed by General Cesare de Bono, Hon. Cesare Maria de Vecchi, Italo Balbo, and Michele Bianchi, then Secretary-General of the Party, Mussolini, the creator of this mighty movement, was summoned by the King to form the new Fascista Cabinet.
It might be a cause of surprise to the superficial observer, this sudden ascent to power of a party which, a few days before it took the government into its hands, had been threatened with martial law, an order which the King wisely refused to sign, thus avoiding civil war. But whoever has followed the development and progress of Fascismo during the last four years, considers its great strength and power in the country, its formidable membership (now over a million strong) compared with that of any other party (the Socialists are reduced to seventy thousand), and takes into account the high and patriotic principles on which this movement is founded will not wonder that the party got to power through an extra-parliamentary crisis. We cannot and must not forget that these “ black shirts ”—as the Fascisti are called—have really saved Italy from Bolshevism, which was sucking her very life-blood, and that they are thereby entitled to the gratitude of our country and of the world at large. “The Moscow conspirators, whose object was the overthrow of Western civilisation, swept with a wide net,” writes Lord Rothermere in his recent article, Mussolini: What Europe owes to him. “They made great headway in Germany, especially in Berlin; they seized Budapest under the direction of a convicted thief, but it was upon Italy they counted most, and when Mussolini struck against them in Italy, he was fighting a battle for all Europe.”
I do not think—and the Hon. Mussolini agreed with me in one of the conversations I had with him—that people abroad, especially in England and the United States, know much about Fascismo. It had been diagnosed as a sporadic revolutionary movement, which sooner or later would be put down by drastic measures. Not many have realised that in this after-war period there is no more important historical phenomenon than Fascismo, which, as our Prime Minister said, “is at the same time political, military, religious, economic and syndicalist, and represents all the hopes, the aspirations and requirements of the people.” The popular air “ Giovinezza ” (Youth), the official song of the Fascisti, with its thrilling notes, which magnetised the heart of the people, the characteristic black shirts with the shield of the “fascio” on their breasts, the “ gagliardetti ” (Fascisti standards)—all these have largely contributed towards rousing a delirium of enthusiasm among the masses for the great cause.
But three other important elements account for the success of the “National Fascista-Party” (as it is now officially constituted, with its “Great National Council”), namely its military organisation, its powerful Press, and, above all, the personality of Mussolini himself, the “Duce,” as he is called. The military organisation is entirely on Roman lines, with Roman names of “ legion," “Consul,” “cohort,” “Senior,” “Centurion,” “Decurion,” “Triari,” etc. The symbol of Fascismo is the same as that of the lictors of Imperial Rome—a bundle of rods with an axe in the centre—and the Fascista salute is that of the ancient Romans—by outstretched arm. The coins which are being struck bear on one side the King’s head and on the other the Roman “fascio;” in the same way special gold coins of one hundred lire will be issued shortly, to celebrate the first anniversary of the “March to Rome.” There is the most rigorous discipline, and the motto: “No discussion, only obedience,” has proved of immense value in all the sudden mobilisations and demobilisations carried out, often at a few hours notice, which could give points to the best organised army in the world. On the occasion of the mass meeting preceding the “March to Rome,” which was attended by over half a million men, in less than twenty-four hours forty thousand left the town in perfect order and without the slightest hitch.
Fascismo possesses a large Press, which comprises five dailies and a large number of weekly, fortnightly and monthly publications and a publishing house in Milan.
But the decisive factor in the great victory of Fascismo is due to the personality of the great leader of this army of Italy's salvation, the very soul of this mighty movement.
Few public men of our time have had a more rapid, brilliant and interesting career than Benito Mussolini, the son of a blacksmith. He is the youngest of his predecessors in this office, as he was bom only forty years ago at Predappio, in the province of Forli, where the villagers still call him simply “Our Benit.” He was deeply attached to his mother, Rosa Maltoni, and her death caused him intense sorrow. He has one sister, Edvige, and a younger brother, Arnaldo, who, since the elder one has become Prime Minister, has taken his place as editor of Il Popolo d’ltalia. Mussolini first worked in his father’s forge and then, having occupied for a time the position of village schoolmaster, emigrated to Switzerland, from which country he was, however, expelled on account of articles he had written advocating the Marxist doctrines. Returning once more to Italy, he became an active member of the Socialist Party and finally editor of its organ, the Avanti. Upon the outbreak of war in 1914, with his keen political insight, Mussolini saw the necessity of Italian intervention, and in consequence was forced to leave the official Socialist Party, giving up all the positions he held in it. He founded his Popolo d’ltalia, and began fiercely to sound the trumpets of war, inciting his country to abandon her neutral attitude and to throw in her lot with the Allies. He gained his end, and in 1915 he went to the front as a simple soldier in the IIth Bersagliere Regiment. In 1917, as the result of the bursting of a shell, he received thirty-eight simultaneous wounds; he was obliged to go to hospital, was promoted on the field, and invalided out of the Army. He then returned to Milan, and having resumed the editorship of his paper, the Popolo d’ltalia, began his political battles, and continued to fight through its columns, spurring his countrymen on to final victory.
With no exaggeration it can be stated that since the advent to power of Mussolini every day has seen a steady advance in the direction of the rebuilding of the country within and a notable enhancement of our prestige abroad. His strenuous everyday work is inspired by an indomitable determination to make Italy worthy of the glories of Vittorio Veneto, strengthened and disciplined, and he will spare neither himself nor those around him in his attempt to bring about its realisation.
He wishes to secure Italy’s rightful position in the world. Mussolini’s foreign policy of dignity, honesty and justice has already been outlined in his opening speech before the Chamber, and can be summarised thus: “No imperialism, no aggressions, but an attitude which shall do away with the policy of humility which has made Italy more like the Cinderella and humble servant of other nations. Respect for international treaties at no matter what cost. Fidelity and friendship towards the nations that give Italy serious proofs of reciprocating it. Maintenance of Eastern equilibrium, on which depends the tranquillity of the Balkan States and, therefore, European and world peace.”
It is enough to cast an eye on the numerous legislative and administrative work accomplished by Mussolini’s Government in these first eleven months to convince oneself that he is in deep earnest as to the vast programme of reconstruction he means to carry through. With reference to domestic matters, the Fascista Government has passed a great number of bills and projects of laws concerning the Electoral Reform Bill approved by the Chamber last July, radical reform of the entire school system, institution of the National Militia, and abolition of the Guardie Regie (which was a poor substitute for the Carabineers), industrialisation of Public Services (Posts, Telegraphs, Railways), abolition of Death Duties between near relations, enactment of Decree on the Eight Hours Work Bill, reformation of the Civil Law Codes, reduction of Ministerial departments, now only nine, which formerly were sixteen, and formation of the recent Ministry of National Economy, under which are grouped various others: Industry, Agriculture, Labour, etc., reduction of the National Debt by over a milliard, a comforting contribution towards the balance of the Budget, as is gathered by the speech delivered in June, at Milan, by the Minister of Finance, Hon. De Stefani.
Mussolini, besides having established a real discipline (there are no more strikes since the Fascista Government is in power), and having fully restored the authority of the State, has shown himself to be the most practical anti-waste advocate which the world has yet known. As to foreign policy, besides adhering to the Washington Disarmament Conference, and having signed conventions relative to the laying of cables for a direct telegraphic communication with North, Central and South America, negotiated important commercial treaties with Canada, Russia, Spain, Lithuania, Poland, Siam, Finland, Esthonia, etc., and having exercised beneficial influence in the Ruhr conflict and in the Lausanne Conference, has been an element of equilibrium for the new after-war international policy in the world.
The selection of his speeches contained in this volume is not a mere translation, since, in fact, the exact equivalent of this book as it has been arranged, classified and edited is not to be found in any other language. These speeches, illustrated by the valuable prefatory notes, almost all of which have been supplied to me by one who has been closely associated with Mussolini during the whole of his political career, serve, in my opinion, as could no biography, to reveal the mind, character and personality of Mussolini himself. Delivered at intervals throughout the various stages of his career, from Socialist to Fascista Prime Minister, they enable the reader to follow intimately the events which led up to the Fascista Revolution and its leader's attainment of his present strong position. The forcible and sober style of his character, shorn of every unnecessary word, betrays the dynamic force and intense earnestness of this man, who has been compared to Cromwell for his drastic and dictatorial methods in the Chamber, and to Napoleon for his eagle-like perception, for his decisiveness and his marvellous power of leadership.
Mussolini is a volcanic genius, a bewitcher of crowds. He seems a regular warrior, with an indomitable daring, great physical and moral courage, and he has seen death near him without wavering. He is the real type of Roman Emperor, with a severe bronzed face, but which hides a kind and generous heart. He is what people call a real “ self-made man,” and is a great lover of the violin and of all kinds of sport: fencing, cycling, flying, riding and motoring. Mussolini gets all he wants and quickly, and, as all his party do, knows exactly what he does want.
Apart from all that has been said, the present collection of speeches, besides showing Mussolini’s strong hand in the difficult art of statesmanship, displays clearly in almost every page (and so, possibly, the book may also appeal to others than politicians), additional important elements I which are not usually found in a volume of political speeches, namely a richness of sympathy for mankind, a blunt straightforwardness, a gentleness of soul together with exceptional moral strength, pure idealism, which lift him not only above party politics, but also high above the average of mankind.
Such is the builder of New Italy, and the enthusiasm and deep confidence which Mussolini has inspired in our country, and the unanimous approval his work has prompted abroad, are a good omen for Italy's future fortunes and for the welfare of the world at large.
BERNARDO QUARANTA di SAN SEVERINO.
Siena, Via S. Quirico, N.i.
October 1923.
REPRODUCTION OF THE ORIGINAL OF THE MANIFESTO ISSUED BY THE HON. MUSSOLINI AFTER HE AND HIS PARTY SUCCEEDED TO THE GOVERNMENT
(English Translation)
FASCISTA NATIONAL PARTY
Fascisti of all Italy!
Our movement has been crowned with success. The leader of our Party now holds the political power of the State for Italy and abroad. While this New Government represents our triumph, it celebrates, at the same time, our victory in the name of those who by land and by sea promoted it; and it accepts also, for the purpose of pacification, men from other parties, provided they are true to the cause of the Nation. The Italian Fascisti are too intelligent to wish to abuse their victory.
Fascisti !
The supreme Quadrumvirate, which has resigned its powers in favour of the Party, thanks you for the magnificent proof of courage and of discipline which you have given, and salutes you. You have proved yourselves worthy of the fortunes and of the future of your Fatherland.
Demobilise in the same perfectly orderly manner in which you assembled for this great achievement, destined — as we firmly believe—to open a new era in the history of Italy. Return now to your usual occupations, as, in order to arrive at the summit of her fortunes, Italy needs to work. May nothing disturb the glory of these days through which we have just passed—days of superb passion and of Roman greatness.
Long live Italy!
Long live Fascismo!
THE QUADRUMVIRATE.
PART I - MUSSOLINI THE “SOCIALIST”
"DO NOT THINK THAT BY TAKING AWAY MY MEMBERSHIP CARD YOU WILL TAKE AWAY MY FAITH IN THE CAUSE ”
Speech delivered on 25th November 1914, at Milan, before the meeting of the Milanese Socialist Section, which had decreed Mussolini’s expulsion from the official Socialist Party.
In the fearless militarism of the dramatic speech with which this volume begins, the Socialistic activity of Benito Mussolini ends— of Benito Mussolini, who from the autumn of 1914 could have been considered the recognised and acclaimed leader of the Italian Socialist Party. He had attained with giant strides the highest rank in the party’s hierarchy, namely the editorship of the Avanti, the chief organ of the political and syndicalist movement. He had been a clever and aggressive writer in a weekly provincial paper of Forli, called La lotta di classe (Class struggle), and an ardent Sunday orator for the “ville" of Romagna. He had revealed himself a “comrade” of tremendous power at the Congress of Reggio Emilia, held in the summer of 1912, where he delivered a memorable speech bitterly criticising the flaccid mentality of Reformism then dominating the party.
It was within two months of his success at Reggio Emilia that the revolutionary leaders, feeling the need of strong men, entrusted to Benito Mussolini the editorship of the Avanti, which was the most powerful weapon of the party.
The following speech was delivered before a furious crowd of not less than three thousand holders of membership cards, who hastened from other centres adjacent to Milan, amid a diabolical tumult in an atmosphere of organised hostility, which was the more violent by contrast with the fanatical devotion which Benito Mussolini had evoked during the two years in which he had been the undisputed mouthpiece of the party.
This atmosphere of intolerance and hatred had been fostered by the neutralist adversaries who had succeeded to the management of the Avanti after the present head of the Italian Government had left the party.
As is known, the excited meeting held in the spacious hall of the Casa del Popolo closed with a resolution for the expulsion of the new heretic, which was passed, except by a negligible minority of about fifty supporters, who afterwards stood by Mussolini in the victorious campaign for intervention.
My fate is decided, and it seems as if the sentence were to be executed with a certain solemnity. (Voices: ‘' Louder! Louder! '’)
You are severer than ordinary judges who allow the fullest and most exhaustive defence even after the sentence, since they give ten days for the production of the motives of appeal. If, then, it is decided, and you still think that I am unworthy of fighting any longer for your cause— (“Yes! yes!” is shouted by some of the most excited among the audience.)—then expel me. But I have a right to exact a legal act of accusation, and in this meeting the public prosecutor has not yet intervened with regard either to the political or to the moral issues. I shall, therefore, be condemned by an “ order of the day ” which means nothing. In a case like this, I ought to have been told that I was unworthy to belong any longer to the party for definite reasons, in which case I should have accepted my fate. This, however, has not been said, and a great many of you—if not all—will leave this room with an uneasy conscience. (Deafening voices: ‘'No! no!”)
With reference to the moral question, I repeat once more that I am ready to submit my case to any Committee which cares to make investigations and to issue a report.
As regards the question of discipline, I should say that this has not been examined, because there are just and fitting precedents for my changed attitude, and if I do not quote them it is because I feel myself to be secure and have an easy conscience.
You think to sign my death-warrant, but you are mistaken. To-day you hate me, because in your heart of hearts you still love me, because . . . (Applause and hisses interrupt the speaker.)
But you have not seen the last of me! Twelve years of my party life are, or ought to be, a sufficient guarantee of my faith in Socialism. Socialism is something which takes root in the heart. What divides me from you now is not a small dispute, but a great question over which the whole of Socialism is divided. Amilcare Cipriani can no longer be your candidate because he declared, both by word of mouth and in writing, that if his seventy-five years allowed him, he would be in the trenches fighting the European military reaction which was stifling revolution.
Time will prove who is right and who is wrong in the formidable question which now confronts Socialism, and which it has never had to face before in the history of humanity, since never before has there been such a conflagration as exists to-day, in which millions of the proletariat are pitted one against the other. This war, which has much in common with those of the Napoleonic period, is not an everyday event. Waterloo was fought in 1814; perhaps 1914 will see some other principles fall to the ground, will see the salvation of liberty, and the beginning of a new era in the world’s history—(Loud applause greets this fitting historical comparison.)—and especially in the history of the proletariat, which at all critical moments has found me here with you in this same spot, just as it found me in the street.
But I tell you that from now onwards I shall never forgive nor have pity on anyone who in this momentous hour does not speak his mind for fear of being hissed or shouted down. (This cutting allusion to the many prominent absentees is understood and warmly applauded by the meeting.)
I shall neither forgive nor have pity on those who are purposely reticent, those who show themselves hypocrites and cowards. And you will find me still on your side. You must not think that the middle classes are enthusiastic about our intervention. They snarl and accuse us of temerity, and fear that the proletariat, once armed with bayonets, will use them for their own ends. (Mingled applause, and cries of “No! no!”)
Do not think that in taking away my membership card you will be taking away my faith in the cause, or that you will prevent my still working for Socialism and revolution. (Hearty applause follows these last words of Mussolini, uttered with great energy and profound conviction. He descends from the platform and makes his way down the great hall.)
PART II - MUSSOLINI THE “MAN OF THE WAR”
FOR THE LIBERTY OF HUMANITY AND THE FUTURE OF ITALY
Speech delivered at the Scuole Mazza, Parma, 13th December 1914.
This speech was delivered under the stress of great excitement. The most ardent supporters of active neutrality were assembled at Parma, a citadel of revolutionary Syndicalism, which opposed Party Socialism, and the majority of whose members, after the outbreak of the European War, sided against the Central Empires and in defence of intervention. Among these we remember Giacinto Menotti Serrati, then Editor-in-chief of the Avanti, and Fulvio Zocchi, a ridiculous and malignant demagogue, now removed from political life.
But, notwithstanding this pressure from outside, the people of Parma, mindful of their Garibaldian and anti-Austrian traditions, sided enthusiastically with Mussolini and Alcesto De Ambris, the leader of Syndicalism and member of Parliament for the city, who had been the first to support the section of the extremists.
Citizens,—It is in your interest to listen to me quietly and with tolerance. I shall be brief, precise and sincere to the point of rudeness.
The last great continental war was from 1870 to 1871. Prussia, guided by Bismarck and Moltke, defeated France and robbed her of two flourishing and populous provinces. The Treaty of Frankfurt marked the triumph of Bismarck’s policy, which aimed at the incontestable hegemony of Prussia in Central Europe and the gradual Slavisation of the Balkan zones of Austria-Hungary. One recalls these features of Bismarck’s policy in trying to understand the different international crises which took place in Europe from ’70 up to the bewildering and extremely painful situation of to-day. From '70 onwards there were only remoter wars among the peoples of Eastern Europe, such as those between Russia and Turkey, Serbia and Bulgaria, Greece and Turkey, or wars in the colonies. There was, in consequence, a widespread conviction that a European or world war was no longer possible. The most diverse reasons were put forward to maintain this argument.
Illusions and Sophisms. It was suggested, for example, that the perfecting of the instruments for making war must destroy its possibility. Ridiculous! War has always been deadly. The perfecting of arms is relative to the progress—technical, mechanical and military—of the human race. In this respect the warlike machines of the ancient Romans are the equivalent of the mortars of 420 calibre. They are made with the object of killing, and they do kill. The perfecting of instruments of war is no hindrance to warlike instincts. It might have the opposite effect.
Reliance was also placed on “human kindness” and other sentiments of humanity, of brotherhood and love, which ought, it was maintained, to bind all the different branches of the species “man” together regardless of barriers of land or sea. Another illusion! It is very true that these feelings of sympathy and brotherliness exist; our century has, in truth, seen the rapid multiplication of philanthropic works for the alleviation of the hardships both of men and of animals; but along with these impulses exist others, profounder, higher and more vital. We should not explain the universal phenomenon of war by attributing it to the caprices of monarchs, race-hatred or economic rivalry; we must take into account other feelings which each of us carries in his heart, and which made Proudhon exclaim, with that perennial truth which hides beneath the mask of paradox, that war was of “divine origin.”
It was also maintained that the encouragement of closer international relations—economic, artistic, intellectual, political and sporting — by causing the peoples to become (better acquainted, would have prevented the outbreak of war among civilised nations. Norman Angell had founded his book upon the impossibility of war, proving that all the nations involved—victors and vanquished alike—would have their economic life completely convulsed and ruined in consequence. Another illusion laid bare! Lack of observation. The purely economic man does not exist. The story of the world is not merely a page of book-keeping; and material interests—luckily—are not the only mainspring of human actions. It is true that international relations have multiplied; that there is, or was, freer interchange—political and economic—between the peoples of the different countries than there was a century ago. But parallel with this phenomenon is another, which is that the people, with the diffusion of culture and the formation of an economic system of a national type, tend to isolate themselves psychologically and morally.
Internationalism. Side by side with the peaceful middle-class movement, which is not worth examination, flourished another of an international character, that of the working classes. At the outbreak of war this class, too, gave evidence of its inefficiency. The Germans, who ought to have set the example, flocked as a man to the Kaiser’s banner. The treachery of the Germans forced the Socialists of the other countries to fall back upon the basis of nationality and the necessity of national defence. The German unity automatically determined the unity of the other countries. It is said, and justly, that international relations are like love; it takes two to carry them on. Internationalism is ended; that which existed yesterday is dead, and it is impossible to foresee what form it will take to-morrow. Reality cannot be done away with and cannot be ignored and the reality is that millions and millions of men, for the t most part of the working classes, are standing opposite one another to-day on the blood-drenched battlefields of Europe. The neutrals, who shout themselves hoarse crying “Down with war! ” do not realise the grotesque cowardice contained in that cry to-day. It is irony of the most atrocious kind to shout “ Down with war! ” while men are fighting and dying in the trenches.
The Real Situation. Between the two groups, the Triple Entente and the Austro-German Alliance, Italy has remained— neutral. In the Triple Entente there is heroic Serbia, who has broken loose from the Austrian yoke; there is martyred Belgium, who refused to sell herself; there is republican France who has been attacked; there is democratic England; there is autocratic Russia, though her foundations are undermined by revolution. On the other side there is Austria, clerical and feudal, and Germany, militarist and aggressive. At the outbreak of war Italy proclaimed herself neutral. Was the “ exception ” contemplated in the treaties ? It seems as if it were so, especially in view of the recent revelations made by Giolitti. If the neutrality of the Government meant indifference, the neutrality of the Socialists and the economic organisations had an entirely different character and significance. The Socialist neutrality intended a general strike in the case of alliance with Austria; no practical opposition in the case of a war against her.
A distinction was made, therefore, between one war and another. Further, the classes were allowed to be called up.
If the Government had mobilised, all the Socialists would have found it a natural and logical proceeding. They admitted, therefore, that a nation has the right and duty to defend itself by recourse to arms, in case of attack from outside. Neutrality understood in this way had necessarily to lead—with the progress of events, especially in Belgium —to the idea of intervention.
The Bourgeoisie is Neutral. It is controversial whether Italy has a bourgeoisie in the generally accepted sense of the word. Rather than the bourgeoisie and lower classes, there are rich and poor. In any case, it is untrue that the Italian middle classes are, at the moment, jingoist. On the contrary they are neutral and desperately pacifist. The banking world is neutral, the industrial classes have reorganised their business, and the agrarian population, small and great, are pacifists by tradition and temperament ; the political and academic middle classes are neutral. Look at the Senate! There are perhaps exceptions, young men who do not wish to. stagnate in the dead pool of neutrality; but the middle classes, taken as a whole, are hostile to war and neutral. As a conclusive proof, compare the tone of the middle-class papers to-day with that shown at the time of the Libyan campaign, and note the difference. The trumpet-call which then sounded for war is muffled now. The language of the middle-class Press is uncertain, wavering and mysterious, neutral in word but, in effect, in favour of the Allies. Where are the trumpets that summoned us in the September of 1911? The secret is out, and ought to make the Socialists, who are not stupid, stop and think. On the one side are all the conservative and stagnant elements, and on the other the revolutionary and the living forces of the country. It is necessary to choose.
We want the War! But we want the war and we want it at once. It is not true that military preparation is lacking. What does this waiting for the spring to come mean ?
Socialism ought not, and cannot, be against all wars because in that case it would have to deny fifty years of history. Do you want to judge and condemn in the same breath the war in Tripoli and the result of the French Revolution of 1793? And Garibaldi? Is he, too, a jingoist? You must distinguish between one war and another, as between one crime and another, one case of bloodshed and another. Bovio said: “All the water in the sea would not suffice to remove the stain from the hands of Lady Macbeth, but a basinful would wash the blood from the hands of Garibaldi." Guesde, in a congress of French Socialists held a few weeks before the outbreak of war, declared that, in case of a conflagration, the nation that was most Socialist would be the victim of the nation that was least. To prove this, notice the behaviour of the Italian Socialists. Look at them in Parliament. Treves lost time by quibbling. At one moment he exclaimed, “ We shall not deny the country.” In fact the country cannot be denied. One does not deny one's mother, even if she does not offer one all her gifts, even if she does force one to earn one’s living in the alluring streets of the world. (Great applause.)
Treves said more: “ We shall not oppose a war of defence.” If this is admitted, the necessity of arming ourselves is admitted. You will not open the gates of Italy yet to the Austrian army, because they will come to pillage the houses and violate the women! I know it well. There are base wretches who blame Belgium for defending herself. She might have pocketed the money of the Germans, they say, and allowed them a free passage; while resistance meant laying herself open to the scientific and systematic destruction of her towns. But Belgium lives, and will live, because she refused to sell herself ignobly. If she had done so, she would be dead for all time. (Great applause, and cries of “Long live Belgium! ” The cheering lasts for some minutes.)
The War of Defence. When do you want to begin to defend yourselves? When the enemy’s knee is on your chest? Wouldn’t it be better to begin a little earlier? Wouldn’t it be better to begin to-day when it would not cost so much, rather than wait until to-morrow when it might be disastrous ? Do you wish to maintain a splendid isolation ? But in that case we must arm; arm and create a colossal militarism.
The Socialists, and I am still one, although an exasperated one, never brought forward the question of irredentism, but left it to the Republicans. We are in favour of a national war. But there are also reasons, purely socialist in character, which spur us on towards intervention.
The Europe of To-morrow. It is said that the Europe of to-morrow will not be any different from the Europe of yesterday. This is the most absurd and alarming hypothesis. If you accept it, there is some absolute meaning for your neutrality. It is not worth while sacrificing oneself in order to leave things as they were before. But both mind and heart refuse to believe that this spilling of blood over three continents will lead to nothing. Everything leads one to believe, on the contrary, that the Europe of to-morrow will be profoundly transformed. Greater liberty or greater reaction ? More or less militarism ? Which of the two groups of Powers, by their victory, would assure us of better conditions of liberty for the working classes ? There is no doubt about the answer. And in what way do you wish to assist in the triumph of the Triple Entente ? Perhaps with articles in the papers and “ orders of the day ” in committee? Are these sentimental manifestations enough to raise up Belgium again? To relieve France? This France which bled for Europe in the revolutions and wars from ’89 to ’71 and from '71 to ’14? Do you then offer to the France of the “Rights of Man” nothing but words?
Against Apathy. Tell me—and this is the supreme reason for intervention—tell me, is it human, civilised, socialistic, to stop quietly at the window while blood is flowing in torrents, and to say, “I am not going to move, it does not matter to me a bit ” ? Can the formula of “sacred egoism” devised by the Hon. Salandra be accepted by the working classes? No! I do not think so. The law of solidarity does not stop at economic competition; it goes beyond. Yesterday it was both fine and necessary to contribute in aid of struggling companions; but to-day they ask you to shed your blood for them. They implore it. Intervention will shorten the period of terrible carnage. That will be to the advantage of all, even of the Germans, our enemies. Will you refuse this proof of solidarity? If you do, with what dignity will you, Italian proletarians, show yourselves abroad to-morrow? Do you not fear that your German comrades will reject you, because you betrayed the Triple Entente? Do you not fear that those in France and Belgium, showing you their land still scarred by graves and trenches, and pointing out with pride their ruined towns, will say to you: “Where were you, and what did you do, 0 Italian Proletarians, when we fought desperately against the Austro-German militarism to free Europe from the incubus of the hegemony of the Kaiser? ” In that day you will not know how to answer; in that day you will be ashamed to be Italian, but it will be too late!
The People’s War. Let us take up again the Italian traditions. The people who want the war want it without delay. In two months’ time it might be an act of brigandage; to-day it is a war to be fought with courage and dignity.
