The missing link of the Italian left  

                                                                             Mauro Abate    About the author

The Italian left after WW2 and the P.C.I.

Berlinguer's split ("Strappo")

Moreover, although in general the P.C.I. was an ally of the Eastern Communist parties, and it had endorsed for over 50 years their policies, it gradually distanced from them. Finally, when the army took power in Poland in 1981, Berlinguer formalized the split (known as "strappo") with the Soviet Union-led "real socialism". Berlinguer asserted that the stage begun with the 1917 October revolution had ended (Moscow's Pravda condemned the statement as "monstrous" and "sacrilegious"). However, to the outer world, all this seemed hardly believable, and the allegiance of the P.C.I. to the democratic values was still questionable. The bottom line: to gain credibility, and governance, also the party name seemed inadequate, and it became debatable whether changing it or not.

Achille Occhetto

Occhetto went beyond Berlinguer's Compromesso Storico policy, as he understood that a new era was rising, in which the alliance of a multitude of liberal forces was needed to reform the society, fuelled by ideas and values. To complete the process  - known as "svolta" or shift - just after the fall of Berlin's wall he changed the party name into "Democratic Party of the Left" (Partito Democratico della Sinistra or PDS), ultimately changed into "Democratic Leftists" (Democratici di Sinistra, or DS).
Predictably enough, a fraction of his party found the shift a right-wing betrayal of the party mostly Marxist essence. They claimed that after all the P.C.I. was not to blame for the Eastern communist parties wrongdoings. The dissidents founded another communist party, Rifondazione Comunista. Occhetto rejected the claim, asserting that his was a necessary step to give new life to the ideals and to the heritage of the party ("We chose the way which brought us to die in order to be born again"). 

The PDS, and thus Occhetto, led the left coalition which lost the crucial 1994 elections against magnate Silvio Berlusconi's right-wing coalition. Occhetto was blamed of not mediating a broader alliance with the centre, appearing too radical to the electors (an allegation he rebuts). He resigned as General Secretary. Since the PDS official policy was to reform society, an internal debate thus begun on what "reformism" actually meant. Occhetto radically believes in egalitarianism and freedom, ideals whose roots date back to the French revolution, and he thus believes in "strong reformism", which should be a constant feature of the "true left" (in his words). To the new leaders of the PDS (at this stage called DS) Occhetto appeared too radical, while he was only consistent with the former P.C.I. ideals.

In the end, while the large majority of the P.C.I. electors (let alone of the Italians) understood and approved his shift, within his party Occhetto was overtaken - at least nominally - both from the left (the dissidents of Rifondazione Comunista) and from the right (the new DS leaders). Shamefully, he was also emarginated, ignored, and to some extent banned by the new leaders of the DS, i.e. of the very same party which he founded.

Still up and running

Occhetto was deeply saddened by his unjust alienation. Nevertheless, after a few years of reflection, also spent writing a book (Secondo me, "According to me", an interesting insight of the history of the P.C.I.), he steamed ahead. As he deemed his former party too moderate in the attempt to please electors of the centre to defy PM Berlusconi, he formed an off-the-beaten track alliance and founded a party with Antonio Di Pietro. The former judge of the trials on political bribery in the 90s, Di Pietro is now a politician supporting uprightness in the Italian political world, and embodying traditional, popular cultural traits. The party (called Italia dei Valori, "Italy of Values") defended uprightness in the government and in the public authority - another teaching of Enrico Berlinguer - and also tackled the conflict of interest regarding PM Berlusconi, the business magnate monopolizing Italian politics and the Italian economy.
In the June 2004 European polls the result was not good. The reason lies in the different political orientation of the party leaders and of their electors, as Di Pietro's are far more moderate than Occhetto's. The latter announced that he and his group will separate from the party. Yet Occhetto didn't throw in the sponge: he just founded the "Cantiere per il Bene Comune"  or "Building yard for the Common Good", a society whose plan is to help founding the above mentioned "true left".

The Italian centre-left, currently

The Italian left is traditionally diversified. Not only parties, but also denominations, coalitions, nicknames, synonyms and definitions abound. There follows a synoptic table (coloured cells explain political standpoints or coalitions). Also shown is the percentage of votes in the 2004 European polls.

Distinctive features of the Italian political movements

(a) The middle class

It is no surprise that Italy undergoes major changes in the present swiftly changing world. Yet changes occurring in Italy are more profound than in other western countries because the "Bel Paese" (Nice Country, one of the nicknames the Italians give to their homeland) has a larger gap to fill. Namely, the industrial revolution which changed Europe in the last two centuries was only partially effective in Italy. Reference is not only to the renowned North-South gap, but also to the incomplete creation of an established "Civil Society", following the ideals and the social and economic patterns brought by the European Enlightenment. In the other western European countries, it was the middle class who took upon itself the burden of the process. In the 19th century, the Italian middle class fulfilled entirely if not heroically the responsibility, during the process called Risorgimento (Resurgence), which brought to the reunion and independence of the country (1860 AD). The Italian patriots were admired internationally not only for their bravery, but also for their political creativity, and frequently also for their great erudition. They mostly belonged to the upper middle class.
However, the newly born Italian Kingdom which they founded (1860 AD) was unable to complete the ideals of the Resurgence. It was a class-based, conservative and increasingly nationalistic society. Notably, many Italians found the society under Fascism closer to the people than the pre-WW1 elitarian Monarchic society. This was one of the reasons of the popularity of Fascism. In other words, to many Italians, the Fascist society delivered more public infrastructures and more working opportunities (especially in the Civil Administration, or in the Army), than the distant Monarchic society. Moreover, the middle class in general appeased to Fascism, and to its wrongdoings. 
On the other hand, as opposed to other Western Countries, many individuals of the middle class contributed to the achievement of the left-wing or Catholic political forces. For example, both the above mentioned Berlinguer and Occhetto belonged to the middle class. So while the middle class failed to become the backbone of a modern country, many individuals, with an idealistic and quasi-missionary approach, were essential in the performance of the ideals of political forces frequently at odds with the interests and outlook of the very same class they belonged to.

(b) The working class

Mirror-like to the inadequacy of the middle class to construct a complete country, thus distinctively the workers' political organizations filled the gap, acquiring managing and government responsibilities. One of its aspects was that a strong welfare state was established and maintained. The Socialist Party (P.S.I.) ruled Italy for nearly 30 years from 1963, together with the prevailingly conservative Christian Democrat Party (D.C.). They mediated and reached a compromise with the P.C.I. on important issues throughout the duration of their various governs. The P.C.I. was also the most elected party in five "red" regions, usually of central-northern Italy, thus administering advanced economy areas.

As a result of all the above mentioned factors, from a political point of view the working class in the last century didn't consider the middle class a reference. The general idea was that middle class didn't have political, social or cultural commitment, and that it was primarily concerned with its own interests. The moderate left also always believed that the economy free trade policy - physiological of middle class - needed corrections to avoid individualism and to reallocate wealth also to the weaker classes. The extreme left rejects the economy free trade policy as selfish and aggressive (Bertinotti, the leader of Rifondazione Comunista states "The freedom they talk about is their freedom, achieved at the expense of someone else, the workers"). Conversely, the general belief was that the workers' organizations were more cultured, farsighted and capable of addressing any political, social or economic issue for the wellbeing of all. Whether this was right or not, for 40 years the Italian left-wing had a sort of cultural hegemony in Italy. A left-wing outlook on most things was not only trendy, but practically mainstream. The most alluring reviews and papers, the most attractive TV shows, the most read books, were all left-wing.

The middle class comeback

In 1993 the so called centre-left government came to an end ruinously. The magistrates found that many politicians, mostly of the D.C. (Christian Democratic Party) and of the P.S.I. (Socialist Party), allied and ruling Italy, had been bribed. The culprits claimed that bribery was meant to lobby their parties, and that it was a customary, ordinary business in Italy. The massive bribery - dubbed Tangentopoli "Bribe town", or Mani Pulite "Clean Hands" - arouse general indignation. To most Italians it was the last straw, as they had enough of the ruling establishment, which appeared corrupt and inefficient.
When in 1963 the P.S.I. broke up the strict alliance with the P.C.I. to join the apparently centre D.C. to form the "centre-left" government, one of its purposes was to lead the D.C. along a centre-left, liberal path. As a matter of fact, quite the opposite occurred. The liberal character of the P.S.I. vanished over the years. It became a centre party, mainly concerned with holding power, and having as many key-positions (and in turn power) for its members. The D.C. purported it was an ecumenical, universal party, representing all social classes and orientations, with a left, a centre, and a right-wing within the party. Actually, its right-wing ruled the party, and thus the entire country. It held most of Italy's key positions and power, and it thus ultimately controlled, and in the long run changed the P.S.I., eager to have more and more power. The two parties, and especially the D.C., set up a gigantic, ruthless, diabolical - and disgusting - patronage system or clientelismo, promising jobs and "favours" (= unfair advantages) to their "clients" in exchange of votes. Under their rule, productivity decreased, the Italian economy lost competitiveness, and with it the entire country simply collapsed.
In the 1994 elections the left coalition, which had opposed the centre-left government for more than 30 years was thus favourite, but at that stage something unexpected happened: the centre-right wing middle class appeared on the scene, and it won the elections.
After more than half a century of bad government, of inefficient and unfair public authority, the Italians naturally sought uprightness in the central government and in the public authority. Yet they wanted their country to be finally modern, without the quirks and quibbles they face every day. The popular password was to seek "normality". The Italians also sought an efficient economy delivering prosperity. They were allured by Silvio Berlusconi, a magnate who made his way through building firms, real estate speculations, and advertising with his privately owned TV stations. Berlusconi wooed electors promising to reverse the economic downturn by implementing efficiency and economic free trade ideas in the Italian economy. The favourite slogans bombarding electors was that he was going to create one million new jobs during his mandate, and that he was going to reduce taxes. Berlusconi's newly founded party, Forza Italia ("Go Italy") became the hinge of the centre-right wing coalition which won the elections, thanks also to the massive hyping up through his privately owned TV stations.

Berlusconi's rule

Fifty-six years after WW2 thus political forces openly representing the middle class, and centre-right, ruled Italy (the D.C. as mentioned pretended to be a universal party, representing all classes). Yet Berlusconi's coalition, still ruling Italy, despite the denomination resembling that of similar forces in the west - "Casa delle liberta'", i.e. House of (all) freedoms -, is far from being the "normal" i.e. constructive, enlightened middle class force, which Italy never had since its independence, as opposed to the other advanced western European countries.  Never mind Berlusconi's self-righteousness and frequently insulting arrogance. Politics is not for the weak of heart, and such personal traits are subjective. In fact Berlusconi's admirers consider them signs of his leadership, deeming him the saviour of the fortunes of the country.  What though is unacceptable of Berlusconi and of his party is the lack of political fairness, and his unscrupulousness. He tries to own as many media he can (TV stations, papers, reviews etc.), where his journalists plug him and his ideas gaining public consent, and thus political power, with which in turn he controls the state-owned TV stations, multiplying public consent and power. He is always on TV for some reason, whether because interviewed, or even as president of the Milan AC football club. Seemingly Berlusconi considers Italians "vidiots" which he can easily influence, as his media strategy is prepared in a clear-headed way.
Naturally, Berlusconi is also omnipresent in the political arena: he is PM, yet at times he appointed himself also as Foreign Minister and Minister of Finance. When magistrates indict him on a number of cases of corruption, he in turn wages war upon them, discrediting them as puppets in the hands of the left-wing, thus reversing the allegations, as if they persecuted him rather than prosecuted him. Moreover, to avoid investigation, or to be acquitted, the coalition that he leads passes specific bills, sometimes "ad personam" or "a la carte", to favour him or his friends in particular trials. His conflict of interest is consequently unheard of in western countries, and he obviously does very little to regulate it.
Economy-wise, Berlusconi and his coalition promised to bring prosperity by implementing free market, reducing taxes, thus stimulating a thriving economy, and creating millions new jobs. Actually, taxes were not reduced, and there are talks of an upcoming tax squeeze to save the national revenue. There was no significant amelioration of the status of large companies or corporations.  The welfare service was dramatically reduced, while in general the government stimulated a private, individual approach to work. The "one million jobs" were not created, and Berlusconi's companies (Mediaset, RTI etc.) shamefully did not even employ the compulsory quota of disabled or refugees. Finally, important workers' rights were contested and debarred.
The major outcome is that professionals and merchants (especially of low profile) increased their expectations, and they have become greedy - despite they deliver a bad service. Moreover, scores of self-styled "entrepreneurs" - mere speculators, usually petty and operating borderline illegally - feel encouraged. As a result inflation skyrocketed and prices nearly doubled in three years (!). Workers, employees, the retired, and the unemployed cannot change their income, and they are on the edge of poverty.
In conclusion, Berlusconi's purported "new Italian miracle" is only delivering social problems and conflicts, and an unfair society. The "miracle" is also generating an even worse consequence: it is subtly changing negatively the Italian culture. The Italians were renowned as gracious, tactful, and compassionate people. If you visit Italy you will find out that they have become increasingly litigious and concerned mainly about their own businesses.  

The 2006 left revenge

The missing link of the Italian left (and of western left-wing parties)

In the end, the missing link of the Italian left - and of the European left - is the incapability to understand that the productive elements of society should become its engine, rather than conceiving them as an enemy. In other words, the market economy should co-exist with liberal and left wing ideas, avoiding to leave the core of productivity in the hands of the centre-right parties and of their ideas. 
It is not only a tactical necessity. In fact a just and developed society can only be achieved with the fulfillment of the hopes of both the individuals and of the community. It is therefore necessary safeguarding both the longing to elevate oneself of each individual, and the needs of the community. Actually, the best solution to reach this goal is to transform the productive classes into the flywheel of the amelioration of the society, not by simply collecting as much as possible their resources by taxing them, but by making them become convinced partners and pioneers of such project.
In conclusion, finding a way to make the middle class become truly liberal and generous is the solution the left should seek, rather than sticking to the old clichés and to obsolete views, only leading to social fragmentation and to a sterile social conflict.

The written authorization of the author is required to use any part of this article. Usually free usage is allowed for cultural / political purposes. Enquiries: mauro@romanhomes.com

Some photos are courtesy of C.G.I.L. (trade union) of Brescia, http://www.cgil.brescia.it