Paul Corner

Everyday Fascism in the 1930s: Centre and Periphery in the Decline of Mussolini's Dictatorship

From the first Italian Fascism proclaimed its aim of nationalising, centralising and moralising Italian politics. During the regime the cult of the ethical state was the most obvious and continuing expression of this ambition. This article argues that the decline of Fascism, already very evident by the end of the 1930s, was closely linked to the regimes failure to realise these objectives and that this failure was in large part a consequence of the difficulties experienced by Fascism in changing the relationship between the provinces and the centre in terms of the way in which power was perceived and employed in the provinces. It is argued that these difficulties were implicit in the way in which Fascism had been understood by its provincial supporters from the very beginnings of the movement.

Italian fascism: organization, enthusiasm, opinion

Abstract In its newspaper accounts and in its documentary films of public demonstrations, the fascist regime attempted to paint a picture of enormous popular enthusiasm for the movement. Clearly a form of impression management, the picture was extremely important for the image of the regime both at home and abroad. This article examines the build up to, and the first months of, the Ethiopian war in 1935 and looks in particular at the immense national demonstration of 2 October 1935 and at the Giornata della fede of 18 December 1935, when women were invited to donate their wedding rings to the national cause. It argues that these events were far less spontaneous and much more organized than is sometimes thought and presents evidence to suggest that the patriotic call was not embraced with enthusiasm by all Italians, fascist supporters included. In conclusion the article posits the existence, as in other totalitarian regimes, of a very significant distinction and distance between formal and ritual observation of obligation to the regime and personal and private thoughts and actions.

The Road to Fascism: an Italian Sonderweg?

The article argues that many of the factors which eventually produced Italian fascism should be identified not in the divisions of the war years nor in the conflicts of the immediate postwar period but in the period 1900–15 and in the failure of Giovanni Giolittis reformist strategy. The increasing popular disaffection with parliamentary politics before the war reflected the inability of Giolitti to widen the political base of liberalism through significant social reform. It was this failure which made the experience of the First World War especially disastrous in Italy. In particular, it is argued that liberal governments totally failed to understand the kind of social conflict which was developing in the large estates of the Po valley – the area which would provide the specific context for the explosion of Fascism in late 1920. The essay links Fascism, therefore, less to an often cited ‘working class revolutionary threat’ in 1919–20 than to unresolved long-term structural problems in certain areas of rural Italy. Alexander De Grand offers a critical commentary on Paul Corners conclusions and the author gives his response.

Non-compliance, Indifference and Resistance in Regimes of Mass Dictatorship

Mass dictatorship—surprising as it may sound—should be seen as a collective enterprise. Despite the commanding position of the dictator—an individual usually marked out as being in some way personally unique—the masses have a fundamental role to play. The cheering crowds and people-packed squares are not simple choreography as they might seem, not just colourful extras to a ruthless will to power on the part of the dictator, but constitute an integral part of the dictatorial whole; without them the dictator stands alone—and the mass dictator cannot stand alone. The people are supposed to be “one with their leader” when it comes to crucial decisions and they are required to express their support in a visible and often vocal manner. The demonstrable consensus of the masses, whether real or apparent consensus, is a key feature of mass dictatorships. It is sufficient to watch newsreels of Hitler at Nuremberg, of Mussolini in Piazza Venezia, of Stalin in Red Square or—nearer to our times—of Kim Jong Un in Pyongyang’s Kim Il Sung Square to appreciate this connection. The intended demonstration of a link between the leader and the led is evident, the role of popular acclamation obvious. It is for this reason that mass dictatorships differ from more simple authoritarian dictatorships, where repression rather than consensus is the dominating characteristic.

Two new books on Fascism. A review, the authors’ responses and the reviewer's comments

This section contains a review by the Italian historian Emilio Gentile of Paul Corners new book on the Fascist Party and public opinion, and of Christopher Duggans intimate history of Mussolinis Italy. The review is followed by responses from Corner and Duggan, and the section concludes with comments by Gentile.

Response to Matteo Millan: Squadrismo and Fascist Violence in the Long Term

Rather surprisingly, Mussolinis blackshirts (the squadristi) have never really received the attention accorded to Hitlers paramilitary groups. It is interesting, therefore, to read an article that seeks to remedy this situation. Millan argues that the traditional view of squadrismo as important before the March on Rome but of less relevance in later years – indeed, as something of a liability – is too simplistic and needs revision. He sees the influence of squadrismo as permeating the regime throughout its existence and suggests that historians have been too quick in seeing the death of squadrismo in the supposed ‘subordination’ of the Fascist Party to the state in the years immediately following 1925.

Special issue in Memory of Christopher Seton-Watson

This special issue of Modern Italy is dedicated to the memory of Christopher SetonWatson, the founder of the Association for the Study of Modern Italy, who died on 8 September 2007. In a sense the issue is presented with real regret – the regret that it was not possible to produce a formal festschrift for him while he was still alive. We hope that the present issue will go some way to compensate for the omission. The contributions presented here come from people who knew Christopher through different paths of contact and in different periods – some as university colleagues, some as his DPhil students in Oxford, some as collaborators in the later phase of his life after retirement from Oriel College. I am grateful to all those who agreed to contribute to this special issue; I am also grateful to Guardian Newspapers (and to John Pollard) for allowing me to reprint John’s Guardian Obituary for Christopher – an obituary which covers ground it would be pointless to reproduce in this presentation. The articles are hardly homogeneous in subject matter but they do all reflect the common theme of interest for contemporary Europe, its history and its politics. Some deal specifically with Christopher’s own publications, of which Italy from liberalism to fascism is the best known; others deal with different, if often related, topics – subjects which one can readily imagine Christopher being happy to reflect on and discuss, given his very broad interest in contemporary history and politics, which went well beyond Italy. It is appropriate to remember here that, although known as one of the foremost historians of contemporary Italy, Christopher’s curiosity often carried him much further afield. He never lost interest for the ‘family’ concern with Eastern Europe and at times his studies took him away from Europe altogether. For example, when I was first sent to him as a postgraduate student in 1967 he was passionately enthusiastic about Latin American politics and sometimes rather reluctant to return to the question of Italian fascism (of which, for the moment and understandably, he had had enough). As all those who knew him well would acknowledge, Christopher was in some ways a very shy man, certainly not one to seek the limelight. It was all the more remarkable, therefore, when, in 1982 and inspired by a visit to a conference of CONGRIPS (the US Association of Political Scientists), he decided to convoke a meeting of historians and

Reply to De Grand: But Did Reform Fail?

I am indebted to Alexander De Grand for taking the time and trouble to comment on my article, although I am sorry that he seems to have read it principally as an attack on Giolitti and Giolittian policies. While I can see that it is possible to read this into the paper, it was certainly not my intention to lay the responsibility for the development of Fascism at Giolittis door. My concern was rather to seek to identify some of the reasons for the dramatic clash between left and right in 1920 and 1921 which led to the affirmation of Fascism; it was in this light that I attempted to assess the Giolittian period, which has always seemed to me the great moment of democratic possibilities between one form of repressive government and another. I agree, of course, that the great radicalising and polarising event in Italy was the First World War. My point – put very simply – was that the experience of the war might have been much less devastating for Italy if the political situation in 1914–15 had not already been characterised by profound lacerations within Italian society. To put it another way, I was interested in seeing why, as De Grand himself says, ‘the great hopes for reform that marked that [Giolittian] period gave rise to little structural reform’ and in assessing the consequences of that lack of reform for the subsequent period. The central question of the article, therefore, is that of Fascism as breach or continuity rather than the culpability of Giolitti.

Women in Fascist Italy. Changing Family Roles in the Transition from an Agricultural to an Industrial Society

Fascist legislation mirrored the ideological values which the regime claimed to represent,, and among these values were the hierarchy of gender and the supremacy of the male. The military virtues of the ’new fascist man’ left little room for women; the role of the women was defined in terms of family and motherhood, and was never intended to be anything other than subordinate. As a consequence, women faced adverse treatment in almost all spheres-political, economic, social-from legislation designed to reinforce the position of the male. 2