MIA > Archive > Nin > TUs Against Fascism
CONCEPTIONS of Fascism are far from unanimous. What is Fascism? Is it a purely Italian phenomenon, or has it already assumed the forms and proportions of an international movement?
We shall not here give a general analysis of this movement, since we have to confine ourselves to the activities of Fascism in the trade union movement; but we shall attempt, nevertheless, to determine its character and significance.
Very often Fascism is confused with the old forms and traditions of bourgeois reaction. But, in our opinion, Fascism is an entirely new phenomenon. Fascism may be defined as a violent and illegal action of capitalism which has its main support in the industrial and agrarian petty-bourgeoisie and in those elements which have been reduced from a higher class to a lower.
The characteristic feature of its methods is the rejection of all political formulae and slogans created by the bourgeoisie itself – such as “democracy,” “justice,” “free speech, press and assemblage,” “parliamentarianism,” etc. Also, by the application of the most violent terrorism against labor organizations and their revolutionary leaders.
Fascism is essentially a post-war phenomenon. The greater part of its adherents is made up of ex-officers and peasants. The Fascist movement is rich in instructive lessons for the revolutionary proletariat. It shows us, above all, the necessity of having a well defined and prudent policy towards the small peasants, whose active co-operation or – at least – neutralization, is absolutely indispensable to the revolutionary proletariat if it wishes to be victorious. An ill-considered policy may convert the small peasants into the most powerful instruments of capitalist reaction – as we have seen in Italy.
Another most important lesson that Fascism teaches us is that there is no middle-road which the proletariat can follow in the present situation. The proletariat must choose between its own dictatorship and the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. If the working class does not take advantage of the opportune moment to establish its dictatorship, it will certainly be crushed by the bourgeoisie which then establishes its own dictatorial rule.
Fascism as a definite trade union movement exists only in Italy at the present time. But after its ascendancy to political power it spread rapidly. We may say that it is a movement which has originated in Italy, but which tends to assume similar forms in other countries. We may already speak of the birth of an international Fascist movement.
The process of the internationalization of Fascism resembles that of the revolutionary movement. In the beginning of the imperialist war there existed an international Socialism, just as an international reaction existed at the beginning of the Fascist movement.
Up to 1917, Bolshevism, which was one of the forms of international Socialism, was an exclusively Russian movement But, with the victory of the November Revolution and the creation of the Communist International, it became a world movement. Today, Bolshevism or Communism is not a Russian doctrine but an international one. Similarly, with the advent of Mussolini to power, the different forms of reaction and White Terror all tend to turn into Fascism, which has now become an international movement with its own characteristics. It is no longer doubted that we are here confronted by an international movement, and we should regard it as such.
We must, of course, exterminate Italian Fascism first. With the fall of the Mussolini government, international Fascism’s hopes would, be blighted. The overthrow of Mussolini would have the same significance for world reaction as the overthrow of the Russian Soviet Republic would have for the world revolutionary movement.
Italian Fascism was born during the war. Its principal initiators were former revolutionaries, syndicalists, anarchists, and socialists. In the beginning of the imperialist war these elements abandoned their comrades in order to promote Italy’s participation in the world massacre.
It should be noted that the majority of these old revolutionists were leaders of the peasants movement. This explains one of the fundamental characteristics of Fascism.
These elements did not abandon their old conceptions suddenly. Thus, at the first Fascist Congress, which took place in March, they adopted certain resolutions in support of the trade union movement and issued such slogans as Workers’ Control, partial expropriations of the capitalists, the distribution of the lands among the peasants, the abolition of the Senate, etc.
In 1918 and 1919 they were in constant touch with De Ambris, once an old revolutionary syndicalist who became a patriot and came out in favor of Italy’s participation in the world war. It was he who abandoned the Union Sindicale Italiana and founded the Union Italiana del Lavoro. The strikes called by this organization whose head- quarters were in Parma, were supported by the Fascisti and were even subsidized by them. This first formation of Fascism was later modified, but its ex-revolutionary elements retained their influence until 1920.
Up to that time there were no Fascist trade unions. It was during that year that such unions began to crop up. The Fascisti became active among the peasants. This was favored by the erroneous policy of the Socialist Party. The Agricultural Workers’ Federation, which was led by the Socialists, stubbornly opposed the cry of the small peasants for land, and did everything to get them into the trade union organizations, which they did not understand.
A different tactic should have been employed with regard to the peasants and workers. Indeed, as our comrades Gramsche and Tasca wrote in a splendid article:
“The Fascisti liberated the small peasants from the yoke of an organization which did not correspond to their class.”
They forced the rich landlords to yield up a part of their estates, thus creating the illusion among the small peasants that the land was to be distributed among them.
The Fascisti thus created a magnificent base for recruiting among the peasantry, which still constitutes the overwhelming majority of their troops. Later, the rest was conquered by force. The methods employed by the Fascisti – the clubbing, castor oil, punitive expeditions, etc. – are too well known for us to review them again here.
The Agricultural Workers who opposed Fascism were quickly disorganized and scattered. This was easy to achieve. Their organizations were everywhere based on the co-operatives,
The Socialist leaders were laboring under the illusion that with the possession; of this great co-operative apparatus a violent revolution could be avoided. They said naively: “But we already have a Socialist Republic; we control thousands of municipalities; we have in our hands a net of co-operatives which constitute the basis of our future socialist distribution.” But the incendiary acts of the Fascisti dispelled these naive illusions.
The Socialist mayors and municipal councilors ware deposed with violence; Labor Council buildings were burned to the ground; the co-operatives were destroyed; the socialist agricultural masses, accustomed as they were to long economic struggles, made possible by financially strong organizations, suddenly found themselves disarmed and at the mercy of the Fascist offensive.
In this manner whole regions passed rapidly from the Socialists into the hands of the Fascisti. At first, the Fascist movement confined itself almost exclusively to the agrarian districts. It was there that Fascism could get a foothold. The conquest of the industrial proletariat was much more difficult, because proletarian class-consciousness was more developed, and the experience of long, active struggles rendered it more capable of resistance.
Labor Temples (Chambers of Labor) were burned down, and hundreds of militants were assassinated; but, in the industrial centers, Fascism progressed slowly.
Supported and abetted by the capitalists, the Fascisti forced the workers to join their Fascist unions by threatening them with death. In’ this way they succeeded in “enrolling” a certain number of industrial workers into their “corporations.”
It is not necessary here to enter into an analysis of the percentage of voluntary membership in these organizations. In spite of their nominal adherence to the Fascist unions, the overwhelming majority of workers in the Italian factories and shops have preserved their class-consciousness. Even now, after it has come to full political power, Fasicsm has not succeeded in getting a hold on the proletarian masses.
Up to the middle of 1921 there was no unity in the Fascist trade union organizations. In the course of that year, however, such an unifying organization was created under the name of the National Confederation of Fascist Unions. The General Secretary of this organization is Rossoni, a former revolutionary trade unionist.
The first conference of Fascist trade unions was convened in the summer of 1921; the second conference was called in November of last year (1922). It is in the various’ resolutions passed at the second conference and in the declaration of its leaders that we find the true ideology of Fascist trade unionism.
What are the principles that guide these organizations? Whatever its variations, Fascist trade unionism is based on the same principles as yellow trade unionism; it pursues the same policy as the strike-breaking organizations that have always existed.
No wonder, then, that Mr. Albert Thomas, the President of the International Labor Bureau and one of the luminaries of the yellow Amsterdam International has such great admiration for the Fascist trade unions. This renegade of Socialism, who was in Italy last March, had the audacity to declare to the editor of L’Epoca that Fascist trade unionism is ” a completely novel and interesting experiment.”
We shall here try to examine the general ideas of Fascist trade unionism and determine the extent to which these ideas have been realized in practice.
Fascist trade unionism has for its guiding tenet the principle that national interests, which, as we know, are nothing else than bourgeois interests, should supersede all other Interests. It therefore rejects the class struggle and preaches class collaboration.
The Fascisti have, of course, revived the slogan of proclaiming the necessity of increased production, so near and dear to the bourgeoisie and to Mr. Albert Thomas. “While Socialism,” said Rossoni, in one of his speeches, delivered on the 19th of January, 1923, “contends that human welfare must be brought about through the abolition of private property, Fascism is based on the fundamental theory that such well-being can only be the result of intensified production and Industry.”
All classes of society are to co-operate harmoniously in the task of building up “the nation.” This principle of class collaboration finds its most characteristic expression in the clauses adopted by the National Conference of (Fascist) Trade Unions at its November conference, 1922.
These clauses read: Under the name of the National Confederation of Trade Unions there has been created throughout Italian territory, an organization which unites, under the Italian flag, all citizens, regardless of sex or religion, all form part of all classes and all categories of labor, manual and intellectual
The Confederation declares that a society based on the unions protects in an equal measure the interests of all categories and of all classes, and establishes among them a net of economic and legal relations which determines their respective social functions.
Thus, the trade union organization is no longer a special characteristic of the working class, despite the fact that the latter has created this organic form. Henceforth, this form becomes an organic part of the Nation as a whole; as such it culminates in the Nation itself and becomes the supreme synthesis of all material and moral values of the race.
The Confederation declares that all classes of society are equally necessary, for each one of them performs a certain function assigned to it by the necessary and rational division of work and production. The further their social functions develop the stronger these classes become, for these functions are determined by economic development, and could never lead to the abolition of classes – since this would mean the retrogression and suspension of activities in the domain of work and production.
The Confederation further declares that the dynamic law of history does not consist in the Class Struggle, that is, in the antagonism and conflict of social functions, nor does it consist in Class Collaboration, which is the confusion of social functions. On the contrary, it consists of the Conflict of Capacities; i.e., of the struggle of groups in the inferior class which have reached a stage of development that enables them to perform the functions of the higher classes, against those groups in the superior class which have lost the capacity of fulfilling the functions incumbent upon their classes.
The Confederation declares as the fundamental principle of trade union organization the formula:
“The Struggle of Capacities. But it cannot be tolerated that class organizations or groups of citizens have as their aim the destruction of social functions. It is therefore impossible to permit the general strike, which affects all classes and groups throughout the Nation.”
Notwithstanding this thesis on the Struggle of Capacities, it is obvious that the fundamental principle of Fascist trade unionism is Class Collaboration. There is nothing new in this. The only original feature that we find in it is the preponderating role assigned to the middle classes (what the American newspapers call “the public”). This is the characteristic fundamental principle that we have pointed out above.
In his report to the Conference, Rossoni also defined the role of the petty-bourgeoisie in the following words:
“It is the middle classes which have always made the greatest sacrifices and which have always remained loyal, for never have they acted to the detriment of the Nation for selfish reason ; they are the classes that furnish society with talent and civilization National trade unionism should be a movement of the elite; it is for this reason that it has its main support in the middle classes, which have furnished us during the war with the bravest officers.”
The leaders of Fascist trade unionism have always conceived their unions as organs comprising all social classes. During the session of the Supreme Council, Mussolini uttered the following:
“Fascist trade unionism differs from the ordinary trade unionism in that the former has a few of its own characteristics and originality. It is the workers, employers and technicians who constitute a harmonious whole with one, single aim – that of obtaining the maximum of production and prosperity by subordinating everything to the interest of the fatherland. This conception contradicts the Marxist formula which considers the Class War as inevitable.”
Fascism, which considers itself the sole representative of the Nation, treats every other trade union organization as illegal. Its immediate aspiration, therefore, is to get a trade union monopoly (a single organization that unites all classes).
The methods employed by Fascism for obtaining such a monopoly before it seized power are sufficiently known; punitive expeditions, assassinations, arson, etc. After it came into power this aspiration for a trade union monopoly was expressed in one of the resolutions passed at their trade union conference in November. It deals with the functions of consultative organs of the state, as follows:
The National Council of the Fascist Confederation of Trade Union Organizations, having discussed the question of the nature of the functions of consultative state organs, whose task it is to solve the labor questions, hereby decides to request the Government to ratify the following project:
Only the representatives of trade union organizations whose statutes are based on the nationalist principles and whose activities are in full accord with the needs and interests of the Nation, are to be permitted into the State organs.
No representatives of trade union organizations which have or permit any international affiliations with other organizations which do not participate in, or are beyond the control of the national government – can be admitted into such State organs. At the same conference another resolution was passed which proposes that all, labor conflicts should be referred to special commissions headed by persons appointed by the competent roots of the National Fascist Party. Thus we see that the only organization that is recognized is that of the Fascisti.
Two months before the Supreme Fascist Council met, the Central Committee of the Fascist Party, as well as the most influential members of their trade union movement, had declared themselves categorically in favor of a monopoly. This question was debated exhaustively by the Supreme Council which adopted the following resolution moved by Farinacci and Rossoni:
“The Supreme Fascist Council recognizes in the trade union organizations one of the aspects of National Fascist Revolution, to whose needs and discipline they submit unconditionally. The Supreme Fascist Council, in conformity with the decisions adopted at its first session, declares itself against any trade union monopoly; none the less, it considers it necessary that all workers, technicians and employers should be brought under the control of Fascism by means of intense propaganda and agitation activities. For only under a single discipline and a single faith is it possible to obtain effective co-operation of all productive elements in. the supreme interests of the Nation.
“Moreover, the Supreme Fascist Council declares that all Fascist members should belong and take an( active part in the management and leadership of the Fascist trade union organizations, and that all organized Fascist groups (railroad workers, postal and telegraph workers) join the Fascist Confederation of Trade Union Organizations.”
One of the most prominent Fascist leaders, Farinacci, declared at the same session that Class Collaboration is not an Utopia, but a clear affirmation of Fascist trade unionism which has been demonstrated and accepted and which has already been realized in practice.
The truth of the matter is just the contrary. The idyllic harmony of all classes has no basis in reality. The workers had no need of opposing the formation of unions which comprise exploiters and exploited, because the bourgeoisie itself, which is most sensitive to its class interests, did not accept this form of organization.
The General Industrial Confederation (an employers’ organization) and the Central Confederation of Agriculture (a landlords; organization), refused to enter the Fascist unions. Both of these organizations insisted upon retaining their autonomy. Mussolini was compelled to recognize that the position adopted by these two organizations was justified.
Answering indirectly to the Fascist elements which insisted upon the dissolution of the Industrial Confederation, Mussolini insisted that not only would it be wrong to destroy this organization, but that everything should be done to promote its development “in the supreme interests of the Nation.” The communist paper of Trieste, El Lavoratore, has characterized this correctly by saying that “The Italian capitalists want Fascism’ as their tool but not as their director or ally.”
As to the General Confederation of Agriculture, the supreme head of Fascism made no public comment; but there is no doubt that in this case also he will not change his decision “in. the supreme interests of the Nation,” that is, in the interests of a regime of capitalism whose deterioration already manifests itself in more than one unmistakable symptom.
The attitude of the agrarians, however, far from roused the unanimous response of the Fascisti. When the refusal of the Confederation of Agriculture (employers and landlords) to merge with the Fascist unions, became known, Baroncini, the Fascist commissar of Bolognia and the provincial secretary of the Federation, became so indignant that he announced his, determination to use the usual Fascist methods in dealing with “these gentlemen,” “I,” he said, “I, who have crushed the rebellious proletariat, will also crush the rebellious agrarians.”
Of course, Baroncini will have to swallow his indignation and the autonomy of the Confederation of Agriculture will have to be respected as was that of the Confederation of Industry. Thus, in spite of the decisions of the Supreme Council and the leading Fascist organs, Italian Fascism is obliged to renounce the application of one of the most essential principles, of Fascist trade unionism. This shows clearly that the Class Struggle is not merely a principle invented by Marx, bat a fact which must be faced.
The Fascisti are obliged by the exigencies of the Class Struggle to revise their fundamental principles. They have therefore advanced a new theory, that of “trade unionism of militant minorities of Fascisti and not of large masses of workers.” In other words, the Fascist trade unions are to be organizations absolutely identical with the strike-breaking organizations.
In spite of all efforts of Fascism to stifle the class struggle, it breaks out in their own ranks. At the session of the Supreme Fascist Council Mussolini said that since the seizure of power by the Fascisti no strikes have taken place, because all conflicts were wisely prevented y the Fascist leaders. Conflicts, however, did break out. It is interesting to note that they were usually provoked by the members of the Fascist trade unions.
The heads of the Fascist trade unions are compelled, therefore, in spite of themselves, to lead such strikes after they have exhausted all their trickeries in the attempt to avoid the conflict. Facts have sufficiently demonstrated the truth of that Marxism which Rossoni characterizes as “a doctrine insufficiently realistic, and arbitrary in its conclusions.”
Let us examine some of the more important strikes. In April, 500 “Fascist” workers went on strike in one of the textile factories in Spolette. This was a protest strike against the attempted 10% reduction of wages. In the same month a strike broke out in Trieste as a protest against the discharge of 50 workers. The heads of the Fascist unions attributed the strike to individual initiative and advised the workers to return to work. The fact was that the strike had been imposed upon the workers by armed Fascist groups because among those discharged were five or six members of the Fascisti.
On the 22nd of March, 1600 “Fascist” trade unionists declared a strike in Monfalcone as a protest against the discharge of 18 workers. On the 2nd of April a strike was called by the printers of the Graphic Institute of Bergone. An April 3rd the metal workers struck at Villa Perosa (Turin). On April nth, 2000 tile workers were locked out in Rome because they refused to accept a 25% wage reduction. In the Province of Sienna the farms were occupied in order to compel the owners to recognize the trade unions.
A general strike was declared in Parma, and telegraph and telephone lines were destroyed. In Paggiox Bealle, near Naples, the cotton workers called a strike as a protest against the 20% wage cut. In Reggio Emilia the Fascist trade union called a strike of the metal workers. In Genoa about a thousand workers occupied the docks (April 10th) because of the suspension of work in the construction of new docks, due to the refusal of credits by the Government.
In Trieste the Seamen’s Federation, which is headed by Fascisti who, as we know, concluded an agreement with, Giolitti, held up a ship for four hours and forced the owners of the ship to discharge the non-union seamen and to replace them with union members. On March 30th a textile strike was called in Eusto Arission. In Chatillion, Turin, 2000 textile workers quit work, refusing to accept a 15% wage reduction.
In Milan, 80% of the metal and building workers and 60% of all typographical workers, quit work. Bombs exploded in Naples and Trieste. In Turin a red flag waved for four hours on the top of the highest tower in the city.
The leaders of Fascist trade unionism are very uneasy in the face of such manifestations of the class struggle, which puncture their theory. They display a remarkable naivete in their attempt to explain away these facts. For them, especially for Rossoni, the existence of these facts does not disprove the correctness of the principles of class-collaboration. They attribute them to a “certain unhealthy section of the bourgeoisie,” which must be combatted.
We have already pointed out that the main support of Fascism is the petty-bourgeoisie and the peasantry. Fascism has not succeeded in conquering the industrial proletariat. According to the data furnished by the head of the Fascist trade unions, their membership is 800,000. In December, 1922, however, their secretary claimed but 250,000.
According to a report delivered to the recent Enlarged Executive Committee of the Communist International by the Italian delegation, the Fascist troops are composed of 60% of peasants, i.e., of about 500,000 workers recruited in the agricultural districts where Fascism arose about two years ago (Emilia, Romagne, Puilles, Venetia). About 100,000 Fascisti are employed in the Public Service (railroad workers, post and telegraph, seamen and municipal employees). Some 50,000 are employed in the large undertakings; the rest are industrial workers.
“The latter,” says the report, “are distributed in several cities where the Terror has attained incredible proportions, and where trade union membership has assumed the form of military recruiting,” as for example in the districts of Venetia, Julienne, Alexandra!, Casale and Carara. If we take into consideration that Italy has more than 3,000,000 of industrial workers, we get an idea of the lack of real Fascist influence among the industrial proletariat.
In spite of the frightful Fascist Terror, the industrial workers did not hesitate to express their real sentiments and to affirm their class-consciousness whenever circumstances permitted. This is to be seen in the election of Factory and Shop Councils. A few samples may be cited from the hundreds of instances that have occurred in recent months:
In the election of a representative to the Street Car Men’s Council, which took place in January, 1923, in Rome, the candidate of the C.G.T. obtained 4,000 votes, whereas the candidate of the. Fascisti and Nationalists received less than 700 votes. In the elections which took place in the same month on the docks of Pola, the trade union candidates received 1,700 votes, while the Fascist candidate received only 603 votes.
In Turin the Fascisti were beaten in the election of the Shop Council in the Piemon automobile factory. By employing all sorts of maneuvers, and by using violence, the Fascisti succeeded in having the election annulled. New elections were instituted. It was announced that if the Fascisti should not be victorious, the workers not belonging to the Fascist unions would be discharged. The local trade union organization recommended to the workers to cast blank ballots with the following inscription: “We want bread and work.” The result was as follows: 998 blanks, 753 Fascisti votes, and 728 abstentions. On the day following the Fascisti shut down the factory and about 1,500 workers who were suspected of disseminating anti-Fascist ideas were chased out.
At the election of Administrative Committees for the FIAT (Turin), in March, the Red union obtained 3,534 votes as against 1,791 cast for the Fascisti and Catholics. In the “Tecnomasio Italiano” of Brown-Bowen, 70% of the 2,000 workers voted for the list put up by the FIOM (Federation of Italian Metal Workers). The victories of the Red unions over the Fascisti have multiplied in Turin during this month. In the Spa factory the union candidate won by 480 votes against 67; in Liancia, by 497 against 104; in the Rapid, the Fascisti obtained 125 votes with 400 abstentions.
We thus see that wherever Fascism cannot impose itself with the bayonet, the candidates of the revolutionary workers are elected. The class-consciousness of the Italian proletariat has remained intact. This does not mean that no danger threatens the revolutionary movement in Italy, but it is a sign that justifies our hope for a reaction on the part of the Italian working class./
Last updated on 20 January 2023