BENITO MUSSOLINI

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 75, Issue 117, 20 May 1932, Page 12

BENITO MUSSOLINI

CHALLENGE TO THE WORLD LECTURE TO THE W.E.A. The subject at the W.E.A. lecture at the City Council Chambers last night was “Mussolini and his challenge to us,” the lecturer, Mr J. A. Brailsford, 8.A., awakening a keen interest among those present, in the subject of Italy’s big man. To the eyes of many of us on the Labour side, he said, the distant hills of Russia looked wonderfull green and inviting, while more conservative people heard of great things done in Italy, and often declared that “What we need is a Mussolini.’’ It was recognised that in both Russia and Italy democracy had been crushed and opponents of the dictatorship rigorously persecuted, Mr Brailsford remarked, but some people seemed to think the cost was worth while, so futile had our Parliamentary system proved itself. It had, in fact, largely broken down. In Britain, Labour leaders had revolted against party discipline and joined the Conservatives in forming a Government, and their disloyalty to party had been approved by the mass of the electors. In New Zealand a coalition of parties was assuming powers of repression that would have been considered outrageous a feew years ago. Lord Eustace Percy, himself a loyal party man, had written in “Democracy on Trial”: “It is one of the ironies of history that the actual effect of democracy is immobility,” and had remarked on “the distrust with which the nation regards the House of Commons” as being due to the “paralytic timidity” of those placed in office.

Mussolini’s Character Mussolini was at least a man who believed in himself, said Mr Brailsford, but many of those who now said: “We need a Mussolini,” would have said that this Mussolini should be deported or shot in the days when he was the reddest of red revolutionaries, with a record of 11 terms of imprisonment for his violent agitation. Later, he had turned against his Socialist friends with equal violence, and in recent years he had changed direction again, but through it all he remained true to the conviction of his own importance. Mussolini’s egotistic ambL tition was egregious. Ho had ex-

pressed a desire to make a mark on his ‘■ra with his will like a lion with its claw. He had the physical courage of a lion, but it was a primitive sort of bravery, weakened by blind superstition. He regarded himself as divinely appointed and his contempt for the Parliamentary system was unbounded. Not liberty, but discipline was his demand. Fascism The people of Italy were far from satisfied with the treatment accorded their country at the Peace Conference. D’Annunzio’s seizure of Fiume carried Mussolini on. He made himself a leader of ex-soldiers. His first Fascists were those of the “Fasci di Combattimento” (groups of fighting men). They adopted the black shirt—the uniform of the Arditi (shock troops). But their programme was revolutionary, proposing a republic in place of the monarchy, abolition of titles, dissolution of banks and companies, confisea tion of unproductive capital, and for the peasants, workers’ control of industry and so forth. As Fascism grew and the ex-soldier element swamped the, Socialists, Mussolini went with the tide. He and his Fascists resisted the feeble attempts at Bolshevik revolution and then turned to the violent repression of Socialists and to a demand for discipline in government. Achievements Mussolini and the Fascist party established a dictatorship and ruled with an iron hand. With all their lawlessness they had restored law and order, discipline and efficiency in the public services so that trains actually ran on time and the freights were not pilfered. Begging was greatly reduced. Tourists found a new Italy and loudly proclaimed the wonders of Fascist rule. The Fascist policy of this period was Ito favour private enterprise in every way. The State telephones had been handed over to a company. Price-fix-ing was abandoned. Rewards were offered for the best wheat Prizes were given to railwaymen for specially efficient service. Seizures of land were stopped, but rent restrictions remained in force. In national finance Mussolini set his Minister the task of honestly balanc-

ing the Budget, and this was accomplished in three years—thanks partly to America’s generosity in regard to war cW'bts. The floating debt had boon converted by an issue of tax-free bonds—the delight of the very rich. On the other hand, the land tax was more widely applied, the personal income tax was graduated from 10 to 24 per cent (in addition to a flat rate), and the poorer people were favoured by a reduction in Customs duties. Lately Government finance has been less successful and Mussolini had had a considerable deficit last year and a far bigger one on the first half of this year. The Fascists had carried out public works on a large scale—roads, railways, harbours, hydro-electric works. Italy had already been a leader in electrical development and was said to have trebled the output of power since the war. Being very poor in coal supplies Italy needed all the electricity it could get. Freedom Destroyed Briefly mentioning Mussolini’s flamboyant militarist utterances and his disputes and reconciliation with the Church, Mr. Brailsford said one must offset against Fascism’s achievements the cruelty of its tyrannies. Professor Salvemini’s book contained a fearful record of Fascist bludgeonings, murders, attacks of property (in particular newspaper offices) and in the later days ironhartded repression, spying and imprisonment of opponents. None but Fascists were allowed to conduct newspapers or other publications. Even university professors had to take an oath of allegiance to the Fascist regime. The people in general seemed to havQ» accepted the dictatorship and in th© guild system the Fascists had perhaps given a lead towards industrial freedom, but Italy under Mussolini was cQTtainly no place for any lover of free speech.

To Make Democracy Real Was it necessary to choose between the two evils of despotism and futile partyisip, asked the lecturer. He thought we should rather recognise that wo had taken only the first steps towards real democracy. Reforms had been tried or suggested that would go far to make Government more efficient without destroying freedom. He outlined several of these reforms. The system of elective executives, as practised in Switzerland and in the States of South Africa gave a fair assurance that Cabinet Ministers were chosen on their merits and retained office as long as they wore the best men available. Members of Parliament, under that system, were able to vote on each measure according to their convictions without fear of ousting a good ministry or preventing a better one from taking office. This would be a long first step towards reconciling efficiency with freedom. Preferential voting was a simple means of assuring the election of those who were really wanted by the electors when it was not a straightforward contest, between two. A reform that would make for continuity and reduce the temptation to run elections on catch-cries and scares was to change the membership of Parliament only part at a time —for instance, to elect

one-third of the membership each year. This was done in many organisations and with success. The occasional use of the referendum on the demand of a sufficient number of voters, was another safeguard of freedom. Ono of the most important reforms was the representation of occupational interests. Italy and Russia had introduced this plan and so had made someadvance towards industrial freedom, while crushing democracy in politics. It. would be difficult to achieve this without bringing the nation under a guild system, as both Italy and Russia had done. The guilds, comprising both the heads of business life and the sub ordinate employees, were represented. Tn Germany another plan had been adopted with similar intent, an industrial Parliament being elected with advisory powers to work with the National Parliament. Unless employers and employed were willing to co-oper-ate, one could hardly hope for a perfect plan of representation of econo mic interests, but until we, made prog ress in this direction we could not have real democracy. However, there were, ways of making some progress in this direction, and in the meantime much could be done to improve the political system by the other reforms mentioned. It veas absv.rd to conclude that, democracy was a failure because party government had shown obviou* Weaknesses. There was no need tc look for a Mussolini to drive tht people, but rather to look for real leaders and place trust in them.