ITALY IN RUINS

Korero (AEWS), Volume 3, Issue 10, 18 June 1945, Page 16

ITALY IN RUINS

by

An account of some of the troubles facing the Italian peasant.

If, in these pages, I appear sympathetic towards the Italians, it is not because I approve of Italy’s Facist war, nor because I love Italy in any way. It is because I spent last year in Italy with the N.Z. Artillery, and saw something of the real Italian people, the peasant people. In pre-Fascist times, almost half the Italian people were employed in agriculture. In spite of fascism and war, both of which caused vast upheavals, Italy is still agricultural and the peasant is the backbone of the country. To some people the word “ Italy ” conjures up cultural associations —memories of painting, music, architecture, sculpture, literature, science. To me it means (apart from the war) a country of villages and peasants, of impoverished and unfortunate people. Living with them at times, I found them simple, ignorant people who did not understand the war and did not wish it. They were at the mercy of forces beyond their control. Now, and in the post-war years, these forces will be mainly economic. I mean that the Italian is not so much in need of political liberty as of something to eat, some means of livelihood. The following is a discussion of the forces at work, and of the future prospects for Italy. Feudalism The first fact about Italy is that she is a nation overpopulated and short of raw materials. The country which we passed

through in central and southern Italy could not be called rich. It is too mountainous. Official estimates class about one-third of the land as either absolutely sterile or extremely poor. Even in normal times Italy cannot produce enough food for her population, and must import wheat, maize, and meat. The second important fact about Italy’s economics is that this land, mediocre though it is, is not owned by the peasants. Figures for pre-Fascist times (there has been no great agrarian revolution yet) show that 24,000 large landed proprietors owned among them about one-third of Italian land. Another third was owned by about 200,000 middling proprietors. The remaining third was divided among several millions of small proprietors, possessing very small portions of land —- portions by no means large enough to make a living for themselves and their families. These were the people we lived amongst. They did all the work and suffered all the injustice. The differences in income under such a system are astounding. In an article in Korero of September 25, 1944, the writer estimates the income of the Marquis of a “ masseria ” 940 acres in size as £20,000 a year. About 150 girls working as casual labourers would get not more than 2s. a day at pre-war rates. Nine workmen employed permanently would get not more than 30s. a week. The great majority of these people would be

miserably poor and illiterate. I have seen similar farms, and consider the wagerates quoted here to be typical. But travelling through Italy we very rarely came into contact with the landowner himself. If we asked the peasants where he was, the reply would be a frown of hatred and some remark that he had gone “ up north ” with the Germans and the Fascists. The fact was that most of the big land owners were high up in the Fascist party, and had departed leaving a manager on the premises. It would be a blessing to Italy if these proprietors never returned from “ up north.” The peasant loves his land, and is part of it. If he could own it and the produce of it, he would be happy. On numerous occasions we met men who had been to America and succeeded in accumulating enough savings to return home and buy a small holding. They had realized their ambition in life —a fortunate few of them. The Fascist War Clearly, Italy has in no way benefited from Mussolini’s war. Admittedly the Italians started a war of conquest. But not the Italian peasant. He did not start it, and, indeed, he declined to fight it. In Greece and in Egypt he much preferred to surrender than to fight for Mussolini —a fact which was fortunate for General Wavell at a'critical stage of operations in the Middle East. At the same time, man-power and materials were drained from the Italian economy to support her faltering armies in the field. At a later stage, a further and deeper draining took place for the

benefit of the German war machine. Foodstuffs and supplies were simply commandeered by the German Army, and worthless paper chits given in payment for them. As the situation grew more serious, the hated Todt Organization commandeered labour-power to work on German production and on military defence projects. This meant not only a great reduction in civil and political liberty (which was small, anyhow), but a further disorganization in Italy’s economic strength. Any trade within the Axis countries naturally benefited Germany alone. Within Italy itself, scarcity and rationing was accompanied by the inevitable black market. Commercial men, however, made the profits from this —not the peasants. The peasant was the loser in every case. At the time of the Allied invasion of Italy, reactionary forces held the power in the land— the monarchy, some sections of the Catholic Church, the great capitalists, and the German command. Under their sway, Italy was -economically crumbling to ruins.

The Allied Campaign From the above short description of the set-up, it might seem that a successful Allied campaign in Italy would liberate the Italian people from a tyranny and give them the opportunity to remodel their country. But the latter aim is not so easy as it sounds. Many factors have combined to prevent Italy from effectively re-planning her future as yet.

In the first place, the armies have been campaigning through the land sowing further destruction and disorganization. Admittedly some areas have escaped attention. Last year the Fabriano-Mar-telica Valley was a pleasant surprise to most New-Zealanders, after coming from a war-scarred area. But most of Italy has been in some way disrupted. It is a familiar story—ruined villages, ruined farmhouses, broken bridges, railways, factories, electrical installations ; livestock dead or deported ; minefields, refugees. Secondly, the army had not the time or capacity to repair all these things. It tried to reorganize rapidly its own ports, railways, and supply roads in order to keep up pressure against a tenacious enemy. The average soldier had no time to worry about civilians at all. Thirdly, the Allied Control Commission, AMGOT, and UNRRA organizations, which follow in the wake of our armies, had too heavy a job on their hands. To the Italian citizen, the remodelling of Italy might seem the most urgent job in the world. But, to these international allied organizations, Italy is only one of many war-torn countries, and unlimited resources cannot be placed in reserve for her rehabilitation. Last year, food was the commodity in shortest supply to the Italian people. The peasant communities could barely produce enough for their own requirements. They were not willing to sell food for consumption in the cities. Even had they been willing, transport was not available to take it there. Because of the urgent needs of shipping and supplies elsewhere, the Allies were not' able to import food into Italy on a scale sufficient to meet the subsistence requirements of everybody. There was no easy or immediate solution to such difficulties —and in the meantime the black market flourished. In short, Italy was struggling to keep alive. She was war-weary and disillusioned. The peasant talked about liberation, rehabilitation, and risorgimento” with a sigh, a sigh of despair and apathy. He was not politically alive. He would talk about the good old times, or about what ought to be done in future (by some one else) but for the moment he

had enough worries. He hated the Fascists and the Germans ; but now that they were gone he was sick of the English and Americans, not to mention the Greeks, Poles, Indians, French, Africans, and negroes whom he found fighting for his “ liberation.”

Future Prospects for Italy The most urgent problem in Italy is the economic one. Italy’s future is entirely bound up with the prosperity and collaboration of other nations. She can never be self-supporting. In order to get her daily bread in the form of food imports, Italy must be able to export to overseas markets a surplus of luxury goods (such as wines, silks, fruits) and manufactured goods. She must obtain capital from abroad to rebuild her dissipated industries. Even then, she may have to continue emigration and colonization to solve her population problem. And what 'is to happen to the " backbone ” of the country, the peasant ? I would say that until all who cultivate the land by their own labour and that of their families are given the chance to own the land and the produce of the land, the peasant is destined to misery and poverty. If the war and disruption in Italy have managed to bring home this essential fact to the people, and to inspire them to work for their liberation themselves, it will have been of some use. Mussolini gave Italy some economic benefits in the early stagesbenefits which were later lost—but any permanent improvement will have to be in the form of progress in which the people themselves co-operate. This is a political task. An economic reconstruction plan could be blue-printed for Italy including all manner of agrarian and industrial reforms. But it would only be a paper ornament unless the people are interested in it and given the the opportunity to work for it. Only then, when the daily life of the people is settled, can our memory of Italy as a land of misery and war be forgotten, and Italy recapture her rightful place in the world as a land of music, art, and beauty.