Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T01:22:01.520Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Italian Socialist Party: A Case Study in Factional Conflict*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Raphael Zariski
Raphael Zariski
Affiliation:
University of Nebraska
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Italian Socialist Party (PSI) is one of the three major groupings—the Social Democrats, the Socialists and the Communists—that have cultivated the ground to the left of center (i.e., to the left of the ruling Christian Democrats) in Italian politics since World War II. As recently as 1951, the PSI appeared to be inextricably linked with the Communists; but the Socialists have gradually worked themselves around to the position, early in 1962, of openly supporting a Left-Center coalition government still headed by the Christian Democrats. This drastic alteration in the Italian political spectrum has created new possibilities for Italy's political development. It has already permitted the long-awaited “opening to the Left”—as a basic alternative to governments dependent on the Center-Right—under which Italy will be ruled by a coalition of Christian Democrats, Republicans, and Social Democrats, with the PSI offering its support in Parliament in exchange for a bold program of economic planning and social reform. But some Socialists see a further possibility: the so-called “Socialist alternative.” They hope for the possible development of the PSI into a second major party in a two-party system which would absorb the great bulk of the Italian electorate, with the exception of minor extremist fringes to the right and left. To be sure, the success of the “opening to the Left” and the eventual emergence of a “Socialist alternative” both depend on the continued supremacy of the more progressive factions within the ranks of the Christian Democratic Party.

Type
'Socialist Parties in Readjustment
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 56 , Issue 2 , June 1962 , pp. 372 - 390
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1962

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For a brief discussion of the two doctrines of “opening to the Left” and “Socialist alternative,” see Codignola, Tristano, “Il PSI davanti al Paese,” Il Ponte, Vol. 13 (01, 1957), p. 27Google Scholar; Macchi, Angelo, “Il XXXIII Congresso del PSI,” Aggiornamenti Sociali, Vol. 10 (03, 1959), pp. 162–170Google Scholar; and “Editoriale,” Nord e Sud, Vol. 6 (02, 1959), pp. 3–9Google Scholar.

2 On the Saragat secession and the internal conflicts in the PSI between 1947 and 1951, see Zariski, Raphael, “Problems and Prospects of Democratic Socialism in France and Italy,” Journal of Politics, Vol. 18 (05, 1956), pp. 256–257 and 269–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Zariski, Raphael, “Socialism in Postwar Italy,” unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University, 1952Google Scholar; D'Arcais, Francesco, “Lineamenti Storici del socialismo italiano,” Civitas, Vol. 8 (08-September, 1957), pp. 52–104Google Scholar, but especially pp. 80–91; Pera, Giuseappe, “L'alternativa socialista del PSI,” Il Ponte, Vol 9, (05, 1953), pp. 579–598Google Scholar; Macchi, Angelo, “Il XXXIV Congresso del PSI,” Aggiornamenti Sociali, Vol. 12 (03, 1961), pp. 295–297Google Scholar; Galli, Georgio, La Sinistra Italiana nel dopoguerra (Bologna, Il Mulino, 1958)Google Scholar, chs. 1 and 5; and Emiliani, Paolo, Dieci anni perduti (Pisa, Nistri-Lischi, 1953)Google Scholar.

3 The PSI is about three times as strong as the PSDI in terms of electoral strength. In the general elections of 1958, it polled 4,206,777 votes, as against 1,345,334 received by the PSDI. Voting figures are drawn from the general elections to the Chamber of Deputies; see Istituto Centrale di Statistica, Elezione della Camera dei Deputati, 25 Maggio 1958, Vol. 1 (Roma, Istituto Poligrafico dello Stato, 1960), pp. 50–51Google Scholar.

4 The pre-Congress campaign of 1949 is ably described by Pera, loc. cit., and by Emiliani, op. cit., pp. 115–123.

5 See Pera, ibid., p. 590.

6 For comments on the role of the “apparatus” in strengthening the PSI, see Pera, ibid., p. 591, and Segre, Umberto, “La stagione dei congressi,” Il Ponte, Vol. 14 (11, 1958), pp. 1373–1374Google Scholar.

7 On losses by the CGIL in various grievance committee elections, see Edelman, Murray, “Causes of Fluctuations in Popular Support for the Italian Communist Party since 1946,” Journal of Politics, Vol. 20 (08, 1958), pp. 542–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Toldo, Antonio, “Situazione Sindacale Italiana,” Aggiornamenti Sociali, Vol. 8 (02, 1957), pp. 113–122Google Scholar; Neufeld, Maurice F., “Appunti sul funzionamento delle commissioni interne,” Il Diritto del Lavoro (Roma, Edizioni del Diritto del Lavoro, 1956), no. 6, pp. 1–8Google Scholar; and LaPalombara, Joseph, The Italian Labor Movement: Problems and Prospects (Ithaca, N. Y., Cornell University Press, 1957), pp. 110–118Google Scholar.

8 On the Milan Congress, see D'Arcais, loc. cit., pp. 91–92.

9 On the movement of the PSI in an autonomist direction from 1953 to 1956, see D'Arcais, ibid., pp. 91–103, and U. Alfassio Grimaldi, “Nuovo capitolo,” Il Mondo, February 12, 1957, pp. 1–2.

10 On developments between the 20th Congress of the CPSU and the PSI Venice Congress, see D'Arcais, ibid., pp. 95–103, and Grimaldi, ibid., pp. 1–2.

11 La Nuova Stampa, January 22, 1957.

12 On the attitude of the revolutionaries (later known as Maximalists) in the PSI in the early 20th Century see Michels, Roberto, Storia critica del movimento socialista italiano (Firenze, La Voce, 1926)Google Scholar, Part V, ch. 2, and Hilton-Young, Wayland, The Italian Left (New York, Longmans, Green, 1949)Google Scholar, passim. For accounts of factional struggle at pre-1922 Socialist congresses, see Pedone, Franco, Partito Socialista Italiano nei suoi Congressi, Vol. II (Milano, Edizioni Avanti, 1961)Google Scholar; and Cannarsa, Spartaco, Il Socialismo e i XXVIII Congressi del Partito Socialista Italiano (Milano, Edizioni Avanti, 1950), pp. 104–244Google Scholar.

13 On the various contending factions in the PSI at the Venice Congress, see Corriere d'Informazione, February 5–6, 1957.

14 On the Venice Congress and its outcome, see Segre, Umberto, “Luci e ombre di un Congresso,” Il Ponte, Vol. 13 (February 1957), pp. 185–192Google Scholar. See also La Nuova Stampa, February 7–10, 12 and 13, 1957, and La Giustizia, February 12, 13, 1957.

15 On the intra-party contest at the provincial level just prior to the Venice Congress, see La Nuova Stampa, January 29, 1957, and Glorioso, F. Paolo, “Nenni 60%,” L'Espresso, January 11, 1959, p. 8Google Scholar.

16 See La Nuova Stampa, February 13–15, 1957.

17 For example, Basso supported Nenni in his refusal to admit the two leaders of the carristi, Lussu and Pertini, to the Directorate. La Nuova Stampa, November 12, 1957.

18 For example, the PSI withdrew from the organization of Peace Partisans. See La Nuova Stampa, May 24, 1957. And a prominent Nenni lieutenant, Francesco De Martino, withdrew from his hitherto active role in the Communistsponsored Movement for the Rebirth of the South. See Galasso, Giovanni Cervigni e Giuseppe, “Il Mezzogiorno e il Partito Socialista,” Nord e Sud, Vol. 4 (05, 1957), pp. 24–25, 37–38Google Scholar.

19 La Nuova Stampa, October 4, 1957.

20 Stampa-Sera, July 20–21, 1957.

21 Two of the former top leaders of the Popular Unity Party, Codignola and Vittorelli, were among the members of the Nenni faction elected to the Central Committee at the Naples Congress of January, 1959. See Corriere d'Informazione, January 20, 1959.

22 This was the case with the Autonomist Deputies Sampietro of Veroelli and Lopardi of L'Aquila, dropped from the PSI slates in Torino-Novara-Vercelli and L'Aquila-Pescara-Chieti-Teramo respectively. Similarly, the Forlì Federation refused to approve the renomination of a prominent Leftist Deputy (Lami) in Bologna-Ferrara-Ravenna-Forlì, and the Venice Federation attempted unsuccessfully to remove the name of Tonetti (another Leftist) from the PSI list in Venice-Treviso. See La Nuova Stampa, March 27, April 3, May 18, 1958; Il Messaggero, May 10, 1958; Il Corriere della Sera, May 16, 1958; and Il Resto del Carlino, May 10, 13, 1958.

23 Albizzati and Malagugini are identified as Leftists by Serpieri, Roberto, “Nella misura in cui …”, Critica Sociale, Vol. 50 (10 5, 1958), p. 456Google Scholar. Both were renominated and Malagugini was re-elected. For the election results in Milan-Pavia, and the preference votes pooled by the various candidates, see I Deputati e Senatori del Terzo Parlamento Repubblicano (Roma, La Navicella, 1960), pp. 629–634Google Scholar.

24 Istituto Centrale di Statistica, op. cit., pp. 50–51. See also I Deputati e Senatori del Terzo Parlamento Repubblicano, op. cit., p. XL for number of seats captured by PSI in 1958, and p. LXVII for comparison with 1953. The PSI Group in the Chamber was, soon after the elections, reinforced by 4 secessionist Deputies from the PSDI and totalled 88 members by 1959.

25 See Pavolini, Paolo, “I sette socialismi,” Il Mondo (08 26, 1958), p. 3Google Scholar.

26 On the pre-Congress campaign of 1958–59, see Glorioso, loc. cit., p. 8.

27 At the Naples Congress of 1959, Basso charged that there had been widespread absenteeism at pre-Congress sectional assemblies. See Pizzorno, Alessandro, “The Italian Socialist Party and Political Participation,” Prod, Vol. 3 (12, 1959), pp. 25–31Google Scholar. Pizzorno confirms the validity of this charge as applied to Milan, and ventures the assumption that Basso was substantially correct with regard to other parts of Italy as well. Babbini estimates that attendance at sectional assemblies averaged 30–35 per cent of total membership. See Babbini, Paolo, “Anatomia del PSI,” Il Mulino, Vol. 10 (03, 1961), p. 128Google Scholar.

28 For the final results of the Naples Congress, see Partito Socialista Italiano, 33° Congresso Nazionale (Milano-Roma, Edizioni Avanti, 1959), pp. 422–428Google Scholar.

29 For Nenni's speeches at the Naples Congress, see Partito Socialista Italiano, ibid., pp. 10–41, and 395–403. His opening speech is commented on in La Stampa, January 16, 1959.

30 La Stampa, September 8, 1959.

31 La Stampa, May 31, 1960.

32 Il Corriere della Sera, August 4, 6, 1960. The Communists had voted against Fanfani on this occasion. For the first time in over a decade, the PSI was abandoning its policy of all-out opposition.

33 The PSI entered Left-Center municipal juntas in the following provincial capitals: Milan, Genoa, Florence, Piacenza, Pavia, La Spezia, Forlì, Rieti. Similar Left-Center experiments were initiated in 25 other communes and in four provinces: Pavia, La Spezia, Avellino, Rieti. See Partito Socialista Italiano, 34° Congresso Nazionale (Milano, Edizioni Avanti, 1961), p. 34Google Scholar (Nenni's report). More recently, the PSI has entered the Sicilian regional government in collaboration with the Christian Democrats, and has agreed to support a Left-Center cabinet in the national government.

34 Unità, May 31, 1960.

35 Il Corriere della Sera, August 3, 1960.

36 Ibid., August 7, 1960. Their names appear in Avanti!, August 6, 1960.

37 ee Partito Socialista Italiano, 34° Congresso Nazionale, op. cit. Results of the Congress are summarized on pp. 264–270. See also La Nazione, March 21, 1961.

38 Many commentators, of diverse political shadings, speculated about the Lombardi subgroup. See La Nazione (an independent conservative paper), March 21, 31, 1961; Il Corriere della Sera (independent conservative), March 19, 1961; Il Paese (independent pro-Communist), March 31, 1961; and Gambino, Antonio, “Hanno ricominciato a discutere tra loro,” L'Espresso (independent Radical and anti-clerical), 03 26, 1961, p. 3Google Scholar.

39 The Autonomists had 14 seats on the Directorate, while 6 were allotted to the Left and 1 to Basso. But according to La Nazione, March 31, 1961, 6 of the 14 Autonomists are supporters of Lombardi.

40 See article by Mancini, Giacomo in Avanti!, 02 12, 1961Google Scholar. See also Babbini, loc. cit., pp. 12–13. These generalizations apply primarily to the two largest factions.

41 See Partito Socialista Italiano, 33° Congresso Nationale, op. cit., pp. 542–545, 34° Congresso Nazionale, op. cit., pp. 443–448, for provincial breakdowns of factional strength.

42 For an account of the influence of the Nenni myth on local discussion and decisions, see the article by Bassi, Cesare in Avanti!, 01 10, 1959Google Scholar.

43 See Michels, Robert, Political Parties (New York, Dover Publications, 1959), pp. 45–48Google Scholar.

44 On the sub-groups in the PSI, see Pavolini loc. cit., pp. 3–4; Segre, Umberto, “Un partito moderno?”, Comunità, Vol. 13 (02, 1959), pp. 3–7Google Scholar; and Gambino, loc. cit., p. 3. A forthcoming article by Antonio Landolfi, to be published soon in Tempi Moderni, should provide us with a more extensive treatment of this subject. It should be noted in passing that, since Mondo Operaio is presently controlled by the Autonomist faction, its former collaborators now contribute articles to the Left organ, Mondo Nuovo.

45 See Pedone, op. cit., pp. 123–214.

46 On Lombardi and his views, see Segre, “Un partito moderno?”, loc. cit., p. 6; Gambino, loc. cit.; and Lombardi's speech at the Milan Congress, Partito Socialista Italiano, 34° Congresso Nazionale, op. cit., pp. 161–168.

47 See Michels, Political Parties, op. cit., especially Part Two, ch. 6, and Part Four, chs. 2–6. Michels was, however, aware of the possibility that conflicts may arise for ideological or personal reasons. See ibid., pp. 167–168.

48 See Pavolini, loc. cit.

49 Giovanni Sartori has completed an exhaustive and penetrating comparative survey of Italian Deputies and their educational, social, and professional backgrounds. This analysis has been published in the Winter, 1961, issue of the International Social Science Journal. My computations are based on the raw data which Professor Sartori was kind enough to let me consult.

50 See Pavolini, loc. cit. On Cattani, see Segre, Umberto, “Il duello dei prossimi due anni,” L'Illustrazione Italiana, Vol. 86 (02, 1959), p. 19Google Scholar.

51 See Cervigni, Giovanni and Galasso, Giuseppe, “Inchiesta sul Partito Socialista Italiano nelle provincie meridionali,” Nord e Sud, Vol. 3 (03, 1956)Google Scholar; the entire issue is devoted to a study of the PSI.

52 On positions taken by the various PSI factions, see Partito Socialista Italiano, 34° Congresso Nazionale, op. cit., passim, but especially pp. 32–44, 64–66, 69–73, 107–109, 116–122, 220–221, 244–245. Basso's statement of his purposes is best summarized on pp. 220–221.

53 Computations are based on raw data collected by Professor Sartori for his article, loc. cit.

54 See La Nuova Stampa, May 3, 1958, and Il Corriere della Sera, April 29, May 3, 1958. For data on factional coloration of the several provinces, see Partito Socialista Italiano, 34° Congresso Nazionale, op. cit., pp. 443–448.

55 See Il Messaggero, May 17, 1958, and Il Corriere della Sera, April 29, 1958.

56 See “Speciale,” L'Espresso, 01 11, 1959, p. 2Google Scholar.

57 On Southern and Central Italian clienteles, see Cervigni and Galasso, “Inchiesta sul Partito Socialista Italiano nelle provincie meridionali,” loc. cit., passim, but especially pp. 6–12, 38–39, 102, 147–152; and Pera, loc. cit., passim.

58 See above, note 34, and Cervigni and Galasso, ibid., pp. 26–27.

59 See Zariski, Raphael, “Party Factions and Comparative Politics: Some Preliminary Observations,” Midwest Journal of Political Science, Vol. 4 (02 1960), pp. 46–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

60 Pavolini, loc. cit. See also Ciccotti, Sigfrido, “Nenni's Party at the Crossroads,” New Leader, Vol. 41 (12 1, 1958), pp. 9–10Google Scholar.

61 See Pavolini, ibid.

62 For voting percentages, province by province, for the 1958 elections, see “Italia. Elezioni 1956—58–60: confronti percentuali per provincie,” Tempi Moderni, Vol. 4 (01-March, 1961), pp. 127–134Google Scholar.

63 See Compagna, Francesco and De Caprariis, Vittorio, Studi di geografia elettorale (1946–1958), (Napoli, Centro Studi “Nord e Sud,” 1959), p. 25Google Scholar and Tables VII and VIII. I am using Braga's sociological classification of Italian provinces. He includes several Central Italian provinces (Lucca, Massa, Ferrara, Parma, Piacenza) in Northwest Italy on socio-economic grounds, and also includes two Southern Italian provinces (Pescara, Teramo) in Central Italy, and three Central Italian provinces (Roma, Latina, Frosinone) in Southern Italy. See Braga, Giorgio, Il Comunismo fra gli italiani (Milano, Comunità, 1956)Google Scholar, ch. 3.

64 See Michels, Roberto, Il Proletariato e la borghesia nel movimento socialista italiano (Torino, Fratelli Bocca, 1908), pp. 217–218Google Scholar.

65 See Il Messaggero, May 8, 1958. See also Preti, Luigi, Le lotte agrarie nella Valle Padana (Torino, Einaudi, 1955), pp. 92, 120, 141, 223–224, 226–227, 240, 323–324, 356–358Google Scholar.

66 Again, I am using Braga's sociological classification. See note 63 above.

67 See Cervigni, Giovanni, “La frana meridionale,” Il Mondo, 02 16, 1960, p. 1Google Scholar.

68 These provinces (Ferrara, Parma, Piacenza, Pavia, Novara, Vercelli, Mantova, Cremona) are referred to by Preti in op. cit., pp. 219–220.

69 Ibid., pp. 136–138, 294–298, 425.

70 On Turin see “Problemi della Società Italiana—I Socialisti a Torino,” Il Mulino, Vol. 8 (08, 1959), pp. 104–107Google Scholar, and Scalfari, Eugenio, “La sconfitta degli operai,” L'Espresso, 07 2, 1961, pp. 8–9Google Scholar. During an interview with a close student of PSI affairs, I was informed that the PSI in Turin had lost contact with the working class, as a result of its refusal to allow PSI union leaders in the FIAT works to secede from the CGIL without facing expulsion from their party.

71 Statistics on percentage of industrial workers were computed from data compiled in Istituto Centrale di Statistica, Annuario di Statistiche Provinciali, 1959 (Roma, Istituto Poligrafico dello Stato, 1959), pp. 24–25, 28–29Google Scholar. The provinces in question were Milan, Turin, Genoa, Como, Varese, Novara, Vercelli, Bergamo, Pavia.

72 Another interesting datum in this connection is provided by a study of trade-union elections in plants employing over 1,000 workers. Of the 14 provinces in which the CGIL polled its highest percentages, 11 were provinces in which the PSI was autonomist in character. See “Le Commissioni interne in Italia nelle 310 aziende con piu di 1,000 dipendenti: risultati elettorali dal 1956 al 1959,” Tempi Moderni, Vol. 3 (10-December, 1960), p. 13Google Scholar.

73 See Cervigni and Galasso, “Inohiesta sul Partito Socialista Italiano nelle provincie meridionali,” loc. cit., pp. 79–86, 90–95, and Cervigni and Galasso, “Il Mezzogiorno e il Partito Socialista,” loc. cit., p. 33. See also Glorioso, loc. cit.

74 See Cervigni and Galasso, “Inchiesta sul Partito Socialista Italiano nelle provincie meridionali,” loc. cit., pp. 42, 68–73, and Cervigni and Galasso, “Il Mezzogiorno e il Partito Socialista,” loc. cit., pp. 31–32. See also Glorioso, ibid.

75 On Emilia, see Segre, “Il duello dei prossimi due anni,” loc. cit., pp. 19–20. On Emilia and Tuscany, see Pera, loc. cit.; party officials and students of PSI problems whom I interviewed all concurred in stressing the role of the provincial apparatus in determining the outcome of the intra-party struggle in the various Tuscan provinces.

76 Zariski, “Party Factions and Comparative Politics: Some Preliminary Observations,” loc. cit., pp. 41–43.

77 See Pavone, op. cit., and Cannarsa, op. cit., passim.

78 See Pavone, ibid., pp. 40–249, Cannarsa, ibid., pp. 205–252.

79 See Pavone, ibid., pp. 169–179, 194–206, 227–234.

80 For the pre-1910 period, see Michels, Il Proletariate) e la borghesia nel movimento socialista italiano, op. cit., pp. 88–114. My assessment of the current situation is based on Cervigni and Galasso, “Inchiesta sul Partito Socialista Italiano nelle provincie meridionali,” loc. cit., pp. 14–17, and on my talks with Antonio Landolfi, whose forthcoming article in Tempi Moderni will presumably touch on this point.

81 For his discussion of caucus-type and branch-type parties, see Duverger, Maurice, Political Parties (New York, 1954), pp. 1–3, 17–27, 120, 152–154Google Scholar.

82 See Partito Socialista Italiano, 34° Congresso Nazionale, op. cit., p. 264.

83 The PSI Stature requires active participation in party affairs as a duty of every party member. See Article 2 of the PSI Statute reproduced in D'Antonio, Mario and Negri, Guglielmo, Raccolta degli Statuti dei partiti politici in Italia (Milano, Giuffrè, 1958), pp. 152–153Google Scholar.

84 Pavolini, loc. cit., and Pera, loc. cit., passim.

85 Babbini, loc. cit., p. 128.

86 See Pizzorno, loc. cit., pp. 25–26.

87 See Segre, “Un Partito moderno?”, loc. cit., p. 5. See also Ardenti, Piero, “L'organizzazione del PSI da Napoli ad oggi,” Problemi del Socialismo, Vol. 4 (01, 1961), pp. 15–26Google Scholar, but esp. pp. 15–18. Ardenti claims the “apparatus” never formed a united faction, and that the real problem is not to dethrone the “apparatus” but to provide the PSI with a more efficient organization.

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.