WI: Italian 1948 general election led to a Communist victory?

[Dan1988]

We could have a finlandized Italy, moving towards the Unaligned Countries after 1956.

Makes sense.

However, I think that civil liberties will suffer quite a lot in the Red Forties and Fifties: even if Christian Democrats are somewhat appeased, the Gedda wing (Civic Committees) is likely to team up with the far right to fight back "Bolshevism", and we'll probably see some heavy hand there, maybe under the guise of "anti-fascist epuration", using the post-war laws. Rome city council elections could be a definite hot point, if the Pope goes on with his idea of a christian-liberal-monarchist-fascist coalition against commies, De Gasperi resists him and a split in the DC occurs.

Hmm, again sounds very similar to Mexico under the PRI - but the PRI did allow the right-wing party the PAN to operate (and the PAN is similar to DC) - in a few cases the PAN were the "loyal opposition".

If the right wing of the DC is banned along with the rising MSI and monarchist groups to "defend democracy against reactionary forces", what will the DC do ? Accept Togliatti's pleas and support the government, effectively leading to a Czechoslovak, Eastern German, Polish or Yugoslav situation as our Agrarian Party, or staying in the opposition and menacing civil disorder to defend parliamentary democracy, thus probably making again Italy a dominant-party State (with the People's Front in charge) up to the end of the Cold War ?

In the latter case, could an alt-Mani pulite investigation also occur, since I could probably assume that something like Tangentopoli would still happen - especially if the merged PSI/PCI becomes entrenched into society and rely on the Mafia and similar organizations to survive.

There's also the question of the small parties - the Liberals and the Republicans. The question with them is how they would fare under this new system.

 

[Manfr]

That's the difficult thing : even if we keep socialdemocratic votes within the PCI / PSIUP political area, we need to diminish that Christian Democratic 48,5%

A tougher Allied approach to Italy in the Gruber affair, and with French occupation of Imperia, as mentioned above ? "Famine fear" was also a powerful motivating factor, the Christian Democrats could offer Plan Marshall, while the Communists offered ... well, Plan Marshall too, but the State Department made much clear thatthis wouldn't happen.

Short of fascist menaces, I think that only a decisive "F**k you!" by the Allies could sway so many votes to the left. A small advantage may come if the Christian Social split within the DC is deeper, and maybe Dossetti and his leftwing christian democrats leave when De Gasperi kicks out the workers' parties.

 

[Manfr]

Makes sense.



Hmm, again sounds very similar to Mexico under the PRI - but the PRI did allow the right-wing party the PAN to operate (and the PAN is similar to DC) - in a few cases the PAN were the "loyal opposition".



In the latter case, could an alt-Mani pulite investigation also occur, since I could probably assume that something like Tangentopoli would still happen - especially if the merged PSI/PCI becomes entrenched into society and rely on the Mafia and similar organizations to survive.

There's also the question of the small parties - the Liberals and the Republicans. The question with them is how they would fare under this new system.

I don't think we p) would entrench with Mafia, they represented at the time mainly agrarian interests and were staunchly anticommunists. However, I can see corruption and clientelarism, just like OTL's Italy, along with a lesser account on Human Rights.
If we go on with partitioning, Mafia would probably dominate even more Sicilian-politics, leading to a Banana Republic situation. If the USA put Umberto II on the sicilian throne, this will soften things a little, but after his death, Sicily will probably move towards rampant Pinochetism.
The other huge mob groups in Calabria, Campania and Puglia would probably be even more involved with far-right activites, possibily becoming the "New Brigands" fighting against government oppression. Southern Italy won't be a pleasant place to live ...

The PRI can be coopted, especially if commies keep Italy unaligned, that was their position in 1948. The Liberals will probably suffer the Radical split, sponsored by the Government, and then ... if they join the monarchists, as in OTL, they may suffer a ban, or heavy restriction measures.

Two interesting issues:

-Freemasonry: Freemasonry was called by Gramsci "the only political party of the italian little bourgesy". Politically, it was divided between moderate conservatives and a socialist / republican wing. When Americans took Sicily, they merged the Grande Oriente, the liberal, socialist and republican lodge, with the Gran Loggia D'Italia, conservative and co-habitating with Mafia. This moved italian Freemasonry towards a staunch atlantism. Many of Saragat's fellows were freemasons, along with some moderate commies.
If the PSIUP stay unified, it may be possible that the new "People's Government" relates to the Freemasonry in a Castro-way of mutual tolerance: otherwise, they would have a dangerous fifth-column in their ranks. As long as the Gran Loggia and the Grande Oriente stay united, I don't think a Chilean situation (with the full weight of the Free masons behind the left government) is possible, although relations might improve after 1956.

-Trade Unions: after the war, we had CGL, a common trade union opposed by some tiny hard-line communist groups. But, with the Cold War, CISL and UIL came out, heavily funded by AFL. If we prevent the PSIUP's split, there won't be any UIL: will the Communist Government tolerate an authonomous, catholic trade union ?

 

[HNHauge]

I think the most likely thing to occur is that Italy and Yugoslavia form a sort of "third block" in Europe. They might incorporate some other countries gradually. Communists also became the largest party in Finland in the late 50s.

 

[Manfr]

Another interesting issue: Italian Constitution can be interpreted in many different ways, either as pro-free market or pro-State and so on. In theory, ours is a Parliamentary democracy, but I cannot see Premiers as the main figures in Commie Italy, with the personality cult so typical in eastern bloc's countries in those years.
After a first "soft" mandate (probably under Francesco Saverio Nitti, an old left liberal), may it be possible that Italy moves towards an "extensive" interpretation of the President of the Republic's powers, thus giving him a US-like veto, 7-years mandates with no term-limits, and the power of disbanding at will Governments and Legislatures ? This would allow the Commies control over the country, without abolishing formally elections. Maybe it can be used as TTL's "Legge Truffa" (in 1953, after having suffered falling support, the DC government passed a law which gave to the allied parties scoring more than 50+1% of the votes the 65% of the seats).

And what about Enrico Mattei, the left wing Christian Democrat which created our Oil State Company, ENI? In OTL, he wanted Italy to leave NATO and join the Unaligned, in order to get better deals with Third World Countries and defeating the Seven Sisters' oligopoly. What would he do in this Italy ? His skills may be unvaluable to the leftwing government, as well as his financial ties with foreign banking institutions.
Speaking of Third World, I don't think we would keep the mandate on Somalia, it would probably be assigned to UK ...

 

[Dan1988]

That's the difficult thing : even if we keep socialdemocratic votes within the PCI / PSIUP political area, we need to diminish that Christian Democratic 48,5%

A tougher Allied approach to Italy in the Gruber affair, and with French occupation of Imperia, as mentioned above ? "Famine fear" was also a powerful motivating factor, the Christian Democrats could offer Plan Marshall, while the Communists offered ... well, Plan Marshall too, but the State Department made much clear thatthis wouldn't happen.

Yeah, sounds like that would be the only way where it would make sense.

Short of fascist menaces, I think that only a decisive "F**k you!" by the Allies could sway so many votes to the left. A small advantage may come if the Christian Social split within the DC is deeper, and maybe Dossetti and his leftwing christian democrats leave when De Gasperi kicks out the workers' parties.

Hmm, apart from what you already mentioned (Austria retaking South Tyrol, French occupying Imperia, etc.), what more of a middle finger would the Allies need?

I don't think we p) would entrench with Mafia, they represented at the time mainly agrarian interests and were staunchly anticommunists. However, I can see corruption and clientelarism, just like OTL's Italy, along with a lesser account on Human Rights.

Again, I'm being reminded of Mexico under the PRI for some reason - though maybe because Mexico has the US as its neighbour.

If we go on with partitioning, Mafia would probably dominate even more Sicilian-politics, leading to a Banana Republic situation.

Well, if we're recreating the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies by having Sicily and Sardinia under one King, could the Mafia extend themselves to Sardinia or support its local equivalent?

If the USA put Umberto II on the sicilian throne, this will soften things a little, but after his death, Sicily will probably move towards rampant Pinochetism.

Sadly, I agree with that assessment. Though if the Cold War is over in TTL, I wonder if there will be a backlash.

The other huge mob groups in Calabria, Campania and Puglia would probably be even more involved with far-right activites, possibily becoming the "New Brigands" fighting against government oppression. Southern Italy won't be a pleasant place to live ...

Hmm, could the Camorra, the 'Ndrangheta, and the like be coöpted by the merged PSI/PCI?

The PRI can be coopted, especially if commies keep Italy unaligned, that was their position in 1948. The Liberals will probably suffer the Radical split, sponsored by the Government, and then ... if they join the monarchists, as in OTL, they may suffer a ban, or heavy restriction measures.

I see. I guess that leaves the other bit of the OTL "pentapartito" - the PSDI. In OTL, it originated as a split from the PSI because of the PSI's preference of an alliance with the PCI (which, in TTL, the alliance becomes firmly cemented). I wonder how the PSDI would fare - would its members remain with the PSI because of the Allied occupation, or would they still attempt to split, with the possibility of being banned?

Two interesting issues:

-Freemasonry: Freemasonry was called by Gramsci "the only political party of the italian little bourgesy". Politically, it was divided between moderate conservatives and a socialist / republican wing. When Americans took Sicily, they merged the Grande Oriente, the liberal, socialist and republican lodge, with the Gran Loggia D'Italia, conservative and co-habitating with Mafia. This moved italian Freemasonry towards a staunch atlantism. Many of Saragat's fellows were freemasons, along with some moderate commies.
If the PSIUP stay unified, it may be possible that the new "People's Government" relates to the Freemasonry in a Castro-way of mutual tolerance: otherwise, they would have a dangerous fifth-column in their ranks. As long as the Gran Loggia and the Grande Oriente stay united, I don't think a Chilean situation (with the full weight of the Free masons behind the left government) is possible, although relations might improve after 1956.

Interesting.

-Trade Unions: after the war, we had CGL, a common trade union opposed by some tiny hard-line communist groups. But, with the Cold War, CISL and UIL came out, heavily funded by AFL. If we prevent the PSIUP's split, there won't be any UIL: will the Communist Government tolerate an authonomous, catholic trade union ?

If it could be easily coöpted, I would think.

Another interesting issue: Italian Constitution can be interpreted in many different ways, either as pro-free market or pro-State and so on. In theory, ours is a Parliamentary democracy, but I cannot see Premiers as the main figures in Commie Italy, with the personality cult so typical in eastern bloc's countries in those years.

Hmm, talk about flexibility.

After a first "soft" mandate (probably under Francesco Saverio Nitti, an old left liberal), may it be possible that Italy moves towards an "extensive" interpretation of the President of the Republic's powers, thus giving him a US-like veto, 7-years mandates with no term-limits, and the power of disbanding at will Governments and Legislatures ? This would allow the Commies control over the country, without abolishing formally elections. Maybe it can be used as TTL's "Legge Truffa" (in 1953, after having suffered falling support, the DC government passed a law which gave to the allied parties scoring more than 50+1% of the votes the 65% of the seats).

Sounds like it would make sense. Though that brings up a question: would the PSI/PCI alliance maintain Italy as a unitary state, or would they go about and start granting autonomy to the regions?

And what about Enrico Mattei, the left wing Christian Democrat which created our Oil State Company, ENI? In OTL, he wanted Italy to leave NATO and join the Unaligned, in order to get better deals with Third World Countries and defeating the Seven Sisters' oligopoly. What would he do in this Italy ? His skills may be unvaluable to the leftwing government, as well as his financial ties with foreign banking institutions.

Hmm, I could see him crossing the floor, so to speak, in TTL.

Speaking of Third World, I don't think we would keep the mandate on Somalia, it would probably be assigned to UK ...

Oh that would be interesting - expanded Somaliland, here I come!

 

[Dan1988]

I think the most likely thing to occur is that Italy and Yugoslavia form a sort of "third block" in Europe. They might incorporate some other countries gradually. Communists also became the largest party in Finland in the late 50s.

Hmm, that could be an interesting start for a non-aligned bloc in Europe.

 

[HNHauge]

Hmm, that could be an interesting start for a non-aligned bloc in Europe.

Timeline?

 

[Dan1988]

Timeline?

Go ahead if you want to do one. My hands are already full ATM. I'd be glad to see one done.

 

[HNHauge]

I have the time, I can try...

 

[Dan1988]

I have the time, I can try...

Sounds good - you have some info in this thread, plus any additional research you come up with.

 

[Valdemar II]

EEC without Italy are going to be interesting. Likely the smaller size would result in a closer co-operation.

I must admit I like the idea of a Italian-Yugoslav block in Europe.

 

[HNHauge]

One question: What set of priorities would an Italian communist government have? What order would nationalizations etc go in?

 

[Dan1988]

One question: What set of priorities would an Italian communist government have? What order would nationalizations etc go in?

The easiest ones I can think of are basically trying to recover from the devastation wrought during WW2, which basically ruined the country. Hence, I could probably see the Catholic Church still operating in the country, and nationalizations basically kept to a minimum (mainly the infrastructure, like railways, electricity, the state broadcaster, etc.). Nothing too grand - unless Manfr disagrees.

 

[HNHauge]

Ah, so sort of like Lenins policy during the first years after the Russian Civil War?

 

[pompejus]

EEC without Italy are going to be interesting. Likely the smaller size would result in a closer co-operation.

A smaller EEC has the distinct danger of becoming some kind of France dominated organisation (which in my maybe too cynical opinion was the intention of France from the start). It has France, three small almost irrelevant countries and a split and beaten Germany. I think that there won't be an EEC without Italy, because the beneluxcountries would see that danger or maybe less cooperation between the countries. , more of an free trade zone less of a union. Maybe the Benelux becomes far more integrated than it is now.

 

[Hendryk]

Ah, so sort of like Lenins policy during the first years after the Russian Civil War?

The context would be completely different. One must emphasize that a Communist Party that gains power through legitimate elections will not behave like a Communist Party that takes over through a violent revolutionary process. This is also why, even if there are some low-level affinities between Italian and Yugoslavian Communists, quite soon the two aren't going to see eye to eye on a number of fundamental issues.

 

[Admiral Brown]

The dividing line between Soviet and US spheres of influence in post-WW2 Europe wasn't determined by Communist electoral victories, but by the presence of Soviet occupation forces. I think that even if the Communists were voted to power in Italy, the country wouldn't actually decide to become a Soviet satellite state--though the relations with the US may become chilly indeed.

Italian Communism had no shortage of intellectual and political talent. Gramsci had died in 1937 (at a still-youthful 46, so perhaps the POD could be that he survives imprisonment by the fascist regime), but even Togliatti was no mere apparatchik. In OTL the Italian CP was known for its relative ideological independence from Moscow's party line.

As Hendryk says, a Communist Italy would not necessarily be a Soviet puppet or even a Soviet ally at all. (There is the OTL small scale example of San Marino, which voted in Communists in the 1950s, stayed democratic and then voted them out again a few years later).

This is actually interesting because the example of there being a large-scale democratic state which votes in Communists, doesn't align with the USSR (probably plotting a third way between the cold war sides) and then lets them be voted out at a subsequent election would doubtless have a marked effect on the perception of communism on both sides of the Iron Curtain.

The context would be completely different. One must emphasize that a Communist Party that gains power through legitimate elections will not behave like a Communist Party that takes over through a violent revolutionary process. This is also why, even if there are some low-level affinities between Italian and Yugoslavian Communists, quite soon the two aren't going to see eye to eye on a number of fundamental issues.

I agree. In practically all the cases were communists gained power through a Communist revolution, the governmnets didn't align completely with Moscow or, if they did, they followed an independent policy pretty soon. (Yugoslavia, China, Cuba, etc.)

And this government wouldn't have gained power thruough a revolution, but through democratic elections. He'll be much more limited. He won't be able to call for Russian troops to help him, so he'll have to survive on it's own. For democratic governments, survival means you've got to stay popular. And you won't be popular if you align completely with another countries interests. They cannot favour international inerests over local ones (in the border issues with Yugoslavia, for example). And they cannot start being authocratic, as thy'd be ousted if they try.

 

[HNHauge]

The context would be completely different. One must emphasize that a Communist Party that gains power through legitimate elections will not behave like a Communist Party that takes over through a violent revolutionary process. This is also why, even if there are some low-level affinities between Italian and Yugoslavian Communists, quite soon the two aren't going to see eye to eye on a number of fundamental issues.

Perhaps. Another interesting part of the discussion is certainly "would the communists be re-elected?". But, assuming they did manage to be re-elected, I think the second term would see more of a transition to a Leninist/Titoist economy.

 

[Dan1988]

Perhaps. Another interesting part of the discussion is certainly "would the communists be re-elected?". But, assuming they did manage to be re-elected, I think the second term would see more of a transition to a Leninist/Titoist economy.

We shall see, but I think a continuance of something like the NEP would be possible. Basically, the PSI/PCI-UP becomes like an Italian version of the Mexican PRI, though with additional parties surviving WW2. The revived Kingdom of the Two Sicilies is going to be a mess, for sure.