Neil+Riley

Research Question: To what extent were Mussolini’s economic policies successful in their respective aims between 1922 and 1940?

A) Plan of Investigation

The question that guides this investigation is to what extent were Mussolini’s domestic policies successful in their respective aims? This will be done by exploring and introducing Mussolini’s domestic policies during his time in power. The investigation will then focus on evaluating the success of these policies and their affects on the dictator’s nation. The two main sources that will be cited in this investigation are Edwin P. Hoyt’s book Mussolini’s Empire, and R.J.B. Bosworth’s work, Mussolini’s Italy. These sources along with several others will be examined according to their respective origins, purposes, values and limitations.

B) Summary of Evidence
 * __ Corporatism: __**
 * Ideology: **


 * “It talked about building a corporate state that the world would marvel at and thereby unite bosses and workers and bring welfare and justice to all. In practice, however, the dictatorship’s economic performance was patchy at best. Its erratic pursuit of free trade at first and autarchy or protection thereafter did nothing to improve the Italian population’s lower standard of living compared with the richer and greater powers to its north and west” [1]
 * “‘Corporatism’...had several key elements: The state comes before the individual”[2]
 * “Planned industrial "harmony." Another keystone of Italian corporatism was the idea that the government's interventions in the economy... should be "coordinated" by some kind of central planning board." [3]
 * “Government-business partnerships. A third defining characteristic of economic fascism is that private property and business ownership are permitted, but are in reality controlled by government through a business-government "partnership.’” [4]
 * “Corporatism, in other words, was a massive system of corporate welfare.[5]
 * “As the 1920s progressed, Mussolini became more ambitious and increasingly attracted to the idea of an economic transformation of Italy. He proclaimed the world’s first ‘corporate state’, supposedly a radical new way of organising and running a nation’s economy, different from and superior to both the capitalist economics of Britain and the USA and the Communist economy of the USSR.”[6] His goal was to prove that Fascism was superior in every way to the other powers of the world and that Italy was just as powerful as Russia, Britain and the U.S.


 * Affects: **


 * “Three years after its creation in 1926 the Ministry of Corporations claimed success. The corporate state was ushering in a new economic era and had removed all class conflict in industry”[7].
 * “Workers were unable to choose their own representatives in their corporation, and instead had Fascist nominees foisted on them. These Fascist officials tended to side with the employers’ representatives over the key issues of wages and working conditions. Only issues such as sick pay for workers and the belated introduction of paid national holidays in 1938 did the corporations further workers’ interests”[8]
 * “In truth, the ‘corporative revolution’ never materialised. Conflict between employer and employee was not solved, only suppressed, and the corporations never achieved the pivotal role in the state and economy envisaged by the Duce.[9]


 * __ Autarky: __**


 * How This was Attempted to be Achieved: **


 * By 1925, Mussolini began to take less notice of businesses in Italy. It is around this time that the Battle for the Lira began. The Battle for the Lira truly began with the revaluation of the Italian currency by Mussolini which “(restored) the value of the lira to its value in October 1922, the month of his ascension to power, (and) increased Mussolini’s prestige both with foreign bankers and with the Italian public”[10]
 * From the very beginning it was Mussolini’s aim to make Italy self-sufficient because, in war, the country would need to rely on its own goods. “The economic sanctions imposed by the League of Nations after Italy’s invasion of Ethiopia in 1935 seemed to prove his point that there must be no reliance on imports"[11]
 * "The depression also forced the reduction of imports by Italy because of the expense and the need to conserve foreign exchange, so with great fanfare Mussolini began "The Battle of the Wheat" [14]
 * “The Battle for Grain began in 1925 and was an attempt to promote Fascist power and national self-sufficiency”[12]
 * Mussolini saw that Italy had to import a majority of the food consumed in the country as a major problem and so in 1925 he began encouraging farmers to grow more grain all across the country, even in lands where other crops used to grown. He gave grants to farmers for the purchase of tractors and seed and taught farmers more efficient farming techniques.[13]


 * The Affects of the attempt at Autarky in Italy **
 * The affects of the Battle for the Lira were far from beneficial. “At a stroke, foreign buyers found Italian goods nearly twice as expensive, and it was not surprising that Italian export industries, particularly textiles, went into depression”[15]
 * “Despite these efforts the Italian economy was still far from self-sufficient when the Duce joined the Second World War in 1940... steel still had to be imported in very large quantities... Italy was unable to match its enemies’ levels of production and could not even replace its losses in shipping and aircraft. The drive for autarky in fact only succeeded in worsening Italy’s financial difficulties”[16]
 * "Its erratic pursuit of free trade at first and autarchy or protection thereafter did nothing to improve the Italian population’s lower standard of living compared with the richer and greater powers to its north and west”[17]
 * “The Battle for Grain certainly had dramatically increased production and helped farmers, but there had been a large price to be paid. First, much of the land in the central and southern regions that had been turned over to wheat was unsuitable for such a crop. The soil conditions and hotter, drier climate were more suited to growing citrus fruits or the production of wine and olive oil. The result was that these traditional agricultural exports declined”[18]

C) Evaluation of Sources:

Bosworth, R. J. B. Mussolini's Italy: Life Under the Fascist Dictatorship, 1915-1945. New York: The Peguin Press, 2006. Print.

This source is a book written by R. J. B Bosworth, an Australian historian and author who teaches at the University of Western Australia and is an expert on Fascist Italy. The book provides an in-depth look at the history of Mussolini’s regime and Italy’s experiments with Fascism. The purpose of the book is to give a vivid, detailed account of life under Benito Mussolini’s Fascist dictatorship. It is meant to inform the reader concerning this time period and how Mussolini changed the history of the world. The value of this source is that it gives a very reliable, widely scoped look at the entire time period that I am studying. It goes into specifics in terms of how Fascism affected Italian economic policy and it will be very useful in every step of this project. One of the main limitations of this source is that Bosworth was not alive during this time period. Therefore, he is unable to give a truly accurate and unbiased account of the history of Mussolini’s Italy.

Robson, Mark. //Italy: The Rise of Fascism//. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.

This source was written by Mark Robson, a history teacher and expert on Fascist Italy. //The Rise of Fascism// gives a concise overview of the history of Mussolini's ascension to power to his death in 1945. The book's purpose is to inform the readers about the life of not only the Fascist dictator but also his people. It covers Mussolini's domestic and foreign policies and their affects on the Italian people as well as the people of the world. This source's analysis of Mussolini's domestic policies is very valuable, especially because of its organized breakdown of the most important policies and their effects on the people of Italy under Fascism. One of the most important limitations of this source that I noticed is that it lacks primary sources throughout the entire book. The analysis and the recounting of history is sound and reliable but the book itself rarely uses sources besides secondary and tertiary accounts.

DiLorenzo, Thomas J. "Economic Fascism." Editorial. //LewRockwell.com//. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Feb. 2012. [].

This source was written by Thomas J. DiLorenzo, is an American economics professor at Loyola University Maryland. "Economic Fascism" explores in detail the concept of Corporatism, an economic policy employed by Mussolini during his time in power. "Economic Fascism's" overall purpose is to persuade the reader to see that "v irtually all of the specific economic policies advocated by the Italian and German fascists of the 1930s have also been adopted in the United States in some form, and continue to be adopted to this day." It gives an overview of the economic policies of Fascist Italy and attempts to prove this thesis. Though this source is full of bias, this does not mean that the information concerning the Corporatist policy is less useful. It will be important especially because of its short section on "Planned Industrial Harmony" which was a crucial pillar of the Italian "big business" policy. This source's main limitation is that it is written as a persuasion piece. It is dripping with bias and most of the information presented must be weighed and reasoned with. This limitation is important to keep in mind but the book's discourse on Italian Corporatism during the Fascist regime is simply too crucial to my project to ignore the article.

Hoyt, Edwin P. //Mussolini's Empire: The Rise and Fall of the Fascist Vision//. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.

This source was written by Edwin P. Hoyt, a highly prolific American writer who specialized in military history. Hoyt's purpose in writing //Mussolini's Empire: The Rise and Fall of the Fascist Vision// was to inform his audience about the rise and fall of the Fascist movement in Italy and to give a "contrarian portrait" of Mussolini's life. Additionally, Hoyt also attempts to persuade the reader against the established idea of Mussolini's evil. The value of this source derives from its useful information concerning the corporate state, the Land Reclamation Plan of 1933, "The Battle of the Wheat", and "The Battle of the Lira", all of which must be addressed in my essay. It also gives direct statistics concerning each of these economic strategies which makes this source indispensable when it comes to writing this paper. This source's limitation mainly comes from the author's bias when it comes to his view of Mussolini. Hoyt attempts to persuade the reader against the established idea of Mussolini's evil, which, in some parts of the book can make the information less reliable. Additionally, Hoyt was not alive during this time and gets many of his accounts from rumors and whisperings. These limitations do not take away from the value of this source and it will be very important in the final product of this project.

D) Analysis:

“As the 1920s progressed, Mussolini became more ambitious and increasingly attracted to the idea of an economic transformation of Italy," [19] a concept that pervaded Italian economic strategy for the whole of the dictator's regime. It seems clear with the benefit of hindsight that Italian policy was aimed at the glorification of Fascism. Mussolini's main policies which included Corporatism (The partnership between the government and big business) and the strive toward Autarchy (Italian self-sufficiency), were supposedly... new radical (ways) of organising and running a nation's economy, different from and superior to both the capitalist economics of Britain and the USA and the Communist economy of the USSR." [20] It is important to assess the extent to which these "superior" stategies were successful so that economically, we can learn from the accomplishments or the failures of history.

In terms of Mussolini's goals and the with the given evidence, Italian economic policy was far from completely successful. In 1926, the Ministry of Corporations of the Fascist government claimed that the new superior corporate state had removed all class conflict in industry, the main goal in the implementation of Corporatism. However, with a closer look, the accuracy of this assessment falters. The Fascist officials assigned to workers to represent them in the Ministry of Corporations tended to side with the employer's representatives in their respective corporations and soon, it became apparent that the "corporative revolution" would never materialize. Mussolini's dreams of a perfect Corporative state in which employer and employee harmony existed were dashed. Therefore, from a Corporatist point of view, Italian economic policy during this time was unsuccessful.

Autarchy was inherently important to the future of the Italian Fascist state. In the brewing war, a lack of self-sufficiency could destroy the fragile infant government that Mussolini had created. As a result, the dictator made autarchy a main priority for the future of the Italian economy during his time in power. Large projects or so-called "Battles" were examples of Mussolini's push toward complete self-sufficiency. Several of these "Battles" were in fact successful in their aims. "The Battle for Grain" certainly dramatically increased food production and helped farmers improve the outdated techniques of the less-than-modern Italian agricultural industry. However, in even the most successful example of these large projects, there was a large price to be paid. "The Battle for Grain" required many of the central and southern regions of Italy, which were traditionally suited to growing citrus fruits and olives, to be turned over to wheat. The result of this transition was the decline of the former traditional exports. Nonetheless, there is no denying that "The Battle for Grain" was a success compared to the other grandly scaled projects such as the Battle of the Lira. The revaluation of the lira sent Italian export industries spiraling into depression and further hindered Mussolini's scramble for autarchy. Though there was indeed some success in the more specific goals, it is clear that overall, the dictator's vision of a self-sufficient, protective Fascist state was never successfully achieved.

E) Conclusion:

On a much smaller scale, it is true that some of Benito Mussolini's economic policies did in fact succeed. However, his dream of a harmonious Corporate state in which employee and employer communicated perfectly were far from fully realized and his push for autarchy for his Fascist Italy was never achieved. He increased grain production and improved age-old farming techniques but failed to reach the levels of production of the Allied enemy, achieve complete self-sufficiency for a wartime economy and create the superior corporate state at which the modern world would marvel. Thus, it can be said that to virtually no extent can Mussolini's economic policies be labeled successful.

[1] Bosworth, R. J. B. Mussolini's Italy: Life Under the Fascist Dictatorship, 1915-1945. New York: The Peguin Press, 2006. Print. [2] DiLorenzo, Thomas J. "Economic Fascism." Editorial. //LewRockwell.com//. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Feb. 2012. []. [3] ibid [4] ibid [5] ibid [6] Robson, Mark. //Italy: The Rise of Fascism//. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print. [7] ibid [8] ibid [9] ibid [10] ibid [11] ibid [12] ibid [13] ibid [14] Hoyt, Edwin P. Mussolini's Empire: The Rise and Fall of the Fascist Vision. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print. [15] ibid [16] ibid [17] Bosworth [18] Robson [19] ibid [20] ibid