What L'Unita' Wants
Historian, journalist, social and political commentator. Born near Bari, and an authority on the South, reputable enough to become an influence on the early Gramsci. His first works were devoted to a study of the Florentine commune in the Middle Ages, and the French Revolution. An intransigent opponent of Giolitti (from the left) (see: Il ministro della malavita, The Minister of Crime, (1909) and of the reformist wing of the Socialist Party. The passages illustrate Salvemini's break with Prezzolini and La Voce over the Libyan campaign, and his founding of L'Unita' (1912). His work on the anti-fascist paper Non Mollare caused his arrest following the murder of Giacomo Matteotti. He escaped abroad and in the 1930's taught history at Harvard. Returned to Italy after World War II, and for a time until retirement resumed teaching at the University of Florence, from which he had been barred by the Fascists in 1925.
Principal works:
The Fascist Dictatorship in Italy (1927)
Under the Axe of Fascism (1936)
Memorie di un fuoruscito (1960 - Memoirs)
Against the Democrats, For Democracy
Unita' sees itself as a "democratic" newspaper. And it takes a lot of courage to call yourself a democrat today in Italy. When we see what democracy--whether in radical, republic or socialist form--has been reduced to in Italy, the very idea of being a democrat may send shivers up your spine, that is, if you feel the duty to love your country and serve it before declaring yourself a democrat.
And yet the profound, unconditional distrust that we on L'Unita' feel for almost all the men who daily brandish the banner of democracy in Parliament, the press and the political associations; the disgust which over the years has increased in us as the parties of democracy have shown themselves unaware of, and indifferent to the deep problems of Italian life: such feelings have been intensified by the emptiness of the programs of the democratic parties, by the ignorance they have revealed about our national needs, drowned in the clamor of their masonic anti-clericalism, and by the need we feel for a new political era, radically different from that in which our traditional political parties have brought dishonor upon themselves. Rather than stop us from calling ourselves democrats, such feelings to the contrary impress upon us today as never before the necessity and the right to assert ourselves permanently and resolutely "democrats."
Let us understand each other. We are not accusing the traditional democratic parties of their abstract ideal of the independence of the lower classes; but of their ineptitude in translating this general aspiration into a reality which amounts to a serious concrete service to the nation. It is their inability to reconcile the appetites and interests of local groups and professional organizations with collective interests. It is the continual sacrifice they have made of those collective interests to the special interest groups. It is the lack of preparation and the moral absenteeism that most of the politicos of democracy have shown these last ten years in the face of such problems as administrative reform, our customs tariffs, our tax structure, our schools and foreign affairs, all of which require immediate solutions. And in particular we refer to the Southern Problem, which remains the profoundest and most tragic (area of neglect) in our national life. It is the systematic and conscious betrayal, committed on a day to day basis of the working classes, left bewildered and disorganized.
But in fighting, as we are doing, the unholy work of the special groups which today hold the democratic field, it remains our intention to serve that ideal, of which they claim to be sole standard bearers, while they do nothing but defile and exploit it. Nor do we intend our efforts to be confused with theirs. For it is their intention to take advantage of the errors and sins of the democratic political hacks, and to prop up in Italy the moral anarchy and parasitism which a discredited democracy has not only failed to eliminate, but has actually encouraged.
(L'Unita': 9th March 1912)
The Enormous Tripolitan Hoax
[The nationalist Enrico Corradini had justified the Italian colonialist campaign in Tripoli, in part by quoting and distorting the historian Herodotus on the legendary fertility of Tripoli. On September 27th, 1911 the Milanese daily, Il Corriere della Sera, had published an article by the deputy Andrea Torre, this time quoting the Roman author Pliny, also extolling the fertility of Cyrenaica. ("The Emperor Nero was presented with an ear of corn from Cyrenaica, with 340 grains of corn on it.") What follows is Salvemini's response]
You have to be very careful before quoting the classics as a basis for economic policy.
Let us not forget that the lie about the 340 grains of corn from a single stalk in Cyrenaica was published in 600,000 copies of the Corriere della Sera in a leading article on the evening of the 27th September, before the Ultimatum to Turkey. This lie was read and swallowed by millions of Italians; reproduced in thousands of local papers; and contributed greatly to the climate of hysteria that gripped Italy in those last days of September...a hysteria composed of (1) the greed inspired by the myth of the fabulous riches to be conquered; (2) the casual conviction of the ease of the enterprise (Arabs "waiting for us with open arms," "preparing flags of welcome," "The Turks, base and in rags, would turn and run," etc. ...); (3) a bestial anger aimed at anyone who refused to lay down his reason in this climate of universal stupidity...
And the war came. "That necessary war," some said. "To push the country into war, it was necessary to deceive it." We will not waste time discussing this pseudo-machiavellianism according to which the country is a backward child who must be systematically deceived for the good of a handful of supermen, and foreign and domestic policy must be based on lies and falsehoods and news of war must be spiced with exaggerations and lies...
Now let us discuss the lofty political reasons that made this war "necessary." We won't discuss them because we do not know what they are. That's water under the bridge. Let us take things as they are, and such that no one can shut his eyes to them. And let us do our duty in the fact of these facts. But why do the mystifications on the treasures of Tripoli multiply even after the war has been launched?
At the end of November this campaign had produced 21,000 requests for passports, largely from southern peasants, to go and seek work in Tripoli. Here and there we hear news of companies starting up, ready to exploit the fabulous wealth of the country. If today you start a company offering 1,000,000 shares at 25 lire a piece with the promise that each share is worth a parcel of land, southern peasants would literally hurl themselves at these shares, and invest all of their American savings. In a month the shares would leap to 100 lire, and those who launched the company would be raking in millions by the barrelful; and within a few years those innocent peasants would find themselves with a lot of dirty paper in their hands, robbed and cheated once again. And already the sharks of high finance are talking of a loan of half a billion or a billion lire to construct railroads over there, ports and roads, etc. ...always, it goes without saying, in the hopes of enriching, not the above-mentioned sharks, but the mother country, Italy.
Now this is not merely a question of international politics in which only our arms are involved, demanding--given the present state of affairs--that we trust the Government, while deep in our hearts we pray that the trust is not displaced. This is quite simply an enquiry into internal policy, which can be stated as follows: "After the conquest of Tripoli, what program of works and development do we propose for her with the full intention of not harming unnecessarily the mother country?" Those who on this question continue to deceive the country by prattling of the present and ancient wealth of Tripoli, have no further right to claim that their deception is based on "lofty political reasons." These are by now exhausted. And the mystifications which continue can only be interpreted for what they are: services rendered to the collective parasitism of the Bank of Tripoli cartel.
(Unita': 6th January 1912)
The content and opinions expressed on this Web page do not necessarily reflect the views of nor they endorsed by the University of Georgia or the University System of Georgia.