Title explains it all. For research on a revival of one of my TLs. I've done some research on the subject already, but what I'm really lacking is a detailed geographic distribution of areas that would support a large communist/socialist movement in Italy around WWI. I have conflicting sources, some saying it would be centered on Milan (which I'm inclined to believe), but also some that say the poorer Southern regions would be more ripe for the movement. Any help would be appreciated.
Does anyone have any good sources on Italian communist/leftist movements? (WWI era)
- Thread starter OAM47
- Start date
Read all you can about Gramsci. He was the leader of [failed] Socialist movement in the post WWI era to overthrow the government and establish a 'worker's state' through a factory revolution(consisting of worker councils set up in factories, but after its failure to spread Gramsci, before his arrest by Mussolini, comtemplated forming a Marxist-Leninist vanguard party to get the ball rolling)
May I suggest his prison Notebooks(at a bookstore or amazon near you). for a lighter read, I suggest The Red Flag: A History Of Communism, which covers Gramsci's failed movement for an Italian Revolution, at the height of 'Communist Fever' in Europe.(C. 1918-23)
sources: Books + I'm a real communist.
May I suggest his prison Notebooks(at a bookstore or amazon near you). for a lighter read, I suggest The Red Flag: A History Of Communism, which covers Gramsci's failed movement for an Italian Revolution, at the height of 'Communist Fever' in Europe.(C. 1918-23)
sources: Books + I'm a real communist.
I'm actually a communist myself, but it has nothing to do with this development in my TL 
But you've touched upon another problem I've across in this regard: Mussolini. Where he's involved things tend to get complicated, and in fact the event this research is for has him involved quite a bit, things tend to get tangled up.
But you've touched upon another problem I've across in this regard: Mussolini. Where he's involved things tend to get complicated, and in fact the event this research is for has him involved quite a bit, things tend to get tangled up.For what it's worth, here's what little I know or think I know:
1) aside from anything going in the cities, where according to Marxist theory the real action should be, there were also agrarian communes arising in the countryside. I can well believe these arose in the south, but the sources I vaguely remember reading suggested that these were largely in the Po Valley in the north.
2) Mussolini was of course a "Red Diaper Baby" as they say, raised in a Socialist family and as Italy entered the Great War, a dedicated and valued member of the party himself. I gather that during the war, he went farther and farther rightward in the sense of becoming more and more preoccupied with Italian nationalism and the nation achieving both advantage and glory with territorial conquests.
3) Meanwhile the original "fascisti" were a movement within the Socialist party, which Mussolini joined of course, looking for a stronger power base than they could find among the working people alone, and thus seeking a formula for winning over (or, as it turned out, being won over by!) members of better-off and more influential classes. They wound up linking up with a movement of younger members of the well-off establishment of the countryside who were organizing what would later be known as "death squads" to break the rural communes. This union of socialists more interested in power than whom they were using it for, and countryside reactionaries intent on preserving theirs at all costs, was the root of the Fascist Party.
Sorry I can't be more definite and give sources! I just didn't want you to overlook the Bolshevik-inspired rural communes, notably the ones in the north.
1) aside from anything going in the cities, where according to Marxist theory the real action should be, there were also agrarian communes arising in the countryside. I can well believe these arose in the south, but the sources I vaguely remember reading suggested that these were largely in the Po Valley in the north.
2) Mussolini was of course a "Red Diaper Baby" as they say, raised in a Socialist family and as Italy entered the Great War, a dedicated and valued member of the party himself. I gather that during the war, he went farther and farther rightward in the sense of becoming more and more preoccupied with Italian nationalism and the nation achieving both advantage and glory with territorial conquests.
3) Meanwhile the original "fascisti" were a movement within the Socialist party, which Mussolini joined of course, looking for a stronger power base than they could find among the working people alone, and thus seeking a formula for winning over (or, as it turned out, being won over by!) members of better-off and more influential classes. They wound up linking up with a movement of younger members of the well-off establishment of the countryside who were organizing what would later be known as "death squads" to break the rural communes. This union of socialists more interested in power than whom they were using it for, and countryside reactionaries intent on preserving theirs at all costs, was the root of the Fascist Party.
Sorry I can't be more definite and give sources! I just didn't want you to overlook the Bolshevik-inspired rural communes, notably the ones in the north.
Nah, that was pretty helpful. Will aid me in making things believable and detailed. And yeah, as this is take two, I have my research from the first time around, which dealt heavily with points 2 and 3, though I'm not entirely sure I did a good job then.
It depends, really.
Milan was the centre of reformist socialist leader Filippo Turati, while in the South clientelarism ran rampant and the Socialist Party itself was seen as too detached from the rural masses (Salvemini was a great critic of this) It's highly unlikely that reformist Trade Unions and the Parrty will mount something revolutionary, bringing the great mass of industrial workers with them, if nothing really bad happens at State-level. And it should also happen before the Bolshevik Revolution, otherwise ruling classes will get too much scared and be ready for everything.
I suggest either a very botched government response to the Red Week in Ancona in 1914, which leads to heavy police repression, deads and injureds, eventually martial law as soon as Italy joins the war and then revolution; or something in the middle of the conflict, such as anarcho-syndicalists leaders survive their first years in the trenches and, as Caporetto hits the Italian Army, they lead an armed uprising against the abysmal Cadorna leadership, allying with mainstream socialists after the government cracks down on all the oppositions.
In both cases, Mussolini would be at the forefront of revolutionary efforts, and could well become the new Italy's Minister for Propaganda, with a serious claim on future leadership, especially in the first case.
Milan was the centre of reformist socialist leader Filippo Turati, while in the South clientelarism ran rampant and the Socialist Party itself was seen as too detached from the rural masses (Salvemini was a great critic of this) It's highly unlikely that reformist Trade Unions and the Parrty will mount something revolutionary, bringing the great mass of industrial workers with them, if nothing really bad happens at State-level. And it should also happen before the Bolshevik Revolution, otherwise ruling classes will get too much scared and be ready for everything.
I suggest either a very botched government response to the Red Week in Ancona in 1914, which leads to heavy police repression, deads and injureds, eventually martial law as soon as Italy joins the war and then revolution; or something in the middle of the conflict, such as anarcho-syndicalists leaders survive their first years in the trenches and, as Caporetto hits the Italian Army, they lead an armed uprising against the abysmal Cadorna leadership, allying with mainstream socialists after the government cracks down on all the oppositions.
In both cases, Mussolini would be at the forefront of revolutionary efforts, and could well become the new Italy's Minister for Propaganda, with a serious claim on future leadership, especially in the first case.
The PoD is in 1917, so that plan of action won't work. Basically, Germany, after knocking Russia out of the war and the failure of the US to enter the war, decides to focus on Italy in the hopes of knocking it out. Once the country starts to suffer seriously the left takes over the anti-war movement when the government fails to respond in any meaning full way. Would that work?
1917 ?
Ok, worse Caporetto, Austrian forces take Venice, panic ensues, Army riots and Cadorna is put on the gallows by enraged soldiers. The panicking government may either sue for peace or throw some sucidial tactics. In Rome, radicals, freemasons and left-wing interventionists stage a coup to put Gabriele D'Annunzio as revolutionary leader. Things go horribly wrong from here, with the Army crushing the uprising, martial law proclaimed, the left-wing interventionists scattered and the anti-war parties join with D'Annunzio finally launching open rebellion against a military dictatorship and proclaiming Revolutionary War !
Hmmm, sounds good. That's about 75% what I had in mind, with the gap being extra details I hadn't thought of. Very workable.
I'm currently reading The Bolsheviks In Power: The First Year of Soviet Rule In Petrograd. it is excellent, but it got me thinking. What if the Bolsheviks either A) Never came to power, and in their place a multiparty socialist platform organized around the Soviets arose or B) Lenin was either captured or killed, along with many other leading [extremist] Bolsheviks such as Trotsky, leading to a much different All Russian Second Congress of the soviets and no "October Revolution", or at the very least a peaceful resolve to the situation?
I plan to do my research and make that alternate history.
I plan to do my research and make that alternate history.