Were Italians better off under F? Flashcards
What was BM’s principal aim?
not the material improvement of people’s lives but to make Italians harder and better fighters; an easy existence might weaken their spirit.
BUT they couldn’t be ignored- don’t want a return to the post-war economic unrest.
What were the aims of Welfare in FI?
1) to protect the interests of the people
2) to reduce the danger of unrest
3) as a form of propaganda to win support
4) to demonstrate a united support
5) to prepare Italians for military success through a larger and more vigorous population.
How was welfare funded?
state taxation and levies on various organisations, e.g. syndicates, companies and banks
Health measures
1) limited sickness insurance in most employment contracts after 1928, but a govt system not introduced until 1943
2) huge variations in hospital provisions: cities- good hospitals BUT many areas had zero hospital facilities
Pensions
No extension of govt scheme until minor improvements in 1939
Working conditions/ unemployment
- NO improvements in v. limited unemployment insurance schemes
- working hours reduced to 40hrs in 1934 but due to GD
Childcare
- 1934 family allowances to factory workers (compensate for fewer working hours)
- ONMI provided infant welfare schemes
General welfare
1.75M families in 1934 receiving winter relief
What did the F regime inherit?
a complicated system of welfare, provided by charities and the CC, and state schemes introduced by LG
What did the party set up to control the distribution of funds?
the EOA (an umbrella organisation)
Where did most of the funds come from for the EOA?
Industrialists and syndicates but party claimed the credit
When were govt welfare schemes extended?
1930s- mainly due to GD, but also by the increasing stress in that decade in “going to the people”, to make the mass of Italians more committed to F.
What did BM hope welfare would allow the F regime to do?
reach areas of life as yet little touched by the regime
What would welfare provision demonstrate?
-the NATIONAL COMMITMENT and INTER-CLASS SOLIDARITY of the regime, with the rich contributing to help the poor.
What is Morgan’s view of the WS?
“By providing the moral and material benefits of welfare, the party was extending the regime’s network of control and surveillance of the population”
What was Clarke’s view of the WS?
“This was not exactly a Welfare State but it helped to defuse WC unrest”
To some extent what did these leisure facilities replace?
those similar that had been previously provided by cooperative and labour organisations which the govt had dissolved.
When was the OND founded?
1925
What was the OND/ Doplavoro?
provided state-sponsored after work entertainment
What was BM primarily motivated by when he created leisure facilities?
not a desire to make life more enjoyable BUT to improve their HEALTH and to gain their SUPPORT for the regime.
Providing greater sports facilities would assist propaganda.
What does the OND illustrate?
the TOTALITARIAN aspirations of the regime- seeking to exercise control over all aspects of Italians’ lives.
Particularly aimed at those in rural areas who remained largely outside the influence of press, radio and cinema.
Why did the OND undergo a massive extension in the 1930s?
As part of the “going to the people” policy of trying to integrate the masses into the state”.
What is important to understand about the OND?
It undoubtedly won support for the regime but it must be DISTINGUISHED from turning Italians into committed Fs:
MOST ACCEPTED THE REGIME BUT DID NOT ABSORB THE IDEOLOGY
When was the role of the OND extended?
during the BfL to help workers suffering wage reductions
What did industrial firms develop?
their own Doplavoro firms
EX= Doplavoro Ansaldo (steel)- 50k members
When was the OND reorganised?
1927 under PNF control
Doplavoro aims
- to replace and extend services previously provided by labour organisations
- to provide compensation for low pay
- to help production by developing healthier workers
- to foster the image of caring employers
- to gain popularity and support by being largely non-ideological: i.e. geared to WIN support, NOT CONVERT Italians to Fascism
How was OND funded?
Subscription dues were subsidised by the state and employers were forced to contribute
Activities offered by OND
- subsidised trips
- mobile cinemas
- obligatory showing of newsreels produced by LUCE
- sports and summer camps
- welfare to families in distress
IMPACT: EXTENT
Impressive membership
Largest and most active adult organisation
In late 30s it provided 4M holidays p/a
Most villages, even in S, had a Doplavoro clubhouse
Took over the CC as social hub
How many member did OND have by 1939?
3.8M
80% of salaried employees
40% of industrial workforce
25% of peasants
IMPACT: INFLUENCE
- Main point of contact with the industrial WC who were seen as potentially hostile; it was hoped that through it they might become more attracted to the regime.
- diverted attention from economic and social problems
- assisted management control over employees’ leisure time.
- placed less emphasis on self improvement than NG’s Strength Through Joy
- It did NOT foster a NATIONAL COMMUNITY; often there was class segregation on trains and cruises.
- the state helped develop mass leisure; elsewhere this was done by a consumer society
- most popular institution and survived the regime’s collapse
What has Tannenbaum described the OND as?
“the most popular of all F institutions”
What did Whittam say about the OND?
“If F hoped to create a forceful, militaristic society and to transform the average Italian into a “uomo Fascista” then the OND not only failed to fulfill this aim, it had proved counter- productive. It was so popular because it enabled Italians to enjoy resources w/o the obligation of any full commitment to F ideals and practice”.
Factors which influenced standard of living
- fall in emigration to the US
- increased social security contributions
- decline in female employment in the 1930s
- lack of genuine TU representation
- Autarky
personal consumption
increased by 6% between ‘23 and ‘39
fell by 15% between ‘39 and ‘42
fell dramatically during ‘42 and ‘45
Social groups: industrialists and N latifundi
profited most- lower taxes at first
neutering of TU power and the WCs
Reaffirmed their dominance over the WC
Social groups: MCs and PB
- gained stability and protection from Socialism and the Bolshevik threat
- their savings were guaranteed from inflation by the BfL.
- doubled the no. of public employees, civil servants and teachers from 500k to 1M- stable jobs in the state service
Social groups: peasantry
despite his repeated slogan of giving land to the peasants, the low price of bread in the interwar period and the emphasis of growing grain at the expense of fruit, veg and wine ensured that the number of small farmers declined by 400k by 1931
Social groups: industrial workers
- better off than peasantry
- TUs destroyed and the new syndicates nowhere near as effective in defending their interests against employers
- 1926: had to work longer hours
- 1924-28: wages cut by 12%
- yet workers benefited from FI’s speedy recovery from the GD and the syndicates successful in securing employment and welfare measures for their members.
- to compensate for 40hr week- family allowances introduced
- christmas bonuses and holiday pay by 1939
- all this alongside OND prevented WC discontent
- on the whole workers accepted what was on offer w/o becoming supporters of F
According to Williamson did BM unite Italy?
NO- the N/S divide further widened
standard of living fell drastically in S and by 1950 income per head was only 60% of what it had been in 1924
How was a WC family affected by the F regime?
1) F syndicates:
- membership compulsory
- involved in pay discussions but powerless
- workers had to pay subscriptions
2) OND
- subsidised holidays and trips
- sporting facilities
3) CC
- supported regime
4) Communal radio
- speeches by BM
5) Cinema
- entertainment and propaganda newsreels
6) ONB
- sports
- indoctrination
7) ONMI
- infant welfare
PLUS:
- sense of belonging to a great nation/empire
- winning the world cup (1934 and 1938)
- family allowances (1934 onwards)
CONS:
- periodic wage cuts
- strikes banned
- hours periodically cut
- expensive bread
- NO pol power
