Transformation of the State

March 19, 2018

 

Today we speak fluently of the Fascist Revolution. The phrase, which aroused a little while ago, even in the fascist camp, some repugnance and some dissent, is now universally accepted to designate the complex phenomenon that began in 1919 with the formation of the Fasci di Combattimento, it was established with the March on Rome October 28, 1922, and that gradually, but unceasingly, over the past four years, has transformed the spirit of the masses and the very structure of the state.

Revolution, therefore, without a doubt. Revolution, not so much because violent movement of the people, culminated with the conquest of power, by virtue of an act of force, but above all because it has radically changed the systems, and the very notion of the state, has replaced the old ruling class with a new one, formed during the hard labor of war and post-war, and has worked deeply on the psychology of the masses, transforming their spiritual orientation.

As can be seen, I place above all the intimate revolutionary virtue in the new legal and moral order created by Fascism. A revolution, in reality, does not deserve such a name, if it does not lead to a new system of public law and a new spirit of the people. To believe, as sometimes happens, that the revolution may be exhausted in the street motions, in violence, in capital executions and in popular massacres, is to confuse the form with the substance, the episode with the historical fact. Certainly every revolution has its tremendous and tragic episodes, but all this is not yet the revolution. If it were, the "jacqueries", the revolts of the peasants or slaves, the explosions of anger of the malcontent or excited crowd would deserve the name of revolution; revolution would have been Bolshevik anarchy that raged in Italy in 1919 and 1920. The revolution, the same name says it, is above all a political or social upheaval, that is, political and social together, then a historical process that leads to a new state order or of the Company or both. In other words, revolution can not be an end in itself, it is necessarily a means for the formation of a new order. The labor for this training is as a rule very long and very hard. The French Revolution did not place its head in a new order that after more than ten years, and became a true regime only with the Napoleonic reforms. But, undoubtedly, the goal of every revolution is to create after destroying. Like the bee that dies by engendering, the revolution as such is extinguished when the new order is created. At this moment the revolution becomes, you pass me the antithesis, conservative; conservative of the new system that was born of it.

It may be that a vast movement of renewal arising from a political and social ideology does not succeed in the end that determined it, but it results in a different one. That is to say, not always the idea that moved the revolution triumphs in the revolution: it is the case of Russian Bolshevism, which, after having made the revolution to implement Marxist communism, decidedly moves towards a structure that is neither communist nor communist. neither Marxist, but which is certainly profoundly different from that of Russia in 1914.

Fascism, on the other hand, belongs to the list of those revolutions, which, albeit with the inevitable adaptations imposed by historical necessities, realize its ideology. He realizes it in the spiritual field, awakening in the mass the feeling of duty, the habit of discipline, the idea of ​​the subordination of the individual to the nation. It realizes it in the juridical field, creating, on the ruins of the liberal and democratic State, the Fascist State.

This transformation process is in progress. It is far from being accomplished, indeed it is just at the beginning. But already the great lines of the new building begin to appear clear, through the manifestations of the regime. From the juridical point of view there is no doubt that the years 1925 and 1926 mark a decisive stage towards the transformation of the state. And, as the Fascist Government's Keeper of the Fascist during this fortunate period, I had the opportunity to collaborate in most of the legislative reforms, by virtue of which on the ruins of the liberal, agnostic and abulic state, of the democratic state dominated by particularistic selfishness, the Fascist State, I think it is not useless to gather in volume the speeches and the relationships, with which, on behalf of the Head of Government Benito Mussolini, I had the

This means that not all the fascist legislation is reproduced and commented on in this volume, but only that, to whose elaboration I gave my personal work. Other fundamental laws, which also contributed powerfully to give the new status of the State, remain outside the framework of this volume, such as the school reform, and the reform of the Municipalities. These laws and still others that the inevitable development of the fascist transformation will render necessary, will be systematically illustrated in its time, when the revolutionary cycle of the revolution will be accomplished. The intent of this collection can not be so vast: the present moment of fascist evolution would not allow it. I limit myself, therefore, today to present, gathered in volume,

Undoubtedly, also in this field, January 3 marks a decisive date. From October 28, 1922 to January 3, 1925, Fascism did not rule Italy alone; he governed it in collaboration with other parties. This collaboration, very large at first, had gradually narrowed; but in substance only with the 3 January each residual of the coalition government was eliminated, and Fascism dominated the state alone. It was therefore natural that, as long as debris from the old political world, with a totally different mentality, professing antithetical doctrines to the fascist one, collaborated with Fascism in the Government, it would be difficult to start vigorously a total transformation of the State. We add that the public opinion was not yet mature, despite the triumph of the march on Rome, for the complete abandonment of legal and political forms, which had been entitled to citizenship in Italy for almost eighty years. The antinational reaction of the second semester of 1924 gave Fascism the clear feeling that the time had come for it to govern itself and to transform the state, or to make up for the failure of the revolution. Between the two routes the choice could not be doubted, and Mussolini, with the infallible intuition that assists him in the most serious moments, in the speech of January 3, necessary complement of the march on Rome and therefore eminently revolutionary act, opened the new phase of the revolution: the realization of Fascism and the creation of the Fascist State. That the moment for such a decision was opportune is shown by the unanimous consent, with which the Italian people accepted the beginning of the new period. In fact, the announcement that fascism would henceforth implement its renewal program in an intransigent manner, was accepted as a liberation from all fascists and non-fascists. From the fascists, who acquired the certainty of the realization of their doctrines. From the non-fascists, and I mean also from the adversaries of Fascism, who henceforth saw themselves subjected to the legal discipline of the State more rigorously, but were placed in this position to be safe from extra-legal reactions due precisely to the inadequacy of juridical sanctions. who acquired the certainty of the realization of their doctrines. From the non-fascists, and I mean also from the adversaries of Fascism, who henceforth saw themselves subjected to the legal discipline of the State more rigorously, but were placed in this position to be safe from extra-legal reactions due precisely to the inadequacy of juridical sanctions. who acquired the certainty of the realization of their doctrines. From the non-fascists, and I mean also from the adversaries of Fascism, who henceforth saw themselves subjected to the legal discipline of the State more rigorously, but were placed in this position to be safe from extra-legal reactions due precisely to the inadequacy of juridical sanctions.

However, the decisive historical value for the creation of the fascist State, which must be attributed to the date of January 3, 1925, does not mean that even in the previous period, which was of transit and collaboration, major reforms were not implemented. Especially in the year 1923, a major revision of the legislative structure of the state was carried out by the Government, by virtue of the full powers obtained by the Parliament. It was, as the times allowed, a mainly technical reform, but that should not be forgotten, both because it was the crowning of long legislative work conducted over decades, and that they had never managed to achieve a concrete result, due to the irremediable weakness of the Governments antecedents, both because it had some non-indifferent political reflection.

From this point of view, the first place undoubtedly belongs to the reform of the school, prepared and implemented by Giovanni Gentile with strict coherence and indomitable energy, which profoundly transformed all the orders of schools, from primary to university, and which was not only reform of legal systems or programs, but of spirit and method. From the agnostic school, devoid of moral content, without idealism, pure provider of knowledge, which the liberal democratic state had created, the educating school came out, not only of the intellect but of the soul, with its religious and national content, new Italian, worthy of the new history of Italy, able to understand it and realize it. Despite the criticism and opposition that such a vast and profound reform was to raise, and despite the inevitable errors in detail, which in such a colossal work, prepared and implemented in a few months, could not be absent, the school reform will remain as one of the fundamental titles of the merit of Fascism towards Italy. Rightly the Goy, head of the information office of the Sorbonne, declared: "This Gentile reform greatly passes the framework of purely educational institutions: it is primarily a political event", and added that the reform "will have incalculable consequences on the future. of the neighboring nation ".

Next to the reform of the Hon. Gentile the financial reforms of the Hon. De Stefani. Technical reforms of course, but which contributed powerfully to the financial structure of the state and which allowed the consolidation of the budget, an indispensable prerequisite for the reconstruction of Italian finance and economy. Suffice it to recall the reorganization of taxes, which finally had a final and organic structure, the revision of the law of general accounting of the State, which established a strict control of expenditure making a government out of the revolution the most cautious and orderly administrator, and finally the reform of the hierarchical order of the bureaucracy, which gave the Italian administration a structure, perhaps not without mende,

 

Finally we must not forget the reforms implemented in the field of the Administration of Justice, among which very important that of the judicial district, and especially that unification of the Supreme Court, old aspiration never implemented for the irredeemable opposition of regional interests, to which the parliamentary regime could not nor could he resist. 

But after the technical reform, political reform had to come. I am not a fetishist of reforms, I am a heretic in this field. The reforms, in fact, carried out by the laws are no longer valid if they are not realized above all in the custom, in the spirit, in the tradition. Only those reforms are durable that are done first in the minds and then in the laws.

That is why, if Fascism, anticipating the times, had, at its first advent in power, immediately started the reform of the state, it would have perhaps done vain work. In fact, it was necessary first to create, in customs and in spirit, the new state desired by fascism, and later, but only afterwards, a legal form and legal organization could be given to it. After two years of fascist rule, even legislative reform was possible, because essentially the fascist state existed in reality.

 

But what does this fascist state consist of? What is it different from the liberal democratic state?

 

The Liberal State, whose remote origins must be traced back to spiritual and political movements unrelated to our country and to the Italian spirit, was constituted in Italy above all for reasons of contingent opportunity, in a period in which liberalism triumphed in Europe and in which the formation of the unitary Italian State as a liberal state seemed more likely to overcome the obstacles, which nationalism and the imperialisms of others imposed on our resurgent nationalism. And in this adaptation of political and juridical systems, inspired by fundamentally individualistic and anti-state ideologies, to a people just emerging from long centuries of servitude and over a millennium of disintegration, devoid of national consciousness, and without any idea of ​​the state, errors the degenerations multiplied and worsened.

 

The very structure of the liberal democratic state made it a fragile building for itself, whose resistance was linked to the concurrence of conditions that were lacking in Italy.

In fact, the characteristics of the liberal democratic state are two. First of all, it is an organism unrelated to the living forces operating in the country, which places all the same and all equally protected. Secondly, it is an organism without its own concrete content, without its own ideals, open to all ideals and all programs. The consequences of this twofold premise are obvious. The liberal democratic state does not dominate the forces existing in the country, but it is dominated by it: these are the ones who decide, the state undergoes the decision and executes it. Not enough, the liberal democratic state, not having its own idea to impose, becomes the field open to the struggles of all the currents and forces that exist in the country: all have the right, from time to time, to penetrate the state, or alternatively, that is, even worse,

This conception of the state was so deeply rooted in Italy that it had become a premise common to all parties, even those that most bitterly fought each other. It was one of those truths that are not discussed, because evident to all, a truism, as the English say. This conception was accepted not only by liberals and democrats, but also by the socialists, who, although fighting for the advent of a different type of state, actually realized the liberal state also, and for the liberal state they operated everyday; and the same people, who claimed to derive their doctrine from Catholic doctrine, which is so far removed from liberalism, had become the staunchest proponents of the liberal democratic state. In truth it seemed that in Italy liberalism and democracy, legitimate sons of Protestantism, were to celebrate their greatest victory, the one on Catholicism, which they were about to absorb and convert.

 

No wonder that this almost total triumph of liberalism and democracy in Italy has led the Italian state to the brink of the abyss.

 

Outside of Italy, especially in the Anglo-Saxon countries, the liberal democratic state had been able to flourish and even operate great things, because it found itself in the social and political conditions of those corrective peoples that were missing from us. In the Anglo-Saxon countries and also in France there is a great national tradition, and the idea of ​​the state has been strengthened through centuries of struggles supported by the state for the affirmation of its supremacy. Moreover, in England, a strict moral upbringing has been superimposed on the individualistic and disintegrating spirit of Germanism, so that the individual, while theoretically claiming the widest freedom in the face of the State, knows in the spontaneously to limit it.

 

All these conditions were missing in Italy. The old Roman tradition, splendidly renewed by the Catholic Church, was inspired by the principle of discipline, hierarchy, the subjugation of individuals to the State, but it was a long tradition, on which the disruptive influences of Germanism, the medieval anarchy, had profoundly worked and finally the foreign servitude. The latter, above all, making the State appear for centuries as an instrument of foreign oppression, had given birth and deeply rooted in the Italian masses the spirit of distrust and revolt against public authority. This spirit should have been transformed by a pertinent work of political education and state discipline. The liberal democratic state was, unfortunately, incapable, spiritually and materially, to fulfill this, which should have been his first and most urgent function. Thus it happened that, even after attainment of unity and independence, the Italian masses kept towards the National State that same suspicious and hostile attitude, which they had for centuries held against the foreign State or client of the foreigner.


In this state of affairs it is surprising that the liberal state in Italy has been able to stand for sixty-two years, and that the conquered independence has not been overwhelmed by anarchy. But it was evident that at the first big bump that larva of state would have fallen apart. During the great war he saved him, though distant and incapable, the intimate virtue of the race and the military organization of the people in arms. But the great disturbance that followed the war found the State weaker and more than ever absent and without will. When the military organization failed, the liberal state, undermined on every side, could no longer resist or resist. After the war a period of total anarchy ensued, in which the State, having become the shadow of itself, had to assist impassively with the unleashing of civil strife,

At this point the liberal democratic state was virtually over in Italy. The March on Rome was the historic consecration of the collapse. Even if the forces of fascism had been less impressive than they were, they would have equally triumphed. No regime falls by the strength of its opponents, all fall for their weakness. 

The conquest of the state by Fascism had to necessarily lead to its transformation. Gradually, but unceasingly, as we have seen, first in fact, then in the laws, the Fascist State was formed which, as content and form, is totally different from the liberal state. 

I say fascist state and not national state, as is used by some, because the expression is more comprehensive and more exact.

The Fascist State is in fact the State, which realizes the legal organization of the Company to the maximum of power and cohesion. And society, in the conception of fascism, is not a mere sum of individuals, but is an organism, which has its own life and its ends, which transcend those of individuals, and its own spiritual and historical value. Even the State, which is the legal organization of society, is for Fascism an organism distinct from the citizens, who at each moment are part of it, which has its own life and its own ends, superior to those of the individual, to whom the ends of individuals must be subordinated.

The fascist state is therefore the truly social state, whatever the type of society organized in it. There is a fascist state in the city-type societies, dominant in the ancient and medieval world. There is a fascist state in national-type societies, which still prevail today in civilized countries. There is a fascist state in imperial-type societies, of which antiquity gives us conspicuous examples and which are now becoming more and more affirmed in the world. The city-state, the nation-state and the state-empire can be fascist.

When it is said that the fascist state is the national state, it is said to be true for today's Italy, which is a national-type society, it is not said to be true for what will be tomorrow's Italy, nor for what today it is England, France, Japan, the United States of America: in these cases the fascist state would be the imperial state. Basically, while the concept of the national state responds to a concrete condition of social life, that of the Fascist State responds to a general and abstract condition, which occurs every time a society is organized strongly to the State, for the realization of perpetual purposes. of the species.

From this they can easily deduce the differences that distinguish the fascist state from the liberal state. These are differences that concern both the social point of view, that is the content, as well as the juridical point of view, that is the form. 

Socially, the fascist state has its own ends, that is, its own function and its own mission. The fascist state is not agnostic, like the liberal state, in every field of collective life; on the contrary, in every field it has its own function and its will.

The fascist state has its moral, its religion, its political mission in the world, its function of social justice, and finally its economic task. And therefore the fascist state must defend and spread morality among the people; he must deal with religious problems, and therefore profess and protect the true religion, that is, the Catholic religion; it must fulfill in the world the mission of civilization entrusted to the peoples of great culture and great traditions, which means to work for the expansion of political and intellectual economy outside the borders; he must do justice among the classes by forbidding unbridled class self-defense; finally, it must promote the increase of production and wealth, using, when necessary, the powerful spring of individual interest, but also intervening, when necessary,

This once again demonstrates the truth that I have repeatedly had the right to affirm: the fascist State contains within itself the elements of all the other conceptions of the State, but not yet, as in them, in a unilateral and therefore erroneous manner, but in an integral manner , and therefore true. The fascist state contains liberalism and overcomes it: it contains it, because it uses freedom when it is useful; it overcomes it, because it reinforces freedom when it is harmful. The fascist state contains democracy and exceeds it; it contains it, because it involves the people in the life of the State as it is necessary; it surpasses it, because it keeps in reserve the possibility to make the essential problems of the life of the State decide to those, who have the possibility to understand them, raising above the consideration of the contingent interests of the individuals. Lastly, the fascist state contains socialism and overcomes it: it contains it, because it wants, like it, to achieve social justice; it surpasses it because it does not allow this justice to be done through the brutal collision of social forces, nor does it believe that it is necessary to implement a mammoth and complicated system of collective production, which would end by suppressing any spirit of saving, and absorbing all the profits of the production process.

The differences between the liberal state and the fascist state are juridically no less profound. The fascist state is the truly sovereign state, that is, that dominates all the forces existing in the country and all subjects to its discipline. For if the ends of the state are superior, even the means which it uses to achieve them must be more powerful than any other, the force which it has must be overwhelming above all other forces.

This theory of the sovereign state is not, in fact, new, because the whole juridical school of public law professes it. This school has always taught that sovereignty is not of the people, but of the State, a principle affirmed in all the writings of foreign and Italian public law masters, and also of many of our jurists, who in the political field declared themselves liberal or democratic, without doubting at all the patent contradiction, in which they came to be with themselves. In reality, to say that the state is sovereign is to deny liberalism and democracy, so that a superiority of ends of the state over those of the individual does not exist, as there is no sovereignty of the state.

This contradiction, in the same men, between the juridical conception and the political conception of the State is all the more marvelous, since it is clear that the theory of the fascist state is logically derived from the theory of state sovereignty. For if the State is sovereign, if it is in its hands an overwhelming power, which dominates and governs all the other forces existing in society, this means that the State fulfills its own ends, superior to those of individuals. It is in fact not conceivable that an overwhelming force is granted to the State, if not to achieve higher ends and to fulfill a superior mission, otherwise that force would be solved simply by overpowering and mere tyranny. 

Superiority of ends, supremacy of forces; in this dichotomy the conception of the fascist state is summarized.

All new fascist legislation tends to realize this conception of the state.

 

To transform the liberal democratic state, without its content and without effective sovereignty, in the Fascist State, having its concrete ends, the will to realize them, and the force necessary to achieve them, meant on the one hand to give the State a positive content of will and of action, on the other hand to provide him with the indispensable instrument to fulfill his mission, that is, to render his sovereignty effective and his authority effective. In the logical order the first task precedes the second, in the practical order is the second that overwhelms, because the spiritual transformation of the state is essentially moral and political work, its legal transformation is essentially legislative work, and this depends more directly on the will and from government action.


However, the very problem of the creation of a State, having its own content in the ethical, religious, political and economic field, if it depends above all on the transformation of the spirit of the rulers and the masses, of political customs and political culture, also depends on part from the practical address of government action and legislation.

The legislative reforms implemented during the first four years of the Fascist government have had great importance for this internal transformation of the state. I have already mentioned the decisive value of the scholastic reform from this point of view; creating a school educator of the character, propagator of the religious feeling, formator of the national conscience, it has been given to the State a task, to which for the before it was considered extraneous. But no less important are the laws on motherhood and childhood and especially on the National Balilla Works. This great institution is preparing to give a military and national education to the youth from seven to seventeen, through an uninterrupted work, carried out in schools and out of schools, which will soon turn into years, will radically transform the spirit and character of the Italian people. Thus Italy, by virtue of war and fascism, after centuries of indiscipline and negativity, will once again become a great military and warlike nation.

The reform of the codes, already authorized by Parliament, and now being implemented, will also contribute to giving the State the concrete content it has so far lacked. In the civil code, in the penal code, the State will vigorously assert itself as guardian of morality and family order; in the civil code still and in the commercial code, the protection of private property, an indispensable tool for the formation of savings, and the discipline of credit will be considered as essential functions of the State; in the civil code, in the commercial code, in the penal code the political and economic interests of the nation will have, as is the duty of the State, a strong guarantee; in the penal code and in that of penal procedure, the needs of the defense of the Company and of the State will find adequate and adequate satisfaction, repressive and preventive, against delinquency; finally, in the code of civil procedure, the administration of justice will no longer be considered as a passive function of exclusively private interest, but as one of the highest activities of the State, having the eminently political aim of guaranteeing social peace by attributing to each one what belongs to him.

But the reform, in my opinion, which has contributed most to give the Fascist state its physical form and its action a concrete social content, is still that achieved through the law on the legal discipline of collective labor relations and the related legislative regulation .

This law puts an end to the centuries-old agnosticism of the State in the matter of conflicts between categories and classes, and considers the implementation of social justice as a problem, which it must solve in its field and with its forces. With this law the State finally gives a stable structure to the relations between the categories and classes, placing itself against them in a situation of arbitrator and moderator, so as to prevent one from overpowering the other, and that from the struggle of the 'one against the other derives the anarchy, misery and servitude of citizens, But, in addition to solving the problem of substitution of state justice to self-defense class, the new trade union legislation also solves the problem of the organization of Italian company on a professional basis. The democratic system of suffragistic atomism, which ignored the producer and knew only the citizen, if he could at first served to destroy a social and political organization, as was that of the eighteenth century, surpassed by the social and economic evolution of time , had no reconstructive virtue. It started from a fundamentally erroneous conception of social life, which disavowed the organic nature of society, the necessary differences between men, their different value, and the diversity of functions to each individual entrusted in the complex and multiform mechanism of social life. The day, when the system had been led to its extreme consequences and had produced extreme damage, threatening to overwhelm all modern civilization in a universal anarchy, the problem of a reorganization of society and of the State, no longer on the basis of the individualistic atomism of the philosophy of the French revolution, but on the basis of an organic vision of the Society, stood out clearly. The resolution of this problem is one of the most important tasks of the fascist state, which with the law of 3 April 1926 and the regulation of 1 July of the same year, resolutely confronted it, organically governing the whole trade union phenomenon. Realization of social justice by the work of the State, reorganization of the Society on the basis of the productive function of each one exercised, here is the new task assigned to the State, which gives the Fascist State a new strength and a new life. individualistic atomism of the philosophy of the French revolution, but on the basis of an organic vision of the Society, it stood out clearly. The resolution of this problem is one of the most important tasks of the fascist state, which with the law of 3 April 1926 and the regulation of 1 July of the same year, resolutely confronted it, organically governing the whole trade union phenomenon. Realization of social justice by the work of the State, reorganization of the Society on the basis of the productive function of each one exercised, here is the new task assigned to the State, which gives the fascist State a new strength and a new life. individualistic atomism of the philosophy of the French revolution, but on the basis of an organic vision of the Society, it stood out clearly. The resolution of this problem is one of the most important tasks of the fascist state, which with the law of 3 April 1926 and the regulation of 1 July of the same year, resolutely confronted it, organically governing the whole trade union phenomenon. Realization of social justice by the work of the State, reorganization of the Society on the basis of the productive function of each one exercised, here is the new task assigned to the State, which gives the fascist State a new strength and a new life. The resolution of this problem is one of the most important tasks of the fascist state, which with the law of 3 April 1926 and the regulation of 1 July of the same year, resolutely confronted it, organically governing the whole trade union phenomenon. Realization of social justice by the work of the State, reorganization of the Society on the basis of the productive function of each one exercised, here is the new task assigned to the State, which gives the Fascist State a new strength and a new life. The resolution of this problem is one of the most important tasks of the fascist state, which with the law of 3 April 1926 and the regulation of 1 July of the same year, resolutely confronted it, organically governing the whole trade union phenomenon. Realization of social justice by the work of the State, reorganization of the Society on the basis of the productive function of each one exercised, here is the new task assigned to the State, which gives the Fascist State a new strength and a new life.

Neither in this field of the formation of a well-equipped state for the exercise of its social functions, the law on the establishment of provincial councils of the economy can be forgotten, for which the State is provided with an adequate instrument for the exercise of its action economic, which until now was missing, since in the provinces the State was represented by many organs, but it was absent in the economic field.

 

No less important than the internal transformation of the state must be considered the external transformation operated by fascism in recent years. I intend by external transformation the restitution to the State of the fullness of its sovereignty jammed during the liberal democratic regime by a number of constraints, restrictions, controls and above all overwhelmed and canceled by the irruption of multiple forces that tended to diminish it and usurp it.

 

To return to the State the full exercise of its sovereignty means first of all to strengthen the executive power. Executive power is the genuine expression of the state, the essential and supreme organ of its action.


Everywhere, but especially in Italy, the decadence of the State has had as an external manifestation the immense growth of the powers of Parliament and especially of the elective Chamber, to the detriment of the executive power. Significant phenomenon, which immediately suggests a relationship of cause to effect, between this growth and that decadence. And indeed, if one penetrates into the essence of things, it must therefore end, since the elective Chamber, which formally and juridically appears in the constitution as the organ of the State, is from the substantial point of view an organ of particularist interests, of the most diverse and various special interests. Political representation, in fact, as the constitutional law theorists say, is not substantially a designation of capacity, but a representation of interests, naturally interests of individuals or groups and therefore often conflicting with those of the state. Now, as long as the function of Parliament, as organ of the state, is limited to a mere participation in the exercise of sovereignty, the damage is not serious. But it becomes very serious when, with the natural exclusive tendency and usurper of particular interests, the organ of these interests is acquiring a pre-eminent position in the exercise of sovereign power. When this occurs and parliamentary power dominates the executive power, the protection of the historical and immanent interests of the Society, in the face of the particularisms of individuals, categories and classes, fades and often fails. At this point the sovereignty of the state is practically nullified, and it replaces the sovereignty of individuals and groups in perpetual struggle among themselves, hence the continuous clash of brute forces, which tend to overwhelm each other; what means permanent disorder and anarchy.

Such was the state of affairs, which the parliamentary oppression had created in Italy before the advent of Fascism, and which Fascism immediately ceased, returning to its executive power its natural position as the pre-eminent organ of sovereignty. Fascist legislation had to legally consecrate this pre-eminence. Not that in the written constitution of the Italian State this was not already established; as everyone knows, the fundamental Statute of the Kingdom ignores the unrestrained parliamentary regime of the last decades of our political history. It consecrates a simple constitutional regime, in which the main part of the exercise of sovereignty always rests with the executive power and with the King its supreme head, while the Parliament is reserved a secondary function of collaboration and control. But the constitutional practice had for many years changed the Statute, giving more and more to Parliament, and for it to the elective Chamber, the sum of powers. This system could, well or badly, work, as long as there was a relatively homogeneous majority in the Chamber and capable of expressing a homogeneous government from its bosom. But when, with the imprudent introduction of proportional representation in the electoral system, no party had the majority, the crisis became irremediable. When the Chamber was no longer constituted by a majority and by one or more minorities, but by a series of minorities, the necessity of the coalition government was imposed, constituted by the union of several minority parties. Such a system was to lead and fatally led to government paralysis. Each group, who participated in power did not have enough power to govern, but had enough to prevent others from ruling. Thus the liberty veto of the groups was implemented, which led rapidly to the cancellation of the executive power. A similar tradition had to be radically truncated, and for this to happen it was necessary that a series of laws directly and indirectly explicitly sanctioned the principle that the permanent and supreme organ of the exercise of sovereignty is the executive power, reducing the task of Parliament to the field, in which it is only practically possible, of collaboration and control.

Fascism, therefore, immediately began by abolishing the absurd system of proportional representation, for which the State was considered as a private possession of the parties, to be divided among them in proportion to the forces of each. From the totally proportional system of the law of 1919, the majority system was adopted by scrutiny of the national list, with remnants of proportionality in the representation of minorities, consecrated in the electoral reform of 1923; and lastly, the majority of the uninominal scrutiny returned to the law system of 1925. 

Subsequently, with a series of legislative measures the powers of the Government were directly strengthened.

To this group of laws belong: the law on the faculty of executive power to issue legal norms, the law on the faculties and prerogatives of the Head of Government, Prime Minister Secretary of State; the law on the institution of the podestà in the Municipalities and the replacement of the Municipal Consultations to the Municipal Councils.

 

The law on the faculty of executive power to issue legal norms, filling a gap in the same fundamental Statute of the Kingdom, made for a small State and in a historical period of slow evolution of economic and social life, gives the possibility to the Government, permanent organ and supreme sovereignty, to exercise legislative power in some cases, even in the field normally reserved for Parliament. In this way, while the Government is recognized as an organ, not only pre-eminent, but also a permanent state, it is possible to ensure the continuity of the life of the State in the most serious moments of national life. Not only that, but, by giving the Government the possibility to enact, in an emergency, rules having the force of law, it was possible to approve laws, that due to the inevitable opposition of particular conflicting interests, they would never arrive in port with the ordinary parliamentary procedure. This is perhaps a secondary but very important point of the reform, which should not be overlooked. There are laws, which Parliament can never approve, precisely because they are strongly opposed to particular interests, sometimes small but obstinate. So I remember a little legend of no importance over the notarial deeds made during the Austrian occupation in the invaded provinces, which for three legislatures dragged between the Chamber and the Senate, without ever obtaining the consent of the two Chambers on a single text. , because the interested parties, acting once in each branch of the Parliament, were able to make you introduce amendments that delayed the

 

The law on the powers and powers of the Head of Government, with the government's leadership in the hands of the Prime Minister and giving this the sum of powers and responsibilities, constitutes another contribution to the strengthening of the executive power, whose action, become homogeneous and unitary, it is also necessarily more effective. Thus ends the Government compartmentalised by the parliamentary regime, in which each Minister representing his own strength, his own group and particular economic and political interests, tended to make his own policy in the government. But the deeper meaning of the law on the powers of the head of the Government lies in having released, with a formal provision of law, the Government from the dependence of Parliament, reconsecrating the principle already contained in the Statute, but for a long forgotten tradition, that the Government of the King is the emanation of royal power and not of Parliament, and must enjoy the trust of the King, a faithful interpreter of the needs of the nation. In this way the elective Chamber appears as it is, one of the ways of manifesting the needs and feelings of the country, not the only and decisive one. In a period in which the life of a great people has become extremely complex, it is no longer possible to give to the elective representation, based on suffragistic atomism, an absolute value in the Government of the Nation. one of the ways of manifesting the needs and feelings of the country, not the only and decisive one. In a period in which the life of a great people has become extremely complex, it is no longer possible to give to the elective representation, based on suffragistic atomism, an absolute value in the Government of the Nation. one of the ways of manifesting the needs and feelings of the country, not the only and decisive one. In a period in which the life of a great people has become extremely complex, it is no longer possible to give to the elective representation, based on suffragistic atomism, an absolute value in the Government of the Nation.

 

The same need to strengthen executive power in the Provinces and Municipalities is inspired by the law on the powers of the Prefects, and the very important and truly decisive for Italian life, so intense locally, over the institution of the podestà and the Municipal Consultants.


But the omnipotence of the elective Chamber was not the only cause of the disintegration of the liberal democratic state. The forces, which through the parliament, usurped sovereignty and exercised it in their own interest under the legal forms of parliamentarianism, acted even more deeply and illegally outside the Parliament. The parties, the trade unions, the press had come to form as many states in the state, creating a condition of things that had become, ultimately, truly intolerable, so that in the nation everyone commanded, less than the state; hence a perpetual war of all against all, which had suppressed all freedom and created a condition of mutual abuse, which paralyzed the life of the country. In this way, only apparent contradiction, the liberal state, in the last phase of its breakup,

The dilemma was therefore posed to the State: either to change or to pe rire; or reaffirming its sovereignty over all the forces existing in the country or dissolving in universal anarchy. 

The Fascist State has made this transformation; it affirmed its dominion over all the forces existing in the country, all coordinating them, all framing them and all directing them to the higher ends of national life. A series of laws reaffirms this necessary superiority of the state.

To this series of laws belongs the law on secret associations, which aims to bring under the control of the State all the Associations, operating in the national territory and that, if it hit particularly a particular association, the Freemasonry, which had clung to the State and which in a thousand ways held him bound and dominated it, is in reality a provision of a general nature. Which aims to regulate, in the most limited and moderate form, the associative phenomenon, so important in modern life, and that the State can not, without consecrating its full abdication, ignore.

 

To the same category of provisions belongs the law on the press, which wants to slow down one of the saddest phenomena of the last period of Italian life. It was in fact constituted in Italy an immense force, as is that of the press, which claimed to itself the right to remain outside the law and irresponsible, to this consequence having led the degeneration of the institute of the manager. The press has a high and noble function, but the constitution, within the State, of a force superior to the State, uncontrolled and irresponsible, could not be further tolerated.


And equally it is the law on the legal discipline of collective labor relations. This law, I said, proposes above all high social aims: that of rendering justice among the classes and of organizing the productive forces of the country. But it also has a very high political task: to bring back the forces that had formed outside it and against it into the orbit of the state. The trade union phenomenon is an irrepressible aspect of modern life; the State can not ignore it, must know it, regulate it, dominate it; to dominate it with that spirit of absolute impartiality which is proper to the State, guardian of the generals and supreme interests of the nation, and not, as it is desired by Marxist materialism, the representative of a class overwhelming.

Finally, it must be traced back to this cycle of laws restoring the sovereignty of the state over minor groups, including the law on forensic reform. Like the trade unions, like the parties, like Freemasonry, like the press, so also certain professional bodies had organized themselves in a manner that was not independent of the State, so as to constitute forces superior to the State, uncontrolled and uncontrollable. Professional orders, even the noblest and most important traditions, such as forensic orders, are only part of the state organism; they have public functions, which operate instead and in the name of the State and therefore can not escape its control. This control has been established within the most discreet and discreet limits with the recent forensic reform.

The Mussolinian formula is thus achieved: everything for the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State. What does not mean, like someone suffering from belief, the constitution of an omnipotent state, which absorbs everything and oppresses everything. No; our conception of the state is rather that of a sovereign and superior state to individuals, groups, classes, but with the clear and explicit assumption that the state owes that sovereignty to use itself, not to make oppression, but to achieve goals. superior. In the superiority of the ends of the state, in the fulfillment of its mission of moral and civil perfection inside and outside, lies the reason for the superiority of its powers. Thus the power of the state, far from oppressing the citizens, is reflected in a beneficial way on them. The citizens of a weak and miserable state were never happy. On the contrary, only through the State can the citizen find the paths of his own well-being and his fortunes, truths that the Romans expressed sculptorily with the formula:civis romanus sum .

Please reload