By analyzing the long-term socio-economic effects of the reforms that the liberal gov’t of Mussolini’s time made, we can see how it paved the way for Fascism to flourish in Italy in 1924, just as Nazism flourished in Germany. The liberals exacerbated the division between ‘Real Italy’ and ‘Legal Italy’ because they failed to include the backward South in unification process. Their chronic poverty was worsened by soaring taxes and limited spending on social reforms. As well as that, Italy’s industrial development was hampered by lack of resources, and because the government supported employers over workers, peasant unrest was created. This economic turmoil gave fascism an opportunity to gain mass support and also made them look far more competent in comparison to the liberals.
Both Hitler and Mussolini employed means of violence and aggression in order to obstruct, intimidate and deter political opposition as well as to present themselves as the defenders of law and order, however Mussolini used it to an even greater extent, by also using it to gain support from various social groups. Hitler implemented many laws that permitted the use of violence. On the 28 February, Decree of the Reich was established. This law gave secret police power to hold people indefinitely in protective custody and it was also used to repress the KPD. On the 5 March Elections, government used control of radio, police and unofficial pressure to intimidate opponents in election. Also, the January Law for the Reconstruction of the State meant that from March 1933, many local governments were overthrown by SA violence, allowing the Reich government to appoint commissioners. However, the most significant event of violence and aggression was the Night of the long Knives on the 30th of June. As a result of this night, over 1000 opponents were killed, Hitler claimed that 61 had been executed, 13 shot resisting arrest, and 3 committed suicide. As a result, Hitler removed real opponents and intimidated potential ones. This night made him look like he had re established order by removing SA violence and it also made him look like a savior (Defender of the state). Mussolini employed methods of violence to obstruct his political opposition. Many opponents were forced into exile or killed. Eg: Rosselli Brothers, and from 1922-43, there were 5000 political prisoners. The Justice and Liberty leader was killed in 1973 on government instruction, and sometimes people would be assaulted by OVRA or militia simply to remind them that its best to conform. All these acts of violence and aggression made it nearly impossible for any form of opposition to get in his way of power as it intimidated a lot of opponents. In order to deter political opposition, Mussolini implemented many laws. After the Matteoti crisis, press censorship and meetings of political parties were banned in July 1924. In July 1925, the ‘leggi fascistissime’ was passed, banning opposition parties and Free trade Unions. All these laws ensured that opposition was prevented. The fascists also wanted to present themselves as defenders of law and order, thus gaining support from various social groups. In July 1922, he used violence to do this by limiting the strikes’ effect. This impressed the conservative middle classes and convinced them that fascism could be trusted. Historian Mack Smith states “liberals allowed themselves to be convinced that only a Fascist presence in the government could crush the socialists”. This is further reinforced by the time a social deputy was beaten up on the floor of the chamber. This use of violence was successful because the liberals did not take a stand against the fascists.
-
Hitler and Mussolini had differing approaches towards gaining support from the church, petty bourgeoisie and industrialists, with Mussolini needing the Church’s support more than Hitler, thus using a more conciliatory approach as opposed to Hitler’s autocratic approach, and Mussolini relying more on the industrialists and petty bourgeoisie, thus using contradicting propaganda and economic reasons to gain their support, as opposed to Mussolini who just implemented new laws in their favor. Hitler and Mussolini had differing attitudes towards the Catholic church and the amount of influence they had in politics. Hitler initially tried to take over the Church, then gradually expel them from any political activity, whilst Mussolini used a conciliatory approach by gradually increasing the amount of influence the church has in political activity. Mussolini realized the importance of gaining support from the Catholic church as the key to winning conservative support. Mussolini’s relationship with the church was simply a tactic he used in order to boost fascist support, as well as his own support. In November 1921, Mussolini declared that fascism was against divorce, peasants deserve a better deal, and that he was prepared to settle the Roman question on terms that were acceptable to the pope. In 1923, he introduced Religious education in schools, banned contraception and increased government payments to priests. These conciliatory steps were successful as they ensured the Church’s support for the Duce and helped increase the prestige of his regime abroad and in Italy. Hitler, however, was more interested in destroying the Church and removing any sort of political activity the Church might have. In 1933, Hitler attempted to put regional protestant churches under Nazi control by imposing Ludwig Muller, a military chaplain, to be the first Reich bishop of the Reich church. This was unsuccessful, as Niemoller set up the confessional Church to counter-act this attempted take-over. However, on 20th July 1933, Hitler signed a concordat agreement with the Vatican, banning the Church from political activity and promising that the state would not interfere with the internal disputes of the church and vice-versa. As a result, the Catholic center party was disbanded, which effectively destroyed any political opposition against the Nazis. This guarantee of non-intervention meant Hitler could pursue his anti-Semitic policies. Another group Mussolini and Hitler had differing approaches towards gaining their support were the industrialists and the petty Bourgeoisie. Mussolini developed a good relationship with the industrialists by implementing new laws and policies that would work in their favor, and thus, gain their support. Mussolini was lucky to come into power at a time when the industry was booming. For example, exports in cars, agriculture and textiles had doubled between the period 1922-43, and he could therefore claim credit for this. He then employed economics professor, Aberto de Stefani to implement policies that were reassuring to industrialists. For example, he limited government spending, which fought inflation, he reduced state intervention and he reduced or abolished the taxis levied on companies that made huge profits during World War I. This helped ensure the support of industrialists. Hitler however, used contradicting propaganda and economic reasons to gain the support of industrialists and petty bourgeoisie. In 1932, the Nazis had an election poster showing Marxism as the guardian angel of big business, in order to gain the support of industrialists. However, they also had a 1929 leaflet directed to small producers, traders etc… promising to get rid of “the treacherous leaders of Marxism”. Using contradictory messages in their propaganda helped the Nazis gain support of these two groups and more. However, historian Brustein argues that a lot of Germans voted Nazi for their rational economic reasons. Evidence of this is shown between 1930-33 when the Nazis put forward a series of economic policies, offering a third way between Marxism and Laissez-faire capitalism. They advocated public investment in industry to boost the economy, they employed financial controls to protect those in debt and they promised Economic Autarky to put the Germans interests above those of foreigners. This can be further substantiated by the fact that 65% of Nazi party members surveyed stated that their reason for joining the Nazi party was anti-Marxism. Therefore, these policies and promises helped gain the support of both industrialists and the petty bourgeoisie.
In conclusion, Mussolini and Hitler had very similar ways of rising to power. The conditions that they exploited at their time of rising to power were similar as well as their methods of violence. However, the way in which they gained support from various power groups was slightly different. I also believe that their rise in power was more intentionalist than structuralist, as it depended greatly on their manipulation skills and methods.