Italian workers' movement was drawn to two important congresses: that of the Communist Party, and that of the CGIL trade-union tederation under Socialist-Communist leader•
The CP Congress produced nothing new concerning
"dogmatic''" advance;
current immediately took on protective coloration' : it not only abandoned joined in the campaign against "dogmatism"! In consequence the stake in the struggle led some months before the congress by some of the closest collaborators of Togliatti (es pecially Amendola) grew and some of the most notorious sectarians were able to keep their posts either in the Central Committee or in the leadership of the Control Commission which in the Italian CP should have, broader powers than is normally other C Ps). It must be added that, concerning the real extent of this category of "sectarians," a certain ambiguity was allowed to subsist: in this category were included all those who do not share the conception of the "democratic" road to socialism and who cannot be included in that other usual big category, that of the "revisionists." But most often the struggle against "sectarianism" and "dogmatism' was intended to be a struggle against those who did not like the turn taken after the XXth Congress and who still have a more or less concealed nostalgia for certain classic Stalinist methods and conceptions.
On this level, the evolution of the Italian CP has not stopped. The party is far from having gone back to the ore-1956 "automatic" monolithism. Even though this congress was not characterized by such animated debates as those of 1956, ideas circulated quite freely, and critical voices, although not very numerous, did rise up. It must be specified that, amid the persistent apathy of the widest sectors of rank-and-file militants, discussion took place most often among the lower and middle cadres, and even, sometimes, in a very lively way, in the apparatus. This relative differentiation within the apparatus was reflected in the elections to the new Central Committee, where certain leaders, including Togliatti, saw their names stricken off by several delegates and trailed much less well-known elements.
There was, furthermore, a continuation of the process of rejuvenation, except at the very top (secretariat, top leadership), where it remained very limited. From now on the cadres who joined the party after the war have great specific weight in it: these are men who did not receive the Stalinist education of the blackest period and ace hardy Stalinists. the offer side of the coin coasists of the coin consists of the fact that these elements are often all-out rightists; but they are less crystalized, more openminded toward new needs, more attentive to the analysis of the real situation. Another thing that is remarkable is that the rejection the theory of the Soviet state as guide is considered by all these people as an irreversible datum in the conception of the party — whence the much greater flexibility of the Italian CP in its relations with the US SR, the popular democracies, and its brother parties, even if the acceptance of Khrushchevism remains complete.
The Rome Congress continued to work up new "theories" about "alliances" and "convergence"; it insisted on the need to collaborate with ever broader social strata. Now, to Togliatti and his school, the allies of the Italian CP and of the workers' movement ought to be not only the peasants and the petty-bourgeois masses of the cities, but also the small and middle non-monopolized industrialists; and in certain cases it is considered possible to work together with sectors of the agrarian bourgeoisie. The experiences of Sicily, the Val d'Aosta, and especially Sardinia, seem to have given confirmation of a concrete ort to such an outlook. Unfortunately for Togliatti anc his team-mates, the congress had just ended when the Sicilian government of Milazzo fell in a shameful fashion In synthesis, what happened was what the revolutionary communists in Italy had predicted right from the beginning. As long as the CP and the SP agreed to stay quiet, satisfied just to give their votes to the Milazzo government (in which, be it recalled, they did not directly participate), things could more or less work. But when they were obliged to put forward demands, even though these were extremely modest ones, the crisis broke out, for the representatives of the "agrarian bourgeoisie" preferred to return to the fold rather than help — however little — the workers' parties.
Lastly, on the question of the governmental formula, the Italian CP has lately undergone 1956 Congress the slogan was put forward: for a democratic government of the toiling classes - which, it can be seen, remained rather vague (indeed, criticisms effect were raised in the Central Committee itself). Today this general formula continues to be valid, but it is speciied that it might be possible to carry • out economic and ›olitical reforms before the eventual formation of such a government. In reality, the focus of propaganda has been shifted toward the slogan "for a new majority" - which still remains vague and fluid. On the one hand, the belief has been permitted for a long time — and to a certain extent continues to be even now — that it would be possible to break the monopoly of the Christian-Democracy by seeking allies pretty much anywhere (to the right, too, after the example of the experience in Sicily); on the other hand, declarations have been made concerning a readiness from now on to give support to a coalition government of the Christian-Democrats and the Socialists, centre-left government backed by the Socialist. be seen, Togliatti's "flexibility" is really very great!
As for the CGIL Congress, it had traits in common with that of the Italian CP. Though participation rank-and-file militants was especially slight, it cannot be said that a bureaucratic control prevented the circulation of critical idea. Generally, if anyone had something say, he could say it; and a debate was even organızed in he Federation's two organs (a contribution thereto leader of our Italian section, member of a union affiliated the CGIL, was published without any difficulty om-
The document prepared by the outgoing Central mittee (which was criticized for — among other things — its extreme length) was rather eclectic in character, so that, under a certain aspect, everyone could draw whatever he pleased (for example, there was a positive valuation of the struggles in the period following the 1956 Congress, and at the same time a quite clear recognition of the narrowness of the improvements won or the very limited — not to say negative - results of certain
FOURTH INTERNATIONAL agreements about the sliding scale of wages, firings, etc).
But the part that is the most often stressed by the leaders is the chapter devoted to the programme of economic development. It concerns a quite organic platform proposed by the C GIL, which would correspond to the vital needs of the Italian economy. There is not place here to analyze this document in all its details; but we cannot pass over in silence its fundamental inadequacy. Once more a programme is worked up, but it is not said by whom and under what political conditions this programme might be carried out. That explains the indifference with which all these things are received by the toilers, who are in agreement, who want all that, but who do not see the concrete way of achieving it.
internal structure of the Federation, much stress is laid of the need for democracy, and it is specified that the existence of different tendencies constitutes a serious guarantee (in fact, the real tendencies Communist and Socialist), which naturally ought maintained in case of a general reunification of the trade unions. On this level, it is obvious that the attitude of the CG I L is more correct than that of the French C G T, which does not permit tendencies and thereby excludes any possibility of a unification in a single organization.
A word on the Socialist Party.. Nenni's attitude is more and more rightist, but the so-called left is in no condition, blockseim. At one Politial sed in logical ental to mittee, the left gave a dazzling confirmation of its inconsistency. After its having preached in general against collaboration with the Christian-Democrats, when cussion got down to brass tacks and concerned a possible collaboration in Sicily, even the left (with about two exceptions) voted in favor. The least that can be said is that people don't know where they want to go the efrist of the PSt are in the ma rily an parbament, would have members in a possible coalition government).