JAMES G. COLBERT, JR.

EUROCOMMUNISM AND THE ITALIAN MARXIST TRADITION

I. A THEORY OF EUROCOMMUNISM? If Eurocommunism simply means a country building its own type of Communism by itself, then to Stalin must go the honor of being the first Euroconununist, followed at a respectable distance by Tito and Mao. That such a remark might offend Eurocommunists, despite the fact that they tend to want to establish the deep Marxist roots of Eurocommunism, only points to the need for philosophical analysis. My object is to view Eurocommunism as a theory, 1 which has been propounded most notably by Santiago Carrillo, and to examine its grounding in the Italian Marxist philosophical tradition. To view Eurocommunism as a theory requires, of course, that we check its logical consistency, but more importantly that we try to see how it arrives at principled decisions about practical problems and how it stems from Marxian classics. An obvious help in this endeavor is to see how the Eurocommunists themselves talk about both Marxism and competing world views. Now, Eurocommunism is a move by several Communist Parties, and a move by a Communist Party need not be viewed as exclusively ideological. One can relate certain moves to Russian foreign policy (d6tente, defense of the socialist homeland, etc.). Then again, one can relate other moves to the mechanics of party politics: for example, Carrillo's proposed government of national concentration in Spain, makes sense for a small party of the opposition seeking legitimacy. 2 Hence, I have not simply postulated here that Eurocommunism is essentially philosophical, although in any such innovation within the Marxist universe, the question of continuity or break with tradition is invariably raised. We must see how fundamental the Eurocommunist revision is: is it mere opportunism or is it a novelty in Communist theory? In the pictures of Carrillo presented by Jorge Semprfin 3 and Fernando Claudin 4 there is nothing that would make us expect Eurocommunism. What we see instead is opportunism - 'el gran pragmhtico', in Semprfin's term, and rigid control of Party decision from above. While Semprtin and Claudin

Studies in Soviet Thought 23 (1982) 205-228. 0039-3797/82/0233-0205 $02.40. Copyright © 1982 by D. Reidel Publishing Co., Dordrecht, Holland, and Boston, U.S.A.

206

JAMES G. COLBERT, JR.

should certainly put us on our guard, their condemnation of Carrillo is not altogether helpful, even apart from questions about personal animosity due to their expulsion from the Party. They tend to see Carrillo's eadier attitudes as simply wrong-headed, 'subjectivistic'. This would open the door to the possibility of a rectification and hence keep alive the possibility of an 'objective' rationale based on sound Marxist principles. 'Eurocomunismo' y Estado is in many ways theoretically weak and traditional. For example, though Carrillo extends an olive branch to the Spanish Army, his basic military doctrine is that the army will disappear when the State does. This balances some cheery talk about professionalizing the army, s an apparently innocuous goal, which, however, implies that the Spanish armed forces are incompetent and geared only to repressing the populace. Likewise, there is much grumbling about monopolies, 6 but no analysis either of the economic model that would replace them or of the general conditions that lead to them. Another Spanish Communist leader, Ignacio Gallego, has complained that his Party needs a research center to parallel the PCI's Gramsei Institute and the PCF's Thorez Institute. Marxism, he remarks, is a science and cannot be mastered by class instinct, common sense, nor practice, but rather by study. 7 The theoretical journal Nuestra Bandera, which, of course, has only recently been legal in Spain and an institute for Marxist studies founded in Madrid in spring, 1980, try to fill this void. in fairness, Carrillo presents his book as an occasional piece and makes no great pretenses about theoretical depth. While not just electoral propaganda, it may be viewed as a step towards establishing the PCE's new image in Spain. Carrillo composed it just before full legalization of the Party in 1977. Hence the attempt at least to coexist with traditional enemies like Army and Church. Carrillo even suggests that executives,8 as distinct from owners, will have a place in the Communist movement and plan, and his Party would allow multinationals to remove surplus value. One may still wonder, however, why a book like this was not worked out in greater precision, during the long years of exile in France. Not the least of the PCE's problems in image rebuilding stems from the fact that some of its most effective repression during the Civil War was directed at other groups on the left, specifically the anarchists and the Trotskyite POUM. Carrillo points out that some of the repression occurred when Communists re-established the rights of small landowners in areas like Arag6n,

EUROCOMMUNISM AND ITALIAN TRADITION

207

where farms had been forcibly communalized by the anarchists. 9 He likewise points out that the PCE had to contend with putsch attempts in Madrid and Barcelona (although that might not be the way his adversaries would have described them). He considers the murder of POUM leader AndrOs Nin "abominable and unjustifiable, but not ordered in any way by the Communist hierarchy'. 1° Even if one remains unconvinced by that disclaimer, it is probably as far as Carrillo could go. The great theoretical step of Carrillo's E u r o c o m m u n i s m o is the rejection of the dictatorship of the proletariat, coupled with the discovery that formal democracy has some intrinsic value and, consequently, that the Soviet Union is not above reproach and is not a model for all other CP's to follow. Capitalism, indeed, tends to destroy democracy which by nature would overcome capitalism. The Soviet one-party model would not be copied in Western European Communist countries, and Soviet power would not be enhanced by the existence of such countries, n Democracy is not a historic discovery of the bourgeoisie. Parties of the Eurocommunist current agree upon the necessity of multiparty representative institutions, opposition, regular exercise of universal suffrage, independent labor unions, and civil rights. 12 Yet the criticism of the Soviet Union remains ambivalent. It is neither a capitalist country - for there is no private property - nor is it Leninist. Workers' democracy may be as merely formal as Western democracy. 13 The originary capitalist accumulation was accomplished by the Soviet regime with great brutality. Still, Carrillo reverts to the customary references to difficulties in building socialism in one country, to backwardness, lack of a democratic tradition and internal opposition. Here he skates rather close to an open contradiction, for while he explains at one point 14 that dictatorship of the proletariat was necessary for Marx and Engels because even in the most developed countries the politically conscious proletarian sector was a minority, as was the proletariat p e r se in other countries, at another point is he explains that for Marx, Engels, and Lenin, the dictatorship of the proletariat was to be the control of the immense majority over the minority. So it turns out that the dictatorship of the proletariat is an unavoidable historical necessity, 16 but it does not really exist in the USSR. 17 One might deem this effort to touch all the bases, ideological overkill. Indeed, much of Carrillo's argumentation involves overkill. He cites Gramsci 18 and looks forward "to the hegemony of the working classes and

208

JAMES G. COLBERT, JR.

forces of culture" and more especially refers to Togliatti. 19 But at different points 2° CarriUo refers to Lenin, Thorez, and Khrushchev, as admitting diverse roads to socialism, and even mentions Stalin as a respecter of private property and foreign investment. This perhaps is proving too much, and is ill-conceived to give peace of mind to those concerned about the Soviet model. The references are possibly designed to give assurances to Party hardliners, but they are odd even under that assumption. Similarly, in regard to formal democracy, Carrillo makes some ominous noises. He still envisages a political strike against a duly elected government which at a given moment does not respect the wishes of the majority. 21 (But, one asks, who decides what the wishes of the majority really are?) Carrillo asks that the military be allowed to unionize; he argues that a unionized military could never take part in a coup. 22 (Surely an unimaginative argument for a leader with a history of trying to organize political strikes!) The democratic tradition of the PCE is validated by its attempt to hold elections during the Spanish Civil War, with the goal, apart from renewing parliament, of giving representatives to the armed forces? 3 (Others might view this not as high principle but as opportunism in a situation when "at the moment we had control of the tanks, the air force, and the strongest military units". 24) When all is said and done, an evolution has begun which may bring Carrillo closer to some of the positions developed by the PCI, which is acknowledged as a source of inspiration. At present, however, the most notable change in the PCE is its tact and diplomacy in relations with the rest of society, not in a clear change of basic principle or program. For example, CarriUo's Party most emphatically has not revised to social democracy? s PCE labor within democratic institutions is expected to help break the undemocratic counterblow when decisive steps to socialism are taken? 6 It is important to Carrillo - however much there are non-Marxist members of the PCE - to be able to ground his political position in Marxist principlesY For instance, he believes that while economic determinism is not necessarily applicable to individuals, it governs social classes. 28 The subtitle of 'Eurocommunismo' y Estado gives a nod to economic determinism by indicating that Carrillo is elaborating a model suited to advanced industrial nations. Hence, from time to time the question of Japanese Eurocommunism is raised. Sempere ~-9 situates Eurocommunism in the context of an imperialist counteroffensive to defend monopoly capitalism in the current economic crisis. Nonetheless, it seems to me that attempts to place emphasis on

EUROCOMMUNISM

AND ITALIAN

TRADITION

209

economic factors here lack credibility and that the main pressure to formulate Eurocommunism comes from the superstructure of European political culture. In principle, Carrillo would reject such a divorce of superstructure from structure. He asserts: we will not a b a n d o n the revolutionary ideas o f Marxism; the n o t i o n of class struggle, historical materialism, and dialectical materialism, the concept o f a world-wide revolutionary process u n d e r s t o o d n o t as t h e defeat o f this or that c o u n t r y b u t o f a social system which is progressively more h a r m f u l to all countries, even those w h o historically were able to use that system to gain a higher standard o f living and a hegemonic role. 3°

II. C R I T I C S O F E U R O C O M M U N I S M

It is more than poetic justice that searing critiques of Eurocommunism have issued from within the three popular movements, Communism, socialism, and Catholicism, that the PCI proposed until recently should co-operate in a historic compromise. It is surely remarkable that the Communist left remains troubled by both the question of Stalinism and the principled as distinct from opportunistic nature of Eurocommunism; that socialists do not fred sufficient emphasis on comprehension of the substantive civil liberties and procedural safeguards in democracy in the Eurocommunists; that Catholics are troubled by what remains a radically different worldview. A. Left Response

Although the classic Communist assault on Eurocommunism may well become Ernest Mandel's From Stalinism to Eurocommunism, the Soviets through Vadim Zagladin, have taken the fundamentally similar tack of talking about Europe as if Eurocommunism did not exist. Specific background material for a left Communist critique of Eurocommunism is provided in Fernando Claudin's Documentos de una divergencia comunista. 31 The first issue raised by Claudin is Stalinism in Carrillo's leadership. (The latter had headed the Party in Paris since 1955, although ultimate authority rested with Dolores Ir~burri in Moscow.) No one ever disagreed with Carrillo once the latter had taken a position, much less vote him down. De-Stalinization had actually strengthened Carrillo by removing Soviet supervision. The second issue raised by Claudin is Party subjectivism in the assessment of Spanish social and political realities, and consequent continual exaggeration

210

JAMES G. COLBERT, JR.

of Franco's weakness and Communist strength which led to several attempts to organize general strikes (huelga nacional politica). Claudin protests that the Party continued to see Spain in 1930s terms as a country dominated by large landowners, when in fact it had become a capitalist industrial country, with heavy state participation in critical sectors. Even agriculture had started to become capitalistically organized. In general, Claudin reports an improved standard of living in Spain and concludes that monopoly capitalism has gained some breathing room: capitalists are able to deal with workers' demands as economic, not political, and to meet many of them. More dynamic capitalists realize that it would be to their advantage in the long run to get rid of fascist political forms and to learn to run the country through liberal, democratic forms. In this way they would be moving with the general antiFranco sentiment and could co-operate with regionalist (or as the Spanish would say, 'nationalist') groups. Claudin speculates that after Franco, Spain would be governed by a large Christian Democratic party, although not necessarily under that explicit nomenclature. Consequently, the Party would have to begin to work with democratic, bourgeois forces. Thence the unsuitability of such an ambiguous slogan as "the land for those who work for it": in some circumstances it might have a desirable anti-feudal connotation, but in others, where agriculture had been capitalized, it would be prematurely socialistic. In general, barring a catastrophe, Claudin expects a peaceful transition to democracy and believes that the revolution, when it occurs, will be the socialist one. Nuestra Bandera's response to Claudin justifies his accusation of Stalinism and subjectivism since it purports to understand him to say, on the one hand, that a direct transition from fascism to socialism is possible, but, on the other, that the Party should simply become reformist. He is accused both of opportunism and of Chinese catastrophism. Interestingly, Claudin in 1964, already looks toward the PCI. He wants to turn the Party into a Gramscian 'collective intellectual'. He cites Togliatti several times as an authority on the resourcefulness of monopoly capitalism, and on personality cult. a2 Nevertheless, Claudin was certainly not a Eurocommunist in 1964; he simply seeks genuine discussion within a Leninist Party. It is fair to say that the Carrillo he depicts is a most unlikely candidate to become a Eurocommunist leader. Subsequently, Claudin has published his own statement on Eurocommunism. It emphatically rejects the notion that the Soviet Union is a socialist

EUROCOMMUNISM AND ITALIAN TRADITION

211

country and affirms worker self-management (or autogestion) as a vital principle. Claudin somewhat blurs what Eurocommunism ideally might be and what it means in the actual practice of the mainline European CPs, for they in fact do not go quite as far as he proposes. Claudin predicts 33 that Moscow will regard the judgment of Eurocommunist parties that the USSR is not socialist as an intolerable threat, and that Moscow will in consequence create new Marxist-Leninist parties. But the Moscow loyalists of Eduardo Garcia and Enrique Lister have not been succesful in Spain, if indeed it was Moscow's desire that they should be, and Moscow has not made a similar move in Italy. Correspondingly, although Carrlllo has come up to the brink, neither he nor the other Eurocommunists has taken an official policy stand that the USSR is not socialist. Neither have they been excommunicated. By contrast, the Maoists are much harsher towards the Soviets, whom they regard as imperialists pure and simple, than they are toward the Eurocommunists, who are held to be revisionists.

B. Socialist Reservations The renowned political philosopher Norberto Bobbio offers what is surely the most pointed exposition of Italian socialist doubts about Eurocommunism in a series of essays which have been reproduced as Quale socialismo? The critique takes the form of a kind of Socratic questioning about the theory of the State and of democracy. Traditional Marxist theory about the State, Bobbio notes, has looked to its disappearance; hence an understanding of the State as more than a mere instrument of class interest was scarcely pursued. Among other consequences of this attitude, it came as a great shock to Marxists to realize that all power, even socialist power, corrupts, though it is rather obvious to others. To Marx's hope that the State will wither away, which was based largely on a quick analysis of the very limited experience of the Paris Commune, may be opposed Max Weber's notion that the bureaucracy institutionalizes the plans and goals of the State and as such in a complicated world, the bureaucracy is destined to grow. As Bobbio puts it, more socialism equals more bureaucracy. 34 That the State is not going to disappear heightens the need to reconsider democracy and democratic procedures. This is particularly true for a socialist since the historic manifestations of socialism have not been democratic. (Bobbio notes ironically the tendency for critics of socialism to insist that

212

JAMES G. COLBERT, JR.

the USSR is socialist, while the friends of socialism have begun to deny it.) Democracy and socialism - and for that matter, Bobbio adds, liberalism and democracy - are not easily combined. But at least the problem must be recognized and priorities clearly established: are we to set up a democracy through which we work to socialism, or rather construct socialism which we hope will turn out to be democratic. Which is the substance and which the accident? Bobbio demands) s What Bobbio urges upon Marxists is that the rules of democracy, its procedures, are in a sense ends in themselves. To put the matter differently, the rules and procedures are of such moment that good socialist ends do not justify non-democratic means. This awareness is missing. Bobbio insinuates, in the mainline Communists. For, democracy may be defined as a system of power in which collective decisions are taken by all;but for this ('collective', 'decision', 'all') to have any meaning, it is absolutely necessary that there be procedural rules! 36 A mainline Communist might dismiss Bobbio as a revisionist. Indeed, Bobbio cites the study of early revisionists like Bernstein and Kautsky as precedents for the kind of critique of Communism that Italian socialists have recently made. In fact, Bobbio makes a frank confession of eclecticism, which has no parallel in the PCE or PCI. s7 One might confirm Bobbio's critique by reflecting on the Communist criticism of socialist parties. European socialists and social democrats are repeatedly branded 'merely reformist'. But what does this mean? It surely means that when the PCI votes for some measures proposed, say, by the PSI, it does so agreeing that a social problem exists, but also it 'knows' ahead of time that the PSI measure is inadequate. The assumption made by the PCI, then, would be that only basic and fundamental changes can rectify the ills of society. Such an assumption can only be made on the basis of a worldview and a philosophical position. Either the model of society is completely contained in Marxist classics or the PCI is being rather reticent about explicating its own philosophy. Hence the logic of Bobbio's interrogation.

C Catholic Objections

A particularly violent rejection of Eurocommunism is contained in Angel Garcia's El eurocommunismo, contenido y finalidad de la nueva f6rmula politica. 38 For Garcia, Eurocommunism is worse than honest Leninism. It

EUROCOMMUNISM AND ITALIAN TRADITION

213

is a Trojan horse. Following the Italian political philosopher Augusto Del Noce, Garcia emphasizes the Gramscian inspiration of a kind of Kulturkampf against traditional Catholicism: Communism would replace the Church; economic determinism is ignored; the Party aspires to a hegemonic role like that of the Church in the Middle Ages. The Kulturkampf has found an echo in the work of Catholics like the Spanish theologican Jos6 Maria Diez Alegria and the Cristianos pot el socialismo group. An attempt is made to synthesize Catholicism and Marxism, and it is suggested that a Christian ought to be a Communist. Thus, Garcia is right in so far as a diluted Marxism permeates large sectors of Spanish society and of the clergy. Telling examples of the radicalization of sectors of the clergy are streams of titles of progressista (philo-Marxist) theology from publishing houses run by some Spanish religious orders. A startling example is the comment by Juan Benet, writing in the left-wing Christian Democratic journal Cuadernos para el didlogo, on a television appearance by Solzhenitsyn. 39 Benet remarked that as long as there are people like Solzhenitsyn there should be concentration camps, and that while the Soviets might have been more vigilant about whom they released from the camps, they were quite sensible about ridding themselves of such a nuisance by exile. It is not necessary to share Garcia's view of the Church to perceive that the latter may face a threat to its identity in Spain. It is reasonable to observe that such a loss of identity enhances the possibilities of success of Marxist parties. Whether the vague Marxism in great vogue in Spain might not favor the less rigid Partido Socialista Obrero Espafiol (PSOE) and whether legalizing the PCE may not have helped demystify it, are questions too fine for Garcfa's broadbrush style. To cite an example, the leftist Catholic publishing house, Citadella of Assisi has edited a book-debate trying to piece together an overview of where socialism is going in the aftermath of the invasion of Cambodia and of Afghanistan. 4° The participants included people as varied as the prominent Communist intellectual Lucio Lombardo Radice, the ex-Communist and ultra-leftist Rossana Rossanda, the Catholic progressive priests Gianni BagetBozzo and Giulio Girardi and so on. As one might expect, there was little agreement. What consensus existed seems largely negative: the ideal model is not the USSR, China, or Cuba; social-democratic parties are not the vehicle; Yugoslav autogestion receives favorable attention but there is hesitation even

214

JAMES G. COLBERT, JR.

about that. The book ends with questions about how to avoid the concentration of power, how to establish a right to the satisfaction of essential needs without overlooking the inefficiency of present public services, and so on. By and large these intellectuals will not join a Leninist Party but they move in a loosely Communist orbit, as is shown by the fact that their crisis of conscience is provoked by the invasions of Afghanistan and Cambodia (actions not staged by socialism in the abstract!) As it happens, Citadella is one of the groups singled out for criticism by Cornelio Fabro in La trappola del compromesso storico. 41 Unlike Garcia, who relies basically on articles in newspapers and popular magazines, Fabro is a scholar and university professor of international repute, as is Augusto Del Noce, who has also criticized Eurocommunism from a Catholic perspective in L "Eurocommunismo e l'Italia. 42 It should be emphasized that Fabro and Garcia are not so much interested in studying Eurocommunism as in talking to fellow Catholics about how to react to it. This explains the great concern about the Catholic left, which is deemed to react in the wrong way. The trick, trappola of Eurocommunism is that (a) the Communist offer of cooperation turns out to be co-option of Catholic movements like cristianos por el socialismo; (b) over a long period of time, Togliatti, Lenin, and Stalin have made statements about religious freedom - such statements never meant anything and still do not; (c) the Marxian worldview is essentially atheistic, and its social ethic centers on class struggle, both incompatible with Christianity; (d) once you let the Communists into power you never get rid of them; (e) specific experience not only in the East but in regions of Italy governed by the Communists, shows a pattern of harassment, intrusion and interference with Catholic institutions and activities. Although one might ask Fabro to elaborate on some of his factual references, he makes the point quite effectively that the traffic between Church and Party seems to be all one way. As Carrillo assured his colleagues: "How many comrades do you know who have become religious believers since we started to carry out this pohcy? And on the other hand, how many Catholics have become Communists? ''43 Furthermore, Fabro's philosophical message is unexceptionable, both from a Catholic and Marxist point of view: Marxism and Catholicism begin with radically different concepts of man, and in each case there is a praxis inseparable from the vision.44

EUROCOMMUNISM AND ITALIAN TRADITION

215

tli. GRAMSC! Representatives of other major European tendencies refuse to take Eurocommunism at its word. Yet they are not agreed among themselves. Fabro seems to see classical Marxism in Eurocommunism, whereas Bobbio emphasizes more the ambiguities in present Communist theory. To try to see whether the ambiguities have classical roots, let us turn to Antonio Gramsci, almost universally acknowledged by Eurocommunists as a source of theoretical inspiration. Like Palmiro Togliatti and Enrico Berlinguer, Antonio Gramsci was a native of Sardinia. He was born in Ales on January 29, 1891. He met Togliatti when both were enrolled at the University of Turin, where Gramsci studied literature and philosophy, but never obtained his degree. Gramsci and Togliatti subsequently collaborated in different socialist and Communist periodicals, where Gramsci's published work appeared: Grido del Popolo, A vanti, L 'Ordine Nuovo, and Unitd, as well as in the preparation of Party documents, most notably those of the IIIrd Congress of the PCI at Lyon, January 21-26, 1926. Gramsci spent the better part of 1922-24 in the Soviet Union, where he met his wife, Julia Schucht. He subsequently resided in Switzerland as a member of the leadership of the IIIrd International for whom an arrest warrant had been issued in fascist Italy. He returned to Italy in 1926 with the immunity of a member of Parliament, and assumed the double role of spokesman for the Communist parliamentary group and Party General Secretary. Despite his parliamentary immunity, Gramsci was arrested November 8, 1926, and after imprisonment at several locations in Italy, most notably the Prison of Turi at Bari, died in Rome on April 27, 1937, a week after being given full freedom for reasons of health.

A. Young Gramsci on Organization The message of the Scritti Politici 4s above all else concerns the need to organize and the value of experiencing organization. Unorganized employees are unable to pass on increased expenses to their customers as businessmen do. More vitally, the mass meeting (comizio) is the most important means for the worker to acquire class consciousness when he comes together with his fellows without being split up by category or function as in the workplace.

216

JAMES G. COLBERT, JR.

There is a need to integrate political and economic activity with an organ of culture .46 Gramsci recommends often the development of factory councils (consigli di fabbrica) which he views as an Italian replica of the Soviets. The councils have a long-range function. Along with local entities they will be the basis of a new socialist state organization when private property has been abolished, for the workers must realize that it is not possible to continue or develop the existing political apparatus. The workers councils will be the organization in the dictatorship of the proletariat, for "society cannot be without a state", if we mean by state some will superior to individual decision. The discipline of the councils, which is self-imposed, will produce superior results in work to the results produced by the discipline a shareholder can achieve with the threat of dismissal and starvation. Ultimately, there would be a worldwide coordination of each area of production through an international organism, just as there is in the factory, a co-ordination of teams that perform different functions. The important thing is that industrial power is wielded by the working class in the factory, where the councils will be the organic cells of a new state. Somewhat similar claims are made for the Socialist Party, which is organized along the lines of the new Russian state .47 The difference between the councils and the Party or the union is that the council is a kind of public institution that deals with the workers' 'universal' function in society, i.e. production, *~ whereas the council statutes (of which Gramsci was one but perhaps not the only author) indicate that the councils will accept union discipline and order, although the direction of the unions will come from the commissioners (or commissars) of the factories 49 - which somewhat blurs the previous distinction. The councils will need to be prepared to run the factories, so that research and study of industry itself is a major function. Gramsci reports to the International in July, 1920, that during the recent strike the councils had assumed technical functions, which included firing employees who showed themselves to be enemies of the working class s° - 'technical' function with an ominous ring! The Ordine Nuovo faction of the Socialist Party began to style itself the Communist faction, and the Communists split altogether with the Italian Socialist Party at the XVIIth Congress in Leghorn (January, 1921). Gramsci's attention turns much more to the Party, which assumes some of the jurisdiction previously assigned to the councils in his scheme of things. Now, it is

EUROCOMMUNISM AND ITALIAN TRADITION

217

Party cells that must prepare for the dictatorship of the proletariat. The question of cells is not only a technical, organizational question, but also a political one. As the Party Theses for the Congress of Lyon put it: all organizational problems are political problems, s~ We are assured that the dictatorship of the Community Party will not frighten the masses, since the masses understand that it will be the greatest guarantee of their freedom, s2 Summing up Gramsci's ideas on organization, or as he would put it "the concrete revolutionary experience of the international working class ''s3 we find: the organization by trade unions or industrial federations or local Chambers of Labor is inadequate; the revolution is not a miracle but will be accomplished by the development of workers and peasants councils; the councils in the workplace will embody the dictatorship of the proletariat; these units will be organized by industrial branches and then territorially as a system; only this organization can suppress the capitalists and their lackeys in production; Communist mentality will replace bourgeois, utopian, religious, and petty bourgeois mentality. "The Communist Party cannot have competitors in the intimate world of work." B. Initial View o f Leninisrn and Marxism Lenin and the Bolsheviks, or maximalists, as they were initially called, seem to have instantly won Gramsci's sympathy, and in July, 1917, he wrote that the Bolsheviks did not feel that it was necessary to wait to evolve through intermediate steps towards socialism. By July, 1918, Gramsci was writing that anyone who felt that the dictatorship of the proletariat in Russia is utopian has not studied historical materialism but rather is "a Catholic mired down in the syllabus", s4 Of course, Marx had not foreseen the unforeseeable, the catastrophe caused by the European War that shortcircuited the years of development of class struggle. Indeed (wrote Gramsci in June, 1919) the Italian situation was particularly revolutionary in its poor backward economy and might develop in the same way as in Russia. Gramsci confidently assured his readers that the Bolsheviks were not Jacobins, for a minority that is sure of becoming a majority cannot be Jacobin.SS Naturally, Gramsci defended Lenin and the Soviet Union against Lloyd George's complaints about the Cheka, against socialist complaints about the Bolshevik repression of the autonomous regime in Georgia, and insisted that the victory of Western capitalism over the Russian proletariat would mean

218

JAMES G. COLBERT, JR.

that Europe would be thrown into the arms of the most ferocious and merciless reaction, s6 Apparently, the admiration was mutual, for Lenin supported the Ordine Nuovo critique of the Italian Socialist Party in the Second Congress of the IIIrd International. s~ For Gramsci, it seems, the 'abc' of Marxism is that "democracy is equal to State and State is equal to dictatorship", ss The choice is between proletarian and bourgeois dictatorship. By October, 1920, Gramsci was triumphantly asserting that the spirit of the IIIrd International is a maximum of discipline and a stress that the International was not a bureau but a spirit, a consciousness of workers being stronger because of their common aims and bonds with brothers in Spain, France, Japan, and the US. The socialist is opposed to hatred between peoples. The "proletariat cannot live by a territorial idea of the fatherland". The bourgeois empire is contrasted with the socialist international. By January of 1921, Gramsci saw in the executive committee that had emerged from the Second Congress of the International, the seed of a world workers government, s9 There is a theory to be understood here. "Leninism is a unitary system of practical thoughts in which everything is connected to and sheds light on everything else, from the general conception of the world down to the most minute problems of political organization." All of the practical problems of Leninist tactics and organization are connected with the central issue of the dictatorship of the proletariat. But this theory, Gramsci stresses, is genuinely Marxist. Indeed, in letters to Engels - Gramsci insists - Marx held that his most important original discovery was neither historical materialism nor the surplus value theory, but rather the demonstration of the historical necessity of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the function of philosophy, after all, being not to explain the world but to change it. 6° It would be unfair to expect a systematic exposition of Marxist theory from Gramsci's scattered articles. He is at pains to point out, however, that Marxist philosophy is not based on positivism, even though it is scientific, but rather on philosophical idealism; the latter is not to be confused with idealism in the ordinary sense of utopian dreams; some elements of positivism may have crept into Marxism, because Marx was not primarily a philosopher; however, the fact that Marxism uses an experimental method is not because it is positivistic, but because it is scientific, and scientific method was discovered by Galileo. The reference to science, furthermore, should not lead

EUROCOMMUNISM AND ITALIAN TRADITION

219

us to look for predictable patterns of development like philistines. Events have an unbreakable logic beyond reasoning;they constitute the real dialectic. "History is not an oak, and men are not acorns. ''61 C Pre-Prison Attitude Towards Other Social Forces

There is a slight evolution in Gramsci's attitude towards liberals and capitalism. Initially, he remarks that Italian liberals should play their historic role better. He praises English liberals who fight for their ideas instead of just defending bourgeois parasitism; he gives credit to an English policeman defending free speech in Hyde Park. 62 Increasingly there is the overtone that the absolute liberty and competitive economic regime of capitalism create wealth but that the wealthy tend to prefer to conserve their wealth rather than to continue to compete. There is monopoly instead of competition. Small commerce is dead, the banks control industry. Finance capitalism is suicidal, unlike industrial capitalism. Bourgeois society degenerates into monopoly imperialism. 63 All institutions of bourgeois society are tainted, including labor unions. Parliament is a superstructure to be replaced, and new structures with new proletarian personnel and a new system of recruitment will have to be found for the military, the judiciary, the bureaucracy, and the police. Italian juries are classist. The State is the political and economic unity of the bourgeoisie, i.e. its only unity. In sum, we cannot install socialism in a capitalist apparatus. 64 Italy is particularly criticized. It is not really a parliamentary state, but a tempered despotism. It is a parasitic state exploiting the productive part of society. Its monument could be a statue of the plainclothes policeman. In particular, the South of Italy is a kind of colony exploited for the capitalists of the North. 6s None of the diplomacy towards Catholicism developed by Togliatti and Berlinguer since World War II is detectable in Gramsci. His antipathy is not primarily political, although at one point he complains that the State is absorbing the religious myth and making it an ideological tool against socialism. 66 However, sociologically, Italian Catholicism with its base in the peasantry is not identified with the bourgeoisie, and, in fact, the kindest thing Gramsci has to say about Catholicism is a welcome for the Popular Party (predecessor of the Christian Democrats) in December of 1918, for he feels

220

JAMES G. COLBERT, JR.

that the Church organization may be able to break the dominance of the corrupt, inefficient lay conservatives and liberals, so that the Catholic party is the most important fact since the Risorgimento. 67 Beyond that, Gramsci does a good deal of crude priest-baiting. Pope Benedict XV is mocked for changing rules on certain religious holidays established by Pins X and Gramsci wonders which of them is supposed to be infallible. "Benedict XV is only a sphinx without enigma . . . " Gramsci is glad that Christmas and Epiphany are losing their religious character and acquiring a human and social character. The shrine of the Madonna della Consolata is "the grand bazaar of Piedmontese superstition". Catholic Action is part of the Fascist Party. 6s More radically, socialist culture gives a devastating blow "to the dogmatic and intolerant mentality created in the Italian people by Catholic and Jesuit education". Gramsci praises a Christian worker wh6 recognizes that Avanti represents him and his class, but clarifies: Marxist socialists are not religious; they believe that religion is a transitory form of human culture that will be surpassed by a higher form of culture, a philosophical one; they believe that religion is a mythological conception of life, a conception that will be surpassed and substituted by that founded on historical materialism..." In other words, " . . . socialism is precisely the religion that should kill Christianity. Religion in the sense that it too is a f a i t h . . . " 69 The harshest words and the greatest amount of invective is reserved for the competitors of Gramsci's successive parties: first trade unionists, then socialists. Thus, Felippo Turati is bourgeois. Pietro Nenni is corrupt. The Socialist Party is centrist. The Socialist Party is not even undertaking to defend liberal principles against the fascists, let alone socialist ones. The Socialist Party is composed exclusively of the functionaries who make their living from it. The Socialist Party remains (after its Congress of Bologna) a mere parliamentary party, immobilized within the bourgeois mentality. 7° Outside the Socialist Party, people are judged as harshly: along with Turati, Sturzo and Amendola are semi-fascists. Croce is one of the two great figures of Italian reaction. The Kronstadt sailors are counter-revolutionaries. The Constituent Assembly in Russia is a vague and confused myth of the prerevolutionary period. Samuel Gompers is a friend of capitalism. 71 When the left opposition appeared in the Soviet Union, Gramsci quickly sided against it: Trotsky was a revisionist. The bourgeois and social democratic

EUROCOMMUNISM AND ITALIAN TRADITION

221

parties were credited with exploiting the conflicts in the Soviet Party and particularly for their attention to the opposition complaints that the USSR was becoming capitalist. Similarly, Gramsci bitterly attacked Bordiga and the PCI left in July, 1925.72 From all this, the picture emerges of young Gramsci as an activist and theoretician who regarded other worldviews as excluded by historical materialism, who saw nothing good about existing social and political institutions, and who had an exceedingly low tolerance level. Although, 'Stalinism' has become a term of abuse with little analytic content, it is appropriate here in a historical sense, given Gramsci's alignment in intra-Party battles. Moreover, Gramsci's faith in the dialectic of events and his insistence on centralism and discipline seem to have totalitarian implications. He is no advocate of pluralism. This is not intended to put Gramsci on the same cultural level as Stalin, but rather to emphasize that the Party has become an end as well as a means. There is certainly no glimmer of what was to become Eurocommunism.

D. Gramsci in Prison The night Gramsci died, his sister-in-law, Tatiana Schucht, took 33 notebooks out of his hospital room. She brought them to Moscow and had them photocopied and stored safely. The notebooks returned to Rome immediately after its liberation. The first passage from the notebooks is published in the September-October, 1945, issue of Rinascita, although from the very first issue of Rinascita, letters and previously published materials by Gramsci were reproduced. It seems to me that Gramsci's own list of topics to be studied, which he set out in February of 1929 or even the amended version of 1932, does not give a representative notion of his interests. Furthermore, excessive importance can be given to the attempt to fit everything Gramsci studied into some preconceived schema. For example, Gramsci refers with great regularity to the Jesuit publication Civiltd Cattolica, but it strikes me that this assiduous reading may be due not so much to an interest in developing a careful study of Catholicism as it is to the fact that the Civiltt~ Cattolica would have been one of the few reputable journals readily available to Gramsci in a jail in fascist Italy. Similarly, it is impossible to know just how much weight to give to the paraphrase 'philosophy of praxis' that Gramsci uses along with 'historical materialism' instead of saying 'Marxism'. Marx becomes 'the founder of the philosophy of praxis' and Lenin is 'Ili6' or 'Ili6i' except on a few occasions

222

JAMES G. COLBERT, JR.

when Marx is named as being criticized by Croce. It may not be without significance that Gramsci chose a term for Marxism which was the preferred expression of the Italian socialist philosopher Rodolfo Mondolfo, but some choice was forced on Gramsci by the need not to aggravate possible censors. For the same reason no critique of fascism was developed, although factual notes on fascism and Mussolini are present. It is likewise puzzling that Gramsci does not show evidence of having worked directly over texts of Croce and Machiavelli, which ought to have been available. Whether this proves something about Gramsci's scholarship, about the limitations of his situation in prison, or nothing at all, is impossible to tell. 73

E. The Notion of'The Modern Prince' For Gramsci, Machiavelli is a master not only in political theory but also in Italian history, if indeed there is a distinction between the two. Machiavelli not only realized that no nation had been effectively united except under a strong prince, but also that the problem of Italy was precisely the Church with her dual national and international role: too weak to unite Italy and too strong to let anyone else do it. Machiavelli also anticipated that the integration of the peasants into Italian political life was the solution to Italy's problems: specifically, he hoped both to break the power of nobles and soldiers of fortune as well as to be strong enough to reject foreign invaders by incorporating the peasants into a militia. In June of 1525 Machiavelli prevailed upon Pope Clement VII to send him to the President of Romagna, Francesco Guicciardini with just such a proposal (which Guicciardini rejected as risky for the Papal States). 74 Despite his failure to get solutions implemented that would lead to the reunification of Italy, Machiavelli is no utopian in Gramsci's view, but an impassioned man of a party. His writings are not systematic treatises. He comes to identify himself with a people that would accept his principles. His prince is a time example of a Sorelian myth in action, where ideology and science fuse. A modern prince could not be a real person but would have to be an organism. In this organism would be embodied the complex will of its members affirmed in their action. For this complex will to be effective, it is necessary to study social and economic conditions. In Machiavelli's Italy an effective Jacobin force was absent; Jacobinism would also have to be studied as part of the preparation for the modern prince. Also, central questions for

EUROCOMMUNISM AND ITALIAN TRADITION

223

the study of the modern prince would be the intellectual and moral reform, that is the change of worldview or religion. There are two fundamental points here: first, the formation of a collective national-popular will, of which the modern prince is both the expression and organizer; second, the intellectual and moral reform. Machiavelli is seen by Gramsci as the author of a neohumanism, which involves not transcendent or even immanent metaphysical principles but concrete action of men to transform reality according to historical necessities. The Prince takes the place, in people's consciousness of divinity or of the categorical imperative, he becomes the base of a modern laicism and of a complete laicization of all life and of all customary relations. 75 The notion of cultural hegemony is important in combatting economism (Gramsci rejects vulgar materialism whether proposed by Burkharin or attacked by Croce). The development of the notion of hegemony also overcomes the theory of permanent revolution (Trotsky). Popular beliefs indeed have the strength (validitd) of material forces. What is needed is a combination of dictatorship or coercion and hegemony or consensus. The difference between Savonarola and Machiavelli is not the difference between morality and reality but between two moralities, one abstract and the other realistic. Machiavelli tries to base himself on the progressive movement to make it triumph, always operating in effective reality. What-ought-to-be is taken by Machiavelli realistically and in a historicist way. The problem with the Italian reunification as it was carried out by the Piedmontese, was that it involved dictatorship without hegemony, dominion but not direction; the control of one group over another, not of part of a group over a whole. 76 In this light we can understand more fully the role of intellectuals for philosophy of praxis, beyond the specific reflections on Machiavelli. Philosophy of praxis must initially be polemical and critical, a refutation of existing culture and thought. So, there is a critique of common sense and yet a tie to common sense, for it must be clear that everyone is a philosopher. There is some parallel here between what philosophy of praxis tries to accomplish and the relations of Catholic intellectuals to the simple faithful; except that for Gramsci, the Church, by the fact that it acknowledges simple faithful, also acknowledges a split within itself, and attempts to keep the simple faithful on the level of common sense, whereas the philosophy of praxis neither acknowledges the split nor is willing to perpetuate differences between

224

JAMES G. COLBERT, JR.

intellectuals and others. For the philosophy of praxis, there must be contact between intellectuals and simple folk to construct an intellectual and moral block. Every new type of society creates a new superstructure whose representatives are the intellectuals. Frequently, they crystalize as an intellectual class and identify with the previous class and hence are not organic intellectuals. To understand what Gramsci means, one must realize that the real intellectual of capitalism is' the industrialist. The parties offer worldviews in so far as they work out an ethic in conformity to such views; they thus elaborate a new totalitarian (Gramsci's term) intellectuality. Intellectuals from previous periods like professional philosophers and clergy will be assimilated or necessarily disappear. Self-awareness cannot come to the masses without intellectuals, that is, organizers and leaders, but the process of creation of intellectuals is long and full of contradictions. However, in the first stages, innovation cannot come from the masses but from an elite which has already become conscious. 77 Zenovia Sochor 7s has pointed out that Gramsci adopts stances remarkably similar to those of Bogdanov in stressing the importance of development of radically new Communist culture to avoid the dangers of replacement of one oppressive caste by another. Gramsci and Bogdanov may have had personal contact either in the USSR or at Party schools organized by Bogdanov in Bologna and Capri in 1909-11. The coincidence is all the more remarkable in that Bogdanov's Marxism was tinged with positivism, rather than by immanentist idealism. F. War: Means to an End

Another source of inspiration or at least of imagery for Gramsci are his reflections about warfare. He distinguishes three types of warfare: of movement, of position, and subterranean. Subterranean warfare seems to be more a preliminary stage. Gramsci gives as an example the gathering of weapons. In economic terms, war of movement might be a strike whereas war of positions would be a boycott. Writing in 1929-30, Gramsci says India is carrying on a war of position against England, and Germany against France. It would be in the interests of England to be able to precipitate a war of movement just as it would be in the interest of France if the German right would give cause for a war of movement. The moral seems to be that the weaker party must try to fight a war of position. This could be taken as a rationale before the fact of the guerrilla tactic of the national liberation movements. Gramsci

EUROCOMMUNISM AND ITALIAN TRADITION

225

seems to be completely taken with the notion of the superiority of the war of position and feels it is necessary to mention that war of movement has not disappeared completely. One unfortunate example employed by Gramsci is the success of the French General Weygand in mounting a defense outside Warsaw in 1920 against the Russians: war of position wins over war of movement. Naturally Gramsci could not know of the spectacular failure of French preparations for war of position that occurred at the start of World War II. 99 However, if one combines what is said about the role of the intellectuals and cultural hegemony of the working class, with the image of war of position, a possible long-range cultural strategy of the PCI emerges. Gramsci's interest in the popular press takes on new meaning. Del Noce and Fabro's concerns about basic differences in wortdviews rather than specific policies is much more than just an identification of Eurocommunism with the old dialectical materialism. Whether the Party consciously tried to adopt a Gramscian tactic or not, Gramsci proves to be a good prophet. In conclusion, we find a Gramsci writing his notebooks in prison, who resembles the idealists he criticizes. His concern for cultural hegemony hardly foreshadows the fact that pluralism and formal democracy would become acquisitions of Eurocommunism. The interest in cultural hegemony coupled with historicist Machiavellian leeway for the Party, has more profoundly totalitarian implications than anything to be found in the Scritti Politici. A specific philological point illustrates this. Bobbio 8° has noted that the Russian term equivalent to 'hegemony' is not used by Lenin but by Stalin. There is a verbal indication that the immediate background for Eurocommunism would have to be sought in the thought and action of Palmiro Togliatti rather than in Gramsci. How, then, does Gramsci fit into the Eurocommunist move? I would argue that even before de-Stalinization, Gramsci had assumed the role of classic in PCI thought: Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and Gramsci. De-Stalinization automatically moves Gramsci up in the hierarchy. When the Italian road to socialism becomes at least a slogan, it is natural to emphasize Gramsci with his message about cultural (and hence peaceful) hegemony. Gramsci, on this reading, did not lead his readers into Eurocommunism, and there seems no reason to suppose his influence will be a liberalizing or pluralistic one.

Boston State College

226

J A M E S G. C O L B E R T , JR. NOTES

1 The first draft of the present article was prepared during a National Endowment for the Humanities Summer Seminar held in Rome in the Summer of 1980 under the direction of Prof. Joseph LaPalombara of Yale. 2 This is one of Carrillo's favorite topics in Elaao de la constituci6n, Grijalbo, Barcelona, 1978 (2nd ed., 1979), pp. 55, 57, 151, andpassim. The rationale for such a government is that it could only credibly demand necessary sacrifices of workers. 3 Jorge Semprdn, Autobiografia de Federico S~nchez, Planeta, Barcelona, 1977. 4 Fernando Claudin, Documentos de una divergencia comunista: los textos del debate que provoc6 la exclusidn de Claudln y Jorge Semprftn del PCE, El Viejo Topo, Barcelona, 1978. s Santiago Carrillo, 'Eurocornunismo' y Estado, Grijalbo, Barcelona, 1977, pp. 84, 95. Hereafter abbreviated as EYE. 6 EYE, pp. 32, 33, 53, 55, 98, 99,131. See also Ignacio Gallego, Desarrollo delpartido cornunista, Ebro, Paris, 1976, p. 122. 7 I. Gallego, op. cir. p. 52. 8 Although Gallego, op. cir. pp. 141,273, would stress that the Party is a worker's party even if other people belong to it. 9 EYE, pp. 156-160. 1o EYE, pp. 151-152. 11 EYE, p. 51. A resolution of the IXth Congress of the PCE declares that it does not belong to any International (p. 139). It advocates a broad social and political democracy as a transitional stage to socialism and Communism (pp. 83-93). Noveno Congreso del Partido Comunista de Espafia, 14-23 abril, 1978, Grijalbo, Barcelona, 1978. 12 EYE, pp. 141, 186. Gallego, op. cir. p. 38 says: "Conquest of democratic freedoms is an indispensable premise for the advance by a democratic route to socialism." (Still, the last statement is a tautology.) 13 By contrast one might consider the attitude towards the United States as a touchstone of Communist orthodoxy. On this point, Carrillo (EYE, pp. 212, 214)is unrelenting. 14 EYE, p. t90. is EYE, p. 206. 16 EYE, p. 195. Earlier (Dialogue on Spain with Regis Debray and Max Gallo, Lawrence and Wishart, London, 1976, p. 198) Carrillo maintained that after the October Revolution, Lenin imagined the 'petit bourgeois' Mensheviks and Social Revolutionaries would peacefully work in the system, which did not occur, because none of them "believed in the possibility of a socialist regime". 17 EYE, p. 202. 18 EYE, pp. 26, 56, 60. Likewise, Sempere resorts to Gramsci's notion of 'war of position' to describe the Eurocommunist move. (Joaquln Sempere, 'Eurocomunismo, guerra de posiciones y alternativa de sociedad', pp. 7 - 1 1 , Nuestra Bandera, No. 97, Jan., 1979.) 19 EYE, pp. 116,142-143,201. CarriUo (Dialogue, p. 112) holds that Togliatti was the only Communist leader who realized after Khrushchev's revelations that the system was at stake. 20 EYE, pp. 25,108, 109,145-146. Likewise, Gallego, op. cit. p. 33 cites Lenin as being right against Trotsky in refusing to militarize or administratively control labor unions. 21 EYE, pp. 126-127. In Dialogue, p. 198, Carrillo imagines "a socialist regime governed

E U R O C O M M U N 1 S M AND I T A L I A N T R A D I T I O N

227

jointly or alternatively by Communists, socialists, and Christians who are in favor of socialism". - One might wonder whether the accent here is to be placed on 'socialist' (in which case the statement is tautological) or on 'regime' (in which case other groups are excluded). 22 EYE, p. 69. 23 EYE, p. 159. 24 Dialogue, pp. 56-57. 25 EYE, pp. 12, 132, 173, 177, 179. As Gallego, op. cit. pp. 107, 108, 250 putsit, the social-democratic parties are not revolutionary and have left monopolies intact. Alberto Infante insists that the road to socialism must not be petrified in the manner of Soviet bureaucracy or of the German SPD (p. 12 in 'Sobre la teoria politica del eurocomunismo', pp. 12±15, Nuestra Bandera, No. 97, Jan., 1979). 26 EYE, p. 98. 2 7 EYE, p. 180. Gallego, op. cit. p. 180: "It is one thing that the party possesses its own philosophical conception and another that to militate in the Party, one is obliged to be identified with said conception." 28 EYE, p. 124. 29 j. Sempere, op. cit. pp. 7 - 8 . 3o EYE, p. 168. 31 V. Zagladin (ed.), Europe and the Communists, Progress, Moscow, 1977, transl, from the Russian. Ernest Mandel, From Stalinism to Eurocommunism: the Bitter Fruit of Socialism in One Country, London, NLB, 1978. 32 Claudin, Documentos, pp. X, 112, 125,213-214, 221. 33 Fernando Claudln, Eurocomunismo y socialismo, Siglo XXI, Madrid, 1977, pp. 192193. 34 Norberto Bobbio, pp. 4, 36, 4 0 - 4 1 , 4 7 - 4 9 , in Quale socialismo? Einaudi, 4th ed., 1977. Particularly notable are the essays 'Esiste una dottrina marxistica dello stato?' and 'Quale alternativa alla democrazia rappresentativa?' which appeared in Mondoperaio in 1975 in the Aug.-Sept. and Oct. issues. 35 N. Bobbio, Quale socialismo?, pp. 18, 53, 106-107, 109. 36 N. Bohbio, Quale socialismo?, pp. 42-43, 72-73. 37 N. Bobbio, Quale socialismo?, pp. 23, 95. 38 Acervo, Barcelona, 1977. 39 A. Garcfa, op. ciL pp. 3 5 - 3 6 ; h e quotes from Cuadernos para el di(tlogo, March 2 7 April 2, 1976. 4o Quale socialismo?, ed. by Claudia Nazzetti, Citadella Ed., Assisi, 1980, esp. pp. 114, 120-121. Not to be confused with Bobbio's book of the same title. 41 Cornelio Fabro, La trappola del compremesso storico: da Togliatti a Berlinguer, Logos, Roma, 1979. 42 Europa Informazione, Roma, 1976. 43 Dialogue, p. 190. 4.4 Fabro, La trappola, pp. 15-19 and passim. 45 The Scritti Politici comprise five volumes published by Einaudi Turin: Scritti Giovanili, 1914-1918, 1972 reprint of 2nd ed., 1958, hereafter SG. Sotto la mole, 1916-1920, 1971 reprint of 1960 2nd ed., hereafter SLM. L'Ordine Nuovo, 19191920, reprint of 1954 4th ed., hereafter ON. Socialismo e Jdscismo, L'ordine nuovo, 1921-1922, 1971 reprint of 1966, 4th ed., hereafter SF. La construzione del Partito comunista, 1923-1926, 1971, 2nd. ed., hereafter CPC.

228

J A M E S G. C O L B E R T , JR.

46 SLM, pp. 117, 486; SG, p. 144. 47 SG, pp. 160, 315; ON, pp. 66, 68, 126-127; SLM, p. 476; SF, p. 134. 48 ON, p. 150. 49 ON, p. 194. so ON, p. 184; council statutes also insist on the research function - ON, p. 197. 51 CPC, pp. 272-273,504. s2 SF, p. 384. 53 ON, pp. 28-31, an article written in September, 1919. s4 SG, p. 284; cf., p. 124. ss SG, pp. 150-151,161; ON, pp. 252, 89. 56 ON, pp. 479-480, 221,230. s7 ON, pp. 483-484. 58 CPC, 390. 59 ON, p. 353; SLM, p. 258, cf. also pp. 122,210,405;SG, pp. 7, 9; SF, p. 41. 6o CPC, pp. 272,432. 61 SG, pp. 327-328, 284; SF, p. 86. 62 SG, pp. 172, 307. 63 SG, p. 276; ON, pp. 155,254,261; SF, p. 112. 64 SF, pp. 146, 419; SG, p. 230; ON, p. 17. 65 ON, pp. 7 0 - 7 1 , 8 3 ; SLM, p. 170; SF, pp. 66, 115. 66 SG, p. 348. 67 SG, p. 349. 68 SLM, 326,179;SG, pp. 36, 13. 69 SG, p. 145;SLM, pp. 184, 194,495,148. 70 SF, pp. 37, 34, 132,364; ON, pp. 118-119,407. 71 CPC, pp. 39, 150; SF, pp. 9 8 - 9 9 ; SG, pp. 160, 241. 72 CPC, pp. 211,127, 6 8 - 6 9 ; ON, p. 281. 73 See preface by Valentino Gerratana, pp. XI-XLIII in Antonio Gramsci, Quaderni di Carcere, Einaudi, Turin, 1975. The Quaderni are divided into three volumes with note and indices in a fourth volume. The pagination is continuous, so that I will cite as Quaderni and page. See also Luciano Gruppi's general introduction to // materialismo storico di Benedetto Croce, by Gramsci, Riuniti, Roma, 1977, pp. XIII-XLIV. Felice Platone, 'L'eredi~ letteraria di Gramsci; relazioni sui quaderni del carcere. Per una storia degli intellettuali italiani', pp. 81-90, Rinascita, 1946, 4. 74 Quaderni, pp. 5 8 8 - 5 8 9 , 6 1 4 , 4 4 - 4 5 , 1 9 6 - 1 9 7 . 75 Quaderni, pp. 1561, 951-953, 1555-1561, 657. 76 Quaderni, pp. 1 5 9 5 - 1 5 9 6 , 9 9 0 - 9 9 1 , 1577-1578, 1008, 1823-1824. 77 Quaderni, pp. 1041-1044, 1383-1387, 1406-1407. 78 Zenovia A. Sochor, 'Was Bogdanov Russia's Answer to Gramsci?', Studies in Soviet Thought 22 (1981). 79 Quaderni, pp. 122-123, 1566-1567, 859-860, 1613-1616. 8o Bobbio, Quale socialismo?, pp. 36-37.