Berlusconi's polices?

[Zurdito]

I'm asking just out of pure curiosity. It came to my notice that Italy has 32% employment in the manufacturing sector (Britain is 18% and falling) which actually increased from the 1990's (nearly all the rest of the developed world declined int hat period), and a large number of medium-sized family owned business that are very technolgoically advanced and competetive on the global stage.

Seeing as Berlusconi is normally considered to be hardline neo-lib, I was wondering, how did Italy under him manage to avoid falling into the trap of the anglo-saxon economies i.e.: of devastating the manufacturing sector, and crushing most domestically owned business under a tide of multinational penetration, all the while compensating for this by underwriting a huge property/credit boom, i.e., instead of making money from making something, you just now buy from a few multi-nats, and instead make your money from buying up all the newly privatised property (or property which is becoming ever more concentrated due to the perpetual diverting of wealth away from the poor and towards the rich) and borrowing from a "booming" financial sector (propped up with public money).

The funniest thing is that the fanatical neo-liberal press has decided Italy is the "sick-man of Europe", along with France and anyone else with a semblance of a balanced budget, social welfare and manufacturing, and is fast cheerleading the charge to turn them into Reagan/Thatcherite hell-holes just like Britain is today.

Obviously I wouldn't dream of making an apology for Berlusconi obviously, but I'm just curious as to how the manufacturing sector managed to prosper under a neo-liberal in a western state. and why did the British and Italian bourgeoisie decide to take such drastically different routes?

[Dimentio]

He led a coalition government. The coalition government was composed of four parties, two which were supported by the North Italian bourgeoisie (Forza Italia, Lega Nord), and two which were supported by the South Italian petty-bourgeoisie (The christian democrats and the fascists).

Whenever Berlusconi tried to implement any reforms, the southern parties threatened to jump off his bandwagon. Berlusconi was more interested in making laws immunising himself from the accusations of corruption, than to globalise Italy, so it was in his interest to sit in power as long as possible.

[Tower of Bebel]

Berlusconi concentrated himself on foreign policies (the war in Iraq, the European Union, etc.), however, 3 general strikes were set up against Berlusconi's reforms. One of those reforms were the attacks on worker's pensions.


22 September 2003
Italy
Another “Hot Autumn”

It’s likely to be another ‘Hot Autumn’ for the working class in Italy this year. The ruling class plans a major attack on pensions. There will be further attempts to cut back workers’ real wages and their industrial power.
Fabrizio Cucchi, Italy

Italy’s crisis is different from that in Germany and elsewhere. It has both inflation and a fall in production. For the last two quarters, Italy has been technically in recession with production on its way down, but this has been combined with a high level of inflation, producing what is called “stagflation”.

The ruling class urgently needs to bring down inflation and improve the competitiveness of Italian goods. The favoured method of the past - devaluation - which hits workers hard in the pocket, is now ruled out by the regulations connected with the Euro.

Since Italy’s entry into the European Monetary Union, there have been renewed attempts to bring in the Biagi ‘reforms’ which severely undermine workers’ rights. From 1 September, many new kinds of labour contract will be allowed by law. One is the so-called “job on call” where workers have to wait for calls from the factory to work and are only guaranteed a minimum number of hours (and pay). Another is the splitting of one job between two workers. The government has been trying to get such reforms for two years but now they are pushing them through.

There is likely to be another big struggle when the government tries once more to change Article 18 of the country’s Labour Law, which was won through the struggles in the 1970s. This guarantees that workers will not be fired without just cause if they work in factories with over 15 employees. Berlusconi’s government has now made it possible for a factory to be split up into many small units so that more workers are not protected by article 18. Industrial action is promised against this move in the Autumn. The biggest trade union federations are calling for a general strike on the issue but only for two hours. Much bolder action is needed.

There is mounting pressure on the Berlusconi government, both from the leaders of Confindustria – the Italian bosses’ association – and also from the European Union to cut back spending on pensions and/or raise the age of retirement. There are many disagreements amongst the ruling coalition parties about how to deal with the issue. Some are fearful of clashes on the issue, in the light of the massive opposition to pension reform shown on the streets in France and Austria this year and also in Italy the last time a Berlusconi government tried to introduce pensions reform.

Other struggles continue in Italy. Two of the three major union federations have signed a new national contract for the engineering industry. But FIOM – the metal mechanics’ section of the largest union federation, the Cgil - is still fighting to win their original demands. They are concluding separate deals with individual companies if they come up to this level. They say that, in this way workers themselves can judge the gains and losses. But it is a mistaken policy since it undermines the strength that comes from a united struggle.

Inside the Cgil and the other big unions there is mass pressure from below although that is less noticeable in some of the other unions. The other two major union confederations are practically yellow unions. ‘Unions of the base’ were formed in opposition to the major unions’ bureaucracies. Understandably, because of long and bitter experience of betrayals by the leaders of the ‘Big Three’, the attitude of some of the unions of the base can, unfortunately, tend to be somewhat sectarian.

Politically there is confusion amongst workers because the centre-left ‘Olive Tree’ coalition of the period between the two Berlusconi governments also put through anti-working class laws and neo-liberal economic measures.

At the moment, the leaders of the large left-wing Communist Refoundation (Rc) are trying to make a programmatic agreement with the centre left. Quite a lot of Rc members are opposed to such an agreement with a political coalition which would again attack the working class. Many Rc lefts are collecting signatures for a new party congress to come out against this. At the last congress Rc leaders spoke about everything except a new agreement with the centre left. There are definitely problems with democracy in the Rc!

On the other side of the class divide, some bosses such as the leader of the employers’ confederation, D’Amato, have publicly applauded the leader of the Democrats of the Left (the former Communist Party of Italy). They believe his less abrasive, more long-term approach towards attacks on workers’ living standards would be more successful than a head-on clash.

We have a small group in Italy called Lotta per il socialismo. It has a programme similar to that of The Socialist but with some specifically Italian aspects. We see the working class as holding the key to the Italian situation. The struggles of the metal workers and those against the new laws and pension reform will be of vital significance both in Italy and beyond its borders.

From The Socialist, paper of the Socialist Party, CWI England and Wales.

[Demogorgon]

He wasn't that different really. Maybe worse in fact.

Italy has a larger manufacturing sector partly because Italians are a bite lower paid on average and hence big business isn't in quite such a rush to lay them off.

Other factors were some regional governments being resistant to neo-liberal policies and the fact that Italy has quite a lot of co-operatives who are less vulnerable tot his sort of thing.

[hajduk]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20, 2007 10:01 am
I'm asking just out of pure curiosity. It came to my notice that Italy has 32% employment in the manufacturing sector (Britain is 18% and falling) which actually increased from the 1990's (nearly all the rest of the developed world declined int hat period), and a large number of medium-sized family owned business that are very technolgoically advanced and competetive on the global stage.

Seeing as Berlusconi is normally considered to be hardline neo-lib, I was wondering, how did Italy under him manage to avoid falling into the trap of the anglo-saxon economies i.e.: of devastating the manufacturing sector, and crushing most domestically owned business under a tide of multinational penetration, all the while compensating for this by underwriting a huge property/credit boom, i.e., instead of making money from making something, you just now buy from a few multi-nats, and instead make your money from buying up all the newly privatised property (or property which is becoming ever more concentrated due to the perpetual diverting of wealth away from the poor and towards the rich) and borrowing from a "booming" financial sector (propped up with public money).

The funniest thing is that the fanatical neo-liberal press has decided Italy is the "sick-man of Europe", along with France and anyone else with a semblance of a balanced budget, social welfare and manufacturing, and is fast cheerleading the charge to turn them into Reagan/Thatcherite hell-holes just like Britain is today.

Obviously I wouldn't dream of making an apology for Berlusconi obviously, but I'm just curious as to how the manufacturing sector managed to prosper under a neo-liberal in a western state. and why did the British and Italian bourgeoisie decide to take such drastically different routes?
Berlusconi is connected to mafia so....