Did Mussolinis government meaningfully improve the conditions of working class people in any meaningful way? He propped up fascisms corporatist system as a way to resolve class conflict and on paper it should have subordinated the owning class to the state and given the workers more of a say but in practice what was the actual end result?
>>18475225Not really. There was a push for industrialisation and public works , badly needed at the time, but the working class didn't see much gain from it, and often had to do unpaid work building the system up (corvees), or see their ways of living destroyed for some bullshit reason, casting people out from their jobs because of some State planning idea, the poor paid the price, while the managers saw massive improvements in their conditions
>>18475225>Did Mussolinis government meaningfully improve the conditions of working class people in any meaningful way?Yes, and many of his policies were retained after ww2 till like the 70s.He largely rebuilt Italy's welfare state to be a mostly nationalized universal service to streamline costs while providing relatively bountiful benefits (as long as you were actually employed or had a family). Healthcare and retirement funds were the most impacted (positively). If you weren't reliably employed or a mother the situation was grimmer though.He also pushed big time for land reclamation, which resulted in a lot of farmhands becoming actual farmers. Literally whole cities sprung up. Worth mentioning that he also weakened farmhands and sharecroppers's bargaining power massively, so it kinda balanced out for them specifically.
>>18475225Why was he pinching his nose? Did he smell sodomites who fuck men's anuses and eat poop?
>>18476075wut
>>18475225Probably not, but then again living standards for the working class never improved under the commmunist regime either.All in all fascists and communists are two sides of the same coin. They're both totalitarian collectivists no matter how hard normies screech that fascism is "le far-right".In reality communism such as Stalins USSR manifested itself almost identical to that of a fascist state, with just some minor tweaks that seems big on paper (such as fascists allowing private business but those businesses are still completely subservient to the will of the state) but in practice pretty much runs the same way.Communist regimes turned out to be completely militaristic and ultranationalist with a totalitarian statist elite that controls the production and turn the people into a collective mass, just like fascism.There is a reason why Orwell (a socialist) named his fascist dystopian antagonist "English Socialism" (INGSOC), because he knew the hypocracy of Stalins regime; communism in practice becomes what fascism is in theory.
What even is working class, these definitions are loosey goosey
>>18476167Wage laborers who do not own private property or their own means of production.
>>18476171> who do not own private propertyWorking class cant own their own property?Isnt that the seperation between a working class and a proletarian?
>>18476179Proletarian and working class are the same, Marx and Engels both defined the proletariat as the industrial working class.
He did so well that even Bordiga praised him and Hitler as only true revolutionaries.
>>18476182Well Marx and Engels viewed things from a late-1800 lens, when poor peasants were migrating to cities and lived in squalor to work for pennys in horrible conditions.Things had changed in the 1930s around the time of Mussolini. The term "working class" is very fluctuating.
> I gave you trains arriving on time, now go die in Ethiopia and Albania
>>18476212Fair trade?
>>18475225Italian fascism is distinct from other Axis powers because Mussolini consolidated a nationwide Italian welfare state, contrast with the Nazis who early on enacted state-sanctioned euthanasia (Aktion t4) as an austerity measure. It's an important distinction because what united the axis powers was not some shared vision for the future but a variety of different worldviews whose modus operandi were to defeat communism. Hitler wanted to do this with racial purity and lebensraum and Italy wanted to do it by resolving class conflict with corporatism.
>>18476161>All in all fascists and communists are two sides of the same coin.Didn't read the rest of your retardation, educate yourself on what Communism is. I recommend the "socialism for all", YouTube channel
>>18476477>educate yourself on what Communism is.I dont care what communism is on paper.I care about what communism becomes in practice.And communism in practice mirrors fascism.
>>18476450>Italy wanted to do it by resolving class conflict with corporatism.How successful were they exactly? From what I’ve read the result was essentially just defanging any power the workers had and giving big business owners all the real power.
>>18476705>How successful were they exactly?At resolving class conflict? About the same as western democracies, which is to say not at all but the people were mostly kept quiet through comforts and welfare.In effect the system was not meaningfully different from contemporary monolithic unions aside from the ban on strikes (which to be sure was a big negative)
>>18475225Yes, Italy actually got a head start on the whole EU tripartite system because of his policies. People retardedly call modern Europe socialist but it’s actually Diet Corporatism. 1950s Labour in the UK was closer to a socialist society than modern Europe.
>>18476815> People retardedly call modern Europe socialist but it’s actually Diet Corporatism.Gordon Brown/ Tony Blair pretty much turned UK into mini-USA when it comes to economics. NHS is pretty much only socialist thing which differentiates the two.
