BOOKS
463
ceded to anyone who is not delegated by the people concerned through
direct election. This would do away "with the Catholic hierarchy.
I have the impression that Salvemini and La Piana would have
seen the problem of the Catholic Church in a different light if, instead
of considering Italian social and political reconstruction only as a
series of particular reforms, they had been willing to discuss the
principles and fundamental laws of a new society established on a
foundation of liberty and equality. What they say of industrial and
especially agrarian reform indicates that in practice they are prepared
to accept the most radical measures, provided such measures can be
applied without vi0lence and dictatorship.
After the Russian Revolution it has become clear to sensible
people that it is not permissible to experiment with societies, that is
to say, to make bloody mistakes. Experiments involving successive
outbursts of State violence not only result in contradictory com–
promises but lead naturally to totalitarian reaction. So we can agree
with the authors that gradualism
might
be a plausible policy. It is
one thing, however, to know how to compromise with realities and
something else again to be uncertain of the fundamental principle of
action. Compromise is obviously not a pri.1ciple, and actually com–
pels one to shift from one line of action to another in accordance with
what seems expedient at the moment. When Salvemini and La Piana
contend that private ownership in Italy will have to be "very much
restricted", or that the expropriation of the latifundia in Italy should be
accompanied by a "modest" indemnity, we can safely say that this is
not a sufficient basis for a new society or, for that matter, even a viable
republic. The authors' policy would arouse the opposition of the
ruling classes without gaining the support of the common people. The
whole tragic story of modern democracies is to be discerned in this
crucial political error. You cannot mobilize the people for the defence
of new institutions by means of an "almost" that is in itself hypothe–
tical, subordinated as it is to the problem of who has the actual
power. As to the Catholic Church, certainly to invade the convents
would be hateful, but to recognize them as private corporations means
to recognize their right to stay. The problem of the Catholic
Church is for the Italian people a problem of moral life or death.
It cannot be solved through a judicious compromise. At bottom it is
for the Italian peasant himself to dismiss the priest. This requires
education, social conscience and social work. But it is the problem of
the Italians, and we have no reason to discuss it with bishops and
popes, nor, for that matter, with American Catholics and Anglo-Catho–
lics.
One thing we may be sure of: for the people of Europe there are
no more lesser evils or half-goods.
MARIO D'ANDREA
