The Battle for Grain Flashcards
Describe the state of agriculture under the regime?
1925-35 was a period of crisis for Italian agriculture. There was a decline in the rural standard of living, and the importance of agriculture declined in relation to industry
This was not what the regime wanted
During its early years, the regime promoted urbanisation and modernisation, but from the mid 1920s, it placed a huge emphasis on agriculture and the importance of traditional rural values
Italian agriculture, especially in the south, was backward and inefficient
M’s response to solving agricultural problems was contradictory. On the one hand, the regime constantly stressed the need for modernisation, while on the other, it also heavily promoted its policy of ruralisation, idealising the old peasant values and encouraging people to return from the cities back to the countryside, with their propaganda slogan being ‘empty the cities’
The most dramatic expression of the policy of ruralism was the ‘Battle for Grain’…
Describe the motivations behind the battle
M announced the ‘Battaglia del Grano’ in July 1925, promising to ‘liberate Italy from the slavery of foreign bread’
There was a strong emphasis on self-sufficiency and making Italy less dependent on imports and therefore improving the balance of payments (Pollard says that improving the balance of payments was the biggest motivator for M)
Propaganda suggested that the Battle would show the world that Italy was a major power, capable of dynamic expansion
There was an underlying assumption that Italy’s population would be growing soon, and that more food would therefore need to be produced
Grain accounted for half of Italy’s imports
Propaganda opportunity for M – pictures of him helping bring in the harvest presented him as a man of the people
Perhaps the most important motivation was to ensure an adequate food supply in case of war
Promote fascist power and national self-sufficiency
Wanted to increase his own prestige and personal power and prepare Italy for war, it was not an attempt to solve the underlying problems of Italian agriculture
Mussolini saw reliance on imports as a grave weakness in case of war, as imports could be cut off and Italy would face starvation
How did the regime achieve their aims here?
Ambitious targets were set for wheat and cereal production. The regime introduced tariff duties to encourage this
Generous government grants were given to farmers so they could invest in machinery and fertilisers
The government promises to bring in cultivation land that had previously been neglected because it was uneconomic to farm
Propaganda
Free advice was made available on the latest, efficient farming techniques
The state fixed the price of grain to guarantee farmers a high price
M ensured that press photographers were on hand to picture him helping out with the harvest
List the successes of this policy
The price of Italian wheat rose higher that the price on world markets
Wheat production increased by more than 50% due to the Battle
Cereal output increased enormously, doubling between 1922-39
Large scale farms on the Po Valley in the north did particularly well because they were able to maximise mechanised farming techniques and fertilisers. While this seems beneficial, we could make the argument that the benefits were unfairly distributed between the north and south
The success in the north boosted the industrial firms producing the agricultural machinery and the chemical industries producing the fertilisers
The pre-war grain production was at an average of 49 million quintals, by 1932 this had risen to 75 million quintals
There were equal amounts of land under cultivation in 1932 and 1914, which shows that it must be fascist productivity that explains the increase
Between 1925-38 grain production virtually doubled from 4.5 million tonnes to 8.2 million tonnes
Import of wheat fell by 75% between 1925-35
Italy became almost self-sufficient in cereals by 1940
The average harvest rose from 5.5 million tonnes in the early 1920s to 7 million tonnes 10 years later
The Battle appeared to be a resounding success and M took the credit
M was presented as not only the genius who devised the scheme, but also as a true leader of the people who was willing to get his hands dirty in the fields
List the failures of this policy
Benefits unfairly distributed between the north and south
Valuable export crops such as olives, fruits and vegetables were neglected
Decline in livestock; after the first two years of the Battle, Italy’s livestock had fallen by 500,000
Meat and egg production fell, increasing their price and lowering the standard of living
High import duties and subsidies allowed inefficient farms to survive
Little to no agricultural modernisation in the south
Despite the big increases in grain production, Italy was still dependent on foreign imports, importing for than 500 million tonnes in 1933
Encouraged farmers to cultivate land that was not suitable for grain and undergo intensive farming, which had damaging long-term effects on the soil
Led to an increase in the price of staple foods like bread and pasta
Italy didn’t manage to become self-sufficient in fertlisers. This meant that cereal production fell during the war, as Italy could no longer import fertilisers
Increased imports and meat and eggs
Much of the land in central and southern Italy that had been turned over to wheat was unsuitable for such a crop. The soil condition and hotter, drier climate were more suited to the growth of citrus fruits or wine production, and so these traditional agricultural exports also declined as a result
What did Mack Smith say about the success of this policy?
Success in the Battle was yet another illusionary propaganda victory, won at the expense of the economy in general and consumers in particular’
