Every 25 April, in Italy, a debate reopens that goes beyond mere historical commemoration. The anniversary of this date, which marks the liberation from the fascist regime during the Second World War, lends itself to profound reflections and an exploration of its contemporary meaning.
April 25, 1945 is a fundamental chapter in Italian history, a moment in which partisan resistance and Allied intervention ushered in the end of a dark era. The fall of fascism brought with it the promise of a free, democratic and inclusive society. This day is therefore celebrated to honor those who fought for freedom and human dignity.
However, in more recent years, the meaning of April 25 has been the subject of debate. Some see this date as a symbol of national unity and commitment to democratic values, while others raise doubts about its relevance and relevance in the contemporary context.
The debate also extends to the question of historical memory. There are those who argue that April 25 should be remembered primarily as Liberation Day, with a focus on resistance to totalitarianism and the construction of a more just society. Others, however, underline the importance of connecting this date to the fight against the injustices and violations of human rights still present in today’s society. Furthermore, the proximity of April 25 to May Day, the traditional Labor Day, adds another dimension to the debate. Some argue that we should focus more on the social and economic issues that still plague the country, rather than just celebrating historic events.
Gianni Oliva, journalist, teacher (he is currently a professor of History of military institutions), with a political past also with institutional positions, from the PCI to the PDS, to the PD, addresses the burning issue of fascism and anti-fascism in his latest book, 45 million anti-fascists. The about-face of a nation that has not actedyou with the Ventennium. A volume that is anything but nostalgic, but which thoroughly analyzes a story that we are telling ourselves, perhaps lying to ourselves. “Studying and knowing history is the only way to look forward. Today, after many years, we should have built a vision that we can all identify with, but this is not yet the case” explains Oliva during an in-depth analysis broadcast on Rai Tre.
In the book we start by talking about that lost war which, however, we prefer to pretend to have won, in order to achieve a failed purge, since eliminating a (fascist) ruling class required the availability of an alternative, an impossible undertaking given that practically everyone had been involved in fascism. Oliva spares no one in his analysis which looks at and casts shadows and perplexities on the current vision of fascism and anti-fascism. From Gaetano Azzariti – a case that is defined as the tip of the iceberg of a widespread phenomenon – Oliva tells the story of anti-fascism, highlighting the contradictions of an Italy which, even with the change of government in Badoglio, continues the policy of ” double track”: announcing severity in the purge but applying it minimally in practice, preserving the old apparatus.
Rewriting history, or rather, shaping it to one’s liking, however, is a “burden that is transmitted to the present day, reflecting on political disputes” and which leads to a sense of weakness when it comes to common belonging. In the volume Oliva analyzes how these weaknesses derive mainly from the “years of consensus” to the fascist regime, supported by the collaboration of the ruling class. The figures of the Special Tribunal for the Defense of the State document the wide acceptance of fascism and the limited clandestine resistance. The armistice of 8 September saw a defeated Italy that did not react and took refuge in waiting for the Anglo-American liberators. Even the data on participation in the Resistance and the Social Republic indicate that Italy was mainly made up of minorities, while the majority opted for abstention, thus exempting themselves from having to deal with the past. And this leads to a need to reconsider and share collective memory to free ourselves from the manipulations of the present. Speaking of the Resistance, Oliva defines it as a decisive page in Italian history, but highlights its minority nature, underlining that the majority of Italians remained spectators. This inaction, he claims, influenced the course of politics of the period. Among the few exceptions, Oliva recalls Sandro Pertini’s gesture during the ceremonies for the Piazza Fontana massacre, highlighting his decisive attitude against the fascist past. This episode, together with others, underlines the importance of historical memory and honest management of the past for the construction of the present.
With a cold but incisive and penetrating analysis, Gianni Oliva offers a lucid look at Italy’s past and the echoes that still reverberate in the present. It is above all the profound reflection on the nature of defeat in war, which highlights the need to confront historical events without excuses. The focus quickly shifts to identifying the culprits of the past, beyond Mussolini and the king. Oliva sheds light on the role of the Salò soldiers, underlining the young age and indoctrination of many of them, but also the responsibility of the adults involved in the regime.
Currently, Oliva observes that the Italian political debate continues to be influenced by the divisions of the past, highlighting a lack of discussion on historical facts and a persistent “civil war in words”. This, he suggests, may be why the country remains divided, without a definitive victory. “Germany and the Germans have come to terms with the past by admitting that they lost that war” he underlines “It is only in this way that they have managed to move forward”. In Italy, however, something still seems to be at a standstill. Crystallized into a “lie”. Politically aligned on the left, Gianni Oliva does not hold back even when he deals with the current debate and the separation between anti-fascists and fascists. “I sided with the Democratic Party” he explains “But this does not mean that I shared the Dem’s choice to base the entire electoral campaign on anti-fascism”. Why, today, can we still talk about anti-fascists? Maybe not. “I’m not anti-fascist, I’m a democrat. My father could have called himself anti-fascist” he explains “Every democrat is anti-fascist, but as such and light years away from that experience I have doubts that all those who declare themselves anti-fascists today are really democrats”. For Oliva “We are a country that is still divided over words. On facts, however, it has made few calculations. Probably for this reason it remains divided and continues a civil war in words after the real one, the bloody one, is over. Even without victory” .
Precious ideas that lead us to reflect on the challenges of the present in light of the past, inviting greater historical awareness and a commitment to an authentic and inclusive democracy on 25 April which continues to represent an important moment to remember the past, confront the challenges of the present and renew our commitment to building a better future thanks to thoughtful reflections and civic sense.
