Recent news presents several facts worth reflecting on. Though diverse in origin, they all point to the same principle of political wisdom: those seeking victory for a cause should generally favor struggle over concessions.
* * *
Readers are undoubtedly aware that the Italian Christian Democratic Party (CDP) emerged after World War II as the primary instrument for defending Italy against the rise of anticlericalism and Marxism. Most importantly, the Catholic electorate expected it to protect the country from the slippery slope toward communism, defend the Lateran Pacts, essential for normal relations with the Holy See, and prevent the legalization of divorce.
The CDP had all the essential tools to achieve such high goals: almost all Catholic opinion leaders’ support, financial resources, and a powerful propaganda machine.
However, from the start, the CDP leadership allowed itself to be guided by a disastrous tactical principle: to win by avoiding ideological conflict with its opponent and trying to appease it through concessions. This principle led to the “apertura a sinistra” (opening to the left), which can be summed up in the sadly famous motto: “Give in a little, so as not to lose everything.”
Thus, the CDP initially allied with non-Marxist socialists to oppose all kinds of Marxists. Then, eager to expand the “apertura,” it widened its alliance to include Giuseppe Saragat’s Marxists, whom the CDP leadership considered more “moderate” than Pietro Nenni’s. Later, a “thaw” started with Nenni’s supporters.
Each expansion of the “apertura” was linked to successive declines in the anticommunist sentiment among various CDP sectors, which provided communism with new advantages.
Things continued like this until they reached the current extreme. In the Italian Parliament, a bill to establish divorce is in an advanced discussion stage. Passing this measure, strongly opposed to Catholic sentiment, will violate the Lateran Treaty, which upholds the indissolubility of marriage. Everything in this emergency should prompt the CDP to take heroic resistance. However, the party leadership decided to leave the issue open among its congressmen to avoid upsetting its alliance with the left!
Thus, by giving in more and more, the CDP is losing more and more. Even worse, it is losing cheerfully.
* * *
This desire for concessions to the left is typical of CDP’s mindset. Our readers will surely remember the excitement with which the Brazilian CDP—also founded to “fight communism”—cooperated with former President João Goulart. Chilean CDP members, no less passionate about “giving in to avoid losing,” have just made another strongly leftist decision: to ask for the expropriation of the large copper mines owned by Anaconda. Socialists and communists can only praise this move as fully in line with Marxism.
These are the consequences of a “give in to avoid losing” mindset. Surprisingly, many people still fail to see this fundamental truth: if you occasionally give an insatiable enemy a piece of cake to keep him quiet, there will come a time when the entire cake ends up in your enemy’s stomach.
* * *
Many people immediately thought of retreats and concessions during the May 1968 riots in France.
However, according to São Paulo newspapers, the most recent elections in that country revealed the counterproductive effects of those highly theatrical disturbances. One of the targets the Maoist Marxists consistently focused on during the dark days of May was the Communist Party, whose symbolic figurehead is Jacques Duclos. The young insurgents sharply criticized the CP’s bureaucratic nature, its subservience to Moscow, and Duclos’s “conservatism.” The latest election results showed that the CP had nearly fully absorbed the leftist area. Meanwhile, Michel Rocard, the presidential candidate supported by university unrest supporters, received only 3.61% of the vote. Therefore, the university unrest did not produce significant results within the leftist camp.
At the same time, political observers noted that the combined vote for Georges Pompidou and Alain Poher reached 67.78% of the electorate, representing a strong anticommunist majority. In other words, the university unrest did not shift anyone from the right or center to the left. Failure on the left, failure outside the left, failure everywhere. This is the result of riots that— in the heat of the moment and propaganda—seemed capable of consuming France.
In light of this, those who suggested major concessions in May to avoid a complete loss clearly showed a lack of political clarity.
* * *
Some friends have asked me if the TFP should soften its doctrinal stance. This could help reduce the various hostilities the group has faced while still gaining valuable and growing support.
To me, a doctrinal softening has always seemed nonsense, like agreeing that 2 plus 2 equals 4.5 to make peace with a stubborn person who has an aversion to the number 4 and therefore claims that the total is 5.
Furthermore, unlike CDP members, the TFP views rising antagonisms as a sign of success. For this reason (among others), the TFP refuses to adopt “giving in a little so as not to lose it all” as the only rule of its strategy. To support our argument about the political importance of antipathy, it’s worth recalling a French proverb Jacques Duclos quoted. When someone asked him why the French Communist Party faced so much hostility, Duclos replied: “Only trees that bear fruit are stoned.”
* * *
In a notable change from its earlier position, Soviet Russia has decided to halt all media attacks against Titoism and offer Yugoslavia favorable trade terms.
Some time ago, all naive minds thought it was very clever to support Tito’s brand of communism in every way to “detach” it from Moscow. Belgrade repeated economic advantages granted by the West in yet another form of “giving a little in so as not to lose all.”
Now we can see how changeable Soviet “hostility” toward Titoism was and how much we should distrust rifts between communists, such as the one that seems to exist between Belgrade and Moscow.
“Similis simili gaudet,” says St. Thomas: those who are alike rejoice with one another. Because of this, their rifts cannot be very deep.
In short, let’s review the main lesson from these developments: you don’t win the game by giving your opponent the cake in slices.
