Tangentopoli

Tangentopoli (Italian for bribeville) was the name used to indicate the corruption-based system that ruled Italy until the Mani pulite investigation delivered it a deadly blow in 1992.

Whether things have really changed since then, or whether only the names of those involved have, is a matter of debate.

Popular Distrust of Politics

As a general attitude, but especially in the 80s and early 90s, Italians are often sceptical of their own politicians. A common attitude throughout the country is considering the state inefficient, corruption widespread, success based most of the times on personal acquaitances rather than merit. While these claims are quite general, and therefore inherently not always true, they were probably a good approximation of the real picture.

Rich Friars and poor monasteries

It was often observed that, while political parties (especially government members) were in a perennial state of need of money to organize their activities, many politicians were leading lifestyles well beyond what they could have afforded. The powerful secretary of the Italian Socialist Party, Bettino Craxi, is often taken as a typical example, since he used to live permanently in an expensive hotel in Rome's centre, and owned a villa in Hammamet, Tunisia. Few pictures exist of the villa, and reports range from it being described as a castle with a 18-hole golf course to a relatively modest seaside villa. In any case, this lifestyle should have been beyond his means.

Another member of the Italian Socialist Party, Rino Formica, made once a statement that remained proverbial: The friars are rich, but the monastery is poor.

Recommendations

It was also obvious that careers in state conglomerates, especially the public television RAI, were likely to be influenced more by personal acquaitances than by competence. A popular saying was similar to: "It does not matter what you know, it matters whom you know". Again, one of the most blatant cases was Bettino Craxi's mistress, Sandra Milo, making an impressive career in state television during the 80s.

Lottizzazione

The term lottizzazione, meaning the way a terrain is divided up in minor parts or lotti, came to indicate the procedure of awarding guidance of important state conglomerates as IRI, ENEL or ENI to political figures, or at least managers with a clear political orientation. This usually trickled down to lower levels, creating power centres depending on political parties that controlled a significant part of the production system.

The available seats were usually awarded so that government parties (and, in some occasions, opposition parties like the Italian Communist Party) would get a share of power corresponding to their perceived influence in the government. Most people suspected that this "market" could hide less-than-clear interest, and be a way to illegally accumulate capital by means of corruption and mismanagement. Sadly, the investigations of the early 90s proved this suspects mostly true.

The Cencelli Manual

When forming a government, a set of rules, often dubbed Manuale Cencelli from the name of a politician particularly good at this, used to be applied. Governing parties received ministries and charges (collectively dubbed as seats) according to their electoral weight. Some seats were less important than others (the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was more important than the Ministry of the Environment), and some were permanently linked to a party, like the Ministry of Internal Affairs, always appointed to a member of the Democrazia Cristiana from 1948 to 1994. Furthermore, minor parties, like the Italian Socialdemocratic Party, the Italian Liberal Party and the Italian Republican Party, could often leverage their decisive contribute to reach parliamentary majority, necessary to obtain a confidence vote, in order to be over-represented in terms of distributed seats.

This system resulted in a long series of incompetent ministers in many areas, who received their "seat" only because the Cencelli calculated there was a gap to fill for a certain party. Among the least pleasantly remembered figures, Paolo Cirino Pomicino, Minister of Balance, who lacked economic competence and was later sentenced on corruption charges; Francesco De Lorenzo, that was later found to be one of the most corrupt ministers of Public Health ever to take charge; and Giovanni Prandini, for similar reasons immediately dubbed Prendini (from the Italian prendere, "to take").

A Stable Instability

Looking at the list of Italian prime ministers since the end of the War, it is evident that most governments were short-lived, lasting 11 months on average. The shortest of them lasted just three days.

All the Italian parties had large memberships (the Communists more than two million until 1956, the Christian Democrats almost the same by the early 1970s), recruited from organizations such as Catholic Action, cooperatives, and trade unions. These organizations often provided tangible benefits—jobs, disability pensions, and cheap holidays—to their members. Most parties except the Communists were groupings of organized “factions,” each with its own leaders, deputies, regional or ideological base,sources of finance, and journals. Within each party, the factions contended for power and for control of wealthy firms and agencies in the public sector in order to secure financial backing and jobs for supporters. This was the essential reason why governments between 1945–94 were short-lived: governments had to be reshuffled regularly in order to allow different faction leaders to obtain posts. Government instability was encouraged by secret voting in Parliament, which enabled deputies from dissatisfied factions within the coalition parties to bring down governments without attracting blame. However, instability was often more apparent than real—the key government posts were often held semipermanently by top politicians—and it was mitigated by the secretaries of the leading parties, whose role it was to negotiate acceptable deals among faction leaders. Indeed, to be a party secretary was sometimes more significant than to be prime minister, since the latter had no direct mandate from the electorate and was often not even the most prominent member of a party.

This is often cited as a sign of Italian political instability, but in fact throughout this period the parliamentary majority remained much the same, with the Democrazia Cristiana being the largest party, and the only change worth noting being the entrance of the Socialists in the government during the 60s. The system was known as "imperfect bipolarism", as it was impossible for the only major opposition party, the Communists, to gain control of a NATO country. This in contrast with most European democracies, as France, Germany and the United Kingdom, where left-wing and right-wing alternated to power.

Nominally, Italy was ruled by a centre, or centre-left coalition, but this denomination ignores that the main opposition was in fact on the left of the government; to the right of it, there was only the fascist Movimento Sociale Italiano, guided for a long time by World-War-II criminal Giorgio Almirante, which was "exiled" from democratic life. In practice, the Democrazia Cristiana was the party collecting most right-wing votes, even though its orientation was initially defined as a centre party looking to the left. The fascist past after the War made also the term "right-wing" too susceptible of associations with fascism, and was therefore avoided.

Much of the goverment changes were actually adjustments, often based on the Cencelli manual, made after some events had changed the political scenario: typically, a large local election might indicate that some parties or some individual figures had increased their power, and could therefore require more government seats; this would however reduce someone else's share, and a delicate balance had to be struck. Negotiations for the formation of a new cabinet could take months, and given the short duration of these cabinets talks for the formation of the next one could sometimes be their main activity.

However, the uninterrupted presence in power of many powerful and less powerful politicians undoubtedly contributed to the rise of a political class that did not have much consideration of the popular opinion, as they were confident they would not vote for the Communists anyway. The feeling of invulnerability and impunity was broken in 1992, with the Mani Pulite investigation began. It is curious it happened one year after the collapse of the Soviet Union, possibly when the citizens did not consider it necessary anymore to have some politicians in charge only on the grounds they were anti-communists.it:Tangentopoli