From the article of 'Petrel'
No.666 / February 15, 1998
Please
send us your opinion and the impression about this article without reservation.
Experience of Olive Tree in Italy
Did it "Reform" the politics?
After reading 'The regime strategy of "Olive Tree"' by Husao Ato
----------
"Olive Tree" of Italy is paid attention while the New Frontier Party was divided and the Minyuren (The Friends of Poeple) has been formed; The book 'The regime strategy of "Olive Tree"'(by Husao Ato) was published recently. This book tries to read the message to the politics of Japan from the experience of "Olive Tree." Let's examine the meaning of "Olive Tree" depending on this book.
----------
The birth of "Olive Tree" and the Democratic Party of the Left
It was December 1995 that "Olive Tree" was born in Italy. Opposeing the right-wing union that Berlusconi led, 12 centrist-leftist political parties formed a gradual union, that is, a kind of united front aiming at the regime.
Though the election system of Italy in postwar days was the proportional representation, the small constituency system was introduced by the referendum in April, '93 in the separation of the small parties and happening in succession of graft. That is, it became that the representatives are elected from the small constituency system by 75% and from the proportional representation by 25%, so it was changed to a election system like the small constituency and proportion representation concomitance system of Japan (300 in the small constituency, 200 in the proportion district).
Two total elections were executed under the new election system. First of all, it became the fight over three poles of the right-wing union led by "Forza Italia" (Holding out Italy) of Berlusconi and the leftist union led by the Democratic Party of the Left (it changed the name from the Communist Party in '91) and the centrist in the total election in March, '94, and the right wing won.
The defeated leftist led by the Democratic Party of the Left groped for the tie-up with the centrist political party aiming at the total election of '96 and organized a centrist-leftist union with Prodi as the prime minister candidate; This is the "Olive tree."
It is said that this "Olive tree" was originally the one concentrating the centrist political parties again according to the author. The symbol mark of the Democratic Party of the Left was Oak Tree, and the situation at that time was such as many small "clump" (small political party) was scattering under the shadow of Oak Tree. Then, it became to set up "Olive Tree" as another tree.
"That is, they planed "Olive Tree" in the image of another pillar supporting the centrist-leftist union as well as "Oak Tree." It was to try to correct the balance by forming the steady centrist group not so that the leftist color was too strong and it became to be refused from the center vote."
Of course, Prodi agreed with such a proposal and talked, "Though there was only one Oak Tree up to now, it is necessary another strong and steady tree to prove that the variety, that is, the difference being able to coexist is abundance. We planted the Olive Tree for that."
Thus, "Olive Tree" was what they organized the centrist power in the state of disruption under the chain prosecution of graft and the pressure deviding to two poles on the small constituency system, that is, the remaining power such as Catholicism power, the Socialist Party, and the Republican Party and the citizens faction power newly formed, in one united power and the leftist such as the Democratic Party of the Left stuck to it.
Prodi who became the prime minister candidate was an economist and the president of the Industry Revival Public Corporation, the maximum public enterprise group in Italy, and was politically a character near the Christianity Democratic Party. In fact, they say that he had gone immediately before receiving the nomination from the president as a prime minister of cross-party cabinet in April '93 and there was an invitation such as the party leader of the People's Party, the Catholicism centrist party, too.
In short, he was a bourgeois character thoroughly. And, the election struggle also became the one that pushed centrist out forward. The author is describing as follows.
"By the way, the Democratic Party of the Left dared to suppress the image of the party and carried out the campaign centering the union. I was impressed that the most of the activist of the Democratic Party of the Left did not wave the flag of 'Oak Tree' but 'Olive Tree' even in the close meeting in Rome at the final day of the campaign, which I saw directly."
Of course, the author values the moderate correspondence of the Democratic Party of the Left, and he warns that the extreme self-assertiveness of the leftist connects to the loss of the centrist vote under the small constituency system.
For the author, the political party that does not try to get powers cannot be said "Independent political party." And, the leftist should keep from the action that wakes up the revolt of the centrist power at any cost to get powers.
Though "Olive Tree" is advertised as if it is something a new try, it is an ordinary union politics historically. Though there is the experiences that scholar teachers such as Minobe and Kuroda were carried out as the head of reformist municipality in Japan, the deception of such politics and the essence of "Olive Tree" is not different. And it is also the same that the left took pains to hide themselves secretly after the scholar teacher's "Popularity" that had not become dirt and to thin the league color.
Do they defend also "Fair and Justice" under valuing market?
Well, the election outline of "Olive tree" was about following.
(1)Serious efforts to secure participating of Italy in the European Union
(2)The market economy as the core of present age economy
(3)The school as the "foundation of all wealths"
(4)The new nation (The government centering the prime minister; The reorganization of the Senate to the state representative assembly, The unicameral assembly only of the House of Representatives; The complete small constituency and two time vote system of French type)
(5) "The light nation, the nation of rule type" made by not muscle but brain, etc.
There is no basic difference to the right-wing union in the point to hoist participation in the EU integration and valueing of the market economy and to approve Italian capitalism completely. Though it was said as the centrist-leftist union, it was finished up by a complete, bourgeois reformism in fact.
The difference to the right wing is that they do not deny the welfare nation and show a certain repulsion to new liberalism. For instance, Prodi describes as follows.
"A wrong myth that it is necessary for an economic system to pay the price of increase of inequality to raise efficiency without interruption wanders Italy and Europe. However, I want to say eagerly that just the opposite of that is true. In the democratic society, fair is also a condition for the economical efficiency. Inequality is harmful for growth."
However, the accomplishment of the market economy and the valuing of efficiency are just the reinforcement of exploitation to the workers in this capitalism society. We cannot think that it can bring the results other than the expansion of inequality. He only scatters the fantasy as if we can achieve "Fair and Equality" even under capital system.
Moreover, he thinks that he will achieve such "Value of welfare" under "Light nation." He criticizes "Big government" and declares privatization of the public management enterprise and "Setting of a competing rule." In this sense, it is the same as new conservatism that advocates valuing market and deregulation; And, it might be good to do what "Fair and Equality" you can achieve.
The author also says, the difference between the right wing and the leftist becomes "Very narrow range." That is, "It becomes a selection in such a very narrow range as managing to clear an economical condition for the EU integration with maintaining the one like welfare nation in the maximum."
And, there is a meaning also in the powers of the leftist in its own way if we consider the circumstances that they can not avoid the financial compression aiming at the EU integration. That is, he explains, "The leftist making the labor union the support base might rather more easily get the concession on the assumption of mutual trust in a sense."
It is for following reason. In case of Berlusconi regime, the general strike of several hundred thousand persons occurred in the autumn of '94 and the regime base was shaken because he tried to reduce welfare and the like openly, but the leftist regime would be able to manage to advance the reducuction of annual expenditure easier with getting the consent of labor union. (In short, it is for the reason that it is easer to compel victim to the workers.)
It might be clear that the workers cannot hold any expectation in such a regime.
Beautification of small constituency system and expectation for the consevative union.
Thus, the one that the author assumed to be a message to the politics of Japan through the experience of "Olive Tree" is an ideal way of the political party corresponding to the small constituency system. He presents the candid advice that the movement of the Japanese political party is still on the medium constituency system and not adjusting to the new rule of "Democracy Game" though the system becomes the one "enable regime alternation" by the introduction of small constituency system.
Certainly, if we see the current state of Japanese political party, there was ugly one in the meeting and parting between the political parties including the fact that Jishasa (LDP-SDP-Sakigake) union was organized although insisting "anti-LDP" during the election campaign. The political parties (or rather than the individual members of Assembly) act by thinking only about the reelection in the following election and participate in powers by conference, and is presenting the situation as if the commitment to the voter is invalid under the small constituency and proportional representation concomitance system.
However, even if corresponding to the small constituency system is not avoidable for party politics (And, even if "Dramatic regime alternation" is easy because the small constituency system is an election system that advantageously acts on the first party), one-sidedly emphasizing it will become a mistake of bourgeois parliamentarism.
The author excessively evaluates the small constituency system and is making it absolute one in fact. For instance, though he explains the meaning of the small constituency system as follows, might it not be the fantasy to the bourgeois democracy, which is "inside out" of the Communist Party who made the present mediem constituency system absolute one at the introduction of the small constituency system and clamored against "Japanese Fascism?"
"The characteristic of the election of small constituency system is the possibility of a dramatic regime alternation because the majority sect = the regime is settled directly by the result of the vote of the voter, and it is a charm. The regime is not formed by the opaque bargaining between the political parties after election like the proportional representation and the medium constituency system, but the regime selection right of voter is exercised directly."
It is fact that the political partis of Japan have rotted from the basis and the regime have been made by "unfair" and collusive dealings between the political parties after election. However, can we beautify the small constituency system as it is an election system superior to the medium constituency system and "the voter can exercise the regime selection right directly" by that?
For instance, the one party rule of the Liberal-Democratic Party collapsed under the total election of '93, that is, under not the small constituency system but the medium constituency systems in Japan though the author says whether the regime alternation was impossible under the medium constituency.
And, the author who makes "Regime alternation" absolute one says even till that it is better the conservative union regime would be formed once under the situation the unions to the two majority powers do not advance like Italy.
"I think that it is better the regime of the conservative union would be formed once in Japan because the liberal reformation power on the side of conservatives is advanced by one step and they have initiated this election system reformation in fact. .... I think that another liberal reformation power will be formed only in such shape in Japan."
It is an expectation for the conservative union regime of Ozawa and Kajiyama virtually. For the author, it is a problem taking priority over all that two majority powers being able to bear the regime alternation appear, and what kind of political party will sit down at the seat of the regime is made to be the problem of second importance.
However, such an insistence might be an extremely irresponsible and dangerous insistence. What he says is to make a system of "Democracy with the regime alternation" whatever sysytem it is after all, and it is nothing but to recommend unprincipled and inconstant politically. I wonder whether the author really has the qualification criticize the inconstancy of the political party in Japan.
Though the message from "Olive Tree" is to recommend the attempt of reorganization and union of the political party suitable for the small constituency and proportional representative concomitance system, it is still necessary to ask the political content. And, the realities of "Olive Tree" is only a centrist and bourgeois union regime, and is only a regime to compel the victim to the workers by using the name of leftist regime. (It is only an ordinary one that we have experienced historically as a variety of union regime.)
The worker cannot have any fantasy in such "Olive Tree."
(Akihito Yamada)