A Bias for Bias? The Impact of “Authoritarian” Politics as Shown by Italian International Trade Debate Experience, 1913–1942

Abstract

Starting from Gino Arias’s dictum on the uselessness of international trade theory for fascism, this contribution aims to demonstrate two main points. First, the free trade attitude displayed by fascism immediately before and after the “March on Rome” clashed with its nationalist origins. The nationalist movement had supported a strong protectionist policy starting from a rejection of the main principles of marginalist theory. This explains why some issues raised by Pareto and Barone which could have been used as arguments in favor of protectionism were neglected. In turn, this impasse played a major role in the rejection of Mihail Manoilescu’s theory in the thirties. The second point concerns the possibility of some – at least relatively – free theoretical debate on international trade theory and policy. When the regime set itself a clear objective, like the reduction of trade to begin with, and then autarky, the scope for free discussion narrowed to the point of eventually closing. In this context, refusing to support the regime’s choices in economic policy meant resigning oneself to becoming an outcast. A situation offering one more tessera in the complex mosaic of relations between science and politics in authoritarian regimes.

Citation

Bientinesi, F. (2022), "A Bias for Bias? The Impact of “Authoritarian” Politics as Shown by Italian International Trade Debate Experience, 1913–1942", Fiorito, L., Scheall, S. and Suprinyak, C.E. (Ed.) Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology: Including a Symposium on the Work of William J. Baumol: Heterodox Inspirations and Neoclassical Models (Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, Vol. 40B), Emerald Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 193-217. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0743-41542022000040B013