Ignazio Silone
La Scuola Dei Dittatori

Now, I understand that reading political treatises is neither relaxing nor light, and even though they are fundamental for each of our personal growth, I can understand why they are not popular; I even admit that I am not a great user of them myself. But "The School of Dictators" (1938) must be read. It is not a political treatise in the strict sense, but a dialogue concerning politics (and, more specifically, the totalitarian state) between three characters: Mr. Double U, an "aspiring dictator" from the United States, Professor Pickup, his ideological advisor, and Tommaso called "the Cynic," an Italian exile in Switzerland because he opposed the fascist regime (an obvious alter ego of Silone himself). The framework story is quickly told: not having as much dictatorship experience as Europeans, Mr. Double U travels to Europe with his advisor to learn the difficult art of totalitarian government. They meet the author, who directs them to Tommaso the Cynic, based on the principle that "the hidden truth in every political system is preferably found among the opposition".

The dialogue, structurally reminiscent of Platonic ones due to the predominance of one character (Tommaso) over the others with traits that seem more like monologues or personal reflections, is divided by themes, addressing particular aspects considered one at a time. The topic of totalitarianism is analyzed in all its components, from politics to social aspects, obviously passing through economic ones; to get a clearer idea, here are some of the chapter titles from the book: "On traditional political art and its deficiencies in the era of mass civilization" (chap. II), "On the uselessness of programs and the peril of discussions and the modern technique for influencing the masses" (chap. VIII), "On plebiscitary consensus, state-party interpenetration, and the intensive breeding of scapegoats" (chap. XIV). As you might have already noticed from the titles, there is a lot of Machiavelli in this book. The purpose is apparently the same as "The Prince", that is, to give advice for a good head of state, but it is obvious that Ignazio Silone's real aim is to analyze, criticize, and attack the fascist dictatorship primarily, although the work constantly references Hitler, Lenin, and Stalin as well. Even though criticism of fascism is inevitable, Silone mainly criticizes dictatorship itself, regardless of its political color. And he does so with class, indirectly, dispensing advice on how to implement it.

But did you notice the year in which the book was written? In nineteen thirty-eight, before Italy's defeat in World War II, before the clear failure of fascism. Yet, the text is disarmingly lucid, possible only for someone with profound knowledge of political systems. Just to mention one, in the last chapter, Silone even predicts the cause of fascism's fall: if that isn't objectivity and lucidity!  One can only be amazed by the clarity with which this work is written, by the ease and logic with which the author explains sometimes extremely complex topics. Books like this are much more current than the examples they themselves bring to mind. And no, there is no malicious implicit reference in this sentence; I am merely suggesting that the fact that Nazism, fascism, and communism no longer hold dictatorial power in Europe does not imply that the reflections presented in "The School of Dictators" cannot be adapted to different situations, present or future. It is a book for growth, especially for understanding.