This paper corroborates the existing theories about the conduct of the INI (National Institute of Industry) during the autarchic period, particularly those of Martín Aceña and Comín (1991) compared to the new interpretations of Antonio Gómez Mendoza (2000a). Essentially, it demonstrates that 1) the INI was founded in 1941; 2) private initiative did not respond to the incentives of industrial policy between 1939 and 1941 and this fact was used as justification for the creation of the INI; 3) the INI of Suanzes bailed out some private companies and its interests were not always imposed on them; 4) the INI reduced in practice its autarchic and authoritarian principles in the 1950s; 5) the INI contributed to maintaining the autarchic model; 6) Suanzes performed no miracles; 7) nor was Suanzes a myth; and finally, 8) no Spanish government would have reduced the financing of INI companies in order to aid private companies during the autarchy. The only alternative to an autarchic INI would have been a larger institute and more nationalizations, as comparative history shows.

Key words: National Institute of Industry, autarchy.
JEL classification: N0, N44.