The law he passed in 1923 was the Acerbo Law, which along with the 1924 Election also supports the source. They both imply that Mussolini wanted to retain power as they both ensured he got a fascist majority in the 1924 elections. They also suggest that he didn’t know what method to employ as he didn’t need both of them, one would have been sufficient. The Acerbo Law said that if he got 25% of the votes he could have 2/3rds of the seats in the Chamber of Deputies. In the Election Mussolini used intimidation and violence on the voters, to make them vote for the fascists. This proves that he was unsure about what the right course of action was when trying to tackle the other political parties.
F.L. Carsten wrote this source in 1967, which makes it more likely to be accurate because at this time none of the sources about Mussolini would have censored in anyway, regardless of where they were writing. Also at this time he would have been able to access many primary and a few secondary sources about Mussolini and his consolidation of power. The author also specialises in European Fascism making him quite skilled at analysing sources to do with Mussolini and Italian Fascism. This source was taken from his book ‘The Rise of Fascism’ and it is probably aimed at students studying Fascism and should therefore be unbiased and objective. All this suggests that this interpretation is valid.
However there are also many events that disagree with the interpretation, for example the fact that Mussolini didn’t get rid of the King and the Pope. This suggests that he didn’t want to retain complete power. The King and the Pope were far too influential and popular within the Italian public for Mussolini to conceivably get rid of them. So instead of trying to get rid of them he tried to get them on his side, for example when he allowed religion to be taught in schools in 1922. This suggests that he was aware that he couldn’t have complete power in Italy.
The Murder of Matteotti in 1924 showed that Mussolini knew what he wanted to do with his political opponents. Matteotti was leader of the PSI (socialist party) and was abducted by members of the squadristri and then was stabbed repeatedly in the chest. Mussolini admitted responsibility for the killing, thus proving that Mussolini did know what he wanted to do with regards to other political parties.
The Press Law of 1925 suggests he knew what he was doing with regards to the press. Although he didn’t pass it until 1925, it shows that he had a plan in mind and that he wasn’t going to censor the press until it was really needed. After the Matteotti Crisis Mussolini was being slated a lot and support for him dropped rapidly, therefore passing the Press Law in 1925 seemed to be logical move. He didn’t pass it before because he was trying to gain the trust of the country, showing that he wasn’t scared of what other parties were saying about him was one way of doing this. The Press Law implies that he had a plan that he put into action when and if it was needed.
Lastly Legge Fascitissime showed that he knew what he had to do in order to get rid of other political parties, it also showed that he knew what he was doing with the press and parliament. Legge Fascitissime banned all other political parties, strengthened control over press and made him head of government. This proves that he had all three aspects under control, and that he wanted to and did retain power in Italy.
This source is from the book, ‘The Rise of Fascism’ which suggests it looks at the rise of fascism all over the world and at any time in history, it may therefore lack a depth of research and knowledge on Mussolini’s consolidation of power. Because it was written in 1967 there would be a limited number of secondary, objective sources available for him to analyse therefore giving a more narrow view on Mussolini’s consolidation of power. He lastly specialised in European fascism again limiting the amount of specialised knowledge he would have on Italian Fascism and more specifically Mussolini’s consolidation of power. All of this leads us to believe that the interpretation isn’t very valid.
In conclusion I think that although there are many arguments both agreeing and disagreeing with the interpretation, ultimately, F.L. Carsten’s interpretation that, Mussolini wanted to retain power is valid, however the interpretation that he was unsure of the methods to employ towards other political parties and their leaders, towards the press, and towards parliament is invalid. Because although there was some evidence that he was unsure of what to do e.g. The Acerbo Law and the 1924 Election, these were isolated incidents at the beginning of his time in power, there were also far more events proving that he did have a plan behind his actions, he just needed the right trigger to put them into action e.g. Passing the Press Law in 1925 and Legge Fascitissime.
