A Biography Re-Examines Mussolini

[Doug Millison]

"This historical debate has acquired new urgency now that ''post-Fascists''
(as yesterday's neo-Fascists call themselves today) are an important part
of Italy's center-right government led by Silvio Berlusconi. The
post-Fascists have argued that there was a good and a bad Fascism. The good
part, in this view, occurred during the early years following Fascism's
rise to power in 1922, when it put an end to partisan political strife and
the threat of left-wing revolution, drained the country's malarial swamps
and made the trains run on time. The bad part essentially began in 1937,
when Mussolini threw in his lot with Hitler."
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/21/books/review/21STILLET.html?pagewanted=1



It's not difficult to see why the "neo-Fascists" would want to emphasize
this point.



"[...] Initially, Fascism's program retained many socialistic elements:
land reform, workers' rights, resolutions to abolish the monarchy and limit
the influence of the Catholic Church. But as Mussolini maneuvered to take
power, he gradually dropped these more radical demands in order to win over
conservative nationalists, monarchists, army officials and big business.
The continual strikes staged by the Socialists and Communists in 1919 and
1920 paved the way for the Fascists. Italy's terrified establishment stood
by quite happily as Mussolini's henchmen burned down Socialist
headquarters, broke up political rallies and killed Socialist leaders.
[...] "



"Quite happily"!

I don't suppose that was anything like the way the US power elite let their
leaders attack unions, socialists, dissenters, culminating in the
Reagan-Bush years that Pynchon describes in Vineland.   Nah, couldn't be.





At 12:46 PM -0400 7/21/02, Paul Mackin wrote:
>If not already mentioned there's a favorable review of the Bosworth book
>in today's New York Times.