-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I wouldn't say he was an incompetent leader - he was pretty much the longest serving fascist leader after all and before WW2 Italy was quite an effective country. Anyone who can put down the Italian Mafia must be one hell of a man.
Italian army was horrible. It couldn't make its way through Greece or Egypt without excessive German assistance. Hardly Mussolini's fault - they did have the manpower to breach enemy but the leadership sucked.
Armnament policies were bad, though, and related to army's poor performance. But I'd say Mussolini's foreign policy was working - he striked at the right moments when nobody was looking. Had he had a better army he would have gone very far.
Italian army was horrible. It couldn't make its way through Greece or Egypt without excessive German assistance. Hardly Mussolini's fault - they did have the manpower to breach enemy but the leadership sucked.
Armnament policies were bad, though, and related to army's poor performance. But I'd say Mussolini's foreign policy was working - he striked at the right moments when nobody was looking. Had he had a better army he would have gone very far.
He didn't seem to succeed on that on Sicily. The Italian state had very limited control over Sicily at the time.
I myself think the Duce should get better effects, many people judged him purely on Italy's performance in WW2, not on how he helped Italy in the 1920's and 30's. Mussolini was in fact a very competent leader and had he made some better decisions could have succeeded in his promise to bring power back to the Italian state. I am not saying however that some of the negative effects should be taken away however, The -10 org I think reflects well as Mussolini wasn't very understanding of the military and would usually set a date to invade a country/perform a military operation without consulting his commanders as to how long it would actually take. I think Mussolini should give a 5% IC bonus as he greater improved the economy and have some of the negative attributes taken away
Yeah, maybe he put down the 'Ndrangheta, and I don't know that he did, but he was only effective at the start. Eventually, his head swelled, and he kind of stop doing anything useful; he just started to put slavish cronies in important positions and send his army on wild goose chases, neglecting to provide said army with the logistics it needed to succeed. If they had had proper weapons, food etc., the huge swarm of Italians which attacked Egypt in '40 would have, well, swarmed the British and taken their objectives, putting the Allies in a rather hairy position.
...Alternatively he just got into bodybuilding and forgot about everything else. Dude was ripped:
That said, I only left him with the org and morale hits, and the +alliance chances, and I've given Italy an event which grants them +30% wartime economy if certain conditions are met, and it must have Mussolini in charge.
...Alternatively he just got into bodybuilding and forgot about everything else. Dude was ripped:
That said, I only left him with the org and morale hits, and the +alliance chances, and I've given Italy an event which grants them +30% wartime economy if certain conditions are met, and it must have Mussolini in charge.
Last edited:
He was incompetent.
You are confusing his ability to stay in power with his (in)ability to correctly judge his country's potential strengths and weaknesses and adjust his foreign policy and military strategy accordingly. It doesn't do to say about the failure that "it was the army's fault". No, it wasn't - it was the fault of those who failed to reform the army and correctly prepare it for a modern war. It's like saying the Iraqi defeat in 1991 was the fault of the Iraqi army and not of Saddam Hussein who foolishly dragged it into the conflict with the West against which it was totally inadequate.
You are confusing his ability to stay in power with his (in)ability to correctly judge his country's potential strengths and weaknesses and adjust his foreign policy and military strategy accordingly. It doesn't do to say about the failure that "it was the army's fault". No, it wasn't - it was the fault of those who failed to reform the army and correctly prepare it for a modern war. It's like saying the Iraqi defeat in 1991 was the fault of the Iraqi army and not of Saddam Hussein who foolishly dragged it into the conflict with the West against which it was totally inadequate.
Last edited:
He was incompetent, indeed. What are his accomplishments? Conquest of Ethiopia, a backwater country with no modern army? His confusing foreign policy, which was shifting between the Allies and the Axis and in the end achieved nothing? Even his infrastructural projects were mostly for propaganda purposes. He brought his country to the war which Italy couldn't win and completely failed at everything. Hitler had many more successes than him.
Well, it might be unfair to judge Mussolini by the outcome of his actions - if Barbarossa and Seeloewe had succeeded, we might be lauding him as a visionary risk-taker who saw which way the wind was blowing and backed the right horse at the right time.
Mussolini was a high-stakes gambler - he bet his life and lost.
Mussolini was a high-stakes gambler - he bet his life and lost.
The Italian Fascist state failed spectacularly in that it was impressively unpopular - not generally to the point of revolution, but it made the majority of the Italian soldiers unwilling to fight.
It wasn't cowardice that caused the mass surrenders of the non-fascist-loyal Italian regiments throughout the war whenever they had the chance - they simply had no motivation to fight people whom they had nothing against in a war which they felt was unnecessary.
Additionally, Italy was the only major combatant nation in the war that actually had their production of war materiel decrease rather than increase throughout the conflict.
It wasn't cowardice that caused the mass surrenders of the non-fascist-loyal Italian regiments throughout the war whenever they had the chance - they simply had no motivation to fight people whom they had nothing against in a war which they felt was unnecessary.
Additionally, Italy was the only major combatant nation in the war that actually had their production of war materiel decrease rather than increase throughout the conflict.
Mussolini was, internationally, an opportunist. He'd have just as willingly fought on the side of Austria had their nationalist leader not wound up dead. But Hitler just rick-rolled most nations so why not bet on the winning horse. Mussolini tried to play every role to keep the various sides off of his back. Cozying up to Hitler to scare the allies away from enacting real sanctions of Ethiopia/Spain. Getting away from Hitler to avoid preemptive war by proposing a Munich-esc peace conference over Danzig. Not to mention his own role in getting the Munich agreement to happen. Hitler knew exactly how to use Mussolini, Mussolini only partly understood how to use Hitler.
Let's not forget also that Mussolini made Italy one of the first states to recognize the USSR and to begin trade with them, so he was even more liked by the USSR than most give him credit for (despite his persecution of Communists). You can still see the fruits of that agreement to this day: the Soviet automotive industry was mostly built with technicians and equipment from Italy, other industries had the same thing occur.
Most of Mussolini's "improvements" were a joke - as like most dictatorial-revolutionary governments, Mussolini found that most of his people were incompetent who were either flatterers or back-stabbers. Even the trains running on time was only one of those things that was "true" because people said it often enough
He, much like Hitler (but to a lesser extent), also grossly overestimated the importance of their political party's personal armed forces relative to the establish standing army's. He also didn't understand how to play the local elite as well as Hitler did - obviously he understood it well enough to convince the ruling classes of Italy to install him as a dictator to save them from communism, but he didn't get a whole lot out of them as time went on - not nearly as much as Hitler managed anyhow.
The Italian Navy was really the only branch of the Italian armed forces that performed like it ought to have - because Mussolini's people and "fascisti" militia hadn't wormed their way into it and ruined its morale d' corps since street brawlers don't tend to be able to translate their penchant for fist fighting into doing something on a boat, in quite the same way they imagined land warfare would lol.
Let's not forget also that Mussolini made Italy one of the first states to recognize the USSR and to begin trade with them, so he was even more liked by the USSR than most give him credit for (despite his persecution of Communists). You can still see the fruits of that agreement to this day: the Soviet automotive industry was mostly built with technicians and equipment from Italy, other industries had the same thing occur.
Most of Mussolini's "improvements" were a joke - as like most dictatorial-revolutionary governments, Mussolini found that most of his people were incompetent who were either flatterers or back-stabbers. Even the trains running on time was only one of those things that was "true" because people said it often enough
He, much like Hitler (but to a lesser extent), also grossly overestimated the importance of their political party's personal armed forces relative to the establish standing army's. He also didn't understand how to play the local elite as well as Hitler did - obviously he understood it well enough to convince the ruling classes of Italy to install him as a dictator to save them from communism, but he didn't get a whole lot out of them as time went on - not nearly as much as Hitler managed anyhow. The Italian Navy was really the only branch of the Italian armed forces that performed like it ought to have - because Mussolini's people and "fascisti" militia hadn't wormed their way into it and ruined its morale d' corps since street brawlers don't tend to be able to translate their penchant for fist fighting into doing something on a boat, in quite the same way they imagined land warfare would lol.
Sucked for them, I guess. But less than for the Germans who died in their tens of millions, with all their motivation...
No matter what nation, push almost anybody's "right" buttons and you get a slobbering killing machine, let alone a soldier. I guess Il Duce never knew how to do that, or cared.
Edit: also, what the above said. Though I distinctly remember that in the early days, and even into the mid to late Thirties, he had some good people in his government and promoted on merit. It all went south, however, around the time of the conquest of Ethiopia.
No matter what nation, push almost anybody's "right" buttons and you get a slobbering killing machine, let alone a soldier. I guess Il Duce never knew how to do that, or cared.
Edit: also, what the above said. Though I distinctly remember that in the early days, and even into the mid to late Thirties, he had some good people in his government and promoted on merit. It all went south, however, around the time of the conquest of Ethiopia.
Up until 1940, everything Mussolini did was sheer genius, everything after -- sheer idiocy. One of the worst decisions, after going to war, was to fire Starace though.
Well Mussolini achieved quite a bit more than just taking Ethiopia. For one he greatly decreased the influence of the mafia and when the law hindered any attempts he made to further reduce the mafia he just changed the law to compensate his plans. He attempted numerous construction plans such as as the building of many new farms and the draining of marshes which although had mixed success, decreased unemployment and provided jobs to those who needed them. He battled the depression via encouraging donations from the public including forms of jewelry which were melted down into gold and given to banks, this greatly helped Italy avoid much of the great depression. His foreign policy was actually quite effective although some people will disagree. Mussolini tried to please both the allies and the axis, in the invasion of Ethiopia he deliberately started to move towards the axis to avoid the Allies placing sanctions on Italy due to the risk of Italy joining with Germany. Upon the start of WW2 he had the luxury of joining either side, when it seemed clear that German was going to beat France he moved in and declared war on the allies which actually turned out to be the wrong choice. Mussolini was also quite open minded and was originally very tolerant of religions and different races, the Libyan's even gave him the sword of Islam as a gift except you could say it was encouraged for propaganda reasons.
He certainly isn't comparable to Hitler, but he did get carried away with the tide of what was going on around Italy. Before the war, he was very much an open minded person in terms of race, culture and religion...disagreeing with Hitler many times. After Italy's entrance into the war however, that seemed to change...he was even persuaded to start persecuting the Jews. I don't know whether he admired or feared Hitler, but once he was in that alliance he couldn't keep a single word...and that was his incompetence.
P. Kennedy, The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, London 1988, pp. 291-297:
(bear in mind that he is writing from the point of view, that only democracy and free market will prevail)
"...Because of Allied investments, industrialization had proceeded apace from 1915 to 1918, at least in those heavy industries related to arms production. Under Mussolini, the state committed itself to an ambitious modernization program, which ranged from draining the Pontine marshes, [...] to the improvement of the railway system.
[...], and the Italian aeronautical industry seemed to be the most innovative in the world, its aircraft gaining a whole series of speed and altitude records.
Military power, too seemed to give good indications of Italy's rising status.
[...] Both in Abyssinia and, even more, in Spain, the Italians demonstrated the uses of air power and convinced themselves - and many foreign observers - that they possessed the most advanced air force in the world. All this boded well for the creation of a second Roman Empire.
Alas for such dreams, Fascist Italy was, in power-political terms, spectaculary weak. It was a semi-developed country. Thanks to a continued flow of emigrants, Italy's population in the interwar years increased by only 1% per year. At the root of Italy's weakness was continued reliance upon small-scale agriculture which in 1920 accounted for 40% of Gross National Product and absorbed 50% of the total working population. It was a further sign of this economic backwardness that even as late as 1938 over half a family's expenditure went on food. Far from reducing these proportions, fascism, with its heavy emphasis upon the virtues of rural live, endeavoured to support agriculture by a battery of measures, including protective tariffs, widespread land reclamations, and, finally, complete control of the wheat market. [...]and the strong wish to prevent a further drift of peasants into the towns, where they would boost unemployment totals and add to the social problem.
Given the almost irremediable weakness which afflicted the Italian economy under fascism, it would be rash to suggest that it could ever have won a war against another proper Great Power...
[...] The extended Abyssinian campaign, overlapped by the intervention in Spain, led to greatly increased expenditures between 1935 and 1937, which were devoted to current operations, and not to the build-up of the services or the armaments industry. On the contrary, the Abyssinian and Spanish adventures gravely weakened Italy not only because of the losses in the field, but also because the longer it fought, the more it needed to import - and pay for - vital strategic raw materials, causing the Bank of Italy's reserves to shrink to almost nothing by 1940. Unable to afford the machine tools and other equipment needed to modernize the air force and the army, the country was probably getting weaker in the two years prior to 1940."
(bear in mind that he is writing from the point of view, that only democracy and free market will prevail)
"...Because of Allied investments, industrialization had proceeded apace from 1915 to 1918, at least in those heavy industries related to arms production. Under Mussolini, the state committed itself to an ambitious modernization program, which ranged from draining the Pontine marshes, [...] to the improvement of the railway system.
[...], and the Italian aeronautical industry seemed to be the most innovative in the world, its aircraft gaining a whole series of speed and altitude records.
Military power, too seemed to give good indications of Italy's rising status.
[...] Both in Abyssinia and, even more, in Spain, the Italians demonstrated the uses of air power and convinced themselves - and many foreign observers - that they possessed the most advanced air force in the world. All this boded well for the creation of a second Roman Empire.
Alas for such dreams, Fascist Italy was, in power-political terms, spectaculary weak. It was a semi-developed country. Thanks to a continued flow of emigrants, Italy's population in the interwar years increased by only 1% per year. At the root of Italy's weakness was continued reliance upon small-scale agriculture which in 1920 accounted for 40% of Gross National Product and absorbed 50% of the total working population. It was a further sign of this economic backwardness that even as late as 1938 over half a family's expenditure went on food. Far from reducing these proportions, fascism, with its heavy emphasis upon the virtues of rural live, endeavoured to support agriculture by a battery of measures, including protective tariffs, widespread land reclamations, and, finally, complete control of the wheat market. [...]and the strong wish to prevent a further drift of peasants into the towns, where they would boost unemployment totals and add to the social problem.
Given the almost irremediable weakness which afflicted the Italian economy under fascism, it would be rash to suggest that it could ever have won a war against another proper Great Power...
[...] The extended Abyssinian campaign, overlapped by the intervention in Spain, led to greatly increased expenditures between 1935 and 1937, which were devoted to current operations, and not to the build-up of the services or the armaments industry. On the contrary, the Abyssinian and Spanish adventures gravely weakened Italy not only because of the losses in the field, but also because the longer it fought, the more it needed to import - and pay for - vital strategic raw materials, causing the Bank of Italy's reserves to shrink to almost nothing by 1940. Unable to afford the machine tools and other equipment needed to modernize the air force and the army, the country was probably getting weaker in the two years prior to 1940."
Last edited: