no Fascist Italy

What if, instead of letting the Fascists form a government, the King sent the Army to stop their "March on Rome"?
 
If Italy doesn't go fascist, Hitler might not try to copy Mussolini. (Unless he thinks that since he's more competent than Benito, which is possible, he can't fail like him.)

Italy will go through interesting times though. Socialists vs. fascists vs. democrats. This'll take years. Not as bloody as Spain, but still very inconvenient.
 

Hendryk

Banned
Italy will go through interesting times though. Socialists vs. fascists vs. democrats. This'll take years. Not as bloody as Spain, but still very inconvenient.
Indeed, even if the Fascists are thwarted, it's unfortunately not very likely that Italy will remain democratic in the 1920s and 1930s, what with its social and political tensions. The more probable scenario is some form of authoritarian government, perhaps like the rule of the Christian Social Party in Austria.

But it's interesting to consider how right-wing authoritarian regimes of interwar Europe will evolve without the Fascist model as a reference, whether to emulate it wholesale or simply borrow some of its elements.
 
I tend to agree it is unlikely that Italy would survive as a proper Democracy.

Would another reactionary Italy have been willing to support Franco.

Does anyone know how much Portugal did in OTL - this seeming a likely analogue.

Does a clearly neutral Italy make a difference to 1940, I think that the French had troops to deal with a possible Italian attack. (By the way were there also French troops on the Spanish border?)
 
What if, instead of letting the Fascists form a government, the King sent the Army to stop their "March on Rome"?

Civil war, army desertions and revolts, commoners taking up arms.

If Italy doesn't go fascist, Hitler might not try to copy Mussolini. (Unless he thinks that since he's more competent than Benito, which is possible, he can't fail like him.)

Italy will go through interesting times though. Socialists vs. fascists vs. democrats. This'll take years. Not as bloody as Spain, but still very inconvenient.

I think it might be worse than Spain, actually. You'd have France(Not wanting a Communist state on its borders), Britain(Not wanting to upset the balance of power) and the USSR(Eager to gain allies) sending in troops, tanks, planes and everything else to Italy. Which gives me an interesting thought: Naval/street warfare in Venice. Speedboats fitted with machine guns, mines. Ugh.

Indeed, even if the Fascists are thwarted, it's unfortunately not very likely that Italy will remain democratic in the 1920s and 1930s, what with its social and political tensions. The more probable scenario is some form of authoritarian government, perhaps like the rule of the Christian Social Party in Austria.

Don't know much about them, but I agree that Italy would not have a bright future ahead, although possibly better than OTL.

Hendryk said:
But it's interesting to consider how right-wing authoritarian regimes of interwar Europe will evolve without the Fascist model as a reference, whether to emulate it wholesale or simply borrow some of its elements.

Now that's interesting. How would the Iberian nationalist movements fare? I'd imagine without Italian(and presumably German) support, the Republicans would win. If Italy goes Communist, they'll certainly win, possibly forming their own bloc. Portugal may or may not follow, I don't know much about that.

Any possibility of a far-left takeover?

Possibly, with Soviet help.

Does a clearly neutral Italy make a difference to 1940, I think that the French had troops to deal with a possible Italian attack. (By the way were there also French troops on the Spanish border?)

France might do a little better, but their overall strategy was deeply flawed. It'd just mean the Germans would seem even more invincible.

So many tangents.
 
Okay, I'm not getting it. Why would that happen?

Because both the Socialists and the Fascists had a great deal of support. The king had to choose one or risk civil war. I'd imagine a good part of the army would simply refuse orders to march, and if pressed may just desert. The part of the army left would face trouble when they met the Fascists.

It would not be good.
 
I doubt that any king would willingly go with socialists... Socialism and royalties are pretty much mortal ennemies, the people's rule and all that....
 
A longer weuropean wwii

Without the Italians as a deadweight (North Africa, Balcans), Hitler would be free to go after Russia ealier and stronger...
 
And yet.....

Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Britain, Spain, Netherlands, Belgium..... I'm probably forgetting one. :p

Note that the power of the kings then is serverly retrained - constitutional monarchy and what not.

Make no error... Socialism is also republicanism. If the king start to take himself seriously, or is getting really impopular...
 
No, constitutional monarchy would be a bit earlier, like a short time after the French Revolution. Today's monarchies are parliamentary, and the king is but a figurehead.
 
Ah. Sorry, not much knowledgeable on such details.

Change the words and yet it's the same - socialists tolerate monarchies. If they can abolish them, they would. You know the arguments against monarchy....
 
Top