How actually competent (or not) WAS Benny the Moose?

Italy gets a fair bit of stick for how they performed in WW2, with a poorly prepared military, reaching too far, having lofty goals but no real way of achiveing them as well as an inept leadership.

At the top of this sits of course, Benito (Benny) Mussolini. He's generally portrayed as thuggish, dim witted and basically a bit crap, as well as being a lot of a bastard.

But how bad was he? To me he always seems to have been an ineffectual buffoon who made a good show and talked well but could never reach what he wanted. As well as being a bully and a thug. So what were Benny's failings as a leader in the build up to WW2? What did he do wrong, what were his policies that never could have worked and was he as bad as he's portrayed?
 
He did get most of the Mafia imprisoned or out of the Country.

He talked big, but the Italian public at large just wasn't into conquest.

Italy was a Paper Tiger, and most of the Fascist choices made things worse.

Like reorganizing the Army to Binary Divisions, for PR to say he had a huge number of Divisions(that were weak in power) and could reward cronies to take command of those divisions
 
My own reading of him has been that he wasn't stupid, or at least not as stupid as he was made out to be - if he was the buffoon popular culture portrays him as, he'd never have managed to even form the Fascists, let alone take control of the country. However: I think he was a supremely arrogant man, which could blind him to things.

He did get most of the Mafia imprisoned or out of the Country.

Though, in Sicily at least, that was more due to 'il Prefetto di Ferro' Cesare Mori than to Mussolini.
 
Well his army succed far beyond bealife even modern day fascist recognise fact that his tanks was crappy compared to Soviets which were his enemies. So he was failure in regard of post power grab ie Geneal policy and economics.
And he had critigue even in his time from right Julia Evola said to him:
"Why you need political party if you took (supposedly) control of state?"
 
He also had a problem common to most dictators: not knowing when to quit.

Franco was a bastard, but he was a smart bastard. His aim was controlling Spain: once he did that, he didn't push beyond. And, indeed, his regime was capable of change when necessary - the shift from autarky to technocratism. I doubt Mussolini would have managed a shift like that.

Though don't misread that as praise - like I say, Franco was...well, a fascist dictator.
 
Mussolini also had a problem with bad luck. His 'me, too' attack on Southern France stalled in the Alpine Passes, which were very, very well fortified. IIRC, even with crack German Alpine troops joining the attack, those forts easily held out until France fell, had to be ordered to surrender. The RN/RAF Taranto attack tore the heart from his naval ambitions, though seems to have given the IJN confidence to attempt such a coup in the Pacific. The Italian strike into Greece met a small but very professional army, had to be rescued by German Panzers. Ditto in North Africa against the British...

Against that, his people invented mini-subs, man-rider torpedos etc etc and mounted several effective attacks on RN ships & bases around the Med...

IIRC, Mussolini didn't like Hitler or his policies. H's ambition to replace 'Christian' faiths by one retro, almost Norse thing could not have sat well. H's rabid anti-this, that & t'other views famously irritated M, who was not obsessed by racial stuff. Unfortunately, IIRC, M fell under the influence of H's tame doctor, and went down-hill...
 
Well, the answer much depend on the field we consider:

- as a politician he was really competent and smart, taking power in italy by election and keeping it without any serious problem or resistance for 20 years and without resorting to any massive bloodshed (not saying it was pretty, far from it...just that the bodycount was much much less in proportion of that of Hitler, Stalin or Franco)

- as an administrator and statesman, well it's was very amaterish and a control freak/micromanager; many resources wasted in prestige project and in military campaign that even if succesfull (Ethiopia and Spain) failed spectaculary to give any economic, military or polical return or thing were done very slowly due to his need to approve anything.
 

Insider

Banned
Actually if you compare domestic terror Mussolini comes on par with Ceaușescu, Peron, or Pinochet. His body count is in low thousands, I once read a paper that put during the fascist regime (1922-1943) just 6k died because of political violence, state terror and similar reasons. I am not aware if you have to further deduct legitimate death sentences from the number.

His drive for autarky ruined the chance to rebuild after the war, and his policy of War of Grain did more harm then good in Italian agriculture.
 
Top