Keeping Italy Liberal | No Mussolini Discussion

[Rattus]

So, Liberal Italy, before Mussolini, is something which really only came to an end due to Mussolini. Despite the impact of the Biennio Rosso (actually perhaps partly because of it) socialism never seemed to have the support to topple Italy's political structure - somewhat interesting considering the typical corruption of liberal politicians and the, general, ambivalence and distaste the Pontificate had to Italian politics.

All of this poses a question - how do we keep Italy Liberal?
The most obvious cop out is to have Mussolni killed in the Great War, meaning proto-fascism stays as an offshoot of syndicalism.
But more interesting PoDs, imo, would be to have the March on Rome fail and have the King enact martial law or to have the PPI be formed earlier and so stable governing coalitions between themselves and either the liberals or socialists prevent fascism from gaining a foothold politically.

You could also have the Matteoti Crisis spin out of control, but again feels a tad cop outy to me.

What do the rest of you think, with your own knowledge which is probably better than my own?

Edit: Typo

 

[lukedalton]

The march on Rome was a big bluff, if the King give the order the army can eliminate the bulk of the fascist leaderships in a single easy move (the mob lack supply, weapon, ammunition and any other real mean to even defend themselfs); the fear was that the armed forces while succesfull on suppress the fascist were later not capable of doing the same with the socialist (basically the brass said that the army was loyal enough to take down one revolution not two) and there were also fear that the cousin of the king (a fascist sympathizer) will have lead a coup to make VEIII abdicate and take his place.
Frankly, if the king decide to follow Facta suggestion and order the martial law and use the army to suppress the fascist it's game over for the PFI, maybe Giolitti (that was also for using the army and make the fascist desist from their intent) reach in time Rome, instead to be blocked just out of the city and forced to arrive to late as OTL.
If this happen, the March on Rome can become something like the Beer Putsch and make the goverment, at least in the short time, strong enough to resolve some problem

 

[Neoteros]

The march on Rome was a big bluff, if the King give the order the army can eliminate the bulk of the fascist leaderships in a single easy move (the mob lack supply, weapon, ammunition and any other real mean to even defend themselfs); the fear was that the armed forces while succesfull on suppress the fascist were later not capable of doing the same with the socialist (basically the brass said that the army was loyal enough to take down one revolution not two) and there were also fear that the cousin of the king (a fascist sympathizer) will have lead a coup to make VEIII abdicate and take his place.
Frankly, if the king decide to follow Facta suggestion and order the martial law and use the army to suppress the fascist it's game over for the PFI, maybe Giolitti (that was also for using the army and make the fascist desist from their intent) reach in time Rome, instead to be blocked just out of the city and forced to arrive to late as OTL.
If this happen, the March on Rome can become something like the Beer Putsch and make the goverment, at least in the short time, strong enough to resolve some problem

Such a suggestion could pave the way for a different kind of authoritarianism, however, that of the King, his Prime Minister(s), and the liberal status quo - considering how authoritarian the Kingdom already was, that'd actually be nothing more than taking pre-Fascist trends to their logical conclusion, that of a corrupt, elitary and not very liberal democracy under a rather conservative constitutional monarchy. The peninsula could've become a republic anyway by the late 1940s, but in this case the House of Savoy would've been made to flee the country in a much more violent manner than a referendum, unless some member of the royal house or another will experience a Carlist-like drift into leftist federalism out of nothing but good old trasformismo.

 

[Wendell]

Such a suggestion could pave the way for a different kind of authoritarianism, however, that of the King, his Prime Minister(s), and the liberal status quo - considering how authoritarian the Kingdom already was, that'd actually be nothing more than taking pre-Fascist trends to their logical conclusion, that of a corrupt, elitary and not very liberal democracy under a rather conservative constitutional monarchy. The peninsula could've become a republic anyway by the late 1940s, but in this case the House of Savoy would've been made to flee the country in a much more violent manner than a referendum, unless some member of the royal house or another will experience a Carlist-like drift into leftist federalism out of nothing but good old trasformismo.

I agree with you that as is the state would not be very liberal. At the same time, I'm not convinced that this necessarily guarantees the end of the monarchy.

 

[lukedalton]

Such a suggestion could pave the way for a different kind of authoritarianism, however, that of the King, his Prime Minister(s), and the liberal status quo - considering how authoritarian the Kingdom already was, that'd actually be nothing more than taking pre-Fascist trends to their logical conclusion, that of a corrupt, elitary and not very liberal democracy under a rather conservative constitutional monarchy. The peninsula could've become a republic anyway by the late 1940s, but in this case the House of Savoy would've been made to flee the country in a much more violent manner than a referendum, unless some member of the royal house or another will experience a Carlist-like drift into leftist federalism out of nothing but good old trasformismo.

It can end with the King appointing someone by force? Probably a military man? I go with yes for both...but differently from fascism a goverment of this kind will lack a lot of staying power and will to change the society towards totalitarism that fascist always had. Hell it will probably generally supported if it put some stability and start an economic recovery as it probable, after all the initial Mussolini economic policies were basically the liberal one with his face attached to it.

 

[Falecius]

Such a suggestion could pave the way for a different kind of authoritarianism, however, that of the King, his Prime Minister(s), and the liberal status quo - considering how authoritarian the Kingdom already was, that'd actually be nothing more than taking pre-Fascist trends to their logical conclusion, that of a corrupt, elitary and not very liberal democracy under a rather conservative constitutional monarchy. The peninsula could've become a republic anyway by the late 1940s, but in this case the House of Savoy would've been made to flee the country in a much more violent manner than a referendum, unless some member of the royal house or another will experience a Carlist-like drift into leftist federalism out of nothing but good old trasformismo.

Well, the House of Savoy left after a referendum, but the circumstances leading to said referendum were certainly not peaceful in the least.
Note that without Fascism, the entire dynamic whereby Nazis take power in Germany is changed. While I think that some sort of European war in the Forties is still likely to take place, a Liberal Italy could comfortably sit it out unless attacked (which they could, for example over Sudtirol by an hypernationalistic German State).

 

[Nivek]

I doubt italy would stay liberal, if anything a violent end of facism will enbold the communist and 'their move' after them and we could see a commie italy in the 30's...

 

[33k7]

here's the thing if the king had given the order to arrest and kill Mussolini and his allies the Italian government would collapse you would have the Communist rise up in Revolution because they would think they're next and what's left of the fascist would also rise up. you have a civil war

 

[Wendell]

here's the thing if the king had given the order to arrest and kill Mussolini and his allies the Italian government would collapse you would have the Communist rise up in Revolution because they would think they're next and what's left of the fascist would also rise up. you have a civil war

And one that the Communists would lose.

 

[Rattus]

I doubt italy would stay liberal, if anything a violent end of facism will enbold the communist and 'their move' after them and we could see a commie italy in the 30's...

here's the thing if the king had given the order to arrest and kill Mussolini and his allies the Italian government would collapse you would have the Communist rise up in Revolution because they would think they're next and what's left of the fascist would also rise up. you have a civil war

I mean, whilst possible, I do find that a socialist/communist revolution may not be the end result. Such a revolution would be called at the behest of one of the three main socialist parties in Italy, presumably the PCI, and due to the maximalist-reformist split I can't see all of the socialist movement running behind it.

It's not entirely impossible that the PSI and PSU deputies may pull a SPD and, if things become so bad, join a Liberal government properly to stop a PCI uprising.
This is especially so if the Pro-Socialist/Left Liberal faction of the PPI stays prominent and the Vatican can hold its nose at a PPI-PSU coalition.


In other words, for a communist revolution to succeed in a Mussolini-less world you really need socialism to be united or a mass radicalisation of socialism. Which even the Biennio Rosso didn't do.

 

[33k7]

And one that the Communists would lose.

what makes you think they would lose??? there are huge swaths of the Italian people that are still pissed off about how they were treated World War 1 and the Italian government has just killed one of the most vocal people about how they were treated.

the French and German have a socialist government so you actually might see support coming in from France and Germany it might not be much but it will be there.

 

[David T]

"The Catholic PPI, another potentially powerful Fascist opponent, also made a series of errors during this crucial period. Just as the Socialists suffered from a left-right division, so did this organization. Represented by Don Luigi Sturzo, a sociologist, and Guido Miglioli, a northern peasant organizer, the Catholic left staunchly opposed fascism but found itself weakened by Pope Pius XI's support of the right wing. Despite the left's desire for a strong statement against fascism, the PPI congress of October 20-23 avoided condemning it and delivered a weak statement on the possibility of collaborating with the Socialists in a governmental coalition. Noted for his staunch antifascism, Sturzo seemed not to comprehend how close fascism was to achieving power and had no practical plans for thwarting it. Even more serious, and for reasons still hotly debated, Sturzo opposed the return of Giolitti to power after Bonomi's fall. Since even Mussolini believed that Giolitti would have used the army to defeat a Fascist attempt at a coup d'etat had he been at the government's helm in 1922, and given the PPI's lynchpin status for cabinets during this era, Sturzo's 'veto' of the Piedmontese statesman was crucial to fascism's success.

"Although Giolitti's past anticlericalism and his advocacy of registering securities in the names of their owners irritated Sturzo, a diferent conception of politics probably accounts for the PPI's opposition. Sturzo favored negotiating with the other political forces to achieve agreement on a cabinet's program and composition before its installation, whereas Giolitti insisted on making the major decisions himself. The Catholic conception reflected the emerging mass party basis of Italian politics..." https://books.google.com/books?id=BRdWDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT248

 

[Wendell]

what makes you think they would lose??? there are huge swaths of the Italian people that are still pissed off about how they were treated World War 1 and the Italian government has just killed one of the most vocal people about how they were treated.

the French and German have a socialist government so you actually might see support coming in from France and Germany it might not be much but it will be there.

The bourgeois socialist government in France is not going to support a Communist state on its borders, The British could intervene. Austria might try to intervene, or Yugoslavia. Maybe both, and the danger of staying out is that Germany remilitarizes, even if to stop another Communist or Monarchist putsch there. .

 

[Rattus]

I agree with you that as is the state would not be very liberal. At the same time, I'm not convinced that this necessarily guarantees the end of the monarchy.

Indeed, almost all monarchies ended at the end of wars. If Italy stays out of WW2 (if one even happens as we would know it) theres not a bad chance that a corrupt monarchy with a middling economy could stay afloat (think pre-WW2 Bulgaria).

 

[Rattus]

snip

Indeed, a more independent PPI or less paranoid Papacy spells a whole host of changes to the political landscape of interwar Italy.

 

[33k7]

I mean, whilst possible, I do find that a socialist/communist revolution may not be the end result. Such a revolution would be called at the behest of one of the three main socialist parties in Italy, presumably the PCI, and due to the maximalist-reformist split I can't see all of the socialist movement running behind it.

It's not entirely impossible that the PSI and PSU deputies may pull a SPD and, if things become so bad, join a Liberal government properly to stop a PCI uprising.
This is especially so if the Pro-Socialist/Left Liberal faction of the PPI stays prominent and the Vatican can hold its nose at a PPI-PSU coalition.


In other words, for a communist revolution to succeed in a Mussolini-less world you really need socialism to be united or a mass radicalisation of socialism. Which even the Biennio Rosso didn't do.

killing Mussolini and his allies it's just going to cause a power vacuum where I see the socialist and communist stepping in

The bourgeois socialist government in France is not going to support a Communist state on its borders, The British could intervene. Austria might try to intervene, or Yugoslavia. Maybe both, and the danger of staying out is that Germany remilitarizes, even if to stop another Communist or Monarchist putsch there. .

this is 1922 you're saying that European nations will be able to convince there people that we should go to war again so soon after the stupidity of the first world war ya I find that extremely difficult to believe that's just me personally I'm just stating what I believe I'm going to end it here because it seems I'm in the minority

 

[Wendell]

Indeed, a more independent PPI or less paranoid Papacy spells a whole host of changes to the political landscape of interwar Italy.

I would dispute the idea that the papacy was paranoid, given the way social democratic and democratic socialist governments in other Catholic countries were starting to undercut church prerogatives. Mexico comes to mind.

 

[Wendell]

k
this is 1922 you're saying that European nations will be able to convince there people that we should go to war again so soon after the stupidity of the first world war ya I find that extremely difficult to believe that's just me personally I'm just stating what I believe I'm going to end it here because it seems I'm in the minority

Given the choices of falling to yet another left-wing revolution, or fighting to stave off a left-wing revolution, France will seek the latter.

 

[lukedalton]

here's the thing if the king had given the order to arrest and kill Mussolini and his allies the Italian government would collapse you would have the Communist rise up in Revolution because they would think they're next and what's left of the fascist would also rise up. you have a civil war

by the time of the march the possibility of a succesfull communist revolution were almost statistical, the Matteotti affair clearly demonstrated how divided was the left and the Biennio Rosso basically spent the bulk of revolutionary fervor.

what makes you think they would lose??? there are huge swaths of the Italian people that are still pissed off about how they were treated World War 1 and the Italian government has just killed one of the most vocal people about how they were treated.

the French and German have a socialist government so you actually might see support coming in from France and Germany it might not be much but it will be there.

Pissed? Sure but willing to fight against the army? A lot less sure and Benny will not be killed in any confrontation at Rome, because he was smart enough to not be direct linked to the entire affair and remained safe in his home

 

[SandroPertini98]

Avoid Italy's entry in WWI: no one wanted enter in the war a part the King and D'Annunzio and his bunch of nationalists. Not the people, not the Church, not the Parliament and not Giolitti, who wanted mantain neutrality and had to be invited to form the new goverment when Salandra fell in 1915 but renounced when became clear Vittorio Emanuele III wanted war and had just signed the London Pact.
So no WWI (or an intervention in last days to take Trento and Trieste), no postbellum crisis, Gioliti retake office and develop his Gentiloni Agreement with Catholics. No mutilated victory, no Fascism, no destruction of trust in the liberal political class who governed before 1915 and finished to thrown the country in war. The coalition between Liberals and Catholics, with occasional support from conservatives or socialists as Giolitti did in 1910s, can easily becoming the new Goverment Alliance, a lá Christian Democracy and allies in OTL First Republic.