Red Mussolini

Only a few people know that, before turning fascist, Mussolini was one of the most extremist politicians of the italian socialist party, and that in 1912-13 had almost caused a red revolution in northern italy (the red week), exploiting general discontent for the government, for the war in Lybia, and general misery.
(the revolts were shut down after a week of bloody repression and he was put in jail as a revolutionary socialist)
What if he managed to do it?
my opinion is that europe would not felt threaten as per Russian bolshevick revolution (as nobody cared very much of italy), but the interesting point is another: this would be the first socialist revolution in europe, and would shape the way other european countries perceive the concept of "socialist country".
italian revolutionaries had not the stiffness of russian bolshevick, the horror of great war had not hardened the souls of half europe and a general trust on the goodness of mankind was quite diffused.
That, along with general lazy attitude (I'm italian so do not push me on it) would mitigate the harsh points of revolution, and europe would perceive "socialist revolution" in a whole different way, somehow more familar (influence of social-christian view) an a lot less threatening.
what the consequences?
 

Art

Monthly Donor
He was a socialist, NOT a Communist, silly loon! As far as I know, Mussolini never even tried to take over the government at that time. Not that it would have happened anyway. He then abandoned the socialists because the conservatives gave him a better deal.
 
1) the italian communist party was founded in 1921.
beforethat date both socialists and communists belonged to the socialist party.
M was the leader of the Revolutionary (left!) fraction of the party, as opposed to the more moderate Reformist fraction.
When M. was expelled from the party, Lenin criticized harshly the decision, commenting that the socialist expelled "the only person able to cause a socialist revolution in Italy" (sic)
2) yes he was the editor-in-chief of Avanti (Forward!), which was the socialist newspaper, and he was also a gifted editorialist (during his supervision the newspaper icreased x5)
even when he was expelled from the socialist party and founded a new newspaper (Il popolo d'Italia, which will become the mail fascist newspaper after 1922), the headline of its new newspaper remainded "socialist journal" until 1917, when was replaced by "journal of fighters and workers".
3) actually he turned to conservatorism only after 1919-1920, before that he was an extremist leftist.
 
Well, I doubt the "Red Week" becomes a revolution at this point. At best its a Beer Hall putsch parallel. The Fascist "revolution" was really aided by 1) a large corps of combat-experienced war vets pissed off with the Liberal government, 2) a post-war "Vittorio Veneto mindset" influenced by Arditi culture which allowed the Balckshirts a unified military organization the divided Italian socialists lacked, and 3) the Biennio Rosso creating such a fear of Soviet-style revolution (however unfounded for the reasons you state) that Fascist ranks swelled and the establishment (army, monarchy, confindustria) was willing to give tacit permission for the "revolution". Mussie lacked all of these in 1914.

The socialists, as witnessed by the very short lived success of the Biennio Rosso, lacked the organization to pull off a March on Rome in 1920, none the less 1914.

More realistic of a WI might be if Benny the Moose stayed more "orthodox socialist" (rather than split off to found his "third way"). One way to do this is to keep Italy out of WWI, maybe by keeping Giolitti as PM. BM's interventionism was the source for the OTL exile from the PSI. Another possibility is get rid of Gentile or another of the prefascist philosophers, avoid the rise of Actualism as a philosophy (or at least keep BM from adopting it) or prevent the merging of the authoritarian nationalists with the radical syndicalists. In this case maybe BM remains more overtly Marxist and can become the uniting figure the Red movement in Italy needed for success.

Of course in the long run a Mussolinian "Socialist" state probably doesn't differ too much from his OTL "Fascist" state. He loved power and control and was a blatant nationalist and imperialist, so I see him probably becoming more of a Stalinesque figure, nationalizing all labor and industry in a quasi-corporative manner. A different form of rhetoric, red banners rather than black, and different henchmen (Gramsci rather than Grandi, etc.), but similar end results: totalitarian state with expansionist aims.
 
That's right, but my point is that this would not be perceived by europe as an "alien culture" neither as a "threatening danger".
A more morbid example of socialism would have not induced the "Red fear" in europe (nor in america).
Also, supposing some more "seroius" revolution happen (Soviet Union), the precedent would influence the development of communism on a more compromising trail
 
That's right, but my point is that this would not be perceived by europe as an "alien culture" neither as a "threatening danger".
A more morbid example of socialism would have not induced the "Red fear" in europe (nor in america).
Also, supposing some more "seroius" revolution happen (Soviet Union), the precedent would influence the development of communism on a more compromising trail

I'm going to have to disagree here. The Powers That Be in Europe very much feared Marxism with its revolutionary anti-state anti-religious anti-capitalist rhetoric. Virtually anyone who had power, money, or birthright rightfully feared Marx long before Lenin came to power and worked to suppress any "red" networks.

Sure you avoid the added fear bonus of "those Asiatic hordes" being the red ones, but Benny the Red Moose is still going to be expanding his military and sabre-rattling at France and *Yugoslavia. If anything this is now a much closer, more obviously industrialized Red Menace threatening "bastion-of-western-civilization" France!

Hell, the fact that it happened to a "civilized culture" means it could happen "here" too!

So no, I don't think this avoids Red Panic any more than if Russia or Germany is the "first" red.
 
Come on now, it is good-for-nothing lazy italians we are talking here, not "real" europeans.
who in the world would fear them?
Also I doubt very much that a red revolution in italy would be a pro-atheist one: church influence is just too much.
some sort of concordate would be inevitable between church and state with a lot of quotation of social doctrines from the bible, the moral imperative of aiding the downtroddens, etc.
 
Come on now, it is good-for-nothing lazy italians we are talking here, not "real" europeans.
who in the world would fear them?

No comment on the ethnic stereotypes. :p

On who'd fear them: apparently France did OTL...though not as much as they feared the Germans.


Also I doubt very much that a red revolution in italy would be a pro-atheist one: church influence is just too much.
some sort of concordate would be inevitable between church and state with a lot of quotation of social doctrines from the bible, the moral imperative of aiding the downtroddens, etc.
Well, Fascism was rhetorically anti-clerical OTL. Didn't stop the Lateran Pacts so you're right in that Benny couldn't get away with conquering the Vatican even under a Marxist banner lest he have (counter)revolution on his hands. My point on the atheism was in that it'd still be in the rhetoric (if not in the application) and will still be a source of fear. Even if "lazy Italians" couldn't be a military threat :rolleyes: they're still a living example for "your own nation's" reds to aspire to, and therefore still a "threat".
 
ethnical sterotypes

I am italian, so I think that I am allowed using ethnical sterotypes on myself.
And anyway begin-of-the-century europeans DID thought along these lines
 

The Vulture

Banned
It's a really interesting idea. Welcome to the board, by the way!

As someone mentioned, it'll probably look pretty similar, with mostly cosmetic differences (People's Battle Squads instead of Blackshirts, for instance). I have a feeling they'd be viewed in much the same way as Russia was in the closing days of their Civil War: an inspiration for radicals at home rather than a direct military threat. As the years go on, that could very well change.
 
Only a few people know that, before turning fascist, Mussolini was one of the most extremist politicians of the italian socialist party, and that in 1912-13 had almost caused a red revolution in northern italy (the red week), exploiting general discontent for the government, for the war in Lybia, and general misery.
(the revolts were shut down after a week of bloody repression and he was put in jail as a revolutionary socialist)
What if he managed to do it?
my opinion is that europe would not felt threaten as per Russian bolshevick revolution (as nobody cared very much of italy), but the interesting point is another: this would be the first socialist revolution in europe, and would shape the way other european countries perceive the concept of "socialist country".
italian revolutionaries had not the stiffness of russian bolshevick, the horror of great war had not hardened the souls of half europe and a general trust on the goodness of mankind was quite diffused.
That, along with general lazy attitude (I'm italian so do not push me on it) would mitigate the harsh points of revolution, and europe would perceive "socialist revolution" in a whole different way, somehow more familar (influence of social-christian view) an a lot less threatening.
what the consequences?

As Geekhis Khan pointed out, the red week lacked enough support to make a revolution possible. IIRC, the socialists didn't manage to gain enough support among the military and without a good foothold in the army you aren't going to have any successful revolution (plenty of failed ones, though :p).

The best moment to get a "red Italy" would be right after Caporetto. Have the socialists declare against the goverment rather than supporting it and you'll get a civil war. And the troops in 1917 were demoralized enough to revolt against the officers. Besides having Kaiser Willy winning thanks to two red revolutions is quite deliciously ironic.

The civil war could easily became quite ugly (as civil wars tend to be) and I wouldn't put a lot of faith in the italian "laziness" as you put it. Oh yes, we italians crafted a cunning facade of goodness and weakness right after WW2, "italiani, brava gente"but it's just a myth. We simply swept under the rug everything it didn't fit, but if you start to dig around into italian history you can find interesting tales...

In this scenario though, it's worthy considering that the new regime survival will depend on the will, or lack of it, of WW1's victors. Italy is not Russia; it can be invaded and occupied much more easily. In any case a red regime would have never been welcomed. The scare for a socialist first, communist second, revolution was so real to be nearly tangible. Consider the reactions to the socialist victory in Spain before SCW, for example.

Finally, if you want a red Bennie you should really give him "his" movement. Mussolini was a prima donna, who needed a lot of "space". In the socialist party there were already a lot of personalities to deal with, like Gramsci.
 
Top