The Footprint of Mussolini - TL

Because of the claimed equality between federal regions, the ones that until 1918 had royal status (Bayern, Saxony, and Wurttemberg) would not be acknowledged as Kingdoms. But the heirs of such royal houses would see their title restored, and so for the lesser ranks, albeit of course not being anymore the rulers of their own regions. At the same time the Kaiser could have the right through parliamentary approval to appoint new nobles or demote others or even strip their titles. The nation would compensate the noble families victim of acknowledged Nazi purges (one of the most renown cases being Maurice of Hesse, son of Philip, restored in all his dignity despite being at the time more a Prince of Italy than of Germany). But the discussion between returned private properties and ones retained by the German state would cause certain legal contentions – one of the most famous being the property of the castles built by Ludwig II of Bayern, with the Wittelsbach determined to get their palaces back versus the federal state of Bayern. The legal cause lasted for decades and ended in a compromise where the Wittlesbach would obtain a limited property and use and a percentage of the profits coming from touristic visits.

Why not a make the 'fourth reich' more like the first by adding a rotational system like in Malaysia or an elective system which allows the people to select the heir to the throne from amongst the old royal families? That would be a decent compromise between the monarchist and the republican factions in and of itself, and also be a good justification for the Kaiser retaining real power.

The Crown Prince shouldn't have nominally a territory of Germany (see Prince of Wales) and then which one, as Brandenburg and Prussia were not viable choices? Also what to do of the daughters of his older brother, if the Prussian title went less? And the Kaiser won't likely dare in the first years of his reign to concede titles over his family to not let show the Germans to take already advantage of his newfound status... In short the nobility issue would give to Louis Ferdinand and also Adenauer some headaches for a while.

Prussia had plenty of provinces in the west by the time the first world war occurred. The most prestigious of them was Hanover, the use of which would be a diplomatic insult to the British. However, making junior Hohenzollerns princes of Westphalia should not be challenged by anyone. In the above-proposed elective system, this would be their fallback title should they lose the title of Kaiser.
 
Why not a make the 'fourth reich' more like the first by adding a rotational system like in Malaysia or an elective system which allows the people to select the heir to the throne from amongst the old royal families? That would be a decent compromise between the monarchist and the republican factions in and of itself, and also be a good justification for the Kaiser retaining real power.



Prussia had plenty of provinces in the west by the time the first world war occurred. The most prestigious of them was Hanover, the use of which would be a diplomatic insult to the British. However, making junior Hohenzollerns princes of Westphalia should not be challenged by anyone. In the above-proposed elective system, this would be their fallback title should they lose the title of Kaiser.

Well, it would be a bit too "Polish monarchy" like and above all "Holy Roman Empire like" and this might be too much for the Germans to digest it. Also West Germany needs stability and the West want the Empire stable, and certainly political squabbles over electing a new Emperor won't bode well over such image. It would suffice that future Emperors of Germany would be proclaimed by the Parliament.

And Westphalia may be more controversial than you think. From one side, is where a peace was signed ending a long period of turmoil inside Germany, from the other, is reminding of French domain over the same country. Also Westphalia is quite meshed with Hanover... But is also true Hanover was annexed into Prussia so maybe a nudge in that direction might be worthy a chance.
 
Just a quick note.

The reason Hungary won the 1958 World Cup is that there was no 1956 squashing of the Hungarian rebellion (since Hungary isn't dominated by Communism) that broke the team up. The 'Mighty Magyars' are thus able to stick together and grow, not to mention having better equipment and training due to the open economy and society. The USSR was banned from the 1954 World Cup (as well as pretty much every major sporting commission) for its actions against its Jewish population, who responded by forbidding any Stalingrad Pact nation from joining the contest either.
Is there a communist replacement for the olympics?
 
I feel like Mussolini in the colonies will patronize traditional Sufi Islam against pan Arabism and salafism, both threats. Some in Libya are even Ibadi, which may get similarly patronized.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sword_of_Islam_(Mussolini)
Mussolini might try to use this and play it up to deal with threats from Saudi Salafism and Pam Arabism.
Libya I think might become Italian majority given the statistics of settlement otl, whereas Somalia and Eritrea will have significant Italian minorities. I also think Italian Somalia will retain the Ogaden, as “liberating Ogaden” was an early pre text. I do know Mussolini planned to redesign African cities otl, and that will likely occur in this timeline as well, with fascist futurist/modernist architecture popular as already seen to an extent in Eritrea otl.
 
Last edited:
? Because it has to be the European avantguard of Communism as it was in OTL. The Soviets don't have other choices - Finland was annexed, Poland was in a miserable condition, Slovakia is too small to prove the superiority of Communism towards Capitalism, Serbia is essentially isolated (and indipendent)

Serbia actually may be a better candidate than OTL for the post. The USSR has a PR nightmare going for their communist cause. Not only Stalin's atrocities, the Polish conquest was transparent imperialism tainting their image as liberators, and as patrons the defeat of the PRC makes them look bad.

The most solid and presentable win the communists have had since WWII is the Serbian Revolution. For one while they assisted Tito it was a genuine revolution with the populace overthrowing the tyrannical government of collaborators. And then they defended themselves against Fascist aggression so effectively as to cause a regime change in the aggressor.

"Brave Serbia" I expect is the poster child the leadership in Moscow want to promote along with Tito to repair the image of Communism; both with Western leftists Post Stalin and with colonial peoples struggling for liberty. Trying to turn the face of Communism from Stalin and his atrocities and tyranny to the liberator and enemy of Fascism that is Tito to inspire the radical left(with the added bonus that no amount of PR will make Tito a candidate to take over the USSR).

Serbia being independent is actually a mark in its favor. One, Serbia still can't turn against them because one they need Soviet aid with Fascist hostility and Western suspicion. And two, I doubt Tito has personally given up on restoring some form of Yugoslavia as a communists state and he will need the Soviets to get there.

So Serbia can be held up as proof joining the Stalingrad Pact won't mean you have to nd p like the 'slave states'; with the added benefit that Serbia still is required to remain fairly loyal to the Moscow line unofficially.
 
Hey folks.

Exams over, I’ll try and update in a few days - my apologies for the delay.

It will focus on the negotiations of the Chinese War’s final peace and the seeds laid for the Second Arabian War.
 
Hey folks.

Exams over, I’ll try and update in a few days - my apologies for the delay.

It will focus on the negotiations of the Chinese War’s final peace and the seeds laid for the Second Arabian War.

Don’t worry, I’m on exams as well.
 
Question, is the rebellion in Western China ProRoC or trying to establish an independent state?

I could see some in the West wanting to further partition China and try to set up another democratic state like is going on in Tibet. Chiang is hardly popular with the UN leadership, especially with his growing understanding with Mussolini, so checking his expansion to some degree would appeal in certain quarters.

Then you would have those who want the maximum RoC, seeing it as the shield and eventual sword on the frontlines against Communism in Asia.
 
Considering that one of the chapters mentioned Italy managing to hold onto the AOI territories, what does Ethiopia (what's left of it anyway) look like currently?
 
Question, is the rebellion in Western China ProRoC or trying to establish an independent state?
If you mean the revolt in Xinjiang, well, I suspect they won't get Western support to go independent, because a Muslim nation being free on their own risks raising all kinds of Cain back home.
 
If you mean the revolt in Xinjiang, well, I suspect they won't get Western support to go independent, because a Muslim nation being free on their own risks raising all kinds of Cain back home.

Let's not project OTL Islamophobia in the West—much of which was greatly exacerbated by 9/11 and the Bush wars in Iraq and Afghanistan—onto an earlier era. In that time, hating the poor and black people in one's own country were the main preoccupation of reactionary bigots. Indeed, the standard viewpoint in the West was to see countries with large Muslim populations—conservative, religious, anticommunist, often ruled by atheistic governments allied with the Soviet Union—as the West's natural allies against communism. Supporting religious Muslim factions in Muslim countries against socialist governments of Muslim countries was common practice, and, for the West, it was a highly successful strategy. The Soviet Union might exist today if not for it getting sucked into an Afghan quagmire, with the Afghan Islamist dissidents helped generously by the West. If our perspective of the Cold War were not so Western-centric, we would be talking far more about the Soviet war in Afghanistan than the American war in Vietnam; the former was far more important to the outcome.

In TTL, that tendency for alliance was broken in the Middle East. (In OTL it was rather stronger.) But the sort of people who treat everybody of a particular race, or everybody of a particular religion, as if they're a monolithic bloc—a single mindlessly-agreeing group all over the planet, who will naturally show solidarity with each other—is deluding themselves. For example, if I told you today that the main policy priority of Christian-cultured countries like America, France, Germany, Brazil [etc] today is to stop the mass persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt, I would be ludicrously wrong. They don't give a damn. They couldn't care less. Similarly, Muslims aren't hive-mind automatons either; they're just people. If you expect people in Malaysia to care more about people of the same religion in Palestine (thousands of miles away) than about the struggle against communism in Malaysia, you're going to be shocked. A local breakdown of solidarity between the West and the Muslim world in the Middle East isn't going to stop the West from allying with Muslim religious, anti-communist factions elsewhere in the world, because… well… religious, anti-communist, conservative, anti-Soviet.
 

Well said.

I expect the main opposition to independence(other than Chiang obviously) would be Mussolini and Patton. Both would want a strong united China with the best potential for facing the PRC in the next round and to deter any adventurism out of Korea or Ezo toward Japan. Mussolini also finds a kindred spirit in anticommunist-authoritarianism in Chiang, and supporting Chiang would help solidify that into an alliance.

Mussolini aside from maintaining his semi colonial presence on Formosa, and possibly expanding, it would really like a major ally who will not bring up democratic reforms.

By contrast I could see France worried Chiang might cause trouble for them in Indochina down te line if he gets to powerful. And the British and French both would be wary at the Roman Alliance possibly adding Republican China to its ranks or even just as a firm alliance affecting the power dynamic between south and West.
 
Last edited:
Let's not project OTL Islamophobia in the West—much of which was greatly exacerbated by 9/11 and the Bush wars in Iraq and Afghanistan—onto an earlier era. In that time, hating the poor and black people in one's own country were the main preoccupation of reactionary bigots. Indeed, the standard viewpoint in the West was to see countries with large Muslim populations—conservative, religious, anticommunist, often ruled by atheistic governments allied with the Soviet Union—as the West's natural allies against communism. Supporting religious Muslim factions in Muslim countries against socialist governments of Muslim countries was common practice, and, for the West, it was a highly successful strategy. The Soviet Union might exist today if not for it getting sucked into an Afghan quagmire, with the Afghan Islamist dissidents helped generously by the West. If our perspective of the Cold War were not so Western-centric, we would be talking far more about the Soviet war in Afghanistan than the American war in Vietnam; the former was far more important to the outcome.
I just mean more since all the shit going on with other Islamic nations ITTL, well.....
 
I just mean more since all the shit going on with other Islamic nations ITTL, well.....

Given the Arab Nationalism in play, and Turkey being in opposition, I think the West sees more of an "Arab Problem" than a Muslim problem. Which is still going to end badly, but the bigotry pointed in a different direction.
 
Given the Arab Nationalism in play, and Turkey being in opposition, I think the West sees more of an "Arab Problem" than a Muslim problem. Which is still going to end badly, but the bigotry pointed in a different direction.

Israel wanks would necessarily end in Arab screws, and giving how the Arab Federation is an amalgam of bad assorted nationalisms and above all conflicting narcisisms (Nasser in Egypt, Aflaq in Syria and Iraq, and the Saudi family in Arabia) it is going to be a trail of tears from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf. Naturally, to the victors the spoils, but also the consequences of such victories...

Let's see how much I will get near from the final outcome (I swear I don't know what Sorairo is planning even with all the side posts I wrote):

- Turkey is going to get the rest of Syria and all of Kurdistan, but the Kurds would start a long guerrilla war because the Italians at the time propped them and it got out of control. Syria may be much manageable, the Christian minorities would be all for Turkey, we'll see about the Shia.
- Italy is going to take Alexandria, maybe even Damietta to keep a check on the Suez. The city and surroundings will become an Egyptian Coptic majority metropolis as the Copts might escape from future purges if Egypt will become more radical after the defeat, while several Arab Egyptians will leave Alexandria. The sands west of Alexandria will be annexed to give a cushion area to Libya, even if aren't much economically worthy. Also Lebanon will drift towards Italian sphere, sure the Maronites would do that. Mussolini would consider Alexandria the gem of his Italian Empire and would do everything to keep it. But the expected chaos on Egypt might delay his plans to make the city a vibrant Mediterranean metropolis. But if kept under Italian control till modern days, I guess it will become splendid and prosperous...
- Israel is going to take the Sinai and some territory beyond the Golan, maybe even part of the Arabian northern sands, cause, may hide oil and gas. Border much more safer, but from now on expect a long path of terror attacks in Yeretz Israel.
- The Federation would be disbanded by force, maybe the Arab League too, not sure if Aflaq and Nasser will remain in power, maybe the former will try to hold in a weakened and turning hostile and pariah Iraq. But if Nasser will have to cede Alexandria and the Sinai and also Egypt will be denied any right on the Suez, he won't have chances this time.
- Not pronouncing much over Arabia, probably they will go very light cause they only want to get rid of Aflaq and might even approve of the RA/Israeli victory but much might depend from Yemen cause there is since a while an idea on such country which needs Sorairo's seal so we will see.
 
Israel wanks would necessarily end in Arab screws, and giving how the Arab Federation is an amalgam of bad assorted nationalisms and above all conflicting narcisisms (Nasser in Egypt, Aflaq in Syria and Iraq, and the Saudi family in Arabia) it is going to be a trail of tears from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf. Naturally, to the victors the spoils, but also the consequences of such victories...

Let's see how much I will get near from the final outcome (I swear I don't know what Sorairo is planning even with all the side posts I wrote):

- Turkey is going to get the rest of Syria and all of Kurdistan, but the Kurds would start a long guerrilla war because the Italians at the time propped them and it got out of control. Syria may be much manageable, the Christian minorities would be all for Turkey, we'll see about the Shia.
- Italy is going to take Alexandria, maybe even Damietta to keep a check on the Suez. The city and surroundings will become an Egyptian Coptic majority metropolis as the Copts might escape from future purges if Egypt will become more radical after the defeat, while several Arab Egyptians will leave Alexandria. The sands west of Alexandria will be annexed to give a cushion area to Libya, even if aren't much economically worthy. Also Lebanon will drift towards Italian sphere, sure the Maronites would do that. Mussolini would consider Alexandria the gem of his Italian Empire and would do everything to keep it. But the expected chaos on Egypt might delay his plans to make the city a vibrant Mediterranean metropolis. But if kept under Italian control till modern days, I guess it will become splendid and prosperous...
- Israel is going to take the Sinai and some territory beyond the Golan, maybe even part of the Arabian northern sands, cause, may hide oil and gas. Border much more safer, but from now on expect a long path of terror attacks in Yeretz Israel.
- The Federation would be disbanded by force, maybe the Arab League too, not sure if Aflaq and Nasser will remain in power, maybe the former will try to hold in a weakened and turning hostile and pariah Iraq. But if Nasser will have to cede Alexandria and the Sinai and also Egypt will be denied any right on the Suez, he won't have chances this time.
- Not pronouncing much over Arabia, probably they will go very light cause they only want to get rid of Aflaq and might even approve of the RA/Israeli victory but much might depend from Yemen cause there is since a while an idea on such country which needs Sorairo's seal so we will see.

There is already stated that there is independent Kurdistan in early 1970's so even Kurds are succesful against Turks or Iraqi Kurdistan is not annexed. There is too stated that Aflaq is going to die either during or soon after SAW.

My predictions:

- Syria is annexed by Turkey. It is too heavely ethnically cleansed and there will be much of terrorism during next decades.
- Iraq is divided three independent nations: Kurdistan, Sunni state and Shia state which probably will be Iranian puppet.
- Egypt is bit hard but probably Italians take Alexandria and perhaps create Coptic state there. Israel takes Sinai and perhaps Suez Canal. Rest of Egypt might be co-occupied by Italy and United Kingdom. Not sure what happens to its government. Perhaps monarchy is restored.
- Lebanon becomes increasingly Christian dominated and the country might see civil war between Maronites and Muslims in 1960's and afterwards Muslims are kicked out. Perhaps government decide make Aramaic only official language of the country.
- Saudi Arabia is very hard thing. But hardly anything nice.
 

Nephi

Banned
I think Syria ends up a landlocked puppet state, surrounded on all sides by that Italian dominated block when Turkey eventually annexes Mosul, they probably pull something similar to make Iraq landlocked too, maybe an explanded Kuwait.
 
Last edited:
Top