Was Mussolini really such a bad leader?

Question

I don't see why he is considered as bad as Hitler, in many ways Mussolini in my opinion was a great leader who had his country's best interests at heart. Yes, he did allign himself with Hitler, but it is evident that this is not because he believed in his racial ideals, or goals, but because he thought it was the best way of defending Italy's future. It was a rather misguided approach, but nonetheless one that was made with good intention.

Also, many critizise Mussolini for his imperialistic aims, and in the modern day we don't consider imperialism to be a good thing, but let's be honest, was Italy's invasion of Albania and Ethiopia REALLY any different to the British empire, or the Spanish empires which are hailed today as being great? Is his invasion of these countries really do different to the US's invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan?

In many way, I feel Mussolini didn't harm the countries he invaded, but actually did good for them, and much of the Italian infrastructure that was installed in these countries is still in use today, and is the back-bone of many of these countries, particularly rail. 

I also don't believe that Mussolini was a violent butcher, and I don't believe he was any worse than other leaders at the time. While he aligned himself with Hitler, I don't believe he was any where near as violent and discrimintive as Hitler, and this was evident in his domestic policy.

Mussolini was not a racist in the true sense of a racist, he was a "culturist", who I guess believed the Italian culture, and Italian way of doing things was great, and believed in assimilating other races to the Italian system. He did not believe that other races were inherently inferior and did not seek their systematic destruction. 

The truth is, if I was Italian at the time I'd rather be ruled by the great Mussolini than the communist, left-wing scum who murdered him in cold blood. 

The left-wing in most cases are the real violent scum. They have no morals.

Anonymous · Accepted Answer

Yes. I fully agree he was a better leader for his nation than Stalin or Hitler. He accomplished (a.o.) the impossible: he exterminated the mafia and made the trains run on time. And a lot more. 

So why do I rate him as a bad leader? 
He committed Italy into a war, several in fact, without any need for it. Just for prestige. The conquest of Abyssinia could only be achieved by using nerve gas and aircraft. Against an army armed with spears. 

Any competent leader would have concluded that the army was not up to standards until well after a long training and rearming period. But Mussolini went on to conquer Africa. He got in trouble everywhere Italy went to war: Albania, Greece, Egypt. And every time he had to be rescued by the German army. 

Countries have to go to war when not prepared for it. Mine (The Netherlands) for example. Not because we wanted it, but because we were attacked by another nation. It is an entirely different story to go to war for prestige when unprepared. That is willfully sacrificing your citizens and military. 

Spain was more or less in the same position. Franco was smart enough to stay out of the war. That's why Franco was a much better leader than Mussolini.

Anonymous · Answer

For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/awUAV

As far as I know, they were both raised Catholic. Whether they continued to consider themselves Catholics or not isn't clear. The website I provided below indicated that Mussolini worked to maintain a good relationship with the Catholic Church and had his children baptized as Catholics. It may have been entirely for political reasons, of course. A lot of people say Hitler was an atheist, but it appears that he also courted a good relationship with religious leaders for political purposes. Supposedly, he may have been interested in using some ideas from Christianity such as Church administration for the Nazi party. Politicians are often very ambiguous about things like that, even if they aren't horrible tyrants. I have read from various sources that many high ranking officials in the Catholic church were supportive of Hitler and Mussolini. I'm not trying to imply anything bad about the Catholic Church itself, I'm just going along with what I read. In all fairness, some of the Catholics who supported these regimes may have done so out of fear.

Paul · Answer

Both Hitler and Mussolini were not bad leaders, History is written by the winners. The Holocaust has never been proven other than addressing lots of people including Jews suffered and died during the war, especially as it came to a close..  Mussolini was not the only one who was killed after the war, millions of other innocent lives were also taken in cold blood, in Germany and all over... You don't see these stories make it to Hollywood though.

? · Answer

From my point of view, musolini was a good leader for italy, just like hitler was a good leader for germany.
they both did good things about their countries, especialy on the economical part.
but that doesn't meen they were great people for the rest of the world.

but you are teribly wrong about the part he didn't harm the countries he invaded.
he was the only leader who aproved the use of chemical gasses during the ww2. and he used them against the ethyopians, who actualy had an almost medieval army. people on horses just carrying rifles, absolutely no airforce or navy or mechanized forces in general.

about albania, well no he didn't do much bad things to albania, exept from the part that he invaded greece, and greece after a week moved the front several kms inside albania.
albanians themselves were involved in a war that was not theirs in the first place since musolinis goal was greece and not albania.

but that was not the worst thing about musolini, since he was in the axis, and he had lost the war against greece, 
(which was neutral since the equivalent dictator of greece, metaxas was fond of hitler, and the royal family was friendly to the english)
hitler had to prove that his alliance didn't got defeated and was afraid of an english domination of the aegian in case greece joined the allys.
that would effect the war in africa and the oil production. so he had to come and invade countrys like yugoslavia and greece.

musolinis stupid ideas of a new roman empire, created so much trouble in so many countries. and italian people did not actualy believe in thoose things he said. italy had no real reason to go against greece.
but he wanted to immitate anciant romans.
because of a stupid idea, he caused a war, an then a second war against the germans, who actualy had no plans to invade this part of europe.
no he wasn't a butcher, but the occupation of greece from germans-italians-bulgarians brought the highest percentage of deaths compairing to any other europian country.

not to mention all the bad things that came after ww2, like the totaly destoyed industry, the controll of yugoslavia by communists and the greek civil war.


about england spain and such, no they were not better, but because they did this doesn't meen he had a green light to do the same.
about america, well the war on iraq happened just for profit, the exploitation of the countrys oil and creating a new market and rebuilding a country after demolishing it.
well you should ask an iraqi person about how he feels about it, and then an american about how he feels that his countrymen went and died so some people can just get richer.

by the way, you cant realy assimilate other races to italian system, when the total of italian culture is based on that other race.

Tim D · Answer

So you reject democracy and accept the one party state? That is fine, many nations have rejected democracy. But you are wrong stating that Mussolini was not a violent man, the tenets of Italian Fascism, set out in The Doctrine of Fascism, state that peace is a fantasy and that mankind should be constantly at war. And you are wrong about him not being a racist in 1928 he spoke about the White Race being submerged by other coloured races at a rate unknown in our race.

The only railway that he “made run on time” was the one train that took him to Rome from where he had been skulking while his fellow fascists staged a coup d’etat – the railway in Ethiopia, for example, was created by a joint French and British company.

Anonymous · Answer

QUOTE
"In many way, I feel Mussolini didn't harm the countries he invaded, but actually did good for them"
UNQUOTE

I think the Ethiopian women and children in the villages who were bombed with mustard gas might beg to differ!

You obviously don't know anything.
Read a book!

Try this one:
^ Secondary Wars and Atrocities of the Twentieth Century Angelo Del Boca, The Ethiopian War 1935-1941 (1965), cites a 1945 memorandum from Ethiopia to the Conference of Prime Ministers which tallies 

760,300 natives dead; of them, 

battle deaths: 275,000, 
hunger among refugees: 300,000, 
patriots killed during occupation: 75,000, 
concentration camps: 35,000, 
Feb. 1937 massacre: 30,000,
 executions: 24,000, 
civilians killed by air force: 17,800; 

Angelo Del Boca, The Ethiopian War 1935-1941 (1965)


It was Mussolini himself who authorized the use of the weapons:

    "Rome, October 27 1935. To His Excellency Graziani. The use of gas as an ultima ratio to overwhelm enemy resistance and in case of counterattack is authorized. Mussolini."

    "Rome, December 28 1935. To His Excellency Badoglio. Given the enemy system I have authorized Your Excellency the use even on a vast scale of any gas and flamethrowers. Mussolini."

Anonymous · Answer

Mussolini wasn't a bad man he did not want to kill jews but when a monster like Nazi Germany knocks at your door what can you do 

Italy used hitler to get more land for itialy so i think he wanted a empire and to be remeberd in itialy n

Jim L · Answer

Mussolini was certainly not a mass murderer of italians.  Yes, plenty of Ethiopians died.  But the Italians (even Italians, mind!) built more in Abyssinia than was built for the next 50 yoears. He just tried to punch above his weight.

Anonymous · Answer

He was a fascist and lead the National Fascist Party in Italy and was one Hitler's side.
 He did some good things for the country but why does a country need a fascist totalitarian state for that?

cymry3jones · Answer

As far as Italy is concerned, we might yet find out that Berlusconi could have taught Mussolini a thing or two.

Trending News

Was Mussolini really such a bad leader?

15 Answers