Talk:Benito Mussolini

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Mergefrom.svg Benito Mussolini's religious beliefs was nominated for deletion. The debate was closed on 02 June 2009 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Benito Mussolini. The original page is now a redirect to here. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
Diamond-caution.svg This is a controversial historical topic that may be disputed. Please read the talk page and discuss substantial changes there before making them. Please also consider the particular importance of using proper citations when adding information to highly controversial articles.
This is not a forum for general discussion of Benito Mussolini. Any such comments may be deleted or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Benito Mussolini at the Reference desk, discuss relevant Wikipedia policy at the Village pump, or ask for help at the Help desk.
Peace dove.svg Discussions on this page may escalate into heated debate. Please try to keep a cool head when commenting here. See also: Wikipedia:Etiquette.
Nuvola apps date.svg A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day... section on July 25, 2004, October 31, 2004, October 31, 2005, October 31, 2006, and October 31, 2007.


Contents

[edit] Racist?

Mussolini a Racist? But several italian "gerarchi" were jewish themselves! Italy has never been anti-semitic like many other nations... it's not casual that the numbers of the jews deportated in the concentrations camp are very low, if confronted with other axis powers. Fascism was, above all, "in love" with italianship... and the jews were seen firstly as italians, not as jews. (forgive my english) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.237.68.212 (talk) 00:35, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

[edit] POV of opening?

I know a lot of people have been working on this article and there is a long list of settled clowns but it seems to me the overall result is an opening apple pie that shows that this fellow Mussolini was a fine leader and managed to get a lot of poon. Sure, there is a brief mention of censorship and propaganda, but then look at all the domestic accomplishments! The admiration of political leaders! The daring rescue from prison! I realize that there are people who still revere the man, but this barely suggests that he is controversial, let alone widely reviled. You have to keep reading a lot further to find the political violence, the police state, the imperial invasions, the Nazi-backed puppet regime. All of this is in the article, but hidden. Maybe someone who's been working on this article already could take a crack at rewriting the opening to provide at least a bit more balance.Prodes111 (talk) 19:31, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree completely. The opening does not once mention that Mussolini was a dictator (a salient aspect of his role in history!). Skinrider (talk) 11:25, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
No-one is a dictator at Wikipedia. This is a POV word and not allowed. To be serious, this is of course a complicated issue. Yes Mussolini was an authoritarian ruler, but until the war he was hugely popular and there was very little opposition to his regime. Compared to his contemporaries he was, until 1943, a fairly benevolent dictator. Between 1922 and 1939, for example, a grand total of nine people in Italy were executed for political crimes. Compare that to the bloodbath under Stalin, or to Hitler or Franco. And his regime did have considerable accomplishments, compared both to the liberal regime that preceeded it and to the postwar republic, both of which were corrupt and slothful by comparison. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 12:47, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
lol, nice. But to address the serious part of your response, I think it would be safe to insert the phrase "and a dictator of Italy" after the current phrase "was an Italian politician" in the article opening. After all, at least half the article describes Mussolini's dictatorship --- section 3 specifically states that "Mussolini obtained dictatorial powers for one year" and "This is considered the onset of Mussolini's dictatorship", and section 4, entitled "Building a dictatorship", is all about Mussolini's actions as a dictator. A leader does not have to engage in a bloodbath to be a dictator. He only has to have supreme power. Skinrider (talk) 13:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
At Dictator we read: "In modern usage, the term "dictator" is generally used to describe a leader who holds and/or abuses an extraordinary amount of personal power, especially the power to make laws without effective restraint by a legislative assembly. Dictatorships are often characterized by some of the following traits: suspension of elections and of civil liberties; proclamation of a state of emergency; rule by decree; repression of political opponents without abiding by rule of law procedures; these include single-party state, and cult of personality." Did Mussolini meet these criteria? Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
If he didn't meet these criteria, then all uses of the word 'dictator' should be removed from the article. If we refer, at any point in the article, to Mussolini as a dictator, then it's reasonable to also add that word to the article's opening. Skinrider (talk) 18:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
The largest part of this article is titled 'Building a Dictatorship'. Degrees of brutality are not relevant in deciding whether this term applies to him. He is an iconic dictator; it should be mentioned in the first sentence. --Cammacleay (talk) 08:25, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Precisely. Skinrider (talk) 20:35, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
The challenge with Mussolini is the same one historians face when dealing with Italian Fascism in general... It is extremely hard to place neatly into boxes or categories. Having read every work the man ever wrote, it is clear to me that he lived a life full of contradiction and struggled daily with the dual lives he led. Part of the thread above is of primary importance when discussing this man and point in history. When compared to his contemporary "dictators" Mussolini is less dangerous, brutal and overall less hated. His calendar is perennially the number one seller in Italy to this day! His unique place in history is his contradiction; it is amongst the accomplishments listed in the text, his legacy. The POV is accurate because attributing the democratic propaganda term "dictator" to the entrance to the text sets an unfair table for unbiased readers searching for a true picture of the essence of Mussolini. --user:Martillaro 13 December 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.15.244.13 (talk) 20:37, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


Sorry, wasn't sure where to put this. But on the article, it states that Benito improved public transport. It is probably worth noting that Benito did nothing to improve train services. As QI pointed out "The only train he made run on time was one carrying himself from Milan to Rome run on time so he could become Prime Minister. All other improvements in the Italian transport system happened before he came to power" - 23 August 20:35

I agree that the opening section of this article does not meet Wikipedia's NPOV standards. The fact of only listing positive achievements of any political leader would be suspect, since everyone has their faults, but this is especially egregious in this case given that it is not a representative selection of his deeds while in power--so at least we can strive for balance. And yes, by the criteria given above, he was a dictator. I've marked the section for POV until this dispute is resolved. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.30.73.158 (talk) 12:33, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Mussolini a sniper?

Mussolini fought from 1915 to early 1917 in a Bersaglieri regiment. He wasn't a sniper, he was a fusilier, an ordinary infantryman. I have read his war diary and there is no mention of sniping. Later in the war Mussolini was trained to use a trench mortar, and he was in charge of a mortar squad when one of the shells they were shooting at the Austrians misfired and Mussolini got wounded. So I can't see where that bit of information comes from. It is not in the Italian entry on Mussolini, which is thoroughly documented. I do not think that MS Encarta is a reliable source when it comes to this kind of details.--213.140.21.227 17:47, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

You are totally 100% correct. That is insanity to suggest that the crafty editor of newspapers was also a trained sniper. I have over 10 biographies on Mussolini ranging in time and scope and none of them mention him being a sniper. I have updated the World War I section and used legitmate references from a British Ambassador who was a contemporary of Mussolini, Ivone Kirkpatrick. Mussolini is too fascinating a figure to be left to such shoddy citing and crazy claims. It is time to clean this page up!!! (24.12.91.197 (talk) 02:55, 15 January 2008 (UTC))

[edit] The Missing Brother

The importance of Arnaldo, Mussolini's elder brother, in the ascent of the Duce is not mentioned in this entry. Arnaldo was the only person that Benito really trusted, and he was the liason between him and the Vatican (Arnaldo being a devout Catholic, unlike his former Socialist and atheist brother). I think there should be an entry on Arnaldo Mussolini, and something should also be added to this entry.--213.140.21.227 17:52, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] censorship

The section dedicated to Mussolini as a soldier in the first world war has been drastically altered, and I find no mention in the discussion section of any intended modification of the much longer paragraph that was there before. --Jimbolone 11:16, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Grolier copyright and citation issues

The "foreign policy" section seems to have been partially copied from [1]. Other sections should probably be checked for copyright problems. The Groiler's encyclopedia article is cited as a source elsewhere. This is mildly inappropriate, as Wikipedia should finding independent justification for fact in books written by historians, not pointing at competing encyclopedias. -- Beland 06:24, 9 October 2007 (UTC) frevkopfjvprejpvjrefpvpmvpfjpivmpfmrbpvi[mfpivp[ifmrpvmfpimvpfmpvibfpvpbifpvofpovpbogrm

[edit] Mussolini the Socialist

This article states: "He left the army an anti-socialist in 1917"

This is nonsense. Mussolini was and always stayed to be a socialist. However during the first world war many former leading internationalist-socialistic comrades suddenly proved to be much more nationalist than they claimed before. (Search for info on the internet about the betrayel of the second internationalist conference). This let Benito to the conclusion that socialism needed and should use the strength of nationalism. That is how he became a national socialist in the true meaning of the word. So what he really became in 1917 was anti-internationalistic-socialism. He let go of the internationalistic part and not of the socialist part of his believes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.45.225.74 (talk) 11:13, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

(from France) if ever the anonymous propagandist of 29/11/07 at 11:13 had a basic historical knowledge, or if he ever had under the eyes a copy of 'Il Popolo d'Italia', the paper that Mussolini created in nov. 1914 with French (diplomatic) and Italian (bug business) financial's help, he should know that from that time Mussolini stopped to be a socialist. These 29/11 statements are nothing but a childish attempt to tell us the same old story, socialism equal fascism... 194.254.169.6 15:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC) L. Nemeth

If so many people are leftist these days, why wouldn't we remind them socialism killed many millions more people than fascism and nazism? Truly - mankind still isn't able to learn on its mistakes... 85.89.184.212 (talk) 15:10, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

The "Break with Socialists" section amounts to nothing more than two cherry-picked quotes from one ancient source. I am not disputing that Mussolini broke with the actual Italian socialISTS (in distinction to the belief of socialISM, some core values of which he retained), but this section needs much expansion, if it even deserves to be its own section at all.

But, moreover, this entire article seems haunted by the fear that someone might think some ridiculous notion that all current-day Socialists are little Mussolinis. This is obviously false and would be a huge exaggeration, but the fact is that Mussolini was a socialist for a long time, and even after he broke formally with the socialists and stopped believing in the vitality of a Socialist party, he never really renounced many of the tenants of socialism. The tenor of his fascist socialization obviously overlapped with socialism on economic grounds. This is indisputable. To suggest that Mussolini did some sort of complete political 180 and left everything he believed in behind is ludicrous. Not even the stupid college students who run from everything vaguely "right wing" would believe that. It's like suggesting that if a U.S. politician switched parties from Democrat to Republican (or vice versa), then the guy must have renounced a belief in representational government and voting, since the party he left believed in representational government and voting. The point is, Mussolini's brand of fascism had enough in common with socialism that to suggest that Mussolini stopped believing in many tenets of socialism is incorrect. He broke with the actual socialISTS, and believed that the doctrinal package of "Socialism" was ineffective, so he gave a fascistic overhaul to his core beliefs (but did not throw these beliefs out and start over).

However, this is wikipedia, so I don't expect anything remotely "left wing" to be cast in a bad light. Only a moron would interpret acknowledging Mussolini's continued socialist beliefs as an attack against contemporary socialists, but I guess many of the caretakers here are indeed planning for a future when everyone is a moron. Don't worry, fellas, I must admit that the masses are getting ever more dumbed-down. The spin and propaganda is working. Pretty soon you'll be able to call Stalin a right-wing extremist too, if you can't spin him into a misguided saint instead. 66.82.9.59 (talk)

[edit] Internationalist Socialism versus Fascist Socialism

Many people condemn Mussolini for his dictatorship and the violence of fascism. But most people do not understand that before he conquered Italy the International Socialists where planning a revolution orchestrated by the Russian communists. These Russian communist had by this time already many hundreds of thousands people killed in Russia during and after their revolution. The fascist have never ever been as cruel as them, not by a long shot. If Mussolini would not have taken control, than the internationalist Socialists would have turned Italy into a bloodbath. The fascist prevented this, but it was impossible to do this in a friendly way against such a violent enemy.

These remarks show a very shallow knowledge of Italian history 1918-1922. No mention of the fact that Mussolini left the Socialist party because he was given money by powerful Italian industrial cartels (Agnelli, Ansaldo, Perrone, weapon-makers who were in favor of Italy joining the war as it would bring them huge contracts), so Mussolini's opposition to the Socialists started well before the strikes and protests that started after the end of the war. Besides, the Socialists were one thing and the Communists were another, quite different, thing. Saying that "International Socialists where planning a revolution orchestrated by the Russian communists" is proof of a big misunderstanding of what the real relations between Socialists and Communists were in post-war Italy (btw the Italian Communist Party was born in 1921, and that party had strong connections with Moscow; but it didn't exist as an independent organization before that year). Moreover, the diffusion of socialist ideas was caused by the ruthless exploitation of Italian workers and peasants carried out by the Italian middle- and upper-classes, an exploitation which was heightened during the war (imagine going on strike because of low wages in a moment when factories were busy producing machine-guns, mortars, armoured cars, military trucks, etc.--they immediately sent the Army to repress any protest), and was definitely not something remotely controlled by the Bolsheviks in Moscow.

All in all those remarks are nonsense. Mussolini was a ruthless dictator, who carried out an aggressive and imperialistic international policy. One might mention the censorship, the elimination of dissidents, the colonial wars, the role played by Italy in the Spanish civil war, and then what Italians did in the Balkans during W.W.II (the Yugoslav and the Greeks found the Nazis more manageable!).--213.140.21.227 17:43, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

You speak as if fascist methods are incompatible with socialism and tender that as proof Mussolini was no long a socialist. That thinking is fundamentally wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.43.251.182 (talk) 00:59, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] He was executed by firing squad, not assassinated

In the article "execution by firing squad" his execution is even listed as an example! --84.220.25.149 (talk) 23:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Benito Papito was assassinated by the very definition of the word; "Assassination is the targeted killing of an individual who is in a high-profile position. An added distinction between assassination and other forms of killing is that the assassin has an ideological or political motivation."
The fact that he was murdered by a firing squad does not change the fact that communists assassinated him based on him been of a high-profile position, fueled by political and ideological motivations.[2][3][4] Wikipedia can't be used as a source for another article. - Animagentile (talk) 01:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Definition of assassinate from Merriam Webster

You seem to have forgotten the fact that it must be a sudden attack to be an assassination. A firing squad isn't exactly secret. DDSaeger (talk) 02:47, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

That's a very narrow definition of the word. The OED gives "To kill by treacherous violence." So he was assassinated. Carl.bunderson (talk) 05:31, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

While he was high profile he was not in a position of power as he had already been ousted as Italy's leader. I do not think that "assassination" is the correct word and "execution" could imply that his death was ordered as the result of some kind of trial. I think "killed" is probably the least evocative word but does not have the same description of the manner in which he died. I think the most accurate phrase is "summary execution" as this shows that his death was extra-judicial and is not as evocative as "assasination" which relies on the POV that his killing was treacherous. --Aimaz (talk) 14:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I think you had good reasons for changing it. I prefer "summarily executed" to "assassinated". Carl.bunderson (talk) 16:39, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I agree with "summarily executed" as well. However, that change seems to have been reverted. Animagentile, reasons have been provided why this might be more appropriate - why exactly do you prefer assassinated? DDSaeger (talk) 23:20, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Please don't keep changing it back. Summarily executed is clearly the better term. --John (talk) 18:38, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Summarily executed is correct. I remind that Audisio has a written order from Raffaele Cadorna, Jr. to execute Mussolini.User talk:Lucifero4.

[edit] "bloodbath" of -24

The article claims that "The militant members of the party were angry that only a few dozen had been killed and a bloodbath ensued, causing thousands of casualties" following the assassination of Matteotti. I can't find mention of this bloodbath anywhere else, nor is there any citation for the statement. Can someone clarify this? Also, can you be more specific? Was the bloodbath against socialists, communists and/or anarchists, or just civilian Italians in general? Was the bloodbath ordered by Il Duce, the military leaders, or did it "just happen"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.50.170.14 (talk) 22:48, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Anteo Zamboni

Anteo Zamboni, the boy that was lynched by the mob, was actually innocent, it says that in one of my books on Mussolini. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.44.86.61 (talk) 22:57, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] expansionism for militarism

I thought I better explain the reason for such a change in the intro first. Since Italia irredenta was an important part of the ideology of Italian nationalists under Fascism and obviously we have the building of the Italian Empire, "expansionaism" covers both of those things, as well as the obvious means in which the Empire could be formed in the first place; by military force. - Gennarous (talk) 01:09, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Atheist

I have added Mussolini to the atheist category due his anti-clerical and atheist views shown in early writings and then in private even after his supposed "conversion" to Catholicism. It is highly likely if not certain that Mussolini did not believe in God. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.151.160.105 (talk) 03:04, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

As I know Mussolini recived the baptism as an infant so following the canon law is not an atheist but a catholic,but he didn't belive in God that is sure. As I know in 1927 he married Rachele Guidi in front of priest years after his civil marriage with Donna Rachele, this decision of a religius marriage was done before the Lateran Traty. (User:Lucifero4)
Found this sourche through Google books which seems might be the source used for the citation in that section [5] Outomus (talk) 06:45, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Mussolini was catholic, but in adolescent age he matured some doubt about the religion, after studying Nietsche toughts. When became leader of fascism he had retreived his faith. Although fascism made use of anti-clerical people in his squadrons. His last script confirms that:

"It is not the faith that comes at dusk one that keeps me going, is the faith of my childhood and my life that requires me to have to believe, even when I right to doubt.[...]I believed in the victory of our arms, as I believe in God, our Lord[...]" from "letter to Italian people" http://www.ilduce.net/lettera.htm

Moreover the fascist doctrine contained, for want of Mussolini, a lot of Catholic references and the Popes Pius XI, Pius XII and Joannes XXIII taught that Mussolini was "the man of Providence" and "the most big man I knew, and certainly among the most deeply good". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.9.49.26 (talk) 12:38, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh please, don't put up your anticlerical sh... and read about his beliefs in the article. Thank you, all remember that a mass murderer can't be a true Catholic - rather some kind of a sectard. 85.89.184.212 (talk) 15:37, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
He's right you know. Catholics can't be mass murderers. They're too busy being paedophiles. They leave the mass murdering to the baptists... Joking aside I think the religious views part of this article needs some counter views added. I mean I don't doubt he espoused Catholicism partly for political gains, but also some of his biographers were probably a bit biased like this guy above me that I made fun of.89.210.189.119 (talk) 19:29, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Why is it that catholics always want to pass of thier worst as Atheists? He was (like Hitler) were catholics. Whether or not he privately was an Atheist doesnt matter. No one can look into your soul and see what you truely believe. But if you were baptized. If you negotiated the with the vatican so that the vatican could get its own state. If in turn they baptized you and that helped you politically. I am sorry, but you my friend were a Catholic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.140.10.102 (talk) 18:29, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Reference 24 is incorrect

The sentence ending with footnote 24 should be entirely deleted, for the referenced article (footnote 24) makes no mention at all of Dollfuss. Also, the article gives no origin for the alleged quote about 'pederasts'. So please delete that entire sentence (section 5.1). 67.78.143.226 (talk) 19:55, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll move the ref so it doesn't refer to Dollfuss, but there is no reason to remove it wholesale. The article is a whole is referenced--how does it fail to meet the criteria for being a RS? Carl.bunderson (talk) 04:40, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
67.78.143.226, I'm not sure what point you were trying to make? Are you trying to say Mussolini and Dollfuss were not allies before the nazis had him killed? If so, you would be incorrect. - Gennarous (talk) 04:22, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Missing Word

There is a missing word in the first sentence: Benito Amilcare Andrea Mussolini (July 29, 1883 – April 28, 1945) was an Italian who led the National Fascist Party and is credited with being one of key figures in the creation of Fascism.

It should say "one of the key figures," not "one of key figures.

HisPowr4U (talk) 20:28, 11 May 2008 (UTC)HisPowr4U 5/11/08

Noted and fixed. Thanks. Carl.bunderson (talk) 06:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Extra Word

In the sentence, "Mussolini's face looked as if it he had significant pain..." I believe it should read "Mussolini's face looked as if he had significant pain..." or "Mussolini's face looked as if he was in significant pain...". Or it could all be removed since most the information in the Death section has no reference or bad references, but I suppose thats just Wikipedia. At least add some "It is believed..." or "It has been reputed..." --67.168.101.115 (talk) 19:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

           Remove "it" and you're done. Da Baron (talk) 23:58, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Fascism was appropriated by Mussolini to label the movement he led to power in Italy in 1922, but was subsequently generalized to cover a whole range of movements in Europe during the inter-war period. The economic conditions of the period were the main feature that increased the attractions of the Fascists. Although Mussolini's governments tended to interfere considerably in economic life and to regulate its process, there can be no doubt that despite all restrictions imposed on them, the capitalist and landowning classes were protected by the fascist system, and many favored it as an obstacle to socialization. In spite of Italy’s war debts and problems of reconstruction, wages remained at their pre-war levels. In such circumstances, the working-class voters were attracted to the left-wing parties in the hope of pressing for wage claims. Some of these people took action on their own behalf by striking and occupying factories. Consecutively, people who owned property and feared Socialism were encouraged to support extreme parties.

User:Subtank 22:08, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mussolini's Roman Empire

I read a book that's now out of print, called Mussolini's Roman Empire, it cast a lot of light on diplomacy between Italy and Nazi Germany. Hitler and mussolini had several direct meetings in which they spoke about their plans and ideals. The interesting thing is that though mussolini could speak some german he was no good with comprehension so much of Hitler's words most likey went w/o any kind of understanding. Mussolini refused to use a translator and probably didn't understand half of hitler's words. Da Baron (talk) 23:58, 9 June 2008 (UTC)hi how are you

[edit] Mussolini and the Mafia

Why doesn't this article address his dealings with the Mafia? It's an interesting aspect of Italian Fascism:http://www.americanmafia.com/Feature_Articles_267.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.210.220.249 (talk) 18:01, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

The Mafia in the fascist period was suppressed violently and there were no more reports of mafia activity until the period of migration from southern Italy to America. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.9.49.26 (talk) 12:47, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Sourcing issues

In the section "Conquest of Ethiopia" there is a section that describes how European powers such as Britain maintained their African colonies by "brutal" means. I did not think that a very fair assessment, and so checked the source, which turns out to be a website called Counter Currents. This is not an academic/ historical source, but more of an online polemic. Within the Counter Currents article in question, the reference to Africa and British brutality (Kenya in the 1950s) didn't even take place when Mussolini was alive, so how can it be said to be relevant to the context of Mussolini's invasion of Ethiopia?

I feel it is a real failure of Wikipedia's mission for articles to be sourced in such an ideological fashion, and for shoddy sourcing like this to be used.Stevirv (talk) 09:43, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Propaganda

This is more of a request for future expansion than a correction, but at the moment I'm searching for propaganda under Mussolini and the only mentions I've found (through my admittedly quick reading) are the licenses required by papers and one to the concept of propaganda in the opening paragraph. Did Mussolini have a specific ministry of propaganda, like Hitler? Faux scholar (talk) 01:13, 10 September 2008 (UTC)


[edit] remove "TIMMAY!!"

it is obvious vandalism —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.226.255.25 (talk) 19:04, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


In sentence: Mussolini's once-ubiquitous propaganda machine lost its grip on the people; a large number of Italians urned to Vatican Radio or Radio London for more accurate news coverage.

In this sentence: urned

Should be changed to turned Figlinus (talk) 03:11, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mussolini's missing daughter

Mussolini's youngest daughter has been airbrushed out. Anna Maria Mussolini 1929-1968 suffered from childhood polio. She appears to have only been famous through her family but she does deserve a mention. She should not be confused with Anna Maria Mussolini the wife of Romano and sister of Sophia Loren. Can someone authourised put her in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.96.72.111 (talk) 21:26, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Grammar

"There was even some Jews in the National Fascist Party" This has been bugging me since I read it and it needs to be fixed. -08:35 ET, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. Carl.bunderson (talk) 22:00, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Spanish Civil war

This section is far from being neutral because it fails to mention that the Republicans were the democratically elected government and that the Nationalists were attempting a coup d'etat.

The reference to propaganda is misleading because when read naturalistically it implies that Italian military support in Spain was morally justified.

"Italian military help to Nationalists against the anti-clerical and anti-Catholic atrocities committed by the Republican side worked well in Italian propaganda targeting Catholics."

Incidents of "anti-clerical and anti-Catholic atrocities" are not cited and these alone are not the reason for Italian fascist support of Falangist rebels. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.144.32.165 (talk) 02:26, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

The comment that intervention on the side of Franco ended any hope of reconciliation with Britain and France is quite simply incorrect. Despite Mussolini's aid since July 1936 the British attempted throughout the period to reach reconciliation with Italy e.g. with the Gentleman's agreement. At times, repproach with Italy looked likely. At msot, Italy's intervention soured relations between her and Britain only slightly. Odin (talk) 19:55, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Citation required

There, Hitler told him that unless he agreed to return to Italy and set up a new fascist state, the Germans would destroy Milan, Genoa and Turin.

There shall be a citation here, this is quite an obscure statement. Where is this documented? I hope we are not saying now that we have to thanks Mussolini for having avoided bombing Milan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pierino23 (talk • contribs) 12:47, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Father dead link and citation

We currently have a link for Alessandro Mussolini. This page was deleted, please remove the link. Also we mention his father's political views. I do not see a direct citation to back up that he was a Socialist, Anarchist, Republican. I found some evidence of the Socialist, Anarchist (no citation), but the Republican is shakey. Are we talking about an Italian Republican Party that would have been active in 1883-1901 or the American Republican Party that was only know internationally for freeing slaves and fighting racial injustice in the south? I smell bias here from a view point that may not realize that the progressive movement didn't happen until 1912. Let's be faithful to History, clarify what republican party he would have leaned towards and cite it. This is the section showing early influences by his father, so I say 1883-1901 would be the years in question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Micawiki (talk • contribs) 15:54, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Addition of Informative External Link

Proposal for the addition of another external link:

http://robertod.wordpress.com/2009/09/23/despot-of-the-week-7-benito-mussolini/

This is an extensive and informative article about Benito Mussolini that merits consideration for a link.

210.8.191.97 (talk) 07:17, 23 September 2009 (UTC)Doctor D210.8.191.97 (talk) 07:17, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Documents reveal Italian dictator got start in politics in 1917 with help of £100 weekly wage from MI5

--Mais oui! (talk) 21:40, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

yes this is important and needs to be addressed. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.153.214.185 (talk) 15:43, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

So should he be in Category:British spies? Our article might also want to mention what the crown got for that money -- 67.98.206.2 (talk) 21:43, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

(from France) it should be known in England, nowadays, that Mussolini got start in right wing politics in 1914 -in no case 1917- after having received a huge amount of money, not only from italian bug business, but also from France. The referential article has been published more than ten years ago, in Italy : Luc Nemeth, « Dolci corrispondenze. La Francia e i finanziamenti a « Il Popolo d’Italia » 1914-1917″, Italia contemporanea, n. 212, sett. 1998, pp. 605-616. 194.153.110.5 (talk) 12:45, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Mistress' diary: Mussolini was a fierce anti-Semite

This Israeli site: [JP] tells that Mussolini was a fierce anti-Semite.Agre22 (talk) 16:02, 17 November 2009 (UTC)agre22

[edit] Mistress' diary: please take care

I do not want to change the part concerning the Mistress diary by myself but I'd like someone qualified to do it.My point is that Fascism at the beginning was not anti-semite. Simply it was not an issue for them. There were a good number of italian jews between members of Fascist party at the beginning. Furthermore for several year Mussolini used to have an influential lover that was an italian jews too (which is not a tipical antisemite behavior :D). Claretta Petacci in her diary report these speeches of Mussolini in which he claimed to be anti-semite (and several other things) in order to present himself not as an Hitler follower but as the leader of that weird coalition. He was a poor megalomaniac but this claims, even if they comes from himself seems to be inaccurate. Corrado —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.145.155.76 (talk) 12:39, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Mussolini's Body picture

please put the picture of his body hanging back in wikipedia is not supposed to be censored , and then do something to make sure all the little fascists running around here do not remove it again —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eboda (talk • contribs) 08:02, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

[edit] In popular culture

Benito Mussolini was breathly mentioned un the song "The Ultimate Showdown". This should be here... —Preceding unsigned comment added by E102ewan (talk • contribs) 12 April 2010 (UTC) monkey

[edit] Depiction of Il Duce & Ida Dalser in Vincere

Should be included in the 'In popular culture' section —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.53.24 (talk) 13:17, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Name

"Mussolini" is the Italian word for "muslin." Were his ancestors in the fabric business, possibly making sails out of cotton cloth?Lestrade (talk) 20:33, 17 June 2010 (UTC)Lestrade

The Italian name of muslin is mussola or mussolina. The surname Mussolini seems to be a variation of the surname Muzzi. Similar surnames of the same group are: Muzi, Muziano, Muzii, Muzio, Muzza, Muzzarelli, Muzzarini, Muzzio, Muzzioli, Muzzo, Mucci, Muccini, Muccino, Muccio, Muccioli, Mussi, Musi, Musio, Mussato, Mussini, Mussino, Musso, Mussola, Mussolino. Their origin is unsure. They can be interpreted as hipocorisms of surnames as Giacomucci/Giacomuzzi, from Giacomi (son of Giacomo>James). Or from the ancient roman name Mutius (it:Muzio), meaning stuttering. Musso can derive from a toponym. The forms Mussola and Mussolini could also derive from the textile manifacture. In Italy, surnames for non-nobles started to be used from the XIII/XIV century. So, it would be quite difficult to track down if the work of his ancestors is the origin of his surname. --151.51.22.137 (talk) 21:48, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Untitled

"Engelbert Dollfuss the Austrofascist dictator of Austria in 1933." actually assassinated 1934 -Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.248.143 (talk) 16:07, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


[edit] MICHELE SCHIRRU WAS ITALIAN

"American anarchist Michael Schirru" WTF WHO HAS WRITTEN THIS RUBBISH??? THIS IS AN ENCYCLOPEDIA, Michele Schirru (not Michael, beign italian) was born in Padria (province of Sassari, SARDINIA) in 1899

from France.- The only rubbish is... in this childish provocation. Anyone having interest for Michele Schirru should know he was a US citizen (he got the citizenship on oct. 1st, 1926). From the time he entered the country as a permanent resident he was known as Michael. But the compagni, in New York, usually called him Mike... L. Nemeth 143.126.201.151 (talk) 12:30, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Bellini

The partisan Bellini is mentioned in this article and dealt with in some detail in Toland's Last 100 days. Not sure this is the place to ask, but is there anyone with further info on Count Pier Bellini delle Stelle? Does he merit his own article? In Toland, he is shown being against the execution of Mussolini or at least against the summary execution (and also against the murder or his mistress).--Jrm2007 (talk) 09:16, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Marriage to Dalser?

Without any primary source(s) available or record of it, what is the reason to list/mention Ida Dalser as one of his wives? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.57.68.239 (talk) 01:54, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Heard that Mussolinis goverment wouild not expel jews

Heard that the Facist goverment of Mussonlini in Italien terrority or occupied by Mussonlin would not expell the jews as Hitler wanted. True?ANDREMOIME (talk) 15:26, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Benito_Mussolini"
Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
Interaction
Toolbox
Print/export