If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   In an attempt to make you forget about everything else he has said, Silvio Berlusconi claims Mussolini wasn't so bad. Godwini's law has just been invoked   (slate.com) divider line 56
    More: Fail, Berlusconi, Mussolini, Jewish laws, Berlusconi claims  
•       •       •

2103 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Jan 2013 at 8:16 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



56 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-01-27 04:41:33 PM
For some reason I just don't feel any sense of surprise here.
 
2013-01-27 05:04:38 PM
Knowing Berlusconi, he was either serious (he has formed coalitions with Mussolini's successors) or was referring to former model Alessandra Mussolini,  il Duce's granddaughter and Silvio's colleague, possibly wishing for her to join him for a  bunga-bunga party...
upload.wikimedia.org
Her today (but there are many NSFW pics from when she used to model).
 
2013-01-27 05:04:53 PM
You know who else thought he wasn't so bad?
 
2013-01-27 05:38:29 PM
Fatto gli treni in orario?
 
2013-01-27 06:23:00 PM
So Berlusconi's promising to make the trains run on time?
 
2013-01-27 08:20:33 PM
I need to actually read up on Mussolini some time. Bigfoot gets more screen time on History Channel than Mussolini.

/It's always Hitler week
//Or hunting for alien artifacts at discount prices.
 
2013-01-27 08:21:37 PM
for some reason people tend to get upset when I point out whose side Italy was on in the war...
 
2013-01-27 08:24:02 PM
Who care who runs Italy? What's not controlled by the Mafia is controlled by corrupt officials.
 
2013-01-27 08:25:59 PM
This is what I hate about politics. Knee jerk reactions matter more than prolonged conversation and debating facts.

Mussolini came to power in 1922. Hitler in 1933. Eleven years is a long time. People overlook 1922-1933 because 1934-1945 overfills schoolbook attention the world over.

This is why Mussolini came to power- in 1917 the Bolsheviks came to power in Russia. By 1922 the Bolsheviks were strong enough to have consolidated the old empire, retaken Belorussia, and were pressing deep into Poland. In Germany between 1918-1919 there was a naval revolt in Kiel, as well as a communist revolution in Bavaria. In 1919 Bela Kun was leading a communist revolt in Hungry. Even the Ottoman empire had fallen. Fear of chaos and red terror was spreading westward.

Mussolini was able to avoid revolution. Yes, his tactics were strongarm, but Italy was not a democracy, it was a monarchy. "It could have been worse" is not a excuse, but... could it really have been better?

To avoid revolution, the existing order needed to be preserved, the growing urban labour movement needed to be appeased (he himself was a former socialist party member,) the mafia needed to be bought off, and the Vatican needed guaranteed protection. Under Mussolini's rule (until he effectively lost power was was propped up by the also dying National Socialist German empire), avant-garde art flowed. And until the ill fated alliance with Germany and the outbreak of war- people were not round up en masse and put in death camps, and Jews had a much larger gouvernment representation percentage than they had population percentage.

Mussolini gets a worse wrap than he deserves. I'm not saying that he deserves a good wrap. What I am saying is that if it wasnt for WW2 and the alliance with Germany, he would be a regular old dictator swept into the dustbin of history and not have his name next to Hitler and Stalin in the same sentence of all the history books. While some of the methods may have been violent on a individual scale, he was not as brutal as his later allies AND enemies were on a national and international scale. And that he did far more to preserve world order than, unlike his contemporaries, friend or foe, destroy it.
 
2013-01-27 08:27:00 PM
Really, is there still even that much of a difference between him and Mussolini at this point?

Both are narcissistic blowhards who think they're the next Julius Caesar but couldn't be competent enough to successfully run an outlet mall in Idaho, let alone the Italian government.
 
TWX
2013-01-27 08:29:26 PM
You know, Mussolini wasn't so bad.

Compared to Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, Milošević, and even the situation during the various Khanates, Mussolini wasn't so bad.
 
2013-01-27 08:29:56 PM
I was told there would be pizza.
 
2013-01-27 08:30:35 PM
Is this eight millionth straw that will break the camel's back and end Silvio's career?

the man must have dirt on everyone
 
2013-01-27 08:31:30 PM

fusillade762: So Berlusconi's promising to make the trains run on time?


imgs.xkcd.com

\i have nothing to apologize for.
 
2013-01-27 08:33:21 PM

BumpInTheNight: You know who else thought he wasn't so bad?


H... Hitler?
 
2013-01-27 08:34:00 PM

Bukharin: This is what I hate about politics. Knee jerk reactions matter more than prolonged conversation and debating facts.

Mussolini came to power in 1922. Hitler in 1933. Eleven years is a long time. People overlook 1922-1933 because 1934-1945 overfills schoolbook attention the world over.

This is why Mussolini came to power- in 1917 the Bolsheviks came to power in Russia. By 1922 the Bolsheviks were strong enough to have consolidated the old empire, retaken Belorussia, and were pressing deep into Poland. In Germany between 1918-1919 there was a naval revolt in Kiel, as well as a communist revolution in Bavaria. In 1919 Bela Kun was leading a communist revolt in Hungry. Even the Ottoman empire had fallen. Fear of chaos and red terror was spreading westward.

Mussolini was able to avoid revolution. Yes, his tactics were strongarm, but Italy was not a democracy, it was a monarchy. "It could have been worse" is not a excuse, but... could it really have been better?

To avoid revolution, the existing order needed to be preserved, the growing urban labour movement needed to be appeased (he himself was a former socialist party member,) the mafia needed to be bought off, and the Vatican needed guaranteed protection. Under Mussolini's rule (until he effectively lost power was was propped up by the also dying National Socialist German empire), avant-garde art flowed. And until the ill fated alliance with Germany and the outbreak of war- people were not round up en masse and put in death camps, and Jews had a much larger gouvernment representation percentage than they had population percentage.

Mussolini gets a worse wrap than he deserves. I'm not saying that he deserves a good wrap. What I am saying is that if it wasnt for WW2 and the alliance with Germany, he would be a regular old dictator swept into the dustbin of history and not have his name next to Hitler and Stalin in the same sentence of all the history books. While some of the methods may have been violent on a individ ...


The Ethiopians would disagree.
 
2013-01-27 08:36:03 PM

Bukharin: This is what I hate about politics. Knee jerk reactions matter more than prolonged conversation and debating facts.

Mussolini came to power in 1922. Hitler in 1933. Eleven years is a long time. People overlook 1922-1933 because 1934-1945 overfills schoolbook attention the world over.

This is why Mussolini came to power- in 1917 the Bolsheviks came to power in Russia. By 1922 the Bolsheviks were strong enough to have consolidated the old empire, retaken Belorussia, and were pressing deep into Poland. In Germany between 1918-1919 there was a naval revolt in Kiel, as well as a communist revolution in Bavaria. In 1919 Bela Kun was leading a communist revolt in Hungry. Even the Ottoman empire had fallen. Fear of chaos and red terror was spreading westward.

Mussolini was able to avoid revolution. Yes, his tactics were strongarm, but Italy was not a democracy, it was a monarchy. "It could have been worse" is not a excuse, but... could it really have been better?

To avoid revolution, the existing order needed to be preserved, the growing urban labour movement needed to be appeased (he himself was a former socialist party member,) the mafia needed to be bought off, and the Vatican needed guaranteed protection. Under Mussolini's rule (until he effectively lost power was was propped up by the also dying National Socialist German empire), avant-garde art flowed. And until the ill fated alliance with Germany and the outbreak of war- people were not round up en masse and put in death camps, and Jews had a much larger gouvernment representation percentage than they had population percentage.

Mussolini gets a worse wrap than he deserves. I'm not saying that he deserves a good wrap. What I am saying is that if it wasnt for WW2 and the alliance with Germany, he would be a regular old dictator swept into the dustbin of history and not have his name next to Hitler and Stalin in the same sentence of all the history books. While some of the methods may have been violent on a individ ...


But he did ally with Hitler, he was weak, he assisted in the final solution, he was a racist, his military was pathetic and basically lost every battle it ever participated in, and he invaded Ethiopia. El Duce was a douche.
 
2013-01-27 08:36:09 PM
i229.photobucket.com
 
2013-01-27 08:36:34 PM

Scaevola: The Ethiopians would disagree.


That was was 1935-1936, out of the scope of my statement.
 
2013-01-27 08:41:14 PM
He was great in "Fargo".
 
2013-01-27 08:48:58 PM

skinink: Who care who runs Italy? What's not controlled by the Mafia is controlled by corrupt officials.


Redundant sentence is redundant.
 
2013-01-27 08:50:36 PM
But nobody point out that his comments, as quoted in the article, were far more nuanced than the headline suggests and essentially correct. No, it's far easier just to pander to the lowest common denominator and feign outrage. Whargarble, etc.

/probably not the most appropriate time or place to make those kinds of comments but still...
 
2013-01-27 08:58:34 PM
imgs.xkcd.com
 
2013-01-27 09:07:18 PM
Non voi parlate l'Italiano? Fark, sono deluso.
 
2013-01-27 09:10:20 PM
Modern leftists worship his absolute power and wish it for their team.
 
2013-01-27 09:17:50 PM

Bukharin: if it wasnt for WW2 and the alliance with Germany, he would be a regular old dictator swept into the dustbin of history and not have his name next to Hitler and Stalin in the same sentence of all the history books.


And if my aunt had balls...
 
2013-01-27 09:18:33 PM

Nemo's Brother: Modern leftists worship his absolute power and wish it for their team.


0/10

That was bad and you should feel bad.
 
2013-01-27 09:19:08 PM
Godwini?
 
2013-01-27 09:31:24 PM

rattchett: But he did ally with Hitler


So did the rest of Europe sans Britain and France, on account of the threat posed by a rapidly industrializing and militarizing Soviet Union.

rattchett: he was weak


He was very popular domestically and internationally. I fail to see how you could call him a weak leader.

rattchett: he assisted in the final solution


Italy was a better place to be a Jew than much of the rest of Europe, and the deportation of Jews only occurred in German-occupied Italy following the Italian-Allied armistice. Mussolini was a hostage at this point.

rattchett: he was a racist


Mussolini: Race? It is a feeling, not a reality. Ninety-five per cent, at least. Nothing will ever make me believe that biologically pure races can be shown to exist today.... National pride has no need of the delirium of race.


rattchett: his military was pathetic and basically lost every battle it ever participated in


This myth is the result of British and German propaganda. German leaders often blamed their failures on the quality of Italian troops. Admittedly, Italy lacked the quality of equipment of other countries, but that is to be expected from a minor power, just as no one expected Romania, China, or Turkey to produce world-class armour or arms.

rattchett: he invaded Ethiopia


How is this any different from the atrocities committed by the other European powers in the Scramble for Africa, or the crimes they were then-currently committing against their subjugated populaces? Italy's actions in Ethiopia were brutal, but war is brutal, and the Italians never participated in the wanton meaningless slaughter perpetrated in Belgian, yes Belgian, Congo. Their is far more blood on the hands of Belgium's leaders of the era than Mussolini.

rattchett: El Duce was a douche.


You think you're clever, but that is one of the most childish lines I've ever read.

Mussolini was not a monster, and in fact was a pretty decent leader. He increased agricultural output, reduced malaria, improved the Italian economy, reduced the influence of the mafia, and restored Italian national pride. Furthermore, he guaranteed Austrian independence until it was clear that he would have no support from Britain or France, and was one of the few European leaders to actively stand against Hitler.
 
2013-01-27 09:33:33 PM
Bukharin: Your perspective is interesting, but you've obviously cherry-picked the dates so as to pre-date the most objectionable stuff that Mussolini did-- aid to Franco, invading Albania, etc. But what about the brutal suppression of the Libyan revolt in the late 1920s which lasted until 1931? Mussolini signed-off on the herding of thousands of people into concentration camps, the torture of prisoners, the execution of Omar Mukhtar, etc.
 
2013-01-27 09:44:35 PM

JackCanuck: Mussolini was not a monster, and in fact was a pretty decent leader. He increased agricultural output, reduced malaria, improved the Italian economy, reduced the influence of the mafia, and restored Italian national pride. Furthermore, he guaranteed Austrian independence until it was clear that he would have no support from Britain or France, and was one of the few European leaders to actively stand against Hitler.


You must be Italian. Mussolini was an idiot, and a very weak leader. He allied with Hitler very early on--after his support of the Fascists in Spain made him a viable leader in Hitler's eyes--to gain the support he needed in the Italian Parliament. He was only not bad compared to Hitler; kind of like having salmonella is not bad compared to cholera. He made no secret of his dreams of Mediterranean conquest and desire to expand his empire southward. He went after Ethiopia only because if he'd gone to Egypt first he'd have had to fight Britain before he was ready. (Since Egypt was under the British Protectorate at the time)

No, he wasn't a virulent anti-Semite or race purist like Hitler, but Mussolini wasn't some kind of good guy who just got mesmerized by Hitler, either. He was a brutal dictator and just because he made the trains run on time shouldn't obscure that fact. A Fascist Italy alone might not have triggered WWII, but it might have led to a Fascist Mediterranean Axis, which wouldn't have been much better.
 
2013-01-27 09:44:39 PM
i46.photobucket.com
 
2013-01-27 09:44:46 PM
"People who invoke Godwin's Law are worse than Hitler."

--Al Yankovic
 
2013-01-27 09:50:39 PM
www.filmedge.net
WOO WOO WOOWOOWOOWOOWOOWOOWOOWOOWOOWOOWOOWOOWOOWOOWOOWOOWOOWOO!!!
 
2013-01-27 10:06:16 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Bukharin: if it wasnt for WW2 and the alliance with Germany, he would be a regular old dictator swept into the dustbin of history and not have his name next to Hitler and Stalin in the same sentence of all the history books.

And if my aunt had balls...


"... but you fark one goat...."
 
2013-01-27 10:08:38 PM

Voxper: Bukharin: Your perspective is interesting, but you've obviously cherry-picked the dates so as to pre-date the most objectionable stuff that Mussolini did-- aid to Franco, invading Albania, etc. But what about the brutal suppression of the Libyan revolt in the late 1920s which lasted until 1931? Mussolini signed-off on the herding of thousands of people into concentration camps, the torture of prisoners, the execution of Omar Mukhtar, etc.


I wouldnt say 'cherry picked.'

I think the eleven years pre-Hitler and the eleven years post-Hitler are an excellent dividing point, especially considering that until Germany stabilised, the "Red Menice" was a real fear in Europe. Germany was a far larger and more powerful country, and Hitler a much more charismatic and effective leader than Mussolini- but until he came to power, Mussolini was the one of the front line against the chaos and much admired among 'the west.'  And Germany was in chaos for over a decade after WW1. Italy was stable.

"What if" is a tough question to ask, but a fun game to play. What if Mussolini hadnt come to power? Would Italy have gone red? What if Germany had gone red, would war have broken out with Italy as our front line ally?
 
2013-01-27 10:25:58 PM
Bukharin: Franco is a better analogy. Franco had a lot of admirers in the democratic countries, (William Buckley, for one) and he was a fervent anti-communist (he sent the Blue Division to help-out invading the USSR) but, unlike Mussolini, Franco didn't have these grandiose ideas about building a new empire overseas.

Everything tells me that Franco played it way, way smarter than Mussolini. Not only did he live to a ripe old age, he continued to be a respected statesman and, during the Cold War, a NATO ally.
 
2013-01-27 10:26:55 PM
What little I know of Mussolini I learned from reading Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. Bukharin, if you have any books you'd like to recommend I would be grateful.

Also, people tend to underestimate the driving force that fear of communism was in Europe before the second world war. There were many in France, for example, who saw Russia as a greater enemy than Germany even after September of 1939 and despite the past hundred years of history. There was even serious talk, before Germany attacked in the spring of 1940, of bombing the Caucasus oil fields in an attempt to knock Russia out of the war.
 
2013-01-27 10:44:41 PM

Voxper:

I understand, and somewhat agree, but Franco is out of the scope of Berlusconi's comment, or Italy, or anything pre-1933.

miniflea: What little I know of Mussolini I learned from reading Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. Bukharin, if you have any books you'd like to recommend I would be grateful.


Off the top of my head: A History of Fascism 1914-1945, by Stanley Payne

Good coverage of Mussolini pre-Hitler as well as the German Worker's Party before Hitler joined (the Anton Drexler era.) While it does touch on Franco, it also notes that Franco was a military dictator who took power in a coup rather than a leader of a political party that took power legally like Mussolini and Hitler (yes, they were not elected, but they were appointed.) Excelent comparison as well as contrast against events, style, and results of leadership.
 
2013-01-27 10:49:15 PM
Mussolini peaked too soon, militarily. When Italy entered the war, its armaments were obsolescent and never improved. Having officers from the north and soldiers from the south didn't help. When Italy invaded Egypt, they were utterly routed in no time, and when they invaded Greece, the Greeks curb-stomped them. Hitler had to rescue Italy over and over again, including sending the legendary Otto Skorzeny to save Il Duce himself. In every way, Mussolini showed himself to be utterly incompetent to do more than shoot his political enemies.

Admittedly, his Concordat of 1929 did clear up the problem with the Vatican--it had festered since 1870--and his deputy nearly annihilated the Mafia in Sicily. However, he imposed a ludicrous militarism on Italy that never suited it (unlike Germany, where it was as natural as breathing), and was famously referred to as an "auto-idolator" and a "stucco Caesar." Hitler was more horrible, but at least was not utterly ridiculous. Even Franco and Salazar were better than Benny the Moose.
 
2013-01-27 11:27:06 PM
Bukharin: Off the top of my head: A History of Fascism 1914-1945, by Stanley Payne

Anything in there about Peron?
 
2013-01-27 11:40:13 PM

Voxper: Bukharin: Off the top of my head: A History of Fascism 1914-1945, by Stanley Payne

Anything in there about Peron?


I read the book a long time ago, if if there was anything, not much. He only came to power in what... 43? The book is a bit Euro-centric as well.
 
2013-01-28 12:55:53 AM

Lionel Mandrake: Nemo's Brother: Modern leftists worship his absolute power and wish it for their team.

0/10

That was bad and you should feel bad.


This is like the 4th thread so far he's done that, too. Lionel Mandrake doesn't actually seem to have any other purpose except to come into a Fark thread and declare: "Liberals believe X!" for some eye-wateringly ridiculous statement X.

I don't know whether he's a troll or someone who sincerely believes this garbage, but it really doesn't matter. We're not going to be able to reason with him in either case.
 
2013-01-28 12:56:58 AM

ciberido: Lionel Mandrake doesn't actually seem to have any other purpose except to come into a Fark thread and declare: "Liberals believe X!" for some eye-wateringly ridiculous statement X.


Gah, I mean Nemo's Brother, of course. Sorry.
 
2013-01-28 01:00:59 AM

Gyrfalcon: JackCanuck: Mussolini was not a monster, and in fact was a pretty decent leader. He increased agricultural output, reduced malaria, improved the Italian economy, reduced the influence of the mafia, and restored Italian national pride. Furthermore, he guaranteed Austrian independence until it was clear that he would have no support from Britain or France, and was one of the few European leaders to actively stand against Hitler.

You must be Italian. Mussolini was an idiot, and a very weak leader. He allied with Hitler very early on--after his support of the Fascists in Spain made him a viable leader in Hitler's eyes--to gain the support he needed in the Italian Parliament. He was only not bad compared to Hitler; kind of like having salmonella is not bad compared to cholera. He made no secret of his dreams of Mediterranean conquest and desire to expand his empire southward. He went after Ethiopia only because if he'd gone to Egypt first he'd have had to fight Britain before he was ready. (Since Egypt was under the British Protectorate at the time)

No, he wasn't a virulent anti-Semite or race purist like Hitler, but Mussolini wasn't some kind of good guy who just got mesmerized by Hitler, either. He was a brutal dictator and just because he made the trains run on time shouldn't obscure that fact. A Fascist Italy alone might not have triggered WWII, but it might have led to a Fascist Mediterranean Axis, which wouldn't have been much better.



That's a myth, actually. He didn't do a damn thing for the trains.
 
2013-01-28 01:01:14 AM
Thanks! I'll add it to my amazon list. Now I just have to decide if I want a new hardcover for over four hundred dollars or a used hardcover for ten bucks.
 
2013-01-28 01:14:42 AM

Nemo's Brother: Modern leftists worship his absolute power and wish it for their team.


this
 
2013-01-28 01:16:42 AM

ciberido: Gyrfalcon: JackCanuck: Mussolini was not a monster, and in fact was a pretty decent leader. He increased agricultural output, reduced malaria, improved the Italian economy, reduced the influence of the mafia, and restored Italian national pride. Furthermore, he guaranteed Austrian independence until it was clear that he would have no support from Britain or France, and was one of the few European leaders to actively stand against Hitler.

You must be Italian. Mussolini was an idiot, and a very weak leader. He allied with Hitler very early on--after his support of the Fascists in Spain made him a viable leader in Hitler's eyes--to gain the support he needed in the Italian Parliament. He was only not bad compared to Hitler; kind of like having salmonella is not bad compared to cholera. He made no secret of his dreams of Mediterranean conquest and desire to expand his empire southward. He went after Ethiopia only because if he'd gone to Egypt first he'd have had to fight Britain before he was ready. (Since Egypt was under the British Protectorate at the time)

No, he wasn't a virulent anti-Semite or race purist like Hitler, but Mussolini wasn't some kind of good guy who just got mesmerized by Hitler, either. He was a brutal dictator and just because he made the trains run on time shouldn't obscure that fact. A Fascist Italy alone might not have triggered WWII, but it might have led to a Fascist Mediterranean Axis, which wouldn't have been much better.


That's a myth, actually. He didn't do a damn thing for the trains.


Is there some kind of quirk that makes people have this need to correct every comedic tic and humorous comment in their writings? I mean, you read my whole post and that was the ONE THING you took out of it--that I made an inaccurate comment about Mussolini that referred to an unsourced (and probably apocryphal) quote about the trains? And you needed to come back here and fix that? Who the hell cares? (I mean, besides you, because you took time to not only correct me, but provide a link to Snopes in case I didn't know that that was a story about Mussolini).

In the greater scheme of things, a silly statement about Mussolini making the trains run on time is not really as important as correcting a national leader who thinks Mussolini "wasn't that bad."
 
2013-01-28 02:01:55 AM

Gyrfalcon: ciberido: Gyrfalcon: JackCanuck: Mussolini was not a monster, and in fact was a pretty decent leader. He increased agricultural output, reduced malaria, improved the Italian economy, reduced the influence of the mafia, and restored Italian national pride. Furthermore, he guaranteed Austrian independence until it was clear that he would have no support from Britain or France, and was one of the few European leaders to actively stand against Hitler.

You must be Italian. Mussolini was an idiot, and a very weak leader. He allied with Hitler very early on--after his support of the Fascists in Spain made him a viable leader in Hitler's eyes--to gain the support he needed in the Italian Parliament. He was only not bad compared to Hitler; kind of like having salmonella is not bad compared to cholera. He made no secret of his dreams of Mediterranean conquest and desire to expand his empire southward. He went after Ethiopia only because if he'd gone to Egypt first he'd have had to fight Britain before he was ready. (Since Egypt was under the British Protectorate at the time)

No, he wasn't a virulent anti-Semite or race purist like Hitler, but Mussolini wasn't some kind of good guy who just got mesmerized by Hitler, either. He was a brutal dictator and just because he made the trains run on time shouldn't obscure that fact. A Fascist Italy alone might not have triggered WWII, but it might have led to a Fascist Mediterranean Axis, which wouldn't have been much better.


That's a myth, actually. He didn't do a damn thing for the trains.

Is there some kind of quirk that makes people have this need to correct every comedic tic and humorous comment in their writings? I mean, you read my whole post and that was the ONE THING you took out of it--that I made an inaccurate comment about Mussolini that referred to an unsourced (and probably apocryphal) quote about the trains? And you needed to come back here and fix that? Who the hell cares? (I mean, besides you, because you took tim ...


If only there were some political ideology that actively encouraged wrong information that made the state look good. Getting things right is important.
 
2013-01-28 04:22:55 AM
I dunno about trains, but Mussolini made the telephones work

/Or so I've heard.
 
Displayed 50 of 56 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report