On the good side, Portugal saved some one million people during the war. Just for curiosity, recently old documents were found about Macau during WW2, the portuguese colony had at the time some 150 000 people by the end of the war it had 500 000. Lots of people from China, French, Italian, English, Spanish, German, white Russian, Australian, jews, Indians, Indonesian and many other countries. All in all portuguese neutrality saved some 1,5 million people around the world, not bad for a small country.
I certainly agree that Salazar is something of an invisible dictator in English/American literature. For that matter, until recently few in the US that did not trace their family links back to Portugal knew anything about the country. Most here in the US of A probably did not care. That's certainly changed today, as Portugal emerges from the many decades of dictatorship. Portugal is a fascinating country with a rich history and very nice people. Thank you for taking the trouble to produce this video.
American education has always been somewhat myopic, watch those hilarious street interviews before the Gulf wars with folks putting Iraq in Australia. There is very little curiosity about what goes on in the world around them unless it its a direct threat, and too much reliance on politicised, partisan and often incompetent media. I have met several Americans who came over for various professional reasons, and even amongst some academics there is often a small-town mentality that curtails their grasp of a broader cultural reality. Is this done on purpose? Is it the sheer vastness of the US, physically and economically that produces this effect? Or is this effect the manifestation of a compliant nature that is necessary for the generation of such wealth? Are these the folks that stood up to the British in 177x? Who generated the most wonderfully libertarian Constitution on the planet..."We the people..." it starts, if memory serves me.Where have they gone? I see something similar in Germany, the preoccupation with fitting in, obeying orders... and we know where that leads. We indeed are a peculiar species.
Salazar's real skill was diplomacy, keeping many balls in the air at the same time. The Allies recognized this and relied on him and ambassador Teutónio Pereira to forge a neutrality pact with Spain. This was aided by American wheat exports to Spain, on 2 conditions, not a single grain was to go to Germany, and Spain would remain neutral. When Adolf came for a chat with Franco at Hendaye (one issue was Operation Felix), Franco made his agreement dependent on demands Germany could not possibly agree to. Adolf had a fit, Spain remained a non-combatant, heavily favouring the axes powers, but the nazis did not go through to attack Portugal or Gibraltar, and the spaniards ate a little better. Read "Under two cloaks" and "One of our pilots is safe". Admiral Canaris also told Franco that Germany would lose the war, agent Garbo was also there....
Yes, the former Corporal was reported as saying after that meeting with Franco, that he would rather have 6 teeth pulled out without anaesthetic than listen to that high-pitched voice for hours.
@@TheLocalLtHitler should've said Yes to Franco's demands. The evidence is plain that Hitler suffered from undiagnosed Parkinson's disease or something similar. The obvious features of Parkinson's, which do not always appear first, however, are movement problems. It's a degenerative neurological condition, and, as with many such conditions, it can have global effects, eventually. Problems of judgment and discernment can appear even before movement problems. In Hitler's case we have a man who had played a more-or-less perfect game 🎮 until he made the mistake of agreeing to Herman Goering's ludicrous demand that the Luftwaffe be allowed to finish off the British and French forces at Dunkirk on its own. Arguably, though, significant mistakes go back slightly beyond that. He had agreed in writing with Bismarck that Germany should never fight a two front war. Logically, therefore, he could simply have ignored Poland and launched the War with an attack on France and possibly also Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Denmark and Norway in more-or-less the manner he did in 1940. Defeating France opened up the possibility of then extending German power to cover all of Eurafasia except for the Soviet Union and parts to be partitioned with other Axis powers, keeping the Soviet Union and the USA out of the war, until the UK and its empire had been defeated and occupied. Then going for the Soviet Union and, only after defeating it and rolling up Latin America, invading the USA across the Mexican border. God wouldn't allow this, not least because it could have resulted in the complete extermination of the Jews who had so far rejected Christ, and thus made biblical prophecies of the (majority of the Jews turning to Christ and accepting him as Messiah) impossible to fulfill without specific additional divine intervention. That God would not allow this is best illustrated by the answering of allied, especially Greek Orthodox and Coptic Christian but also Muslim prayers to local Saint St. Menas at the battle of El Alamein. He then appeared and stopped the German advance driving back the Germans. Had they won this battle, the allied forces would have been clear through to the Suez canal and on to Palestine, annihilating the ✡️ Jewish settlements there.
Portugal is Englands oldest ally, rather different from British. This may seem a minor point to an outsider but in a U.K./British context is quite important. That being said I would argue that Portugal has made the greatest contribution to global cuisine in history. I know that's a bit of a tangent, but always worth mentioning:-)
The Portuguese offered to honour the Anglo Portuguese pact in 1939. UK declined and Portugal helped the UK in many other ways. Churchill rated Salazar as a leader.
A note on Franco's intentions regarding Portugal. He actually did at one point consider invading Portugal, around the start of WWII, as part of a preemptive strike against Britain. The plans have been uncovered relatively recently (around 2008), which probably explains why it's not common knowledge even among WWII history buffs. Here are some links: www.theportugalnews.com/news/francos-plan-to-invade-portugal-was-serious/52399 expresso.pt/actualidade/o-plano-de-franco-para-invadir-portugal=f446991 (in Portuguese but with one of the maps) It is also known that one the conditions that Franco gave to Hitler as part of the negotiations to join the war was that Spain get annex Portugal (in addition to parts of French North Africa). Germany drew up Operation Felix which included a Germano-Spanish invasion of Portugal (Germany cared about Gibraltar but understood Portugal could become a bridgehead for British intervention). Finally, not related to WWII, but after Portugal regained democracy in 1974, the Franco regime in Spain wanted American permission to invade Portugal and put down the revolution (and, I would guess, probably wouldn't be in any hurry to leave) www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/3373194/Gen-Franco-wanted-to-declare-war-on-Portugal.html
Portugal at the time with it's mostly illiterate population wasn't ready for liberalism. Salazar did the job that had to be done at the time. Interesting fact: When Salazar ended his mandate Portugal had zero debt, and is now buried in debt under the EU.
There is incorrect information on the video: 1st, the Azores and Madeira continue to be a part of Portugal and were not colonies as such. They are, mainly, of Portuguese stock and were not subject to colonial laws. 2nd, there were more than 2 colonies in Africa. Salazar was not President of Portugal, he was the equivalent to the Prime-Minister. He desliked Parliamentary politics and his government (the New State or 2nd Republic) was nationalistic and catholic in nature, as well as strongly corporativist. Not very different from Dollfuss' regime in Austria. Be careful when you associate Catholicism with Fascism as this not the case in either Italy (were Fascism appeared as a political system) or in Nazi Germany. As far as I am concerned, Salazar was fundamental in stabilizing public finances in the country as well as keeping us largely out of the 2nd World War. As far as I am concerned, he outlived his usefulness after the end of the 2nd World War and failed in the way he approached the Portuguese Colonial Wars. This proved to be the downfall of the New State following a military lead insurrection that lead to the creation of the ongoing Democratic and Parliamentary/Semipresidential 3rd Republic. If you wish to have a better understanding of how the New State came into being I suggest you revisit the 1st Republic. It was Democratic and Parliamentary but politically very unstable and it failed to reign in on the economy and on the public finances. Salazar was elected Member of Parliament for the 1st Republic in 1917 but he soon resigned to return to his position as an Academic in Coimbra. In 1926 he was nominated Finance Minister but resigned in just 13 days. He felt he did not have the necessary control to stabilize the finances and it was only after his terms were met that he agreed to return to politics.
@Miguel Sousa This guy who made the video is an American. Most Americans are ignorant of matters unrelated to the US but still like to talk about them as if they know what they're talking about.
Power hates the Void. If Democracy fails, Dictatorship will take its place. And, as far as i am concerned, the high rates of Abstention in our semi-Neo-Liberal Regime polls will lead us to the next "Messiah", just watch how our fascist, conservatory and cristhian right-wing parties are drulling all over, all ready...
"1st, the Azores and Madeira continue to be a part of Portugal and were not colonies as such. They are, mainly, of Portuguese stock and were not subject to colonial laws. " Well... Yes and no. The Azores and Madeira were not treated like the African colonies for example, and in paper didnt have the same status, but it wasnt treated like the rest of Portugal and had a diferent status and had a neo colonial rule. Just a example that the Azores and Madeira had its own coin that was 20% weaker then portuguese coin (Salazar actually ended this), and higher unfair taxes in main Azorean industries like alchool which was very important to the local economy. Portugal and the rich Azorean elite mainly just cared mostly about the resources and key location of those places. This is explotion. Just a example that in the XV century, they would just send some smaller nobility that almost had full power and almost could do everything they wanted on the place.They never were treated the same way as mainland Portugal. Socially, Azoreans were "equal" to mainland portuguese, such a small population produced one prime minister (Hintze Ribeiro, he was the one who helped the first autonomy movement, being him Azorean) and the first 2 presidents of the first portuguese republic. But, in general, Azoreans and the Azores were looked down upon and werent treated the same way, just a example it was "Portugal, the adjacent islands (thats the Azores and Madeira) and the Ultramar (the colonies)". They would just send a governor from mainland Portugal that didnt understand nothing of the place, to rule the districts of the Azores, and almost had no power, because the power would come from Lisbon and they mostly didnt care and left the "islands" to third class treatement and mostly cared about the taxes only. Just another example, when the Portuguese were starting to heavily colonize Brazil, the place they took most people were in the Azores, some by force, some islands never recovered from that, in terms of manpower and population. Islands like Santa Maria. This had deep social impact. There is even a book from Briant Barret a british person who lived in the Azores for some time in the time of the Napolionic wars, talked how the Azorean in Lisbon was almost treated like a black man at the time in London and the population would benefit from other goverment because they were treated badly. The Azores was the poorest region in Europe, one of the many reasons why there was movements for them to have their own goverment, one in the end of the XIX century, one in Salazar time, and one, that almost led to independence after the 25th April revolution. Today they have their own goverment, flag, even anthem, but are also part of the Portuguese republic. There was no need for a Azorean goverment if those facts didnt happen. So the Azores werent treated the same as mainland Portugal, it wasnt officially a colony, but it was ruled in a neo colonial form. Source: im Azorean and just read some books.
Found this video by pure coincidence, and being a Portuguese that actually knows about war equipment after years of study, gotta tell you that I laughed at your video really hard. You are not exactly wrong on many of your points, but you clearly don't understand the context, or the time some things were used. 1º Germany and Italy did need equipment for themselves, but as they kept developing new equipment, the "trash equipment" was left to reserve units or sold to countries like Portugal. You can call it "trash" but many of these things like the mauser m98k could still be used effectively. We actually had countless Steyers MP34 submachineguns sold to us after the anschluss of Austria, not that bad either. 2º As for the Azores, USA could definetely take it most likely with a prolongued blockade (since the Portuguese fleet would be no challenge to them) because on an amphibious landing... Good luck with that. Portugal sent almost 30.000 men into the islands and the american plan (war plan gray) for taking over it included only 28.000 american soldiers. And Azores had things like coastal fortifications/batteries with 260mm cannons so yeah good luck (earlier normandy on portuguese shore? lol). 3º Portugal couldn't defend far east possessions like Timor, but come on, the army and navy were busy near Europe. Who would care about remote territories that barely had 500.000 people on it all combined. The european posessions obviously spoke higher. 4º As for airforce, we actually had bristol blenheim, curtiss mohawk IV and countless other fighters/bombers (junkers for example) by 1940, not only gladiators. By 1943 we had over 100 spitfires and 100 hurricanes, so try to tell me which other small nation in world war 2 actually had this amount of aircraft. Granted, not much if you want to compare with the UK or Germany, but the territory to defend wasn't that large and Portugal wasn't a superpower either. 5º "The Portuguese Navy was only capable of ferrying men" - made for a good laugh as well. Dude are you serious? Most of your info is wrong, and some of those avisos were large enough that they even had a torpedo/recon airplane on it. They were more than capable of engaging Destroyers as well. Not heavy cruisers, though. And given the situation in Europe, you couldn't do much with a fleet either way. If you were on the allies side, you didn't have to worry and would have to worry only about german u-boats, which, we were more than capable of fighting with our own ships or naval aircraft. If Portugal was on the side of the germans, hell, no fleet would be good enough to face the americans or the british on this part of the world isolated from everyone else. The Portuguese fleet wasn't a powerful fleet but it was a fleet powerful enough to do its required job. Avisos were ships for long travels by the way, few ships were ocean worthy and capable of traveling far away. The Portuguese colonies were far away from each other, and ships for long travels were required, and those that Portugal built were more than enough of defending themselves vs smaller vessels too. 6º Your part of the spanish civil war is also interesting "... all he (salazar) did was sent 8-12 thousand men to spain"... You said "all he did". Yes, all he did was send the BIGGEST FOREIGN VOLUNTEER GROUP into the spanish civil war... Not to mention that during this period (1936-1939) Portugal was the TOP importer of weapons and war material IN THE WORLD... because most of it was being smuggled into Spain and Franco's army. That is "all" he did, really. Do you think this sort of aid was small? The USSR pratically did the same but took the majority of the spanish gold reserve (one of the biggest in the world) as payment. lol. 7º As for Salazar himself - he wasn't a fascist. He was a dictator, but not a fascist. He died poor but managed to pay the entire foreign debt and leave the country in a much better shape than he found it - for instance the average wage increased 8x times and Lisbon doubled in size (we had the 2nd biggest economic growth rate in the world for countless years, usually around 20%, with only China being better, but all of this only after ww2 since the economy tanked during the conflict). I actually doubt he feared Franco or an invasion from Spain btw. Franco kept speaking highly of Salazar, and was forever in debt for Salazar's aid. Plus, he needed Salazar to remain friendly with the UK-USA, since Salazar trying to convince the allies that "Franco wanted to be another dictator like Salazar and not like Hitler/Mussolini". 8º Also irrelevant to the ww2 discussion, but Viriato was actually a Lusitanian, and not a Celt-Iberian... Get your facts right, mate! All of this said by someone who actually understands of the topic, by the way. I leave opinions for others, I merely state facts.
I think you're very wrong about Portugal being able to defend Azores from the USA (and Britain): it would have been worse than the Falklands. To begin with, without naval superiority, there's no way to relocate those 30,000 troops in the various islands, so they would have been occupied one by one, using the first one as base for the assault on the others. As the video says (with great reason) fortifications were by then almost useless. Maybe Portugal could have made an epic (or rather tragical) bloody last stand but it would have lost the islands anyhow quite fast. On top of that Portugal had many other things to defend, for which it relied heavily on being allied to Britain and the USA (nobody else could have succesfully conquered stuff like Cape Verde) and even to Apartheid South Africa, perfectly able to invade Angola and Mozambique if backed by Britain and the USA, as these colonies felt no particular loyalty to the metropolis (as evidenced in later liberation wars) and shipping lanes would all be strangled. Portugal could not by any means take a clear pro-German stand: it would have been catastrophic. Another issue would be much larger Spain, which did indeed consider it (on the condition that Suez was captured first, which never happened) but knew well that the price to pay was the Canary Islands (and Equatorial Guinea but nobody cared about that backwater before oil was discovered in the last decades). IF Spain would have entered the war on the Axis side, then things would probably have got very hot for Portugal, because then they would have got an even worse threat than the one by the Anglosaxons: a possible land invasion in retaliation for their pro-London stance (and to serve maybe the imperial ambitions of Franco). However Franco was another Anglosaxon puppet, much like Salazar, so nothing of the like happened. Both Iberian states were (and are) highly dependent on whoever has the naval power in the Atlantic Ocean and thus, even if they wanted, they could hardly challenge such naval supremacy. Spain because its much larger size (and also much larger navy) had/has a chance, slim as it may be, Portugal not at all.
I agree with your 6th point in the sense of the 10K soldiers being a large contingent, however it was not the largest one: Italy sent 70K (plus air force), not a very effective force, because the Italian people were disloyal to Mussolini's dictatorship (as can be also seen in other campaigns, where they'd rather flee than fight) and these "volunteers" were not very voluntary in many cases (largely prisoners promised amnesty in exchange of military service) but there's much stronger memory of them in any case in Spain, even if often to mock them as cowards, while the Portuguese have been completely forgotten by now.
@@LuisAldamiz About the "Portuguese have been completely forgotten by now" - That is largely because history isn't always written properly and many things out there simply aren't spoken of. This happened numerous times and still happens today since the Portuguese state doesn't care about history and no one does, so these things tend to be forgotten and never spoken of. And back then the state prefered to keep the matter as secret as possible and obviously didn't write it on history books to prevent alienating the British or the French. The Portuguese Volunteer group was not as large as the largest ones I believe, but it was still one of the biggest ones, plus without supplies Franco would have lost. You can read anywhere in one of the many reliable sources out there, but you will find the same answer: without Portuguese assistance, Franco would have lost. The amount of equipment being smuggled into Spain was just huge. I already said but I will repeat - Portugal was the top importer of war material during this time in the entire world.
@@LuisAldamiz Thanks for the reply mate but a few things: 1º Azores is an archipelago of Islands close by. If US' ships decided to get that close to the shore to prevent communication between each islands, they would have suffered heavy bombardment from coastal batteries and aerial bombardment (95% of the Portuguese airforce was in there btw). 2º Fortifications were not useless. They did serve a purpose. Check Maginot Line. It was such a heavily defended region that the germans never bothered attacking it until very late in the war vs the French. There were other fortifications at this time like Gibraltar, the Finnish one during the Winter War, etc. Some were ridiculous and too large to actually defend, but we aren't speaking about German fortifications for instance (which, had to be ordered by a megalomaniac like Hitler obviously). The Czechslovak forts were also pretty decent if you ask me, but they never saw action since the allies abandoned the Czechs and caved into Hitler's demands. 3º I will correct you: an entry for Portugal on the German side would have been catastrophic, just like an entry into the war against Germany would have been. The real problem in either scenario wasn't Spain. Spain was recovering from the civil war and the economy was in terrible shape and so was the entire country in all aspects. The real problem would have been Axis troops marching all the way into Lisbon through Spanish Territory if Portugal was fighting against Germany. The Portuguese plans for such a war stated that the Portuguese army would mobilize, but it would adopt a scorched earth tactic from the start and the government would relocate to the Azores. There was simply no hope of winning against the Germans right after they took Paris. Stubborn resistance would be offered on the Capital (with potential allied assistance) but I doubt it would have been sucessful. That is partly why the Azores were heavily defended by then, since the government expected to move there in a worst case scenario. 4º Spain did have larger and more powerful ships compared to Portugal but again, they did not have a colonial empire like the Portuguese did. The Portuguese empire needed ships able to travel more than half of the world with few stops to refuel. Ships with large guns were never a primary concern since the Portuguese navy would never be able to fight versus the British and since the British were Portuguese allies. Against submarines (commerce raiders) it was more than enough. Regardless, the Spanish fleet wouldn't have been able to be a challenge against either British or US' navy. Not even the Italian one was, and it was the biggest in continental europe after France, I don't understand why you think Spain would with older and fewer ships. 5º I fail to understand why you consider Franco, and specially Salazar, a British puppet. The allies actually had reasons for concern against Franco and always saw him with suspicion. They wouldn't if he was their puppet. They only became friendlier with Spain because Salazar was always there to convince them about Franco's good/neutral intentions. I actually think Franco had to be a German (not English) puppet during the war and it wasn't because he liked it - most of the mines in Northern Spain were under control of the germans, and they could exploit them as they wanted without restrictions for example. Franco simply couldn't have said "no", because the Spanish army was a joke, the country was in ruins, and the Germans had just killed France and were at Spannish doors. 6º I didn't say that the Portuguese would have been able to defend the Azores. In fact, I believe I actually said the contrary - we would lose, but the victory would have been very costly for the US' and I bet the world wouldn't like to see a neutral country like Portugal attacked by the US, which, supposedly, were protecting the "free world". Plus the entire American invasion plan would have to be revised, since I doubt their 28.000 army would have been enough to take the entire archipelago from 30.000 portuguese soldiers. You can easily see this if you check the invasion of Normandy: US' and allied forces had over 350.000 men easily, yet they lost almost 200 tanks and 15.000 men against only 50.000 germans spread over all the place. German soldiers did not have the best equipment available since the best equipment went into the eastern front, yet they were able to put up a fight and the USA + allies needed 7x times their numbers to actually get past them. What makes you think USA alone would have been able to take the Azores easily without a prolongued blockade with less soldiers than the portuguese army stationed in there? Specially if you consider that the men (portuguese army) were not spread over the place like in the case of the germans with the Atlantik Wall, which would have made matters much worse for the Americans.
@@LuisAldamiz About the Italian contingent. The Italians and even the Germans did not send Volunteers - they sent an Expeditionary force disguised as Volunteers. It was their way of doing things to avoid alienating France / UK. The Portuguese force, was, the biggest of the volunteer groups, if not the biggest. Italians had 50.000, Germans about 16.000, Portuguese about 12.000. The Portuguese state only really sent pilots and an observation mission (which in total were less than 5% of the 12.000 portuguese involved in the conflict). The remaining 95% Portuguese involved in the conflict were, indeed, volunteers.
My great grandfather sold tungsten to both the Germans and the British. When he was young he started a gold mine in the North of Portugal but it failed and just before WW2 started he started a tungsten mine.
Eu sou do distrito de Viseu. Muitas vezes visitava família nas aldeias quase abandonadas das pessoas que trabalhavam nas minas de volfrâmio. Muitas aldeolas perdidas na montanha
Salazar died on 27 July 1970, not 1968. He fell off a chair, in August 1968, had a brain injury and also subsequent strokes and was never able to resume power, being replaced in September 1968 permanently by Caetano as President of the Council of Ministers and Prime Minister of Portugal. The Presidency of the Republic had become an essentially honorific post, though occasionally, including by Salazar, held between formal elections for the Presidency of the Portuguese Republic.
But most people were dirt poor and barely literate, with most people only having the 3rd or 4th grade when reached his "97%" literacy rate, had the highest infant mortality and all of its economic growth ended being channelled into a useless war that ended or ruined a 10th of the lives of young men.
In 39' there were 5 military regions, each having 3-4 regiments and other units. There were no mobilized Division formations and all the Infantry regiments had 1 active rifle company (2 for 1 regiment in Porto and another in the capital). The only units that were complete were the Caçadores (Hunters/Jagers, whatever term you prefer) Battalions (2-3 per region) and 3 Machine-gun Battalions. Don't know how the cavalry regiments were, but probably similar to the British. There were a lot more artillery, 114mm and 140mm. More would come during ww2, 88mm, 105mm and 140mm. Humber armored cars and Valentine tanks came during the war, Centaur/Cromwell tanks were ordered but arrived at the end of the war. Each infantry regiment also had a training battalion. In total it was planned that 31 Divisions could be raised in less than 3 months. The "Hunters" battalions were meant to be the force to delay an enemy invasion and give enough time to mobilize the divisions. The Northern Region alone could raise 3 divisions in 1 month. 30 Gladiators in 39'. In 41' there was P-36 Hawks and by 43 there were Spitfire MK.VB. Later almost 300 Hurricane mk.2C came and P-47D (the latter came right after the war ended) There had been plans in 1910s to rearm the navy, these were delayed until 1930s due to the fall of the monarchy, then WW1 and then cuz of the unstable political situation throughout the 20s. After the rebellion in Madeira they knew they couldn't let the navy die, Salazar purposely denied funds. These were supposed to be 3 battleships, 6 cruisers and 12 Destroyers. He instead allowed the lighter rearmament of colonial avisos simply to keep the navy alive and to be able to respond to trouble in the islands and in the colonies. Salazar didn't militarise the country so as to not escalate tensions with the neighbour, the axis or the allies. He didn't claim neutrality for nothing, if he wanted war, it would have been different. One of the agreements for letting USA use an Airfield in Azores was that if Germany was to open war against Portugal, the US would arm the portuguese military with US equipment, aircraft and vehicles.
The 1386 Treaty of Windsor was between the Kingdom of England (which united with the Principality of Wales to become England and Wales in 1535 (not [the Island of] "Britain" (which has never been a political entity) and the Kingdom of Portugal. In 1580 the King of Spain succeeded to the throne of the Kingdom of Portugal, promising to respect its status as a separate Kingdom in all matters, including defence and foreign affairs. This was not honoured and the Treaty of Windsor was suspended with much of the 1588 Spanish Armada sailing from Lisbon. Only with the Portuguese declaration of independence in 1640 was it resumed, though England had continued to support rival claimants to the Spanish throne. It has thus been in continuous operation since 1640 only, eventually by their successor states, Great Britain (from 1707 the Union between England and Wales and Scotland, succeeded by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in 1800, which in its turn became the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in 1922. Meanwhile Portugal went through different permutations before becoming the Republic of Portugal in 1910. So, looking generously, it has only been in continuous operation since 1640. 🇵🇹 🇬🇧.
The way Salazar and his government maneuvered first during the close spanish civil war and then during the second world war between the two sides of the conflict is nothing short of brilliant. One must remember what Portugal was as a country before he came. Poor, unstable and illiterate... basically an empire falling to ruin. He brought Portugal UP and maintained the empire intact! Best portuguese ruler of modern times, hands down. Another thing you failed to mention... is that he born poor and died poor. UNCORRUPTIBLE. Classifying him as Fascist is misguided. He was an Authoritarian Conservative. He was not a revolutionary like Fascists were. He did not change the Portuguese society, he conserved it. Also, he came to the government because the military, who really held power, asked him. He was not a politician and didnt have any party or movement behind him. During that time, Portugal was lucky to have a willing, patriot and conscious military that took the mission to change the debacle that Portugal was. They had the conscience to know that they didnt have what it took to rule and bring from the ashes a country like Portugal... so they turned to the best academic and intellectuals they could find and they brought them in to rule, assuring all the stability and authority they required for such a task. This is the essence of the "New State". This has nothing to do with Fascism. ua-cam.com/video/HdUCu0iOXOA/v-deo.html
That 97% literacy in 1968 is very rosy, mind you. They don't have that even today. Also, Masséna did take Lisbon in 1808 and forced the Portuguese king to flee to Brazil. Finally, despite appearances to the contrary (mainly, corporatism) Salazar was never a fascist. Fascism presupposes a revolutionary intent, and Salazar remained too much of a conservative for that.
I didn't realize that Messena was able to take Lisbon in 1808. Almost all of what I know (or thought I knew) about the portion of the conflict in the Peninsula comes from a brief account that I read some years ago about Wellington's campaign against Napoleon's marshals.
Actually today's numbers on literacy is 95%. 5% more than that of 1980.
6 років тому+1
general Bussy-le-Grand 1 invasion - Passing through Idanha, Castelo Branco and Vale do Tejo (Abrantes, Golegã and Santarém), the French troops arrived in Lisbon on November 30, 1807. It was their objective to stop the royal family and the court, which did not happen because D João had already boarded and left the bay of Cascais escorted by an English squadron, the instant of his arrival in São Julião. general Junot - 2 invasion - was defeated in Roliça (17 August of 1808) and in Vimeiro (21 August 1808). General Messena - 3 invasion - The French reached the Lines of Torres on October 14, raised in anticipation of this eventuality and where the Portuguese-British troops were waiting for them from the 10th, retiring, defeated, at the end of the following day. historia-portugal.blogspot.pt/2013/05/as-invasoes-francesas-guerra-peninsular.html
6 років тому+1
Actually in 2000 the illiteracy in Portugal is in 80% www.publico.pt/2000/06/15/jornal/iliteracia-quase-nos-80-por-cento-145246
Ive always been fascinated by the smaller countries revolving around World War II. I think it would be really interesting to make a mini series of sorts describing the situations of non major powers during WWII. Especially nations like Sweden, Bulgaria and and Brazil.
I am slowly but surely in the process of doing just that. At the moment, I am only planning to do neutral powers like Switzerland, Ireland, Sweden, and Turkey, but I am open to the possibility of extending my coverage to minor participants like Brazil as well.
Thank you. I appreciate your contribution to the topic. I was educated as an historian, but it was many years ago. This is definitely a neglected area of study. Lisbon during WW II was the Vienna of the Cold War.
Salazar, regardless of what ignorant people think about him, saved Portugal from the Nazis. He was one of the most intelligent leaders of his time, if not the most intelligent in the world. He made the best with what he had to work with. If it weren't for his ability to manipulate the allies and the axis and avoid too much conflict either way, I would not be alive today!
The Nazis did not attack Portugal, they could not do that. They could not even persuade Franco's Spain to enter the war (not against Portugal but against Britain for Gibraltar), go figure!
The portuguese military was very modernized by the 50's. In the Second World War, we had almost 100 Spitfire MK IX, in the army aero-naval aeronautic, before the foundation of it's air force. We had Matilda British tanks, american M3 Stuart Lee, american M4 Sherman's and germans Junkers Ju-87 transport planes, where the first paratroopers were formed in 1956, and conducted for jumps and transport of airborne and all kinds of things. We had allied and axis equipment and armament, in WW2. Viriatos were volunteers in the Spanish Civil War. In WW2, the blue division of the Wehrchmat was composed by portuguese and spanhish volunteers. Beside the allied, the green legion was a division of portuguese volunteers who fought in european theater of operations. In the navy, we had also almost 10 submarines.
Salazar with its conservative economic policies and ambiguous foreign policy made Portugal to navigate well in the 30s and 40s. Later on, however, the colonial rule proved to be an excrescence and consumed Portugal in the 60s and early 70s.
As a portuguese person, Salazar is still a weird topic. Yes he was a facist but aldo did gret things like making going to school obligatory. Also the park for kids "portugal dos pequeninos" aka "portugal of the little ones" really shows how salazr saw portugal
Dr. Salazar is one of the most lied about men in Portuguese history, especially by his hateful political opponents who soon after he passed rose to power and gained prominence in the political sphere. He made many mistakes but he's put to insanely unfair levels of hate by people who love to parrot the ideas of an opposing political agenda that had long threatened the country, and that today reigns supreme and unopposed.
Point number 1. The Treaty of Windsor was signed between England and Portugal in 1373, not 1386. Point number 2. I think you will find that the Duke of Wellington was in overall command of the joint Anglo-Portuguese forces during the Penninsular War and was responsible for the defeat of the Napoleonic army under Marshal Massena at The Lines of Torres Vedras, in 1810. It was far from a some Portuguese soldiers and a few British Engineers. It is very well documended, check it out.
Two corrections: 1 - Salazar's regime was not fascist, this was a label that the left in 1974 stuck on him, it's simple "you are either a comrade or you're a fascist". It actually reveals lack of political maturity, Stalin's regime mas much more fascist than Salazar's. Fascist regimes are all progressive, sanguinary, with great ambitious industrialization schemes and the like, Salazar's regime was authoritative, ultra-conservative, repressive and violently anti-communist. In effect, he had more in common with the ancien régime in France prior to the Revolution than with fascism. He made use of the then fashionable trappings of fascism, however taking care to make sure they were never anything more than that. His connections with the Church were much more tenuous than many people think, he certainly did not do their bidding, nor did the Church do his. The economic model was essentially agrarian, which made sense as the country was in chaos and starving, industrialization came later. Industry = workers = unions = trouble! His policies regarding the colonies were a recipe for disaster. He admired Mussolini which is strange, as he was a very modest man, never wore a uniform and eschewed all the theatricals of a dictator, whilst Mussolini was like something out of a bad opera. In fact, according to some he had a discrete contempt for Franco regarding him as a jumped-up colonial (midget) soldier, and Franco hated his guts because of his intellect, ability and status. Both used a single party to rise to power, and both made sure the said party fizzled out. The real fascists in Portugal at this time were Rolão Preto's Camisas Azuis (blue shirts). Salazar shut them down in no time. 2 - Portugal also exported tungsten to Britain, who did not really need it as much came from Canada, but by insisting on both sides being sold equal amounts Britain was limiting what went to Germany. The smuggling, cheating, dirty dealing that went on around this would fill several books. I was told once that some sold sacks of ordinary rocks to the British and tipped off the nazis with the sailing times of the freighters to make sure they never got home... A lot of foodstuffs went to Germany by rail, which is why the Portuguese population produced but went hungry, and rationing was imposed, particularly on fats.
There are various kinds of fascism. Hitler's was extremely anti Semitic, aggressive, and ambitious. Mussolini's was not anti Semitic, it was aggressive, and limited by the Monarchy, the Church, the Army and other institutions. Franco's was Catholic, not aggressive, deeply conservative. Salazar's was also Catholic, not aggressive, conservative. All fascisms were repressive, undemocratic, opposed to trade unions, nationalistic, and mobilized mass support using techniques often copied from the Left, but controlled by the leadership. All raised their Leaders to semi divine status, all fought Communism and Socialism and cooperated with big business.
@@daebak6974 Franco's fascism was aggressive. About 200.000 republicans or republican sympathizers were wiped out after the end of the civil war, and active armed resistance groups were around until the 1960's. He also had an eye on Portugal (and Gibraltar), it's an old ambition in Spain, irrespective of the régime. Portugal's alliance with Britain has been a good deterrent. Not so much external aggression, I would agree with you. You do not mention social-fascism such as Stalin's, or Mao's, or the current European Commission's dictatorial stance on Hungary, Poland and other nations that wish to retain a modicum of independance. Basically fascism means total disrespect for the individual, total state control, demonization of any opposition, etc.
@@ricardodavidson3813 By "aggressive" I mean prone to invade other countries. Of course all fascist regimes are aggressive internally. Stalin and Mao were not fascists. They were Communists, and were as murderous as any fascists, but their regimes were different in many ways from fascist regimes. Fascists are allied with big business; Communists abolish big business and nationalize it. Fascism is strongly nationalistic, often racist. Communism was internationalist, though it could have some nationalist characteristics. Fascism allies itself with religion, Communism opposes and suppresses it. Fascism is ideologically militarist, Communism is not. Your description could be applied to any tyranny. Fascism and Communism are not just any tyranny, but each has its own characteristics, which overlap, but are ideologically quite different. I don't know why you think the EU is dictatorial against Orban's Hungary. In fact, it is Orban's regime that is dictatorial, that despises human rights and freedom, and that agitates against Jews and Roma. The EU is simply saying: If you want to be fascist, go ahead. But don't expect us to finance your government as we have been doing for decades. You want to be fascist? YOU pay for it.
@@daebak6974 By my book communist single-party regimes are fascist. As to whether they are militaristic or not, they may start as one and end up the other, it is a question of convenience. Your discussion of the issue of religion is seriously flawed. Both communists and fascists decry religion unless it suits them. Spain was (and is) a predominantly Catholic nation, the republicans were anti-clerical so the fascists got on the other bus. It's all a question of leverage. In Portugal the régime was pro-Church but a lot less so than historians make out, a good book for this is "História(s) do Estado Novo", a recent compilation of episodes. Again a question of convenience, communism was the bogeyman and I think it was more the Church embracing the régime than vice-versa. Communism does NOT eliminate big business, it takes it out of private hands and puts the nomenklatura in charge of it, fascist régimes support big business but put their nomenklatura in its top echelons (where's the difference?). Mao had this cretinous idea of making everything village-based, look at the steel production project, with its quotas, etc. Millions starved as a consequence and 98% of the steel produced was only fit as feedstock for proper steel mills. Orban is not a fascist, he is a conservative nationalist democratically elected, who is carrying out the will of his people. The EU commission was not democratically elected by anyone but purports to dictate to all, this is fascism in a fluffy dress. What started off as a good idea, free trade, common industrial standards, common policies in many lateral but universally relevant issues such as medicines regulation, environment, etc. became a sick cancerous parasite that by trying to override the representatives of the people is eroding what's left of democracy in Europe. This is a gigantic step backwards.
"Aviso" type ships are more at the level of, what we use nowadays as "coast guard" or "long distance patrol" if you will! Nothing to do with the firepower of a destroyer or any other vessels of similar class. In spite of what the length or tonnage might imply. Not a war ship "per se", but yes they do have (very) limited defensive/offensive capabilities.
Portugal in the Atlantic Ocean held Azores and Madeira. In Africa held Angola, Mozambique, Cabo Verde, São Tomé e Príncipe and Guiné Bissau. In India held Goa, Damão and Diu. In Oceania held Timor Leste.
@@KTR2022 To be fair, he did have his merits as a Finance minister, i.e. rather before being made prime minister. I've read a wise assessment that he was good at raising and saving money but poor at spending it wisely - so much more money went into a very ineffective military than into education.
Dr. Salazar saved Portugal from communist enslavement. Calling him disgusting names is all the radical left does, since the radical left always supports communist take overs.
@@notroll1279 But most of the schools that still operate today as well as high schools were built in his time. Due to authoritarianism after the revolution, many things were negativized about it.
18:17 it is important to mention Aristides de Sousa Mendes when discussing jewish refugees in prtugal during WWII. Because of his direct actions, he was able to save the lives of 30,000 refugees. For this act of kindness he was punished by the Salazar regime. They told him not to grant visas, which he explicitly disobeyed leading to his firing and unfortunately he would die years later in poverty, all because he defied a dictator to save lives.
www.publico.pt/2016/11/13/local/noticia/alemaes-homenageiam-os-sete-mortos-da-batalha-de-aljezur-caidos-em-combate-na-ii-guerra-mundial-1750806 found this article today! It's in portuguese, hope you have some tool to translate online, if don't tell me that I'll do for you. It's about the only battle that happened in Portuguese soil in the second world war, in between the english and the germans. It's an amazing story actually
man, some simple research would avoid some basic errors, that make this some kind of an alternative history. -Salazar died in 1970 (not 1968) -Salazar and Franco died in their 80´s, not 60s and 70s -Madeira and Azores were not colonies. And never were. They were inhabited when discovered and are still part of Portugal today. -Massena didn't turn back at the fortifications of Lisboa, but instead in the fortifications surrounding the city (Linhas de Torres Vedras), some 40-50 Kms away from the capital, with a little help of the Tagus River, a huge mass of water with no bridges near the Capital at that time.
Could also write a wall of text about the tanks, but the 6-ton vickers that you loved to state that was "so obsolete" and that any "gamer would upgrade it right away in any game" - That tank was used by the Finnish troops in the WInter War vs Russia, and I think every ww2 "historian" or "lover" knows how the Winter War went badly for Russia. I am also pretty sure that Portugal had a stronger economy and better weaponry than Finland and far more military experience after the Spanish civil war than Finland. Would it be enough to face any of the superpowers alone? No, but that wasn't needed, either, since we would be able to rely on one of the sides if we got attacked by the other and would still be able to offer stubborn resistance like the finnish people did.
At the end you say you are rambling and that seems the case lol. You claim at the end that Salazar was representing the church, but Salazar also told his cardinal friend when he got power that now their paths diverged. I don't find much evidence that Salazar stood for the church anymore than any other catholic. Portugal was pretty secular.
Just one observation. Salazar was against parliament and democracy because, like was said, the knowned experience with a democracy was deeply negative. Like was said, Portugal from 1910 to 1926 was a mess with governments falling down almost every year, with a wild persecutions to Church and with military coups frequently. What Portugal needed at the time was simply order and democracy only left the country in an anarchic state. This context was very favorable for a person like Salazar to ascend and impose himself.
1197 England along with Northern European Crusaders helps the King of Portugal fend off a Moor invasion. 1294 the Aliance is starting to come to fruition culminating in the 1373 treaty. Further reinforced in 1386.
This was really interesting, if I was to classify Salazar politically I wouldn't call him a fascist rather than put him in the same class as say Putin as I would call him more of an extreme reactionary.
@@ThersitestheHistorian - It remains an undeniable fact that Salazar was "all for the nation, nothing against the nation", that was an official propaganda phrase. Be it good or bad! I'll trow a curious data. Between the fall of the monarchy and the first (military) dictatorship, 1910~1926. In those 16 years Portugal had 45 government's, 7 parliaments and 8 president's!! With republicans, monarchists, masons, carbonara, anarchists, etc. fighting on the streets! A mess that's almost unbelievable, real chaos! The entire country was in shambles, no education, no infrastructures, the finances were non existent and so on. Salazar came to power and all that stopped on the spot! Straighten out finances, build schools, roads, hospitals, bridges and a big etc. Plus all the amazing "gymnastics" of the WWII. That alone was a feat of diplomacy at any level we look. I'll trow an interesting number. Portugal after WWII, in 1948, had gold reserves of 170 tons. By the time the regime went down in the "carnation revolution", 1974. Those gold reserves were almost 900 tons! Not much of an external depth we could talk about. Strong coin, economic growth, that would make many "powers" cry for... BTW nowadays those same reserves account for 383 tons, still make Portugal #14 in the world rank! But admittedly that's a "shit load" of gold to "vanish"! External depth...OK! let's change the subject! LOL 😂 It started from a "disastrous" beginning and was going in the right direction. Whether we liked it or not! Certainly there was a big bunch of issues and faults. Probably the biggest and most obvious of them all, political freedom. For which there's no way to counter argue! Although I cringe when I hear some "less informed people" compare him with Hitler, Stalin or even Franco. Example "Tarrafal" the most brutal and feared penal colony of the regime. Count, during the entire regime existence of >40 years, a total of 33 victims! The mildest in this "comparison" would be Franco. Became famous for his outrageous massacres in North Africa. And let Spain with the vice record of "mass graves", only behind Pol Pot's, Cambodia. Some food for taught! ;-) When he's most fearsome opponents and enemies. Men like the leader of the Portuguese socialist party, or the leader of the Portuguese communist party. Both deceased! Men who have been jailed, exiled and "handled" by the PIDE (political police)! Openly admit that Salazar had many faults, but NEVER put his hands "on the cookie jar" of the nation or people! Well that says a lot! ;-)
Salazar died in 1970, however in 1968 he makes a bad fall in the tub and after that he can't walk anymore so the job of prime minister was finito for him
Viva Portugal. 48 years of Estado Novo was best for the Portuguese State than currently 46 years of Sham democracy with no accountability for all mistakes by Socialist party's and immature leaders of Today. The presenter just does not know that Estado Novo was controlled by General Oscar Carmona , General Francisco Caveiro Lopes and Admiral Emerico Tomas. Dr Antonio de Oliveira Salazar was a selected first Finance Minister and then a Prime Minister only to control Internal Administration and Portuguese State affairs . Portuguese Colonies were controlled by Military and President in Military Uniform advising the Governor General's.
Dude, Franco was not a fascist. He was an authoritarian conservative. @24:12 Salazar is a fascist based on his corporatism & strong allegiance with the catholic church? Part of fascism is defined as anti-capitalism, anti-conservatism (including anti-religious), & it's revolutionary by nature. The fact that Salazar Portugal allowed private ownership & privatized the means of production suggests he supports capitalist principals. & the fact that Salazar aligned himself with the catholic church where as real fascists like Hitler or Mussolini were anti-religious and were influenced greatly by atheism, that would support the assertion that Salazar was NOT a fascist, not the other way round.
I was stationed with US Forces Azores in 1968-9 and at one point traveled to Maderia and Lisbon briefly. By that time the regime had become so old and arthritic that it barely functioned. They were carrying on efforts to supress three independence movements in Africa (Angola, Mozambique, and a very small piece of West Africa Portuguese Guinea). The wars ended when the regime was overthrown in 1974 and there was migration of colonialists back to Portugal. In an Armed Forces Day celebration the Portuguese compared their efforts in Africa with ours in Vietnam. Today the economic and political situation is much improved and they succeed where others don't. In fact with substantial oil revenues and a very corrupt regime Angola is providing some financial aid to Portugal. To promote tourism in Maderia the country has borrowed heavily from the EU for huge infrastructure improvements which is really for the benefits of northern EU people. The Azores and much of the mainland is less popular or attractive for tourism.
A bit oblivious and ignorant based comment. As expected from an American! sorry to say. I'll explain, the wars in Africa, particularly in Angola were a "poisonous" move, from you hypocritical's with the moral of a snake! In case you don't know. The massacres of population that deployed the war. As usual had American hand behind. So typical as we say nowadays! UPA the terrorists, where supported by US. Deployed the war against Portugal at American "command"! Cynical detail: It was well orchestrated! On the same day, Holden Roberto, the leader of the terrorists. Was brought to the UN, in New York, with the American "tap on the shoulder". For the vote of a "Portugal condemnation motion", conveniently proposed by the Americans! Precisely on the same day civilians, curiously many white, but the vast majority black natives! Were being slaughtered in all the most horrible manners imaginable! Beheaded, disembowel, dismembered and a vast, etc. of the most vicious acts. Men, women, children even toddlers or farm animals! In actions that would make ISIS look like choir boys on a Sunday school! Call us colonialists, bad mouth us in all sorts of manner. Portuguese were in Africa half a millennium before you sons of a bit__ came running to steal it! That's the reality. When Salazar refused to sell (literally) Angola and Mozambique to the Americans. From then on, was just problems and "colonialists" tags and all sorts of insults and dark propaganda! Until the final act, war! Lousy scum! Salazar's said on the famous speech "Portugal is not for sale..." Let me tell you the "regime...that barely functioned"! Supported a 13 years long war. Meanwhile build roads, dam, railways, schools, entire cities, bridges, etc. The "colonies" payed for the war and even tough, they had an economic growth that shamed Americans! You guys are still waiting for Mexico to pay for a certain wall! Portugal was able to start and finish "on time" and literally "under fire" what is still one of the most important powers dams in Africa! You mention Vietnam, let me put it this way. When Portugal left the "colonies" there was good work done that could be seen by anyone. When Portugal left Vietnam, centuries ago, left an alphabet they still use nowadays! When Portugal left Japan left technology, commerce structure and founded a city called Nagasaki. When Americans left Vietnam, only massacres, misery and destruction stayed behind and "forward", for that matter!! Since supplied the surplus Vietnam weapons, for Indonesia to invade Portuguese Timor!! When Americans "left" Japan. Portuguese founded Nagasaki, had been nuked to the ground! I'll let you "ASSume" your conclusions!
A great observation. The dictatorship did fence off the threat of losing everything to the Anglosaxons, only to lose it decades later to the native "communist" guerrillas and metropolitan Portuguese exhaustion and discontent.
Nice documentary, only too bad you define Salazar as fascist by using a very liberal definition of 'fascism' which is common in marxist historiography. 24:11 So aligning with the Catholic Church makes someone a fascist? Sorry but I can't take such remarks seriously. The same with calling Franco fascist while he clearly was not. Yes both Salazar and Franco were nationalist dictators like Mussolini but comparing based on a few vague similarities does not make them all fascist. The differences between Portugal, Spain and Italy are greater than their similarities. Fascism only existed under Mussolini's Italy. The same applies on your statement of calling Salazar fascist because he introduced a corporatist system. Corporatism is not a fascist concept but rather a catholic one because it was already suggested by the Popes since the 19th century (corporatism itself was also based on the medieval guild system). Yes there was corporatism in fascist Italy but it's important to note that Mussolini twisted the concept of corporatism to fit his own ideological and political needs and was therefor not representative for the corporatist systems in Europe based on the catholic social teachings.
tbppuglia - American economy and most of the so called modern economy is based on "printing" paper money. A big air balloon, filled with "not much". ;-)
Sadly the mismanagement of the empire by the monarchy extravagant spending during its glory days, left it losing the race of weaponry around the 17th century, something that leaves a sour taste to our pride, besides other factors like entering the industrial revolution too little too late.
I know this is an old video but it would be awesome if you could explore some of the Etruscan origins of the Acores islands prior to Portuguese colonisation
World history is very important, especially for the one nation in the world with a very unique centuries-old global history i.e. ❤️🇵🇹❤️. Kindly do not minimize who we, the Portuguese nation, are, in order to elevate your so-called greater power/s.... not sure whom you referring to, though? But perhaps you could chit-chat about yourself, as well as, the greater powers that you are referring to (which you obviously are a part of)? You know, some nations are all about the wrapping paper (so that it may appear more inviting to others), but it's just wrapping. Perhaps a good topic for you to start off with?
Very good work, but... Your profile of Salazar is "impaired by" : (1) Salazar was not a Fascist, he was a CONSERVATIVE, with a XIX Century political outlook , (2) you "bring him too close to Hitler, Mussolini, ...", (3) he HAD to confront the irresponsibility and demagoguery of the (incompetent) left, (4) he HAD to do "first things first", like keeping the (weak/poor) economy running (public debt to a minimum ! , !), (5) he HAD to prioritize education, health & sanitation, (6) keep Portugal safe/independent, good relations with Spain was a must (muy amigos ?!). (7) and, please, please, Açores/Azores, Madeira are/were NOT ,colonies for heavens sake !!!, they are overseas Portugal, not possessions, they are Portugal ! (8) he was very, very, competent, a great intellect ( discreetly, looked down upon Franco who knew he, Salazar was his best, a more "well rounded" as Statesman than himself); he was completely honest, humble (not a façade), a highly moral man both in public and private affairs, (9) he, most definitely, leaned, from the outset, towards Britain and Allies but had to "roll with the punches" so to speak. He was an authoritarian ruler out of conviction (order or anarchy ?) but abhorred Hitler, Musdolini, Stalin. He was a paternalistic, protective, leader, not a buffoon like Mussolini, or a hatred-filled Hitler; far, very far from it ! ! ! He, AND, THIS IS CRUCIAL TO UNDERSTAND THE PORTUGUESE FOREIGN POLICY: was reported as having said: "no matter what be ALLWAYS in good terms with BRITAIN & BRAZIL, if you do not get this, you will not get a number of his decisions right, (9) his entourage ....., this hasn't been looked into. It should/must. (10) after WW I I his regime "missed (?) the boat" to "come out of the shell", failed to "modernize", and became "ossified" with all the (bad) consequences of it.... A great man of his time. Did he outlived "his time" ?
Well, Salazar wasn't entirely innocent of being compared with Mussolini - especially in his early years he was quite impressed by him and was seen with a Mussolini Portrait on his desk. And regardless of the exact political colour of his doctrine, he clearly used the dictator's toolkit of power preservation: a censorship of the press, suppression of political parties, a secret police with excessive powers and a single election that was quite certainly rigged. I agree that he did not enrich himself personally in that he amassed wealth for himself. You could argue, however, that being a bachelor having the state's ressources at his disposal, there was no need to. Portugal was lucky enough to have him rather than General Franco or one of the Axis maniacs in place - but there is no reason to wish a dictatorial type like him back in place.
@@notroll1279 - It's kind of curious the "propaganda" of the time still echoes trough out time. Do you know those "conveniently" located photos on his desk etc. Depended, a lot, on the political image that was needed in a certain moment?! ;-) That's a fact that still confuse a lot of people. But in reality he was a very good diplomat! Surprisingly or not. Many are not aware, for example, the real admirer of Hitler was... General Humberto Delgado!! Yep! Even wrote a book praising Hitler! That's a surprise to many. ;-)
@@crpth1 I'm not suggesting that Delgado would have been a good president. I've read credible comments that he was opportunistic and would have chosen whatever political colour helpful to bis career. But is that a justification to have the elections rigged and to have the man killed - and his young secretary along with him? Does that strike you as legitimate means of politics and proper use of police resources? Really?
@@notroll1279 - I was stating a fact, not saying you're defending this guy or that guy. ;-) And please do not "assume", because you're the one assuming all that BS!
@@crpth1 I'm not assuming anything - neither with nor without paranthesis. If you suggest that Salazar had himself photographed next to "conveniently located" Mussolini pics, you're the one assuming things - either that his portrait was forged or that Salazar was too messy to see which portraits were on his desk - both pretty steep...
Loving History on the whole but in particular the 1914-1945 period from Historical perspective, I can say at last a very interesting video dealing with a scarce topic. I knew barely nothing about Salazar. Now I know a little more about him. Soon or later I will try to get and read the book you recommend in this video. Thank you so much Thersites the Historian and keep going! Cheers from Paris, France.
Btw Salazar did not contribute anything to the decrease in Illiteracy, this role was played by many priests, military personnel and municipalities who were anti-regime and to prevent teenagers from having to go to War or embark on a military career starting in the so-called " Mocidade Portuguesa", a fascist institution similar to Mussolini's "fascist Youth", signed up with assistants from Schools, municipalities, hospitals or Private Institutions of Social Solidarity, and thus avoid being sent to Military service or even to War where Ninety percent of the population The country's young male was mobilized for the Overseas War, which caused around 10,000 deaths and 20,000 invalids among soldiers and more than 100,000 victims among civilians living in the colonies....my father( RIP) to avoid going to Angola, he was in The GNR( a sort of military police) and fortunately he did not go, but my Uncle had to go and still has PTSD with 83 years and is very afraid of fireworks. My other uncle served in the Navy but he's not in danger because he stayed in Cape Verde from 70 to 73...
Wrong: Franco wanted to invade Portugal and unite both countries. A spanish researcher found documents proving that... you can check: it was discovered by Manuel Ros Agudo. they actually used to sang " We only wait for the order given by our General to erase Spain's border with Portugal".
True: www.lasrepublicas.com/2019/12/16/el-dia-que-espana-pensaba-invadir-portugal-el-plan-militar-de-99-paginas-que-franco-oculto/ The main reason Franco did not enter the war along the Axis was that he felt that Britain exerted too much naval power and that, therefore, in order for his regime to be somewhat safe, it was needed that the Axis conquered Egypt first (Suez Canal specifically), so that Britain could not access the Mediterranean Sea anymore once Gibraltar was conquered (which is as such easy-peasy if you are Spain). He had plans, ambitions, re. North Africa and Portugal but all depended on the issue of Gibraltar and thus of Egypt-Suez. When the USA landed in Morocco they offered Franco to take some of the French protectorate as long as it were lands that did not obstruct their maneuvers, Franco ignored the offer, probably suspecting it a trap and deeming the gains not worth it.
1)Portugal had more then 2 colonies in Africa has the map you used shows. 2) Saying that Franco never had plans to invade his neighbor is wrong. He did on more then 1 occasion got tempted to invade Portugal and also recover Gibraltar...He did want to expand the Spanish Colonial Empire too(French Moroco,Algeria,...). Historian Manuel Ros Agudo published the book "La Gran Tentación"(2008)In which he reveals all about the documents themselves and what happened before,during and after such plans were made(politics,talks with both sides of the war....). The plans itself he found during his research on the Spanish military Archives.
Well put. Franco's "brilliant" idea never passed unnoticed to Salazar, who was perfectly aware of the case. Among many other details it was finally put to rest. by two major events. The agreement Salazar-Franco. And the final straw. The fall of the German army in Stalingrad in 43! That sealed once and for all, that no help would come from Germany. They were "busy" enough! Fun fact: During the entire >40 years regime. Salazar only left the country ONCE! To visit Spain/Franco in 1942! For that high level talks and sign of the agreement!
FYI This year the "Carnation Revolution" turns 50 and fortunately due to the courage of several Captains who on April 25, 1974 came to Lisbon supported by several regiments from three branches of the armed forces led by Otelo Saraiva de Carvalho and supported by General Costa Gomes, the Practical School of Cavalry was responsible for the most complicated operation of occupying the place where the government was and later going up to Largo do Carmo where there was finally the surrender to Salgueiro Maia. and we owe our independence to them even though we now have an extreme right-wing party that has 50 deputies and will deny what I said! Viva o 25 de Abril viva a liberdade e abaixo o Fascismo! Já Chega de Chega! Avante Camaradas!
Figures like Franco and Salazar are tricky. Both were clearly anti-liberal and anti-left counter-revolutionary Catholics and staunch nationalists. Of course, Fascism is tricky and shape-shifting, too, as the classic article by the great Umberto Eco noted. Eco felt that Fascism was best thought of as a family resemblance and these regimes do tick some of his boxes but, importantly, also fail to tick some others. www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/ Neither were expansionistic, although both worked to maintain the vestiges of colonial empire. Corporatism itself is kind of difficult, in the sense that it often recognized things like labor unions, but only insofar as they fit in the overall scheme of their notion of a well-ordered society. So a Catholic labor union might be OK, but a Marxist or even independent one? Not a chance. Fascism also had a decidedly anti-Christian sentiment to it, most specially Naziism. Both Franco and Salazar were deeply suspicious of Hitler, whom I'm sure they both viewed as being a loose cannon. Hitler famously said he thought dealing with Franco was less pleasant than visiting his dentist and Franco cannily sent the hardcore Falangists in Spanish service to the Eastern Front, getting them out of Spain while appeasing Hitler with a contribution of troops. As you note both Salazar and Franco recognized how vulnerable their respective countries were to the Allies, while the Nazis would have had to invade through the difficult Pyrenees. I'm not defending them, mind you, but do think that there are some pretty important differences between their regimes and those of Mussolini and, most definitely, Hitler.
There was never any German threat of invasion of Spain: it'd be impossible unless backed by the locals and the only locals wanting to back an invasion were anti-fascists (whose guerrillas were active until the early 60s and then again since the late 60s). Sadly no such invasion ever happened and a man from Arrigorriaga had to kill the ogre almost on his own (not Franco, the ogre was Franco's right hand and expected successor Carrero Blanco). Franco's Spain had indeed expansionist plans but felt could not implement them without the Axis first securing control of the Mediterranean Sea, i.e. capturing Egypt and the Suez Canal. He had a plan for Gibraltar (easy peasy if you are Spain, the cost is in Canary Islands and possible landing in areas where the guerrilla or in general opposition to the regime was strong, as Galicia), plans for North Africa and a quite detailed plan to invade Portugal as well: www.lasrepublicas.com/2019/12/16/el-dia-que-espana-pensaba-invadir-portugal-el-plan-militar-de-99-paginas-que-franco-oculto/ Franco was absolutely fascist in everything, however there's some people who like to imagine that fascism is radically distinct from conservatism and it is not: in Germany and Spain especially it is very clear how the lines between the extremist right and the slightly less extremist conservatives are very blurry. Hitler was appointed by the conservatives and even the Christian-Democrats, Franco was equally backed massively by the conservative party CEDA, which smoothly transitioned into the National Movement, even if this was originally created around the strict fascists (Falangistas) and ultra-reactionaries (Carlistas), which were way too weak to matter.
@@LuisAldamiz Thanks for the info re Franco's expansionism. It it's not too surprising I suppose. You're right, without an Axis victory he wasn't going anywhere. I think the point about the blurry lines between Francoism and other versions of fascism is also interesting. I cited Umberto Eco, who spends a good bit of time showing that fascism is best thought of not as a natural kind with clear category boundaries but as a family resemblance. This is particularly relevant for varieties of fascism given how essentially anti-logical they are. peoplePhilippinesNo question that Francoism, Italian Fascism, Naziism, and many other variants shared some important aspects, though. In a lot of ways this was the same with Stalin's Soviet Union, though there was clearly an ideological core to Marxism that fascism lacked.
@@crimfan - Franco owed to Italy, to Portugal and to Germany (less than to the others as they only sent a token air force, while Italy sent 70,000 and Portugal 10,000 troops, the Spanish Civil War was rather the Second Roman Invasion of Spain, incl. one of my grandfathers, who had to flee Italy after WWII for being way too fascist). But he also owed *a lot* to Britain, which enforced a blockade against both sides (equally to the fascists, not really functional, as to the democrats, much more effective, especially as France was dragged into such suicidal scheme). Actually Britain had been toying with fascism a lot in Europe and it's impossible to understand how most of Europe had gone under various fascist regimes without that meddling from London, which at first loved Mussolini a lot. Hence he and his clique were torn about how to fit in WWII: their position was still precarious, as many guerrillas existed until c. 1960 (and then again since 1968), and the geostrategical location of Spain depended a lot on naval power, something Germany lacked and Italy had not been good enough at either. They were aware that Canary Islands and the two African colonies were impossible to retain in case of war with Britain (let alone the USA) and were hoping at most to take Gibraltar (more of interest to the Axis proper than to Spain as such, it's soooo tiny!) and the free city of Tangiers (which was readily occupied on "neutrality" pretexts, no need to enter the war for that). What else could Spain hope to gain from the war? Well, Portugal was certainly discussed and that's a much more sizable prize. Franco did send a "volunteers" division to the Eastern Front anyhow, the Blue Division, on anti-communist pretext but refused to intervene against Britain (and possibly France) unless they had first their Mediterranean back covered, what never happened. Other stuff that was on the table later on was an offer by the USA for Spain to take parts of the French protectorate of Morocco for as long as it did not bother US military deployment in North Africa. Franco ignored that offer, probably imagining in his paranoia that it was a trap. Franco offered to join the Allies at the end of the war in the Pacific scenario, i.e. against Japan, an offer that was dismissed by the Allies (opportunistic and worthless). After WWII, Spain had a period of international isolation of around a decade, it was not even admitted to the UN and suffered from serious scarcity, which Argentina's Peron eased. It was anyhow not as bad as in war-devastated Europe, my relatives who fled Italy often mentioned that they could finally enjoy white bread after a long period of having only brown bread, often full of toasted roaches (yummy protein I guess). In those days integral bread was considered inferior, unlike today. However as the Marshall Plan recovered the rest of Europe in order to serve US interests the situation of "autarchical" and isolated fascist Spain was becoming more difficult. Luckily for Franco (not for Spaniards though) Eisenhower decided to make a pact with the devil in the mid 50s and thus Franco could reach old age and make a very ordered and authoritarian transition to "democracy" (and full integration in NATO and its civilian department, the EU) in the 70s only. Some guy from my town killed his sidekick Admiral Carrero-Blanco however but that didn't change much in the end. As Franco said in his death bed: "I leave everything tied and well tied" ("atado y bien atado").
Great overview, thanks. I think it's important to get clear about these terms like Nazism, Fascism, Totalitarianism etc (especially to understand how such ideologies win power and stop them returning), so whether Salazar can be called a fascist is something I intend to look more closely at.
@@endovelicvs oque mano a minha avó tem 95 anos e o meu pai 63 eles viveram nesse tempo e sabem que Portugal n era livre quando o meu pai era pequeno havia colegas dele que iam descalços pá escola
@@JoaoPedro-ob5sd vê se logo o tipo de pessoa que és ao assumires que sou rico por achar que o Salazar fez muitas coisas boas por Portugal, não passas de um ignorante
all i have to say is salazar was voted the best portuguese personality of all times recently,and that is amazin for a so called dictator,a great men chosen by god to save a great nation from the horours of ww2
Sir, you should check your facts thoroughly. There are many errors and inconsistencies on your video. Too many to name them here. I am Portuguese and I must say that I'm not terribly proud of Fascism and also the Colonies around the world.
The current history books paint Stalin as a victim, but do a little research you'll find in the 1920's those "Russians" where starving the Ukrainians . . . attacking Finland . . . in Russia they had work/death camps . . . most of this before the 1939 start of war
You false equivalency falls on its ass. Bad deeds do not justify bad deeds - that's just a ridiculous notion. "I'm sorry babushka but you have to be raped and murdered because some bad communist guys also come from the same geographic location and they apparently did some bad shit to some kulaks in Ukraine you've never met or interacted with in any way" - give me a break. The Azul division wasn't in Ukraine administering justice and supposedly raising up the peasant folk to be good Catholics - it was freezing its balls off in the North fighting off Vodka-fueled hordes in a nice corner of the front where nobody would ever hear or see it long enough for it to cause Spain or Portugal any trouble. Don't fool yourself.
Jay Lopes . Yes, this has been overlooked. Must be studied in detail, beyond the "action-movie approach"; why they soldiers volunteered, how many, for how long, of course the battles they took part on, and WHY they went; not forgetting how were the Portuguese volunteers' interaction with Spaniards and Germsn soldiers. How many survived ? What became of them ? Why were/are they forgotten ?? Neglect ? "Shame" ? I am VERY PROUD OF THEIR BRAVERY regardless of side. They were very brave !!!
Tony after Europe lost the 1945 war, the Americans and British became the masters of Europe - ( the goal all along ! ) 20 years ago I went to the coast of Portugal looking to buy a ocean front home, the best homes where owned by the British and they had raised the prices to keep out "the foreigners" aka the Portuguese. Salazar never would have let the British control our land or let the Africans control our streets.
You forgot to say that there were Portuguese soldiers winning territory in German at the beginning of the war when all your ather so-called " mush powerful nations were getting slaughter by the Germans.
Balancing the budget does not work?Yah, big debt and massive interest payments are a good thing?If you want your Nation to go bankrupt at the first spike in interest rates its a brilliant strategy!
You are right in principle - avoiding debt is sensible - and reducing the level of debt during the first 10 years in power was quite an achievement. However, especially in the final years of his rule, Salazar was being criticized for spending lots of money on the military (clearly without getting the results he wanted) and underspending on education at the same time. He did a lot of things conservative politicians would stay clear of today: he micro-managed the country by setting prices, intervening with foreign investment - and imposing rent caps for Lisbon and Porto. Nearly everything was directed from his Sao Bento office - so everything went pretty mad when the Estado Novo collapsed a few years after his demise. Strangely even the rent caps went on for thirty more years - despite all the inflation that had ravaged the currency. No wonder that inner Lisbon lost a third of its inhabitants since the 1950s: many buildings just were impossible to maintain properly at those rents. It's a charming idea to remember him as a non-corrupt (which he was) and non-evil (which he was to a lesser extent) dictator who kept order. But by today's standards, he was rather an accountant than an economist.
I believe you think that Truman, Roosevelt, Churchill, etc, were good guys! Give me a break please and next time make a video about flowers or anything but this bull sheet!
the role of "minor powers in WWII". MINOR? Hmm! MAYBE! Perhaps today it is nothing more than a mediocre country in the 21st century. But let us remember the discoveries and who contributed most to the Renaissance. Where a country with just one million inhabitants created the first intercontinental ship, the first sails that allowed sailing against the wind, navigation instruments to find latitude and navigate by the stars, the first country to end the Silk Road and creating a Maritime route with Africa, South America, Asia, and destroying the Commercial Empires of the Netherlands, the Arabs, and the Italian Kingdoms! having started in 1415 in Ceuta (Morocco), and so on: 1418 Porto and Madeira Islands, 1420 Canary Islands, Azores Islands 1427, 1444 to 1451 The entire African Coast up to Guinea and Sierra Leone, 1460 Southern Hemisphere São Tomé and Princepe, Gabon, Angola South Africa until 1500 onwards: Brazil, Indian Ocean, the entire African Coast up to the Arabian Peninsula, Goa, Damao, Diu, Macau, Philippines, Indonesia, China and Japan! For a lower power it's not bad at all!
Amazing work on this topic! Probably the best on youtube. Most of population in Portugal are agaisnt Salazar. The older people thought kinda like him because Portuguese economic and social situation was so bad before the revolution, bad they're still against him. The only big topic missing in here is that Salazar also had a crazy vision for Portugal as Hitler had for Germany. Salazar believed that Portugal sticking to his colonies was the only way to gain economic supremacy and so our colonial wars(post WWII) in Africa we're brutal and stupid. Mostly because the people/soldiers didn't want to fight it and this was Salazar "operation Barbarossa" kind of biggest mistake. Portugal and the portuguese always had a big bond with these colonies and cultures and another thing to keep in mind is that as the world may not think(because of colonization and slavery), the portuguese people by themselves are really peaceful and easy-going. Just some close examples of this war: -My father was born in Angola as a caucasian. Portuguese people had all sorts of businesses in Africa, so they weren't quite happy as Portugal was invading the place they lived. So as Portugal was attacking the colonies, the people from these colonies started to create hate and doubt towards the caucasian(even the ones that had family generations born in Africa). Unfortunately when the war started all of my fathers family went to Macau(the last colony of Portugal "given back" to the chinese in 1999), abandoning a lifetime farm. After the end of the dictatorship they moved back to Portugal. -The uncle from my mothers side, lived in Portugal and was called to fight in Mozambique. First thing his crew did arriving in Africa was abandon their war post, selling the weapons and equipment into the freedom fighters in Mozambique and just get some land to start a croping business. It's not that every crew of soldiers did this, but a lot of them did it. After the fall of our dictatorship, he came back. This kinda proves the disaproval by the military forces to actually battle this war, most of them already knew that Salazar woudn't last long in power also. - If you actually talk to people from Angola, Mozambique, São Tomé e Príncipe, Cabo Verde... They'll say that these wars ended much sooner than announced. Salazar knew he didn't had a chance of keeping all of these colonies because Portugal is a country with a small population. There are different opinion on this topic of why that Salazar wanted the war propganda to continue and why he didn't actually try to "maintain" the colonies. Some say the URSS was helping the freedom fighters with weapon in exchange of spreading communism and gain interest in the oil that these countries had. Some say the propaganda of war was happening because, to distract democracy and communism movements(had exactly the opposite effect) or to create a world image that Portugal was a military force(which we definetly wasn't). Sorry for my long insight of Salazar and war on colonies! I loved your video, will definetly subscribe!
Hi Antonio, I'm glad that you enjoyed the video. I didn't know all of that about Portugal's post-war problems or Salazar's guiding vision. I am only vaguely familiar with Portugal's colonial wars in Africa, but now I want to know more those conflicts.
Your uncle is a traitor !!! I also had a traitor in my family he name was Fernao Lopes he was tortured and disfigured in punishment, - good !. For you to write about your uncle like he is some type of hero is amazing, those weapons he sold killed our fellow country men, this is why Portugal has nothing today because of self loathing Portuguese like you that are subservient to anyone that gives "some land"
If it wasnt for people like your uncle then Portugal would still have those colonies. It is because of people like your uncle that Portugal went from being an empire to a weak, worthless backwater country in Iberia. The only thing that can redeem your country is if it brings back the monarchy but we all know that would never happen.
Your tavleing in shaky waters!! We are not only founders of UN but Also the bilderberg group we want to be left alone expecally during time you are inquiring about.. THANKS
Port. was an Empire in its OLD AGE! you don"t fite b/c you can"t ! so you let other viable Empires}}} Germs take on Brits--TWICE! and lose---TWICE......you watch it all go down
miguel brito . Sr. Brito, Salazar was not an horrible person ! After WW I I he missed opportunities to "soften" his "managing of day-to-day" policies/politics; he didn't do it, he didn't "see" he had better options he could have pursued. His associates, and himself, were unable to conceive of a Portugal different than of decades back. They did not make room for change, and this was his "bad side", including the horrific political repression. He was a Consevative, Patriotic, in charge of a poor country whose independence and safety was his main concern. He was INCORRUPTIBLE !!! Modest, honest, competent, but he was trapped by likeminded people who were backward looking ! Very unfairly, the socialist driven propaganda only focus on the minus side forgetting the great good he did for Portugal ! God bless you and your family, " eVIVA LUSITÂNIA !!!! "
He was incorruptible?????????????????you could have that opinion, but I dont agree. THe only thing I can say for shure, is that Salazar was one of the best dictators, but stil a fascist dictator. Sorry but I dont debate conspiracy theories, and I dont like fascists ( no matter the little good things they did )
miguel brito . Hi Miguel ! Salazar was CONSERVATIVE, CATHOLIC, TRADITIONALIST, XIX Century MIND SET. Not a Fascist, not an Mussolini, not a Franco, both ideologues with "Manias de Grandesa" , blood thirsty. Right after the war he "missed the boat" by not enlarging his power base with people who had more liberal (yet responsible) political views. He and his political circle formed a very closed circle defended with an iron fist. But yes, he was a man of principles and these did not include ( for him personally ) corruption. He was, like it or not,,a modest man! By the way, I am not a Salazarista ! ( what would that be ?!), but his "historical persona" hasn't yet well understood/known. The socialist inspired "propaganda" has muddled the understanding of his role in History !
modest and incorruptible are not the same thing Tony. His political circle was made by the most rich and influence familys, and they did what ever they want during does times. And a person that wants power for life ( and he did, like it or not, regarding governing Portugal ) cant be a modest person ( becase he thoght that he was the only one that could save the country ). Do you really think a modest person would think that???? Do you know all the characteristics of fascism? go to wikipedia or something, the most basic I found was this: "There are several fundamental characteristics of fascism, among them are: Right Wing: Fascists are fervently against: Marxism, Socialism, Anarchism, Communism, Environmentalism; etc - in essence, they are against the progressive left in total, including moderate lefts (social democrats, etc). You say that Salazar dosent fit with this discription? blood thirsty and manias de grandesa, have nothing to do with the ideology of fascim. And I agree that Mussolini and Franco were mutch more Autoritários.
On the good side, Portugal saved some one million people during the war. Just for curiosity, recently old documents were found about Macau during WW2, the portuguese colony had at the time some 150 000 people by the end of the war it had 500 000. Lots of people from China, French, Italian, English, Spanish, German, white Russian, Australian, jews, Indians, Indonesian and many other countries. All in all portuguese neutrality saved some 1,5 million people around the world, not bad for a small country.
I certainly agree that Salazar is something of an invisible dictator in English/American literature. For that matter, until recently few in the US that did not trace their family links back to Portugal knew anything about the country. Most here in the US of A probably did not care. That's certainly changed today, as Portugal emerges from the many decades of dictatorship. Portugal is a fascinating country with a rich history and very nice people. Thank you for taking the trouble to produce this video.
American education has always been somewhat myopic, watch those hilarious street interviews before the Gulf wars with folks putting Iraq in Australia. There is very little curiosity about what goes on in the world around them unless it its a direct threat, and too much reliance on politicised, partisan and often incompetent media. I have met several Americans who came over for various professional reasons, and even amongst some academics there is often a small-town mentality that curtails their grasp of a broader cultural reality. Is this done on purpose? Is it the sheer vastness of the US, physically and economically that produces this effect? Or is this effect the manifestation of a compliant nature that is necessary for the generation of such wealth? Are these the folks that stood up to the British in 177x? Who generated the most wonderfully libertarian Constitution on the planet..."We the people..." it starts, if memory serves me.Where have they gone? I see something similar in Germany, the preoccupation with fitting in, obeying orders... and we know where that leads. We indeed are a peculiar species.
Salazar's real skill was diplomacy, keeping many balls in the air at the same time. The Allies recognized this and relied on him and ambassador Teutónio Pereira to forge a neutrality pact with Spain. This was aided by American wheat exports to Spain, on 2 conditions, not a single grain was to go to Germany, and Spain would remain neutral. When Adolf came for a chat with Franco at Hendaye (one issue was Operation Felix), Franco made his agreement dependent on demands Germany could not possibly agree to. Adolf had a fit, Spain remained a non-combatant, heavily favouring the axes powers, but the nazis did not go through to attack Portugal or Gibraltar, and the spaniards ate a little better. Read "Under two cloaks" and "One of our pilots is safe". Admiral Canaris also told Franco that Germany would lose the war, agent Garbo was also there....
Ricardo Davidson . Excellent !!!
Yep Franco demanded that Spain receive large portions of French colonies in northwest Africa
@@TheLocalLt Le Maroc et la Mauritanie
Yes, the former Corporal was reported as saying after that meeting with Franco, that he would rather have 6 teeth pulled out without anaesthetic than listen to that high-pitched voice for hours.
@@TheLocalLtHitler should've said Yes to Franco's demands.
The evidence is plain that Hitler suffered from undiagnosed Parkinson's disease or something similar.
The obvious features of Parkinson's, which do not always appear first, however, are movement problems.
It's a degenerative neurological condition, and, as with many such conditions, it can have global effects, eventually.
Problems of judgment and discernment can appear even before movement problems.
In Hitler's case we have a man who had played a more-or-less perfect game 🎮 until he made the mistake of agreeing to Herman Goering's ludicrous demand that the Luftwaffe be allowed to finish off the British and French forces at Dunkirk on its own.
Arguably, though, significant mistakes go back slightly beyond that.
He had agreed in writing with Bismarck that Germany should never fight a two front war.
Logically, therefore, he could simply have ignored Poland and launched the War with an attack on France and possibly also Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Denmark and Norway in more-or-less the manner he did in 1940.
Defeating France opened up the possibility of then extending German power to cover all of Eurafasia except for the Soviet Union and parts to be partitioned with other Axis powers, keeping the Soviet Union and the USA out of the war, until the UK and its empire had been defeated and occupied.
Then going for the Soviet Union and, only after defeating it and rolling up Latin America, invading the USA across the Mexican border.
God wouldn't allow this, not least because it could have resulted in the complete extermination of the Jews who had so far rejected Christ, and thus made biblical prophecies of the (majority of the Jews turning to Christ and accepting him as Messiah) impossible to fulfill without specific additional divine intervention.
That God would not allow this is best illustrated by the answering of allied, especially Greek Orthodox and Coptic Christian but also Muslim prayers to local Saint St. Menas at the battle of El Alamein. He then appeared and stopped the German advance driving back the Germans.
Had they won this battle, the allied forces would have been clear through to the Suez canal and on to Palestine, annihilating the ✡️ Jewish settlements there.
Portugal is Englands oldest ally, rather different from British. This may seem a minor point to an outsider but in a U.K./British context is quite important. That being said I would argue that Portugal has made the greatest contribution to global cuisine in history. I know that's a bit of a tangent, but always worth mentioning:-)
Portuguese food is great: If you count every bacalhau dish, tempura, pasteis de nata that's a good start.
The Portuguese offered to honour the Anglo Portuguese pact in 1939. UK declined and Portugal helped the UK in many other ways.
Churchill rated Salazar as a leader.
A note on Franco's intentions regarding Portugal. He actually did at one point consider invading Portugal, around the start of WWII, as part of a preemptive strike against Britain. The plans have been uncovered relatively recently (around 2008), which probably explains why it's not common knowledge even among WWII history buffs. Here are some links:
www.theportugalnews.com/news/francos-plan-to-invade-portugal-was-serious/52399
expresso.pt/actualidade/o-plano-de-franco-para-invadir-portugal=f446991 (in Portuguese but with one of the maps)
It is also known that one the conditions that Franco gave to Hitler as part of the negotiations to join the war was that Spain get annex Portugal (in addition to parts of French North Africa). Germany drew up Operation Felix which included a Germano-Spanish invasion of Portugal (Germany cared about Gibraltar but understood Portugal could become a bridgehead for British intervention).
Finally, not related to WWII, but after Portugal regained democracy in 1974, the Franco regime in Spain wanted American permission to invade Portugal and put down the revolution (and, I would guess, probably wouldn't be in any hurry to leave)
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/3373194/Gen-Franco-wanted-to-declare-war-on-Portugal.html
Portugal at the time with it's mostly illiterate population wasn't ready for liberalism. Salazar did the job that had to be done at the time. Interesting fact: When Salazar ended his mandate Portugal had zero debt, and is now buried in debt under the EU.
There is incorrect information on the video: 1st, the Azores and Madeira continue to be a part of Portugal and were not colonies as such. They are, mainly, of Portuguese stock and were not subject to colonial laws. 2nd, there were more than 2 colonies in Africa.
Salazar was not President of Portugal, he was the equivalent to the Prime-Minister. He desliked Parliamentary politics and his government (the New State or 2nd Republic) was nationalistic and catholic in nature, as well as strongly corporativist. Not very different from Dollfuss' regime in Austria. Be careful when you associate Catholicism with Fascism as this not the case in either Italy (were Fascism appeared as a political system) or in Nazi Germany.
As far as I am concerned, Salazar was fundamental in stabilizing public finances in the country as well as keeping us largely out of the 2nd World War. As far as I am concerned, he outlived his usefulness after the end of the 2nd World War and failed in the way he approached the Portuguese Colonial Wars. This proved to be the downfall of the New State following a military lead insurrection that lead to the creation of the ongoing Democratic and Parliamentary/Semipresidential 3rd Republic.
If you wish to have a better understanding of how the New State came into being I suggest you revisit the 1st Republic. It was Democratic and Parliamentary but politically very unstable and it failed to reign in on the economy and on the public finances. Salazar was elected Member of Parliament for the 1st Republic in 1917 but he soon resigned to return to his position as an Academic in Coimbra. In 1926 he was nominated Finance Minister but resigned in just 13 days. He felt he did not have the necessary control to stabilize the finances and it was only after his terms were met that he agreed to return to politics.
Miguel Sousa . Excellent Miguel. "E VIVA LUSITÂNIA". !!!!
Salazar took power as financial minister, in 1928.
@Miguel Sousa
This guy who made the video is an American. Most Americans are ignorant of matters unrelated to the US but still like to talk about them as if they know what they're talking about.
Power hates the Void. If Democracy fails, Dictatorship will take its place. And, as far as i am concerned, the high rates of Abstention in our semi-Neo-Liberal Regime polls will lead us to the next "Messiah", just watch how our fascist, conservatory and cristhian right-wing parties are drulling all over, all ready...
"1st, the Azores and Madeira continue to be a part of Portugal and were not colonies as such. They are, mainly, of Portuguese stock and were not subject to colonial laws. " Well... Yes and no. The Azores and Madeira were not treated like the African colonies for example, and in paper didnt have the same status, but it wasnt treated like the rest of Portugal and had a diferent status and had a neo colonial rule. Just a example that the Azores and Madeira had its own coin that was 20% weaker then portuguese coin (Salazar actually ended this), and higher unfair taxes in main Azorean industries like alchool which was very important to the local economy. Portugal and the rich Azorean elite mainly just cared mostly about the resources and key location of those places. This is explotion. Just a example that in the XV century, they would just send some smaller nobility that almost had full power and almost could do everything they wanted on the place.They never were treated the same way as mainland Portugal.
Socially, Azoreans were "equal" to mainland portuguese, such a small population produced one prime minister (Hintze Ribeiro, he was the one who helped the first autonomy movement, being him Azorean) and the first 2 presidents of the first portuguese republic. But, in general, Azoreans and the Azores were looked down upon and werent treated the same way, just a example it was "Portugal, the adjacent islands (thats the Azores and Madeira) and the Ultramar (the colonies)". They would just send a governor from mainland Portugal that didnt understand nothing of the place, to rule the districts of the Azores, and almost had no power, because the power would come from Lisbon and they mostly didnt care and left the "islands" to third class treatement and mostly cared about the taxes only. Just another example, when the Portuguese were starting to heavily colonize Brazil, the place they took most people were in the Azores, some by force, some islands never recovered from that, in terms of manpower and population. Islands like Santa Maria. This had deep social impact.
There is even a book from Briant Barret a british person who lived in the Azores for some time in the time of the Napolionic wars, talked how the Azorean in Lisbon was almost treated like a black man at the time in London and the population would benefit from other goverment because they were treated badly.
The Azores was the poorest region in Europe, one of the many reasons why there was movements for them to have their own goverment, one in the end of the XIX century, one in Salazar time, and one, that almost led to independence after the 25th April revolution. Today they have their own goverment, flag, even anthem, but are also part of the Portuguese republic. There was no need for a Azorean goverment if those facts didnt happen.
So the Azores werent treated the same as mainland Portugal, it wasnt officially a colony, but it was ruled in a neo colonial form.
Source: im Azorean and just read some books.
Found this video by pure coincidence, and being a Portuguese that actually knows about war equipment after years of study, gotta tell you that I laughed at your video really hard. You are not exactly wrong on many of your points, but you clearly don't understand the context, or the time some things were used.
1º Germany and Italy did need equipment for themselves, but as they kept developing new equipment, the "trash equipment" was left to reserve units or sold to countries like Portugal. You can call it "trash" but many of these things like the mauser m98k could still be used effectively. We actually had countless Steyers MP34 submachineguns sold to us after the anschluss of Austria, not that bad either.
2º As for the Azores, USA could definetely take it most likely with a prolongued blockade (since the Portuguese fleet would be no challenge to them) because on an amphibious landing... Good luck with that. Portugal sent almost 30.000 men into the islands and the american plan (war plan gray) for taking over it included only 28.000 american soldiers. And Azores had things like coastal fortifications/batteries with 260mm cannons so yeah good luck (earlier normandy on portuguese shore? lol).
3º Portugal couldn't defend far east possessions like Timor, but come on, the army and navy were busy near Europe. Who would care about remote territories that barely had 500.000 people on it all combined. The european posessions obviously spoke higher.
4º As for airforce, we actually had bristol blenheim, curtiss mohawk IV and countless other fighters/bombers (junkers for example) by 1940, not only gladiators. By 1943 we had over 100 spitfires and 100 hurricanes, so try to tell me which other small nation in world war 2 actually had this amount of aircraft. Granted, not much if you want to compare with the UK or Germany, but the territory to defend wasn't that large and Portugal wasn't a superpower either.
5º "The Portuguese Navy was only capable of ferrying men" - made for a good laugh as well. Dude are you serious? Most of your info is wrong, and some of those avisos were large enough that they even had a torpedo/recon airplane on it. They were more than capable of engaging Destroyers as well. Not heavy cruisers, though. And given the situation in Europe, you couldn't do much with a fleet either way. If you were on the allies side, you didn't have to worry and would have to worry only about german u-boats, which, we were more than capable of fighting with our own ships or naval aircraft. If Portugal was on the side of the germans, hell, no fleet would be good enough to face the americans or the british on this part of the world isolated from everyone else. The Portuguese fleet wasn't a powerful fleet but it was a fleet powerful enough to do its required job. Avisos were ships for long travels by the way, few ships were ocean worthy and capable of traveling far away. The Portuguese colonies were far away from each other, and ships for long travels were required, and those that Portugal built were more than enough of defending themselves vs smaller vessels too.
6º Your part of the spanish civil war is also interesting "... all he (salazar) did was sent 8-12 thousand men to spain"... You said "all he did". Yes, all he did was send the BIGGEST FOREIGN VOLUNTEER GROUP into the spanish civil war... Not to mention that during this period (1936-1939) Portugal was the TOP importer of weapons and war material IN THE WORLD... because most of it was being smuggled into Spain and Franco's army. That is "all" he did, really. Do you think this sort of aid was small? The USSR pratically did the same but took the majority of the spanish gold reserve (one of the biggest in the world) as payment. lol.
7º As for Salazar himself - he wasn't a fascist. He was a dictator, but not a fascist. He died poor but managed to pay the entire foreign debt and leave the country in a much better shape than he found it - for instance the average wage increased 8x times and Lisbon doubled in size (we had the 2nd biggest economic growth rate in the world for countless years, usually around 20%, with only China being better, but all of this only after ww2 since the economy tanked during the conflict). I actually doubt he feared Franco or an invasion from Spain btw. Franco kept speaking highly of Salazar, and was forever in debt for Salazar's aid. Plus, he needed Salazar to remain friendly with the UK-USA, since Salazar trying to convince the allies that "Franco wanted to be another dictator like Salazar and not like Hitler/Mussolini".
8º Also irrelevant to the ww2 discussion, but Viriato was actually a Lusitanian, and not a Celt-Iberian... Get your facts right, mate!
All of this said by someone who actually understands of the topic, by the way. I leave opinions for others, I merely state facts.
I think you're very wrong about Portugal being able to defend Azores from the USA (and Britain): it would have been worse than the Falklands. To begin with, without naval superiority, there's no way to relocate those 30,000 troops in the various islands, so they would have been occupied one by one, using the first one as base for the assault on the others. As the video says (with great reason) fortifications were by then almost useless. Maybe Portugal could have made an epic (or rather tragical) bloody last stand but it would have lost the islands anyhow quite fast. On top of that Portugal had many other things to defend, for which it relied heavily on being allied to Britain and the USA (nobody else could have succesfully conquered stuff like Cape Verde) and even to Apartheid South Africa, perfectly able to invade Angola and Mozambique if backed by Britain and the USA, as these colonies felt no particular loyalty to the metropolis (as evidenced in later liberation wars) and shipping lanes would all be strangled.
Portugal could not by any means take a clear pro-German stand: it would have been catastrophic. Another issue would be much larger Spain, which did indeed consider it (on the condition that Suez was captured first, which never happened) but knew well that the price to pay was the Canary Islands (and Equatorial Guinea but nobody cared about that backwater before oil was discovered in the last decades). IF Spain would have entered the war on the Axis side, then things would probably have got very hot for Portugal, because then they would have got an even worse threat than the one by the Anglosaxons: a possible land invasion in retaliation for their pro-London stance (and to serve maybe the imperial ambitions of Franco). However Franco was another Anglosaxon puppet, much like Salazar, so nothing of the like happened. Both Iberian states were (and are) highly dependent on whoever has the naval power in the Atlantic Ocean and thus, even if they wanted, they could hardly challenge such naval supremacy. Spain because its much larger size (and also much larger navy) had/has a chance, slim as it may be, Portugal not at all.
I agree with your 6th point in the sense of the 10K soldiers being a large contingent, however it was not the largest one: Italy sent 70K (plus air force), not a very effective force, because the Italian people were disloyal to Mussolini's dictatorship (as can be also seen in other campaigns, where they'd rather flee than fight) and these "volunteers" were not very voluntary in many cases (largely prisoners promised amnesty in exchange of military service) but there's much stronger memory of them in any case in Spain, even if often to mock them as cowards, while the Portuguese have been completely forgotten by now.
@@LuisAldamiz About the "Portuguese have been completely forgotten by now" -
That is largely because history isn't always written properly and many things out there simply aren't spoken of. This happened numerous times and still happens today since the Portuguese state doesn't care about history and no one does, so these things tend to be forgotten and never spoken of. And back then the state prefered to keep the matter as secret as possible and obviously didn't write it on history books to prevent alienating the British or the French. The Portuguese Volunteer group was not as large as the largest ones I believe, but it was still one of the biggest ones, plus without supplies Franco would have lost. You can read anywhere in one of the many reliable sources out there, but you will find the same answer: without Portuguese assistance, Franco would have lost. The amount of equipment being smuggled into Spain was just huge. I already said but I will repeat - Portugal was the top importer of war material during this time in the entire world.
@@LuisAldamiz Thanks for the reply mate but a few things:
1º Azores is an archipelago of Islands close by. If US' ships decided to get that close to the shore to prevent communication between each islands, they would have suffered heavy bombardment from coastal batteries and aerial bombardment (95% of the Portuguese airforce was in there btw).
2º Fortifications were not useless. They did serve a purpose. Check Maginot Line. It was such a heavily defended region that the germans never bothered attacking it until very late in the war vs the French. There were other fortifications at this time like Gibraltar, the Finnish one during the Winter War, etc. Some were ridiculous and too large to actually defend, but we aren't speaking about German fortifications for instance (which, had to be ordered by a megalomaniac like Hitler obviously). The Czechslovak forts were also pretty decent if you ask me, but they never saw action since the allies abandoned the Czechs and caved into Hitler's demands.
3º I will correct you: an entry for Portugal on the German side would have been catastrophic, just like an entry into the war against Germany would have been. The real problem in either scenario wasn't Spain. Spain was recovering from the civil war and the economy was in terrible shape and so was the entire country in all aspects. The real problem would have been Axis troops marching all the way into Lisbon through Spanish Territory if Portugal was fighting against Germany. The Portuguese plans for such a war stated that the Portuguese army would mobilize, but it would adopt a scorched earth tactic from the start and the government would relocate to the Azores. There was simply no hope of winning against the Germans right after they took Paris. Stubborn resistance would be offered on the Capital (with potential allied assistance) but I doubt it would have been sucessful. That is partly why the Azores were heavily defended by then, since the government expected to move there in a worst case scenario.
4º Spain did have larger and more powerful ships compared to Portugal but again, they did not have a colonial empire like the Portuguese did. The Portuguese empire needed ships able to travel more than half of the world with few stops to refuel. Ships with large guns were never a primary concern since the Portuguese navy would never be able to fight versus the British and since the British were Portuguese allies. Against submarines (commerce raiders) it was more than enough. Regardless, the Spanish fleet wouldn't have been able to be a challenge against either British or US' navy. Not even the Italian one was, and it was the biggest in continental europe after France, I don't understand why you think Spain would with older and fewer ships.
5º I fail to understand why you consider Franco, and specially Salazar, a British puppet. The allies actually had reasons for concern against Franco and always saw him with suspicion. They wouldn't if he was their puppet. They only became friendlier with Spain because Salazar was always there to convince them about Franco's good/neutral intentions. I actually think Franco had to be a German (not English) puppet during the war and it wasn't because he liked it - most of the mines in Northern Spain were under control of the germans, and they could exploit them as they wanted without restrictions for example. Franco simply couldn't have said "no", because the Spanish army was a joke, the country was in ruins, and the Germans had just killed France and were at Spannish doors.
6º I didn't say that the Portuguese would have been able to defend the Azores. In fact, I believe I actually said the contrary - we would lose, but the victory would have been very costly for the US' and I bet the world wouldn't like to see a neutral country like Portugal attacked by the US, which, supposedly, were protecting the "free world". Plus the entire American invasion plan would have to be revised, since I doubt their 28.000 army would have been enough to take the entire archipelago from 30.000 portuguese soldiers. You can easily see this if you check the invasion of Normandy: US' and allied forces had over 350.000 men easily, yet they lost almost 200 tanks and 15.000 men against only 50.000 germans spread over all the place. German soldiers did not have the best equipment available since the best equipment went into the eastern front, yet they were able to put up a fight and the USA + allies needed 7x times their numbers to actually get past them. What makes you think USA alone would have been able to take the Azores easily without a prolongued blockade with less soldiers than the portuguese army stationed in there? Specially if you consider that the men (portuguese army) were not spread over the place like in the case of the germans with the Atlantik Wall, which would have made matters much worse for the Americans.
@@LuisAldamiz About the Italian contingent. The Italians and even the Germans did not send Volunteers - they sent an Expeditionary force disguised as Volunteers. It was their way of doing things to avoid alienating France / UK. The Portuguese force, was, the biggest of the volunteer groups, if not the biggest. Italians had 50.000, Germans about 16.000, Portuguese about 12.000. The Portuguese state only really sent pilots and an observation mission (which in total were less than 5% of the 12.000 portuguese involved in the conflict). The remaining 95% Portuguese involved in the conflict were, indeed, volunteers.
My great grandfather sold tungsten to both the Germans and the British. When he was young he started a gold mine in the North of Portugal but it failed and just before WW2 started he started a tungsten mine.
Eu sou do distrito de Viseu. Muitas vezes visitava família nas aldeias quase abandonadas das pessoas que trabalhavam nas minas de volfrâmio. Muitas aldeolas perdidas na montanha
Salazar died on 27 July 1970, not 1968. He fell off a chair, in August 1968, had a brain injury and also subsequent strokes and was never able to resume power, being replaced in September 1968 permanently by Caetano as President of the Council of Ministers and Prime Minister of Portugal. The Presidency of the Republic had become an essentially honorific post, though occasionally, including by Salazar, held between formal elections for the Presidency of the Portuguese Republic.
He balanced the Government budget. I say it does work. We will see in America how an out of balance budget will collapse.
But most people were dirt poor and barely literate, with most people only having the 3rd or 4th grade when reached his "97%" literacy rate, had the highest infant mortality and all of its economic growth ended being channelled into a useless war that ended or ruined a 10th of the lives of young men.
In 39' there were 5 military regions, each having 3-4 regiments and other units. There were no mobilized Division formations and all the Infantry regiments had 1 active rifle company (2 for 1 regiment in Porto and another in the capital). The only units that were complete were the Caçadores (Hunters/Jagers, whatever term you prefer) Battalions (2-3 per region) and 3 Machine-gun Battalions. Don't know how the cavalry regiments were, but probably similar to the British. There were a lot more artillery, 114mm and 140mm. More would come during ww2, 88mm, 105mm and 140mm. Humber armored cars and Valentine tanks came during the war, Centaur/Cromwell tanks were ordered but arrived at the end of the war.
Each infantry regiment also had a training battalion. In total it was planned that 31 Divisions could be raised in less than 3 months. The "Hunters" battalions were meant to be the force to delay an enemy invasion and give enough time to mobilize the divisions.
The Northern Region alone could raise 3 divisions in 1 month.
30 Gladiators in 39'. In 41' there was P-36 Hawks and by 43 there were Spitfire MK.VB. Later almost 300 Hurricane mk.2C came and P-47D (the latter came right after the war ended)
There had been plans in 1910s to rearm the navy, these were delayed until 1930s due to the fall of the monarchy, then WW1 and then cuz of the unstable political situation throughout the 20s. After the rebellion in Madeira they knew they couldn't let the navy die, Salazar purposely denied funds. These were supposed to be 3 battleships, 6 cruisers and 12 Destroyers. He instead allowed the lighter rearmament of colonial avisos simply to keep the navy alive and to be able to respond to trouble in the islands and in the colonies.
Salazar didn't militarise the country so as to not escalate tensions with the neighbour, the axis or the allies. He didn't claim neutrality for nothing, if he wanted war, it would have been different. One of the agreements for letting USA use an Airfield in Azores was that if Germany was to open war against Portugal, the US would arm the portuguese military with US equipment, aircraft and vehicles.
The 1386 Treaty of Windsor was between the Kingdom of England (which united with the Principality of Wales to become England and Wales in 1535 (not [the Island of] "Britain" (which has never been a political entity) and the Kingdom of Portugal. In 1580 the King of Spain succeeded to the throne of the Kingdom of Portugal, promising to respect its status as a separate Kingdom in all matters, including defence and foreign affairs. This was not honoured and the Treaty of Windsor was suspended with much of the 1588 Spanish Armada sailing from Lisbon. Only with the Portuguese declaration of independence in 1640 was it resumed, though England had continued to support rival claimants to the Spanish throne. It has thus been in continuous operation since 1640 only, eventually by their successor states, Great Britain (from 1707 the Union between England and Wales and Scotland, succeeded by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in 1800, which in its turn became the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in 1922. Meanwhile Portugal went through different permutations before becoming the Republic of Portugal in 1910. So, looking generously, it has only been in continuous operation since 1640. 🇵🇹 🇬🇧.
Yeah I really wish there was more info in English on this topic because I find it really interesting.
The way Salazar and his government maneuvered first during the close spanish civil war and then during the second world war between the two sides of the conflict is nothing short of brilliant. One must remember what Portugal was as a country before he came. Poor, unstable and illiterate... basically an empire falling to ruin. He brought Portugal UP and maintained the empire intact! Best portuguese ruler of modern times, hands down. Another thing you failed to mention... is that he born poor and died poor. UNCORRUPTIBLE.
Classifying him as Fascist is misguided. He was an Authoritarian Conservative. He was not a revolutionary like Fascists were. He did not change the Portuguese society, he conserved it.
Also, he came to the government because the military, who really held power, asked him. He was not a politician and didnt have any party or movement behind him. During that time, Portugal was lucky to have a willing, patriot and conscious military that took the mission to change the debacle that Portugal was. They had the conscience to know that they didnt have what it took to rule and bring from the ashes a country like Portugal... so they turned to the best academic and intellectuals they could find and they brought them in to rule, assuring all the stability and authority they required for such a task. This is the essence of the "New State". This has nothing to do with Fascism.
ua-cam.com/video/HdUCu0iOXOA/v-deo.html
That 97% literacy in 1968 is very rosy, mind you. They don't have that even today. Also, Masséna did take Lisbon in 1808 and forced the Portuguese king to flee to Brazil. Finally, despite appearances to the contrary (mainly, corporatism) Salazar was never a fascist. Fascism presupposes a revolutionary intent, and Salazar remained too much of a conservative for that.
I didn't realize that Messena was able to take Lisbon in 1808. Almost all of what I know (or thought I knew) about the portion of the conflict in the Peninsula comes from a brief account that I read some years ago about Wellington's campaign against Napoleon's marshals.
Bom Cabedal is mostly right though the french general that took Lisbon in 1808 was not Masséna but Junot.
Actually today's numbers on literacy is 95%. 5% more than that of 1980.
general Bussy-le-Grand 1 invasion - Passing through Idanha, Castelo Branco and Vale do Tejo (Abrantes, Golegã and Santarém), the French troops arrived in Lisbon on November 30, 1807. It was their objective to stop the royal family and the court, which did not happen because D João had already boarded and left the bay of Cascais escorted by an English squadron, the instant of his arrival in São Julião.
general Junot - 2 invasion - was defeated in Roliça (17 August of 1808) and in Vimeiro (21 August 1808).
General Messena - 3 invasion - The French reached the Lines of Torres on October 14, raised in anticipation of this eventuality and where the Portuguese-British troops were waiting for them from the 10th, retiring, defeated, at the end of the following day.
historia-portugal.blogspot.pt/2013/05/as-invasoes-francesas-guerra-peninsular.html
Actually in 2000 the illiteracy in Portugal is in 80%
www.publico.pt/2000/06/15/jornal/iliteracia-quase-nos-80-por-cento-145246
Ive always been fascinated by the smaller countries revolving around World War II. I think it would be really interesting to make a mini series of sorts describing the situations of non major powers during WWII. Especially nations like Sweden, Bulgaria and and Brazil.
I am slowly but surely in the process of doing just that. At the moment, I am only planning to do neutral powers like Switzerland, Ireland, Sweden, and Turkey, but I am open to the possibility of extending my coverage to minor participants like Brazil as well.
Great! I look forward to it. Ill be keeping an eye on my sub bar for them.
Brazil actually actively participated in the war, we even around 20000 men to fight in Italy against the Germans and Mussolini.
@@ThersitestheHistorian Ireland didn't fight in world war 2 but secretly helped the allies.
Thank you. I appreciate your contribution to the topic. I was educated as an historian, but it was many years ago. This is definitely a neglected area of study. Lisbon during WW II was the Vienna of the Cold War.
Salazar, regardless of what ignorant people think about him, saved Portugal from the Nazis. He was one of the most intelligent leaders of his time, if not the most intelligent in the world. He made the best with what he had to work with. If it weren't for his ability to manipulate the allies and the axis and avoid too much conflict either way, I would not be alive today!
The Nazis did not attack Portugal, they could not do that. They could not even persuade Franco's Spain to enter the war (not against Portugal but against Britain for Gibraltar), go figure!
Lisbon was the only european capital city That never was bombed in her entire history
Not so: Bern, Switzerland; Vaduz, Liechtenstein; Andorra-a-Velha, Andorra; Monte Carlo, Monaco; Stockholm, Sweden; San Marino...etc.
The portuguese military was very modernized by the 50's. In the Second World War, we had almost 100 Spitfire MK IX, in the army aero-naval aeronautic, before the foundation of it's air force. We had Matilda British tanks, american M3 Stuart Lee, american M4 Sherman's and germans Junkers Ju-87 transport planes, where the first paratroopers were formed in 1956, and conducted for jumps and transport of airborne and all kinds of things. We had allied and axis equipment and armament, in WW2. Viriatos were volunteers in the Spanish Civil War. In WW2, the blue division of the Wehrchmat was composed by portuguese and spanhish volunteers. Beside the allied, the green legion was a division of portuguese volunteers who fought in european theater of operations. In the navy, we had also almost 10 submarines.
Source?
My grandpa always said "Salasar had a stroke and died falling down a chair"
Like Michael Corleone?
Salazar with its conservative economic policies and ambiguous foreign policy made Portugal to navigate well in the 30s and 40s. Later on, however, the colonial rule proved to be an excrescence and consumed Portugal in the 60s and early 70s.
Yes I would like to learn more about Salazar
As a portuguese person, Salazar is still a weird topic. Yes he was a facist but aldo did gret things like making going to school obligatory. Also the park for kids "portugal dos pequeninos" aka "portugal of the little ones" really shows how salazr saw portugal
And now we are on third place in the global peace index for 2019 and 2020. Greetings from a portuguese born in germany.
Dr. Salazar is one of the most lied about men in Portuguese history, especially by his hateful political opponents who soon after he passed rose to power and gained prominence in the political sphere. He made many mistakes but he's put to insanely unfair levels of hate by people who love to parrot the ideas of an opposing political agenda that had long threatened the country, and that today reigns supreme and unopposed.
Nice diatribe with zero facts or examples
Thank you, very interesting, Salazar should be seen and judged as a man of his period of time in history.Context is the key.
Point number 1. The Treaty of Windsor was signed between England and Portugal in 1373, not 1386.
Point number 2. I think you will find that the Duke of Wellington was in overall command of the joint Anglo-Portuguese forces during the Penninsular War and was responsible for the defeat of the Napoleonic army under Marshal Massena at The Lines of Torres Vedras, in 1810. It was far from a some Portuguese soldiers and a few British Engineers. It is very well documended, check it out.
Two corrections: 1 - Salazar's regime was not fascist, this was a label that the left in 1974 stuck on him, it's simple "you are either a comrade or you're a fascist". It actually reveals lack of political maturity, Stalin's regime mas much more fascist than Salazar's. Fascist regimes are all progressive, sanguinary, with great ambitious industrialization schemes and the like, Salazar's regime was authoritative, ultra-conservative, repressive and violently anti-communist. In effect, he had more in common with the ancien régime in France prior to the Revolution than with fascism. He made use of the then fashionable trappings of fascism, however taking care to make sure they were never anything more than that. His connections with the Church were much more tenuous than many people think, he certainly did not do their bidding, nor did the Church do his. The economic model was essentially agrarian, which made sense as the country was in chaos and starving, industrialization came later. Industry = workers = unions = trouble! His policies regarding the colonies were a recipe for disaster. He admired Mussolini which is strange, as he was a very modest man, never wore a uniform and eschewed all the theatricals of a dictator, whilst Mussolini was like something out of a bad opera. In fact, according to some he had a discrete contempt for Franco regarding him as a jumped-up colonial (midget) soldier, and Franco hated his guts because of his intellect, ability and status. Both used a single party to rise to power, and both made sure the said party fizzled out. The real fascists in Portugal at this time were Rolão Preto's Camisas Azuis (blue shirts). Salazar shut them down in no time. 2 - Portugal also exported tungsten to Britain, who did not really need it as much came from Canada, but by insisting on both sides being sold equal amounts Britain was limiting what went to Germany. The smuggling, cheating, dirty dealing that went on around this would fill several books. I was told once that some sold sacks of ordinary rocks to the British and tipped off the nazis with the sailing times of the freighters to make sure they never got home... A lot of foodstuffs went to Germany by rail, which is why the Portuguese population produced but went hungry, and rationing was imposed, particularly on fats.
There are various kinds of fascism. Hitler's was extremely anti Semitic, aggressive, and ambitious. Mussolini's was not anti Semitic, it was aggressive, and limited by the Monarchy, the Church, the Army and other institutions. Franco's was Catholic, not aggressive, deeply conservative. Salazar's was also Catholic, not aggressive, conservative. All fascisms were repressive, undemocratic, opposed to trade unions, nationalistic, and mobilized mass support using techniques often copied from the Left, but controlled by the leadership. All raised their Leaders to semi divine status, all fought Communism and Socialism and cooperated with big business.
@@daebak6974 Franco's fascism was aggressive. About 200.000 republicans or republican sympathizers were wiped out after the end of the civil war, and active armed resistance groups were around until the 1960's. He also had an eye on Portugal (and Gibraltar), it's an old ambition in Spain, irrespective of the régime. Portugal's alliance with Britain has been a good deterrent. Not so much external aggression, I would agree with you. You do not mention social-fascism such as Stalin's, or Mao's, or the current European Commission's dictatorial stance on Hungary, Poland and other nations that wish to retain a modicum of independance. Basically fascism means total disrespect for the individual, total state control, demonization of any opposition, etc.
@@ricardodavidson3813 By "aggressive" I mean prone to invade other countries. Of course all fascist regimes are aggressive internally.
Stalin and Mao were not fascists. They were Communists, and were as murderous as any fascists, but their regimes were different in many ways from fascist regimes.
Fascists are allied with big business; Communists abolish big business and nationalize it. Fascism is strongly nationalistic, often racist. Communism was internationalist, though it could have some nationalist characteristics. Fascism allies itself with religion, Communism opposes and suppresses it. Fascism is ideologically militarist, Communism is not.
Your description could be applied to any tyranny. Fascism and Communism are not just any tyranny, but each has its own characteristics, which overlap, but are ideologically quite different.
I don't know why you think the EU is dictatorial against Orban's Hungary. In fact, it is Orban's regime that is dictatorial, that despises human rights and freedom, and that agitates against Jews and Roma. The EU is simply saying: If you want to be fascist, go ahead. But don't expect us to finance your government as we have been doing for decades. You want to be fascist? YOU pay for it.
@@daebak6974 By my book communist single-party regimes are fascist. As to whether they are militaristic or not, they may start as one and end up the other, it is a question of convenience. Your discussion of the issue of religion is seriously flawed. Both communists and fascists decry religion unless it suits them. Spain was (and is) a predominantly Catholic nation, the republicans were anti-clerical so the fascists got on the other bus. It's all a question of leverage. In Portugal the régime was pro-Church but a lot less so than historians make out, a good book for this is "História(s) do Estado Novo", a recent compilation of episodes. Again a question of convenience, communism was the bogeyman and I think it was more the Church embracing the régime than vice-versa. Communism does NOT eliminate big business, it takes it out of private hands and puts the nomenklatura in charge of it, fascist régimes support big business but put their nomenklatura in its top echelons (where's the difference?). Mao had this cretinous idea of making everything village-based, look at the steel production project, with its quotas, etc. Millions starved as a consequence and 98% of the steel produced was only fit as feedstock for proper steel mills. Orban is not a fascist, he is a conservative nationalist democratically elected, who is carrying out the will of his people. The EU commission was not democratically elected by anyone but purports to dictate to all, this is fascism in a fluffy dress. What started off as a good idea, free trade, common industrial standards, common policies in many lateral but universally relevant issues such as medicines regulation, environment, etc. became a sick cancerous parasite that by trying to override the representatives of the people is eroding what's left of democracy in Europe. This is a gigantic step backwards.
Source?
"Aviso" type ships are more at the level of, what we use nowadays as "coast guard" or "long distance patrol" if you will! Nothing to do with the firepower of a destroyer or any other vessels of similar class. In spite of what the length or tonnage might imply. Not a war ship "per se", but yes they do have (very) limited defensive/offensive capabilities.
7:07 -7:21 These artillery pieces are Obice de 75 /18 Model 34 75mm howitzers imported from Italy...
Portugal in the Atlantic Ocean held Azores and Madeira.
In Africa held Angola, Mozambique, Cabo Verde, São Tomé e Príncipe and Guiné Bissau.
In India held Goa, Damão and Diu.
In Oceania held Timor Leste.
A great book to read on what happened with Portugal's territories in Africa and how that all started is *The Fabric of Terror.*
I will have to read that some time. Thanks for the recommendation.
Actually Doctor Salazar died in 1970!
To me Doctor Salazar was the economic savour of Portugal.
@@KTR2022 To be fair, he did have his merits as a Finance minister, i.e. rather before being made prime minister.
I've read a wise assessment that he was good at raising and saving money but poor at spending it wisely - so much more money went into a very ineffective military than into education.
Dr. Salazar saved Portugal from communist enslavement. Calling him disgusting names is all the radical left does, since the radical left always supports communist take overs.
Incorrect. He died on 1968, substituted by Marcello Caetano.
@@notroll1279 But most of the schools that still operate today as well as high schools were built in his time. Due to authoritarianism after the revolution, many things were negativized about it.
Another excellent and concise video. Thank you for posting it.
18:17 it is important to mention Aristides de Sousa Mendes when discussing jewish refugees in prtugal during WWII. Because of his direct actions, he was able to save the lives of 30,000 refugees. For this act of kindness he was punished by the Salazar regime. They told him not to grant visas, which he explicitly disobeyed leading to his firing and unfortunately he would die years later in poverty, all because he defied a dictator to save lives.
www.publico.pt/2016/11/13/local/noticia/alemaes-homenageiam-os-sete-mortos-da-batalha-de-aljezur-caidos-em-combate-na-ii-guerra-mundial-1750806 found this article today! It's in portuguese, hope you have some tool to translate online, if don't tell me that I'll do for you. It's about the only battle that happened in Portuguese soil in the second world war, in between the english and the germans. It's an amazing story actually
Oh, very cool. I'll definitely check this out soon. I should be able to get through it passably well with the aid of Google translate.
An excellent and concise video. Thank you.
man, some simple research would avoid some basic errors, that make this some kind of an alternative history.
-Salazar died in 1970 (not 1968)
-Salazar and Franco died in their 80´s, not 60s and 70s
-Madeira and Azores were not colonies. And never were. They were inhabited when discovered and are still part of Portugal today.
-Massena didn't turn back at the fortifications of Lisboa, but instead in the fortifications surrounding the city (Linhas de Torres Vedras), some 40-50 Kms away from the capital, with a little help of the Tagus River, a huge mass of water with no bridges near the Capital at that time.
He said they died in THE 60s and 70s, now that they were that age.
Could also write a wall of text about the tanks, but the 6-ton vickers that you loved to state that was "so obsolete" and that any "gamer would upgrade it right away in any game" - That tank was used by the Finnish troops in the WInter War vs Russia, and I think every ww2 "historian" or "lover" knows how the Winter War went badly for Russia.
I am also pretty sure that Portugal had a stronger economy and better weaponry than Finland and far more military experience after the Spanish civil war than Finland. Would it be enough to face any of the superpowers alone? No, but that wasn't needed, either, since we would be able to rely on one of the sides if we got attacked by the other and would still be able to offer stubborn resistance like the finnish people did.
At the end you say you are rambling and that seems the case lol. You claim at the end that Salazar was representing the church, but Salazar also told his cardinal friend when he got power that now their paths diverged. I don't find much evidence that Salazar stood for the church anymore than any other catholic. Portugal was pretty secular.
Just one observation.
Salazar was against parliament and democracy because, like was said, the knowned experience with a democracy was deeply negative.
Like was said, Portugal from 1910 to 1926 was a mess with governments falling down almost every year, with a wild persecutions to Church and with military coups frequently.
What Portugal needed at the time was simply order and democracy only left the country in an anarchic state.
This context was very favorable for a person like Salazar to ascend and impose himself.
1197 England along with Northern European Crusaders helps the King of Portugal fend off a Moor invasion. 1294 the Aliance is starting to come to fruition culminating in the 1373 treaty. Further reinforced in 1386.
This was really interesting, if I was to classify Salazar politically I wouldn't call him a fascist rather than put him in the same class as say Putin as I would call him more of an extreme reactionary.
Based on some further reading that I have done since making this video, I am inclined to agree with you.
@@ThersitestheHistorian - It remains an undeniable fact that Salazar was "all for the nation, nothing against the nation", that was an official propaganda phrase. Be it good or bad! I'll trow a curious data. Between the fall of the monarchy and the first (military) dictatorship, 1910~1926. In those 16 years Portugal had 45 government's, 7 parliaments and 8 president's!! With republicans, monarchists, masons, carbonara, anarchists, etc. fighting on the streets! A mess that's almost unbelievable, real chaos! The entire country was in shambles, no education, no infrastructures, the finances were non existent and so on.
Salazar came to power and all that stopped on the spot! Straighten out finances, build schools, roads, hospitals, bridges and a big etc. Plus all the amazing "gymnastics" of the WWII. That alone was a feat of diplomacy at any level we look. I'll trow an interesting number. Portugal after WWII, in 1948, had gold reserves of 170 tons. By the time the regime went down in the "carnation revolution", 1974. Those gold reserves were almost 900 tons! Not much of an external depth we could talk about. Strong coin, economic growth, that would make many "powers" cry for... BTW nowadays those same reserves account for 383 tons, still make Portugal #14 in the world rank! But admittedly that's a "shit load" of gold to "vanish"! External depth...OK! let's change the subject! LOL 😂
It started from a "disastrous" beginning and was going in the right direction. Whether we liked it or not! Certainly there was a big bunch of issues and faults. Probably the biggest and most obvious of them all, political freedom. For which there's no way to counter argue!
Although I cringe when I hear some "less informed people" compare him with Hitler, Stalin or even Franco.
Example "Tarrafal" the most brutal and feared penal colony of the regime. Count, during the entire regime existence of >40 years, a total of 33 victims! The mildest in this "comparison" would be Franco. Became famous for his outrageous massacres in North Africa. And let Spain with the vice record of "mass graves", only behind Pol Pot's, Cambodia. Some food for taught! ;-)
When he's most fearsome opponents and enemies. Men like the leader of the Portuguese socialist party, or the leader of the Portuguese communist party. Both deceased! Men who have been jailed, exiled and "handled" by the PIDE (political police)!
Openly admit that Salazar had many faults, but NEVER put his hands "on the cookie jar" of the nation or people! Well that says a lot! ;-)
Salazar died in 1970, however in 1968 he makes a bad fall in the tub and after that he can't walk anymore so the job of prime minister was finito for him
He probably had a stroke (AVC) which provoked the fall and left him physically and mentally incapable. He fell off a bath chair, not in his tub!
Viva Portugal. 48 years of Estado Novo was best for the Portuguese State than currently 46 years of Sham democracy with no accountability for all mistakes by Socialist party's and immature leaders of Today. The presenter just does not know that Estado Novo was controlled by General Oscar Carmona , General Francisco Caveiro Lopes and Admiral Emerico Tomas. Dr Antonio de Oliveira Salazar was a selected first Finance Minister and then a Prime Minister only to control Internal Administration and Portuguese State affairs . Portuguese Colonies were controlled by Military and President in Military Uniform advising the Governor General's.
Dude, Franco was not a fascist. He was an authoritarian conservative.
@24:12 Salazar is a fascist based on his corporatism & strong allegiance with the catholic church? Part of fascism is defined as anti-capitalism, anti-conservatism (including anti-religious), & it's revolutionary by nature.
The fact that Salazar Portugal allowed private ownership & privatized the means of production suggests he supports capitalist principals. & the fact that Salazar aligned himself with the catholic church where as real fascists like Hitler or Mussolini were anti-religious and were influenced greatly by atheism, that would support the assertion that Salazar was NOT a fascist, not the other way round.
Thanks for posting this. I share your interest in the role of lesser powers during ww2. BTW....Timor is 'tee-more' not TIMur.
I was stationed with US Forces Azores in 1968-9 and at one point traveled to Maderia and Lisbon briefly. By that time the regime had become so old and arthritic that it barely functioned. They were carrying on efforts to supress three independence movements in Africa (Angola, Mozambique, and a very small piece of West Africa Portuguese Guinea). The wars ended when the regime was overthrown in 1974 and there was migration of colonialists back to Portugal. In an Armed Forces Day celebration the Portuguese compared their efforts in Africa with ours in Vietnam.
Today the economic and political situation is much improved and they succeed where others don't. In fact with substantial oil revenues and a very corrupt regime Angola is providing some financial aid to Portugal. To promote tourism in Maderia the country has borrowed heavily from the EU for huge infrastructure improvements which is really for the benefits of northern EU people. The Azores and much of the mainland is less popular or attractive for tourism.
A bit oblivious and ignorant based comment. As expected from an American! sorry to say. I'll explain, the wars in Africa, particularly in Angola were a "poisonous" move, from you hypocritical's with the moral of a snake!
In case you don't know. The massacres of population that deployed the war. As usual had American hand behind. So typical as we say nowadays! UPA the terrorists, where supported by US. Deployed the war against Portugal at American "command"!
Cynical detail: It was well orchestrated! On the same day, Holden Roberto, the leader of the terrorists. Was brought to the UN, in New York, with the American "tap on the shoulder". For the vote of a "Portugal condemnation motion", conveniently proposed by the Americans!
Precisely on the same day civilians, curiously many white, but the vast majority black natives! Were being slaughtered in all the most horrible manners imaginable! Beheaded, disembowel, dismembered and a vast, etc. of the most vicious acts. Men, women, children even toddlers or farm animals! In actions that would make ISIS look like choir boys on a Sunday school!
Call us colonialists, bad mouth us in all sorts of manner. Portuguese were in Africa half a millennium before you sons of a bit__ came running to steal it! That's the reality.
When Salazar refused to sell (literally) Angola and Mozambique to the Americans. From then on, was just problems and "colonialists" tags and all sorts of insults and dark propaganda! Until the final act, war! Lousy scum! Salazar's said on the famous speech "Portugal is not for sale..."
Let me tell you the "regime...that barely functioned"! Supported a 13 years long war. Meanwhile build roads, dam, railways, schools, entire cities, bridges, etc.
The "colonies" payed for the war and even tough, they had an economic growth that shamed Americans! You guys are still waiting for Mexico to pay for a certain wall! Portugal was able to start and finish "on time" and literally "under fire" what is still one of the most important powers dams in Africa!
You mention Vietnam, let me put it this way. When Portugal left the "colonies" there was good work done that could be seen by anyone. When Portugal left Vietnam, centuries ago, left an alphabet they still use nowadays! When Portugal left Japan left technology, commerce structure and founded a city called Nagasaki.
When Americans left Vietnam, only massacres, misery and destruction stayed behind and "forward", for that matter!! Since supplied the surplus Vietnam weapons, for Indonesia to invade Portuguese Timor!!
When Americans "left" Japan. Portuguese founded Nagasaki, had been nuked to the ground! I'll let you "ASSume" your conclusions!
A great observation. The dictatorship did fence off the threat of losing everything to the Anglosaxons, only to lose it decades later to the native "communist" guerrillas and metropolitan Portuguese exhaustion and discontent.
A great book to read on what happened with Portugal's territories in Africa is *The Fabric of Terror.*
Nice documentary, only too bad you define Salazar as fascist by using a very liberal definition of 'fascism' which is common in marxist historiography. 24:11 So aligning with the Catholic Church makes someone a fascist? Sorry but I can't take such remarks seriously. The same with calling Franco fascist while he clearly was not. Yes both Salazar and Franco were nationalist dictators like Mussolini but comparing based on a few vague similarities does not make them all fascist. The differences between Portugal, Spain and Italy are greater than their similarities. Fascism only existed under Mussolini's Italy. The same applies on your statement of calling Salazar fascist because he introduced a corporatist system. Corporatism is not a fascist concept but rather a catholic one because it was already suggested by the Popes since the 19th century (corporatism itself was also based on the medieval guild system). Yes there was corporatism in fascist Italy but it's important to note that Mussolini twisted the concept of corporatism to fit his own ideological and political needs and was therefor not representative for the corporatist systems in Europe based on the catholic social teachings.
Probably US right wingers would consider him a leftist..see the rather risible attempts to portray Hitler and Mussolini as far left socialists
4:15 Knowed as "Exposição Do Mundo Português", in 1940.
What do you mean "balancing budgets actually doesn't work"?
tbppuglia - American economy and most of the so called modern economy is based on "printing" paper money. A big air balloon, filled with "not much". ;-)
Cheers for this video, very measured and informative
Sadly the mismanagement of the empire by the monarchy extravagant spending during its glory days, left it losing the race of weaponry around the 17th century, something that leaves a sour taste to our pride, besides other factors like entering the industrial revolution too little too late.
My grandparents immigrated to Canada because they were afraid of Salazar and what he had potential to turn portugal into
see "Diplomatic Immunity", by Tony Teixeira [de Albegaria]
where did you get the information about the equipment?
I know this is an old video but it would be awesome if you could explore some of the Etruscan origins of the Acores islands prior to Portuguese colonisation
There was nobody in the Azores (nor in Madeira) prior to Portuguese colonization.
World history is very important, especially for the one nation in the world with a very unique centuries-old global history i.e. ❤️🇵🇹❤️. Kindly do not minimize who we, the Portuguese nation, are, in order to elevate your so-called greater power/s.... not sure whom you referring to, though? But perhaps you could chit-chat about yourself, as well as, the greater powers that you are referring to (which you obviously are a part of)? You know, some nations are all about the wrapping paper (so that it may appear more inviting to others), but it's just wrapping. Perhaps a good topic for you to start off with?
"anti parliamentarian, anti-democratic, and anti liberal" So this Salazar was guilty of being awesome.
Funny you say that cuz now days you can find fascists face down in the river bloated af or hanging on the 25th April bridge ...as it should be!!
@@casualultra92 No you can't but that fever dream of your says much about you 🤡
Very good work, but...
Your profile of Salazar is "impaired by" : (1) Salazar was not a Fascist, he was a CONSERVATIVE, with a XIX Century political outlook , (2) you "bring him too close to Hitler, Mussolini, ...", (3) he HAD to confront the irresponsibility and demagoguery of the (incompetent) left, (4) he HAD to do "first things first", like keeping the (weak/poor) economy running (public debt to a minimum ! , !), (5) he HAD to prioritize education, health & sanitation, (6) keep Portugal safe/independent, good relations with Spain was a must (muy amigos ?!). (7) and, please, please, Açores/Azores, Madeira are/were NOT ,colonies for heavens sake !!!, they are overseas Portugal, not possessions, they are Portugal ! (8) he was very, very, competent, a great intellect ( discreetly, looked down upon Franco who knew he, Salazar was his best, a more "well rounded" as Statesman than himself); he was completely honest, humble (not a façade), a highly moral man both in public and private affairs, (9) he, most definitely, leaned, from the outset, towards Britain and Allies but had to "roll with the punches" so to speak. He was an authoritarian ruler out of conviction (order or anarchy ?) but abhorred Hitler, Musdolini, Stalin. He was a paternalistic, protective, leader, not a buffoon like Mussolini, or a hatred-filled Hitler; far, very far from it ! ! ! He, AND, THIS IS CRUCIAL TO UNDERSTAND THE PORTUGUESE FOREIGN POLICY: was reported as having said: "no matter what be ALLWAYS in good terms with BRITAIN & BRAZIL, if you do not get this, you will not get a number of his decisions right, (9) his entourage ....., this hasn't been looked into. It should/must. (10) after WW I
I his regime "missed (?) the boat" to "come out of the shell", failed to "modernize", and became "ossified" with all the (bad) consequences of it....
A great man of his time. Did he outlived "his time" ?
Well, Salazar wasn't entirely innocent of being compared with Mussolini - especially in his early years he was quite impressed by him and was seen with a Mussolini Portrait on his desk.
And regardless of the exact political colour of his doctrine, he clearly used the dictator's toolkit of power preservation: a censorship of the press, suppression of political parties, a secret police with excessive powers and a single election that was quite certainly rigged.
I agree that he did not enrich himself personally in that he amassed wealth for himself. You could argue, however, that being a bachelor having the state's ressources at his disposal, there was no need to.
Portugal was lucky enough to have him rather than General Franco or one of the Axis maniacs in place - but there is no reason to wish a dictatorial type like him back in place.
@@notroll1279 - It's kind of curious the "propaganda" of the time still echoes trough out time. Do you know those "conveniently" located photos on his desk etc. Depended, a lot, on the political image that was needed in a certain moment?! ;-)
That's a fact that still confuse a lot of people. But in reality he was a very good diplomat!
Surprisingly or not. Many are not aware, for example, the real admirer of Hitler was... General Humberto Delgado!! Yep!
Even wrote a book praising Hitler! That's a surprise to many. ;-)
@@crpth1 I'm not suggesting that Delgado would have been a good president. I've read credible comments that he was opportunistic and would have chosen whatever political colour helpful to bis career.
But is that a justification to have the elections rigged and to have the man killed - and his young secretary along with him?
Does that strike you as legitimate means of politics and proper use of police resources? Really?
@@notroll1279 - I was stating a fact, not saying you're defending this guy or that guy. ;-)
And please do not "assume", because you're the one assuming all that BS!
@@crpth1 I'm not assuming anything - neither with nor without paranthesis.
If you suggest that Salazar had himself photographed next to "conveniently located" Mussolini pics, you're the one assuming things - either that his portrait was forged or that Salazar was too messy to see which portraits were on his desk - both pretty steep...
Loving History on the whole but in particular the 1914-1945 period from Historical perspective, I can say at last a very interesting video dealing with a scarce topic. I knew barely nothing about Salazar. Now I know a little more about him. Soon or later I will try to get and read the book you recommend in this video. Thank you so much Thersites the Historian and keep going! Cheers from Paris, France.
Professor Salazar is today, the most respected leader in Portuguese Histori. A votation make this clear in tv station RTP1 9 years ago.
A colonial power that isnt industrialized runs the risk of being over run by more developed countries.
Btw Salazar did not contribute anything to the decrease in Illiteracy, this role was played by many priests, military personnel and municipalities who were anti-regime and to prevent teenagers from having to go to War or embark on a military career starting in the so-called " Mocidade Portuguesa", a fascist institution similar to Mussolini's "fascist Youth", signed up with assistants from Schools, municipalities, hospitals or Private Institutions of Social Solidarity, and thus avoid being sent to Military service or even to War where Ninety percent of the population The country's young male was mobilized for the Overseas War, which caused around 10,000 deaths and 20,000 invalids among soldiers and more than 100,000 victims among civilians living in the colonies....my father( RIP) to avoid going to Angola, he was in The GNR( a sort of military police) and fortunately he did not go, but my Uncle had to go and still has PTSD with 83 years and is very afraid of fireworks. My other uncle served in the Navy but he's not in danger because he stayed in Cape Verde from 70 to 73...
Wrong: Franco wanted to invade Portugal and unite both countries. A spanish researcher found documents proving that... you can check: it was discovered by Manuel Ros Agudo. they actually used to sang " We only wait for the order given by our General to erase Spain's border with Portugal".
True: www.lasrepublicas.com/2019/12/16/el-dia-que-espana-pensaba-invadir-portugal-el-plan-militar-de-99-paginas-que-franco-oculto/
The main reason Franco did not enter the war along the Axis was that he felt that Britain exerted too much naval power and that, therefore, in order for his regime to be somewhat safe, it was needed that the Axis conquered Egypt first (Suez Canal specifically), so that Britain could not access the Mediterranean Sea anymore once Gibraltar was conquered (which is as such easy-peasy if you are Spain).
He had plans, ambitions, re. North Africa and Portugal but all depended on the issue of Gibraltar and thus of Egypt-Suez. When the USA landed in Morocco they offered Franco to take some of the French protectorate as long as it were lands that did not obstruct their maneuvers, Franco ignored the offer, probably suspecting it a trap and deeming the gains not worth it.
Salazar died in 1970, not 68 !
So. Needed.
1)Portugal had more then 2 colonies in Africa has the map you used shows. 2) Saying that Franco never had plans to invade his neighbor is wrong. He did on more then 1 occasion got tempted to invade Portugal and also recover Gibraltar...He did want to expand the Spanish Colonial Empire too(French Moroco,Algeria,...). Historian Manuel Ros Agudo published the book "La Gran Tentación"(2008)In which he reveals all about the documents themselves and what happened before,during and after such plans were made(politics,talks with both sides of the war....). The plans itself he found during his research on the Spanish military Archives.
Well put. Franco's "brilliant" idea never passed unnoticed to Salazar, who was perfectly aware of the case. Among many other details it was finally put to rest. by two major events. The agreement Salazar-Franco. And the final straw. The fall of the German army in Stalingrad in 43! That sealed once and for all, that no help would come from Germany. They were "busy" enough!
Fun fact: During the entire >40 years regime. Salazar only left the country ONCE! To visit Spain/Franco in 1942! For that high level talks and sign of the agreement!
FYI This year the "Carnation Revolution" turns 50 and fortunately due to the courage of several Captains who on April 25, 1974 came to Lisbon supported by several regiments from three branches of the armed forces led by Otelo Saraiva de Carvalho and supported by General Costa Gomes, the Practical School of Cavalry was responsible for the most complicated operation of occupying the place where the government was and later going up to Largo do Carmo where there was finally the surrender to Salgueiro Maia. and we owe our independence to them even though we now have an extreme right-wing party that has 50 deputies and will deny what I said!
Viva o 25 de Abril viva a liberdade e abaixo o Fascismo! Já Chega de Chega! Avante Camaradas!
Salazar was a great patriot.
Figures like Franco and Salazar are tricky. Both were clearly anti-liberal and anti-left counter-revolutionary Catholics and staunch nationalists. Of course, Fascism is tricky and shape-shifting, too, as the classic article by the great Umberto Eco noted. Eco felt that Fascism was best thought of as a family resemblance and these regimes do tick some of his boxes but, importantly, also fail to tick some others. www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/
Neither were expansionistic, although both worked to maintain the vestiges of colonial empire. Corporatism itself is kind of difficult, in the sense that it often recognized things like labor unions, but only insofar as they fit in the overall scheme of their notion of a well-ordered society. So a Catholic labor union might be OK, but a Marxist or even independent one? Not a chance. Fascism also had a decidedly anti-Christian sentiment to it, most specially Naziism.
Both Franco and Salazar were deeply suspicious of Hitler, whom I'm sure they both viewed as being a loose cannon. Hitler famously said he thought dealing with Franco was less pleasant than visiting his dentist and Franco cannily sent the hardcore Falangists in Spanish service to the Eastern Front, getting them out of Spain while appeasing Hitler with a contribution of troops. As you note both Salazar and Franco recognized how vulnerable their respective countries were to the Allies, while the Nazis would have had to invade through the difficult Pyrenees.
I'm not defending them, mind you, but do think that there are some pretty important differences between their regimes and those of Mussolini and, most definitely, Hitler.
There was never any German threat of invasion of Spain: it'd be impossible unless backed by the locals and the only locals wanting to back an invasion were anti-fascists (whose guerrillas were active until the early 60s and then again since the late 60s). Sadly no such invasion ever happened and a man from Arrigorriaga had to kill the ogre almost on his own (not Franco, the ogre was Franco's right hand and expected successor Carrero Blanco).
Franco's Spain had indeed expansionist plans but felt could not implement them without the Axis first securing control of the Mediterranean Sea, i.e. capturing Egypt and the Suez Canal. He had a plan for Gibraltar (easy peasy if you are Spain, the cost is in Canary Islands and possible landing in areas where the guerrilla or in general opposition to the regime was strong, as Galicia), plans for North Africa and a quite detailed plan to invade Portugal as well: www.lasrepublicas.com/2019/12/16/el-dia-que-espana-pensaba-invadir-portugal-el-plan-militar-de-99-paginas-que-franco-oculto/
Franco was absolutely fascist in everything, however there's some people who like to imagine that fascism is radically distinct from conservatism and it is not: in Germany and Spain especially it is very clear how the lines between the extremist right and the slightly less extremist conservatives are very blurry. Hitler was appointed by the conservatives and even the Christian-Democrats, Franco was equally backed massively by the conservative party CEDA, which smoothly transitioned into the National Movement, even if this was originally created around the strict fascists (Falangistas) and ultra-reactionaries (Carlistas), which were way too weak to matter.
Probably US right wingers would consider him a leftist..see the rather risible attempts to portray Hitler and Mussolini as far left socialists
@@vanpallandt5799 Current US right wingers haven't met a set of facts they can't try to twist into a pretzel.
@@LuisAldamiz Thanks for the info re Franco's expansionism. It it's not too surprising I suppose. You're right, without an Axis victory he wasn't going anywhere.
I think the point about the blurry lines between Francoism and other versions of fascism is also interesting. I cited Umberto Eco, who spends a good bit of time showing that fascism is best thought of not as a natural kind with clear category boundaries but as a family resemblance. This is particularly relevant for varieties of fascism given how essentially anti-logical they are.
peoplePhilippinesNo question that Francoism, Italian Fascism, Naziism, and many other variants shared some important aspects, though. In a lot of ways this was the same with Stalin's Soviet Union, though there was clearly an ideological core to Marxism that fascism lacked.
@@crimfan - Franco owed to Italy, to Portugal and to Germany (less than to the others as they only sent a token air force, while Italy sent 70,000 and Portugal 10,000 troops, the Spanish Civil War was rather the Second Roman Invasion of Spain, incl. one of my grandfathers, who had to flee Italy after WWII for being way too fascist). But he also owed *a lot* to Britain, which enforced a blockade against both sides (equally to the fascists, not really functional, as to the democrats, much more effective, especially as France was dragged into such suicidal scheme). Actually Britain had been toying with fascism a lot in Europe and it's impossible to understand how most of Europe had gone under various fascist regimes without that meddling from London, which at first loved Mussolini a lot.
Hence he and his clique were torn about how to fit in WWII: their position was still precarious, as many guerrillas existed until c. 1960 (and then again since 1968), and the geostrategical location of Spain depended a lot on naval power, something Germany lacked and Italy had not been good enough at either. They were aware that Canary Islands and the two African colonies were impossible to retain in case of war with Britain (let alone the USA) and were hoping at most to take Gibraltar (more of interest to the Axis proper than to Spain as such, it's soooo tiny!) and the free city of Tangiers (which was readily occupied on "neutrality" pretexts, no need to enter the war for that). What else could Spain hope to gain from the war? Well, Portugal was certainly discussed and that's a much more sizable prize.
Franco did send a "volunteers" division to the Eastern Front anyhow, the Blue Division, on anti-communist pretext but refused to intervene against Britain (and possibly France) unless they had first their Mediterranean back covered, what never happened.
Other stuff that was on the table later on was an offer by the USA for Spain to take parts of the French protectorate of Morocco for as long as it did not bother US military deployment in North Africa. Franco ignored that offer, probably imagining in his paranoia that it was a trap.
Franco offered to join the Allies at the end of the war in the Pacific scenario, i.e. against Japan, an offer that was dismissed by the Allies (opportunistic and worthless).
After WWII, Spain had a period of international isolation of around a decade, it was not even admitted to the UN and suffered from serious scarcity, which Argentina's Peron eased. It was anyhow not as bad as in war-devastated Europe, my relatives who fled Italy often mentioned that they could finally enjoy white bread after a long period of having only brown bread, often full of toasted roaches (yummy protein I guess). In those days integral bread was considered inferior, unlike today. However as the Marshall Plan recovered the rest of Europe in order to serve US interests the situation of "autarchical" and isolated fascist Spain was becoming more difficult. Luckily for Franco (not for Spaniards though) Eisenhower decided to make a pact with the devil in the mid 50s and thus Franco could reach old age and make a very ordered and authoritarian transition to "democracy" (and full integration in NATO and its civilian department, the EU) in the 70s only. Some guy from my town killed his sidekick Admiral Carrero-Blanco however but that didn't change much in the end. As Franco said in his death bed: "I leave everything tied and well tied" ("atado y bien atado").
Great overview, thanks. I think it's important to get clear about these terms like Nazism, Fascism, Totalitarianism etc (especially to understand how such ideologies win power and stop them returning), so whether Salazar can be called a fascist is something I intend to look more closely at.
Who would have invaded Portugal in WW1?
Salazar foi um grande líder que fez muitas coisas boas. Que Deus descanse sua alma.
O gajo foi um ditador de merda
@@JoaoPedro-ob5sd e tu es um ignorante de merda que se acredita em tudo o que vê na televisão
@@endovelicvs oque mano a minha avó tem 95 anos e o meu pai 63 eles viveram nesse tempo e sabem que Portugal n era livre quando o meu pai era pequeno havia colegas dele que iam descalços pá escola
@@JoaoPedro-ob5sd vê se logo o tipo de pessoa que és ao assumires que sou rico por achar que o Salazar fez muitas coisas boas por Portugal, não passas de um ignorante
@@endovelicvs mano n importa que ele tenha ajudado a economia e essas merdas as coisas que ele facia eram fodidas
Don't forget that many portugal go to worke in Germany at the beginning 1941/42
all i have to say is salazar was voted the best portuguese personality of all times recently,and that is amazin for a so called dictator,a great men chosen by god to save a great nation from the horours of ww2
"chosen by god" - really? Were you present when this happened and saw the divine finger coming out of the sky in 1928 or 1932)
I oof whenever I hear about timor
Thanks, a good brief about something i know very little about in ww2 history.
Sir, you should check your facts thoroughly. There are many errors and inconsistencies on your video. Too many to name them here. I am Portuguese and I must say that I'm not terribly proud of Fascism and also the Colonies around the world.
13:35 I regret he didn't speak more of our support towards fighting the communist in the Blue Division 250th :en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Division
You mean murdering Russians.
The current history books paint Stalin as a victim, but do a little research you'll find in the 1920's those "Russians" where starving the Ukrainians . . . attacking Finland . . . in Russia they had work/death camps . . . most of this before the 1939 start of war
You false equivalency falls on its ass. Bad deeds do not justify bad deeds - that's just a ridiculous notion. "I'm sorry babushka but you have to be raped and murdered because some bad communist guys also come from the same geographic location and they apparently did some bad shit to some kulaks in Ukraine you've never met or interacted with in any way" - give me a break. The Azul division wasn't in Ukraine administering justice and supposedly raising up the peasant folk to be good Catholics - it was freezing its balls off in the North fighting off Vodka-fueled hordes in a nice corner of the front where nobody would ever hear or see it long enough for it to cause Spain or Portugal any trouble. Don't fool yourself.
Jay Lopes . Yes, this has been overlooked. Must be studied in detail, beyond the "action-movie approach"; why they soldiers volunteered, how many, for how long, of course the battles they took part on, and WHY they went; not forgetting how were the Portuguese volunteers' interaction with Spaniards and Germsn soldiers. How many survived ? What became of them ?
Why were/are they forgotten ?? Neglect ? "Shame" ? I am VERY PROUD OF THEIR BRAVERY regardless of side. They were very brave !!!
Tony after Europe lost the 1945 war, the Americans and British became the masters of Europe - ( the goal all along ! ) 20 years ago I went to the coast of Portugal looking to buy a ocean front home, the best homes where owned by the British and they had raised the prices to keep out "the foreigners" aka the Portuguese. Salazar never would have let the British control our land or let the Africans control our streets.
Good video.
You forgot to say that there were Portuguese soldiers winning territory in German at the beginning of the war when all your ather so-called " mush powerful nations were getting slaughter by the Germans.
Dude i can translate portuguese text for you! Just send me the links and I'll translate it to english
Lol cool to know when I'm form portugal
Balancing the budget does not work?Yah, big debt and massive interest payments are a good thing?If you want your Nation to go bankrupt at the first spike in interest rates its a brilliant strategy!
You are right in principle - avoiding debt is sensible - and reducing the level of debt during the first 10 years in power was quite an achievement.
However, especially in the final years of his rule, Salazar was being criticized for spending lots of money on the military (clearly without getting the results he wanted) and underspending on education at the same time.
He did a lot of things conservative politicians would stay clear of today: he micro-managed the country by setting prices, intervening with foreign investment - and imposing rent caps for Lisbon and Porto.
Nearly everything was directed from his Sao Bento office - so everything went pretty mad when the Estado Novo collapsed a few years after his demise.
Strangely even the rent caps went on for thirty more years - despite all the inflation that had ravaged the currency.
No wonder that inner Lisbon lost a third of its inhabitants since the 1950s: many buildings just were impossible to maintain properly at those rents.
It's a charming idea to remember him as a non-corrupt (which he was) and non-evil (which he was to a lesser extent) dictator who kept order. But by today's standards, he was rather an accountant than an economist.
I believe you think that Truman, Roosevelt, Churchill, etc, were good guys! Give me a break please and next time make a video about flowers or anything but this bull sheet!
the role of "minor powers in WWII". MINOR? Hmm! MAYBE! Perhaps today it is nothing more than a mediocre country in the 21st century. But let us remember the discoveries and who contributed most to the Renaissance. Where a country with just one million inhabitants created the first intercontinental ship, the first sails that allowed sailing against the wind, navigation instruments to find latitude and navigate by the stars, the first country to end the Silk Road and creating a Maritime route with Africa, South America, Asia, and destroying the Commercial Empires of the Netherlands, the Arabs, and the Italian Kingdoms! having started in 1415 in Ceuta (Morocco), and so on: 1418 Porto and Madeira Islands, 1420 Canary Islands, Azores Islands 1427, 1444 to 1451 The entire African Coast up to Guinea and Sierra Leone, 1460 Southern Hemisphere São Tomé and Princepe, Gabon, Angola South Africa until 1500 onwards: Brazil, Indian Ocean, the entire African Coast up to the Arabian Peninsula, Goa, Damao, Diu, Macau, Philippines, Indonesia, China and Japan! For a lower power it's not bad at all!
Amazing work on this topic! Probably the best on youtube. Most of population in Portugal are agaisnt Salazar. The older people thought kinda like him because Portuguese economic and social situation was so bad before the revolution, bad they're still against him.
The only big topic missing in here is that Salazar also had a crazy vision for Portugal as Hitler had for Germany. Salazar believed that Portugal sticking to his colonies was the only way to gain economic supremacy and so our colonial wars(post WWII) in Africa we're brutal and stupid. Mostly because the people/soldiers didn't want to fight it and this was Salazar "operation Barbarossa" kind of biggest mistake. Portugal and the portuguese always had a big bond with these colonies and cultures and another thing to keep in mind is that as the world may not think(because of colonization and slavery), the portuguese people by themselves are really peaceful and easy-going. Just some close examples of this war:
-My father was born in Angola as a caucasian. Portuguese people had all sorts of businesses in Africa, so they weren't quite happy as Portugal was invading the place they lived. So as Portugal was attacking the colonies, the people from these colonies started to create hate and doubt towards the caucasian(even the ones that had family generations born in Africa). Unfortunately when the war started all of my fathers family went to Macau(the last colony of Portugal "given back" to the chinese in 1999), abandoning a lifetime farm. After the end of the dictatorship they moved back to Portugal.
-The uncle from my mothers side, lived in Portugal and was called to fight in Mozambique. First thing his crew did arriving in Africa was abandon their war post, selling the weapons and equipment into the freedom fighters in Mozambique and just get some land to start a croping business. It's not that every crew of soldiers did this, but a lot of them did it. After the fall of our dictatorship, he came back. This kinda proves the disaproval by the military forces to actually battle this war, most of them already knew that Salazar woudn't last long in power also.
- If you actually talk to people from Angola, Mozambique, São Tomé e Príncipe, Cabo Verde... They'll say that these wars ended much sooner than announced. Salazar knew he didn't had a chance of keeping all of these colonies because Portugal is a country with a small population. There are different opinion on this topic of why that Salazar wanted the war propganda to continue and why he didn't actually try to "maintain" the colonies. Some say the URSS was helping the freedom fighters with weapon in exchange of spreading communism and gain interest in the oil that these countries had. Some say the propaganda of war was happening because, to distract democracy and communism movements(had exactly the opposite effect) or to create a world image that Portugal was a military force(which we definetly wasn't).
Sorry for my long insight of Salazar and war on colonies! I loved your video, will definetly subscribe!
Hi Antonio, I'm glad that you enjoyed the video. I didn't know all of that about Portugal's post-war problems or Salazar's guiding vision. I am only vaguely familiar with Portugal's colonial wars in Africa, but now I want to know more those conflicts.
Really happy that you made such an awesome videos of our small country! Thank you :D
LOL Ó toninho tens mesmo o grunhir de um comuna À B.E .l lixo
Your uncle is a traitor !!! I also had a traitor in my family he name was Fernao Lopes he was tortured and disfigured in punishment, - good !. For you to write about your uncle like he is some type of hero is amazing, those weapons he sold killed our fellow country men, this is why Portugal has nothing today because of self loathing Portuguese like you that are subservient to anyone that gives "some land"
If it wasnt for people like your uncle then Portugal would still have those colonies. It is because of people like your uncle that Portugal went from being an empire to a weak, worthless backwater country in Iberia. The only thing that can redeem your country is if it brings back the monarchy but we all know that would never happen.
Salvé Salazar
Salazar was not fascist
Your tavleing in shaky waters!! We are not only founders of UN but Also the bilderberg group we want to be left alone expecally during time you are inquiring about.. THANKS
Port. was an Empire in its OLD AGE! you don"t fite b/c you can"t ! so you let other viable Empires}}} Germs take on Brits--TWICE! and lose---TWICE......you watch it all go down
Great Salazar.
Biggest european politican in XX century
He's not even the fattest - that'd be Churchill - let alone the most important or impactful or effective.
you should erase this video
i think our reality is a fucking movie for the higher dimension beings lol o0r maybe a game .yeah a game.
he was one of the best dictators. But still a horrible person.
And some years latter he made us go to war against our African colonies.
miguel brito . Sr. Brito, Salazar was not an horrible person ! After WW I I he missed opportunities to "soften" his "managing of day-to-day" policies/politics; he didn't do it, he didn't "see" he had better options he could have pursued. His associates, and himself, were unable to conceive of a Portugal different than of decades back. They did not make room for change, and this was his "bad side", including the horrific political repression. He was a Consevative, Patriotic, in charge of a poor country whose independence and safety was his main concern. He was INCORRUPTIBLE !!! Modest, honest, competent, but he was trapped by likeminded people who were backward looking ! Very unfairly, the socialist driven propaganda only focus on the minus side forgetting the great good he did for Portugal !
God bless you and your family, " eVIVA LUSITÂNIA !!!! "
He was incorruptible?????????????????you could have that opinion, but I dont agree.
THe only thing I can say for shure, is that Salazar was one of the best dictators, but stil a fascist dictator.
Sorry but I dont debate conspiracy theories, and I dont like fascists ( no matter the little good things they did )
miguel brito . Hi Miguel ! Salazar was CONSERVATIVE, CATHOLIC, TRADITIONALIST, XIX Century MIND SET. Not a Fascist, not an Mussolini, not a Franco, both ideologues with "Manias de Grandesa" , blood thirsty. Right after the war he "missed the boat" by not enlarging his power base with people who had more liberal (yet responsible) political views. He and his political circle formed a very closed circle defended with an iron fist. But yes, he was a man of principles and these did not include ( for him personally ) corruption. He was, like it or not,,a modest man!
By the way, I am not a Salazarista ! ( what would that be ?!), but his "historical persona" hasn't yet well understood/known. The socialist inspired "propaganda" has muddled the understanding of his role in History !
modest and incorruptible are not the same thing Tony. His political circle was made by the most rich and influence familys, and they did what ever they want during does times. And a person that wants power for life ( and he did, like it or not, regarding governing Portugal ) cant be a modest person ( becase he thoght that he was the only one that could save the country ). Do you really think a modest person would think that????
Do you know all the characteristics of fascism? go to wikipedia or something, the most basic I found was this: "There are several fundamental characteristics of fascism, among them are: Right Wing: Fascists are fervently against: Marxism, Socialism, Anarchism, Communism, Environmentalism; etc - in essence, they are against the progressive left in total, including moderate lefts (social democrats, etc).
You say that Salazar dosent fit with this discription? blood thirsty and manias de grandesa, have nothing to do with the ideology of fascim. And I agree that Mussolini and Franco were mutch more Autoritários.
he made us????? LOL he only tried to defend the country!!! African colonies? Portugal didn~t had colonies sicne 1951..you´re quite confuse about it
Viva Salazar viva a vitória