Talk:Clerical fascism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Only Christian examples[edit]

Why are there no examples of other religions. Of the top of my head I can think of a few countries that are doing exact the same thing with Islam. Is Iran not a clerical fascist country? At least the Islamic Revolutionary Guard should be on the list. What about Saudi Arabia? Common guys the truth is the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.46.238.213 (talk) 13:07, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What about the Muslim Brotherhood? Its objective is to introduce "Sharia Law". What is Sharia Law if not clerical fascism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.46.238.213 (talk) 13:11, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

American presence[edit]

USA groups seem hugely under represented on this topic. Liquidvisual (talk) 15:59, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Clerical fascism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:54, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In Jan. 1939, The Jewish National Monthly reports "the only bright spot in Italy has been the Vatican, where fine humanitarian statements by the Pope have been issuing regularly". When Mussolini's anti-Semitic decrees began depriving Jews of employment in Italy, Pius XI, on his own initiative, admitted Professor Vito Volterra, a famous Italian Jewish mathematician, into the Pontifical Academy of Science. * 'Scholars at the Vatican,' Commonweal, December 4, 1942, pp.187-188) 62.45.158.228 (talk) 03:40, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The part about Jews and Protestants dying in concentration camps implies this was done by the Italian Fascists when it was during German Nazi occupation when Catholics were likewise persecuted. Additionally Pope Pius XI objected to the racial laws which had nothing to do with clericalism and everything to do with Mussolini trying to strengthen ties with Nazi Germany after having thrown the Clerical Fascists of the Fatherland Front in Austria under the bus. 62.45.158.228 (talk) 13:16, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I hope that we can reach a consensus on the subsection on Clerical Fascism in Italy, as it is now it is highly misleading. Mussolini passed the race laws to strengthen ties with Nazi Germany, not because of the Catholic Church which criticized the race laws. Additionally Jews die in concentration camps only after the Nazi occupation began in 1943. At the time the Vatican openly supported the resistance and Hitler was even considering a plan to kidnap the pope. The Holocaust in Italy therefore has nothing to do with Clerical Fascism. 62.45.158.228 (talk) 14:55, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Salazar's Estado Novo was NOT Fascist[edit]

The reliable sources agree that he was not a fascist....and the article itself is full of details. here are quotes from five reliable sources: 1) Carlos A. Cunha, ‎(2010) states "A comparison of Salazar's dictatorship with German or Italian fascism shows that Portugal was not a fascist state." 2) Bernard Cook, (2001) states "he was not a fascist but rather an authoritarian conservative. " 3) Portuguese Studies Review - Volume 2 - Page 109 (1993) "an authoritarian or clerico-corporatist state not a fascist one." 4) António Costa Pinto - 1991 states "He was not a fascist, but a reactionary" 5) Fascism in Europe, 1919-1945 (Routledge Companions) by Philip Morgan (2002) states: "Lacking the impulse and will for wars of expansion, and the need, then, to organize their populations for war, where reasons why the authoritarian regimes of Salazar and Franco never became totalitarian.

The real Portuguese fascists were exiled. In 1934, Salazar exiled Francisco Rolão Preto as a part of a purge of the leadership of the Portuguese National Syndicalists, also known as the camisas azuis ("Blue Shirts"). Salazar denounced the National Syndicalists as "inspired by certain foreign models" (meaning German Nazism) and condemned their "exaltation of youth, the cult of force through direct action, the principle of the superiority of state political power in social life, [and] the propensity for organising masses behind a single leader" as fundamental differences between fascism and the Catholic corporatism of the Estado Novo.

Salazar's own party, the National Union, was formed as a subservient umbrella organisation to support the regime itself, and therefore did not have its own philosophy. At the time, many European countries feared the destructive potential of communism. Salazar not only forbade Marxist parties, but also revolutionary fascist-syndicalist parties. In 1934, Salazar exiled Francisco Rolão Preto as a part of a purge of the leadership of the Portuguese National Syndicalists, also known as the camisas azuis ("Blue Shirts"). Salazar denounced the National Syndicalists as "inspired by certain foreign models" (meaning German Nazism) and condemned their "exaltation of youth, the cult of force through direct action, the principle of the superiority of state political power in social life, [and] the propensity for organising masses behind a single leader" as fundamental differences between fascism and the Catholic corporatism of the Estado Novo. Salazar's own party, the National Union, was formed as a subservient umbrella organisation to support the regime itself, and therefore did not have its own philosophy. At the time, many European countries feared the destructive potential of communism. Salazar not only forbade Marxist parties, but also revolutionary fascist-syndicalist parties.[1]

The corporatist state had some similarities to Benito Mussolini's Italian fascism, but considerable differences in its moral approach to governing.[2] Although Salazar admired Mussolini and was influenced by his Labour Charter of 1927,[3] he distanced himself from fascist dictatorship, which he considered a pagan Caesarist political system that recognised neither legal nor moral limits. Salazar also viewed German Nazism as espousing pagan elements that he considered repugnant. Just before World War II, Salazar made this declaration: "We are opposed to all forms of Internationalism, Communism, Socialism, Syndicalism and everything that may divide or minimise, or break up the family. We are against class warfare, irreligion and disloyalty to one's country; against serfdom, a materialistic conception of life, and might over right."[4]

Page protected[edit]

The page is protected. Let me know how things go. Contact another administrator if I don't respond in a timely manner. Other admins should feel free to adjust the protection or take other measures as necessary. Tom Harrison Talk 21:51, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Arrow Cross?[edit]

The Arrow Cross cannot be properly counted as Clerical Fascism considering that it wanted the Catholic Church to cut ties with the Vatican and wanted to confiscate church lands. 83.128.99.144 (talk) 10:56, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:20, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Restored example[edit]

@Blackwater-Bradfield1900: I restored the example on the Anti-Abortion movement. The solution to a lack of citation is to find reliable secondary sources (which shouldn't be that difficult), not to remove the whole thing. 46.97.170.32 (talk) 12:06, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Horse Eye's Back: @William Kruzt: I started this thread specifically to discuss the inclusion of the Anti-Abortion movement. Please discuss it here. While it's true that the paragraph so far lacks citation, The Anti-Abortion movement has been described in terms that match clerical fascism, and the edit comments for removing the entry boil down to WP:IDONTLIKEIT. I think inclusion is appropriate, we just need a proper citation. 46.97.170.32 (talk) 09:03, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The premise still does not make sense since if anything is labelled fascist, then the bulk of the present political movement is also called fascist. It is still unrelated to Fascist philosophy or theory. If the anti-abortion movement is as fascist as the preceding fascist movement, can you point to any features that the American anti-abortion movement has with the Doctrine of Fascism?
If people call the anti-abortion movement a clerical fascism, why is it on the examples but not on the supplementary? Indeed, the entry boiled down to I don't like it, therefore I added it. A citation is required for the claim; the entry should be placed on the supplementary but not on the example. William Kruzt (talk) 10:16, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To make an extraordinary claim, that the anti-abortion being fascist, requires extraordinary proofs. If coverage is sufficient by reliable sources but there is no scholarly consensus, I would incline to think it merits some mention but with the fascism claim credited to the authors rather than presented as a hard "fact". Dentren | Talk 18:16, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Kay 1970, p. 55.
  2. ^ Kay 1970, pp. 50–51.
  3. ^ Wiarda 1977, p. 98.
  4. ^ Kay 1970, p. 68.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Clerical_fascism&oldid=1216332485"