How Do Fascist Régimes Fall?

Why not give an overview?

• 1920, the Italian Regency of Carnaro capitulated to Italy;
• 1938, the Austro-Fascist régime fell, agressed by Hitler in the Anschluss;
• 1939, the Sanacja régime (Poland) fell, agressed by Hitler in the outbreak of WW-II;
• 1942, the Free Zone of Vichy France was put under German military administration;
• 1943, the Mussolini era of the Kingdom of Italy ended, Mussolini being arrested by the King, in connection with the Allied Invasion;
• 1944, the Horthy era ends by National Socialist invasion;
• 1944, the Pétain era ends by Allied Invasion;
• 1945, the Salò Republic (also under Mussolini, liberated by the Germans and in a sense their puppet) ended, by Allied Invasion;
• 1974, four years after the death of Salazar, the Carnation Revolution ended the dictatorial forms of power, not the least because officers were tired of the war in Angola;
• 1975 to 1977, Francoism fell by La transición, Juan Carlos implementing a return to regional and multiparty liberties after Franco's death.

So, the main cause is, the states were small and open to foreign invasion, from Hitler or Allies or both. In the very first case, from pre-Fascist Italy.

The two surviving Fascist régimes after 1945, the leaders die, and after that:

• the successor is less popular, which turns to impopular due to war fatigue;
• the successor is not interested in continuing Fascism.

That a country falls prey to invasion, is hardly a question of its régime, but more of the ambitions of the invaders.

Is Peronism a Fascism? A certain Finchelstein, cited on the wiki of Peronism, denies it in these terms:

The core differences that Finchelstein noted between Peronism and fascism were: "While fascism mobilized the middle classes, Peronism rallied the working class. While fascism gave war, imperialism, and racism to Europe and the world, Peronism never provoked war." He also argued that "In contrast to fascism, which used democracy to destroy itself and establish a dictatorship, Peronism originated in a military dictatorship, but established a populist authoritarian democracy. Fascism sustained itself in the ideal of violence and war as sublime values of nationality and the leader’s persona. In military terms, it mobilized the masses but tended to demobilize them in social terms. Peronism inverted the terms of the fascist equation."

Look what Fascisms Finchelstein just reclassified as Peronism!

"While fascism mobilized the middle classes, Peronism rallied the working class."

José Antonio. ¡Presente!

"While fascism gave war, imperialism, and racism to Europe and the world, Peronism never provoked war."

Hoch Dollfuss!

"In contrast to fascism, which used democracy to destroy itself and establish a dictatorship,"

Is Finchelstein thinking of Nazism? Some, including me, would not classify it as a Fascism.

"Peronism originated in a military dictatorship, but established a populist authoritarian democracy."

Spain 1939 to 1977.

Ireland from the War of Independence to the long rule of Éamon de Valera with others.

Poland in the early days of Pilsudski.

"Fascism sustained itself in the ideal of violence and war as sublime values of nationality and the leader’s persona. In military terms, it mobilized the masses but tended to demobilize them in social terms"

Finchelstein again is confusing it with National Socialism.

"Peronism inverted the terms of the fascist equation."

Or better, some Fascisms, including Peronism, inverted the terms of the Nazi equation. Though admittedly, Gentile and at times Mussolini did express themselves in terms lending to this confusion of Fascism with Nazism.

Éamon would be somewhat like Juan insofar as it is hard to know when the régime ended, since it was not a dictatorship. Or if it has ended. However, overdoing immigration, apparently, to judge from the news, and legalising abortion and gay marriage, in recent years, that would count as the spirit of de Valera at least taking a huge nap.

I have not included the Argentine Junta, which I classify as Stalinism with Capitalism and some sense of Catholicism, just as at present Red China (which is lots worse) is allowing Capitalism. I have also not counted Pinochet, whom I like better than the Junta, since his economic policies were Capitalist with not much even trace of Corporatism. Mussolini would have been adverse to his view of workers. So would, obviously, Perón or de Valera.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Immaculate Conception of the BVM
9.XII.2024