Why didnt fascism work in Latin America? I have recently gained an interest in studying latin american history after reading a couple old books by some authors from there. I used to believe those regimes the US estabilished there in the 60s were fascist but the 3 or so latin americans I know told me they werent and that they were just "vaguely authoritarian but not really fascist"With so many germans and italians fleeing specifically to South America and with fascism being a seemingly big party thing there why did it never get close to rising to power? If anything communism got way closer to javing a stranglehold there
>>18504154Because fascism doesn’t work period.
>>18504154Because fascism is just populism irl. I know that in theory it's meant to be a corporative state with a hegelian lens of the nation, but irl, it just devolves into an autocratic state-capitalist country, like Russia or Belarus today. The same thing is true with commies too. Everytime they managed to seize power, the iron law of oligarchy made sure that the new elites diverged from the rest of the population. Liberal regimes also had this initially (look up the corruption scandals in the 19th century) but 2 world wars and regular elections cemented a pseudo-appearance of democracy
>>18504154
>>18504154What works in Latam? You might just need to consider the stock of people can't organize into civilized societies under any governance
>a fully latinx SSthey'd make those cartel torture/execution videos look like a death row convict getting a peaceful lethal injection, terrifying 2bh
>>18504154Because the Latam Caudillo tradition predates European Fascism by over a century.
>>18504154Well the line between fascism and communim has alway been a bit blurry. And you could make the argument a few regimes were fascist. Ultimately though, Fascism as a proper phenomenon is closely tied to the conditions of inter-war Europe.But if you want some possible candidates (assuming we are using a coherent definition of fascism):>Juan Domingo Perón's first presidency (strongest case, anyway)>Getulio Vargas' first period in Brazil>Plutarco Elias Calles in MéxicoAnd, as any communist will doubtlessly tell you, a lot of our dictators during the time had personal sympathies with the facist states.And also, what do you define as fascism?
>>18504154>With so many germans and italians fleeing specifically to South America and with fascism being a seemingly big party thing there why did it never get close to rising to power?Pre-existing authoritarian regimes, mostly. Even then you could still make the argument.
>>18504390these three worked tbf
>>18504390Going by the original fascism definition in Italy>Class Collaboration>Anti-Communism>Corporatism>Irredentism>Revolutionary Nationalism>Mass PoliticsBeyond anti-communism, the Latam juntas weren't that much ideological, nor they had much interest in changing their countries beyond protecting the already existing oligarchies
Getulio Vargas was a common sense fascist he was pro class collaboration and against retarded racial supremacism
>>18504440>retarded racial supremacism
>>18504439None of the regimes I cited were military juntas though, much less the late twentieth century ones. Those just catch flack because they collaborated with former Nazis extensively and have a fatigue fetish. Also communist polemics.Latin America has a variety of different political traditions and should not be simplified into all having one form of government.
>>18504439And sans the irredentism, all three of those make the cut in a way even the more explicitly axis tied countries don't.
>>18504458From TikTok comment
>>18504286
>>18504154No fascist power to support them
>>18504672>when you're begging for the sweet release of death after having 52% of your skin flayed off and your captors just give you that prussandean stare
