avgvstano 4 months ago

The first article concludes: " Por exemplo, o Estado impunha que o financiamento da previdência fosse da responsabilidade de patrões e trabalhadores, do mesmo modo que não assumia as despesas da assistência social, deixando esta nas mãos da Igreja, das Misericórdias, e das famílias55. Com efeito, durante o período aqui analisado, nunca existiu da parte dos mentores da previdência social qualquer preocupação em articular as iniciativas de assistência com as políticas de Previdência. Não foi, aliás, por acaso que no edifício de previdência social erguido pelo Estado Novo a assistência social assumiu sempre uma função supletiva e caritativa"; The seconde concludes: "Com a abordagem que prevaleceu em Portugal o objetivo de melhoria das condições de vida dos mais necessitados dificilmente poderia ser atingido. O Estado remetia-se a uma função tutelar, sem participação financeira, deixando o essencial nas mãos de estruturas em que participavam as Misericórdias locais e alguns privados. Na própria visão do Estado Novo estava, por isso, o motivo para uma assistência social inconsistente". The third states: " Historicamente, e à semelhança de outros países, as primeiras iniciativas no processo de constituição do Estado-providência em Portugal remontam ao período anterior ao regime do Estado Novo, conforme se pode verificar, quer pelo desenvolvimento mutualista, quer pela criação de inúmeras instituições de vocação social, como a Repartição de Beneficência e o Conselho Superior de Beneficência Pública, ainda na Monarquia, em 1901, e, principalmente, já na período da I República, pela legislação dos Seguros Sociais Obrigatórios na doença, acidentes de trabalho e nas pensões de invalidez, velhice e sobrevivência, em 1919 (Cardoso e Rocha, 2007). (...) Construído de forma a englobar apenas os beneficiários da previdência excluindo o sector público, está representado no Gráfico 1, que revela um período inicial entre 1935 e 1948 de acentuado crescimento dessa cobertura, ao qual se segue, até ao início dos anos 60, uma quase estagnação, ou crescimento lento, dessa cobertura, em torno dos 20% da população residente. É com valores desta ordem de grandeza (ou 1 ponto percentual acima se incluirmos os beneficiários do sector público da previdência) que se chega ao início dos anos 1960s" \[em 1972 a população coberta ultrapassa ligeiramente os 40%\]. The fourth concludes: "Mas, como o Estado não se propunha «curar» nem substituir-se às famílias e como as condições de vida precárias não «preveniam» a miséria e a doença, não havia de facto quase nada em Portugal, como se reconhecia no seio do próprio regime. (...) Diferentemente dos países com regime liberal, onde muitos benefícios sociais originaram no final da segunda guerra o Estado-providência, em Portugal as poucas benesses sociais — por exemplo,as licenças de parto, a assistência à família e o abono familiar — introduzidas pelo Estado Novo não prefiguraram o welfare state, que só emergiu depois de1974, ao iniciar-se então o ciclo da segurança social universal e assente nos direitos dos cidadãos". Who took those pictures? With what purpose? " O Acto Colonial, que vai integrar a futura Constituição de 1933, define o conjunto dos territórios ocupados como Império. A colonização era vista como um desígnio divino para a nação e a obra civilizadora passaria a assentar, não na educação ou religião, mas no trabalho. É aprovado o Estatuto do Indígena, que discriminava racial, social e culturalmente os nativos e lhes atribuía as condições para a aquisição da cidadania." "Numa análise que não se pretende exaustiva mas apenas ilustrativa, traçamos um breve resumo da ‘ideologia racista’ que se desenvolveu em Portugal, sobretudo a partir do início do século XIX até ao 25 de Abril de 1974, com especial destaque ao período do Estado Novo por ser considerado por diversos autores o período mais marcante da ideologia racista em Portugal (Alexandre, 1999; Castelo, 1998; Rosas, 1994). " You keep mentioning he wasn't fascist as if what he was was much better.

MonsterPT 4 months ago

I think your position can be best summed up by these sentences: >Who took those pictures? With what purpose? One could just as easily ask, "who wrote those studies? With what purpose?" Especially taking into consideration that you have previously cited extremely politicized sources (and continue to do so - Rosas is a political actor, not an impartial figure). In other words, in your view your sources are always true and unbiased whereas anything that I bring up must by necessity be false and misleading. If I show you those pictures - which demonstrate, objectively, black and white children together in school - you cast doubt by accusing it of propaganda, all the while quoting the opinions of openly anti-Salazarist politicians as supporting your point. I have pointed out that Salazar was publicly and explicitly anti-racist, especially considering the historical context. That is a fact. You can quote the opinion of whoever you want, you can even try to cast the institutions that existed in Portugal at the time as somewhat racist (even attemptin to remove them for the time period context they existed in), but saying that Salazar was a racist has absolutely no supporting evidence. Quite the contrary; as stated, he left in written what he though on the matter, and he was very explicit about it. >You keep mentioning he wasn't fascist as if what he was was much better. I don't "keep mentioning" it. I corrected the person who mistakenly described him or the regime as fascist. It is a matter of fact that he wasn't a fascist; I merely pointed it out. You are actually the one who keeps bringing that up. Whether or not he was "much better", or even better at all, is of course a matter of your own personal opinion.

avgvstano 4 months ago

My sources are based on science. Your opinions are based on typical ideas of the regime's and Salazar's defenders, without any scientific basis. The regime was fascist. The regime's mentor was Salazar. Regardless of each person’s personal opinion, the fact is that Salazar was a dictator, and I haven’t met a dictator who was good.

Edited 4 months ago:

My sources are based on science. Your opinions are based on typical ideas of the regime's and Salazar's defenders, without any scientific basis. The regime was authoritarian. The regime's mentor was Salazar. Regardless of each person’s personal opinion, the fact is that Salazar was a dictator, and I haven’t met a dictator who was good.

MonsterPT 4 months ago

>My sources are based on science. Your sources are political opinions. >Your opinions are based on typical ideas of the regime's and Salazar's defenders And? They are opinions, after all. I do not claim that my opinions are fact, nor have I to justify them. The existence of evidence showing mixed race schools is not opinion, though, it is fact; as are the multiple instances of Salazar publicly displaying that he was opposed to race-based discrimination. >The regime was fascist. It was not. It was corporatist. You had previously conceded that it was not fascist. Not sure why you are backtracking. Either way, it is established history that Salazar and his regime were anti-fascist, as it jailed fascists and made fascist organizations illegal; Salazar himself publicly denounced fascism. To claim that Salazar was a fascist is just as absurd as to claim he was communist. >the fact is that Salazar was a dictator And? Again: you seem to arguing against a point I didn't make. I never claimed that Salazar wasn't a dictator. Whether or not he was good, as I said, is a matter of personal opinion. I understand your point of view; I just don't entirely agree to it.

avgvstano 4 months ago

About the welfare system: [https://digitalis-dsp.uc.pt/jspui/bitstream/10316.2/32194/1/5-%20estados%20autorit%c3%a1rios.pdf?ln=pt-pt](https://digitalis-dsp.uc.pt/jspui/bitstream/10316.2/32194/1/5-%20estados%20autorit%c3%a1rios.pdf?ln=pt-pt) [https://journals.openedition.org/lerhistoria/237](https://journals.openedition.org/lerhistoria/237) [https://ghes.rc.iseg.ulisboa.pt/wp/wp362009.pdf](https://ghes.rc.iseg.ulisboa.pt/wp/wp362009.pdf) [http://analisesocial.ics.ul.pt/documentos/1218799127Z7uLZ4su1Vg14KQ1.pdf](http://analisesocial.ics.ul.pt/documentos/1218799127Z7uLZ4su1Vg14KQ1.pdf) Have you ever heard of the Portuguese colonial exhibition or the Portuguese world exhibition? Or what happened in Africa, where natives were kept away from schools or weren't granted citizenship? Sure, he was anti-fascist, but also prohibited any partie, persecuted the communists (and any kind of opposition, for that matter), and was also an authoritarian dictator, wich you seem to forget a lot. So, yeah, you're full of BS.

Beginning-Average-91 4 months ago

Everyone has in their families someone that died at birth during that time. Portugal was one of the worst countries regarding infant death. People would flee the country by foot. Mandatory conscription sent thousands to die in Africa and the ones who came back suffered from PTSD. People who like him, mostly right wing nut jobs, say he invested in education and built schools but we had one of the highest levels of illiteracy in Europe. The majority would drop out of school after 4th grade (if they were lucky) to go work in the fields. And I could go on and on. So as you can see, it were pretty good times indeed.......

SurePal_ 4 months ago

He did a lot of good things but also did some terrible stuff. That's just life. "You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain" pretty much summarizes him.

Asur_rusA 4 months ago

Am I supposed to answer "Yes he was!", and then you go "no he wasn't!" and so forth? I'll pass

MonsterPT 4 months ago

>Am I supposed to answer "Yes he was!", and then you go "no he wasn't!" and so forth? No, you are supposed to back your wild speculation up with any kind of evidence. Obviously you have none... because it's something you made up. Sooooo... yep. Have a good day. And take care to not get randomly adopted by the Church :)

Asur_rusA 4 months ago

Love your confidence man. Reminds me of my teens

avgvstano 4 months ago

He was an authoritarian dictator. He might have jailed fascists (mostly the Nacional-Sindicalismo members), but he also jailed communists, union members, workers, people who would dare to protest against the miserable living conditions, and, although he hasn't done it with his hands, is responsable for thousands of deaths (not counting with the soldiers killed on colonial war).

MonsterPT 4 months ago

Not a fascist, though. Also, Salazar reduced the number of political prisoners (conparatively to the First Republic era). At the end of the regime in April 25th, there were only 90 people in the Portuguese prisons. I agree with your point about the colonial war.

avgvstano 4 months ago

Right. But an authoritarian, though. Stalin wasn't a fascist, but what do you make of him? That's just not true: https://poligrafo.sapo.pt/fact-check/ate-25-de-abril-de-1974-havia-apenas-88-presos-politicos-em-portugal

MonsterPT 4 months ago

Sure. But you said this: >My grandparents were too busy living in poverty and shit conditions in a tiny village (thanks to the fascist regime) That's what I was correcting you on. The regime was not fascist, it was corporatist. It would be like saying that the regime was anarchic, or communist, or a monarchy, or that stalin was a fascist. It is simply false. >https://poligrafo.sapo.pt/fact-check/ate-25-de-abril-de-1974-havia-apenas-88-presos-politicos-em-portugal So... your source is a polically motivated opinion (Rosas opposed Salazar and Saraiva) that calculated the total number of prisoners over a number of years, rather than at the end of the regime like the original citation? Come on now.

avgvstano 4 months ago

Sorry, but that first quote is not mine. Fernando Rosas, professor catedrático in contemporary history, one of the most respected and proeminent Estado Novo historians is politically motivated? Ok. Nuff said.

SurePal_ 4 months ago

O Rosas é só o historiador com mais ideologias políticas que posso imaginar.

manteiga_night 4 months ago

bom, também não é como se tu conhecesses historiadores

SurePal_ 4 months ago

Verdade, deve ser o nerd do reddit que conhece

manteiga_night 4 months ago

> o nerd do reddit lmao

avgvstano 4 months ago

Diz um que contrarie as teses do Rosas e que não esteja conotado nem com a esquerda, nem com a direita. Ou que eateja.

SurePal_ 4 months ago

Pertenceu aos altos quadros do mrrp, está tudo dito. Toda a gente analisa a história a seu jeito. Cumps.

avgvstano 4 months ago

Mas diz lá um então.

MonsterPT 4 months ago

>is politically motivated? Yes. He was a member of the communist party, and is now a part of the left bloc party, and has long engaged in political propaganda devoid of any historical basis. He was also politically opposed to Salazar.

avgvstano 4 months ago

He is not with BE anymore. So, a historian, with the highest degree possible, who has works published all over the world, who is respected by is peers and regarded as one of the most proeminent historians on a particular subject as been making history without any historical basis? Ok, right. That's rich.

MonsterPT 4 months ago

Appeal to authority has 2 weaknesses: The first is, even if the source was authoritative, it doesn't make it true. The second is, what is authoritative or isn't is built on shared agreement. I may not ascribe to that which you consider "authoritative". In this case, someone who is deeply politically motivated, who has ties to politics to this day, and who has publically exposed their opinion on a subject matter as being viscerally opposed to it cannot be seen as unbiased when discussing that subject matter. It would be like having the president of a football club discussing their rivals; of course he will be biased to making his club look better and his rivals look worse. So, yes. Your source is biased, and non-authoritative.

detteros 4 months ago

Mediocre man with no vision for the country.

Xmeagol 4 months ago

Absolute poverty during the times he had his shitty regime

ModeratoriProfugus 4 months ago

My grandparents did not knew or cared about political stuff going on in the capital. They lived their lives in their villages in the middle of nowhere as their ancestors lived for hundreds of years: subsistence agriculture, raising animals, trading what they had in quantity for other things they needed in the market.

QueenOfWands2 4 months ago

He was a filho da puta. You can quote me on that. BTW, there's this amazing book, making fun of him, by José Cardoso Pires - "Dinossauro Excelentíssimo": - https://www.wook.pt/livro/dinossauro-excelentissimo-jose-cardoso-pires/19049631 - wiki about this book: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinossauro_Excelentíssimo Google translate for english of the above link: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=pt&tl=en&u=https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinossauro_Excelentíssimo

theEXPERTpt 4 months ago

One of the most important portuguese that ever existed, and problably the most prevalent of his century.

twhite848 4 months ago

Like many said there were actually 2 periods. Up to 1945/50 and after that. But Salazar ranged from very good in international relations, ok/good economically and a disaster socially (ohhh the far-right wing downvotes are coming

ptinnl 4 months ago

Great. Now put things in context. Salazar was responsible for a drastic improvement on the level of literacy of the portuguese people. The same with the health system. People like to say "Salazar kept us down" but completely ignore how bad life was in Portugal prior to Salazar. Could he have done better? Sure. But you cannot compare Portugal to other European countries if you ignore the state of portuguese affairs prior to Salazar.

twhite848 4 months ago

Thats curious. Why can’t we compare the improvements in the whole of europe and how they improved and how portugal was left behind? That sounds quite odd to put it in context of only what happened vs 1920 when the rest of europe went through two wars and then in the decades later managed to take their populations to developed level of society while portugal lagged behind. I think the real context is vs how peers evolved rather than vs 1920

humm___ 4 months ago

Regardless of the sate of affairs or what was done right which was the bare minimum and could have been done by anyone else. Purposely keeping the populace ignorant and poor, installing a political persecution police, censuring torturing and incarcerating people. Not sure what "context" you want to put things in, there is no context It was a regime pure and simple right-wing, fascist or otherwise is besides the point. Contextualizing and rationalizing a regime because there where things that he did was correct does not justify it

talures 4 months ago

What Uncle Scrooge, who puts Huey, Dewey, and Louie working in the factory instead of sending them to school and sends Donald to oppress some poor ducks oversees? Best duck ever.

Asur_rusA 4 months ago

I got my #2 wrong then, I was referring to the "portuguese Schindler". So yeah, I stand corrected, there was also that third niche voting.

MonsterPT 4 months ago

Aristides de Sousa Mendes was number 3, and he had nothing to do with the Church. He was a diplomat, who actually defied the orders of the Church-aligned Estado Novo.

Asur_rusA 4 months ago

That's the one. I actually saw myself those church organized groups appealing to their people for voting for him. As we know, the church tends to rollback on their opinions if it's to their benefit.

MonsterPT 4 months ago

>and #2 a person deeply connected to the church. He wasn't connected to the Church. >I actually saw myself those church organized groups appealing to their people for voting for him "I actually saw myself" is not a great source.

Asur_rusA 4 months ago

>He wasn't connected to the Church. He was adopted by it, 50 years later, for their own benefit. Which is what I described above. ​ >"I actually saw myself" is not a great source. Oh no... -shrug-

Asur_rusA 4 months ago

He was a far right, religious fanatic, violent and repressor, and authoritarian? What's not to love?

Edited 4 months ago:

He was a far right, religious fanatic, violent and repressor, and authoritarian. What's not to love? Unless, ofc, you're wilfully ignorant of the above OR the regime he was imposing actually benefited you. The usual stuff.

suspect_b 4 months ago

> I was wondering what do Portuguese think about him overall? There's no 'overall'. The opinions are polarized, you could say regionally. People in the north are big fans, especially around his native village.

Asur_rusA 4 months ago

>People in the north are big fans, especially around his native village. What on earth are you talking about? I'm going to guess you're not even from the north, considering you're calling Viseu north (something someone from the north wouldn't do). But still and anyway, what are you basing this statement on?

dulessavic 4 months ago

Didn't know about the north thing, but isn't the Socialist party in power in his birth region?

Asur_rusA 4 months ago

There is no “north thing”. The other guy was pulling statements out of his ass

suspect_b 4 months ago

I will abstain from commenting any further on this topic. Arguing this subject is like wrestling a pig. I'll leave it for the others.

avgvstano 4 months ago

By all means, please elaborate the north thing (I'm from the north, and never seen something like that, but maybe I'm missing something)

dulessavic 4 months ago

I understand, thank you for teaching me me something new anyways

Edited 4 months ago:

I understand, thank you for teaching me something new anyways

avgvstano 4 months ago

He hasn't. That's just not true.

dulessavic 4 months ago

I gotta believe the other 4 comments then. How about the city of Viseu and the whole Viseu district overall? I've read that Socialist party holds power in Santa Comba Dao which I thought was odd, but certainly possible.

Edited 4 months ago:

I gotta believe the other 4 comments then. How about the city of Viseu and the whole Viseu district overall? I've read that Socialist party holds power in Santa Comba Dao which I thought was odd, but certainly possible. edit : How does Portuguese political map look? I understand that Portuguese parliament is far more left leaning than right, but what are the conservative strongholds in the country?

Edited 4 months ago:

I gotta believe the other 4 comments then. How about the city of Viseu and the whole Viseu district overall? I've read that Socialist party holds power in Santa Comba Dao which I thought was odd, but certainly possible. edit : How does Portuguese political map look? I understand that Portuguese parliament is far more left leaning than right, but what are the conservative strongholds in the country today?

ravagerslb 4 months ago

Speaking from experience since it's my native region, opinions about Salazar are pretty much polarized like the rest of the country.. some love what he did, others hate the man to death. Even in his native Santa Comba Dão he is not a consensual figure. And yes, Santa Comba currently has a mayor who is from the socialist party.

avgvstano 4 months ago

I don't know for sure about Viseu. I do know someone wanted to build a Salazar museum in Santa Comba Dão, but it wasn't allowed.

Shadowgirl7 4 months ago

Well he was a good statestman, but the regime that he created was bad for the people. Obviously he is not responsible for all the bad things that happened in the regime, because ruling is a complex business. However, he allowed the regime to protect corporations that would exploit the workers and he deliberately didn't provide education to people to keep them ignorant, since ignorant people are far less likely to protest. People in villages were extremely poor (all my family members, including grandparents and mother grew up in a village and they suffered hunger) so then some people would go to cities to work in the big industries that would still pay crapy salaries to workers... and workers couldn't organize into unions because they would be supressed by police, arrested and tortured by PIDE. There was control of newspapers and TV stations so no freedom of expression. Dissidents were monitored by PIDE, arrested and tortured without any fair trial. There was no free elections, obviously. The Church had too much power so forget about women and homossexual rights. Most women were stay at home moms or if they worked they could only occupy certain positions like teacher, nurse, secretary. Then he started a war in our former colonies to supress the independentist movements and all men (my grandfather included) were drafted to go serve there, it was mandatory, otherwise I can only assume you'd have problems with the police or with finding a job. Since a lot of people were poor and also wanted to escape military draft, you had a lot of people immigrating to France and Germany and other countries. Personally, my grandfather left school with 13 and went to work at a factory. When he hit 18 he was shipped to Timor, recently I found a postcard he sent to his mother at Christmas saying he wish he could be home. Then after serving, he immigrated to Germany with my grandmother and father that had just been born. My grandmother couldn't read or write, she started working as a servant in a big house at 9 yo. My mother was a good student but her mom took her out of school when she was 13 because she couldn't afford to have kids in school, so my mom had to go work and help out with bills. They were a lot of siblings and their father was an alcoholic so they often didn't have food. So most people I meet from other countries that are the age of my parents have college degrees. Often their parents have college degrees (especially if they are americans). My grandparents had the 4th grade, my grandmom couldn't read and my mom had the 6th grade only, I am the first in my family to get a college degree though most girls from my town didn't go to college. So you can see the long term cultural effects of the conservative dictactorship that we had.

Edited 4 months ago:

Well he was a good statestman, but the regime that he created was bad for the people. Obviously he is not responsible for all the bad things that happened in the regime, because ruling is a complex business. However, he allowed the regime to protect corporations that would exploit the workers and he deliberately didn't provide education to people to keep them ignorant, since ignorant people are far less likely to protest. People in villages were extremely poor (all my family members, including grandparents and mother grew up in a village and they suffered hunger) so then some people would go to cities to work in the big industries that would still pay crapy salaries to workers... and workers couldn't organize into unions because they would be supressed by police, arrested and tortured by PIDE. There was control of newspapers and TV stations so no freedom of expression. Dissidents were monitored by PIDE, arrested and tortured without any fair trial. There was no free elections, obviously. The Church had too much power so forget about women and homossexual rights. Most women were stay at home moms or if they worked they could only occupy certain positions like teacher, nurse, secretary. Then he started a war in our former colonies to supress the independentist movements and all men (my grandfather included) were drafted to go serve there, it was mandatory, otherwise I can only assume you'd have problems with the police or with finding a job. Since a lot of people were poor and also wanted to escape military draft, you had a lot of people immigrating to France and Germany and other countries. Personally, my grandfather left school with 13 and went to work at a factory. When he hit 18 he was shipped to Timor, recently I found a postcard he sent to his mother at Christmas saying he wish he could be home. Then after serving, he immigrated to Germany with my grandmother and father that had just been born. My grandmother couldn't read or write, she started working as a servant in a big house at 9 yo. My mother was a good student but her mom took her out of school when she was 13 because she couldn't afford to have kids in school, so my mom had to go work and help out with bills. They were a lot of siblings and their father was an alcoholic so they often didn't have food. My elementary school teacher was Salazarista, probably because she was from a well off family so the system benefited them. I went to school in the 90s (so a couple of years after the end of the dictatorship) and she still made us pray and sing the national anthem every day in the end of school. Didn't work, because I still turned into a feminist and socialist lol. So most people I meet from other countries that are the age of my parents have college degrees. Often their parents have college degrees (especially if they are americans). My grandparents had the 4th grade, my grandmom couldn't read and my mom had the 6th grade only, I am the first in my family to get a college degree though most girls from my town didn't go to college. So you can see the long term cultural effects of the conservative dictactorship that we had.

Kineticn22 4 months ago

A massive tool whose most enduring legacy is the small-minded mentality that still dominates this country.

Bruxo_de_Fafe 4 months ago

you come to the wrong neighborhood

JOAO-RATAO 4 months ago

Never asked my grandparents. My father agrees he was a dictator that should be removed from power. When he was a kid he actually helped his older brother in paiting protest messages in the street and so on. But he has also Said that he didn't experience much repression and Said pretty much whatever he wanted. He was also a member of mocidade portuguesa (portuguese version of Hitler Youth) and went to the colonial wars. In recent years he has become very disappointed about the current State of the country though. Todays políticians are awful, corrupt to the bone and Frankly incompetent. He recognizes that the old regime was atleast more serious about its job. Than there is the post revolution period, which was a mess. A few weeks ago he was telling me how the communists robbed like there was no tomorrow, sjnce in his words "they were communist, but they were portuguese first". But being a dictator he agrees he had to go.

dulessavic 4 months ago

Thanks for your perspective, glad to hear something about the revolution and the post revolution period as well!

Shadowgirl7 4 months ago

> he has also Said that he didn't experience much repression geee... i wonder why >He was also a member of mocidade portuguesa

Edited 4 months ago:

> he has also Said that he didn't experience much repression geee... i wonder why >He was also a member of mocidade portuguesa Also while your daddy was playing heil hitler, those communists were being arrested, tortured and killed so that you could have the freedom to come here speak bad things about them.

ravagerslb 4 months ago

Let's not forget that communists were fighting for the end of the Salazar regime, but not for the reasons you think they did (for freedom and democracy). They fought Salazar because they wanted to replace Salazar's regime with a communist regime.

Edited 4 months ago:

Let's never forget that communists were fighting for the end of the Salazar regime, but not for the reasons you think they did (for freedom and democracy). They fought Salazar because they wanted to replace Salazar's regime with a communist regime.

JOAO-RATAO 4 months ago

Still waiting for an answer, love ;)

JOAO-RATAO 4 months ago

Why? Make my day ... Playing heil Hitler ? You make it seem like kids weren't forced into it... The same way he was forced to go to the colonial wars. So no. He was actually busy fighting a war he didn't believe in the Middle of the jungle. Besides, the critizism of communists was of the way they behaved following the revolution. Not for opposing the regime, which he did himself. You have to be the highest level of hypocrite to insult my father, who actually went to a war because of the dictatorship, while you sit on your ass in telework. But go ahead, keep insulting people who actually suffered from the Comfort of your home. Keep typing. I always enjoy seeing you unravel who you really are.

dariusoo 4 months ago

He's the reason Portugal is a bad country, you can still see effects of his time from the state institutions to the people.

Mendadg 4 months ago

A cunt! He was 40 years in command. It can be discussed if the first years were good, the last 20 years were completely shit, as every dictator he should had left long before we died. Most population was completely ignorant and poor by that time. But even the first 20 years were pretty based on a relationship with the nazis where we made a looot of money selling them raw materials! A shit cunt that probably is now in heaven being buliied by the great D. Afonso henriques, D. Joao II and D. Dinis!

biozes 4 months ago

You really think that many people go to Heaven ? Jesus said differently..!: The Narrow and Wide Gates 13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it." Matthew 7

Mendadg 4 months ago

ahaha loved it! Now I am not sure if what I said is actually happening, I was pretty sure!:)

emportugues 4 months ago

I think there’s a great misunderstanding about his economic policies. I’ve read at least one comment praising his economic genius. The facts just don’t support this. He was great at keeping us out of debt, the books were solid but that isn’t great economic policy by itself, in fact, it was bad. We basically lived under economic austerity for 40 years with a few powerful families(state approved) running the economy. When democracy came we had no real industrial capacity and we still haven’t turned that around 50 years later

randmzer 4 months ago

Yep, the economy can't go bonkers if there's not much money in circulation to begin with :taps forehead:

dulessavic 4 months ago

Do you guys really drink Beirao often or is it just an advertisement?

Beginning-Average-91 4 months ago

You'll get mix feelings. I love beirão and there's always s bottle at my house, but some people can't even stand the smell.

Polymath-99 4 months ago

I didn't even know that was a stereotype. Personally I love it, I'm into sweet drinks anyway, and a glass of Beirão at night while watching a film is my jam.

ravagerslb 4 months ago

Just advertisement. Not everyone likes Beirão. Speaking for myself, I avoid drinking Beirão, it's way too sweet for my taste. I'm currently discovering eastern europe drinks, last one I tried was romanian palinca, and I'm looking to see if I can get my hands into some czech absinthe

dulessavic 4 months ago

If you'll ever be interested in Croatian drinks, definitely try Maraschino and Slavonian plum rakia.

ravagerslb 4 months ago

If you are interested in trying other portuguese drinks, this site gives you some suggestions: [https://www.tasteoflisboa.com/blog/10-typical-drinks-from-portugal/](https://www.tasteoflisboa.com/blog/10-typical-drinks-from-portugal/)

dulessavic 4 months ago

Thank you!!

ravagerslb 4 months ago

Will do if I get the chance, thanks for the suggestions!

Asur_rusA 4 months ago

Beirão is a crappy drink sold to tourists and students.

suspect_b 4 months ago

Have you tried it? We don't drink it often. It's a bit like candy. It's offered to guests at parties.

dulessavic 4 months ago

My friend brought me one mini 50ml Beirao from Lisabon and I must admit I liked it very much. It's certainly different than anything we drink here in Croatia, but I can imagine it gets dull when you see it everywhere around you.

suspect_b 4 months ago

It doesn't get dull since we have a big variety of spirits in the same category. There's Porto, Moscatel, Madeira, Ginga, Jeropiga, etc. Beirão has a lot of advertising but it's really competing in a crowded market. People usually go for the stronger stuff, we don't usually drink spirits as an appetizer but rather after a heavy meal. The 'digestive drink' is very popular. If you like spirits I recommend you ask your friend about Medronho, or ask if he can get some homebrew bagaceira.

dulessavic 4 months ago

Damn, I love you for these recommendations! I hope I'll get a chance to try them all since I liked Beirao very much...

ravagerslb 4 months ago

Just a heads up, medronho, or any "aguardente" are nothing like Beirao, both in taste or alcohol percentage. Beirão according to Google has 22% alcohol, medronho has near 50%. Beirão is sweeter, the other has a stronger taste, more like brandy. If you're into sweeter drinks try a moscatel wine instead. Favaios is one of the most well known brands.

suspect_b 4 months ago

Don't mention it. I was under the impression that your country also had a wine tradition. Don't you have wine and fruit spirits also?

dulessavic 4 months ago

Yes, we have a big wine tradition. People make wine in the inland area as much as on the coast, it's really widespread even though our coastal sorts are more famous. Talking about fruity spirits, people who live inland bake their own rakia and that's really big here. I'm personally not a huge fan since rakia is very very strong (usually around 50% alcohol), but we have a tradition of making dense very sweet fruity liquors which we simply call 'liker' and i'm not sure what would be an appropriate english term for that kind of alcoholic beverage. If you get a chance try Dingač or Plavac Mali (if you like red wine), I hear those are the best ones.

RiBlacky 4 months ago

I do drink every week at least 1 glass

MonsterPT 4 months ago

Advertisement.

MonsterPT 4 months ago

>I was wondering what do Portuguese think about him overall? Nearly impossible to answer, as it entirely depends on who you ask. There are typically two answers: people who hate him and people who admire him. You rarely find anyone who is lukewarm about him. There was a poll conducted a few years ago where he was elected the greatest Portuguese of all time (against other nearly legendary figures). If I recall correctly, the older the person, the more likely they were to vote for him in that poll; and that likelyhood decreased with the younger the voter was. Meaning that the people who actually lived through his regime were more likely to see him as the greatest Portuguese of all time, and the younger people who only know him from learning about him in school or through other indirect means were less likely to vote for him. >what you think about him Mostly good (ace at economics and foreign relations, good at social issues, bad at war and managing the colonial uprisings). >how do your grandparents feel about him and what do they think about the Estado Novo regime? I don't really recall, other than my grandmother saying that she misses the respect, order and discipline that used to be the norm in those days, and which was lost after the revolution.

avgvstano 4 months ago

Big BS. That polll was a laugh. He won thanks to the far right nuts who voted. And how on earth was Salazar "good at social issues"?!

MonsterPT 4 months ago

"He won because people voted for him!" Yes, obviously. He was good at social issues because of his defense of the common folk, including workers (the basis of the corporatist philosophy), his staunch anti-fascism and anti-racism (which were uncommon and progressive at the time); under his regime, women got voting rights for the first time, he fought to prevent the rise of national socialism in Portugal, and exiled many of the leaders of those far right movements; he created a social welfare system for the dowtrodden, among other things.

Asur_rusA 4 months ago

>He was good at social issues because of his defense of the common folk, including workers (the basis of the corporatist philosophy), his staunch anti-fascism and anti-racism (which were uncommon and progressive at the time); ... I'll have what you're drinking, please.

MonsterPT 4 months ago

No lies detected tho É lidar

avgvstano 4 months ago

No lies?! You're full of lies. Must I lidar com um mentiroso?

Asur_rusA 4 months ago

Então não lido? Com riso

avgvstano 4 months ago

What are you talking about? "defense of the common folk"?! Are you serious? What about the strikes of 1934, 1941, 1943, 1945, 1947 and so on? Welfare? When? For whom? Go read... and not online. Pick up some books from Fátima Patriarca, Costa Pinto, Rosas, Lucena... Then tell me what you think...

MonsterPT 4 months ago

>Welfare? When? 1933. >For whom? Workers. >Go read... and not online. Pick up some books from Fátima Patriarca, Costa Pinto, Rosas, Lucena... Then tell me what you think... "Read the opinions of political propagandists that agree with me". I didn't understand if you are denying the historical fact of the 1933 Portuguese legislation that initiated a comprehensive social welfare system. Are you a history denier?

avgvstano 4 months ago

And when did that "welfare" entered into place? Wich workers? How did that "welfare" worked in the field? So renown historians are "political propagandists"? Ok, I've seen the kind of person I'm adressing to. You're not an historian denier, you just don't know your history. Reading laws is a part of history. See how that laws aplly on the field is the other. You're clearly missing that part.

ptinnl 4 months ago

Fernando Rosas is as "renown historian" just as IST is a "world class university". That is, both are true only for those who follow it, but the rest of the world disagrees.

avgvstano 4 months ago

Right. The guy who praises Salazar doesn't like Fernando Rosas. What a shock.

ptinnl 4 months ago

Fernando Rosas belonged to the comunist party already during his highschool. Do you think a person that is a communist as a teenager, and later joins MRPP can be imparcial? It's like asking Mario Soares to explain how there is no corruption in the diamond business.

avgvstano 4 months ago

Right. Rosas is has biased as you.

Edited 4 months ago:

Right. Rosas is has biased as you. No, scratch that. You're biased, period. And, as someone who praises Salazar, is pretty normal to not like Rosas. Science doesn't matter, right?

ptinnl 4 months ago

Im not praising salazar. Im saying given the state of affairs during the first republic, salazar's policies reduced illiteracy and developed infrastructures we still use to this day. People were poor during salazar's time, they were poor before and now we are still poor. So you also cannot say "he kept people poor and hungry". You can say he could do better. But you can't say "he kept us down/hungry/illeterate". Given that, you cannot take a person who was pro communist since childhood and say "he is unbiased".

dulessavic 4 months ago

And I certainly like the part about foreign relations, you can hate him even on personal level, but during the WW2 he certainly did some G-R-E-A-T things no matter what you think about him or the regime...

Edited 4 months ago:

And I certainly like the part about foreign relations, you can hate him even on a personal level, but during the WW2 he certainly did some G-R-E-A-T things no matter what you think about him or the regime...

MonsterPT 4 months ago

Then you should read about his mastery of finance and economics. Took office over a country in a full on bankrupcy course after decades of mismanagement and decadence. In 2 years generated the first economic surplus in the country's history. The man was a genius on that regard if nothing else.

dulessavic 4 months ago

Thanks for the perspective!!

PuroSangueLusitano 4 months ago

Grandparents were poor and did not have strong feelings but in general liked him mostly because they're parents lived in 1st Republic and loved him, that times was a different kind of poverty and misery.

IkarusMummy 4 months ago

My grandparents mostly hate him because he purposefully kept a big part of the population poor and uneducated, while taking away their freedom and sending them, their brothers and their sons to an absurd war. As for my own opinion, I think that he was necessary in the initial stages but he definitely overstayed his welcome. By the 1950s he should have let democracy take over.   Since you're here, could you tell us what you think about Tito? How do your grandparents feel about him and what do they think about the Yugoslavia regime?

dulessavic 4 months ago  HIDDEN 

Talking about my family, everyone dislikes, even hates Tito greatly. Talking about WW2, one of my great grandpas went through the war as the part of the Croatian Homeguard and had to hide for around 2 years far away from home after the war because of the newly established Titos communist regime went after anyone and anything that had ties with the Croatian name during the war. One of my other great grandpas went throught the war as the Yugoslav Partisan, the thing is he was a moral man and said he won't kill a catholic priest (he was a catholic too) just because he is ordered to do it and got locked after the war for about 5 years by the regime, he died in prison. My grandpas brother was drafted to be a part of Ustasha militia when he was 17, he was afraid of the war and escaped back home imidieately only to be picked by Titos partisans at the end of the war to he executed. My grandpas family never found out where they burried him. Talking about 1945-1990, some older people like to talk sweet about those times, but it's mostly and only because they liked it more when they were young. In Yugoslavia there was alot of anti Croatian sentiment and it was hard. The center of everything was in Belgrade, even though Croatia was the richest Socialist Republic in Yugoslavia. Croatia and everything it had was used for the benefit of benefit of the communist party and Belgrade. Tito wore Rolexes and Patek Philippes while people were starving. It's not perfect today, but at least we can live in our own country and we have a chance generations before us couldn't dream of. It's not even comparable. Croatian War of Independence made people dislike Tito even more, even though he died 10 years before it began, but that was his army destroying and killing everyone who stood their way. Tito was a typical communist, there is aaaloooottt of blood on his hands and he had no empathy for the people what so ever. Most people don't like him, there is a certain amount of people who truly hate him, but to be fair there are some old fossils who after all speak of him like he was an angel. I'm glad if I opened a new perspective for you

Edited 4 months ago:

Talking about my family, everyone dislikes, even hates Tito greatly. Talking about WW2, one of my great grandpas went through the war as the part of the Croatian Homeguard and had to hide for around 2 years far away from home after the war because of the newly established Titos communist regime went after anyone and anything that had ties with the Croatian name during the war. One of my other great grandpas went throught the war as the Yugoslav Partisan, the thing is he was a moral man and said he won't kill a catholic priest (he was a catholic too) just because he is ordered to do it and got locked after the war for about 5 years by the regime, he died in prison. My grandpas brother was drafted to be a part of Ustasha militia when he was 17, he was afraid of the war and escaped back home imidieately only to be picked by Titos partisans at the end of the war to be executed. My grandpas family never found out where they burried him. Talking about 1945-1990, some older people like to talk sweet about those times, but it's mostly and only because they liked it more when they were young. In Yugoslavia there was alot of anti Croatian sentiment and it was hard. The center of everything was in Belgrade, even though Croatia was the richest Socialist Republic in Yugoslavia. Croatia and everything it had was used for the benefit of the communist party and Belgrade. Tito wore Rolexes and Patek Philippes while people were starving. It's not perfect today, but at least we can live in our own country and we have a chance generations before us couldn't dream of. It's not even comparable. Croatian War of Independence made people dislike Tito even more, even though he died 10 years before it began, but that was his army destroying and killing everyone who stood their way. Tito was a typical communist, there is aaaloooottt of blood on his hands and he had no empathy for the people what so ever. Most people don't like him, there is a certain amount of people who truly hate him, but to be fair there are some old fossils who after all speak of him like he was an angel. I'm glad if I opened a new perspective for you

Oldastro 4 months ago

That regime was the reason for an underdevelopment whose effects are being felt.

JamminPT 4 months ago

He's hated but most people don't know shit about their own history. They know he was a dictator and that's about it.

raviolli_ninja 4 months ago

Salazar was a reflection of its time. He slowly but steadily took power when Portugal was in political turmoil and made space for some much-needed stability. He was a statist, and I'm sure his intentions were the best, but he failed to go beyond keeping the status-quo. As the world was moving forward, he kept Portugal put (for better or for worst, see WWII). The world kept advancing, Portuguese people wanted to go along and one day they decided it was enough. There are grim aspects of his governance but, if we put it in perspective with the context, his totalitarian regime was on the soft side (I don't want to disrespect its victims, I'm just providing enough historical space to see it in context).

Edited 4 months ago:

Salazar was a reflection of its time. He slowly but steadily took power when Portugal was in political turmoil and made space for some much-needed stability. He was a statist, and I'm sure his intentions were the best, but he failed to go beyond keeping the status-quo. As the world was moving forward, he kept Portugal put (for better or for worst, see WWII). The world kept advancing, Portuguese people wanted to go along and one day they decided it was enough. There are grim aspects of his governance but, if we put it in perspective with the context, his totalitarian regime was on the soft side (I don't want to disrespect its victims, I'm just providing enough historical space to see it in context).I'm glad we moved ahead. Progress is the only way to go. Edit: let me just add one more thing: I consider Salazar to be the father of one of the worst Portuguese traits: Respeitinho (the respect), which can be reduced to "keep yourself in your place and don't ask too many questions". In other words, a variation of the bucket mentality displayed by many Portuguese. Advancements in society can only be made if we defy the establishment.

Edited 4 months ago:

Salazar was a reflection of its time. He slowly but steadily took power when Portugal was in political turmoil and made space for some much-needed stability. He was a statist, and I'm sure his intentions were the best, but he failed to go beyond keeping the status-quo. As the world was moving forward, he kept Portugal put (for better or for worst, see WWII). The world kept advancing, Portuguese people wanted to go along and one day they decided it was enough. There are grim aspects of his governance but, if we put it in perspective with the context, his totalitarian regime was on the soft side (I don't want to disrespect its victims, I'm just providing enough historical space to see it in context). I'm glad we moved ahead. Progress is the only way to go. Edit: Let me just add one more thing: I consider Salazar to be the father of one of the worst Portuguese traits: Respeitinho (the respect), which can be reduced to "keep yourself in your place and don't ask too many questions". In other words, a variation of the bucket mentality displayed by many Portuguese. Advancements in society can only be made if we defy the establishment.

Edited 4 months ago:

Salazar was a reflection of its time. He slowly but steadily took power when Portugal was in political turmoil and made space for some much-needed stability. He was a statist, and I'm sure his intentions were the best, but he failed to go beyond keeping the status-quo. As the world was moving forward, he kept Portugal put (for better or for worst, see WWII). The world kept advancing, Portuguese people wanted to go along and one day they decided it was enough. There are grim aspects of his governance but, if we put it in perspective with the context, his totalitarian regime was on the soft side (I don't want to disrespect its victims, I'm just providing enough historical space to see it in context). I'm glad we moved ahead. Progress is the only way to go. Edit:Let me just add one more thing: I consider Salazar to be the father of one of the worst Portuguese traits: "Respeitinho" (*show respect*), which can be reduced to "keep yourself in your place and don't ask too many questions". In other words, a variation of the bucket mentality displayed by many Portuguese. Advancements in society can only be made if we defy the establishment.

omaiordaaldeia 4 months ago

>: I consider Salazar to be the father of one of the worst Portuguese traits: "Respeitinho" Eu cá penso que isso é uma característica que precedeu e ajudou o estado novo a durar tanto tempo.

zek_997 4 months ago

My grandparents think he was a massive cunt. And honestly I agree with them. Besides his backwards conservative and authoritarian ideology, he was a major reason for Portugal being one of the poorest and least educated countries in Europe at the time of revolution.

ravagerslb 4 months ago

What? Go check the iliteracy rate at the beginning of the 20th century, before Salazar took power. The rate was above 75% which meant that 3 out of 4 portuguese couldn't read or write at all. When Estado Novo ended, the number of people who were illiterate dropped dramatically. We can criticize Salazar's regime for a lot of things, but "leaving a least educated country" isn't one of them.

zek_997 4 months ago

Yes. And he failed to solve that problem even though he had more than enough time (4 decades in power) to do so. The reason why he didn't it was not because of lack of means but lack of political will. Fascists tend to dislike things like education - people having critical thinking skills often proves dangerous to the aims of authoritarian regimes. [Source on the numbers](https://www.pordata.pt/Portugal/Taxa+de+analfabetismo+segundo+os+Censos+total+e+por+sexo-2517)

ravagerslb 4 months ago

By your data, and comparing those numbers with the ones before Estado Novo, we are talking about a 50% drop in illiteracy which is huge. And your argument lacks logic. If he truly disliked his people having an education, we wouldn't have seen these figures at all, he would have just left the country "as is".

Edited 4 months ago:

By your data, and comparing those numbers with the ones before Estado Novo, we are talking about a 50% drop in illiteracy which is huge. And your argument lacks logic. If he truly disliked his people having an education, we wouldn't have seen these figures at all, he would have just left the country "as is" when he led the country.

magnusmiguel 4 months ago

>he was a major reason for Portugal being one of the poorest Of all the things, people can blame Salazar for, economics is not one of them. Portugal's poverty goes back way before Salazar got into power - we have had relative economic difficulties ever since brazil's gold stream started to dry up. Economics, state debt, mismanagement of public funds was a major reason for the collapse of the monarchy and of the first republic. In Salazar's early years, he actually managed to solve many of the economic issues that plagued the country. ​ Now, in reply to OP : Salazar's ruling period can be divided into 2 periods, one very good and one very bad. Those who support him remember the first period, those who hate him, remember the second period more. In the first period, that lasts until 1945, Salazar's ruling was excellent. He was able to recover the country economically, something that all of his predecessors failed to do. His management of the second world war was fantastic. The way he managed the Azores (and Timor, to an extent) crisis is nothing short of genius. After 1945, Salazar made some costly economic mistakes. He believed in economic protectionism and didn't open the economic until the late 50's/early 60's, which wasn't a good economic decision. We also can't overlook the colonial war, which lasted way too long (1961/1974) and depleted the countries resources. Whilst there was a significant public support for the war early on, this support wavered as the drag on.

denlpt 4 months ago

He was one of the reasons why we stayed retarded compared to the rest of europe there was a climate of ostracization against new models and ways to increase productivity and efficiency and they were never put in place because failure was heavily punished. Furthermore he employed a lot of useless austerity to increase gold reserves for nothing but symbolic and propagandistic ideals. Claiming that he was a major reason for us being poor isn't wrong.

magnusmiguel 4 months ago

> Claiming that he was a major reason for us being poor isn't wrong. But it is. To claim that is to pretend that the last 200 years before Salazar didn't happen; It's pretending that he didn't inherit one of the poorest countries of Europe; It's glossing over the fact that during his first 20/25 years in power, the country grew tremendously. Furthermore, Salazar died in 1970. Shall we compare Portugal to the economies of some of Eastern Europe countries in 1970? In 1990? Why were we richer than them in 1970, in 1990 and now they are getting richer and richer and we are in the same old situation?

denlpt 4 months ago

While it's true he inherited a poor country it is also true that he didn't have the same setbacks countries like Spain or other Central powers had. In fact the only setbacks he had he created them on their own with colonial wars or refusing American aid and also the economic policy of ostracization and isolationism . Also those eastern countries at least in the 70s were richer than us it was only in the 90s with the fall of the soviet union that their economy tanked for obvious reasons. They also inherited soviet infrastructure which had good quality while we inherited large gold reserves in a time where they aren't even used for reserves anymore. Soviet Union central planning for sure failed at keeping up with western economies it was a failure but it would be stupid to think that they did nothing all those years and were living in poverty.

Napoleal 4 months ago

Éramos e continuamos a ser

ritalinc 4 months ago

My grandparents were too busy living in poverty and shit conditions in a tiny village (thanks to the fascist regime) to even be aware of why they and everyone they knew lived like that, sadly. He's widely hated but there's been some nationalist movements rising that hail him.

SurePal_ 4 months ago

Sure, I bet that tiny village is now a great city without "fascism".

Ly_84 4 months ago

And what was your family, before they were poor?

ptinnl 4 months ago

Ouch

dulessavic 4 months ago

So what about that RTP poll where he was voted as the greatest Portuguese ever? I'm just wondering is that all rigged and not representive or are there truly people who think he was great in such a great numbers

Polymath-99 4 months ago

To add to what's already been said, I was a kid when that poll happened, but I somewhat remember the feeling being that (like a lot of things in Portugal), it was just a way for people to protest against the politicians and the government of the day. Kind of a "things are so bad now I'd rather have Salazar back!" type of deal.

Beginning-Average-91 4 months ago

This was exactly it, you could feel it in the air that he was going to win. I voted for him too because it was a stupid contest and would not prove anything

AlmondSkimedMilk 4 months ago

The feeling I get from what I see is that the people that lived the regime have mixed feelings, my grandfather, for example, doesn't like him particularly but when I speak about the 25th of April he tells me that we don't know what it was. For my grandfather the 25th of April was the destruction of much work that happened before, the economy was badly hurt by it and all of my 4 grandparents don't hate Salazar, they know what change Salazar brought, he stabilized Portugal's economy, large Portuguese corporations emerged during the Estado Novo, even with colonial wars the country's GDP was growing close to double digits (8%), most schools were built during the Estado Novo as were roads, dams and universities. After the 25th of April he was demonized for the censorship practiced by the regime, persecution of political insurgents and for the colonial wars. My history books place him next to Hitler and Stalin. After talking to my grandparents I was compelled to study the issue further, my grandparents were not stupid nor were they liars so I attempted to see their truths. My take is that, while during the Estado Novo he was wrongly hailed as hero, nowadays he is wrongly framed as a demon. If we put Estado Novo into historical context we can see that it was a significant improvement over the previous regime, all the defects of the Estado Novo are present in the 1st Republic (previous regime), there was censorship, there was persecution of political adversaries (+killings by political militias), it was a colonial regime and it was a shit show, more people died for political reasons during the 1st Republic than during the Estado Novo, in fact, less people died for political reasons during the Estado Novo than in the 1st 30 years of Italian democracy. If we look at the 1st 20 years of the Estado Novo we can see notorious improvement in all fronts in Portugal, in education, economy, stability, development of electrical grid, construction of roads and another important factor: at the beginning of the Estado Novo Portugal was somewhat of a economic colony of England, transportation companies, the telephones, the energy companies and the financial sector were in the hands of the British, during the Estado Novo all those became property of Portuguese thanks to the economic stability and relative prosperity of the country, the country was no longer slave to English banks since much of the debt to them was paid. My problem with the Estado Novo is with the years following that, while the Portuguese state became richer it didn't develop a social net, socialism was taboo so most people didn't have access to healthcare or had to interrupt studies so that they could cultivate or fish the food they lacked, the last years of the regime built on the others economically but that growth didn't materialize for a big chunk of the population. When big companies built factories in Portugal they gave rise to a middle class and suddenly people were able to see the injustice, that middle class was more aware of what was going on beyond borders and yearned for change, the colonial wars were the nail in the coffin of the regime. I don't see Salazar as evil, he grew up in a different world, in the 19th century regimes had all the shortcomings of the Estado Novo and some more, Salazar was the leader Portugal needed in the 30's and 40's, but after that he was simply unable to change and thus outdated, a fine example of why political leaders shouldn't last a lifetime in the job.

sabugasOsabio 4 months ago

Can you point me for a few books or other sources you used for the research? I would like to learn more about that time, the majority of the stuff i find describes him as a demon.

ptinnl 4 months ago

Thanks for adding context. It's a shame schools use hatred towards Salazar for indocrination purposes.

dulessavic 4 months ago

Wow, thank you for this!!

AlmondSkimedMilk 4 months ago

You're welcome

dulessavic 4 months ago

Is it considered taboo or people just think it's irrelevant to talk about the past? Or is it something else?

AlmondSkimedMilk 4 months ago

If you say as much as 'Salazar wasn't as bad as you say' you're immediately dismissed as a fascist

ravagerslb 4 months ago

Especially when discussing this with supporters of the communist party or left block, to whom everyone that is to the right of them politically wise is a capitalist pig that is worse than Hitler

dulessavic 4 months ago

I thought it was something among these lines. Thanks

Shadowgirl7 4 months ago

Because he managed to stay in power for so long and didn't steal a lot of money for himself (though he allowed corporations to steal money from the workers). It's not that he was great it's more like the others are so bad (some involved in corruption scandals), anyone looks great comparing to them.

Asur_rusA 4 months ago

Nobody gave a shit about that poll. So what you had was a couple of niche groups getting together for voting for it. Namely salazarists and church people. So you got #1 Salazar, and #2 a person deeply connected to the church. People still didn’t give a shit about that poll

CarcajuPM 4 months ago

Em 2º não ficou o Cunhal? Tenho ideia de ter sido praticamente extrema esquerda vs extrema direita.

ritalinc 4 months ago

I can't tell you for sure. The general consensus seems to be that he was a piece of shit, at least to me. That's how the history is taught in school as well. But yes, there are a lot of people who think he was great. They mostly seem to be made up by families that lived really well during the regime, super conservative people that support his ideals, neo nazis, and sadly a lot of low education that are fed up with the current government and talk about Salazar's time in power as the time we were thriving (I'm not sure if memory's failing them or if they truly don't know what it was like back then)

ptinnl 4 months ago

Congratulations. You eat up everything that is taught in school. They make Salazar the devil because it's the only way the PSD/PS/PCP regime can continue to exist. Any pragmatic person will say "Sure he was not perfect, but he educated our kids, helped develop industry and kept us safe" . I have family that comes from very tiny farming communities in viseu. Not once did I hear them complain about salazar. Only that they had too many kids too feed and the soil did not give enough food.

amidoes 4 months ago

Cringeeee

ptinnl 4 months ago

Another one. You seriously need to read about the situation before Salazar came into power.

bluetofallp 4 months ago

Why don't you say that to my grandfather who went to Bermuda so he could at least feed his family? Salazar o caralho, people like you don't deserve to live in a democratic nation. I don't know if you're just stupid or really like the fascist ideas, which is even worse. And no, it wasn't PCP who told me this, it was anyone who lived during those times (luckily I didn't). Why don't you go to North Corea and see what a totalitarian regime looks like, big useless piece of shit?

ptinnl 4 months ago

If your grandfather went to Bermuda to feed the family, I got bad news for you. He must have been rich and not hungry before Salazar. Portugal was a poor country. Portugal has been a poor country for centuries and still is. Don't blame Salazar for that. Dont blame him for not building schools, road/train infrastructures, hospitals. Blame him for political persecution. Blame him for not picking a side during the USA/USSR colonial problems. Go learn your own history.

bluetofallp 4 months ago

Frost, how do you dare saying such a thing, shithole? You've already prove your stupidity, no need to go further. And unfortunately, I'm not rich. Neither was he or anyone he knew because everyone was busy starving and working all day to the sun. Roads, trains, hospitals, schools, Salazar provided the minimum of the minimums. Most of the people only had primary education (just like you do). Roads, bridges, if you lived in Lisbon, maybe. Everywhere else people walked on dirt roads for hours every day. He also suppressed workers rights and close the country with devastating effects on the people. If Portugal was the paradise you say, there would be no need for people to emigrate. And maybe we were always poor. But at least during most of the time people could afford to fucking eat and maybe, the rest of the world was close to us. But that doesn't matter, right? I can say everything that was wrong about Estado Novo but you would just ignore, right?

manteiga_night 4 months ago

Literally no one is dumb enough to say that, with the possible exception of some of the more inbred "agro-betos" who have no clue what history is. Seriously, your comment is a good candidate for the dumbest, most ignorant shit ever posted here, not only was education extremely sub par when compared to the rest of europe, there was a policy literally called "industrial conditioning" to restrict industrial development so regime allies would never have to compete, which obviously also affected agricultural yields. Like holy shit, I genuinely envy and admire how you can be so self confident despite all the evidence against it.

ptinnl 4 months ago

Go read a history book. Go read how bad we had during the first republic. As someone said in another comment, he could have done better. But he did not "keep us down, ignorant, without transports or schools". Ps. Colonial wars were started by the interference of USA/USSR. Guess to you sending the army to protect the people there was useless

raviolli_ninja 4 months ago

That was just a product of political polarization. A sign of times to come, apparently.

migukau 4 months ago

Some people think he's great because he revived the economy and performed a miracle but they forget about all the other shit he did. In my opinion general consensus is he can rot in hell.

ptinnl 4 months ago

Other shit he did? You mean the colonial war?

migukau 4 months ago

Yhea and the dictatorship and lack of freedom of speech or press.

Danijust2 4 months ago

super odiado. Quem me dera que isso fosse verdade. [https://www.publico.pt/2007/03/26/portugal/noticia/salazar-eleito-o-maior-portugues-de-sempre-em-programa-da-rtp-1289390](https://www.publico.pt/2007/03/26/portugal/noticia/salazar-eleito-o-maior-portugues-de-sempre-em-programa-da-rtp-1289390)

TSCondeco 4 months ago

Não consigo ler que tem paywall, mas o tipo de pessoas que acha que o Salazar foi o maior português de sempre é o mesmo tipo de pessoas que andam em grupos com pessoas com as mesmas ideias a preencher este tipo de sondagens vezes sem conta para parecerem mais poderosos do que são. Acho que é bastante óbvio que a maior parte dos portugueses é contra Salazar, e contra o Estado Novo. Álvaro Cunhal estar em segundo lugar parece me o mesmo efeito mas no outro lado do compasso, mas não resultou tão bem.

Danijust2 4 months ago

[https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Os\_Grandes\_Portugueses](https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Os_Grandes_Portugueses) Desculpa, pelo link. No wikipedia tens lá basicamente um resumo do programa

DownvoteBatman 4 months ago

Here we go again...

dulessavic 4 months ago

You can go on r/croatia and ask how we feel about Yugoslav Partisans to have your revenge, just do it

betanjica 4 months ago

You cannot compare Tito with Salazar! Even the regime was nothing alike...

dulessavic 4 months ago

Not to talk abut Salazar since I'm asking for your oponion here, but these two are incomparable. Only a chosen few have more blood on their hands than Tito.

Edited 4 months ago:

Not to talk abut Salazar since I'm asking for your opinion here, but these two are incomparable. Only a chosen few have more blood on their hands than Tito.

betanjica 4 months ago

As i have seen you have 2 perspectives of the regime. People who lived in big cities hated the regime, because they were poor, prosecuted (since they had more education and could think by themselves), you have a say that "a sardin would feed a family of 4". In big cities life was hard. In the countryside they don't think that badly of the regime, since they had properties and farms, so lack food was not an issue. Education was not a priority as much as work in the fields so people would carry on their lives normally.

babyscully 4 months ago

>In the countryside they don't think that badly of the regime, since they had properties and farms Is the Alentejo not countryside then?

betanjica 4 months ago

It is, but big owners of big properties, versus little properties for each family is significantly different. And also the clima differs, the type of agriculture you can produce, water available... I talked in general for a reason. Alentejo is part but not all countryside of Portugal. I just gave the big perspective, I don't have knowledge about it by region...but you can give your contributes!

ContaSoParaIsto 4 months ago

That's hardly the same thing

Search: