Was Catholicism a major reason why Salazar/Franco/Mussolini weren't as bad as Hitler/Stalin?

[Scarface F]

Of course I do not deny that there were also German Catholics who supported the NSDAP or felt sympathy for them but the majority of Catholics did not, in fact there was tension between the Nazi government and the German Catholic population perhaps that is why they offered membership to those from the south. to gain the trust of Catholics.

Nazism was incompatible with Catholicism (or any kind of Christianity), however higher percentage of nazis and SS members came from Catholic majority regions of Germany, Austria especially but also Bavaria. I assume northern Germany with Prussian military tradition who were in control of mainstream armed forced were not so impressed with nazism (despite nazis won elections there).

[Ruggery]

Nazism was incompatible with Catholicism (or any kind of Christianity), however higher percentage of nazis and SS members came from Catholic majority regions of Germany, Austria especially but also Bavaria.

Maybe those SS people were like Hitler, they grew up in Catholic environments and a Catholic family but they were not believers.

I assume northern Germany with Prussian military tradition who were in control of mainstream armed forced were not so impressed with nazism (despite nazis won elections there).

What do you mean by this last one?

[Scarface F]

What do you mean by this last one?

If you check list of prominent nazis there are comparably few Prussians or northerners. Traditionally in Germany Prussians were prominent in Wehrmacht, or the official army. SS was another thing with obviously much less tradition and prestige.

[Tooting Carmen]

Argentina received many Jews during the Second World War. It is impossible for us to be anti-Semitic, nor was Peron anti-Semitic.

Am I also right in that human rights abuses under Peron were comparatively minor - most persecuted dissidents would be jailed or exiled, rather than killed or disappeared like under El Proceso (and the regimes surrounding the latter)?

[Tooting Carmen]

Nazism was incompatible with Catholicism (or any kind of Christianity)

The Nazi position re Christianity seems ambiguous - sometimes the leaders would embrace it, other times actively denounce it.

[Scarface F]

The Nazi position re Christianity seems ambiguous - sometimes the leaders would embrace it, other times actively denounce it.

It's totally incompatible.

[Tooting Carmen]

It's totally incompatible.

Well of course it is, but its position regarding it was more ambivalent compared to the USSR, which was very openly and viciously anti-clerical.

[RogueState]

Similarities:
All these systems were nationalists, with a leadership cult (strong man/caudillo/führer/Duce/el Jefe) rejected the liberal-bourgeois order (today's progressive "liberal-leftist" core ideology), the "liberal democracy" and parliamentarian regime, the cosmopolitan "urban" individualism mentality, that emerged from the Enlightenment

Differences:
But the Iberian "fascisms" were "reactionary" movements came from the rural Catholic conservative background and traditional agrarian aristocracy (Falange, from Primo de Rivera), with a certain reserve towards the Masses (see Ortega y Gasset criticism) - their goal was to return to old traditional regime against corrupted/decadent modernity - it was a political and cultural war against Modernity

The German and Italian "fascisms", although having same disdain towards the corrupted/decadent modern order, were not reactionary by nature, but embraced modernity, in the sense of not wanting to return to the ancient inegalitarian aristocratic order but rather appealed to the Masses (what we call "populism" - they emerged from socialist/working-class movements); with a strong emphasis of Organic unity of the Nation (Race); with abolition of social classes and redistribution of wealth, heavy nationalizations/centralizations (totalitarian control), and high disdain for individualism (as corruptive ideology against the Collective).

Religion was not central - and even a competitor to capture the mind and soul of people - although for practical reasons, they kept good relations with religious authorities as the population weren't secularized yet and still attached to the old institution.

German and Italian fascisms were not traditionalists/social conservatives per se, it was secondary; their primary goal is the Will of Power of the Nation (Race), i.e. restoring the "grandeur" of their people

In short:
- German & Italian fascisms are fully ALTERNATIVE modern ideologies - they are a by-product of Modernity
- Iberian fascisms are rather reactionary and ANTI modern ideologies - they are in opposition against Modernity

[Scarface F]

German and Italian fascisms were not traditionalists/social conservatives per se, it was secondary; their primary goal is the Will of Power of the Nation (Race), i.e. restoring the "grandeur" of their people

Indeed. They were modernist and revolutionary ideologies.

[Tooting Carmen]

Similarities:
All these systems were nationalists, with a leadership cult (strong man/caudillo/führer/Duce/el Jefe) rejected the liberal-bourgeois order (today's progressive "liberal-leftist" core ideology), the "liberal democracy" and parliamentarian regime, the cosmopolitan "urban" individualism mentality, that emerged from the Enlightenment

Differences:
But the Iberian "fascisms" were "reactionary" movements came from the rural Catholic conservative background and traditional agrarian aristocracy (Falange, from Primo de Rivera), with a certain reserve towards the Masses (see Ortega y Gasset criticism) - their goal was to return to old traditional regime against corrupted/decadent modernity - it was a political and cultural war against Modernity

The German and Italian "fascisms", although having same disdain towards the corrupted/decadent modern order, were not reactionary by nature, but embraced modernity, in the sense of not wanting to return to the ancient inegalitarian aristocratic order but rather appealed to the Masses (what we call "populism" - they emerged from socialist/working-class movements); with a strong emphasis of Organic unity of the Nation (Race); with abolition of social classes and redistribution of wealth, heavy nationalizations/centralizations (totalitarian control), and high disdain for individualism (as corruptive ideology against the Collective).

Religion was not central - and even a competitor to capture the mind and soul of people - although for practical reasons, they kept good relations with religious authorities as the population weren't secularized yet and still attached to the old institution.

German and Italian fascisms were not traditionalists/social conservatives per se, it was secondary; their primary goal is the Will of Power of the Nation (Race), i.e. restoring the "grandeur" of their people

But the point is that the German and Italian versions of Fascism were pretty different too: notwithstanding his racism towards Africans and the concomitant brutal invasion of Abysinnia (though it should be pointed out that he was not such an outlier for his time in that regard - look at the attitudes towards Blacks of Churchill, De Gaulle and Roosevelt), Mussolini and his followers did NOT believe in the primacy and importance of race like the Nazis did, and instead glorified and emphasised the cultural legacy of Ancient Rome in particular. Furthermore, despite having coined the word 'totalitarian' himself, Mussolini did not seek to intrude into every aspect of people's lives to anywhere near the extent that Hitler's regime did.