Estado Novo- Portugal’s Reactionary Dictatorship under Salazar

Have you ever gotten out of a particularly engrossing lecture and thought ‘this lecturer would make a great world leader’? Neither have I, but this situation befell Portugal for much of the twentieth century. Professor Antonio Salazar ruled the Iberian nation between 1932 and 1968. 

In many ways, Salazar’s academic background and reputation were vital in allowing him to reach the upper echelons of Portuguese politics. It would also define the way he ruled, as he succeeded in creating a repressive state that was nonetheless markedly different from other prominent dictatorships of the time.  

Antonio Salazar had, as an adolescent, seemed destined for a life in the clergy but ended up studying law at the University of Coimbra, which has long been Portugal’s most hallowed academic institution. He became a Professor in Political Economy at age 28, and his academic connections would be instrumental to the composition of his governments, with university professors making up at least a fifth of his cabinet between 1932 and 1961. Despite abandoning the clerical path, Salazar would remain a devout Catholic and later sought to ensure the government he presided over enforced strict Christian values, often at the expense of individual rights and freedoms.  

In 1928, now a young professor, Salazar was drafted into the military, with the hopes that he would help to salvage the Portuguese economy at a time of great precarity. Despite originally being sceptical of taking on a government role due to his awareness of ‘the vast gulf between theory and practice’, he eventually relented. In exchange for his expertise, he demanded to be made a ‘financial dictator’, with a veto on all national expenditure and complete control over state finances. Although the generals originally baulked at these requests, the other option was an equally unpalatable loan from the League of Nations, which would have involved a similar surrendering of authority. As the military top brass saw it, if there had to be a financial dictator, it would be best if they were Portuguese rather than foreign. 

Under Salazar, the Portuguese economy stabilised, and the government even began to post budgetary surpluses. This was viewed as a minor miracle and lent performance legitimacy to his budding career. It only took four years for the Vimieiro native to secure the post of Prime Minister. From this point onwards, he proceeded to consolidate his position and promote his two preferred virtues: obedience and resignation to one’s social position. 

Salazar’s regime was rigidly authoritarian, but beyond this it often defied easy definition. Although there were many who understandably wished to tarnish him with the label of ‘fascist’, this was an accusation Salazar himself rejected and decried. He described fascism and the omnipotent state it entailed as ‘essentially Pagan and incompatible with our Christian civilisation’. Nevertheless, his statements did not stop the academic debate on this matter, with Portuguese historians generally referring to him as a fascist dictator. 

On the other side, historians including Stanley Payne and Tom Gallagher prefer to view him as a conservative authoritarian, pointing out a number of differences between Salazar and messrs Hitler, Mussolini and Franco. The Portuguese autocrat eschewed grandiose speeches and did not seek to spread his beliefs by forced indoctrination. Nevertheless, the ruthlessly effective PIDE (secret police) operated throughout the country and was not averse to using torture. However, it operated in a more circumspect fashion than counterparts in other dictatorships. 

Salazar’s regime was known as Estado Novo (the New State), but the irony was that it sought to preserve the old over the new, preferring to freeze society in place. Although this cryogenic project was bound to eventually fail, it achieved remarkable longevity. This was partially down to Salazar’s deft management of foreign policy. During the Second World War, he managed to appease both the Allied and Axis sides. After the war, he benefited from a shift in the preoccupations of western countries, as communist expansion rather than lingering fascism became the principal international bugbear. 

Salazar promoted austerity, both in a financial sense and as a way of life. This was a doctrine he followed personally, as he reportedly did not leave enough money behind to pay for his own funeral. Although this perhaps absolves him of any accusation that he may have used his office for financial gain, the steadfast rejection of anything that resembled modernity did little to promote economic growth or general development. In 1933, Salazar told his biographer that he considered it more urgent to construct very large elites, rather than teach the people how to read. 

In Tom Gallagher’s words Salazar ‘manifested the true reactionary’s horror of change’. At no point was this truer than when oil was discovered off the coast of Angola in 1967, which was at the time, still a Portuguese colony. Instead of celebrating what could have been a much-needed windfall for the Portuguese economy, he simply remarked ‘Oh what a pity’. His government’s failure to accept or understand the winds of change extended to its reticence to grant its collection of colonies independence.  

Even when it seemed inevitable that Portugal would no longer be able to sustain its empire, he went against the advice of domestic firms who wanted to see a reorientation towards Europe. The futility of this mission is demonstrated by an incident in Goa. In seeking grenades to protect themselves from invading Indian forces, the Portuguese garrison asked for a shipment of ‘sausages’. This was a codeword for grenades which had long been forgotten by the Foreign Office, who duly sent a shipment of undoubtedly delicious meaty treats to the besieged Goan garrison. 

Salazar suffered a stroke in 1968, which effectively ended his time in office. In contemporary Portugal, his legacy remains a contested one. The feeling of longing for something which cannot return is referred to in Portugal as saudade, and this is an emotion which runs deep through the nation. Turn to any fado playlist and you will quickly realise how its chief characteristic is existential angst, driven by a regret for what had once been. This may partly explain the shocking result of the national broadcaster’s vote of the greatest Portuguese to ever live in 2007, in which Salazar emerged as the victor. If repeated today a certain footballer would likely give him a close run for his money, but the result still reflects an enduring nostalgia for his regime. 

Reference list 

Bilefsky, D. (2007). Nostalgia for António de Oliveira Salazar divides the Portuguese. The New York Times. [online] 23 Jul. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/23/world/europe/23iht-salazar.4.6790015.html [Accessed 9 Dec. 2021]. 

Gallagher, T. (1979). Controlled Repression in Salazar’s Portugal. Journal of Contemporary History, 14(3), pp.385–402. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/002200947901400302. 

Lewinsohn, R. (1935). Portugal’s Teacher-Dictator. Current History, 41(4), pp.429–433. doi:https://doi.org/10.1525/curh.1935.41.4.429. 

MacDonagh, W.P. (1940). A Professor in Politics: Salazar and the Regeneration of Portugal. The Irish Monthly, 68(806), pp.417–427. 

Mónica, M.F. (1978). Educação e Sociedade no Portugal de Salazar. Lisbon: Editorial Presença. 

Sanfey, M. (2003). On Salazar and Salazarism. Studies: an Irish Quarterly Review, 92(368M). 

Wright, C. (2011). Sausages Instead of Grenades. [online] Portugal Resident. Available at: https://www.portugalresident.com/sausages-instead-of-grenades/.