Talk:Austrofascism

Fascism in Austria

Fascism in Austria would make a more normal heading. The point of the neologism Austrofascism is to isolate the phenomenon of Austrian fascism to the period 1934 - 1938. --Wetman 07:00, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• No. Austrofascism is not a neologism. It is the normal term normally used for the regime in Austria 1934-1938 as it is taught in schools. See e.g. [1] (AEIOU Encyclopedia of Austria, maintained by the Austrian ministry of education and compiled by historians). Fascism in Austria would be unprecise and too broad, as it would also have to include Nazi activity in Austria which is an entirely different animal. Martg76 10:30, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Today a more detailed article on Austrofacism has been published in the german Wikipedia. It would be great if someone want's to translate it. Right now there is much outdated information in the english article. --84.138.76.74 20:24, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Typography

Should the German eszett letter be used in English rendering of the name? Perhaps "Dollfuss (German spelling Dollfuß)"?

Mistake?

As there are reference to Franco, there should also be a reference to Portugal's Salazar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.139.74.131 (talk) 22:54, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Unless I'm reading something incorrectly, the following should probably be corrected/better explained: "However, two days before the referendum, the National Socialists -- without the use of violence -- evicted the National Socialists from the government." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lonevvolf (talk • contribs) 09:24, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

doesnt

it looks like a neologism to me. Maybe it could be moved to Fascism in Austria or Dictatorships in Austria. Vertenoir (talk) 21:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

no it's the term usually used by historians —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.164.211.92 (talk) 13:39, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Translation inconsistency

The phrase "überhitlern" occurs in the article twice, in the Ideology and Ideals section it is translated as "over Hitler" and in the section Criticism of the Term it is translated as "out-Hitler". I can't say I really know German and I know über probably can have more than one meaning, but in this particular instance I don't think that's the case. It should probably say "out-Hitler" in both cases.--Loje (talk) 23:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

What is this?

Is this article about the political system Austrofascism of is it about the political organization of Federal State of Austria? It's a mess and whoever messed it up should fix it. Move the name back to Federal State of Austria and keep the Infobox or kill the Infobox but put a section for Federal State of Austria. If German Wikipedia jumps off a bridge do we have to jump off it too? --Hutcher (talk) 19:58, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

the forcible incorporation

The "Anschluss" wasn't forcible, but done after referendum. Please straighten out the facts --41.151.86.7 (talk) 11:27, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

No, actually the "referendum" took place on 10 April 1938, one month after the "Anschluss", which took place on 12 March 1938. (And it was BTW not a fair referendum.) --81.3.214.193 (talk) 23:12, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

And there were some little areas that were not yet occupied by German Armed Forces. In these areas, I have been told, the referendum quit regularly some 99% against the Anschluss. Call that coincidence who wants to.--93.134.242.251 (talk) 12:12, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

The term "Austrofascism"

As the article itself notes that the term "Austrofascism" is now deprecated and avoided by historians, this raises the obvious question of why it continues to be used on this site. Since the very term which this article is named after is disputed (and also in light of how much of it is completely unsourced), I propose it be merged into the Federal State of Austria article. St Judas the Lazarene (talk) 08:43, 23 February 2020 (UTC)