Is this some kind of typo ():

“Franco was anti-Catholic (anti-religion or anything outside of the socialist republic for that matter), and many of the martyrdoms continued under his reign.“

It's still an inspiring photo and article.  Thanks for sharing it!

Here is today's revolution in Spain:



The 19th-Century Church Dominated by a Supercomputer

It's being used for human genome triple-strand research.


http://www.slate.com/blogs/atlas_obscura/2014/07/02/barcelona_supercomputing_center_at_the_former_chapel_torre_girona.html

Is this some kind of typo ():

“Franco was anti-Catholic (anti-religion or anything outside of the socialist republic for that matter), and many of the martyrdoms continued under his reign.“

I don't know if it's a typo or the author of this blog was very drunk when he wrote the post, or he's very misinformed, or a Novus Ordinarian trying to be anti-integralist or what, but this is the opposite of anything I've read about Generalissimo Franco even from those who hated his regime. 

Pace Integralism1234, I don't think Franco was "perfect". He made mistakes and there were some things that I believe ought to have been done different. But to say that he was anti-Catholic and that the martyrdom of Catholics continued under his rule is plain wrong.

Unfortunately, no. In fact, most of the problems of modern Spain began under Franco.

Modern Spain emerged 3 years after Franco's death. Her elites grew up under Francoism and were part of the Movement, until they changed their jacket en masse and the population enthusiastically accepted the changes.  If Franco had left a healthy Spain that wouldn't have happened.

Also have other problems that originated under Francoism, such as the relaxation of morals, Marxist infiltration, the parcial surrender of national sovereignty to the USA (Pact of Madrid) or the Sahara disaster (Green March)

Franco did a great job in defeating the Soviet puppet in the cινιℓ ωαr. But his government had many problems and laid the foundations for the disaster that is Spain today.

I agree. He wasn’t too friendly to the Carlist cause. Perhaps if he was Spain could have been protected a lot more from the modern errors. Cardinal Segura criticised him for being too soft on the Protestants. 
https://web.archive.org/web/20081215063029/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,866644,00.html

I am mostly familiar with Franco during the cινιℓ ωαr and WW2 during which times he seemed to do well.

Are the things you list like relaxation of morals and Marxist infiltration Franco's fault, or are these fruits of Vatican II? I believe I read that after V2 the clergy (who had hitherto supported Franco's regime) began actively undermining Franco and even openly condemned his government?

Surely he still owns some fault as the buck stops with the leader, but it seems to me a nearly impossible task to operate a Catholic confessional state when the Catholic Church (or what appears to be the Church) in your state has gone insane/heretical and is undermining you.

Vatican II undoubtedly influenced it. very much. But the problems are previous.  For example: Dialogue notebooks (cuadernos para el diálogo) which were Marxist propaganda, for example, they propose as a "solution" to the bankrupt companies that they be expropriated without compensation by the state and given to the workers, since the employers have been "incompetent" to manage them. With this "logic" in Allende's Chile, the workers made the factory go bankrupt first (with strikes and sabotage) and then they kept it. were never censored, they began to be published in 1963. By the way, the founder was Minister of Education during part of the Franco regime and member of the Catholic Association of Propagandists.

Joaquín Ruiz-Giménez. Google it.

All the current progressive topics are already in "Cuadernos": "Feminism", "Anti-Racism", "Internationalism",... everything.


Democracy and Human rights



Marriage and divorce. Public order, the harshness of a law. The escalation of collective conflicts. The resurgence or death of the Galician language. 


Round table on atheism.

Ricardo de la Cierva summed up the "Cuadernos" as "Christians talking about becoming Marxists, but never again Marxists talking about becoming Christians."

In effect, the path was unidirectional: Every Christian interested in Marxism ended up becoming a Marxist, but never the other way around.

The Pact of Madrid (Google it) is from 53. An attempt was later made to ensure national sovereignty with nuclear weapons (Proyecto Islero. Google it) but that ended in failure due to the opposition of the United States. The assassination of Carrero Blanco, one of the main  project developers was coincidentally one day after a meeting with Henry Kissinger, an assassination officially attributed to a terrorist group, but in my opinion it is quite suspicious.

Higher education was in the hands of the government. What did Vat II influence her? Without a doubt, but, as we have seen with the "cuadernos", the problem started earlier. The elite educated under Franco became democrats after Franco's death. There is a book from 1976 (Franco died on November 20, 1975)  that parodies this, but I think it isn't in English:



In general, most of this author's books are good for understanding what happened in the transition and how the late Franco regime worked. The problem is that they aren't translated into English, but if you know Spanish and you are interested in this topic, I recommend reading this book and also this:



In this interesting book (1979) he narrates his astonishment at the Spain of 1978, a Spain that -he wrote- suddenly saw its streets full of thugs, delinquents, hippies, communists and people that the poor man wondered where they had come from. They had come out of the Francoist regime, obviously. They were all born, educated and raised under Franco.