The definition and limits of power can be seen in the 1947 Succession Law that outlined the role of Spain’s political unit in which Franco nationalized Catholicism and the eventual revival of the monarchy. Franco appointed, Juan Carlos, as the next heir to the succession of the monarchy. In 1947, Franco stated that he had no intention to modify the existing authoritarian structure other than “combining traditional legitimacy with specific new features” (322). Franco intended to be head of state for life. It stated that the Franco accepted the “principles of monarchical legitimacy but redefined it to fit himself” in which he would “Franco would govern until his death” (372). The next King must be a “male, thirty years old, Catholic” and must …show more content…
It is highly debated by historians whether it was an authoritarian or totalitarian regime. The Franco regime is defined by Franco himself, as an “authoritarian monarchy state” (413). The Franco regime went through many phases and was vastly different from the beginning to the end. Anne Applebaum describes a totalitarian regime as “no private business, no private thought and everything within the state.” Franco’s regime had an absent ideology of controlling all aspects of life. According to Payne, the Franco regime was “plainly an authoritarian, but not totalitarian because it did not control all social, cultural and religious institutions like the Nazis or Stalin did” (626). Franco ruled and “exercised power within formal defined limits” (Linz 159), rather than a full out totalitarian regime. As described Juan J. Linz “the most persuasive taxonomist of regimes” (626), he classifies the regime as a “rightist bureaucratic authoritarian regime” (Linz 125). The whole regime was held together by political support of the military. The Franco regime did not control every aspect of people’s lives. During the first years of the regime concentrated all power, the regime grew older the regime unity decreased. The regime was non-democratic, members of society did not “have an equal right to have a say and make their opinions count” (Beetham). The regime developed some representation through reform, but not democratic institutions of its own. The parliamentary system was state appointed. All political decisions were not “collective decisions” (Beetham). The decisions came directly came from Franco “a strong authoritarian government without political parties” (623). All forms of political opposition were