>>35
Bolivarianism has heavy nationalist and socialist leanings. I suppose national socialism would be more accurately defined as imperial socialism while Bolivarianism is pro-nationalism and anti-imperialism. Not exactly fascism, but throw a demagogue with a personality cult and an inflammatory foreign policy into the mix and you're getting there.
Political theories are often nothing like the results that occur when certain groups attempt to put them into practice, it's better to judge them by their effects. Fascism was more succesful in industrialised nations without a long history of liberal democracy, communism was more succesful in less developed nations which were generally wartorn and politically unstable, in each of these cases the political theories served more use as propoganda than actual policy since real fascists rarely paid people according to their contribution and real marxists rarely gave people the supplies they needed.
A 19 year old male agricultural laborer will have more trust in the communist party of China's rhetoric of creating a utopia than the Kuomintang's authoritarian elitist attitude which is no different from that of any other warlord or the Japanese for that matter, the communists were just as authoritarian as the Kuomintang but they inspired far greater morale and competence in their personnel.
A 23 year old engineer who earns enough to keep himself out of poverty and is literate and informed enough not to take utopian ideals at face value is more likely to support the General trying to restore order than a bunch of communists and anarchists, even though he lives in the city and has more exposure to the inequality aswell as marxist propoganda he can also see people improving their standard of living and achieving a comfortable middle class lifestyle, maybe he could marry Isabella and achieve the same. His skills allow him to contribute more to the war effort than a conscripted agricultural laborer.