The Spanish Republic and the civil war 1931-1939 Essay Example for Free

The Spanish Republic and the accomplished warfare 1931-1939 EssayTragic altogethery in 1939, later on three years of bitter civil war and with the loss of around 750,000 Spanish lives, Spain fell to the rule of a Fascist dictatorship that was to last for just ab extinct four decades. The Spanish tragedy has been told and analysed by countless historians, and of these works Gabriel capital of Mississippis The Spanish Republic and the Civil contend 1931-1939 is widely referred to as the definitive liberal story of the Spanish Republic. Jackson begins with an outline of the nineteenth century monarchical and semipolitical upheavals that preceded the birth of the Spanish republic in 1931. From there, we are given a expatiate account of events leading to Francos final victory in 1939 and finally a synopsis which attempts to address some of the unfavorable judgments that provoke been levelled at Jacksons image. One such criticism is that Jackson leaves a crucial part of the s tory untold, namely that of the struggle of workers and peasants against not just the nationalist forces, but too against the conditions of capitalism and semi-feudalism.One of Jacksons some ardent critics has been Noam Chomsky, who through his Objectivity and Liberal Scholarship has provided an excellent theoretical framework to enable a critical reading of Jackson, primarily in his depiction of events from 1936-1937. In this work Chomsky points to the subordination of liberal intelligencia, universities in particular, to the military- industrial complex, in this case the American State and big business. In separate words, writers of ostensibly impersonal historical works become compromised by their social, economic and political ties to the prevailing ideology, leading them to interpret events with the notion in read/write head of the inevitability and desirability of burgher democracy. Alongside this, according to Zbigniew Brzezinski,the largely humanist-oriented, occasiona lly ideologically-minded intellectual-dissenter, who sees his employment largely in terms of pr dispatchering social critiques, is rapidly be dis dwelling housed either by experts and specialists, who become come to in special governmental undertakings, or by the generalists-integrators, who become in take house-ideologies for those in power, providing overall intellectual integration for disparate actions.1The search for object truth then is subordinated in these instances to the subjectivity of the author/investigator and in the final instance we are given a partial and distorted captivate of historical events, as is the case with Jacksons work. The motivations and actions of those directly involved are written out of the story, and instead the logic of liberal scholarship gives precedence to the political leading of the natural parties of government. As Chomsky points out, Jackson makes it abundantly clear that he is, in favour of liberal democracy, as represented by figur es such as Azana, Casares Quiroga, Martinez Barrio, and other responsible national leaders. and, makes little attempt to disguise his antipathy towards the forces of popular conversion in Spain, or their goals. 2Therefore, mass action is generally regarded as of secondary importance to the manoeuvrings of the Popular Front government, even when in practice it was often powerless. Further, when these masses little terroren the natural order of capitalist doing, by acts of collectivisation, expropriation, body politic seizure and abolition of money, they are described as, nave, counterproductive, ill educated, fundamentally conservative and misled. Only when these masses follow the lead and policies of the natural elite does Jackson recognise and applaud mass contribution, and Jackson fails to recognise the crucial temperament of the revolutionary/counterrevolutionary period from the summer of 1936 to 1937 in which,the revolution was largely oral with mass participation of anar chist and socialist industrial and agricultural workers the counterrevolution was under communist direction3To partly summarise Chomskys criticisms, two examples of Jacksons subjective analysis of this period are, the role of the Communist Party in Spain and collectivisation in Catalonia.Under a capital of the Russian Federation directive, the PCE was founded in Spain with only 800 members in 1930. This number grew to around 20,000 in 1934 musical composition the PCE had dropped its social fascist stance regarding other left groupings, to embrace all parties of the left under the Popular Front umbrella.Stalin had concluded that international fascismposed a affright after allHis answer was the adoption during 1934/35 of a Popular Front policy for resisting fascism.4 This membership grew to over 250,000 during the first eight months of the war, 40% of this number being made up the petit bourgeoisie. The PCE, again under orders from Moscow, embraced bourgeois democracy, their only ta sk to defend the Republic, and revolutionary action by the masses was not on Stalins agenda.In responding to a plea from help from Spains Popular Front government, Stalin was perusing what he perceived to be in the foreign policy interest of the Soviet UnionWhat Soviet aidbegan to reach Spain in October 1936, was emphatically not intended to advance the cause of social revolution in Republican Spain.5Jackson however claims,The interrupted motion toward world revolution, as well as the security of the Soviet Union, might well be advanced by a Republican victory in Spain.6Chomsky rightly regards Jacksons view of The Soviet Union as a nation hungry to embrace world revolution as entirely mistaken, and indeed the Soviet Union of the 1930s had come a long way from the days of the storming of the Winter Palace in the November Revolution of 1917.Russia is a totalitarian regimethe frame of mind its leaders is cynical and opportunist. To expect such men to lead a social revolution in Spain, where the wildest idealism is combined with great independence of character, was out of the question.7Political purges and show trials in the Soviet Union in 1934-36 had seen potential political opposition to Stalin brutally removed, m either being accused, as was Leon Trotsky, of having been in confederacy with Hitler. Russia was then a country with a revolutionary past, not a revolutionary present.8Stalins main aim in 1936 was to ward off any threat from Hitlers Germany, by allying himself with Britain and France. Accordingly, a proletarian revolution in Spain could not be allowed to succeed, bringing as it would a threat of instability to ruling classes the world over, and a shift in the balance of European power. Communist policy as regards Spain then was one of subordinating their PCE national policies to the USSRs supposed international interests.9 In effect this meant the defence of all legitimate middle-class authority at the expense the grass root militancy that could hav e helped avert the tragic outcome to Spains civil war. As one communist student of the time, critical of such policy noted,But a more revolutionary course will only cow the democracies, people said. What nonsense The capitalist democracies were frightened enough already by what was happening in Spain. Stalin wont agree, said others. But was that the case? Would Stalin not have had to do what he did anyway and a lot more, perhaps if we had pursued a more revolutionary course? Could he afford to be seen betraying a proletarian revolution?10The next bone of contention, is the account Jackson gives of collectivisation. In the initial process of collectivisation, Jackson berates unions in Valencia and Barcelona for abusing their sudden authority to place the sign incautado on all manner of buildings and vehicles.11 However, as Chomsky notes, this wording belies Jacksons ignorance towards the reality of the revolutionary situation. While Jackson recognises the occurrence of ..the most profound social revolution since the fifteenth century..12, it seems that he is not inclined to recognise the actions that are an integral part of such a profound social revolution.Later, Jackson claims that in 1936, the revolutionary tide began to ebb in Cataloniaaccumulating food and supply problems, and the experience of administering villages, frontier posts, and public utilities, had rapidly shown the anarchists the unexpected complexity of modern society.13 Chomsky on the other cave in points to the attack led by the Communist Party to destroy the gains made by workers and peasants without the blessing of any legitimate government force. First win the war then make the revolution, was the slogan that epitomised the drive to subordinate the revolutionary aspirations of the masses to the will of the legitimate powers.Collectivisation brought order to the chaotic situation All the parties and organisations solemnly agreed to respect the letter and the spirit of the new law but within three months the Republican parties were systematically obstructing it and soon afterwards the communists were sabotaging it..14 andInternational capitalism was determined to do everything in its power to force the failure of the collectivised Catalan economy.15Chomsky too challenges Jacksons attitude towards and analysis of war production and distribution in collectivised areas. For example,In Catalonia, the CNT factory committees dragged their heels on war production, claiming that the government deprived them of raw materials and was favouring the bourgeoisie,16Firstly this is in stark contrast to Jacksons charitable attitude towards production methods in fascist controlled areas, and his fairly uncritical depiction of later communist methods which involved substantially restoring a free market in essential without any apparent benefits to the war effort. Secondly, as Chomsky notes, Jackson does not substantiate his statement with fact. These two criticisms perhaps point t o another instance where Jackson noticeably favours traditional capitalist production against that of the collective. In any case, evidence points to the fact that darn conditions were favourable, with recover to raw materials for example, collective production rivalled that elsewhere in Spain.The war labor in Catalonia had produced ten times more than the rest of Spanish industry put together and .this output could have been quadrupled as from beginning of September if Catalonia had had access to the necessary raw materials that were unobtainable in Spanish territory.17 Further, it is evident that the central government denied much needed financial assistance because of its lack of sympathy with, or else hostility towards collectivisation. Only in exchange for government control would they give financial assistance.18Whatever accusations may be levelled at the running of the collectives, at to the lowest degree two points must be remembered. Firstly, in many instances, collecti visation came as the result of a huge surge from below,The revolution was like a pass over shaking itself when it comes out of the water the Spanish people shaking itself free of 400 years injustice. There was nothing we militants could do but go forrad or shoot ourselves.19Secondly, against overwhelming odds, the Catalan working class kept collectivised production going for thirty months of war.20In conclusion, this paper has only managed to concisely capture Chomskys detailed criticism of Jackson, and to follow on from Chomsky is no easy task given his coherent, thoroughly researched critique. Chomsky highlights Jacksons apparent lack of understanding of the true nature of revolutionary struggle, which leads him to mistakenly identify the 1930s Soviet Union as a revolutionary force and to disparage the actions of mass movements lacking conventional political leadership.The first mistaken belief is, as Chomsky points out, entirely in keeping with the American Cold War mythology that has invented an international Communist conspiracy directed from Moscow to justify its own interventionist policies.21 The two beliefs together lead him to significantly underplay the destructive role played by Communist policy in Spain, which, while not wholly to blame for the Fascist victory, significantly dented the workers will to fight. Many theorists have argued that only a successful revolution could have in the long run beaten the fascists, and that an early arming of workers could have averted three years of carnage. However, We werent being armed because the Republican authorities were more frightened of the working class than off the military. (Francisco Cabrera, Communist Youth, Seville)Communist insistence on an exclusively Popular Front, petty bourgeois programme was disastrous, which ultimately undermined the fight against Fascism. The loss of the Civil War in Spain to the fascists was more than just a military defeat, as in the words of Ronald Fraser,For the objective was not only to castigate the defeated but to crush for all time working class militancy and the threat of socialist revolution, so that Spanish capitalism could prosper.Quotes1 Chomsky, N, Objectivity and Liberal Scholarship, p302 Chomsky, p753 Chomsky, p814 Blinkhorn, Democracy and Civil War in Spain, p365 Blinkhorn, p366 Jackson, The Spanish Republic and the Civil War 1931-1939, p2597 Chomsky, p848 Chomsky, p859 Fraser, Blood of Spain, p32810 Fraser, p32911 Jackson, p27912 Jackson, p27713 Jackson, p31414 Fraser, p21515 Fraser, p21616 Jackson, p36517 Chomsky, p8918 Chomsky, p9019 Fraser, p22920 Fraser, p23421 Chomsky, p86BibliographyJackson, G, 1965, The Spanish Republic and the Civil War 1931-1939, Princeton University PressFraser, R, 1979, Blood of Spain, PenguinBlinkhorn, M, Democracy and Civil War in SpainChomsky, N, Objectivity and Liberal Scholarship