💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › politics › SPUNK › sp000335.txt captured on 2022-03-01 at 16:18:19.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Spain and its Relevance Today - Part 1
by Iain MacSaorsa
"If instead of condemning that experience [of collaboration],
the [anarchist] movement continues to look for excuses for it,
the same course will be repeated in the future...exceptional
circumstances will again put...anarchism on [its] knees before
the state"
(Juan Gomaz Casas, Anarchist Organisation: The History of the
FAI, page 251).
Introduction
Spain, in the 1930's, had the largest anarchist movement in
the world. At the start of the Spanish "Civil" war, over one
and one half million workers and peasants were members of the
C.N.T.(the National Confederation of Labour), an
anarchosyndicalist union federation, and 30,000 were members
of the F.A.I. (the Anarchist Federation of Iberia). The total
population of Spain at this time was 24 million. The anarchist
movement was larger, more dynamic and more influential than
the corresponding Marxist organisations (the U.G.T. union
federation, the Socialist Party, etc). Since 1868, the history
of the Spanish Labour and revolutionary movement was dominated
by anarchism, a situation unique to Spain in many respects.
Therefore, considering this, the need to understand and know
the events of Spain is essential. Firstly, to learn from the
activities of our comrades, to learn from their mistakes and,
secondly, to find and apply what is still relevant from their
history to OUR activities and political programme/agenda.
Thirdly, to discuss some basis ideas of anarchism, with
reference to actual events, which should be clear in people's
heads.
Hopefully comrades will find this article useful. Needless to
say far more could be written on the subject of Spain. This is
one view point and should be seen as an aid for the
discussion, for further reading and debate and as an
indication of what anarchism and anarchists are capable of
doing.
The Start of the Civil War/Revolution
When the Generals revolted against the republic on July the
19th 1936, the government was paralysed. The only resistance
to the fascists came from the working class, first and
foremost from those sections organised in the C.N.T. and
F.A.I.. While the government tried to negotiate with the
fascists, offering them spaces in the cabinet at one point,
the C.N.T. (and to a lesser degree the radical sections of the
U.G.T.) constantly urged people to organise for a general
strike, arm themselves and directly resist the coup.
When the army did start its uprising, it was met on the
streets with the heroism and initiative of the members of the
C.N.T. ("Cenetistas") who went on the offensive. It was the
C.N.T./F.A.I. which lead the resistance to the Generals. The
members of the U.G.T. followed behind, while the politicians
did nothing (as usual). It should be noted that U.G.T. unions
in areas where the C.N.T. was strong were totally reformist.
In areas where the C.N.T. was organised, but smaller, the
U.G.T. was forced to be more radical under the influence of
C.N.T. activities and the fear that their members would join
the more militant (and effective and modern) organisation.
After the resistance of the 19th of July, the Generals' coup
had been defeated in TWO THIRDS of Spain.
It is clear that as the cenetistas fought and died on the
barricades they would not be risking their lives for some poxy
republic. They unleased the most profound social revolution in
the history of the world (so far at least...).
The Revolution
In the heady days after the 19th of July (people burning money
was a common sight in the streets of Barcelona, for example)
the initiative and power truly rested in the hands of the rank
and file members of the C.N.T. and F.A.I. No positive
directives came from the C.N.T. committees (who were to busy
doing other things as we shall see later). It was ordinary
people, under the influence of Faistas (members of the F.A.I.)
and C.N.T. militants no doubt, who, after defeating the
uprising, got production, distribution and consumption started
again (under more equalitarian arrangements of course) as well
as organising, and volunteering (in their thousands) to join,
the militias which were to be sent to free those parts of
Spain under Franco. In every possible way, the working class
of Spain were creating by their own actions a new world based
on their own ideas of social justice and freedom (ideas
inspired, of course, by anarchism and anarchosyndicalism).
The full extent of this revolution cannot be covered here. All
that can be done is highlight a few points of special interest
and hope that these will give some indication of the breath of
these events and encourage people to read a few of the books
listed in Appendix 1.
All industry in Catalonia was placed either under workers
self-management OR workers control (that is, either totally
taking over ALL aspects of management, in the first case, or,
in the second, controlling the old management). There was, of
course, a direct relationship between the size and influence
of the C.N.T. and the number and internal nature of the
collectives formed. Workers in the U.G.T. were generally
inspired to action by the practical example of the C.N.T.
In some cases whole town and regional economies were
transformed into federations of collectives. The example of
Alcoy (population 45 000) can be given as a typical example:
"Everything was controlled by the syndicates. But it most not
therefore be assumed that everything was decided by a few
higher bureaucratic committees without consulting the rank and
file members of the union. Here libertarian democracy was
practised. As in the C.N.T. there was a reciprocal double
structure; from the grass roots at the base....upwards, and in
the other direction a reciprocal influence from the federation
of these same local units at all levels downwards. from the
source back to the source." (Gaston Leval, quoted in "The
Anarchist Collectives", Ed Sam Dolgoff, page 105)
It should be noted this was obviously before the
counterrevolution got under way and that the organs of the
collectives were NOT identical to the corresponding organs of
the C.N.T., although they did operate like the C.N.T. did
before the Civil War.
In practice, until sabotaged by the state, the collectives
proved that ALL aspects of industry and agriculture can be
operated better by the workers themselves (using anarchist
organisation) than under capitalism.
Collectivisation was not full socialism (although it was
definitely socialistic). For example, most collectives kept
the use of money (in some form or another) as well as
distributing goods according to DEED not NEED (ie, saying that
so much labour is "worth" so much and so retaining value
relationships from capitalism). Obviously, food was
distributed free in some cases (to the old, sick, etc and
militia at the front) but the main rationing schemes were
still based on certain (not all) capitalist principles.
As Gaston Leval states, "it was not... true socialisation, but
a form of workers neo-capitalism, a self-management straddling
capitalism and socialism, which we maintain would not have
occurred had the Revolution been able to extend itself fully
under the direction of our syndicates" (Gaston Leval,
"Collectives in the Spanish Revolution", p227/8).
This should be remembered, as should the last point. In no way
can this truly detract from the positive achievements of
working class self-management and the anarchist reorganisation
of the economy. In general, the collectives created most of
the structural framework of an anarchocommunist economy,
while, due to the concrete realities of Spain (its isolation
economically and politically, the lack of other widespread
revolutionary movements in other countries and its agrarian
economic base) it could not apply some of the social aspects
(abolition of wage labour, money, etc).
The militias set to fight the war were organised in true
anarchist fashion and often defeated better armed, better
trained and more numerous detachments of the fascist army.
There was no rank, no saluting and no officer class. Everybody
was equal. The militias did use ex-officers, but only as
advisors. The direction of the war rested in the militia
committees, under the control of the front line fighters who
could countermand and replace delegates. The militias
contained both men and women. Ironically enough, Trotskyites
always say how much they approve of the militias and how
"democratic" they were, without ever mentioning how Trotsky
removed all these features from the Red Army before and during
the Russian Civil War.....
When a militia entered a town or village, they did not force
the people to join collectives or dictate the form social life
would take. All they did was to ensure the population could
organise their own lives, as the population saw fit.
On the social front, anarchist organisations created rational
schools, a libertarian health service, social centres, and so
on. The Mujeres Libres (free women) combated the traditional
role of wymmin in Spanish society, empowering thousands both
inside and outside the anarchist movement (much to the
annoyance of some male anarchists...). The story of the
Mujeres Libres would take an article in itself (See the Free
Women of Spain by Martha A. Ackelsberg for more information on
this very important organisation). This activity on the social
front only built on the work started long before the start of
the war, for example the unions often funded rational schools,
workers centres and so on.
This (very) short summary cannot do justice to the
achievements of our comrades in Spain. The booklist in
Appendix 1 contains material for those who wish to find out
more. It should come as no surprise that anarchism did create
the seeds of a new world and that this world operated
infinitely better than capitalism (or state socialism). And we
must also remember that anarchism can never be created
"overnight". Between capitalism and a classless society (full
communist anarchism), there will, of necessity, be a
"transition" period after a successful insurrection. This
period will be marked by the need to create anarchist
structures and social relationships (consolidating the
revolution) while defending this task (by force, if
necessary). Its first step will be to smash the state and
ensure a new one is not formed.
The Counterrevolution
The "May Days" of 1937 signified the effective defeat of the
Spanish Revolution. The state felt strong enough to crush the
power of the working class and remove the last remains of
their conquests from the 19th of July. The leaders of the CNT
and FAI urged compromise, and so aided the state and the
counterrevolution.
So what went wrong? What had allowed the social revolution to
be sidetracked and defeated so quickly. Sad to say, it was the
actions of the CNT-FAI and, in particular, the actions of
certain "influential militants" (or leaders).
For a revolution to be successful it needs to create
organisations which can effectively replace the state and the
market, that is to create a widespread libertarian
organisation for social and economic decision making
through which working class people can start to set their own
agendas. Only by going this can the state and capitalism be
effectively smashed . For example, if the state is not
smashed, it continue and get stronger as it will be the only
medium for wide scale decision making. This will result in
revolutionaries having to work within it, trying to influence
it since no other means exist to reach collective decisions.
This problem confronted the leaders of the CNT on the 20th of
July. They interpreted the needs of the situation as "either
we seize power or we collaborate with political parties" (and
so the state) in effect, "anarchist dictatorship" or
"democracy". While the rank and file members of the CNT (and
other sections of the working class inspired by the CNT) were
in the process of constructing a new world, clearly showing in
practice that they were in favour of anarchism, the
"influential militants" in CNT committees were stabbing them
in the back.
Instead of pursuing anarchist policies (and past CNT policy as
indicated from congresses), the committee members started to
pursue their own policies. Far from NOT seizing power
themselves (as the Trotskyites lament, their definition of
"workers power"), the CNT and FAI committee members seized
power within their own organisations. Without receiving any
mandate from the CNT syndicates they claimed to be delegates
from, the leading committees decided off their own backs not
to talk of libertarian communism but only of the fight against
fascism.
In practice the committees had been separated from the rank
and file and their members transformed from delegates into
representatives ("leaders" in every sense of the word) who
started to make policy decisions on the rank and files behalf,
without bothering to consult them.
On the 20th of July, instead of, for example, organising a
joint plenum of CNT and UGT syndicate delegates plus delegates
from previously unorganised workplaces (mandated by the rank
and file) in order to discuss the situation and possibly
create a permanent delegate federation to coordinate the
revolution and the war against the fascists, the CNT-FAI
committees sent a delegation of its members to meet the leader
of the Catalan Government "The delegation...was
intransigent....[e]ither Companys [the Catalan president] must
accept the creation of a Central Committee [of AntiFascist
Militias] as the ruling organisation or the CNT would CONSULT
THE RANK AND FILE AND EXPOSE THE REAL SITUATION TO THE
WORKERS. Companys backed down."
(p216, Durruti the people armed (my emphasis))
This shows clearly the role of the CNT committee members (see
also "Towards a Fresh Revolution" by the Friends of Durruti).
They used their new found influence in the eyes of Spain to
unite with the leaders of other organisations/parties but not
the rank and file. This process lead to the creation of the
"Central Committee of AntiFascist Militias", in which
political parties as well as labour unions were represented.
This committee was not made up of mandated delegates, but of
representatives of existing organisations, nominated by
committees. Instead of a genuine federal body (made up of
mandated delegates from workplace, militia and neighbourhood
assemblies) the C.N.T. created a body which was not
accountable to, nor could reflect the ideas of, ordinary
working class people expressed in their assemblies. The state
and government was not abolished by self-management, only
ignored.
This first betrayal of anarchist principles led to all the
rest, and so the defeat of the revolution and so the civil
war. In the name of "antifascist" unity, the CNT worked with
parties and classes which hated both them and the revolution.
In the words of Sam Dolgoff "both before and after July 19th,
an unwavering determination to crush the revolutionary
movement was the leitmotif behind the policies of the
Republican government; irrespective of the party in power"
(The Anarchist Collectives, p40)
It is clear that anti-fascism destroyed the revolution, not
fascism. "Fascism is not something new, some new force of evil
opposed to society, but is only the old enemy, Capitalism,
under a new and fearful sounding name...AntiFascism is the new
slogan by which the working class is being betrayed"
(Ethal McDonald, Workers Free Press, Oct 1937)
To justify their collaboration, the leaders of the CNT-FAI
claimed not to collaborate would have lead to a civil war
within the civil war. In practice, while paying lip service to
the revolution, the communists and republicans attacked the
collectives, murdered anarchists, cut supplies to
collectivised industries (even WAR industries) and disbanded
the anarchist militias after refusing to give them weapons and
ammunition (preferring to arm the Civil Guard in the rearguard
in order to crush the CNT and so the revolution). By
collaborating, a civil war was not avoided. One occurred
anyway, with the working class as its victims, as soon as the
state felt strong enough. Garcia Oliver (soon to be the first
ever "anarchist" minister of justice) stated that
collaboration was necessary and that the CNT had "renounc[ed]
revolutionary totalitarianism, which would lead to the
strangulation of the revolution by anarchist and Confederal
[CNT] dictatorship. We had confidence in the word and in the
person of a Catalan democrat" Companys (who had in the past
jailed anarchists). Which means that only by working with the
state, politicians and capitalists can an anarchist revolution
be truly libertarian!
The continued existence of the state ensured that economic
federalism (ie extending the revolution under the direction of
the syndicates) could not develop naturally nor be developed
far enough in all places. Due to the political compromises of
the C.N.T. the tendencies to coordination and mutual aid could
not develop. For example, in Barcelona during the first two
months of the revolution there were few real attempts at
economic federation between industries. While understandable
in the circumstances, ie the need to get production going
again placed federalism down the list of things to do, it did
lead to some collectives becoming "collective capitalists" as
the market could not be replaced by an integrated social
organism. In addition, due to the existence of rich and poor
capitalist firms before the revolution, there were rich and
poor collectives as well. Since there did not exist the means
to coordinate production and distribute goods according to
need, attempts at mutual aid were often ad hoc.
This lack of coordination meant that the collectivisation
could not develop towards full socialisation
(socialism/communism) plus it made equalising any differences
between collectives much harder to achieve. It also allowed
the state to intervene into the economy and, through its
control of credit, control the collectives. The October 1936
Collectivisation Degree (used by the CNT leadership to
"legalise" the revolution!) allowed the state a further way to
undermine self-management in industry. This Decree distorted
and controlled the revolutionary economy, ensuring that it
could develop no further and laid the ground work for its
degeneration back towards normal capitalism, which state
control of credit (and so the collectives) ensured.
Not destroying the state meant that the revolution could never
be fully successful economically as politics and economics are
bound together so closely. Only under the political conditions
of anarchism can its economic conditions flourish and vica
versa.
The CNT leaders, from the very start of the revolution,
claimed that only by a united ("anti-fascist") front, could
fascism be defeated. The leadership gave the rank and file no
choice (a fait accompli) and, in addition, members at the
front were not consulted (most of the "hard-core" anarchists -
ie those who were most against compromise - were there) thus
reducing opposition to the leadership's line. This fait
accompli was the most extreme example of similar actions which
had occurred periodically in the past, ie the committees
controlling the union and not the syndicate assemblies.
Usually, CNT plenums,congresses and conferences managed to
curb this tendency to a large extent. The leadership centrally
controlled the organisation, calling plenums at short notice,
defining the agenda (which was unheard of in the past) and not
distributing information to the union assemblies. The
leadership's policy, of "anti-fascism" as opposed to
antistate/anticapitalism and its actions lead to the defeat of
the revolution and so the war. As Vernon Richards makes clear:
"[was it] essential, and possible, to collaborate with
political parties that is politicians honestly and
sincerely, and at a time when power was in the hands of the
two workers organisations...
...All the initiative... was in the hands of the workers. The
politicians were like generals without armies floundering in a
desert of futility. Collaboration with them could not, by any
stretch of the imagination, strengthen resistance to Franco.
On the contrary, it was clear that collaboration with
political parties meant the recreation of governmental
institutions and the transferring of initiative from the armed
workers to a central body with executive powers" (Vernon
Richards' Lessons of the Spanish Revolution, page 42).
This is a very good book and is recommended.
This collaboration gave the state and capitalism a breathing
space and time to gather their strength. When the time was
right, they counter attacked and destroyed the revolution and
their "allies" in the antifascist front, the CNT-FAI. In the
space of two months, the Central Committee of Anti-Fascist
Militias was abolished and, having no where left to go, the
CNT committees sent 4 representatives into the government as
ministers. According to Solidaridad Obrera (the CNT paper)
this meant that "the government has stopped being an
oppressive force against the working class...with the
participation of the CNT, the state and
government no longer oppress the people".
This is a sick joke considering that soon after the state
decided to crush the collectives by force and provoked the May
Day events (during which the "anarchist" ministers, in effect,
sided with the state and in the name of antifascist "unity"
called on the working class to stop resistance).
Spain, by the actions of the ordinary members of the CNT-FAI
gave anarchism one of its most glorious moments.
Unfortunately, it also gave us one of its worse by the actions
of certain "influential militants".
In part 2, next issue, lessons from the Spanish Revolution and
Spanish anarchism.
Appendix 1 : Bibliography
Lessons of the Spanish Revolution by Vernon Richards
(Freedom Press)
Anarchists in the Spanish Revolution by Jose Peirats
(Freedom Press)
The Spanish Anarchists by Murray Bookchin
Collectives in the Spanish Revolution by Gaston Level
(Freedom Press)
Free Women of Spain by Martha A. Ackelsberg
A New World in Our Hearts edited by A. Meltzer
Durruti the People Armed by Abel Paz
(Black Rose Books)
Anarchist Organisation : the History of the F.A.I.
by Juan Gomaz Casas
(Black Rose Books)
Objectivity and Liberal Scholarship by Noam Chomsky
The Spanish Case by J. Romero Maura
(contained in Anarchism Today, pages 60-83,
edited by James Joll and David E. Apter).
The Practice of direct action : The Barcelona rent strike of
1931
by Nick Rider
(from For Anarchism edited by David Goodway
Vision of Fire: Emma Goldman (Edited David Porter)
Homage to Catalonia by George Orwell
The anarchist collectives edited by Sam Dolgoff
(Black Rose Books)
Towards a Fresh Revolution by The Friends of Durruti
(Drowned Rat)
Spain: Social Revolution, Counter Revolution
Freedom Press (selections from "Spain and the World")
The Writings of Camillo Berneri
Cienfuegos Press Anarchist Review
The Spanish Revolution by Burnett Bolloten
The Blood of Spain by Ronald Frazer