Homage to Cataluna: How much of it is true?

[ellipsis]

So I am reading orwell's tome Homage to Cataluna right now and have two questions for revleft:

1) what are your general feelings about the book? i am thoroughly enjoying it and am learning a lot from reading it, both about the logistics of armed revolutionary organizations and about the history of the conflict.

2) how true is orwell's account? he makes a point to tell the reader that much of it is unverifiable due to lack of unbiased accounts. specifically, I am curious as to whether the USSR/ spanish communist party were really a counter revolutionary as he says.

[Charles Xavier]

So I am reading orwell's tome Homage to Cataluna right now and have two questions for revleft:

1) what are your general feelings about the book? i am thoroughly enjoying it and am learning a lot from reading it, both about the logistics of armed revolutionary organizations and about the history of the conflict.

2) how true is orwell's account? he makes a point to tell the reader that much of it is unverifiable due to lack of unbiased accounts. specifically, I am curious as to whether the USSR/ spanish communist party were really a counter revolutionary as he says.


Orwell was anti-Soviet from day one and argued for the British Labour Party (which he was a member) to expel communist members from its ranks. He considered himself a socialist but he was from the right-wing of the socialist movement. So I find it hard to heed the call of an anti-communist reformer who calls people Counter-Revolutionary. It was in fact the Soviet Union that came to the defense of the Spanish Republic when it didn't need to and by doing so it was provoking itself into war with the Imperialist countries. The Spanish Communist Party's line was defend the republic, anarchists were out killing priest which did more harm than good, and trotskyists refused to work with other communists. Later in life he became a police informant.

John Reed is a much better author, however he never lived to see the Spanish Civil War, if you want to get a better idea of Armed Revolution I would recommend reading Insurgent Mexico, or 10 Days that shook the World.

[x359594]

how true is orwell's account? he makes a point to tell the reader that much of it is unverifiable due to lack of unbiased accounts.

Orwell was talking about the capitalist and Stalinist press of tghe day. Since then there's been tremendous research that's been done on the topic.

Here are some other contemporary accounts:

Red Spanish Notebook by Mary Low and Juan Brea (POUM sympathizers from Australia and Cuba respectively. Vividly written.)

Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Spain by Felix Morrow (from the perspective of an American Trotskyist.)

The Spanish Cockpit by Franz Borkenau (a European Marxist observer.)

Recent studies:

The Revolution and Civil War in Spain by Pierre Broue and Emile Temime (1970. A readable and concise overall account from a Marxist point of view.)

The Spanish Revolution by Burnett Bolloten (1979. Covers events up to the aftermath of the May Days in 670 pages, supported by eye-witness interviews and primary source material.)

Blood of Spain: An Oral History of the Spanish Civil War by Ronald Fraser (1996. A collection of interviews with combatents of every political persuasion.)

Free Women of Spain by Martha Ackelsberg (1991/2003. A study of women militants drawn from interviews with survivors and primary documents.)

Not to mention the vast Spanish language literature that's appeared in recent years.

In my view, Orwell was telling the truth as he saw it. Of course, he was anti-Stalinist from the get go, and that no doubt colored his judgement.

Best to compare all the accounts and come to your own conclusions. Good luck!

[ellipsis]

if you want to get a better idea of Armed Revolution I would recommend reading Insurgent Mexico, or 10 Days that shook the World.

Those books look interesting, I'll add them to my every growing list of books to read.

[Random Precision]

Orwell was anti-Soviet from day one

False.


and argued for the British Labour Party (which he was a member)

False.


to expel communist members from its ranks.

Why would they want to be in Labour in the first place?


He considered himself a socialist but he was from the right-wing of the socialist movement.

False.


It was in fact the Soviet Union that came to the defense of the Spanish Republic when it didn't need to and by doing so it was provoking itself into war with the Imperialist countries.

The Republic was an imperialist state, and not worth defending in and of itself. By defending it in that way the Soviet Union only proved its committal to preserving capitalism internationally and defending against genuine attempts to establish socialism.


The Spanish Communist Party's line was defend the republic, anarchists were out killing priest which did more harm than good,

Their activity can hardly be boiled down to simply "killing priests". In any case most of the priests in Catalonia supported the fascist coup, in several cases violently.


and trotskyists refused to work with other communists.

There were about 200 official Trotskyists (Bolshevik-Leninists) in all of Spain.

The POUM (which was not Trotskyist, but rather a fusion of Left and Right Opposition groups) actually collaborated with both the anarchists and Stalinists of the PCE and PSUC, until the Stalinist/government provocation during the May Days, which they were then blamed for by the latter forces and then widely persecuted.

Their leader, Andreu Nin, was in fact illegally arrested by the GPU's agents in Spain, tortured to obtain a confession of counter-revolutionary activity, then shot when he would not give one.


Later in life he became a police informant.

Quite unsurprisingly, this is also false.

[Pogue]

False.



False.



Why would they want to be in Labour in the first place?



False.



The Republic was an imperialist state, and not worth defending in and of itself. By defending it in that way the Soviet Union only proved its committal to preserving capitalism internationally and defending against genuine attempts to establish socialism.



Their activity can hardly be boiled down to simply "killing priests". In any case most of the priests in Catalonia supported the fascist coup, in several cases violently.



There were about 200 official Trotskyists (Bolshevik-Leninists) in all of Spain.

The POUM (which was not Trotskyist, but rather a fusion of Left and Right Opposition groups) actually collaborated with both the anarchists and Stalinists of the PCE and PSUC, until the Stalinist/government provocation during the May Days, which they were then blamed for by the latter forces and then widely persecuted.

Their leader, Andreu Nin, was in fact illegally arrested by the GPU's agents in Spain, tortured to obtain a confession of counter-revolutionary activity, then shot when he would not give one.

I'd like to add: He didn't become an informer for the police. There is absolutely know evidence for this claim.

I'd like you to clarify why you think the Spanish Republic wasn't worth defending in and of itself? I assume you mean the reasons for defending it was to resist fascism's spread, protect workers etc, as opposed to emrely defending a left leaning liberal democracy?

[Random Precision]

Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Spain by Felix Morrow (from the perspective of an American Trotskyist.)

This is pretty good, but it's written as a polemic rather than a serious history of the conflict. As such it makes a series of errors concerning the revolution that any long-distance observer would no doubt be prone to.


The Spanish Cockpit by Franz Borkenau (a European Marxist observer.)

He was actually an ex-Marxist liberal, but nevertheless his account is quite honest and he makes many intelligent observations, for example on the entanglement of liberals with the Communist Party, which became the party of the petty bourgeoisie as the war progressed.


The Revolution and Civil War in Spain by Pierre Broue and Emile Temime (1970. A readable and concise overall account from a Marxist point of view.)

This is probably the one I'd start with, the best overall history that focuses on the war's revolutionary aspects. These are uniformly ignored in the books by Hugh Thomas and Antony Beevor.


The Spanish Revolution by Burnett Bolloten (1979. Covers events up to the aftermath of the May Days in 670 pages, supported by eye-witness interviews and primary source material.)

Unfortunately this is quite expensive and hard to find even at most university libraries. He also wrote a three-volume history called The Spanish Civil War: Revolution and Counterrevolution which takes in a broader scope, and is a bit easier to find. Nevertheless it's quite a tome, so I wouldn't recommend trying to read the whole thing.


Blood of Spain: An Oral History of the Spanish Civil War by Ronald Fraser (1996. A collection of interviews with combatents of every political persuasion.)

This one is also excellent, I found the accounts of the economic changes in revolutionary Catalonia quite useful in my own research.

[Pogue]

The CNT were also the first force to mobilise militarily against the fascists.

[Random Precision]

I'd like you to clarify why you think the Spanish Republic wasn't worth defending in and of itself?

The government of the Republic, which was made up by liberals and reformists (both Socialists and Communists) contributed to its own defeat by fascism in many different ways. From the moment of the coup, they were determined to negotiate with the officers involved rather than fight; we see this in their refusal to allow workers of the CNT and POUM access to arms to fight the fascists. Their repeated delays and attempts to negotiate resulted in the loss of many areas of Spain which could have been preserved with firmer leadership. They also refused to promise Morocco independence; as a result they demoralized Moroccan fighters who could have prevented Franco's army from ever reaching Spain in the first place. Moroccans even ended up joining Franco's army in large numbers, because he made better promises to them than the Republic's leaders did.

And of course all this isn't to mention the numerous ways in which the Republic's leaders helped to crush the popular revolution led by CNT and POUM militants.


I assume you mean the reasons for defending it was to resist fascism's spread, protect workers etc, as opposed to emrely defending a left leaning liberal democracy?

Well, having a liberal democratic government is certainly better than having a fascist one. But in Spain it wasn't a choice between fascism and liberal democracy, but one between fascism and social revolution. Throughout the conflict it was only the workers who engaged in effective resistance to fascism, and it was to a large extent the Republic's numerous betrayals and cowardice that lost the fight. I imagine that a successful revolution in Catalonia, one that would not have been defused by the cowardly and increasingly reformist CNT leadership, would have ended up spreading throughout Republican territory and sweeping away the decrepit institutions of bourgeois rule that the Republic represented.

[Cumannach]

Homage to Catalunya; anti-communist rubbish

[ZeroNowhere]

Homage to Catalunya; anti-communist rubbish
Are you planning to back this up?

[Charles Xavier]

" My most earnest hope is that the Labour Party will win a clear majority in the next General Election."


"I should like to put it on record that I have never been able to dislike Hitler."


Orwell offered writer's blacklist to Anti-Soviet propaganda unit


http://www.k-1.com/Orwell/site/opinion/memoryhole/article.html?article=2&category=recent

[Pogue]

" My most earnest hope is that the Labour Party will win a clear majority in the next General Election."


"I should like to put it on record that I have never been able to dislike Hitler."


Orwell offered writer's blacklist to Anti-Soviet propaganda unit


http://www.k-1.com/Orwell/site/opinion/memoryhole/article.html?article=2&category=recent


Such bollocks. He was a democratic socialist. He never denied that. This was back when the Labour party had some credebility. He also participated in a revolution which established communism in Spain.

Are you suggesting he was sympathetic to fascism? Why would he then risk his life going to fight in a war, voluntarily, against fascism in Spain? I quote from the man himself "This fascism, someone has to stop it."

He didn't give info to any government agency about communists. This has never been proved. I believe, although I'd need to check my sources, that he advised a friend or ediotor of a paper he wrote for about who were Stalinists and shouldnt be trusted, or something similar.

I never understood the Orwell bashing some figures of th eleft did. I don't see why they'd view him so badly. Is it because he wrote the truth about Stalin's abuses?

[Charles Xavier]

Such bollocks. He was a democratic socialist. He never denied that. This was back when the Labour party had some credebility. He also participated in a revolution which established communism in Spain.

Are you suggesting he was sympathetic to fascism? Why would he then risk his life going to fight in a war, voluntarily, against fascism in Spain? I quote from the man himself "This fascism, someone has to stop it."

He didn't give info to any government agency about communists. This has never been proved. I believe, although I'd need to check my sources, that he advised a friend or ediotor of a paper he wrote for about who were Stalinists and shouldnt be trusted, or something similar.

I never understood the Orwell bashing some figures of th eleft did. I don't see why they'd view him so badly. Is it because he wrote the truth about Stalin's abuses?


How could he have wrote the truth about Stalin's abuses when he was a fiction author.

[Led Zeppelin]

"I should like to put it on record that I have never been able to dislike Hitler."

Could you perhaps, I don't know, source that quote?

If you had bothered to read Homage you would have realized how ridiculous that is.

Anyway, to answer the thread title; all of it is true and it's a great read.

[Killfacer]

Now Orwell likes Hitler? You don't exactly do you claims much good with this kind of far fetched mud slinging.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Orwell was anti-Soviet from day one and argued for the British Labour Party (which he was a member) to expel communist members from its ranks. He considered himself a socialist but he was from the right-wing of the socialist movement. So I find it hard to heed the call of an anti-communist reformer who calls people Counter-Revolutionary. It was in fact the Soviet Union that came to the defense of the Spanish Republic when it didn't need to and by doing so it was provoking itself into war with the Imperialist countries. The Spanish Communist Party's line was defend the republic, anarchists were out killing priest which did more harm than good, and trotskyists refused to work with other communists. Later in life he became a police informant.

John Reed is a much better author, however he never lived to see the Spanish Civil War, if you want to get a better idea of Armed Revolution I would recommend reading Insurgent Mexico, or 10 Days that shook the World.

Shut the fuck up.

[Random Precision]

" My most earnest hope is that the Labour Party will win a clear majority in the next General Election."

He was a supporter of Labour, not, as you claimed, a member. And you still haven't explained why the big-C Communists you're so fond of would want to be in that same party. Or sourced your claim that Orwell tried to have them expelled.


"I should like to put it on record that I have never been able to dislike Hitler."

As usual, the context is king:


... But Hitler could not have succeeded against his many rivals if it had not been for the attractions of his own personality, which one can even feel in the clumsy writing of Mein Kampf, and which is no doubt overwhelming when one hears his speeches. I should like to put it on record that I have never been able to dislike Hitler. Ever since he came to power- till then, like nearly everyone, I had been deceived into thinking that he did not matter- I have reflected that I would certainly kill him if I could get within reach of him, but that I could feel no personal animosity. The fact is that there is something deeply appealing about him...

He goes on to describe the psychological appeal of Hitler as a tragic hero figure and of Nazism as a doctrine that calls for "struggle and self-sacrifice" above the "hedonism" offered by bourgeois liberalism. It's an attempt to explain Hitler as a phenomenon.


Orwell offered writer's blacklist to Anti-Soviet propaganda unit

http://www.k-1.com/Orwell/site/opinion/memoryhole/article.html?article=2&category=recent


He gave a personal friend of his a list of prominent authors who he felt were unsuitable for jobs in the IRD, a section of MI5 dedicated to producing anti-Soviet propaganda. The people on the list were all known by their writings as Communists or sympathizers. He didn't tell anyone important anything that wasn't already easily found out, and nothing happened to the people on his list as a result.

[ls]

What is certain people on Revleft's problem with Orwell?

I read a thread that LZ started about Animal Farm descend into a war of Orwell was anti-communist bla bla bla just yesterday.. well he never was and people never, never backed their false claims up with anything other than shit.

Having not read this book, can't comment on it, but it seems like a good read so'll do that.

[Vendetta]

"I should like to put it on record that I have never been able to dislike Hitler."

Yeah, I suppose that's why he helped fight against the fascists in Spain.

Complete sense.

[x359594]

...having a liberal democratic government is certainly better than having a fascist one. But in Spain it wasn't a choice between fascism and liberal democracy, but one between fascism and social revolution. Throughout the conflict it was only the workers who engaged in effective resistance to fascism, and it was to a large extent the Republic's numerous betrayals and cowardice that lost the fight. I imagine that a successful revolution in Catalonia, one that would not have been defused by the cowardly and increasingly reformist CNT leadership, would have ended up spreading throughout Republican territory and sweeping away the decrepit institutions of bourgeois rule that the Republic represented.

I think that's a fair and accurate analysis succinctly put. Judging by your familiarity with the literature of the Spanish revolution and civil war it seems to have been arrived at after weighing all the different facts, views and interpertations.

By the way, and in case it wasn't clear from my earlier post, Red Spanish Notebook is an eyewitness account as well-written as Orwell's book.

[Invader Zim]

He gave a personal friend of his a list of prominent authors who he felt were unsuitable for jobs in the IRD, a section of MI5 dedicated to producing anti-Soviet propaganda. The people on the list were all known by their writings as Communists or sympathizers. He didn't tell anyone important anything that wasn't already easily found out, and nothing happened to the people on his list as a result.

One correction, the IRD was a branch of the Foreign office, not MI5.


Yeah, I suppose that's why he helped fight against the fascists in Spain.

Complete sense.

And like manby other socialists who initially opposed war with Germany, changed their minds after contemplating just what the enemy was.

[Bilan]

Orwell was anti-Soviet from day one and argued for the British Labour Party (which he was a member) to expel communist members from its ranks. He considered himself a socialist but he was from the right-wing of the socialist movement. So I find it hard to heed the call of an anti-communist reformer who calls people Counter-Revolutionary. It was in fact the Soviet Union that came to the defense of the Spanish Republic when it didn't need to and by doing so it was provoking itself into war with the Imperialist countries. The Spanish Communist Party's line was defend the republic, anarchists were out killing priest which did more harm than good, and trotskyists refused to work with other communists. Later in life he became a police informant.

John Reed is a much better author, however he never lived to see the Spanish Civil War, if you want to get a better idea of Armed Revolution I would recommend reading Insurgent Mexico, or 10 Days that shook the World.

In your world, its black and white, and the Soviet union was socialist.
Reality is different.
Please don't post such utter drivel.

[ls]

By the way fellas and femmes, all chapters of this great book can be read here: http://www.george-orwell.org/Homage_to_Catalonia/0.html. :)

[ellipsis]

all interesting and useful discussion. thanks for the reading suggestions.