International Brigades, Spain

[Brady]

Were the international brigades that fought for the republic mostly drafted in by the communists, or did some volunteers choose to join the anarchists? Also, were the brigades welcomed or opposed by the anarchist militias? I've read that the anarchists tried to stop the volunteers crossing the border from France, was this the general attitude?

[Искра]

The most of international brigades were organised by Komitern. Therefore, they were members of communist parties from whole over the world (mainly Europe) controlled by Soviet Union (Stalin).
There were also volunteers who came to Spain and joined anarchists or POUM. For example few anarchists from Croatia went to Spain and fought in Ascasso and Durruti militias.

[Kléber]

The CNT/FAI were initially hostile to the arrival of volunteers, stating (rightly) that "arms were needed, not men." Before the Comintern formed international brigades, most volunteers in Spain wound up with the POUM militias, the ones most readily accepting from the start. After the Communist Parties took over the deal, it became a regular process with recruitment straight into the international brigades of the regular army, and the anarchists reversed their position.

[Искра]

CNT-FAI were not hostile to volunteers, but to Comitern's reactionary puppets.
There were a lot of "foringers"/volunteers in CNT-FAI's militias. For example ex-Mahnovschina, ex-USI's, CNT France, IWW, comrades from Balkans etc

[Искра]

Oh, sorry. I wanted to say anarchists from France, anarcho-syndicalists. They had some organisation... I don't know its name. I hear about it in the movie Lucio, when some guys from CNT-F talked about it. I wanted to say "pre-CNT-F".

[Partizani]

The International Brigades was a largely 'communist' based organisation as it was set up, funded and armed by the Soviet Union, volunteers were directed to the International Brigades by thier local Communist Party headquarters (Tito worked in a directing office in Paris, his job was to give documents to would be volunteers to get them through France and across the Pyrenees). The fact that they were supported by Stalin upset the POUM and the Anarchist militias who were opposed to Stalins regime even though they supplied Tanks, Planes, ammunition, guns and COUNTLESS other materials needed to fight the war against Franco. I question the Spanish Republics ability to have held out untill 1939 if it were not for the Soviet aid and Foriegn volunteers who were organised by the USSR.

[Искра]

Ok.
Problem is that Stalin didn't want to give those arms to Anarchists and POUM, because he was afraid of revolution in Spain which could destroy his efforts to collaborate with France and England and to make alliance with them against 3rd Reich. We should never forget that Spain was in 1st place REVOLUTION and then CIVIL WAR.
Stalin's guns were only gave to CPS's militias and international brigades, which later, after they destroyed revolution and workers militias, transformed into army.
If the workers militias were supplied by the guns revolution will be over by 1937.
Also, we should never forget that Stalin's aid wasn't free. Where's that gold by the way?

[Devrim]

CNT-FAI were not hostile to volunteers, but to Comitern's reactionary puppets.
There were a lot of "foringers"/volunteers in CNT-FAI's militias. For example ex-Mahnovschina, ex-USI's, CNT France, IWW, comrades from Balkans etc

I am not one 100% sure that I am right here, but as I remember it, the anarchist line was that workers should stay and oppose their own states where they were, but they encouraged refugees from the fascist states to come.

Devrim

[Devrim]

. We should never forget that Spain was in 1st place REVOLUTION and then CIVIL WAR.

I think that we should never forget that there wasn't a revolution in Spain. There were workers' uprisings in July 1936, and May 1937, but the state was not smashed and the bourgeoisie remained in control.

Devrim

[Sasha]

CNT-FAI were not hostile to volunteers, but to Comitern's reactionary puppets.


dont be an unrespectfull dick, you cant call the volunteers of the international brigades reactionary puppets. these where brave workers who wanted to do their thing to fight fascism in spain and couldn't give an donkeys arse who managed to get them there.
for example the rank and file of the dutch communist who went there where still heavy influenced by pannenkoek and other dutch left communists and cant be writen of as stalinist puppets.
and yes, i have family who fought there and died at the front, so i take it as an personal insult.

[Devrim]

dont be an unrespectfull dick, you cant call the volunteers of the international brigades reactionary puppets.

Why not? Objectively it is true. They were the tools of a 'Communist' Party, which was completely on the side of the bourgeoisie, played their part in putting down the workers' uprising in Barcelona in May 1937, and afterwards murdered revolutionaries.


these where brave workers

So were many fascists fighting on the Russian front in the Second World War. So what? Workers have died bravely for all sorts of causes. It is generally the working class who die in wars, and many of them are brave.


these where brave workers who wanted to do their thing to fight fascism in spain

People may want all sorts of things. That, however, does not stop them being used as puppets.


for example the rank and file of the dutch communist who went there where still heavy influenced by pannenkoek and other dutch left communists and cant be writen of as stalinist puppets.

They couldn't have been very influenced by them as the remenants of the German and Dutch council communists argued against support for the Republic in the war.


and yes, i have family who fought there and died at the front, so i take it as an personal insult.

I had a relative who fought in the Brigades too. It doesn't make what I say about them write, and neither does the fact that your relatives died make you right. Whether you take it as an insult or not is really besides the point.

Devrim

[Partizani]

The comintern was hostile to supply arms to the Militias simply because they were not nearly as organised as the communist based International Brigades and 5th Regiment. Put your self in Stalin's position, either supply arms to a disciplined, organised and well trained army, or to a bunch of Militia.


We should never forget that Spain was in 1st place REVOLUTION and then CIVIL WAR.
The Popular front (a coalition of socialists, social democracts and communists) democratically won the 1936 Election. Something that Franco and his Falangist friends were not too happy with.
The Anarchists believed that whilst fighting a war against a very hard enemy (the army of africa) to also have a revolution, this is something which is simply not possible. Where-as the international brigades realised that first you need to defeat fascism by whatever means, then have your revolution afterwards.


Where's that gold by the way? The Spanish government needed arms, whats the best way to acquire them. To Pay.

[Искра]

I am not one 100% sure that I am right here, but as I remember it, the anarchist line was that workers should stay and oppose their own states where they were, but they encouraged refugees from the fascist states to come.
It might be that way. I don't know, but I know that many revolutionaries came to Spain. Especially those who fought in Ukraine. I read it somwhere :)


I think that we should never forget that there wasn't a revolution in Spain. There were workers' uprisings in July 1936, and May 1937, but the state was not smashed and the bourgeoisie remained in control.
Revolution was in progress... what about collectivisation? You can't deny that.


dont be an unrespectfull dick, you cant call the volunteers of the international brigades reactionary puppets. these where brave workers who wanted to do their thing to fight fascism in spain and couldn't give an donkeys arse who managed to get them there.
for example the rank and file of the dutch communist who went there where still heavy influenced by pannenkoek and other dutch left communists and cant be writen of as stalinist puppets.
and yes, i have family who fought there and died at the front, so i take it as an personal insult.
Yugoslav commies fought there and die there and then they came back and fought here and create Yugoslavia. They were brave, they were workers and they were Stalin's puppets.
I agree with Devrim's post.
Fighting fascism is not enough. You have to fight (state) capitalism, also.


The comintern was hostile to supply arms to the Militias simply because they were not nearly as organised as the communist based International Brigades and 5th Regiment. Put your self in Stalin's position, either supply arms to a disciplined, organised and well trained army, or to a bunch of Militia.
I really despise this kind of arguments.
Are you saying that only good revolutionary is the one who fights under hierarchy organised army? Army which is organised like Franco's army? Discipline, punishment? Army which promotes patriarchy by not letting women to fight in it? Army with officers who are taking care of their ass while they lead their man to slaughter?
Do you even know anything about military achievements of militias?
Also, I don't really care about Stalin and to who he wanted to give or didn't want to give the weapon (btw. It's really interested that you talk like Stalin owned those weapons. I always taught that there was no private property in Soviet Union :rolleyes:), because your arguments about organisation being reason of it fail. His main interest was that everything be in interest of Soviet Union.


The Popular front (a coalition of socialists, social democracts and communists) democratically won the 1936 Election. Something that Franco and his Falangist friends were not too happy with.
The Anarchists believed that whilst fighting a war against a very hard enemy (the army of africa) to also have a revolution, this is something which is simply not possible. Where-as the international brigades realised that first you need to defeat fascism by whatever means, then have your revolution afterwards.
So we will won war using hierarchy, (state) capitalism etc. and then we will have revolution? :rolleyes:
This is like you say Hay, lets have revolution today and tomorrow we will talk about women, gay etc. emancipation and about racism... Yupi, yay!


The Spanish government needed arms, whats the best way to acquire them. To Pay.
Do you even know the story about that gold?

[Devrim]

Revolution was in progress... what about collectivisation? You can't deny that.

No, there was extensive collectivisation, but is worker control of a capitalist economy within the framework of a bourgeois state a revolution?

Devrim

[What Would Durruti Do?]

No, there was extensive collectivisation, but is worker control of a capitalist economy within the framework of a bourgeois state a revolution?

Devrim

capitalist and collectivist are two different things, and there were no bourgeois, or even a state in Catalonia and Aragon during this collectivized period. It was technically republic territory, but the state had no real control in the area until later in the war.

it was very much a revolution, but unfortunately it got engulfed and set aside by soviet intervention and the fight against the fascists

[Devrim]

capitalist and collectivist are two different things, and there were no bourgeois, or even a state in Catalonia and Aragon during this collectivized period. It was technically republic territory, but the state had no real control in the area until later in the war.

it was very much a revolution, but unfortunately it got engulfed and set aside by soviet intervention and the fight against the fascists

I think that the idea that their wasn't a state in Catalonia and Aragon during the early stages of the civil war is not based on historical reality.

On the question of whether there was a revolution, it isn't only left communists today who take the position that there was no socialist revolution. It was held by anarchists in Spain at the time too.


How do we account for the fact that in the July revolution we saw a repetition of the errors we have criticised hundreds and hundreds of times? How come we did not hold out for social revolution in July? How come workers' organisations failed to assume maximum control of the country?

The vast majority of the working population stood by the CNT. Inside Catalonia, the CNT was the majority organisation. What happened, that the CNT did not makes its revolution, the people's revolution, the revolution of the majority of the population?

What happened was what had to happen. The CNT was utterly devoid of revolutionary theory. We did not have a concrete programme. We had no idea where we were going. We had lyricism aplenty; but when all is said and done, we did not know what to do with our masses of workers or how to give substance to the popular effusion which erupted inside our organisations. By not knowing what to do, we handed the revolution on a platter to the bourgeoisie and the marxists who support the farce of yesteryear. What is worse, we allowed the bourgeoisie a breathing space; to return, to re-form and to behave as would a conqueror

On the question of whether there was a state in Catalonia and Aragon, one would ask if the state had disappeared, what then was the government that the anarchists joined. Of course, the state continued to exist. This quote about the 'Council of Anti-fascist Militias' is interesting:


In July a Committee of Antifascist Militias was set up. It was not a class organ. Bourgeois and counter-revolutionary factions had their representatives on it. It looked as if this Committee had been set up as a counter-balance to the Generalitat. But it was all sham.

The 'Generalitat' was the government of Catalonia. Why would people be talking of a counter balance if the state ceased to exist? How could a state that had disappered send 20,000 assault guards against armed workers in the streets in May 1937 only ten months later?

On the difference between capitalist and collectivist, I think you are right that they are different things. They are different catogories, but not mutually exclusive. It is possible to have a collectivly managed capitalist enterprise, which is what many workers co-ops are today. The collectivisations in Spain were more often than not, take overs by the CNT and the UGT, two bodies which had by that time been incorperated into the state.

Devrim

[Andropov]

I really despise this kind of arguments.
Are you saying that only good revolutionary is the one who fights under hierarchy organised army? Army which is organised like Franco's army? Discipline, punishment? Army which promotes patriarchy by not letting women to fight in it? Army with officers who are taking care of their ass while they lead their man to slaughter?
Do you even know anything about military achievements of militias?
Also, I don't really care about Stalin and to who he wanted to give or didn't want to give the weapon (btw. It's really interested that you talk like Stalin owned those weapons. I always taught that there was no private property in Soviet Union :rolleyes:), because your arguments about organisation being reason of it fail. His main interest was that everything be in interest of Soviet Union.
Even though the Anarchist Militias were brave and fought with valour for their cause there is no denying that the Soviet Backed Regiments were more effective throughout the war. Alot of that could be down to the aid they almost exclusively received from the USSR but one must not ignore the efficiency of the Soviet model of mobilisation, communciation and co-operaption that even the Anarchists did adopt to some extent in the later stages of the War.


This is like you say Hay, lets have revolution today and tomorrow we will talk about women, gay etc. emancipation and about racism... Yupi, yay!

Whats your point here?

[Kléber]

CNT-FAI were not hostile to volunteers, but to Comitern's reactionary puppets. CNT unions and the FAI did not have a single policy among them for everything. Many of their policies (including the policy on volunteers) also changed throughout the war. I was talking about the period before the International Brigades were formed, so what "reactionary puppets" you are referring to is a mystery to me. The anarchist policy I described had nothing to do with the Comintern because that body did not yet support Republican Spain at the time.

As for your assertion that everyone in the Brigades was a Stalinist, the ranks of the International Brigades actually included liberals, anarchists, social-democrats and Trotskyists, and some International Brigadiers were shot by their Stalinist commissars for "political deviations." Some Brigadiers were only turned into Stalinists by their experiences in Spain, and some ardent Stalinists who went to Spain became totally disillusioned by Stalinism while there. So it is incorrect to blanket everyone in the brigade as a "Comintern reactionary puppet."

[JohannGE]

I think that the idea that their wasn't a state in Catalonia and Aragon during the early stages of the civil war is not based on historical reality.

On the question of whether there was a revolution, it isn't only left communists today who take the position that there was no socialist revolution. It was held by anarchists in Spain at the time too.Devrim
Indeed!

Furthermore, it was considered important that the situation was not portrayed or percieved as revolutionary as it would alienate moderate support.
---

Of the approx 32 - 35,000 international fighters in Spain approx 5.000 served outside the brigades, mainly with the POUM.
An interesting and relevant letter from a dissilusioned IWW member about his experience and treatment in Spain:-


"The following letter was published in the paper of the American IWW's paper, One Big Union Monthly in 1937.

Original introduction

The One Big Union Monthly and the Industrial Workers of the World are heart and soul for the success of the anti-fascist fight going on in Spain but we see no reason why we should stick our heads in the sand and pretend not to be aware of the capitalist class element within the Spanish United Front government that is trying to rob the Spanish revolutionary unionists of victory.
No matter what our opinion may be as to the wisdom of the syndicalists' policy of co-operation with political government, the information and arguments contained in this letter from a rank and file fighter in the cause of working class freedom, and in other articles appearing in this magazine, cannot but be valuable reminders that there are still working class enemies among those who favour "democracy" as opposed to fascism - Editor.

A soldier returns

Marseilles, France

Fellow Worker:-

Received your letter the other day in Barcelona. I typed three pages in reply but could not smuggle it out of the country, so I tore it up.
I am out of Spain. The reasons are numerous. I was not wanted by the government as I was in the Durruti International Shock Battalion. The government sabotaged us since we were formed in May and made it impossible for us to stay at the front. No tobacco unless you had money. All of the time I was in the militia I received no money. I had to beg money for postage stamps, etc. I was sent back from the front slightly shell-shocked and put in a hospital in Barcelona. when we registered at the hospital I told them I was from the Durruti International Battalion and they wouldn't register me. In fact they told me to go and ask my friends for money for a place to sleep. I explained to them that I was from Canada and had no friends in Barcelona, then they tried to make me a prisoner in the hospital. I called them all the lousy -- I could think of. Anyway, I ran away from the hospital one day to the English section of the CNT-FAI and the people there insisted that I see the British consul for a permit to leave Spain, which I did, though I hated to leave.

Spain is a wonderful country. At present it reminds me of the stories I have read of the O.G.P.U. [secret police] in Russia. The jails of loyalist Spain are full of volunteers who have more than a single-track mind. I know one of them from Toronto, a member of the L.R.W.P. I wonder if they will bump him off. The Stalinists do not hesitate to kill any of those who do not blindly accept Stalin as a second Christ. One of the refugees who came over with me from Spain was a member of the O.G.P.U. in Spain, which, by the way, is controlled by Russia. Every volunteer in the Communist International Brigade is considered a potential enemy of Stalin. He is checked and double-checked, every damn one. If he utters a word other than commy phrases he is taken "for a ride." This chap (ex- O.G.P.U.) is like all the other commies coming out of Spain, absolutely anti-Stalin and anti-communist. He skipped the country by flashing his O.G.P.U. badge on the trains etc.
I believe that the I.W.W. has lost some members here, as I doubt if they would keep quiet at the front in view of what is taking place.

It was only through sabotage that the government succeeded in disbanding the International Battalion of Anarchists. Four of our bunch died of starvation in one day. Our arms were rotten, even though the Valencia government has plenty of arms and planes. They know enough not to give arms to the thousands of anarchists on the Aragon front. We could have driven the fascists out of Huesca and Saragossa had we had the aid of the aviation. But the Anarchists form collectives where ever they advance, and these comrades would rather let Franco have those cities that the CNT-FAI.

Fenner Brockway, prominent labour leader in England, exposed the way the communists were treating those boys (volunteers) in the International Brigade. They will not let any of them come back unless they are racketeers of the Sam Scarlett type who will say anything they are told as long as the pork chops are coming in.

The CNT-FAI seems to have lost all the power they had in the army. There is a good fort on the top of a hill overlooking Barcelona which the anarchists captured from the fascists. When I left for the front it was still in the hands of the FAI but when I came back the communists had it. The workers of Spain are against the communists, but the latter don't care. They are making a play for the support of the bourgeoisie and other racketeers. As far as the industries are concerned the CNT has a lot of power, far more than any other organization.

Well, Fellow Worker, one day has elapsed since I wrote the above. Last night I had a head ache and I had to postpone finishing the letter. I am eating good since coming to France.

I believe the British consul is going to send me to England or to Canada. If I wasn't such a wreck I would ship on a British ship for Spain. Wages are double on the Spanish run, and ships are tied up because of a shortage of men. I have been on English ships and none of the crew would speak English.

I met two more men from the International Brigade this morning. They say many Canadians are in prison in Spain.

With best wished for the I.W.W.,
I remain Bill Wood

from One Big Union Monthly, September 1937."

LibCom (http://libcom.org/library/soldier-returns-letter-durruti-column-american-fighter)

[syndicat]

A couple of things are being confused. The CNT did hold that a revolution was in process. This is why they held that "the revolution and the war are inseparable." when Durruti spoke over the radio in October 1936 he said "the workers of spain are not fighting and dying for the bougeois republic. they are fighting for the factories and the fields. for a new way of life."

In what way was there a revolution? The entire property of the industrial and agricultural capitalist elite was expropriated directly by the workers organizations. According to the estimates cited by Burnett Bolletin in "The Spanish Revolution", more than 18,000 companies were expropriated and more than 14 million acres of agricultural land, plus houses of the rich and thousands of other urban buildings.

It is important not to confuse this with "collectivization". That came later. Initially the unions ran the various industries. They called it "socialization" or union socialization. the shop stewards committees were usually converted into workers administrative councils and the union or section assemblies became the workplace assemblies. these were not intended to be operated as cooperatives in a market economy. The anarcho-syndicalists didn't advocate that. They were to be merged together into a single planned organization for social production. This is why the various small companies had their assets seized and then merged into a larger organization. This extended down to the small business class as well. All of the 1,100 barber shops in the Barcelona metro area were expropriated and shut down and their merged assets used to create a single network of 250 neighborhood haircutting centers. That's just an example.

The aim of the anarcho-syndicalists was a social revolution, which would be consolidated with the state being replaced by free municipalities, worker congresses and defense councils to run a people's militia. The debate over whether to overthrow the government in July, which is referred to in the quote from Friends of Durruti (actually Jaime Balius) continued and in Sept 3 1936 CNT proposed to the Left Socialists that the two labor federations jointly eliminate the Popular Front government and the parliament in favor of a national workers congress and a National Defense Council to run a unified people's army controlled jointly by the two labor federations, UGT and CNT.

The Communists opposed this vehemently. At its July 1936 meeting, the Comintern decided on a two-stage revolution for Spain. (Evidence for this is in "Spain Betrayed.") First they would beat the drum for rebuilding the conventional hierarchical army, always in the name of efficiency and discipline, and rebuild the state. But they also proposed a highly naive strategy of hiding the true proletarian nature of the revolution and conflict (the civil war was really a revolutionary class war) to try to gain military arms from USA and other "Democracies." the anarchist youth organization called this dumb since they said, correctly, that the western capitaliist powers would be aware of what was really going on in Spain. after all, the working class had just expropriated the capitalist class and built its own army (the militias). The anarcho-syndicalists were the last part of the radical left in Spain to hold out against the silly strategy proposed by the Communists. Apparently the Communists convinced the Left Socialists and Largo Caballero and the UGT leadership turned down the CNT proposal for a proletarian government. The Soviet ambassador had warned him the CNT 's proposal would "destroy the international legitimacy of the Spanish republc"...as if a workers revolution that expropriates the capitalist wouldn't do this.

at that point Durruti proposed a strategy for the CNT to take power in the regions where it was the majority and thus had the power to take power. And in fact this is what they did in Aragon.

In sept 1936 the CNT village unions invoked a regional people's congress and elected a regional defense council. also there were some cities in Catalonia where the CNT unions did take power (such as Hospitalet).

but at this point the FAI splintered. a large chunk of the FAI apparently regarded Durruti's strategy as too risky...and thus the CNT at end of October agreed finally to join the Popular Front government. During Sept and oct 1936 the big CNT daily paper in Barcelona, Solidaridad obrera, had been beating the drum for Durruti's defense council (workers government) proposal. When they refused to accept the flipflop at end of October, the editor, Liberto Callejas, and many of the writers, including Jaime Balius, were fired. A few months later Callejas and Balius formed the Friends of Durruti group to continue to beat the drum among the rank and file to return to the CNT's Sept program for a revolutionary junta. Thus the CNT's own program of Sept 1936 is in fact the origin of the program of the Friends of Durruti. So the various Trotskyists and others who think Friends of Durruti were breaking from anarcho-syndicalism are wrong. They wanted a return by the union to its anarcho-syndicalist program.

Thus the revoluition was not consolidated. When Friends of Durruti talk about "making the social revolution" they were talking about consolidating the revolution. They were not saying that the seizure of industry and its management by the workers was not part of the revolutionary process or that a revolution hadn't occurred.

The doctrine that no revolution had taken place was only advocated at the time by the Communist Party...because they were trying to hide the true nature of the reality from the rest of the world as part of their strategy of placating and appealing to the western capitalist "Democracies." and inside Spain even the CPE had at times to acknowledge that a revolution had taken place.