Source: http://www.renegadetribune.com/anarchy-action-spanish-civil-war/
By Eric Thomson (2000)
Some ideas
are so bad that they reveal themselves as bad jokes, as soon as people attempt
to apply them to reality. “Lenin” allegedly attempted to apply the Marxist
principle of “From each, according to his ability, to each, according to his
need” for an entire week when he moved into Russia after the departure of his
fellow tribesman, “Kerensky”. After seeing Marxist ideology cripple some major
factories, “Lenin” announced that “Those who do not work shall not eat!” This
is, of course, the exact opposite of Marxism, but “Lenin”, with typical
impudence, called his doctrine “Marxism-Leninism”. This is as oxymoronic as
Christians who claim that the god of the Old Testament is the same as that of
the New Testament. “Cold fusion” was another such absurdity, which shows that
many people cannot see the obvious, or, as P.T. Barnum was alleged to have
said: “There’s a sucker born every minute!” Anarchy is another dumb, bad idea.
The sad truth is, that bad ideas never die. There are always new generations of
suckers who fall for them.
It is certainly true that no system,
ideology, leadership or organization can make up for poor quality in its
adherents, whereas people of good quality can usually overcome organizational
oversights, thanks to their ability and good will. The ‘best’ system in the
world can not be expected to function if it is composed of miscreants,
malcontents, morons and quarrelsome sectarians, but there is one ‘system’ known
to defy the effectiveness of the best people who attempt to practice it, and
that is anarchy. The goal of anarchy is to eliminate all forms of organization
beyond the individual: to eliminate all social institutions. The logical goal
of anarchy is the elimination of society itself. This is the goal of Marxism,
in which communism is described as the result of “the withering away of the
state” and the ‘return’ to the ‘ideal state of anarchy’, as proclaimed by the
madman, Jean Jacques Rousseau. Some modern day Libertarians hover close to
anarchism, like moths to a flame. “Aw, shucks,” some may disagree, “anarchy
never was given a real chance.” Well, after rereading “The Spanish Civil War”
by Hugh Thomas, I recommend that everyone who claims to sympathize with the
philosophy of anarchy stop to consider what a good chance it had in Spain to
strut its stuff.
Spain is a geographical entity.
Despite government propaganda, it is not a nation, but an area in which various
nations reside. These nations correspond in general to the provinces, which
have variously been independent, like Portugal and Catalonia, and/or ruled by
the central government in Madrid. Previous to that, some provinces were under
Moorish rule. In Spain, unity is accepted with reluctance by the majority of
Spaniards, so that the Madrid regime rules the country like a colonial power,
with its Guardia Civil, the paramilitary police force and army garrisons
in every province. At times, the uneasy truce between local interests and the
central government is broken by guerrilla warfare. Spain is the original home
of the “guerrilla” or “little war”, which received that name during the popular
uprisings against the French occupation, during the Napoleonic Wars.
Anarchy is the extreme form of
local, regional, provincial forces of political and economic disintegration.
Ironically, anarchy in Spain achieved its greatest success because of
uniformity, rather than the diversity of its adherents. Anarchists were
primarily working-class and they were mainly Catalans, although the other
provinces of Spain had their own anarchists. The anarchists far outnumbered the
socialists, whose trade union members actually negotiated with government and
employers. The anarchist unions did no such thing. They merely went out on
strike and were fond of burning buildings, especially churches, for they viewed
the Catholic Church as a weapon of mass-oppression. Hey, even anarchists can’t
be all bad! Ironically, the Church supported many of the pre-capitalist
communal ideas of the anarchists and the socialists, just as it champions the
tenets of Marxism today.
Anarchy had broken out several times
in 20th century Spain before the 1936-1939 Civil War. Anarchist miners in
Asturias devastated towns with their favorite means of expression: dynamite.
Even the U.S. Supreme Court might deem that rather extreme as a form of “free
speech”, but it is said that an anarchist without a bomb is like a day without
sunshine.
The divisions within Spanish society
and the weak Republican regime gave the anarchists the opportunity they wanted,
for they refused to participate in any form of government, with the exception
of Catalonia, in which anarchists participated as de facto members, but
not de jure members. Anarchists deem any recognition and/or
participation in government, political parties or other organizations to be
immoral. However, the anarchists did have their trade union and an
organization, FAI (Anarchist Federation of Iberia), who were principally
involved with the blasting of buildings and the assassination of opponents,
similar to The Molly Maguires in the Pennsylvania mining areas. Spanish
anarchists derived their primary inspiration from Bakunin, an exotic creed for
domestic disaster.
Thus it was, that on the eve of
Civil War, the Spanish anarchists had the numbers and the fervor in support of
their ideology, which was absurdly, an ideology of disunity and
disorganization.
As Spain split into two warring
factions, the rebels became known as “Nationalists”, and the Republicans as
“Reds”, which became a fact with the arrival of Communist Party functionaries,
including Jews of the infamous NKVD, successor to the Cheka and predecessor of
the KGB, now FSB. Prior to the Civil War, the influence and membership of the
Communist Party in Spain was a virtual unreality, nonexistent, according to
historian Hugh Thomas. There were even more members of POUM, a Trotskyite
‘workers’ movement’. But as the war progressed, the Republic found the USSR,
under “Stalin”, to be its foremost supplier of military weapons, ammunition,
oil and even food. Henceforth, the Communist minority gained predominant
influence within the Republic, not only because of their material support, but
equally so for the dedication, skill and organization of their representatives.
The Communists dealt with the anarchists as a snowplow deals with snow.
Before the advent of Communist Party
influence, the anarchists took over most of the Spanish Navy’s fleet by killing
the officers. The Army became alarmed, assuming they would be next, so the
rebellion intensified. The anarchists retaliated by killing Army officers and
garrisons wherever they could, and the Civil War was on, without quarter being
given by either side. Let’s consider anarchy in action, the most desperate
action known to man: war.
The bulk of the Republican fighting
forces were the anarchist militias, including socialists. They disdained all
forms of military training, including marksmanship and weapons maintenance.
Although they were ostensibly ‘led’ by regular Spanish Army officers, they
usually disobeyed orders outright, or they might vote whether or not they would
obey, and to what degree. Officers had to exercise extreme caution to avoid
being shot by ‘their’ own men, so they became no better than the ‘soldiers’
whom they were charged with leading. Although the Republican forces outnumbered
the Nationalist forces on most occasions, the militias proved disastrous on the
offensive and not much better on the defensive. They refused to dig trenches,
because they considered them a sign of ‘cowardice’. After several massacres,
the militias finally deigned to dig trenches, and when they did so, they
sometimes refused to leave them, and so were outflanked and encircled: more
massacres at the hands of the Nationalist forces. A few aerial bombs in their
vicinity would cause them to panic, even if the bombs were duds! Venereal diseases
were rife, since anarchist units insisted on bringing along diseased whores for
companionship. Men became so ill, primarily from gonorrhea, that they were shot
when they refused orders to leave the front for medical treatment. Some units
got drunk and then attacked the enemy, who believed in Santa Claus from that
point onward. Anarchist units would refuse to prepare adequate defences, then
they would panic when the Nationalists attacked. They would abandon their
positions, and their weapons and run like rabbits, except that rabbits have the
intelligence to run to cover. Not the anarchists, who ran down the roads, where
they were easy targets for aviators with machineguns. An anarchist retreat was
really a combination of rout and massacre.
The anarchist navy had taken over
the most powerful units of the Spanish Fleet, but the sailors lacked that which
they had disdained: officers. The Republican fleet participated in one
disastrous attempt to seize the island of Majorca, after which it spent most of
the time in port.
In summary, anarchy in action, or ‘leaderless
resistance‘, attempted to oppose training, discipline, organization and
leadership with chaotic masses whose bravery and ignorance were no match for
their opponents’ bravery and skill. An anarchist can never be a leader, only an
agitator, for each individual anarchist is his ‘equal’, and everyone’s
ignorance is deemed as ‘good’ as anyone’s knowledge. Anarchists cannot
distinguish folly from wisdom. That is why they are anarchists!
Wars are team efforts, similar to
team sports. Teamwork wins, and individual ‘all-stars’ lose. Teamwork requires
leadership, skill, organization and discipline, all of which are excluded from
anarchy, by definition. ‘Organized anarchy’ is just another oxymoron like ‘leaderless
resistance.’ While leadership can be bad, sometimes, no leadership is bad
all the time. As the Spanish Civil War demonstrated, a mass of anarchist, leaderless
resisters can be conquered by a small number of those who have organization
and discipline as part of their ideology. Just as often, the most heroic
efforts of anarchists can help the enemy! Anarchists are the last ones to
benefit from their actions, which aim at seizing political power to destroy it.
If they succeed, they merely create a vacuum into which step the organized
conquerors. This lesson has been repeated, but never so forcefully as in the
Spanish Civil War. Leaderless resisters take note: We can march
separately, but we must strike together if we hope to win.
No comments:
Post a Comment