Obama and the Spanish Second Republic

On April 14^th, 1931, Spain elected a Second Republic, with a Parliament dominated by members of a Left-wing, popular front coalition.[i]  Niceto Alcalá-Zamora was President, and he appointed Manuel Azaña as Minister of War; the two learned to tag-team their opponents. 

The King, Alfonso XIII, was driven into exile, along with his monarchical dictatorship and its façade of a Republic.  (This era is often marked by Prime Minister Primo de Rivera.)  Spaniards had the audacity to hope for change in Spain.  

The Second Republic, however, showed little different for workers than the previous dictatorship.  Now ruled by the Left, workers still faced all their old enemies.  When strikes happened, the new Civil Guard was called in to put them down.  When workers spoke out against these atrocities, lies were slandered against them in the press.  Namely, the National Confederation of Workers (CNT) became the major scapegoat union, because it was started by “radicals”—anarchists. 

The CNT was a workers union in which there were no bureaucrats.  Nobody paid dues to a middle bargaining agent who had ulterior interests; they self-managed their own affairs and were realistic about their consequences.  The CNT acknowledged that capitalism inherently exploits workers and pits workers’ against capitalists’ interests.  They acknowledged that the state was propped up by capitalists.  Thus, to the CNT, it followed that the capitalists own the state, meaning that the state would enforce the will of capitalists to the point of death against workers. 

The CNT sought to fight capitalism and the state by forming workers’ militias that would eventually confront the state and its brutality, when it attempted to stop workers seeking justice.  Also, the CNT’s founders and most popular members historically maintained the position that the state was not a system with which they could collaborate or cooperate.  The CNT generally refused to vote or stand down on account of legality. 

The Second Republic came into many conflicts with the CNT, most probably out of intent to crush the CNT, in favor of the more easily disciplined, state-friendly union, the UGT.  On April 8, Minister of Labor Largo Caballero’s dream was achieved, as the Law of April 8 was passed.  The Law of April 8 established clear conditions under which unions could negotiate, strikes could be waged, and limits set for the union’s resistance with the state.  This bill was targeted at the CNT, as it was the only union in Spain that challenged the UGT in size, as well as the only union that engaged in risqué tactics that undermined the state and capital. 

Another popular card the Second Republic would play to undermine and cripple the CNT was its contention that the CNT disrupted “public order”.  When the CNT had strikes or rebellions, it was very common for them to hold rallies throughout Spain to explain the affair to other workers.  These rallies indicated their ability to successfully mobilize large numbers of people into the streets, and with a small confrontation, they could be made into rebellions on their own.  In other words, for the CNT to organize a rally was to disrupt the public order.  To prevent these inconveniences, the Republican-Socialist government passed the Public Order on July 26, 1933, allowing them to arrest and detain organizers of events that would disrupt the “public order”.    

After arresting Buenaventura Durruti and many CNT militants repeatedly on trumped up charges—once for a charge against the old monarchy, on which Durruti was immediately released once bureaucrats realized that their excuse undermined their façade of hope and change—the state quit being so creative in its laws.  A law against vagrancy was passed as an excuse to arrest militant CNT members and detain them indefinitely; they were simply classified as “vagrants”. 

These were always coupled with a constant media blitz of lies against the CNT, claiming they were behind almost every bank robbery and murder in Spain—even after the CNT repeatedly claimed it did not support individualized robbery, but instead, supported collective expropriation.[ii] 

Going into the 1933 elections, the Left-wing coalition was fragile, at best.  The Right-wing, on the other hand was running further and further to the Right, while gaining momentum from an increasingly fearful Catholic bureaucracy.  They formed a fascist front within its coalition (CEDA, Spanish Confederation of Autonomous Right), with Gil Robles as the Right-wing coalition leader, an explicit fascist.  The campaigns showed more and more clearly that the Left had its turn to change Spain, and they failed.  Spain was not fundamentally different than it was in the late 1920s. 

Civil and Assault Guards had replaced the old military and police forces, which put down strikes.  King Alfonso XIII and Primo de Rivera had been replaced by Zamora and Azaña.  Where was the change? 

The CNT heavily debated what to do in the elections.  If they supported the Left, they may have a chance at more easily fighting the state.  However, how could they support a campaign for a party that intentionally imprisoned, tortured, and killed some of its best members?  How could the CNT knowingly support candidates who would keep their activities criminal and negate every statement the CNT had principally stood for?  They could not support either candidate. 

“If one looks at the Republic’s work, one can immediately see that it has failed in every sense.  It passed three laws that are anti-democratic in the most fundamental way.  They are a disgrace: the law of April 8, Public Order, and Vagrants.”  —Vizente Perez, Thursday, November 16, FAI rally, Barcelona’s Palace of Decorative Arts

“We’ve talked enough already.  Now it’s time for action.  …[Politicians say] that we aren’t good for anything except votes, but we won’t cast any vote on November 19.  No party represents the Spanish people.  To [them] we say: forget the threats.  The people have the right not to believe.  How can anyone believe in politicians after the bloody Republican experience?

We won’t vote.  The Catalan Confederation [of the FAI] will not vote.  More than 50 percent will abstain in the next election.  What good are threats?  What good is it to say that we’ll be straightened out?  Make all the threats you like, it’s useless: we won’t vote and we’re ready to confront any rash actions from the reactionaries.” —Buenaventura Durruti, Thursday, November 16, FAI rally, Barcelona’s Palace of Decorative Arts

As if the results of the 1933 elections need seen, here they were: “The Left won ninety-nine seats (including sixty for the Socialists and one for the Communist Party); the Center, 156…; and the Right, 217 (115 went to the CEDA).”[iii]  The Right had a clear upper hand in Parliament, and the Left coalition was quick to blame the CNT, despite its past two years of raids, imprisonment, and all out war on the CNT and the FAI (Iberian Anarchist Federation, an anarchist political faction within the CNT—it also, had bodies for propaganda and political agitation). 

Unsurprisingly, in the final days of the Socialist-Republican reign (December 1933), socialism was still non-existent in Spain.  All of the CNT’s statements about politicians were ringing truer than ever.  The CNT’s abstention, however, did make a dent in the electoral turnout; voters clearly did not want either coalition in power.[iv] 

The CNT was not naïve in its abstention.  As Durruti declared, “[W]e’re ready to confront any rash actions from the reactionaries.” They were prepared to move forward with a CNT-FAI National Revolutionary Committee that would coordinate actions and defenses in a general strike, insurrection, and attempt to win over new recruits, namely socialists and communists disillusioned with their political leaders.  On December 8, 1933, a general strike was declared in Zaragoza, and a brutal battle began. 

The battles raged across Spain for about a day, but it exhibited the courage of the anarchists.  With the fascists now in power, would the Socialists and Republicans come to their defense?[v]  Oddly enough, no.  The CNT and the FAI were alone in the streets on December 8, fighting the fascist state solo.[vi]  As a result, the government outlawed the CNT and the FAI, along with any anarchist papers, including technical, scientific, and literary magazines with libertarian leanings. 

Relevance to Today

These were the early days of the Spanish Civil War, and they were brutal.  However, Spain’s Second Republic’s early years show many similarities with the United States today. 

After 9/11, America went into quite a frenzy, and the days of “King George” W. Bush began, with a reign of invasions through Iraq, Afghanistan, a coup in Venezuela, and other aggressive foreign policies.  We saw Bush gut the poorest schools with No Child Left Behind, and we saw standards of living plummet.  Bush finished his reign with the largest financial meltdown since the Great Depression, which ironically is usually marked as a pressure point that ended King Alfonso XIII and Primo de Rivera’s reign in Spain. 

Americans voted for hope and change with President Barrack Obama.  They received a coup in Honduras, a continuation of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, unquestioned Israeli-bombing of Palestinian children, and backhandedness in Egypt.  Americans voted for the Employee Free Choice Act, but it was never seriously pushed in Congress.  Americans voted for economic recovery, they saw rising unemployment, followed by rising underemployment.  Americans got nothing they wanted. 

On Monday, April 4, 2011, President Barrack Obama announced his intention to run for re-election in 2011, for President of the United States.  In November 2012, Americans will be face with a choice similar to that of the people of Spain in 1933.  Do they vote for the swindlers who have lied and ruthlessly ruled them for the past term, or do they find a way to respond? 

Needless to say, Spain in 1933 is not America today.  The CNT had a well-disciplined cadre base, with a mass membership, making it the second largest union in Spain.  The FAI had well-disciplined cadre working within the CNT and training workers in militia drills to one day fight for their freedom.  Anarchism in Spain was a development of its past century, thriving on its autonomous communes in history.  Into the 20^th century, no legal trade union existed to organize industrial or non-trades workers, which was how the “criminal” tactic of organizing the un-organized worked for anarchists to develop the CNT. 

In America today, most of the CNT’s actions would be nearly impossible.  All passageways—state and private property—today is surveillanced electronically, with video, and secured.  Any trespasser would not need to be seized on the spot, but have her/his identity narrowed down, in order to be located and detained.  Technology is far more developed today, and the state and capital have its odds set against us.  Like technology, the state is far more developed, too. 

The US government has developed along with its social movements.  Riots, strikes, and rebellions led to more aggressive police strategies, tactics, and equipment, labor laws that co-opt workers’ militancy, and preemptive efforts that detain organizers before they act.  The state has learned and grown from its previous failures, which were our previous opportunities.  For example, bills like the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act (and institutions, like the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration) were responses to police failures to easily defeat previous rebellions—namely, the OCCSS Act was a response to the LAPD’s failure to handle the Watts Riots in 1965. By establishing universal police codes across city, county, and state borders, the nation-state has made itself more able to respond to rebellions that might incite further rebellions or legitimate defiance against the state.  Today, this bureaucratic swiftness makes the likeliness of immediate victories through catching the state off-guard even less.  

As a result, Americans today cannot approach the police and the army as the CNT-FAI did, or we will be doomed to immediate defeat.  The CNT-FAI was not as well-equipped as the state, but they were not as stratified in military equipment as we are today.  Today, the US could, if it wanted to, obliterate every American fairly easily—not that it would, but it could.  Also, the CNT-FAI had prepared itself militarily to combat the state’s efforts, gearing up with previous rebellions, showing that it could go toe-to-toe with the state in combat, especially on its own peasantry turf. 

Instead, Americans are faced with the need to weaken the state and promote public interest most effectively.  Mutinies are almost inevitable for strategy in America today, unless we want to seriously do combat with tanks, assault rifles, bombs, and one of the most strictly disciplined militaries on the planet.  So, winning over the armed forces and convincing police to not attack is essential for Americans to defeat the state today; the CNT-FAI were able to more reasonably confront the state directly as a serious force, prepared to take on whatever troops called in to silence them. 

But these points do not make the CNT or the FAI’s position in 1933 irrelevant.  Their opposition to the election was also about the organizational base of the Left coalition, which collaborated with the slimiest politicians in history, as well as the capitalist class for its campaigns.  The CNT opposed the historic efforts of the Republicans to fight against workers’ interests, and to support the Republicans, then, would be to support the killing of their own. 

For us, today in the US, we could follow in the footsteps of the CNT-FAI—with a context of our own—by building a stronger movement.  This can be done through non-electoral efforts, or it could also be done through a principally-based united front electoral effort that allowed by organizational self-management. 

Regardless, the historical indications are clear.  If we put ourselves in the shoes of Buenaventura Durruti, Francisco Ascaso, or other principled CNT-FAI members, we can easily see how no principled revolutionary could ever support the Republican-Socialist popular front coalition.  Likewise, we need to honestly assess the Democratic Party and Obama, seeing that neither party or politician have helped the working class—in some ways they have stalled our momentum. 

We have to build an alternative and stop wasting our time and audacity on false hopes for change. 

“The cult of the state is a lie, false, and deceitful.  It’s election time now and they’ll promise you everything, even the moon.” —Domingo Germinal,  Thursday, November 16, FAI rally, Barcelona’s Palace of Decorative Arts

Germanal’s words are never truer than today.  In the next year and a half, Barrack Obama will promise us a new world.  Will you help delude voters into following another deceit, or will you principally call the state and capital out on their injustices?  For any principled revolutionary, the answer should be crystal clear.