Went through the Wikipedia for it and read appendix 6. I still stand by my opinion that the anarchists were doomed by either fascist or communist hands due to there lack of discipline. Yeah everyone was aligned against the anarchists, but everyone was aligned against the bolsheviks in 1917 and they were still able to win a civil war and establish a government.
Most of the appendix I read was litigating the conflicts in Barcelona in May and how the communist press distorted and lied about what happened. I’m willing to accept the communists did a coup and tried to cover it up and blame it on the POUM. The question is whether that was the right strategic move given the circumstances, and Orwell recognizes this:
Of course it is arguable that the C.N.T. workers ought to have handed over the Telephone Exchange without protest. One’s opinion here will be governed by one’s attitude on the question of centralized government and working-class control.
And elsewhere he emphasizes the difference between communists and anarchists:
So, roughly speaking, the alignment of forces was this. On the one side the C.N.T.-F.A.I., the P.O.U.M., and a section of the Socialists, standing for workers’ control: on the other side the Right-wing Socialists, Liberals, and Communists, standing for centralized government and a militarized army.
In a war you need centralized military control to win, and war has never been won without a commander and a hierarchy below them controlling the troops. Orwell seems to be of the mind that a revolutionary discipline can be achieved through a sincere belief for a cause. This makes sense for a foreign volunteer who signed up for there belief in socialism, but your average person isn’t motivated enough by ideology to voluntarily risk there life.
This is shown by the anarchists unwillingness to relieve Madrid. By the time of the POUM purge the Republicans were losing the war. What needed to be done was a mass conscription drive and then a push to relieve Madrid. The anarchists couldn’t do that because conscription was authoritarian and a democratic militia is never going to vote to leave there defensive lines and go on the offensive as that would mean more danger and casualties. So they were content to man the front in aragon and not much else. Orwells account shows this.
I share Orwells love for the worker control and true democracy of Barcelona during the civil war, but I don’t think that system can survive the realities of a civil war. I’d love to be proven wrong but I haven’t found any evidence to the contrary. If you have one please let me know, it’d restore my faith in the ability of man to overcome oppression.
Great argument, really debunked all my bullshit there
Perhaps you should get your military education from something other than video games?
?
Where’d that come from, i didnt cite any games, and as far as I know there aren’t even any games about the Spanish civil war .
If your such a military history expert could you point me to a civil war where an anarchist faction won and wasn’t eventually defeated by authoritarians?
I’m not going to read the rest of your comment but starting it with “I read on Wikipedia” is a good way to make sure people don’t listen to what you have to say if they have read primary sources.
I read appendix 6 and even gave some quotes from the source showing my point. I’m not gonna read the whole thing in a day to reply to a comment, most of it is his war memoir and has little to do with the discussion. Appendix 6 was the one talking about propaganda that op directed me to.
Went through the Wikipedia for it and read appendix 6. I still stand by my opinion that the anarchists were doomed by either fascist or communist hands due to there lack of discipline. Yeah everyone was aligned against the anarchists, but everyone was aligned against the bolsheviks in 1917 and they were still able to win a civil war and establish a government.
Most of the appendix I read was litigating the conflicts in Barcelona in May and how the communist press distorted and lied about what happened. I’m willing to accept the communists did a coup and tried to cover it up and blame it on the POUM. The question is whether that was the right strategic move given the circumstances, and Orwell recognizes this:
And elsewhere he emphasizes the difference between communists and anarchists:
In a war you need centralized military control to win, and war has never been won without a commander and a hierarchy below them controlling the troops. Orwell seems to be of the mind that a revolutionary discipline can be achieved through a sincere belief for a cause. This makes sense for a foreign volunteer who signed up for there belief in socialism, but your average person isn’t motivated enough by ideology to voluntarily risk there life.
This is shown by the anarchists unwillingness to relieve Madrid. By the time of the POUM purge the Republicans were losing the war. What needed to be done was a mass conscription drive and then a push to relieve Madrid. The anarchists couldn’t do that because conscription was authoritarian and a democratic militia is never going to vote to leave there defensive lines and go on the offensive as that would mean more danger and casualties. So they were content to man the front in aragon and not much else. Orwells account shows this.
I share Orwells love for the worker control and true democracy of Barcelona during the civil war, but I don’t think that system can survive the realities of a civil war. I’d love to be proven wrong but I haven’t found any evidence to the contrary. If you have one please let me know, it’d restore my faith in the ability of man to overcome oppression.
Ie, you’re full of shit.
Perhaps you should get your military education from something other than video games?
Great argument, really debunked all my bullshit there
?
Where’d that come from, i didnt cite any games, and as far as I know there aren’t even any games about the Spanish civil war .
If your such a military history expert could you point me to a civil war where an anarchist faction won and wasn’t eventually defeated by authoritarians?
I’m not going to read the rest of your comment but starting it with “I read on Wikipedia” is a good way to make sure people don’t listen to what you have to say if they have read primary sources.
I read appendix 6 and even gave some quotes from the source showing my point. I’m not gonna read the whole thing in a day to reply to a comment, most of it is his war memoir and has little to do with the discussion. Appendix 6 was the one talking about propaganda that op directed me to.