World War II, the CNT, and more

49 posts / 0 new
Last post
lem
Offline
Joined: 25-07-05
Dec 21 2005 00:22
World War II, the CNT, and more

How did the CNT support WWII? What would have happened if the proletariat refused to participate? confused Revolution? Europe wide fascism? A complete holocaust? Etc confused Cheers

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Dec 21 2005 01:48
lem wrote:
How did the CNT support WWII?

they didn't.

lem
Offline
Joined: 25-07-05
Dec 21 2005 01:59
Lazlo_Woodbine wrote:
lem wrote:
How did the CNT support WWII?

they didn't.

What did they do to attract allegations that they did?

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Dec 21 2005 02:05

from who?

lem
Offline
Joined: 25-07-05
Dec 21 2005 02:09
Lazlo_Woodbine wrote:
from who?

From the left?

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Dec 21 2005 02:12

That's really vague. You'll have to do better than that,

lem
Offline
Joined: 25-07-05
Dec 21 2005 02:19

Well, I'm not interested in who uses which criticism. Any from all would be good.

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Dec 21 2005 02:20

so maybe none from no one?

lem
Offline
Joined: 25-07-05
Dec 21 2005 02:21

The ICC. I didn't want to say because you might not take it seriously oops

alibadani
Offline
Joined: 12-09-05
Dec 21 2005 02:39
Quote:
The ICC. I didn't want to say because you might not take it seriously

How about a link?

Quote:
What would have happened if the proletariat refused to participate?

There would have been no war. Maybe a repeat of 1917-1923 with, maybe, better results. It's really speculative.

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Dec 21 2005 11:39
alibadani wrote:
Quote:
What would have happened if the proletariat refused to participate?

There would have been no war. Maybe a repeat of 1917-1923 with, maybe, better results. It's really speculative.

Indeed.

As for the ICC criticisms of the CNT in WW2, I'm afraid I'm not aware of them. A link? AFAIK the CNT leadership in exile hoped that the Allied powers would depose Franco, but were, obviously, disappointed.

lem
Offline
Joined: 25-07-05
Dec 21 2005 15:20
ICC wrote:
Anarcho-syndicalism foundered body and soul in its support for imperialist war: in 1914 the CGT enrolled the French working-class for war, while in 1936-37 Spanish CNT, through its antifascist ideology and its participation in government, became one of the main pillars of the bourgeois republic

http://en.internationalism.org/ir/118_syndicalism_i.html

alibadani wrote:
Quote:
What would have happened if the proletariat refused to participate?

There would have been no war. Maybe a repeat of 1917-1923 with, maybe, better results. It's really speculative.

What would have happened with fascism, Hitler and the holocaust if parts of the proletariat had not participated.

alibadani
Offline
Joined: 12-09-05
Dec 21 2005 19:04

That ICC quote was about the imperialist war in Spain. The ICC sees the War in Spain as an imperialist war too.

Quote:
In the history books the events in Spain from 1936 are described as a "civil war". The Trotskyists and the Anarchists see them as the "Spanish Revolution". For the ICC they were neither a "civil war" nor a "revolution" but an imperialist war. It was a war between two fractions of the Spanish bourgeoisie: on the one hand, Franco backed by German and Italian imperialism; and on the other, the Republic of the Popular Front, which in Catalonia, in particular, included the Stalinists, the POUM and the CNT, backed by the USSR and the democratic imperialisms.

http://en.internationalism.org/ir/102_durruti.htm

Quote:

What would have happened with fascism, Hitler and the holocaust if parts of the proletariat had not participated.

I really hope someone from the ICC responds to this in a satisfying way. These are the very types of qestions that go through people's minds. How can they take the internationalist position seriously if these basic questions remain unsatisfactorally anwered.

I may come back to you on that.

lem
Offline
Joined: 25-07-05
Dec 21 2005 20:39
alibadani wrote:
That ICC quote was about the imperialist war in Spain.

How embarseeing. Its just thats its followed by a comparision with the wobblies position in the US.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Dec 21 2005 22:25

All their ideas are predicated on the fact that the working class is united. This is an utterly bollocks idea, cos if all the working class were united, we'd be living in communism now. Of course if the German proletariat had refused to carry out the Holocaust and invade Poland there wouldn't have been WW2 - but the w/c is not united. You have to decide what to do as things are NOW, in times where large sections of the working class act against our class interest. Like WW2, the Spanish Civil War, or whenever. And if that means killing large numbers of them then that's very sad - but sometimes it is necessary.

alibadani
Offline
Joined: 12-09-05
Dec 22 2005 00:14

revol,

It'll take some effort but maybe you should look at the analysis of Bilan written in 1936:

http://en.internationalism.org/ir/006_bilan_34.html

http://en.internationalism.org/ir/006_bilan_35.html

http://en.internationalism.org/ir/006_bilan_36_dont_betray.html

This is a bit of the left communist analysis of the war in Spain.

A word about decadence. This is not deterministic. Nothing about this theory sayst the revolution is inevitable. The decadent phase of capitalism makes the revolution possible and historically necessary.

alibadani
Offline
Joined: 12-09-05
Dec 22 2005 01:14
Quote:
And if that means killing large numbers of them then that's very sad - but sometimes it is necessary.

Sounds like a "tragic neccesity" argument. 8)

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Dec 22 2005 01:27
alibadani wrote:
Quote:
And if that means killing large numbers of them then that's very sad - but sometimes it is necessary.

Sounds like a "tragic neccesity" argument. 8)

Look I cannot understand how you lot are such idiots about this, especially in relation to WW2.

If you're a Jew, or a communist, and the Nazis invade your country, if you don't beat then you are going to die. Of course if they refused to fight you'd all be fine. This is an irrelevant argument - because they weren't refusing to fight. Therefore you have to defend yourself (and your class/interest).

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Dec 22 2005 02:06
alibadani wrote:
Sounds like a "tragic neccesity" argument. 8)

you're such a bitch sometimes wink

alibadani
Offline
Joined: 12-09-05
Dec 22 2005 03:24

Dude lighten up.

Tell me if this is your question: If the working class in the democracies had heeded the appeals of the internationalists, and they faced the working class in the fascist states who remain nationalist, should they fight the German/Austrian/Italian etc. workers in uniform?

Is this your question?

Or maybe this is your question: Since the workers everywhere in 1939 were drunk with nationalism and would never have paid much attention to any internationalist appeal, what do revolutionaries do?

Here it goes. What if by some miracle the workers had listened to the appeals of the internationalists in the democracies in WW2. We have some precedent for that: WW1. Workers in Tsarist Russia listened to the appeals of the internationalists there. However the logical consequence of such a massive change of heart is a massive leap in class consciousness. Like in Russia that would have meant a struggle against the bourgeois state at home. Armed with a strong regroupment of internationalists (a necessary precondition for internationalism to have such an echo among the masses), and the rich experiences of the failed revolutions of 1917-1923, the workers would have created soviet states in the democracies. Again as the 1917 precedent showed, revolution is contagious and there is no reason to believe it wouldn't have spread in to Germany proper where the workers who made the 1919 revolution in Germany were the parents of those now in Nazi uniforms. All this would have been more likely given the improvements in travel, communication etc. since 1917.

Hey you wanted speculation so I'm giving it to you.

With regards to the second question. Pannekoek wrote his most widely-read book Workers' Councils in Holland under Nazi occupation. The communist left worked hard for their positions. They called for fraternisation with German troops. They were bieng attacked and some shot by both Nazi and Stalinist (resistance) agents. Imagine if all the anarchists did the same thing the left communists did.

As for the Jews, the allies could care less about them. They knew about the concetration camps and did nothing about them. Even when offered Jews in exchange for trucks they refused. Fighting Germans didn't stop the holocaust. In fact the final solution was instituted when Gernmany began losing the war. (I know I know i'm bollocks, or whatever Brits say).

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Dec 22 2005 10:35
revol68 wrote:
Oh wait this particular brand of left communism cares little for historical fact, it is but a fuck toy to felate their hard determinist cock.

I love you, sometimes 8)

btw, can someone correct the spelling of 'cunt' in the thread title, please?

MalFunction
Offline
Joined: 31-10-03
Dec 22 2005 11:02

Hi

still looking for info on this but found:

ANARCHIST ACTIVITY IN FRANCE DURING WORLD WAR TWO

Wednesday August 25th, 2004

summary of material from the C.I.R.A., Marseille, BULLETIN No. 21/22 (Summer, 1984), which had the theme Anarchists and the Resistance.

http://cnt-ait.info/article.php3?id_article=1021

(I'm trying to locate a photo i seem to remember seeing of CNT members with a sherman tank involved in the liberation of Toulouse or Marsailles. I also remember reading that members of the spanish exiled CNT forces (who weren't interned etc) did join up with the maquis in attacking the occupying german forces and their vichy supporters )

MalFunction
Offline
Joined: 31-10-03
Dec 22 2005 11:06

Hi

this is in the google cache:

Quote:
Forgotten Heroes

Spanish Resistance in France 1939-45

http://www.libcom.org/history/articles/spanish-resistance-in-france-1939/

Admin edit - google cache link was so big it stretched the page, so shorter, more convenient link on libcom.org/history inserted instead ;)

Alf's picture
Alf
Offline
Joined: 6-07-05
Dec 22 2005 16:05

Looking for material to answer Lem's question, I came across the same text as Malfunction, but if you read French, there's a more detailed article on the CNT's French pages

http//cnt-ait.info/article.php3?id_article=1011

"Bon nombre de ces maquisards se retrouveront dans le bataillon « Libertad » sous la responsabilité de l’anarchiste Santos. Ce bataillon atteint par la suite la pointe de Grave et libère le Lot et Cahors. Enfin, la présence anarchiste est particulièrement remarquable (et superbement ignorée) dans la 2ème DB du Général Leclerc. A plus de 60% espagnole, la 2ème DB compte bon nombre d’anarcho-syndicalistes tant et si bien qu’ils sont hégémoniques dans la 9ème compagnie du 3ème RMT, « la nueve », uniquement composée d’espagnols à l’exception du Capitaine Dronne qui la commande. C’est elle qui rentre la première dans Paris. Les premiers blindés portent des noms qui rappellent l’Espagne, les deux premiers se nomment « Ascaso » et « Durruti » rappelant les illustres solidarios (militants de la CNT), un autre s’appelle « Casas Viejas » pour ne pas oublier la répression anti-cénétiste de 1931 et un autre encore « Teruel » en référence à une grande bataille de la guerre civile. Les militants de la CNT-FAI sont bel et bien présents, la nueve installe un premier canon, nommé « El Abuelo », dans l’Hôtel de ville de Paris ainsi que le premier drapeau..."

To summarise the CNT had a significant presence in the armoured division led by the famous French general Leclerc and they were among the first to enter Paris at the head of the allied armies. Some of their armoured vehicles bore names that paid tribute to anarchist heroes or battles fought by the CNT.

There's also some information here

http//www.balagan.org.uk/war/1939/spanish_in_ww2.htm

"In particular ex-republicans formed the 9th company in the RMT (9ème compagnie de combat du RMT) - they called themselves "La Nueve". The First and Second Platoon were formed from moderate Socialists and Republicans, whereas Third Platoon comprised Anarchists. There were few Communists. This unit fought from Normandy to Germany. "La Nueve" wore standard USA Uniforms" (there follows much detail of interest to army uniform fans).

To come back to Lem's question the CNT was present not only in the patriotic resistance but also in the official armies of allied imperialism. This was in complete continuity with its role in Spain, where 'anti-fascist' unity was defended at the expense of proletarian autonomy, even to the point of participating in the highest structures of the bourgeois state.

We don't conclude from this that all the anarchists played this role in World War Two. Others genuinely tried to maintain internationalist positions against the war. But the case against the CNT is fairly clear.

Regarding your other questions about 'what would have happened if....', it's difficult to answer them because they seem to enter into the sphere of speculation as Alibadani says. At the time the clearest internationalists knew from at least 1933 that the system was heading towards another world war the proletarian revolutions of 1917 on had been crushed and the renewal of the crisis was pushing capitalism towards war as its only 'solution'. A measure of this defeat was the dramatic reduction in the size of the revolutionary minority by 1939. Most of the revolutionaries believed that the war would give rise to a second revolutionary wave, but the bourgeoisie was also aware of this danger and took preventitive measures (such as Churchill allowing the Nazis to repress the Italian workers strikes in 1943, and the subsequent terror bombing of Germany).

The debates about World War Two that keep coming back on these threads are about what revolutionaries do in unfavourable situations where they are not able to get a broad echo in the class. But this post is already too long and we will have to come back to this later on.

alibadani
Offline
Joined: 12-09-05
Dec 22 2005 16:45
Quote:
Oh wait this particular brand of left communism cares little for historical fact, it is but a fuck toy to felate their hard determinist cock.

Revol, Am I a brand of left communism? And how did I become a "thier" insted of a "his." You're starting to go Lazy Riser on us dude.

And why do you keep on with this determinism stuff?

Great post Alf. I just wonder why the CNT would name one of thier armoured cars "Durruti"?

alibadani
Offline
Joined: 12-09-05
Dec 22 2005 17:50

Yeah revol, it's Marxism. roll eyes

l'agité
Offline
Joined: 28-07-05
Dec 22 2005 19:13
Quote:
As for the Jews, the allies could care less about them. They knew about the concetration camps and did nothing about them. Even when offered Jews in exchange for trucks they refused. Fighting Germans didn't stop the holocaust. In fact the final solution was instituted when Gernmany began losing the war. (I know I know i'm bollocks, or whatever Brits say).

neutral yes you are perfectly right the nazi started lose the war on the mid of 1941...

and the resistance never destroy a only railroad.

And your are right : "Fighting Germans didn't stop the holocaust"... ohh what stupids were the FTP-MOI ! what counter-revolutionnaries and burgeois the workers, jews, and anti-fascsits immigrants in the Resistance in fight against the Nazi to save theirs lives ! ! !

And you are perfeclty rigth the antisemitic persecutions ddidn't began in 1933 but in the end of the war.

But to respond to the question : "How did the CNT support WWII?"

The CNT is a spanish organisation, and the Spain don't participate in the WWII. Therfore the CNT don't participate in this war (and in 1940's the CNT is almost destruct by the franquist regime)

But their are thousands of spanish refugees in France after the end of the civil war in Spain (in 1939). Many hundreds (probably thousands) are anarchists of the CNT or/and the FAI. In France before the begenning of the War the French Republic open concentrations camps for this refugees (because they fear of communists and anarchists activities, they want to controle them , and there some refugees who died of disease).

In the begenning of the war in fews weeks the France is invaded by the Nazi Germany, the french Republic is destructed and a new regime (Vichy regime) is created to collaborate with the Germany. The Germany want to imprison all the anti-fascists refugees (Germans, italians, spanish and portugeses) .

The italians, the spanish etc ... and anti-fascists immigrants in France had no choice. They didn't "support" the war but hadn't the possibility to escape the war. It was impossible for them to have a pure anarchists/ antimilitarists position about the war and participate in. They didn't have the alternatives (the choice is simple : to be imprisonned or live in the clandestinity ... but if you live in the clandestinity you can't work, you can't live .... and therefore many immigrants antifascists and anarchists enter in the Resistance (Resistances is more appropriate because very differents groups in methods, in ideologies and purpose existed). There was anarchists who participate in the Resistance in very differents ways : there was spanish anarchists who it were engaged in the allies armies forces (their are many of spain and anarchists in the Second Blinded Division, the first column who enter in Paris in 1944 ), there was anarchists in differents maquis in the South of France and participate in guerrilla actions, there was anarchists who were hidden and tryied to escape the persecutions, there was immigrants anarchists who die in prisons before fighting ... etc. ...

(... a day i will correctly write in english wink ! )

alibadani
Offline
Joined: 12-09-05
Dec 22 2005 21:39

secondary comments on WW2 History,

September 12, 1941: The first snow slows the Wehrmarcht's advance in Operation Barabarossa.

September 1941: Leningrad successfully defended by general Zhukov

November 25, 1941: Operation TYPHOON. The Wehrmarcht's final drive on Moscow begins. The attack reaches to within 20 miles of Moscow before it is halted by stiff resistance and bitter cold.

December 5, 1941: Hitler abandons the attack on Moscow. Zhukov begins a counter-attack, utilizing Siberian troops no longer needed against Japan since the April Neutrality Pact with Japan.

December 1941: Turning point, Germany's fortunes change.

At the end of 1941, Hitler was left wondering what was holding the Red Army together. The Russians had lost 3 million soldiers (its entire strength at the start of the war.) Fully half of its economic base was in German hands. But Russia was still strong. It had 9 million men of military age left, (enough for 400 divisions) and produced 4500 new tanks over the winter. Germany could not match either of these numbers. A sustained battle of attrition strongly favored Russia.

January 13, 1942. Russians recapture Kiev.

May 28, 1942. German General Paulus' 6th Army closes a trap at Kharkov, capturing 240,000 Russians.

From here on, mass captures of this kind become rare for two reasons. First, Stalin began to allow his troops to retreat when their flanks were threatened. Second, stories of Germany's horrendous treatment of POW's filtered throughout the Russian ranks (of 5.7 million prisoners taken by Germany in the course of the war, 3.3 million died in captivity.) Russians now prefer to die in combat rather than surrender.

Germany is now clearly losing.

August 1942: Hitler goes berserk and orders an attack of Stlalingrad

August 1942: Hitler's memorandum formalises the plan to exterminate the whole of European Jewry (final solution)

----------------------------------------------------------------

Hence the statement, "final solution was instituted when Germany began losing the war"

Note: I didn't say, "final solution was instituted because Germany began losing the war"

L'agite, ton ami Staline etait en train de preparer son propre genocide de juifs juste avant sa mort. I'll n'y a pas de plus reactionnaires que les Staliniens. Il n'y a pas de principe plus proletaire que l'internationalisme.

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Dec 22 2005 21:54
alibadani wrote:
Hence the statement, "final solution was instituted when Germany began losing the war"

I'd agree with that. The dynamics of the eastern front contributed a lot to the start of the shoah, especially the ensatsgruppen killings, which started well before the death camps.

jef costello's picture
jef costello
Offline
Joined: 9-02-06
Dec 22 2005 22:06
alibadani wrote:

L'agite, ton ami Staline etait en train de preparer son propre genocide de juifs juste avant sa mort. I'll n'y a pas de plus reactionnaires que les Staliniens. Il n'y a pas de principe plus proletaire que l'internationalisme.

Pourquoi parler de Staline?

L'agite merci d'avoir poste, t'es en France maintenant?

si t'habite la comment t'as trouve ce site?

Einsatzgruppen were mostly used against Slavs on the eastern front.

Stalin had already purged the jews by his death, do you have any proof for your statement Alibadani?

Quote:
Hence the statement, "final solution was instituted when Germany began losing the war"

Now this is an interesting topic. I would like to point out that mass murder was already common and encouraged but doctors etc were reporting the bad psychological effects it was having on even their most committed men.

alibadani
Offline
Joined: 12-09-05
Dec 22 2005 22:50
Quote:
Pourquoi parler de Staline?

L'agite a dit qu'il preferait les staliniens de la resistance aux militants de la gauche communiste qui, selon lui, n'ont rien fait.

Quote:
do you have any proof for your statement Alibadani

The so-called Doctor's Plot. A show trial purged a bunch of Jewish doctors said to be plotting against the state.

Here's some stuff (pretty well documented)) from this website: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=139050#B6

Quote:
the Doctors' Plot and intended show trial were meant to cleanse the Soviet Union of “foreign,” “cosmopolitan,” and “Zionist” (read Jewish) elements.
Quote:
The show trial was meant to initiate a carefully constructed plan in which almost all of the Soviet Union's two million Jews, nearly all of whom were survivors of the Holocaust, were to be transported to the Gulag—in cattle cars. Between the January announcement and Stalin's death a month and a half later it became clear that careful plans had been laid for the transfer and “concentration” of Soviet Jews. Rapoport quotes a Soviet Jewish engineer who reported seeing, in the early 1960s, a “never used camp with row after row of barracks: ‘Its vastness took my breath away.’ ”6 Other witnesses corroborated the existence of the deportation plans.