Talk:Spanish Civil War

Should the conflict between the Republican Popular Front versus the Republican Anarchist and POUM factions be shown somehow in the infobox. Many were killed and arrested in this factional infighting.

A well-known conflict erupted during the Spanish Civil War within the Republican faction between the Popular Front government versus the anarchist CNT-FAI and the Trotskyist POUM that the Popular Front accused of treason. There was violence between these forces, widespread arrests, police raids, and executions. Should this be shown in the infobox as another part of the civil war? If so, it will need to be arranged so that one side is not confused as being on the National faction that will be listed above it in the Republican vs. National section. The Yugoslav Wars infobox separates conflicts between multiple two-sided conflicts in a way that the multiple conflicts are not confused as being singular.--R-41 (talk) 05:05, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

We can't possibly describe that sort of internal politics without being confusing. Ultimately, POUM lost out but the rest of the Popular Front was not significantly affected. It was more like an internal change; to say people on one side of the Barcelona troubles were as opposed to other parts of the Popular Front as the Nationalists would be misleading: it was a different sort of opposition. As I said, it could be really confusing for the reader. Being under the impression that they were united when actually there were (bloody) internal struggles is not that wrong. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 08:34, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

'being under the impression that they were united..is not that wrong' - is wrong. if Beevor titles a chapter 'civil war within the civil war' that points to disunity - in fact as orwell etc pointed out, Stalinism was a whole other phenomenon - the POlish intelligentsia rounded up after the molotov-Ribbentrop pact, the Moscow TRials, etc Anton Ciliga - the USSR was on the side of the USSR -and this was becoming clear to some at the time , not just hindsight, hence the chapter title of beevor's book 'civil war within the civil war ' = not united.- Sayerslle (talk) 19:34, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

I have Beevor, and it is clear from the resst of the book that the Popular Front/Republic forces continued to be in alliance against the Nationalists before, during, and after the internal troubles. Relations were not perfect, but they do not justify considering it a three-sided war, which would be deeply confusing to the reader. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 19:42, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

The civil war within the civil war is a chapter of Beevor's book on the Spanish civil war and it is very important. orwell wrote of the italian militiaman he met in the barcelona barracks "probably a trotskyist or an Anarchist, and in the peculiar conditions of our time when people of that sort are not killed by the gestapo they are usually killed by the GPU - the story is a disgusting one. the germans and italians intervened in order to crush spanish democracy the russians doled out a small quantity of weapons and extorted the maximum of political control in return. the british and french looked the other way . for a year or more the Spanish govt was effectively under russian control - the sinister development of soviet russia -" when stalinists were doing all in their power to crush people they were supposedly fighting alongside - to say Stalin was as opposed to parts of the Left as the nationalists would not be misleading at all .The Stalinists were cynics - the Pact and katyn were just round the corner. Sayerslle (talk) 09:12, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't follow the point of your post. I certainly accept that the internal struggles within the Left were important, but they are not easily displayed in the infobox.

This doesn't relate to the infobox issue, but POUM was a member of the Popular Front and a mainstream (i.e. non-revolutionary) party, certainly not Trotskyite. Trotsky himself condemned it and endorsed a different Spanish faction. There was a former associate of Trotsky in the leadership. A lot of prominent Trotskyites have converted and moved right; It is an odd little trend. Kauffner (talk) 04:59, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

What is clear is that the reports back to Moscow were violent against the 'counter-revolutionary trotskyists' - 'it goes without saying that it is impossible to win the war against the rebels if these scum within the republican camp are not liquidated' (military advisor Berzin) - people like Aleksandr Orlov, rep of the NKVD, etc - these are not on the same side as the POUM . if it is difficult to represent in an infobox Grandiose, I can see that - the Yugoslav wars infobox lokked pretty confusing to me in a way - but I don't see why an infobox titled 'civil war within the civil war' can't be placed somewhere under the main one, with on the (far, far, right) of the infobox Stalinists, and Orlov, Marty , - Orwell wrote at the time how hard it was to get people to grasp that the Communists, the Stalinists, were on the right, - that Stalinism represented something that had to be understood afresh - George Orwell -"As to the russians their motives in the Spanish war are completely inscrutable. Did they intervene in order to defend democracy? then why did they intervene on such a niggardly scale and finally leave Spain in the lurch? or to foster revolution? then why did they do all in their power to crush the spanish revolutionary movements..I believe stalins foreign policy has been merely opportunistic and stupid." Christopher Hitchens , "Orwell..came to unsderstand that much of the talk about 'discipline and 'unity' was a rhetorical shield for the covert Stalinization of the Spanish Republic." I don't see why there can't be a second infobox for the civil war within the civil war.Sayerslle (talk) 11:46, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

POUM was in the Popular Front, but it was expelled. After it was expelled it was denounced in official propaganda for allegedly being a crypto-fascist organization designed to damage the Republican war effort. The anarchist CNT-FAI and POUM were attacked by Republican army forces in Barcelona in 1937 and later POUM members were arbitrarily arrested. As for how to organize the infobox if it is decided to include this fighting between the Popular Front Republican government vs. the CNT-FAI and POUM, look at the Yugoslav Wars infobox in how it divides multiple but interrelated conflicts in a single infobox. That is how I suggest it could be done in this article's infobox.--R-41 (talk) 20:27, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Well I think it should be in the infobox - up front in the article infobox , pointing up this was a complicated struggle, - points to the ideological chicaneries and tragedies of the time as the world headed for ww2 - sounds a bit pompous, but anyhow, i think it should be in there. Sayerslle (talk) 21:51, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Spain had ceased to be Catholic

I removed this sentence "In fact, even the integrist Isidro Goma y Tomas had spoken in similar vein in 1931-"Catholic conviction, this - is not found in abundance."" I don't understand what this means. Its introduction seems to have been a response to the inclusion of Beevor's politically unwise point, but that viewpoint does not need balancing because it is entirely representative of the literature on the subject, which notes a considerable political firestorm in the comment's wake. At a guess, I would say that the sentence above is attempting to support Azana's statement. Its veracity is not doubted in the article at current. It should be at least reworded to make sense in English, since it doesn't at the moment so I've had to guess. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 13:40, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Its Thomas not Beevor in the ref isnt it?- its not a big deal - the point of the Goma quote is that, not just AZana, but others, of a very different political stripe, were making similar observations - to comment on its 'unwiseness' suggests it made a difference - whereas other writers, like Hilari Raguer, believe the catholic Right had it in for the REpublic whatever - so it was irrelevant kind of thing - its a minor point but I've said what I think HIlari Raguer was saying in 'Gunpowder and Incense' - the words of Azana were twisted - deliberately - the point is that the firestorm, the catholic Right would have brought the storm, whatever comments were made - Sayerslle (talk) 14:00, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

7.2 Republicans

In section 7.2 Republicans there appears to be a minor mistake. In the second paragraph, Moreno's claim to the number of clergy killed in the war, the word "including" is written twice and there are two commas when one is sufficient. Also, the numbers do not add up to the given total of 6,832, but to 6,845. The difference might have something to do with the 13 bishops. DoverGwiki362 (talk) 02:19, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

France de facto supported the Republicans in 1936

France under the government of Leon Blum de facto supported the Republicans in 1936. At the beginning of the Civil War, France was openly pro-Republican, it was in negotiations with the Spanish Republic that involved sending military aid and technology to the Republicans including aircraft and utilizing the French navy to blockade the National-led Spanish Army of Africa from crossing from Spanish Morocco to Spain.(Michael Alpert. A New International History of the Spanish Civil War. Hampshire and London, England, UK: MACMILLAN PRESS, LTD; New York, New York, USA: ST. MARTIN'S PRESS, INC, 1994. Pp. 14) France recognized the Spanish Republic the "legitimate government" of Spain while referring to the Nationalist-led Spanish State as "rebels". The French government could not officially support the Republicans because its ally Britain wanted official neutrality by outside powers on the civil war, and because fascists and the far-right in France violently opposed support being given to the Republicans, they supported Franco. In 1936 France allowed Republican military forces to be able to cross the Spanish border into France, also in response to pressure by his left-wing supporters, Blum covertly sold French military aircraft to the Spanish Republic that included the following: Potez 54 bomber aircraft, Dewoitine aircraft, and Loire 46 fighter aircraft being sent from 7 August 1936 to December of that year to Republican forces.(Michael Alpert. A New International History of the Spanish Civil War. Hampshire and London, England, UK: MACMILLAN PRESS, LTD; New York, New York, USA: ST. MARTIN'S PRESS, INC, 1994. Pp. 46-47.) Also, until 8 September 1936, aircraft could freely pass from France into Spain if they were bought in other countries.(Michael Alpert. A New International History of the Spanish Civil War. Hampshire and London, England, UK: MACMILLAN PRESS, LTD; New York, New York, USA: ST. MARTIN'S PRESS, INC, 1994. Pp. 47.) Later in 1936 France ended this pro-Republican activity to abide by the British initiative of neutrality involving an embargo on sale of military equipment to either side in Spain. I have provided sources for this material on the article: Republican faction (Spanish Civil War).--R-41 (talk) 12:22, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

What?

Where are the Regulares? They were involved in the Spanish Civil War. I'm tired of people editing the factions involved. B-Machine (talk) 15:43, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

They formed part of the Army of Africa, which is mentioned. (In terms of the infobox, it formed a direct part of the Nationalist faction. I don't really mind if the Army of Africa was included there, but I don't think it's worth arguing over.) The regulares should be name-checked somewhere. The "Background" and "Coup" sections need updating from their main articles, which I've substantially improved, but I don't have time at the moment. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 16:01, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

The regulares, i think got continually removed from the infobox because they embarrassed the far right catholic faction of editors who didnt like to see muslims up front in the crusade. franco's Spain was set out as real Spain as against anti-Spain as i understand it, infiltrated by foreign elements, so the Francoist editors blanked the regulares out the infobox - i dont think its worth arguing over is wrong imo - the disappearance of the regulares, is ideologicaly motivated, and connived at by those who say why make a fuss - why make a fuss - because it should be part of the record in the infobox, they were central to the Uprising , " the battle hardened colonial army, consisting of the spanish foreign legion and Arab mercenaries of regulares indigenas , was to be the cornerstone of nationalist success - (Paul Preston) Sayerslle (talk) 16:30, 26 January 2012 (UTC)