Tell me about Revolutionary Catalonia, Veeky Forums

>hurr nothing except mussolini is fascist
dont fascists realise that this just makes fascism look even more shit

>>hurr nothing except mussolini is fascist
I don't remember saying that.

who is a fascist then?
what's the specific doctrine of fascism?
oh wait there isn't one lol

>who is a fascist then?
Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera and Ramiro Ledesma were the main proponents of fascism in the years preceding the civil war in Spain.

>what's the specific doctrine of fascism?
Of course a term that englobes verious movements in post-WW1 Europe doesn't have ONE specific theory but it has instead many reoccurring tenets such as nationalism, corporatism, a rejection of the left and right, etc. We can also recognize a fascist movement in its origins, that is early 20th century syndicalist and integralist circles as opposed to the traditionalists in Spain that evolved from the original 19th century Carlists.

Of course some of the ideas change from country to country but the fundamental remains there and that is not only true for fascism but also for pretty much every multinational political movements.

If you want to know more about the original doctrine of the Falange, you can read the points made by Primo de Rivera here: heraldicahispanica.com/XXVIpuntos.htm

I also find relevant to point to this discussion the opposition some falangists held during Franco's regime: es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oposición_falangista_al_franquismo

I know I diverged a lot form your question but I hope it clears some of the confusions people have about falangism.

Productivity actually increased under anarchism massively. So it worked in the sense of being efficient

>and in what ways was it communist, as opposed to anarchist?
As far as economics are concerned there isn't much of a distinction. The chief difference is the means in which those economic conditions are achieved, one advocating an intermediary state (which to a certain extent Catalonia had), one advocating going straight to statelessness.

Nothing wrong.

but if fascism is diverse, why isn't francoism fascism?
perhaps it was more traditionalist or ecclesiastical, but so was the falange compared to other fascist groups

This thread will be full of fascist memers (like you).

There is no such thing as "Francoism", Franco just practiced what you could call the Catholic version of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism.

>implying the Nationalists had any room to criticize anyone for atrocities

Except the Paris Commune really was by and large democratically controlled.

The fact that Russians tried communism and it degenerated into tyranny then exported that system all over the world isn't an argument against communism, it's an argument against Russians being human.

Whenever any other nation tried communism without Russian influence they got democracy and worker control of the means of production just as expected. But whether Russians try monarchy, communism or liberal democracy it always devolves into Asiatic tyranny.

>be Stalin
>ruin everything

The 25th point of the Falange Española says:
>25. Our movement incorporates the feeling of Catholicism—that of glorious tradition and predominance in Spain for the national reconstruction. The Church and the State shall agree with their respective powers, without interference or activity that would lessen the dignity of the State or the integrity of the Nation
(sorry for the rough translation)

So here we can see how falangism, and fascism in general, looks at both the Church and tradition: they shall be protected to some extent for the preservation of the cultural and historical identity of the country without dogmatically enforcing it. That is the "feeling" of Catholicism, a spiritual flame that helps keeping the integrity of the people alive.

Traditionalism main goal is to reject modernity and embracing tradition and, most of the time, it supports the idea of a deep union between the Church and the State. While fascism rejects the leftist and rightist view of modernity, it embraces a new idea of modernity in the search of a national renew, for a glorious present.

To make it simple, in fascism, tradition is a means to an end while in traditionalism it's an end in itself.

Of course this is only one of the many differences between the two ideologies. I don't think I can show more than one per post.

these are quality posts man, thanks for increasing the standard of discussion even if I disagree with you

I'm glad that my posts are informing people about a subject that interests me deeply. I'm thinking about translating the 27 Points of the Falange myself, the translations I've found online aren't very good.

But for now, I'm going to bed.

Everything you need to know:
youtu.be/s6zO-qhQx_8?t=16m37s

>ancap
to the trash.

Yes, ancaps are autistics. But the Spanish civil war is spot on.

To be fair he makes it sounds awesome and 110% revolutionary.

>tfw your friend is a libertarian ancap
>slowly turning him onto the idea that it leads to despotism without societal institutions to stand up to strongman policy

It's a process. Ancaps are just idealists, like bizarro communists.

>tfw you almost went full ancap when you were like 14
If I could go back in time I would slap myself.

>"state dictatorship that was advocated by Marx"
>it was a dictatorship because they embargoed muh small business owners who refused to collectivize
>chaos in production (despite a net increase in productivity).

It's cool, I've been there too. It's good for having a scope of things to have once been a part of a logical extreme.

A bunch of warlords killing each other, and commie troops genociding, any stalinist oposition.Heaven on earth for this people.If it lasted more than 5 years, it would have become the biggest failure in history.It had shortage problems, and they were killing each other in the streets

Source?

>MY ESPECIFIC BRAND OF COMMUNISM HAS NEVER BEEN TRIED
>IMplying that there are variations of right wing populism
leftards sound this stupid

Production increased because there was a fucking war, and they were about to be hanged.If you are so narrow minded that can see this you are a fool.They would have starved to death if Franco didn't conquer them.

>They would have starved to death if Franco didn't conquer them.
How can you possibly know that?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_Days
It was a cluster fuck.Anyone that ideolizes it, is just searching a safe spce to idiolizze his ideology

They were killing each other all the time, and trade would have been certainly cut.It would have failed, as hard as lefties crap always do.

If you consider a Jewish despotate to be democratic, then yea.

>Linking a battle
lmao

>hey were killing each other all the time
No they weren't.
>and trade would have been certainly cut
Franco got embargoed anyway and diplomatically the Republicans, including the anarchists had more international support
>.It would have failed, as hard as lefties crap always do.
From the brief moment it existed it seemed to do pretty good.

It was an example.Stalinists, Trotskist and anarchist were killing each other all the time.Companys started a killing spree inside Catalonia.But well, keep believing in your unaccuarate version of history to make yourself think that it can really work

>No they weren't.
kek.COmpanys started a killing spree and they were battles in Barcelona in which anarchists and trotskies confronted the communists and republicans.
>Franco got embargoed anyway and diplomatically the Republicans, including the anarchists had more international support
Franco had enough centralized power,the anarchists were a desorganized clusterfuck,oN top of that, the republic had the support, not the stalinist/anarchist nutjobs that leaded the defence, which would have been way more isolated
>From the brief moment it existed it seemed to do pretty good.
It had daily killing sprees, and targeted civilians to kill.And Trostkies and Stalinists were killing each other to the point of genocide.TheUSSR had a police corps to target and kill civilian population.Fucking paradise.

I'm interested in hearing more about the history of Catalonia at this time. I'm not fully convinced that it was perfect.

However thus far, and from my own reading. It seems like the leftist narrative of events is more accurate wheras the right-wing vision of Catalonia is extremely selective and on occasion just overtly biased.

>Stalinists, Trotskist and anarchist were killing each other all the time
Of course they were, it was a war.

Ok, what is your source for all of that.

Without referencing the communist factions.

>Of course they were, it was a war.
They were in the same side of that war...
This is the a picture of a place of BArcelona, after Franco liberated it.Noone outside of Orwell reader, remembers that period as a good one.I have family in Barcelona, and my grandfather told me horrible things about that period, and I havent met an old person that remembered it nosgalticaly

Of what part? Stalin had his own police in Republican control places.

>kek.COmpanys started a killing spree
>It had daily killing sprees, and targeted civilians to kill

>They were in the same side of that war...
Except they weren't, the anarchists and the communists were diametrically opposed.

Yes, but they both supported the republic

And one of the main problems with the republic was internal conflicts between the various factions.

I can give them to you in Spanish

Yes, but how would Catalonia be succesful if they were killing each other all the time?
Companys alone singed 9000 killing sentences, which is three times what Pinochet did in 10 years

Fair enough.

>Yes, but how would Catalonia be succesful if they were killing each other all the time?
Evidently they couldn't as they lost.

Because Cuba is such a great democracy with wokers controlling the means of production.

Exactly, it's one of the places where Russians exported their system.

Would you mind describing what your grandfather and other people tell you about this period? I would like to hear some off the record accounts on it.

Also put here guerrilla-controlled zones in Latin America (Southern Mexico, southern Colombia, Cuba, northern Perú, ...)

>Whenever any other nation tried communism without Russian influence they got democracy and worker control of the means of production just as expected
Like which places around the world?

Ukraine (until Russian ML autism ruined everything)
Germany (but got crushed)
Catalonia (until Russian ML autism ruined everything)
Cuba (until Russian ML autism ruined everything).
Yugoslavia (until Serbian pseudo-Russian shitters ruined everything)
Various Latin American workplaces and communities in recent years.

Even the manifestation of early 19th century theoretical socialism represents this. American thinkers were decisive individualist anarchists. German thinkers were pro-democracy. English thinkers were pro-democracy. French thinkers were very pro-democracy. But Russian barbarians are incapable of understanding anything other than iron-fisted state control so they invented vanguardism and planned economies to compensate for their inability to agree on anything ever.

>Various Latin American workplaces and communities in recent years.
Being from Latin America I challenge you to name one of those
t. not one of those gated-community dwellers who post frequently here

You forgot Paris.

Though that was one of the few actually crushed by the Bourgeoisie instead of ML autism.

Hotel Bauen
Brukman factory
FaSinPat

This delusion.No wonder that noone takes you nuts seriously.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Harmony,_Indiana
This is an interesting read that shows, how your meme crap would have ended if given time. But keep your delusion alive

>communism can only work in a small scale - closed setting
now you see how things work

We still have small-scale socialist communes all over the world. In Israel Kibbutz make up like 10% of the economy.

>small-scale

this is the point you nigger

If it can work in one, why not just have lots of small scale settings.

I mean that's basically what workplaces already are, and it's not like most people spend much time outside of their local community.

I'm not sure what your point is. New Harmony was also pretty small scale and the point of anarchism isn't to expand worker control across the entire planet like one big commune. It's to have everyone across the planet control their own workplace and community.

It worked because all their neighbourghs wanted to kill them, what is called a external threat.On top of that, it lives inside a capatilist society.WHen this comunes don't have any outside threat/slash religious believe to hold them united, they just crumble.As it happened in New Harmony.

>what is globalization
never ever again

Which is stupid, as you will kill entrepreneurship, and would destroy big scale projects.Your meme ideology, would cause technological stagnation, poverty and scarcity based on pure evidence.

Kibbutz aren't the only worldwide examples of communes.

> it lives inside a capatilist society.
So it does, so did every socialist society democratic or otherwise on the count that capitalism has been the dominant system for at least 200 years now.

What?

> as you will kill entrepreneurship,
Yes, and this is a good thing.
>and would destroy big scale projects
So you would, but if the free market doesn't want big scale projects then so be it.
>would cause technological stagnation
The greater threat to technological advancement isn't the lack of capitalism. Technology trundles along just fine without capitalism. The greater threat to technological advancement is the lack of a state to invest in ambitious research and development projects. But even without that technology would still advance as there will always be newer and more efficient ways of doing things to be discovered, if slower without a directed and concentrated effort to focus on how.

>poverty and scarcity based on pure evidence.
On the contrary evidence suggests worker control is the cure to poverty and scarcity.

>Yes, and this is a good thing.
How?
>>and would destroy big scale projects
>So you would, but if the free market doesn't want big scale projects then so be it.
I am not an ancap.And at least ancaps can justify that companies make technological progress, as Bell did, there is no prove that technology would advance in a system like yours
>>would cause technological stagnation
>The greater threat to technological advancement isn't the lack of capitalism. Technology trundles along just fine without capitalism. The greater threat to technological advancement is the lack of a state to invest in ambitious research and development projects. But even without that technology would still advance as there will always be newer and more efficient ways of doing things to be discovered,
It took more than 200k years to discover agriculture, and until the industrial revolution progress was very slow,you would just cause an ecoomic risis bigger than the fall of the Roman empire, and this is without taking factors like warlords into account
>>poverty and scarcity based on pure evidence.
>On the contrary evidence suggests worker control is the cure to poverty and scarcity.
Which one? Do you consider a tribal African tribe wealthy, because everyone in the tribe controls everything? The key from people to get out of povery are technological leaps.On top of that your evidence is none existant, outside of memes, like Catalonia that was a huge fucking failure.Just pure wishful thinking

The Industrial Revolution was a massive mistake, anyway.

>The Industrial Revolution was a massive mistake, anyway.
>Modern Medicine was a mistake
>Child mortality being low was a mistake
>Technological inovations were a mistake, like radiators or air conditioners
>toilets are awful
>The increase of wealth on most of the population was a mistake
>You probably couln't live a onfortable life without all the industrial revolution inovation, but you call it a mistake behind your computer.
tips

Anarchists are batshit

Destruction of the environment was a mistake.

The explosion of the human population was a mistake.

Massive urban centers were a mistake.

Unsustainable growth was a mistake.

>hurr you wouldn't have ur computer

I'm already here, might as well use it.

I'm not an Anarchist.

>How?
Having a lack of hopeful future bourgeoisie is a good thing. It's like saying
>If no feudalism then what is incentive to be lord?

>I am not an ancap.And at least ancaps can justify that companies make technological progress, as Bell did, there is no prove that technology would advance in a system like yours
If you're taking proof to mean historical instances then I would have to agree since no anarchist society existed long enough for any notable technological advancement to happen or to be observed to happen.

>It took more than 200k years to discover agriculture,
So it did, but now that we have industrialization as well as a massive almost instanteous and constant transfer of information there's no reason to believe it will ever be as slow as it was pre-industrialization. It's not as if universities, schools and so forth would simply cease to exist and everyone would start working manual labour. People would still be reseaching, developing and exchanging ideas, just without concentrated government and/or corporate patronage in doing so.

>you would just cause an ecoomic risis bigger than the fall of the Roman empire, and this is without taking factors like warlords into account
Fuck the Roman Empire, and to defend against warlords (which I doubt would be that much of a problem) this is why everyone should have guns.

>Which one?
Catalonia
>Despite the critics clamoring for "maximum efficiency" rather than revolutionary methods, anarchist collectives often produced more than before the collectivization. In Aragon, for instance, the productivity increased by 20%.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Revolution_of_1936#Social_revolution

>b-but Catalonia was a huge fucking failure
That is the real meme here.

>The key from people to get out of povery are technological leaps.
Yes, and greater social mobility and empowerment. And there is no greater method for that than direct democracy both in and outside of the workplace.

Yet things have went good enough for people since Marx's stupid rant.
Get out of the XIX century and take a look at XXI century where the most of people live better than ever in human history thanks to mass production, industrialization, capital markets and entrepeneurship

Not thanks to collective backwards slavery

>Having a lack of hopeful future bourgeoisie is a good thing. It's like saying
>Having people that risk their wealth to produce wealth and innovation is bad
>t.autism
>So it did, but now that we have industrialization as well as a massive almost instanteous and constant transfer of information there's no reason to believe it will ever be as slow as it was pre-industrialization. It's not as if universities, schools and so forth would simply cease to exist and everyone would start working manual labour. People would still be reseaching, developing and exchanging ideas, just without concentrated government and/or corporate patronage in doing so.
And the research would be on a very small scale.Do you seriously think that things like this could be achieve with voluntary cooperativism?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIGO
>Fuck the Roman Empire, and to defend against warlords (which I doubt would be that much of a problem) this is why everyone
should have guns.
This delusion.
>>Despite the critics clamoring for "maximum efficiency" rather than revolutionary methods, anarchist collectives often produced more than before the collectivization. In Aragon, for instance, the productivity increased by 20%.
Productivity increases during war, fuc you are a genious!!!!
>That is the real meme here.
No it didn't.It was in a constant stage on conflict, and half of Barcelona went to celabrate Franco taking the city.
>Yes, and greater social mobility and empowerment. And there is no greater method for that than direct democracy both in and outside of the workplace.
>Source:My ass
You mongrels would reverse the industrial revolution, and make the world economy to stagnate

Yes and feudal serfs lived better than Roman slaves. Advancing technology is on the whole a good thing, hierarchal material relationships on the whole are not.

>Not thanks to collective backwards slavery
shiggy

>Destruction of the environment was a mistake.
Reforastation is bigger than ever in Europe, while in the pre industrial revolution, forest were burnt yearly, for more farmable land.
>The explosion of the human population was a mistake.
What explotation mongral.
>inb4 if I dont recieve a paycheck for not working on anything productive or control the "means of production" is explotation
>Massive urban centers were a mistake.
>Unsustainable growth was a mistake.
Source:Your ass

There's more to environmental destruction than deforestation, like massive die offs of animal species, dangerous amounts of carbon in the atmosphere, rising ocean temperatures, that fun stuff.

>What explotation mongral.

I said EXPLOSION. You know, the one that gave us seven billion humans in two hundred years and is on track to give us a couple billion more before the midpoint of the century. Never mind that we won't have enough water for everyone by then.

>>Having people that risk their wealth to produce wealth and innovation is bad
What's the penalty for failing? Having to work for a living? What a risk that is.

>And the research would be on a very small scale.Do you seriously think that things like this could be achieve with voluntary cooperativism?
Yes, one of the mentioned main contributers to this is the Max Planck society which is non-governmental and non-profit. Why not just have more non-governmental research organizations?

>This delusion.
k

>Productivity increases during war, fuc you are a genious!!!!
Well it didn't decrease did it? So obviously it doesn't lead to scarcity like you claimed.

>No it didn't.It was in a constant stage on conflict,
Yes I believe we call those wars.
>and half of Barcelona went to celabrate Franco taking the city.
At present the population of Bacelona is a little under 2 million. Following the Catalonia offensive almost 500,000 people fled Catalonia as refugees, and 15,000 died as prisoners of war for various reasons without considering how many died as a result of fighting.

Given the pure volume of refugees I doubt it was that unpopular.

>You mongrels would reverse the industrial revolution, and make the world economy to stagnate
Source: your anus.

>EXPLOSION
Read it wrong sorry.If there is not enough water africans should adapt and lower their birthrates, is their problem for acting like retards

It's humanity's problem for making ridiculous population growth like this possible. We don't need one billion people on this planet, much less eleven billion.

>What's the penalty for failing? Having to work for a living? What a risk that is.
Losing a house, acar or ot be able to recive a credit in your entire life?
>Yes, one of the mentioned main contributers to this is the Max Planck society which is non-governmental and non-profit. Why not just have more non-governmental research organizations?
Because to prove most of the modern theories of physics you need more complex experiments.Or do you expect things like the Manhattan project to happen in your meme ideology?
>Well it didn't decrease did it? So obviously it doesn't lead to scarcity like you claimed.
It does when the external conflict ends, like it happened in New Harmony
>Given the pure volume of refugees I doubt it was that unpopular.
Refugees came from all of Spain to go to France,and most leaved to escape future oppression, nothing to do with the clusterfuck that Catalonia was during the war.
>Source: your anus.
>Wanting to end big projects and the destruction of the current economical system that sustains the army and academia, and also wanting to eliminate the army, wont bring technological and economic stagnation.
Sounds very reasonable and plausible.

>It's humanity's problem for making ridiculous population growth like this possible. We don't need one billion people on this planet, much less eleven billion.
Humanity is an abstraction.The fault is only on niggers for breading more than they should, and they will have to deal with this problem soon

anarchism is actually partly communism. Just not soviet communism, or anything like that. Stateless society with no hierchical statures.

this is bait

>Losing a house, acar or ot be able to recive a credit in your entire life?
What a fate, having to be working class.
>Because to prove most of the modern theories of physics you need more complex experiments.Or do you expect things like the Manhattan project to happen in your meme ideology?
Not as quickly as they do now, and frankly I'd rather they didn't develop weapons of mass destruction anyway.

>It does when the external conflict ends, like it happened in New Harmony
Except there are still communes in the USA right now. I don't know why you have such a throbbing hate-boner for that one.

>Refugees came from all of Spain to go to France,and most leaved to escape future oppression, nothing to do with the clusterfuck that Catalonia was during the war.
I'm talking about refugees from the Catalonia offensive alone, not just the entire war.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalonia_Offensive#Military_and_political_consequences

>>Wanting to end big projects and the destruction of the current economical system that sustains the army and academia, and also wanting to eliminate the army, wont bring technological and economic stagnation.
1. Ending the military is a great idea
2. It wouldn't end academia, they still had education in Catalonia after all.

>hierarchal material relationships on the whole are not
thats a nice moral judgement m8.
Now prove me that you can permanently abolish hierarchical material relationships.
k thanks

Cultural revolution.

Mao was on to something good.

>von Ungern-Sternberg wasn't Genghis Khan reborn
fuck off syndie scum

>What a fate, having to be working class.
The working class usualy can take mortages, entrepreneurs may never be able to own anything if they fail
>Not as quickly as they do now, and frankly I'd rather they didn't develop weapons of mass destruction anyway.
Nucler energy could solve the greenhouse effect in 15 years.If you are narrow minded is not my problem
>I'm talking about refugees from the Catalonia offensive alone, not just the entire war.
Runing from repression is something that losers usually do.still proves nothing.
>1. Ending the military is a great idea
Most of the technology that we use comes from there
>2. It wouldn't end academia, they still had education in Catalonia after all.
Education=/=academia.Modern academia is substained on goverment subsidies and military subsidies

>The working class usualy can take mortages, entrepreneurs may never be able to own anything if they fail
Yes they could. We do have extensive safety nets in the first world and I doubt many homeless people are failed entrepeneurs.

>Nucler energy could solve the greenhouse effect in 15 years.If you are narrow minded is not my problem
Well yes but you've just created the new problem of what to do with the resulting nuclear waste and potentially have to deal with meltdowns.

>Runing from repression is something that losers usually do.still proves nothing.
If equivalent to a third of the present population of Barcelona fled the country clearly Franco wasn't just welcomed as a liberator as implied.

>Most of the technology that we use comes from there
Yes, and quite a sizable portion of corpses come from there as well.

>Education=/=academia.Modern academia is substained on goverment subsidies and military subsidies
Not true, there are universities in many countries that are not funded by the government at all.