Spanish Civil War

Buy This Item Spanish Civil War by Mpi Home Video  Available from Amazon  $79.98  on 11-26-2008     I had already read George Orwell's "Homage to Catalonia" before I saw this video. If you are at all familiar with the Spanish Civil War you can understand why I came away from that excellent book still pretty confused about all of the political parties (left AND right), their leaders, their motives, and the roles they played in the loss of the war to General Franco.<p>But this video is absolutely fabulous in clearing much of that up. It is true that it is long (six one-hour parts), but that is because it is obviously meant for a class or tv documentary series. One reason it is so long is because of all of the interviews with ordinary people who participated in the revolution and the ensuing right-wing rebellion. I wouldn't cut out a second of it, and I might just rent it again. Reader Reviews This documentary is absolutely the best visual document of the Spanish Civil War that I have ever seen! Running six hours in length it tells the story from the events that led up to the war up though the first years of Franco's dictatorship. What makes this documentary so great? 1) There is extensive footage of events. 2) The story is told largely through interviews with people who lived through it, both important personages and ordinary citizens. Produced in the 1980's we hear firsthand accounts from diverse figures such as members of the Republican government, Pilar Primo de Rivera, the anarchist leader Federica Montseny, La pasionaria, high ranking officers in Franco's army, the chief of police in Barcelona during the war, the German commander of the squadron that bombed Guernica, landless peasants, Andalusian landowners, members of the Catalan independence movement, socialists, Asturian coal miners, right-wing militiamen, a Portuguese reporter who witnessed the massacre of Republicans in the bullring of Badajoz, and international volunteers from several countries. 3) Through these interviews, the documentary gives a multi-faceted perspective on the war and in this way resists the tendency to present a Manichean narrative of events. When Franco was in power, the Nationalists were the heroes and the Republicans, the villains. In post-Franco Spain, the tables have turned: the Nationalists were monsters and the Republicans, the heroes of freedom. This documenrtary, however, reminds us that both sides massacred civilians and carried out unprovoked assassinations. The fog of war turned many people into brutes. Furthermore, although my sympathies are clearly with the Republic, I appreciated hearing the points of view of Franco's supporters, because it helps me understand WHY they would side with Franco. Those with wealth and property feared losing everything they owned, and even feared for their lives (rightfully so, considering that there were random assassinations of landowners). Also, a belief in the righteousness of a traditional world order supported by social hierarchies, patriarchy and religion, brought many people, of all social classes and nationalities, to the Nationalist side. I find this particularly interesting as it echoes what we continue to see happening in politics today: cultural issues trump economic ones when people feel uneasy with modernity (today "postmodernity"). Many people clearly yearn for a structured world of moral absolutes above all else, including over personal economic interests or social justice. 4) It clearly explains the political divisions of the right. The nationalists were composed of Monarchists, the Falange (a Spanish fascist movement led by José Antonio Primo de Rivera), Carlists and Conservatives (represented by the CEDA party). Franco, essentially a monarchist himself, squelched these divisions in order to bring them all under his complete control and avoid the possibility of dissent within the nationalist lines. When the successor to José Antonio Primo de Rivera refused to submit to Franco's authority, Franco imprisoned him for life. This is just one example that demonstrates that Franco was not a Fascist, in any strict sense of the term. The Spanish Fascists, although totally antidemocratic, did want to resolve some of the class conflict in Spain through land reform. Franco, however, was not interested in any such "radical" reorganization of society. He wanted to revive "old Spain" and simply return the land to the original landowners. Nevertheless, a large part of Franco's success was due to his ability to unite the Nationalists by borrowing Fascist rhetoric and symbols (church, country and order) and by lionizing the (conveniently) deceased Primo de Rivera. 5) It goes into depth about the political divisions that seriously undermined the Republic. The Republic consisted of moderate Republicans, Socialists, Communists (pro- and anti-Stalin, the latter group belong mainly to the POUM), and Anarchists (mainly organized in the trade union the CNT). At the beginning of the war, the Anarchists rose to power in Barcelona since they were the ones to take up arms and initially defeat the loyalist troops. Their dominance, however, severely divided the left. In addition to fighting Franco, they sought a social revolution: a complete restructuring of society in which church, government and private property were abolished and in which the workers took control of all the means of production through the establishment of collectives. The Anarchists' forced collectivization of land and factories, random acts of violence, murder of factory and landowners and attacks on the Church and its members, alienated much of the middle-class, some of whom initially supported the Republic because of their regional loyalties. Later in the war, the Anarchists and the POUM would become the victims of Stalin and his Communist supporters. In their attempts to organize and unify the left, the pro-Stalin Communists were determined to crush the Anarchists and their revolution. In order to do so, they killed (and sometimes even tortured) many of its followers. These divisions weakened the Republican forces while Franco's troops continued to make significant advances on the war front. 6) We get a very thorough explanation of the Anarchist movements in Catalonia and Aragon. The Anarchist movement in Spain was the largest and most successful in Western Europe. They abolished government and the Church. Factories and farms were collectivized and run by the workers, money was eliminated and barter took its place. Production was high and the workers' conditions approved greatly; they were even given healthcare and adequate pensions. The experiment was clearly a success. One is left wondering if Anarchism is actually a viable political system: would it have continued to function if it had been allowed to continue? 7) The documentary explores the stark contrast between the role of women on the two sides. On the Nationalist side, propaganda films encouraged the traditional, domestic role of women. In an interview with Pilar Primo de Rivera (sister of José Antonio and leader of the female section of the Falange), she argues that a woman's duty to society is to fulfill the role of wife and mother. Education, career, and personal interests must be placed aside so that a woman can dedicate herself solely to the rearing of her children. Women were clearly expected to be martyrs for traditional society. On the Republican side, things were very different. There was strong feminist strain to workers movements. Women worked and fought alongside men in the factories and on the front. Divorce, birth control and abortion were legalized. The anarchists even encouraged "free love," as they viewed marriage as a bourgeois, oppressive institution. Nevertheless, as one of the former anarchist youths explains, this often proved a little impractical and revolutionary weddings (independent of church and state) were established. One leaves this documentary with a very good sense of the great complexity of the Spanish Civil War, an event in which almost all the political ideologies of Western Europe came into play. Sadly one is also left feeling that the war was probably inevitable. The society of the time was so polarized that there was no center; no government could have possibly appeased all sides. I know many people argue that Franco's victory was probably the best thing since the pro-Stalin Communists had become the dominant force on the left and Stalin proved himself to be much more brutal than Franco. But, personally I don't buy this argument. First of all, the Republic was forced to depend on Stalin because Britain, France and the US chose to remain "neutral," while Germany and Italy armed Franco to the teeth. Furthermore, even if a Stalin-dominated government had won, this would have made Spain part of the allied forces in WWII (remember Stalin fought with us against Hitler in the war). Considering how the map of post-war Europe was drawn, Spain most likely would have been established as one of the free democracies of Western Europe, and not as a Soviet satellite. I believe non-intervention on the part of Western democracies was a huge mistake. It meant that Spain would have to suffer nearly four decades of a Franco dictatorship before it could establish the democracy it should have created in 1936. Absolutely wonderful documentary! Highly recommended to anyone interested in the Spanish Civil War!

Spanish Civil War Available from Amazon Price: $79.98 Updated on 11-26-2008.

SPONSORED LINKS