MovieChat Forums > For Whom the Bell Tolls (1943) Discussion > The International Brigades

The International Brigades

posted 19 years ago by duxbellorum50
18 replies | jump to latest

First of all, excuse me for my painful English.

I'm afraid most of the people who aren't from Spain see our Civil War as a conflict between two authoritarian ideologies (fascism and communism, Hitler and Stalin), and, as a result, see the participation of international volunteers backing the Loyalist side(as Robert Jordan in the movie) hard to understand. Well, it's true that Stalin and the Komintern where te responsibles of the organization of the International Brigades, but many of the volunteers weren't stalinsts, or even communists. The fight for the Spanish Republic against Franco and his Italo-German support was seen by most of the occidental world as the fight for democracy.

I also want to honour and thank the brave men of the Lincoln Brigade, true fighters for democracy, for whom his fellow countryman George W Bush must take example.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cropknox 18 years ago

The International Brigades were most definitely Communist in their make up. The members were usually smuggled into Spain by the Communist parities of their home country.

But to simply classify the war as a struggle between Fascism and Communism would be a gross simplification. The Popular Front government was made up of the PCE (Communist party of Spain), The POUM, a socialist party, the CNT/FAI and anarchist party/union, as well as hosts of other parties that ran the gambit of political leanings.

Likewise Franco's insurgents were made up of Caralists (Catholic Monarchists), The Flange (Fascists), the Catholic Church, and the generally socially conservative.

The common ground between both sides, was that they were both made up of many different groups, who often had opposing viewpoints.

I would call it a war between the forces of the Left and the Right

[–] abclaret 18 years ago

I think calling it a conflict between left and right is a bit of a simplification, for example see Ken Loachs - Land and Freedom. More info on the Brigades can be seen at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Brigade

[–] stuivers 18 years ago

The movie Land and Freedom is certainly a good starting point, and you'll have a good time watching it too.

Actually the communist influence was minimal in the beginning of the civil war. The anarchist influence was much bigger. However, during the war the "democratic" countries in the world refused to trade arms to the anarchists, as the USA and the Europe countries thought anarchism to be a bigger thread then fascism. How wrong they could be...
The only one who wanted to seel arms was Stalin, but only to communists. As the people who fought the fascists at the front had one rifle for three men, the only way to survive was to become communist. Then in 1939 the communists betrayed the cause. At orders from Stalin the revolutionairy socialists and anarchists were set aside with much violence. The revolution ended. As there was no real cause to defend anymore, the war against the fascists was lost soon too.

Today the anarchist union CNT still has 1.000.000 members in Spain. This is despite the communist betrayal. And despite the oppression by fascist dictator Franco, who won the war with support of Hitler and Mussolini and stayed in charge until his death in 1975, and who murdered 100.000's of people after the war, mostly anarchists.

The war was never between fascists and communists, they are too much alike for that.

[–] HijodelCid 18 years ago

Only a very cynical person with a very sarcastic and very nasty sense of humor would call the Second Spanish "Republic" a democracy (which is the REAL Spanish Republic? The regime installed on 6 Dec 1978). Foreigners such as Robert Jordan and the International Brigadeers were intruders meddling into something that was not their affair. If they wanted revolution so badly, they should have fought for it in their own countries, not in a foreign state of whose history and politics they knew absolutely nothing.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] v-tadic 17 years ago

Well, HijoDelCid, you could not resist, could you. You had to show your ugly fallangist face. You have only forgotten to finish your, oh, so wise comment with "Long Live Death". No, the war was not for democracy, only for basic human rights. Not rights of noblemen, landowners and bishops. And the revolution was defended against "moros, mercenarios y fascistas". If Western democracies had not been sitting on their hands, much less lives should have been lost in the subsequent WWII.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] HijodelCid 17 years ago

Deluded idealists like Robert Jordan fought for an ideal republic that never existed; the rebels fought against the republic that really existed. Read the books of Hugh Thomas and Antony Beevor, which depict the 2d Republic as it really was: a total grotesque caricature of what republican governments are supposed to be. I myself had several relatives who fought on both sides. One was a cadet of the Toledo Academy during the siege of 1936. Another fought at the side of the Internationals at the Battle of the Ebro. After the republican defeat, he settled in the Soviet Union. The bitter reality of the workers' paradise of Stalin so distressed him that, when Germany invaded the USSR in 1941, he enlisted in the Red Army with the deliberate purpose of deserting at the first opportunity. That came about in 1945, when his unit met the US army in Germany. After several adventures--starting with persuading the Americans not to turn him back to the Soviets--, he settled in southern France, where he lived until 1976, when he finally returned to Spain. His experience in the Soviet Union served us as a warning against what Spain might have been had the communists taken over. That is most important, since many historians are of the opinion that the 2d Republic could have won only by allowing the communists to take full control of the government, the army and the security forces--ie, by turning Spain into a popular democratic anti-republic analogous to those established in East Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Albania by the Red Czar.

[–] babel_on_5 17 years ago

It sounds like what you're saying, Cid, is that there weren't any "good guys" in this civil war.

[–] HijodelCid 17 years ago

The Church people who were killed, such as Bishop of Teruel Anselm Polanco, who was beatified by HH Pope John Paul II, were certainly good. As for Franco, at least Spain is still in one piece, totally unlike the Yugoslavia of Tito. Tito, as I'm sure you know, fought on the Republican side.

[–] blacknight-5 17 years ago

You can't blame the breakup of Yugoslavia on Tito - they have some deep-seated cultural differences there.

The Spanish Civil War is quite simple to understand - there were two sides: the Republicans, who wanted to share the wealth of the country equally and fairly between people so there would be no more poverty, and the Fascists, supported by the rich of Spain, who wanted to keep the wealth to their greedy selves. That is why the International Brigades fought for the Republicans - it was the just and moral side in that war. If only people today had the same moral courage to stand up for the rights of the poor and powerless as the brave and noble International Brigade fighters did!

[–] HijodelCid 16 years ago

George Orwell saw the War of 1936-39 very differently; you should read his HOMAGE TO CATALONIA. By the time they left Spain in 1938, the Internationals were sorely disappointed with the leftists, particularly the stalinists; if you read Hemingway's book carefully, you will catch references to that situation.

[–] HijodelCid 16 years ago

MY FAMILY WAS DIVIDED BY THE WAR, just as happened with the family of Mary Todd Lincoln during YOUR Civil War. You Americans long ago came to agree that the Lord knew what he was doing when He allowed the Confederacy--despite the saintly qualities of Lee and Jackson--to be defeated. Maybe everybody--in and out of Spain--should also agree eventually that the Lord knew what He was doing when He allowed la Nin~a Bonita=the Pretty Girl to be defeated.

[–] lumbee 13 years ago

The US Government, then as now, gave its' tacit approval to the violent overthrow of yet another Democratically elected Government that threatened to seek an equitable price for its agro/industrial exports to US concerns. Some things never change, eh?

The Fascists were reactionaries, lapdogs to the Capatalists & deeply hostile to Democracy. The men & women of the International Brigades were heroes & visionaries fighting for rights we Americans have always held as self-evident & Creator bestowed. Obviously the people of Spain were not ready for this until another thirty years had elapsed. Pity. A generation of lost potential. Shame, that.

[–] WarHawkeye 15 years ago

If you think that the Spanish Civil War was easy to understand then I have to assume you haven't looked into it very much. I am just starting to read about it and it seems infinitely complicated to me.

[–] Rueiro 10 years ago

Benito and Adolf also came to stick their noses in someone else's war in a country that was not theirs, you hypocrite.

[–] Kawada_Kira 10 years ago

The International Brigades were mostly communists, who went to Spain to fight fascism and support the progressive cause. And that's a good thing. And you're sh!tting on their memory by associating a reactionary like George W Bush with them. George Bush would have supported Franco and the fascists against the republic. Just look at the Venezuelan coup of 2002 where he tried to overthrow a progressive democratic government and replace it with a right-wing oligarchy.

The US supported Franco and inducted his fascist regime into their NATO alliance. Ronald Reagan said the Abraham Lincoln Brigade fought on "the wrong side" in the Spanish Civil War. That tells you all you need to know.

"The comfort of the rich depends upon an abundant supply of the poor."
- Voltaire