Collectives in the Spanish Revolution

417 Pages·2018·10.749 MB·English

by  Gastón Leval, Vernon Richards

Collectives in the
Spanish Revolution
Gaston Leval
Translated from the French by Vernon Richards
Collectives in the Spanish Revolution
Gaston Leval
Translated from the French by Vernon Richards
This edition © 2018 PM Press
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be transmitted by any means without
permission in writing from the publisher.
ISBN: 978–1–62963–447–0
Library of Congress Control Number: 2017942919
Cover by John Yates / www.stealworks.com
Interior design by briandesign
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
PM Press
PO Box 23912
Oakland, CA 94623
www.pmpress.org
Printed in the USA by the Employee Owners of Thomson-Shore in Dexter,
Michigan.
www.thomsonshore.com
CONTENTS
preface to the 2018 edition v
introduction ix
foreword 7
PART ONE PREAMBLE
i The Ideal 17
ii The Men and the Struggles 39
iii Material for a Revolution 58
iv A Revolutionary Situation 70
PART TWO AGRARIAN SOCIALISATION
v The Aragon Federation of Collectives 83
1. Graus 92
2. Fraga 104
3. Binefar 113
4. Andorra (Teruel) 121
5. Alcorisa 129
6. Mas de las Matas 136
7. Esplus 143
vi Collectives in the Levante 148
General Characteristics 148
1. Carcagente 159
2. Jativa 165
3. Other Methods of Operation 173
vii The Collectives of Castile 178
viii Collectivist Book-Keeping 191
ix Libertarian Democracy 204
x The Charters 214
PART THREE INDUSTRY AND PUBLIC SERVICES
xi Industrial Achievements 223
1. Syndicalisations in Alcoy 231
xii Achievements in the Public Sector 240
1. Water, Gas and Electricity in Catalonia 240
2. The Barcelona Tramways 245
3. The Means of Transport 253
4. The Socialisation of Medicine 264
PART FOUR TOWNS AND ISOLATED ACHIEVEMENTS
xiii Town Collectivisations 279
1. Elda and the S.I.C.E.P. 280
2. Granollers 284
3. Hospitalet de Llobregat 289
4. Rubi 296
5. Castellon de la Plana 300
6. Socialisation in Alicante 306
xiv Isolated Achievements 312
1. The Boot and Shoemakers of Lerida 313
2. The Valencia Flour Mills 314
3. The Chocolate Cooperative of Torrente 315
4. The Agrarian Groups in Tarrasa 316
PART FIVE PARTIES AND GOVERNMENT
xv Political Collaboration 321
xvi Libertarians and Republicans 327
xvii The Internal Counter-Revolution 329
PART SIX EPILOGUE
xviii Final Reflections 339
bibliographical notes 357
about the authors 369
index 371
preface to the 2018 edition
Collectives in the Spanish Revolution can only deal in any detail
with some of the self-managed collectives that were established in
Republican Spain during the struggle against Franco, for, as the
author points out, there were 400 agricultural collectives in Aragón,
900 in Levante, and 300 in Castile. In addition, the whole of indus-
try in Catalonia and 70 per cent in Levante was collectivised.
Leval’s study brings together two aspects that are generally dif-
ficult to unite—analysis and testimony—but, and in part owing to
this method of presentation, the reader’s interest is held throughout
the book. He visited the towns and villages of revolutionary Spain
where, soon after July 19, 1936, people had opted to live a libertar-
ian communist lifestyle almost without precedent in all history, col-
lectivising the land, factories and workshops, and the social services.
He paints a serene but not uncritical picture of the role of
the countless rank-and-file activists of “the idea” who had long
discussed the possibilities of a self-managed economic and social
system that was truly communal and anti-authoritarian:
It is clear, the social revolution which took place then did not
stem from a decision by the leading organisms of the C.N.T.
or from the slogans launched by the militants and agitators
who were in the public limelight. . . . It occurred spontane-
ously, naturally, not (and let us avoid demagogy) because
“the people” in general had suddenly become capable of per-
forming miracles . . . but because, and it is worth repeating,
among those people there was a large minority who were
active, strong, guided by an ideal which has been continuing
v
collectives in the spanish revolution
through the years a struggle started [more than half a century
earlier] in Bakunin’s time (p. 80).
This raises the question: were the collectivisations enforced at the
point of a gun, as argued by a number of bourgeois historians?
In fact, in most villages collectivisations occurred after the
major landowners had fled to the Francoist zone: usually, assem-
blies were held at which it was decided to expropriate the land-
owners’ land and machinery and share their own for the common
good; teams were formed to carry out the necessary tasks, each
electing recallable delegates to a village assembly. Leval writes
that in Aragón, where the libertarian militias were numerous, their
role was minimal if not negative inasmuch as they lived, in part,
at the expense of the collectives. As he describes it, they “lived on
the fringes of the task of social transformation being carried out,”
although Durruti, realising their importance, did send some of his
men, skilled organisers not armed troops, to help the collectives. All
the energy, however, came from the local militants who took initia-
tives “with a tactical skill often quite outstanding” (p. 91).
Other chapters make fascinating reading: “The Socialisation
of Medicine,” “The Charters,” “Rubi,” “Lerida,” etc. The agricul-
tural, industrial and social service industries are all explained with
their own peculiar aspects, and their development traced within the
overall scheme of self-management.
A number of points deserve separate study, such as the
problem of the relationship of individuals to their work in a new
society: “Obviously some would have preferred to stay in bed, but
it was impossible for them to cheat” (p. 117); “there was no place
in the rules for the demand for personal freedom or for the auton-
omy of the individual” (p. 125); “Building operatives were working
with enthusiasm. They had started off by applying the eight-hour
day, but the peasants pointed out they worked a twelve-hour day”
(p. 146 and also pp. 211, 212, 304).
Some of the author’s comments are well off track: “his Slavonic
psychology, his generous Russian nature” (p. 18 on Bakunin, but
Lenin too was a Russian), “preaching the libertarian gospel” (p. 47),
vi
preface to the 2018 edition
“the Good News” (p. 56), but fortunately they are few and make no
difference to the essence of Leval’s story.
More curious, however, is Leval’s position: “convinced very soon
that the anti-fascists would end by losing the war” (p. 68), he dedi-
cated himself to collecting together the results of this unique experi-
ment for posterity. There are contemporary articles written by Leval:
“I had to make an effort to give them confidence and offered them
words of hope” (p. 112). We cannot but underline Leval’s patronising
hypocrisy in this matter—a sort of tourist’s eye view of the attempts
to live of the condemned. What was there to do? Leval seems to be
trying to be a historian first and anarchist second, overlooking that
it is always one and the same struggle: “Posterity is us, just later on.”
There are, in fact, two faces to Leval. In one chapter entitled
“Political Collaboration” he writes, “This excursion in the corridors
of power was negative” (p. 324). But while he was in Spain, during
the Civil War, that was not Leval’s opinion at all. On arrival he
published an article in Solidaridad Obrera (November 27, 1936, p. 8)
entitled “Discipline: A Condition of Victory”; in February 1937 he
took part in a meeting with Mariano R. Vázquez (a strong supporter
of CNT participation in the government) and again in France in
November 1937, in Le Libertaire, he pleaded for a moratorium on
the anarchist programme for the duration of the war.
Leval also published articles of a practical nature, such as:
“The Small Proprietor and the Small Business,” “Our Programme
for Reconstruction,” “Let Us Establish Co-operatives,” (Solidaridad
Obrera, December 12, 1936, p. 4; December 27, 1936, p. 10; March
2, 1937, p. 6). His stand in support of the pro-governmental section
of the CNT is important. Before the war Leval was better known
for his books on social reconstruction, written in the spirit of Peter
Kropotkin’s The Conquest of Bread but adapted to the epoch. Many
of the collectivists knew Leval from these writings and had he
defended at the time the position he takes in Collectives then the
opposition to the political sidetracking that was going on could well
have been far greater.
Interesting too is that the translator and publisher of the origi-
nal 1975 English-language edition, Vernon Richards, fails to point
vii
collectives in the spanish revolution
out this evolution in Leval’s thinking. It would also have been
useful to know that Sam Dolgoff, author of The Anarchist Collectives:
Workers’ Self-Management in the Spanish Revolution, 1936–1939, took
his texts from the 1952 Italian edition of Leval’s book, with varia-
tions. (The figures, for example, given in the chapter on the sociali-
sation of medicine are different from Richards’ translation. Are
they typographical errors by Dolgoff or forgetfulness on the part
of Richards?) Other texts, in particular “The Characteristics of the
Libertarian Collectives,” an excellent résumé of the nineteen points
of the main aspects of self-management, as well as the section of the
1948 Italian pamphlet L’attivita sindicale nella transformazione sociale
that deals with industry, should have been included in the 1975
edition but for some reason Leval and Richards chose not to do so.
Collectives in the Spanish Revolution demonstrates clearly that
the working class are perfectly capable of running farms, factories,
workshops, and health and public services without bosses or manag-
ers dictating to them. It proves that anarchist methods of organising,
with decisions made from the bottom up, can work effectively in
large-scale industry involving the coordination of many thousands
of workers in many hundreds of places of work across numerous
different cities and towns, as well as broad rural areas. The Spanish
Revolution also gives us an insight into the creative and construc-
tive power of ordinary people once they have some control over
their lives. The Spanish working class not only kept production
going throughout the war but in many cases managed to achieve
increases in output. They improved working conditions and created
new techniques and processes in their workplaces. They created,
out of nothing, an arms industry without which the war against
fascism could not have been fought. The Revolution also showed
that without the competition bred by capitalism, industry can be
run in a much more rational manner. Finally it demonstrated how
the organised working class inspired by a great ideal has the power
to transform society.
Stuart Christie
January 2018
viii
INTRODUCTION
The only constructive, valid, important achievement during the
Civil War was in fact that of the Revolution, on the fringe of power.
The industrial collectivisations, the socialisation of agriculture, the
syndicalisations of social services, all that, which made it possible
to hold out for nearly three years and without which Franco would
have triumphed in a matter of weeks, was the achievement of
those who created, organised without concerning themselves with
ministries and ministers.
Gaston Leval, Collectives in the Spanish Revolution
1
More than eight decades ago revolutionary Spain implemented
a massive model of worker-controlled agriculture, industry and
public services based on libertarian communism and collectives
in the midst of the Civil War. Workers had to do so under the
threat posed by Francoist troops, the Communist persecution of
anarchists,1 the active boycott of the most conservative policies
established by the Spanish Second Republic,2 and the scarcity
brought about by the conflict. The experiment only lasted for a
brief time in the Republican zone, but the world is still fascinated
1 “The brigade led by the communist Lister was soon to abandon the front to go
and destroy ‘manu militari’ almost all the Aragonese Collectives, including that
of Binefar and its canton” (p. 121).
2 “It was not an easy matter to assert themselves so as to avoid friction among
the anti-Francoist sectors. For the socialist, republican, and communist politi-
cians actively sought to prevent our success, even to restoring the old order or
maintaining what was left of it” (p. 239).
ix