Studied by 0 people
There was a clear divide between the agenda of the communists and the anarchists on the “primacy of war or revolution” (Preston)
The anarchists on the other hand believed that “the so-called nationalist revolution … could be halted only by a Social Revolution” (Adelante Newspaper, 1937).
These militias, therefore, ended up engaging in “widespread terrorism for a brief period, mainly directed against the supporters of right-wing parties and clergy.”
As Paul Preston insightfully stated, the rivalries and their effects were only “exacerbated by… the questions of foreign aid and the Republican dependency on the Soviet Union” not caused by them.
historian Denis Mack Smyth suggests that without the German Condor Legion the Nationalists would have faced a “piecemeal defeat” within the first year of the war.
Soviet support had a far more limited impact as the “aircrafts and tanks were obsolete against their German counterparts” (Beevor).
Hence, as historian Francisco J. Romero Salvado stated, the neutral policies of the western democracies was “never more than a sham which actually worked in favour of the insurgents.”
Historian Helen Graham called the years following Nationalist victory “war against the defeated”
he managed to “associate politics with danger” (Gonzalez-Ruibal)
historian Paul Preston claims that “the clear link between repression and capital accumulation made possible the economic boom of the 1960s”.
policy of autarky had a detrimental effect on the Spanish economy as “Spain lacked the technological and industrial base for this policy” (Preston)
the goal of the Nationalists, therefore, was the reversal of this “feminist revolution of the Second Republic” (Preston)
Note
Flashcard