Why did the Soviet Union only offer token help to Loyalist forces in the Spanish Civil War? Why was the response of the Soviets so different to that of the Nazi's? Why were the democratic governments so passive?
France was very polarised. Blum wanted to help, and he sent some supplies, but his country was on the brink of a civil war
Britain wanted to stay out from the problems of Europe. They maintained this position until September 1939
Soviet Union forbid cooperation of communists and other left-wing forces until Hitler's rise. They corected this blunder, but were slow to act
Because placating the French and British states were of greater importance in Soviet geopolitics due to the United Front / Socialism in One Country line.
Supporting the Spanish republic would have supported the Trotsky line rather than the Stalin line and resulted in party divisions during a period when they were clinging onto the 2nd 5 year plan by the skin of their teeth and already liquidating the party in purges.
Read Fitzpatrick's every day stalinism.
>you will never be a young Falangist killing anarchists and communists everyday
It hurts to live.
>ywn slaughter fascist pigs and their moroccan mercenaries
>doesn't even have the Republican flag colours
Reminder that many of those who took part in the battle of cable street were shipped in from across the country for the event to try and stop Mosley's march through one of his political strongholds, the real scum are the ones who resorted to violence and disrupting a non-violent march desu
It was made in Czechoslovakia for the 25th anniversary of the foundation of International Brigades
Author probably wasn't aware the Republic had different flag
It was a success
Political uniforms were banned and British fascists fell into obscurity
Violence is sometimes necessary to stop evil
Thank GOD (and his one and true prophet PBUH) we killed all those bigoted fascist bastards because I just LOVE to dismantle my once great empire and to be economically, politically, militarily and culturally dependent on other nations!
>Why did the Soviet Union only offer token help to Loyalist forces in the Spanish Civil War?
They offered the only major contributions including but not limited to funds, materiel, personnel. They were however limited because they couldn't risk making overt aid known since everyone in the world would have taken any reason to organize all out war against them. In contrast the liberal, and otherwise, governments of the world didn't give a flying fuck what the fascists did as long as it meant killing leftist democratic movements like anarchism and communism. And a hundred years later the descendants of those liberal bystanders (in some cases outright aides) to fascism go on Australian Frisbee Enthusiast websites to talk about why the Soviets "only offered token help" to the Republican cause.
Didn't Hitler and other fascists praise islamic culture for it's militancy? An didn't Franco used mercenary moros to fight in the SCW? Also, you don't have to be a fascist to hate the moros.
My ancestor fought in the International Brigades
After being interned in the concentration camp, he was almost senteced to death in the purges after communist coup and spent 6 years doing hard labour in Uranium mines
That's what he got for being a naïve leftist and not a card-carrying opportunist
was it even possible for the USSR to send more help to the republicans? they were on the other side of the continent with a very small navy and air force
trying to ferry 10k or 20k men across the north sea would have resulted in the italian and german fleets blockading spanish ports
>Mexico furnished $2,000,000 in aid and provided some material assistance, which included rifles, food and a small amount of American-made aircraft such as the Bellanca CH-300 and Spartan Zeus that served in the Mexican Air Force.
You mean as a class conscious worker he got fucked by states and nomenklatura-capitalists? REALLY? OH MY GOD—WHEN DID BEING A REVOLUTIONARY BECOME HARD?
>was it even possible for the USSR to send more help to the republicans?
Force the Anglo-French blockade with the Black Sea Fleet.
They probably could have sent a corps as "volunteers."
You do realise Mosley cared more for the average worker than the Labour party of the time, Mosley was a man of action motivated by his experiences in the war, to build the land fit for heroes the wartime coalition promised and never built. Labour was still dominated by men who's only really ambition was power (Ramsay MacDonald) and those who no longer had a radical flame (Philip Snowden) the party as content to embrace the establishment and old way of things, while Mosley looked to the future, became an early discipline of Keynes, and promised all Attlee is praised for; back in 1930, which is why Mosley left Labour, for it was not a party of evil.
I'll concede that due to the growing influence of actual fifth columnists like William Joyce the British Union of Fascists was in a serious irreversable decline due to Joyce's rabid anti-Semitism.
But was Mosley really evil like you claim? His policies were focussed around employment and national revival, Mosley wished to spend to create new jobs, to create supply leading to demand, a concept embraced by the modern left after Attlee. He wanted to end British involvement in foreign conflicts from the beginning, to focus on the problems at home and to protect Britain rather than let British men bleed and die again for foreign interests and the elite, after experiencing the horrors of WWI.
The only controversial policies espoused are suggested repatriation of foreign nationals, so the peoples of their own counties may better their homes, never was hatred or intolerance supported, only that a country care for her own first to better them, so they may better their country. The Jews Mosley supported the establishment of a national home for, so they may have their own nation again too. No dictatorship was supported, only a new democratic system where voters voted for representatives based on their field from their field, rather than voting on arbitrary old geographical lines, a more democratic system.
The only thing that fucked the Republicans was the Anarchists and their inability to maintain solidarity under pressure when the war was turning against them. As if massacring the unaligned peasantry and anyone that isn't orthodox enough for you (yes, Republicans did this) is a viable, nevermind worthy, option for self-described "class conscious workers".
So what made this pacifistic man, who looked out for the unemployment, the oppressed worker, the unrepresented, and the new woman worker (All of Mosley's early endeavours had a disproportionate number of female members, attracting many former suffragettes) an evil individual who deserved to be physically assaulted and attacked, was it because he used a label for his organisation did that make him a just target
Isn't that stereotyping though?
I could say; give a socialist a state and they move into Stalinism
Fascism isn't a unified ideology, in fact even less so than communism, due to one being founded on Marxist intentionalism, and the other splitting with the socialist movements due to a rejection of the total internationalism present in Marxist thought
There's a difference between appreciation a culture and accepting millions of people of a foreign culture for the sake of anti-racism.
>An didn't Franco used mercenary moros to fight in the SCW?
A means to an end.
You mean those Francoist priests that were drinking the blood of the people and supported Franco with money from the Catholic's Church property? What was innocent about them?
lol even Hitler hated Franco's guts and thought he was a psychopath. Imagine that!
>"Franco, of course, had very exaggerated ideas on the value of Spanish intervention.Nevertheless I believe that, in spite of the systematic sabotage perpetrated by his Jesuit brother- in-law, he would have agreed to make common cause with us on quite reasonable conditions - the promise of a little bit of France as a sop to his pride and a substantial slice of
Algeria as a real, material asset. But as Spain had really nothing tangible to contribute, I came to the conclusion that her direct intervention was not desirable. It is true that it
would have allowed us to occupy Gibraltar. On the other hand, Spain's entry into the war would certainly have added many kilometres to the Atlantic coast-line which we would have had to defend - from Saint Sebastian to Cadiz. Then there was the further possibility of a renewal of the civil war, fanned by the British. We might thus have found ourselves bound for better or for worse to a regime for which I have now, if possible, less sympathy than ever, a
regime of capitalist profiteers, puppets of the clerical gang! I shall never forgive Franco for not having reconciled the Spaniards once the civil war was over, for having ostracized the Phalangists, whom Spain has to thank for
such aid as we gave her, and for having treated like bandits former foes, who were very far from all being Reds. To put half a country beyond the pale of the law while a minority
of pillagers enrich themselves, with the blessing of the priesthood, at the expense of the rest is no solution at all. I am quite sure that very few of the so-called Reds in Spain
were really Communists. We were badly deceived, for, had I known the real state of affairs, I would never have allowed our aircraft to bombard and destroy a starving population and at the same time re-establish the Spanish
clergy in all their horrible privileges."
-Adolf Hitler, Last Political Testament
No, not Francoist priests. Not even Franco aligned peasants, although there should at least be some effort to sway them (imagine). I mean the peasants that tried to remain neutral in a crazy fucking war full of war crimes and unknowable outcome. Notice the word "innocent" isn't used here.
>it's not okay for the Soviets to take over a revolutionary army hemorrhaging from ideological infighting
>but it's okay to massacre the local farmer because he's not swearing absolute allegiance to whichever splinter group is talking to him at the time
>tfw the father of my grandfather was a falangist before the war but fought for the republic because his town was in republican zone and he was forcibly recruited
The poor man had a hard and weird life
Read what actually happened between the revolutionary forces during the civil war. Even better, read what happened to man pic related. Commies are backstabbing bastards, that's what happened.
>Why did the Soviet Union only offer token help to Loyalist forces in the Spanish Civil War?
he only viewed hardcore commies and borderline stalinists as his friends
>Why was the response of the Soviets so different to that of the Nazi's?
spain bordered france
>Why were the democratic governments so passive?
the noninterference meme, individual politicians didn't want to risk embarressment
The Soviets were the ONLY chance they had
What, do you think they could've won again the Nationalists, Germany AND Italy?
No, they needed a powerful leader (even if blackmail was needed) and none of the local parties had the strength to form a cohesive alliance.
>machnovists, cnt-fai, cronstand sailors
Stalin's regime and other hardline communists were exploitative, you had few options for work and education unless you had connections, if you didn't work you lived in poverty, a similar set up seen elsewhere in the world. If anything the fruitier anarchists were the ones genuinely attempting to get away from this.
First and foremost, Soviets were neck deep in political reforms (constitution). It was the biggest political crisis in the history of USSR (eventually culminated into Purges). Basically, making any sudden political movements was equivalent to volunteering to stand in front of firing squad. So the initiative was mostly muted.
Second problem was Trotsky. Soviet politicans knew of his major influence in Spain and wanted to avoid aiding his allies. It was also kinda dangerous to suggest sending help to suspected trotskists in the middle of Purges against trotskist conspiracy.
Finally, USSR was preparing for the coming war and was undergoing industrialization. In 1936 Soviet Union was hardly the major player. It still required as much cooperation with the West as possible, both for industrial goods and for postponing the beginning of war.
Essentially, Spain was deemed not important enough to start WW2 prematurely and face almost certain defeat by allied Europe.
Surprise! Soviets didn't really care if they got murdered by god-loving Allies or Nazi Germans. Until Soviets managed to make Allies fight against Nazies, they didn't really see any difference between either of them.
I like how you people make outrageous statements and then demand impeccable evidence, if those statements are challenged in any way.