They were paying homage yesterday. In towns and villages across the island, they remembered the victims, though the date is more of a celebration. Eighty-five years ago on 14 April, the Second Republic came into being. It was to herald a period of chaos, extraordinary even for a nation that had endured decades of chaos and violence. It was the culmination of all that had been unleashed at least since the time of the Napoleonic War and the drafting of the 1812 Liberal Constitution (some one hundred years earlier, in truth). It ushered in the years of the great dictator - great in the sense that Franco was far more important in dictatorial terms than Primo de Rivera (who had preceded the Republic) had been. Franco can never be considered in isolation. His regime had an inevitability about it: one created by political, religious, monarchical and military disasters. To quote Bismarck: "I am firmly convinced that Spain is the strongest country in the world. Century after century trying to destroy herself and still no success."
Some villages suffered more than most. Pollensa was one of them. Some 26 Republicans were executed. They, and the around 150 people who were imprisoned, were remembered in the town's Seglars square yesterday evening. The executions and imprisonments were often just politically motivated. Being a Republican was a sufficient enough crime. Others who were victims of the Nationalists were so because of motives of revenge. Vendettas, only partly related to the division that fostered the Civil War, were an excuse for payback. Charges were often spurious and weak. I learned recently about a gardener from Pollensa who was imprisoned merely because he had been employed by a Republican.
Pollensa town hall recently expressed its support for the regional government's law on war graves and for the Argentinian legal initiative in respect of violations under Franco. There was almost unanimous backing. The one Partido Popular councillor abstained, out of step with former PP colleagues, including the ex-mayor, who formed a rival group prior to last year's election. For the most part, even the right sympathise with pro-Republican sentiment in Pollensa. Or is this better expressed as anti-Francoist sentiment? There is a difference.
In Palma the homage paid was on a grander scale. Well, there was a DJ as well. It was held in the town hall square - Plaça de Cort. "Visca la República!" said the poster. The gathering had the support of the town hall, Podemos, Més, unions, feminists, a Palestinian group, a Greco-Mallorcan solidarity group and others, one of which was the Fundació Emili Darder. He was the Republican mayor of Palma, shot in 1937. Pollensa's Republican mayor, Pere Josep Cànaves, was shot in 1938.
Why some of these groups were lending their support was not totally clear. But if they wished to, then that was up to them. There was, though, a question about the support shown by the town hall. The PP and the C's questioned it. The town halls' official social media accounts were used to promote the event; Ajuntament de Palma appeared on the poster. The administration, argued the PP/C's, should not be involving itself in something of an ideological and partisan nature.
Absent from the political parties named as supporters was PSOE. By implication, though, it was a supporter. The mayor is a PSOE man, after all. The mayor, José Hila, has appeared to be easily swayed by Republican initiatives. Whereas he once agreed that the Feixina monument should become a monument to the victims of war and so lose its Francoist symbolism, he now heads an administration which has formally announced the specification for the monument's demolition on the Official Bulletin. Hila bends to the will of his political partners, one can't help but feeling. Previous PSOE mayors - all previous and surviving mayors of the democratic era in fact - are opposed to the demolition.
The monument has been allowed to become a cause célèbre, a case of whipping up a storm unnecessarily in the pursuit of ideological righteousness. By some, that is. Does Hila truly subscribe to it? Maybe he does. In the process, division has been created. It may have existed previously but it has been allowed to become more visible, while there are those without strong sympathies either way who have no wish to see the monument go.
One can understand that passions of 80 or more years ago still burn. Heaven knows, it will be 80 years on 17 July when the Civil War broke out with the military uprising in Morocco. There are bound to be events. The past cannot and should not be forgotten. For family descendants, the war graves act might allow them to get that now clichéd word "closure". Remembering and remembrance are appropriate. Ideological posturing is quite a different matter.
Showing posts with label Second Republic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Second Republic. Show all posts
Friday, April 15, 2016
Monday, April 15, 2013
300 Years Of Memory: Regionalism and Republicanism
There have been two anniversaries over the past few days, one of them a commemoration of an act 300 years ago, the other rather nearer to the present day, but both of them have significance for present-day Spain and can, in certain respects, be linked.
On 11 April 1713 the Treaty of Utrecht was signed. It brought to an end the War of the Spanish Succession and, while the treaty in theory created a unified Spanish state, it in fact laid the foundations for many of the problems that the Spanish state has endured ever since and still does. Under the treaty, the grandson of Louis XIV of France, Philip, the Duke of Anjou, was recognised as the King of Spain. He became King Philip V, the first Bourbon king and so the creator of the ancestral line to the current king, and it was he who was responsible for the so-called Nuevas Plantas, the decrees by which the old charters, institutions and privileges enjoyed by Catalan-speaking territories were removed.
One of the institutions that was done away with was one that had in effect been in abeyance since before the end of the fourteenth century, namely the Kingdom of Mallorca. This had come under the Crown of Aragon, and it was this "crown" which comprised various Catalan-speaking areas - Aragon itself, Valencia, the Balearic Islands and, most importantly of all, Catalonia. One says most importantly of all, because this is how it has turned out. The suppression of Catalonia's rights and privileges by Philip V lies at the heart of current Catalonian claims for independence. All the Aragon crown lands came under the rule of laws from Castile, and these laws included those to do with the use of language (Castellano and not Catalan). They were issued as retribution for Catalan opposition to Philip during the War. The Treaty of Utrecht explains a great deal about present-day tensions.
It also explains tensions on an international level. One at any rate. Under the treaty Gibraltar was ceded to Britain. Gibraltar's strategic importance (far greater than that of Menorca, which was also ceded to the British) explains why the Spanish have always wanted it back. It had been captured by a combined British and Dutch force in 1704. Utrecht defined it as British and as a British possession in perpetuity.
The more recent of the two anniversaries occurred on 14 April. This marked 82 years since the formation of the Second Republic when another Bourbon king, Alfonso XIII, was forced into exile. The Republic was to end in total disaster. It failed for all sorts of reasons, not least because it became the context for factional violence led by anarchists and communists. Yet, had it not become a potential puppet for the Soviet Union, had it not been the pretext for Franco's uprising, where might Spain be now?
It wouldn't be a monarchy, that's for sure. But it would have had many more years of settled democracy. The Republic favoured freedom of speech, ruined under Franco. It favoured freedom of association, which arguably meant that unionism, once democracy was re-established, was to be more fervent than it might otherwise have been and which arguably has also meant that political parties suffer from a certain immaturity that they might not have, had they been allowed to flourish from the 1930s. It also favoured regional autonomy, which was not to become a reality for almost fifty years. And this of course is the main link with Philip V and the Treaty of Utrecht.
82 years do not mark a notable anniversary, but in recent years the remembrance of 14 April has grown stronger across Spain and Mallorca; Pollensa is one of the towns on the island with the strongest Republican sentiment. And various events of very much more recent history have done little to douse the revival of Republicanism.
A year or so ago I would have said that the monarchy was still very much the glue that held Spain together and that Republicanism was just an old ideal of a minority on the left. A lot has happened over the past year, though, to make me wonder. The Catalans seem determined to press ahead with their referendum, one that, were independence to be claimed, would rip up the provisions made by the original Bourbon king. And the current king has his well-publicised problems, those largely not of his making but of his son-in-law.
In Spain you can never forget certain anniversaries. They are ingrained in the national psyche. And while they remain so ingrained, they can always be more than just remembered.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
On 11 April 1713 the Treaty of Utrecht was signed. It brought to an end the War of the Spanish Succession and, while the treaty in theory created a unified Spanish state, it in fact laid the foundations for many of the problems that the Spanish state has endured ever since and still does. Under the treaty, the grandson of Louis XIV of France, Philip, the Duke of Anjou, was recognised as the King of Spain. He became King Philip V, the first Bourbon king and so the creator of the ancestral line to the current king, and it was he who was responsible for the so-called Nuevas Plantas, the decrees by which the old charters, institutions and privileges enjoyed by Catalan-speaking territories were removed.
One of the institutions that was done away with was one that had in effect been in abeyance since before the end of the fourteenth century, namely the Kingdom of Mallorca. This had come under the Crown of Aragon, and it was this "crown" which comprised various Catalan-speaking areas - Aragon itself, Valencia, the Balearic Islands and, most importantly of all, Catalonia. One says most importantly of all, because this is how it has turned out. The suppression of Catalonia's rights and privileges by Philip V lies at the heart of current Catalonian claims for independence. All the Aragon crown lands came under the rule of laws from Castile, and these laws included those to do with the use of language (Castellano and not Catalan). They were issued as retribution for Catalan opposition to Philip during the War. The Treaty of Utrecht explains a great deal about present-day tensions.
It also explains tensions on an international level. One at any rate. Under the treaty Gibraltar was ceded to Britain. Gibraltar's strategic importance (far greater than that of Menorca, which was also ceded to the British) explains why the Spanish have always wanted it back. It had been captured by a combined British and Dutch force in 1704. Utrecht defined it as British and as a British possession in perpetuity.
The more recent of the two anniversaries occurred on 14 April. This marked 82 years since the formation of the Second Republic when another Bourbon king, Alfonso XIII, was forced into exile. The Republic was to end in total disaster. It failed for all sorts of reasons, not least because it became the context for factional violence led by anarchists and communists. Yet, had it not become a potential puppet for the Soviet Union, had it not been the pretext for Franco's uprising, where might Spain be now?
It wouldn't be a monarchy, that's for sure. But it would have had many more years of settled democracy. The Republic favoured freedom of speech, ruined under Franco. It favoured freedom of association, which arguably meant that unionism, once democracy was re-established, was to be more fervent than it might otherwise have been and which arguably has also meant that political parties suffer from a certain immaturity that they might not have, had they been allowed to flourish from the 1930s. It also favoured regional autonomy, which was not to become a reality for almost fifty years. And this of course is the main link with Philip V and the Treaty of Utrecht.
82 years do not mark a notable anniversary, but in recent years the remembrance of 14 April has grown stronger across Spain and Mallorca; Pollensa is one of the towns on the island with the strongest Republican sentiment. And various events of very much more recent history have done little to douse the revival of Republicanism.
A year or so ago I would have said that the monarchy was still very much the glue that held Spain together and that Republicanism was just an old ideal of a minority on the left. A lot has happened over the past year, though, to make me wonder. The Catalans seem determined to press ahead with their referendum, one that, were independence to be claimed, would rip up the provisions made by the original Bourbon king. And the current king has his well-publicised problems, those largely not of his making but of his son-in-law.
In Spain you can never forget certain anniversaries. They are ingrained in the national psyche. And while they remain so ingrained, they can always be more than just remembered.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Monday, April 16, 2012
Republican Sympathies
On Saturday, commemorations were held that marked the 81st anniversary of the establishment of the Second Republic. Mallorca was not excluded from these celebrations. Porreres staged one of the best attended events. In Pollensa, as has become traditional on the anniversary of the birth of the Republic, the PSM (Mallorcan socialists) offered a floral tribute.
That it is the socialists who arrange the event says much about the political colour of the memories of the Republic and also about hopes of a revival of Republicanism. Like its Nationalist counterpoint, it has lurked in the undergrowth away from the main glare of monarchical democracy since 1975. Republicanism wasn't destroyed in 1939 at the end of the Civil War; it remained, in exile and latterly through the titles or sympathies of minority political parties.
The Second Republic ended in total disaster. Its liberalism was overtaken by violence and extremism. Against a background of depression, it couldn't combat unemployment. Economically and politically it was a failure, but Republicanism has remained an ideological force because of what happened after the Republic fell. It is the "good guy" of the Civil War, despite its own atrocities.
It has remained a force also because of what created the Second Republic. The government of the first dictator, Primo de Rivera, had become untenable as had the position of the Bourbon king, Alfonso XIII, who, on 14 April 1931, was forced into exile. Alfonso was considered a traitor as, in 1923, he had not blocked the coup which led to the establishment of the first dictatorship. An understanding of the Civil War and the Franco era is not complete without an appreciation of the monarch's support for Rivera. In 1923, the king assisted in breaking a system of monarchical democracy that was not to be restored for over 50 years.
Lessons of history and all that, but the past has a habit of turning itself into tradition. And with tradition comes a desire for re-enactment or an expectation that history will repeat itself or a perception that history is repeating itself. The tradition of the Civil War, despite the best attempts of many Spaniards to indulge in mass amnesia and the best attempts of the legal and political system to airbrush it out of existence, remains well rooted.
If not of course actual re-enactment, there is the narrative that nuances the current day in terms of this tradition. Republicanism 2012 in Mallorca, and elsewhere no doubt, rejects, as you would expect it to, the rights of another Bourbon king, Juan Carlos. Anti-monarchy sentiment is not unreasonable, but what is unreasonable is to somehow compare the current king with the treacherous Alfonso. It is not only unreasonable, it fails completely in recalling that it was the current king who turned his back on Francoism. For today's Republicans, however, a Bourbon monarch is a Bourbon monarch, regardless of very different circumstances.
Republicanism 2012 manages also to make some quite extraordinary allusions to Nationalism. The Partido Popular government in the Balearics, in agreeing to the development of a hotel near Es Trenc beach, is somehow engaged in Francoism. Well yes, there was destruction of the coastlines in the Franco era. No one would deny this, but it had nothing to do with Francoism or Nationalism; it had everything to do with turning the dross of a basket-case economy into something approximating gold.
The compulsion to style the current day with the narrative of the past extends to the lobbing of insults. When the head of the UGT union in the Balearics called President Bauzá a fascist, rather than requesting the attorney-general to start proceedings, Bauzá would have been far better off returning his own insult and moving on. Resorting to legal redress institutionalises the narrative and therefore the tradition, proving that Balearics politicians are as trapped in the past as are union leaders.
Right-wing governments both nationally and regionally that are pursuing policies of austerity do not, as is being implied by Republicanism 2012, amount to Nationalism. It is an absurdity to suggest that they do, especially as these policies are a furtherance of those initiated by socialist governments. But this is how the narrative insists that it should be.
In Porreres in 1938, a dreadful Nationalist atrocity was committed. The past should not be forgotten, and it is understandable that the town should be the location for a commemoration of Republicanism, but the narrative is of the past, of a time when, unlike today, the army were the ultimate enforcers and the monarchy the arbiters. The narrative is obsolete, a perverse romance of tradition. It is of the past, and that, God willing, is where it remains.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
That it is the socialists who arrange the event says much about the political colour of the memories of the Republic and also about hopes of a revival of Republicanism. Like its Nationalist counterpoint, it has lurked in the undergrowth away from the main glare of monarchical democracy since 1975. Republicanism wasn't destroyed in 1939 at the end of the Civil War; it remained, in exile and latterly through the titles or sympathies of minority political parties.
The Second Republic ended in total disaster. Its liberalism was overtaken by violence and extremism. Against a background of depression, it couldn't combat unemployment. Economically and politically it was a failure, but Republicanism has remained an ideological force because of what happened after the Republic fell. It is the "good guy" of the Civil War, despite its own atrocities.
It has remained a force also because of what created the Second Republic. The government of the first dictator, Primo de Rivera, had become untenable as had the position of the Bourbon king, Alfonso XIII, who, on 14 April 1931, was forced into exile. Alfonso was considered a traitor as, in 1923, he had not blocked the coup which led to the establishment of the first dictatorship. An understanding of the Civil War and the Franco era is not complete without an appreciation of the monarch's support for Rivera. In 1923, the king assisted in breaking a system of monarchical democracy that was not to be restored for over 50 years.
Lessons of history and all that, but the past has a habit of turning itself into tradition. And with tradition comes a desire for re-enactment or an expectation that history will repeat itself or a perception that history is repeating itself. The tradition of the Civil War, despite the best attempts of many Spaniards to indulge in mass amnesia and the best attempts of the legal and political system to airbrush it out of existence, remains well rooted.
If not of course actual re-enactment, there is the narrative that nuances the current day in terms of this tradition. Republicanism 2012 in Mallorca, and elsewhere no doubt, rejects, as you would expect it to, the rights of another Bourbon king, Juan Carlos. Anti-monarchy sentiment is not unreasonable, but what is unreasonable is to somehow compare the current king with the treacherous Alfonso. It is not only unreasonable, it fails completely in recalling that it was the current king who turned his back on Francoism. For today's Republicans, however, a Bourbon monarch is a Bourbon monarch, regardless of very different circumstances.
Republicanism 2012 manages also to make some quite extraordinary allusions to Nationalism. The Partido Popular government in the Balearics, in agreeing to the development of a hotel near Es Trenc beach, is somehow engaged in Francoism. Well yes, there was destruction of the coastlines in the Franco era. No one would deny this, but it had nothing to do with Francoism or Nationalism; it had everything to do with turning the dross of a basket-case economy into something approximating gold.
The compulsion to style the current day with the narrative of the past extends to the lobbing of insults. When the head of the UGT union in the Balearics called President Bauzá a fascist, rather than requesting the attorney-general to start proceedings, Bauzá would have been far better off returning his own insult and moving on. Resorting to legal redress institutionalises the narrative and therefore the tradition, proving that Balearics politicians are as trapped in the past as are union leaders.
Right-wing governments both nationally and regionally that are pursuing policies of austerity do not, as is being implied by Republicanism 2012, amount to Nationalism. It is an absurdity to suggest that they do, especially as these policies are a furtherance of those initiated by socialist governments. But this is how the narrative insists that it should be.
In Porreres in 1938, a dreadful Nationalist atrocity was committed. The past should not be forgotten, and it is understandable that the town should be the location for a commemoration of Republicanism, but the narrative is of the past, of a time when, unlike today, the army were the ultimate enforcers and the monarchy the arbiters. The narrative is obsolete, a perverse romance of tradition. It is of the past, and that, God willing, is where it remains.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
