An important document from the Spanish left as the leadership of Joaquín Maurín’s Workers’ and Peasants’ Bloc evaluates the events of October, 1934. A rising class struggle after Spain’s Republic was first formed in 1931 culminated in 1934 insurrections in Asturia and Catalonia as responses to monarchist and fascist threats to the new Republic. A major force in those events was the Workers’ Alliance founded on the initiative of the Bloque Obrero y Campesino. Beginning as the Catalan section of the Spanish Communist Party led by Jaun Maurin, later the Iberian Communist Federation and aligned with the so-called ‘Right Opposition’ internationally forming the Workers and Peasants Bloc in 1931. That Bloc would unite Andreu Nin’s Left Opposition to establish the P.O.U.M. in 1935.

‘The October Revolt in Spain’ by the Bloque Obrero y Campesino from Road to Communism (I.C.O.). Vol. 2 No. 2. Spring, 1935.

REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE IBERIAN COMMUNIST FEDERATION—WORKERS’ AND PEASANTS’ BLOC

I. The Working Class Seeking Unity of Action

The Spanish Revolution begun in 1930 continues its forward march. The first phase begins in January, 1930, with the fall of the military dictatorship followed by the revolutionary movement of December, and culminates with the establishment of the Republic. The second phase begins with the Republic and ends in October, 1934.

The October days are the beginning of a new phase.

During the first period there is a coalition of working class forces with the petty-bourgeoisie and a considerable section of the bourgeoisie itself against the dictatorship and the monarchy.

During the second period, differences manifest themselves and the working class and the bourgeoisie separate. During the third period begins the open struggle of the proletariat for the conquest of power in order to complete the democratic revolution and to begin the socialist revolution.

The revolt of October should not be considered by itself but in relation to the general course of the revolution.

The Socialist Party with its policy of collaboration from 1931-1933 dealt a heavy blow to the revolutionary movement. It was precisely when the revolutionary enthusiasm was at its highest that the Socialist Party constituted a dam destined to check the overflow of the masses and the development of revolutionary action.

The Socialist Party could have justified its participation in the government if at the attempted coup d’etat of General Sanjurjo in August, 1932, it had made use of its position to take complete power, thus alienating the helpless and bombastic petty bourgeoisie and then with the support of the masses of the working class and peasantry it could haye ended the democratic revolution and begun the socialist revolution. Such, however, was not the case. The Socialist Party continued to use Parliament to strangle the revolutionary movement, thus contributing to the further division of the working class.

The reformist policy followed by the Socialist Party did not help the working class but on the contrary helped the bourgeoisie. The Socialist Party had to approve the rise in taxes and the strengthening of the repressive forces of the State—civic guard, guard of assault, etc.—and had to tolerate the assassination of workers and peasants by counter-revolutionary forces. The bourgeois used the Socialist at that time to enchain the revolutionary movement.

The anarchists almost repeated their errors of 1873 which helped to bring about the liquidation of the first republic. They did not realize that we were undergoing a bourgeois revolution and that we had to achieve democratic transformations. With their program of immediate “Libertarian Communism” they strayed from historical reality and helped the counter-revolution.

The growth of the reaction is due in the first place to the defects of the working class movement itself—mistakes of the Socialist Party and mistakes of the Anarchists.

Nor was the Communist Party of Spain able to understand any better the characteristics of our revolution, led by the false political line which recently again triumphed in the Communist International; it greatly increased the division of the working class; first by trying to create a new trade union movement; then by calling the Socialists and the Anarchists fascists (“social-fascism—anarcho-fascism”); lastly by opposing in practice any real united front.

The only working class party in Spain which, from the very beginning had a correct analysis of the Revolution, was the Iberian Communist Federation (Workers’ and Peasants’ Bloc). The Workers’ and Peasants’ bloc, realizing at the beginning of 1933 the growth of the counter-revolution and the menace of Fascism and convinced that the only way to stop its triumph was by united action of the working class, launched the idea of organizing the Workers’ Alliance (Alianza Obrera) which, after the preliminary phase of preparation and propaganda, was definitely crystalized in Catalonia toward the end of 1933 and from there spread through out the whole peninsula.

At the same time as the movement in favor of a united front was progressing in the whole country, a healthy change was fortunately beginning to manifest itself in the Socialist Party. The pressure of the proletarian masses, convinced through painful experience that the reformist tactics of the Party had led them to the brink of disaster, brought about a new orientation in accepting, though incompletely, the united front (Workers’ Alliance).

The Anarchists, even after having witnessed that a working class uprising cannot be successful if it is only a single party movement, systematically refused to take part in the united front. It is only in Asturias where the National Conference of Labor had an exact understanding of what its revolutionary duties were, that it broke with the Anarchists sectarianism and joined the Workers’ Alliance in time.

The official Communist Party after having been a relentless enemy of the Workers’ Alliance to which it proposed the so-called “united front from below”, rectified its position and declared itself in favor of the Workers’ Alliance just when an important change was occurring in the policy of the International as a result of the new international policy of the U.S.S.R.

The general favorable turn toward the united front had important revolutionary manifestations in the months preceding the October insurrection.

These mass movements which became increasingly larger and more intense, clearly showed that the proletariat had found the correct road to victory. The unification of the working class forces was being carried out at a much more rapid pace than that of the forces of the counter-revolutionaries. The reaction took this into consideration and decided, without loss of time, to attack the working class movement in order to paralyze this rapid convergence of its forces. “A few more weeks and we will be lost,” thought the counterrevolution.

The counter-revolution during the month of September took a series of steps destined to block the rising of the working class movement—measures which were definitely provocative; the closing of the House of the Republic in Madrid, the arrest of many militant workers, the discovery of ammunition storehouses, etc. The declaration of a state of alarm was the preface to the struggle desired by the reaction.

The Samper government resigned the first of October when Gil Robles, the leader of the counter revolution, refused his cooperation.

The new government with three representatives of the Cedaa (the party of Gil Robles) was an act of defiance to the working class and the announcement of a thorough offensive against all revolutionary forces. The Lerroux-Gil Robles government took over power with a very definite aim: to destroy the whole organized labor movement by the use of force, to break the unity of action of the proletariat, to liquidate all the democratic victories, and by means of all the repressive machinery of the state to give the Fascists time to organize so that power might be turned over to them at the opportune moment. The Lerroux-Gil Robles government of Spain was to play the same role historically as the Von Papen government in Germany—i.e. to prepare the way for Fascism. After the government headed by Lerrox would come another led by Gil Robles who, having muzzled the working class, could then commence the building of the corporate state. Such were the projects of the counter-revolution.

II. The Insurrection

The labor movement was forced into a difficult battle before it was able to complete the consolidation of its forces. The coming of the counterrevolution into power could not take place without a relentless fight on the part of the working class. Germany and Austria had shown the Spanish proletariat that it is better to retreat fighting than to leave the field free to the enemy. More by instinct than by national coordination (which was unfortunately non-existent) the Spanish proletariat, not in its entirety however, understood on the 3rd and 4th of October that it was necessary to declare a general strike to thwart the plans of the counter-revolution.

The general strike could have been a simple movement of protest, a mobilization of the masses put on guard, or a general revolutionary strike of an insurrectionary character.

The strike was of the latter type in Asturias and in Catalonia. In the rest of the country, except in the unimportant instances, the strike was not insurrectionary.

In Asturias the general strike of Friday the 5th immediately changed into revolutionary action. Asturias was the one region in Spain where the Workers Alliance embraced all working class organizations. The Socialist Party, the General Union of Workers (U.G.T.), the Workers’ and Peasants’ Bloc (Iberian Communist Federation), the National Confederation of Labor (C.N.T.), the Left Communist (Trotsky) group and, just the day before the insurrection the Communist Party of Spain—all participated. The Asturian proletariat was the first in all Spain to achieve complete unity of action. That is why it was an irresistible, forward-marching force.

From the 6th on, the workers of Asturias were the absolute masters of the situation. The state machinery collapsed like a house of cards, the workers in revolt were able to arm themselves sufficiently. Immediately the proletariat with admirable creative spirit began to organize the political and economic life of the country. Asturias became the heroic vanguard of the Spanish social revolution.

Nevertheless, the glorious Asturian Commune could not survive unless the rest of the Spanish proletariat followed its example.

After two weeks of resistance, of incomparable heroism, the workers of Asturias had to retreat. They were momentarily beaten but not vanquished.

Undoubtedly the Commune of Asturias constitutes a point of departure of incalculable value for the future labor movement of Spain. Marx showed that the beginning of the German labor movement was the revolt of the Silesian weavers in 1844. The insurrection of the Asturian miners in 1934, is a sign of a new stage in the history of our social struggle.

Closely allied to the Asturian movement was the uprising of the proletariat to the north of the province of Leon and in certain sections of the province of Viscaya (Eibar, Mondragon, etc.) but it was put down because of its limited character and often only local action.

In Madrid, the proletariat declared a general strike from the 5th to the 13th. Frequent armed conflicts between the revolutionary centers and the state forces occurred, but the strike movement never reached the revolutionary stage.

In the rest of Spain—except Asturias and Catalonia—the general strike was far from being unanimous and complete. There was no strike in a great number of important cities, and in some places it occurred only when the circumstances were already strategically favorable to the government.

III. The Insurrection in Catalonia

The insurrectionary action in Catalonia had special characteristics because of the converging of the working class and of the petty-bourgeois government of the Generalitat.

It is in Catalonia, as we have already indicated above, that the Workers’ Alliance was born, thanks to the correct policy of the Workers’ and Peasants’ Bloc.

The Workers’ Alliance included the Workers’ and Peasants’ Block (Iberian Communist Federation), the Catalonian Socialist Federation (Socialist Party), the General Union of Workers, the Opposition Unions, the Communist Left (Trotskyite), the Unions outside of the National Confederation of Labor, the Libertarian Syndicalist Federation, and from the 4th of October on, the official Communist Party.

The Workers’ Alliance had indisputable strength, but it was still far from realizing unity of action of the majority of the working class. Outside of the Workers’ Alliance were: the National Confederation of Labor (Iberian Anarchist Federation), which though inarticulate possesses undeniable influence especially in a section of the proletariat of Barcelona rather than in the rest of the province; the Socialist Union of Catalonia which had previously separated itself from the Workers’ Alliance to form a bloc with the petty-bourgeois in the government of the Generalitat, and finally, the Peasant Organization controlled and led by the Catalonian Left.

The revolutionary forces in Catalonia were at that time:

a. The parties and trade union organizations which formed the Workers’ Alliances.

b. The National Confederation of Labor (Iberian Anarchist Federation).

c. The Peasant Organization.

d. The Generalitat. (The government of Catalonia).

The Generalitat, petty-bourgeois government found itself in a dilemma; either it joined the revolutionary movement of the working class against the Fascist reaction, or it would be defeated along with the labor movement.

The objective of the Lerroux-Gil Robles government was not only the destruction of the working class movement but the absolute centralization of power; to reduce Catalonian autonomy to a simple administrative office as well as the annulment of the law of the Contracts of Culture, a law which linked the peasants to the Catalonian Left.

The proletariat and the democratic victories of the Revolution coincided.

The convergence of the government of the Generalitat and of the Workers’ Alliance came about through the interplay of revolutionary circumstances. There never existed, however, an organic coordination between the Generalitat and the Workers Alliance. The Generalitat would not unite its action with that of the Workers’ Alliance. The petty-bourgeoisie of the Generalitat understood that once the movement was started it might not be able to hold it within convenient bounds.

After much hesitation the Generalitat influenced by the pressure of the working masses decided to revolt against the Lerroux-Gil Robles government which had just been organized in Madrid. This decision of the Catalonian Left resulted in the participation of the peasants in the movement.

The revolutionary front was thrown together without having any form: the proletariat, the peasant, and the petty-bourgeoisie seeking national independence for Catalonia.

There was a proletarian sector missing, the Anarchists of the C.N.T. (National Confederation of Labor) who when invited by the Workers’ Alliance to participate in the general strike of the 5th refused to cooperate.

The relation of forces, in spite of the defection of the anarchists, was extraordinarily favorable to the revolution. The Generalitat, government of Catalonia, had great quantities of armaments. Two thousand police and militiamen armed, constituted a wall of steel, and at their side a very large proletariat and all the peasants impatient to enter the fight. The battle could not have been lost without the treachery of one of the participants in this revolutionary front.

In the midst of the revolutionary battle the panic of the petty-bourgeoisie increased at the growth of the movement and its possible results. They understood that in the end the proletariat would have the upper hand.

The Generalitat refused to arm the Workers’ Alliance. Dencas, Minister of the Interior of the Generalitat, gave as a pretext the lack of arms, which was absolutely untrue. Dencas himself ordered the automobiles of the Workers’ Alliance to be fired on, saying that they were Fascist autos. The Committee of the Workers’ Alliance was almost shot down on the nights of the 6th and 7th of October by a Dencas group.

The Catalonian Left not only refused to arm the workers but also refused to utilize its own machinery of force against the very weak army of the Lerroux-Gil Robles government at Barcelona. About four hundred soldiers triumphed over two thousand armed police and six thousand armed militiamen on the streets of Barcelona, who offered no resistance. The Generalitat gave up without trying either the offensive or the defensive. The hysterical pleas by radio did more to dishearten the workers than to encourage them. The Generalitat in capitulating, betrayed the revolution, the working class movement, the peasants, and Catalonia.

One can apply to the Catalonian Left what Marx said of the German petty-bourgeoisie which also betrayed the revolution: “This is its most unpardonable act. Never has any party in History so betrayed its best allies and itself, and whatever humiliation and punishment is reserved for this section of the middle class, this act alone justifies it.”

IV. Critical Analysis

The result of the October revolution shows that the moment was not objectively favorable to the triumph of the revolution. The Workers’ and Peasants’ Bloc in discussions with the Socialist Party had at several different times pointed out the dangers of a premature insurrection, The Workers’ and Peasants’ Bloc, nevertheless, was always in the front line of combat.

The objective and subjective conditions necessary for a successful working class revolution have been indicated by Lenin: “It is not enough to have convinced the vanguard of the revolutionary class; it is also necessary to have disposed of the actually active forces in all classes in society without exception so that when the final struggle comes, the forces of the hostile classes will be confused, discordant among themselves, and weakened by disruptive internal conflict; secondly, that all the intermediary, hesitating, unconscious elements, i.e., the petty-bourgeoisie and the petty-bourgeois democracy will have been thoroughly exposed and disgraced by their political failures; thirdly, that there commence to form within the proletariat and extending to the masses, a change of opinion in favor of bolder, more decisive revolutionary action against the bourgeoisie. That will be the time, if we have correctly analyzed the conditions indicated and briefly sketched above, if we have correctly chosen the moment, our victory will be assured.”

Different revolutionary experiences in different countries have confirmed these conditions so that they may be considered classic.

Did these conditions exist in Spain in September and October?

Working class unity of action was not yet completely realized. The Anarchists of the C.N.T. and of the F.A.I. which influenced about half of the working class movement in our country were missing.

There was no revolutionary labor party that had the general sympathy of the majority of the working class. The Socialist Party which had just made such serious blunders had only begun to rectify its line. The Communist Party modified its tactics a few minutes before the revolutionary explosion. The Iberian Communist Federation (Workers’ and Peasants’ Bloc) had no real effective strength except in Catalonia.

The situation in which the bourgeoisie found itself, though very serious was not desperate as it still had resources. The majority of the population did not believe that the government crisis was insoluble.

The Socialist Party in always holding the movement back from unity had helped to keep it immature in a revolutionary sense. The Socialist Party opposed the national organization of the Workers Alliance which would have coordinated revolutionary action.

The official Communist Party in implacably criticizing the Workers’ Alliance and the organizations that belonged to it up to the very eve of revolutionary action, was also an obstacle.

The position of the Anarchists (C.N.T.) in opposing unity action was another important difficulty.

The peasants did not collaborate with the revolutionary action, except in Catalonia, because the Socialist Party had lead an unsuccessful strike last June. That is why the peasants would not join the proletarian revolution.

In spite of these unfavorable objective and subjective conditions, the revolutionary movement could have succeeded (a) with the active participation of the Catalonian Generalitat; (b) with revolutionary action of the working class of Madrid, strongly organized and center of the working class movement of all Spain up to that time; (c) with insurrection in Asturias.

If the Generalitat had wanted to win and not to lose, if it had attacked, the working class movement and the Generalitat would have been victorious in Catalonia. The victory of the revolution in Catalonia would have called for insurrection in the provinces of Valencia, Alicante, Castellon, etc. And if the working class of Madrid had participated even though it would not have been victorious at the start, victory would have been finally assured hy the successes of Asturias and Catalonia.

The great sustaining strength was in the Generalitat. The position of the Workers’ and Peasants’ Bloc was to defend that policy in the Workers Alliance which would have lead the Generalitat to a rupture with the central government by placing it in an inexorable dilemma: revolution on the side of the working class, or counter-revolution.

Another important fact which is to be considered in an analysis of tactics and strategy is that Madrid, lacking a large proletarian mass, cannot be the center of insurrectionary action.

The defection of the Anarchists, their systematic refusal to take part in the revolutionary struggle was a crime that will not be easily pardoned by the working class. The Anarchists—except those who naturally participated in Asturias and certain centers of Catalonia—were an important aid to the counter-revolution. The treachery of the Generalitat in a certain measure is less than that of the Anarchists, for the Generalitat was composed of petty bourgeoisie while the Anarchists were workers.

V. Historical Importance

The results of the October Revolution cannot be compared in so far as perspectives are concerned was either the Paris Commune of 1871 or 1905 in Russia. In 1871 and 1905 the revolution was defeated. Our revolution underwent a defeat in one of its encounters but the war goes on. A defeat in one battle does not mean that the whole war is lost.

The October events may be compared historically to the July days of 1917 in Russia and even to December, 1930, in Spain.

In July, 1917, the Russian proletariat had an armed demonstration which one of the leading parties of the working class wanted to convert into an insurrection for the taking of power. The proletariat was vanquished giving rise to the ferocious persecution of the Kerensky Government against the revolutionary proletariat. Four months later the conquered of July were the conquerors of October. The proletariat had taken power.

In December, 1930, during the fight against dictatorship and the monarchy, the Spanish revolutionary movement was forced to retreat; the monarchy was victorious. Four months later however the monarchy collapsed and the Republic was set up.

The Spanish revolution is taking place in Spain with the Spanish working class against the Spanish reactionary forces. It is impossible to forget the historical facts and influences that exist today in our own country.

From this point of view, the October events offer a certain parallel to those of 1909 and 1917 which must be taken into account.

In 1909 the Catalonian proletariat arose against the reactionary government of Madrid. The uprising was suppressed. But shortly afterwards due to great mass pressure of the labor masses, the government was overthrown and a relatively democratic period began followed by considerable strengthening of the labor movement.

In 1917 revolutionary action was also put down but the labor movement developed in unheard of fashion as a result of the revolutionary intervention. The Socialist Party and syndicalism grew considerably from 1917 on.

Growth and strengthening of the labor movement has followed in our country every mass action of a revolutionary nature.

This gives us sufficient cause to believe that the working class movement will come out of the October Revolution strengthened and with revolutionary experience which will be of supreme value to it. A defeat is often necessary in order to have a decisive victory. Without the Paris Commune the Russian Revolution of 1905 would not have been possible. And without the revolution of 1905 (Lenin himself said it) victory would not have been possible in 1917. “A defeat in a hard fought battle has the same revolutionary importance as an easily obtained victory.” (Marx)

During the last two years there have been in the international labor movement three classic examples each of symbolic value, Germany, Austria, and Spain.

In Germany the working class because of errors of its leaders, impassably watched the development of Fascism, without being able to get unity of action at first, nor entering the combat later on to defeat Fascism. Hitler was able to triumph because the working class did not struggle against him.

In Asturia the proletariat struggled but it was too late. The revolutionary action of February, 1934, should have taken place before then, before Fascism had organized as it already had done by February, 1934. Nevertheless the fact that the Asturian proletariat did not capitulate as the proletariat had in Germany, kept it from feeling vanquished and helped it to react quickly so that one can already see on the horizon future struggles of the Asturian workers against Fascism.

To perish without a struggle is to die. To be defeated in combat is a momentary retreat to rehabilitate one’s forces and to strike again.

The Spanish proletariat, educated by the tragic realities of Germany and Austria knew enough, fortunately, to react in time. It struggled against Fascism before Fascism had a chance to organize and penetrate into the labor movement.

The October battles shook not only the foundations of the Lerroux-Gil Robles government but those of the existing order. The newly born Fascist movement after the formidable pressure of the proletariat far, from gaining in strength, finds itself deeply undermined.

The Spanish proletariat has not only shown that Fascism will not triumph over it, but that on the contrary it will inevitably climb over the cadaver of Fascism.

PDF of full issue: https://archive.org/download/road-to-communism_spring-1935_2_2/road-to-communism_spring-1935_2_2.pdf