This is a study of social protest and repression in one of the twentieth century's most important revolutionary hotspots. It explains why Barcelona became the undisputed capital of the European anarchist movement and explores the sources of anarchist power in the city. It also places Barcelona at the center of Spain's economic, social, cultural and political life during 1898-1937.
This book has also been republished as Anarchism and the City: Revolution and Counter-revolution in Barcelona, 1898–1937 by AK Press (on AK USA site) (on AK UK site)
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Class, Culture and Confict in Barcelona.pdf | 3.38 MB |
- Printer-friendly version
- Login or register to post comments
Can comment on articles and discussions
Comments
http://www.anarkismo.net/article/18125
Brilliant, thanks for posting this
Thanks a lot.
Slowly putting this in nicely formatted text format…
Thanks for making this available.
This is pretty much all done now, just need to go through and add the images
admin note: this post refers to a comment above which has been unpublished as it contains untrue smears
He never threatened legal action. Gelderloos is being pissy and trying to say that if anyone gets a grant for academic research then that automatically makes one beholden to the grantor's agenda. Ridiculous. And to think that he's making anything from writing that particular book is even more ridiculous.
Fair enough, I'm not a partisan of Gelderloos or Ealham. I just stumbled across that review and remembered the book was here on libcom so thought it was relevant.
I think there are several problems with that review beyond the attempt to link his theoretical disagreements with Ealham to the latter's funding.
For example, it repeats the canard that the CNT joining the CCMA was down to a decision made at an assembly when in fact it was presented to the membership as a fait accompli. It also suggests that the "revolutionary gymnasia" tactics criticised by Ealham were the basis of the success of July 36, and uses the example of the Nosotros affinity group to prove this. This group had, however, explicitly abandoned these tactics after 1934, spearheading the transition from Action groups to Defence Committees (whose national council stated: “There can be no revolution without preparation. We have to end the bias towards improvisations. That error, of faith in the creative instinct in the masses, has cost us dear. The methods of war necessary to fight a state that has experience, armaments and a greater offensive and defensive capacity, are not acquired through spontaneous generation”).
There are other things I'd take issue with, such as describing the POUM as Trotskyist and "a tiny cult" whose intervention in putting down the fascist uprising was insignificant. Well, you can't have your cake and eat it; if the Nosotros group were of critical importance in those days then there is no reason why the intervention of an organisation numbering several thousand could not also be.
Gelderloos is totally uninformed. I've seen this scurrilous review of his. He's a disgrace, a joke and a wannabe Pol Pot when he talks about executing academics 'when the revolution comes'...Maybe instead loudmouth ignoramuses will get it instead. He'd be a prime candidate.
Hahaha, I knew I'd find a poster angry with that college radical du jour Genderloos! Yep, Genderloos' is a fucking hack and an idiot, an unstable little squirrel! Glad someone said it. He's a crimethinker (of the old lifestylist variety) who hasn't read crimethink yet, spiritually an eternal activist.