20th century ideological history

[Jack Weber]

I found this series on youtube.I've always been interested in what happened in Spain at that time,but I was'nt aware of the specifics.The Spanish Civil War was a micrcosm of the ideological struggles of Europe in the early part of the 20th century up until the end of the Cold War.It also seemed like a dry run for World War 2 with the ideological powers of Europe picking sides and arming them.

It's a fairly long series but extremely informative.There are 6 segments broken up inot 6 parts each,most run for about 10 minutes.

Part 1 is here...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wS-KLhoenmI

Edited April 17, 2010 by Jack Weber

[Pliny]

Yes. Not much is heard about the Spanish civil war. Thanks, Jack.

[Jack Weber]

You're welcome.

The Spanish Civil War is a the Viet Nam War before there was a Viet Nam War.It was an internal conflict that all the major ideological players of the day meddled in.Adolph Hitler and Benito Mussolini coming in on the side of Franco's Nationalists.Stalin coming in on the side of the Republicans.It was basically a dry run for the Second World War...

[ToadBrother]

Yes. Not much is heard about the Spanish civil war. Thanks, Jack.

I had an uncle, a dedicated Communist his whole life, who went over to Spain. He never got much of a chance to fight, and spent a chunk of the war in prison.

[Bonam]

Hmm I don't feel like the Spanish civil war is particularly unknown. Every time I've watched a documentary overviewing WWII, it included the leadup to it including the civil war. Every time I've learned about it in school, the Spanish civil war was discussed.

[bush_cheney2004]

Hmm I don't feel like the Spanish civil war is particularly unknown. Every time I've watched a documentary overviewing WWII, it included the leadup to it including the civil war. Every time I've learned about it in school, the Spanish civil war was discussed.

Agreed....the Spanish civil war has been in mainstream media for many years.....from Hemingway books to films like "The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie". Hell, I distinctly remember the slow agonizing death of Franco back in 1975 complete with the whole story of the Spanish civil war.

[M.Dancer]

Hell, I distinctly remember the slow agonizing death of Franco back in 1975 complete with the whole story of the Spanish civil war.

Is Franco still dead?

[Pliny]

Hmm I don't feel like the Spanish civil war is particularly unknown. Every time I've watched a documentary overviewing WWII, it included the leadup to it including the civil war. Every time I've learned about it in school, the Spanish civil war was discussed.

To me it seems a blank spot. Why is there no condemnation of this dictatorship? Franco is rarely mentioned and you would never have known Spain to be a dictatorship after WWII when national socialism was held in general disdain.

There is something odd about Franco not being vilified in the mainstream media during his dictatorship. The MSM, although progressive at the time, were still heralding democracy. I'm sure if you were interested there was enough information to give one a perspective but, in my opinion, it was, for the most part, given a pass, at least here in North America.

[Michael Hardner]

To me it seems a blank spot. Why is there no condemnation of this dictatorship? Franco is rarely mentioned and you would never have known Spain to be a dictatorship after WWII when national socialism was held in general disdain.

There is something odd about Franco not being vilified in the mainstream media during his dictatorship. The MSM, although progressive at the time, were still heralding democracy. I'm sure if you were interested there was enough information to give one a perspective but, in my opinion, it was, for the most part, given a pass, at least here in North America.

Pliny, I appreciate your perspective on this. There are certainly examples of 'blind spots' in the media that don't appear to be ideologically driven. Spain was a dictatorship into the 70s I believe. Likewise, Chile had an oppressive regime that executed peaceful protesters and students in that era.

My question is: how many of those blind spots persist today and what are they ?

[M.Dancer]

To me it seems a blank spot. Why is there no condemnation of this dictatorship? Franco is rarely mentioned and you would never have known Spain to be a dictatorship after WWII when national socialism was held in general disdain.

There is something odd about Franco not being vilified in the mainstream media during his dictatorship. The MSM, although progressive at the time, were still heralding democracy. I'm sure if you were interested there was enough information to give one a perspective but, in my opinion, it was, for the most part, given a pass, at least here in North America.

Spain was a dictorship before the second world war ended....if he wasn't vilified as much as you like, it has more to do with Spain not being belligerent internationally. Never the less, because of the facsism and dictatorship, Spain was shunned widely on the world stage, denied membership in Nato, the EU and so on. It wasn't till after his death and the accension of Jaun Carlos that Spain was welcomed back into the fold.

[eyeball]

Pliny, I appreciate your perspective on this. There are certainly examples of 'blind spots' in the media that don't appear to be ideologically driven. Spain was a dictatorship into the 70s I believe. Likewise, Chile had an oppressive regime that executed peaceful protesters and students in that era.

My question is: how many of those blind spots persist today and what are they ?

Afghanistan for one given these sorts of pals Ahmed Wali Karzai or Asadullah Khalid.

Ethiopia for another.

We allied with communists to defeat fascists, and then with dictators and even a few Islamic radicals to defeat the communists. Now we've had to resort to allying ourselves with communists to defeat the Islamic radicals.

“Thanks to Chinese electronic monitoring-and-control software, the government is able to block most opposition electronic communications when it desires,” the group said in a recent report.

http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:http://www.ethiopianreview.com/content/11315

We need to back Ethiopia's government because it's a key African ally in the "war on terror".

The pattern of abuses by Ethiopian government forces is not new. Eyewitness accounts of atrocities, including the destruction and burning of villages, forced relocations of civilians, summary executions, and violent acts of rape and torture, date back more than a decade.

http://ipsnews.net/africa/nota.asp?idnews=42766

Meet the new century...same as the old one.

[Pliny]

Spain was a dictorship before the second world war ended....if he wasn't vilified as much as you like, it has more to do with Spain not being belligerent internationally. Never the less, because of the facsism and dictatorship, Spain was shunned widely on the world stage, denied membership in Nato, the EU and so on. It wasn't till after his death and the accension of Jaun Carlos that Spain was welcomed back into the fold.

Yes, this seems to be my recollection. Mostly shunned and ignored.

It would be interesting to find out how it survived economically. I think I will google that.

[Pliny]

Meet the new century...same as the old one.

Those darn conservatives, how can there be any progress when things just stay the same.

[Jack Weber]

Yes, this seems to be my recollection. Mostly shunned and ignored.

It would be interesting to find out how it survived economically. I think I will google that.

Not necessarily true...

When Franco died Nixon said the US had lost a great friend and defender of freedom(I'm paraphrasing).Then again,to the US state Dept. at the time,if one was not Communist,they were A-OK!Fascist thugs are easy to control...A little money...A few guns...Free reign to get rid of anyone who opposes them...Franco and Salazar were the US' men on the Iberian penninsula for that very reason....

[Pliny]

Not necessarily true...

When Franco died Nixon said the US had lost a great friend and defender of freedom(I'm paraphrasing).Then again,to the US state Dept. at the time,if one was not Communist,they were A-OK!Fascist thugs are easy to control...A little money...A few guns...Free reign to get rid of anyone who opposes them...Franco and Salazar were the US' men on the Iberian penninsula for that very reason....

Well. I googled the economic history under Franco and it didn't fair well until 1958. They remained fairly isolated until then suffering economic hardship and instability for almost the entirety of that time(1937-1958).

In 1958 they joined the IMF, the World Bank and with some loans from them and some aid from good old Uncle Sam became a part of the global economic community and started to turn things around. Not at first - squandering some of the early economic aid but eventually establishing a fairly stable economy. As stable as, any country with a fiat currency can be said to be stable.

[Jack Weber]

Well. I googled the economic history under Franco and it didn't fair well until 1958. They remained fairly isolated until then suffering economic hardship and instability for almost the entirety of that time(1937-1958).

In 1958 they joined the IMF, the World Bank and with some loans from them and some aid from good old Uncle Sam became a part of the global economic community and started to turn things around. Not at first - squandering some of the early economic aid but eventually establishing a fairly stable economy. As stable as, any country with a fiat currency can be said to be stable.

The main reason for the economic hardship after the Civil War was because of disastrous internal economic policies and the inconvenient truth that Franco murdered almost anyone who stood against him during and after the war.In doing this,he eliminated most of the manpower that would have been necessary to rebuild the country...

[bush_cheney2004]

....In 1958 they joined the IMF, the World Bank and with some loans from them and some aid from good old Uncle Sam became a part of the global economic community and started to turn things around. Not at first - squandering some of the early economic aid but eventually establishing a fairly stable economy. As stable as, any country with a fiat currency can be said to be stable.

...and Uncle Sam got US Naval Base, Rota, Spain.....a lovely place!

[Pliny]

The main reason for the economic hardship after the Civil War was because of disastrous internal economic policies and the inconvenient truth that Franco murdered almost anyone who stood against him during and after the war.In doing this,he eliminated most of the manpower that would have been necessary to rebuild the country...

Yes. He spent a lot of money buying arms from Hitler and Mussolini and after that fighting communist guerillas. A lot of manpower left the country because of lack of work.

[Pliny]

...and Uncle Sam got US Naval Base, Rota, Spain.....a lovely place!

Uncle Sam always looks after it's interests - at least until recently.

[bloodyminded]

Uncle Sam always looks after it's interests - at least until recently.

It obviously still does. It could scarcely behave any other way, right or wrong.

[Pliny]

It obviously still does. It could scarcely behave any other way, right or wrong.

It has recently shifted it's interests to becoming part of the global community and run things from a global perspective rather than an American perspective.

Edited April 29, 2010 by Pliny

[bloodyminded]

It has recently shifted it's interests to becoming part of the global community and run things from a global perspective rather than an American perspective.

I don't think this is true; the administration has rather reverted to the more traditional methods of internationalism, of which the Bush admin. was a sharp break. Obama is more conservative and traditional in his approach.

And whatever one thinks of US foreign policy in general, the Bush method has been a colossal failure, so Obama has made a relatively (and I stress "relatively") reasonable return to centuries of doctrine.

Edited April 29, 2010 by bloodyminded

[bush_cheney2004]

It has recently shifted it's interests to becoming part of the global community and run things from a global perspective rather than an American perspective.

This is wishful thinking.....it is still very much an American perspective....which has competing interests and global partners just as before. If such partners think it is more collaborative with Obama that's fine, but the American objectives remain largely unchanged.

[Pliny]

This is wishful thinking.....it is still very much an American perspective....which has competing interests and global partners just as before. If such partners think it is more collaborative with Obama that's fine, but the American objectives remain largely unchanged.

I agree American interests remain unchanged.

However, I don't equate Obama's interests with American interests.

That's why you have a national healthcare bill in effect now. That's why GM is being run by the government? That's why the banking industry is on the verge of being nationalized? That's why he is apologizing for America to the rest of the world.

[Pliny]

I don't think this is true; the administration has rather reverted to the more traditional methods of internationalism, of which the Bush admin. was a sharp break. Obama is more conservative and traditional in his approach.

And whatever one thinks of US foreign policy in general, the Bush method has been a colossal failure, so Obama has made a relatively (and I stress "relatively") reasonable return to centuries of doctrine.

Reverted? America has traditionally had a perspective of sovereignty and other nations have looked to it for leadership. Obama is moving it toward a commonwealth of nations - if that's a return to centuries of doctrine but I thought that was what the American revolution was about.

I would never call him "conservative and traditional" in the American sense of the words.

As for Bush, I like the man but he wasn't Presidential material - not much of a leader at all. I don't think there was a Bush method. He initiated the two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and gave a lot of aid to Africa but not much else.