because we were doing well.
before the republican government attacked the anarchists, the anarchists were the most decisive opponents to franco's movement.
then all of a sudden it became our fault?

please

When was it ever your fault? <:caring:312066184948350976>

franco almost lost because of the anarchists and the poum

he won because of the republicans

He won because overwhelming foreign aid and the Soviet union essentially killing the revolutionary fervor

They were counter-revolutionary in spain by all accounts and essentially hijacked the civil war.

i can get behind that statement

@alines Franco wasn't a communist you dumbass.

@Firefly#9983 I will give you one thing, in that the anarchists own beliefs are what make them behave so incompitently in warfare.

i never said he was.
hamfisted tactics by the republican movement led to nationalist victory.
you never actually pay attention to conversations, do you?

@alines The anarchists were at one point capable of winning the war? Nope, they were destroyed by a single group, that being the falange.

because of republcan disarmament.
how could anarchists be disarmed by republicans after being crushed by nationalists?

When even all the trotskyist internationalists in the soviet union could not defeat the Falange or Franco's armies, that really shows how bad they were.

I hate anarchists, it's all promises and no responsibility

@alines Are you arguing with yourself now?

Let's bring that to question since you argued with yourself.

in what way?

How could anarchists be disarmed by the republicans, if this was after the war ended in favor of the nationalists?

you seem to think that's the way it had to have happened, since falange apparently has full culpability according to you

@alines That's the way you put it, you quite literally are arguing with yourself now.

no, i said FIRST anarchists were disarmed by republicans, THEN crushed by falange.
try actually reading

@alines But you questioned yourself on how the anarchists could have been disarmed by the republicans.

what is rhetoric?

"how could anarchists be disarmed by republicans after being crushed by nationalists?"

what are rhetorical questions?

@alines The only rhetoric I see here is fallacy.

go on and tell me what fallacy

not a word

I would say a hastily generalization, mostly due to the fact that you questioned how the anarchists could have been disarmed after the civil war, which didn't happen, and you bring together another fallacy, by just stating "OH IT WAS ALL A RHETORIC ALL ALONG!" which I seriously doubt is the truth, unless english isn't your first language, you are autistic, or just have issues with reading and text, along with that, you seem to be so stubborn, that you will outright refuse to admit that you made a mistake, in favor of continuing to argue with me.

falange wasn't the only force responsible for the defeat of the anarchists.
that's where you seem to have it wrong.
and i can admit to mistakes and still argue with you

Then prove it!

"I can admit mistakes, but I won't for you!"

How hypocritical.

You truly will say anything to make yourself seem better, won't you?

okay, i shouldn't have assumed you had the order of events leading to anarchist defeat switched

Was that what you call an apology?

You must have issues pal.

falange did not defeat the anarchists simply by overwhelming them.
the anarchist disarmed by republican forces before falange got to them

Ah, avoiding now I see.

this has been my argument the entire time

@alines So instead of acknowledging your faults and responding to them, you simply ignore them and move onto something else? How pathetic you truly are.

repeating myself is moving on to something else.
yes calling people pathetic is always proof of your own validity. what's really pathetic is starting with saying i argue with myself, then saying i'm avoiding the topic i keep making the exact same comments on.
that's pathetic

Oh I am not doing this for myself, but I am calling you out on your short comings which you are extremely stubborn on and refuse to acknowledge, and then I called you out again for attempting to ignore them.

you'll just grab on to any fallacy you can think of instead of saying, "no the anarchists still had weapons, falange just overwhelmed them."
say it

make it clear, what are those shortcomings?

What? That is what I have been trying to say for the longest time, but yet you have gone on your nonsensical rants and what not, derailing this whole conversation.

One of your biggest shortcomings are your stubborness you will argue for the sake of arguing, and will refuse to ever admit that you are in the wrong. The second is your wording and text, seeing as how you can't make hardly any argument that holds up over time, and you constantly have to change, restate, and give up all together, just because you cannot string a proper sentence and statement together, without seeming like a person who cannot make up his mind to save his life.

i've been saying over and over that the republican government betrayed the revolution in barcelona and catalonia.
they did.
many times.
but i guess now they didn't because you said so.

insult after insult, and projection.
that is the crux of your thinking

and being betrayed by the republican government didn't lead to the defeat of the anarchists, is that what you're gonna say next?

@alines Did I ever claim that they didn't?

Projection? Insulting? Hah.

'pathetic' 'stubborn'
not insults, i suppose

They are harsh critisisms of what you really are.

how is 'pathetic' a criticism and not just plainly an insult?

@Queef Madagascar as for you,
anarchists made many attempts to educate the workers, many were successful, and published the philosophy that made the second republic of spain possible.
they increased literacy, made honest attempts at training workers for fighting, established worker's syndicates, collectivized labor and industry, and helped to bring down the monarchy and established democratic territories for themselves.
yup, we're just ALL empty promises

fuck you

anarchist and communist should always support each other

we might have different POVs

but like we all want the same

@alines Fuck you and your idealistic horseshit. You anarchists have contributed so little to the international socialist movement and have gotten in the way of socialist construction so many times as to make you an enemy of anyone that desires true freedom for working people.

@alines Because it is a critism about your behaviour.

Fuck anarchism.

Stupid, idealistic pipe-dream.

@Deleted User For once I agree with the internationalists.

Long Live Marxism!

Except the marxism part.

@alines The anarchists did not do shit, and all you blame it on is other people, you are a living example of this, with how you fail to acknowledge any of your failure, and instead screech at other people.

There was one anarchist society and that lasted for 3 years and there are only scraps of info

care to remember which society was that?

@Artemis Kulaks?

Catalonia

wow

It was barely ancom it was more of a refugee camp for war victims

With the civil war going on they had no choice but to ration resources to keep people alive

Of course a real ancom never existed so ancoms have the advantage of making unfalsifiable claims

Like Chomsky

@Queef Madagascar That's some real anarchism right there, a refugee camp that had to give up anarchism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgteTrnKx5I

>anarchists didn't do shit for socialism
that is outright denial of history.
and you faggots should be ashamed
https://youtu.be/yVjYaAOMGtc

but i guess in your eyes, shit like holodomor and dprk are much better contributions

go fuck yourselves

@alines >"For info go to marxists.org"
>Uses examples from the spanish anarchists who were utterly incompitent and had to rely off of aid from the soviet union and trotskyists to survive

only for guns

No, for EVERYTHING for their survival, and even then, they were destroyed, and didn't you say that they got disarmed? So which is it?

for the millionth fucking time, disarmed and then destroyed

they only got guns from the soviets.
and i'm sure the soviet guns went to the republicans first.
republicans denied anarchists guns to defend themselves.
nobody in spain received anything else from the soviets to my knowlege

@alines How would you know?

no reports of any other forms of aid

You THINK, but do you really know?

name one example of "EVERYTHING"

can you?

@alines Don't ignore what I said pal, how do you know that the anarchists really didn't get the guns from the soviets?

"Due to the Franco-British arms embargo, the **Government of the Republic** could receive material aid and could purchase arms only from the Soviet Union. To pay for these armaments the **Republicans** used US$500 million in gold reserves."
as i thought, the soviets only sent military hardware to the REPUBLICANS

@alines And where are you getting that from?

wikipedia

Aaaand there goes all credibility out the window.

@alines Fuck off you ignorant anarkid

With your shitty ass theory

because wikipedia

During the war, 1,811 specialists were sent to Spain, including 772 aviators, 351 tankmen, 222 general-purpose advisers and instructors, 77 military seamen, more than 150 various other military specialists, 130 workers and engineers of aviation factories, 156 signalmen, 204 translators . At the same time in Spain there were never more than 600-800 Soviet advisers and specialists. 127 Soviet advisers and specialists were killed in fights, 11 died from wounds, 32 were lost, 19 people were killed in case of accidents.