A - I n f o s
a multi-lingual news service by, for, and about anarchists **

News in all languages
Last 40 posts (Homepage) Last two weeks' posts

The last 100 posts, according to language
Castellano_ Català_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkçe_ The.Supplement
First few lines of all posts of last 24 hours || of past 30 days | of 2002 | of 2003

Syndication Of A-Infos - including RDF | How to Syndicate A-Infos
Subscribe to the a-infos newsgroups
{Info on A-Infos}

(en) Red & Black Revolution #7 - Industrial Collectivisation during the Spanish Revolution by Deirdre Hogan

From Worker <a-infos-en@ainfos.ca>
Date Sat, 20 Dec 2003 07:05:42 +0100 (CET)

A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
News about and of interest to anarchists
http://ainfos.ca/ http://ainfos.ca/index24.html

Although it was in the countryside where the most far-reaching
anarchist socialisation took place, the revolution took place in the
cities and the towns too. At that time in Spain almost 2 million out of a
total population of 24 million worked in industry, 70% of which was
concentrated in one area - Catalonia. There, within hours of the fascist
assault, workers had seized control of 3000 enterprises. This included
all public transportation services, shipping, electric and power
companies, gas and water works, engineering and automobile
assembly plants, mines, cement works, textile mills and paper
factories, electrical and chemical concerns, glass bottle factories and
perfumeries, food processing plants and breweries.

It was in the industrial areas that some of the first collectivisations
took place. On the eve of the military uprising a general strike was
called by the CNT. However once the initial period of fighting was
over it was clear that the next vital step was to ensure the
continuation of production. Many of the bourgeoisie sympathetic to
Franco fled after the defeat of the insurgent armed forces. The
factories and workshops owned by these were immediately seized and
run by the workers. Other sections of the bourgeoisie were reluctant
to keep the factories going and by closing them attempted to indirectly
contribute to Franco's cause. Closing factories and workshops would
also lead to higher unemployment and increasing poverty, which would
play into the enemy's hands. "The workers understood this
instinctively, and established in almost all workshops, control
committees, which had as their aim to keep a watch on the progress in
production, and to keep a check on the financial position of the owner
of each establishment. In numerous cases, control was quickly passed
from the control committee, to the directive committee, in which the
employer was drawn in with the workers and paid the same wage. A
number of factories and workshops in Catalonia passed in this way
into the hands of the workers who were engaged in them."[1]

Also of the utmost importance was to create, without delay, a war
industry in order to supply the front and to get the transport system
moving again so that the militias and supplies could be sent to the
front. Thus, the first expropriations of industries and public services
took place in order to insure victory over fascism, with anarchist
militants taking advantage of the situation to push immediately for
revolutionary goals.
The role of the CNT

The social revolution can be best understood in the context of the
relatively long history in Spain of workers' organisation and social
struggle. The CNT, which was the major driving force of the
collectivisations, had been in existence since 1910 and had 1.5 million
members by 1936. The anarchist syndicalist movement had existed in
Spain since 1870 and, from its birth to the (partial) realisation of its
ultimate ideal during the social revolution, had a history of constant
engagement in intense social struggle - "Partial and general strikes,
sabotage, public demonstrations, meetings, struggle against
strikebreakers.., imprisonment, transportation, trials, uprisings,
lock-outs, some attentats"[2]

Anarchist ideas were widespread by 1936. The circulation of anarchist
publications at that time gives us some idea of this: there were two
anarchist dailies, one in Barcelona, one in Madrid, both organs of the
CNT with an average circulation of between 30 and 50 thousand.
There were about 10 periodicals, in addition to various anarchist
reviews with circulations of up to 70,000. In all the anarchist papers,
pamphlets and books, as well as in their trade union and group
meetings, the problem of the social revolution was continuously and
systematically discussed. Thus, the radical nature of the Spanish
working class, politicised through struggle and confrontation, as well
as the influence of anarchist ideas meant that in a revolutionary
situation anarchists were able to obtain mass popular support.

The CNT had a very strong democratic tradition at its core. Decisions
on all local and immediate matters such as wages and conditions were
in the hands of the local membership who met regularly in general
assembly. Mutual aid and solidarity between workers was encouraged
and posed as the central way of winning strikes. The CNT organised
all workers irrespective of skill. In other words, workers were
encouraged to form one general union with sections based on a
particular industry rather than separate unions for each different job
within an industry. Both the democratic tradition and the industrial
nature of the trade union greatly influenced the structures of the
revolutionary collectives, which generally, grew out of and were
shaped by the industrial unions already in place.

Another important aspect of the CNT that accounted for the strength
of the revolution was its use of direct action. "The CNT had always
advocated 'direct action by workers themselves' as a means of solving
disputes. This policy encouraged self-reliance and self-confidence
within the union and membership - there was a prevailing culture of 'if
we want something sorted out, we have to do it ourselves'."[3] Finally
the federal structure of the CNT which was based on local autonomy
and which created a stable but highly decentralised form also
encouraged self-reliance and initiative, indispensable qualities which
greatly contributed to the success of the revolution.

Gaston Leval highlights the importance that this culture of direct
democracy and selfreliance has when it comes to a revolutionary
situation when he compares the role of the CNT with that of the UGT
in the collectivisation of the railways. Describing the highly organised,
efficient and responsible manner in which the railway industry was put
back into action under revolutionary control in only a few days he
writes "All this had been achieved on the sole initiative of the
Syndicate and militants of the CNT Those of the UGT in which the
administrative personnel predominated had remained passive, used to
carrying out orders coming from above, they waited. When neither
orders nor counterorders came, and our comrades forged ahead, they
simply followed the powerful tide which carried most of them along
with it."[4]

This history of struggle and organisation and the anarcho-syndicalist
nature of their union gave the CNT militants the necessary experience
of self-organisation and initiative which could then be put to use
naturally and effectively in the reorganisation of society along
anarchist lines when the time came. "It is clear, the social revolution
which took place then did not stem from a decision by the leading
organisms of the CNT... It occurred spontaneously, naturally, not
...because "the people" in general had suddenly become capable of
performing miracles, thanks to a revolutionary vision which suddenly
inspired them, but because, and it is worth repeating, among those
people there was a large minority, who were active, strong, guided by
an ideal which had been continuing though the years of struggle
started in Bakunin's time and that of the First International." [5]
Anarchist democracy in action in the collectives

The collectives were based on the workers self-management of their
workplaces. Augustin Souchy writes: "The collectives organised
during the Spanish Civil War were workers' economic associations
without private property. The fact that collective plants were managed
by those who worked in them did not mean that these establishments
became their private property. The collective had no right to sell or
rent all or any part of the collectivised factory or workshop, The
rightful custodian was the CNT, the National Confederation of
Workers Associations. But not even the CNT had the right to do as it
pleased. Everything had to be decided and ratified by the workers
themselves through conferences and congresses." [6]

In keeping with the democratic tradition of the CNT the industrial
collectives had a bottom up delegate structure of organisation. The
basic unit of decision-making was the workers' assembly, which in
turn elected delegates to management committees who would oversee
the day-to-day running of the factory. These elected management
committees were charged with carrying out the mandate decided at
these assemblies and had to report back to and were accountable to
the assembly of workers. The management committees also
communicated their observations to the centralised administrative

Generally, each industry had a centralised administrative committee
made up of a delegate from each branch of work and workers in that
industry. For example, in the textile industry in Alcoy there were 5
general branches of work: weaving, thread making, knitting, hosiery
and carding. The workers from each of these specialised areas elected
a delegate to represent them in the industry-wide administrative
committee. The role of this committee, which also contained some
technical experts, included directing production according to the
instructions received at the general assemblies of workers, compiling
reports and statistics on the progress of work and dealing with issues
of finances and co-ordination. In the words of Gaston Leval "The
general organisation rests therefore on the one hand on the division of
labour and on the other on the synthetic industrial structure."[7]

At all stages, the general assembly of Syndicate workers was the
ultimate decision making body. "all important decisions [being] taken
by the general assemblies of the workers, . . . [which] were widely
attended and regularly held. . . if an administrator did something which
the general assembly had not authorised, he was likely to be deposed
at the next meeting."[8] Reports by the various committees would be
examined and discussed at the general assemblies and finally
introduced if the majority thought it of use. "We are not therefore
facing an administrative dictatorship, but rather a functional
democracy, in which all specialised works play their roles which have
been settled after general examination by the assembly."[9]
Advancing along the road of Revolution

The stage of industry-wide socialisation did not occur overnight but
was a gradual and ongoing process. Nor did the industrial collectives
proceed in the same manner everywhere, the degree of socialisation
and the exact method of organisation varying from place to place. As
mentioned in the introduction, while some work places were
immediately seized by the workers, in others they gained control of
their workplaces by first creating a control committee which was there
to ensure the continuation of production. From this the next natural
step was the take over the workplace entirely by the workers.

Initially, when the continuation of production was the most pressing
task, there was little formal co-ordination between different
workshops and factories. This lack of co-ordination caused many
problems as Leval points out: "Local industries went through stages
almost universally adopted in that revolution . . . [I]n the first instance,
committees nominated by the workers employed in them [were
organised]. Production and sales continued in each one. But very soon
it was clear that this situation gave rise to competition between the
factories. . . creating rivalries which were incompatible with the
socialist and libertarian outlook. So the CNT launched the watchword:
'All industries must be ramified in the Syndicates, completely
socialised, and the regime of solidarity which we have always
advocated be established once and for all."[10]

The need to remedy this situation - where although the workers had
gained control of the workplaces the different workplaces often
operated independently and in competition with each other - and to
complete the socialisation process and so avoid the dangers of only
partial collectivisation was a task of which many workers were keenly
aware. A manifesto of the Syndicate of the wood industry published in
December 1936 stresses that the lack of coordination and solidarity
between workers in different factories and industries would lead to a
situation where workers in more favoured and successful industries
would become the new privileged, leaving those without resources to
their difficulties, which in turn would lead to the creation of two
classes: "the new rich and ever poor, poor."[11]

To this effect increasing efforts were made by the collectives not to
compete with each other for profits but instead to share the surpluses
across whole industries. So for example the Barcelona tramways,
which was particularly successful, contributed financially to the
development of the other transport systems in Barcelona and helped
them out of temporary difficulties. There were many cases of
solidarity across industries too. In Alcoy, for example, when the
printing, paper and cardboard Syndicate was experiencing difficulties
the 16 other Syndicates that made up the local Federation in Alcoy
gave financial assistance that enabled the printing Syndicate to

However as well as bringing an anarchist society a step closer it was
also a question of efficient industrial organisation. In the manifesto
published by the wood industry Syndicate it was stated "The Wood
Syndicate has wanted to advance not only along the road of the
Revolution, but also to orientate this Revolution in the interests of our
economy, of the people's economy."[12] In December 1936 a plenum of
syndicates met and made analyses on the need to completely
reorganise the inefficient capitalist industrial system and press
onward towards complete socialisation. The report of the plenum

"The major defect of most small manufacturing shops is
fragmentation and lack of technical/commercial preparation. This
prevents their modernisation and consolidation into better and more
efficient units of production, with better facilities and coordination. . . .
For us, socialisation must correct these deficiencies and systems of
organisation in every industry. . . . To socialise an industry, we must
consolidate the different units of each branch of industry in
accordance with a general and organic plan which will avoid
competition and other difficulties impeding the good and efficient
organisation of production and distribution. . ."[13]

The effort made to do away with the smaller, unhealthy and costly
workshops and factories was an important characteristic of the
industrial collectivisation process. As was the case with land
cultivation, it was felt that with the running of workshops and
factories" the dispersal of forces represented an enormous loss of
energy, an irrational use of human labour, machinery and raw
materials, a useless duplication of efforts."[14] For example, in the
town of Granollers "All kinds of initiatives tending to improve the
operation and structure of the local economy could be attributed
to...[the Syndicate]. Thus in a very short time, seven collectivised
hairdressing salons were set up through its efforts, replacing an
unknown number of shabby establishments. All the workshops and
mini-factories on shoe production were replaced by one large factory
in which only the best machines were used, and where necessary
sanitary provisions for the health of the workers were made. Similar
improvements were made in the engineering industry where numerous
small, dark and stifling foundries were replaced by a few large working
units in which air and sun were free to penetrate... Socialisation went
hand in hand with rationalisation."[15]
The creative drive unleashed

The Barcelona Tramways

As was the case with the collectives in the countryside, workers
self-management in the cities was associated with remarkable
improvements in working conditions, productivity and efficiency. Take
for example the achievements of the Barcelona tramways. Just five
days after the fighting had stopped, the tramways lines had been
cleared and repaired and seven hundred tramcars, which was a
hundred more than the usual six hundred, appeared on the road, all
painted diagonally across the side in the red and black colours of the
C.N.T. - F.A.I. The technical organisation of the tramways and the
traffic operation was greatly improved, new safety and signalling
systems were introduced and the tramway lines were straightened.
One of the first measures of the collectivisation of the tramways had
been the discharge of the excessively paid company executives and
this then enabled the collective to reduce the fares for passengers.
Wages approached basic equality with skilled workers earning 1
peseta more a day than labourers. Working conditions were greatly
improved with better facilities supplied to the workers and a new free
medical service was organised which served not only the Tramway
workers but their families as well.
The Socialisation of Medicine

The socialisation of medicine was another outstanding achievement of
the revolution. After July 19 the religious personnel who had been
administering the sanitary services disappeared overnight from the
hospitals, the dispensaries and other charitable institutions, making it
necessary for new methods of organisation to be improvised
immediately. To this effect the Syndicate for Sanitary Services was
constituted in Barcelona in September 1936 and within a few months
had 7000 skilled medical professional members, over 1000 of which
were doctors with different specialities. Inspired by a great social
ideal the aim of the Syndicate was to fundamentally reorganise the
whole practice of medicine and of the Public Health Services. This
Syndicate was part of the National Federation for Public Health, a
section of the C.N.T. which by 1937 had 40,000 members.

The region of Catalonia was divided up into 35 centres of greater or
lesser importance, depending on population density, in such a way that
no village or hamlet was without sanitary protection or medical care.
In one year, in Barcelona alone, six new hospitals had been created,
including two military hospitals for war causalities as well as nine new
sanatoria established in expropriated properties located in different
parts of Catalonia. Whereas before the revolution doctors were
concentrated in rich areas, they were now sent where they were
needed most.
Factories and workshops...

In the factories, too, great innovations were made. Many workplaces,
once in control of the workers, were converted to the production of
war materials for the anti-fascist troops. This was the case of the
metal industry in Catalonia which was completely rebuilt. Only a few
days after July 19th, for example, the Hispano-Suiza Automobile
Company was converted to the manufacture of armoured cars,
ambulances, weapons, and munitions for the fighting front. Another
example is the optical industry which was virtually non-existent before
the revolution. The small scattered workshops that had existed before
were voluntarily converted into a collective which constructed a new
factory. "In a short time the factory turned out opera glasses,
telemeters, binoculars, surveying instruments, industrial glassware in
different colours, and certain scientific instruments. It also
manufactured and repaired optical equipment for the fighting fronts. . .
.What private capitalists failed to do was accomplished by the
creative capacity of the members of the Optical Workers' Union of the

A good example of the scale of some of the industrial collectives is
the textile industry which functioned efficiently and employed "almost
a quarter of a million textile workers in scores of factories scattered in
numerous cities... The collectivisation of the textile industry shatters
once and for all the legend that the workers are incapable of
administrating a great and complex corporation." [17]

One of the first steps towards building an anarchist society is the
equalisation of wages. This is necessary in order to finish the
divisions within the working class, divisions which only serve to
weaken the class as a united whole. In the industrial collectives often
this did not happen immediately and there sometimes existed
relatively small differences in wages between technical and less
specialised workers. Wages were decided by the workers themselves
at the general assemblies of the Syndicates. When wages differences,
between workers with technical responsibilities and those without,
were accepted by the majority of workers this was often seen as a
temporary measure to avoid provoking conflicts at this stage of the
revolution and to ensure at all costs the smooth continuation of
production. Highly paid executive wages, however, were abolished and
ex-bosses given the option of leaving or working as one of the regular
workers, which they often accepted.

With private profit as the main motivating factor in the organisation of
industry gone, industries could be reorganised in a more efficient and
rational manner. For example, there were many electricity generation
stations scattered all around Catalonia which produced small and
insignificant outputs and which, although suited to private interest,
were not in the public interest at all. The electricity supply system
was completely reorganised, with some of the inefficient stations
closed. In the end this meant that the saving in labour could be used on
improvements such as a new barrage near Flix constructed by 700
workers which resulted in a considerable increase in the available
Participation of women in the collectives

One major change brought about during the revolution was the large
scale incorporation of women into the workforce. The CNT began
seriously to push for the unionisation of women workers. In the textile
industry, piecework for women was abolished and homeworkers
incorporated into the factories, which generally meant improvement of
wages and hours worked. The responsibility for childcare and
housework was, however, still left to women and many women found it
difficult to balance their multiple roles. Sometimes childcare was
provided by the collectives. For example, the wood and building trades
union in Barcelona as well as building a recreational area with a
swimming pool, also reconverted a church into a day-care centre and
school for workers' children.

Mujeres Libres, the women's anarchist organisation, organised
secciones de trabajo with responsibilities for specific trades and
industries which cooperated with relevant CNT syndicates. These
secciones de trabajos helped set up childcare centres in factories and
workshops as well as running schools and training pro - grams to
prepare women for work in factories. These training programs helped
women access work which had previously been restricted to men. For
example, one of the first women licensed to drive trams in Barcelona
describes her work there: "They took people on as apprentices,
mechanics, and drivers, and really taught us what to do. If you could
only have seen the faces of the passengers [when women began
serving as drivers], I think the companeros in Transport, who were so
kind and cooperative toward us, really got a kick out of that."[18]

However it is not true to say that women achieved equality with men
in the industrial collectives. Wage differentials between men and
women continued to exist. Also, except for a few exceptional cases,
women were under-represented in the factory committees and other
elected positions within the collectives. The continuation of women's
traditional domestic roles was no doubt one of the factors which
contributed in preventing the more active participation of women in the
collectives and these issues, as well as others that effect women in
particular (such as maternity leave), were not prioritised. Although
large numbers of women entered the workforce during the revolution,
equal participation in the paid workforce was not achieved and
because the anarchosyndicalist vision of social organisation was
based around the workforce, people not in the industrial collectives
were effectively excluded from social and economic decision making.
Difficulties and Weaknesses

The revolution in the countryside was more advanced than the
collectivisations that took place in the industrial areas. Many of the
agricultural collectives succeeded in reaching a stage of libertarian
communism, operating on the principle "from each according to ability,
to each according to need". Both consumption and production were
socialised. "In them one did not come across different material
standards of life or rewards, no conflicting interests of more or less
separated groups."[19 This was not the case with the collectivisation
in the towns and cities, where aspects of the capitalist money
economy still existed along with a fair proportion of the bourgeoisie,
state institutions and traditional political parties. Collectivisation was
limited to workers' self-management of their workplaces within the
framework of capitalism, with workers running factories, selling goods
and sharing the profits. This led Gaston Leval to describe the
industrial collectives as a sort of "a workers' neocapitalism, a
self-management straddling capitalism and socialism, which we
maintain would not have occurred had the Revolution been able to
extend itself fully under the direction of our Syndicates."[20]
What happened...?

The revolution, however, was unable to extend itself due mainly to the
fact that while the rank and file seized control of the factories and
pursued the work of socialisation, there was a failure to consolidate
these gains politically. Instead of abolishing the state at the outbreak
of the revolution, when it had lost all credibility and existed only in
name, the state was allowed to continue to exist, with the class
collaboration of the C.N.T leadership (in the name of antifascist unity)
lending it legitimacy. Thus, there existed a period of dual power, where
the workers had a large element of control in the factories and streets
but where the state was slowly able to rebuild its power base until it
could move against the revolution and take power back. The economic
shortcomings of the revolution: the fact that the financial system was
not socialised, that collectivisation lacked unity on a national level,
that the industrial collectives did not go further than, at best,
co-ordination at the level of industry, is inextricably linked to this
major political mistake and betrayal of anarchist principles.

In order to achieve libertarian communism with production based on
need and communal ownership of means of production as well as of
what is produced it was necessary to replace the entire capitalist
financial system with an alternative socialised economy based on
federative unity of the entire workforce, and a means of making
collective decisions for the entire economy. This required the setting
up of workers congresses and a federal coordinating structure which
would unify collectives all over the country and allow for effective
coordination and planning for the economy as a whole. This new
system of economic and political organisation must replace the
government and capitalist market economy. As Kropotkin said, "a new
form of economic organisation will necessarily require a new form of
political structure." [21] However, as long as the capitalist political
structure - state power - remained, the new economic organisation
could not develop and full coordination of the economy was held back.
Counter Revolution

The industrial collectives were hindered from advancing in the same
manner as the agricultural collectives "as a consequence of
contradictory factors and of opposition created by the coexistence of
social currents emanating from different social classes."[22] In the
industrial town of Alcoy, for example, where the Syndicates had
immediately gained control of all industries without exception, the
organisation of production was excellent. However Leval points out:
"the weak point was, as in other places, the organisation for
distribution. Without the opposition of tradesmen and the political
parties, all alarmed by the threat of complete socialisation, who
combated this "too revolutionary" programme, it would have been
possible to do to better... For the socialist, republican and communist
politicians actively sought to prevent our success, even to restoring
the old order or maintaining what was left of it."[23] The
counter-revolutionary forces were able to unite in their opposition to
the revolutionary changes taking place in Spain and use the power of
the state to attack the collectives. From the start the State remained
in control of certain resources, such as the country's gold reserves.
Through its control of the gold reserves and its monopoly of credit the
Republican state was able to take aspects of the economy out of the
control of the working class and thus undermine the progress of the

In order to gain control over the collectives, to minimize their scope
and to oppose moves made by the working class in the direction of
economic unification and overall economic regulation from below, the
Catalan State issued the Collectivisation Decree in October 1936. The
decree which "legalised" the collectives, prevented them from freely
developing into libertarian communism by obliging each workshop, and
each factory to sell that which it produced, independently. The state
attempted to control the collectives through the decree by creating
administrative committees which were answerable to the Ministry of
Economy. The decrees also allowed only factories of 100 or more
workers to be collectivised.

As mentioned earlier, the C.N.T. militants fought against this system
and for greater inter-workplace co-ordination. In their press and within
meetings in their unions and collectives they worked at convincing
their fellow workers of the dangers of partial collectivisation, of the
necessity of keeping the control of production entirely in their own
hands and of eliminating the workers' bureaucracy which the
collectivisation decree attempted to create. They were partially
successful, and the industrial collective tended towards greater
socialisation. However, they suffered from the increasing difficulty of
obtaining raw materials as well as from the continuing
counter-revolutionary attacks. Attempts were made to sabotage the
functioning of the collectives. These included deliberate disruptions of
urban-rural exchanges and the systematic denial of working capital
and raw materials to many collectives, even war industries, until they
agreed to come under state control.

Then in May 1937, street battles broke out as government troops
moved against urban collectives such as the CNT controlled telephone
exchange in Barcelona. In August 1938, all war-related industries
were placed under full government control.

"In all cases where the collectives were undermined, there were
substantial drops in both productivity and morale: a factor which
surely contributed to the final defeat of the Spanish Republic by the
Francoist forces in 1939."[24]

Despite the limitations of the Industrial revolution in Spain, it
demonstrated clearly that the working class are perfectly capable of
running factories, workshops and public services without bosses or
managers dictating to them. It proved that anarchist methods of
organising, with decisions made from the bottom up, can work
effectivly in large scale industry involving the coordination of
thousands of workers across many different cities and towns. The
revolution also gives us a glimpse of the creative and constructive
power of ordinary people once they have some control over their lives.
The Spanish working class not only kept production going throughout
the war but in many cases managed to increase production. They
improved working conditions and created new techniques and
processes in their workplaces. They created, out of nothing, a war
industry without which the war against fascism could not have been
fought. The revolution also showed that without the competition bred
by capitalism, industry can be run in a much more rational manner.
Finally it demonstrated how the organised working class inspired by a
great ideal have the power to transform society.

Further information

* A quick introduction to the Spanish Civil War
* Anarchist rural Collectives by Deidre Hogan
(also in Spanish as El triunfo de la libertad)
http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/inter/groups/cuac/collectives.html *
Dozens of documents and photos


(1) Gaston Leval, Collectives in Spain,

(2) Gaston Leval, Collectives in the Spanish Revolution, Freedom
Press, 1975, chapter 2, pg54.
(3) Kevin Doyle, The Revolution in Spain,
(4) Gaston Leval, Collectives in the Spanish Revolution, Freedom
Press, 1975, ch 12, pg 254
(5) ibid, chapter 4, pg 80.
(6) Flood et al, Augustin Souchy cited in.. I.8.3,
(7) Gaston Leval, Collectives in the Spanish Revolution, Freedom
Press, 1975, ch 11, pg234.
(8) Robert Alexander cited in the Anarchist FAQ, I.8.3,
(9) Gaston Leval, Collectives in Spain,
(10) Gaston Leval quoted in the anarchist FAQ, I.8.4
(11) From the Manifesto of the CNT Syndicate of the wood industry,
quoted in Collectives in
the Spanish Revolution, Gaston Leval, Freedom Press, 1975, ch 11,
(12) ibid, ch 11, pg230.
(13)Cited by Souchy, cited in the Anarchist FAQ, section I.8.3,
(14) Gaston Leval, Collectives in the Spanish Revolution, Freedom
Press, 1975, ch 12, pg259
(15) Ibid, ch 13, pg287.
(16) The Anarchist Collectives: Workers' Self-management in the
Spanish Revolution, 1936-
1939, ed. Sam Dolgoff, Free Life Editions, 1974, ch 7.
(17) Augustin Souchy, Collectivization in Catalonia,
(18) Pura Perez Arcos cited by Martha A. Ackelsberg, Free Women
of Spain, anarchism and
the struggle for the emancipation of women, Indiana University Press,
1991, ch 5, pg 125.
(19) Gaston Leval, Collectives in the Spanish Revolution, Freedom
Press, 1975, ch 11, pg227.
(20) ibid, ch 11, pg 227.
(21) Kropotkin cited in the anarchist FAQ, I.8.14,
(22) Gaston Leval, Collectives in the Spanish Revolution, Freedom
Press, 1975, ch 11, pg227
(23) ibid, ch 11, pg239.
(24) Lucien Van Der Walt, The Collectives in Revolutionary Spain,

This page is from Red & Black Revolution
(no 7, Winter 2003)
Print out a PDF file of Issue 7

Most recent Red and Black Revolution

Part of the pages of the
Workers Solidarity Movement

****** The A-Infos News Service ******
News about and of interest to anarchists
INFO: http://ainfos.ca/org http://ainfos.ca/org/faq.html
HELP: a-infos-org@ainfos.ca
SUBSCRIPTION: send mail to lists@ainfos.ca with command in
body of mail "subscribe (or unsubscribe) listname your@address".

Full list of list options at http://www.ainfos.ca/options.html

A-Infos Information Center