[The following article appeared in the February 4 issue of Combate, the newspaof the Liga Comunista (LC- per Communist League), a sympathizing organization of the Fourth International in Spain. The translation and footnotes are by Intercontinental Press.]
[Premier Carlos] Arias Navarro's Janu ary 28 speech began with the statement: "The legitimacy of the crown... is above ... debate." Thus the monarchy, bearer of the values of July 18, 1936, and keystone in the effort to maintain the dictatorship erected on the destruction of the workers parties and the trade unions, has been declared "undebatable." The content of the speech is based on the same principlemaintenance of the dictatorship.
This was made clear point by point in reference to the needs of the masses. The refusal to grant amnesty and freedom of association to the masses of the oppressed nationalities, the workers, and those in the forefront of the struggle against the dictatorship was reflected in these words: "Neither those who attack the sacred unity of the homeland with one or another form of separatism, nor those who aspire... to establish totalitarian Communism... can expect to be permitted access to the very freedoms they want to destroy once and for all." The refusal was accompanied by praise for the monstrous bureaucratic and repressive apparatus built by Francoism, as well as for the army of civil warmortal enemies of the masses and of their most elementary rights and demands.
With regard to the nationalities, Arias Navarro's statement on "the necessity of a strong, unitary state" reaffirmed the traditional Francoist doctrine of forced unity of the peoples of the Spanish state, which denies any rights whatever to the oppressed nationalities.
But Arias, Fraga, and Areilza? are fettered by the powerful national and international mobilizations of the proletariat and the masses against the dictatorship. They had to give the monarchy of
Juan Carlos a "different" look. In talking about "'Spanish democracy" and "bicameralism," Arias tried to cover up the reality of "organic democracy." This has as pillars the family, the municipality, and the "Syndicate," and is the opposite of the democratic right'of the masses to make the will of the majority felt through free elections and universal suffrage. It gushed from the lips of Arias, who defined
"Spanish democracy" as a "representative ••. social democracy ••. combining all forms of representation, territorial and corporatist ... not strictly formal... but integrated ... into your family ... your municipality." His mention of a "chamber of deputies" and a "Senate" after speaking about reforming the Cortes' and the Consejo Nacional del Movimiento doubtless was one of the passages where his effort to cover up for "organic democracy" reached the greatest levels of cynicism.
Each and every one of the demands of the masses was passed over in silence or made a mockery of—amnesty; full freedom for political parties; elections for fully sovereign national and state constituent assemblies, under direct, free, universal suffrage and on the basis of complete elimination of the entire Francoist repressive apparatus; destruction of the CNS; trade-union freedom; improvements in living conditions; an end to shutdowns; and so on. The entire "reformist," "liberalizing" halo the government has attempted to wear has fallen with a clatter. The eyes and ears of millions were riveted to Arias Navarro's words. The workers, youth, and oppressed nationalities have become stronger in their conviction that nothing can be expected of this government.
While thousands of workers fighting for their rights challenged Arias's program on the very day he announced it in the Cortes, the bourgeois figures of the Democratic Opposition scurried to make the speech more palatable. After remaining absolutely silent about the monarchy being "beyond debate," Tierno Galván" said, "... we are confident that practice will not coincide with theory. ... We have to believe that the premier has not expressed the opinion of the majority of the government." Ruiz Giménez' added along the same lines, "... it [the speech] is not a dogma and thus it can and must be revised as soon as possible, whether from the summit of the Supreme Magistracy of the state or from within the government itself." That came after he spoke of the "positive" aspects of the speech. And at the same time they polished the image of the government they have become accustomed to, these "democrats" kept advising the movement to be patient. Thus Tierno said, "Until they are tested [referring to the government's democratic intentions], we will continue to wait and see."
3. The official Falangist trade union, the Central Nacional Sindicalista (CNS-National Federation of Syndicates).
4. The Francoist parliament.
5. National Council of the Movement, the Francoist political organization.
But the opposition elements in the bourgeoisie are frightened of the mass movement, fearing that it will roll right over the government and finish off the dictatorship to its very foundations. That is why they propose that the government confer legal status on the workers parties, making it possible to reach an agreement with them. In their view "there is a risk of an overflowing of the waters [could the "waters" be the people?] that no one in the government, not even in the opposition, could desire" (Ruiz Giménez).
But unfortunately, instead of denouncing the government and openly urging a mass struggle against it and against the bourgeois elements who hope to build a dike against the "waters" of the people, these workers parties-which have the trust of the great part of the working class and oppressed masses—prefer to give way to the policy of those gentlemen who, without their help, would have no influence among the proletariat and the people.
Thus Solé Tura of the PSUC," the Catalan branch of the PCE, after talking about "some positive elements," followed Arias's lead and said nothing about the "indisputable" role of the king. The evolutionists in the government "want to move toward a change," he said, but "in harmony with the most intransigent sectors." He then proposed that the "evolutionists" sign a "constructive pact with the democratic opposition," which "would be the
6. Enrique ferno Galván, leader of the Partido Socialista Popular (People's Socialist party).
7. Joaquín Ruiz Giménez, a prominent figure in the "democratic" opposition group, the Convergencia Democrática (Democratic Convergence).
8. Partit Socialista Unificat de Catalunya (United Socialist party of Catalonia).
9. Partido Comunista de España (Spanish Communist party).
371 371
best guarantee of a peaceful, orderly change."
To understand what this leader of the PSUC is saying, it is necessary to look at what this verbiage, which the bourgeoisie has accustomed us to, means for the masses. A "constructive" pact for Fraga can only be one that does not demolish the dictatorship. "Orderly" means without going beyond the limits of legality imposed by the government.
The leaders of the PSOE and the UGT, after following Arias's advice of not taking after following Arias's advice of not taking up the question of the king, have not said so much as a syllable about the "bicameral" system, that is, against the most obvious swindle to popular sovereignty. Such a system means that above the chambers elected by the population there exist others where the lords or other privileged sectors are seated, with the latter restricting in greater or lesser measure the powers of the elected chambers. At bottom, their European cothinkers serve as the fundamental support of these antidemocratic systems.
To that must be added the statements by Felipe Gonzales'| in Seville: "Fraga is the only member of the government who has a program to carry out." And without defining whether he considered it good or bad, he spoke of "possible negotiations between the right and the left."
Far from advancing the aims of the workers, the pacts of the PCE and PSOE with such bourgeois figures and parties, and the demands on them to act like the parties "of order," merely hold back the workers' independent struggle. They subordinate the most militant elements of the population-the workers and youth-to vacillating bourgeois elements who favor truces and patience, who discover promises and see reforms where they do not exist, who are concerned with helping the government with its problems as often as they can, and who suffer insomnia when they think about mass mobilizations.
If the revolutionary mobilization of the masses forces sectors of the bourgeoisie to take their distance from the coattails of Francoism, the masses will be able to recognize that this was the result of their growing strength and the bourgeoisie's fear of it. But it is not through the "evolution" of Francoism, nor through pacts with these bourgeois personalities and parties, that the program of the workers will be carried out. Only their united, revolutionary mobilization, only a
- 372
united front of the workers and all the oppressed, will demolish Francoism and its institutions to the point that not a stone remains standing. And this will not be for the purposes of forming a coalition government with this pious bourgeoisie, but for establishing an independent government of the workers and oppressed, of the only ones who really fight, of the only ones really interested in achieving true democracy—a workers government.
Notes
1. Date of Franco's fascist rising, which initiated the civil war.
2. Manuel Fraga Iribarne, minister of the interior; José María de Areilza, minister of foreign affairs.
10. Partido Socialista Obrero Español (Spanish Socialist Workers party), the Social Democrats; Unión General de Trabajadores (General Workers Union), the PSOE's trade-union arm.
11. Leader of the PSOE.