holocausts and massacres
The new book by British Hispanic Paul Preston is an extensive catalog of horror stories, a hyperbolic and unbalanced account of what happened on both sides Civil War
JORGE M. REVERTE
Mario Onaindia, which knew effectively blend humor and intelligence, he said that he would have liked to be truly English was Hispanic. He was referring, of course, the possibility to observe the happenings of Spain, whose story fascinated him, from a distant perspective and wise.
argues that the rebels launched a task terminator as part of a political plan
anarchist and communist leaders did have knowledge of what happened in Paracuellos
Unfortunately, we can now see it being common and remotely analyze English episodes need not necessarily go together.
not want to hurt the sensibilities of Ian Gibson English called him, but his position was for a time of Hispanics, and years later dropped out to jump into the arena of the fight. Of course, we must recognize that English was forced to move away from the simplicity that is required to their species.
now has fallen to Paul Preston's turn touching the heartstrings. Preston has decided, apparently, be English and has given us an extensive catalog of horror stories that are grouped under the sonorous title of "The English Holocaust.
The news of the book has more character, both for the importance of the baggage of Preston as the receipt of which has been subjected. Have been said about this book things like that only a foreigner could write this. And he has paid homage to his hyperbolic intellectual and unbalanced account of what happened during the Civil War, 1936. What of hyperbole does not come because they exaggerate the horrors experienced, but by the name you searched, and the unbalanced by the classification of the perpetrators of such horrors as they were on one side or another.
The use of the word holocaust brand and the book from the start, because since the Nazis proceed and ordered the systematic murder of millions of Jews between 1942 and 1945, you should use the word carefully. Just to understand each other better. To me it seems to me excessive, although the English Royal Academy (RAE) will suffice to describe a massacre.
In Spain there was a systematic elimination of a social group. Maybe with two exceptions: the religious, who were in some Republican areas much like the genocide, and the Masons, who suffered the same in the rebel zone. In the first, killed almost everyone who was in Lleida, for example, of seconds, the same among those captured by Franco. The percentages of deaths in both groups far exceed those in the shock units.
The eerie relationship has spun the author with major local aid has a clear intention that no secret: violence which took place from Cain 17 July 1936 and lasted until long after Franco was not of the same nature on the rebel side in the side of those who defended the Republic.
In a very brief reading follows the rebels launched a task terminator as part of a plan essential to the nature of its policy, while violence was on the Republican side, with exceptions to be analyzed, reaction to bombings, shootings and other atrocities.
is, there was a cold and planned violence against another hot and improvised. This I have also said other historians, and Paul Preston is assumed.
tools to prove it is mixed. The first, the justification of violence on the Republican side. At the port of Bilbao killings precede them Portugalete bombing, the assault on the Modelo prison in Madrid, will precede slaughter of Badajoz, in Guadalajara, another bombing. We do not know, however, in reality, what precedes the systematic killings in Castilla-La Mancha (except the hatred of landlords), or the systematic liquidation of small traders in Catalonia, to name two examples. "It might be possible that, as described by Fernando del Rey, La Mancha farmers were unclear who liquidated in case of conflict, or that the action of the Catalan anarchist and POUM was Nin as programmatic as that of the rebels? In the proclamations of Largo Caballero also can find calls for the extermination of the enemy class. Preston
extends over the killings of Paracuellos, because perhaps the biggest issue has been dismasted the theory of planning is not on the Republican side, or the innocence of the loyalists. It seems difficult to prove that Azaña, Largo Caballero Miaja or General Vicente Rojo and his assistant were aware of the case. But change is certain that they were aware the main anarchist leaders, as the Minister of Justice, García Oliver, and the whole apparatus of the Communist Party of Spain. The literature of the time points including Margarita Nelken, even then in the Socialist ranks, which strives to decouple Preston of any complicity. It was a crime of the Government, but a part of the apparatus that was in it or supported it.
This means that the issue is complex. As is the analysis of what happened with Franco. It looks increasingly difficult to prove that the massacre that claimed, well expressed in policies Mola (which were met), had to result in an extermination, a holocaust. It was a terrible carnage that continued until 1943 with a balance of at least 150,000 dead, it is not necessary to multiply for us to put the willies. But a massacre, as it has shown other English Julius Ruiz called, had no similar objects to Hitler. Preston insists, to show that had those purposes over the more than long war theory, inherited from Ridruejo and Hilari Raguer Dionisio, that Franco deliberately prolonged the war to kill more comfortably. One theory that I believe is already discredited by extensive documentation.
count in Badajoz, in my opinion is incurred in the risk of overstatement to speak of more than 8,000 killed, according to Espinosa. Does that seem just 4,000 or 6,000? It's the same technique used by César Vidal Paracuellos and unmasked among others by Javier Cervera. (I can not avoid adding a fact to this story: Vidal Paracuellos included as a victim of my uncle Manolo, with which I tried many years, and I swear I breathed).
Preston's book is, unfortunately, a thorough update of what happened during the war, nor in the numbers or reasons. And so lame sometimes shocking, as when he explains that in Catalonia and the Basque Country repression turned especially against the nationalists, in contrast with the data which explain that these two regions the Franco regime killed proportionately less than in almost any other part of Spain.
Preston's work contributes to inflame those who believe that the fortunes of war have not been paid well, but ironically brings a silver lining for believers in divine justice: in the epilogue can be noted with satisfaction how the perpetrators were punished. Some died attacked by cancer, others went mad and killed their own children, others repented publicly. "God's punishment? Preston does not believe a thing of high, but we did have shown that punishment.
What Preston does not show is that there was a holocaust, or even that there is a programmatic intention to exterminate. Franco, Mola (and many others) were ruthless beings and murderers, but not announced to Hitler, as much as his intentions were clearly homicidal.
And "our" what to say. There was everything. Although they were right in defending the legitimate regime. Jorge M.
Reverte is a journalist and writer.
The new book by British Hispanic Paul Preston is an extensive catalog of horror stories, a hyperbolic and unbalanced account of what happened on both sides Civil War
JORGE M. REVERTE
Mario Onaindia, which knew effectively blend humor and intelligence, he said that he would have liked to be truly English was Hispanic. He was referring, of course, the possibility to observe the happenings of Spain, whose story fascinated him, from a distant perspective and wise.
argues that the rebels launched a task terminator as part of a political plan
anarchist and communist leaders did have knowledge of what happened in Paracuellos
Unfortunately, we can now see it being common and remotely analyze English episodes need not necessarily go together.
not want to hurt the sensibilities of Ian Gibson English called him, but his position was for a time of Hispanics, and years later dropped out to jump into the arena of the fight. Of course, we must recognize that English was forced to move away from the simplicity that is required to their species.
now has fallen to Paul Preston's turn touching the heartstrings. Preston has decided, apparently, be English and has given us an extensive catalog of horror stories that are grouped under the sonorous title of "The English Holocaust.
The news of the book has more character, both for the importance of the baggage of Preston as the receipt of which has been subjected. Have been said about this book things like that only a foreigner could write this. And he has paid homage to his hyperbolic intellectual and unbalanced account of what happened during the Civil War, 1936. What of hyperbole does not come because they exaggerate the horrors experienced, but by the name you searched, and the unbalanced by the classification of the perpetrators of such horrors as they were on one side or another.
The use of the word holocaust brand and the book from the start, because since the Nazis proceed and ordered the systematic murder of millions of Jews between 1942 and 1945, you should use the word carefully. Just to understand each other better. To me it seems to me excessive, although the English Royal Academy (RAE) will suffice to describe a massacre.
In Spain there was a systematic elimination of a social group. Maybe with two exceptions: the religious, who were in some Republican areas much like the genocide, and the Masons, who suffered the same in the rebel zone. In the first, killed almost everyone who was in Lleida, for example, of seconds, the same among those captured by Franco. The percentages of deaths in both groups far exceed those in the shock units.
The eerie relationship has spun the author with major local aid has a clear intention that no secret: violence which took place from Cain 17 July 1936 and lasted until long after Franco was not of the same nature on the rebel side in the side of those who defended the Republic.
In a very brief reading follows the rebels launched a task terminator as part of a plan essential to the nature of its policy, while violence was on the Republican side, with exceptions to be analyzed, reaction to bombings, shootings and other atrocities.
is, there was a cold and planned violence against another hot and improvised. This I have also said other historians, and Paul Preston is assumed.
tools to prove it is mixed. The first, the justification of violence on the Republican side. At the port of Bilbao killings precede them Portugalete bombing, the assault on the Modelo prison in Madrid, will precede slaughter of Badajoz, in Guadalajara, another bombing. We do not know, however, in reality, what precedes the systematic killings in Castilla-La Mancha (except the hatred of landlords), or the systematic liquidation of small traders in Catalonia, to name two examples. "It might be possible that, as described by Fernando del Rey, La Mancha farmers were unclear who liquidated in case of conflict, or that the action of the Catalan anarchist and POUM was Nin as programmatic as that of the rebels? In the proclamations of Largo Caballero also can find calls for the extermination of the enemy class. Preston
extends over the killings of Paracuellos, because perhaps the biggest issue has been dismasted the theory of planning is not on the Republican side, or the innocence of the loyalists. It seems difficult to prove that Azaña, Largo Caballero Miaja or General Vicente Rojo and his assistant were aware of the case. But change is certain that they were aware the main anarchist leaders, as the Minister of Justice, García Oliver, and the whole apparatus of the Communist Party of Spain. The literature of the time points including Margarita Nelken, even then in the Socialist ranks, which strives to decouple Preston of any complicity. It was a crime of the Government, but a part of the apparatus that was in it or supported it.
This means that the issue is complex. As is the analysis of what happened with Franco. It looks increasingly difficult to prove that the massacre that claimed, well expressed in policies Mola (which were met), had to result in an extermination, a holocaust. It was a terrible carnage that continued until 1943 with a balance of at least 150,000 dead, it is not necessary to multiply for us to put the willies. But a massacre, as it has shown other English Julius Ruiz called, had no similar objects to Hitler. Preston insists, to show that had those purposes over the more than long war theory, inherited from Ridruejo and Hilari Raguer Dionisio, that Franco deliberately prolonged the war to kill more comfortably. One theory that I believe is already discredited by extensive documentation.
count in Badajoz, in my opinion is incurred in the risk of overstatement to speak of more than 8,000 killed, according to Espinosa. Does that seem just 4,000 or 6,000? It's the same technique used by César Vidal Paracuellos and unmasked among others by Javier Cervera. (I can not avoid adding a fact to this story: Vidal Paracuellos included as a victim of my uncle Manolo, with which I tried many years, and I swear I breathed).
Preston's book is, unfortunately, a thorough update of what happened during the war, nor in the numbers or reasons. And so lame sometimes shocking, as when he explains that in Catalonia and the Basque Country repression turned especially against the nationalists, in contrast with the data which explain that these two regions the Franco regime killed proportionately less than in almost any other part of Spain.
Preston's work contributes to inflame those who believe that the fortunes of war have not been paid well, but ironically brings a silver lining for believers in divine justice: in the epilogue can be noted with satisfaction how the perpetrators were punished. Some died attacked by cancer, others went mad and killed their own children, others repented publicly. "God's punishment? Preston does not believe a thing of high, but we did have shown that punishment.
What Preston does not show is that there was a holocaust, or even that there is a programmatic intention to exterminate. Franco, Mola (and many others) were ruthless beings and murderers, but not announced to Hitler, as much as his intentions were clearly homicidal.
And "our" what to say. There was everything. Although they were right in defending the legitimate regime. Jorge M.
Reverte is a journalist and writer.
0 comments:
Post a Comment