What are the common anarchist excuses for anti-clericalism and the red terror in Revolutionary Catalonia?

Any recommended reading on the subject.

I'd like some sources to look at, if you have any.

If they were hiring hitmen, maybe. But some of what I've read sounds like they were killing christians because they were at the wrong place at the wrong time. catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=7999&CFID=23811582&CFTOKEN=60559071

You do realize that you won't find accurate information there, right? The Church will try to spin the narrative so that it reads as "those poor Christians massacred by ruthless atheists".

You can read the following, for clarification:
cvltnation.com/no-gods-no-masters-blasphemy-desecration-and-anticlerical-violence-during-the-spanish-civil-war/

As for recommended reading, I'd suggest simply reading on Wikipedia concerning the history of the area. I would say to start with the Albigensian Crusade/Cathar movement (ironically, the Inquisition was first created as a response to the Cathar "threat" in Catalonia) and move from there to the Inquisition and the specific Spanish Inquisition, moving up to the history of the Spanish Empire and Napoleonic-era Kingdom of Spain.

One just has to read history. It's a bit spread out, though.

read that again

If you really want to argue semantics, take that shit to KC, assburger faggot.

^this fam. I'm catholic, but I only trust the church about as far as I can throw it for history. They do what ever they can to fit history into a sympathetic narrative.

Mate…

smh tbh fam

It's not semantics, it's you saying it's something and then proceeding to describe the opposite. Is English your first language?

There are Catholics who are sympathetic to leftism.
Why alienate an ally?

The Progressive movement was reactionary because it was 'reacting' against the status quo and establishment; the Church was against these reforms, and as such, was anti-reactionary.

Same reason why teachers correct pupils who give a wrong answer. Your belief is objectively misplaced, since there is no supernatural element to Christianity and as such, it does not 'exist'. It is stupid to continue believing and investing oneself in something that is untrue and even wrong/false and invented by others to control or to assuage their own insecurities.

Please stop posting

OK, but what does that have to do with leftism?
If I personally believe something that you don't agree with and think it's false, but I'm not forcing you to believe it, why such a strong reaction? I don't plan to push it on anyone, and I'll stop anyone who does.
Also, there are Christians and Catholics that believe in a more Spinoza version of God, but they're a silent minority. I could see that becoming more common in the future, though.

Thanks.
I'll read up on that.

My bad, it seems you are correct.

It would have been the Church that was reactionary.

I already said that for the same reason that a teacher corrects a student when he gives a wrong answer. Why should society tolerate your wrong beliefs, even if they are 'privately held'? If they truly are privately held, then you should speak of them to no one or ever mention them.

Are you the same guy who was describing his retarded scientist kings idea

No.

I am curious as to why you believe in something that is obviously false, though.

Because that would be thought crime.
We're against that, right?

If they're not relevant, then I usually don't. I didn't want to bring them up until you pushed the issue. The person you were responding to was actually being critical of the Catholic Church. That seems like something you could have agreed with, but decided to ridicule instead.

Fucking christfags

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholicism_in_the_Second_Spanish_Republic#Catholic_support_for_the_rebellion

According to Mary Vincent, "The Church was to become the most important source of legitimation for the rebellious generals, justifying the rising as a crusade against godlessness, anarchy and communism. Although such a close identification with the Nationalist cause was not to be fully elaborated until the Spanish hierarchy's joint pastoral letter of July 1937, there was no doubt that the Church would line up with the rebels against the Republic. Nor, at local level, was there any hesitancy. The only sizeable group of Catholics to remain loyal to the republic were the Basques. "[67] Similarly, Victor M Perez-Diaz wrote, "The church reacted to all this by mobilizing the mass of peasants and the middle classes and channeling them into professional and political right wing organisations prepared for by decades of careful organisation. The extreme right took upon itself the task of conspiring to overthrow the regime. The moderate right refused to state its unambiguous loyalty to the new institutions and openly flirted with authoritarianism."

I'm not a Christian, what are you on about?

Whoops, forgot to sage.

Saging now to let it be known that my previous intent was to sage, but I forgot.

Source?

So you get your leftist analysis from metal neckbeards?

this is one of the most arrogant things I've seen on this site

Words can not describe how insulting this is, not just towars the religious but towards anyone without class conscience
If you're a socialist just because you think you know what is better for "those dumb bums" you may as well be a fascist.

New Atheists pls leave

It's not hard to know better than religious fools

religion of peace

Now you're just baiting

It isn't arrogant at all. How is it 'arrogant' for me to tell you that virgin births, resurrections, displays of supernatural abilities, demonic possessions, and other things are impossible? Any teacher/researcher/scientist would tell you the same.

Oh please, it's obvious you're just some Christcuck saying he's Leftist in some manner simply because doing so makes whatever point you say somehow more valid, in your mind.

the catholic church and the Spanish monarchy and state were so interlinked that they were virtually indistinguishable from one another. Fuck the clergy.

So according to you I can't be socialist because I'm christian
That is very elitist

You obviously have never worked alongside actual workers or any kind of grassroots movements with actual working class people.

If you go around saying bullshit like that no one is going follow you or work with you for anything whatsoever, the working class has a very hard life and believing in something like god helps them pull trhough the hardest parts of the struggle. (ie: going weeks without pay during a strike or getting kidnapped).

When you actually take action you will see that the real struggle is full of contradictions but in the end leads to results.
Being smug because you are more educated than the peasants just makes you useless in any movement might as well join the local liberal party.

this tbh
being a smug cunt helps nothing

religionfags are the fucking worst

Being a Leftist ≠ Wanting a worker's revolution

I don't care about the "plight" of the industrial workers, considering that in relative terms, they are few in number the U.S. and Western Europe, and that they often earn more than office drones; my Leftism extends to anti-clericalism and other issues.

So your entire post about my anti-religiosity being something that would alienate the 'working class' is irrelevant. I don't try to pander to the 'working class' or even associate with them. Having Leftist tendencies on issues does not mean one is a pre-68 Classical Leftist of the Marxist-Leninist streak.

Anarkids are bourgie teens.
What do you expect?

:^)

Religion is full of contradictions that oppress people and keep them under control. Why aren't you starting an atheist enlightenment and cultivating a secular consciousness?

Does your revisionist doctrine really think there's a way to have a revolution as long as as the worker is given a steady supply of opiates?

REVISIONIST REVISIONIST REVISIONIST FILTHY DIRTY REVISIONIST

The Red Terror began as a spontaneous reaction against the Rebel's initiation of the violent coup d'etat (that's what it was) and at the same time when the Church decided to side with the reactionary fascist Francoists against the Republic and provided their religious ideological defense. It is important to realize that the Red Terror was not enacted as a form of coordinated policy and involved several left-wing groups not just the anarchists such as the Republicans, the communist and Trots and Stalinists. Again, not all anarchists participated and the killing was freely done. Just like not all anarchists were syndicalists associated with the CNT and not all the members of the CNT were anarchists. It wasn't that simple. The Red Terror pales in comparison to the severity of the White Terror after the Rebel's victory where the daily executions, incarcerations and torturing of members leftist groups was carried out as a policy. In this hundreds of thousands were murdered while the Church enjoyed a growing congregation, official state supported central role in education and reestablished control over many aspects in daily life. There was even a persecution against Protestants when the Francoists took over as well as the revival of religious prohibitions against divorce and other manners that had been lifted by the secular Republic and all while businessmen enjoyed getting wealthy by selling religious merchandise. People not attending Church would even be suspected or threatened for having left-wing sympathies. The erupting violence against Church was a result of decades of oppression against the proletarians but SHOULD NOT be condoned. Many innocent clergymen and religious people died at the result of this. It isn't right or humane. In short, the Church is far too exaggerating with the Red Terror and leftist scholars are too apologetic. What really pisses me off though is that afterwards the Church honored and celebrated many of the clergy victims of the Red Terror WHILE IT IGNORED THE CHURCH VICTIMS OF FRANCO'S REGIME WHO PUT LIVES LIVES ON THE LINE BY CONDEMNING THE ATROCITIES OF THE MASS EXECUTIONS OF THE POPULATION BY THE FRANCOISTS! It's truly disgraceful.

On another note, yeah guys that's what we really fucking need right now! We really need to tell the great majority of the proles in this world that they're fucking stupid. We need to say that to some of most oppressed and exploited people slaving to feed their families in shitty mostly shipped jobs fearing whether they'll be fired for not being perfect enough, not being able to find any jobs and dealing with the double violence from the state and local armed gangs. We need this arrogant sentiment to build up violence against the religious only for the victims to play the persecution card and for the whole world to condemn us while they move in to smash out movement in order to secure interests. Good luck convincing the people we need to get shit done who are dirt poor, dealt with a lot of shit in their lives and see God as a symbol of justice and compassion out of their desperation. Go tell that to the Zapatistas and the proponents of Liberation Theology. It's obvious that any revolution that engages in that type of shit will alienate a tonne of people and will be more likely to be smashed. Come to Guatemala and tell that to the peasants here. I agree that organized religion could lead to problems, but I say that it must be reformed in order to prevent it from acquiring an authoritative power and marginalizing other groups of people. Leave the religious leftists alone. We frankly need more of them so as not to seem like same anti-religious (towards religious people) group and can gain more sympathies.

Basically you're admitting you're an elitist and you're okay with that
If you dislike poor people so much why are you a socialist in the first place?
Elitist like to flash their status and being smart dosn't give you much of that.

Enver go back to your grave

I still have no idea why you think I'm a socialist/marxist/communist.

It's like seeing a right-winger and thinking he must be a monarchist, which is plainly wrong. There are many shades of Leftist thought that do not explicitly deal with issues concerning the "working class". Simply holding a Leftist-leaning viewpoint on a number of issues does not instantly render one into some kind of proletariat-obsessed revolutionary.

You misunderstand. Most of the "working class" in what we would consider the First World (Western Europe, the U.S. and Canada) are very much elites themselves, since many of the highest-paying and most in-demand jobs are technical and factory jobs - what you would call 'working class' ones, as opposed to the replaceable office drones and paper pushers. The rights of industrial workers are simply an issue I do not concern myself with.

oh so you're just a liberal
that explains a lot

Hahaha then you're just a right-wing liberal. No wonder. That's also not what working class means. The working class (low class) are the ones working for wages and do not just include blue-collared jobs you idiot.

Apologies if it bursts your bubble and somehow messes with your LARPing, but modern Liberalism (not of the Classical type) is still Leftist-thought.

No you're wrong. Social liberals are right-wing stupid.

at the very most it's center left so that's not saying much
also go to gulag you filthy liberal

1) Where is that parrot from?
2) Can you please expand upon what you refer to as liberalism.
3)Which areas of leftism do you agree with and do you want a revolution?

Aw, i'm not them.
But it does sound like you are a butthurt communist/tankie who LARPS in commie clothes, wears a fedora and creeps out normal people with your babble.

Because sending people you disagree with into gulags will REALLY help your revolution. /S

Sorry to interrupt your LARPing. You can carry on singing 'Red October' and wearing your badly-fitting Mao jacket, don't mind me.

Still Leftism, as even you conceded. There are degrees of Leftist-thought, and it would be ridiculous to think one would be 100% Leftist (considering we don't even know what 'true' Leftism is - is it Marxism? Leninism? Maoism? Pre-68 thought? Post-68 school?)

Disney cartoon

You are aware a revolution is literally a violent overthrow of the state right? Violence is intrinsic to it's very definition.

This furry you can't even get basic Atheist critique right.

whops

They were literally fascists. It wasn't a "lesser of two evils at least conservatives won't kill us" type of deal, the church literally believed there was a "judeo-masonic conspiracy".

FTFY

would you prefer the guillotine?

...

Look at this idiot, look at this idiot and laugh like pic related

True that brah

Excuse? There is no excuse.

Fuck them, the Catholic church are a blight on humanity and the Spanish would have been wise to kill more of them.

...

Who's excusing them?

I was just referencing OP's question.

Oh, but the OP is asking for the ANARCHISTS' excuse for their violence against the Church and not for the Church's excuse.

There's no need for an excuse.

s-spook! yeah, it… it was just a spook!
heh

That's Zé carioca from Los Tres caballeros

bump for interest

Because the church essentially gave legitimacy to the generals that led the coup (Franco n friends). They were literally reactionary. In response, the anarchist and non soviet communists pillaged the churches. That's all. Fuck off christfag.

This is the anarchist "excuse" feast your eyes. Done with this Christ bs

Daily reminder that Jesus was jewish.

Why don't you look at the massive brazzers logo in the corner

New guy, huh?

fuck off retard

...

More people died from the "white terror" than the "red terror", and yet the latter has always gotten more attention.

Imo anti-clericalism is justifiable but indiscriminately killing priests just turned would be Catholic allies against us. Even to this day there's resentment amongst older Spaniards due to the popular conception that Franco saved Spain from the church-hating Judeo-Masonic-Bolshevist hordes.

God is not real. Religion is fucking stupid.
I dont care if youre triggered by this but 99% of leftists dont give a shit or support religion and calling yourself a religious leftist is pretty retarded fam. Its like calling yourself an antiracist fascist

The "bad" version of Catholicism in Spain, namely the Jesuit elite parasites, were never sympathetic to socialism or republicanism, but would support the royalist/francoist side for no reason other than protecting their untaxed vast lands and other wealthy properties.

Don't confuse that brand of European Catholicism which bowed it's head to Mussolini, Franco and Hitler with the Latin American one, that became a refuge for the poor and persecuted by the American funded anti-left dictators like Pinochet. Latin American Catholicism has it's own history and modus operandi that separates it from the old world clergy which has almost always been reactionary.

What is real?