The World In Protest, Revolution or Civil War? Part Six

This was first published in early 2012. 

"Polarization of Spain Brings Civil War" Part 1

The American Civil War was fought over "states' rights," and more specifically over the issue of slavery, and whether states had a right to permit slavery within their own borders, or whether the national government had a right to outlaw slavery throughout the land. The practice of slavery was well established in the southern parts of the country, especially, but not exclusively, on large estates (plantations), and many prominent early Americans, including George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, owned slaves. More and more Americans of those times came to view slavery as morally wrong, although opposition came to be concentrated in northern states, with states bordering the north and south facing divided public opinion.* Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican president,** was a staunch foe of slavery, and his election brought the declaration from a number of southern states that they were leaving the "Union;" that is, the United States, to form a "confederation" of states; thus, the term "Confederacy." Lincoln said states could not leave the "Union," and a violent war began to settle the issue (for those times).***

Spain was a monarchy until 1931, when King Alfonso XIII abdicated (he literally left the country). The king, the Roman Catholic Church, the army and wealthy interests, including industrialists, had had the largest say in the governance of Spain,**** and the strains on Spanish society were becoming more and more evident, as reforms to help protect workers, farmers, and regional interests were not carried through. The Spanish socialist party became increasingly popular, along with strong anti church elements, and pro-democracy elements.***** In elections in 1931, this "coalition" group won a majority in elections, the king left the country, and a "republic" was declared. All seemed well on the surface, and it appeared Spain would move forward, but opposition to the new republic from entrenched interests quickly mobilized to prevent change.

* The southern states of America were generally not as densely populated as northern states, and the availability of land for farming, combined with the longer growing season, made agriculture a major part of the southern economy, with labor intense cotton being one of the main crops, as it was also sold overseas. The long tradition of slave labor in the region carried over from colonial times to the decades after American independence.

** The Republican Party had been established with a strong anti-slavery element. Lincoln's candidacy prompted southerners to flock to the Democratic Party, where they and their descendants remained until the last couple of decades, when they began voting Republican, even if not always at first registering as Republicans. The Democratic Party maintained a staunch segregationist element from the post-Civil War era until a number of prominent Democrats began to push for an end to segregation and for laws to try to make the country fairer. More and more the segregationist elements voted Republican or became Republicans, undoubtedly causing Lincoln several turns in his grave. So historically, neither major political party is without guilt, but at least Democrats basically got over it. Republicans took their party's roots and chopped them off.

*** I say "for those times," because just in the last couple of years some Republicans in southern states, including Governor Perry of Texas, have suggested they might want to secede from the "Union," mainly because of President Obama's health care plan. Such talk has now subsided, but it is interesting that the Republican South, undoubtedly the most fundamentalist Christian (by their definition; keep reading) part of the country, and Rick Perry, who flaunts his Christianity so publicly, would talk of secession from the country, because a president wants to help Americans who don't have health insurance! I'm not saying you have to support Obama's plan (I wasn't especially thrilled by it, but for different reasons), but to essentially say to those who don't have access to adequate health care, "The hell with you! I've got mine, go get yours," is just astounding. It shows how human beings make religion to be whatever we want it to be, AT THE MOMENT. Christianity especially does NOT advocate selfishness, accumulation of wealth, turning your back on the needy or sick, but, quite to the contrary, the OPPOSITE OF THESE THINGS! Going to church, singing hymns, memorizing Bible verses, saying "God loves you," and forming social cliques is not Christianity, although many seem to believe that is its purpose. Oooo, I can feel the condemnations now! But for those condemning me, you'd better go look in that mirror and ask yourself some tough questions. And no "spinning" the answers to come out the way you want them to come out; that is, "making religion be what you want it to be, at the moment."

**** There was a military government throughout much of the 1920s, but it grew increasingly unpopular, including with the wealthy, since the government raised their taxes to help pay for public works projects. Hm, you don't think there's a similarity to modern America here, do you? The government, which was supported by the king, succeeded in angering just about every segment of Spanish society with oppressive policies or by not following through on promised reforms; thus further tarnishing the king, who already had a reputation as anti-democratic.

***** The Roman Catholic Church had had tremendous influence in Spain for centuries. Since the Church tended to support the rulers of Spain, it too was seen by a certain segment of the population as being part of the country's problems.

WORD HISTORY:
Civil-It "seems" this word, closely related to "civic" (not a Honda), goes back to Indo European "k(h)ei," with the meaning "settle, lie down;" thus, "homestead," and also the figurative noun sense, "family" (from the homestead/settle notion). This gave its Latin offspring "civis," which meant "citizen" (here again, the "homestead, settle, and family notions tie in). This then produced Latin "civilis," with the meaning "pertaining to the public, to citizens." Old French, a Latin-based language, "inherited" the word as "civil," and English borrowed it from French in the late 1300s (the Middle English period). The further notion of "courteous, polite," as in "civil discussion," seems to have been picked up by English in the 1500s, as Latin had developed that same meaning, derived from the idea of regular citizens being more polite than military and religious authorities.