‘Everybody’s Favourite Fascist’: An Examination of the Figure of José Antonio Primo de Rivera within the Historiography of Spanish Fascism Alexander Charles Parsons Department of History Faculty of Arts The University of Adelaide Thesis Presented as the Requirement for the Degree of Master of Philosophy in the Faculty of Arts University of Adelaide April 2018 Contents Abstract iii Declaration iv Acknowledgements v Introduction 1 Chapter One: ‘Charismatic Leadership’ and the 24the Allure of Señoritismo Chapter Two: Primo de Rivera as the 53 the Ni Non-Violent Jefe of a Violent Terroristic Movement ffdfsd Movement 53 Chapter Three: The Impact of the Franco 81Rgime Regime on the Legacy of Primo de Rivera Conclusion: The Need to Reconsider the Figure 101of Pri of Primo de Rivera within the Historiography of Spanish Fascism Spanish Fascism Bibliography 104 Abstract As the founder and leader of the Falange Española (Spanish Phalanx), José Antonio Primo de Rivera has been almost universally held by historians specialising in fascist studies as the only important figure of Spanish fascism. Primo de Rivera’s movement, a paramilitary organisation that publicly endorsed the toppling of the democratic Spanish Republic, was noted for its inflammatory rhetoric and violent actions. Yet, Primo de Rivera has recently been described by eminent American historian of fascism Stanley Payne as ‘everybody’s favourite fascist’. This thesis argues that historians of twentieth century Spanish politics have overwhelmingly idealised Primo de Rivera in a manner incongruent with the long-standing mainstream academic hostility towards fascism. He has been depoliticised and reified into an upstanding ‘gentleman’, yet still understood as the only ‘important’ fascist in Spanish history. His violent rhetoric has been classed as ‘poetic’, and his violent actions as heroic in spite of their alignment with traditional understandings of fascism. This image has been reinforced by the centrality of Francisco Franco, long-held by most mainstream historians to be non-fascist in character, to acrimonious historical polemic over the nature and legacy of Spanish fascism. This thesis demonstrates that the confused and misleading nature of this historical assessment of Primo de Rivera has not been adequately addressed by historians. With Primo de Rivera upheld as an aberration from ‘normal’ fascism, deeper critical inquiry into the role fascism played during the Second Spanish Republic, and subsequent Franco dictatorship, has been unnecessarily stymied. Declaration I certify that this work contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in my name, in any university or other tertiary institution and, to the best of my knowledge and belief, contains no material previously published or written by another person, except where due reference has been made in the text. In addition, I certify that no part of this work will, in the future, be used in a submission in my name, for any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution without the prior approval of the University of Adelaide and where applicable, any partner institution responsible for the joint-award of this degree. I give permission for the digital version of my thesis to be made available on the web, via the University’s digital research repository, the Library Search and also through web search engines, unless permission has been granted by the University to restrict access for a period of time. I acknowledge the support that I have received for my research through the provision of an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship. Alexander Charles Parsons 27 April 2018 Acknowledgements My deepest thanks to my supervisor Associate Professor Vesna Drapac for her patience and dedication to assisting me in completing this thesis. Thanks also to my co-supervisor Dr Gareth Pritchard for guiding me in the early months as well as during the final stretch. Special thanks to Professor Paul Preston, who was kind enough to answer some questions regarding some questions I had regarding his work via email. Special thanks as well to Dr Darryl Burrowes, who kindly granted me access to his as of then unpublished doctoral thesis. My early research was aided by the friendly assistance of Margaret Hosking, the Research Librarian for History at the Barr Smith Library. The collegiate and helpful atmosphere of my office space and the Department of History in general was much appreciated. Finally, thanks to friends and family who encouraged and supported me through the research and writing process. 1 Introduction As the founder and leader of the Falange Española (Spanish Phalanx), José Antonio Primo de Rivera (1903-1936) has been almost universally held by historians specialising in fascist studies as the only important figure of Spanish fascism.1 Many historians have even seen his personality as inextricable from the very concept of Spanish fascism.2 Primo de Rivera’s movement, a paramilitary organisation that publicly endorsed the toppling of the democratic Spanish Republic, was noted for its inflammatory rhetoric and violent actions. This violence has been understood as an important factor in the political destabilisation which led to the Spanish Civil War and decades of dictatorship under General Francisco Franco (1892-1975). Yet, Primo de Rivera has recently been described by eminent American historian of fascism Stanley Payne (b.1934) as ‘everybody’s favourite fascist’.3 Primo de Rivera’s personal charm has been well documented, his rhetoric has been classed as poetic, and his death has been viewed as a needless tragedy. In 1999, prominent British historian Paul Preston (b.1946) claimed that ‘the attractions of [Primo de Rivera’s] personality have seduced more than one Anglo-Saxon scholar’.4 The relevance of this seduction, mentioned only in passing by Preston, was demonstrated five years later in Fascists (2004) by American sociologist Michael Mann (b.1942). In this highly-acclaimed book, which denounced fascism as a fundamentally evil force, Mann nevertheless outlined an image of Primo de Rivera that fits within Preston’s notion of seduction.5 Mann claimed that Primo de Rivera’s ‘poetic and sentimental style, squeamishness, and political innocence typified the kind of “moral fascist” who rarely survived at the top of fascist movements’.6 Mann did not clarify what he meant by squeamishness, political innocence or even ‘moral fascist’, or offer evidence to support the use of these terms. Instead, he referred to a well-established historical perspective of Primo de Rivera as fundamentally distinct from norms of fascist leadership. This thesis critiques the manner in which historians have consistently portrayed Primo de Rivera in a positive light, through an examination of his personal leadership of the Falange, his relationship with violence, and the legacy of Francoism. 1 I have supplied the dates of birth and death of relevant figures where possible. 2 Nathanael Greene, Fascism (New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1968), 247. 3 Stanley Payne, Spain: A Unique History (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2011), 202. 4 Paul Preston, ¡Comrades! Portraits from the Spanish Civil War (London: HarperCollins, 1999), 77. 5 Michael Mann, Fascists (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 4. 6 Ibid., 334. 2 Fascism is among the most nebulous of political concepts, with academics unable to define the term without controversy.7 Fascism is understandably reviled for its association with the material and human destruction of the Second World War, and of the genocidal horrors perpetrated by Nazi Germany in the Holocaust. Fascism as a form of government, therefore, has been thoroughly discredited. Even its nature as an ideology has been contested. Regardless of definitional concerns, the idea of a ‘generic fascism’ has become widely accepted in English-language historiography. This conceptualisation categorises the myriad of aggressively nationalistic and purportedly totalitarian movements as members of the same general political phenomenon. Even though many of these groups had highly idiosyncratic elements, ‘fascism’ is thus understood as a ‘generic’ category, beyond the specific examples of the regimes of Italy and Germany. While the work of influential British historian Roger Griffin (b.1948) has forcefully argued for treating fascism as a genuine ideology, some historians still feel that to acknowledge fascism this way risks rehabilitating its elitist, violent ideals and de- emphasising the practical consequences of fascist rule.8 This shift towards an emphasis on ideology has not softened academic denunciation of fascism itself. Griffin demonstrated the mainstream historical perception of fascism when he pleaded his case for the publication of a collected volume of fascist texts in 1995: A Reader devoted to fascism might thus be construed as endowing with a bogus aura of serious theoretical content, and even dignity, something which is best regarded as a perversion of human mind and spirit. Yet there is no reason in principle why primary sources relating to negative aspects of the human condition should be any less worthy of scholarly or general interest than positive ones.9 He twice emphasised the dangers of fascism. There were ‘scores of other fascist movements which fortunately for humanity have withered on the vine before achieving power’, and ‘fortunately for humanity only two fascist movements have been in a position to attempt to implement their total