Austin Bryan 12/14/2020 Subversive Patriots Presidential historian Jon Meacham recently stated that “history [...] has a wonderful way of changing how we view things. In real time, people or events that are dismissed or derided can 1 come to look better and loom larger in retrospect.” ​ Such a historiographical lesson is perhaps ​ indispensable in evaluating the merit of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade’s commitment to fighting fascism in Spain. It is commonly accepted today that the allied effort in the second World War was an absolutely necessary and righteous rejection of Nazism, Italian fascism, and Japanese imperialism. What’s less commonly considered is the pre-war reluctance, throughout the 1930s, of democratic Europe and the United States to oppose the territorial expansion, and military buildup, of fascist European regimes. The notion of negotiating with Hitler appears, with historical hindsight, akin to madness. The hard lessons learnt from Munich, however, prove that within the contemporaneous political landscape, appeasement, and tangentially non-intervention, were considered reasonable policies to the end of avoiding another calamitous war. Waiting in the wings for his history-defining service as the British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill was a famous dissenting voice within conservative circles regarding appeasement. Less widely acknowledged in their prescient assessment of the danger of fascism were the roughly 3,000 American volunteers who combated a fascist uprising in Spain, on the eve of global war.2 ​ The Spanish Civil War is an historical event which, when viewed from the future, does assume greater significance as a prelude, of sorts, to the following world war. The war began as an attempted military coup initiated by several prominent Spanish generals, in July of 1936. As 1 Jon Meacham, "Ronald Reagan's Farewell Address," C13Originals, 2020, ep. 5. 2 C​ ary Nelson and Jefferson Hendricks, Madrid 1937 (New York: Routledge, 1996), 1. the Second Spanish Republic (the formally recognized, left-leaning, and democratic government of Spain) successfully resisted the capture of eastern Spain by the fascist rebels, the coup became a prolonged civil war that would ultimately end in April of 1939, in a nationalist (fascist/rebel) victory. Early in the course of the conflict, Francisco Franco assumed leadership of the nationalist faction, supported with arms and air support from Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy. The Second Spanish Republic, in turn, received munitions from the Soviet Union in exchange for Spanish gold reserves. While the republic was still formally recognized by the United States, Great Britain, and France up until its eventual defeat, these nations assumed positions of neutrality and policies of non-intervention in regards to the Spanish Civil War.3 ​ The American reluctance to become entangled in the conflict can be explained by a general isolationist sentiment that characterized the US approach towards Europe in the 1930s. The British and French policies towards Spain can be understood as partially stemming from a miscalculated acceptance of false German assurances of non-intervention. The republican war effort was bolstered, however, by the presence of international volunteer soldiers who were organized into the International Brigades by the Soviet organization Comintern (communist international). The American volunteers were organized into a Washington Battalion and an Abraham Lincoln Battalion, later combined and collectively referred to as the Abraham Lincoln Brigade. Most of the Lincoln volunteers veered left to far-left in their politics, and demonstrated in their writings a coincidentally limited understanding of the totalitarian nature of the USSR.4 ​ But in more earnestly considering the perspective of these early American anti-fascists, it becomes clear that much of their commitment to preserving Spanish democracy can be drawn from their own objections to the political and social climate of America at the time. The service 3 Ibid., 1; Brian Domitrovic, “There Must Be Moscow Gold,” Forbes; Nelson and Hendricks, 3. ​ 4 Ibid., 3; Ibid., 307. ​ and writings of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade expressed discontentment with the politics of 1930s America, and a desire for change. Namely, these grievances are best understood through the issues of racial injustice, isolationism, and the lack of political and social tolerance for left-leaning ALB veterans. The Abraham Lincoln Brigade was one of the first racially integrated American fighting units, with black and white soldiers fighting alongside each other, 11 years ahead of President Truman’s executive order to integrate the previously segregated US military in 1948. More than 80 African-Americans served in the ALB. Some of these men rose to the ranks of company 5 captains during the course of the war. ​ Moreover, in the many personal writings and testimony of ​ black ALB veterans, these men consistently praise the openness of the Spanish people and the International Brigades to fighting with black soldiers. When asked by a US Subversive Activities Control Board member, in 1954, whether he felt as though he had been treated unfairly on the basis of race by his peers in the International Brigades, ALB veteran Crawford Morgan offered a poignant response: “No, from the time I arrived in Spain until the time I left, for that period of my life I felt like a human being [...] People didn’t look at me with hatred in their eyes because I was black, and I wasn’t refused [anything] because I was black. I was treated like all the rest of the people were treated, and when you [...] have been treated worse than people treat their dogs, it is quite a nice feeling to go someplace and you feel like a human being.”6 ​ Integrated service in the Abraham Lincoln Brigade reflected a progressive racial outlook on the part of American volunteers that stood in contrast to racial attitudes in 1930s America that were shaded by Jim Crow. The Lincoln vets’ frustrations towards segregation were exacerbated for the 5 Peter Carroll, The Good Fight Continues (New York: New York University Press, 2008), 116; Langston Hughes, ​ "Harlem Ball Player Now Captain in Spain,” Afro-American, February 12 1938, 6. 6 Carroll, 258. many ALB vets who elected to join the US military for a second go against fascism in WWII.7 ​ For black soldiers going from service in an integrated outfit to a segregated army, the transition highlighted a rather obvious hypocrisy on the part of a country mobilizing against the Nazi 8 regime and its odious racial philosophies. ​ Even prior to reintroduction to segregated service, ​ while in Spain, Lincolns wrote extensively on racial injustice and the need to overthrow racism in the US. Many believed that their service in Spain would aid in the battle against Jim Crow, given that, to the Lincoln Brigade, Jim Crow policies were emblematic of a form of American fascism. This sentiment is reflected in letters written by veteran Canute Frankson: “why I, a Negro [...] am here in Spain today? [...] Because if we crush fascism here, we’ll save our people 9 in America.” ​ He reiterated this belief a year later, in another letter: ​ “I do hope that everyone of you who love liberty and democracy has done, and is doing, everything to help our cause here [...] You must understand, by now, that our fight is inseparable from the struggle of the progressives of the world who fight to put an end to tyranny [...] And that we can never think of freedom for our oppressed race until a realm of freedom and democracy is established for the whole people.”10 ​ The experiences of ALB volunteers fighting in integrated units in Spain underscored their acrimony towards racial relations in the US. Their service abroad, and their writings, serve as a repudiation for what the Lincolns perceived as shades of fascism in Jim Crow policy. In his letter, Frankson's allusion to the ‘whole people’ reveals another characteristic of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade members, a commitment to internationalism. In many of their actions and writings, this feeling is most obviously manifested in their critiques of American 7 Carroll, 127. 8 Ibid., 136. ​ 9 Nelson and Hendricks, 34. 10 Ibid., 132. isolationism. The United States enacted an arms embargo as the war began in order to maintain a position of neutrality. General American opinion tentatively sided with the Spanish republicans, 11 but with a tremendous Catholic influence that supported the rebels. ​ This dichotomy resulted in ​ occasional clashes between groups that supported the ALB at home, such as the Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade (VALB) or the Friends of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade (FALB), and Catholics who were supportive of the arms embargo and policy of neutrality.12 ​ In a New York Times article dated to December of 1938, it was reported that labor union ​ ​ affiliates were supporting VALB and FALB in their efforts urging President Roosevelt to lift the embargo on Spain. Archie Brown wrote a month earlier on rumors circulating through the brigade of Roosevelt’s desire to lift the embargo: “Today’s papers carry the story that Roosevelt will propose the lifting of the embargo on Spain [...] Boy what the Spanish people couldn’t do with a few more artillery pieces & planes & of course food [...] The people of Spain need guns & food.” While this hope (that the Spanish people would win out against the nationalists with military aid) was present among the Lincolns throughout the war, it gained additional credence and fervor following the relatively successful Ebro offensive. Following a limited resupply of munitions from the Soviet Union, the International Brigades were able to mount a surprise attack across the Ebro river. Until Franco’s reinforcements arrived, the brigades performed with incredible competence given their comparative lack of arms. Following the Ebro offensive, Lincolns became incredibly confident that the rousing performance of the brigades could convince the democratic powers to lift their embargos, ditch their neutrality policies, and support the republic in a substantive way.