José Antonio Primo de Rivera birthplace

During the Second Republic, some elements of fascist ideology were added to conservative political discourse as a way of attracting the masses and giving conservatism an air of modernity. Violence became a core of fascist discourse, and although how this was understood varied from one group to another, they all  justified it as a legitimate way of defending the nation, punishing its enemies, or as a response to what they saw as the aggressions of an unjust government.

The connection between violence and youth made by Onésimo Redondo, representative of the National Socialist Offensive Groups (JONS) or what José Antonio Primo de Rivera, founder of the Falange Española, called the “dialectic of fists and firearms”, are significant examples of this rhetorical universe in which violence as a means of political action and the cult of death, as well as the praise of military values were the principal lines of propaganda.

There were notable differences in the ideologies of these groups. Ledesma’s national syndicalism and Primo de Rivera’s secular, modernizing totalitarian doctrines contrasted with Redondo’s Catholicism and the traditionalist ural populism of the Carlists. Even so, they all advocated violence as a means of political action and, to a greater or lesser extent, they created paramilitary organizations, especially among the youth, as in the case of the JAP. It is also important to note that the founders of these movements were far from having systematized their ideas and focused instead on creating easily recognizable identities that appealed to their militants and which helped mobilize them and make them more visible. 

Radicalization was another characteristic of these right-wing groups, with the most violent and radical collective action taking off after the victory of the Popular Front in the elections of February 1936. This outcome, which they saw as a revolutionary threat, contributed to the growth of political militias at the same time as the plans for the coup d’etat were “cooking”. 

Finally, the differences among the various right-wing organizations, together with the limited development of any theoretical or ideological resources beyond the defence of violence, and whose only point of agreement was their anti-republicanism, meant that the conspiracy against the Republic was dominated by military men who had the means to carry out a coup d’etat.

ACS