logo
The untold story of the Australians who helped fight Franco

The untold story of the Australians who helped fight Franco

HISTORY
Anti-Fascists: Jim McNeill and his mates in the Spanish Civil War
Michael Samaras
Connor Court Publishing, $39.95
Doubtless European leaders today use the Spanish Civil War as a lesson to harden resolve against Vladimir Putin and Russia. Like Ukraine, the Spanish War came to represent a global struggle against authoritarianism. The Western democracies' milquetoast non-intervention response deteriorated into appeasing Adolf Hitler, failing utterly to check fascism's advance early, leading to the far bloodier war later.
Yet, some foreigners understood that fascism could not be simply 'niced away' and considered the Spanish Republic and democracy worth defending, enlisting regardless of their country's official stance. Many had escaped fascism at home, but some came from Western democracies like Australia. Anti-Fascists: Jim McNeill and his mates in the Spanish Civil War is about one group of Australians whose principles and conviction took them to a faraway battleground.
Anti-Fascists was knocked back by a dozen publishers before finding a home with Connor Court, a boutique publisher with climate denial in their back catalogue. Author Michael Samaras had already proved his research mettle in 2022 when he made headlines for discovering Wollongong Art Gallery had a benefactor who had been an intelligence agent in the Lithuanian SS. You would think a well-researched history of Australian anti-fascists would easily land a mainstream publisher.
The book revolves around Balmain born Jim McNeill but branches into the stories of 'his mates', giving Anti-fascists an episodic quality. The other major figure is renowned English firebrand Ted Dickinson whom McNeill meets when he joins the International Workers of the World (IWW). The pair work together promoting the 'Wobblies' with Dickinson often speechifying in recognisable forums like Sydney's Domain.
Like McNeill, his mates are mostly working class, some from very difficult backgrounds. They experience political awakenings through the labour movement which imbues them with a sense of justice and international solidarity.
Their convictions are tested on the streets. Depression Australia was preceded by labour violence like the Port Adelaide waterfront strike where the union took on 1000 newly appointed 'constables' armed with rifles and bayonets. Once the Great Depression struck proper, battles took on ideological lines. Australia's The New Guard was a far-right paramilitary group that took cues directly from Hitler and Mussolini and bragged a Sydney membership of 36,000. Their toughs disrupted speeches which often led to all-in brawls and sometimes worse.
This background is important because it shows what drove McNeill and co. to take an immense risk to travel to Spain. Most had never left the country, and the dangers began before they set sail. Foreign enlistment was actively discouraged in Australia, as it threatened the claim of neutrality. Passage was also difficult – almost all of Samaras' anti-fascists stowed away on Europe-bound ships, some transiting through the UK where foreign enlistment was a crime for all British subjects, Aussies included. From there they were smuggled through France and across the Pyrenees to Spain.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

NATO will commit to Trump's spending target: Hegseth
NATO will commit to Trump's spending target: Hegseth

The Advertiser

time9 hours ago

  • The Advertiser

NATO will commit to Trump's spending target: Hegseth

US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth says he's confident members of the NATO alliance will sign up to Donald Trump's demand for a major boost in defence spending, adding that it had to happen by a summit later in June. The US president has said NATO allies should boost investment in defence to five per cent of gross domestic product, up from the current target of two per cent. "To be an alliance, you got to be more than flags. You got to be formations. You got to be more than conferences," Hegseth said as he arrived at a gathering of NATO defence ministers in Brussels. Diplomats have said European allies understand that hiking defence expenditure is the price of ensuring a continued US commitment to the continent's security and keeping the US on board means allowing Trump to be able to declare a win on his five per cent demand during the summit, scheduled for June 24-25. "That will be a considerable extra investment," NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte told reporters, predicting that in the Hague summit "we will decide on a much higher spending target for all the nations in NATO." In a bid to meet Trump's goal, Rutte has proposed alliance members boost defence spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP and commit a further 1.5 per cent to broader security-related spending, Reuters has reported. Details of the new investment plan will likely continue to be negotiated until the eve of the NATO summit. In the meantime, Rutte said he expects allies to agree on Thursday on what he called "historic" new capability targets. The targets, which define how many troops and weapons and how much ammunition a country needs to provide to NATO, would aim to better balance defence contributions between Europe, Canada, and the United States and "make NATO a stronger, fairer and a more lethal alliance", he said in opening remarks to the meeting. US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth says he's confident members of the NATO alliance will sign up to Donald Trump's demand for a major boost in defence spending, adding that it had to happen by a summit later in June. The US president has said NATO allies should boost investment in defence to five per cent of gross domestic product, up from the current target of two per cent. "To be an alliance, you got to be more than flags. You got to be formations. You got to be more than conferences," Hegseth said as he arrived at a gathering of NATO defence ministers in Brussels. Diplomats have said European allies understand that hiking defence expenditure is the price of ensuring a continued US commitment to the continent's security and keeping the US on board means allowing Trump to be able to declare a win on his five per cent demand during the summit, scheduled for June 24-25. "That will be a considerable extra investment," NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte told reporters, predicting that in the Hague summit "we will decide on a much higher spending target for all the nations in NATO." In a bid to meet Trump's goal, Rutte has proposed alliance members boost defence spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP and commit a further 1.5 per cent to broader security-related spending, Reuters has reported. Details of the new investment plan will likely continue to be negotiated until the eve of the NATO summit. In the meantime, Rutte said he expects allies to agree on Thursday on what he called "historic" new capability targets. The targets, which define how many troops and weapons and how much ammunition a country needs to provide to NATO, would aim to better balance defence contributions between Europe, Canada, and the United States and "make NATO a stronger, fairer and a more lethal alliance", he said in opening remarks to the meeting. US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth says he's confident members of the NATO alliance will sign up to Donald Trump's demand for a major boost in defence spending, adding that it had to happen by a summit later in June. The US president has said NATO allies should boost investment in defence to five per cent of gross domestic product, up from the current target of two per cent. "To be an alliance, you got to be more than flags. You got to be formations. You got to be more than conferences," Hegseth said as he arrived at a gathering of NATO defence ministers in Brussels. Diplomats have said European allies understand that hiking defence expenditure is the price of ensuring a continued US commitment to the continent's security and keeping the US on board means allowing Trump to be able to declare a win on his five per cent demand during the summit, scheduled for June 24-25. "That will be a considerable extra investment," NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte told reporters, predicting that in the Hague summit "we will decide on a much higher spending target for all the nations in NATO." In a bid to meet Trump's goal, Rutte has proposed alliance members boost defence spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP and commit a further 1.5 per cent to broader security-related spending, Reuters has reported. Details of the new investment plan will likely continue to be negotiated until the eve of the NATO summit. In the meantime, Rutte said he expects allies to agree on Thursday on what he called "historic" new capability targets. The targets, which define how many troops and weapons and how much ammunition a country needs to provide to NATO, would aim to better balance defence contributions between Europe, Canada, and the United States and "make NATO a stronger, fairer and a more lethal alliance", he said in opening remarks to the meeting. US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth says he's confident members of the NATO alliance will sign up to Donald Trump's demand for a major boost in defence spending, adding that it had to happen by a summit later in June. The US president has said NATO allies should boost investment in defence to five per cent of gross domestic product, up from the current target of two per cent. "To be an alliance, you got to be more than flags. You got to be formations. You got to be more than conferences," Hegseth said as he arrived at a gathering of NATO defence ministers in Brussels. Diplomats have said European allies understand that hiking defence expenditure is the price of ensuring a continued US commitment to the continent's security and keeping the US on board means allowing Trump to be able to declare a win on his five per cent demand during the summit, scheduled for June 24-25. "That will be a considerable extra investment," NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte told reporters, predicting that in the Hague summit "we will decide on a much higher spending target for all the nations in NATO." In a bid to meet Trump's goal, Rutte has proposed alliance members boost defence spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP and commit a further 1.5 per cent to broader security-related spending, Reuters has reported. Details of the new investment plan will likely continue to be negotiated until the eve of the NATO summit. In the meantime, Rutte said he expects allies to agree on Thursday on what he called "historic" new capability targets. The targets, which define how many troops and weapons and how much ammunition a country needs to provide to NATO, would aim to better balance defence contributions between Europe, Canada, and the United States and "make NATO a stronger, fairer and a more lethal alliance", he said in opening remarks to the meeting.

Enhanced Games' Aussie boss flags aquatics legal action
Enhanced Games' Aussie boss flags aquatics legal action

The Advertiser

time9 hours ago

  • The Advertiser

Enhanced Games' Aussie boss flags aquatics legal action

World Aquatics' ban on anyone involved in Enhanced Games is "downright disgusting behaviour" and likely illegal, the Australian founder of the drug-friendly games says. Melbourne-born entrepreneur Aron D'Souza is flagging legal action against swimming's global governing body and its new by-law. "We are assessing our legal options and look forward to pursuing all remedies that are available to us," D'Souza told AAP. "It is clearly restraint of trade." World Aquatics enacted a fresh by-law on Wednesday giving it powers to ban anyone involved in Enhanced Games, a multi-sports event with no drug testing. The by-law covers "any individual who supports, endorses or participates in sporting events that embrace the use of scientific advancements or other practices that may include prohibited substances and/or prohibited methods". "(They) will not be eligible to hold positions with World Aquatics or to participate in any World Aquatics competitions, events or other activities," World Aquatics said. The move didn't surprise D'Souza, a lawyer who is president of Enhanced Games. "I always expected that the governing bodies or the International Olympic Committee would take such a step," he said. "The legal case law is not supportive of their position. "This is exactly what they did against the International Swimming League and this is what the PGA Tour did against LIV Golf. "And European courts, American courts, have routinely ruled that this is an abuse of monopoly power. "World Aquatics' move is designed to impoverish the greatest athletes in the world and that is such inappropriate and downright disgusting behaviour." The aquatics governing body stated in its fresh by-law that any appeal against a ban could only be heard by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). "Let's be clear, the Court of Arbitration for Sport is not a court," D'Souza said. "And the use of the term court, I have always felt, is an abuse of that term and certainly possibly unconstitutional in the United States. "That tribunal is an internal organisation of the International Olympic Committee, it hasn't been constituted by statute in any country nor has it been constituted by a treaty. "And so it's legal standing to be the ultimate arbitration body for sport is only on a contractual level between parties. "If they think that matters related to the Enhanced Games can somehow be decided in CAS, it's a farce because we're not a participant in that system nor do they have any legal authority." World Aquatics' ban on anyone involved in Enhanced Games is "downright disgusting behaviour" and likely illegal, the Australian founder of the drug-friendly games says. Melbourne-born entrepreneur Aron D'Souza is flagging legal action against swimming's global governing body and its new by-law. "We are assessing our legal options and look forward to pursuing all remedies that are available to us," D'Souza told AAP. "It is clearly restraint of trade." World Aquatics enacted a fresh by-law on Wednesday giving it powers to ban anyone involved in Enhanced Games, a multi-sports event with no drug testing. The by-law covers "any individual who supports, endorses or participates in sporting events that embrace the use of scientific advancements or other practices that may include prohibited substances and/or prohibited methods". "(They) will not be eligible to hold positions with World Aquatics or to participate in any World Aquatics competitions, events or other activities," World Aquatics said. The move didn't surprise D'Souza, a lawyer who is president of Enhanced Games. "I always expected that the governing bodies or the International Olympic Committee would take such a step," he said. "The legal case law is not supportive of their position. "This is exactly what they did against the International Swimming League and this is what the PGA Tour did against LIV Golf. "And European courts, American courts, have routinely ruled that this is an abuse of monopoly power. "World Aquatics' move is designed to impoverish the greatest athletes in the world and that is such inappropriate and downright disgusting behaviour." The aquatics governing body stated in its fresh by-law that any appeal against a ban could only be heard by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). "Let's be clear, the Court of Arbitration for Sport is not a court," D'Souza said. "And the use of the term court, I have always felt, is an abuse of that term and certainly possibly unconstitutional in the United States. "That tribunal is an internal organisation of the International Olympic Committee, it hasn't been constituted by statute in any country nor has it been constituted by a treaty. "And so it's legal standing to be the ultimate arbitration body for sport is only on a contractual level between parties. "If they think that matters related to the Enhanced Games can somehow be decided in CAS, it's a farce because we're not a participant in that system nor do they have any legal authority." World Aquatics' ban on anyone involved in Enhanced Games is "downright disgusting behaviour" and likely illegal, the Australian founder of the drug-friendly games says. Melbourne-born entrepreneur Aron D'Souza is flagging legal action against swimming's global governing body and its new by-law. "We are assessing our legal options and look forward to pursuing all remedies that are available to us," D'Souza told AAP. "It is clearly restraint of trade." World Aquatics enacted a fresh by-law on Wednesday giving it powers to ban anyone involved in Enhanced Games, a multi-sports event with no drug testing. The by-law covers "any individual who supports, endorses or participates in sporting events that embrace the use of scientific advancements or other practices that may include prohibited substances and/or prohibited methods". "(They) will not be eligible to hold positions with World Aquatics or to participate in any World Aquatics competitions, events or other activities," World Aquatics said. The move didn't surprise D'Souza, a lawyer who is president of Enhanced Games. "I always expected that the governing bodies or the International Olympic Committee would take such a step," he said. "The legal case law is not supportive of their position. "This is exactly what they did against the International Swimming League and this is what the PGA Tour did against LIV Golf. "And European courts, American courts, have routinely ruled that this is an abuse of monopoly power. "World Aquatics' move is designed to impoverish the greatest athletes in the world and that is such inappropriate and downright disgusting behaviour." The aquatics governing body stated in its fresh by-law that any appeal against a ban could only be heard by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). "Let's be clear, the Court of Arbitration for Sport is not a court," D'Souza said. "And the use of the term court, I have always felt, is an abuse of that term and certainly possibly unconstitutional in the United States. "That tribunal is an internal organisation of the International Olympic Committee, it hasn't been constituted by statute in any country nor has it been constituted by a treaty. "And so it's legal standing to be the ultimate arbitration body for sport is only on a contractual level between parties. "If they think that matters related to the Enhanced Games can somehow be decided in CAS, it's a farce because we're not a participant in that system nor do they have any legal authority." World Aquatics' ban on anyone involved in Enhanced Games is "downright disgusting behaviour" and likely illegal, the Australian founder of the drug-friendly games says. Melbourne-born entrepreneur Aron D'Souza is flagging legal action against swimming's global governing body and its new by-law. "We are assessing our legal options and look forward to pursuing all remedies that are available to us," D'Souza told AAP. "It is clearly restraint of trade." World Aquatics enacted a fresh by-law on Wednesday giving it powers to ban anyone involved in Enhanced Games, a multi-sports event with no drug testing. The by-law covers "any individual who supports, endorses or participates in sporting events that embrace the use of scientific advancements or other practices that may include prohibited substances and/or prohibited methods". "(They) will not be eligible to hold positions with World Aquatics or to participate in any World Aquatics competitions, events or other activities," World Aquatics said. The move didn't surprise D'Souza, a lawyer who is president of Enhanced Games. "I always expected that the governing bodies or the International Olympic Committee would take such a step," he said. "The legal case law is not supportive of their position. "This is exactly what they did against the International Swimming League and this is what the PGA Tour did against LIV Golf. "And European courts, American courts, have routinely ruled that this is an abuse of monopoly power. "World Aquatics' move is designed to impoverish the greatest athletes in the world and that is such inappropriate and downright disgusting behaviour." The aquatics governing body stated in its fresh by-law that any appeal against a ban could only be heard by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). "Let's be clear, the Court of Arbitration for Sport is not a court," D'Souza said. "And the use of the term court, I have always felt, is an abuse of that term and certainly possibly unconstitutional in the United States. "That tribunal is an internal organisation of the International Olympic Committee, it hasn't been constituted by statute in any country nor has it been constituted by a treaty. "And so it's legal standing to be the ultimate arbitration body for sport is only on a contractual level between parties. "If they think that matters related to the Enhanced Games can somehow be decided in CAS, it's a farce because we're not a participant in that system nor do they have any legal authority."

My grandmother fled the holocaust. Now it's time for Jews to abandon Israel
My grandmother fled the holocaust. Now it's time for Jews to abandon Israel

Sydney Morning Herald

time10 hours ago

  • Sydney Morning Herald

My grandmother fled the holocaust. Now it's time for Jews to abandon Israel

Since the October 7 butchery of Jews by Gaza's reigning death cult, the anti-Zionist left and the antisemitic right have indulged in a masterclass of double standards and selective outrage. Social media algorithms, designed to inflame, flood our feeds with Gazan disaster porn. Instagram influencers are suddenly brave opponents of the Zionist colonial-settler state. Many of them know little of the Oslo Accords, of Yitzhak Rabin, of Ehud Olmert 's peace plan. They couldn't tell you who invaded and occupied the West Bank as soon as Israel was created (hint: it wasn't Israel, and it rhymes with 'Blordan') or who invaded and occupied Gaza (hint: it wasn't Israel, and it rhymes with 'Blegypt'). The online warriors elide the Arab states' sterling effort at wiping out Israel in 1967 and the attempted do-over in 1973. They denounce Israel's failure to create a Palestinian state while ignoring the repeated reluctance of Palestinians to condone a two-state solution during periods when a majority of Israelis believed it was not merely desirable but inevitable. So Jewish Australians have found it head-spinning, since October 7, to be collectively blamed for the plight of Palestinians by anti-Zionists who don't seem to give two stuffs about actual, real-life Palestinian people – activists who never mention the sinister coercions of Qatar, Iran or Hezbollah in Lebanon; who've never campaigned for the right of Palestinian refugees to escape Hamas' brutality by seeking better lives in neighbouring Arab states; who remain silent about Muslims being crushed in Syria, Chechnya, Yemen and Sudan; who chant catchy slogans whose subtexts they don't understand about rivers and seas, and globalised intifadas; who pretend that Iranian theocracy and jihadist ideology aren't a problem in Palestine or the wider Muslim world. Many pro-Palestinian Jews who detest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are rendered mute by a tsunami of foggy-headed anti-Zionist righteousness so selective that it smells like an anti-Jewish double standard. Many Jews also remain wistful about a homeland for the most persecuted group in history. There's still an allure to the Israel that my grandmother dreamt of when she fled the Holocaust; the Israel envisioned by Zionism's early pacifist-socialist, hippy-dippy kibbutzniks, of which today's anti-Zionists are unaware. But how far does the Actual Existing Israel have to stray from its founding principles and from the basic moral tenets of Jewishness – and for how long – before we stop making excuses for it? Loading Palestinians in the occupied West Bank endure lives of systematic dehumanisation under military law. Their Jewish neighbours, most of them in newly illegally built towns, enjoy the full rights of citizenship, sometimes with violent impunity. The settlements are an elaborate, militarised thicket of ethnic discrimination. Meanwhile, Palestinians in Gaza have been crushed to within an inch of their lives, many of them too young to bear any responsibility for the jihadists holding them hostage. The annihilation of Gaza and the open rhetoric from senior Israeli cabinet ministers of ethnically cleansing the territory are not self-defence. Israel is no longer in an emergency, where all bets are off. It is now choosing a strategy. It is now proactively erasing the future of millions of people. If you suspect that a fair bit of the pro-Gaza hoo-ha is motivated by bias against Israel (and some of it is), read the work of Israel's own progressive independent media: Haaretz, +972 Magazine, and B'Tselem, and the Israeli historian Lee Mordechai's website Witnessing the Gaza War. Listen to my recent interview with the world-renowned Israeli genocide expert Professor Amos Goldberg, who wrote 'There's No Auschwitz in Gaza. But It's Still Genocide.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store