Fascist association of workers in Romania
Corpul Muncitoresc Legionar or Corpul Muncitorilor Legionari (CML, the Legionary Worker Corps or Legionary Workers' Corps) was a
1941 Rebellion and Pogrom.
[1] The CML had its headquarters in
Bucharest, on Calea Călăraşilor.
[2]Together with the Iron Guard, it was outlawed by Conducător Ion Antonescu during the Rebellion, and dissolved itself. In time, the group formed around Dumitru Groza was drawn into collaboration with Antonescu, and later refused to become involved in talks with the Romanian Communist Party over the possibility of a political truce.
History
Context and creation
Even before the Corps creation, the Legionary Movement's leader,
DNSAP.
[3] In 1933, he was among those who condemned the repression of the
Grivița Strike by the
National Peasants' Party cabinet of
Alexandru Vaida-Voevod.
[4] Nevertheless,
Roger Griffin's analysis of the relations established between the Movement and the
working class indicates that such interventions were marginal in respect to other goals set by Codreanu, and largely fruitless.
[5] In contrast, Codreanu himself is thought to have based his decision on the fact that industrial employees were already joining his grouping in relevant numbers.
[6]Corpul Muncitoresc was created on October 25, 1936.working-class political cells (
cuiburi, or "nests") withdrew from their affiliation with local structures, and were reunited inside the CML.
[1] Codreanu underlined the class' importance in the context of his ideology,
[1] and, through an appeal to the CML in particular and the
proletariat
"In your fight, up to now, you have strayed on hundreds of slanting paths and you have been defeated. All your attempts have been crushed. This time around, you will vanquish under the Legionary symbol, your sacrifice will be rewarded with a reward of the victorious and the masters of a country."[1]
Early trends
Various other statements of Legionary leaders clarified their intention to marginalize
left-wing politics inside the labor movement, while making vague promises regarding social equality (appealing to "authentic workers", they indicated their refusal to accept "transforming the administrative and professional problem into a terrible political weapon", and proclaimed a will to balance the labor cause with
capitalism, leading to a world were employers and employees would be "comrades").
[3][5] Dumitru Groza, who expanded on the theme of Legionary workers being "masters of their own country",
[5] is known to have deemed Codreanu "the
Messiah of the Romanian worker".
[5]The Corps, coinciding with a peak in Iron Guard popularity and influence,industrialization in Romania,
[3] signified a major shift in regard to recruitment policies.
[3][5] Before the period of persecution and Codreanu's killing (November 1938), it swelled in numbers.
[4][6] There are several views in respect to its overall importance inside the larger movement: according to
Aurel Dragoş Munteanu, the Corps was the largest and most popular branch,
[4] while
Francisco Veiga describes it as "an elite organization", and argues that its strength lay in determination rather than sheer numbers.
[3]
Initially, the CML made gains in the ranks of semi-skilled workers.Societatea de Transport București, and in
Nicolae Malaxa's factories).
[4] Veiga indicates that the organization had only marginal impact on the
Prahova County, where the oil industry was centered.
[3]
It soon began organizing a series of
Fascist Italy, a number of
campsites were set up, offering free vacationing to working-class children.
[3]Following
Siguranţa Statului).
[3] It has also been argued that the Corps nonetheless gained political support, as an indirect consequence of Carol's similar move to outlaw all
trade unions.
[7]National Legionary State
Under the
was quoted as saying:
"among the workers today will be recruited the tomorrow's factory owners, if not in the first generation, at least in the second."[5]
In autumn 1940, as tensions between the Guard and Antonescu escalated, the movement began appealing to
Romanian Army personnel, in an attempt to draw support away from the military leaders.
[9] In the process, the CML and
Ajutorul Legionar, the Guard's humanitarian venture, were depicted as evidence that the Sima's was the only political body capable of dealing with the social problems faced by soldiers.
[9] In parallel, the CML's paramilitary troops took part in waves of violence and repression, occasionally taking initiative; on November 26–27, 1940, together with Legionary sympathizers in the
Romanian Police, it carried out the killings of former
National Renaissance Front officials who were detained in
Jilava.
[3]The CML was among the main participants in the
Legionary Rebellion of January 21, 1941, when the final clash with Antonescu took place.
[1][10] It also played a prominent part in the parallel
pogrom, organizing a roundup of
Jews.
[2][3] The Corps transported those captured to the forest in Jilava, where they were shot.
[2] Among those killed were the two sons of
Rabbi Zvi Gutman (shots were also fired in Gutman's direction, as he laid down on the ground, but missed their target).
[2]Aftermath
Although Antonescu singled out Dumitru Groza as one of the Rebellion leaders,
Romania during World War II), and the establishment of the
Petru Groza executive, state authorities progressively came under control from the
Romanian Communist Party. In the process, the factionalized and underground interior branch of the Iron Guard was approached by the Communist Party's
Teohari Georgescu and
Alexandru Nicolschi with an offer for a truce (evidence was also cited that the agreement was directly ordered by
Soviet overseers).
[4][10] Such talks were mainly carried out with
Nicolae Petraşcu, who claimed to represent the exiled leadership of Sima.
[4][10] Dumitru Groza's faction refused to partake in the deal.
[10]During the
Communist regime, established in 1948, the CML's impact in industrial areas of Bucharest was obscured, with the PCR claiming to have been the main agent of political agitation during the 1930s.
[4] As part of their conflict with
Gheorghe Gheorghiu-Dej, both
Ana Pauker and her associate Georgescu were accused of having orchestrated the enrollment of Legionaries in the Party (Pauker is known to have publicly welcomed former members of the Iron Guard on one occasion in 1945,
[4] and it has been argued that she took part in the actual negotiations).
[10]References
- ^ a b c d e f Eftimie Ardeleanu, "Structuri legionare" ("Legionary Structures"), in Dosarele Istoriei, 4/1997, p.44-45
- ^ a b c d Ion C. Butnaru, Waiting for Jerusalem: Surviving the Holocaust in Romania, Praeger/Greenwood, Westport, 1993, p.40
- ^ ), p.47-49, 224-226, 263, 285-286, 292-293, 301
- ^
Jurnalul Naţional
, September 20, 2006
- ^ a b c d e f g h i Roger Griffin, Fascism, Totalitarianism And Political Religion, Routledge, London, 2005, p.151-152
- ^ a b Ion C. Butnaru, The Silent Holocaust: Romania and Its Jews, Praeger/Greenwood, Westport, 1992, p.52
- ^ a b Final Report Archived June 29, 2007, at the Wayback Machine of the International Commission on the Holocaust in Romania, p.110
- ^ a b Stanley George Payne, A History of Fascism, 1914–1945, Routledge, London, 1995, p.394
- ^ a b (in Romanian) Petre Otu, "Septembrie 1940-ianuarie 1941. Armata în 'Statul Naţional Legionar': Preliminarii" ("September 1940-January 1941. The Army in the 'National Legionary State': Preliminaries") Archived 2007-10-10 at the Wayback Machine, in Magazin Istoric, June 1997
- ^
Jurnalul Naţional
, May 10, 2006
