EDIT: Ah, I found that he was indeed at least open to the idea to centralize the militias.
He then met with Cipriano Mera, who proposed that all the confederal militias in Madrid be unified under Durruti's single command; this would prevent an army from being formed, while also relinquishing the democratic control the rank-and-file had over the command structure. Mera and Durruti then agreed to meet the following morning
At the meeting, Mera said âfor people to carry out their mission and not budge from their assigned positionâin a word, so that they obeyâthere is no choice but to use the tool that weâre afraid to even mention: discipline.â
Mera recorded Durrutiâs response: âOK, Mera, weâre mostly in agreement about this. I agree with the core of what youâre saying, and also with your idea of joining our forces. Mine have to be relieved because theyâve suffered heavy blows in the last few days. Weâll see comrade Val at 4:00 and can discuss all this together.â
It looks like he still wanted to hash some things out, but as far as I can tell, that meeting with Val never occurred due to his death the next day.
End of edit.
Could you share your source which details that Durruti created specifically a top-down centralized militia? From the sources I've read, he created a bottom-up militia with the ability to recall poorly performing elected leaders. As an example, from Chapter 7 of Paz Abel's 'Durruti in The Spanish Revolution':
The volunteers decided among themselves how to organize themselves, and all opposed anything that suggested a resuscitation of the militarist spirit or hierarchies of command. The structure and organization of the militias, which lasted until the general militarization in March 1937, emerged from the discussions among the future combatants. It was simple: ten men constituted a group, which nominated a representative; ten groups formed a centuria, which elected a representative of its own; and five centuries would form an agrupaciĂłn. The leader of the agrupaciĂłn and the centuria delegates made up the agrupaciĂłn committee. [540]
Iâve said it once and Iâll say it again: Iâve been an anarchist my whole life and the fact that Iâm responsible for this human collectivity wonât change my convictions. It was as an anarchist that I agreed to carry out the task that the Central Committee of Anti-Fascist Militias entrusted to me.
I donât believeâand everything happening around us confirms thisâ that you can run a workersâ militia according to classical military rules. I believe that discipline, coordination, and planning are indispensable, but we shouldnât define them in the terms of the world that weâre destroying. We have to build on new foundations. My comrades and I are convinced that solidarity is the best incentive for arousing individual responsibility and a willingness to accept discipline as an act of self-discipline.
War has been imposed upon us and this battle will be different than those weâve fought in Barcelona, but our goal is revolutionary victory. This means defeating the enemy, but also a radical change in men. For that change to occur, man must learn to live and conduct himself as a free man, an apprenticeship that develops his personality and sense of responsibility, his capacity to be master of his own acts. The worker on the job not only transforms the material on which he works, but also transforms himself through that work. The combatant is nothing more than a worker whose tool is a rifleâand he should strive toward the same objective as the worker. One canât behave like an obedient soldier, but as a conscious man who understands the importance of what heâs doing. I know that itâs not easy to achieve this, but I also know that what canât be accomplished with reason will not be obtained by force. If we have to sustain our military apparatus with fear, then we wonât have changed anything except the color of the fear. Itâs only by freeing itself from fear that society can build itself in freedom.[541]
Durruti had expressed himself with extreme clarity. His goal was to unite theory and practice. As an anarchist, he intended to remain faithful to libertarian ideals while leading a workersâ column that would soon fight important in AragĂłn, on the frontlines as well as among the peasants in the rearguard. [542]
When I submitted arguments like these to the most rabid anti-authoritarians, the only answer they were able to give me was the following: Yes, that's true, but there it is not the case of authority which we confer on our delegates, but of a commission entrusted! These gentlemen think that when they have changed the names of things they have changed the things themselves. This is how these profound thinkers mock at the whole world.
EDIT: Ah, I found that he was indeed at least open to the idea to centralize the militias.
It looks like he still wanted to hash some things out, but as far as I can tell, that meeting with Val never occurred due to his death the next day.
End of edit.
Could you share your source which details that Durruti created specifically a top-down centralized militia? From the sources I've read, he created a bottom-up militia with the ability to recall poorly performing elected leaders. As an example, from Chapter 7 of Paz Abel's 'Durruti in The Spanish Revolution':
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm