"For the simpletons who talk about good and bad": Pérez-Reverte's masterclass on the political class in Spain

Academic Arturo Pérez-Reverte has once again sparked political debate after his appearance on El Hormiguero . The Cartagena-born writer participated in Pablo Motos's program and, true to his straightforward style, didn't hesitate to give his take on the current political situation . He took the opportunity to draw a parallel between the prologue to A sangre y fuego (A Blood and Fire) , the work by Manuel Chaves Nogales written in 1937, in the midst of the Civil War, and today's political discourses , which continue to divide the country.

During the interview, Pérez-Reverte read a fragment of the Sevillian writer 's work live, defending the text's relevance as a tool against ideological manipulation. He noted that its message continues to be an antidote to the self-serving simplification of history and the use of the Civil War as a weapon.

It wasn't the first time the RAE member relied on the Sevillian journalist to make his case. For years, he has championed his role as one of the best chroniclers of his time and considers him an essential author for understanding the lights and shadows of the Civil War without falling into labels of victors and vanquished . His remarks on Antena 3, later reinforced on social media, once again rekindled the debate about the need to revive critical readings in a time marked by political polarization.

"For the simple ones who..."

“ I left when I had the inner conviction that everything was lost and there was nothing left to save , when terror wouldn't let me live and blood was drowning me. And my desertion was weighed down by the blood shed by the gangs of murderers who carried out the red terror in Madrid, as well as that shed by Franco's planes murdering innocent women and children. And I was as afraid, or more so, of the barbarity of the Moors, the bandits of the Tercio, the assassins of the Falange, as I was of the illiterate, anarchist, or communist people ,” Pérez Reverte began reading from some sheets of paper he had taken to the studio where El hormiguero is broadcast.

“The final outcome of this struggle doesn't worry me too much. I'm not very interested in knowing that the future dictator of Spain will emerge from one side or the other of the trenches . The strong man, the leader, the victor, who in the end must settle his bottom in the pool of blood of my country with a knife between his teeth, will keep the surviving Celtiberians in servitude. He can emerge indiscriminately from one side or the other . He won't be any of the leaders or caudillos who, with their monstrous stupidity and cruelty, have caused this great cataclysm in Spain. Red or white, army captain or fascist or communist political commissar. Probably neither of the two, or both at the same time. The committee that makes us whip ourselves out of this mess must be equally cruel and inhuman. It will have cost Spain more than half a million lives. It could have been cheaper ,” he finished reading the text under the attentive gaze of Pablo Motos and among the applause from the audience.

After reading it, the writer emphasized: " This prologue inoculates anyone, with a moderate amount of clarity, from all the garbage that some and others are continually poisoning people with ." The academic added that the Sevillian journalist's speech should serve as a pedagogical example in classrooms, a way to educate critical citizens in the face of biased messages. "This should be done in schools, with a good teacher, a lucid and normal teacher who gets the kids to read this, debate it, study it, and discuss it. It would do more good than nothing," Pérez-Reverte concluded.

Later, through the social network X , he reinforced his message with a tweet that generated thousands of reactions: “ For the simpletons who still talk about good and bad : Chaves Nogales, defender of the Republic, perhaps the best journalist of his generation , wrote this in 1937, when he fled Spain disgusted by both sides .” With this, the writer once again underlined the need to flee from the sides and recover the complexity of historical memory.