Spain suppressing Catalan Indyref

[McHrozni]

Whilst I think the response of the Spanish authorities were poor. I think it would be wrong to argue the present referendum gave a democratic legitimacy to Catalan independence. This was not a free and fair vote. (It matters little whose fault this was).

The best outcome is if this could be used to move to a proper referendum.

I agree, but only after those who have broken law in pushing such a referendum through get punished. It was clear they wanted the Spanish police to supress the referendum, it was clear the referendum would give them no democratic mandate and they declared they would announce independence within 48 hours of the results, if it was in their favor - regardless of the problems this would cause to their constituencies and the continent as a whole. This is not democracy any more than the Spanish police response is.

I think Madrid needs to rework their strategy on how to keep Spain together. It's not so much that Catalonia deserves a free and fair referendum as it is the only way it will keep the passions subdued for another generation. Granted this is but buying more time, the precendens it creates will ensure the state will disintegrate at a certain point in the future. But perhaps another generation or two is all it is needed, perhaps in 30-40 years or later when the vote goes in favor the EU integration will be so advanced that breaking Spain apart will be as disruptive as making two communies/municipalities out of one.

McHrozni

 

[Craig B]

With 42% participation? None. Check participation in those two referendums, both had participation of well over 90%, with over 90% of votes being in favor. 90% of 42% is barely over 1/3 of the electorate, those two both had almost 90% of the entire electorate in favor.

The results in Catalonia are in line with polls. Most of those who want an independent Catalonia voted, most of those who don't stayed at home, since it was an illegal venture. Madrid would be well advised to agree to a referendum and defeat the separatists at the polls. That may be the best course of action if Catalonia was their only issue.

The only problem is that would likely result in more demands for more referendums, for example in Basque country. They would probably already do so if it was just Catalonia. The picture is a tad more complex than most analysis imagine.

McHrozni

That utterly invalidates Spain's actions as regards Catalonia. We need to brutalise the Catalans because otherwise the Valencians and the Basques and the Galicians may get uppity ideas too. So all the smaller states may want to dissolve union with Castile, and only displays of thuggery by the heirs of the Phalange will keep them in order. If you are right, and that is what Madrid is thinking, it's not the Catalan separatists who are criminally inclined.

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another ...​

 

[Craig B]

I agree, but only after those who have broken law in pushing such a referendum through get punished.

It was the execution of the signatories of the 1916 Proclamation that turned the populace against the UK in Ireland. And their offence was not to hold a peaceful Referendum, but to launch a bloody uprising.

If Madrid punishes the Generalitat for conducting a peaceful democratic enterprise, following the Spanish police's own recent brutality in Barcelona, that will be a gift to the separatists.

 

[McHrozni]

It was the execution of the signatories of the 1916 Proclamation that turned the populace against the UK in Ireland. And their offence was not to hold a peaceful Referendum, but to launch a bloody uprising.

If Madrid punishes the Generalitat for conducting a peaceful democratic enterprise, following the Spanish police's own recent brutality in Barcelona, that will be a gift to the separatists.

Well then we have an inpasse, don't we?

As others pointed out, the Catalonian authorities openly and with the full knowledge of illegality of their actions violated the constitution of the country. They can not continue to remain a credible party to the deal. Of course something similar may be said for the Spanish police, where the parties responsible for the violence must also be held accountable at the highest echelons of power. I certainly hope for the sake of Spain this is done as quickly as possible, the investigation needs to be launched today.

After that is said and done they should come for Catalonian leaders who pursued a clearly illegal referendum.

And after that, Spain should announce it would hold a referendum on the future of Catalonia, but with proper democratic credentials and with plenty of time to campaign for one or the other. This would include debates which would see the proponents of indenpendance explain how will the newly indepndendent country operate, how will it deal with the new currency it would have to print, how it would deal with the debt and the fact it would be torn out of the EU.

I'd expect the voters to break 2:1 in favor of remaining in Spain, but even a small victory for Cataremain would do and the issue would be dead for a generation or so.

McHrozni

 

[Hlafordlaes]

I am reminded these days of that twisted derivation of tolerance and forgiveness known as the Spanish Inquisition. Same sort of logic one gets from Castile vis-a-vis democracy.

The constitution is barely legitimate, for starters. When the choice is "say 'Yes' or I'll take it you want another 40-year Catholic fascist dictatorship," people will say "Yes" to anything short of another round of Franco.

Let's recall Franco's treason, motivated in large part by the growing independence of two historical nations within Spain's nation-state under the Republic. In that light, examine the Spanish constitution approved under duress: it restores the monarchy (bye-bye, republic) and specifically prohibits regional referendums, a clear fix.

Or let's examine the oft-repeated claim that Catalonia, a militarily conquered people, "belongs to" Spain. As in English, that verb allows two interpretations. One, the normal one, would also admit "Spain belongs to Europe," speaking of geography. The other definition denotes ownership. There can only be ownership if the State, or Crown in this case, owns the land and the people's will is subordinate to that regal right. Let's recognize this as what it is: cheap backdooring of absolutism using loose language.

This screaming champion of "democracy" one gets on the main news channels, in the form of a Mariano Rajoy claiming that the oppression of a permanent ethnic minority is perfect democratic business as usual, plays well on cursory examination, but falls crashing through its gossamer rationale with merely minor due diligence. However, given the global situation of chaos ushered in by the likes of Brexit and Trump, Catalan independence is being read in the wrong context.

Or take the US War of Secession. Any difference? On a cursory level, perhaps not. Upon examination, polar opposites. The Civil War was based on a claim of secession based on the violation of a democratic norm, i.e., to continue to twist democracy into its opposite, a machine of systematic oppression to deny a minority its rights. Trash talk, and dirty logic. The Catalan independence movement is an effort to secure the rights of a minority who cannot find sufficient protection for those rights in courts and institutions dominated by a prejudiced majority.

Anecdotally, some common language used by Castilians:
- On hearing Catalan: "Speak to me in Christian."
- On asserting the truth of any idea: "As God ordains."
- On explaining Catalan economic prowess: "All based on those textile mills the King allowed the poor bastards (in the 19th century)."
- On referring to Catalans: Cata-*****, Cata-pitufos.

These are people highly offended by the majority of Catalonia rejecting animal torture (bull-fights), something Castilians prize as, ahem, "cultural heritage."

Nah, nah. Skip the Castilian baloney posturing, as "democratic" and "free" as goose-stepping Trumpian Republicanism in the US. The Catalan independence movement is all about modernity escaping obscurantism and trogloditic mono-culturalism, the same challenge facing the US today.

 

[McHrozni]

Or let's examine the oft-repeated claim that Catalonia, a militarily conquered people, "belongs to" Spain.

This is nonesense.

Catalonia was a major part of the kingdom of Aragon, which formed, alongside kingdoms of Castillie, Leon and Asturias, the kingdom of Spain. It was never conquered by Spain, Spain didn't even exist when the union was created. It doesn't belong to Spain any more than Castillie does.

McHrozni

 

[Craig B]

Well then we have an inpasse, don't we?

As others pointed out, the Catalonian authorities openly and with the full knowledge of illegality of their actions violated the constitution of the country. They can not continue to remain a credible party to the deal. Of course something similar may be said for the Spanish police, where the parties responsible for the violence must also be held accountable at the highest echelons of power. I certainly hope for the sake of Spain this is done as quickly as possible, the investigation needs to be launched today.

After that is said and done they should come for Catalonian leaders who pursued a clearly illegal referendum.

And after that, Spain should announce it would hold a referendum on the future of Catalonia, but with proper democratic credentials

So there is to be a referendum, but the Catalan authorities are to have no part in it because they can't remain a credible party to the deal.

If this referendum was illegal, why would a referendum organised by Madrid be legal? I thought the problem was that the Constitution precluded any dissolution of the unified Spanish state, therefore no referendum to that end could be lawfully valid. By contrast, are you saying, like Nixon: "If the President does it, it must be legal"?

 

[McHrozni]

So there is to be a referendum, but the Catalan authorities are to have no part in it because they can't remain a credible party to the deal.

If this referendum was illegal, why would a referendum organised by Madrid be legal? I thought the problem was that the Constitution precluded any dissolution of the unified Spanish state, therefore no referendum to that end could be lawfully valid. By contrast, are you saying, like Nixon: "If the President does it, it must be legal"?

Because that referendum would be preceded by an alteration of the constitution which would allow secession, under certain circumstances. A referendum would be a part of the requirements - but not with 50% plus one vote. At least a 60% majority with at least 60% of population attending the referendum, something like that.

Furthermore it would need to spell what happens after the secession, how is the national debt divided - richer regions end up with a greater proportion, the part that is seceding also gets saddled with extra national debt - and so on, so secession is technically possible, but it would benefit the rest of the country more than it would the part that seceded.

I did mention Madrid needs to rethink and reformulate their strategy to keep the country together, didn't I? Well, the above is one way to do it. This is the model EU uses to prevent countries from leaving on a whim, with only a modification that would put a potato in the tailpipe of the only exception thus far.

If Catalonia wishes to secede under the conditions I outlined above, Spain should just let it go. There is no point in trying to maintain a union which is opposed despite the obvious downsides such a secession would bring. If, however, the secession is just a whimsical idea of a populist to maintain power in a corrupt way and his promises have no basis in reality - as is the case here - then it really needs to be examined in much more detail.

McHrozni

 

[Craig B]

This is nonesense.

Catalonia was a major part of the kingdom of Aragon, which formed, alongside kingdoms of Castillie, Leon and Asturias, the kingdom of Spain. It was never conquered by Spain, Spain didn't even exist when the union was created. It doesn't belong to Spain any more than Castillie does.

McHrozni

It existed when the independence of Aragon, and Catalonia were ended in 1714. See here

The surrender of the pro-Archduke forces to the Franco-Spanish army in 1714 was not only the end of the war, but also a phase in the centralization of various monarchies on the European continent which had been going on for two centuries. With the War of the Spanish Succession completed, Spain evolved from a personal union of different states to a centralized kingdom. The defenders of the city were buried in a cemetery, now a plaça (in Catalan: square) called Fossar de les Moreres, where Catalans gather every 11 September, known as the National Day of Catalonia or la Diada.​

 

[Craig B]

Because that referendum would be preceded by an alteration of the constitution which would allow secession, under certain circumstances.

and what procedure would be involved in that? A Spain-wide constitutional referendum presumably? Or perhaps only a Catalonian referendum on the constitution? Can you be specific?

 

[McHrozni]

It existed when the independence of Aragon, and Catalonia were ended in 1714.

It existed as a subject of the Crown of Spain, which fought on the losing side of a succession war. That gives it about as much claim to independence as the Confederacy might have today.

No, their sole claim to independence is and should be the fact a large portion of the population wants it. If that proportion is large enough (>60%, IMHO) then it might be worthwhile to go ahead with it, if not it's not worth the effort and there is no mandate for it anyway.

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

and what procedure would be involved in that? A Spain-wide constitutional referendum presumably?

Section 167, page 81. Happy reading!

http://www.congreso.es/portal/page/...ist_Normas/Norm/const_espa_texto_ingles_0.pdf

McHrozni

 

[ceptimus]

Bad laws that are still supported by the people who hold power can only be changed by breaking those laws. History provides innumerable examples.

 

[Craig B]

Section 167, page 81. Happy reading!

http://www.congreso.es/portal/page/...ist_Normas/Norm/const_espa_texto_ingles_0.pdf

McHrozni

Thank you. So if even one tenth of the members of each house so decide, it will be put to a Spain wide referendum. (I can see why you didn't think it expedient to write that down yourself.) Thus the Catalans will be acting lawfully only if they secure the prior consent of 90+% of legislators or a Spain-wide referendum. Otherwise their elected leaders will be criminals. I get the idea.

 

[Craig B]

It existed as a subject of the Crown of Spain, which fought on the losing side of a succession war. That gives it about as much claim to independence as the Confederacy might have today.

That is incomprehensible gibberish. You're not even trying to make sense. You've shouted Confederacy so as to discredit Catalan independence by association. But of what Crown were the slave states dependencies in 1860? Rubbish.

No, their sole claim to independence is and should be the fact a large portion of the population wants it. If that proportion is large enough (>60%, IMHO) then it might be worthwhile to go ahead with it, if not it's not worth the effort and there is no mandate for it anyway.

Proportion of what? Of Catalan voters? But what about the amendment to the Spanish constitution you call for? Can that be secured by 60% of Catalan electors?

 

[McHrozni]

Thus the Catalans will be acting lawfully only if they secure the prior consent of 90+% of legislators or a Spain-wide referendum. Otherwise their elected leaders will be criminals. I get the idea.

This would be a Madrid-led effort, not a Barcelona-led one. They would have decent chances in both options. No, their leaders would not be criminals if they pursued a legal change of status or constitution through legal means.

Pursuing an illegal referendum in the face of strict opposition from Madrid and the constitutional court without any Venezuela-like shenanigans (read section 2), is criminal. As someone put what would be next, arresting journalists who report on the bad aspects of indepednance? Madrid couldn't let this referendum happen due to several reasons, to keep the country apart was but one of them. The other is that a violation of constitution that goes unchallanged creates a dangerous precendens by itself.

Should it act differently, with more restraint? Sure. I expect of them to put those who permitted (or ordered) the usage of rubber bullets and battons over the referendum on trial and have the highest ranking responsible punished to the full extent of the law. Much of their other actions, including taking away the control of the police force, are exactly how a democracy should react to a rogue faction in the government using the Constitution as toilet paper.

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

That is incomprehensible gibberish. You're not even trying to make sense. You've shouted Confederacy so as to discredit Catalan independence by association. But of what Crown were the slave states dependencies in 1860? Rubbish.

The only thing rubbish about it is your response.

Proportion of what? Of Catalan voters?

Obviously

But what about the amendment to the Spanish constitution you call for? Can that be secured by 60% of Catalan electors?

Probably not, unless the turnout in the other regions is really, really low.

Why?

McHrozni

 

[Craig B]

This would be a Madrid-led effort, not a Barcelona-led one.

I see. So in the same way Ireland should have waited for London to lead the effort to secure independence for Ireland. That might have involved some delay.

Yes. In the U.K. London, and in Spain Madrid, decides what is or is not lawful after all. I'm beginning to suspect that your contributions here are a subtle satire on the nature of imperialism, rather than the outcome of serious meditation.

 

[Craig B]

Why?

I'm inclined to take that question as proof of the satirical intent of your comments. It must be obvious why.

 

[aleCcowaN]

Any democratic country faced with an illegal independence referendum would act in a similar manner.

Isn't the "democratic country" just a subterfuge to leave apart the "the British are coming" -not precisely riotous tourists, I mean- scent in all of this issue?
_____________________________________________________________

What I'm saying about the topic:

Unlike the case for Scotland, Castilian Spain has been mooching of Catalonia during centuries.

Unlike the case for Scotland, Castilian Spain have sent their unemployed and internal migrants to Catalonia for Catalans to employ and feed them and as a result about half of the make-up of Catalonia's population come from people born in other places of Spain during the last century, hence there are so many "Catalans" against independence (Any Spanish citizen can vote, not only Catalonia's natives. Any person can be polled by Gallup, not only Spanish citizens but illegal immigrants who fear to lose their jobs in an independent Catalonia and will declare to the pollsters to be citizens)

Unlike a relatively uniform Britain (yes, the keyword is "relatively", and be sure I know Britain a hundred times better than most people here know Spain), there are much deeper differences among different Spanish nationalities, with 10 different languages -one of them not even and Indoeuropean one- some of them nearly extinct owing to political pressure from the central government*, and basically the hard working people (Galicia, Asturias, Cantabria, Basque Country, Navarra, Aragon, Catalonia, Valencia, Balearic Islands) feeding the imperialists (Castile, mainly Madrid, and Leon) and the any-time-of-day-is-good-for-a-siesta bumps (Extremadura, Andalusia, Murcia, Canary Islands).

Yesterday, the actual political system -not the legal ones- in Spain simply imploded. Now it's time to watch and learn, not to cast light opinions.

* Signs I have read in different regions to mark the train station exits:

Salida in Castilian
Sortida in Catalan
Euxida in Valencian (from Latin, like English "exit")
Irteera in Basque​