The problem is... what are they gonna negotiate? More privileges to Catalonia? "Give us things, or we are gonna leave"?
The problem with that, is that we come down again to the fact that the rest of the Autonomic Comunities are gonna look dumb, because if catalonia gain privileges with this, why shouldn't the rest do the same?
If, in the other hand, by negotiation they are talking about, negotiating the terms of the independence, thats a big no-no from the Gogerment.
Galas wrote: The problem is... what are they gonna negotiate? More privileges to Catalonia? "Give us things, or we are gonna leave"?
The problem with that, is that we come down again to the fact that the rest of the Autonomic Comunities are gonna look dumb, because if catalonia gain privileges with this, why shouldn't the rest do the same?
If, in the other hand, by negotiation they are talking about, negotiating the terms of the independence, thats a big no-no from the Gogerment.
I think the point is that if Rajoy refuses to sit and talk the UDI is legitimised because we tried to negotiate but the gov didnt.
If Spain sits and negotiates? Things were being thrown around about us getting the Basque deal. Which I certainly wouldn't mind. As for the other CA's asking for more privileges? They totes should be, but they aren't. Maybe the whole "Coffee for everyone" deal wasn't realistic? Maybe only some regions wanted autonomy? Maybe they are fine with their competences and don't want more? Maybe they are ruled by people who don't want more privilegees for the CAs?
Or it may be a clever ploy, Slovenian style. Tomorrow Independence will be proclaimed, border posts taken and the Spanish army thoroughly humiliated and destroyed. A teenager can dream.
But yeah, the negotiation bit was directed to the International Community, not to the Spanish Government.
Galas wrote: The problem is... what are they gonna negotiate? More privileges to Catalonia? "Give us things, or we are gonna leave"?
The problem with that, is that we come down again to the fact that the rest of the Autonomic Comunities are gonna look dumb, because if catalonia gain privileges with this, why shouldn't the rest do the same?
If, in the other hand, by negotiation they are talking about, negotiating the terms of the independence, thats a big no-no from the Gogerment.
Well, it is up to the Spanish government to find something to talk about now. Puigdemont is willing to talk, now they need to be to. The only alternative to talking is the use of force, which is not going to end well for anyone.
jouso wrote: I'm just waiting to watch the CUP's take on things.
Again, popcorn time.
Well they've stopped just short of calling Puigdemont a traitor. Another crack in the Indy wall.
Puigdemont praying that someone will take his idea of internationalisation of the conflict seriously because a good part of his Indy base either has been radicalised beyond repair and is solidly in the hands of the CUP or genuinely fears for their livelihood.
Puigdemont is finished as a politician, and already the vultures are circling around the corpse. Junqueras will carry the Indy banner while the former CiU are already grooming Santi Vila as a less confrontational figure (he's the economy minister that earlier this week called for delaying the whole thing once companies started to look for greener pastures).
Of course there's still hope for the Indies that Rajoy will overreact and once again cement those cracks.
Or it may be a clever ploy, Slovenian style. Tomorrow Independence will be proclaimed, border posts taken and the Spanish army thoroughly humiliated and destroyed. A teenager can dream.
While brief, that was still a war, with 60+ dead. And Indy supporters were complaining about a few cracked heads?
Not to mention that Slovenia had German and international backing while Catalonia has feth all.
If I was the Spanish government I would announce a process to create a convention to consider the claims of Catalonia and the other regions with the purpose of revising the constitution to accommodate such diversity within a new federal structure.
Kilkrazy wrote: If I was the Spanish government I would announce a process to create a convention to consider the claims of Catalonia and the other regions with the purpose of revising the constitution to accommodate such diversity within a new federal structure.
That could be a dream come true. But it isn't gonna happen. We can't even have a referendum to decide if we want a Monarchy or a Republic...
Do you know the best thing about all of this? During this two months, the approval of the state's general budgets has been postponed. So we are here, after a whole year with the actual Goverment, and not even the state budgest have been aproved.
Mariano Rajoy's should have call for elections at this point, but at this rate he is gonna have a full 4-year legislature
Pentos is a city where wealth equals power, ruled over by a prince with a council of rich magisters. The prince has a mostly ceremonial function, however, while the magisters rule. The prince, who is chosen from forty families, presides chiefly over balls and feasts.[6] He is carried from place to place in a rich palanquin with a handsome guard. Each new year he deflowers two maidens, the maid of the sea and the maid of the fields, to ensure prosperity on land and sea.If there is famine or war is lost, the magisters sacrifice the prince and slit his throat to appease the gods, then choose a new prince.
Galas wrote: The problem is... what are they gonna negotiate? More privileges to Catalonia? "Give us things, or we are gonna leave"?
The problem with that, is that we come down again to the fact that the rest of the Autonomic Comunities are gonna look dumb, because if catalonia gain privileges with this, why shouldn't the rest do the same?
If, in the other hand, by negotiation they are talking about, negotiating the terms of the independence, thats a big no-no from the Gogerment.
Well, it is up to the Spanish government to find something to talk about now. Puigdemont is willing to talk, now they need to be to. The only alternative to talking is the use of force, which is not going to end well for anyone.
The range of options is not exactly great.
Finding a peaceful ending would be preferable.
jouso wrote: I'm just waiting to watch the CUP's take on things.
Again, popcorn time.
Well they've stopped just short of calling Puigdemont a traitor. Another crack in the Indy wall.
And it gets better, CUP feel betrayed by the Puigdemont administration and will cease all parliamentary activity until "decisive steps towards an independent republic" are taken. Full-on divorce, to be expected when a Christian democratic party in the mould of the UK Tories or German CDU gets in bed with the anti-capitalist left.
Pres. Rajoy has announced an urgent cabinet meeting for tomorrow morning where they will discuss the Catalonia situation after a private meeting with PSOE's leader Pedro Sánchez.
Incidentally Catalonia's largest publishing house Grupo Planeta, which btw is the largest Spanish language publishing conglomerate, is also upping sticks and moving to Madrid.
What democratic rights are they lacking exactly? The right to vote in Spanish elections? No... they've got that. The right to vote in Catalonian elections? No, they've got that, too.
I'm unclear what rights you think anyone involved are lacking.
Tyran wrote: Brexit and Trump happened. Economic arguments are very easy to defeat by populism.
Eh? Both of those relied on the other side not being able to talk coherently about economics, and the media being lazy and letting their economic narratives (and lies) just stand unexamined. Trump led thousands to the voting stations by economic arguments alone.
What democratic rights are they lacking exactly? The right to vote in Spanish elections? No... they've got that. The right to vote in Catalonian elections? No, they've got that, too.
I'm unclear what rights you think anyone involved are lacking.
They want to pay less for the other regions of Spain, disregarding their own deficit and other more complicated issues.
I find the Catalans amazing, in a disconcerting way. Which oppression are they subjected to in the centuries? Is as if they compare their situation to, say, the Irish/English relationship while the historical background is completely different.
Spain doesn't have a referendum on keeping the Monarchy or becoming a republic for the same reasons the UK isn't having one either. There's just not enough public support for that.
Spain doesn't have a referendum on keeping the Monarchy or becoming a republic for the same reasons the UK isn't having one either. There's just not enough public support for that.
20% tops.
Obviously that's the percentage of the population that should be allowed to vote. We cannot have majorities voting the wrong thing. Or so some people were saying last election when Mr Rajoy managed to barely scrap by. If old people don't know how to vote the "correct" choice they shouldn't be allowed to vote at all.
What democratic rights are they lacking exactly? The right to vote in Spanish elections? No... they've got that. The right to vote in Catalonian elections? No, they've got that, too.
I'm unclear what rights you think anyone involved are lacking.
They want to pay less for the other regions of Spain, disregarding their own deficit and other more complicated issues.
I find the Catalans amazing, in a disconcerting way. Which oppression are they subjected to in the centuries? Is as if they compare their situation to, say, the Irish/English relationship while the historical background is completely different.
What democratic rights are they lacking exactly? The right to vote in Spanish elections? No... they've got that. The right to vote in Catalonian elections? No, they've got that, too.
I'm unclear what rights you think anyone involved are lacking.
Tyran wrote: Brexit and Trump happened. Economic arguments are very easy to defeat by populism.
Eh? Both of those relied on the other side not being able to talk coherently about economics, and the media being lazy and letting their economic narratives (and lies) just stand unexamined. Trump led thousands to the voting stations by economic arguments alone.
You can have your ethnicity and still be part of a wider union with other people. Catalans for the most part feel both Catalan and Spanish (and European on top of that), only 22% feel exclusively Catalan on the last survey in July.
Identity is not necessarily binary, there are degrees and overlaps.... unless you're using it as a tool for confrontation, that is.
You can have your ethnicity and still be part of a wider union with other people. Catalans for the most part feel both Catalan and Spanish (and European on top of that), only 22% feel exclusively Catalan on the last survey in July.
Identity is not necessarily binary, there are degrees and overlaps.... unless you're using it as a tool for confrontation, that is.
Sometimes you can and sometimes you can not. It depends on the specific ethnic identity.
You can have your ethnicity and still be part of a wider union with other people. Catalans for the most part feel both Catalan and Spanish (and European on top of that), only 22% feel exclusively Catalan on the last survey in July.
Identity is not necessarily binary, there are degrees and overlaps.... unless you're using it as a tool for confrontation, that is.
Sometimes you can and sometimes you can not. It depends on the specific ethnic identity.
On the topic at hand you definitely can. Unless you want to self-impose an us vs them mentality.
Pentos is a city where wealth equals power, ruled over by a prince with a council of rich magisters. The prince has a mostly ceremonial function, however, while the magisters rule. The prince, who is chosen from forty families, presides chiefly over balls and feasts.[6] He is carried from place to place in a rich palanquin with a handsome guard. Each new year he deflowers two maidens, the maid of the sea and the maid of the fields, to ensure prosperity on land and sea.If there is famine or war is lost, the magisters sacrifice the prince and slit his throat to appease the gods, then choose a new prince.
You can have your ethnicity and still be part of a wider union with other people. Catalans for the most part feel both Catalan and Spanish (and European on top of that), only 22% feel exclusively Catalan on the last survey in July.
Identity is not necessarily binary, there are degrees and overlaps.... unless you're using it as a tool for confrontation, that is.
Sometimes you can and sometimes you can not. It depends on the specific ethnic identity.
On the topic at hand you definitely can. Unless you want to self-impose an us vs them mentality.
Without us vs them there can be no ethnicity or any kind of group mentality. Humans are social creatures that naturally gather in like minded groups. An us vs them mentality is something every single human is guilty of.
On the topic at hand, it is definitely possible to reconcile a Catalan identity with a larger Spanish identity and be both at the same time, just like Frisians in the Netherlands also feel Dutch or Chuvash in Russia also feel Russian. This is quite common and a lot of Catalans do seem to identify as Spanish. But it also seems that a very significant portion of Catalans does not have or has lost the Spanish identity. And that obviously is going to create trouble. Even if the current crisis is solved, the problem will just surface again. Only permanent solutions are either accepting Catalan independence or to find a way to make the Catalans identify as Spanish as well as Catalan. I am not sure whether the Spanish government is taking good steps towards that however.
You can have your ethnicity and still be part of a wider union with other people. Catalans for the most part feel both Catalan and Spanish (and European on top of that), only 22% feel exclusively Catalan on the last survey in July.
Identity is not necessarily binary, there are degrees and overlaps.... unless you're using it as a tool for confrontation, that is.
Sometimes you can and sometimes you can not. It depends on the specific ethnic identity.
On the topic at hand you definitely can. Unless you want to self-impose an us vs them mentality.
Without us vs them there can be no ethnicity or any kind of group mentality. Humans are social creatures that naturally gather in like minded groups. An us vs them mentality is something every single human is guilty of.
On the topic at hand, it is definitely possible to reconcile a Catalan identity with a larger Spanish identity and be both at the same time, just like Frisians in the Netherlands also feel Dutch or Chuvash in Russia also feel Russian. This is quite common and a lot of Catalans do seem to identify as Spanish. But it also seems that a very significant portion of Catalans does not have or has lost the Spanish identity. And that obviously is going to create trouble. Even if the current crisis is solved, the problem will just surface again. Only permanent solutions are either accepting Catalan independence or to find a way to make the Catalans identify as Spanish as well as Catalan. I am not sure whether the Spanish government is taking good steps towards that however.
You have the figures earlier in the thread. Support for straight-up, unconditional independence is hovering around 35% Around 20% of people feel exclusively Catalan.
What's up with the 65/80% that make up the rest of Catalans? They're every bit as Catalan (in citizenship terms) as the others.
What democratic rights are they lacking exactly? The right to vote in Spanish elections? No... they've got that. The right to vote in Catalonian elections? No, they've got that, too.
I'm unclear what rights you think anyone involved are lacking.
They want to pay less for the other regions of Spain, disregarding their own deficit and other more complicated issues.
I find the Catalans amazing, in a disconcerting way. Which oppression are they subjected to in the centuries? Is as if they compare their situation to, say, the Irish/English relationship while the historical background is completely different.
I cannot help feel contempt for these people.
I mean, through-out the centuries there have been periods where their language and aspects of their ethnic individuality was suppressed by Spanish rulers (typically after siding with a losing party in a civil war).
Not the most oppressed culture since most of the time that hasn't been the case, but it's not like it hasn't ever happened.
Also from my understanding Catalonia has less exemptions (specifically the ability to control their own tax rates) than Basque despite being a richer region? Though this is just what I've been hearing recently, and I'm by no means an expert on the intricacies of Spain and its regions.
The problem when you speak about ethnicity is that you are talking about "Catalans" and "Spanish" as being two different groups.
The truth is that, theres no such thing as "Spaniards". A catalonian is no less spanish than a Basque, or a Galician, or someone from Andalucia.
Theres no such thing as "Spanish culture". The fascists, spanish nationalists and Franco's own view about what is spanish and what is not where totally arbitrary.
Many of the things that people associate with Spain, like Flamenco, are from Andalucia, a Community with their own independists movement.
Why is the dance from Andalucia more "spanish" than the Sardanas of Catalonia, the Muñeiras of Galicia or the Canary dance from the Canary Islands? The truth is that, it isn't. Spain is the sum of its parts, and the vast mayority of people think like that.
Franco's Spanish nationalism promoted a unitary national identity by repressing Spain's cultural diversity. Bullfighting and flamenco[84] were promoted as national traditions while those traditions not considered "Spanish" were suppressed. Franco's view of Spanish tradition was somewhat artificial and arbitrary: while some regional traditions were suppressed, Flamenco, an Andalusian tradition, was considered part of a larger, national identity. All cultural activities were subject to censorship, and many, such as the Sardana, the national dance of Catalunya, were plainly forbidden (often in an erratic manner). This cultural policy was relaxed over time, most notably during the late 1960s and early 1970s.
What democratic rights are they lacking exactly? The right to vote in Spanish elections? No... they've got that. The right to vote in Catalonian elections? No, they've got that, too.
I'm unclear what rights you think anyone involved are lacking.
They want to pay less for the other regions of Spain, disregarding their own deficit and other more complicated issues.
I find the Catalans amazing, in a disconcerting way. Which oppression are they subjected to in the centuries? Is as if they compare their situation to, say, the Irish/English relationship while the historical background is completely different.
I cannot help feel contempt for these people.
I mean, through-out the centuries there have been periods where their language and aspects of their ethnic individuality was suppressed by Spanish rulers (typically after siding with a losing party in a civil war).
Not the most oppressed culture since most of the time that hasn't been the case, but it's not like it hasn't ever happened.
Also from my understanding Catalonia has less exemptions (specifically the ability to control their own tax rates) than Basque despite being a richer region? Though this is just what I've been hearing recently, and I'm by no means an expert on the intricacies of Spain and its regions.
Problem is, those rulers tended to suppress the rest of the different languages and peoples that make up modern Spain. It was by no means unique to the Catalans, and they can hardly complain about the situation now. Everything that's in public hands now is skewed towards promoting the Catalan language and culture. The main language at public schools is Catalan, Catalan is a requisite to take up public employment, the regional Catalan TV station is exclusively in Catalan language, not insignificant subsidies are doled out to private newspapers, radio stations and to dub films in Catalan. Yes, they had it rough for a while but not anymore. Not with the present constitutional monarchy established in 1978.
It is true though that Basque country and Navarre have a privilege dating back to medieval times when they were incorporated into the kingdom of Castile, which puts significant limits in their interregional solidarity (though for two Basque provinces it was temporarily rescinded during the Franco dictatorship since they were considered "traitor provinces"). It's a very thorny issue and like many things in Europe has many roots and ramifications. Keep in mind though that the Catalans were initially offered this deal in the early years of the modern democracy and the Catalan politicians of the day rejected because they thought they would be better off in the general regime.
Galas wrote:The problem when you speak about ethnicity is that you are talking about "Catalans" and "Spanish" as being two different groups.
That is true, yes. What I really mean when I say 'Spanish rulers' is 'rulers of the collection of regions known as Spain'.
(If you aren't referring to me with this, feel free to rightfully ignore this).
What democratic rights are they lacking exactly? The right to vote in Spanish elections? No... they've got that. The right to vote in Catalonian elections? No, they've got that, too.
I'm unclear what rights you think anyone involved are lacking.
They want to pay less for the other regions of Spain, disregarding their own deficit and other more complicated issues.
I find the Catalans amazing, in a disconcerting way. Which oppression are they subjected to in the centuries? Is as if they compare their situation to, say, the Irish/English relationship while the historical background is completely different.
I cannot help feel contempt for these people.
I mean, through-out the centuries there have been periods where their language and aspects of their ethnic individuality was suppressed by Spanish rulers (typically after siding with a losing party in a civil war).
Not the most oppressed culture since most of the time that hasn't been the case, but it's not like it hasn't ever happened.
Also from my understanding Catalonia has less exemptions (specifically the ability to control their own tax rates) than Basque despite being a richer region? Though this is just what I've been hearing recently, and I'm by no means an expert on the intricacies of Spain and its regions.
Problem is, those rulers tended to suppress the rest of the different languages and peoples that make up modern Spain. It was by no means unique to the Catalans, and they can hardly complain about the situation now. Everything that's in public hands now is skewed towards promoting the Catalan language and culture. The main language at public schools is Catalan, Catalan is a requisite to take up public employment, the regional Catalan TV station is exclusively in Catalan language, not insignificant subsidies are doled out to private newspapers, radio stations and to dub films in Catalan. Yes, they had it rough for a while but not anymore. Not with the present constitutional monarchy established in 1978.
It is true though that Basque country and Navarre have a privilege dating back to medieval times when they were incorporated into the kingdom of Castile, which puts significant limits in their interregional solidarity (though for two Basque provinces it was temporarily rescinded during the Franco dictatorship since they were considered "traitor provinces"). It's a very thorny issue and like many things in Europe has many roots and ramifications. Keep in mind though that the Catalans were initially offered this deal in the early years of the modern democracy and the Catalan politicians of the day rejected because they thought they would be better off in the general regime.
As I said, I'm by no means an expert on inter-regional Spanish politics as is and was merely repeating what little stuff I have heard recently about why some Catalonians want independence. Also, my point was more that there have been periods where Catalans were oppressed (Kaiyanwang seemed to be saying that they had never been oppressed ever).
As an aside, I must admit, I was actually thinking more about the aftermath of the War of Spanish Succession than the much more recent and relevant dictatorship (my modern European history knowledge isn't so great outside of some of the key events in the 2 World Wars), though I do know that again it wasn't just Catalonia that was affected.
Ethnicity is not a excuse to destabilise a nation in difficult times, unless such "ethnicity" is persecuted somehow. If this is what you are implying, I will just laugh in your face. Don't try to play the "LOL DUMB AMERICAN DOESN'T GET IT" with me, I am Italian and I lived in half of Europe. And since I am Italian I know very well how much stupid independence movements can get. And this one is the dumbest because is just "look we have an economic advantage, let's feth everything up because we want to pay slightly less taxes". I expected more from Europe at this moment of history to be quite honest. One of the reasons the union was built was to go beyond this crap. Also, see what Galas posted.
Ethnicity is not a excuse to destabilise a nation in difficult times, unless such "ethnicity" is persecuted somehow.
Every independence movement in the world will disagree with you on this. Difficult times are the best times for trying to gain independence. If the state is totally stable, it is really damn hard to break away. And yeah... Look at history. Ethnicity is a great excuse for destabilising nations. Also, to a nationalist, foreign rule equals persecution.
Kaiyanwang wrote: If this is what you are implying, I will just laugh in your face. Don't try to play the "LOL DUMB AMERICAN DOESN'T GET IT" with me, I am Italian and I lived in half of Europe.
I didn't call you dumb...
Kaiyanwang wrote: And since I am Italian I know very well how much stupid independence movements can get.
Idk. Regional independence movements in Italy don't seem to have the same kind of momentum as those in Spain. Correct me if I am wrong, but to me it seems that 'Italian' as an identity and ethnicity is much stronger than the Spanish identity is.
Kaiyanwang wrote: And this one is the dumbest because is just "look we have an economic advantage, let's feth everything up because we want to pay slightly less taxes".
There is more than just economic reasons. Economic reasons can fuel an independence movement, but the main driving factors are always pride in the own identity and the desire to be free of 'foreign' rule, for a people to be masters of their own destiny.
Kaiyanwang wrote: I expected more from Europe at this moment of history to be quite honest. One of the reasons the union was built was to go beyond this crap.
Not really. The Union was created to form a large economic block that can compete with other great economic powers such as the US and China. It wasn't meant to put an end to European nation-states, nationalism, regional indentities or independence movements. Quite the contrary, the EU has a lot of legislation that protects and empowers smaller ethnic groups that do not have their own state and the EU has been huge in fanning the flame of nationalism across Europe (surprisingly, nationalists don't like it when foreigners dictate rules to them).
Iron_Captain wrote: Sometimes you can and sometimes you can not. It depends on the specific ethnic identity.
Take, as an example, Native Americans vs the US. Many of us are forcibly part of someone else's country, because they made a law there that we had no say in, and our lands were seized by force of arms (leaving out the genocide, etc etc to further damage relations). From our perspective, we have every right to tell them to GTFO. Many of us see ourselves as Native far ahead of any 'American' national identity. There are many reasons for this, but that's it in a nutshell.
Every independence movement in the world will disagree with you on this. Difficult times are the best times for trying to gain independence. If the state is totally stable, it is really damn hard to break away. And yeah... Look at history. Ethnicity is a great excuse for destabilising nations. Also, to a nationalist, foreign rule equals persecution.
This does not make them suddenly on the right.
Idk. Regional independence movements in Italy don't seem to have the same kind of momentum as those in Spain. Correct me if I am wrong, but to me it seems that 'Italian' as an identity and ethnicity is much stronger than the Spanish identity is.
You don't know Italy very well, do you? There is more troubled past between 2 random Tuscanian cities than anything that ever happened between Catalonia and Madrid. Also hold my beer and watch this:
Spoiler:
Half of these will disappear in 100 years but I guess you get my point. Italians are italians when outside the borders and when the national soccer team plays. See genetics scientific papers too. Geneticists always have to classify italians in 3-5 clusters because is impossible to cluster them together. EDIT: of course everyone is required to know Standard Italian, that is a form of Tuscanian.
There is more than just economic reasons. Economic reasons can fuel an independence movement, but the main driving factors are always pride in the own identity and the desire to be free of 'foreign' rule, for a people to be masters of their own destiny.
I'd rather say that since you cannot "just" say that is for economic reasons, you bring some more poetic crap on the table.
Not really. The Union was created to form a large economic block that can compete with other great economic powers such as the US and China. It wasn't meant to put an end to European nation-states, nationalism, regional indentities or independence movements. Quite the contrary, the EU has a lot of legislation that protects and empowers smaller ethnic groups that do not have their own state and the EU has been huge in fanning the flame of nationalism across Europe (surprisingly, nationalists don't like it when foreigners dictate rules to them).
This is true, but incomplete. You stated valid reasons but the removal of nationalisms was an idea that stemmed from the end of WWII because draw borders on ethnicities was one of the reasons that led to that bloodshed. Then the EU support local languages but is a matter of conservation of european culture, because we have a fragmented, beautiful identity. They do it with other stuff like art or food. But this means do not suppress regional cultures, and support them. That's fantastic. Does not mean that such regional identity must be a reason to fragment the states that are part of the union. Also, remember that when some secessionist start to be rowdy, the EU remembers: "dude, if you go, you have to re-do all the deals with the EU from scratches".
Iron_Captain wrote: Sometimes you can and sometimes you can not. It depends on the specific ethnic identity.
Take, as an example, Native Americans vs the US. Many of us are forcibly part of someone else's country, because they made a law there that we had no say in, and our lands were seized by force of arms (leaving out the genocide, etc etc to further damage relations). From our perspective, we have every right to tell them to GTFO. Many of us see ourselves as Native far ahead of any 'American' national identity. There are many reasons for this, but that's it in a nutshell.
I completely understand this, but the situation in Catalonia is so different that is comical. The Crown of Aragona was actually dominating half of current Italy for centuries, they were not an oppressed minority in their country.
I completely understand this, but the situation in Catalonia is so different that is comical.
The Crown of Aragona was actually dominating half of current Italy for centuries, they were not an oppressed minority in their country.
While I admit that I'm arguing from a position of ignorance here (my interest in Catalonia only really extends as far as the Albigensian Crusade) you seem to think that people just 'forget' about who they used to be. Take Ireland; the Irish were under the yoke of England for centuries, and yet they exploited the first world war to try and gain their freedom. It didn't quite take on the first try, and England's reprisals can only be called 'inhuman', but I think you can see where I'm going with this.
Just because one is decedent from Magnus Maximus does not mean that all of western Europe should be bending a knee to one's Imperial throne. A nation's boarders are not set in stone, and sometimes it's better to let a little territory go to preserve internal peace.
Mariano Rajoy is truly a case to be studied. One of the most incompetent politicians in all of Spanish history, but he jump from political win to political win without doing NOTHING. Literally, others won his battles for him!
And about that new, yeah. This is the Catalonian Schrödinger independence
Sorry Galas, but Rajoy is an idiot, he and Theresa May should breed, for science, and the offspring installed as a ruler of a small island in a park under controlled monitoring to see how they will feth up next.
This is what I was concerned would happen and the worse for the fact that Puigdemont didnt make solid statements of a delayed independence move, he merely implied it. Now the implication comes with threats, threats Puigdemont needs to cement support.
Independent wrote:Spain's prime minister had demanded Catalan's leader clarifies whether independence has been declared.
Mariano Rajoy said clarification is needed before he can decide what steps to take, going on to say the Catalan government's response would be crucial in deciding "events over the coming days."
In a veiled threat, he said the clarity was required by the constitutional article that would allow Spain to intervene and take control of some or all of Catalonia's regional powers.
He said the government "wants to offer certainty to citizens" and it is "necessary to return tranquility and calm."
Catalan regional president Carles Puigdemont said he would proceed with the secession but would suspend it for a few weeks in order to facilitate negotiations.
The Spanish government has given little indication it is willing to entertain the talks.
I see bait.
Puigdemont: "We are willing to negotiate"
Rajoy: "All we want to know is are you preparing UDI, if so I am getting my hammer."
...soon....
Puigdemont: "look everyone, we tried to be reasonable, but Spain isn't willing to negotiate."
I am surprised the Spanish government have made it this easy. Rajopy cant be the only idiot, his hardline speech got a standing ovation appartently.
While I admit that I'm arguing from a position of ignorance here (my interest in Catalonia only really extends as far as the Albigensian Crusade) you seem to think that people just 'forget' about who they used to be. Take Ireland; the Irish were under the yoke of England for centuries, and yet they exploited the first world war to try and gain their freedom. It didn't quite take on the first try, and England's reprisals can only be called 'inhuman', but I think you can see where I'm going with this.
Iron_Captain wrote: Every independence movement in the world will disagree with you on this
Especially without it resulting in a war. What? Catalonians would be better off waiting for stable time and then rice up in arms with rifles etc ala what America did? THAT'S better solution?
Peacefully without bloodshed you pretty much need host country to NOT be in stable situation or you are never pulling it off.
It wasn't meant to put an end to European nation-states, nationalism, regional indentities or independence movements. Quite the contrary, the EU has a lot of legislation that protects and empowers smaller ethnic groups that do not have their own state and the EU has been huge in fanning the flame of nationalism across Europe (surprisingly, nationalists don't like it when foreigners dictate rules to them).
Yeah. Finland is part of EU. I'm still Finnish. Lot different than just being same country. You can have funny enough mutually beneficially alliance and separate countries.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Random note. Yes got 92.01% votes with 43.03% attendance? So if I'm not off with my calculations if somewhere between 18% and 19% of remaining population that didn't vote would have voted yes on the scenario where ALL votes yes would have got over 50% anyway.
Far cry from 90% but were "no" really THAT lopsided in non-voters if majority are against independence?
Random note. Yes got 92.01% votes with 43.03% attendance? So if I'm not off with my calculations if somewhere between 18% and 19% of remaining population that didn't vote would have voted yes on the scenario where ALL votes yes would have got over 50% anyway.
Far cry from 90% but were "no" really THAT lopsided in non-voters if majority are against independence?
If you forget people voting multiple times, ballot boxes full of votes even before the vote officially started, people voting in their own home and in the street without any kind of verifiable census and even the official figures not adding up yes, the vote results were very impressive for the Indy camp.
I completely understand this, but the situation in Catalonia is so different that is comical. The Crown of Aragona was actually dominating half of current Italy for centuries, they were not an oppressed minority in their country.
Take Ireland; the Irish were under the yoke of England for centuries, and yet they exploited the first world war to try and gain their freedom. It didn't quite take on the first try, and England's reprisals can only be called 'inhuman', but I think you can see where I'm going with this.
My point is exactly this: Compare an union of Crowns with what the Irish had to suffer under the english is incredibly unfair. What I see in Catalonia is "I don't want to pay tax-I MEAN, I HAVE BEE OPPRESSED (?) CENTURIES!".
My point is exactly this: Compare an union of Crowns with what the Irish had to suffer under the english is incredibly unfair. What I see in Catalonia is "I don't want to pay tax-I MEAN, I HAVE BEE OPPRESSED (?) CENTURIES!".
That's exactly what we told the Americans! But did they listen?
My point is exactly this: Compare an union of Crowns with what the Irish had to suffer under the english is incredibly unfair. What I see in Catalonia is "I don't want to pay tax-I MEAN, I HAVE BEE OPPRESSED (?) CENTURIES!".
That's exactly what we told the Americans! But did they listen?
Every independence movement in the world will disagree with you on this. Difficult times are the best times for trying to gain independence. If the state is totally stable, it is really damn hard to break away. And yeah... Look at history. Ethnicity is a great excuse for destabilising nations. Also, to a nationalist, foreign rule equals persecution.
This does not make them suddenly on the right.
That depends on the person you are talking to. Right and wrong are relative.
Kaiyanwang wrote: You don't know Italy very well, do you? There is more troubled past between 2 random Tuscanian cities than anything that ever happened between Catalonia and Madrid. Also hold my beer and watch this:
Spoiler:
Half of these will disappear in 100 years but I guess you get my point. Italians are italians when outside the borders and when the national soccer team plays. See genetics scientific papers too. Geneticists always have to classify italians in 3-5 clusters because is impossible to cluster them together. EDIT: of course everyone is required to know Standard Italian, that is a form of Tuscanian.
No, you are right about that. I have been to Rome lots of times and generally traveled around Italy quite a bit (though never farther south than Rome). I think it is a wonderful country, but yeah. That does not mean I am very knowledgeable on it, although I probably know more than the average person not from Italy (especially about the history). I do know there is loads of regional cultures, languages and identities in Italy, but my point was that to me it seemed (when I am in Italy or when I talk to Italians) that they all seem to identify as Italian as well. This common Italian identity seemed to be to be stronger than the common Spanish identity in Spain. Pretty much a lot like Germany where you also have loads of strong regional identities but despite that people also have strong common German identity. These are just observations by me though, so if you say it is otherwise I will believe you.
There is more than just economic reasons. Economic reasons can fuel an independence movement, but the main driving factors are always pride in the own identity and the desire to be free of 'foreign' rule, for a people to be masters of their own destiny.
I'd rather say that since you cannot "just" say that is for economic reasons, you bring some more poetic crap on the table.
Thing is, people care about this 'poetic crap'. A lot. 'Poetic crap' like this can stir strong emotions in a way that economic arguments never will be able to.
I do think Spain will roll in tanks etc.
They will March in gurdia civil.
However is gonna make some very ugly images as you take over and evict catalan police, arrest catalan government members.
Its gone a stick in people's minds.
Spain will restore control, and EU will hand wave it. Glad secretly as it sends message EU is one block.
It will look ugly though. And catalonia will remember watching Spain seize back control.
That's the Catalan government plan.
So the central government formally asked Cat Govt if they had indeed declared independence or not, and apparently they are going to answer with a transcript of Mr. Puigdemont address. You can't make this gak up.
Meanwhile 3 of the 4 biggest parties on the Spanish parliament have agreed to start the process of Constitutional reform, though they will not recognize Puigdemont as a valid party in the talks, so the plan seems to be to force a regional election through direct rule so that a new untainted government is elected and talks can be started. PdeCat seems to be quietly grooming Santi Vila for the job.
I do think Spain will roll in tanks etc.
They will March in gurdia civil.
However is gonna make some very ugly images as you take over and evict catalan police, arrest catalan government members.
Its gone a stick in people's minds.
Spain will restore control, and EU will hand wave it. Glad secretly as it sends message EU is one block.
It will look ugly though. And catalonia will remember watching Spain seize back control.
If this is so I have to wonder if a terrorist campaign will start. Nobody needs it to go that far, but cooler heads will cease to prevail and someone somewhere might make a bomb. If the Spanish government does roll in the army Puidgemont's best option is to ask for total non-cooperation.
The EU''s handling of this has been staid but I can see the underlaying desperation. Brexit didn't cause the same ruffles. If the Brits want out let them, not that they can stop us. Catalonia would leave a hole inside the EU geographical bloc and that they will not tolerate. Hence the turning of blind eyes everywhere.
Poland was threatened with sanctions because it placed unilateral limitations on immigration, Spain can use police brutality and the same EU which has bleeding hearts over Poland turning away refugees is quite happy to let Spain get on with it,
jouso wrote: So the central government formally asked Cat Govt if they had indeed declared independence or not, and apparently they are going to answer with a transcript of Mr. Puigdemont address. You can't make this gak up.
Guess Madrid didn't take that response well. They're preparing to invoke 155.
Meanwhile 3 of the 4 biggest parties on the Spanish parliament have agreed to start the process of Constitutional reform, though they will not recognize Puigdemont as a valid party in the talks, so the plan seems to be to force a regional election through direct rule so that a new untainted government is elected and talks can be started. PdeCat seems to be quietly grooming Santi Vila for the job.
Pardon my ignorance of the Spanish election law. Can the federal government use Article 155 like a scalpel to dissolve the Catalan parliament? Have them re-elect, then gamble on the new government being less interested in pursuing the Catexit agenda with the constitutional reform as the carrot and increased autonomy loss as the stick. Then you can usurp Puigdemont's moral high ground of leaning on the ballot box by calling for a more "legitimate" election.
jouso wrote: So the central government formally asked Cat Govt if they had indeed declared independence or not, and apparently they are going to answer with a transcript of Mr. Puigdemont address. You can't make this gak up.
Guess Madrid didn't take that response well. They're preparing to invoke 155.
Meanwhile 3 of the 4 biggest parties on the Spanish parliament have agreed to start the process of Constitutional reform, though they will not recognize Puigdemont as a valid party in the talks, so the plan seems to be to force a regional election through direct rule so that a new untainted government is elected and talks can be started. PdeCat seems to be quietly grooming Santi Vila for the job.
Pardon my ignorance of the Spanish election law. Can the federal government use Article 155 like a scalpel to dissolve the Catalan parliament? Have them re-elect, then gamble on the new government being less interested in pursuing the Catexit agenda with the constitutional reform as the carrot and increased autonomy loss as the stick. Then you can usurp Puigdemont's moral high ground of leaning on the ballot box by calling for a more "legitimate" election.
That would be a smart strategy, but as there previously proven actions are. They where not. They used thugs, rubber bullets and aggressive tactics.
There probbly gonna be idiots. March in. Depose police and just looks awful.
It's gonna leave the Catalan question hovering for months or years.
jouso wrote: So the central government formally asked Cat Govt if they had indeed declared independence or not, and apparently they are going to answer with a transcript of Mr. Puigdemont address. You can't make this gak up.
Guess Madrid didn't take that response well. They're preparing to invoke 155.
Meanwhile 3 of the 4 biggest parties on the Spanish parliament have agreed to start the process of Constitutional reform, though they will not recognize Puigdemont as a valid party in the talks, so the plan seems to be to force a regional election through direct rule so that a new untainted government is elected and talks can be started. PdeCat seems to be quietly grooming Santi Vila for the job.
Pardon my ignorance of the Spanish election law. Can the federal government use Article 155 like a scalpel to dissolve the Catalan parliament? Have them re-elect, then gamble on the new government being less interested in pursuing the Catexit agenda with the constitutional reform as the carrot and increased autonomy loss as the stick. Then you can usurp Puigdemont's moral high ground of leaning on the ballot box by calling for a more "legitimate" election.
Exactly. Under the table Puigdemont was offered amnesty if they called an election, and refused.
The next step is use 155 to call an election if they don't by themselves. Indy supporters know they've reached their high water mark and now that the real economic weight of independence is being felt, just by thinking it might happen, momentum is on the remain side.
As long as the election is run fairly using the same mechanisms that are normally used for running Catalonian elections, the result will be legitimate regardless of whether the election was triggered by Madrid or the Catalan parliament.
Whether the result is a parliament that is pro- or anti-independence, it will be in a strong position to deal with the Madrid government and the independence movement.
The referendum result cannot be taken as a legitimate democratice vote because it was badly disrupted on both sides.
Kilkrazy wrote: As long as the election is run fairly using the same mechanisms that are normally used for running Catalonian elections, the result will be legitimate regardless of whether the election was triggered by Madrid or the Catalan parliament.
Whether the result is a parliament that is pro- or anti-independence, it will be in a strong position to deal with the Madrid government and the independence movement.
The referendum result cannot be taken as a legitimate democratice vote because it was badly disrupted on both sides.
Whether it is legitimate or not depends on one's point of view really. Hardcore nationalists probably do not see Madrid's control over Catalonia as legitimate, so they could see any election called by them as also not being legitimate.
But yeah, in case the nationalists don't make too much trouble over it, a new Catalan government could be a very good start for negotiations indeed.
Kilkrazy wrote: As long as the election is run fairly using the same mechanisms that are normally used for running Catalonian elections, the result will be legitimate regardless of whether the election was triggered by Madrid or the Catalan parliament.
Whether the result is a parliament that is pro- or anti-independence, it will be in a strong position to deal with the Madrid government and the independence movement.
The referendum result cannot be taken as a legitimate democratice vote because it was badly disrupted on both sides.
Whether it is legitimate or not depends on one's point of view really. Hardcore nationalists probably do not see Madrid's control over Catalonia as legitimate, so they could see any election called by them as also not being legitimate.
But yeah, in case the nationalists don't make too much trouble over it, a new Catalan government could be a very good start for negotiations indeed.
Elections seem best plan if I'm honest.
Id not wanna be Madrid representative who had to be Catalan leader, there's a percentage who see you and any guada civil as a occupation.
Just not a job you'd want.
Letting the elect and negotiate with a more sensible government makes far more sense.
Yes, I agree. Though if hardliners don't see a Catalan election as legitimate if it was called by Madrid, the current Catalan parliament was set up by Madrid, so it too must illegitimate by the same reasoning, and so is the referendum it decided to hold. Yet those same hardliners are clamoring that the election result justifies immediate independence.
In other words, some people accept or reject things according to their own preferences, without much concern for fairness and principles.
Kilkrazy wrote: As long as the election is run fairly using the same mechanisms that are normally used for running Catalonian elections, the result will be legitimate regardless of whether the election was triggered by Madrid or the Catalan parliament.
Whether the result is a parliament that is pro- or anti-independence, it will be in a strong position to deal with the Madrid government and the independence movement.
The referendum result cannot be taken as a legitimate democratice vote because it was badly disrupted on both sides.
Whether it is legitimate or not depends on one's point of view really. Hardcore nationalists probably do not see Madrid's control over Catalonia as legitimate, so they could see any election called by them as also not being legitimate.
But yeah, in case the nationalists don't make too much trouble over it, a new Catalan government could be a very good start for negotiations indeed.
Elections seem best plan if I'm honest.
Id not wanna be Madrid representative who had to be Catalan leader, there's a percentage who see you and any guada civil as a occupation.
They don't need to send the guardia civil, just put the mossos under direct control of the govt. Art. 155 is not a wholesale reversal of autonomy but more like putting a few technocrats in key positions of the regional govt.
Main parties have agreed to make a new election on January this morning so there's that.
Why do a lot of people keep talking about these mythical catalans?
Are they some kind of cat people?
The Spanish region is called Catalonia in English, and it inhabitants are Catalonians, so who are you people discussing?
Bran Dawri wrote: Why do a lot of people keep talking about these mythical catalans?
Are they some kind of cat people?
The Spanish region is called Catalonia in English, and it inhabitants are Catalonians, so who are you people discussing?
My point is exactly this: Compare an union of Crowns with what the Irish had to suffer under the english is incredibly unfair. What I see in Catalonia is "I don't want to pay tax-I MEAN, I HAVE BEE OPPRESSED (?) CENTURIES!".
That's exactly what we told the Americans! But did they listen?
Bran Dawri wrote: Why do a lot of people keep talking about these mythical catalans?
Are they some kind of cat people?
The Spanish region is called Catalonia in English, and it inhabitants are Catalonians, so who are you people discussing?
You know this would be pretty good fodder for some memes. Someone find a picture of a cat and slap "Catalan has wares, if you have coins" on it
For those on dakka who know me, I have been asking this question for a long, long, time: what happened to all the competent politicians and statesmen in the West?
Once again, Rajoy has shown himself to be a blundering amateur, somebody who would struggle to find a tombstone in a graveyard.
What will Madrid do if a pro-indy majority is returned again? And there's a good chance this could happen.
Meanwhile, the EU continue to turn a blind eye to this, and give a nod and a wink to Madrid. It's one of the reasons why I utterly despise the EU.
I hope there will be a peaceful solution to this mess, but with Rajoy pulling the strings, I can only foresee disaster on the horizon.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: .
What will Madrid do if a pro-indy majority is returned again? And there's a good chance this could happen.
No there isn't. On the latest poll the PDCat (Puigdemont party) has burned itself to irrelevance (under 10%) while the CUP has almost halved (circa 5%). Only ERC holds because Junqueras has been kept outside the limelight while Puigdemont has taken the brunt of the hit.
And in January it will only get worse as the economic consequences will keep trickling.
I do agree Rajoy is a blustering coward, and a bearded mannequin would do a better job as president though.
Meanwhile, the EU continue to turn a blind eye to this, and give a nod and a wink to Madrid. It's one of the reasons why I utterly despise the EU.
And when the EU tells Poland it can't just dismantle its independent judiciary you protest because it's interfering with a sovereign state. The EU could solve world hunger and bring about world peace and you'd be complaining that they're evil.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: For those on dakka who know me, I have been asking this question for a long, long, time: what happened to all the competent politicians and statesmen in the West?
Once again, Rajoy has shown himself to be a blundering amateur, somebody who would struggle to find a tombstone in a graveyard.
What will Madrid do if a pro-indy majority is returned again? And there's a good chance this could happen.
Meanwhile, the EU continue to turn a blind eye to this, and give a nod and a wink to Madrid. It's one of the reasons why I utterly despise the EU.
I hope there will be a peaceful solution to this mess, but with Rajoy pulling the strings, I can only foresee disaster on the horizon.
The EU threatens sanctions against Poland because they stood up to them. By criticising them and refusing to take in immigrants they earned their ire, even though it was all peaceful. The EU then turn a blind eye to the events in Spain because Madrid toes their line. Even though they were having people beaten to a pulp. They can't give us that "respecting sovereignty" bollocks because they're perfectly happy to break it when it suits them. Scumbags.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: Yep. Totes didn't have anything to do with Poland trying to dismantle one of the cornerstones of a working democratic society. No sir.
Poland isn't doing that, quite the opposite in fact.
The Poles realise that unrestricted immigration is socially damaging, an aren't going to be bleeding heart about whether or not they like to embrace jihadism or rape gangs. Elsewhere in many parts of Europe the horrible consequences are being swept aside or flat out denied.
What type of working democratic society denies the existence of rape culture, as has happened in the UK, Germany and Sweden. Poland has seen the BS and wisely wants no part of it.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: Yep. Totes didn't have anything to do with Poland trying to dismantle one of the cornerstones of a working democratic society. No sir.
Poland isn't doing that, quite the opposite in fact.
The Poles realise that unrestricted immigration is socially damaging, an aren't going to be bleeding heart about whether or not they like to embrace jihadism or rape gangs. Elsewhere in many parts of Europe the horrible consequences are being swept aside or flat out denied.
What type of working democratic society denies the existence of rape culture, as has happened in the UK, Germany and Sweden. Poland has seen the BS and wisely wants no part of it.
I was referring to the fact that they wanted to give the government the power to dismiss judges in the supreme court. The EU:s criticism of Poland for their heavy-handed reforms to media jurisdiction likewise has nothing to do with immigration.
I'd also ask you to substantiate your claims, but last time we had this "debate" you lied through your nose (or were completely ignorant, but I'll assume you're competent), so I'm not going to bother.
Bran Dawri wrote: Why do a lot of people keep talking about these mythical catalans?
Are they some kind of cat people?
The Spanish region is called Catalonia in English, and it inhabitants are Catalonians, so who are you people discussing?
Catalans is the proper word for people from Catalonia (for comparison, the word is Catalans in Catalan, Catalanes in Spanish and Catalans in French).
The -ia part in Catalonia is only a noun-forming suffix. Such suffixes are sometimes left out when you make another noun (the name of the people) that is derived from the same root. This is why people from Scotland are Scots and not Scotlanders or people from Germany are Germans and not Germanians. In many other cases it stays in place (Iceland, Icelanders, Italy, Italians etc). And then there is the rare case where the name of the people comes from an entirely different root (the Netherlands, Dutch). There are no real rules as to why people from Germany are German but people from Italy are not Italan. It is simply a matter of custom that is usually derived from the native language of the people you are talking about. That is why you get so many variations and 'weird' situations, and it is why the english language prefers Catalans over Catalonians (to compare, Google gives 12,800,000 results for "Catalans" but only 259,000 results for "Catalonians". My spellchecker also recognises Catalans but not Catalonians.).
The Rest of the Planet realized that unrestricted British Invasion is socially damaging, and are not going to be bleeding hearts about whether or not they like to embrace British Imperialism or rape gangs.
Fixed to reflect the level of hypocrisy involved here. I'll say this for refugee Rape Gangs, they were not preconceived as instruments of state, unlike SOME former globe straddling Empires. Maybe that's why England is so xenophobic. They know karma's on it's way around, and isn't going to use Vaseline.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bran Dawri wrote: Why do a lot of people keep talking about these mythical catalans?
Are they some kind of cat people?
The Spanish region is called Catalonia in English, and it inhabitants are Catalonians, so who are you people discussing?
Weirdly, we learned it as Iberians, but that would also include Portugal.
Meanwhile, the EU continue to turn a blind eye to this, and give a nod and a wink to Madrid. It's one of the reasons why I utterly despise the EU.
And when the EU tells Poland it can't just dismantle its independent judiciary you protest because it's interfering with a sovereign state. The EU could solve world hunger and bring about world peace and you'd be complaining that they're evil.
A common accusation levelled at people like me is that you complain when the EU interferes, and complain when it doesn't.
When I'm wrong, I don't mind admitting I'm wrong. When I'm being a hypocrite, I don't mind admitting to that either.
But I'm just one man on an internet forum shouting at a loud. My actions or words have very little consequence for the vast majority.
The same couldn't be said for the EU. They only believe in European values when it suits them.
They were very slow to condemn police brutality in Catalonia, and they are hiding behind a wall of legality and turning a blind eye to Spanish tyranny.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: For those on dakka who know me, I have been asking this question for a long, long, time: what happened to all the competent politicians and statesmen in the West?
Once again, Rajoy has shown himself to be a blundering amateur, somebody who would struggle to find a tombstone in a graveyard.
What will Madrid do if a pro-indy majority is returned again? And there's a good chance this could happen.
Meanwhile, the EU continue to turn a blind eye to this, and give a nod and a wink to Madrid. It's one of the reasons why I utterly despise the EU.
I hope there will be a peaceful solution to this mess, but with Rajoy pulling the strings, I can only foresee disaster on the horizon.
The EU threatens sanctions against Poland because they stood up to them. By criticising them and refusing to take in immigrants they earned their ire, even though it was all peaceful. The EU then turn a blind eye to the events in Spain because Madrid toes their line. Even though they were having people beaten to a pulp. They can't give us that "respecting sovereignty" bollocks because they're perfectly happy to break it when it suits them. Scumbags.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: .
What will Madrid do if a pro-indy majority is returned again? And there's a good chance this could happen.
No there isn't. On the latest poll the PDCat (Puigdemont party) has burned itself to irrelevance (under 10%) while the CUP has almost halved (circa 5%). Only ERC holds because Junqueras has been kept outside the limelight while Puigdemont has taken the brunt of the hit.
And in January it will only get worse as the economic consequences will keep trickling.
I do agree Rajoy is a blustering coward, and a bearded mannequin would do a better job as president though.
For an outsider like me, it's hard to tell what's happening in Spain. I certainly don't trust the British media to do their job. The BBC's coverage of the referendum and police brutality, was an utter disgrace.
A common accusation levelled at people like me is that you complain when the EU interferes, and complain when it doesn't.
Well gee no wonder since that is what you do. You have irrational hate of eu and claim everything is their fault twisting facts to suit. They interfere? You blame them for that. If they hadn't you would blame them for that.
A common accusation levelled at people like me is that you complain when the EU interferes, and complain when it doesn't.
Well gee no wonder since that is what you do. You have irrational hate of eu and claim everything is their fault twisting facts to suit. They interfere? You blame them for that. If they hadn't you would blame them for that.
Pointlesswto "discuss" with that attitude
I'm trying to stay OT here, but your point highlights my issue with the EU. They try to be all things to all men, and end up falling flat on their faces. It's a Goldilocks institution. can't be too hot, can't be too cold, we'll interfere here, but won't interfere there. It's ll drift and inertia. And it causes an awful lot of problems.
They stick their noses in when they scent an easy victory on a minor issue (Poland) and they turn a blind eye to genuine brutality (Spain) when their project could be at risk.
To use an old British saying, the EU need to gak or get off the toilet seat.
A common accusation levelled at people like me is that you complain when the EU interferes, and complain when it doesn't.
Well gee no wonder since that is what you do. You have irrational hate of eu and claim everything is their fault twisting facts to suit. They interfere? You blame them for that. If they hadn't you would blame them for that.
Pointlesswto "discuss" with that attitude
I'm trying to stay OT here, but your point highlights my issue with the EU. They try to be all things to all men, and end up falling flat on their faces. It's a Goldilocks institution. can't be too hot, can't be too cold, we'll interfere here, but won't interfere there. It's ll drift and inertia. And it causes an awful lot of problems.
They stick their noses in when they scent an easy victory on a minor issue (Poland) and they turn a blind eye to genuine brutality (Spain) when their project could be at risk.
To use an old British saying, the EU need to gak or get off the toilet seat.
They are inconsistent in upholding the founding principles and values of the EU.
They'll send EU Ministers to Kiev to publicly endorse the Maiden uprising, but when Catalonia's independence movement is violently repressed by Madrid, it barely provokes a whimper out of the EU?
I don't want the EU interfering in the domestic affairs of nation states. But they can and they do, when its convenient for the EU. So I'd prefer they at least be consistent, and not hypocritical.
They are inconsistent in upholding the founding principles and values of the EU.
They'll send EU Ministers to Kiev to publicly endorse the Maiden uprising, but when Catalonia's independence movement is violently repressed by Madrid, it barely provokes a whimper out of the EU?
I don't want the EU interfering in the domestic affairs of nation states. But they can and they do, when its convenient for the EU. So I'd prefer they at least be consistent, and not hypocritical
The EU is great, working together so closely brings many benefits to the countries of Europe. But yeah. They do need to be consistent and not forget about their principles as soon as those become politically inconvenient. Right now the way they act isn't exactly doing a lot of good to repair their cracked image.
The EU should have been taking a more active role in the Catalonia question. Get the two sides together and force them to make a compromise. The way they behave regarding Poland and Ukraine clearly shows that the EU has no problem meddling in internal affairs of states (in fact, meddling in internal affairs of states is a big part of the EU's job). Spain should be no different.
I'd also ask you to substantiate your claims, but last time we had this "debate" you lied through your nose (or were completely ignorant, but I'll assume you're competent), so I'm not going to bother.
If you are going to dare call me a lier, put up your claim.
As for problems with Islamification here are some examples:
Rotherham, during the New Labour years paedophilia was underinvestigated by the police for fears of being 'racist' by targeting predominantly Islamic offenders. This is still a problem today, but the Cameron government took action on the issue. Prior to this it was 'racism' to report the issue.
Sweden is in a similar position as the UK was, but in Sweden the status quo is still in denial. During New Labour years in the UK there was no statistical evidence for the rise in Islamic rape culture, we knew it was happening but officially it wasn't. It took a change of government and government policy for the truth to emerge.
Sweden on paper is nice and safe, in reality its the rape capital of Europe, Islamic violence is also on the rise in the streets but declining in the official statistics.
It is nice to be able to proclaim "X is on the rise" with no evidence, and declare any evidence to the counter just part of a conspiracy of political correctness.
The Rest of the Planet realized that unrestricted British Invasion is socially damaging, and are not going to be bleeding hearts about whether or not they like to embrace British Imperialism or rape gangs.
Fixed to reflect the level of hypocrisy involved here. I'll say this for refugee Rape Gangs, they were not preconceived as instruments of state, unlike SOME former globe straddling Empires. Maybe that's why England is so xenophobic. They know karma's on it's way around, and isn't going to use Vaseline.
Hostile fixed it for you's are not allowed on Dakka.
Racist ones doubly so.
And for the record, when the British was invading people, so was everyone else who could, including Spain, France and even the USA. Don't highlight one nation in isolation for 19th century actions by 21st century morals.
LordofHats wrote: It is nice to be able to proclaim "X is on the rise" with no evidence, and declare any evidence to the counter just part of a conspiracy of political correctness.
There is plenty of evidence. Google it. I would try 'Birmingham Islamification schools 2010', and 'Rotherham rape gangs' for starters.
Then come back and bleat 'no evidence' if you like.
As for the counter evidence for that to. Again you can Google it. Look for articles prior to 2010.
Rotherham is a great example of this. the systemic rapes occured for years, and the police were aware. Action against them started after 2010.
I have second hand experience of the Islamification of schools in Birmingham (know the parents of kids involved) and the rife discrimination. However there was not a peep in the press about it until 2010 when the Cameron government dealt with the issue.
The tories had/have many faults, but they dealt with the rape culture and the brainwashing of primary school children and associated discrimination.
From being a story with near zero press time outside the Daily Mail, who were actually telling the truth on this issue; it was suddenly all over the press and police were taking action. Now you either had to assume that suddenly after Cameron took office rape gangs and Islamified schools just appeared, or that the problems were already there and were being ignored because they were not politically correct.
As for Sweden, and Germany, the situation is similar to the UK, plenty of anecdotal evidence but little statistical. However the reports we are seeing are pretty telling. Malmo, Cologne etc the list goes on.
450k at a protest in Barcelona alone.
Thats 25% of thr city.
Some are calling it a coup. Others seemed to have accepted it.
So. A mix.
Invoking article 155 is the latest in a series of over-reactions.
Puidgemeont has several options. He has threatened to declare UDI if article 155 is triggered. Alternately he can hold an election and pull the rug from under Madrid. Assuming he wins the vote he would be re-legitimised and make Madrid's position very difficult.
LordofHats wrote: It is nice to be able to proclaim "X is on the rise" with no evidence, and declare any evidence to the counter just part of a conspiracy of political correctness.
There is plenty of evidence. Google it. I would try 'Birmingham Islamification schools 2010', and 'Rotherham rape gangs' for starters.
Then come back and bleat 'no evidence' if you like.
As for the counter evidence for that to. Again you can Google it. Look for articles prior to 2010.
Rotherham is a great example of this. the systemic rapes occured for years, and the police were aware. Action against them started after 2010.
I have second hand experience of the Islamification of schools in Birmingham (know the parents of kids involved) and the rife discrimination. However there was not a peep in the press about it until 2010 when the Cameron government dealt with the issue.
The tories had/have many faults, but they dealt with the rape culture and the brainwashing of primary school children and associated discrimination.
From being a story with near zero press time outside the Daily Mail, who were actually telling the truth on this issue; it was suddenly all over the press and police were taking action. Now you either had to assume that suddenly after Cameron took office rape gangs and Islamified schools just appeared, or that the problems were already there and were being ignored because they were not politically correct.
As for Sweden, and Germany, the situation is similar to the UK, plenty of anecdotal evidence but little statistical. However the reports we are seeing are pretty telling. Malmo, Cologne etc the list goes on.
450k at a protest in Barcelona alone.
Thats 25% of thr city.
Some are calling it a coup. Others seemed to have accepted it.
So. A mix.
Invoking article 155 is the latest in a series of over-reactions.
Puidgemeont has several options. He has threatened to declare UDI if article 155 is triggered. Alternately he can hold an election and pull the rug from under Madrid. Assuming he wins the vote he would be re-legitimised and make Madrid's position very difficult.
Fething idiots. It need not have come to this.
Yeah a election going Madrid way. Kills this. Stone dead.
If it goes Catalan. Then things get dicey. And two Italian regions. Quite wealthy saw idea of autonomy and mutterings.
Its a far bigger issue than just Spain now.
It's Italian. Maybe France...
Orlanth wrote: Google it. I would try 'Birmingham Islamification schools 2010',
A single incident is not indicative of a trend, and if it is then I demand we address Christians trying to spread extremist beliefs in education. Personally I think a handful of people with radical ideas is a comparatively minor problem when they can't get past institutional systems and have no broad community support but hey if this is now the standard of evidence we're running with I formally declare that Christian radicals are trying to take over British schools and perpetuate hateful and bigoted ideas that have no place in education.
and 'Rotherham rape gangs' for starters.
Then you'll be dealing with the Catholics then?
However the reports we are seeing are pretty telling.
Except for the one's you've chosen to ignore naturally.
I have second hand experience of the Islamification of schools in Birmingham
Oh well never mind then. I didn't realize you had anecdotal evidence of a pervasive cultural problem effecting entire countries that no one else knows. Clearly national studies and stats are completely disproven by your sole personal experience and cherry picked reading of reports.
Sooner or later you're going to have to realize that singular incidents however real do not form a persistent trend across a country, especially not when you blow one of them out of proportion, or that the problem isn't even remotely unique to Muslims. It's the same bs every time this topic comes up, pointed out to you by the same people, and yet we're here again. Of course that's completely bs. You're never going to realize it.
Yeah a election going Madrid way. Kills this. Stone dead.
If it goes Catalan. Then things get dicey. And two Italian regions. Quite wealthy saw idea of autonomy and mutterings.
Its a far bigger issue than just Spain now.
It's Italian. Maybe France...
Madrid has called for an election, but after six months direct rule. This would give Rajoy the advantage. However why not have an election in the region now, because you want to be in long enough to rig it?
Puigdemont is still regional president at this time. He could call an election (AFAIK this one would actually be legal) and hope that the sudden swell of nationalism and outrage carries him forwards. Pro-union Catalans might boycott a referendum, but they cant boycott a regional election. Reaffirmed support for Puigdemont at this time would give him leverage to declare UDI.
All in all Puigdemont has played his hand with savvy, underhand no doubt and more than a little dishonest. But clever nonetheless. The Spanish government has lurched from one failure to the next, they should have been able to diffuse this.
The fuse isn't really lit yet, just smouldering, but waiting for the heat to be turned up a notch or two more. It still might not happen, if the next moves are carefully planned timed and orchestrated.
It now depends on what the national police will do when they take over regional services and the first clashes happen.
It depends on how the Spanish government handles the regional police, which has shown itself to have sided with pro-independence. Also the fire brigade.
It also depends on how Puigdemont is removed from office after article 155. Will he need to be dragged from a government building. They should be savvy enough to deal with him in his car or at his home. Then again he might not actually go home.
It lay has separatist troubles, as does Belgium. I don't know if the French do. It's bad for the EU though.
And for the record, when the British was invading people, so was everyone else who could, including Spain, France and even the USA. Don't highlight one nation in isolation for 19th century actions by 21st century morals.
I initially wrote a nasty, historically accurate, but very nasty, response to this. Since England didn't limit it's rape and invasion to just the 19th Century., but has closer to a thousand years of rape and invasion under it's belt.
And, if you're going to call me racist, alongside your gross exaggerations about non-white refugees, all I can say is 'Kettle, How Black Thou Art.' After all, the main authors of the refugee issue are England and France. The nations doing the least and protesting the most. Oh, and the US, but they were late comers to this party.
The Spanish Government is declaring that the images of police beating people were faked, and the whole thing was 'Fake News'.
The "just declare it fake" strategy. If it's good enough for the internet its good enough for the state
I am disappointed however by the remarkable lack of effort. Not even a video of someone holding up a photo with some cool red circles and explaining how it's photo-shopped? Come on Spain. You can't even put as much effort into it as the moon landing nuts and the 9/11 Truthers? Disappointing
Orlanth wrote: Google it. I would try 'Birmingham Islamification schools 2010',
A single incident is not indicative of a trend.
Sorry neither were single incidents. Try googling again/at all. These were serious ongoing problems. In Birmingham the schools radicalisation was long-term ongoing and multi-site, at least six schools were placed under administration. This occurred almost immediately after the change of government, and was due to a change in policy on tolerance of abuse not a sudden awareness of the problems existence.
The Rotherham rape scandal was again long ongoing, and dealt with by a change in government.
As for analysing trends multiple incidences are indicative, and we certainly have that.
No this was, if you checked, about Islamic grooming gangs which the police were aware of but turned a blind eye to because it might offend multi-cultural sensibilities to arrest minorities gang raping children.
In one ugly incident (and AFAIK this was isolated) the parent of a victim was arrested for harrassment after trying to rescue his daughter.
I dont know where Catholism comes into it, except in your head.
I have second hand experience of the Islamification of schools in Birmingham
Oh well never mind then. I didn't realize you had anecdotal evidence of a pervasive cultural problem effecting entire countries that no one else knows. Clearly national studies and stats are completely disproven by your sole personal experience and cherry picked reading of reports.
Yes I did know anecdotal evidence and knew that it was a major problem that was not being addressed because again it involved children again the authorities were aware but unwilling to act because othe thnicities of the perpetratiors. The whole issue however broke news after new Labour lost the election and was replaced by a new government with different agendas.
Sooner or later you're going to have to realize that singular incidents however real do not form a persistent trend across a country....
Don't patronise me. I was aware of this a priori, which is hardly therefore a position of ignorance and saw what I knew hit the press and a later government take action on it.
, especially not when you blow one of them out of proportion, or that the problem isn't even remotely unique to Muslims. It's the same bs every time this topic comes up, pointed out to you by the same people, and yet we're here again. Of course that's completely bs. You're never going to realize it.
Rape is not a blown out of proportion issue. And as this is now in the public domain, with trials etc. You can hardly consider me confused or innaccurate for commenting on known facts, that were proven in a court of law.
If the 'same people', whoever they are, are in denial about known facts, then that is their problem not mine.
And for the record, when the British was invading people, so was everyone else who could, including Spain, France and even the USA. Don't highlight one nation in isolation for 19th century actions by 21st century morals.
I initially wrote a nasty, historically accurate, but very nasty, response to this.
I am sure you would, because your vitriliolic hatred of the English is well understood from previous encounters.
I wouldnt hold my breath about it being historically accurate though.
Since England didn't limit it's rape and invasion to just the 19th Century., but has closer to a thousand years of rape and invasion under it's belt.
Good example here. You even single out the English even when referring earlier to events after the treaty of Union. i.e the British.
Also a thousand years or rape. Seems you have been watching too much Braveheart, and worse probably think it's accurate. A thousand years ago England was still ruled by the Anglo Saxons, who generally went nowhere, while the Normans after them did some nasty stuff, it was on a par with the rest of medieval society, in fact the history of the islands was a whole lot less bloody than that on the continent for almost the entireity of the last millenia. Also in the 10th century or after human rights didn't mean a whole lot, to just about anyone. If you want to single out one people group over this over such a long time ago, it is looking more like a mental health issue on your part. Give it up.
And, if you're going to call me racist, alongside your gross exaggerations about non-white refugees, all I can say is 'Kettle, How Black Thou Art.'
Interesting to find out about these supported gross exaggerations about non-white refugees. And where you get the idea that I am anti-non white either?
BaronIveagh wrote: After all, the main authors of the refugee issue are England and France.
Ok how did England cause the refugee crisis. Seeing as England has been operating as the UK since the early 18th century.
On that matter how is it the French's fault?
The Spanish Government is declaring that the images of police beating people were faked, and the whole thing was 'Fake News'.
The "just declare it fake" strategy. If it's good enough for the internet its good enough for the state
I am disappointed however by the remarkable lack of effort. Not even a video of someone holding up a photo with some cool red circles and explaining how it's photo-shopped? Come on Spain. You can't even put as much effort into it as the moon landing nuts and the 9/11 Truthers? Disappointing
This is not gong to help. The pictures are often not still camera but rolling footage and often by third parties. Some events might have been staged, but most likely means to do this is with rent-a-crowd.
People gathering to march under one flag or other might be bussed in, not local to make support look larger than it is. Large banners magnify a relatively small crowd easily, and estimates of crowd numbers can be guestimated up or down.
No evidence that that is happened, but already today there were multiple groups waving Catalan or Catalan and Spanish flags. This will occur and will be encouraged and seeded with slogans.
One thing I did notice the pro-union Spanish crowd do right. They waved both Catalan and Spanish flags, visibly so, and waved them together. This denies the Catalan flag as purely a seperatist symbol. During the Scottish referendum the Better Together camapign most heavily favoured the Union flag and this was a mistake as the Saltire was at least partly absorbed as a seperatist symbol. Though the press being lazy were partly to blame using the Union flag and Saltire as opposed symbols in infographics.
I'm just wondering how many tangents we're going to rope into a regional Spanish autonomy issue, and how far we're going to delve down into them.
We've got EU conspiracies and hypocrisy, Tory/Labour dynamics, Imperialism's karma, and the bleeding hearts allowing rape culture thus far on this page alone.
Reread/read my post at all. I think Birmingham was blown out of proportion, and I brought up the Catholic Church because it is an organization that has engaged in decades long cover ups of sexual abuse, in many instances with public officials being complicit but when a Catholic priest abuses a kid, no one makes it evidence of how Catholics or Christians are dangerous to society. This isn't the first time you've been completely incapable connecting extremely obvious dots I might add, so maybe I need to address you on an even more basic level than I already do.
You can hardly consider me confused or innaccurate for commenting on known facts, that were proven in a court of law.
Many a contrivance are built on known facts and they are quite confusing when presented as undeniable fact. I mean I could build a whole idea that Christians want to kill all the Jews, gays, and gypsies based on nothing more than known facts proven in a court of law if I ignore that outside of involving "white people in Europe" there is no connection between the facts.
Don't patronise me.
I am a poster on DakkaDakka, which is hardly a position of ignorance and can say that my first hand experience with your cherry picking of information, inflating the value of your own suppositions, and being horribly incapable of following even basic responses that your opinions are built on such basic flaws, which is more of your problem than mine, that it's not really possible to respond to them without a little patronizing happening. Especially when it often comes off that those flaws are made by choice rather than a lack of ability to recognize them.
Orlanth wrote: If they roll up to bite me, I face them down.
Riiight. Keep telling yourself that while you hide behind semantics and technicalities Give Edward the Confessor my regards when you see him, and my apology for including his reign in my broad assertion about England's actions for the last millennium.
Orlanth wrote: If they roll up to bite me, I face them down.
Riiight. Keep telling yourself that while you hide behind semantics and technicalities Give Edward the Confessor my regards when you see him, and my apology for including his reign in my broad assertion about England's actions for the last millennium.
I don't know why you go on about this.
We were having a nice mostly on topic conversation when you pipe in on a topic about historic brutality by Spain in Catalonia by commenting that how the English were so much worse. It wasn't relevant to anything but racism like that has to be challenged.
England is so evil for a thousand years! <Blink> the English have behaved like just about every other country in Western civilisation according to the methods of the time, and frankly was usually early on the curve for reform on several key issues including slavery and womens rights, though by no means the first. Sure the British Empire committed many actions which by todays standards would be considered vile atrocities, just like any other western civilisation that were able to do more than sit at home. However former British colonies are mostly in better shape than those colonised by others, and relations are mostly friendly. There are exceptions, but most of those have a religious bent behind them and it wouldn't have mattered who was the colonising power.
Also why the 'English'? When redcoats did what redcoats do they were as often a Welshman, Scot or Irishman in the uniform, or even as their commander.
You sir have a racist attitude towards my people, and based on actions from ludicrously long ago, its futile asking you to stop, but it would be interesting to understand what makes you tick, in the same way I am interested in the motivations behind followers of Zanu PF or Daesh.
Reread/read my post at all. I think Birmingham was blown out of proportion, and I brought up the Catholic Church because it is an organization that has engaged in decades long cover ups of sexual abuse, in many instances with public officials being complicit but when a Catholic priest abuses a kid, no one makes it evidence of how Catholics or Christians are dangerous to society. This isn't the first time you've been completely incapable connecting extremely obvious dots I might add, so maybe I need to address you on an even more basic level than I already do.
However your comment holds no connexion as I am not either making comment to link the Islamic extremists or rape gangs against all/most Moslems either. So there is no valid comparison.
In your little mind you however assume this is that case, because its easier to critique someone if they criticise pandering to extremism if you can relabel their position as a hatred of an entire people group.
You are not the first to use that dirty little trick, and won't be the last.
It is in fact why the paedophile rape gangs got away with what they did for so long, if you criticised them you were just an anti-Moslem bigot. It worked on the police too.
You can hardly consider me confused or innaccurate for commenting on known facts, that were proven in a court of law.
Many a contrivance are built on known facts and they are quite confusing when presented as undeniable fact.
However no contrivance was built. I knew about this a priori and believed there was an issue that was being swept under the carpet, this position was vindicated by revelations in government.
I am a poster on DakkaDakka, which is hardly a position of ignorance and can say that my first hand experience with your cherry picking of information, inflating the value of your own suppositions, and being horribly incapable of following even basic responses that your opinions are built on such basic flaws,
I am not cherry picking, just presenting the relevant facts. If was cherry picking you would be able to provide alternate facts that were carefully omitted. However you never post links, or even search criteria. Just baseless accusation; you say its cherry picking ad lib because it allows you to avoid countering a factual based argument with contrary data. It's both dishonest and lazy.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Anyway, moving on.
When is the Senate vote on article 155 scheduled? Does anyone know.
Neither do I. What two incidents in the UK have to do with stuff in the rest of Europe is very unclear but you're here contriving a whole bunch of stuff anyway, and the contrivance is so basic I could throw together any number of alternate contrivances that are equally absurd but that you'd never buy into.
because its easier to critique someone if they criticise pandering to extremism if you can relabel their position as a hatred of an entire people group
Well you speak in such general terms, it is pretty easy but I haven't even jumped on that wagon this time
I am not cherry picking, just presenting the relevant facts.
When you narrowly define relevant to exclude all counter evidence (like crime stats), it's still cherry picking.
However you never post links, or even search criteria.
This whole tangent started when you were asked to provide evidence of a rather sweeping claim to which you have posted no links and the only search criteria you offered is to two cases in the UK. I don't need to post links or search criteria to point out how that doesn't hold up. You made the claim. It's not my burden to disprove it, though poking holes at it and watching you fumble around to hold the flimsy position together is entertaining in a mundane way.
Just baseless accusation
Like the baseless accusation that multiple European countries are ignoring things for political correctness? Honestly I find your entire response to people criticizing your opinion;
both dishonest and lazy
And funny because once again your attempts to dismiss criticism are really just a reflection of your own posting style more than anything; throw as many generalities as possible, then switch to specificity when those generalities are called out.
The Spanish Government is declaring that the images of police beating people were faked, and the whole thing was 'Fake News'.
The "just declare it fake" strategy. If it's good enough for the internet its good enough for the state
I am disappointed however by the remarkable lack of effort. Not even a video of someone holding up a photo with some cool red circles and explaining how it's photo-shopped? Come on Spain. You can't even put as much effort into it as the moon landing nuts and the 9/11 Truthers? Disappointing
There's more to it than declare it fake. The foreign press has been too gullible with the oppressed people narrative that they were fed by interested Catalan parties.
Even notorious lost-cause advocates the guardian had to issue a sort-of apology.
1 October referendum was hardly a model of sound, democratic expression. Only a minority of Catalans took part (turnout was 43%), and its organisation ran counter to Catalonia’s own legislation. The two laws that led to it were voted through without the two-thirds majority the Catalan charter (the Estatut) requires for such a momentous reform process. Nor was the vote overseen by the regional constitutional court. The Council of Europe, Europe’s democracy watchdog, said it did not abide by its fundamental criteria. Reporters without Borders, an organisation that scrutinises freedom of the press, denounced the harassment and intimidation – sometimes physical – of reporters who did not toe the pro-independence line.
Puidgemeont has several options. He has threatened to declare UDI if article 155 is triggered. Alternately he can hold an election and pull the rug from under Madrid. Assuming he wins the vote he would be re-legitimised and make Madrid's position very difficult.
That's the option he's been offered to save face (including an amnesty). Call an election or we will trigger 155 and do it for you.
Drop this random tangent about Islam, it's wildly off topic, insulting and barely based in reality outside of the Daily Mail and similar carriers.
Do not post 'FTFY' posts, be they hostile, supportive, or "funny".
In short, this thread is on notice. As is the UK politics thread. You'll end up like US politics if you can't behave like adults. Gradually shortening threads as each one gets locked before the topic gets forbidden. You've been given too much leeway to bite and snipe at each other recently because you "weren't as bad" as the US thread. Now that isn't around, your behaviour is centre stage for "political discussion on dakka dakka". So do better. And keep it to 1 thread.
The Spanish Government is declaring that the images of police beating people were faked, and the whole thing was 'Fake News'.
The "just declare it fake" strategy. If it's good enough for the internet its good enough for the state
I am disappointed however by the remarkable lack of effort. Not even a video of someone holding up a photo with some cool red circles and explaining how it's photo-shopped? Come on Spain. You can't even put as much effort into it as the moon landing nuts and the 9/11 Truthers? Disappointing
There's more to it than declare it fake. The foreign press has been too gullible with the oppressed people narrative that they were fed by interested Catalan parties.
Even notorious lost-cause advocates the guardian had to issue a sort-of apology.
1 October referendum was hardly a model of sound, democratic expression. Only a minority of Catalans took part (turnout was 43%), and its organisation ran counter to Catalonia’s own legislation. The two laws that led to it were voted through without the two-thirds majority the Catalan charter (the Estatut) requires for such a momentous reform process. Nor was the vote overseen by the regional constitutional court. The Council of Europe, Europe’s democracy watchdog, said it did not abide by its fundamental criteria. Reporters without Borders, an organisation that scrutinises freedom of the press, denounced the harassment and intimidation – sometimes physical – of reporters who did not toe the pro-independence line.
Puidgemeont has several options. He has threatened to declare UDI if article 155 is triggered. Alternately he can hold an election and pull the rug from under Madrid. Assuming he wins the vote he would be re-legitimised and make Madrid's position very difficult.
That's the option he's been offered to save face (including an amnesty). Call an election or we will trigger 155 and do it for you.
That's gonna intresting election.
Its the big test for Catalan independence.
If Madrid win. It's settled.
If Catalan. Well then that's gonna present real issues as they validated the refreanedum with a legal vote.
Its the big test for Catalan independence.
If Madrid win. It's settled.
If Catalan. Well then that's gonna present real issues as they validated the refreanedum with a legal vote.
Well, for starters they'll have their own *exit issue right off the bat.
Of course it's all in a bit of jest, but it highlights that pro-indy regions who are so staunchly against their money being sent to poorer regions are in turn subsidised by the overwhelmingly pro-remain bigger cities. Much like London during the run up to Brexit.
There's more to it than declare it fake. The foreign press has been too gullible with the oppressed people narrative that they were fed by interested Catalan parties.
Even notorious lost-cause advocates the guardian had to issue a sort-of apology.
It was inevitable with the sheer volume of images and stories that some were going to be "fake," whether that be in attribution or fabrication, but I think that's not the real point.
When your mom catches your hand in the cookie jar, you don't turn around and say "but I only took two cookies." No one really cares that your sister is lying about how you took a third cookie. Your hand shouldn't have been in the jar to begin with, and focusing on the cookies you didn't eat is a very shallow and blatant attempt to obfuscate responsibility. To not even put much effort into the excuse is just kind of an insult added to foolishness. The damage was done the moment Spain responded to the independence movement by sending in hordes of national police and guards, and the details are just a matter of degrees that might effect the level of outrage but don't really have any bearing on the question of why Spain needed such a heavy response to an event that Spain itself has put great effort into downplaying, an act that just further begs why the response needed to be so heavy and the independence movement is so small and of such limited scope.
There's more to it than declare it fake. The foreign press has been too gullible with the oppressed people narrative that they were fed by interested Catalan parties.
Even notorious lost-cause advocates the guardian had to issue a sort-of apology.
It was inevitable with the sheer volume of images and stories that some were going to be "fake," whether that be in attribution or fabrication, but I think that's not the real point.
When your mom catches your hand in the cookie jar, you don't turn around and say "but I only took two cookies." No one really cares that your sister is lying about how you took a third cookie.
The wheels for the whole thing were set in motion before that, but let's just go a week before the shock! horror! images you refer.
Let's explain the picture. You have two guys standing on top of a completely vandalized police vehicle (the contents of which including ammunition were also stolen, but anonymously returned days later) leading a mob of several hundred people.
That mob is surrounding a government building where 8 police and prosecutor office employees are surrounded and unable to leave, for almost 24h. The police only prevented the mob from entering the building, among other things because they didn't have the numbers and didn't want to escalate the situation. They only charged when the numbers thinned in the early hours of the morning to allow the trapped officials inside to finally leave (though one female officer left through the roof to neighboring building with the help of plainclothes police).
So what was that restraint good for? Basically nothing, only to embolden the separatists further.
You're from the USA, can you imagine what would happen if a mob of, idk, Texans surrounded 8 federal officers in a State office, vandalized three (federal agency of your choice) marked SUVs and prevented them from leaving while chanting threats? I'm sure they wouldn't have gotten off this lightly.
These two leaders btw are now in jail, while Catalan politicians cry "political prisoners". Sure thing.
With regards to police Brutality on 1-O there are several criminal investigations going on. Let justice do its job and have the sword ready for whichever heads have to roll.
Radicals are as emboldened by inaction as they are by watching people get beat up. Honestly they're radicals and you can't really dissuade them one way or the other, but an overreaction just build sympathy and undermines the rule of law by creating distrust in law enforcement. It legitimizes the grievances of the agitator and gives them new grievances.
jouso wrote: You're from the USA, can you imagine what would happen if a mob of, idk, Texans surrounded 8 federal officers in a State office, vandalized three (federal agency of your choice) marked SUVs and prevented them from leaving while chanting threats? I'm sure they wouldn't have gotten off this lightly.
We actually have had stuff sort of like that (the Bundy Ranch Standoff for example), and shockingly the Feds didn't kick down the door and go balls to the walls. They let it die and went after those involved after the fact. A lack of response there probably lead to the occupation of the Manhuer Wildlife Refuge later (debatable), but there again the Feds didn't automatically jump to kicking down the door and going balls to the walls. For whatever its worth the US government seems to have realized since incidents like Waco and Ruby Ridge that overreactions not only play badly from a PR front, but undermine the reason for the effort taken in the first place.
With regards to police Brutality on 1-O
I'm not sure what exactly we disagree about. If people are being charged then presumably Spanish officials also think things went to far.
LordofHats wrote: We actually have had stuff sort of like that (the Bundy Ranch Standoff for example), and shockingly the Feds didn't kick down the door and go balls to the walls. They let it die and went after those involved after the fact. A lack of response there probably lead to the occupation of the Manhuer Wildlife Refuge later (debatable), but there again the Feds didn't automatically jump to kicking down the door and going balls to the walls. For whatever its worth the US government seems to have realized since incidents like Waco and Ruby Ridge that overreactions not only play badly from a PR front, but undermine the reason for the effort taken in the first place.
I think there's a fundamental difference between a bunch of loonies locking themselves out in the sticks (even if it's in a Federal building) and having government officials surrounded and threatened for 24h in downtown Barcelona.
But yeah, I was as shocked and disgusted as anyone when I saw the videos. One because I knew that was the indy plan from the beginning, but also because I have family in Barcelona some of whom did vote.
LordofHats wrote: We actually have had stuff sort of like that (the Bundy Ranch Standoff for example), and shockingly the Feds didn't kick down the door and go balls to the walls. They let it die and went after those involved after the fact. A lack of response there probably lead to the occupation of the Manhuer Wildlife Refuge later (debatable), but there again the Feds didn't automatically jump to kicking down the door and going balls to the walls. For whatever its worth the US government seems to have realized since incidents like Waco and Ruby Ridge that overreactions not only play badly from a PR front, but undermine the reason for the effort taken in the first place.
I think there's a fundamental difference between a bunch of loonies locking themselves out in the sticks (even if it's in a Federal building) and having government officials surrounded and threatened for 24h in downtown Barcelona.
But yeah, I was as shocked and disgusted as anyone when I saw the videos. One because I knew that was the indy plan from the beginning, but also because I have family in Barcelona some of whom did vote.
Madrid has badly mishandled this from the get-go, and frankly, I'm surprised to see them repeat so many of the mistakes other governments have made in the same circumstances,
The smart move would have been to just let the vote go forward, but to declare it non-binding. Then based on the outcome, craft a response. The moment armed men roll in and try to prevent the vote, you've already lost, and it does not matter if they're the police, the army, or a band of wild gunmen from the hills.
LordofHats wrote: We actually have had stuff sort of like that (the Bundy Ranch Standoff for example), and shockingly the Feds didn't kick down the door and go balls to the walls. They let it die and went after those involved after the fact. A lack of response there probably lead to the occupation of the Manhuer Wildlife Refuge later (debatable), but there again the Feds didn't automatically jump to kicking down the door and going balls to the walls. For whatever its worth the US government seems to have realized since incidents like Waco and Ruby Ridge that overreactions not only play badly from a PR front, but undermine the reason for the effort taken in the first place.
I think there's a fundamental difference between a bunch of loonies locking themselves out in the sticks (even if it's in a Federal building) and having government officials surrounded and threatened for 24h in downtown Barcelona.
But yeah, I was as shocked and disgusted as anyone when I saw the videos. One because I knew that was the indy plan from the beginning, but also because I have family in Barcelona some of whom did vote.
Madrid has badly mishandled this from the get-go, and frankly, I'm surprised to see them repeat so many of the mistakes other governments have made in the same circumstances,
The smart move would have been to just let the vote go forward, but to declare it non-binding. Then based on the outcome, craft a response. The moment armed men roll in and try to prevent the vote, you've already lost, and it does not matter if they're the police, the army, or a band of wild gunmen from the hills.
Yes. There tactics basically entrenched things.
They need to be careful because with the election plan they Don t want to fuel the elections for thr opposition and independence campaign.
LordofHats wrote: We actually have had stuff sort of like that (the Bundy Ranch Standoff for example), and shockingly the Feds didn't kick down the door and go balls to the walls. They let it die and went after those involved after the fact. A lack of response there probably lead to the occupation of the Manhuer Wildlife Refuge later (debatable), but there again the Feds didn't automatically jump to kicking down the door and going balls to the walls. For whatever its worth the US government seems to have realized since incidents like Waco and Ruby Ridge that overreactions not only play badly from a PR front, but undermine the reason for the effort taken in the first place.
I think there's a fundamental difference between a bunch of loonies locking themselves out in the sticks (even if it's in a Federal building) and having government officials surrounded and threatened for 24h in downtown Barcelona.
But yeah, I was as shocked and disgusted as anyone when I saw the videos. One because I knew that was the indy plan from the beginning, but also because I have family in Barcelona some of whom did vote.
Madrid has badly mishandled this from the get-go, and frankly, I'm surprised to see them repeat so many of the mistakes other governments have made in the same circumstances,
The smart move would have been to just let the vote go forward, but to declare it non-binding. Then based on the outcome, craft a response. The moment armed men roll in and try to prevent the vote, you've already lost, and it does not matter if they're the police, the army, or a band of wild gunmen from the hills.
As I understand it, the referendum was organised not in accordance with Catalan parliament rules on referendums, so it was illegal from that aspect if not from the constitutional position of dividing an undivisable country (moot point.)
This is why lots of anti-separatists boycotted the vote, leading to low turnout of 43% and high Yes vote of 90%. There is no winning position for moderates in this situation. If the anti-separatists had voted en masse, they might or might have won, but it would have added a veneer of democratic respectability to the otherwise very flawed vote. Not voting allowed the separatists to claim a victory.
However, sending in the police to try and break up the referendum also was a bad move.
LordofHats wrote: We actually have had stuff sort of like that (the Bundy Ranch Standoff for example), and shockingly the Feds didn't kick down the door and go balls to the walls. They let it die and went after those involved after the fact. A lack of response there probably lead to the occupation of the Manhuer Wildlife Refuge later (debatable), but there again the Feds didn't automatically jump to kicking down the door and going balls to the walls. For whatever its worth the US government seems to have realized since incidents like Waco and Ruby Ridge that overreactions not only play badly from a PR front, but undermine the reason for the effort taken in the first place.
I think there's a fundamental difference between a bunch of loonies locking themselves out in the sticks (even if it's in a Federal building) and having government officials surrounded and threatened for 24h in downtown Barcelona.
But yeah, I was as shocked and disgusted as anyone when I saw the videos. One because I knew that was the indy plan from the beginning, but also because I have family in Barcelona some of whom did vote.
Madrid has badly mishandled this from the get-go, and frankly, I'm surprised to see them repeat so many of the mistakes other governments have made in the same circumstances,
The smart move would have been to just let the vote go forward, but to declare it non-binding. Then based on the outcome, craft a response. The moment armed men roll in and try to prevent the vote, you've already lost, and it does not matter if they're the police, the army, or a band of wild gunmen from the hills.
As I understand it, the referendum was organised not in accordance with Catalan parliament rules on referendums, so it was illegal from that aspect if not from the constitutional position of dividing an undivisable country (moot point.)
This is why lots of anti-separatists boycotted the vote, leading to low turnout of 43% and high Yes vote of 90%. There is no winning position for moderates in this situation. If the anti-separatists had voted en masse, they might or might have won, but it would have added a veneer of democratic respectability to the otherwise very flawed vote. Not voting allowed the separatists to claim a victory.
Yeah, but that would have been a waaay better option. It would have stopped the independence movement dead in its tracks, at least for the near future. If you can vote, you should always vote, even if you disagree with the referendum itself. Nobody will care that you didn't vote. By not voting you are just giving the organisers of the referendum a license to do whatever they want.
LordofHats wrote: We actually have had stuff sort of like that (the Bundy Ranch Standoff for example), and shockingly the Feds didn't kick down the door and go balls to the walls. They let it die and went after those involved after the fact. A lack of response there probably lead to the occupation of the Manhuer Wildlife Refuge later (debatable), but there again the Feds didn't automatically jump to kicking down the door and going balls to the walls. For whatever its worth the US government seems to have realized since incidents like Waco and Ruby Ridge that overreactions not only play badly from a PR front, but undermine the reason for the effort taken in the first place.
I think there's a fundamental difference between a bunch of loonies locking themselves out in the sticks (even if it's in a Federal building) and having government officials surrounded and threatened for 24h in downtown Barcelona.
But yeah, I was as shocked and disgusted as anyone when I saw the videos. One because I knew that was the indy plan from the beginning, but also because I have family in Barcelona some of whom did vote.
Madrid has badly mishandled this from the get-go, and frankly, I'm surprised to see them repeat so many of the mistakes other governments have made in the same circumstances,
The smart move would have been to just let the vote go forward, but to declare it non-binding. Then based on the outcome, craft a response. The moment armed men roll in and try to prevent the vote, you've already lost, and it does not matter if they're the police, the army, or a band of wild gunmen from the hills.
As I understand it, the referendum was organised not in accordance with Catalan parliament rules on referendums, so it was illegal from that aspect if not from the constitutional position of dividing an undivisable country (moot point.)
This is why lots of anti-separatists boycotted the vote, leading to low turnout of 43% and high Yes vote of 90%. There is no winning position for moderates in this situation. If the anti-separatists had voted en masse, they might or might have won, but it would have added a veneer of democratic respectability to the otherwise very flawed vote. Not voting allowed the separatists to claim a victory.
Yeah, but that would have been a waaay better option. It would have stopped the independence movement dead in its tracks, at least for the near future. If you can vote, you should always vote, even if you disagree with the referendum itself. Nobody will care that you didn't vote. By not voting you are just giving the organisers of the referendum a license to do whatever they want.
The referendum fell short of just about every democratic measure. It was not just an issue of you should have voted. Leaving aside the fact that the referendum law was passed without the required majority in the Catalan parliament (and thus suspended by the Constitutional court):
- It was sponsored, organised and overseen by one of the interested parties. There was no organised NO campaign.
- Census did not comply with the Catalan electoral law.
- Figures did not add up (possibly because of the previous point).
- There was plenty of evidence of vote tampering, and people voting multiple times (also because of the previous points).
Why would a no voter go when the vote tally is going to be made exclusively by the opposing camp? When the Constitutional court and the government have been saying for weeks "don't do this, it's illegal and we're going to seize the ballot boxes"?
If a good number of Catalans don't feel represented by the current Spanish government, it also happens that an equally good, most likely higher, number of Catalans don't feel represented about the current Catalan government.
LordofHats wrote: We actually have had stuff sort of like that (the Bundy Ranch Standoff for example), and shockingly the Feds didn't kick down the door and go balls to the walls. They let it die and went after those involved after the fact. A lack of response there probably lead to the occupation of the Manhuer Wildlife Refuge later (debatable), but there again the Feds didn't automatically jump to kicking down the door and going balls to the walls. For whatever its worth the US government seems to have realized since incidents like Waco and Ruby Ridge that overreactions not only play badly from a PR front, but undermine the reason for the effort taken in the first place.
I think there's a fundamental difference between a bunch of loonies locking themselves out in the sticks (even if it's in a Federal building) and having government officials surrounded and threatened for 24h in downtown Barcelona.
But yeah, I was as shocked and disgusted as anyone when I saw the videos. One because I knew that was the indy plan from the beginning, but also because I have family in Barcelona some of whom did vote.
Madrid has badly mishandled this from the get-go, and frankly, I'm surprised to see them repeat so many of the mistakes other governments have made in the same circumstances,
The smart move would have been to just let the vote go forward, but to declare it non-binding. Then based on the outcome, craft a response. The moment armed men roll in and try to prevent the vote, you've already lost, and it does not matter if they're the police, the army, or a band of wild gunmen from the hills.
As I understand it, the referendum was organised not in accordance with Catalan parliament rules on referendums, so it was illegal from that aspect if not from the constitutional position of dividing an undivisable country (moot point.)
This is why lots of anti-separatists boycotted the vote, leading to low turnout of 43% and high Yes vote of 90%. There is no winning position for moderates in this situation. If the anti-separatists had voted en masse, they might or might have won, but it would have added a veneer of democratic respectability to the otherwise very flawed vote. Not voting allowed the separatists to claim a victory.
Yeah, but that would have been a waaay better option. It would have stopped the independence movement dead in its tracks, at least for the near future. If you can vote, you should always vote, even if you disagree with the referendum itself. Nobody will care that you didn't vote. By not voting you are just giving the organisers of the referendum a license to do whatever they want.
The referendum fell short of just about every democratic measure. It was not just an issue of you should have voted. Leaving aside the fact that the referendum law was passed without the required majority in the Catalan parliament (and thus suspended by the Constitutional court):
- It was sponsored, organised and overseen by one of the interested parties. There was no organised NO campaign. - Census did not comply with the Catalan electoral law. - Figures did not add up (possibly because of the previous point). - There was plenty of evidence of vote tampering, and people voting multiple times (also because of the previous points).
Why would a no voter go when the vote tally is going to be made exclusively by the opposing camp? When the Constitutional court and the government have been saying for weeks "don't do this, it's illegal and we're going to seize the ballot boxes"?
If a good number of Catalans don't feel represented by the current Spanish government, it also happens that an equally good, most likely higher, number of Catalans don't feel represented about the current Catalan government.
True, and I understand the reasons people did not vote, but by not voting, they effectively gave the Catalan government a license to do whatever the hell they want because the yes vote of this referendum gives them a thin veneer of democratic legitimacy for their actions. Sure, there were some flaws in the referendum, but in the grand scheme of things such things often tend to get overshadowed by the people yelling about how 90% of the people are in favour. In contrast, if the people that are opposed to independence had bothered to organise a good no campaign and turned up in strength, they could have easily shut the whole thing down. It would have been even better if Madrid had approved and supported the referendum (while campaigning for a no vote). I understand why they did not vote, but not voting was not a smart decision. It never is, because as I said, people in charge simply do not care about people that do not vote. Those people are much more easily ignored than people who actively vote no.
I don't agree that the non-voting antis made the illegal referendum a fair democratic vote that supports the Catalan government. It's exactly the opposite. If they had voted, they might have won, but it would not have made the vote legal.
These are the sort of things that happen in places like Zimbabwe.
Kilkrazy wrote: I don't agree that the non-voting antis made the illegal referendum a fair democratic vote that supports the Catalan government. It's exactly the opposite. If they had voted, they might have won, but it would not have made the vote legal.
These are the sort of things that happen in places like Zimbabwe.
Which is why the best solution is to call a snap election, where every party has its definite line with regards to indy yes or no, and do it with all the weight of the democratic state behind you.
Puigdemont has until Friday to call it or the government will do it through art. 155 for him.
Kilkrazy wrote: I don't agree that the non-voting antis made the illegal referendum a fair democratic vote that supports the Catalan government. It's exactly the opposite. If they had voted, they might have won, but it would not have made the vote legal.
These are the sort of things that happen in places like Zimbabwe.
Of course not. Thing is, regardless of how fair the vote actually was, the Catalan government is treating it as a fair democratic vote and derives a mandate for independence from it. If people had turned up to vote no, they would not have been able to do this. Ultimately, whether something is strictly legal or not is totally meaningless when it comes to governments (because 'legal' is in the end just a malleable and arbitrary term). They don't care about legality, they only care for the appearance of legality. And this referendum had enough democratic trappings to be used to build that appearance of legality, which the Catalan government can use to mobilise its supporters and press through with its goals. Had the Spanish government endeavoured to drag a 'no' vote out of this referendum, they would have beaten the Catalan separatists at their own game. Instead, by the actions now took they handed the Catalans three powerful tool (the appearance of legality, the appearance of oppression and international sympathy). Sometimes you have to do what is legal or what is right according to your principles. And sometimes you have to screw laws and principles and just do what is smart. In politics, this is also called realpolitik.
However, now that opportunity is lost for Spain, they better keep fighting Catalonia on legal terms and hope that Puigdemont doesn't just declare independence now. If he doesn't, Spain could get a new chance through new elections (which might also turn out really bad). If he does, then it is probably going to turn ugly.
The current unpopular Catalan parliament may or may not regard it as a democratic mandate. In fact Puigedemont and other separatists rabbit on at length about democratic mandates. But the anti-separatists who make up over half the population, and largely did not vote, will not accept it as a mandate for independence, and will fight back against it.
Ultimately a veneer of legality is irrelevant if the hearts and minds of the population are not prepared to go along.
The current unpopular Catalan parliament may or may not regard it as a democratic mandate. In fact Puigedemont and other separatists rabbit on at length about democratic mandates. But the anti-separatists who make up over half the population, and largely did not vote, will not accept it as a mandate for independence, and will fight back against it.
Ultimately a veneer of legality is irrelevant if the hearts and minds of the population are not prepared to go along.
Will they though? They were not as motivated before, and they need to get off their arses if they want a pro-union campaign to succeed. A so called silent majority is no power base, for starters no faction has the right to claim a non voting demographic as their own.
The current unpopular Catalan parliament may or may not regard it as a democratic mandate. In fact Puigedemont and other separatists rabbit on at length about democratic mandates. But the anti-separatists who make up over half the population, and largely did not vote, will not accept it as a mandate for independence, and will fight back against it.
Ultimately a veneer of legality is irrelevant if the hearts and minds of the population are not prepared to go along.
Will they though? They were not as motivated before, and they need to get off their arses if they want a pro-union campaign to succeed. A so called silent majority is no power base, for starters no faction has the right to claim a non voting demographic as their own.
They sure have. For the first time separatism has looked like it might have a shot at succeeding so pro-union are starting to get themselves organised. The pro-union demonstration a few years back was the first ever of its kind in Barcelona, and drew almost half a million people which, considering the stigma usually attached to the Spanish flag in Catalonia is wildly successful.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: The appearance of legality is so flimsy that if you made a garment out of it a Rio Carneval dancer would find it too immodest.
Fortunately or unfortunately, as look as it 'looks' substantive, and, more importantly, legitimate, it's effective. Spain's heavy handed response made it look even more so, as though they assumed a 'Yes' vote was a forgone conclusion if they did not suppress it.
BaronIveagh wrote: as though they assumed a 'Yes' vote was a forgone conclusion if they did not suppress it.
That's a fundamental misunderstanding of why the police was there.
Yes was always going to win because the vote was organised by the yes camp without following the legal procedure for a lawful vote (basically because they did not have enough MPs to do it). The reason the police went there to seize the ballots, etc. is because the Catalonia Supreme Court declared the law null and void.
It wasn't "the government" who sent the police there, it was Catalonia's highest court (the members of which are proposed 2/3 by the Catalan Legislative Assembly and 1/3 by the Central Judiciary Council). Any excesses should still be laid at the government feet, since security forces ultimately answer to the Central government delegate in Catalonia, but the reason they were there is due process and rule of law, not an executive decision.
Yeah. Appearances and what kind of spin you can put on things are what matters here. Spain sent in the jack booted thugs with sticks and riot shields unnecessarily, and gave their opponents all the ammo they need to play the oppressed party.
The current unpopular Catalan parliament may or may not regard it as a democratic mandate. In fact Puigedemont and other separatists rabbit on at length about democratic mandates. But the anti-separatists who make up over half the population, and largely did not vote, will not accept it as a mandate for independence, and will fight back against it.
Ultimately a veneer of legality is irrelevant if the hearts and minds of the population are not prepared to go along.
Actually as it is we do not know how much of catalonians support independence. All we have is some polls which only sample small sections. If polls were accurate we wouldn't have brexit nor trump.
What we do know is that unless there was HUGE scams in the voting we had(not even talking 1% of votes being incorrect but more like good two digits) basically nearly every voter that didn't vote would have had to vote no to get over 50% no's.
So either the "no independency" advantage isn't as big as people think if there is at or there was gargantuan voting scamming going on.
The current unpopular Catalan parliament may or may not regard it as a democratic mandate. In fact Puigedemont and other separatists rabbit on at length about democratic mandates. But the anti-separatists who make up over half the population, and largely did not vote, will not accept it as a mandate for independence, and will fight back against it.
Ultimately a veneer of legality is irrelevant if the hearts and minds of the population are not prepared to go along.
Actually as it is we do not know how much of catalonians support independence. All we have is some polls which only sample small sections. If polls were accurate we wouldn't have brexit nor trump.
What we do know is that unless there was HUGE scams in the voting we had(not even talking 1% of votes being incorrect but more like good two digits) basically nearly every voter that didn't vote would have had to vote no to get over 50% no's.
You do have a very accurate description of the Catalan makeup just by following the regional election results.
Pro-indy parties got 47% of the valid vote, no-indy parties got 53%
And we know based on polls that not all who voted for pro-indy parties want independence. A good 20% of those voters only want extended autonomy or a new makeup of the Spanish state.
That's why pro-indy are in a rush to get everything passed right away and without following due process. Because thanks to the electoral system those 47% of the votes actually translate to over 50% of the MPs, so they are gaming the system by passing substantial reforms that need more ample majorities. That's why their laws are getting shot down all the time by the Supreme Court (including the electoral law that gave the Catalan parliament powers to call a referendum on a constitutional issue).
Automatically Appended Next Post: ....and it's done. Puigdemont has finally decided to call an early election for Dec. 20th instead of having the government using art. 155 for that.
There's a press conference called in less than 1h.
Grey Templar wrote: Yeah. Appearances and what kind of spin you can put on things are what matters here. Spain sent in the jack booted thugs with sticks and riot shields unnecessarily, and gave their opponents all the ammo they need to play the oppressed party.
I think there is a legitimate argument that when the advocates of a political position are being arrested or having their heads cracked by police for no adequate reason, those advocates are actually being oppressed. Quite literally in every sense of the word. It's not quite Monty Python when a bloke is physically laying into you and yours with a truncheon for standing in a street and holding your hands up.
Can you imagine if we'd done that at the SNP rallies?
Scargill's political error was not to ballot his members on industrial action. If he had done so, there is not much doubt that he would have had a mandate for the strike.
By failing to do so he allowed Thatcher to send in the cops on the basis of suppressing an illegal act.
Things of course turned very nasty and the memory is still with people today, who are old enough to have lived through that period. It was a great disservice to the nation as a whole.
Similarly, Puigdemont ought to have organised a referendum in accordance with the law. This would have made interference by the police clearly repressive.
Grey Templar wrote: Yeah. Appearances and what kind of spin you can put on things are what matters here. Spain sent in the jack booted thugs with sticks and riot shields unnecessarily, and gave their opponents all the ammo they need to play the oppressed party.
I think there is a legitimate argument that when the advocates of a political position are being arrested or having their heads cracked by police for no adequate reason, those advocates are actually being oppressed.
Actively preventing the police from taking something a judge has ordered seized will get you in trouble with the police anywhere.
Grey Templar wrote: Yeah. Appearances and what kind of spin you can put on things are what matters here. Spain sent in the jack booted thugs with sticks and riot shields unnecessarily, and gave their opponents all the ammo they need to play the oppressed party.
I think there is a legitimate argument that when the advocates of a political position are being arrested or having their heads cracked by police for no adequate reason, those advocates are actually being oppressed.
Actively preventing the police from taking something a judge has ordered seized will get you in trouble with the police anywhere.
Pull the other one. In very few cases could you actually say there was 'adequate reason' for physically assaulting citizens. I've seen sufficient footages of police laying in with batons to crowds of people literally just standing there that saying they were 'obstructing the police' doesn't fly. Sure, you can argue in some cases the police felt threatened, in others that they were blocking the police's right of way, and still others were 'fake footage', but you reach a point where it becomes obvious that you're just trying to justify violence against people who have political views you disagree with.
And that's oppression. It's not really up for debate. We all know what happened. The police went in mobhanded, and committed excessive violence on its own citizenry in an unjustified and abhorrent manner. When you reach the point where you're 'victim blaming' for that sort of thing? You might want to either ethically re-examine where you really stand, or at the least own it and say 'I think the police should have the right to kick the crap out of anyone who does something the government doesn't like'.
EDIT:- I just filtered your responses through this entire thread (of which you've actually personally made up 1 1/2 pages of 12 so far), and you know what I found? Or rather, didn't find? A single example of you even mentioning the police brutality, let alone condemning it. Best I could get was one reference to 'heavyhanded' police actions.. There are endless posts about how undemocratic the Catalonian Government is, but not a single one where you've said 'Bashing people's heads in is generally a bad thing'.
I think that really says it all about your political priorities, quite frankly.
Kilkrazy wrote: It reminds me of Scargill and the miners' strike.
Scargill's political error was not to ballot his members on industrial action. If he had done so, there is not much doubt that he would have had a mandate for the strike.
By failing to do so he allowed Thatcher to send in the cops on the basis of suppressing an illegal act.
Things of course turned very nasty and the memory is still with people today, who are old enough to have lived through that period. It was a great disservice to the nation as a whole.
Similarly, Puigdemont ought to have organised a referendum in accordance with the law. This would have made interference by the police clearly repressive.
The problem is that the Spanish constitution prohibits secession from Spain, there is no legal way to get a mandate for a ballot, which gives opportunity to have one anyway.
Similarly, Puigdemont ought to have organised a referendum in accordance with the law.
And if that were possible you might have a point. But by it's very nature any such referendum is automatically illegal. Which is why the judge ruled thus. Just a wee legal throwback to Franco.
Similarly, Puigdemont ought to have organised a referendum in accordance with the law.
And if that were possible you might have a point. But by it's very nature any such referendum is automatically illegal. Which is why the judge ruled thus. Just a wee legal throwback to Franco.
Spain has alot of Franco quietly left in place in the system.
Gurdia Civil was one.
Now yeah. Catalan was breaking the law whichever way they did it. Spain. Could of done it the easy way.
They did what they did now it's gonna take months.
Grey Templar wrote: Yeah. Appearances and what kind of spin you can put on things are what matters here. Spain sent in the jack booted thugs with sticks and riot shields unnecessarily, and gave their opponents all the ammo they need to play the oppressed party.
I think there is a legitimate argument that when the advocates of a political position are being arrested or having their heads cracked by police for no adequate reason, those advocates are actually being oppressed.
Actively preventing the police from taking something a judge has ordered seized will get you in trouble with the police anywhere.
True, but its still quite bad for your image to assault a mob, even if its justified.
Its always better to wait a week or so till the mob loses interest and then quietly arrest the person.
Its always better to wait a week or so till the mob loses interest and then quietly arrest the person.
Um...personal experience, that can be a long wait, depending on how angry the mob is. I've seen that sort of thing stretch out for years, if you can get international boundaries mixed up in it.
Grey Templar wrote: Yeah. Appearances and what kind of spin you can put on things are what matters here. Spain sent in the jack booted thugs with sticks and riot shields unnecessarily, and gave their opponents all the ammo they need to play the oppressed party.
I think there is a legitimate argument that when the advocates of a political position are being arrested or having their heads cracked by police for no adequate reason, those advocates are actually being oppressed.
Actively preventing the police from taking something a judge has ordered seized will get you in trouble with the police anywhere.
True, but its still quite bad for your image to assault a mob, even if its justified.
The 'mob' here isn't laying a finger on the police, and they're not inside a polling station or preventing the police from collecting boxes. If the police wanted to leave, I daresay that they could have pushed their way through at any point easily enough given that the edge of the ring is clearly visible (later in the video if you watch). So they're not trapped. The protestors aren't even trying to get in somewhere, they're just standing there. Yet somehow a whole row of the police decide the best course of action is to lay into people using batons.
I see no justification for actions such as these. Any self-respecting police force should be disgusted at such a lack of restraint by their officers, that when faced with a chanting group of protestors with their hands clearly up, their officer's primary resort is violence. I've seen and been in larger and louder crowds kettled at New Year's in London, and yet somehow the police there manage without laying into them with truncheons. If I got clobbered by a copper like that chap did at the start, I'd have papers filed within the week for police brutality and compensation. And I'd win. It wouldn't be acceptable or justified for a policeman to randomly walk up and smack me personally with a truncheon, it doesn't suddenly become legal and right just because there's people standing next to me and we're chanting something.
Spanish police is all political, be it the national spanish one, the special basque or catalonian one, etc... they are dogs of the goverment.
The mossos d'esquadra where specially brutal during the 2012-2013 protests, even compared with the rest of spanish police. Thats why ,personally, I find disgusting how they play the "We protect catalonian people" when 4-5 years before they where the ones that let a woman blind of an eye with a rubber ball. They don't care about catalonians, they care about the pro-independence goverment and their orders.
In resume: The orders that were given in the 1-O where horrible, the Spanish police actions where horrible, but to be honest, it wasn't something we haven't seen in Spain every time theres protests. The "wounded-count" actually was pretty small in comparasion with protests of the past years for the economical crisis.
And I'm not saying this to justify the actions of the police, but to critizise their violence. All of those videos, Ketara? They are just the tip of the iceberg.
Similarly, Puigdemont ought to have organised a referendum in accordance with the law.
And if that were possible you might have a point. But by it's very nature any such referendum is automatically illegal. Which is why the judge ruled thus. Just a wee legal throwback to Franco.
That doesn't matter. If you're organising a referendum on independence it's pretty unlikely to be in accordance with overlord law, but that's the whole point.
The problem with Puidgemont's referendum is that it was not run in accordance with Catalan's own law, which he could easily have done but avoided because he probably wouldn't have got the votes in the Catalan parliament.
And that's oppression. It's not really up for debate. We all know what happened. The police went in mobhanded, and committed excessive violence on its own citizenry in an unjustified and abhorrent manner. When you reach the point where you're 'victim blaming' for that sort of thing? You might want to either ethically re-examine where you really stand, or at the least own it and say 'I think the police should have the right to kick the crap out of anyone who does something the government doesn't like'.
EDIT:- I just filtered your responses through this entire thread (of which you've actually personally made up 1 1/2 pages of 12 so far), and you know what I found? Or rather, didn't find? A single example of you even mentioning the police brutality, let alone condemning it. Best I could get was one reference to 'heavyhanded' police actions.. There are endless posts about how undemocratic the Catalonian Government is, but not a single one where you've said 'Bashing people's heads in is generally a bad thing'.
I think that really says it all about your political priorities, quite frankly.
I entered this thread a few days after the actual events happened, for the most part to set the record straight with regards to quite a few inaccuracies or straight-up propaganda that the foreign press swallowed hook, line and sinker. You have all the right in the world to feel outraged, horrified etc. by police beating on people, as should every person in the world that's not a psychopath. For the record you will find me calling for the resignation of the president and police chief over that, so I guess if I did a similarly cursory glance at your interventions in this thread I might think you're a dangerous anarchist with total disregard for the rule of law. I won't do that, so I hope you don't do the same.
I did have family members voting on 1-O, so I had plenty more at stake that 99% of people in the UK, which I assume is your case. So let's leave the ad hominem aspect of this whole thing aside shall we?
Your point is OMG this people are innocent bystanders being beaten and my point is those people were put there exactly to be beaten, in the latest chapter of the tug-of-war between the Catalan government and the Spanish authorities. Let's go back.
3 years back, the very same Catalan government did the same trick. Called a referendum, which was cancelled by the Constitutional court (again, a majority not large enough) but unlike earlier in this month the government (sort of) complied. Instead, a couple associations appeared out of nowhere and called a "consultative public vote" which was very prominently not organised by the Catalan government (apparently back then a Constitutional Court order still meant something).
There was no police in sight, people voted and the Catalan government proudly announced some 80% support for independence, while the central government said it was a Mickey Mouse vote which meant nothing. No one got hurt.
Of course that was not shocking enough for the Catalan government, so they said. OK, let's call an early election put all independentist parties on a single platform and make it a plebiscite on the Catalan question future. Which they lost. They won enough seats to form a majority, but didn't get even 50% of the popular vote, much less the reinforced majority needed to take on Constitutional reform.
"The declaration of indepence was tied to the plebiscite, we have lost the plebiscite so we will not declare independence"
Then came the parliamentary tactics, trying to modify the laws though less than legal means and, finally. Another try at the referendum, again cancelled by the Constitutional Court, but this time they didn't care. They called it nevertheless, and they called for the people to act as human shields for it and got exactly, precisely what they wanted.
There are legal means to call a referendum, but they don't have the numbers for it so their only recourse is to whip their people into a frenzy, create a constant state of confrontation and have everyone in the middle have to take a side. Eventually the Catalan people will demand retribution for this.
I entered this thread a few days after the actual events happened, for the most part to set the record straight with regards to quite a few inaccuracies
Not the hero Dakka needs, but the Hero we deserve, eh?
For the record you will find me calling for the resignation of the president and police chief over that, so I guess if I did a similarly cursory glance at your interventions in this thread I might think you're a dangerous anarchist with total disregard for the rule of law. I won't do that, so I hope you don't do the same.
That's a strange perspective given that my first five or so posts were essentially me expressing disgust at the physical violence as it happened, and pointing out that police violence is illegal and clashes with EU law. That qualifies one as a 'dangerous anarchist with a total disregard for the rule of law'? I mean, I'm quite literally expressing a desire for the police to follow the law!
So let's leave the ad hominem aspect of this whole thing aside shall we?
I haven't made a single ad hominem. I'm simply pointing out the complete omission of any kind of moral or humanitarian concerns from your (many) posts, and the way in which you're blaming those subjected to police brutality for the violence. All of this is based entirely on your post content. Not a single personal insult.
Heck, you just agreed with me and said what your real political priorities were in this thread literally a few sentences before this one. You're far more interested in 'setting the record straight' over minor legal discrepancies committed by the Catalan Government than the very real physical violence committed by the Spanish Government. That is what interests you and motivated you to post. And I find it personally concerning that someone could be so much more interested in that than the physical oppression committed by the government against the population.
I mean, it's not even the case that you'd only made a few posts relating to it compared to loads about the legalities, it was the fact you made no reference to it at all in literally one and a half pages of posts beyond blaming the people who got beaten up for it happening.
Your point is OMG this people are innocent bystanders being beaten and my point is those people were put there exactly to be beaten
Yes. And it's utterly irrelevant.
When your teenage son doesn't do as you say, you don't kick the crap out of him. When a schoolkid isn't listening, you don't slam his head into the wall. When some Nazis do a march through Brixton, you don't attack them with automatic rifles. When someone says , 'Hey, take a swipe at me and prove you're a bad person', you don't don your chainmail fist and deliver JUSTICE Judge Dredd style.
Why do we not do these things? Because doing it proves you are everything that they are saying, and worse than them. It's why physical violence is always rewarded with a longer jail sentence than verbal assault. It is generally recognised that kicking the crap out of people is ethically considerably worse than any half baked political speeches, legal maneovring, or protests.
Similarly, Puigdemont ought to have organised a referendum in accordance with the law.
And if that were possible you might have a point. But by it's very nature any such referendum is automatically illegal. Which is why the judge ruled thus. Just a wee legal throwback to Franco.
That referendum was illegal even under their own (still-born) constitution.
I mean, it's not even the case that you'd only made a few posts relating to it compared to loads about the legalities, it was the fact you made no reference to it at all in literally one and a half pages of posts beyond blaming the people who got beaten up for it happening.
Let's move to the short explanation format, then.
jouso wrote: Which is what they should have done, and is the reason why the president and the chief of police should resign.
I won't spend thousands of words condemning police violence because it's fethingly obvious that police beating people is wrong. There's really no debate when everyone just agrees.
I will object that the people there didn't know what was coming to them, and that they got exactly what they were looking for (to the point they had to exaggerate and make up new evidence when the police wouldn't supply enough). Fake blood, fake broken fingers, fake allegations of sexual assault. I don't have the tiniest bit of respect for a government that puts their citizens knowingly in front of riot police to make a political point, especially as a substitute for the majority they don't have.
Kilkrazy wrote: To be fair, while the Spanish government overreacted, they are not a dictatorship.
We've seen equally bad (and worse!) police behaviour in various western European countries including the UK.
Oh, to be sure. It's just the victim blaming I don't get. The 'If they didn't want to have the crap kicked out of them, they shouldn't have stood near an illegal referendum' mentality. It's only one step removed from the 'She shouldn't have gone out dressed like that' approach to ethics, after all.
I'm certain that both sides are filled with scummy politicians doing scummy things, but that's the same the world over. As long as nobody's getting hurt, I don't care if the Catalan Government holds half a dozen illegal referendums, stuff the boxes with doughnuts and does hula hoop dances on pictures of the Spanish Premier. If it's against the rules for using public funds, fire them. Nobody is getting hurt at the end of the day.
It's when people start getting smacked about with truncheons and others go 'Meh, they were asking for it' that I raise an eyebrow.
Galas wrote: Oh boy, Here come the tanks!
I have friends in Catalunya (Independentists, actually), I wish nothing happens to them, or obviously anybody else.
But this can get ugly.
Just in case I'm going to buy a spanish flag and go and hide inside the Bruc Military Barracks.
Apparently shortly after Catalunya declared independence the government in Madrid passed legislation saying they get full control over Catalunya. So, yeah, fun times about to happen there.
History has shown us time and time again (Irish independence, pre-American revolution etc etc ) that if you start jailing or shooting people, you make martyrs of them.
Now, obviously, Madrid isn't shooting people and thank God for that, but if they start handing out 25 year jail sentences, it will only increase support for Catalan independence.
High level, round table talks, with the Swiss as a neutral referee, was what was needed here, not brinksmanship from both sides.
Madrid have handled this so badly, I wonder if Rajoy isn't a double agent for Catalan independence.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: History has shown us time and time again (Irish independence, pre-American revolution etc etc ) that if you start jailing or shooting people, you make martyrs of them.
You're only remembering the successes because they stand more prominent in history; there are plenty of revolts suppressed with violence regardless of the martyrdom.
Using violence to suppress a revolution/secession/uprising/revolt is not inherently wrong as long as the force is applied in a controlled manner. What makes violence wrong is the reasoning behind applying it, I think you'll find very few people who would argue that violence applied against the Confederate States of America was "wrong".
avantgarde wrote: I think you'll find very few people who would argue that violence applied against the Confederate States of America was "wrong".
Oh, my sweet summer child...
First that was the 19th century.
Second the moral implications were different, the Catalan parliament is working on a vote backed by a referendum, the legal shakiness of either doesnt entirely undermine the popular vote that proports it.
Third only one side is authorising violent control.
Are the tanks moving, or was that just a figure of speech?
The best the pro-independence movement can do is follow Ghandi's 'peaceful non-cooperation' policy, and organise a sit down protest, if the Spanish government runs roughshod over that it will end up badly for them.
avantgarde wrote: I think you'll find very few people who would argue that violence applied against the Confederate States of America was "wrong".
Oh, my sweet summer child...
First that was the 19th century.
Second the moral implications were different, the Catalan parliament is working on a vote backed by a referendum, the legal shakiness of either doesnt entirely undermine the popular vote that proports it.
Third only one side is authorising violent control.
Are the tanks moving, or was that just a figure of speech?
The best the pro-independence movement can do is follow Ghandi's 'peaceful non-cooperation' policy, and organise a sit down protest, if the Spanish government runs roughshod over that it will end up badly for them.
Yeah. Peaceful protests and you turn up armed and start beating people up.
Yeah that worked well for UK in India. It never works. UK has been a former colonial power to have experience in it. .
We did smart thing and let them, we gave them the country before we triggered full civil war and before too much blood was spilled.
The problem the Catalan senate has is that no one is recognising the vote in the western world. The US, UK, Germany, France, EU. This causes them problems politically because even if Spain withdrew everything from them (so funds, banking support etc) and let them get on with it then where are they going to get any finance from to support anything? They will become a void state that will only result in the suffering of the people.
The UK cannot because if illegal referendums were legitisised the SNP will hold one, and if needs be another one, and another, until they get what they want.
Whirlwind wrote: The problem the Catalan senate has is that no one is recognising the vote in the western world. The US, UK, Germany, France, EU. This causes them problems politically because even if Spain withdrew everything from them (so funds, banking support etc) and let them get on with it then where are they going to get any finance from to support anything? They will become a void state that will only result in the suffering of the people.
Well unless Putin wanna troll the globe to a level of full blown bridge con one.
But he has separatists regions, however, Russia is a little more forceful I'm there keeping them in line.
Third only one side is authorising violent control.
In which measure is not-violent? I have read on Italian newspaper that in universities and other public places any independentist opinion was suppressed and intimidated. Independentist have good PR, a veeery shaky referendum, shallow history rewriting and bleak perspectives.
Third only one side is authorising violent control.
In which measure is not-violent? I have read on Italian newspaper that in universities and other public places any independentist opinion was suppressed and intimidated.
Independentist have good PR, a veeery shaky referendum, shallow history rewriting and bleak perspectives.
I didn't know about intimidation of pro-idependence supporters in universities, but with or without that info the point still stands.
The intimidation is one way.
Belligerent student intimidation is different anyway, I don't blame any segment of the pro-Spanish unity movement for them, students often go off the rails with their activism, and anyone here who is pro-Spain and wants to wash their hands of what student activists do should get a free pass.
Third only one side is authorising violent control.
In which measure is not-violent? I have read on Italian newspaper that in universities and other public places any independentist opinion was suppressed and intimidated.
Independentist have good PR, a veeery shaky referendum, shallow history rewriting and bleak perspectives.
I didn't know about intimidation of pro-idependence supporters in universities, but with or without that info the point still stands.
The intimidation is one way.
He surely meant it the other way. Pro-indy suppressing and intimidating the others.
Elections called for Dec 21st. Puigdemont and his government deposed.
avantgarde wrote: I think you'll find very few people who would argue that violence applied against the Confederate States of America was "wrong".
Oh, my sweet summer child...
First that was the 19th century.
Second the moral implications were different, the Catalan parliament is working on a vote backed by a referendum, the legal shakiness of either doesnt entirely undermine the popular vote that proports it.
Third only one side is authorising violent control.
Are the tanks moving, or was that just a figure of speech?
The best the pro-independence movement can do is follow Ghandi's 'peaceful non-cooperation' policy, and organise a sit down protest, if the Spanish government runs roughshod over that it will end up badly for them.
If you want a modern example, you'll find few people outside some nutters that would argue the violence applied against the breakaway Islamic State is morally wrong. Not even when it's violence from a regime as nasty as Bashar's.
I have no stake in whether or not the Spanish gov't uses force to bring a wayward region in line. I do think it would be dumb to give the secessionists a body to parade down the streets.
jhe90 wrote: Yeah. Peaceful protests and you turn up armed and start beating people up.
Yeah that worked well for UK in India. It never works.UK has been a former colonial power to have experience in it. .
I just listed several examples where governments just killed/imprisoned people until they stopped publicly agitating. Violently suppressing a revolution then reforming afterwards can be a successful suppression tactic. That's literally what the British Empire did in response to the Mutiny of 1857 and they held the Raj for 90 more years. India/Pakistan was several times the size of the UK in population and size, the British were never going to hold the nations in the wake of WW2 once the Indians/Pakistanis organized and stopped actively assisting the British in policing themselves whether or not the Indian independence movement was violent.
avantgarde wrote: I think you'll find very few people who would argue that violence applied against the Confederate States of America was "wrong".
Oh, my sweet summer child...
First that was the 19th century.
Second the moral implications were different, the Catalan parliament is working on a vote backed by a referendum, the legal shakiness of either doesnt entirely undermine the popular vote that proports it.
Third only one side is authorising violent control.
Are the tanks moving, or was that just a figure of speech?
The best the pro-independence movement can do is follow Ghandi's 'peaceful non-cooperation' policy, and organise a sit down protest, if the Spanish government runs roughshod over that it will end up badly for them.
The popular vote doesn't support the Catalan referendum or parliament.
The problem with the Catalan independists movement is that it broke the law three times:
-They broke the Spanish constitution.
-They did broke the Catalonian Constitution law to approve their modifications to make their referendum "legal"
-They did broke their own referendum laws to make the referendum and declare independence because by their own law they shouldn't have done it.
Galas wrote: The problem with the Catalan independists movement is that it broke the law three times:
-They broke the Spanish constitution. -They did broke the Catalonian Constitution law to approve their modifications to make their referendum "legal" -They did broke their own referendum laws to make the referendum and declare independence because by their own law they shouldn't have done it.
And the problem for the Spanish Government is that their heavy handed response rendered all of that a moot point. Perception is everything. The Referendum might have been illegal, but all that matters is the images and footage of voters being beaten to a pulp by Police plastered all over the media.
Whose narrative do you think is winning here? The Spanish Government's narrative of an illegal and invalid referendum?
Galas wrote: The problem with the Catalan independists movement is that it broke the law three times:
-They broke the Spanish constitution.
-They did broke the Catalonian Constitution law to approve their modifications to make their referendum "legal"
-They did broke their own referendum laws to make the referendum and declare independence because by their own law they shouldn't have done it.
And the problem for the Spanish Government is that their heavy handed response rendered all of that a moot point. Perception is everything.
To you sitting comfortably a few hundred miles away maybe.
When people start losing jobs because their companies have upped sticks and left for somewhere else or, worse, get thrown in jail for doing something stupid in the heat of the moment they'll see that perception is extremely relative but the law is still the law.
Galas wrote: The problem with the Catalan independists movement is that it broke the law three times:
-They broke the Spanish constitution.
-They did broke the Catalonian Constitution law to approve their modifications to make their referendum "legal"
-They did broke their own referendum laws to make the referendum and declare independence because by their own law they shouldn't have done it.
And the problem for the Spanish Government is that their heavy handed response rendered all of that a moot point. Perception is everything. The Referendum might have been illegal, but all that matters is the images and footage of voters being beaten to a pulp by Police plastered all over the media.
Whose narrative do you think is winning here? The Spanish Government's narrative of an illegal and invalid referendum?
Or the Catalan Separatist's victim narrative?
There is a point. Media perception is a very powerful tool in anyones arsenal of political and media manipulation.
They do say a image is worth 1000 words. Even if that image is not entirely true.
I wouldn't call those 'controlled' in... well, any sense of the word. I seem to recall they got pretty brutal toward the end. Same with Watt Tyler's Rebellion, or any number of uprisings and rebellions against the 'British and/or English' crown.
avantgarde wrote: I think you'll find very few people who would argue that violence applied against the Confederate States of America was "wrong".
Oh, my sweet summer child...
First that was the 19th century.
Second the moral implications were different, the Catalan parliament is working on a vote backed by a referendum, the legal shakiness of either doesnt entirely undermine the popular vote that proports it.
Third only one side is authorising violent control.
Are the tanks moving, or was that just a figure of speech?
The best the pro-independence movement can do is follow Ghandi's 'peaceful non-cooperation' policy, and organise a sit down protest, if the Spanish government runs roughshod over that it will end up badly for them.
The popular vote doesn't support the Catalan referendum or parliament.
Sorry, what popular vote. One faction cannot claim ownership of every registered voter who stays away.
Those who do not vote in an election shouldnt complain if their preferred candidate loses, this is no different.
There was a lot wrong with the referendum, but the right to hold a single binding referendum was constitutionally blocked when freedom through democratic mandate is illegal, the law is at fault not the populace, it's as wrong as apartheid. The answer is to allow a single binding referendum and make sure you win it, from whatever perspective.
When people start losing jobs because their companies have upped sticks and left for somewhere else or, worse, get thrown in jail for doing something stupid in the heat of the moment they'll see that perception is extremely relative but the law is still the law.
Historically, when those things happen, the fight just gets nastier. The government moves to executions, and the independents move to terrorism. And no one wins. you assume that every one of them just goes 'Oh, my goodness what a fool I've been!' but that sort of revalatory moment is actually very rare. the man without a job blames the government. the man in prison blames the government. And if and when they get out, they're now 'self radicalized' as the US likes to call it now.
I wouldn't call those 'controlled' in... well, any sense of the word. I seem to recall they got pretty brutal toward the end. Same with Watt Tyler's Rebellion, or any number of uprisings and rebellions against the 'British and/or English' crown.
Or anyone else at the time, if you are capable of being even remotely fair.
Galas wrote: The problem with the Catalan independists movement is that it broke the law three times:
-They broke the Spanish constitution.
-They did broke the Catalonian Constitution law to approve their modifications to make their referendum "legal"
-They did broke their own referendum laws to make the referendum and declare independence because by their own law they shouldn't have done it.
And the problem for the Spanish Government is that their heavy handed response rendered all of that a moot point. Perception is everything.
To you sitting comfortably a few hundred miles away maybe.
When people start losing jobs because their companies have upped sticks and left for somewhere else or, worse, get thrown in jail for doing something stupid in the heat of the moment they'll see that perception is extremely relative but the law is still the law.
I agree that the economic factor is of lesser importance once nationalism is riled up. It will be a case of 'better poorer but free'.
It is not all doom and gloom for the Spanish response though. Rajoy has called elections in Catalonia, in a method smart enough that he likely wasnt behind it according to his recent performance.
The December elections will be recognised by Spain and the EU, yet the Catalans independents have no choice but to ignore them and hold thier own 'national'elections. This gives opportunity for a pro-Spain party to be elected and internationally recognised as representing Catalonia.
To make this work Puigdemont needs to be formally removed, which has happened, but NOT arrested and thus unable to fight the regional election. If he participates, its on Spains terms, is he loses, its a mandate however much the pro independent supporters might ignore it.
The only option is to hold snap general election as free Catalonia on or before that date, and Dec 15th (or earlier) is a tough target date for fair 'national' elections.
Rajoy can still feth this up by arresting or disavowing enough seperatists that the ballot becomes intrinsically unfair. The only way out will be for proxy leaders offering allegiance to Catalonian independence but not formally its leaders. This raises new problems because of conflicting egos. Whoever the seperatists have leading the Dec 16th election would be president of Catalonia (autonomous region), not Puigdemont, and it could all dissolve in a power play.
Orlanth wrote: Or anyone else at the time, if you are capable of being even remotely fair.
Charles the Bad of Navarre went your way on that. Charles IV of France managed a similar issue far better, through negotiation. Ferdinand II of Aragon managed to deal with another somewhat better in Catalonia.
When people start losing jobs because their companies have upped sticks and left for somewhere else or, worse, get thrown in jail for doing something stupid in the heat of the moment they'll see that perception is extremely relative but the law is still the law.
Historically, when those things happen, the fight just gets nastier. The government moves to executions, and the independents move to terrorism. And no one wins. you assume that every one of them just goes 'Oh, my goodness what a fool I've been!' but that sort of revalatory moment is actually very rare. the man without a job blames the government. the man in prison blames the government. And if and when they get out, they're now 'self radicalized' as the US likes to call it now.
Not necessarily. Basques eventually took off their ski masks so did the IRA. Also the terrorism normally predates the move to executions, and a policy of execution isnt certain either. The exception being the policy for the marxist international, which was class rather than race struggle. The idea that the escalation is caused by the state not the seperatists/rebel movement. This works because the socio-political climate itself is thretened and the elite, seeing their incomes at risk, demand increasingly heavy handed reaction. While both the Basques and the IRA both hoped this model would work for them as it did in Africa and Central America, it doesn't apply to a race based conflict.
If Catalonian terrorism kicks off it will be a race rather than class struggle. This means people on both sides for each economic section of the community from the well to do to the underclass.
I cannot see this ending well at all for Catalonian independence movement, the peaceful approach is tactically more sound, even when analysed coldly and with the moral implications ignored for the moment.
Orlanth wrote: Not necessarily. Basques too off their ski masks so did the IRA. Also the terrorism normally predates the move to executions.
The IRA stood down after more or less winning so I'm not entirely sure that would count.
Winning what? Northern Ireland is still part of the UK. Power sharing in Stormont was on the cards anyway, they just prefered rule 100% from Dublin. As for the border poll, once was offered in the 1970's but the nationalists boycotted it because they would lose and it would look bad.
The real clincher though was bribery and release of terrorists from prison, and reclassification of terrorists also. The IRA did gain from Good Friday, but mostly as a seat in government and cash handouts to its leaders and activists, with mirrored handouts to loyalist thugs. All in all it was worth it from the UK perspective, expensive, though less so than army involvement. Though the peace was not seen as anything more than a temporary convenience by more hardcore nationalists until 9/11 taught most Americans that terrorism wasn't a heroic venture.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Looking up Barcelona has had recent terror attacks, from Islamists, this could ironically help now as there is likely little taste for this type of action, and it clearly isn't policy from either side.
Galas wrote: The problem with the Catalan independists movement is that it broke the law three times:
-They broke the Spanish constitution.
-They did broke the Catalonian Constitution law to approve their modifications to make their referendum "legal"
-They did broke their own referendum laws to make the referendum and declare independence because by their own law they shouldn't have done it.
And the problem for the Spanish Government is that their heavy handed response rendered all of that a moot point. Perception is everything. The Referendum might have been illegal, but all that matters is the images and footage of voters being beaten to a pulp by Police plastered all over the media.
Whose narrative do you think is winning here? The Spanish Government's narrative of an illegal and invalid referendum?
Or the Catalan Separatist's victim narrative?
Oh yeah, I don't dispute that. The goverment has do a horrible job at handling this situation. But the only response one should expect from the ones that in the first place are responsivle for allowing this to reach this point.
But I wasn't talking about that subject, I wrote that because people where arguing about the "legality" of the referendum, that independentists movement normally don't follow any legality of the "parent" state, etc...
Galas, there is no legal avenue for a lawful democratic majority, which therefore enables one by alternate means.
This ends when the Spanish government allows a legal referendum and motivates the majority it claims it has to vote for continued union with Spain.
Or with independence.
Or with people too mentally and financially exhausted to carry on.
Pick one.
Rajoy's my way or my way is an immediate 'solution'; lasting only as long as police are deployed and then only within baton range.
Orlanth wrote: Galas, there is no legal avenue for a lawful democratic majority, which therefore enables one by alternate means.
This ends when the Spanish government allows a legal referendum and motivates the majority it claims it has to vote for continued union with Spain.
Or with independence.
Or with people too mentally and financially exhausted to carry on.
Pick one.
Rajoy's my way or my way is an immediate 'solution'; lasting only as long as police are deployed and then only within baton range.
Aye. There's no long tern solution to this in fear and jail cells.
Real peace and solutions come from the ballot box and the meeting table.
Actually theres ways to reform the Constitution to allow for a democratic and legal referendum. Heck, even some pro-union parties like PSOE and Podemos (The second and third bigger parties in the parlament) are pro-Constituional reform to allow for legal referendums. They are pro-union but pro-referendum.
But the independentists goverment doesn't want that. Because they don't want real independence.
I agree, Rajoy is a incompetent pig. And the use of the Police has been disproportionate and it wasn't really needed, but with the PP in charge what can one expect?
But this "The Spanish goverment needs to made a legal referendum" doesn't make any sense, the Constitution just doesn't allows that. Literally the goverment can't create a legal referendum of independence from the air (And I have said many times how I think our constitution is a fraud, but sadly I'm not in charge of the nation). As I said, theres a good amount of support for a constituional reform even inside the Spanish parlament, even before the 1-O. Independentists have never wanted that. This was from the beginning just a ploy, a smoke wall, to try to force the central goverment for fiscal privileges like the Basque have.
Galas wrote: Actually theres ways to reform the Constitution to allow for a democratic and legal referendum. Heck, even some pro-union parties like Podemos and PSOE (The second and third bigger parties in the parlament) are pro-Constituional reform to allow for legal referendums. They are pro-union but pro-referendum.
Ok, once Rajoy has finished blundering someone else can fix this. However doesnt the Spanish constitution enforce indivisible union under all circumstances?
Its an English language news site from Catalonia with an undisguised pro-independence slant, a bit amateur but fit for purpose. I will be checking them daily for the forseeable future.
Now we need to find its mirror opposite. I generally find that two or more mirrored biased accounts offer better perspective than our own medias editing for balance we normally get.
Looking at the articles they produced they explin the crisis in much better detail than elsewhere.
So far the news has been
- the Catalan government did this...WTF, or
- the Spanish government did this...WTF
The above site gives detail as two why Puigdemont is doing what he is doing, it is interesting to note from yesterdays article that an invitation to hold elections was taken off the cards because hardliners wanted an immediate break from Spain, and Puigdemont himself was painted as more moderate. This news site also heralded intentions of the Catalan government ahead of time in its recent commentaries, other English language news sources made no comments that were not retroactive.
What we need to find now is a link to Rajoy's own online mouth of sauron as a counterfoil. Other than jouso.
*points to all the rest of Ireland* You forget why England, excuse me, 'The United Kingdom', gave up on all that?
Sure, they wanted independence, the UK wanted Belfast, important at the time and still the most economically active part of the island, it also had the unionist majority. Home Rule was a popular motion going through UK parliaments etc since the mid 19th century. Gladstone was in favour.
Anyone have commentary on the Catalan parliament voting 70-12 in favor of independence?
Sure. Two abstentions, ten voted no, about thirty members walked out rather than vote because they were not going to win.
Some pro-union members wanted to fillibuster, but Puigdemont himself stepped forward and called an immediate ballot. It is not known if the interrupt is legal, but the pro-independence members knew time was running out to be the first to legislate - independence vote or Senate vote to dissolve Catalan parliament.
Sources, general European news BBC/Sky/Euronews with the linked site above for local details.
Galas wrote: The problem with the Catalan independists movement is that it broke the law three times:
-They broke the Spanish constitution.
-They did broke the Catalonian Constitution law to approve their modifications to make their referendum "legal"
-They did broke their own referendum laws to make the referendum and declare independence because by their own law they shouldn't have done it.
Again, when it comes to Declaring Independence legality is null and void as a consideration. Even Catelonia's own laws don't have to be followed for an Independence movement.
In my opinion when the Independists goverment doesn't even follow their own laws that they made À la carte breaking their Constitution (Both the spanish and catalonian) in the process, they show their own intentions and true colours.
Of course as you say, this is actually non-important. Not their followers, not anyone is really interested in that little bit of ironic incoherence. I just wanted to pointed and highlight it.
Galas wrote: In my opinion when the Independists goverment doesn't even follow their own laws that they made À la carte breaking their Constitution (Both the spanish and catalonian) in the process, they show their own intentions and true colours.
Of course as you say, this is actually non-important. Not their followers, not anyone is really interested in that little bit of ironic incoherence. I just wanted to pointed and highlight it.
Its not really ironic at all. Any type of independence movement breaks "their own laws".
Galas wrote: In my opinion when the Independists goverment doesn't even follow their own laws that they made À la carte breaking their Constitution (Both the spanish and catalonian) in the process, they show their own intentions and true colours.
Of course as you say, this is actually non-important. Not their followers, not anyone is really interested in that little bit of ironic incoherence. I just wanted to pointed and highlight it.
Its not really ironic at all. Any type of independence movement breaks "their own laws".
No. Generally they break the laws of the country they want to secede from.
These guys broke the laws they made specifically for this situation.
Which were not necessarily made by them but others for intent to stop them.
Franco repressed the Catalans, and after his death the constitution included a clause for the indivisible state.
There is no democratic avenue, so democracy follows its own path.
The only way to head off a popular vote is to win one yourself. Referenda are not, repeat until successful, that is also undemocratic.
The only viable way out for Spain without lasting harm is to promise a legal referendum and make sure they win it. This can easily be done. Catalonia is unequivocably pro-EU, and is part of geographical mainland Europe, the EU will assist. Let Catalans know a vote to leave leaves the EU, have EU leaders make the message and visit. They will do this, because its Spain.
The pro-union lobby will carry the vote if they have any competence to them
Orlanth wrote: Which were not necessarily made by them but others for intent to stop them.
No. They made a new electoral law, and a "transition law" themselves, which they haven't followed.
It's like Washington breaking the Constitution a week after it was approved.
Could you expand on those please? 'They' doesnt explain whether you are referring to Catalonians or Madrid.
Cheers
Andrew
The Catalan government passed a new electoral and a transition law.
They haven't followed them. But what's more, they broke Catalan law (Estatut, kind of their Constitution) in the way they passed those laws so it goes way back.
Prior (pro-Union) governments made the referendum hoops unattainable. You wont get the majorities required in any PR system except under the most unusual circumstances.
This is acceptable if the referendum to join was as stringent, it wasn't however. AFAIK there was no referendum to join.
The results would not be effective or binding, of course, but it would have had significant moral weight if it had been conducted in accordance with the Catalan law.
Unfortunately, instead of a solemn and well-conducted poll, which would have accurately reflected public opinion, the Catalans got a fudge confected to enable the independence movement to provoke a crisis and claim a victory.
The reason for doing this is that the independence movement is not strong enough to be sure of winning a fairly conducted vote.
Kilkrazy wrote: There is no law against holding a referendum.
The results would not be effective or binding, of course, but it would have had significant moral weight if it had been conducted in accordance with the Catalan law.
Unfortunately, instead of a solemn and well-conducted poll, which would have accurately reflected public opinion, the Catalans got a fudge confected to enable the independence movement to provoke a crisis and claim a victory.
The reason for doing this is that the independence movement is not strong enough to be sure of winning a fairly conducted vote.
I don't think thats true, the poll numbers are there, which is why a boycott strategy rather than voting the referendum down was used.
The issue here is the vote in the Catalan parliament required, the incumbent government went with a majority mandate, the formal rules however required substantially more support. In a party list proportional representation system its nearly impossible to get a significant voting block large enough to block reform unless the popular vote drops critically low.
Now again stringent laws for a referendum, rather than a simple majority are acceptable if the same procedure was required to join. However the existing Catalan parliament received no such invitation, union was forced by dictat by Franco.
So we have a province with a pre-existing parliament seeking autonomy, which never had a referendum to join or accept the current constitutional arrangement, which cannot jump through the hoops to make a legal independence referendum according to Spanish law, yet a popular mandate exists.
So Spain either gives them a single binding referendum, or they make their own.
Kilkrazy wrote: There is no law against holding a referendum.
The results would not be effective or binding, of course, but it would have had significant moral weight if it had been conducted in accordance with the Catalan law.
Unfortunately, instead of a solemn and well-conducted poll, which would have accurately reflected public opinion, the Catalans got a fudge confected to enable the independence movement to provoke a crisis and claim a victory.
The reason for doing this is that the independence movement is not strong enough to be sure of winning a fairly conducted vote.
I think this is a fair assessment of the situation.
Kilkrazy wrote: There is no law against holding a referendum.
The results would not be effective or binding, of course, but it would have had significant moral weight if it had been conducted in accordance with the Catalan law.
Unfortunately, instead of a solemn and well-conducted poll, which would have accurately reflected public opinion, the Catalans got a fudge confected to enable the independence movement to provoke a crisis and claim a victory.
The reason for doing this is that the independence movement is not strong enough to be sure of winning a fairly conducted vote.
I don't think thats true, the poll numbers are there, which is why a boycott strategy rather than voting the referendum down was used.
If anything polls (conducted by the Catalan government) tell that Indy support (proper Indy, not "independent but within a Federal Spain" wishy washy stuff) sit at the mid to high 30s).
Now there's going to be a proper vote, less than 2 months from now. Let people speak.
Don't most political parties make it into power by having only a fraction of the vote? Half the voters don't show up, and then a portion of them vote for one side or the other...
Wyrmalla wrote: Don't most political parties make it into power by having only a fraction of the vote? Half the voters don't show up, and then a portion of them vote for one side or the other...
You cannot blame a ballot on low turnout. If people stay away and you get Brexit/Trump/Catalan independence that is what you get.
Now there's going to be a proper vote, less than 2 months from now. Let people speak.
Is there?
And if the people on 21st December elect members of the Junts pel Sí, will you permit the people to speak and reignite independence.
Or is democracy only valid if it goes your way?
Well, I held a referendum seven minutes ago, and it was 100% in favour of having Italy annex Catalonia. Anyone who didn't vote obviously didn't care enough to vote, so we should just disregard them!
Kilkrazy wrote: There is no law against holding a referendum.
The results would not be effective or binding, of course, but it would have had significant moral weight if it had been conducted in accordance with the Catalan law.
Unfortunately, instead of a solemn and well-conducted poll, which would have accurately reflected public opinion, the Catalans got a fudge confected to enable the independence movement to provoke a crisis and claim a victory.
The reason for doing this is that the independence movement is not strong enough to be sure of winning a fairly conducted vote.
I think this is a fair assessment of the situation.
Except that the assessment is false. There IS a law against holding a referendum, the Spanish constitution prohibits them (on secession issues).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AlmightyWalrus wrote: Well, I held a referendum seven minutes ago, and it was 100% in favour of having Italy annex Catalonia. Anyone who didn't vote obviously didn't care enough to vote, so we should just disregard them!
This was after the referendum removing you from the status of human being. So no humans were balloted, only walruses, which don't count......
See I can do this too, anyone can.
Back to reality please. There needs to be some form of popular mandate, but if there is, apparently odd demands can happen, and those demands can be politically realistic
If the population of Catalonia were of Italian descent and wanted union with the motherland post independence, this could happen, strange as it seems to you, and this form of politics arrises, even relatively recently. There can be consequences, such as the Enosis movement in Cyprus and subsequent Turkish invasion in 1974.
That was my entire point: anyone can make a referendum, but there needs to be some way of determining whether it is legitimate or not. The Catalan referendum didn't even follow the rules they had set up themselves.
Except that the assessment is false. There IS a law against holding a referendum, the Spanish constitution prohibits them (on secession issues).
No it doesn't. It prevents them from seceding. Not from having a referendum on whether they think they should. You can hold a non-binding referendum on anything. Holding a referendum on it peacefully in line with existing Catalan law , stressing the non-binding nature, and then presenting it to the Spanish Parliament as a way of pressuring for an alteration of the Constitution would have been entirely legitimate.
As pointed out earlier by many people though, the Catalan Government know that they would quite possibly have lost such a referendum undertaken in that manner.
Kilkrazy wrote: There is no law against holding a referendum.
The results would not be effective or binding, of course, but it would have had significant moral weight if it had been conducted in accordance with the Catalan law.
Unfortunately, instead of a solemn and well-conducted poll, which would have accurately reflected public opinion, the Catalans got a fudge confected to enable the independence movement to provoke a crisis and claim a victory.
The reason for doing this is that the independence movement is not strong enough to be sure of winning a fairly conducted vote.
I think this is a fair assessment of the situation.
Except that the assessment is false. There IS a law against holding a referendum, the Spanish constitution prohibits them (on secession issues).
There is no law in Catalonia against holding a referendum. The Catalonian parliament violated its own legal arrangements by the way it organised the referendum. Which it did for the reasons I gave above.
Ketara wrote: No it doesn't. It prevents them from seceding. Not from having a referendum on whether they think they should. r.
They've had quite a few of those non binding ones, most of which the answer was 'yes' (80% yes in 2014). Carles Puigdemont actually ran for office on the platform of finally having a binding vote on the issue. (Bizarre, a politician carrying out an election promise!)
I mean, hell, Franco made no bones about punishing the Catalans for supporting the Republic of Spain in the Spanish Civil War. This is just another remnant of that. Instead of addressing the issue of continued Fascist influences in Spain, they'd rather repeat everyone else's mistakes until it comes to violence.
Funny, the outcome was right in line with the last four non-binding votes on the issue, so I may suggest that this is actually how the public feels on this.
Kilkrazy wrote: There is no law against holding a referendum.
The results would not be effective or binding, of course, but it would have had significant moral weight if it had been conducted in accordance with the Catalan law.
Unfortunately, instead of a solemn and well-conducted poll, which would have accurately reflected public opinion, the Catalans got a fudge confected to enable the independence movement to provoke a crisis and claim a victory.
The reason for doing this is that the independence movement is not strong enough to be sure of winning a fairly conducted vote.
So we have a province with a pre-existing parliament seeking autonomy, which never had a referendum to join or accept the current constitutional arrangement
Actually, all of Spain voted in a referendum to approve our constitution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_constitutional_referendum,_1978 In Catalonia, it has a turnout of 69% and a YES of 95,15%.
Basque Country in the other hand, had a turnount of 45%, a YES of 75% and a NO of 25% (By the constitutional referendum LAW, if any region had a turnount of less than 55%, it shouldn't be have been approved, but... Spanish politicians, you know)
After Basque Country, Galicia was the second with the lowest turnount, 50%, but a YES of 94%.
The rest of the provinces all had a turnount higher than 60%
I mean, hell, Franco made no bones about punishing the Catalans for supporting the Republic of Spain in the Spanish Civil War. This is just another remnant of that. Instead of addressing the issue of continued Fascist influences in Spain, they'd rather repeat everyone else's mistakes until it comes to violence.
This is just wrong. Catalonia was LITERALLY the province that during Franquism received more money. Literally, whole industries where moved from other provinces to Catalonia under Franco orders. Catalonia had one of the highest rates of approval of the Franco dictatorship of all of Spain.
I'll say something that for many people will be hard to believe: If Franco stayed in "office" for 39 years was because... people liked him. Yes, really. The population liked him, or maybe, not so liking him as fearing the alternatives, Franco was good enough. You can explain why: The Second Republic period was a very insecure period, full of violence, murder, etc... and Franco did a good job of indoctrination, and in relation with the period before him, it was a "peacefull" time. The Cold War propaganda agaisn't the "Marxists", with Franco has a "Parangon of the West" that other countries pushed didn't helped to make him less appealing to the population.
But that was the reality. Spanish people liked Franco and his Dictatorship. (Of course, not ALL of them).
Funny, the outcome was right in line with the last four non-binding votes on the issue, so I may suggest that this is actually how the public feels on this.
The mayority of those non-binding votes where deslegitimated by the Central Goverment. They didn't followed a "If you want to remain in Spain, go and vote "no"". They ran the "Thats a poll made by seccecionists, don't vote in it" rethoric.
The real one was the autonomic election of the goverment, that was run with the "Vote us if you don't want to leave spain" rethoric, where 53% of the people voted for non independists options.
This is the one you mentioned, the 2014 one. It was declared unconstitutional, so they ran an alternative one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_self-determination_referendum,_2014 It had a participation of 37%. In my opinion, the "Don't vote, this is a vote made by seccecionists" was a very bad strategy, they should have run a strong "Go and vote that you want to remain in Spain" one.But as I said in other posts, sadly I'm no President
Galas wrote: The problem with the Catalan independists movement is that it broke the law three times:
-They broke the Spanish constitution.
-They did broke the Catalonian Constitution law to approve their modifications to make their referendum "legal"
-They did broke their own referendum laws to make the referendum and declare independence because by their own law they shouldn't have done it.
And the problem for the Spanish Government is that their heavy handed response rendered all of that a moot point. Perception is everything. The Referendum might have been illegal, but all that matters is the images and footage of voters being beaten to a pulp by Police plastered all over the media.
Whose narrative do you think is winning here? The Spanish Government's narrative of an illegal and invalid referendum?
Or the Catalan Separatist's victim narrative?
Oh yeah, I don't dispute that. The goverment has do a horrible job at handling this situation. But the only response one should expect from the ones that in the first place are responsivle for allowing this to reach this point.
But I wasn't talking about that subject, I wrote that because people where arguing about the "legality" of the referendum, that independentists movement normally don't follow any legality of the "parent" state, etc...
In reality. seccession was not favored by any governing body of any country in question. Even if the seccession is 'legal'... Remember the US of A some 150 years ago. (And there are good reasons to worry)
1. Possible foreign 'Annexation' of a seceeded territory (Usually by neighbours, as in case of 3 Provinces in the Southern Thailand.... there are fears that if these provinces (Which were once a portion of the former Battani Sultanate) break away, they will promptly join Malaysia.
2. Economy concerns... a territory seeking secession are usually economically advantageous (Catalognia)
3. National Integrity... If one region breaks away, others will follow... (American Civil War... If the Confederacy won, Any factions resented the Federal Government due to serious 'frictions' in the past will do the same (By 1860, The Mormons still not yet forgive the Federal Governments, After so many mental wounds the likes of Maarten van Bruen, and James Bucchanan inflicts upon them. they would promptly restore The Holy Republic of Deserette... remember that the memories of the massacres still fresh to them ), Native 'nationalist' will follow suit.. seeking international recognition to their 'Great Nation' which series of Whites robbed them for three centuries... it might be possible either by force of arms or by diplomatic methods...) )... Another case was Post Tito Yugoslavia.
Seccession movements usually leads up to the armed conflict.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: That was my entire point: anyone can make a referendum, but there needs to be some way of determining whether it is legitimate or not. The Catalan referendum didn't even follow the rules they had set up themselves.
No, your point was to propose a ridiculous extreme in the hope to break the logical system, and failed.. Referenda have to be organised nationally to vote on national issues. Two guys cant hold a referendum to effect a nation state, so no referenda can't be made by just anyone, bur a regional government or larger body can feasibly organise one.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: That was my entire point: anyone can make a referendum, but there needs to be some way of determining whether it is legitimate or not. The Catalan referendum didn't even follow the rules they had set up themselves.
No, your point was to propose a ridiculous extreme in the hope to break the logical system, and failed.. Referenda have to be organised nationally to vote on national issues. Two guys cant hold a referendum to effect a nation state, so no referenda can't be made by just anyone, bur a regional government or larger body can feasibly organise one.
Why? How do we decide who can and who can't call a referendum?
AlmightyWalrus wrote: That was my entire point: anyone can make a referendum, but there needs to be some way of determining whether it is legitimate or not. The Catalan referendum didn't even follow the rules they had set up themselves.
No, your point was to propose a ridiculous extreme in the hope to break the logical system, and failed.. Referenda have to be organised nationally to vote on national issues. Two guys cant hold a referendum to effect a nation state, so no referenda can't be made by just anyone, bur a regional government or larger body can feasibly organise one.
Why? How do we decide who can and who can't call a referendum?
"we" don't decide those things. Governments decide those things. It is up to a government to decide who can call a referendum and on when a referendum will take place.
Sealand is different. Roy Paddy Bates moved into an abandoned offshore seafort and applied a maritime law loophole. In which case he was the 'national' population.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: That was my entire point: anyone can make a referendum, but there needs to be some way of determining whether it is legitimate or not. The Catalan referendum didn't even follow the rules they had set up themselves.
No, your point was to propose a ridiculous extreme in the hope to break the logical system, and failed.. Referenda have to be organised nationally to vote on national issues. Two guys cant hold a referendum to effect a nation state, so no referenda can't be made by just anyone, bur a regional government or larger body can feasibly organise one.
Why? How do we decide who can and who can't call a referendum?
"we" don't decide those things. Governments decide those things. It is up to a government to decide who can call a referendum and on when a referendum will take place.
Gain a movement of several million people, become a literal or close to literal majority in your country or region. Claim to all wish to return to free Walrusitania, and force the Swedish government to agree to have a vote, or have a vote anyway in your own breakaway province with fellow Walrusoons..
AlmightyWalrus wrote: That was my entire point: anyone can make a referendum, but there needs to be some way of determining whether it is legitimate or not. The Catalan referendum didn't even follow the rules they had set up themselves.
No, your point was to propose a ridiculous extreme in the hope to break the logical system, and failed.. Referenda have to be organised nationally to vote on national issues. Two guys cant hold a referendum to effect a nation state, so no referenda can't be made by just anyone, bur a regional government or larger body can feasibly organise one.
Why? How do we decide who can and who can't call a referendum?
A referendum is a legal process that goes through legislative processes of approval (which vary from country to country) and are put on public ballots, all of which (ballots, staff for the voting places, etc) is paid for by the government in question (on a national, regional or local level, whichever applies). So each country has laws on how a referendum process happens, which makes legitimacy a pretty clear thing in most cases.*
*unless the laws are poorly written and have loopholes.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: That was my entire point: anyone can make a referendum, but there needs to be some way of determining whether it is legitimate or not. The Catalan referendum didn't even follow the rules they had set up themselves.
No, your point was to propose a ridiculous extreme in the hope to break the logical system, and failed.. Referenda have to be organised nationally to vote on national issues. Two guys cant hold a referendum to effect a nation state, so no referenda can't be made by just anyone, bur a regional government or larger body can feasibly organise one.
Why? How do we decide who can and who can't call a referendum?
A referendum is a legal process that goes through legislative processes of approval (which vary from country to country) and are put on public ballots, all of which (ballots, staff for the voting places, etc) is paid for by the government in question (on a national, regional or local level, whichever applies). So each country has laws on how a referendum process happens, which makes legitimacy a pretty clear thing in most cases.*
*unless the laws are poorly written and have loopholes.
Precisely. The Catalonian government hasn't done that.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: That was my entire point: anyone can make a referendum, but there needs to be some way of determining whether it is legitimate or not. The Catalan referendum didn't even follow the rules they had set up themselves.
No, your point was to propose a ridiculous extreme in the hope to break the logical system, and failed.. Referenda have to be organised nationally to vote on national issues. Two guys cant hold a referendum to effect a nation state, so no referenda can't be made by just anyone, bur a regional government or larger body can feasibly organise one.
Why? How do we decide who can and who can't call a referendum?
A referendum is a legal process that goes through legislative processes of approval (which vary from country to country) and are put on public ballots, all of which (ballots, staff for the voting places, etc) is paid for by the government in question (on a national, regional or local level, whichever applies). So each country has laws on how a referendum process happens, which makes legitimacy a pretty clear thing in most cases.*
*unless the laws are poorly written and have loopholes.
Precisely. The Catalonian government hasn't done that.
Just like every government ever that wanted to be independent, so who cares? Independence movements pretty much by definition do not follow laws. Since laws are usually designed to forbid or prevent independence, they simply can't if they ever want to have a chance at being independent.
Iron_Captain wrote: ... ...
Just like every government ever that wanted to be independent, so who cares? Independence movements pretty much by definition do not follow laws. Since laws are usually designed to forbid or prevent independence, they simply can't if they ever want to have a chance at being independent.
The difficulty for Catalan independence right now is that while it's a popular idea it only has the support of less than half of the Catalan population.
A dodgy power grab at independence, ignoring the majority, as well as annoying the Madrid government, is the wrong way to go about things. It's difficult to see how it could succeed.
A greater proportion of the population would support more autonomy while remaining within the Spanish state, In the long term this might lead towards complete independence.
There's no reason why Catalonia couldn't be another successful minor state within the EU, providing it has the goodwill of its own population, and its neighbours and partners. The EU provides a structure to support that.
Iron_Captain wrote: ... ...
Just like every government ever that wanted to be independent, so who cares? Independence movements pretty much by definition do not follow laws. Since laws are usually designed to forbid or prevent independence, they simply can't if they ever want to have a chance at being independent.
The difficulty for Catalan independence right now is that while it's a popular idea it only has the support of less than half of the Catalan population.
A dodgy power grab at independence, ignoring the majority, as well as annoying the Madrid government, is the wrong way to go about things. It's difficult to see how it could succeed.
Iron Captain is right.
Also, its not a majority if it doesn't speak out.
It is inherently dishonest to claim that all or even most of those who did not vote supported continued union.
The separatists strategy has been pretty much spot on, they are getting the results they want peacably. This is Rajoy's own fault.
There's no reason why Catalonia couldn't be another successful minor state within the EU, providing it has the goodwill of its own population, and its neighbours and partners. The EU provides a structure to support that.
Err, no. While you are technically correct, Catalonia could easily be a functioning state in the EU, and the whole region is very firmly pro-EU this whole process goes against dogma, and the EU is very doctrinaire.
Did you read what Juncker said about Catalan independence Paraphrased "I dont want to wake up and find the EU has ninety member states."
the EU is all about ever closer union, less states more EU superstate, seperatism within EU member states in continental European countries is not what the project is all about.
Also several countries in the EU, including France is not happy about this. The French press (English language) are more hostile than press sources in rSpain. Italy is even more worried.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
welshhoppo wrote: Spain could sort this whole thing out much quicker and far less painful if it just authorised and held a referendum in Catalonia.
They will have to at some stage. It's the only way out now without heavy repression.
It keps things civil in places with similar issues, like Scotland and Quebec.
People here are sweating the small stuff. Independence movements often have to go against the set rules. 1776 anyone. Now Puigdemont might have been a very naughty boy for doing what he has done, but internationally a finger wagging is in order, that is all.
This doesn't mean that Catalonia should be recognised as a sovereign state, but it does mean the ballot and its consequences should be taken seriously.
In the larger scale of things Catalonia held a vote which resulted in overwhelming approval, and critically the vote was not as far as we know restricted or rigged. The only issues with the ballot are technicalities.
The people have spoken and Spain didnt take that seriously enough.
Complaining about ballot technicalities that don't involve vote rigging, is like seeing an invading army and complaining about littering. There are larger issues at stake.
In case anyone hasnt realised Washington didnt get legal permission to declare independence either. Anyone here going to argue that the Declaration of Independence was a worthless document in law because it wasnt countersigned by the British Foreign Office?
Iron_Captain wrote: ... ...
Just like every government ever that wanted to be independent, so who cares? Independence movements pretty much by definition do not follow laws. Since laws are usually designed to forbid or prevent independence, they simply can't if they ever want to have a chance at being independent.
The difficulty for Catalan independence right now is that while it's a popular idea it only has the support of less than half of the Catalan population.
A dodgy power grab at independence, ignoring the majority, as well as annoying the Madrid government, is the wrong way to go about things. It's difficult to see how it could succeed.
Iron Captain is right.
Also, its not a majority if it doesn't speak out.
It is inherently dishonest to claim that all or even most of those who did not vote supported continued union.
It is not dishonest, you just have to read regional election results.
Indy parties have failed to get a majority of the vote in each and every democratic election. Not a vote without a proper census, where one of the parties also tallies the votes and with plenty of evidence of vote tampering.
Iron_Captain wrote: ... ...
Just like every government ever that wanted to be independent, so who cares? Independence movements pretty much by definition do not follow laws. Since laws are usually designed to forbid or prevent independence, they simply can't if they ever want to have a chance at being independent.
The difficulty for Catalan independence right now is that while it's a popular idea it only has the support of less than half of the Catalan population.
A dodgy power grab at independence, ignoring the majority, as well as annoying the Madrid government, is the wrong way to go about things. It's difficult to see how it could succeed.
Iron Captain is right.
Also, its not a majority if it doesn't speak out.
It is inherently dishonest to claim that all or even most of those who did not vote supported continued union.
It is not dishonest, you just have to read regional election results.
Indy parties have failed to get a majority of the vote in each and every democratic election. Not a vote without a proper census, where one of the parties also tallies the votes and with plenty of evidence of vote tampering.
Aye, but what Orlanth means I think is that a majority doesn't mean anything if you don't take action. Often, revolutions and such are not supported by a majority at all, but rather by a radical minority that is willing to actually take action. The majority of the people simply want to avoid confrontation and go on with their lives, so they will not step up to this minority even if they disagree.
Revolutions and other such significant changes are not about gaining support, but rather about gaining momentum. Even very small groups can affect a revolution and force through changes if they gain enough momentum to roll over the silent majority. However, in Catalonia I do notice a good amount of pro-unity protests and such, so if the pro-unity are indeed the majority then at least they aren't silent.
Iron_Captain wrote: ... ...
Just like every government ever that wanted to be independent, so who cares? Independence movements pretty much by definition do not follow laws. Since laws are usually designed to forbid or prevent independence, they simply can't if they ever want to have a chance at being independent.
The difficulty for Catalan independence right now is that while it's a popular idea it only has the support of less than half of the Catalan population.
A dodgy power grab at independence, ignoring the majority, as well as annoying the Madrid government, is the wrong way to go about things. It's difficult to see how it could succeed.
A greater proportion of the population would support more autonomy while remaining within the Spanish state, In the long term this might lead towards complete independence.
There's no reason why Catalonia couldn't be another successful minor state within the EU, providing it has the goodwill of its own population, and its neighbours and partners. The EU provides a structure to support that.
With just under half the population in support, they have more support than the American revolution had among the population of the 13 colonies. The American revolution had maybe 1/3 of the population in full support at best. Everybody else was a loyalist or apathetic.
Let me just remind you all something: even countries with MANDATORY voting often do not get above a 84% turn out, even when the police will round you up and escort you to the polling station.
The reason for this varies, but typical reasons include things like inaccurate voting registries, deaths, and people moving.
Iron_Captain wrote: ... ...
Just like every government ever that wanted to be independent, so who cares? Independence movements pretty much by definition do not follow laws. Since laws are usually designed to forbid or prevent independence, they simply can't if they ever want to have a chance at being independent.
The difficulty for Catalan independence right now is that while it's a popular idea it only has the support of less than half of the Catalan population.
A dodgy power grab at independence, ignoring the majority, as well as annoying the Madrid government, is the wrong way to go about things. It's difficult to see how it could succeed.
Iron Captain is right.
Also, its not a majority if it doesn't speak out.
It is inherently dishonest to claim that all or even most of those who did not vote supported continued union.
It is not dishonest, you just have to read regional election results.
Indy parties have failed to get a majority of the vote in each and every democratic election. Not a vote without a proper census, where one of the parties also tallies the votes and with plenty of evidence of vote tampering.
But have they voted for indendence or for party? You know there's generally more than 1 reason to vote for party. Just because somebody supports independency doesn't mean they might consider that party better than others.
Iron_Captain wrote: ... ...
Just like every government ever that wanted to be independent, so who cares? Independence movements pretty much by definition do not follow laws. Since laws are usually designed to forbid or prevent independence, they simply can't if they ever want to have a chance at being independent.
The difficulty for Catalan independence right now is that while it's a popular idea it only has the support of less than half of the Catalan population.
A dodgy power grab at independence, ignoring the majority, as well as annoying the Madrid government, is the wrong way to go about things. It's difficult to see how it could succeed.
Iron Captain is right.
Also, its not a majority if it doesn't speak out.
It is inherently dishonest to claim that all or even most of those who did not vote supported continued union.
It is not dishonest, you just have to read regional election results.
Indy parties have failed to get a majority of the vote in each and every democratic election. Not a vote without a proper census, where one of the parties also tallies the votes and with plenty of evidence of vote tampering.
But have they voted for indendence or for party? You know there's generally more than 1 reason to vote for party. Just because somebody supports independency doesn't mean they might consider that party better than others.
On the last 3-4 elections each party has declared their position on whether they're pro- or anti-indy.
But if you go deeper the picture looks even worse for the indy parties.
Not even 50% of the ruling PdeCat party would be in favour of straight independence, 50% would choose to continue being part of Spain with a better economic deal.
Aye, but what Orlanth means I think is that a majority doesn't mean anything if you don't take action. Often, revolutions and such are not supported by a majority at all, but rather by a radical minority that is willing to actually take action. The majority of the people simply want to avoid confrontation and go on with their lives, so they will not step up to this minority even if they disagree.
Revolutions and other such significant changes are not about gaining support, but rather about gaining momentum. Even very small groups can affect a revolution and force through changes if they gain enough momentum to roll over the silent majority. However, in Catalonia I do notice a good amount of pro-unity protests and such, so if the pro-unity are indeed the majority then at least they aren't silent.
Edit: written as a reply to a collective 'you'.
This and more.
Iron Captain is correct that the momentum of a minority can be the catalyst of political change. This is even true of normal politics, most incumbent governments have minority support valid through low electoral turnout, divided opposition, coalition or even general apathy. So long as those who wished to vote against were not actively prevented from doing so, such minority mandates are valid.
However the big lie is the myth of the silent majority. If its silent then you simply cannot claim it as in support of either side. Sure some boycotted the referendum, but to not vote is a democratic choice available in all ballots in most countries. The proper way to note dissent would be to return spoiled ballots.
However pro-union supporters talk of a silent majority despite a 90% result on a turnout of 42%, which is low but actionable. At that rate just about everyone who didn't vote would have to be pro-union for the actual polling to be overturned. There is no evidence to support this. For a start some did vote but had their ballot boxes seized by Spanish police.we dont know how many or who they voted for. Some people habitually don't vote and could have any opinion. Some might have not voted for independence to avoid disappointment as much as because of disbelief in the merits of the ballot. We don't know, yet time again dishonest claim is made for the absent demographic.
Sure they might want to turn up now, but too fething late. Plenty of mostly young people wanted to reverse Brexit who could not be bothered to go out and vote in the rain, leaving more determined pro leave voters, mostly of an older demographic who didnt mind getting wet to go out and vote. Too fething late the next day.
Also people who bemoaned the election of Trump, but couldn't sink their differences enough to vote for Hillary. Too fething late the next day, congratulations Mr President.
The referendum happened. As Iron Captain understands it wasnt entirely on the level, but that doesn't matter when the peple want freedom and have no avenue for it. Spain proved that no matter how much you disagree when they reacted the way they did. The message is loud and clear and is the thread title. Catalan Indyref - Spanish police beat old women, seize ballot boxes, fire rubber bullets at voters.
The Madrid government did not act against the ballot per se, but against Catalans who chose to vote. Message sent loud and clear. Catalans you will NOT get a single free referendum to choose to leave or keep union with Spain as Quebec did and as Scotland did. That validated the vote in terms of realpolitic.
Somethign else I should note. Many of the criticisms of Catalan independence referendum and its aftermath come from vested interests. I can respect that up to a point, Jouso, Galas and other Spaniards here have every right to be worried, but the fact that they dont like the arguments put forward by Puigdemont et al, and their failure for some to condemn the methods used by Spanish police are a triumph of nationalism over rationality.
On a logical rational level Madrid is losing and losing hard. They have been outmaneuvered, outplayed and when acted have done exactly the wrong thing and handed opportunity for victory on a plate to their opponents.
Its all the fault of this arsehead:
Technicalities of the election aside, and those are minor grievances compared to the overreaction of the state, Catalan independence has the momentum, the leadership and the moral high ground. That is from the point of view of realpolitik. Catalonia isn't recognised not on merit but because international recognition is not an exercise of merit but an exercise of benefit from the point of view of foreign regimes. Taiwan should be recognised on merit, but people much prefer not to piss off China. The merits of independent Catalonia are outweighed by the ruptures it would cause in Europe.
The UK cannot support because Rajoy has kicked the wasps nest, illegal referendums used not to count, but that was before grannies trying to vote got truncheoned. The SNP is watching and choosing its words carefully. Plaid Cymru has already called for the Welsh assembly to recognise Catalonia. Just adding this here in case anyone thinks my disagreement with the pro-Spanish lobby here is based on personal emotive opinion, feth that, I actually would prefer you guys were right, but sadly you are not.
Italy is in a worse state than the UK on this, and the whole EU is generally not happy, the Federalists have been delivered a huge fly in their wine gobblet, EU show of strength unity has large cracks now and everything will get more expensive all round as a wealthy portion of a member state goes tits up financially sinking Spain further into the territory of a 'club med' economy. Germany is sick of paying for Greece and Portugal, Barcelona keeps the Spanish economy bouyant, now that will sink and the balance of input output of EU resources will be come less favourable to the wealthier northern economies.
The trouble now is, its a populist movement now, with a zeitgeist so the economic pressures are mostly on Madrid, not Barcelona. This is because it's considered worthwhile to suffer a drop in income in return for 'freedom'. The economic exodus from Barcelona, if it happens, and any economic downturn will hurt Madrid more. While the EU has confirmed its an internal Spanish matter, and there is an affirmation of sovereignty in that, its also has a double meaning. Your mess so you fix it. Rajoy has already had open comments on an intergovernmental level on how to deal with the issue, some bordering on the patronising, that inform him not to go over the edge, again.
The pro-independence Catalans could do a lot worse, tactically, than simply being hold-outs over the process. This adventure will cost Spain visibly, and it will then cost the EU visibly, which with a combo with the strong probability of a no deal Brexit will leave EU finances uncomfortable, then the Germans and French will start grumbling, that Madrid cannot ignore, and the Catalans will hold they key to any solution.
Rajoy could speed this up by heavy handed means, if he does this he WILL lose the province from Spain sometime in the next five to fifteen years, if that.
He could offer a super autonomy, independence lite option and bribe them back. That might work, but UDI has been declared, and this is aklready a criminal matter according to Madrid.
Or he could offer a blanket pardon, and arrange a referendum saying it should be done legally and ask the EU for proactive help to ensure the pro-union campaign does not lose.
Not even 50% of the ruling PdeCat party would be in favour of straight independence, 50% would choose to continue being part of Spain with a better economic deal.
Not relevant. People voted for Thatcher to give her a landslide in '87, that doesnt mean Tories forever. Blair had a landslide in '97, Labour is not in power.
You can post a hundred pie charts, but when on the day of the referendum the result says 90% the other way your excuse had better be 'vote rigging', as its the only one that counts. Sadly for you the vote does not appear to have been rigged or interfered with, except by the Spanish police, on orders from Madrid, to oppress the voters by force.
It doesn't look good however you slice it.
I'll only ask to not be mixed with Jouso and his ideas. Not that I'm saying that they are wrong per se, but I have different ones. I have made my opinions on this clear, in the firsts pages of this thread
I despise equally the central goverment and the independists one. To be honest, I despise more Rajoy and the central goverment, but at the end of the day, I'm just tired of the farse of the wholle Spain political system built under the orders of that piece of **** of Franco.
Galas wrote: I'll only ask to not be mixed with Jouso and his ideas. Not that I'm saying that they are wrong per se, but I have different ones. I have made my opinions on this clear, in the firsts pages of this thread
I despise equally the central goverment and the independists one. To be honest, I despise more Rajoy and the central goverment, but at the end of the day, I'm just tired of the farse of the wholle Spain political system built under the orders of that piece of **** of Franco.
Opinion noted. However you appear to share the same love and concern for Spain, as Jouso, if with a different political stance. Both of you have been strongly opposed to the referendum.
I remember your comments on the Scottish indyref campaign, and how we agreed that Spain would be forced to veto Scottish application to join the EU, and it was on this issue. How the world turns. Better Together made some mistakes, but feth, this has been handled worse than Brexit, and that should have been won but for Cameron's complacency.
There is a recurring message, if you don't take a ballot seriously and act to defeat it, expect disappointing consequences.
Spain can win here, and safely too, but it would require a visible U turn at this point, a careful approach and a new leader. How attached is Rajoy to the trappings of power? Could he be persuaded to fall on his sword?
Actually I have said many times that I'm pro-referendum but pro-union.
I have been opposed with how they have made this referendum, the agenda behind it, etc... but even more opposed with how the central goverment has react to it.
And no. The problem with Rajoy and the PP is that even being the MOST corrupt political party on Spain, like, literally the week before has been proved by the anti-corruption fiscal, that is very very possible that Rajoy has been receiving many illegal bonuses. If we had a election now in Spain, they'll win again. Because people is like that. I have said many times that Spanish is more similar to an American banana republic than to an advanced democratic European country.
Rajoy didn't leaved the power position even when the party that supported the PP to become presidents (Ciudadanos) campaigned under the idea that they would only support the PP if Rajoy ceased to be president. Rajoy refused, and Ciudadanos supported them and make him president.
You can post a hundred pie charts, but when on the day of the referendum the result says 90% the other way your excuse had better be 'vote rigging', as its the only one that counts. Sadly for you the vote does not appear to have been rigged or interfered with, except by the Spanish police, on orders from Madrid, to oppress the voters by force.
It doesn't look good however you slice it.
Again. It was not a referendum. It was a glorified single-party event, just like the previous one. Which is why only one part of the electorate showed up.
Would you accept as legitimate a Scottish referedum held at the SNP national convention and where only the SNP campaigned? Do you accept the Crimean 2014 referendum as valid? On a different scale, this is the same here.
And no. The problem with Rajoy and the PP is that even being the MOST corrupt political party on Spain,
The problem with Rajoy is that his party seems to have a floor of 8 million votes. Unless they feel punished by the electorate they will go on doing exactly the same thing.
You being Galician (just like in my home Valencia) know that whoever the PP puts in front could murder a child in live TV and they'd still get their 8 million votes from pensioners, small business owners and everyone in their client network (which is huge at the local level). 4 million still find a way to blame "the left" for everything and the other 4 would say "ok they're bad" but would still grudgingly vote PP because "the other options are worse".
Would you accept as legitimate a Scottish referedum held at the SNP national convention and where only the SNP campaigned? Do you accept the Crimean 2014 referendum as valid? On a different scale, this is the same here.
Ok lets run with this, and the possibility that Sturgeon would pull a stunt like this is not incoceivable.
The Scottish government have claimed to have a right to hold a second referendum, legally this is not true, it does need Westminster backing so the UK could have a very similar problem as Spain has.
So what to do about it.
1. Pro-union Scots would be best advised not to boycott the referendum even if illegal. Vote anyway, make sure its not one sided, it is not for the voter to determine the legality of the ballot, and it is not illegal of itself to vote in a ballot that is illegal.
2. The Scottish Government will be informed directly and clearly that the ballot is illegal as the existing ballot structure agreed with Westminster is that ONE ballot occurs, which is final and lasting and that one ballot speaks for Scotland and is binding on Scotland and the UK These were terms the Scottish government had to sign agreement to.
Now at that point Sturgeon could just hold an illegal ballot anyway, but three further points remain.
3. Because the ballot is de facto illegal the UK itself does not have to agree to it, and unlike Spain because a ballot has been agreed a priori there is no consequence for not doing so. It is likely Scotland would not be recognised as a separate state under those circumstances.
4. It can be pointed out repeatedly that if Scotland had voted Yes to independence in 2014 and the majority of Scots wanted to change their mind in 2017 would Sturgeon and Salmond allow them to do so and reverse independence? The chances are very likely they would not.
5. Scotland has had one partisan referendum, only Scots were balloted. However the Scots in a ballot have confirmed they are part of the UK. So if a new ballot is to be held it is a UK issue, as confirmed by the Scots in 2014 when they confirmed they would remain UK citizens. Scottish independence effects people on both sides of the border, and therefore the ideal of a Scottish referendum is a legal one off as it is a suspension of equal opportunities and free voting rights. Now that single event has passed a legal challenge could be made that for reasons of democratic equality and fairness every UK citizen of voting age, regardless of where they live in the UK should be entitled to a ballot on the issue.
To not ballot the English Welsh and Irish members of the UK on a repetitive issue effecting the UK is inherently undemocratic. This can be held in the courts long enough to kick the issue into touch.
There are probably other legal arguments and challenges possible. They are unlocked by giving the Scots, or Catalans a fair one time referendum, making sure you win the vote for pro-union, and then being armed with the ballot results to neutralise further seperatist demands.
It works well enough.
And no. The problem with Rajoy and the PP is that even being the MOST corrupt political party on Spain,
The problem with Rajoy is that his party seems to have a floor of 8 million votes. Unless they feel punished by the electorate they will go on doing exactly the same thing.
You being Galician (just like in my home Valencia) know that whoever the PP puts in front could murder a child in live TV and they'd still get their 8 million votes from pensioners, small business owners and everyone in their client network (which is huge at the local level). 4 million still find a way to blame "the left" for everything and the other 4 would say "ok they're bad" but would still grudgingly vote PP because "the other options are worse".
Sadly, you are absolutely correct. My poor country, how the PP has destroyed it.
1. Pro-union Scots would be best advised not to boycott the referendum even if illegal. Vote anyway, make sure its not one sided, it is not for the voter to determine the legality of the ballot, and it is not illegal of itself to vote in a ballot that is illegal.
Again, why? Why would supporters of one party knowingly participate in a publicity stunt organised by the opposing party?
Just because I say "this is a referendum" it doesn't make it so.
Let's forget Scotland and to go the other example: Do you accept the Crimean referendum? Do you support Russia annexing Crimea based on that?
1. Pro-union Scots would be best advised not to boycott the referendum even if illegal. Vote anyway, make sure its not one sided, it is not for the voter to determine the legality of the ballot, and it is not illegal of itself to vote in a ballot that is illegal.
Again, why? Why would supporters of one party knowingly participate in a publicity stunt organised by the opposing party?
Just because I say "this is a referendum" it doesn't make it so.
Ok. By encouraging the populace not to boycott the ballot you prevent a whitewash result. 90% is pretty damning, its the opposite of the sweet spot. Had nearer 100% of those polled been pro-indy it would appear to be a North Korean election and a joke. There are exceptions to that, but only where the position of the local populace is exceptionally clear, which isnt the case in Catalonia. This can be true locally to you though,, Gibraltar is one such case.
90% is a clear indication of massive support for independence.
Next is it a stunt though? No. Ballot papers were delivered everywhere, the voting booth placement map was not fixed or slanted to make it more difficult to vote in areas known to have strong pro-Spanish community. I cannot write off a ballot that is not of itself rigged that showed fair and open distribution as a stunt.
You are let complaining that the Catalan parliament didn't go through proper procedures, but their error is less than those opposed. If Rajoy had not intervened with the ballot stations and simply disavowed the election results we might not be having this conversation. Pro-Catalonian independence crowds would be smaller, pro-Spain crowds larger and you would have more time for a breather. Nobody would be forced into a position to dissolve parliaments or issue criminal warrants, extra time for dialogue would occur.
It is then that a ballot result could be contested on reasons of legality in the courts, there would be zeitgeist for a UDI declaration, and no need to rush one either.
Let's forget Scotland and to go the other example: Do you accept the Crimean referendum? Do you support Russia annexing Crimea based on that?
Putin invades Crimea with a military force while a pro-Russian Ukrainian government leaves the door open for them. Most non Russian speaking populace of Crimea have to flee and thus the remaining population is not a fair indication of the whole, No the referendum was illegal because it was issued by an invading force on another nations sovereign territory after removing opposed population base.
However conquest happens, Putin conquered Crimea, I respect him for having the balls to pull off a territorial conquest in a European territory in the 21st century.
Its not legal, but it was mostly bloodless, supported by the remaining population without a holocaust and the Russians aren't going to leave.
It has happened, like Tibet happened, and the cause is lost. So no point making waves.
Instead of complaining about Crimea soldiers have been sent to the Baltic states and the remainder of the Ukraine. Putin knows his neighbours won't be caught napping a second time. Ukraine will have no more pro-Moscow governments to sell them out, and the Baltic states are wide awake to the threat and NATO is deploying token troops in border regions so an unopposed walk in is not possible.
welshhoppo wrote: Spain could sort this whole thing out much quicker and far less painful if it just authorised and held a referendum in Catalonia.
Or it just hang all the mayors who supported it. As this is Spain, option B is more likely than you might think.
Puigdemont has already been offered asylum. If he has to leave and there are martyrs left behind; assuming they are imprisoned not executed. I cannot myself believe Madrid would sink that low. Puigdemont would become president-in-exile, the true leader of the Catalan people, and hyped as expected, maybe even 'destined' to return. Give him a makeover to get rid of his 60's hairstyle and he is ready.
He would become a mythical great leader like Mandela was touted to be. Mandela was actually a corrupt incompetent, and that was untested because he was in prison, but he knew how to play the messiah card given to him by supporters he had no contact with. Unlike Mandela cannot fault Puigdemont's smarts one bit, and thus to give him a mythical leader persona would be a very dangerous mistake.
1. Pro-union Scots would be best advised not to boycott the referendum even if illegal. Vote anyway, make sure its not one sided, it is not for the voter to determine the legality of the ballot, and it is not illegal of itself to vote in a ballot that is illegal.
Again, why? Why would supporters of one party knowingly participate in a publicity stunt organised by the opposing party?
Just because I say "this is a referendum" it doesn't make it so.
No, but if it is your government that says "this is a referendum" it does make it so. The referendum in Catalonia was called by the legitimate government of Catalonia, and even if they may not have acted legitimately in that, they still are the government.
jouso wrote: Let's forget Scotland and to go the other example: Do you accept the Crimean referendum? Do you support Russia annexing Crimea based on that?
Oh, can I answer this one? You mentioned Crimea, I have to answer now. The situation in Crimea isn't really comparable to Catalonia. Crimea is a part of Russia that suddenly found itself 'on the wrong side of the border' in 1991, and the referendum only took place after Crimea was already independent. The referendum was not on independence, but a choice for re-joining either Russia or Ukraine. Catalonia by contrast has been part of Spain for ages and the referendum was about independence. It is much more comparable to the Scotland or Quebec referenda. And no, like the referendum in Catalonia, I do not believe the referendum on Crimea was entirely 'clean'. But unlike Catalonia, the referendum on Crimea was a completely moot point anyway. It was conducted just for show, because it was already known beforehand that the majority of the Crimean population was ethnically Russian and wanted to become part of Russia. In Catalonia, I feel that the independist and unionist sides are much more closely matched in support.
Let's forget Scotland and to go the other example: Do you accept the Crimean referendum? Do you support Russia annexing Crimea based on that?
Putin invades Crimea with a military force while a pro-Russian Ukrainian government leaves the door open for them. Most non Russian speaking populace of Crimea have to flee and thus the remaining population is not a fair indication of the whole, No the referendum was illegal because it was issued by an invading force on another nations sovereign territory after removing opposed population base. However conquest happens, Putin conquered Crimea, I respect him for having the balls to pull off a territorial conquest in a European territory in the 21st century. Its not legal, but it was mostly bloodless, supported by the remaining population without a holocaust and the Russians aren't going to leave. It has happened, like Tibet happened, and the cause is lost. So no point making waves. Instead of complaining about Crimea soldiers have been sent to the Baltic states and the remainder of the Ukraine. Putin knows his neighbours won't be caught napping a second time. Ukraine will have no more pro-Moscow governments to sell them out, and the Baltic states are wide awake to the threat and NATO is deploying token troops in border regions so an unopposed walk in is not possible.
It isn't really conquest if you agree to it, nor is it an invasion if the soldiers are already there. You give Putin too much credit. It was really the Crimean government that was responsible for all this. They declared independence and invited the Russian army in, Putin did not have to do anything but shrug and say ok.
Sorry Iron Captain, I smell Putin all over this, and am not saying that as an accusation. I like the smell of the bs you just served, it's quite funny in its front actually. It's chutzpah as they say.
Putin just happened to shrug and say ok, and mobilise an army before someone in Kiev can say 'did you forget to lock the door into Russia last night?'. Yeah right.
Orlanth wrote: Sorry Iron Captain, I smell Putin all over this, and am not saying that as an accusation. I like the smell of the bs you just served, it's quite funny in its front actually. It's chutzpah as they say.
Putin just happened to shrug and say ok, and mobilise an army before someone in Kiev can say 'did you forget to lock the door into Russia last night?'. Yeah right.
Putin didn't mobilise anything. A lot of Russian soldiers were already in Crimea. Sevastopol is and was the base of the Russian Black Sea Fleet even when it was part of Ukraine, not to mention a large presence of Cossacks and plenty of volunteers. That was why it happened so quickly. Soldiers from mainland Russia only appeared a lot later, and even then they were not specially mobilised for the job but rather part of standing units from the southern military district. Putin acted upon the opportunity very smartly, but he did not create the opportunity. That really was the doing of Aksyonov and the Crimean parliament. They, and their "self-defense" forces that helped them seize power, created the opportunity for Putin to come in and annex Crimea nice and swiftly. I know that people in the West have the tendency to credit or blame Putin for every single little thing that happens in Russia, but that is quite frustrating for all the people in Russia who do a lot of hard work.
Btw, you know what I find really strange about this whole Catalan independence thing? It is how quiet everything is. Catalonia has already declared independence. Usually such things are followed (or preceded) by lots of heated passion and frantic action on both sides. Here it is just really quiet, with only a few politicians flinging mud and the occasional peaceful protest in the streets. Where are all the emotions? Where is the action? The Catalan and Spanish people and politicians seem remarkably controlled and restrained about this whole thing
Orlanth wrote: Sorry Iron Captain, I smell Putin all over this, and am not saying that as an accusation. I like the smell of the bs you just served, it's quite funny in its front actually. It's chutzpah as they say.
Putin just happened to shrug and say ok, and mobilise an army before someone in Kiev can say 'did you forget to lock the door into Russia last night?'. Yeah right.
Putin didn't mobilise anything. A lot of Russian soldiers were already in Crimea. Sevastopol is and was the base of the Russian Black Sea Fleet even when it was part of Ukraine, not to mention a large presence of Cossacks and plenty of volunteers. That was why it happened so quickly. Soldiers from mainland Russia only appeared a lot later, and even then they were not specially mobilised for the job but rather part of standing units from the southern military district. Putin acted upon the opportunity very smartly, but he did not create the opportunity. That really was the doing of Aksyonov and the Crimean parliament. They, and their "self-defense" forces that helped them seize power, created the opportunity for Putin to come in and annex Crimea nice and swiftly. I know that people in the West have the tendency to credit or blame Putin for every single little thing that happens in Russia, but that is quite frustrating for all the people in Russia who do a lot of hard work.
Btw, you know what I find really strange about this whole Catalan independence thing? It is how quiet everything is. Catalonia has already declared independence. Usually such things are followed (or preceded) by lots of heated passion and frantic action on both sides. Here it is just really quiet, with only a few politicians flinging mud and the occasional peaceful protest in the streets. Where are all the emotions? Where is the action? The Catalan and Spanish people and politicians seem remarkably controlled and restrained about this whole thing
Things have been quiet. The Spanish have not jumped the gun like last time and sent in the heavies at first time of trouble. They seem to be playing a longer. Smarter game than first time round.
Theres no long term end if they got for the blood and batons approach.
Orlanth wrote: Sorry Iron Captain, I smell Putin all over this, and am not saying that as an accusation. I like the smell of the bs you just served, it's quite funny in its front actually. It's chutzpah as they say.
Putin just happened to shrug and say ok, and mobilise an army before someone in Kiev can say 'did you forget to lock the door into Russia last night?'. Yeah right.
Putin didn't mobilise anything. A lot of Russian soldiers were already in Crimea. Sevastopol is and was the base of the Russian Black Sea Fleet even when it was part of Ukraine, not to mention a large presence of Cossacks and plenty of volunteers. That was why it happened so quickly. Soldiers from mainland Russia only appeared a lot later, and even then they were not specially mobilised for the job but rather part of standing units from the southern military district. Putin acted upon the opportunity very smartly, but he did not create the opportunity. That really was the doing of Aksyonov and the Crimean parliament. They, and their "self-defense" forces that helped them seize power, created the opportunity for Putin to come in and annex Crimea nice and swiftly. I know that people in the West have the tendency to credit or blame Putin for every single little thing that happens in Russia, but that is quite frustrating for all the people in Russia who do a lot of hard work.
I wonder if you actually believe all that.
Putin was an intelligence officer, he had his eye on the scenario. There was also communication throughout. Also movements of that scale CANNOT happen by accident, its not anyones way, Russians least of all. Russian command doctrine is still heavily centralised. What you say is frankly flat out impossible, but this is the scenario you spin when you need to.
TLDR Your position can be summed up as "We found this Crimea laying around, looks discarded, shall we keep it?"
Btw, you know what I find really strange about this whole Catalan independence thing? It is how quiet everything is. Catalonia has already declared independence. Usually such things are followed (or preceded) by lots of heated passion and frantic action on both sides. Here it is just really quiet, with only a few politicians flinging mud and the occasional peaceful protest in the streets. Where are all the emotions? Where is the action? The Catalan and Spanish people and politicians seem remarkably controlled and restrained about this whole thing
That isnt suprising me one bit and shouldnt surprise you.
Madrid has a lot of thinking to do. Rajoy cannot afford another mistake.
We can summise information from the lack of information, basic analysis. Here goes.
Some suppositions:
- We can summise that the Catalonian independence gambit, however it plays out can effect the economy of Barcelona and Spain as a whole, and Barcelona is a contributor sub-economy for Spain.
- We can thus assume that any lengthy downturn will have negative effects on Spain's economy and effect Spain's overall status as a contributor/recipient nation in the EU.
- The uncertainty has already hit the Euro hard, and places immediate economic pressure on the EU.
- Brexit will cost the EU 20 billion Euro/year in lost capital. The EU is already struggling with replacing that. Anything Theresa May agrees to pay is a one off.
- The EU is purchasing bonds to counter and has extended bond purchase until September 2018 due to the vote.
So what would you do if you were a part of a major contributor economy like France or Germany, or a leader within the EU itself?
You cannot directly effect the outcome here. but you can facepalm at how Rajoy's mishandling has made it worse. Rajoy's blunders will cost Germany money, will cost France money, will setback the progress of the EU project. What will Merkel be thinking, or Macron, or Donald Tusk? Damage limitaton? If so, how.
One thing they can do is try to stop Rajoy from blundering. We have just had a weekend since Fridays vote. I would not be surprised if the Spanish government got some firm but friendly advice on what not to do, even if they do or don't know what to do.
As for the Catalan government/former government. It's a waiting game from them. They have made their move, now hey site back. The last thing they want to do is taunt Madrid into action , that will lose them victim status. It is also a time for pro-independence leaders to gather and talk. They might have to scatter soon, so they need to get their own ducks in row. Though from the handling so far everything seems well orchestrated.
We should get a feel of how this will be played out tomorrow. It's certainly Madrid's turn to move, but they do not have the political initiative, so I expect the next move to either be very cautious or massive and sudden, and I am doubting the latter will end well.
Next we have to look at the legal issues from Madrid's perspective. Do they send in police to arrest? If so, who. Where do they do this, at what time and how do they prepare the police. Do they involve the military (which would be a severe escalation) or rely on the police and hope they don't ha up the entire exercise and feth off everyone.
Next who decided legality, which courts and when do they sit?
Madrid could do worse than sending the entire issue onto legal staff and seek warrants both through Spanish police, Catalan police (just to see them disobey) and Interpol simultaneously. They might do nothing after the weekend but make statements to this effect.
Now from the pro-independence movement what should they do. First step would be to ask for floor time at the UN and ask the general assembly for votes of recognition. They will possibly even get some from somewhere. Trouble is the US is against, and as they are not recognised by the US they might be told they might not even get through the door at New York airport. There are provisions in such case for chambers to be held in Geneva. This will add to the time, usually years.
What they will want is business as usual in Barcelona Monday morning, and following through the week as long as possible. I can't see any advantage in positional play here. Instead when in the correct position stop moving.
Orlanth wrote: Sorry Iron Captain, I smell Putin all over this, and am not saying that as an accusation. I like the smell of the bs you just served, it's quite funny in its front actually. It's chutzpah as they say.
Putin just happened to shrug and say ok, and mobilise an army before someone in Kiev can say 'did you forget to lock the door into Russia last night?'. Yeah right.
Putin didn't mobilise anything. A lot of Russian soldiers were already in Crimea. Sevastopol is and was the base of the Russian Black Sea Fleet even when it was part of Ukraine, not to mention a large presence of Cossacks and plenty of volunteers. That was why it happened so quickly. Soldiers from mainland Russia only appeared a lot later, and even then they were not specially mobilised for the job but rather part of standing units from the southern military district. Putin acted upon the opportunity very smartly, but he did not create the opportunity. That really was the doing of Aksyonov and the Crimean parliament. They, and their "self-defense" forces that helped them seize power, created the opportunity for Putin to come in and annex Crimea nice and swiftly. I know that people in the West have the tendency to credit or blame Putin for every single little thing that happens in Russia, but that is quite frustrating for all the people in Russia who do a lot of hard work.
I wonder if you actually believe all that.
Putin was an intelligence officer, he had his eye on the scenario. There was also communication throughout. Also movements of that scale CANNOT happen by accident, its not anyones way, Russians least of all. Russian command doctrine is still heavily centralised. What you say is frankly flat out impossible, but this is the scenario you spin when you need to.
TLDR Your position can be summed up as "We found this Crimea laying around, looks discarded, shall we keep it?"
Btw, you know what I find really strange about this whole Catalan independence thing? It is how quiet everything is. Catalonia has already declared independence. Usually such things are followed (or preceded) by lots of heated passion and frantic action on both sides. Here it is just really quiet, with only a few politicians flinging mud and the occasional peaceful protest in the streets. Where are all the emotions? Where is the action? The Catalan and Spanish people and politicians seem remarkably controlled and restrained about this whole thing
That isnt suprising me one bit and shouldnt surprise you.
Madrid has a lot of thinking to do. Rajoy cannot afford another mistake.
We can summise information from the lack of information, basic analysis. Here goes.
Some suppositions:
- We can summise that the Catalonian independence gambit, however it plays out can effect the economy of Barcelona and Spain as a whole, and Barcelona is a contributor sub-economy for Spain.
- We can thus assume that any lengthy downturn will have negative effects on Spain's economy and effect Spain's overall status as a contributor/recipient nation in the EU.
- The uncertainty has already hit the Euro hard, and places immediate economic pressure on the EU.
- Brexit will cost the EU 20 billion Euro/year in lost capital. The EU is already struggling with replacing that. Anything Theresa May agrees to pay is a one off.
- The EU is purchasing bonds to counter and has extended bond purchase until September 2018 due to the vote.
So what would you do if you were a part of a major contributor economy like France or Germany, or a leader within the EU itself?
You cannot directly effect the outcome here. but you can facepalm at how Rajoy's mishandling has made it worse. Rajoy's blunders will cost Germany money, will cost France money, will setback the progress of the EU project. What will Merkel be thinking, or Macron, or Donald Tusk? Damage limitaton? If so, how.
One thing they can do is try to stop Rajoy from blundering. We have just had a weekend since Fridays vote. I would not be surprised if the Spanish government got some firm but friendly advice on what not to do, even if they do or don't know what to do.
As for the Catalan government/former government. It's a waiting game from them. They have made their move, now hey site back. The last thing they want to do is taunt Madrid into action , that will lose them victim status. It is also a time for pro-independence leaders to gather and talk. They might have to scatter soon, so they need to get their own ducks in row. Though from the handling so far everything seems well orchestrated.
We should get a feel of how this will be played out tomorrow. It's certainly Madrid's turn to move, but they do not have the political initiative, so I expect the next move to either be very cautious or massive and sudden, and I am doubting the latter will end well.
Next we have to look at the legal issues from Madrid's perspective. Do they send in police to arrest? If so, who. Where do they do this, at what time and how do they prepare the police. Do they involve the military (which would be a severe escalation) or rely on the police and hope they don't ha up the entire exercise and feth off everyone.
Next who decided legality, which courts and when do they sit?
Madrid could do worse than sending the entire issue onto legal staff and seek warrants both through Spanish police, Catalan police (just to see them disobey) and Interpol simultaneously. They might do nothing after the weekend but make statements to this effect.
Now from the pro-independence movement what should they do. First step would be to ask for floor time at the UN and ask the general assembly for votes of recognition. They will possibly even get some from somewhere. Trouble is the US is against, and as they are not recognised by the US they might be told they might not even get through the door at New York airport. There are provisions in such case for chambers to be held in Geneva. This will add to the time, usually years.
What they will want is business as usual in Barcelona Monday morning, and following through the week as long as possible. I can't see any advantage in positional play here. Instead when in the correct position stop moving.
I agree at your assessment on events.
And yes, well Rayjoy is likely feeling the knives being sharpened in own party and such. If he gets up and causes them to lose a entire chunk of Spain then he goes down as the man who broke up Spain.
A name I'm sure he very very willing to avoid.
They waiting and getting council and advice from other European leaders makes sense. The first time they fetched up royaly, they will not get a second chance without the result being major FUBAR.
And yes, well Rayjoy is likely feeling the knives being sharpened in own party and such. If he gets up and causes them to lose a entire chunk of Spain then he goes down as the man who broke up Spain.
A name I'm sure he very very willing to avoid.
Ego is a compelling but unsound motivator. And Rajoy from accounts here is more self centered than average.
They waiting and getting council and advice from other European leaders makes sense. The first time they fetched up royaly, they will not get a second chance without the result being major FUBAR.
Perhaps you misread me slightly. Due to the severity of the moment, I don't think any advice from Germany, France or Brussels will be by request.
1. Pro-union Scots would be best advised not to boycott the referendum even if illegal. Vote anyway, make sure its not one sided, it is not for the voter to determine the legality of the ballot, and it is not illegal of itself to vote in a ballot that is illegal.
Again, why? Why would supporters of one party knowingly participate in a publicity stunt organised by the opposing party?
Just because I say "this is a referendum" it doesn't make it so.
Ok. By encouraging the populace not to boycott the ballot you prevent a whitewash result. 90% is pretty damning, its the opposite of the sweet spot. Had nearer 100% of those polled been pro-indy it would appear to be a North Korean election and a joke. There are exceptions to that, but only where the position of the local populace is exceptionally clear, which isnt the case in Catalonia. This can be true locally to you though,, Gibraltar is one such case.
90% is a clear indication of massive support for independence.
Next is it a stunt though? No. Ballot papers were delivered everywhere, the voting booth placement map was not fixed or slanted to make it more difficult to vote in areas known to have strong pro-Spanish community. I cannot write off a ballot that is not of itself rigged that showed fair and open distribution as a stunt.
You are let complaining that the Catalan parliament didn't go through proper procedures, but their error is less than those opposed. If Rajoy had not intervened with the ballot stations and simply disavowed the election results we might not be having this conversation. Pro-Catalonian independence crowds would be smaller, pro-Spain crowds larger and you would have more time for a breather. Nobody would be forced into a position to dissolve parliaments or issue criminal warrants, extra time for dialogue would occur.
It is then that a ballot result could be contested on reasons of legality in the courts, there would be zeitgeist for a UDI declaration, and no need to rush one either.
Let's forget Scotland and to go the other example: Do you accept the Crimean referendum? Do you support Russia annexing Crimea based on that?
Putin invades Crimea with a military force while a pro-Russian Ukrainian government leaves the door open for them. Most non Russian speaking populace of Crimea have to flee and thus the remaining population is not a fair indication of the whole, No the referendum was illegal because it was issued by an invading force on another nations sovereign territory after removing opposed population base.
However conquest happens, Putin conquered Crimea, I respect him for having the balls to pull off a territorial conquest in a European territory in the 21st century.
Its not legal, but it was mostly bloodless, supported by the remaining population without a holocaust and the Russians aren't going to leave.
It has happened, like Tibet happened, and the cause is lost. So no point making waves.
Instead of complaining about Crimea soldiers have been sent to the Baltic states and the remainder of the Ukraine. Putin knows his neighbours won't be caught napping a second time. Ukraine will have no more pro-Moscow governments to sell them out, and the Baltic states are wide awake to the threat and NATO is deploying token troops in border regions so an unopposed walk in is not possible.
welshhoppo wrote: Spain could sort this whole thing out much quicker and far less painful if it just authorised and held a referendum in Catalonia.
Or it just hang all the mayors who supported it. As this is Spain, option B is more likely than you might think.
Puigdemont has already been offered asylum. If he has to leave and there are martyrs left behind; assuming they are imprisoned not executed. I cannot myself believe Madrid would sink that low. Puigdemont would become president-in-exile, the true leader of the Catalan people, and hyped as expected, maybe even 'destined' to return. Give him a makeover to get rid of his 60's hairstyle and he is ready.
He would become a mythical great leader like Mandela was touted to be. Mandela was actually a corrupt incompetent, and that was untested because he was in prison, but he knew how to play the messiah card given to him by supporters he had no contact with. Unlike Mandela cannot fault Puigdemont's smarts one bit, and thus to give him a mythical leader persona would be a very dangerous mistake.
You can post a hundred pie charts, but when on the day of the referendum the result says 90% the other way your excuse had better be 'vote rigging', as its the only one that counts. Sadly for you the vote does not appear to have been rigged or interfered with, except by the Spanish police, on orders from Madrid, to oppress the voters by force.
It doesn't look good however you slice it.
Again. It was not a referendum. It was a glorified single-party event, just like the previous one. Which is why only one part of the electorate showed up.
Would you accept as legitimate a Scottish referedum held at the SNP national convention and where only the SNP campaigned? Do you accept the Crimean 2014 referendum as valid? On a different scale, this is the same here.
Except that with the voting % and results you would need to have ridiculously high % of non-voters to be pro-remain unless there was major voting fraud. Like 40% of votes being fraudulant votes.
Easy to say "most of stay voters didn't vote" but the ratio would have to be pretty ridiculously high for that to be true. Or major voting fraud.
1. Pro-union Scots would be best advised not to boycott the referendum even if illegal. Vote anyway, make sure its not one sided, it is not for the voter to determine the legality of the ballot, and it is not illegal of itself to vote in a ballot that is illegal.
Again, why? Why would supporters of one party knowingly participate in a publicity stunt organised by the opposing party?
Just because I say "this is a referendum" it doesn't make it so.
Ok. By encouraging the populace not to boycott the ballot you prevent a whitewash result. 90% is pretty damning, its the opposite of the sweet spot. Had nearer 100% of those polled been pro-indy it would appear to be a North Korean election and a joke. There are exceptions to that, but only where the position of the local populace is exceptionally clear, which isnt the case in Catalonia. This can be true locally to you though,, Gibraltar is one such case.
90% is a clear indication of massive support for independence.
Next is it a stunt though? No. Ballot papers were delivered everywhere, the voting booth placement map was not fixed or slanted to make it more difficult to vote in areas known to have strong pro-Spanish community. I cannot write off a ballot that is not of itself rigged that showed fair and open distribution as a stunt.
You are let complaining that the Catalan parliament didn't go through proper procedures, but their error is less than those opposed. If Rajoy had not intervened with the ballot stations and simply disavowed the election results we might not be having this conversation. Pro-Catalonian independence crowds would be smaller, pro-Spain crowds larger and you would have more time for a breather. Nobody would be forced into a position to dissolve parliaments or issue criminal warrants, extra time for dialogue would occur.
It is then that a ballot result could be contested on reasons of legality in the courts, there would be zeitgeist for a UDI declaration, and no need to rush one either.
There is more to a referendum than just saying it is. It needs a census, to ensure everyone who has a right to vote can vote a single time (it didn't). It needs properly organised yes and no campaigns (again, it didn't), but above all it needs an independent electoral authority, of which there wasn't. The votes are collected and tallied by the same people who wants a yes result. Why would anyone voting no bother?
But still, the most important issue is that the vote was called through an illegal law. The Catalan parliament did not have the power to call a referendum, it tried to appropriate that through a law for which they didn't have enough majority to pass. That's why it was cancelled by the courts and why everyone except those who wanted to make a show out of it just stayed away. And on those wanting to make a show I'm of course including the central govt.
This is not really the place to go on about the Crimean referendum, for those interested here are a few links.
This is an issue I had to follow pretty close since my Ukrainian distributor is/was located in Simferopol and there are still tons of legal and commercial issues around (for starters my Russian distributor is in Novorrossiysk), so feel free to continue discussion somewhere else.
And yes, well Rayjoy is likely feeling the knives being sharpened in own party and such. If he gets up and causes them to lose a entire chunk of Spain then he goes down as the man who broke up Spain.
A name I'm sure he very very willing to avoid.
Ego is a compelling but unsound motivator. And Rajoy from accounts here is more self centered than average.
They waiting and getting council and advice from other European leaders makes sense. The first time they fetched up royaly, they will not get a second chance without the result being major FUBAR.
Perhaps you misread me slightly. Due to the severity of the moment, I don't think any advice from Germany, France or Brussels will be by request.
True. I think secretly that the Spanish though the EU said a internal matter might have a strong hand in negotiations with Catalonia and its leadership.
Taking some degree of charge, acting as a intermidate between the two. The EU values its unity or at least perceived unity greatly.
Well, let's have a round of applause for the Spanish government. Way to go. This will be sure to calm tensions no end...
There are times when I despair at the sheer stupidity of Western leaders.
The light touch was needed to defuse this, not all guns blazing!
See! I knew Spain would not disappoint. They are made of sterner stuff. Texans have full knowledge if Spain's methods for handling customer complaints.
Mixed messages in the press. I read them as they broke very late last night but was too tired to come back and comment.
So Puigdemont can run for office if he is not in prison. Well, it has one clear signal, zero compromise. Were Puigdemont to run it would be on Madrid's terms, even if he were not facing any charges. However the comment itself makes clear that despite justice being a procedure, and the procedure takes time the process can be handwaved away for convenience.
Either' 'its out of our hands and is a matter for the judiciary' or its a cat and mouse game with the law. Alfonso Dastis muddied the waters somewhat, but made it open to implication that the legal process is merely a convenience.
I was watching France24 last night, English language channel. This news outlet is wholly owned by the French government. It is also comments in support of the Madrid government and it's supporters. Sky, BBC both tried to have some perspective, and sought opinions from multiple perspectives. France24 had none. Interesting that. Methinks Paris may have been spooked by events.
This crisis being a fly in the goblet of the EU project thing is looking like its true then. France is rolling out big wheels propaganda it appears, but this wont be confirmed without seeing more France24 coverage and looking for bias over time.
According to France 24 the unity demonstration in Barcelona yesterday had a million attendees. That is not that unreasonable, though crowds that large anywhere are exceptionally rare these are exceptional circumstances. However the crowd appears to be mostly young adult, though admittedly we saw only a portion and would have to account for 20% of the entire Catalan population.
Either France24 is exagerrating wildly, or the crowd was bussed in, or both.
Well, let's have a round of applause for the Spanish government. Way to go. This will be sure to calm tensions no end...
There are times when I despair at the sheer stupidity of Western leaders.
The light touch was needed to defuse this, not all guns blazing!
Orlanth wrote:Mixed messages in the press. I read them as they broke very late last night but was too tired to come back and comment.
So Puigdemont can run for office if he is not in prison. Well, it has one clear signal, zero compromise. Were Puigdemont to run it would be on Madrid's terms, even if he were not facing any charges. However the comment itself makes clear that despite justice being a procedure, and the procedure takes time the process can be handwaved away for convenience.
Either' 'its out of our hands and is a matter for the judiciary' or its a cat and mouse game with the law. Alfonso Dastis muddied the waters somewhat, but made it open to implication that the legal process is merely a convenience.
I was watching France24 last night, English language channel. This news outlet is wholly owned by the French government. It is also comments in support of the Madrid government and it's supporters. Sky, BBC both tried to have some perspective, and sought opinions from multiple perspectives. France24 had none. Interesting that. Methinks Paris may have been spooked by events.
This crisis being a fly in the goblet of the EU project thing is looking like its true then. France is rolling out big wheels propaganda it appears, but this wont be confirmed without seeing more France24 coverage and looking for bias over time.
According to France 24 the unity demonstration in Barcelona yesterday had a million attendees. That is not that unreasonable, though crowds that large anywhere are exceptionally rare these are exceptional circumstances. However the crowd appears to be mostly young adult, though admittedly we saw only a portion and would have to account for 20% of the entire Catalan population.
Either France24 is exagerrating wildly, or the crowd was bussed in, or both.
Spain has acted as normal, they seeking charges against the Catalan leader with some 25 + years in jail...
sure that's going to calm the waters. He made a run for Belgium, his own police where told not to arrest him and seem they followed through on that. he made the border, they did not stop him.
Others who go to work face similar charges but that's going to look so much like some kind of dictatorship. Political prisoners, jeez. Im sure Catalonia will forget that and the 900 people there thugs beat up.
EU complicit as hell.
SO SO glad we are leaving! Should of run to Gibraltar, we should offer him protection there, and its a act of war to invade it against a fellow Nato member!
Spain would of loved that one.
Well, to get back to the main topic, it is reported by the BBC that Puigdemont has gone to Brussels. This presumably is to avoid the possibility of arrest for sedition. He will find it hard to fight an election from there, but may score points as a "martyr" to Spanish despotism. He might score more points by returning and being arrested.
Could the independentists have overplayed their hand? If they don't have sufficient public support to guarantee their freedom to fight the election, the unionists will have an easier time of it. However, the best course of action may be to hold full and free elections with an amnesty for Puigdemont and the others so they can campaign.
Why exactly would spain want to calm the waters here? They can crush their opposition right now. And they should - if they want to maintain their countries unity. Did anyone honestly see this turning out any different?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kilkrazy wrote: Well, to get back to the main topic, it is reported by the BBC that Puigdemont has gone to Brussels. This presumably is to avoid the possibility of arrest for sedition. He will find it hard to fight an election from there, but may score points as a "martyr" to Spanish despotism. He might score more points by returning and being arrested.
Could the independentists have overplayed their hand? If they don't have sufficient public support to guarantee their freedom to fight the election, the unionists will have an easier time of it. However, the best course of action may be to hold full and free elections with an amnesty for Puigdemont and the others so they can campaign.
Team Independence has been over playing their hand the entire time. They don't have the support. They don't have an army. Puig will be lucky if he is allowed to return to Spain.
Xenomancers wrote: Why exactly would spain want to calm the waters here? They can crush their opposition right now. And they should - if they want to maintain their countries unity. Did anyone honestly see this turning out any different?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kilkrazy wrote: Well, to get back to the main topic, it is reported by the BBC that Puigdemont has gone to Brussels. This presumably is to avoid the possibility of arrest for sedition. He will find it hard to fight an election from there, but may score points as a "martyr" to Spanish despotism. He might score more points by returning and being arrested.
Could the independentists have overplayed their hand? If they don't have sufficient public support to guarantee their freedom to fight the election, the unionists will have an easier time of it. However, the best course of action may be to hold full and free elections with an amnesty for Puigdemont and the others so they can campaign.
Team Independence has been over playing their hand the entire time. They don't have the support. They don't have an army. Puig will be lucky if he is allowed to return to Spain.
Spain should have wanted to calm the waters.. This crackdown will only breed long term resentment and sympathy among the international community for the seperatists. They set themselves up for a civil war in the next 50-100 years.
Well it sounds like Puigdemont has run off to form some sort of government in exile in Belgium
(since although an EU member cannot grant political asylum to citizens of another member state, Belgium or at least the relevant part of it has never ratified that part of the treaty so maybe it can..... it can certainly tie up any extradition request in court for years)
and his political party while it is claiming he is still the president of the new Catalan republic is also going to go along with the new elections called by the Madrid government
SO SO glad we are leaving! Should of run to Gibraltar, we should offer him protection there, and its a act of war to invade it against a fellow Nato member!
Spain would of loved that one.
That would be a fun stunt but would be very Joffreyesque. The UK, and Gibraltar, needs to stay out of this.
Yes the EU is complicit, and Francoist songs and Nazi salutes were both seen at the unity rally according to reports today. Those pro-union attendees have every right and reason to disown them.
The interesting thing is what is behind the flight of Puigdemont to Belgium. apparently it is not an invite by the Belgian government, I suspected it was and the EU was trying to lure and contain him and then basically control his output. Instead more interestingly he has been given sanctum by Flemish separatists who have their own autonomous region, and are off script when it comes to EU's harmonious ever closer union. So rather than containment this is an opportunity to be a long term thorn in side.
Some of the Madrid government have done their nut about Puigdemont and five others asylum was guaranteed for by the Flemish separatist government. Threats of long prison terms, 30 years for Puigdemont, become jokes if the Spanish can't legally reach him, and that is on top of the price of the heavy handed approach they are using. Seems like the pro-indy group are looking for a long term living martyr strategy. Puigdemont will hold Assange like interviews from Belgium and be difficult to silence.
I wonder if anyone might thing he is due an accident?
Team Independence has been over playing their hand the entire time. They don't have the support. They don't have an army. Puig will be lucky if he is allowed to return to Spain.
They have played the hand they had, and played it well.
No outright majority, no military force, no international recognition.
Yet they have engineered circumstances to make a credible formal UDI and forced Madrid to take heavy handed action. From one point of view the Catalans are an oppressed people again, that is excellent moral capital. Now the strategy changes to a longer term hearts and minds strategy. The seed is planted, when the economy next has a downturn and people are grumbling, then will be the time to get people to remember their dream of 'freedom', remind them about the heavy handedness and corruption of Madrid and offer 'hope' and 'change'. Two words that allow a demagogue to rise offering a brighter future. People are fickle and fall for this easily, time and again.
I cannot fault the strategy being employed here. Sure its dishonest and underhand, but it wasn't bloody and it made a huge amount of progress, more s than at first appears.
Spain has sent a competent overlord to administer Catalonia though. They got this much right. Soraya Saenz de Santamaria is known for having little charisma, but is hard nosed, visibly competent and has managed to avoid being hit by the scandal rife within the PP party. In other words "honest".
I wondere whose idea it was to place direct control of events in hands other than Rajoy's, the Spanish government or concerned EU mandarins?
Automatically Appended Next Post: The pro-indy mouthpiece online news channel has a new video. Interesting to watch as it hints about future strategy.
The above is a good source from the point of looking into the mindset and strategems of the pro-independence faction in Catalonia.
6:18ff The pro-indy strategy for the December regional election. We already discussed theory on what they might do here on Dakka, watch the 'spoiler'.
They have played the hand they had, and played it well.
No outright majority, no military force, no international recognition.
I can't agree to that. They have driven an almost irreconciliable wedge between two sides of Catalonia that had for the most part lived harmoniously side by side. They have sent away almost 2.000 companies away (losing over half a % point of GDP in one week). And, what's more important, they have awakened a unionist movement which didn't exist as such, leading the way for more confrontation in the future.
They have neglected their government duties for the last 2-3 years, put the prosperity of the next generation of Catalans in jeopardy, and there are some very good indications that all of this was done to draw attention away from some of the worst corruption scandals.
Tactical stalemate (and that's being generous) for a strategic major defeat.
They have played the hand they had, and played it well.
No outright majority, no military force, no international recognition.
I can't agree to that. They have driven an almost irreconciliable wedge between two sides of Catalonia that had for the most part lived harmoniously side by side. They have sent away almost 2.000 companies away (losing over half a % point of GDP in one week). And, what's more important, they have awakened a unionist movement which didn't exist as such, leading the way for more confrontation in the future.
You don't see the wedge but this campaign has been long ongoing, so others do.
You don't like developments, but nobody is asking you to.
Puigdemont has played his hand well, and that is ongoing, not over.
Today he held a press conference, in Brussels, in English. Accusing Madrid of heavy handedness and calling on Catalans for peaceful opposition only (violent seperatism could undo what the pro-indy movement has achieved).
On top it off being given reassurances of asylum from the autonomous Flemish government, which has this power within Belgium, and despite facing charges and threat of extremely heavy sentencing, 30 years at current count. He is making claiming to make press conferences in Brussels not you asylum purposes (thinly technically true as Ghent is offering asylum) but because Brussels is the heart of the EU.
Now international pres won't be focused on Puigdemont for long, next topical shiny will draw attention away. Best Madrid can do is try a business as usual approach and consolidate in Catalonia, however because Madrid is making heavy handed threats, failing to implement them will lose faith and control over time; unless they consolidate media control heavily, which is not impossible as the Catalonia broadcasting services are directly under Madrid's control now, and other EU countries are receptive to propaganda as shown. But memories and hopes don't go away.
Tactical stalemate (and that's being generous) for a strategic major defeat.
You are reading this very wrong. A crackdown was inevitable, and Madrid could bully the province any time it wants to, and the EU is afraid of further seperatism. Recognised independence was not a viable current goal, but it can be set up for later. This has been achieved.
Puigdemont has moved over for new separatist leaders to take centre stage, they need a charismatic now in Barcelona that Madrid cannot legally touch. He can cheerlead from Belgium, and remind Catalans that their lawfully democratically elected government, removed by dictat had already prior to its removal held a vote for UDI based on the mandate given them by the people; and that it is only a matter of time.
Spain will feth up soon, the pieces are in place, wait for events, keep a shiny demogogue with no attached scandal in the wings to offer 'hope' and 'change'. Next global recession maybe, maybe sooner if the PP feths up badly enough.
The EU was perfectly happy to accept the separatism of Czecho and Slovakia, also child states like Croatia and Slovenia. I don't see why the EU wouldn't accept Catalonia as a member.
Kroem wrote: I'm confused about why the rebel leaders have fled to Belgium, if they are wanted in Spain won't Europol just issue a warrant for their arrest?
The Flemish regional autonomous government has guaranteed political asylum. They have the legal power, and political motive to do this. Puigdemont cant be touched by lawful means so long as that state of grace persists.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kilkrazy wrote: The EU was perfectly happy to accept the separatism of Czecho and Slovakia, also child states like Croatia and Slovenia. I don't see why the EU wouldn't accept Catalonia as a member.
Situation was very different. The others were former Eastern bloc countries with a forced hegemony, either from the Soviets or Tito that played different racial groups against each other to maintain control. That is why when Yugoslavia unraveled it did so with the manner and brutality that it did. Czech Republic and Slovakia were more or less an even split of one larger territory, there wasn't one nation breaking away from another, the old nation ceased to exist.
Catalonia on the other hand has direct parallels to Lombardy, Flanders, Sicily, Brittany, Bavaria, Wales, Northern Ireland, and Scotland. Though the EU is not concerned for the latter three they are concerned about the rest because the nations involved are core EU nation states and would face upheaval if a successful independence bid occurred. Also Madrid wants core unity and constitutionally disavows secession so Brussels has to respect that sovereign choice by a member state.
To go back to the point about the EU not accepting Catalonia as a separate member state, the idea that it is different to Czechoslovakia sounds a bit "No true Scotsman."
After all, whatever Madrid thinks, one of the core values of the EU is self-determination, and another one is the ability to accomodate separate states within a union. It's a bad example, since Scotland voted to remain in the Union, but who can doubt that the EU would have easily been able to accept Scotland as a member?
Look at the problems around the Irish border with the UK. Why would the EU want to create another problem like that in between southern France and northern Spain.
The Flemish regional autonomous government has guaranteed political asylum. They have the legal power, and political motive to do this. Puigdemont cant be touched by lawful means so long as that state of grace persists.
Cool, thanks for the info! I remember those chaps making trouble before because they wouldn't ratify a treaty or something.
They have played the hand they had, and played it well.
No outright majority, no military force, no international recognition.
I can't agree to that. They have driven an almost irreconciliable wedge between two sides of Catalonia that had for the most part lived harmoniously side by side. They have sent away almost 2.000 companies away (losing over half a % point of GDP in one week). And, what's more important, they have awakened a unionist movement which didn't exist as such, leading the way for more confrontation in the future.
You don't see the wedge but this campaign has been long ongoing, so others do.
You don't like developments, but nobody is asking you to.
Puigdemont has played his hand well, and that is ongoing, not over.
Today he held a press conference, in Brussels, in English. Accusing Madrid of heavy handedness and calling on Catalans for peaceful opposition only (violent seperatism could undo what the pro-indy movement has achieved).
On top it off being given reassurances of asylum from the autonomous Flemish government, which has this power within Belgium, and despite facing charges and threat of extremely heavy sentencing, 30 years at current count. He is making claiming to make press conferences in Brussels not you asylum purposes (thinly technically true as Ghent is offering asylum) but because Brussels is the heart of the EU.
Now international pres won't be focused on Puigdemont for long, next topical shiny will draw attention away. Best Madrid can do is try a business as usual approach and consolidate in Catalonia, however because Madrid is making heavy handed threats, failing to implement them will lose faith and control over time; unless they consolidate media control heavily, which is not impossible as the Catalonia broadcasting services are directly under Madrid's control now, and other EU countries are receptive to propaganda as shown. But memories and hopes don't go away.
Tactical stalemate (and that's being generous) for a strategic major defeat.
You are reading this very wrong. A crackdown was inevitable, and Madrid could bully the province any time it wants to, and the EU is afraid of further seperatism. Recognised independence was not a viable current goal, but it can be set up for later. This has been achieved.
Puigdemont has moved over for new separatist leaders to take centre stage, they need a charismatic now in Barcelona that Madrid cannot legally touch. He can cheerlead from Belgium, and remind Catalans that their lawfully democratically elected government, removed by dictat had already prior to its removal held a vote for UDI based on the mandate given them by the people; and that it is only a matter of time.
Spain will feth up soon, the pieces are in place, wait for events, keep a shiny demogogue with no attached scandal in the wings to offer 'hope' and 'change'. Next global recession maybe, maybe sooner if the PP feths up badly enough.
That's a rather interesting interpretation of the situation. They way it's been read around here (even by pro-indy media) is that Puigdemont is just trying the last hail mary to save his bottom from prison. He didn't tell anyone from the government except his 4 mates in running that he was leaving. His CUP and ERC partners in government have stopped just short of calling him a traitor, and are trying to salvage what's left of the deposed government (https://www.ara.cat/politica/Junqueras-Turull-Romeva-Parlament-Puigdemont_0_1897610357.html), so in essence the deposed government is effectively split into two camps.
His heir presumptive has already stepped forward (Santi Vila, I spoke about him a few weeks back) for the December election trying to stem the flow of votes towards other parties. The rift between PDeCat, ERC and CUP is beyond repair now and a rework of the Junts x Sí coalition is impossible. Santi Vila who, btw, is opposed to independence since the party has recognised they have to go back to their moderate roots as a middle-class, conservative outfit.
The CUP and ERC hope for disobedience has not materialised, all public servants have welcomed their new PP overlords and the transition has been smooth.
So yes, they have overplayed their hand, exhausted their voter base and in the process set back the economic clock for a few years.
avantgarde wrote: Puigdemont said in his morning presser he's not seeking asylum, he's just waiting for a guarantee from Spain. Who also haven't issued a warrant.
So he and his cabinet are probably trying to negotiate some sort of amnesty to avoid the messiness of arrest for both sides.
Watch what is said and done.
Here are the events in order.
1. Flemish autonomous regional government guarantees asylum in public record.
2. Puigdemont and five other Catalan seperatist leaders drive over the border to France, the Mossos do not hinder them.
3. In France as EU citizens they fly to Belgium before the French can hope to react to a Spanish warrant (as yet unissued) , they wont dare act unilaterally so this move was safe once Puigdemont was outside Spain.
4. Puigdemont makes the comments that he made today in Belgium.
Puigdemont is telling the truth by direct technicality: he has NOT claimed asylum, yet. He will not need to until a warrant is issued. Spain also knows that if that line is crossed so long as Puigdemont is in Belgium when it happens he is safe.
Reading between the lines Puigdemont's actual guarantee was the public statement, which means that the Catalan and Flemish region governments were likely in communication throughout. Puigdemont has visited Ghent before the two separatist governments have similar agendas and consider each other allies. Some degree of trust is there.
The Flemish regional autonomous government has guaranteed political asylum. They have the legal power, and political motive to do this. Puigdemont cant be touched by lawful means so long as that state of grace persists.
Cool, thanks for the info! I remember those chaps making trouble before because they wouldn't ratify a treaty or something.
If would be cool if it was true.
It all comes from a single comment by a single junior minister. His party has stated they haven't invited Puigdemont, the Belgian government has said pretty much the same and the Spanish government has said that so far Mr. Puigdemont is free to go anywhere just like any other European citizen.
1. Flemish autonomous regional government guarantees asylum in public record.
2. Puigdemont and five other Catalan seperatist leaders drive over the border to France, the Mossos do not hinder them.
3. In France as EU citizens they fly to Belgium before the French can hope to react to a Spanish warrant (as yet unissued) , they wont dare act unilaterally so this move was safe once Puigdemont was outside Spain.
4. Puigdemont makes the comments that he made today in Belgium.
1. Is not true. Theo Francken, a junior minister said they could. His PM shut him down, his party said they don't have anything to do with that.
2. They didn't need to. They could have taken the flight from Barcelona. Puigdemont (as ex-president) still has police escort, so his movements are known all the time.
To go back to the point about the EU not accepting Catalonia as a separate member state, the idea that it is different to Czechoslovakia sounds a bit "No true Scotsman."
when Czecheslovakia split there was no Czecheslovakia left to complain have half the nation had left Czecheslovakia.
Spain will remain if Catalonia goes. Spain will complain if Catalonia goes.
After all, whatever Madrid thinks, one of the core values of the EU is self-determination,
A soundbyte, that is all. The EU has been very heavy handed sometimes and quite willing to ride roughshod over self determination. Smaller non-core economies get railroaded as required.
In 2008 Ireland voted in a referendum to not back the Lisbon treaty. That wasn't good enough for the EU so the Irish had to vote again in 2009 and potentially again until they got it 'right'.
In 2015 Greece rejected austerity in the referendum, in 2016 it happened anyway due to EU pressure.
and another one is the ability to accomodate separate states within a union. It's a bad example, since Scotland voted to remain in the Union, but who can doubt that the EU would have easily been able to accept Scotland as a member?
I can doubt, and so could you if you understood realpolitik.
We had this conversation before in 2014 and you couldnt get over your very naive and two dimensional view of international politics. Yes Scotland could be a feasible economy but there is far more to it than that.
In 2014 Rajoy publically confirmed that Spain would veto Scottish membership of the EU in case it triggered hopes of separatist ambitions in Catalonia. I believed him then, do you in hindsight believe him now?
Look at the problems around the Irish border with the UK. Why would the EU want to create another problem like that in between southern France and northern Spain.
They don't, but problems like this happen. Take a look at how France has been reacting. Have you seen French media coverage, you got more balanced reporting from the Soviet Union. They need this problem like a hole in the head.
1. Flemish autonomous regional government guarantees asylum in public record.
2. Puigdemont and five other Catalan seperatist leaders drive over the border to France, the Mossos do not hinder them.
3. In France as EU citizens they fly to Belgium before the French can hope to react to a Spanish warrant (as yet unissued) , they wont dare act unilaterally so this move was safe once Puigdemont was outside Spain.
4. Puigdemont makes the comments that he made today in Belgium.
1. Is not true. Theo Francken, a junior minister said they could. His PM shut him down, his party said they don't have anything to do with that.
2. They didn't need to. They could have taken the flight from Barcelona. Puigdemont (as ex-president) still has police escort, so his movements are known all the time.
So Puigdemont takes a flight from Barcelona to Brussels. Spanish air traffic control diverts flight to Madrid on central government orders. They can do that and the pilot would comply.
The French dare not get directly involved with same from flight from Marseilles to Brussels, and said flight could not be diverted across a third party border not on its flight path.
I still feel in my naievete (Fr) that Puigedemont's midnlight flit to Ghent may not be the culmination of his amazing masterplan to convince Catalonia to vote for independence.
So Puigdemont takes a flight from Barcelona to Brussels. Spanish air traffic control diverts flight to Madrid on central government orders. They can do that and the pilot would comply.
The French dare not get directly involved with same from flight from Marseilles to Brussels, and said flight could not be diverted across a third party border not on its flight path.
Why on earth would Spain do that? Belgium is within EAW reach. It makes absolutely no difference than if he just stayed at home.... except for media purposes, that is.
EAW is automatic. It doesn't go through the executive (regional or otherwise) as you seem to think.
The Flemish regional autonomous government has guaranteed political asylum. They have the legal power, and political motive to do this. Puigdemont cant be touched by lawful means so long as that state of grace persists.
Cool, thanks for the info! I remember those chaps making trouble before because they wouldn't ratify a treaty or something.
If would be cool if it was true.
It all comes from a single comment by a single junior minister. His party has stated they haven't invited Puigdemont, the Belgian government has said pretty much the same and the Spanish government has said that so far Mr. Puigdemont is free to go anywhere just like any other European citizen.
We wont see it confirmed true or false until Spain tries to make a move. If they do formalise the warrants threatened it will be a staring contest. Spain may well lose that.
Do you feel lucky punk?
So Puigdemont takes a flight from Barcelona to Brussels. Spanish air traffic control diverts flight to Madrid on central government orders. They can do that and the pilot would comply.
The French dare not get directly involved with same from flight from Marseilles to Brussels, and said flight could not be diverted across a third party border not on its flight path.
Why on earth would Spain do that? Belgium is within EAW reach. It makes absolutely no difference than if he just stayed at home.... except for media purposes, that is.
EAW is automatic. It doesn't go through the executive (regional or otherwise) as you seem to think.
Not in Belgium it isnt. Remember compliance to EU law is for non-core members. France, Germany and Belgium do as they please. See above link.
Belgium has refused to ratify EAW, France refuses to ratify EU copyright law, I dont know what Germany refuses to ratify, but if they choseexception for themselves in an area or two they would likely get away with it.
The UK was in a very similar position, there was a lot binding on the UK that the UK ignored, but the UK had to fight for its special status, motions against France, Belgian and German interests never get tabled to begin with but get filtered out prior to reaching assembly.
I still feel in my naievete (Fr) that Puigedemont's midnlight flit to Ghent may not be the culmination of his amazing masterplan to convince Catalonia to vote for independence.
Well it worked, they did and he managed to get a UDI out of it.
That is as far as it goes.
Spain has more tanks, Spain has international recognition, Spain has more police more money more everything. Pro-indy cant win if Spain doesnt overplay its hand. They got a lot of momentum from Rajoy's mistakes. They cant count on that all the time, especially with the EU breathing down Rajoy's neck.
People are people though, they change their minds on issues. The economy if pretty good right now, people vote for odd things when their wallets are empty though. Trump for instance. Spain doesnt have the most stable economy, and is fairly corrupt. Time now to sit back and mark time, it's a long game.
In 2008 Ireland voted in a referendum to not back the Lisbon treaty. That wasn't good enough for the EU so the Irish had to vote again in 2009 and potentially again until they got it 'right'.
In 2015 Greece rejected austerity in the referendum, in 2016 it happened anyway due to EU pressure.
As I've recently explained in the UK Politics thread, that claim is a blatant lie; the parts of the Lisbon Treaty that Ireland took exception to when voting it down was adressed in the Seville Declaration and the Irish electorate was presented with a modified version of the Lisbon treaty that reflected these changes. It wasn't "voting again" on the same issue, the EU compromised and made concessions to the Irish electorate.
The 2016 bailout of Greece wasn't forcing Greece to do anything, either. That was Greece asking the EU to dig them out of a hole they'd made themselves. Sure, Greece was acting under what was effectively duress, but they'd placed themselves in that situation.
I still feel in my naievete (Fr) that Puigedemont's midnlight flit to Ghent may not be the culmination of his amazing masterplan to convince Catalonia to vote for independence.
Well it worked, they did and he managed to get a UDI out of it.
That is as far as it goes.
A UDI is meaningless if no one recognizes it. Anyone can say "I'm no longer part of X" and it would have the same value.
Catalonia has failed at getting anyone on board. It has exhausted his voters and damaged their standing. The most evident effect has been to galvanise the usually passive unionist electorate.
We will see record participation on the December election, and that can only be good for democracy.
After all, whatever Madrid thinks, one of the core values of the EU is self-determination.
With local, regional, national and EU elections, you'd really have to warp the meaning* of 'self-determination' to claim that Catalonia didn't have it.
*like the indy reps, who seem to feel that 'we don't currently like some circumstances' is equivalent.
I still feel in my naievete (Fr) that Puigedemont's midnlight flit to Ghent may not be the culmination of his amazing masterplan to convince Catalonia to vote for independence.
Well it worked, they did and he managed to get a UDI out of it.
That is as far as it goes.
A UDI is meaningless if no one recognizes it. Anyone can say "I'm no longer part of X" and it would have the same value.
Catalonia has failed at getting anyone on board. It has exhausted his voters and damaged their standing. The most evident effect has been to galvanise the usually passive unionist electorate.
We will see record participation on the December election, and that can only be good for democracy.
Ahat did you expect them to achieve? You think Rajoy would let Catalonia walk away.
Success isn't measured by getting what you want NOW. Thinking like that is what ruins futures.
It's a long game and a lot of progress has been made. They got as far as UDI and faced visible oppression. Those are good cards to carry in the future.
Also to think the Catalan independence movement is exhausted, is delusional. They are complying with an external heavy handed regime applying force majeure, and will remember. Puigdemont et al hasn't threatened anyone with incarceration if they don't get their way. Madrid has, and remember article 155 is a direct suspension of democracy and the removal of a mandated government without application of a further manbdate from the Catalan people. The pro-independence movement has placed Spain in a position where it has had to soil its hands to retain control.
Automatically Appended Next Post: On another note.
What I find bemusing right now is the affront to list wasting public money as one of the major charges raised against the pro-independence leaders.
The money wasted being the cost of holding a referendum.
So wasting public money is a crime in Spain is it? It doesn't seem like it was before. Now for any European government to accuse another of squandering is fairly hypocritical, but the Spanish government, the PP led Spanish government....
It's hard to find parallels, so try this:.
So wasting public money is a crime in Spain is it? It doesn't seem like it was before. Now for any European government to accuse another of squandering is fairly hypocritical, but the Spanish government, the PP led Spanish government....
It's hard to find parallels, so try this:.
Are you familiar with the concept of separation of powers? Governments don't prosecute, the judiciary does.
Just a reminder, the Dutch voted down the same EU constitution as the Irish in our own referendum, only to have its contents forced down our throats in the treaty of Maastricht a few years later anyway. EU is not about self-determination at all. Never has been.
...
Just as with the Ukraine association treaty, and come January, the referendum on our new "let's allow security services to monitor innocent citizens" law.
And politicians wonder why people like Trump or our own Geert Wilders and more recently Thierry Baudet get so many votes...
Are you familiar with the concept of separation of powers? Governments don't prosecute, the judiciary does.
Only if the judiciary is actually independent of the other branches. Frankly even when it is, sometimes it isn't.
When the charges are being read by politicians, not lawyers, it is hard to argue due process is being followed.
If political class force the charges and they do say give him there 20 years. They do follow through.
Well they just made a political prisoner. A mayter. A man who suffered for Catalonia. And regardless of how effective, if he was a idiot or not. That's a powerful symbol.
Killkrazy wrote:
and another one is the ability to accomodate separate states within a union. It's a bad example, since Scotland voted to remain in the Union, but who can doubt that the EU would have easily been able to accept Scotland as a member?
I can doubt, and so could you if you understood realpolitik.
With such a winning personality as that, I'm amazed you can extricate yourself from your no-doubt legions of friends and admirers long enough to post such eloquent counter-debate.
Yodhrin wrote: A few folk on here will suspect I have a bias on this situation, and they'd be right, I firmly believe in self-determination and support the Catalan movement for independence from Spain(as I support the Kurds, and any other group who choose to peacefully self-organise and democratically demand political autonomy). But we're past the point where this can be about individual biases on semi-related political questions like Scottish independence, this is about a member of the European Union attempting to repress democracy with intimidation and violence.
Rajoy's government have used every possible method to try and prevent this referendum - arresting Catalan officials, having the Constitutional Court declare the basic idea of a referendum illegal, having other courts demand that websites be shut down and apps be removed from Google's service, suspending the finances of the Catalan parliament, even charging participants and organisers of entirely peaceful marches in support of Catalan independence with "sedition" - fething sedition for marching down a road with a sign - but they failed, the vote began this morning.
Many folk thought that would be it, that their bluff had been called, their posturing faced down, and now democracy would take its course one way or the other.
They were wrong, because the spirit of Franco is alive and well in Spain.
At some polling stations, people queuing to vote were "kettled" and then violently dispersed by the Guarda Civil(Spain's paramilitarised state police)
Others attempted to prevent their local polling stations from being raided by gathering at the entrances and sitting down to block them. This was the result:
This isn't about whether or not you support Catalonia seceeding from Spain, or indepenence movements in general - this is about whether or not you support fascism. I'd urge anyone in an EU member state to email your reps urging them to step in and condemn the Spanish state's behaviour, get on social media and add to the calls to the EU Commission and Parliament to do the same. A supposedly modern democracy in 2017 is using a paramilitary force to violently prevent a democratic vote - if we let this stand unremarked then words like democracy cease to have any real meaning.
I was in one of those voting centers that day, luckilly our grandmas had toughtness 5 . On the EU subject, EU is a states club, all those human right and fancy words mean nothing, even if there were more serious crimes comited by the state the EU would never go farther than saying some illmanered words about this subject. The geopolitical level played on the EU is beyond any regional "willi wonka" for them. The spanish state has a loong list of dictatiorial acts, hiding the belgian dicatator during nazi ocupantion and refusing to handle him to belgian authorities even when spain acomplished a "democratic state". Also creating an undecover paramilitary group that acted in a terrorist fashion in the 1980's, kiddnaping, using torture and murder (zero trials) on suposed terrorist which some of those was finally discovered that they were civilians, almost all paramilitary members (which were also policeman) were granted a pardon by the president. Also mantaining same institutions and high ranking oficials from the previous dictatorial state. Also separations of powers is a joke, all judges from the contitucional court (sumpreme court for brits) were members of one of the two big parties before beig placed into office (some of them were still members of the actual governing party although being ilegal to be in the supreme court and be member of a political party)
I could go all day with this crap but it's time to check the new minis.....
Orlanth wrote: It was a struggle perhaps but I did post reasons.
You should try being honest enough not to edit down what you are critiqueing to remove supporting commentary.
I made no off cuff remark, but followed through with reasoning.
My (somewhat sardonic) comment was on your style of address, not the general content of the post (as well you know). If I prefaced everything I said with 'I'm awesome and understand stuff but you aren't and don't', I wouldn't get far in life. Given that Killkrazy is a literate, intelligent poster, saying that kind of thing to him doesn't exactly help any argument you might try to make. Quite the contrary, really.
Bran Dawri wrote: Just a reminder, the Dutch voted down the same EU constitution as the Irish in our own referendum, only to have its contents forced down our throats in the treaty of Maastricht a few years later anyway. EU is not about self-determination at all. Never has been.
...
Just as with the Ukraine association treaty, and come January, the referendum on our new "let's allow security services to monitor innocent citizens" law.
And politicians wonder why people like Trump or our own Geert Wilders and more recently Thierry Baudet get so many votes...
Bran Dawri wrote: Just a reminder, the Dutch voted down the same EU constitution as the Irish in our own referendum, only to have its contents forced down our throats in the treaty of Maastricht a few years later anyway. EU is not about self-determination at all. Never has been.
...
Just as with the Ukraine association treaty, and come January, the referendum on our new "let's allow security services to monitor innocent citizens" law.
And politicians wonder why people like Trump or our own Geert Wilders and more recently Thierry Baudet get so many votes...
What?
Yeah, and if I am not mistaken they now even want to revoke the law that allowed referenda. Evidently, the Dutch government only likes democracy when people vote what the government wants them to vote. Democracy, but preferably just kratos without demos.
