|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Catalonia Independence
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Cod:
But why should a minority have the right to disrupt - sometimes repeatedly - the affairs of the entire state without the rest of its citizens having a say?
Did you really just ask that question? History is replete with examples of minorities disrupting the affairs of the entire state because that's the only way for them to get a fair hearing.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
quote:
Originally posted by Cod:
You overlook the importance of consent.
If I've been such a bastard to my partner, abusing my order of magnitude power over them so that they want a divorce, my 'consent' is all part of the abuse, the delusion of power.
Exactly.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Cod:
But why should a minority have the right to disrupt - sometimes repeatedly - the affairs of the entire state without the rest of its citizens having a say?
Did you really just ask that question? History is replete with examples of minorities disrupting the affairs of the entire state because that's the only way for them to get a fair hearing.
Yeah but where's my dinner and who's going to do the washing and collect the kids and I suppose a shag's out of the question, even though I've got my hand warmly round your throat?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Cod:
But why should a minority have the right to disrupt - sometimes repeatedly - the affairs of the entire state without the rest of its citizens having a say?
Did you really just ask that question? History is replete with examples of minorities disrupting the affairs of the entire state because that's the only way for them to get a fair hearing.
eg, when said minority owns most of the state's assets. Then they effectively own the government, even in supposedly democratic states.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pangolin Guerre:
Your piling of ifs is so counterfactual that it's distractingly pointless
The clause following the first IF is an attempt to paraphrase something you yourself said.
The second IF was what the whole Québécois independence referendum was predicated on, so it can't be that counterfactual.
quote:
cease being so condescending.
What excellent advice that is indeed.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
I'm trying to get my head around this and I'm struggling. It's not that I disagree with the Catalonian right to have independence if that's what they want, but I've lived through enough to know that what might look great somewhere else is epically crap when its on your own doorstep. That aside, there seems to be a lot missing from this debate. Maybe some of these points are entirely wrong - I have no doubt they will be dutifully corrected - but I think they are worth putting out there for the sake of clarity.
1. Why do independence movements (often that we barely know the background and circumstances of) elicit our support so long as they aren't on our doorstep? There was a much more nuanced approach to an independent Scotland and a united Ireland is rarely countenanced by the same people who would jump on the bandwagon of supporting an independent Catalonia.
2. The vote was illegal; wasn't it? In that sense it was the perfect coup, putting the Spanish government in a position whereby no matter what they did, they couldn't win. But would you be so delighted by an illegal Scottish independence vote or Gerry Adams holding such a vote and then threatening the British government with the blackmail of declaring independence on the back of such a sham pantomime?
3. Only 25%, or something like that went out and voted for independence? Sure, Spain could grant a legal referendum on the issue after rewriting its constitution. But would it really be worth all that expense and energy and political upheaval and instability for 25%
4. This is the same 25% of loud voices that know an independent Catalonia's greatest source of income would be from tourism and yet who also arranged marches against the vast swathes of tourists invading Barcelona? Do they really know what they want?
5. The idea of a fractured Spain is surely an unholy demonic terror to all who lived through the civil war years?
6. There seems to be evidence of Russian shit stirring.....again. I've no idea why Russia would be interested in this part of Spain or why it would interfere in such a manner. Is it nonsense?
7. I know there are some in the UK who would love to see this. They truly and misguidedly believe that an independent Catalonia somehow emboldens the cause of a hard Brexit in the same way they hoped that Europe might fall to the far right to 'help them out'. Words outside of hell can't describe my utter contempt for such attitudes.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
I would never regard anything other than an overwhelming majority of the electorate voting for independence as truly ethically valid.
If Gerry Adams obtained that tomorrow from 67% of the electorate, if Liverpool did, that's that.
Unless they decided to be ... Christ-like about it.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
But which electorate do you ask in an independence referendum? Only the areas which which to secede (Catalonia, Scotland); or the country as a whole (Span, Britain). To me there is no "right" answer to this conundrum as I'm sure losing a large chunk of a country must affect those who stay.
FWIW my Scottish wife felt it was right that only Scotland was involved in its referendum (of course this both included non-Scots living there and excluded Scots living beyond its borders); I was not so sure.
[ 06. October 2017, 13:39: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
But which electorate do you ask in an independence referendum? Only the areas which which to secede (Catalonia, Scotland); or the country as a whole (Span, Britain). To me there is no "right" answer to this conundrum as I'm sure losing a large chunk of a country must affect those who stay.
The divorce analogy has been used before, and the conclusion that we have come to in that case (divorces happen more often than independence, so we've had more practice) is that if one party is set on leaving, there's not much to do except say "OK" and work on a reasonable division of property.
There are plenty of cases where one partner wants a divorce and the other wants to stay married, and certainly losing a spouse affects the one that "stays", but that doesn't mean that we look at such couples and say "well, the vote is 50-50, so there's no majority, so you stay married.)
I think independence should be a slow process (it's pretty irreversible, so you should be pretty sure that it's what you want. cf. Brexit!) but I don't see any justice in allowing the rump country to keep the separatists hostage.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
That makes sense, although (as in a divorce) one would hope for the separation and asset-splitting to involve a lot of amiable discussion.
I don't think a simple majority for those voted to secede would be enough though: I would want at least 50% of the total potential electorate, if not more.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Sorry - I tried to edit that to say:
That makes sense, although (as in a divorce) one would hope for the separation and asset-splitting to involve a lot of amiable discussion.
I don't think a simple majority of those who voted would be enough for secession though: I would want at least 50% of the total potential electorate, if not more. Or perhaps two votes, a few months apart.
[ 06. October 2017, 14:01: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
Baptist Trafain quote:
To me there is no "right" answer to this conundrum.
Couldn't agree more. One of the many problems associated with the right of national self-determination is in establishing "the self' which is to do the determining. in this context is the collective "self" Spain or Catalonia? The rest of Spain might claim that independence for Catalonia is as much a matter for them as for the people of that region/nation, so that they, too, should have a vote on the matter.
We might also take the view that if Spain were to agree to a referendum on the issue that were Catalonia to vote for independence from Spain those parts of Catalonia bordering on Spain that voted against i.e. regarded themselves as politically Spanish, should remain within Spain. Similar arguments might be advanced regarding Scottish and Welsh referendums on the issue. Ditto in Canada had Quebec voted for independence. In the US, of course, the matter was decided by the civil war.
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kwesi:
Baptist Trafain quote:
To me there is no "right" answer to this conundrum.
Couldn't agree more. One of the many problems associated with the right of national self-determination is in establishing "the self' which is to do the determining. in this context is the collective "self" Spain or Catalonia?
Or Spanish people (including those who live in Catalonia) or Catalans (who may live anywhere, but let's just stick to the rest of Spain for convenience).
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
Baptist Trafain quote:
Or Spanish people (including those who live in Catalonia) or Catalans (who may live anywhere, but let's just stick to the rest of Spain for convenience).
OK, but you make an important point. Respecting the Scottish Referendum, Scots living in England (indeed, outside Scotland) were disfranchised, but Englishmen and other nationalities living in Scotland were included. In a finely-balanced referendum such exclusions and inclusions could be decisive.
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
We all agree on slow (a week between each phase at least? A month?), overwhelming electorate majority (67%?), mediated, decrees nisi and absolute confirmed by second referendum I imagine.
[ 06. October 2017, 14:50: Message edited by: Martin60 ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
Martin60 quote:
We all agree on slow, overwhelming electorate majority
Majority of whom? Who constitute the relevant electorate?
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Those seceding. Those wanting a divorce. Which can work the other way of course ...
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
The problem with democracy when it comes to independence movements is that when 'majority rules' the minority which seeks independence hasn't got a proper voice. If the majority won't listen to the minority, then it comes to votes and perhaps violence. Does there not have to be restraint on majorities when they infringe on minority rights? Did Spain impose the majority Spanish will on Catalonia? Did they talk and negotiate about what the Catalans desire?
Does the UK properly respect the Scottish? Doesn't the UK have to devolve powers to the Scotland in aid of keeping Scotland in the union? When is there too much history to have accommodation of minority nations into a larger country?
The Québec votes, the first in 1980, the second in 1995 were preceded by the FLQ in the 1960s and 70s, culminating in the 1970 October Crisis, which involved terrorism, murder, the army and tanks on the streets of Canada's cities, people jailed without clear cause and held (I was terrified personally). The determination was to negotiate and talk after this, which led in a sinuous path to the referendums. It appears that the French speaking minority in Canada feels its national interests are accommodated mostly kind of sort of within Canada now, as previously discussed.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Why do independence movements (often that we barely know the background and circumstances of) elicit our support so long as they aren't on our doorstep?
For my part, I was (and remain) just as much in favour of Scottish independence as Catalonian. In both cases, of course, my support has always been caveated with "if that's what the people there want".
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kwesi:
Baptist Trafain quote:
Or Spanish people (including those who live in Catalonia) or Catalans (who may live anywhere, but let's just stick to the rest of Spain for convenience).
OK, but you make an important point. Respecting the Scottish Referendum, Scots living in England (indeed, outside Scotland) were disfranchised, but Englishmen and other nationalities living in Scotland were included. In a finely-balanced referendum such exclusions and inclusions could be decisive.
This was clearly an issue about civic nationalism, as opposed to ethnic nationalism. I thought that the SNP scored plus points on this.
It seems very weird to contemplate a vote for an entire country, from which a region wishes to secede. Imagine this over Ireland in 1918-9, I mean, if the whole UK had voted. It would probably make everything worse.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kwesi:
We might also take the view that if Spain were to agree to a referendum on the issue that were Catalonia to vote for independence from Spain those parts of Catalonia bordering on Spain that voted against i.e. regarded themselves as politically Spanish, should remain within Spain.
This is a fair point. There is no a priori reason to draw a succession line at a particular existing political boundary. It depends at some level on whether you view your country as a federation of states / provinces / whatever, or as a single country that is divided into convenient administrative regions. In the latter case, there's no reason at all to expect the successionist desire to align with a political boundary.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Kwesi:
We might also take the view that if Spain were to agree to a referendum on the issue that were Catalonia to vote for independence from Spain those parts of Catalonia bordering on Spain that voted against i.e. regarded themselves as politically Spanish, should remain within Spain.
This is a fair point. There is no a priori reason to draw a succession line at a particular existing political boundary. It depends at some level on whether you view your country as a federation of states / provinces / whatever, or as a single country that is divided into convenient administrative regions. In the latter case, there's no reason at all to expect the successionist desire to align with a political boundary.
A friend tells me that one of the elements which raised doubt in the minds of Québec voters was the obvious unfairness of using the provincial boundaries for their new state and the impossibility of doing anything else. One of the main drivers of separatism was the sentiment that the (francophone) Québécois had been treated unfairly; and there was a reluctance to be unfair in their own turn.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Kwesi:
Respecting the Scottish Referendum, Scots living in England (indeed, outside Scotland) were disfranchised, but Englishmen and other nationalities living in Scotland were included. In a finely-balanced referendum such exclusions and inclusions could be decisive.
This was clearly an issue about civic nationalism, as opposed to ethnic nationalism. I thought that the SNP scored plus points on this.
As you say, there are two forms of nationalism. A nationalism that is defined by ethnicity is a thing of great horror, a xenophobic and racist evil, the first few steps down a road that leads to concentration camps and gas chambers. It's the sort of nationalism that the UK government has embraced in it's barking mad hostility to immigrants and pursuit of a disasterous Brexshit.
The alternative is to define a nation by geography (albeit inevitably arbitrarily) and the people of that nation as those who live within that area - possibly with some allowance for those who have moved temporarily to other locations. Which is, of course, the definition used by the vast majority of nations. Though not ideal (nationality is still a divisive matter), it's far preferable to ethnicity.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
quezalcoati quote:
It seems very weird to contemplate a vote for an entire country, from which a region wishes to secede.
Not at all. As I tried to point out, for Spanish nationalists Catalonia is part of Spain, so national self-determination is a matter for Spain not a sub-national region. The decision to amend its territorial boundaries is an all-Spanish matter. There is nothing weird in this: the United States fought a civil war to defend its territorial integrity and deny any right of the Confederacy to secede.* I bet the civic nature of Scottish nationalism would be severely tested if it were proposed to redraw the boundaries of Scotland to allow areas contiguous with England to remain in Britain, should the inhabitants so desire, and/or to accommodate a decision of Shetlanders to remain outside an independent Scotland. I do not raise the question of the Sudetan Germans!
* Odd, isn't it that a president of the USA should support national self-determination. One waits with anticipation for a latinised Texas, California, New Mexico, Arizona et. to seek reintegration with Mexico.
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
That seems to contradict self-determination to me. It would mean that Scottish independence would be determined by English voters. Eh? That sounds nonsensical, or really, determination by someone else.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
quetzalcotl:
quote:
That seems to contradict self-determination to me. It would mean that Scottish independence would be determined by English voters. Eh? That sounds nonsensical, or really, determination by someone else
]
That's because you have difficulty recognising that Scotland is part of a legal entity called the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, whose nationality is British. Like any other nation the British claim a right to self-determination, which they exercise through their parliament. That collective self has a view as to its territorial rights. Within that territory there are some who reject their British identity, including Scottish nationalists, who assert a contrasting Scottish right to self-determination. Consequently, there is a conflict between two concepts of self-determination in relation to a particular piece of territory. They both uphold the principle of self-determination but are clearly in conflict because they hold incompatible views regarding "the collective self" that is doing the determining. In the UK case, the collective will of the British, expressed through its parliament, agreed to cede part of its territory, Scotland, should voters living there so wish, but do not regard it as a right of the Scottish parliament to hold a referendum on the matter without the say-so of the UK..
The international community, for quite sensible reasons, does not recognise the right of any group within an existing nation the right to secede simply because a regional majority claims it is another nation and wants independence. The problem with the concept of national self-determination is that it's by no means obvious what are the nations which have that right. Wait until Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran begin to respond to Kurdish claims for national self-determination.
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
They've been doing just that in their unenlightened way for a century.
Imagine!
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Re Kurdish independence:
I think their various countries should let them go, if that's what the majority of Kurds want. AIUI, their countries don't want really want them, but won't let them leave. But letting them leave would save trouble, time, money, and lives on both sides.
And Kurds are already referring to themselves as Kurdistan.
I wonder if there are valuable natural resources in Kurdish territory? That might explain why the countries want to hold on to the land.
I hope we're not looking at a Turks vs. Armenians situation...which became genocide against the Armenians...
![[Paranoid]](graemlins/paranoid.gif)
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
No we're not. But it shows how dangerous Balkanization is with unenlightened dominant cultures.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jonah the Whale
Ship's pet cetacean
# 1244
|
Posted
Independence movements are fine when it involves groups we sympathise with. How many Westerners were opposed to independence for Kosovo? South Sudan?
Why did Britain ever let USA get away with declaring independence all those years back? Well, because Britain couldn't prevent them, not because they saw the light. Unfortunately for people like the Kurds, in most cases independence is only viable if it can be backed by force.
Posts: 2799 | From: Nether Regions | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kwesi:
I bet the civic nature of Scottish nationalism would be severely tested if it were proposed to redraw the boundaries of Scotland to allow areas contiguous with England to remain in Britain, should the inhabitants so desire, and/or to accommodate a decision of Shetlanders to remain outside an independent Scotland.
Seems like that would be both defensible and fairly straightforward. Tally votes per geographical region (not necessarily one coincident with existing administrative boundaries, but small regions bordered by geographic features - rivers, hill ranges, watersheds, roadsheds, and so on.) Impose a rule that a new independent country must be continuous (islands such as Shetland are special cases). Small islands of independence in a sea of remain lose out, as do islands of remain in a sea of independence, but border communities get to decide which way to jump.
Once you've done that, you have a proposed boundary for the new country. Now you hold a second ballot, asking people if they want independence on those terms (imagine, for example, that the economic strength of a country is in the border regions, and those regions vote to stay with the old country rather than becoming independent. The independence-minded voters might change their mind when they discover that they're not getting what they thought they would get.
(I'm actually less supportive of independence movements within an EU or similar federal umbrella state, 'cause it seems that there are opportunities to game the regional development grants and similar inter-state transfers if you can split off from the parent country whilst remaining in the EU. If a proposed state intends to stand on its own financial feet, it has a stronger case.)
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jonah the Whale:
Independence movements are fine when it involves groups we sympathise with. How many Westerners were opposed to independence for Kosovo? South Sudan?
Why did Britain ever let USA get away with declaring independence all those years back? Well, because Britain couldn't prevent them, not because they saw the light. Unfortunately for people like the Kurds, in most cases independence is only viable if it can be backed by force.
There was the coincidence of Britain also fighting other wars at the same time. We have seen some interesting not violent independence. Norway from Sweden. Czech Republic and Slovakia. But more are violent.
Then there's Algeria from France, Bangladesh from Pakistan, East Timor from Indonesia, various nations of Yugoslavia, Eritrea from Ethiopia, South Sudan from Sudan. All terribly violent.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Re Kurdish independence:
I think their various countries should let them go, if that's what the majority of Kurds want. AIUI, their countries don't want really want them, but won't let them leave. But letting them leave would save trouble, time, money, and lives on both sides.
And Kurds are already referring to themselves as Kurdistan.
I wonder if there are valuable natural resources in Kurdish territory? That might explain why the countries want to hold on to the land. *snip*
Oilfields of Mosul. That was the prime reason the western allies created Iraq after WWI.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
...
Then there's Algeria from France, Bangladesh from Pakistan, East Timor from Indonesia, various nations of Yugoslavia, Eritrea from Ethiopia, South Sudan from Sudan. All terribly violent.
Will shipmates please stop including East Timor among the list of states that have split from others. East Timor did not secede from Indonesia in any normal sense of the word.
East Timor was a Portuguese colony which became independent in the normal way when the Portuguese empire fell apart after the Carnation Revelation. Because it lacked the armed forces to defend itself, almost immediately Indonesia invaded and purported to annex it. That triggered a war of resistance which lasted some 25 years until Indonesia was forced to accept that its annexation had failed. It is no more correct to speak of East Timor seceding from Indonesia than to say that D Day was the beginning of France's secession from Nazi Germany.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
Alan Cresswell talked about cultural nationalism vs civic nationalism upthread, and deplored the former as racist xenophobic bigotry (cf. some of the Brexit rhetoric) whilst applauding the latter as the natural desire of people settled in a particular area to chose a government that meets their needs.
And yet when we talk about the dissolution of Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia, or the independence of Pakistan and Bangladesh from India (all things that enjoy widespread support), we're talking about cultural states. We don't want to be part of them because we're Muslim and they're Hindu. We're Bosniaks and they're Serbs. Whatever.
And quite often, we want to be our own country because we're treated badly by the country that we're in because we're a minority. So I'm not sure the distinction is quite as clear-cut as Alan painted it.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Except, the formation of those states along cultural or religious lines are hardly examples of peaceful independence. Which pretty much proves my point about how unpleasant nationalism along those lines is.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
Is Catalonian nationalism predominantly civic or ethnic in character? If civic, what is to be gained by independence from Spain? The same question might be asked of civic nationalists in other liberal democracies.
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
I don't fully understand all the nuances, but I think it is firmly in the 'ethnic' camp. One of the arguments that you hear time and time again is 'Sure even the language is different' which is a little like saying Munster Irish is different from Ulster Irish - which it is, but it's still Irish. The problem with the narrative isn't the issue of difference, but that the narrative posits difference as a way of moulding that difference in opposition rather than a diversity to be celebrated. I guess Spain has been looking at some of the freedoms and favours given Catalonia over the last number of years and felt it made an error that has has bolstered notions of independence; so I can understand why they have rescinded (not that this makes it right). I think if Catalonians were being treated in Spin as second class citizens, persecuted or in some way oppressed then an Independence movement would have a lot more traction in terms of it's adoption in my own mind; as it is. It could be argued that what was rescinded politically (in 2012 or whenever it was) is the oppression, but the problem with that is that the rest of Spain probably looks at that as putting them on the same footing with the rest of Spain.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
I don't fully understand all the nuances, but I think it is firmly in the 'ethnic' camp. One of the arguments that you hear time and time again is 'Sure even the language is different' which is a little like saying Munster Irish is different from Ulster Irish - which it is, but it's still Irish. ...
Not quite FC. Although Spanish and Catalan are quite closely related, they are both still in prevalent vernacular use. Unless my information is complete rubbish, hardly anyone in Munster or Ulster speaks either sort of Irish as their vernacular.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kwesi:
Is Catalonian nationalism predominantly civic or ethnic in character? If civic, what is to be gained by independence from Spain? The same question might be asked of civic nationalists in other liberal democracies.
Of course, in probably all cases a civic nationalism would have cultural components - the region seeking independence could have their own language (almost always a minority language because it's been suppressed by the language of the dominant nation), for example.
But, the argument for independence based on civic nationalism has a strong political and economic base. In any country, different regions will have differences in economy - some areas are rural and agricultural, others coastal with fishing, some areas have heavy industry, others financial etc. A government that enacts economic policies that favour the economic strengths of some regions at the detriment of other regions creates a basis for why those disadvantaged regions would seek independence (or at least genuine devolved powers that allow them to adapt national economic policy for their needs), especially if changes in government don't do much to change the overall bias. Politically, driven by cultural differences, then a region that always votes for parties on a different part of the spectrum compared to the whole nation will feel alienated - eg: where they routinely elect left wing candidates and the nation as a whole routinely elects right wing governments.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Posted by Enoch:
quote:
Although Spanish and Catalan are quite closely related...
This was the point I was making, not whether or not they are still in regular use
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
Re the language question, my own very subjective experience is that, being able to read and speak French fairly well, I find Catalan much easier to read than Spanish. Most of the touristy places in the area where my sister lives offer guide leaflets etc. in French or Catalan.
As for understanding spoken Catalan, well, I find it's a lot easier to comprehend after a carafe or two of the local vi negre (red wine - in Spanish vino tinto).
Sister and I once went to a presentation of troubadour songs etc. in the Catalan House of Culture in Perpignan.
It was most enjoyable, but the French chappie (from the City Council, I think) introducing it happily lapsed into French for our benefit (we were the only two non-Catalans present, I guess), explaining that he actually found Catalan difficult..... ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
Whatever comes of the present troubles, Catalonia (both north and south of the border) is a delightful part of Europe.
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
Alan Cresswell quote:
But, the argument for independence based on civic nationalism has a strong political and economic base..............
So, the basis of civic nationalism is an assessment of economic economic advantage. In that case one would expect a region or regions anticipating a material advantage from independence to be more prone to civic nationalism than regions dependent on them. That would certainly fit the case of Catalonia, the Italian Northern League and Alberta, and would benefit a nation based on the South East of England, centred on London. Poorer regions would be expected to eschew civic nationalism, given their advantage in being subsidised by the richer ones, so to the outsider it is difficult see Welsh and Scottish nationalism as explained by the civic nationalist model, as they claim. Furthermore, it's difficult to see why civic nationalism defined as a function of economic greed should be seen as more virtuous thnt ethnic nationalism, is it not?
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Re the language question, my own very subjective experience is that, being able to read and speak French fairly well, I find Catalan much easier to read than Spanish. Most of the touristy places in the area where my sister lives offer guide leaflets etc. in French or Catalan.
As for understanding spoken Catalan, well, I find it's a lot easier to comprehend after a carafe or two of the local vi negre (red wine - in Spanish vino tinto).
*snip*
Like Bishop's Finger, I found Catalan much easier to read than Castilian but was not sufficiently in Catalan-speaking circles to get a feel for the spoken language (most of my Catalan friends were anxious to practise their English and I was too lazy to argue).
In recent years, the Catalan authorities have strongly supported language classes for teh considerable number of immigrants into Barcelona and surrounding areas, but they are fighting the uncomfortable fact that Castilian is as much a default language in Barcelona as is Catalan (which is much more predominant in the region outside Barcelona). One of the engines driving Catalan nationalism, like Québécois nationalism of days gone by, is a sentiment that they are becoming a minority in their own territory. And unlike anglophone Canadians, who have a vague sympathy for the use of French in Canada (as long as it doesn't involve any personal expenditure of energy!!), Castilians are much less so.
Still, the situation continues to develop.....
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kwesi:
Alan Cresswell quote:
But, the argument for independence based on civic nationalism has a strong political and economic base..............
So, the basis of civic nationalism is an assessment of economic economic advantage. In that case one would expect a region or regions anticipating a material advantage from independence to be more prone to civic nationalism than regions dependent on them.
I said political and economic, so it doesn't come down to just the bottom line. If the people living in a particular region feel that their political aspirations were being held back by different political aims from the nation they're part of, or that they would be financially better off without the constraints imposed by national government (or, they'd have better schools, hospitals, welfare etc) then that feeds (civic) nationalism.
quote:
Poorer regions would be expected to eschew civic nationalism, given their advantage in being subsidised by the richer ones, so to the outsider it is difficult see Welsh and Scottish nationalism as explained by the civic nationalist model, as they claim.
That supposes that independence wouldn't change the economic circumstances. If independence (or greater devolution) allows tailoring policy to the needs of that region as opposed to the needs of the larger nation (or, even a different region therein) then that would offset lost subsidy (at least partially). Is it so unreasonable to think that the people who live within a defined region are better able to understand the needs of their own region than people living in different areas? And, better able to devise policies that better meet those needs?
quote:
Furthermore, it's difficult to see why civic nationalism defined as a function of economic greed should be seen as more virtuous thnt ethnic nationalism, is it not?
But, modern nations are defined by "economic greed". Is it any worse to vote for a national government who promise to increase your standard of living, or to support independence which promises to increase standard of living? Whether that applies to you as an individual or the region as a whole.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
Alan Cresswell quote:
But, modern nations are defined by "economic greed". Is it any worse to vote for a national government who promise to increase your standard of living, or to support independence which promises to increase standard of living? Whether that applies to you as an individual or the region as a whole.
I don't think that we are in disagreement here. The point I was making is that civic nationalists often claim to be somehow more virtuous than ethnic nationalists. A case could be made that an ethnic group seeking independence to defend and promote its communal identity at economic cost to themselves, prepared to be "poor but proud", are more to be congratulated than those principally motivated by material values. Are not those seeking Catalonian independence to promote its culture more meritorious than those unwilling to share its economic advantages with poorer regions of Spain?
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
Alan Cresswell quote:
Is it so unreasonable to think that the people who live within a defined region are better able to understand the needs of their own region than people living in different areas? And, better able to devise policies that better meet those needs?
I suspect you are right, which may explain why the Scots voted to stay within the United Kingdom.
A problem with the local solution to local problems depends on the capacity of the locality to command the resources and wider political influence to implement them.
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Posted by Enoch:
quote:
Although Spanish and Catalan are quite closely related...
This was the point I was making, not whether or not they are still in regular use
I may be misunderstanding your point, but Spanish and Catalan are no closer than Spanish and (standard) Italian. The vocabulary is relatively similar, so if your knowledge of Catalan comes from road signs then you might be fooled into thinking they are just dialects of the same thing, but the phonology is something like French would be if they pronounced all the letters, and the underlying grammar is quite distinct.
For example, if you know any other Romance language, you might think that ell va arribar means 'he will arrive', but actually it means 'he arrived'.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
For those who are interested the folks at War is Boring have a quick summary of what an independent Catalan military might look like, given geographic and budgetary restraints and likely necessity/missions. There's no anticipation of war between a theoretically independent Catalonia and any of its neighbors, just guesses about what would be needed to secure ports and (aspirationally) participate in NATO. Part of the problem that would face a newly independent Catalonia is that very little of Spain's current military infrastructure is located within Catalonia, a fact the analysis takes into account.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cod
Shipmate
# 2643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Cod:
But why should a minority have the right to disrupt - sometimes repeatedly - the affairs of the entire state without the rest of its citizens having a say?
Did you really just ask that question? History is replete with examples of minorities disrupting the affairs of the entire state because that's the only way for them to get a fair hearing.
Yes I really did ask that question.
Discussion of secession tends to take for granted that those who want to secede are absolutely entitled to do so and accept the ramifications that go with it. That was the basis on which the Scottish referendum proceeded. I think that was appropriate, not least because the rest of the UK was content to leave it to the Scots (probably because they assumed a No vote was certain).
However, I think that in the absence of genuine oppression, it's a legitimate to argue that the entire state has sufficient interest in the matter for them to have enforceable rights too. Their jobs, businesses, and rights will be affected too, their families potentially split, and the state they belong to will tend to be diminished. There is also precedent for arguing that an entire state (not simply the seceding bit) should decide, e.g. Western Australia and Texas. And everyone has an interest in making sure the rule of law is upheld, as that makes the difference between democracy and mob rule.
As for Catalonia, there is a constitution they adopted in the recent past that appears to require an all-Spain referendum. Given the last 100 years of Spanish history, I think all Spain has an interest in making sure that constitution isn't simply left on the shelf and that the rule of law is upheld. If an unlawful exception can be made for the Catalans, who's to say when the Spanish government will ignore it next? That is what proponents of Catalan independence appear to believe: that if the laws get in the way, they should simply be ignored. Certainly that's the way the Catalan authorities are currently behaving; even to the extent that the Catalan high court has ordered Spanish (ie, not Catalan) police to protect it due to concerns that the judges will be ejected from the building by the Catalan authorities.
I'm not a Spanish lawyer, but I would have thought the obvious step was for Madrid to immediately introduce a motion in the Spanish parliament to facilitate the debate legally. Whether or not they've done this I don't know, but even if they've refused, I don't think an Ian Smith-style declaration of UDI on behalf of a minority is justified.
--------------------
"I fart in your general direction."
M Barnier
Posts: 4229 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
