|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Catalonia Independence
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Question: I heard that some European gov'ts have said they won't recognize an independent Catalonia. I'm guessing that's partly because they don't want their own countries breaking up along ethnic or cultural lines? (Into Northern and Southern Germany, for example.)
If all those bits of countries that were pushed together, and lost much of their culture and independence, started splitting off, what might the EU do? And the UN?
Thx.
--------------------
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
|
|
Ian Climacus
Liturgical Slattern
# 944
|
Posted
I think the (perceived) illegality of the referendum has a fair bit to do with the lack of support, but then again I doubt other countries would want to encourage breakaway regions in their own states as you wrote.
I could see the EU welcoming an independent Catalonia, if it believed the vote was fair and legal. I suspect they would not want to upset Spain, and Spain could prevent their accession, but I also suspect a new European member would be welcome. Especially a powerhouse.
UN? Not sure. Can countries veto? What happened when South Sudan was formed? I did not pay a lot of attention to UN goings-on.
[ 28. October 2017, 05:13: Message edited by: Ian Climacus ]
Posts: 7800 | From: On the border | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
I agree with Kwesi that SPK's point 4) is by no means a given. Of course the media depicts huge demonstrations awash with Catalan flags but the unconstitutional referendum tells a different story - 90% of 43% is not a majority.
The EU was firm that if Scotland were to secede from an un-Brexited EU it would have had to apply for membership all over again and I think the same would apply for Catalonia.
What all this undoubtedly tells us is that the EU has done a terrible job of selling itself.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ian Climacus
Liturgical Slattern
# 944
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
What all this undoubtedly tells us is that the EU has done a terrible job of selling itself.
Can you flesh this out a bit, please? I'm not sure I follow.
Posts: 7800 | From: On the border | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
As I understand it the EU was primarily about "never again" having war in Europe, and secondarily about nurturing economic and political stability. It is also about wealth redistribution with funds from richer regions being used to foster development in poorer regions. It is also a way of implementing beneficial but commercially unpopular policies, for example in the field of energy transition, and imposing standards on industry. And finally it is about nurturing cross-cultural communication and understanding.
The trouble is that all of these are relatively intangible and long-term goals, and the EU is really bad at communicating about them. Nobody knows who their Euro-MP is (I certainly don't know who mine is!) but everybody gripes about this or that pesky regulation which does in fact achieve an improvement and drive technological innovation (the banning of incandescent light bulbs in favour of LEDs springs to mind).
I think the rise of both populism and separatism is an indictment of the EU's communications policy.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
I agree with Kwesi that SPK's point 4) is by no means a given. Of course the media depicts huge demonstrations awash with Catalan flags but the unconstitutional referendum tells a different story - 90% of 43% is not a majority.
The EU was firm that if Scotland were to secede from an un-Brexited EU it would have had to apply for membership all over again and I think the same would apply for Catalonia.
What all this undoubtedly tells us is that the EU has done a terrible job of selling itself.
As Alan pointed out that 90% / 43% results in the same proportion of the electorate - 37% - as the 52% / 72% that Brexited us.
What dog's breakfast democracy.
[ 28. October 2017, 08:14: 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
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
And as I pointed out, the two are not comparable.
Nobody here has made a case for the legitimacy of the Catalan referendum. It was ruled unconstitutional; it's not surprising those not in favour boycotted it (which is also no doubt why opponents boycotted the independence vote in the regional parliament).
The Brexit referendum was constitutional; nobody complained about its legitimacy until it delivered a result they didn't like.
People not being bothered to turn out and vote in an entirely legitimate referendum is a whole different kettle of fish to boycotting one many held to be unconstitutional, and the responsibilities are accordingly different.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kwesi:
Alan Cresswell quote:
At the moment there are two governments for Catalonia, each claiming the right to govern and stating that the other is illegitimate. And, both have good reasons for that claim.
Nope. You are mistaken. According to the Spanish Constitution the Catalan government has acted ultra vires, and the Spanish government has acted within the terms of the constitution in declaring the recent referendum as illegal and the declaration of independence equally against the law. The Spanish government has adopted the appropriate legal procedures to defend the integrity of the nation's constitution in taking over the regional administration. There is no dubiety
about this. The declaration of Catalonian independence, however welcome, is an act of rebellion and illegitimate.
As you say, it's clear from the point of view of the Spanish government. They have the Spanish constitution on their side, and the courts ordering a referendum illegal.
But, from the Catalan Independence side then things are different. They have a democratically elected Parliament and Government. Does the constitution of another nation (as they see it) control what the people of Catalonia want, as expressed in the ballot box electing those members? Is it not unreasonable, from their perspective, to respect the wishes of the people who elected them to hold a referendum on independence and then act upon it?
--------------------
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
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
In any case, acts of rebellion are often illegal from the point of view of the governing authorities. After all, they usually don't view independence by a region kindly.
Ireland (1916) is usually cited as an act of illegality, but one can also cite Belgium. Often termed the Belgian revolution (1830), I'm sure it was very remiss of the Belgians to flout the legal authority of the Netherlands. Perhaps they should apologize. Quite amusing that Junker is from Luxembourg, which also I think unravelled at that time from the Netherlands.
One can also cite the American Revolution. I suppose the point about acts of independence, is that you'd better get it right, as if you don't, you will get punished.
Incidentally, the Belgian one was one of those occasions when an opera helped spark rebellion, supposedly, people emerged from the theatre and joined in street riots.
[ 28. October 2017, 11:29: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
It seems clear to me what the (former) Catalan Government's game is:
I'm not sure it is so clear. Because at present the "(former)" part of that isn't necessarily accurate. The government in Madrid has dissolved the Parliament and removed the powers of the local government - but, that is only effective if all the hundreds of thousands of civil servants within Catalonia follow the instructions of their new management. What if they continue to work for the democratically elected government of Catalonia, against the Madrid governmental order that the Catalan government is dissolved? What if the Catalan Parliament continues to meet, ignoring the order from Madrid to dissolve? They have, after all, been elected by the people of Catalonia in an election over which there was no dispute.
What if the pro-Independence parties and their supporters boycott the new election on the basis that it's the responsibility of the Catalan government to call an election, and the action of Madrid in dismissing a democratically elected Parliament may be technically legal within the constitution of Madrid, but is acting contrary to the democratic will of the people of Catalonia. And, they've declared themselves independent so it's functionally (to them) little different from the German government (say) dismissing their government and calling a new election. What happens if the new elections have no pro-Independence candidates, and their members don't vote, with a turn-out of less than 50%? We will have a new Parliament of Unionist members, an old Parliament of Independence members, both passing legislation and commanding civil servants to enact their new laws. Where does that leave Catalonia?
--------------------
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
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
All of this happened in Ireland, didn't it? Sinn Fein had many MPs elected in 1918, and this was a defeat for the nationalist Irish Parliamentary Party.
Sinn Fein didn't take their seats in Westminster, obviously, and met in Dublin, as the first Dáil. This led to the revolutionary war of independence.
I believe quite a few bits of this were illegal, from the British point of view!
Apologies if I've got any details wrong. I don't know if MPs were called TDs then or not. Also I think quite a lot of Sinn Fein MPs were in prison.
[ 28. October 2017, 11:40: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Carlos Puigdemont reminds me too much of David Cameron.
He reminds me most of Yanis Varoufakis - who on the whole I quite admire. He overestimates the degree to which having a reasonable argument weighs on people who don't have any incentive to offer him any concessions.
I assume what Mr Puigdemont wants is for Spain to allow the referendum to be re-run legally. They could get round the constitutional issue by saying that the result is advisory but in the event of a majority for independence the Partido Popular will look to amend the constitution.
If he loses a legal referendum, Mr Puigdemont can at least say he tried. Mr Rajoy could in theory favour this solution on the grounds that it doesn't look to me that a majority would back independence, so the constitutional issue wouldn't arise. But recent history has not been kind to prime ministers who call referendums believing they can control the outcome, so I can understand Mr Rajoy not wanting to go down that route, and Mr Puigdemont doesn't actually have any means of forcing him to.
--------------------
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
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
Alan Cresswell quote:
What if............ ?
Your last post lists a number of "What ifs?" but they really are of little more than academic interest. Lenin would ask "What is to be done?" and point out that 'the first question any revolutionary must ask is who are our enemies and who are our friends?"
I see the situation as follows:
The question faced by any group wishing to secede from an existing polity is what it needs to do to persuade the legitimate power to let them go. If the existing state is willing to let them go then the question can be settled by a referendum. If not, then the separatists need to force the existing state to let them go by military means in a war of national liberation, or to make the cost of remaining too high and not worth the candle through civil disobedience and/or violent force. The United States is an example of the former, Ireland and India, a case of the latter. In the case of a political and military struggle it is helpful if the separatists have the support of other states affording them diplomatic recognition, financial backing and military supplies.
The problem for the Catalans in the face of Spanish intransigence is that they do not seem to be in an advantageous position. Firstly, a significant proportion of the population does not want independence, not a sound foundation on which to sound the note of rebellion; secondly, acts of civil disobedience in Catalonia and any strikes by public servants will be felt mostly by the Catalans rather than inconveniencing the Spanish in general; thirdly, international support is non-existent, crucially so respecting France and the EU; fourthly, one doubts that the Catalans have the stomach or means to conduct a revolutionary war, especially as it has little chance of success. Heavy-handed action by the Spanish government might increase public sympathy for Catalan independence abroad, but as we have seen governments are heavily biased against interference in other states however egregious their actions.
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
If all those bits of countries that were pushed together, and lost much of their culture and independence, started splitting off, what might the EU do? And the UN?
They'd have more constituent members.
I still don't see what would be so wrong with Catalonia, Scotland, Prussia, Wallonia, Bavaria, Wales, Flanders, Brittany, Cornwall and so forth becoming separate countries if they so desire. Seriously, what's the downside?
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
All of this happened in Ireland, didn't it? Sinn Fein had many MPs elected in 1918, and this was a defeat for the nationalist Irish Parliamentary Party.
Sinn Fein didn't take their seats in Westminster, obviously, and met in Dublin, as the first Dáil. This led to the revolutionary war of independence.
I believe quite a few bits of this were illegal, from the British point of view!
Apologies if I've got any details wrong. I don't know if MPs were called TDs then or not. Also I think quite a lot of Sinn Fein MPs were in prison.
As a tangent, the legal status of the first Dail was been the cause of much theorizing in Ireland. Some commentators hold that it was the source of Irish authority and sovereignty and that the Free State Dail following the treaty was not. On this basis, some IRA activists continued on, holding to their oaths to the First Dail. Other constitutional specialists hold that authority came from the Dail elected as the Parliament of the Irish Free State, but only insofar as it was the Dail. Then there were those who held that it was the Dail elected as the Parliament of the Irish Free State, but as such.
I think it gets even more complicated, but I lost track.
In the case of Catalonia, we will now see how the elections to the Generalitat go, and what will happen next. If it's not a strong majority for independence, we'll be left in the same spot as we are now. It may be an interesting occasion for a discussion on what will be meant by an independent Catalonia.
Some comments have been made on Europe's response to the declaration. As the proposed referendum did not go to the European Council's Venice Commission for review, I wonder if the European Community is not frowning on what sports people would call an end run. After all, the unwritten clause of Spain's accession to Europe was an observance of democratic procedures and practices.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kwesi:
Firstly, a significant proportion of the population does not want independence, not a sound foundation on which to sound the note of rebellion
Which isn't relevant. In 1776 there was still a significant proportion of the population of North America who did not want independence from England, it didn't stop a Declaration of Independence and the formation of a new country. In 2016 there was a significant proportion of the UK population who wanted the UK to remain part of the EU, it didn't stop Brexit. It's the nature of democracy that there will always be a significant proportion of the population who disagree with anything their government does.
--------------------
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
|
|
John Holding
Coffee and Cognac
# 158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Kwesi:
Firstly, a significant proportion of the population does not want independence, not a sound foundation on which to sound the note of rebellion
Which isn't relevant. In 1776 there was still a significant proportion of the population of North America who did not want independence from England, it didn't stop a Declaration of Independence and the formation of a new country.
Only after a number of years of armed conflict, and after the intervention of a foreign power (France) which couldn't have cared less about the independence of the colonies , but had a significant agenda of its own in its ongoing conflict with the UK. I suppose I should also note that at least one of the NA colonies managed to defeat the invasion from what became the US.
I'm not sure what you propose as the parallels to a shooting war with thousands of casualties, or an outside power to send in arms and money and soldiers, or which part of Catalonia might play the part of Quebec -- though I understand that some parts of Barcelona itself are not too keen on the whole independence thing.
John
Posts: 5929 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
No particular insight into the future directions in Catalonia, just an observation that practically nothing happens politically in which there isn't a significant proportion of the population who are in disagreement. That a significant proportion of the population of Catalonia do not want independence is no more an argument against independence than the converse, that a significant proportion of the population of Catalonia do not want to maintain the current Spanish borders is an argument for independence.
It was ever thus, whenever the arbitrary lines that divide people into nations were moved, removed or created there were a lot of people unhappy with the new situation ... and when they failed to be moved, removed or created there was another large group of people who were unhappy that the old situation was perpetuated.
--------------------
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:
Kwesi: Firstly, a significant proportion of the population does not want independence, not a sound foundation on which to sound the note of rebellion
Alan Cresswell: Which isn't relevant. In 1776 there was still a significant proportion of the population of North America who did not want independence from England, it didn't stop a Declaration of Independence and the formation of a new country.
I find the suggestion that the level of popular support for a particular course of action has little bearing on its chances of success as somewhat bizarre, particular in the context of political rebellion. The example you give of the American War of Independence is hardly grist to your mill. The revolt was successful because the combined forces of loyalist colonists plus British and Hanoverian troops were weaker, less numerous, than those available to George Washington. Even so the cause was not achieved without a significant shedding of blood. Given the military, diplomatic, and strategic advantages enjoyed by the Spanish state, one would have thought that a Catalonian rebellion would need all the local support it could muster, whereas barely half the population, if that, wishes the region to be independent. Your example of the UK Brexit vote is quite irrelevant to the Catalonian case, as is your observation that government policies and legislation mostly receive far less than unanimous support. Democracies are designed to take decisions through agreed procedures that minimise the necessity of other than legal force to implement them. The Catalan government has rejected the legitimacy of those democratic procedures as expressed in the Spanish constitution, which means it cannot enforce its will by law and must contemplate other measures if it is serious.
Alan Cresswell quote:
No particular insight into the future directions in Catalonia, just an observation that practically nothing happens politically in which there isn't a significant proportion of the population who are in disagreement.
Gosh, I never knew that!
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I still don't see what would be so wrong with Catalonia, Scotland, Prussia, Wallonia, Bavaria, Wales, Flanders, Brittany, Cornwall and so forth becoming separate countries if they so desire. Seriously, what's the downside?
In the case of Brittany, to give just one example, the region would need to import virtually all its electricity. It doesn't have a single major power station and frequently verges on blackouts during the winter months.
This morning I hear a Spanish politician has said Puigdemont would be welcome to stand in the forthcoming regional election. This, coupled with Puigdemont's refusal to call such an election himself, suggests that both sides deem that the separatists cannot win a free and fair election.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I still don't see what would be so wrong with Catalonia, Scotland, Prussia, Wallonia, Bavaria, Wales, Flanders, Brittany, Cornwall and so forth becoming separate countries if they so desire. Seriously, what's the downside?
The short answer, ISTM, is that it depends on which state or proposed state you are talking about.
States come in all sorts of shapes and sizes and with varying levels of ethnic diversity and social and political integration. Iceland is a small state with a population of rather more than 300,000 which seems to function well and has overcome a severe banking crisis, not to mention the longevity of Andorra and San Marino, and the independent Vatican City, while a large state like the Congo is a basket case and Nigeria has serious problems of national integration. There is no obvious reason why the territories in your list could not become successfully functioning independent states, including Catalonia.
The practical questions are about state capacity and the degree to which a state has the ability to exercise its theoretical sovereignty. Generally, larger states: the United States, China, Russia, and Germany, for example, have greater leeway than lesser ones, whose choices are much more limited because they are less able to structure the external environment which frames the parameters of their decisions. For example, the United Kingdom currently bargains together with the EU over tariffs and trade with other countries, the decisions are collective and necessitate compromises with other member states. Following Brexit the United Kingdom will have the freedom follow its own policies in such matters, but the reality will be that external constraints may mean it will have less influence in these areas than it currently has as part of the EU. The paradox of independence is that one might find it more difficult to get one’s own way. On the other hand independence has probably helped Iceland to better defend its fish stocks and certainly to produce a football team capable of defeating the English.
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
That a significant proportion of the population of Catalonia do not want independence is no more an argument against independence than the converse
It's a pretty incontrovertible argument if the proportion exceeds 50%. But we won't know until a proper legal referendum is held.
--------------------
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
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kwesi:
Democracies are designed to take decisions through agreed procedures that minimise the necessity of other than legal force to implement them. The Catalan government has rejected the legitimacy of those democratic procedures as expressed in the Spanish constitution, which means it cannot enforce its will by law and must contemplate other measures if it is serious.
OK, so what route to a "legal" referendum on independence were available to the Catalan government under the Spanish constitution? When the constitution expressly forbids independence, and the courts rule that therefore even a referendum is illegal, you have no option but to act outwith the constraints of the constitution. That is a rebellion.
--------------------
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
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Kwesi:
Democracies are designed to take decisions through agreed procedures that minimise the necessity of other than legal force to implement them. The Catalan government has rejected the legitimacy of those democratic procedures as expressed in the Spanish constitution, which means it cannot enforce its will by law and must contemplate other measures if it is serious.
OK, so what route to a "legal" referendum on independence were available to the Catalan government under the Spanish constitution? When the constitution expressly forbids independence, and the courts rule that therefore even a referendum is illegal, you have no option but to act outwith the constraints of the constitution. That is a rebellion.
One route to a "semi-legal" referendum would have been to use the parameters for a referendum laid out under the European Council's Venice Commission's protocol, then proceed under the Catalan Statute of Autonomy's procedures (by the 2/3 vote required, submitting it to the Commission for review, incorporating the results, observing the schedules and using the structures required (independent managing body, equal time on media etc).
If that had been done -- and it wasn't -- the Catalan separatists would have had a very strong moral argument that a clear result on a fair procedure gives them a democratic mandate. The Europeans, having been involved, would have had greater reason to accept the result.
The Spaniards, even when centralist, have come to value constitutional procedure and legal validity, having been deprived of it for so long, and Rajoy's ability to respond aggressively would have been greatly weakened and implementing Section 155 would have been very challenging.
But Puigdemont and his CUP partners opted to go for a quick and dirty procedure, and now they've got a quick and dirty result.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I thought that Alan is right, and Madrid is dead set against secession, and it is forbidden in the Spanish constitution. It reminds me of Irish Home Rule, which dragged on for decades, and could be talked about indefinitely. The Irish cut the Gordian knot.
Having said that, Puigdemont doesn't have enough forces behind him, I think. And the financial situation is very difficult - Madrid is in control of tax receipts and so on.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
One curious thing I have found, talking to people over there, is that quite a lot of people on the left oppose independence, and I think that Puigdemont is sort of centre right. But there is also a hard left which support independence. But nationalism straddles left/right.
--------------------
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
it may well be that the only alternative available to the Catalans is rebellion, and I have no normative view on that. What I am pointing out is that this is a route which requires considerable planning and a willingness to kill and die for the cause should peaceful resistance fail. Otherwise the Spanish authorities can sit it out as the Catalans strike and non-cooperate with themselves until they get bored and/or run out of cash. I'm sceptical that the Catalan are up for it. I don't think Puigdemont and most of the bourgeois fair-weather demonstrators are.
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I think that's right. If it's true that Puigdemont and his party are of the centre right, I doubt that they will go to the barricades, in the Belgian fashion. If they are going to negotiate with Madrid about the constitution, well, give that a few decades.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
