What's wrong with self-determination?
If it worked the way you imply what would be the limit to what you can justify with “self determination”?
Existing laws may be undemocratic and unjust. If your bar for secession is legality, I will have to point out that the United States should still be part of the British Empire (The revolution was illegal), Hong Kong should pipe down, and stop protesting (They are bound by CPC laws, which have ruled the protests illegal), and most of Africa should still be governed from London and Paris (Most of it did not leave in the context of existing laws.)
> what would be the limit to what you can justify
There really isn't one, but six people seceeding their house is not going to be a minimally viable country for very obvious reasons. When you secede, you lose a lot of benefits, including economic, military, etc, protection from neighboring states.
I don't think that's really the right reason for saying a house isn't valid. Catalonia is a well defined, self-governing region of Spain. That means the Spaniards have already admitted that they're basically a sensible territory for being an independent state.
You could probably argue, in a case like the US, that New York isn't a valid territory for independence since it was created a long time ago prior to much settlement in the area - but the self government isn't revokable under the US constitution.
Catalonia has no such problem, since its autonomy is a relatively recent gift and is constantly revokable, so the fact that the Spanish haven't done it is proof that they think it's reasonable.
Even then, you still have places like Monaco and San Marino, which are very small. It's hard to argue they're minimally viable countries, just places history forgot, but they are independent.
Also, in every case you mention, there were international support for the secession, while the Catalan independist movement, in spite of its strong efforts, has got almost zero support. By the way, this is the same international community who thinks that Spanish laws are not undemocratic or unjust.
So you can find a limit. What if Barcelona does not want to be in that new country (and they don’t)? Will the borders of that new country inside which you start counting votes include Barcelona against their will? What freedoms do people who want to stay with the "original" country get? They suddenly become the oppressed minority. How many splinters is too many?
You object to the “dictatorship” of democracy in Spain but the plan is do do the exact same at a smaller scale in the new country to a newly created minority. The reason we’ve had the longest period of peace and prosperity in Europe’s history is that the rules are as they are now and they're the best compromise. Any “improvement” you want to get for yourself comes at a major cost for everyone.
Catalonia should have a right to poll its people about whether to engage in negotiations, and to discuss terms with Spain (who, naturally, should represent coherent minority interests in Catalonia who do not want to depart).
Spain should have a right to say "Well, look, the border should not include Barcelona since 60% of them (or whatever the figure might be in a just and fair plebiscite) have expressed a desire to remain".
Once fair negotiations have taken place and each side has accepted that they have won some and lost some, Catalonia could have another referendum, and it might turn out that no-one wants independence from both Madrid and Barcelona.
Spain says it's illegal to start, middle and end the process. If the Catalans don't really want to separate, then starting is free. It will almost certainly increase the order and decrease the tension if they let a plebiscite go forward.
(The last paragraph is an irrelevance, since there's no evidence that a European Union of many smaller states, incapable of independently sustaining a modern armed force, will be any more likely to go to war than a European Union of fewer larger states, capable of independently sustaining modern armed forces. In fact, even putting the argument down in black on tan really brings out its ridiculousness.)
Polling someone about something implies one of the results is perfectly possible. I considered that as being the final result for the purpose of the discussion because that's the crux of the matter. So yes, that is the only side that matters. There are no "fair" negotiations to be had. Spain has nothing to gain. It would not only show willingness to let illegal activity go unpunished and worse, it encourages it by negotiating.
What happens next time someone wants something illegal according to country laws and constitution? Negotiate every time? There is no negotiation that will please everybody and at best you'd end up with a random collection of patches where 100% of the population wants independence (since you don't want to oppress anyone).
> Spain should have a right to say "Well, look, the border should not include Barcelona since 60% of them (or whatever the figure might be in a just and fair plebiscite) have expressed a desire to remain".
What about the 40% (just to fit the math) that want the independence in Barcelona? Aren't they to Barcelona what Catalonia is to Spain? Should they splinter from Barcelona? How many times do you splinter? How long until you say "well I think we have enough"? And when you do isn't that arbitrary and hypocritical?
Both results of asking Catalonia whether or not it should start negotiating with Spain as to what independence would look like are completely possible. It's up to Spain to accept that possibility, though, not Catalonia.
> There are no "fair" negotiations to be had. Spain has nothing to gain.
Internal stability, an end to social unrest, and doing the right thing, by letting people govern themselves, is not something to gain?
You shouldn't block your spouse from divorcing you in a broken marriage, and you should generally not keep people who want to leave, in your country.
> What happens next time someone wants something illegal according to country laws and constitution? Negotiate every time?
Generally speaking, when there's a large demand in a democracy for an unjust law to be changed, the correct thing to do is to, in fact, change the law.
> What about the 40% (just to fit the math) that want the independence in Barcelona? Aren't they to Barcelona what Catalonia is to Spain? Should they splinter from Barcelona? How many times do you splinter? How long until you say "well I think we have enough"? And when you do isn't that arbitrary and hypocritical?
That's the whole point of going to the negotiating table, in good faith. To discuss the options, to figure out how edge cases will work. If Barcelona wants to remain in Spain, I see no reason for why Catalonian secession should have to include it. Catalonia can then make the choice of whether or not it wants to secede without Barcelona. It will probably choose to not do so, and you will solve your problem without turning to violence and repression.
Of course, this requires negotiating in good faith, which seems to be anathema.
It appears that most of the country (Spain) does not agree hence the existing laws. It's questionable whether even most of Catalonia agrees. Just because a small minority thinks that it's the right thing means nothing in the context of a whole country.
> You shouldn't block your spouse from divorcing you
If you have to use broken analogies to make the point then you don't have much of a point. It should be pretty clear right now that unlike divorce, what we're talking about here is illegal. You don't get to vote whether laws apply to you or not. The country as a whole votes what happens to the country.
> when there's a large demand in a democracy
Spain is the democracy, not Catalonia. And Spain's laws/constitution are pretty clear. The only democratic process that would be valid right now is to change the laws as a country, and then do anything about independence.
You seem to think democracy is this weird selective process where you can take an arbitrary group of people and as long as they mostly agree on something then everyone should submit to that.
Your logic above is perfectly able to justify anything, even genocide, as long as laws no longer apply because (local) majority consensus exists.
At difference than Norway, there is a silent majority in Catalonia that is fuming. They had being opressed in the last decades by separatism. Now they can't exit home without finding a burning barricade and the pavement vandalised, can't go to work without finding the highway blocked by a group of clowns sit singing kumbaya, can't enter in the university without the permit of masked people boycotting the classes and closing the doors (It does not really matter because they will not find a local job anymore in the 5000 companies that have quited the area by this permanent climate of confrontation).
Poor workers struggling to survive, students from modest families, owners of small family bussiness sued by using spanish in their small shops, elders that can't sleep by youngs playing war games all night... Being poked in the eye each month, each day, hour and minute, by children demanding permanent attention. Children that want to steal their rights and identity, make their lifes miserable and chase them off from their homes and properties...
In some moment of the future this silent half will face some apparently trivial issue, reach boiling point, explode and raise in a bloodthirsty rage swirl.
Separatists crave to achieve a reaction from Spain that would justify their agenda, but trust me, the mortal hit will come from inside.
The rest of Spain will take some popcorn and enjoy the carnage and backstabbing on TV
> Trust me, in this case will be war
Sorry, after reading your text the one thing I can't do is to trust you.
> At difference than Norway, there is a silent majority in Catalonia that is fuming.
I would love to see data on that; right now, pro-independence parties are majority in the parliament and have had 10x times the amount of people on the streets (without the need of bringing outsiders). That majority is not silent, is inexistent.
> Now they can't exit home without finding a burning barricade and the pavement vandalised (...)
All that is false. I have multiple friends in Barcelona and protests have been focalized in a small area (spanish police station in Via Layetana).
> It does not really matter because they will not find a local job anymore in the 5000 companies that have quited the area by this permanent climate of confrontation
That is also false. There were some movements of the headquarters address that didn't really affected the business. The part that should be scary to all democrats is how the Spanish government created a law specifically to facilitate this change of address and how the king of Spain started calling companies to do that change.
> The rest of Spain will take some popcorn and enjoy the carnage and backstabbing on TV
This is pretty disgusting and telling.
This seems often like trying to explain colors to blind people. Even worse, to people that are not blind but refuse to understand even really simple concepts that everybody out of the bubble can see inmediately.
The population in Catalonia is 7,5 millions, and the people that voted independentist parties are 1,6 millions. Have you consider the possibility than not all those "inexistent" people are independentists?.
Lets assume that some strangers would appear at your door requiring politely you to leave your home and work and go away because you aren't in the right kind of thinking and your bloodlines are Spainted. Oh, and you are not a US citizen (or a german citizen, french, whatever...) anymore.
Would you fight back for defending your rights and your home?
If the separatists really expect all this millons of people lowering their head, going to the exile and leaving in peace without a word they are even dumber than they seem. They will wake up and eat them alive.
> protests have been focalized in a small area, a single street...
If you really want to educate yourself, a simple search in youtube will provide you with plenty of data that debunk this idea. Think about it.
> I don't trust you
Good. As I'm just a stranger in internet, this is the right thing to do. By the way, I don't care about who do you trust either, so is not a problem at all. Go out and explore the world by yourself. Cheers.
7.5 million including kids and people who don't vote. 5.5 million people that can vote, ~4.3 that voted (2017 numbers). Over 2 million votes that voted explicitly pro-independence parties [1].
Those are the real numbers.
> Lets assume that some strangers would appear at your door requiring politely you to leave your home and work and go away because you aren't in the right kind of thinking and your bloodlines are Spainted. Oh, and you are not a US citizen (or a german citizen, french, whatever...) anymore.
That's sci-fi. It hasn't happen. It won't happen. If Catalonia would become independent, why would they kick anybody out?
> If you really want to educate yourself, a simple search in youtube will provide you with plenty of data that debunk this idea. Think about it.
Go to Barcelona, report back if that's a war zone or not. The problems/fires have been extremely focalized.
Because is easy to see that they wouldn't tolerate anything remotely "spanish" tomorrow in their cuckoopia and nobody would stop them to continue to make the life impossible to this people and increase the pressure until they go away, (except a resistance movement).
Spanish democracy is malapportioned: Basically, rural voters get more of a say than urban voters. The pro independent parties have a majority in the Spanish parliament for the same reason that Republicans have a majority in the US Senate: Americans and Spaniards prefer havoc and civil war to democracy, so they'll do everything they can to make sure their parliaments are illegitimate. It's worked for them both before.
The rest of us know that you permit democratic expression so that the force is spent at a ballot box. Most people don't want needless change (in fact, the countries first used referendums used them precisely to prevent change).
If Catalonia had've been permitted to vote in a fair referendum, it would've been lost 45 to 55 and there would be peace and order in the streets of Barcelona, just like Glasgow.
Instead, the ignoramouses in Madrid thought force was the first choice, and now everyone in Barcelona suffers - those who want change, and those who don't.
Why do you insist on keeping people who feel that way in the country, against their will?
It's something that often puzzles me against political stances that oppose separatism. Often, they both express contempt for the people who want to leave, while at the same time, not allowing them to.
No-one is opposing separatism by the way, it's just that the whole country has to agree. The catalans signed up to the constitution like everyone else.
Why should they be able to shit all over it? And by the way is less than half of catalans who want this.
This awfully sounds like:
"We know better" "Hey Catalans, you guys don't really know what's good for you, so we are taking decisions on your behalf"
All your argument can only be explained from the right of conquest.
Hey Catalans, you guys really know what's good for you!, you are trying to get out of Spain and EU all in the same step. Hooow foxxxyyy!
You don't want to be like those savages that speak spanish in Chile, Buenos Aires, Mexico, Los Angeles or Madrid! you are too good to speak the language of torturers!
You can insult your main customers six times a day because you are best buzzinezmen in the world!. Customers love a "meneíto" and everybody will kill for buying your stuff made of pure freedom vapour! at any price!.
Independence will raise your economy to the stratosphere like a Winged San Jorge ascending to heaven with a choir of Xavier Cugats playing golden trumpets in the background!. The world will worship you as the first really freemocratic potency in Europe and you are zupaclever and megasmart and have a solid economic plan for the future.
...
That would be better for you?
Lies feel warm?
You seem to be implying that you know more than me by taking the higher road, you dictator! :P
It also seems like if we follow that all the way down where does the fracturing stop and how do you maintain a larger society? Does every sub division of administration have that same right to just say screw the rest of you I'm going home? Allowing it all the way down seems like a ticket straight to fractious setup of loosely associated towns and cities. There's reasons we built up the larger groups over time and part of accessing those benefits requires gluing those partisan impulses together to resist tribal urges.
The results of the elections and the independence referendum strongly disagree.
>Most people in Catalonia (1978) voted in favor of these constitution,
Unlike those that voted the Estatut d'Autonomia (see below), many of these people are dead. There was no alternative to this constitution as it happened in a very unstable climate after the death of the dictator, where the constitution was seen as the one way to stabilize the country and advance towards a democracy.
And the fact people want this is in no way unrelated to what happened to the Estatut d'Autonomia, which defines the relationship between Catalonia and Spain. The current version of the document was written in Catalonia, revised and cut several times until Spain was OK with it, then voted in a referendum in Catalonia and put into effect, only to be cut down dramatically shortly after by the constitutional court, acting on the behalf of a Spanish nationalist political party which gets almost no votes at all in Catalonia. This was perceived as a massive insult to Catalan people.
Not only the situation was not repaired, but Spain's attacks on Catalonia's self government continued. This is the main reason why independence took a hold, perceived as the only option going forward.
The turn out in the 2017 one was 43% and iirc at the time those against the referendum were encouraged to and did sit out as a way of saying 'this is not legitimate' which kind of muddies the water a bit on the actual numbers. [0]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Catalan_independence_refe...
[0] Of course this is the problem with any low turn out election, how do you account for the people that don't turn out? Are they protesting, happy with either choice or something else?
Nobody took a "carte blanche" to secede. The succession of pro-independence governments were put in there by voters. These governments exhausted all possible avenues with the spanish goverment, which refused to even talk about the topic.
Catalan people were then asked explicitly whether they wanted it, in the referendum that's famous for the violence of the spanish police that were sent to prevent it. And even after that, the Catalan government tried again and again to establish dialogue with Spain, to no avail.
Spain then went on to suspend catalan government, put everybody they could in jail, and to force an election in Catalonia. An election from which yet another pro-independence government was formed.
And to date, Spain has refused any and all dialogue, and the politicians in Jail have been given a judgement that most people in Catalonia cannot agree with, by a trial that independent international observers found outrageously biased and unfair.
This is why we are where we are. The people have taken to the streets because that's what's left.
If the trial was fair, why is the majority of the sentence an explanation about how fair they were? One doesn't need to explain how clean they are, they just need to be clean.
Why were policemen allowed to explain their fears, but not the defense witnesses?
Why were only some of the defense witnesses warned that omitting the truth would be considered perjury but no single accusation witness was? The Spanish politicians were really withholding a lot.
The minister in charge of taxes said, on the trial, that there wasn't an euro unaccounted for. So where is the mishandling of money? The law was stretched thin on this.
But all these expert seem to ignore that these people can appeal their sentences if they don't agree with them. Spain, at difference of authoritarian countries, is subjected to international law. Do you accept these international courts or are they fascists too? Because if the whole world think that what these politicians did was wrong maybe, just maybe, you should consider that there is a possibility that what they did was wrong.
The Spanish government has made many mistakes, and I am very sure they will make many more, no matter who wins the elections. But the Generalitat cannot just take the law into their hands. Everybody knew it would have legal consequences. Most of them can be out early next year. Do you think this an injustice that deserve rioting and burning your city? That is what I would call an stretch.
How justice works is to usually make the initial judgement on a low court and the recourses go to higher ones. Not on this, it was directly judged on the higher one and no recourse can be made about the judgement, only about how it was reached.
This ruling is not something that "deserves" rioting, it was the straw that broke the camel's back.
I am talking about official positions, not "interventions". Please, show me all those countries that have condemned Spain for its fascist non-democratic practices.
And, I repeat than I am not a layer, but as far as I understand this sentence can still be appealed in international courts.
In a shallow search I've found this, from just before the trial [0] Iceland, and Scotland, ask for democratic solution. Couple of quotes: "The Icelandic Government has called upon their Spanish counterparts to look for a negotiated solution, emphasising the need to respect human rights.", "Scottish minister reiterates support for “the people of Catalonia to determine their own future”". February 15th 2019.
I've heard interventions on the EU parliament to talk about the issues, but it was voted against.
On the other hand I've seen no country saying that Spain is doing great with their police. Almost the opposite, with China saying that Hong Kong police are better than Spanish police and the press is the other way around [1].
Then, again, the appeal to the sentence to international courts will do nothing. The appeal, even if it prospered, it would do nothing against the ruling, at most it would ask a revision of the trial [2]. And that's from a pro-independence source, so you can imagine what others might say.
[0] https://www.commonspace.scot/articles/13862/iceland-becomes-... [1] http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1168214.shtml [2] https://www.naciodigital.cat/noticia/189638/exvicepresident/...
You show the case of Iceland. They have "expressed concern". That's fine. I'm concerned too. And Scotland asks for a "democratic solution". A democratic solution cannot include breaking the law or ignoring court orders from a democratic country. I think both sides are guilty of not finding a democratic solution, don't you agree? Don't you think that these people refused the democratic solution the moment they decided to ignore the law? And, if you really think Spanish police is worse than the Chinese one, well... you should go there and check by yourself, I sincerely don't know what to say about such statement.
But let's forget for a second about the other comments and, please, answer me one question: what do you want? What should happen now to make you happy (or at least to stop spreading FUD about our country)? Should the government go against the court rule ignoring separation of powers? Should they allow the kids to burn Barcelona? What exactly do you want?
On that "both sides are guilty" I could find all the times the Catalan government has tried to talk and the Spanish response has been "no". It's hard to reach a consensus when one side is so fixed on not taking.
I haven't said, and neither think, that the Spanish police is worse than the Chinese one. But if they can make the comparison it's because the way the Spanish police is acting is quite unprofessional and unworthy of a force acting in a democratic country.
What do we want? Lots of things, because there are lots of "factions", each with different needs. I'll try to summarise the principal, some of which I may not agree with. I won't enter into wether they are real or not, some you might think they are not and I'm tired of explaining the same to different people in different media, I should make a github repo.
* Cultural freedom. Catalan culture feels the constant oppression of centralist Spanish culture trying to reduce it to folk usage, like it has almost done with Galician and Valencian (which is the Catalan spoken in Valencia).
* Our money. Catalonia gives more money than it receives.
* End of corruption. We are tired of the rampant corruption in Spain. And yes, Catalan corrupts should go to jail too, starting with Pujol.
* A future. The young ones don't have a future. There is no money, there are no jobs, the world is being destroyed.
* Improve public services. They are being destroyed, in the name of profit (for friends of the different ruling parties).
These are different things that different people want, there are probably more (like letting the political prisoners out and remove the occupation forces). Some are right wing, some left wing, and most of them would sit well with Spanish people.
This is not Catalonia against Spain, it's not even left vs right, it's up vs down.
If you don't mind, I will response to your points one by one. Feel free to not respond if you don't feel like it.
> Cultural freedom.
I think we will agree the situation has greatly improved in the last 40 years. I also agree with you it has to improve more. There is indeed some reject to everything related to Catalan culture by a minority in the centre of Spain. I have seen similar attitudes in the other side (hate for everything related with Spain). At least where I'm from (deep Castille), most of these people will be death in the next 20 years. Unfortunately, this is changing right now, due to the last events (from both sides).
> Money.
Any wealthy region has to help poorer regions for the greater being. Where to put the line is a matter of personal opinion. Although I don't share it, I respect your opinion that the line should be the border of Catalonia.
> Corruption.
This is as much a Spanish problem as a Catalan problem. Everybody in Spain (and everywhere else) is against corrupt politicians (even the corrupt politicians if you ask them!).
> Future and public services.
Again, everyone wants that, and this is not an "Spanish problem".
As you correctly say, it's up and down. Up is powerful, really powerful. When you need to fight a powerful force, looking for cooperation is always more useful than confrontation. You will find strong support all over Spain for these demands, or most of them. As you will find support to have a fairer justice system, or against the anti-riot police (everyone who has been at the other side at some point hates them). I understand these problems, but I do not see how independence will solve them. In some cases, I think all this "proces" is just making it worse.
But we do not need to agree. It is ok if we have different opinions. Again, thank you for a civilized discussion (it's getting harder and harder these days).
If these problems were solved without us having to resort to become independent we would not do that. In fact if most of them were "solved" the independence movement would diminish a lot.
But right now there's too much immobilism and cronyism in Spain. There are some of these questions that are met with a direct "no" from some parties (culture), and most of them are guilty of the main problems (corruption and public services) and will not solve them.
Having a blank slate would make it easier to solve them (theoretically).
Do you want to help solve the independence "problem" without "breaking" Spain up? Vote correctly this weekend, and help others choose any of the correct options, that do not want the power for the sake of the power.
The Catalans never voluntarily agreed to be part of Spain as far as I know. They were essentially annexed a long time ago. And yet Spain says they have to stay no matter what. This doesn't sound right to me.
But sure, the EC not having had a defined process there was an oversight. But it was clear that the EC would not prevent the UK or any other member from leaving should they have chosen to do so. They wouldn't have arrested the Queen and replaced the UK members of parliament with EC people.
Article 50 really is just about establishing a procedure for an orderly withdrawal from the union (well, not that orderly in practice it would seem).
When did that happen?
Since then. I think that the source of conflict is that, for multiple reasons, catalans wanted to be part of a bigger political reality, but in "their" terms. And Spain, as a centralized system, didn't like that, doesn't like that and will not like that. To Spain, Catalonia is a property, why would they let it go? After all, it's their right (of conquest) to keep it.
Anyway, they level of independence that Catalonia has had in the last decades is much higher that before that “annexion”.
I am sorry to say, but this is the misleading part. You can't compare the situation hundreds of years ago with today's standards. Politically, Catalonia has less level of independence than 300 years ago. After all it had its own political institutions, courts, laws and coinage of money; all of them separated from the Kingdom of Castile.
The annex I was referring to was political, economical, legal and monetary unification after Catalonia defended a different candidate for the crown. And this is the level of autonomy that some Catalans wanted to regain.
That’s a very good point. But for some reason some people can’t leave 1714 behind!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_from_the_European_U...
It's basically a checklist item for a negotiated diplomatic withdrawal, to avoid triggering a knee-jerk military suppression of the unlawful rebellion. If "the rest of the country" does not agree, and won't negotiate, secession is still possible, it just means winning the civil war.
Why do they need the approval of people living elsewhere?