8 ms·

It seems shocking that Spain a member of the EU is resorting to these tactics. Can you discuss some of their justifications for doing so?

kilburn 9y ago
The spanish constituion explicitly states that Spain is an indivisible country. Hence, the Constituional Court (that is elected by the parliament) has ruled out that any referendum about independence is illegal. At this point, the government says that both them and the judiciary powers are just defending the democratic rules, and Catalonia's government is the one at fault for all this hassle. The problem is that it is accepted that there's a wide majority of catalan people who want a referendum, and here we are...
- pvaldes 9y ago
  And this is not the end of the history. Would be naively opening the door to a full hell of pain. Try to give one candy to calm a child having a tantrum in a room full of them and see what happens when the other children realize that crying, breaking toys and banging the head on the wall equals to be rewarded with sweets. You allow somebody to break the law and jump over the constitution just because they are inconsolable otherwise. You fell in the trap. Now you must grant the same treatment to the rest. Similar referendums were demanded (and should have to be allowed in the very next day) for Euskadi, Galicia, Canary Islands, Asturias, Leon, Andalucia and only god knows what more. Two can play this game, and ten also. The idea is not Germany allowing or not a referendum for Bavaria; or UK trying to please Scottland; the idea would be: you must now be forced to grant referendums for each single state in Deutschland or UK to make us happy "or we will stop breathing (and will create a permanent state of confrontation and street disturbs)".
  - ukoki 9y ago
    So? If they want independence who are we to deny it? If your spouse wants a divorce, if your children wish to disown you — you can't deny them just because it's an inconvenience — it is their right.
    - QAPereo 9y ago
      Countries are not people, they don't respect or love each other, they oscillate between peace and war. The history of every major nation is a history of violence and conquest, not freely entered union. So, why deny independence? Because only the optics have changed, not the reality?
      - wav-part 9y ago
        > Countries are not people, they don't respect or love each other, they oscillate between peace and war. The history of every major nation is a history of violence and conquest, not freely entered union. IMO that has not been true for last 70 yrs. Point to me a war that has been People vs People. The fact of the current world is People Are Sovereign. If some >=N people domiciled in continuous region wants self-determination, thats their human right.
        kgwgk 9y ago
        I suspect that those who want to separate Catalonia from the rest of the country wouldn’t agree with the human right of the people in the Barcelona metropolitan are to choose by themselves their own future...
        NetStrikeForce 9y ago
        They do agree though. Barcelona, Aran, whatever. You name it. Just start the political movement and it'll be respected. I think it's a fair ask.
        euyyn 9y ago
        It won't be respected by all, not even by all ERC politicians. Don't fall into the trap of thinking Catalonia is somehow free of hypocrites: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnMA7KdGxn0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnMA7KdGxn0
        9y ago
- literallycancer 9y ago
  Changing the constitution isn't feasible? Are there any pro-separation parties in the national parliament?
  - jsdario 9y ago
    It is completely feasible. In fact Spain was the project of many different kingdoms (or "nations" by modern standards): Basque, Aragon/Catalan, Galician and Castilian. Not only that but many modern leftist political parties advocate for self determination freedom within our constitution. So the fact that the Catalan parliament with a simple majority of separatists are claiming unilateral referendum of independence in a free country is just to gather momentum.
    - kilburn 9y ago
      Come on jsdario... It is indeed possible to change the constution, but: 1) You need 3/5ths of the camera to do so. 2) There is only one significant state-wide party supporting self determination (podemos, which a very young party that entered the scene only in the last election). 3) The major parties (PP and PSOE, which would be like the republicans and democrats in the state) are both overtly against self determination. In any case, having to change the constitution amounts to having to get the support of 3/5ths of spain. This is hardly self-determination, don't you think?
      - jsdario 9y ago
        I may agree it's really hard, but the response is accurate. It is still possible. These kind of restrictions exist to defend people of tyranny. The same restrictions exists in Catalonian Parliament for things such as changing the "Estatut". It is not right for a simple majority to enforce their will over the people their opposition represent. Therefore the referendum is not legal, nor legitimate.
        elecbit 9y ago
        Tyranny is a group not allowing another group to decide what to do. Hear yourself: "the referendum is not legal". Such a nice view of what democracy is. So willing to vote and say goodbye to this bla-bla-bla-this is not legal, that is not legal. Good bye opressors. My deceased family in the war the dicator won will be really happy if we can finally separate. Too many open wounds you have never tried to heal.
- jacquesm 9y ago
  Governments usually do not like to give up the money making portions of their countries and neither does the population of the rest of the country. You never see a poor part of a country seceding (well, other than Quebec maybe).
  - literallycancer 9y ago
    Slovakia was much poorer than the Czech part of Czechoslovakia. The decision to split was made by the politicians rather than the people in a referendum though. Seems to be working out quite OK for everyone so far.
  - Mikeb85 9y ago
    Quebec never did secede though, and they're definitely not 'poor'.
  - tartuffe78 9y ago
    The South in the U.S. Civil War?
    - jacquesm 9y ago
      The people driving that were very wealthy.
    - int_19h 9y ago
      The South expected massive cotton revenues to prop its economy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Cotton https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Cotton
      - QAPereo 9y ago
        To be fair however, it was known how the war would proceed before the outset! In the words of General Sherman: You people of the South don't know what you are doing. This country will be drenched in blood, and God only knows how it will end. It is all folly, madness, a crime against civilization! You people speak so lightly of war; you don't know what you're talking about. War is a terrible thing! You mistake, too, the people of the North. They are a peaceable people but an earnest people, and they will fight, too. They are not going to let this country be destroyed without a mighty effort to save it… Besides, where are your men and appliances of war to contend against them? The North can make a steam engine, locomotive, or railway car; hardly a yard of cloth or pair of shoes can you make. You are rushing into war with one of the most powerful, ingeniously mechanical, and determined people on Earth — right at your doors. You are bound to fail. Only in your spirit and determination are you prepared for war. In all else you are totally unprepared, with a bad cause to start with. At first you will make headway, but as your limited resources begin to fail, shut out from the markets of Europe as you will be, your cause will begin to wane. If your people will but stop and think, they must see in the end that you will surely fail. People are not rational however, and the wealthy landowners were facing the extinction of their wealth... so they started a war.
- kodablah 9y ago
  > and Catalonia's government is the one at fault for all this hassle. My interpretation of GP's comment was about the draconian approach towards silencing internet activity. Is it believed the raiding of ISPs, outright blocking of websites, etc is the fault of Catalonia's government or Spain's?
  - kilburn 9y ago
    Internet activity that promotes illegal actions is already illegal, and there are laws in spain allowing for these raids and closures. Edit: "Getting away with it" is mostly a question of "which side are you on?". Independentists and most non-government supporters think that what's going on is outrageous, whereas government supporters are totally fine with it. These laws where passed mainly to fight against piracy (think thepiratebay). Of course the excuse was that it was a tool against terrorism and pedophilia though ;)
    - elecbit 9y ago
      Think out of the box. Is moral a law that forbids people speaking? Self-determination is in the human rights and Catalonia has more than 1000 years of history, culture and language. Democracy cannot be illegal, so this banning must be disobbeyed. Without disobbeying, woman and black people would not vote nowadays, so history proves it is a good way to take down immoral legal laws. EDIT: UN experts say that Spain must respect fundamental rights in Catalonia. Freedom of expression, freedom of press and power separation is at stake. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=22176&LangID=E http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?Ne... This is about democracy.
      - ktzar 9y ago
        I've heard pro-independence people twisting facts for over 20 years... Not surprised anymore. Democracy is deciding new law based on current law following people's desires... Like it or not, every day meter of Catalan soil belongs as much to a Catalan woman as to an Andalusian man... Nobody in his right mind would say that Catalonia is an oppressed region by Spain's government... Quite the opposite actually.
- toyg 9y ago
  > The spanish constitution ... was drafted 40 years ago by a Franchist establishment concerned with maintaining a certain degree of continuity. It's not surprising that the people most oppressed by Franco are not particularly happy with the result. Besides, the Wilson doctrine is usually more relevant for this sort of movements than whichever piece of paper is supposed to be law here or there. A population cannot be denied the right to self-determination, which includes splitting off if they really want to. It can be a stupid move (see Brexit), but people must be given the possibility to democratically discuss it and vote on it; because otherwise things will eventually go full Balkan, and you never want to go full Balkan.
  - euyyn 9y ago
    That Constitution was voted in referendum by the whole country, and the support it got in Catalonia was even greater than in Madrid. > the people most oppressed by Franco Let's at least agree that this is subjective.
    - toyg 9y ago
      People voted for a dramatic improvement in the status quo, not necessarily for a perfect document. It was drafted by 7 hand-picked representatives, 4 of which were basically franchists, and ratified by franchist institutions before being put to a popular vote. Had it been written in a more democratic way, by an assembly of people elected democratically, maybe it would have been different and more respectful of different identities; but it wasn’t, because franchist interests were still very strong.
      - euyyn 9y ago
        That is pure revisionism. > It was drafted by 7 hand-picked representatives, 4 of which were basically franchists Two out of the seven writers of the Constitution were Catalan (~1/3 of the writers for ~1/6 of the population). One of them a communist. The other one, exiled during the dictatorship for supporting Catalan nationalism. > ratified by franchist institutions before being put to a popular vote Before being put to a popular vote, it was ratified by the Congress that resulted from the first free elections in Spain in 40 years. The francoist party of Fraga only won 16/350 seats in that Congress; comparable to the 11 seats obtained by the Catalan party of Pujol. Half the seats had been won by centrist voters, and the other half by marxist voters. This Congress was our "assembly of people elected democratically", that could tell the writers to go back to their drafts until the result was to their liking. Those seven writers, by the way, weren't "hand-picked": they were picked by that Congress, among their members; they were all freely-elected representatives.
- gotbeans 9y ago
  I think he's talking about the "how" (blocking internet, policialization) not about the "why".
- NetStrikeForce 9y ago
  The Constitutional Court hasn't ruled out yet. Just suspended it while they deliberate. That's why most of the actions taken have been ordered by the Attorney General and not a court... Because the ref is not illegal :)
  - euyyn 9y ago
    Why would the TSJC judge be ordering things like taking apps and websites down, if the referendum weren't illegal?
    - NetStrikeForce 9y ago
      Ask them about it :-) but I could guess their logic: - They don't want people to vote. - Maybe if it's suspended you should refrain from going on with it until there's a ruling. - They know what how they want the ruling to be, so they act like it was done already. They're just working on making it legally sound in the meanwhile. Choose whichever you prefer, all those are guesses. The fact is that there's no ruling and that's easily verifiable.
      - euyyn 9y ago
        Luckily all court orders in Spain (like in most or all western countries) are explicitly reasoned in the order itself, so there isn't a need to ask the judge or guess. The people getting served those orders can publish the legal reasoning given.
        NetStrikeForce 9y ago
        Interestingly enough assemblea.cat's legal department has sent letters to the telcos because their site was blocked without a court order or any kind of notice. Also, some of the operations these days are not actually ordered by TSJC but by a separate judge using an old (almost forgotten) case: http://m.huffingtonpost.es/2017/09/20/el-juez-ha-ordenado-las-detenciones-y-registros-sin-que-lo-solicitara-la-guardia-civil-y-la-fiscalia-y-obviando-al-tsjc_a_23216427/ http://m.huffingtonpost.es/2017/09/20/el-juez-ha-ordenado-la... And during the first days of sites blocked no telco provided the court order they were in theory served. In fact, not all the telcos are blocking the sites. So yeah, western democracy and all that. It all smells incredibly fishy and ad-hoc.
- yxhuvud 9y ago
  Constitutional rules are not written in stone though. If there is political will to change them, it usually can be done (often there are speed limits for how fast this can be done). This is altogether a political issue, that the ruling party doesn't want the rules to be changed, but points to the constitution instead of taking responsibility for their stance.
fiatjaf 9y ago
They're a State. As a State, they want more power always, not less. Losing a bunch of taxpayers is untolerable for them.
alexasmyths 9y ago
The greater region of Montreal considered separating from the rest of Quebec if Quebec were to have separated from Canada. Same with some Aboriginal communities (who in some ways control vast areas of land, greater in size that many European countries!) They were quickly denied the right to do so on a legal basis. It never came to fistycuffs, but it could possibly have. Independence movements are a tricky thing.
- jsdario 9y ago
  In any democracy or lawful state, independence movements are just a matter of nationalistic feelings. It's normal they are a tricky thing. They do not obey the principles of solidarity (in this case) or rational thinking. They live mainly from either supremacist or victimization arguments.
  - alexasmyths 9y ago
    I completely disagree. Perhaps to Americans, wherein the concept of 'ethnicity' is culturally foreign concept, it can be complicated to put into the local, American framework for understanding identity. People are different, cultures are different, ethnicities are different. Why do you think that after 1000 years of war (in the case of the 'Germanics' - you could say 2000 years, i.e. against the Romans) - that places like 'Germany' still exist as a relatively coherent entity? Even when they were not 'a single state' they were allied. The boundaries of Europe for some reason always seem to 'snap back' to something resembling an ethnographic map. Why did the Greeks - who were never 'a country' in antiquity rallied together in defence against the Persians? Far from being 'radical' it's actually the epitome of 'reasonable' and even 'pragmatic' that ethnic groups want their own states. Every case is different: Catalonia, Scotland, Quebec, former Yugoslav states, heck - even Crimea ... but there's always at least some reason behind these movements - even if it does get caught up in 'stupid nationalism' or even, sadly, 'stupid racism' - those are usually just the extreme voices. Most people are not like that.
    - skissane 9y ago
      > Why do you think that after 1000 years of war (in the case of the 'Germanics' - you could say 2000 years, i.e. against the Romans) - that places like 'Germany' still exist as a relatively coherent entity? Even when they were not 'a single state' they were allied. When has "Germany" been a "a relatively coherent entity"? The "Germanics" the Romans fought against have just as much in common with today's Germans as they do with the French or the Dutch–the French get their name from a Germanic tribe (the Franks), the principal historical difference between France and Germany is that the Germanics who invaded the Roman Empire ended up adopting the language of the people they had conquered, whereas those who remained beyond its borders kept their original Germanic language. Moving forward, what we call "Germany" today is just the Prussian-dominated part of the Holy Roman Empire–"Austria" being the other main component–the separation of "Germany" and "Austria" is fundamentally due to dynastic politics (the Hohenzollern dynasty ruling Prussia vs. the Habsburg dynasty ruling Austria) and religion (the former being dominated by Protestants, the later dominated by Catholics)–the differences between Austrians and Germans are really no greater than the internal differences within each country, and the fact that they are two separate countries today is more an accident of history than anything deeper. The only time that historic Germany has ever been a "relatively coherent entity" was in the Nazi period. (I think Hitler's role in Austria-Germany relations was sort of paradoxical, in that despite briefly unifying the two countries, he ended up associating the whole idea of unification with his own odiousness, such that Austria-Germany unification is a lot less likely now than it would have been had Hitler never happened.) > The boundaries of Europe for some reason always seem to 'snap back' to something resembling an ethnographic map. Yes and no. On the one hand, political boundaries often (but not always) end up following ethnic boundaries. On the other hand, ethnicity is often a deliberate political construction. Look at France – for many decades, even centuries, the policy of the French central government was to suppress regional ethnic/cultural/linguistic identities in favour of a homogenous notion of Frenchness. If people on opposite sides of France see themselves today as having a common ethnic identity, that is due to the deliberate policy of the French state, rather than something that happened naturally.
walterstucco 9y ago
Except being Spain, the country where inquisition and conquistadores were born and where Franco ruled till mid 70s?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- Oletros 9y ago
  Still with the black legend of Inquisition and Conquistadores?
  - walterstucco 9y ago
    You would like to be seen like regular people, but you all, Catalans and Castilian, are and have been the plague of Europe. Every European knows that. It's so funny to watch you kill each other over stupid arguments of "independence" dating back 1700 Grow up It's 2017 Still you managed to be the last western country to free yourself from fascism Even Greece did better And you still are fascists and are fighting among brothers for no real reason Meanwhile we think we live in Europe and don't care about you being so childish Franco is so proud of what's happening in Spain right now. He's smiling in hell watching his legacy unfold
tcard 9y ago
I'm not a lawyer and I don't have an opinion on the Spanish government's or judicial system's concrete actions to stop a illegal law to take effect, but: the only websites, posters, etc. being seized are those paid for and organized by the Catalan government. Any association, political party, or individual is completely free to campaign for whatever they want, including independence. We have a Spain-wide constitution. The Catalan government decided it has a democratic mandate by the people of its region to not abide by it. The NORMAL reaction by the state is to apply it, and stop the Catalan government from breaking it. It's only oppresive insofar laws and the judicial system are opressive. Disclaimer: I'm a non-nationalist Spaniard living (but not born) in Catalonia. I don't particularly care about Catalan seceding or not (except for pragmatic concerns such as freedom of movement, etc.). I do care about whatever country I live in being able and willing to enforce its laws, insofar they are enacted by legitimate democratic institutions (and thus can be changed or repelled by democratic means) and there's freedom to disagree with them. I also support a secession referendum for Catalonia. There's a very strong and majoritary demand for it that the state should address. But it needs to happen in due lawful process.
- literallycancer 9y ago
  >We have a Spain-wide constitution. The Catalan government decided it has a democratic mandate by the people of its region to not abide by it. The NORMAL reaction by the state is to apply it, and stop the Catalan government from breaking it. It's only oppresive insofar laws and the judicial system are opressive. Of course, the American Revolution was also illegal by the laws of the British. It's also oppressive in the sense of trying to rule people without their consent. If you try to let people choose, but the other side says no, what's there left to do?
  - tcard 9y ago
    I'm not even arguing the Catalan government actions aren't _justified_, as the American Revolution may have been. My point is that the Spanish judiciary's reaction is just that of a normal, European, liberal democratic state under rule of law. (It's my opinion that it's _not_ justified, though: there's a fair chance of getting through the necessary changes to allow a referendum and other self-government demands by following legal procedures, given the current Spain-wide political climate. I believe this is mainly a politically dishonest and populist move by the Catalan government. But that's besides the point.)
jsdario 9y ago
Catalan parliament has deployed a referendum law with +1 MPs, breaking regional Catalan law, silencing opposition and its own constituent powers. The referendum law states that any positive result from the referendum will result in a declaration of independence, with or without agreement with the central government. Trying not to be get too biased, I'd conclude that Spanish central government is trying to protect the rule of law, state-wide or regional-wide, while also protecting those who didn't vote for separatists parties, which in 2015 elections were 52%.
- NetStrikeForce 9y ago
  You can be biased as long as you're truthful. Sadly, you are not being truthful. Catalan Parliament passed a law with more than 50% of the vote. In a Parliamentary democracy, Parliament is sovereign. The law says that if YES wins, there will be a mandate for independence and negotiations will start with the central government. If the result is NO the Catalan Parliament will dissolve the government and call for regional elections. More than 80% of Catalans want a legally binding referendum, regardless of pro or against indy.
jopsen 9y ago
At first yeah, I'm surprised too. Is the Catalan government a private organization? Or is it technically a part of the Spanish state. Private organizations can organize, fund, and promote whatever referendums they want. And the Spanish govt. would just say they don't recognize the result. But if the organizer is not a private organization, but instead a public institution, then it's likely abuse of authority and funds.
- icebraining 9y ago
  The Catalan government is the government of the autonomous region of Catalonia. So, I'd say "neither". They are a public institution, but their authority comes from the people, not from the central state.
  - NetStrikeForce 9y ago
    Sadly, Spain and many Spaniards can't see that. They keep claiming Spain "owns" Catalonia and also claim Catalan Devolution only exists because they "allow it"
- teknopaul 9y ago
  Spain has a constitution, trying to break it up is not "constitutional", even if you do it from Madrid. Saying that without taking sides. Its not a public/private debate, its all very much public. If you play divide and conquer long enough you end up on your own.
qiv 9y ago
Well, do you think it is worse than stationing four thousand police officers in cruise ships in the port of Barcelona? The Spanish government is determined to not let this happen. Period. Fortunately (and to make things more complicated) the parliament did not revoke the Catalan autonomy.

kilburn 9y ago

The spanish constituion explicitly states that Spain is an indivisible country. Hence, the Constituional Court (that is elected by the parliament) has ruled out that any referendum about independence is illegal. At this point, the government says that both them and the judiciary powers are just defending the democratic rules, and Catalonia's government is the one at fault for all this hassle. The problem is that it is accepted that there's a wide majority of catalan people who want a referendum, and here we are...

pvaldes 9y ago
And this is not the end of the history. Would be naively opening the door to a full hell of pain. Try to give one candy to calm a child having a tantrum in a room full of them and see what happens when the other children realize that crying, breaking toys and banging the head on the wall equals to be rewarded with sweets. You allow somebody to break the law and jump over the constitution just because they are inconsolable otherwise. You fell in the trap. Now you must grant the same treatment to the rest. Similar referendums were demanded (and should have to be allowed in the very next day) for Euskadi, Galicia, Canary Islands, Asturias, Leon, Andalucia and only god knows what more. Two can play this game, and ten also. The idea is not Germany allowing or not a referendum for Bavaria; or UK trying to please Scottland; the idea would be: you must now be forced to grant referendums for each single state in Deutschland or UK to make us happy "or we will stop breathing (and will create a permanent state of confrontation and street disturbs)".
- ukoki 9y ago
  So? If they want independence who are we to deny it? If your spouse wants a divorce, if your children wish to disown you — you can't deny them just because it's an inconvenience — it is their right.
  - QAPereo 9y ago
    Countries are not people, they don't respect or love each other, they oscillate between peace and war. The history of every major nation is a history of violence and conquest, not freely entered union. So, why deny independence? Because only the optics have changed, not the reality?
    - wav-part 9y ago
      > Countries are not people, they don't respect or love each other, they oscillate between peace and war. The history of every major nation is a history of violence and conquest, not freely entered union. IMO that has not been true for last 70 yrs. Point to me a war that has been People vs People. The fact of the current world is People Are Sovereign. If some >=N people domiciled in continuous region wants self-determination, thats their human right.
      - kgwgk 9y ago
        I suspect that those who want to separate Catalonia from the rest of the country wouldn’t agree with the human right of the people in the Barcelona metropolitan are to choose by themselves their own future...
        NetStrikeForce 9y ago
        They do agree though. Barcelona, Aran, whatever. You name it. Just start the political movement and it'll be respected. I think it's a fair ask.
        euyyn 9y ago
        It won't be respected by all, not even by all ERC politicians. Don't fall into the trap of thinking Catalonia is somehow free of hypocrites: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnMA7KdGxn0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnMA7KdGxn0
        9y ago
literallycancer 9y ago
Changing the constitution isn't feasible? Are there any pro-separation parties in the national parliament?
- jsdario 9y ago
  It is completely feasible. In fact Spain was the project of many different kingdoms (or "nations" by modern standards): Basque, Aragon/Catalan, Galician and Castilian. Not only that but many modern leftist political parties advocate for self determination freedom within our constitution. So the fact that the Catalan parliament with a simple majority of separatists are claiming unilateral referendum of independence in a free country is just to gather momentum.
  - kilburn 9y ago
    Come on jsdario... It is indeed possible to change the constution, but: 1) You need 3/5ths of the camera to do so. 2) There is only one significant state-wide party supporting self determination (podemos, which a very young party that entered the scene only in the last election). 3) The major parties (PP and PSOE, which would be like the republicans and democrats in the state) are both overtly against self determination. In any case, having to change the constitution amounts to having to get the support of 3/5ths of spain. This is hardly self-determination, don't you think?
    - jsdario 9y ago
      I may agree it's really hard, but the response is accurate. It is still possible. These kind of restrictions exist to defend people of tyranny. The same restrictions exists in Catalonian Parliament for things such as changing the "Estatut". It is not right for a simple majority to enforce their will over the people their opposition represent. Therefore the referendum is not legal, nor legitimate.
      - elecbit 9y ago
        Tyranny is a group not allowing another group to decide what to do. Hear yourself: "the referendum is not legal". Such a nice view of what democracy is. So willing to vote and say goodbye to this bla-bla-bla-this is not legal, that is not legal. Good bye opressors. My deceased family in the war the dicator won will be really happy if we can finally separate. Too many open wounds you have never tried to heal.
jacquesm 9y ago
Governments usually do not like to give up the money making portions of their countries and neither does the population of the rest of the country. You never see a poor part of a country seceding (well, other than Quebec maybe).
- literallycancer 9y ago
  Slovakia was much poorer than the Czech part of Czechoslovakia. The decision to split was made by the politicians rather than the people in a referendum though. Seems to be working out quite OK for everyone so far.
- Mikeb85 9y ago
  Quebec never did secede though, and they're definitely not 'poor'.
- tartuffe78 9y ago
  The South in the U.S. Civil War?
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    The people driving that were very wealthy.
  - int_19h 9y ago
    The South expected massive cotton revenues to prop its economy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Cotton https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Cotton
    - QAPereo 9y ago
      To be fair however, it was known how the war would proceed before the outset! In the words of General Sherman: You people of the South don't know what you are doing. This country will be drenched in blood, and God only knows how it will end. It is all folly, madness, a crime against civilization! You people speak so lightly of war; you don't know what you're talking about. War is a terrible thing! You mistake, too, the people of the North. They are a peaceable people but an earnest people, and they will fight, too. They are not going to let this country be destroyed without a mighty effort to save it… Besides, where are your men and appliances of war to contend against them? The North can make a steam engine, locomotive, or railway car; hardly a yard of cloth or pair of shoes can you make. You are rushing into war with one of the most powerful, ingeniously mechanical, and determined people on Earth — right at your doors. You are bound to fail. Only in your spirit and determination are you prepared for war. In all else you are totally unprepared, with a bad cause to start with. At first you will make headway, but as your limited resources begin to fail, shut out from the markets of Europe as you will be, your cause will begin to wane. If your people will but stop and think, they must see in the end that you will surely fail. People are not rational however, and the wealthy landowners were facing the extinction of their wealth... so they started a war.
kodablah 9y ago
> and Catalonia's government is the one at fault for all this hassle. My interpretation of GP's comment was about the draconian approach towards silencing internet activity. Is it believed the raiding of ISPs, outright blocking of websites, etc is the fault of Catalonia's government or Spain's?
- kilburn 9y ago
  Internet activity that promotes illegal actions is already illegal, and there are laws in spain allowing for these raids and closures. Edit: "Getting away with it" is mostly a question of "which side are you on?". Independentists and most non-government supporters think that what's going on is outrageous, whereas government supporters are totally fine with it. These laws where passed mainly to fight against piracy (think thepiratebay). Of course the excuse was that it was a tool against terrorism and pedophilia though ;)
  - elecbit 9y ago
    Think out of the box. Is moral a law that forbids people speaking? Self-determination is in the human rights and Catalonia has more than 1000 years of history, culture and language. Democracy cannot be illegal, so this banning must be disobbeyed. Without disobbeying, woman and black people would not vote nowadays, so history proves it is a good way to take down immoral legal laws. EDIT: UN experts say that Spain must respect fundamental rights in Catalonia. Freedom of expression, freedom of press and power separation is at stake. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=22176&LangID=E http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?Ne... This is about democracy.
    - ktzar 9y ago
      I've heard pro-independence people twisting facts for over 20 years... Not surprised anymore. Democracy is deciding new law based on current law following people's desires... Like it or not, every day meter of Catalan soil belongs as much to a Catalan woman as to an Andalusian man... Nobody in his right mind would say that Catalonia is an oppressed region by Spain's government... Quite the opposite actually.
toyg 9y ago
> The spanish constitution ... was drafted 40 years ago by a Franchist establishment concerned with maintaining a certain degree of continuity. It's not surprising that the people most oppressed by Franco are not particularly happy with the result. Besides, the Wilson doctrine is usually more relevant for this sort of movements than whichever piece of paper is supposed to be law here or there. A population cannot be denied the right to self-determination, which includes splitting off if they really want to. It can be a stupid move (see Brexit), but people must be given the possibility to democratically discuss it and vote on it; because otherwise things will eventually go full Balkan, and you never want to go full Balkan.
- euyyn 9y ago
  That Constitution was voted in referendum by the whole country, and the support it got in Catalonia was even greater than in Madrid. > the people most oppressed by Franco Let's at least agree that this is subjective.
  - toyg 9y ago
    People voted for a dramatic improvement in the status quo, not necessarily for a perfect document. It was drafted by 7 hand-picked representatives, 4 of which were basically franchists, and ratified by franchist institutions before being put to a popular vote. Had it been written in a more democratic way, by an assembly of people elected democratically, maybe it would have been different and more respectful of different identities; but it wasn’t, because franchist interests were still very strong.
    - euyyn 9y ago
      That is pure revisionism. > It was drafted by 7 hand-picked representatives, 4 of which were basically franchists Two out of the seven writers of the Constitution were Catalan (~1/3 of the writers for ~1/6 of the population). One of them a communist. The other one, exiled during the dictatorship for supporting Catalan nationalism. > ratified by franchist institutions before being put to a popular vote Before being put to a popular vote, it was ratified by the Congress that resulted from the first free elections in Spain in 40 years. The francoist party of Fraga only won 16/350 seats in that Congress; comparable to the 11 seats obtained by the Catalan party of Pujol. Half the seats had been won by centrist voters, and the other half by marxist voters. This Congress was our "assembly of people elected democratically", that could tell the writers to go back to their drafts until the result was to their liking. Those seven writers, by the way, weren't "hand-picked": they were picked by that Congress, among their members; they were all freely-elected representatives.
gotbeans 9y ago
I think he's talking about the "how" (blocking internet, policialization) not about the "why".
NetStrikeForce 9y ago
The Constitutional Court hasn't ruled out yet. Just suspended it while they deliberate. That's why most of the actions taken have been ordered by the Attorney General and not a court... Because the ref is not illegal :)
- euyyn 9y ago
  Why would the TSJC judge be ordering things like taking apps and websites down, if the referendum weren't illegal?
  - NetStrikeForce 9y ago
    Ask them about it :-) but I could guess their logic: - They don't want people to vote. - Maybe if it's suspended you should refrain from going on with it until there's a ruling. - They know what how they want the ruling to be, so they act like it was done already. They're just working on making it legally sound in the meanwhile. Choose whichever you prefer, all those are guesses. The fact is that there's no ruling and that's easily verifiable.
    - euyyn 9y ago
      Luckily all court orders in Spain (like in most or all western countries) are explicitly reasoned in the order itself, so there isn't a need to ask the judge or guess. The people getting served those orders can publish the legal reasoning given.
      - NetStrikeForce 9y ago
        Interestingly enough assemblea.cat's legal department has sent letters to the telcos because their site was blocked without a court order or any kind of notice. Also, some of the operations these days are not actually ordered by TSJC but by a separate judge using an old (almost forgotten) case: http://m.huffingtonpost.es/2017/09/20/el-juez-ha-ordenado-las-detenciones-y-registros-sin-que-lo-solicitara-la-guardia-civil-y-la-fiscalia-y-obviando-al-tsjc_a_23216427/ http://m.huffingtonpost.es/2017/09/20/el-juez-ha-ordenado-la... And during the first days of sites blocked no telco provided the court order they were in theory served. In fact, not all the telcos are blocking the sites. So yeah, western democracy and all that. It all smells incredibly fishy and ad-hoc.
yxhuvud 9y ago
Constitutional rules are not written in stone though. If there is political will to change them, it usually can be done (often there are speed limits for how fast this can be done). This is altogether a political issue, that the ruling party doesn't want the rules to be changed, but points to the constitution instead of taking responsibility for their stance.

fiatjaf 9y ago

They're a State. As a State, they want more power always, not less. Losing a bunch of taxpayers is untolerable for them.

alexasmyths 9y ago

The greater region of Montreal considered separating from the rest of Quebec if Quebec were to have separated from Canada. Same with some Aboriginal communities (who in some ways control vast areas of land, greater in size that many European countries!) They were quickly denied the right to do so on a legal basis. It never came to fistycuffs, but it could possibly have. Independence movements are a tricky thing.

jsdario 9y ago
In any democracy or lawful state, independence movements are just a matter of nationalistic feelings. It's normal they are a tricky thing. They do not obey the principles of solidarity (in this case) or rational thinking. They live mainly from either supremacist or victimization arguments.
- alexasmyths 9y ago
  I completely disagree. Perhaps to Americans, wherein the concept of 'ethnicity' is culturally foreign concept, it can be complicated to put into the local, American framework for understanding identity. People are different, cultures are different, ethnicities are different. Why do you think that after 1000 years of war (in the case of the 'Germanics' - you could say 2000 years, i.e. against the Romans) - that places like 'Germany' still exist as a relatively coherent entity? Even when they were not 'a single state' they were allied. The boundaries of Europe for some reason always seem to 'snap back' to something resembling an ethnographic map. Why did the Greeks - who were never 'a country' in antiquity rallied together in defence against the Persians? Far from being 'radical' it's actually the epitome of 'reasonable' and even 'pragmatic' that ethnic groups want their own states. Every case is different: Catalonia, Scotland, Quebec, former Yugoslav states, heck - even Crimea ... but there's always at least some reason behind these movements - even if it does get caught up in 'stupid nationalism' or even, sadly, 'stupid racism' - those are usually just the extreme voices. Most people are not like that.
  - skissane 9y ago
    > Why do you think that after 1000 years of war (in the case of the 'Germanics' - you could say 2000 years, i.e. against the Romans) - that places like 'Germany' still exist as a relatively coherent entity? Even when they were not 'a single state' they were allied. When has "Germany" been a "a relatively coherent entity"? The "Germanics" the Romans fought against have just as much in common with today's Germans as they do with the French or the Dutch–the French get their name from a Germanic tribe (the Franks), the principal historical difference between France and Germany is that the Germanics who invaded the Roman Empire ended up adopting the language of the people they had conquered, whereas those who remained beyond its borders kept their original Germanic language. Moving forward, what we call "Germany" today is just the Prussian-dominated part of the Holy Roman Empire–"Austria" being the other main component–the separation of "Germany" and "Austria" is fundamentally due to dynastic politics (the Hohenzollern dynasty ruling Prussia vs. the Habsburg dynasty ruling Austria) and religion (the former being dominated by Protestants, the later dominated by Catholics)–the differences between Austrians and Germans are really no greater than the internal differences within each country, and the fact that they are two separate countries today is more an accident of history than anything deeper. The only time that historic Germany has ever been a "relatively coherent entity" was in the Nazi period. (I think Hitler's role in Austria-Germany relations was sort of paradoxical, in that despite briefly unifying the two countries, he ended up associating the whole idea of unification with his own odiousness, such that Austria-Germany unification is a lot less likely now than it would have been had Hitler never happened.) > The boundaries of Europe for some reason always seem to 'snap back' to something resembling an ethnographic map. Yes and no. On the one hand, political boundaries often (but not always) end up following ethnic boundaries. On the other hand, ethnicity is often a deliberate political construction. Look at France – for many decades, even centuries, the policy of the French central government was to suppress regional ethnic/cultural/linguistic identities in favour of a homogenous notion of Frenchness. If people on opposite sides of France see themselves today as having a common ethnic identity, that is due to the deliberate policy of the French state, rather than something that happened naturally.

walterstucco 9y ago

Except being Spain, the country where inquisition and conquistadores were born and where Franco ruled till mid 70s?

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
Oletros 9y ago
Still with the black legend of Inquisition and Conquistadores?
- walterstucco 9y ago
  You would like to be seen like regular people, but you all, Catalans and Castilian, are and have been the plague of Europe. Every European knows that. It's so funny to watch you kill each other over stupid arguments of "independence" dating back 1700 Grow up It's 2017 Still you managed to be the last western country to free yourself from fascism Even Greece did better And you still are fascists and are fighting among brothers for no real reason Meanwhile we think we live in Europe and don't care about you being so childish Franco is so proud of what's happening in Spain right now. He's smiling in hell watching his legacy unfold

tcard 9y ago

I'm not a lawyer and I don't have an opinion on the Spanish government's or judicial system's concrete actions to stop a illegal law to take effect, but: the only websites, posters, etc. being seized are those paid for and organized by the Catalan government. Any association, political party, or individual is completely free to campaign for whatever they want, including independence. We have a Spain-wide constitution. The Catalan government decided it has a democratic mandate by the people of its region to not abide by it. The NORMAL reaction by the state is to apply it, and stop the Catalan government from breaking it. It's only oppresive insofar laws and the judicial system are opressive. Disclaimer: I'm a non-nationalist Spaniard living (but not born) in Catalonia. I don't particularly care about Catalan seceding or not (except for pragmatic concerns such as freedom of movement, etc.). I do care about whatever country I live in being able and willing to enforce its laws, insofar they are enacted by legitimate democratic institutions (and thus can be changed or repelled by democratic means) and there's freedom to disagree with them. I also support a secession referendum for Catalonia. There's a very strong and majoritary demand for it that the state should address. But it needs to happen in due lawful process.

literallycancer 9y ago
>We have a Spain-wide constitution. The Catalan government decided it has a democratic mandate by the people of its region to not abide by it. The NORMAL reaction by the state is to apply it, and stop the Catalan government from breaking it. It's only oppresive insofar laws and the judicial system are opressive. Of course, the American Revolution was also illegal by the laws of the British. It's also oppressive in the sense of trying to rule people without their consent. If you try to let people choose, but the other side says no, what's there left to do?
- tcard 9y ago
  I'm not even arguing the Catalan government actions aren't _justified_, as the American Revolution may have been. My point is that the Spanish judiciary's reaction is just that of a normal, European, liberal democratic state under rule of law. (It's my opinion that it's _not_ justified, though: there's a fair chance of getting through the necessary changes to allow a referendum and other self-government demands by following legal procedures, given the current Spain-wide political climate. I believe this is mainly a politically dishonest and populist move by the Catalan government. But that's besides the point.)

jsdario 9y ago

Catalan parliament has deployed a referendum law with +1 MPs, breaking regional Catalan law, silencing opposition and its own constituent powers. The referendum law states that any positive result from the referendum will result in a declaration of independence, with or without agreement with the central government. Trying not to be get too biased, I'd conclude that Spanish central government is trying to protect the rule of law, state-wide or regional-wide, while also protecting those who didn't vote for separatists parties, which in 2015 elections were 52%.

NetStrikeForce 9y ago
You can be biased as long as you're truthful. Sadly, you are not being truthful. Catalan Parliament passed a law with more than 50% of the vote. In a Parliamentary democracy, Parliament is sovereign. The law says that if YES wins, there will be a mandate for independence and negotiations will start with the central government. If the result is NO the Catalan Parliament will dissolve the government and call for regional elections. More than 80% of Catalans want a legally binding referendum, regardless of pro or against indy.

jopsen 9y ago

At first yeah, I'm surprised too. Is the Catalan government a private organization? Or is it technically a part of the Spanish state. Private organizations can organize, fund, and promote whatever referendums they want. And the Spanish govt. would just say they don't recognize the result. But if the organizer is not a private organization, but instead a public institution, then it's likely abuse of authority and funds.

icebraining 9y ago
The Catalan government is the government of the autonomous region of Catalonia. So, I'd say "neither". They are a public institution, but their authority comes from the people, not from the central state.
- NetStrikeForce 9y ago
  Sadly, Spain and many Spaniards can't see that. They keep claiming Spain "owns" Catalonia and also claim Catalan Devolution only exists because they "allow it"
teknopaul 9y ago
Spain has a constitution, trying to break it up is not "constitutional", even if you do it from Madrid. Saying that without taking sides. Its not a public/private debate, its all very much public. If you play divide and conquer long enough you end up on your own.

qiv 9y ago

Well, do you think it is worse than stationing four thousand police officers in cruise ships in the port of Barcelona? The Spanish government is determined to not let this happen. Period. Fortunately (and to make things more complicated) the parliament did not revoke the Catalan autonomy.