7 ms·

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,

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.
- elecbit 9y ago
  Democracy is listening the majority of a group, without forgetting and respecting the minorities. You don't argument why Catalonia is not opressed. Banning all the laws emerging from its parliament is not respecting. Sorry Spaniards, we will vote. It's not about you, it's about us. It's not about us feeling superior or supremacist. It's about deciding our way, as we think too different in too many things. We can be good neighbours.
  - euyyn 9y ago
    > [Catalonia is oppressed:] Banning all the laws emerging from its parliament is not respecting. Not all laws emerging from its parliament are ruled unconstitutional by the courts. And unconstitutional laws enacted by any parliament in Spain are banned by the courts, Catalonia or not. It's not really a matter of respect.
    - NetStrikeForce 9y ago
      That's why Spanish Constitutional Court tore down articles of the Catalan Estatut (sort of regional constitution) that are accepted in exactly the same terms for others and are even covered in the Spanish Constitution. E.g. "Catalonia is a nation". The Spanish Constitution says "Catalonia is a nationality" while the Andalusian Estatuto says "Andalusia is a nation".
      - euyyn 9y ago
        A 1min Google search gives: TÍTULO PRELIMINAR Artículo 1. Andalucía. 1. Andalucía, como nacionalidad histórica y en el ejercicio del derecho de autogobierno que reconoce la Constitución, se constituye en Comunidad Autónoma en el marco de la unidad de la nación española y conforme al artículo 2 de la Constitución. http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/html/especiales/NuevoGobiernoVIII/images/17estatuto.pdf http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/html/especiales/NuevoGobierno... Unless that's not the most current estatuto, you've been misled.
        NetStrikeForce 9y ago
        Not sure if you're native Spanish speaker or not, but nacionalidad is nación when talking about a group of people (simplifying as typing from mobile) The count is of about 30 different articles. Here's a comment from El País (hardly pro-indy or pro-catalan) about it: https://elpais.com/diario/2007/07/05/espana/1183586424_850215.html https://elpais.com/diario/2007/07/05/espana/1183586424_85021...
        euyyn 9y ago
        I'm a native speaker, yes. You say "The Spanish Constitution says Catalonia is a nationality". It does indeed (emphasis mine): La Constitución se fundamenta en la indisoluble unidad de la Nación española, patria común e indivisible de todos los españoles, y reconoce y garantiza el derecho a la autonomía de las nacionalidades y regiones que la integran y la solidaridad entre todas ellas. The Andalusian estatuto almost uses the exact same words, "nacionalidad historica" in the "unidad de la nación española". Can hardly be considered against the Constitution. Agreed? One can argue that "Cataluña es una nación" is a valid interpretation of the Constitution (I won't, because I'm not a constitutional lawyer and I don't think you are either), but you can't really use the Andalusian estatuto to support that the Tribunal Constitucional gives inconsistent rulings. (And has the Andalusian one even been challenged? I don't think the Tribunal Constitucional can strike down laws that haven't been brought to them).
- adventured 9y ago
  > Like it or not, every day meter of Catalan soil belongs as much to a Catalan woman as to an Andalusian man Like it or not, Catalonia will break away from Spain if it wants to and there's nothing Spain can do to stop it short of murdering thousands of people. That's the choice Spain will have to make when it comes down to it.
  - pvaldes 9y ago
    > there's nothing Spain can do except murdering lots of people That would be horrible, for sure, but don't worry. Using my disheveled imagination I think that asking the people responsible of breaking the laws to explain their behaviour in front of a jury could be one (very obvious) thing that Spain could do. It seems that they are doing it yet, in fact.
- drdeca 9y ago
  > Democracy is deciding new law based on current law following people's desires This does not seem like the correct definition to me. Suppose that a country is an absolute dictatorship, with the exception that the citizens may vote on the color of a bikeshed, and their word goes for the color of the bikeshed regardless of the dictator's preference for the color of the bikeshed, and that this is all enshrined in law. This would not be a democratic country. Democracy is based on people voting on the decisions being made. "deciding the new law based on the current law" is not a fundamental part of democracy? That is not to say that I don't think that "deciding the new law based on the current law" is valuable. I strongly agree that it is valuable. But it is not, I think, an essential part of what democracy is.
  - harperlee 9y ago
    You are right in that just voting does not a democracy make. But in the same vein, restricting communication and organization of groups does not immediately a dictatorship make. The current status is complicated and a failure of politicians' ability to do their job, but the fact is that trying to split the country unilaterally is currently illegal and wrong from at least some very sound points of view (another comment put it very well: Catalonia is as much of the Andalusians as of the Catalans). So the government is now forced to stop this - they would otherwise be letting Andalusians be robbed. It is their job to block the referendum. It was also their job to avoid this situation by creating avenues of dialogue though... So in my opinion their next task in their job is to resign.
zanny 9y ago
Even the US has precedent on banning speech that will "incite imminent lawless action". And compared to countries like the UK or Germany they are a bastion of free speech. I agree free speech laws in pretty much every country are unethical because they are arrayed in a way to ban speech that might risk the dissolution of the nation, but every single country has those laws because its governments trying to protect themselves.
- gerdesj 9y ago
  "And compared to countries like the UK or Germany they are a bastion of free speech." Care to elucidate me on what basis that statement lies? I am a UKoGBnNI citizen who has also lived in DE for a few years in the West Germany part in the 70's and 80's and have friends who are native to DE. In the UK we have laws banning inflammatory speech of various types that are clearly categorised and so does Deutschland. Both countries also, I think, have citizens who pride themselves on being able to pretty much speak their mind freely. I think both are very liberal states in this regard. I do feel that some of my civil liberties have been eroded over the years but I in no way feel that my right to freedom of speech has been compromised in any way. I may live in a country that (worryingly) has more CCTV cameras pointing at me than you can shake a stick at but I do not believe that my right to express myself coherently and freely is damaged in any way. I'm not happy about say RIPA and co but we have a formal, legalised right to freedom of speech in the UK. You are obviously not a US citizen because you seem to believe the US is one "thing" or a single country. It isn't and yet it is. It is a federation of states with a few odd bits tacked on (just like the UK - not) which means that there are federal laws, state laws, county laws, city laws, bye laws and made up by someone laws. This is also how most "normal" countries work. So, where do you live?
  - adventured 9y ago
    > ... you seem to believe the US is one "thing" or a single country. It isn't and yet it is. It is a federation of states with a few odd bits tacked on ... which means that there are federal laws, state laws, county laws, city laws, bye laws and made up by someone laws. Free speech laws in the US are strictly governed at the federal level, not at the city / state / county level. Your comment accordingly makes no sense. The states are legally unable to make any laws abridging freedom of speech. Every time a local entity has attempted such, it has ultimately been struck down by the federal government, which retains supremacy over many rights (and will ensure those rights with force against a local entity if necessary, as when ending segregation).
euyyn 9y ago
> Spain must respect fundamental rights in Catalonia. Freedom of expression, freedom of press and power separation Spain respects fundamental rights in Catalonia and anywhere else in the country; respecting them is the supreme law of the land. Anyone who violates those rights will have the courts after them the exact same way as the courts are acting against this referendum.
- elecbit 9y ago
  However, United Nations experts don't think the same as you. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=22176&LangID=E http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?Ne... Censorship in internet. Opening private letters. Political detentions and raids to political parties offices, searching for posters and ballots. Bringing 10000 policeman by boat to avoid a vote. Sound quite authoritarian to me.
  - euyyn 9y ago
    I was actually quoting from your link. "The measures we are witnessing are worrying because they appear to violate fundamental individual rights". They are worrying because they appear to violate those rights. Of course, any such actual violation can be brought to court.
    - elecbit 9y ago
      And all violations that have happened have been brought to the Spanish and European court. In some years I am sure Spain(or the rest of it) will have to pay for it. Threats to the press, threats to polititians. Closing websites, chasing teenagers who fork a repo in github, opening mail, spying communications. Check Julian Assange tweets to know a bit more about it. You cannot accuse him of being a part in this conflict. https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/914029345018122240 https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/914029345018122240
- goliatone 9y ago
  It could be argued that this platonic view is not very factual. If you look at how corruption is dealt with and the reticence to apply the same constitutional laws you can get a sense of how things work. There were numerous members of the royal house we could talk about, or politicians...

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.

elecbit 9y ago
Democracy is listening the majority of a group, without forgetting and respecting the minorities. You don't argument why Catalonia is not opressed. Banning all the laws emerging from its parliament is not respecting. Sorry Spaniards, we will vote. It's not about you, it's about us. It's not about us feeling superior or supremacist. It's about deciding our way, as we think too different in too many things. We can be good neighbours.
- euyyn 9y ago
  > [Catalonia is oppressed:] Banning all the laws emerging from its parliament is not respecting. Not all laws emerging from its parliament are ruled unconstitutional by the courts. And unconstitutional laws enacted by any parliament in Spain are banned by the courts, Catalonia or not. It's not really a matter of respect.
  - NetStrikeForce 9y ago
    That's why Spanish Constitutional Court tore down articles of the Catalan Estatut (sort of regional constitution) that are accepted in exactly the same terms for others and are even covered in the Spanish Constitution. E.g. "Catalonia is a nation". The Spanish Constitution says "Catalonia is a nationality" while the Andalusian Estatuto says "Andalusia is a nation".
    - euyyn 9y ago
      A 1min Google search gives: TÍTULO PRELIMINAR Artículo 1. Andalucía. 1. Andalucía, como nacionalidad histórica y en el ejercicio del derecho de autogobierno que reconoce la Constitución, se constituye en Comunidad Autónoma en el marco de la unidad de la nación española y conforme al artículo 2 de la Constitución. http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/html/especiales/NuevoGobiernoVIII/images/17estatuto.pdf http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/html/especiales/NuevoGobierno... Unless that's not the most current estatuto, you've been misled.
      - NetStrikeForce 9y ago
        Not sure if you're native Spanish speaker or not, but nacionalidad is nación when talking about a group of people (simplifying as typing from mobile) The count is of about 30 different articles. Here's a comment from El País (hardly pro-indy or pro-catalan) about it: https://elpais.com/diario/2007/07/05/espana/1183586424_850215.html https://elpais.com/diario/2007/07/05/espana/1183586424_85021...
        euyyn 9y ago
        I'm a native speaker, yes. You say "The Spanish Constitution says Catalonia is a nationality". It does indeed (emphasis mine): La Constitución se fundamenta en la indisoluble unidad de la Nación española, patria común e indivisible de todos los españoles, y reconoce y garantiza el derecho a la autonomía de las nacionalidades y regiones que la integran y la solidaridad entre todas ellas. The Andalusian estatuto almost uses the exact same words, "nacionalidad historica" in the "unidad de la nación española". Can hardly be considered against the Constitution. Agreed? One can argue that "Cataluña es una nación" is a valid interpretation of the Constitution (I won't, because I'm not a constitutional lawyer and I don't think you are either), but you can't really use the Andalusian estatuto to support that the Tribunal Constitucional gives inconsistent rulings. (And has the Andalusian one even been challenged? I don't think the Tribunal Constitucional can strike down laws that haven't been brought to them).
adventured 9y ago
> Like it or not, every day meter of Catalan soil belongs as much to a Catalan woman as to an Andalusian man Like it or not, Catalonia will break away from Spain if it wants to and there's nothing Spain can do to stop it short of murdering thousands of people. That's the choice Spain will have to make when it comes down to it.
- pvaldes 9y ago
  > there's nothing Spain can do except murdering lots of people That would be horrible, for sure, but don't worry. Using my disheveled imagination I think that asking the people responsible of breaking the laws to explain their behaviour in front of a jury could be one (very obvious) thing that Spain could do. It seems that they are doing it yet, in fact.
drdeca 9y ago
> Democracy is deciding new law based on current law following people's desires This does not seem like the correct definition to me. Suppose that a country is an absolute dictatorship, with the exception that the citizens may vote on the color of a bikeshed, and their word goes for the color of the bikeshed regardless of the dictator's preference for the color of the bikeshed, and that this is all enshrined in law. This would not be a democratic country. Democracy is based on people voting on the decisions being made. "deciding the new law based on the current law" is not a fundamental part of democracy? That is not to say that I don't think that "deciding the new law based on the current law" is valuable. I strongly agree that it is valuable. But it is not, I think, an essential part of what democracy is.
- harperlee 9y ago
  You are right in that just voting does not a democracy make. But in the same vein, restricting communication and organization of groups does not immediately a dictatorship make. The current status is complicated and a failure of politicians' ability to do their job, but the fact is that trying to split the country unilaterally is currently illegal and wrong from at least some very sound points of view (another comment put it very well: Catalonia is as much of the Andalusians as of the Catalans). So the government is now forced to stop this - they would otherwise be letting Andalusians be robbed. It is their job to block the referendum. It was also their job to avoid this situation by creating avenues of dialogue though... So in my opinion their next task in their job is to resign.

zanny 9y ago

Even the US has precedent on banning speech that will "incite imminent lawless action". And compared to countries like the UK or Germany they are a bastion of free speech. I agree free speech laws in pretty much every country are unethical because they are arrayed in a way to ban speech that might risk the dissolution of the nation, but every single country has those laws because its governments trying to protect themselves.

gerdesj 9y ago
"And compared to countries like the UK or Germany they are a bastion of free speech." Care to elucidate me on what basis that statement lies? I am a UKoGBnNI citizen who has also lived in DE for a few years in the West Germany part in the 70's and 80's and have friends who are native to DE. In the UK we have laws banning inflammatory speech of various types that are clearly categorised and so does Deutschland. Both countries also, I think, have citizens who pride themselves on being able to pretty much speak their mind freely. I think both are very liberal states in this regard. I do feel that some of my civil liberties have been eroded over the years but I in no way feel that my right to freedom of speech has been compromised in any way. I may live in a country that (worryingly) has more CCTV cameras pointing at me than you can shake a stick at but I do not believe that my right to express myself coherently and freely is damaged in any way. I'm not happy about say RIPA and co but we have a formal, legalised right to freedom of speech in the UK. You are obviously not a US citizen because you seem to believe the US is one "thing" or a single country. It isn't and yet it is. It is a federation of states with a few odd bits tacked on (just like the UK - not) which means that there are federal laws, state laws, county laws, city laws, bye laws and made up by someone laws. This is also how most "normal" countries work. So, where do you live?
- adventured 9y ago
  > ... you seem to believe the US is one "thing" or a single country. It isn't and yet it is. It is a federation of states with a few odd bits tacked on ... which means that there are federal laws, state laws, county laws, city laws, bye laws and made up by someone laws. Free speech laws in the US are strictly governed at the federal level, not at the city / state / county level. Your comment accordingly makes no sense. The states are legally unable to make any laws abridging freedom of speech. Every time a local entity has attempted such, it has ultimately been struck down by the federal government, which retains supremacy over many rights (and will ensure those rights with force against a local entity if necessary, as when ending segregation).

euyyn 9y ago

> Spain must respect fundamental rights in Catalonia. Freedom of expression, freedom of press and power separation Spain respects fundamental rights in Catalonia and anywhere else in the country; respecting them is the supreme law of the land. Anyone who violates those rights will have the courts after them the exact same way as the courts are acting against this referendum.

elecbit 9y ago
However, United Nations experts don't think the same as you. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=22176&LangID=E http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?Ne... Censorship in internet. Opening private letters. Political detentions and raids to political parties offices, searching for posters and ballots. Bringing 10000 policeman by boat to avoid a vote. Sound quite authoritarian to me.
- euyyn 9y ago
  I was actually quoting from your link. "The measures we are witnessing are worrying because they appear to violate fundamental individual rights". They are worrying because they appear to violate those rights. Of course, any such actual violation can be brought to court.
  - elecbit 9y ago
    And all violations that have happened have been brought to the Spanish and European court. In some years I am sure Spain(or the rest of it) will have to pay for it. Threats to the press, threats to polititians. Closing websites, chasing teenagers who fork a repo in github, opening mail, spying communications. Check Julian Assange tweets to know a bit more about it. You cannot accuse him of being a part in this conflict. https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/914029345018122240 https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/914029345018122240
goliatone 9y ago
It could be argued that this platonic view is not very factual. If you look at how corruption is dealt with and the reticence to apply the same constitutional laws you can get a sense of how things work. There were numerous members of the royal house we could talk about, or politicians...