Let’s say you’re black in the American south before 1868, or South Africa before 1993. Voting or any sort of civic duty is illegal for you. Does that mean that

Let’s say you’re black in the American south before 1868, or South Africa before 1993. Voting or any sort of civic duty is illegal for you. Does that mean that you shouldn’t be allowed to vote? I am NOT saying Catalonians are oppressed the way blacks were in the American south or South Africa. Please don’t misunderstand. I’m purposefully using a more extreme example to illustrate that this is a moral, not legal question. Self-determination is a fundamental human right, by the philosophy of the Enlightenment at least. And this remains true whether or not it happens to be codified in law. If the Spanish constitution blocks reasonable paths to self determination, then the constitution is wrong—morally, not legally, of course. And why should we support an immoral law? There are good reasons for doing so in fact — preventing anarchy in the pejorative sense — but only if a constructive alternative is provided to fixing the law within the system in a reasonable amount of time. Surely there is a process for modifying or amending the constitution? Spain didn’t try.