5 ms·

That's not self-serving argument, it's just plain true. Most of those who didn't support independence simply didn't vote. Parties against this movement sent thi

That's not self-serving argument, it's just plain true. Most of those who didn't support independence simply didn't vote. Parties against this movement sent this message to their voters. It seems that only a slice from the non-supporters from the left showed up to vote.

JoeAltmaier 7y ago
That sounds like you abdicated your part in the decision, then? How is democracy to work, if the parties see 'not voting' as some sort of super-vote? Next time, I humbly suggest everyone vote, and have their voice heard.
- rumanator 7y ago
  > That sounds like you abdicated your part in the decision, then? Given that the so called decision was ripe with voting fraud (I mean, separatists storing voting ballots at home?) then the process actually has nothing to do with deciding and everything to do with a Putin-istic imposition of a policy hidden with a thin façade of an election.
- kentrado 7y ago
  The vote was illegal according to the Spanish constitution, the supreme court later confirmed this. You adbicate nothing by refusing to participate in a illegal vote. You can't talk about democratic legitimatecy when only 40% voted.
  - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
    Wasn't that after re-writing the constitution? So was the vote illegal at the time? I know this is an emotional issue. But the rule of law is purported to be enshrined in the Spanish Constitution.
    - kgwgk 7y ago
      > Wasn't that after re-writing the constitution? No. "The Constitution has been amended twice. The first time, Article 13.2, Title I was altered to extend to citizens of the European Union the right to active and passive suffrage (both voting rights and eligibility as candidates) in local elections. The second time, in August/September 2011, a balanced budget amendment and debt brake was added to Article 135." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Spain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Spain
- SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
  The argument is that democracy was not meant to work in this case; that the vote should not have been held at all and Madrid was right to prohibit it. From that perspective, there's a reasonable argument for boycotting the vote to strengthen the case that it's not valid.
- iagovar 7y ago
  I'm not Catalan, so even if I wanted to vote, I can't.
- wbronitsky 7y ago
  This is a pretty "I know better than you" take, one that is eliding pretty important facts, like that this election was blatantly illegal. I, for one, would probably choose to not vote in an illegal election that purports to speak for me as well. Additionally, it is not helpful to "suggest" that a majority of a region take part in illegal activity. It would seem to me that not every election is democratic; this reductive argument that elections, write large, equal democracy does not help find a solution

JoeAltmaier 7y ago

That sounds like you abdicated your part in the decision, then? How is democracy to work, if the parties see 'not voting' as some sort of super-vote? Next time, I humbly suggest everyone vote, and have their voice heard.

rumanator 7y ago
> That sounds like you abdicated your part in the decision, then? Given that the so called decision was ripe with voting fraud (I mean, separatists storing voting ballots at home?) then the process actually has nothing to do with deciding and everything to do with a Putin-istic imposition of a policy hidden with a thin façade of an election.
kentrado 7y ago
The vote was illegal according to the Spanish constitution, the supreme court later confirmed this. You adbicate nothing by refusing to participate in a illegal vote. You can't talk about democratic legitimatecy when only 40% voted.
- JoeAltmaier 7y ago
  Wasn't that after re-writing the constitution? So was the vote illegal at the time? I know this is an emotional issue. But the rule of law is purported to be enshrined in the Spanish Constitution.
  - kgwgk 7y ago
    > Wasn't that after re-writing the constitution? No. "The Constitution has been amended twice. The first time, Article 13.2, Title I was altered to extend to citizens of the European Union the right to active and passive suffrage (both voting rights and eligibility as candidates) in local elections. The second time, in August/September 2011, a balanced budget amendment and debt brake was added to Article 135." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Spain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Spain
SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
The argument is that democracy was not meant to work in this case; that the vote should not have been held at all and Madrid was right to prohibit it. From that perspective, there's a reasonable argument for boycotting the vote to strengthen the case that it's not valid.
iagovar 7y ago
I'm not Catalan, so even if I wanted to vote, I can't.
wbronitsky 7y ago
This is a pretty "I know better than you" take, one that is eliding pretty important facts, like that this election was blatantly illegal. I, for one, would probably choose to not vote in an illegal election that purports to speak for me as well. Additionally, it is not helpful to "suggest" that a majority of a region take part in illegal activity. It would seem to me that not every election is democratic; this reductive argument that elections, write large, equal democracy does not help find a solution