Catalan independence referendum, 2017

CroFag

Courts are doing what they're supposed to do, there is no violence in jailing people who advocate & actively contribute to the state's separation. If politicians in Donegal proclaimed an independent state, I'm sure the Irish courts would pursue justice for them...

CroFag

Courts doing their job in accordance to the law cannot be "violence". Many countries around the world have a death penalty for the crime of homeland's betrayal. Spain is luckily not one of them.

FrancieBrady

CroFag wrote: »

Courts doing their job in accordance to the law cannot be "violence". Many countries around the world have a death penalty for the crime of homeland's betrayal. Spain is luckily not one of them.

Who said it was 'violence'?

feargale

CroFag wrote: »

Peaceful people? Stirring division

Better ban political parties then. Free speech too while you're at it.

CroFag wrote: »

& sectarianism, excuse me, is far from peaceful.

Sectarianism? Protestants in Catalonia?

feargale

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

Where is the disdain exactly?

feargale wrote: »

Are you serious?

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

Very serious. Can you please explain and give factual examples rather than emotional responses, and if you're going to cite police brutality that excuse is so flogged to death at this stage and so discredited I can't be bothered replying to your virtue signalling.

You must be joking re emotional responses given your own apparent proximity to apoplexy here. I don't suppose jailing people who haven't fired a water pistol would rank as disdainful in your book. Next you'll be telling us that you yourself are not disdainful of the pro-independence people or the pro-self-determination people.

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

This is not the great civil rights struggle of our time, there is no oppression, repression, suppression or whatever the buzz word is that sounds cool on the left going on in Catalonia other than the pro Spanish majority of who have kept their heads down for the last 15 years for fear of being singled out, called a facist , losing their public service job or other reprisals.

The left? Last time I checked it was being alleged that Catalan independence was being driven by a Catalan elite. The only majority is the one that emerges from the ballot box. By persisting in asserting that there is a unionist majority while denying a vote, you protest too much, showing yourself as a propagandist. Could we have an independent source for the allegation of intimidation of unionists? You've referred to fascists in your thread. Have they all gone away?

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

The noisy minority of people in Catalonia would not gain any more rights or freedoms that they don't already have as Spanish citizens.

FYP. None other than what noisy Irish people gained following a vote for separation in 1918.

Catalonia not a nation? By whose dictum? If it is not, neither is Singapore. Let the people decide.

I am neither for nor against Catalan independence. I am for self-determination. Madrid has made a balls of it. If Madrid had more experience of democracy they would follow the example of Westminster a propos Scotland and Canada re Quebec. And if your claim of a majority is correct that would be the end of the matter.

v638sg7k1a92bx

feargale wrote: »

You must be joking re emotional responses given your own apparent proximity to apoplexy here. I don't suppose jailing people who haven't fired a water pistol would rank as disdainful in your book. Next you'll be telling us that you yourself are not disdainful of the pro-independence people or the pro-self-determination people.

The left? Last time I checked it was being alleged that Catalan independence was being driven by a Catalan elite. The only majority is the one that emerges from the ballot box. By persisting in asserting that there is a unionist majority while denying a vote, you protest too much, showing yourself as a propagandist. Could we have an independent source for the allegation of intimidation of unionists? You've referred to fascists in your thread. Have they all gone away?


FYP. None other than what noisy Irish people gained following a vote for separation in 1918.

Catalonia not a nation? By whose dictum? If it is not, neither is Singapore. Let the people decide.

I am neither for nor against Catalan independence. I am for self-determination. Madrid has made a balls of it. If Madrid had more experience of democracy they would follow the example of Westminster a propos Scotland and Canada re Quebec. And if your claim of a majority is correct that would be the end of the matter.

Why is it pro independence advocates always ask for sources when they never provide any themselves?

Scotland is a country, Catalonia is not. Both the referendums in Scotland and Canada were conducted in accordance with the rule of law in those countries. Catalonian referendum was both unconstitutional under Spanish law and also broke the rules of the Catalonian statutes of autonomy.

Self determination only applies to colonised people and people under apartheid regimes. As a matter of international law you only become a state when recognised by other states which is why your comparison to Ireland's fight for independence and the whole bases for your argument has just fallen to pieces

NEXT!

recedite

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

Self determination only applies to colonised people and people under apartheid regimes. NEXT!

How does that relate to the US Declaration of Independence?
The colonised people were the native americans, but they weren't involved much in the proceedings, if at all. It was the colonists who sought and fought for independence from the UK.
Illegally.

v638sg7k1a92bx

recedite wrote: »

How does that relate to the US Declaration of Independence?
The colonised people were the native americans, but they weren't involved much in the proceedings, if at all. It was the colonists who sought and fought for independence from the UK.
Illegally.

I think you either misunderstand how it is applied or you're clutching at straws again.

recedite

Not an answer.

A Dub in Glasgo

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

SNIP

Illegal, illegal.... illegal....

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

Self determination only applies to colonised people and people under apartheid regimes

Says who (apart from you)?

v638sg7k1a92bx

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Says who (apart from you)?

Says international law actually. lol :pac: :pac: :pac:

The Golden Miller

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

Says international law actually. lol :pac: :pac: :pac:

That just means any colonised country must be given the right to self-determination with all round recognition from other bodies once independent. That does not mean nations that are not colonized cannot seek it either e.g Scotland

A Dub in Glasgo

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

Says international law actually. lol :pac: :pac: :pac:

Oh dear, you really do believe your own trumpet :rolleyes:

marienbad

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Oh dear, you really do believe your own trumpet :rolleyes:

there is none so blind as those that cannot see

A Dub in Glasgo

marienbad wrote: »

there is none so blind as those that cannot see

are

v638sg7k1a92bx

The Golden Miller wrote: »

That just means any colonised country must be given the right to self-determination with all round recognition from other bodies once independent. That does not mean nations that are not colonized cannot seek it either e.g Scotland

Scotland is a country, Catalonia has never been an independent country.

The Scottish referendum was within the existing legal framework, Catalan referendum was not.

Your interpretation of international law and right of self determination is wrong.

v638sg7k1a92bx

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Oh dear, you really do believe your own trumpet :rolleyes:

Just statements of fact.

The Golden Miller

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

Scotland is a country, Catalonia has never been an independent country.

The Scottish referendum was within the existing legal framework, Catalan referendum was not.

Your interpretation of international law and right of self determination is wrong.

Scotland has no official standing as a country so it's recognition as being distinct within the UK is predicated on the fact it is still a nation, which funnily enough Spain acknowledges Catalonia as. Former independence has no bearing on this, other than your own made up parameters.

No my interpretation is spot on. Colonized countries must be given the right to self-determination, but others may still seek it e.g Scotland. Whether Scotland's referendum was legal or not is not relevant here, it's the principle that they were within their rights to seek it

FrancieBrady

It is all stuff and nonsense really.

You have a peaceful separatist movement with significant support. What are you going to do to solve the problem?
So far Madrid's solution has been: batter and bludgeon those who want a peaceful referendum.
Imprison those who represent the significant number who want independence

Real politic. Wise men and women at the helm? I don't think so.

marienbad

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Scotland has no official standing as a country so it's recognition as being distinct within the UK is predicated on the fact it is still a nation, which funnily enough Spain acknowledges Catalonia as. Former independence has no bearing on this, other than your own made up parameters.

No my interpretation is spot on. Colonized countries must be given the right to self-determination, but others may still seek it e.g Scotland. Whether Scotland's referendum was legal or not is not relevant here, it's the principle that they were within their rights to seek it

And the holding of the referendum was granted by the British Parliament .

The Golden Miller

marienbad wrote: »

And the holding of the referendum was granted by the British Parliament .

What was accepted by the British parliament subsequently is neither here nor there in the context of Scotland's right to seek self-determination in the first place. It was in response to a claim that self-determination "only" applies to colonized countries. Unless you agree with that statement?

marienbad

The Golden Miller wrote: »

What was accepted by the British parliament subsequently is neither here nor there in the context of Scotland's right to seek self-determination in the first place

Of course it is , the SNP accepted then as now the primacy of Parliament

The Golden Miller

marienbad wrote: »

Of course it is , the SNP accepted then as now the primacy of Parliament

Yes, but regardless of the answer they got from parliament, it did not stop them seeking self-determination. The had a right, as a distinct nation, to seek it from the government body regardless of the answer they got. And if they had been rejected, further avenues would have been explored. What's key here really is that they are clearly distinct as a nation from the rest of the UK, as are Catalonia in Spain. The crux of the point is, self-determination does not only apply to colonized countries

v638sg7k1a92bx

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Scotland has no official standing as a country so it's recognition as being distinct within the UK is predicated on the fact it is still a nation, which funnily enough Spain acknowledges Catalonia as. Former independence has no bearing on this, other than your own made up parameters.

No my interpretation is spot on. Colonized countries must be given the right to self-determination, but others may still seek it e.g Scotland. Whether Scotland's referendum was legal or not is not relevant here, it's the principle that they were within their rights to seek it

If I may use your own words:

The Golden Miller wrote: »

The points you raised have been address numerous times, why willfully ignore the responses and continue to circle old ground?

Scotland is a country, that is a statement of fact https://goo.gl/de9bos

Catalonia is within it's rights to seek independence but it has to do so within the existing legal framework. As I have said many times, the Catalan government broke it's own parliamentary rules, it's own statutes of autonomy and the Spanish Constitution. They couldn't get the required majority to call the referendum which they said gave them a mandate for independence even though it was considered illegal by their own parliament and statue of autonomy rules. After the vote they couldn't even get the majority for the UDI but again decided to press ahead anyway. This is before we even touch on the points that the referendum itself had no independent electorate board, no census, and in some places more people voted than were actually registered.

If you and other posters are so concerned about right to self determine, then what you should really be concerned about is the majority of people in Catalonia who are not in favour of independence. Why should they be expected to participate in an referendum which every democratic institution both in Cataluna and Spain considers illegal, where your opponents have take custody of the ballot boxes, the ballot papers and physically occupied the polling stations in the run up to the election. Have you considered the impact on them and the potential situation whereby you have a majority of people living in an independent country of Catalonia who want to remain part of Spain, are those people not entitled to the same right of self determination as Catalonians who don't feel Spanish?

The Golden Miller

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

If I may use your own words:



Scotland is a country, that is a statement of fact https://goo.gl/de9bos

Catalonia is within it's rights to seek independence but it has to do so within the existing legal framework. As I have said many times, the Catalan government broke it's own parliamentary rules, it's own statutes of autonomy and the Spanish Constitution. They couldn't get the required majority to call the referendum which they said gave them a mandate for independence even though it was considered illegal by their own parliament and statue of autonomy rules. After the vote they couldn't even get the majority for the UDI but again decided to press ahead anyway. This is before we even touch on the points that the referendum itself had no independent electorate board, no census, and in some places more people voted than were actually registered.

If you and other posters are so concerned about right to self determine, then what you should really be concerned about is the majority of people in Catalonia who are not in favour of independence. Why should they be expected to participate in an referendum which every democratic institution both in Cataluna and Spain considers illegal, where your opponents have take custody of the ballot boxes, the ballot papers and physically occupied the polling stations in the run up to the election. Have you considered the impact on them and the potential situation whereby you have a majority of people living in an independent country of Catalonia who want to remain part of Spain, are those people not entitled to the same right of self determination as Catalonians who don't feel Spanish?

A statement of fact backed up with quora? Really? "Country" when used outside the context of sovereignty can apply interchangeably with many terms such as nation. By the same reckoning, one could call Catalonia a country.

Catalonia doesn't have to do anything within the existing legal framework. It may choose to do so, or may not. Just as nearly any country up until this point has chosen not to.

marienbad

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Yes, but regardless of the answer they got from parliament, it did not stop them seeking self-determination. The had a right, as a distinct nation, to seek it from the government body regardless of the answer they got. And if they had been rejected, further avenues would have been explored. What's key here really is that they are clearly distinct as a nation from the rest of the UK, as are Catalonia in Spain. The crux of the point is, self-determination does not only apply to colonized countries

In any democracy there is nothing stopping any person or group from seeking anything , be it gay marriage or divorce as in this country or constitutional change in Catalonia . But as in Scotland it can only be done within the law .

It cannot be done unilaterally.

v638sg7k1a92bx

The Golden Miller wrote: »

A statement of fact backed up with quora? Really? "Country" when used outside the context of sovereignty can apply interchangeably with many terms such as nation. By the same reckoning, one could call Catalonia a country.

Catalonia doesn't have to do anything within the existing legal framework. It may choose to do so, or may not. Just as nearly any country up until this point has chosen not to.

So Scotland is not a country according to you?

Unfortunately for a minority of people in Catalonia they do have to operate within the legal framework as that is the rule of law in that country. Same applies in Ireland when we call a referendum that it must go before the Dail.

I see you are still choosing to ignore the facts around the voting irregularities, the fact that there was no democratic mandate, parlimentary rules, statutes of autonomy etc and just circle back to old ground. What's the story with that?

The Golden Miller

marienbad wrote: »

In any democracy there is nothing stopping any person or group from seeking anything , be it gay marriage or divorce as in this country or constitutional change in Catalonia . But as in Scotland it can only be done within the law .

It cannot be done unilaterally.

But it has been done unilaterally many times before, because "democracy" is an overstated term which manifests itself by generally being corrupted in some form or another, often favouring the ruling body funnily enough i.e Spain and Catalonia. "Democracy" in this instance is knowingly placing barriers which cannot be overcome, even if 100% of the population of Catalonia wanted independence. Democracy indeed!

The Golden Miller

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

So Scotland is not a country according to you?

Unfortunately for a minority of people in Catalonia they do have to operate within the legal framework as that is the rule of law in that country. Same applies in Ireland when we call a referendum that it must go before the Dail.

I see you are still choosing to ignore the facts around the voting irregularities, the fact that there was no democratic mandate, parlimentary rules, statutes of autonomy etc and just circle back to old ground. What's the story with that?

Scotland is a country in the sense it's a nation. The same can be applied to Catalonia.

We do not know if the minority or majority in Catalonia wants independence.

I do not care for the legal jargon in your posts. In a unilateral declaration of independence, they no longer see themselves as bound by the old rules. Catalonia is a nation, and as far as I'm concerned that is the only criteria that needs be for self-determination. Other than that, it's corrupted democracy preventing them from doing so. If it was left to the mechanisms and jargon of watered down fascists, no country would have ever been able to obtain independence. Catalonia are not going to play by those rules ultimately, so it's of no use constantly saying what they should have done

FrancieBrady

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

So Scotland is not a country according to you?

Unfortunately for a minority of people in Catalonia they do have to operate within the legal framework as that is the rule of law in that country. Same applies in Ireland when we call a referendum that it must go before the Dail.

I see you are still choosing to ignore the facts around the voting irregularities, the fact that there was no democratic mandate, parlimentary rules, statutes of autonomy etc and just circle back to old ground. What's the story with that?

Many things have been achieved in the world by the breaking of law.

Were they all wrong even though they were illegal?