Catalan independence referendum, 2017

v638sg7k1a92bx

Hector Savage wrote: »

Exactly, they need a 66% majority approval from the catalan parliament to legally hold a referendum - something the independence people stick their heads in the sand over

You should have been around here for the last 50 pages! I've been banging my head against the keyboard trying to explain this ad nausea to independence advocates and all I got in return was hyperbolic posts about oppression, repression, Franco, Fascism, copy and pastes from pro independence websites of memes and images of Spanish police beating protesters.

When you look at the basics, what you had was a group of political parties who represented less than 50% of electorate attempted to hold a referendum to create their own country against the will of the majority and somehow the accepted school of thought online and in the media is that these are the ones being oppressed???

flaneur

It was grossly mishandled by Madrid. There's no real way of ignoring that.

Had the referendum gone ahead and even if Madrid had just used it as a starting point for a negotiated solution, there would not have been scenes of ferry loads of police and heads being cracked.

oscarBravo

flaneur wrote: »

It was grossly mishandled by Madrid. There's no real way of ignoring that.

Had the referendum gone ahead and even if Madrid had just used it as a starting point for a negotiated solution...

...Madrid would have been legitimising a referendum for which there was no legal basis.

I'm not going to claim that Madrid couldn't have handled it better, but if there's no legal basis for a referendum, then it would be a mistake for the government to do anything other than ignore it completely.

There's a legal route to independence for Catalonia. Trying to pursue an illegal route just because the legal route is too hard isn't good enough.

EagererBeaver

Avatar MIA wrote: »

George Sunsnow wrote: »

Even though according to sky news right now,a majority voted for anti independence parties? 52% popular vote
You can bet a lot of those voting for independence parties would vote the other way in a properly enforced regulated referendum

Not sure who's misrepresenting the results, you or Sky news.

47% voted for independence parties but less voted for the unionist parties. There was approx. 9% voting for the socialist party that advocated a referendum, but not particularly coming down on a particular side re independence.

There is a problem here where people get confused. People who don't know what they're talking about throwing our comments like this further adds to the confusion.
The PSC, the Catalan arm of PSOE are "the socialist party". They won 13.9% of the vote. They are decidedly AGAINST independence.
En Comu Podem is an electoral pact of various leftist parties and groupings affiliated to the national Podemos group. They won 7.4% of the vote. The most prominent figure in it is probably Ada Colau, the mayor of Barcelona. Both her and Podemos are AGAINST independence, but are not as adamant as others that there should be no referendum. Colau supported the October 1st referendum going ahead. Pablo Iglesias denounced it as illegal.

recedite

Hector Savage wrote: »

Exactly, they need a 66% majority approval from the catalan parliament to legally hold a referendum - something the independence people stick their heads in the sand over

...and don't forget that after that, they will also "need" approval from Rajoy and the rest of Spain. The whole "legal route" process is rigged to fail, if not at one hurdle, then at the next one.

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

You should have been around here for the last 50 pages! I've been banging my head against the keyboard trying to explain this ad nausea to independence..

The problem is, you refuse to listen to anyone else's point of view.
Can you understand why the UK citizens outside Scotland did not get a vote in the Scottish independence referendum.

Can you understand that was the right and correct way of doing things?

The others in the UK said they wanted the Scots to stay, but they weren't going to force them to stay in the union. And no Scots were beaten up or imprisoned. And the Scots decided to stay. Can you understand the significance of any of that?

Avatar MIA

EagererBeaver wrote: »

There is a problem here where people get confused. People who don't know what they're talking about throwing our comments like this further adds to the confusion.
The PSC, the Catalan arm of PSOE are "the socialist party". They won 13.9% of the vote. They are decidedly AGAINST independence.
En Comu Podem is an electoral pact of various leftist parties and groupings affiliated to the national Podemos group. They won 7.4% of the vote. The most prominent figure in it is probably Ada Colau, the mayor of Barcelona. Both her and Podemos are AGAINST independence, but are not as adamant as others that there should be no referendum. Colau supported the October 1st referendum going ahead. Pablo Iglesias denounced it as illegal.

Socialist Podemos (okay, I got the party wrong) may be luke warm on the union, but that's not the reason people vote for them, so you definitely can't say all their voters are unionists. And there could be a pro independence vote there with a small swing of their vote to pro independence.

EagererBeaver

What I'm saying is you need to me very careful about how you term all these parties and pacts add it gets very confusing and is easily misrepresented, especially when comparing to previous results as parties and pacts change constantly.

"The Socialist Party" is PSC (Catalan arm of PSOE). They are anti independence.

Let's use Podemos as a proxy for En Comu Podemos - they're further to the left of PSC/PSOE, have some "grassroots" elements in Catalunya (e.g. Colau). They're not necessarily pro Union but they are, currently, anti independence.

You obviously have socialist parties in the independence side of things as well - ERC (Oriol Junqueras) and CUP.

The third arm of the presumptive pro independence coalition is led by Puigdemont, under the banner of JuntxCat is time. This is effectively a rebrand and repackage of the same old right of centre Convergencia crowd from the days of Artur Mas and Jordi Pujol.

v638sg7k1a92bx

recedite wrote: »

...and don't forget that after that, they will also "need" approval from Rajoy and the rest of Spain. The whole "legal route" process is rigged to fail, if not at one hurdle, then at the next one.

The problem is, you refuse to listen to anyone else's point of view.
Can you understand why the UK citizens outside Scotland did not get a vote in the Scottish independence referendum.

Can you understand that was the right and correct way of doing things?

The others in the UK said they wanted the Scots to stay, but they weren't going to force them to stay in the union. And no Scots were beaten up or imprisoned. And the Scots decided to stay. Can you understand the significance of any of that?

But the other points of view were of no consequence. As I've explained to you numerous times that there is no comparison btw Scottish Independence vote and Catalonia.

1. Scotland is a country Catalonia is not

2. The Scottish vote was sanctioned by UK parliament, the 1 - O was not even sanctioned by the regional parliament

3. The UK does not have a Constitution, Spain does

4. The other countries within the UK all recognise one another as being countries within the UK. Nobody recognises Catalonia as being an independent country.

We have been over this so many times and some posters just revert back to the same arguments. What part of those facts do you not accept?

v638sg7k1a92bx

flaneur wrote: »

It was grossly mishandled by Madrid. There's no real way of ignoring that.

Had the referendum gone ahead and even if Madrid had just used it as a starting point for a negotiated solution, there would not have been scenes of ferry loads of police and heads being cracked.

The use of force was an ill-judged tactic rather than principle but just go online and read the amount of tweets and commentary by indepes who believe that the referendum on 1st October was a legitimate referendum that gave Catalonia a mandate to declare independence!

feargale

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

But the other points of view were of no consequence.

Because they weren't expressed arrogantly enough?

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

As I've explained to you numerous times that there is no comparison btw Scottish Independence vote and Catalonia.

1. Scotland is a country Catalonia is not

You keep throwing out that old chestnut. What does Scotland have that Catalonia doesn't, apart from a soccer team? A rugby team too, though Catalonia had that too in the 1930s. Even if Catalonia were not a country, on that basis Singapore should not have been allowed independence in the 1960s. Incidentally what is your definition of a country? You need to educate yourself on democracy. All that should matter is the will of the people.

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

2. The Scottish vote was sanctioned by UK parliament, the 1 - O was not even sanctioned by the regional parliament

So, how did it take place?

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

3. The UK does not have a Constitution, Spain does

Constitutions can be changed. Catalans endorsed the Spanish Constitution as an alternative to that murderous usurper Franco's thuggery. And give over your quasi-Godwin sh**e, your attempts at bullying people here into refraining from mentioning that scumbag and his acolytes. They didn't go away, alot of them are in Rajoy's party as the jackboot tactics will attest. Yes it is true that many unionists are anti-Franco, but not all.

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

4. The other countries within the UK all recognise one another as being countries within the UK. Nobody recognises Catalonia as being an independent country.

Nobody? Have you been paying attention over the last 24 hours?

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

What "facts" do you not accept?

FYP. Yours.

P.S. You counted your chickens before they were hatched. It would be foolish now for any of us to gloat over the fact that it's been shoved up Rajoy's ass. Even if a clear, substantial majority had emerged either way, thanks to Rajoy and his fellow assoles a degree of bitterness has been created within Catalonia and between Catalonia and Madrid that Scotland and Quebec will never know. It is not good for Catalonia or Spain. Need I say that this will not go away? Madrid is a relative newcomer to democracy and should have observed the UK and Canada more closely,

P.P.S.

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

The use of force was an ill-judged tactic.

Good. You have finally made a concession, even if it took a slap in Rajoy's face to make you do it. I notice he also appears to see a tiny chink of light. He will talk. About bloody time, if not too late.

EagererBeaver

feargale wrote: »

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

You need to educate yourself on democracy. All that should matter is the will of the people.

Plenty of people in this thread and in Catalunya, not least Carles Puigdemont need to "educate themselves" (I can't stand that ****ing phrase) on what democracy is.

There has just been a democratic election in Catalunya which, while not a referendum, one in which less than 50% of the population expressed a preference for candidates supporting Catalan independence. Therefore Puigdemont, his Pujol disciple cronies and all the muppets on here harping on about "the will of the people" need to pipe down a bit.

v638sg7k1a92bx

Ok, here we go again.

feargale wrote: »

Because they weren't expressed arrogantly enough?

You keep throwing out that old chestnut. What does Scotland have that Catalonia doesn't, apart from a soccer team? A rugby team too, though Catalonia had that too in the 1930s. Even if Catalonia were not a country, on that basis Singapore should not have been allowed independence in the 1960s. Incidentally what is your definition of a country? You need to educate yourself on democracy. All that should matter is the will of the people.

So Scotland is not a country, what about England are they a country? Catalonia is categorically not a country, it has been a part Spain when it was formed in 1492 and has never been an independent country/nation/state.

feargale wrote: »

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

2. The Scottish vote was sanctioned by UK parliament, the 1 - O was not even sanctioned by the regional parliament

So, how did it take place?

As you have been told numerous times but continuously choose to ignore. This is one of the reasons why the referendum was illegal and why there is no mandate for independence.The minority pro independence government required a 2/3 majority in their own Parliament to hold a referendum on 1 - O. They couldn't get the majority so decided to break their own Parliamentary rules and push ahead with the referendum anyway. They then handed the organising of the referendum over to a group of pro independence volunteers who ordered the ballot boxes online, took custody of the ballot boxes by hiding them in their homes. They then chose where the polling stations would be and occupied them by sleeping in them the night before the election. If that's not bad enough, there was no voter list, no census and no legal oversight of any kind not to mention that it was reported that in 17 municipalities there were more Yes votes then there was on the official electoral register for those constituencies. The indepes decided to take the results of that phoney election and make a UDI on the basis that it gave them a mandate for independence.
Now, if the significance of that statement needs to explained to you and why that constitutes an illegal election then you need to "educate yourself on democracy". Can we finally put this to bed or need I say more?

feargale wrote: »

Constitutions can be changed. Catalans endorsed the Spanish Constitution as an alternative to that murderous usurper Franco's thuggery. And give over your quasi-Godwin sh**e, your attempts at bullying people here into refraining from mentioning that scumbag and his acolytes. They didn't go away, alot of them are in Rajoy's party as the jackboot tactics will attest. Yes it is true that many unionists are anti-Franco, but not all.

Very tiresome repeating myself but here goes. The means to Catalan independence already exists within the Spanish constitution but first they require a 2/3 majority in the Catalan Parliament to hold a referendum. If that was approved, it would go to a vote where ALL of Spain would get to choose whether they want Catalonia to secede and break up the country of Spain as we have known it for the past 500 years. Since Catalonia is still part of Spain and any breakup would affect their countries borders and all of the people living in Spain, they are entitled to vote just like if there was to be a United Ireland a vote in the North would have to pass and then it would go to vote in the South. Are you old enough to remember the Good Friday Agreement where two referendums were held across the Island of Ireland because it impacted ALL of the people living on this Island???

Constitutions can be changed but they require legal referendums where ALL of the country decides just like we did with abortion, Lisbon, divorce, children's rights, same sex marriage, the Good Friday Agreement. A total of 35 times Ireland has amended it's constitution. This is how constitutions are changed not by a minority of people who can't get enough votes deciding to throw their toys out of the pram and holding illegal elections and declaring a new country.

feargale wrote: »

Nobody? Have you been paying attention over the last 24 hours?

As a matter of international law you become a state by being recognised by other states.Please tell us which other countries have recognised Catalonia in the past 24 hours?

feargale wrote: »

FYP. Yours.

P.S. You counted your chickens before they were hatched. It would be foolish now for any of us to gloat over the fact that it's been shoved up Rajoy's ass. Even if a clear, substantial majority had emerged either way, thanks to Rajoy and his fellow assoles a degree of bitterness has been created within Catalonia and between Catalonia and Madrid that Scotland and Quebec will never know. It is not good for Catalonia or Spain. Need I say that this will not go away? Madrid is a relative newcomer to democracy and should have observed the UK and Canada more closely,

I'm willing to stand corrected if you can point out which of my assertions are factually incorrect. The question for you is at what stage are you willing to keep flogging this dead horse about Franco and oppression, the facts and history are not on your side. This is not the civil rights struggle of our time but a cynical attempt at nation building and a minority of people trying to impose a nationalist ideology on the majority.

recedite

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

Since Catalonia is still part of Spain and any breakup would affect their countries borders and all of the people living in Spain, they are entitled to vote just like if there was to be a United Ireland a vote in the North would have to pass and then it would go to vote in the South.

Creating a union between ROI and NI is not relevant. You need the consent of both parties for a marriage, but only one for a separation.
Now, getting back to the comparison with Scottish independence, you were saying Scots had a right to decide their own destiny because Scotland is "a country" but Catalonia is not. Is that based on Scotland having its own rugby team, or what is your definition of "a country"?

EagererBeaver

Scotland is one of the four constituent countries of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and, unfortunately, Northern Ireland. This is a known fact, and self evident.

Catalonia is an autonomous community within the Kingdom of Spain. This, again, is a known fact.

I'm not sure how much more mileage there is in this ffs.

recedite

EagererBeaver wrote: »

I'm not sure how much more mileage there is in this ffs.

Not much, we'll have to agree to disagree on it.
At the end of the day, Scotland is a country because it chooses to identify as one, and nobody else seems to object.
Catalonia declared independence, and therefore it could be considered to be in the transitional stage to being an independent republic, or else just a semi-autonomous community within the Kingdom of Spain. Depending on who you ask.
The term "country" is an English word, its a bit vague and does not really apply directly.

EagererBeaver

Catalunya did NOT declare independence. A group of politicians representing a minority, albeit a sizeable one, of the population declared independence and in doing so broke umpteen laws and parliamentary procedures.

v638sg7k1a92bx

recedite wrote: »

Creating a union between ROI and NI is not relevant. You need the consent of both parties for a marriage, but only one for a separation.
Now, getting back to the comparison with Scottish independence, you were saying Scots had a right to decide their own destiny because Scotland is "a country" but Catalonia is not. Is that based on Scotland having its own rugby team, or what is your definition of "a country"?

But Catalonia doesn't have consent. Just because a minority of people declare independence does not make it so.

As a matter of international law, you become a state by being recognised as a state. No other state in the world recognises Catalonia as being independent.

recedite

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

But Catalonia doesn't have consent.

They had a referendum to establish consent.
No doubt you will just say the referendum was illegal because it did not have the consent of those in the rest of Spain. And so we go round in circles.

EagererBeaver

It was illegal because it was illegal. They broke their own rules and procedures in the Parlament to call it.

Look up the footage. They're all celebrating as everyone else walks out of the chamber in disgust at what they've seen.

An Ciarraioch

EagererBeaver wrote: »

Scotland is one of the four constituent countries of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and, unfortunately, Northern Ireland. This is a known fact, and self evident.

Catalonia is an autonomous community within the Kingdom of Spain. This, again, is a known fact.

I'm not sure how much more mileage there is in this ffs.

Legally, Wales is part of England, but as you say, it is generally regarded as a constituent country. Similarly, the use of País in Spanish to describe Euskadi, Valencia and Catalonia suggests an analogous status for those autonomous communities.

EagererBeaver

But País isn't used to describe Valencia or Catalunya, only the País Vasco?

Barna77

Franco is named more here in this forum than in Spanish history books.....

EagererBeaver wrote: »

But País isn't used to describe Valencia or Catalunya, only the País Vasco?

According to El Periódico, in the case of Valencia, "país" was used centuries ago. País Valenciá. As well as Kingdom of Valencia
Nationalists brought it back in the 19th century and of course its use was stopped after the war.
The official name is Comunitat Valenciana, but some people still would use the term "país". Their estatut quotes "País Valenciá", but not as the official name

feargale

I'm observing a Christmas truce.

Happy Christmas to all.

I''ll be back.

v638sg7k1a92bx

recedite wrote: »

They had a referendum to establish consent.
No doubt you will just say the referendum was illegal because it did not have the consent of those in the rest of Spain. And so we go round in circles.

Consent from who, they broke their own Parliamentary procedures to hold the referendum?

bertie 56

Celia Late Troop wrote: »

Consent from who, they broke their own Parliamentary procedures to hold the referendum?

I note that you present this as a true fact.
I'll be happy if you can offer relevant linkage, or at least source.
Thanks .

bertie 56

bertie 56 wrote: »

I note that you present this as a true fact.
I'll be happy if you can offer relevant linkage, or at least source.
Thanks .

No source or link , then ?

Normal.

The procedure to hold the referendum was 100 % legal , they haven't broke any Catalonia Parliament procedure...

:rolleyes:

EagererBeaver

No no, you're quite wrong. They altered the day's agenda back in September to force the referendum legislation onto the table in the first place and then skipped debate on the issue. Junts pel Sí themselves said they weren't happy with how they went about it but had no alternative. The Catalan high court was immediately involved.

And of course it was illegal under the Constitution. Cheerio now Bertie.

bertie 56

EagererBeaver wrote: »

No no, you're quite wrong. They altered the day's agenda back in September to force the referendum legislation onto the table in the first place and then skipped debate on the issue. Junts pel Sí themselves said they weren't happy with how they went about it but had no alternative. The Catalan high court was immediately involved.

And of course it was illegal under the Constitution. Cheerio now Bertie.

This is a completely legal procedure , which is called " la via expres " .
It has been used before all around Spain,in other autonomous chambers and at national level, in the Congress.

Prior to that , a reform of the parliamentary regulation which allowed " la via expres " was done in July by the Catalan Parliament .

The Spanish Constitutional Court has declared this reform in line with the Spanish Constitution the 29/11/2017.

So I maintain, Catalonia didn't broke their own Parliamentary procedures to hold the referendum ...

bertie 56

First vote this morning for the new elected Catalan Parliament.

Despite having 5 members absent and therefore unable to vote ( big round of applause for each of them when their names were called to vote ) , Roger Torrent ( ERC - independentist ) has been elected at the majority by the Parliament as the new President of the Parliament.

bertie 56

Second vote of the day saw Josep Costa ( Junts per Catalunya - independantist ) being elected at the majority of the Parliament as Vice-President of the Catalan Parliament.

The Parliament is now back as before the 155 - coup d'Etat , with a President and Vice-President coming from independentist side .

José Maria Espejo-Saavedra (C's - monarchist unionist ) takes what is left, which is the place of second Vice-President, as he was before.


Please note that 8 democratically elected members of this Parliament are missing with 3 political prisoners in remand without judgment in Madrid jails ( they had a delegate to vote for them ) , and 5 are in Belgium ,with threads on their freedom if they come back to Catalonia ( they were unable to vote ). This include President Puigdemont.

Please note as well that 17 members of this newly democratically elected Parliament are under direct judicial thread from Madrid.