The other independence vote that doesn't seem as well known

[Zaune]

I could max out the word-count for an individual post copying and pasting the word "bugger" over and over again and that would still not be saying the half of it.

[The Romulan Republic]

Brown stuff headed for the fan time - Catalonian parliament just declared independence, just as Madrid was going to resume direct control.

God fucking damn it.

I guess nobody on the separatist side has heard of "rule of law"... and nobody on the Spanish government side has heard of "diplomacy".

[Jub]

Brown stuff headed for the fan time - Catalonian parliament just declared independence, just as Madrid was going to resume direct control.

God fucking damn it.

I guess nobody on the separatist side has heard of "rule of law"... and nobody on the Spanish government side has heard of "diplomacy".

Why should they respect a law that says, in no uncertain terms, that their independence is illegal and not up for discussion? What other steps should they take when attempts to get a vote have thus far failed?

[The Romulan Republic]

I suppose they could try to push for a change to the constitution that would allow them to hold such a referendum?

[Jub]

I suppose they could try to push for a change to the constitution that would allow them to hold such a referendum?

When the government's first response is a police action to break up your attempt to voice your dissent through a peaceful vote, I don't see that working. I think Catalan has handled this more patiently than most would be breakaway states would have.

[The Romulan Republic]

I did say that the government's response was idiotic as well, you know.

I just don't think that excuses the idiocy (or criminality) on the part of the separatists.

But then, I also think they're making a mistake to try to secede in the first place. Pragmatically speaking, and leaving aside the legal question or their specific tactics altogether.

[Jub]

I did say that the government's response was idiotic as well, you know.

I just don't think that excuses the idiocy (or criminality) on the part of the separatists.

But then, I also think they're making a mistake to try to secede in the first place. Pragmatically speaking, and leaving aside the legal question or their specific tactics altogether.

So? If they want independence they should have it.

Spain, hardly a nation anyone should be looking at as an example of how not to fuck things up, should suck it up and consider that conquering people who just want to be left alone might not be the best way to form a cohesive nation.

[The Romulan Republic]

I did say that the government's response was idiotic as well, you know.

I just don't think that excuses the idiocy (or criminality) on the part of the separatists.

But then, I also think they're making a mistake to try to secede in the first place. Pragmatically speaking, and leaving aside the legal question or their specific tactics altogether.

So? If they want independence they should have it.

Why? Don't just make the assertion- justify it.

Why should a minority (remember, it is highly questionable weather a majority of Catalans supported this) be allowed to unilaterally tear a country apart? Especially when doing so will likely severely negatively effect not only Catalonia, but all of Spain and the EU?

Spain, hardly a nation anyone should be looking at as an example of how not to fuck things up, should suck it up and consider that conquering people who just want to be left alone might not be the best way to form a cohesive nation.

"Conquering" seems rather excessive to me, but in keeping with the overall bias of your posts on the subject.

[Jub]

Why? Don't just make the assertion- justify it.

Why should a minority (remember, it is highly questionable weather a majority of Catalans supported this) be allowed to unilaterally tear a country apart? Especially when doing so will likely severely negatively effect not only Catalonia, but all of Spain and the EU?

They did try to have a vote on this subject to show their side's strength, but that may have had some slight interference run by Spain...

As for tearing the nation apart, why should any nation exist eternally with the same lands held in perpetuity? This has never happened in all of history and I don't see why it should start now. The EU shouldn't be hurt by this unless Spain is a butthurt dick and vetoes a Catalonian re-entry into the EU. If this does come to pass and Spain acts as we fear they will, I fail to see how it is Catalonia that has hurt the EU.

"Conquering" seems rather excessive to me, but in keeping with the overall bias of your posts on the subject.

"Following the surrender of Catalan troops on 11 September 1714, Philip V's enacted the Nueva Planta decrees banning all the main traditional Catalan political institutions and rights and merged its administration into that of the Crown of Castile as a province. However, the Bourbon monarchy allowed for Catalonia's civil law code to be maintained. With the exception of the loyal Basque Country, the new Bourbon king, Philip V of Spain, abolished the ancient privileges of all of Spain's medieval kingdoms, including the Crown of Aragon and with it, those of the Principality of Catalonia. Following the model of France, he imposed a unifying legislation and administration across Spain, as well as introducing the French Sallic Law and founding Spain's own Royal Academy in 1714. This led to the eclipse of Catalan as a language of government and literature."

That sounds like conquest to me and seeing as modern Spain uses many of the same territorial claims now as they did then, so I see no reason to consider the line between their 1714 conquest and now to have been broken.

[Murazor]

That sounds like conquest to me and seeing as modern Spain uses many of the same territorial claims now as they did then, so I see no reason to consider the line between their 1714 conquest and now to have been broken.

That is not called conquest, however.

That is called losing a civil war and getting screwed by the winning side for the trouble.

By that logic, Virginians, Floridians and other residents of former CSA states are as much of a conquered people as the catalans and while this is hardly an unprecedented claim, it is one I've always regarded as claptrap.

[Jub]

That sounds like conquest to me and seeing as modern Spain uses many of the same territorial claims now as they did then, so I see no reason to consider the line between their 1714 conquest and now to have been broken.

That is not called conquest, however.

That is called losing a civil war and getting screwed by the winning side for the trouble.

By that logic, Virginians, Floridians and other residents of former CSA states are as much of a conquered people as the catalans and while this is hardly an unprecedented claim, it is one I've always regarded as claptrap.

Look, the history of that region is a mess but there is a reason things are so regionalized to this day. When taken as a whole, it does and should count as conquest.

For the record, yes, the CSA states were conquered. Given what they stood for I'm not sad that they were.

[Zaune]

I suppose they could try to push for a change to the constitution that would allow them to hold such a referendum?

From what I can gather, they've been doing that very thing for decades, and getting continually stonewalled and fobbed off with excuses until they finally threw up their hands and did it unilaterally.

[The Romulan Republic]

Why? Don't just make the assertion- justify it.

Why should a minority (remember, it is highly questionable weather a majority of Catalans supported this) be allowed to unilaterally tear a country apart? Especially when doing so will likely severely negatively effect not only Catalonia, but all of Spain and the EU?

They did try to have a vote on this subject to show their side's strength, but that may have had some slight interference run by Spain...

An illegal and dubiously democratic vote, sure.

And I took that less as a "show of strength" than a "pretext for unilateral secession".

But as I've said many times, the Spanish government fucked up its response. No argument there.

As for tearing the nation apart, why should any nation exist eternally with the same lands held in perpetuity? This has never happened in all of history and I don't see why it should start now. The EU shouldn't be hurt by this unless Spain is a butthurt dick and vetoes a Catalonian re-entry into the EU. If this does come to pass and Spain acts as we fear they will, I fail to see how it is Catalonia that has hurt the EU.

How will it hurt the EU? It will likely economically weaken a EU member, and encourage future secession movements that will politically destabilize the EU. As well as either a) costing the EU a region, or b) giving it a new member that is likely economically weak and politically unstable.

All of which plays into the hands of Vladimir Putin, who stands to benefit from undermining the EU.

As to why a country should continue to exist within its present boundaries (unless there is a very pressing reason for change)? Because changes to those boundaries tend to be both politically and economically destabilizing.

And you still haven't explained why you apparently feel that there is a right to unilateral secession, regardless of laws or consequences, for anyone who wishes it. Especially when, as in this case, it is highly doubtful that the majority of the region in question even wants to leave.

"Following the surrender of Catalan troops on 11 September 1714, Philip V's enacted the Nueva Planta decrees banning all the main traditional Catalan political institutions and rights and merged its administration into that of the Crown of Castile as a province. However, the Bourbon monarchy allowed for Catalonia's civil law code to be maintained. With the exception of the loyal Basque Country, the new Bourbon king, Philip V of Spain, abolished the ancient privileges of all of Spain's medieval kingdoms, including the Crown of Aragon and with it, those of the Principality of Catalonia. Following the model of France, he imposed a unifying legislation and administration across Spain, as well as introducing the French Sallic Law and founding Spain's own Royal Academy in 1714. This led to the eclipse of Catalan as a language of government and literature."

That sounds like conquest to me and seeing as modern Spain uses many of the same territorial claims now as they did then, so I see no reason to consider the line between their 1714 conquest and now to have been broken.

Ah, I thought you were being hyperbolic and referring to the present actions of the Spanish government as a conquest. My mistake.

Still, though, this is a big part of what irritates me about secession movements in general. They're always about refighting some centuries-old war, and trying to turn the clock back to undo an injustice where all the original perpetrators and victims are long dead.

There is certainly a place for redressing past wrongs, but I am of the view that it is generally better for a society to look forward rather than back, to try to build a better future rather than return to the past. I mean, how far do you take that? How many centuries must pass before you can be considered a part of a single country? We could be constantly drawing and redrawing every boundary on the planet in an effort to re-litigate centuries-old wars, and what would be the good of it to anyone?

It might be different if the Catalans were currently suffering some sort of despotic oppression at the hands of the Spanish government. But (aside from the recent crackdown, which I agree was excessive on the part of Spain's government), is that the case? Was their a degree of persecution or oppression of the Catalans that would make the chaos and economic perils of unilateral secession the lesser evil?

[The Romulan Republic]

I suppose they could try to push for a change to the constitution that would allow them to hold such a referendum?

From what I can gather, they've been doing that very thing for decades, and getting continually stonewalled and fobbed off with excuses until they finally threw up their hands and did it unilaterally.

If so, that makes me slightly more sympathetic to them, but only slightly.

The secession itself still seems like shooting themselves in the foot, it will likely have very serious reprecussions for the entire EU (and possibly, indirectly, globally), and in any case, they forfeited all right to my sympathy the moment they started making threats to officials who would not go along with their referendum (presuming those reports are accurate).

[Jub]

An illegal and dubiously democratic vote, sure.

And I took that less as a "show of strength" than a "pretext for unilateral secession".

They started to process in 2015 when the current regional party was elected and only got a solid no a month before the vote was set to take place. In addition there have been other regional polls on this issue that have indicated that, at the least, a vote should be held on the issue. This is all basic info that can be found with a simple Google search TRR so why are you acting like this whole situation is some murky quagmire that cannot possibly be understood?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_independence

I'm on my phone at work but that should get you started.

How will it hurt the EU? It will likely economically weaken a EU member, and encourage future secession movements that will politically destabilize the EU. As well as either a) costing the EU a region, or b) giving it a new member that is likely economically weak and politically unstable.

All of which plays into the hands of Vladimir Putin, who stands to benefit from undermining the EU.

An independent Catalonia would be around the 20th largest GDP in the EU, assuming they are 8% of Spain's 1.25 Trillion dollar GDP as reported in 2016, fitting roughly between Hungary and Slovakia. Catalonia also has a diverse econmy so this should hold true or even grow as Spain can no lobger siphon off funds to cover less well of regions.

Spain would remain firmly on 6th place. This does hury them but shouldn't hurt enough to sink their economy. So that debunks the economic issue.

As for stability Catalonia would likely do well with a strong economy and a ready made national identity. This is better than some of the least stable EU nations and should at least put them firmly middle of the pack.

Of course none of this is really your issue. You have an irrational fear of Russia (at best a regional power) and a desire to prop up the west at all costs. Even, apparently, if that cost is the west's identy as a democratic bastion.

As to why a country should continue to exist within its present boundaries (unless there is a very pressing reason for change)? Because changes to those boundaries tend to be both politically and economically destabilizing.

Only when one side sabotages the other.

And you still haven't explained why you apparently feel that there is a right to unilateral secession, regardless of laws or consequences, for anyone who wishes it. Especially when, as in this case, it is highly doubtful that the majority of the region in question even wants to leave.

Unilatreal succession is a right backed not only by historical precidence but by the right of a people to choose their fate. It is less harmful than civil war and other means of breaking away from a nation and, especially, for historically oppressed regions like Catalonia are a means of escaping an abusive relationship on a national scale. Or should batteref wives stay home for the 'unity of tension family and sake of the children'?

Still, though, this is a big part of what irritates me about secession movements in general. They're always about refighting some centuries-old war, and trying to turn the clock back to undo an injustice where all the original perpetrators and victims are long dead.

So historical precidence is cool but only for the victors? Fuck that noise.

It might be different if the Catalans were currently suffering some sort of despotic oppression at the hands of the Spanish government. But (aside from the recent crackdown, which I agree was excessive on the part of Spain's government), is that the case? Was their a degree of persecution or oppression of the Catalans that would make the chaos and economic perils of unilateral secession the lesser evil?

They have had their rights rolled back since a 2006 law granting them increased autonomy was challenged so they are being oppressed. They also have a strong sense of regional pride and a laundry list of past grievences.

How is this not enough for you?

[Jub]

[Murazor]

They have had their rights rolled back since a 2006 law granting them increased autonomy was challenged so they are being oppressed. They also have a strong sense of regional pride and a laundry list of past grievences.

So you have made a lot of dubious claims in your previous posts, but I've decided to focus in this one, so pretty please start detailing the characteristics of this oppresion you claim exists, as well as the contents of this alleged laundry list.

[The Romulan Republic]

They started to process in 2015 when the current regional party was elected and only got a solid no a month before the vote was set to take place. In addition there have been other regional polls on this issue that have indicated that, at the least, a vote should be held on the issue. This is all basic info that can be found with a simple Google search TRR so why are you acting like this whole situation is some murky quagmire that cannot possibly be understood?

Um, I'm not?

The issue is quite comprehensible, but that does not mean that your interpretation is the correct one. And you have yet to support either your apparent assumption that Catalonians in general want independence, to demonstrate to my satisfaction your position that their is an inviolable right to unilateral secession regardless of the circumstances or the cost of doing so, or to demonstrate that their is a level of oppression of Catalans that would justify secession.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_independence

I'm on my phone at work but that should get you started.

Wikipedia is hardly an optimal source, but thanks anyway.

An independent Catalonia would be around the 20th largest GDP in the EU, assuming they are 8% of Spain's 1.25 Trillion dollar GDP as reported in 2016, fitting roughly between Hungary and Slovakia. Catalonia also has a diverse econmy so this should hold true or even grow as Spain can no lobger siphon off funds to cover less well of regions.

Spain would remain firmly on 6th place. This does hury them but shouldn't hurt enough to sink their economy. So that debunks the economic issue.

Not necessarily.

Economics, is more than just the size of your GDP. I was under the impression that Spain has had a somewhat fragile economy, with high unemployment, for some time now. So I'm skeptical of how resilient it will be in the face of such a loss.

You also have to consider the likely complications to regulations and trade arising from cutting off a region of the country.

I believe that you are oversimplifying the issue to justify your biases.

As for stability Catalonia would likely do well with a strong economy and a ready made national identity. This is better than some of the least stable EU nations and should at least put them firmly middle of the pack.

Yeah, about that "ready made national identity".

How long are you going to keep ignoring the evidence so you can pretend that Catalans are united in desiring independence?

Of course none of this is really your issue. You have an irrational fear of Russia (at best a regional power) and a desire to prop up the west at all costs. Even, apparently, if that cost is the west's identy as a democratic bastion.

This is a straw man on at least two counts. First, you falsely represent the fear of Russia as the entirety of my motives and position, dismissing all other arguments that I have made. Secondly, you falsely characterize me as having "a desire to prop up the west at all costs.", which is pretty a pretty obvious euphemism for calling me a bigoted, colonialist imperialist.

No, I do not "desire to prop up the west at all costs". I desire to promote global peace and stability, as well as the democratic rights of the people, because those two things go hand in hand, and undermining one invariably undermines the other.

Not that I would call fear of Russia (or rather the Russian government- I have no animosity towards the Russian people) "irrational", considering that they are a militarily aggressive nuclear power which likely played a significant role in picking the US President. But that is a topic for another thread.

The question of weather unconditionally allowing unilateral secession is the "democratic" thing to do I will address later in this post.

Only when one side sabotages the other.

The process of splitting off a region from a country and creating a new sovereign nation, with all of the negotiations, political and cultural adjustments, and legal questions that must accompany it, can never be a simple process, nor an easy one, regardless of the level of good or ill-will on either side.

Unilatreal succession is a right backed not only by historical precidence but by the right of a people to choose their fate. It is less harmful than civil war and other means of breaking away from a nation and, especially, for historically oppressed regions like Catalonia are a means of escaping an abusive relationship on a national scale. Or should batteref wives stay home for the 'unity of tension family and sake of the children'?

Of course not. And that is a ludicrous and frankly offensive comparison.

You have not, however, demonstrated a level of mistreatment of Catalonia that would make them the regional equivalent of a "battered wife". You have simply assumed and implied, and failed to back it up, and I am not the only one to call you out on this.

Maybe if you spent more time on supporting your arguments and less on insinuating that I'm a Russophobic authoritarian imperialist?

Certainly, secession can be a better alternative than civil war (though it is not necessarily so- I would point to my own country's civil war as a case where war, however horrible, was a superior alternative to allowing the South to rip the country apart because they lost an election and were afraid of losing their slaves). However, that is less a question of their being a right to secession than one of pragmatism, of choosing "the lesser evil". A decision to be made based on a cost/benefit analysis, rather than a stand in defense of an inviolable principle.

As to the "right of a people to choose their fate", I am, of course, generally in agreement with self-determination and democratic governance. However, it is not an absolute right- it cannot be, because one person's choices might interfere with other peoples' rights and freedom of choice.

To refer again to the American Civil War, one could argue that allowing the South to unilaterally secede because they lost an election would undermine democracy, likely fatally, by setting a precedent that a faction or region can quit whenever the democratic process results in an outcome that they do not like. This was essentially one of Abraham Lincoln's arguments during that conflict, and its one that I agree with very strongly.

In other words, I question weather it is "democratic" to allow actions which represent a direct assault on the democratic system, to the extent that allowing them makes democracy itself unable to function.

So much for the absolute right to secession. Now let's look at the specific circumstances of Catalonia. Now, obviously, the circumstances in Catalonia are very different from those in the Civil War-era United States. But unless you or someone else here can demonstrate a degree of oppression (which cannot be better addressed by other means) that would warrant secession, we are apparently left with "centuries old conflict" and "separate national identity" as justifications. Which are common enough "justifications" for secession that you could probably tear apart pretty much any nation on Earth on those grounds, whenever the group in question is dissatisfied with the current government.

So historical precidence is cool but only for the victors? Fuck that noise.

Another straw man, in the same vein as the previous ones.

Historical precedent matters, but present circumstances matters more. I see no good in trying to right a past wrong if doing so is likely to cause far more harm than good in the present.

There are circumstances where I would probably conclude that allowing secession was the lesser evil, based on the current circumstances in a country and the needs of its people. But you have yet to convincingly demonstrate to me that this is one of them.

And I do think that their needs to be a "statute of limitations" for re-litigating past conflicts. Otherwise, they never end, and you could justify any conflict between practically any two groups of people on the planet. I would suggest that (if their is no widespread persecution continuing into more recent times) that "when all the originals perpetrators, and victims, and their children, and their grandchildren, are dead" is a pretty reasonable statute of limitations.

They have had their rights rolled back since a 2006 law granting them increased autonomy was challenged so they are being oppressed. They also have a strong sense of regional pride and a laundry list of past grievences.

How is this not enough for you?

Then surely you can list those grievances, with citations from credible non-partisan sources, while explaining how secession constitutes a superior alternative to pushing for domestic political reform.

[Ziggy Stardust]

There are circumstances where I would probably conclude that allowing secession was the lesser evil, based on the current circumstances in a country and the needs of its people.

Out of curiosity, what are the general circumstances that would lead you to that conclusion? (Independent of Catalonia, because I admit to not knowing enough of the facts on the issue to have a strong opinion one way or the other, I mean this in the more abstract sense).

[Crazedwraith]

Well Madrid has retaken direct control of Catalonia, ejected the catalan ministers from office and charged them with crimes. While those ministers have... fled Catalonia for Belgium is the rumour.

It seems to be relatively peaceful so far afaik.

[streetad]

It seems that that a Flemish nationalist government minister in Belgium made an unauthorised offer of asylum for the Catalan separatists. The Belgian government is currently a very fragile coalition including Flemish separatists and four other parties.

Hugely embarrassingly for everyone else in the coalition, the Catalan president and five of his ministers have turned up to take him up on the offer, turning a Spanish clusterfuck into a pan-European clusterfuck with the potential to bring down the Belgian government. Hooray!

I'm just thankful (in a selfish way) that it wasn't one of the more loose cannon members of the SNP, as it could very easily have been.