Catalonia

[John Lambies Doos]

Have to agree with Kilbowie. The fact that we were offered the chance of self determination and turned it down is a pure minter for our country. Laughed at from abroad.

[TheProgressiveLiberal]

28 minutes ago, kilbowie2002 said:

Thats the thing though being 'given' a referendum by our political masters just shows how browbeaten as a country we are. I think the fact they as a country have stood up and given Spain the middle finger and given themselves a referendum is a much bigger display of strength. I get your point about legitimacy, but I also believe in the legitimacy of peaceful revolutionary acts. I don't think just going for it will be the big issue that people perceive it will be, the EU won't want to lose Catalonia (in the exact same way they wouldn't want to lose Scotland had we not shat it), the UN will recognise Catalonia but have to be seen to discourage it until its inevitable. The outcry over Spain's actions I think has actually given legitimacy to the Catalans. Offering to enter into dialogue also gives them legitimacy, Spain's reluctance to offer anything more than tidbits of democracy to a nation which demands it in my opinion is akin to the fall of the British empire. I can see the argument people are making but I just don't agree with it.

So you would have preferred a referendum without consulting the UK government?

Or you would prefer that the SNP government declare independence despite the result of the referendum?

 

[John Lambies Doos]

So you would have preferred a referendum without consulting the UK government?
Or you would prefer that the SNP government declare independence despite the result of the referendum?
 

That's really not what he said

[welshbairn]

I don't see why breaking up nations is something we should have on default as "good". The only parts of Europe to have conflict since WW2 broke up outside the EU, and the consequences were horrendous. Stability seems to be an undervalued thing in the UK these days but in Europe generally they have longer memories of how things can go very badly wrong. Catalonia has pretty well absolute cultural and language rights within Spain, and have done well out it economically. If they leave it will have serious ramifications on the ability of Spain to continue as a stable nation state. Russia is cheering them on of course, as they were the Front National in France and the AfD in Germany. We shouldn't compare every campaign for independence to our own.

[Granny Danger]

31 minutes ago, kilbowie2002 said:

Thats the thing though being 'given' a referendum by our political masters just shows how browbeaten as a country we are. I think the fact they as a country have stood up and given Spain the middle finger and given themselves a referendum is a much bigger display of strength. I get your point about legitimacy, but I also believe in the legitimacy of peaceful revolutionary acts. I don't think just going for it will be the big issue that people perceive it will be, the EU won't want to lose Catalonia (in the exact same way they wouldn't want to lose Scotland had we not shat it), the UN will recognise Catalonia but have to be seen to discourage it until its inevitable. The outcry over Spain's actions I think has actually given legitimacy to the Catalans. Offering to enter into dialogue also gives them legitimacy, Spain's reluctance to offer anything more than tidbits of democracy to a nation which demands it in my opinion is akin to the fall of the British empire. I can see the argument people are making but I just don't agree with it.

I think you're confusing posturing with progress.  I agree that Spain's actions have helped legitimise Catalonia's position but it already had legitimacy.

 

[LongTimeLurker]

4 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

I don't see why breaking up nations is something we should have on default as "good". The only parts of Europe to have conflict since WW2 broke up outside the EU, and the consequences were horrendous. Stability seems to be an undervalued thing in the UK these days but in Europe generally they have longer memories of how things can go very badly wrong...

If the end game was a Europe of the Regions inside a reformed and more deeply federal EU, the end of the 19th century nation state in the shape of Spain would probably be no bad thing in terms of enhanced stability. If it's a case of Balkanisation along the lines of what replaced the Austro-Hungarian Empire or Yugoslavia, I definitely agree with you.

[TheProgressiveLiberal]

Breaking up nation states in order to replace them with a so-called "Europe of regions" dominated by the EU is an idea I just can't understand coming from self described "nationalists." You're just trading rule by people who are more like you for rule by people who are less like you. And if Devo-Max is on the table from the greater nation-state, you're actually giving up potential national self rule. The end logic of globalism is that every nation and culture will be destroyed in the long term. That's what you're signing up for gladly. 

[NotThePars]

Ethno-nationalism is a heck of a drug.

[KarlMarx]

9 minutes ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said:

Breaking up nation states in order to replace them with a so-called "Europe of regions" dominated by the EU is an idea I just can't understand coming from self described "nationalists." You're just trading rule by people who are more like you for rule by people who are less like you. And if Devo-Max is on the table from the greater nation-state, you're actually giving up potential national self rule. The end logic of globalism is that every nation and culture will be destroyed in the long term. That's what you're signing up for gladly. 

If it would rid us of being ruled by c***s like Trump and Yank oppression then that would be a bonus.

[bob the tank]

Breaking up nation states in order to replace them with a so-called "Europe of regions" dominated by the EU is an idea I just can't understand coming from self described "nationalists." You're just trading rule by people who are more like you for rule by people who are less like you. And if Devo-Max is on the table from the greater nation-state, you're actually giving up potential national self rule. The end logic of globalism is that every nation and culture will be destroyed in the long term. That's what you're signing up for gladly. 

That is complete bollocks Swampy. Scotland has always been more European than England, and were trading with Northern Europe 500 years ago. England have all the levers of power, and seem to be hellbent on a scorched earth policy for Scotland. The EU are arms length by any reckoning.

[TheProgressiveLiberal]

7 hours ago, NotThePars said:

Ethno-nationalism is a heck of a drug.

I've never claimed to be an ethno-nationalist. I'm a civic nationalist. I just acknowledge that a civic rather than ethnic basis for nationalism may not be possible, and that certain cultures can't be absorbed into existing Western nations. 

6 hours ago, bob the tank said:

 

That is complete bollocks Swampy. Scotland has always been more European than England, and were trading with Northern Europe 500 years ago. England have all the levers of power, and seem to be hellbent on a scorched earth policy for Scotland. The EU are arms length by any reckoning.

 

I was making a general statement about the Europe of regions, rather than nations, within the EU. I'm not informed enough about any particular secession movement to speak confidently about their local conditions. I'm just skeptical of independence movements where the group trying to secede doesn't have some sort of obvious cultural difference that's greater than regional differences you'd expect in any nation. I 100% get why Crimea would want to leave the Ukraine, or Quebec would want to leave Canada. When it comes to other independence movements I'm not so sure.

The EU is not going to remain at arms length. The EU superstate will in the end take all the former powers of the nation state if they can. The deconstruction of the traditionally powerful European nation states will aid in this trend. 

[GTG_03]

I was making a general statement about the Europe of regions, rather than nations, within the EU. I'm not informed enough about any particular secession movement to speak confidently about their local conditions. I'm just skeptical of independence movements where the group trying to secede doesn't have some sort of obvious cultural difference that's greater than regional differences you'd expect in any nation. I 100% get why Crimea would want to leave the Ukraine, or Quebec would want to leave Canada. When it comes to other independence movements I'm not so sure.
The EU is not going to remain at arms length. The EU superstate will in the end take all the former powers of the nation state if they can. The deconstruction of the traditionally powerful European nation states will aid in this trend. 

Isn't one of the EU'S principles to retain all the cultures of each individual nation?
This argument about being controlled by Brussels instead of London is nonsense.
Can anyone seriously argue that Denmark, Portugal, Germany aren't independent nations.
The EU is a trading union whereas the UK is an overpowering political and economic union where Scotland's wishes are continually ignored and our MP'S are trolled and mocked in parliament, all the while being told that we punch above our weight.
A few years ago I'd have been happy with home rule/federalism but now it's Indy all the way.

The UK is going backwards. Time to get off.

[Antiochas III]

1 hour ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said:

I'm just skeptical of independence movements where the group trying to secede doesn't have some sort of obvious cultural difference that's greater than regional differences you'd expect in any nation. I 100% get why Crimea would want to leave the Ukraine, or Quebec would want to leave Canada. When it comes to other independence movements I'm not so sure.

 

Which independence movements are on your "not enough difference" list?

[TheProgressiveLiberal]

29 minutes ago, Antiochas III said:

Which independence movements are on your "not enough difference" list?

I suppose we can start with the Texas Nationalist guys.

[tirso]

I don't want independence but the idea the people wanting it are remotely similar to AfD is offensive.  It's the far right which are on the Madrid side.  Have you seen Hogar Social?  As opposed to the CUP and ERC?

Keep hearing about this domino break up of countries.  Apart from Scotland, Catalonia, Pais Vasco and possibly the Flemlands there aren't really any other equivalents.  So what does this amount to?  A very few countries that didn't become independent at the establishment accepted time.  Scotland is probably not happening soon, neither is PV so this fragmentation is just another easy line.  I don't want every region on earth declaring independence.  That's not happening.  But cultures like Scotland and Catalonia are not anything like the Liga Nord group or Dutch nationalist groups.  Those groups don't have a real cultural unit.  Would it really be such a big disaster if EU went from 27 to 29 or something?

Don't believe everything you read in the Guardian.  Plenty left of centre, left people want independence in Catalonia.

It's offensive to take strong views on the matter without even being able to understand more than what google translate tells you, in my opinion.

It's quite obvious Catalonia is 'different enough' to anyone with a passing understanding of the place to merit its rights.  When was the last time Scotland's president was assassinated for amongst other things proclaiming a republic or your language (if enough Scotland really had one "different enough" from that expected of a region'....) systematically  oppressed it.   Yes, I don't believe Catalonia should be independent but they have as much right as any other to decide that.

Apologies if it comes across badly.  It's weird to see your rights being questioned one way or another and i'm no nationalist.

Edited October 13, 2017 by tirso

[LongTimeLurker]

40 minutes ago, tirso said:

...Apart from Scotland, Catalonia, Pais Vasco and possibly the Flemlands there aren't really any other equivalents....

There are several more obvious ones that could happen, if the precedent was set that the post-WWII set of borders can change. Sudtirol (Italy), Szeklerland (Romania) and Corsica (France) immediately come to mind.  The biggest ones lumbering over the horizon albeit outside the EU are Republika Srpska, the Serb majority areas in Northern Kosovo and the Albanian majority areas of Macedonia as those will almost certainly kick off the next wars in the Balkans at some point before the end of this century.

Edited October 13, 2017 by LongTimeLurker

[tirso]

13 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

There are several more obvious ones that could happen, if the precedent was set that the post-WWII set of borders can change. Sudtirol (Italy), Szekerland (Romania) and Corsica (France) immediately come to mind.  The biggest ones lumbering over the horizon albeit outside the EU are Republika Srpska, the Serb majority areas in Northern Kosovo and the Albanian majority areas of Macedonia as those will almost certainly kick off the next wars in the Balkans at some point before the end of this century.

Of course.  That is when you start to have more of an argument about what is right and wrong at this level.  I would suggest most of them are ethnic overspills on different sides of border than a similar situation to Catalonia and Scotland.  i.e more attachment to another state..than a state themselves.  I would suggest they are not quite equivalent in most cases.

Edited October 13, 2017 by tirso

[Ad Lib]

One critical difference concerning Scotland, Catalonia and Quebec is that they are undisputed territorial political societies. That is to say, they are peoples whose self-identification as a people maps very cleanly onto a generally accepted population, living in a generally accepted territorial space, and  who exercise within the internal constitutional arrangements of their State legitimate, recognised, institutional self-government.

They share essentially all the fundamental properties of the basic units (sovereign, and typically nation, states) that the international community is built upon. To deny these communities a right of self-determination is very different from denying it for communities for whom these properties do not arise. This is a respect in which I think we can draw a meaningful distinction even between them and either the Flemish or Walloons, given the underlying dispute about the status of Brussels.

It should be abundantly clear to anyone that where the internal borders of a state are hotly disputed, or where the ambiguity of borders is necessary to prevent ethnic conflict, that a right of secession or at least a right to establish a desire to secede can and ought reasonably to be restricted or not recognised, save as a remedial right against oppression or colonialism.

But where they aren't, and where the parent state itself has literally recognised the importance of a sub-State unit as a people, to the extent that they have a territorially stable space and significant institutions of self-government, it is absurd that they should be denied those basic constitutional or fundamental rights as peoples, even if you think, and think fervently, that they should not secede from their parent states.

Edited October 13, 2017 by Ad Lib

[git-intae-thum]

27 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

One critical difference concerning Scotland, Catalonia and Quebec is that they are undisputed territorial political societies. That is to say, they are peoples whose self-identification as a people maps very cleanly onto a generally accepted population, living in a generally accepted territorial space, and  who exercise within the internal constitutional arrangements of their State legitimate, recognised, institutional self-government.

They share essentially all the fundamental properties of the basic units (sovereign, and typically nation, states) that the international community is built upon. To deny these communities a right of self-determination is very different from denying it for communities for whom these properties do not arise. This is a respect in which I think we can draw a meaningful distinction even between them and either the Flemish or Walloons, given the underlying dispute about the status of Brussels.

It should be abundantly clear to anyone that where the internal borders of a state are hotly disputed, or where the ambiguity of borders is necessary to prevent ethnic conflict, that a right of secession or at least a right to establish a desire to secede can and ought reasonably to be restricted or not recognised, save as a remedial right against oppression or colonialism.

But where they aren't, and where the parent state itself has literally recognised the importance of a sub-State unit as a people, to the extent that they have a territorially stable space and significant institutions of self-government, it is absurd that they should be denied those basic constitutional or fundamental rights as peoples, even if you think, and think fervently, that they should not secede from their parent states.

Completely agree

 

For the tldr brigade........Spanish constitution is pish (on this issue)

[welshbairn]

1 hour ago, Ad Lib said:

One critical difference concerning Scotland, Catalonia and Quebec is that they are undisputed territorial political societies. That is to say, they are peoples whose self-identification as a people maps very cleanly onto a generally accepted population, living in a generally accepted territorial space, and  who exercise within the internal constitutional arrangements of their State legitimate, recognised, institutional self-government.

They share essentially all the fundamental properties of the basic units (sovereign, and typically nation, states) that the international community is built upon. To deny these communities a right of self-determination is very different from denying it for communities for whom these properties do not arise. This is a respect in which I think we can draw a meaningful distinction even between them and either the Flemish or Walloons, given the underlying dispute about the status of Brussels.

It should be abundantly clear to anyone that where the internal borders of a state are hotly disputed, or where the ambiguity of borders is necessary to prevent ethnic conflict, that a right of secession or at least a right to establish a desire to secede can and ought reasonably to be restricted or not recognised, save as a remedial right against oppression or colonialism.

But where they aren't, and where the parent state itself has literally recognised the importance of a sub-State unit as a people, to the extent that they have a territorially stable space and significant institutions of self-government, it is absurd that they should be denied those basic constitutional or fundamental rights as peoples, even if you think, and think fervently, that they should not secede from their parent states.

Catalonia is not an accepted territorial space, Catalonian political parties campaign in regions of Spain outside the Autonomous Region of Catalonia that they claim as their own, including the Balearic Islands.They also claim parts of France. The mix of populations in Barcelona is not unlike that of Brussels.