Humanities desk
< October 27	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 29 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 28

Declaration of Independence of Catalonia

There are lots of things I don't understand about the current situation in Catalonia.

1) Was the Declaration of Independence in response to Section 110 or vice versa? I've seen sources imply either, though I think it is fairly agreed-on that the declaration came first. Was this some kind of mutual causality?

2) What is the point of making the Declaration first? I mean, if you're going to declare what will be called an illegitimate country, why rush to do it in a legitimate regional congress?

3) Why did the opposition walk out? It sounded like they were not far from getting a majority, and with legislators worried about being prosecuted to vote the wrong way, it seems like it would have been possible to get last minute defectors.

4) Does Catalonia have an army, weapons, fortifications, or a battle plan of any kind? It seems like they have a moderately defensible border with a lot of river boundaries, but are they taking any effort to secure it?

5) Above all, what is the rationale of Catalan pro-independence legislators and voters? I am seeing pretty one-sided coverage against them -- what is their thought process? How do they hope to surpass or even maintain the level of autonomy they had pre-referendum? Wnt (talk) 19:35, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the Catalans likely wanted to declare independence before the Spanish decree abolishing the region's autonomy was passed, to give it additional legitimacy, but the situation now is more political than legal. Since the Spanish state doesn't want to negotiate and the Catalans don't want to back down on their quest for independence, it will come down to who can make the reality on the ground conform to its vision of what is happening. In other words, Spain has suspended Catalonia's autonomy, but if a Catalan government continues to function in spite of this, the law doesn't mean much. Similarly, if the Catalan government cannot demonstrate a minimum of control over its territory, its declaration of independence will be meaningless and eventually become simply a historical curiosity. The problem at this point is that no one can say with any degree of confidence how things will turn out: how much force will Spain be willing to exert to demonstrate the Catalan declaration is ineffectual? If the vast majority of the population supports independence, as appears to be the case, it's going to be very difficult for Spain to reassert its rule in the face of massive demonstrations and civil disobedience. But the population could also get over its initial enthusiasm for independence and not oppose much resistance to Spain's efforts to reassert control. No one knows how it will turn out at this point. One thing is certain though: your option 4 is a misreading of the situation: no one on either side wants a military confrontation and if it gets to that, it will be because both sides have played their hand terribly. What is the rationale (question 5)? the same as most nationalist movements: the Catalans feel the central government does not represent them correctly, impedes their development (economic, cultural or whatever) and consider they would be better off if they had complete control of their own destiny. If they do achieve independence, they would definitely surpass the level of autonomy they had before the referendum. There are also plenty of intermediate arrangements that could give Catalonia much greater government powers within Spain... if the two sides eventually agree to sit down and discuss things. The arrangement that existed pre-referendum gave Catalonia powers that were inferior to most constituent states of a federal government, so there was a lot to gain, potentially. But they could also lose everything. We'll see. Xuxl (talk) 20:35, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The reason why force seemed relevant is, well, what else can stop the Spanish government from arresting all their officials and going into the banks to seize whatever accounts hold the regional budget, the local police force's pension plan, etc.? (Actually I don't understand much about how banks arrange to have their money considered "real" -- it's not clear to me the government can't just pick up a phone and essentially make the money theirs, or whatever bank holds it) If they are free to roam around taking whoever and whatever they want, they demonstrate the essence of governance.... Wnt (talk) 04:27, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There's a difference between asking police to enforce laws and raising the issue of military force and defensible borders and fortifications, which is what the OP mentioned in his point 4. --Xuxl (talk) 12:22, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding If the vast majority of the population supports independence, as appears to be the case, that’s not true. I’ve read numerous times that slightly more than half of Catalons expressing an opinion are against independence. For example, this article https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/29/spain-barcelona-set-for-huge-rally-against-catalan-independence-catalonia refers to polls saying “anti-independence parties winning 43.4% of the vote to pro-independence parties’ 42.5%”. Loraof (talk) 17:55, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

About point 4), the Catalans have the ability to set up alternative government systems in cyberspace, also the Catalans contribute a lot to the State finances via taxes, so they can just stop paying taxes to the Spanish government and instead pay taxes to their local government. Count Iblis (talk) 22:58, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Governments regularly seize assets with apparent ease; see U.S. Seizes Billions in Iraqi Assets (2003) and Spanish police seize property worth £590m from Assad family (April 2017). Perhaps we could confine ourselves to finding sources which give possible courses of action rather than just guessing? Alansplodge (talk) 09:10, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Such sources are welcome, but I have no idea how they generalize when the bank is physically located in a newly rebellious province. All of a sudden the philosophical question of "where" the bank's intangible currency is located becomes a practical question, one I have no idea how to answer. Wnt (talk) 14:40, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I just had another look at a news archive search; some moderately relevant sources are [1] (Considering a cryptocurrency) [2] (Caixabank and Sabadell have "left Catalonia", and "the stock market" has crashed; quote: "But the Catalans are much too sensible to try to take on the military might of the Spanish state. They will instead allow Madrid to tie itself in knots as it tries to take over and run the province. There will be passive resistance and there will be marches and strikes. If Spain prosecutes and imprisons Carles Puigdemont, as it has threatened to do, a dozen others will appear in his place. It's no easy matter to run a government when the various arms of the state, like the civil service, police, and judges, are unwilling agents. ") [3] (those two banks suffered huge stock losses).

Honestly, I still don't understand any of it. Starting a new cryptocurrency sounds like a great idea, but if it is, why wasn't it a great idea a month ago? Or better yet, a low-denomination bearer bond, perhaps in the form of a note or coin, that is backed by loans/bonds taken out by a region's small businesses (we ought to get one of these for America...) But --- most people involved with banks don't have a choice. I mean, either they have a pension fund or nest egg in the bank, which they might only be allowed to access if they are in good legal standing and swear loyalty to the King of Spain or something, or they have an outstanding loan that they might not dare to ignore out of hope that an independent Catalonia will forget about the international bourgeoisie, because what fine young republic ever does that? Which leaves ... a bunch of street demonstrations for independence, which they could have done before, with equally little result. If the Spanish get serious, the gold standard response is Sinicization of Tibet. Wnt (talk) 14:57, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]