💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › anonymous-voting-in-catalonia.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 07:47:38. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: Voting in Catalonia Author: Anonymous Date: October 18, 2017 Language: en Topics: catalan independence, democracy Source: Retrieved on 23rd April 2021 from https://gatorna.info/threads/voting-in-catalonia-an-anarchist-glance-on-the-cat-960/
The independence of Catalonia is a complicated issue. It may have
entered the European public discourse with a blast, partly due to the
referendum and partly due to the raw and disproportionate suppressive
violence that the — addicted to this sort of behaviors – centralized
Spanish state exercised, however it is a matter that occurred and has
been solidly developing throughout the years.Any approach to understand
this issue must leave aside obsessional ideological fermatas and
simplistic slogans. Examples of this style are references such as “from
national to class emancipation” or a vague “solidarity with the people
of Catalonia”. Those who delve deeper into the issue of Catalonian
independence must make themselves familiar, at least to a certain
extent, with the conditions within which this issue arose. Therefore, it
is important to us, before expressing any opinion, to make a short
historical account of the political, social, economic and class aspects
that constitute the Catalan issue.
After the death of Franco and the Spanish Transition to democracy, the
1978 constitution was enacted that divided the Spanish state (and
nation, according to the constitution) to 17 autonomous communities with
increased self-organized jurisdictions. This was a negative development
for the supporters of a complete independence of territories such as the
Basque Country or Catalonia. It also signified a shift from the
centralized Francoist model to a model that provided the Autonomous
regions with the ability to decide on their own, on issues regarding,
amongst others, culture, public transport, public order and so on.
Policy areas such as healthcare, education and justice were subject to a
shared jurisdiction with the Spanish state. One initial observation to
make is the fact that the approval of the Autonomous regions system was
set to a referendum, for various reasons, to solely four regions:
Galicia, Andalusia, Catalonia and the Basque country. In 1979 in
Catalonia, 88% of the voters voted for the constitutional (under the
auspices of Spain) Autonomy, a result that significantly weakened the
dynamics for a potential struggle for complete independence. Likewise,
in the Basque country, 90% of the voters voted YES, against the 10%,
supported by Herri Batasuna and ETA, who wished complete independence.
A minor comment here: Catalonia’s Autonomy does not include the Autonomy
of the community of Valencia or the Balearic Islands, regions where
Catalan dialects are broadly spoken and related cultural traditions have
survived. Pancatalanism, as a nationalist ideology, includes regions
such as one part of Aragon, part of southern France and the Principality
of Andorra. The referendum that took place on October 1, 2017, concerned
only the Autonomy of Catalonia. The rest of “Catalan Countries” (as
defined by the nationalist ideology) wish neither to be independent nor
a potential union with Catalonia.
In 2005, there was an attempt to change the status of the Autonomy of
Catalonia, involving improved conditions that allowed a greater autonomy
and, mainly, the abandonment of Catalonia’s obligation to financially
support the rest of the Spanish Autonomies. The government bill was
eventually blocked in 2010 by the Constitutional Court of Spain, despite
the fact that it had been approved (74% of the voters, 51% electoral
abstention) by a referendum in Catalonia in 2006. Catalonia has had one
of the highest GDP rates in comparison to the rest of the Autonomies for
several years now, before and after the 2008 financial crisis. A large
part of these revenues is allocated for the economic support of the
financially weaker Autonomies. This system of state redistribution of
resources was what the Catalan bourgeoisie has aimed to get rid of, but
has failed. This is actually one of the main disputes in the current
situation, which is directly related to the formation of a Catalan state
tax collecting mechanism that will not be accountable to the central
Spanish government.
The financial aspect of the Catalan issue consists of two main axes.
First, the Catalan capital does not wish independence from Spain,
because this event would directly imply exit from the Eurozone,
political instability and the loss of the status of duty free exports
for its products to its main target market, namely the Spanish as well
as the European. However, the Catalan capital wishes the Autonomy of
Catalonia but with upgraded jurisdictions, since only then it will gain
a privileged position because its interest will be directly accommodated
by the neoliberal Catalan governmental alliance, which will have thrown
away Madrid’s centralized financial control and the obligation to
channel part of its revenues to the rest of the Spanish regions.
Simultaneously, an enlarged autonomy could pave the way for direct
negotiations with the EU and demands for increased EU resources, a
recurring demand of the Catalan capital and the Catalan government that
are skeptical to an equal distribution of European funds amongst the
financially weaker Spanish Autonomies. This demand is also made evident
through the rhetoric that accompanied the narrative of independence: the
initiators of the referendum wish a Catalonia within the Eurozone, as
part of the EU, as member of NATO and do not propagate for any political
or economic rupture in the case of independence.
The second axe concerns the class background of the demand for
independence. Based on data sourcing from the Catalan statistical
authority, the statistical profile of the supporters of independence is
citizens with middle or high income, of Catalan origin that goes all the
way to their grandparents, and higher education. The lower the income
and the educational status of a citizen is, the lower the support to
independence. In other words, if someone would attempt to define
simplistically the class background of the vote, this would be “the rich
vote for independence”. The poor, “the common people” as a populist
approach would say, are largely against independence or indifferent.
Correspondingly, in wealthy areas of the Catalan province, where
families-bearers of the Catalan tradition live, independence is entirely
accepted in comparison to the e.g. class differentiated area of
Barcelona’s suburbs. In any case, the opinion surveys of the Catalan
media showed before the referendum and the violent intervention of the
Spanish state that only 42% supported full independence. In conclusion,
the Catalan bourgeoisie, which is represented by the governing alliance
of president Puigdemont and consists of a center-right wing party (which
has repeatedly cooperated in the Spanish central political arena with
the center-right wing PP supporting austerity policies) and the Catalan
social-democratic party, propagates independence but they do not wish
independence. They only wish a broadened financial autonomy.
This text was conceived and came to life the day after the referendum.
The course of events confirms our argument, given that during the
well-expected historical declaration of independence, on Tuesday October
10, Puigdemont did not have the slightest problem to ignore the “popular
will” of thousands of people that he manipulated and mobilized, those
who stood outside the parliament and waited for the declaration of
independence. Puigdemont served the interests of those who support him.
With an abstract statement, he threw the ball back to Madrid: “Let’s
negotiate, let’s see what you can offer us” was the bottom line of his
statement.
Nevertheless, the right-wing Spanish government through its non-tolerant
stance, which united its voters and made itself appear as the only
“responsible” actor in this crisis, inflexibly continues demanding
president Puigdemont to clarify his stance, so the Spanish state will be
in a position to have knowledge of whether it will declare Catalonia in
a state of emergency or not and overthrow Catalonia’s elected
leadership. This development would be the only solution regardless the
result of the referendum and the timing of such an event. No state hands
over its power and territory without consequences. When it comes to the
unhappy crowd that left the streets around the parliament in silence,
they should be aware that this is what happens when they are asked to
take a stance for or against a state imposed dilemma and to act within a
framework defined by the ruling political and economic elites.
As expected, the events in Catalonia also engaged the anarchist
movement. Several reasons lie behind this: the history of Barcelona in
regards to the anarchist movement, the violent police suppression of
Catalonians, the consequent strike, the “direct democracy” narrative
that accompany referendums, as well as the correlation between a
national liberation sensation and a revolutionary prospect and social
subversion are some of the main reasons.
With regard to the historic relation of anarchists and Catalan
nationalists, their relationships had been – with minor exceptions- of
the worst kind. CNT reached the audiences of poor workers that swarmed
in Barcelona to work in the factories of the Catalan capital. Before the
1934 uprising, when autonomists cooperated with the socialists against
the right-wing ruled state, the Catalan rebel government detained a
great number of CNT militants to prevent the anarchists from taking
action in the region. The Catalan cops of 1931–36 where unceasing
torturers of anarchist activists. Catalan politicians on the other hand
had leading roles in the political machinations against CNT-FAI during
the civil war and the events of May 1937 and – since the Communist Party
was non-existent in Catalonia-, they took the initiative to deter the
Revolution through their dilatory actions. The only sentimental
commonality that ever existed between anarchists and Catalan autonomists
overtime was one of hatred against the central fascist state of Madrid,
especially during the dictatorship.
With regard to police brutality, we are obviously against any similar
instances of cops against crowds of protestors, let alone against a
peaceful and unarmed crowd who only cries out “Votarem”, meaning “we
will vote”. We stand against any repressive mechanism and the state of
terror that has been imposed over many areas of Catalonia. Unfortunately
though, there was no global condemnation when the Mossos d’Esquadra, the
police force of the Autonomy of Catalonia, was indiscriminately beating
protestors of austerity, was taking out eyeballs of our comrades using
plastic bullets, was enforcing the evictions of home residencies over
debts, when it repressed all strike rallies, the Indignados movement,
the libertarian squats and so on. The logic of victimization played a
role in favor of the Catalan government’s goal, but we, as anarchists,
as the usual candidates for state repression, we ought to comprehend the
limits between sympathy and solidarity. It is not a coincidence that
more severe state repression against movements with popular support
takes place in many places in the world, movements that were fomented by
reactionary elites or are imbued with disputable demands. For this kind
of repression, it is difficult for us to comment and to adopt a clear
position as a political movement.
We stood in solidarity with the struggle of Catalan protestors when they
encircled the Catalan Parliament (while the Catalan middle-right wing
party was in power) in 2011, forcing the politicians to enter the
Parliament by helicopters in order to vote for the austerity budget. We
stood in solidarity with anarchists when the Catalan police participated
in the “antiterrorist” raids of Operation Pandora or cracked down on our
comrades who were striving to hold on the Can Vies squat. However,
solidarity grows on and results from common visions; otherwise, it is
reduced to mere expression of sympathy and in this case, the dispute,
the vision, is a Catalan independence as a demand and pursuit by the
Catalan bourgeoisie.
The support of the demand for independence by the anticapitalist CUP
(Popular Party) is not a sufficient condition to make as stand in
solidarity with the Catalan cause, since the question of the referendum,
the terms for a possible independence, the reason why it takes place,
are all elements evidently alien to any libertarian logic, to any social
emancipation concept. This sort of Independence is not accompanied by a
program of self-determination and autonomy neither by a prospect of
federalization of the Spanish territory. The anticapitalist and
libertarian cause would be the first to receive repression in an
independent Catalonia, an independent Catalonia that would be the result
of the political powers that pursue it. An independence with no social
and communal characteristics, with no class characteristics, with no
revolutionary program, has nothing to do with libertarian principles. As
anarchists, we do not believe in the theory of stages, in good and worse
states, but we believe in self-determination, anti-hierarchy and direct
action. When we abolish our fundamental principles and adopt the logic
of “lesser evil”, “realism” and adaptivity, we are in great danger of
becoming mere supporters of state planning.
If the referendum in Catalonia had been the result of popular pressure
with liberal characteristics, this discussion would take place on a
completely different basis. Unfortunately, part of the people who align
themselves with the plans of the Catalan government, are the same people
that fought against austerity, in favor of self-determination through
the indignados movement, against the very governmental elite that
organized the referendum. Today they stand allied with this elite,
influenced by the all-powerful nationalist paradigm, decorated with a
little bit of anti-Francoism, Barcelona FC and pacifist civil
disobedience. The readiness by which an anti-systemic social
predisposition can be channeled towards patriotic and nationalist
ideologies is something that we need to contemplate on.
In Spain, like in Greece, the goal of the revolutionary movement is to
regroup after the successive repressive blows that it suffered and after
the social dejection caused by austerity and by the failure of the
Movements of the Squares and work constantly and by plan driven by
libertarian demands. Delegating our lives to the hands of political
parties, politicians and enlightened avant-gardes will never deliver the
desired outcome. The pursuit of political instability can only bear
fruit when there are grassroots organizations and structures from below,
to grasp it and use it for opening prospects of struggle, prospects of
social and class emancipation. Otherwise, we just pave the way to
reaction and state organization.
Δ.Β. and Κ.Φ., two anarchists from Athens