To prevailing reasoning for not letting Catalunya decide that without involving the rest of Spain seems to be because Catalunya is one of the biggest contributor to the overall economy of Spain, so if Catalunya leaves Spain, it'll impact the entire country, not just Catalunya itself.
They are wealthy because they have high-quality policy-making and a less corrupt government than the other autonomous communities. Other parts of Spain could engage in reform efforts of their own and contribute just as much to the government budget. Why should this be an argument against Catalunya?
> they have a less corrupt government than the other
Yeah, sure.
"In July 2014, Jordi Pujol confessed that for 34 years, including 23 as the President of Catalonia, he had maintained secret foreign bank accounts inherited from his father".
"His children have amassed a fortune in private businesses that frequently did business and received contracts from the Catalan government" (The infamous 3% scandal).
"They have investments in the tens of millions of dollars in Mexico, Panama and Argentina. Financial records show the movement of money between foreign banks in Andorra, Switzerland, Jersey, Cayman Islands and other tax havens in excess of €100 million".
He and his seven children face charges for illicit association, money laundering, falsification of documents and seven different tax crimes. the prosecutor asks between that could compris between 28 and 7 years of jail. The wife has been recorded laundering money but has been exonerated by her problems of health.
Well, a much more desirable solution would be not having a corrupt government for most of the last decades.
At least four of the last presidents of Cataluña (all either from the Pujol's party or their legacy) had been involved in a rich catalog of scams and frauds, including one fugitive in search and capture and two inhabilitated by repeatedly disobeying the laws that they should represent or spending public money in very questionable ways.
There is material here for several godfather trilogies plus a police academy series. Is simply grotesque.
While there has been corruption in all sides, this statement needs clarification. The search and capture issued to interpol was obeyed by Germany. Upon examination of Spain‘s reasons the court in Germany decided it was not enough proof to send Puigdemont back to Spain. If anything, this seems to contradict what one would think of when reading the above sentence without context.
> Why should this be an argument against Catalunya?
I have no stake in either outcome of independence happening or not, but I can definitely understand that some people can see it as problematic if one part of a bigger thing wants to leave without considering the other parts.
I still think Catalunya should be able to decide themselves, just like the UK decided themselves if they wanna leave the EU. Forcing states to belong to other states is something I thought we left behind a long time ago.
To force them to stay because other groups rely on money taken from them doesn't sound right. A similiar reasoning for keeping slavery existed in the US over similiar claims.
Slavery is an unfortunate comparison. Barcelona made a lot of money in the antiquity by being a main port in the slave trade that lasted until the XIX century it seems. Much later than other places.
The idea here would be more like: I rebuild your home, I spend a lot in infrastructures for you and now that you are rich you slam your door in my face.
Would this actually be such a bad idea if all parties were still part of some supranational entity like the EU with some level of free movement and common regulation?
I actually would like to see this type of balkanization happen while still keeping everything inside the EU, incl open borders. This was actually the idea of the early Pan-Europa people... As it is right now, the population heavyweights in the EU have way too much say compared to the smaller states.
Surely the kindergartener attitude is the attitude that a group of people should be denied self-determination and forced to be part of a larger political body against their will. It's the same kind of childish reasoning China uses to justify oppressing Xinjiang and Tibet, and that Russia's using for annexing parts of Ukraine.
> Surely the kindergartener attitude is the attitude that a group of people should be denied self-determination and forced to be part of a larger political body against their will
HN lately doesn't fail to disappoint. I don't know what else to do other than quote what you are replying to. Turn your auto pilot off.
> I am neither for nor against Catalan independence
The reasoning China and Russia give for their actions is facile. You're rather making my point.
"Catalonia should be independent! And Barcelona should be an independent city-state within it! Why not!"
"I am neither for nor against independence but this is an overly simplistic attitude, you clearly haven't thought about what you're saying seriously at all"
"You're just like China!"
> Voting independence is preferred over military or terrorist tactics.
I have a better idea, why not threat with stop breathing until their requirements are accepted?
Now seriously. This is a false dichotomy. Threatening an entire nation with terrorism until you have your candy and are allowed to stole the properties of the majority of your neighbors is neither acceptable, funny, or serious. Not when all that you have to sustain your utopia is a big mouth and guerrilla tricks seen in internet.
If suggesting naive adolescents to engage in terrorism is the level of the arguments, we need more adults entering the room. Blackmailing an entire country will often backfire.
Giving me a billion dollars is preferred over terrorist tactics. The argument makes no sense here.
What if that town votes for independence and then votes to be part of, lets say, China? They would have enough resources then. But anyway, nobody is using the resource argument here in the Catalonian independence issue.
> Giving me a billion dollars is preferred over terrorist tactics. The argument makes no sense here.
You may not like it but it does make sense - countries have come into existence as a direct result of "terrorism" leading to civil war. Given the demographic breakdown of HN, it is very likely you live in one of those right now. Also remember that Spain struggled with violent separatist movement which was still active well into this century, so it is certainly not outside the realm of possibility.
No, it doesn't make sense because we're not in a situation where we have to stop terrorism from happening. It's just a made up scenario, a false dilemma, terrorism or independence.
Terrorism in Catalonia was a thing years ago but it stopped. They never went as far as the ETA terrorist group from the Basque Country. And even then, independence was not an option. If you start conceding things under the thread of terrorism, where do you draw the line?
The Spanish constitution is clear. You can't claim/vote for independence. As in any other modern country we are subject to the rule of law so if they want independence, they should start by trying to change the constitution.
The point was that any government will consider ceding some sort of autonomy to a province that’s threatening to break away, if there’s a possibility that not doing so could result in terrorism. In Spain’s case they’ve had a similar situation in recent history, so you’d hope that they would be extra keen to avoid decades of train station bombings and such.
> Balkanization is the wet dream of many enemies of Europe
Meanwhile, back in the real world, states in the actual Balkans are actively joining the European Union and gaining freedom of movement throughout the region. Even Balkanization is not what it used to be.
He used the term not in reference to the actual balkan geographical area.
In the real world there are world powers that benefit from a unified Europe with strong central authority and those that don't. Brexit serves the interests of the later. Scottish independence would further those interests still.
Catalan independence weakens Spain and by extension NATO.
This is not a statement on the morality of such movements or whether they might be a good idea in the narrow sense for Scots, Catalans, the people of Flanders and so forth. Rather it is a look at the larger map and unintended consequences.
Finally, as to what is actually happening in the Balkans - the state of affairs between Kosovo and Albania (ironically they might form a union) and Bosnia is.. not fantastic to say the least.
Sadly memories are short and attitudes are cavalier.
I am not a conservative. Your attitude itself is an example of the division and political instability.
The SNP (love them or hate them, I don't care): "an independent Scotland would prioritise the speediest possible safe removal of nuclear weapons."
Say this populist party has its William Wallace moment, now what is left of the UK will have to disentangle itself militarily. It will certainly be a politically heated moment in time, I'm sure you're aware of Russian interference in these things if nothing else as agents of chaos - Voilà.
It is certainly easier to agitate an independent small country to force the Brits to move their nuclear subs.
You can be all for Scottish independence conceptually, morally, whatever - and still be concerned about the whole board.
an independent Scotland would prioritise the speediest possible safe removal of nuclear weapons
This is disingenuous without giving the context of that quote. The UK's nuclear submarines are stored in Scotland, near Edinburgh (the Forth estuary). The Scottish people don't want those nukes there, both because of the inherent danger these missiles pose, and because it paints a target on their head.
The SNP's position is that if the English want to keep their nukes, they should keep them in England. That's what "removal" refers to here, it is not about forcing the English to disarm.
> This sounds crazy but why not let go and allow them to decide their own fate?
Because is my country also, and they want to gag me and to steal me.
The sovereignty of a country relies in all citizens, and the citizenship came with some inalienable rights. In the same way as Nevada couldn't wake up tomorrow and decide that they will became part of China and the rest of the Americans can't enter or live there anymore. Changing the fate for every citizen would need to consult every citizen in the country about what they want to do, and the immense majority of us don't want to lose part of our country by a bunch of crooks. Period. Is called democracy.