Spanish Partition, Federalism and Independence

[Deleted]

I am in Catalonia at the moment. You see their flags everywhere but imo it is all just populism.

Politicians like selling the idea of independence because it sounds good and it's easier to sell to moderates than blaming the immigrants.

But actually it doesn't solve anything. Catalonia has immense dept and I am not sure they could shoulder independence.

I also oppose the whole idea that somehow everybody is better off by themselves. It's just not true.

[Deleted]

I don't understand the European obsession with every little cultural faction having to have their own country. Is there some kind of cultural xenophobia that is simply ingrained into every last European?

Catalonia has almost 8 million people, almost twice as Ireland, 3 more than Denmark and almost as much as Israel or Switzerland....i wouldn´t call that "little cultural faction".

---------- Post added 2013-06-15 at 06:38 PM ----------

Its kind of funny that many people claim cataluña has nothing to do with Spain when many of their people are from other provinces like andalucia specially and when the mayority speaks spanish and not catalan. Anyway, I´m not saying they shouldnt have the rights to make their own country, if the vast mayority wants to be independent, let them be. I really want to see catalan as the main tongue, it would be really funny as hell.

I am catalan, and, as most of catalan people, speak catalan with our family and friends...i dont find anything "funny" about that.
Maybe you preffer what happened during Franco dictatorship where catalan was banned from school and prohibited in most places under pealty of imprisonment or even death.

Don´t bother having an argument...someones whos nick is "spanish4ever"....well...don´t even try.

[Elegiac]

Catalonia has almost 8 million people, almost twice as Ireland, 3 more than Denmark and almost as much as Israel or Switzerland....i wouldn´t call that "little cultural faction".

It's still an annoyance and a hindrance to good government.

---------- Post added 2013-06-15 at 12:28 PM ----------

Let me guess, you're from the American Continent?

Which is relevant to anything, how? The continental US has its own set of cultural differences between regions, differences which selfish people make a fetish of promoting as requiring distinct governance to the detriment of the country as a whole, as in Europe.

[Sunseeker]

Catalonia has almost 8 million people, almost twice as Ireland, 3 more than Denmark and almost as much as Israel or Switzerland....i wouldn´t call that "little cultural faction".

And of those 8 million who are old enough to understand what this is all about, how many actually support this?

---------- Post added 2013-06-15 at 11:53 AM ----------

Let me guess, you're from the American Continent?

Because *insert stereotypical assumption about America here* means that I'm clearly *various insults go here* and that I shouldn't be talking out of my *specific body part* because I'm *insult about being American*.

That's where you were going with this right? Because otherwise it shouldn't matter where I'm from.

[Deleted]

And of those 8 million who are old enough to understand what this is all about, how many actually support this?

According to the last voting intention figures (published last week), the parties in favor of the referendum would hold two thirds of the seats in the Catalan Parliament. And for the first time ever, ERC —left-wing— would surpass CiU —centrists— and win the elections. On top of that, you would need to add the nationalists that support federalism — about 10% of the seats. So yeah, it's a pretty significant slice of the cake.

A notion usually promoted by upper (middle) class white folks who would generally be the only beneficiaries of their bullshit.

Again, not the case here. You should probably read up on the topic, instead of making yet another sweeping generalization.

Cultures are either strong enough to survive, or they are not, and they die. There is nothing wrong with this.

Oh, gee, a social darwinist. Imagine that.

It's still an annoyance and a hindrance to good government.

The majority should rule unopposed. Nothing bad ever comes out of that. Right?

[Sunseeker]

Again, not the case here. You should probably read up on the topic, instead of making yet another sweeping generalization.

I wasn't speaking specifically with the case, I was in part referring to a great deal of previous political writing I've read about how we need to "preserve" minority cultures and not allow them to become watered down or influenced by others.

Oh, gee, a social darwinist. Imagine that.

It's not like I'm holding myself to some different standard. If American culture(whatever the hell that might be) can't hold up to the test of time, while unfortunate, I don't expect to get my own little square of land were I can practice my "traditions". Life, people, traditions grow and change, come and go with the wind. Attempting to "preserve" them by sectioning them off , either by their own choice or by the force of others, only causes them to stagnate and die a long, slow death. It doesn't do anyone any good.

[artemishunter1]

I wasn't speaking specifically with the case, I was in part referring to a great deal of previous political writing I've read about how we need to "preserve" minority cultures and not allow them to become watered down or influenced by others.


It's not like I'm holding myself to some different standard. If American culture(whatever the hell that might be) can't hold up to the test of time, while unfortunate, I don't expect to get my own little square of land were I can practice my "traditions". Life, people, traditions grow and change, come and go with the wind. Attempting to "preserve" them by sectioning them off , either by their own choice or by the force of others, only causes them to stagnate and die a long, slow death. It doesn't do anyone any good.

The slow death is the important part. Being slow it allows it adapt, change into something new. Fast change is always violent, and not all people can survive such change. Slow pace of change allows people to come to term with the change. Same as nature, fast change does not allow species to adapt and that leads to complete extinction.

---------- Post added 2013-06-15 at 06:52 PM ----------

It's also hilarious you say that when you say in your signature that you are a nationalist.
The nations that create empires aren't usually all that keen on giving up their national identity to create a new, welded identity together with the conquered nations. Unless their own culture is severely lacking (like the mongol conquerors in China, India and the Caliphate), they often try to impose their culture on the conquered people. Vae victis.
Do you know why Poles, for example, are a bit iffy about being neighbours with (white) Russians and Germans?

Of course cultures evolve over time! It's natural. But that's the oposite to what empires do inside of their borders. I think i only remember this one empire who tried to do it a bit differently, and failed hard.

It's all fine and dandy if you belong to a powerful culture that could impose itself to others on the past. Good for you. Just don't tell me not to be a barbarian and to speak the language of the empire.

Except Change is inevitable. Do you think Mongols wanted to take chinese culture as their own? Hell, they wanted to destroy all of China, turn it into grasslands for their horses. But inevitably they taken part of the chinese culture. Chinese culture also got influenced by the Mongol culture. No conqueror ever willingly takes the culture of lesser people (by being conquered, they became lesser people). But it happens without their control through economy, marriage, and people being people etc.

---------- Post added 2013-06-15 at 06:57 PM ----------

According to the last voting intention figures (published last week), the parties in favor of the referendum would hold two thirds of the seats in the Catalan Parliament. And for the first time ever, ERC —left-wing— would surpass CiU —centrists— and win the elections. On top of that, you would need to add the nationalists that support federalism — about 10% of the seats. So yeah, it's a pretty significant slice of the cake.



Again, not the case here. You should probably read up on the topic, instead of making yet another sweeping generalization.



Oh, gee, a social darwinist. Imagine that.



The majority should rule unopposed. Nothing bad ever comes out of that. Right?

Offcourse, but do you think protecting minority's interest does not come at a price? For 1)it puts power away from the people, to officials who can pander to various minority group to always stay in power. they may not become majority, but it hardly matters as system would be designed to get minority a voice.
2)the same power also allows politicians to completely ignore the voice of the majority of the people that elected them. They get to design rules that keeps them in power i.e. jerrymendering. Reform being impossible to do in american system as since people do not have direct power, and politicians are ones who benefiting from the disfunction(offcoure, they are not going to change anything, and people CANNOT change anything either). There will be point where protecting minority interest is going to cost too much.

[Sunseeker]

The slow death is the important part. Being slow it allows it adapt, change into something new. Fast change is always violent, and not all people can survive such change. Slow pace of change allows people to come to term with the change. Same as nature, fast change does not allow species to adapt and that leads to complete extinction.

The point of "preservation" is to prevent change.

[artemishunter1]

The point of "preservation" is to prevent change.

Change is inevitable. Every culture in the history of history has tried to keep their culture unchanged, but it changed inevitibly. People must try to preserve their culture (which is futile as it would change slowly anyway, but thanks to result of slow change, that old culture can become something new entirely and people themselves can adapt to it). Alternative is fast change, which in history is always end up in violence. Not to mention, fast change means only changing one culture to another. Theres no growth happen, culture stagnates nonetheless.