Catalonia referendum

[glynnlondon]

Interesting question about where you draw the line Glasgow and Dundee voted for independence maybe we could build a wall and they can pay for it. Works for me

[Ulysses]

You think police forces create the definition of what illegal means? Aye ok.

 

I didn't tell you what I thought police forces were for.  I asked you to tell me what you thought they were for.  Do you want to have a try at doing that?

[Rocco_Jambo]

I didn't tell you what I thought police forces were for. I asked you to tell me what you thought they were for. Do you want to have a try at doing that?

I didn?t answer because it was utterly irrelevant. How about you answer the question of how that is relevant to what the definition of illegal is? Then I might. What?s the definition of llegal got to do with how many people were arrested?

[doctor jambo]

Er, doc, if you think that the need to "draw the line somewhere" is any justification for baton-charging grannies and firing plastic bullets at unarmed civilians you probably need a re-think. A big, long re-think.

Depends I guess, the police may think they are quelling a revolution, and they may be right. How many countries police would not use force? Apart from uk where our cops are passive beyond belief .

Many countries would use teargas baton rounds and horses.

This is not a referendum - it is an anti democratic coup.

You don't confront continental riot police

[Shanks]

Genuine question, could Spain not just send in the army to get the region under control?

[redjambo]

Genuine question, could Spain not just send in the army to get the region under control?

 

Watch this space.

[Ulysses]

I didn?t answer because it was utterly irrelevant.

 

I know what police forces are for.  I just couldn't tell if you did.

 

Police forces are there to enforce the law.  If it is a criminal offence to do something (say stealing, or putting an X in a ballot paper in an unconstitutional referendum), there is likely to be a piece of legislation somewhere that says so.  If the law says something is a criminal offence, then it is a matter for the police to enforce that law if it is being broken.  If the law doesn't say something is a criminal offence, then the police have no law to enforce. 

 

In other words, criminality isn't a matter of opinion; it's a matter of law.

 

It follows that the issue of arrests is important.  Arrest is a highly significant power - in legal terms, the power of arrest is really what separates the police from the rest of us.  If a person has committed a crime, the police can arrest them and arrange for them to be charged.  If these people were committing serious offences, it wouldn't be unreasonable to expect a significant number of arrests.  But there were hardly any.  Therefore it would be reasonable to suggest that these people were not committing serious offences.  But if they weren't, why baton-charge them?  Why fire plastic bullets at them? 

 

Some posters suggested that the police were simply enforcing the law.  At least one or two claimed that it was blindingly obvious that this was the case.  I've asked what laws were being broken and what laws were being enforced.  If it is blindingly obvious, then it should be really easy for someone to address those simple questions.  It's been some time since they were asked, though.

[Ulysses]

Depends I guess, the police may think they are quelling a revolution, and they may be right. How many countries police would not use force? Apart from uk where our cops are passive beyond belief .

Many countries would use teargas baton rounds and horses.

This is not a referendum - it is an anti democratic coup.

You don't confront continental riot police

 

 

I'll repeat what I said in my post directly above; criminality isn't a matter of opinion; it's a matter of law.

[michael_bolton]

Maybe you should look up how many people have lost their lives over nationalist territorial conflicts in Europe

I'm arguing for stability- you are the one arguing for alterations of borders based on the demands of small pockets of people based on nationalistic/racial ideology and asking why people get so upset by border change......

you cannot presume that the demands of a "race" to seize land and assets from another to establish "homeland" will not erupt into violence

 

This line stands out for me. You can't argue for stability. Political stability either exists or it does not.

 

In this case, it does not exist. A significant minority of the Catalan population wish to no longer be part of Spain. You can't argue against that, it is real. It's like arguing against cold weather and saying it would be better if we all just pretended to be warm.

 

There are arguments to be had about what should happen, but defending the nation state with the argument of 'stability' makes no sense. That stability no longer exists.

 

Nation states were a good answer to the problems that Europe had a century ago. But the time since the war has seen huge change in the shape of the Cold War (which kept peace rather than nation states) beginning and sort of ending, the creation of many new states in the east, the opening of trade and movement bringing into question the relevance of the nation state (what's the difference between living in Barcelona and Paris when it comes to trade etc?), a huge influx of people from Asia and North Africa changing the make-up of some areas of Europe, the economic collapse of some parts of Europe.

 

In short, in the face of all this change and upheaval, it is a big stretch to say that the nation state still answers the questions that Europe needs answered. Especially since the people themselves don't seem to think it does. Scotland and Catalonia have been the most high profile examples recently, but there are growing independence movements in various parts of Europe. People no longer widely accept the nation state, not in the way they did before.

 

There's your instability. By arguing for 'stability' you are just heading down the route of protest and conflict.

[Ibrahim Tall]

Genuine question, could Spain not just send in the army to get the region under control?

Worryingly the probably will if the Catalan government 'declare independence' in the next few days like they've claimed they will.

[Seymour M Hersh]

Does anyone know if it's true that a village of just 450 people returned a vote of 1000 in favour of independence in the Catalonia "referendum"?

[DETTY29]

Does anyone know if it's true that a village of just 450 people returned a vote of 1000 in favour of independence in the Catalonia "referendum"?

Likely village plus environs would push numbers up, offset by too young, too frail, can't be bothered to vote.

[Gorgiewave]

Also? 

 

Who said that saying "Sevilla" was the work of a cretin?  I hope you're not suggesting that I did.  I merely pointed out that posting "Sevilla" or "Catalunya" seem to be pretty much on a par with each other.

No, but I believe it's also stupid to use Sevilla, except for the team. The same exists in Spanish: the Basque Country, which has at least two names in Spanish, is frequently referred to by its Basque name, "Euskadi." Similarly, the Basque language is known as "Euskera," when vasco and vascuence are perfectly good Spanish names for them.

 

I have wondered before why I don't think like this with personal names. Karl Marx is known in Spain as Carlos Marx. To me, this sounds ridiculous. I wouldn't call him Charles Marx either. I don't know what unstated criterion my brain applies to discriminate like this.

[Thunderstruck]

This line stands out for me. You can't argue for stability. Political stability either exists or it does not.

 

In this case, it does not exist. A significant minority of the Catalan population wish to no longer be part of Spain. You can't argue against that, it is real. It's like arguing against cold weather and saying it would be better if we all just pretended to be warm.

 

There are arguments to be had about what should happen, but defending the nation state with the argument of 'stability' makes no sense. That stability no longer exists.

 

Nation states were a good answer to the problems that Europe had a century ago. But the time since the war has seen huge change in the shape of the Cold War (which kept peace rather than nation states) beginning and sort of ending, the creation of many new states in the east, the opening of trade and movement bringing into question the relevance of the nation state (what's the difference between living in Barcelona and Paris when it comes to trade etc?), a huge influx of people from Asia and North Africa changing the make-up of some areas of Europe, the economic collapse of some parts of Europe.

 

In short, in the face of all this change and upheaval, it is a big stretch to say that the nation state still answers the questions that Europe needs answered. Especially since the people themselves don't seem to think it does. Scotland and Catalonia have been the most high profile examples recently, but there are growing independence movements in various parts of Europe. People no longer widely accept the nation state, not in the way they did before.

 

There's your instability. By arguing for 'stability' you are just heading down the route of protest and conflict.

You are not arguing against the nation state, you are proposing differently sized and centred nation states and, as discussed above, that process could continue ad absurdum. It is difficult to see how that adds to stability.

 

We have evolved from City States and Princely States to the relatively modern nation state. This, in turn, is giving way to the larger economic state - if Europe doesn?t tear itself apart, it will evolve into the federal US of E where the current nations will be no more a sovereign nation state than Rhode Island.

[Strachsuit]

I think it gets more interest in Scotland because the Nats see the Catalans as being in the same boat as them.

 

Bless.

 

Easily one of the saddest things I've ever seen is a bunch of rabid Nats waving Scottish and Catalan flags in Barcelona. I wonder if they know how much of an irrelevance they are?

 

There aren't enough facepalms in the world to reflect this strange behaviour.

[Seymour M Hersh]

Likely village plus environs would push numbers up, offset by too young, too frail, can't be bothered to vote.

 

I think the suggestion was voting fraud!

[AlphonseCapone]

I think the suggestion was voting fraud!

 

Voters were being told they could print off ballots at home and vote anywhere that was still open as opposed to their local polling station if that was shut down.

 

I don't know if the story you brought up is definitely true but there are several explanations why it might be.

 

Which also means UDI has no real basis at this moment and time.

[Rocco_Jambo]

I know what police forces are for. I just couldn't tell if you did.

 

Police forces are there to enforce the law. If it is a criminal offence to do something (say stealing, or putting an X in a ballot paper in an unconstitutional referendum), there is likely to be a piece of legislation somewhere that says so. If the law says something is a criminal offence, then it is a matter for the police to enforce that law if it is being broken. If the law doesn't say something is a criminal offence, then the police have no law to enforce.

 

In other words, criminality isn't a matter of opinion; it's a matter of law.

 

It follows that the issue of arrests is important. Arrest is a highly significant power - in legal terms, the power of arrest is really what separates the police from the rest of us. If a person has committed a crime, the police can arrest them and arrange for them to be charged. If these people were committing serious offences, it wouldn't be unreasonable to expect a significant number of arrests. But there were hardly any. Therefore it would be reasonable to suggest that these people were not committing serious offences. But if they weren't, why baton-charge them? Why fire plastic bullets at them?

 

Some posters suggested that the police were simply enforcing the law. At least one or two claimed that it was blindingly obvious that this was the case. I've asked what laws were being broken and what laws were being enforced. If it is blindingly obvious, then it should be really easy for someone to address those simple questions. It's been some time since they were asked, though.

Ask away. Just when you are quoting someone make your question bare some relevance to what you are quoting.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

I wonder what the next move is.

 

Fair enough, this referendum was illegal but they're saying 90 per cent voted in favour of independence. On that basis, surely the Spanish government are going to have to allow a second,unopposed referendum simply to see if the 90 per cent figure is anything like reflective of Catalonia as a whole. 

[redjambo]

I wonder what the next move is.

 

Fair enough, this referendum was illegal but they're saying 90 per cent voted in favour of independence. On that basis, surely the Spanish government are going to have to allow a second,unopposed referendum simply to see if the 90 per cent figure is anything like reflective of Catalonia as a whole. 

 

That's not the way the Spanish government thinks. Defending the structural integrity of Spain through upholding the Spanish constitution is its be all and end all. In its mind, the referendum has no validity whatsoever, no matter any result it might have had. The chances of it allowing a second referendum are nil.

 

The next move is the government's invoking of article 155 of the constitution, allowing it direct control over Catalonia, backed up by military intervention. Whether it does this before or after UDI is the question. The only other approach I can see the Spanish government possibly taking is to militarily take over the airports and blockade the region, attempting to force Catalonia into submission with minimum casualties simply by making everyday life difficult, but it is a dangerous approach and would risk generating more support for Catalonia internationally.

 

Edit: Got my worms all muddled up.

[redjambo]

Not a chance of that happening.

 

Spain only need to look at the UK to realise don't have a referendum if you aren't the side wanting change. The Scottish one was expected to be an easy win (ok it wasn't too close) but the Yes vote was 12-15% higher than expected. The EU vote was again expected to be only about 33% for leave and that one they lost!!

 

If you don't want the change, don't hold a vote.

 

I wish you had been David Cameron's political adviser.

[redjambo]

.
 

[Francis Albert]

I wonder what the next move is.

 

Fair enough, this referendum was illegal but they're saying 90 per cent voted in favour of independence. On that basis, surely the Spanish government are going to have to allow a second,unopposed referendum simply to see if the 90 per cent figure is anything like reflective of Catalonia as a whole.

 

if we had a referendum in scotland where basically only supporters of independence had any reason to vote then i think we would have 90% yes. It is meaningless and gives no mandate for anything.

[reaths17]

I wonder what the next move is.

 

Fair enough, this referendum was illegal but they're saying 90 per cent voted in favour of independence. On that basis, surely the Spanish government are going to have to allow a second,unopposed referendum simply to see if the 90 per cent figure is anything like reflective of Catalonia as a whole. 

90% of 40% of the people who voted. it looks like the majority of people saw it as a mickey moose referendum and most of the voters were the rabid separatists. if they cant get the majority of voters to vote I don't see why the Spanish government should give a toss

[redjambo]

90% of 40% of the people who voted. it looks like the majority of people saw it as a mickey moose referendum and most of the voters were the rabid separatists. if they cant get the majority of voters to vote I don't see why the Spanish government should give a toss

 

"Rabid separatists". That's pretty dismissive of folk's opinions. You can choose to vote a particular way in a referendum without being "rabid". Demonising the enemy is a pretty poor political argument.

[redm]

90% of 40% of the people who voted. it looks like the majority of people saw it as a mickey moose referendum and most of the voters were the rabid separatists. if they cant get the majority of voters to vote I don't see why the Spanish government should give a toss

 

2 million "rabid separatists"? That's a lot of ...eh...rabidity. If that's even a word.

[Boab]

I wish you had been David Cameron's political adviser.

Damn right !

 

Spineless twat !

[Cade]

The claims of "stuffed ballot boxes" may well be true.

 

But look deeper and the reason becomes clear.

 

Spanish government stormtroopers erm I mean police removed many ballot boxes and shut down lots of polling places.

 

The people simply went elsewhere to cast their votes, with locations of operating polling stations being shared around.

 

This is why some small villages with only a couple of hundred residents returned thousands of votes. 

 

Because it was the only place TO vote, since the larger polling stations were being invaded by police and voters being beaten up.

[SwindonJambo]

I know, if 36% of the total Electorate are "Rabid Separatists" then there isn't too far to go to win a majority.

 

A rabid supporter of a cause or party gets 1 vote, exactly the same as a passive supporter of a different part or cause who quietly votes and never talks about their choice.  Aggressively and loudly jumping up and down expressing your cause doesn't win converts - rational debate and gentle persuasion does.

 

Quite aside from that, there's no doubt the violent response by the Spanish Authorities has been absolutely shameful.

[Unknown user]

I wonder what the next move is.

 

Fair enough, this referendum was illegal but they're saying 90 per cent voted in favour of independence. On that basis, surely the Spanish government are going to have to allow a second,unopposed referendum simply to see if the 90 per cent figure is anything like reflective of Catalonia as a whole.

They've said there's zero dialogue between the two authorities though, which makes things problematic. I don't think Spain want to legitimise the claim by entering talks as equals and are just looking to stamp this out.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

2 million "rabid separatists"? That's a lot of ...eh...rabidity. If that's even a word.

How many voted early and voted often?

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

They've said there's zero dialogue between the two authorities though, which makes things problematic. I don't think Spain want to legitimise the claim by entering talks as equals and are just looking to stamp this out.

Spain is quite right to dismiss that Catalan idiot. The whole thing was a stunt.

[Thunderstruck]

The claims of "stuffed ballot boxes" may well be true.

 

But look deeper and the reason becomes clear.

 

Spanish government stormtroopers erm I mean police removed many ballot boxes and shut down lots of polling places.

 

The people simply went elsewhere to cast their votes, with locations of operating polling stations being shared around.

 

This is why some small villages with only a couple of hundred residents returned thousands of votes.

 

Because it was the only place TO vote, since the larger polling stations were being invaded by police and voters being beaten up.

Would you accept the result of any vote:

-Where the franchise (who can vote) was subject to late changes.

-Where there was no proper supervision of the polling place or the number of votes being cast by any individual.

-Where there was no proper security for all of the ballot boxes (there is no way that the contents of a ballot box should spill as depicted if it had been properly sealed).

-Where there was no proper audit trail between polling place and counting venue.

-Where the counting process seemed to be conducted in an ad-hoc manner.

 

The whole thing was a farce and nobody should give any credence to the vote or the outcome.

[Psychedelicropcircle]

I heard they're gonna build a wall & spains paying

[redjambo]

And where one side was doing everything it could to sabotage the election.

 

That's what gets me. You can't do everything you can to sabotage a vote and then claim that it wasn't fairly held. Whoever thought up that strategy needs to find another job.

[Francis Albert]

That's what gets me. You can't do everything you can to sabotage a vote and then claim that it wasn't fairly held. Whoever thought up that strategy needs to find another job.

It was never going to be "fairly held" because those opposed to independence did not recognise its legitimacy and were for the most part never going to vote.

[Thunderstruck]

And where one side was doing everything it could to sabotage the election.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Deflection. I don?t see many posts that argue that the police were justified in their actions.

 

Are you suggesting that the organisation and management of the referendum should be free from criticism or that there was no fraud perpetrated?

[Gorgiewave]

The point is that letting the referendum happen and then ignoring it was not a good option. Everybody can see it was a farce, but the seps are still using it to declare independence. So it was a pretext and an excuse, used for blackmail. Jail for not a few, please.

[redjambo]

It was never going to be "fairly held" because those opposed to independence did not recognise its legitimacy and were for the most part never going to vote.

 

And if the Spanish government had used that argument and let the referendum go ahead as originally planned (not by saying "we agree to the referendum", just by emphasising it had no legitimacy and not sending in the cops), they wouldn't be in nearly as much crap as they currently are.

[Ulysses]

Ask away. Just when you are quoting someone make your question bare some relevance to what you are quoting.

 

I can't help your lack of understanding, but I'll bear what you say in mind. 

[Ulysses]

Jail for not a few, please.

 

That'll be jail for breaking the criminal law.

 

Would someone like to indicate what the criminal law in question might be?

[Gorgiewave]

That'll be jail for breaking the criminal law.

 

Would someone like to indicate what the criminal law in question might be?

 

The Chief of the Catalan Police is being investigated for sedition. Maximum penalty: 15 years in prison.

https://elpais.com/elpais/2017/10/04/inenglish/1507110391_236888.html

 

Protesters and other leaders in Catalan civil life have been accused by a court of sedition.

 

https://elpais.com/elpais/2017/09/22/inenglish/1506091941_018182.html

 

14 Catalan government officials arrested on suspicion of disobedience, abuse of power and embezzlement. The embezzlement charge carries a maximum prison sentence of 10 years.

 

The referendum was banned by the Constitutional Court. I don't know if you can be imprisoned for failing to obey such a court order.

[Gorgiewave]

The Chief of the Catalan Police is being investigated for sedition. Maximum penalty: 15 years in prison.

https://elpais.com/elpais/2017/10/04/inenglish/1507110391_236888.html

 

Protesters and other leaders in Catalan civil life have been accused by a court of sedition.

 

https://elpais.com/elpais/2017/09/22/inenglish/1506091941_018182.html

 

14 Catalan government officials arrested on suspicion of disobedience, abuse of power and embezzlement. The embezzlement charge carries a maximum prison sentence of 10 years.

 

The referendum was banned by the Constitutional Court. I don't know if you can be imprisoned for failing to obey such a court order.

 

They've spent quite a few million Euros of public money on a so-called referendum that the Consitutional Court had banned.

[Rocco_Jambo]

I can't help your lack of understanding, but I'll bear what you say in mind. 

 

Sorry I must have misunderstood you. I took from you quoting my post then asking further questions you were disagreeing with something I said. It appears you weren't actually but instead you just wanted me to answer some further questions unrelated to my post which I never suggested I could answer. Sorry I don't have all the answers but it would be helpful if you realised quoting someones post with other questions creates the impression you disagree with what they are saying.

 

It would save me the time in future of having to read a page of waffle including insightful pearlers such as "Law is FACT".

[Francis Albert]

And if the Spanish government had used that argument and let the referendum go ahead as originally planned (not by saying "we agree to the referendum", just by emphasising it had no legitimacy and not sending in the cops), they wouldn't be in nearly as much crap as they currently are.

I agree that would have been a better strategy, but it would not have made the outcome much different nor have made it any less legitimate. And I am afraid it is not the Spanish Government that is in so much crap but rather the Catalan independence leader or President. (President? Even the SNP doesn't have that much pretension)

[Ulysses]

The referendum was banned by the Constitutional Court. I don't know if you can be imprisoned for failing to obey such a court order.

 

Let me know if you find out.

[Ulysses]

Sorry I must have misunderstood you.

 

 

No problem.  I'm sure you won't make that mistake again. 

[Ulysses]

I agree that would have been a better strategy, but it would not have made the outcome much different nor have made it any less legitimate. And I am afraid it is not the Spanish Government that is in so much crap but rather the Catalan independence leader or President. (President? Even the SNP doesn't have that much pretension)

 

Bad and all as the hysterical over-reaction by Madrid was, it's got to be said that yer man Puigdemont has kinda cornered the market in political daftness.

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

.

[doctor jambo]

Bad and all as the hysterical over-reaction by Madrid was, it's got to be said that yer man Puigdemont has kinda cornered the market in political daftness.

He's done a "Salmond"

- tried to make himself a political figure of historical and national significance regardless of the consequences.

He has engineered a situation that regardless of outcome can be spun to make himself look like a Catalan hero