|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On November 03 2017 05:26 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2017 05:17 opisska wrote:On November 03 2017 04:59 Plansix wrote:On November 03 2017 04:36 opisska wrote:On November 03 2017 04:27 Plansix wrote:
Democracy doesn’t mean holding a vote and then the thing that was voted for happens. Independence is serious business and not something that is just allowed at the whim of a referendum and a simple majority. Other nations cannot support independence movements when they are allies with controlling nation, it would sour future relations for decades with either party. Independence is always a fight and it’s one that takes an entire generation, not a month or a year. Yes, this describes the current state of affair. Why should we support it, just because it happens to be status quo? There is a literally almost endless list of things that "used to be that way" and then we eventually knew better. I agree that simple majority isn't a very convincing argument, but to be fair, do we have something significantly better? I just wish people stopped clinging to the concept of states as if it was something great and glorious. Once the fluidity of the organisation of people into units becomes the accepted norm, we are gonna laugh at this rigid medieval epoch when people would get stuck in borders drawn by power hungry monkeys for centuries unless they were willing to kill other people for it. And you are not right about the international support either. If enough people in the world get their heads out of their asses and start pushing for the right of everyone's self-determination, there will be no problem in supporting that internationally. Remember, the politicians are the representatives of the people, the government should serve, not rule and we should be pushing for that at every front. Supporting the conservation of current border and the outdated concepts around sovereignty is directly against this flow and will come to bite people who do that eventually. Nations are not perfect, but they provide stability, structure and conflict resolution that does not involve violence. The alternative to that is conflict and warfare. Independence movements are normally followed by open conflict and outside interference. You see this brave new world beyond nations, where self determination rules. That just sounds like a lawless land where someone finally decides that self determination means they can kill to take what they want. Why do you have to be so stubborn about it? Second, why do you have to be so extreme about it? Why violence, why lawlessness, why killing? Because the thing you want to do away with is what prevents violence and conflict. Historically the ideas of nations, culture, boarders and laws all developed out of a desire to avoid violence and open conflict. Nations did not always exist. They developed after centuries of conflict and thought on what defined people. All the services we know today were mostly created in the last 100 years. Professional police, fire departments or the public libraries(as we know them) were created and refined as public services to the nation and its people. They don’t exist without it. So if nations are going to be replaced, they need to be replaced by something equally robust, not simple self determination.
By the way, self-determination simply creates smaller nations; it doesn't create a new principle.
|
Sometimes it creates bigger nations, like Germany or Italy
|
And sometimes it's used for "peaceful" conquest.
|
On November 03 2017 05:39 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2017 05:26 Plansix wrote:On November 03 2017 05:17 opisska wrote:On November 03 2017 04:59 Plansix wrote:On November 03 2017 04:36 opisska wrote:On November 03 2017 04:27 Plansix wrote:
Democracy doesn’t mean holding a vote and then the thing that was voted for happens. Independence is serious business and not something that is just allowed at the whim of a referendum and a simple majority. Other nations cannot support independence movements when they are allies with controlling nation, it would sour future relations for decades with either party. Independence is always a fight and it’s one that takes an entire generation, not a month or a year. Yes, this describes the current state of affair. Why should we support it, just because it happens to be status quo? There is a literally almost endless list of things that "used to be that way" and then we eventually knew better. I agree that simple majority isn't a very convincing argument, but to be fair, do we have something significantly better? I just wish people stopped clinging to the concept of states as if it was something great and glorious. Once the fluidity of the organisation of people into units becomes the accepted norm, we are gonna laugh at this rigid medieval epoch when people would get stuck in borders drawn by power hungry monkeys for centuries unless they were willing to kill other people for it. And you are not right about the international support either. If enough people in the world get their heads out of their asses and start pushing for the right of everyone's self-determination, there will be no problem in supporting that internationally. Remember, the politicians are the representatives of the people, the government should serve, not rule and we should be pushing for that at every front. Supporting the conservation of current border and the outdated concepts around sovereignty is directly against this flow and will come to bite people who do that eventually. Nations are not perfect, but they provide stability, structure and conflict resolution that does not involve violence. The alternative to that is conflict and warfare. Independence movements are normally followed by open conflict and outside interference. You see this brave new world beyond nations, where self determination rules. That just sounds like a lawless land where someone finally decides that self determination means they can kill to take what they want. Why do you have to be so stubborn about it? Second, why do you have to be so extreme about it? Why violence, why lawlessness, why killing? Because the thing you want to do away with is what prevents violence and conflict. Historically the ideas of nations, culture, boarders and laws all developed out of a desire to avoid violence and open conflict. Nations did not always exist. They developed after centuries of conflict and thought on what defined people. All the services we know today were mostly created in the last 100 years. Professional police, fire departments or the public libraries(as we know them) were created and refined as public services to the nation and its people. They don’t exist without it. So if nations are going to be replaced, they need to be replaced by something equally robust, not simple self determination. By the way, self-determination simply creates smaller nations; it doesn't create a new principle.
Yeah, that is after a whole lot of war and conflict. And after all that, we are not even sure those new nations would be functional.
|
local autonimy is important, creating plenty of small states is stupid.
On baic stuff, Spain and Catalonia agree... Its just local stuff that needs to be sorted out, so let local issues be governed locally and have the big picture be governd by the big entity. Which also means that the country/big entity has to be fair.
|
On November 03 2017 06:18 Velr wrote:
local autonimy is important, creating plenty of small states is stupid.
On baic stuff, Spain and Catalonia agree... Its just local stuff that needs to be sorted out, so let local issues be governed locally and have the big picture be governd by the big entity. Which also means that the country/big entity has to be fair.
But local autonomy is exactly what Catalunya was denied. Their special status was cancelled by the Constitutional court in 2010. Independentism was actually minority a few years ago. With his catastrophic reactions, Rajoy is fueling it to make it majority!
|
On November 03 2017 05:33 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2017 03:37 warding wrote:On November 03 2017 03:29 opisska wrote:
Last time I checked, it was 21st century. That people had to fought civil wars for their self-determination in the past is true, but that doesn't make it right, or something worth of adoration. We have largely gotten rid of a lot of baggage from the past, including slavery, racism, bigotry, gender inequality etc... and so we should want to get rid of this absurd idea that people and lands are the property of the state that happens to control them. I don't know exactly what countries have which laws against secession, but if they have and such laws do not present a clear path to a secession of a region with significant majority support for such moves, I consider such laws profoundly immoral and I am willing to support their disregard. We don't need rebellions because we have liberal and democratic states with the rule of law, where no one can really claim to be oppressed by the government*. We still need those laws, however, because the state needs to be preserved - preserving the states assures people and provides stability for people and businesses. The practical consequences of Catalonian secession would include a huge disruption for businesses, devaluation of assets and huge legal costs. Catalonian and Spanish citizens need to be protected against adventurous regional governments, and the laws that offer those protections in this case are laws against rebellion and sedition. There isn't a significant majority support for independence in Catalonia. Either way, the path to independence would have to move through national political instituions, not only regional ones. EDIT: *Obviously exceptions exist. Point was, Catalonians aren't oppressed. Being oppressed isn't a requirement to the right to self determination. The right of self determination is a fundamental principle of international law and in the UN charter. You talk about liberalism yet you have no problem with a state massively limiting it by not giving catalans the ability to choose their sovereignty. Spain as a state has no god given right to exist. It's people give it that right by consent and if they don't want to anymore then they should be allowed to leave. That's liberty. While you're right about the practical consequences, ultimately the decision whether they're worth it or not is not up to you. Brexit is hugely damaging to the UK yet it's their choice and we should.respect it. Yes there's no significant majority for independence so why not just give the catalans a real referendum? It's possible in Scotland so why not in Spain? The whole reason it's only going through regional institutions is that Spain is has no pathway to secession at all.
I'll plainly admit I'm analysing events through the lens of conservatism rather than liberalism. Let me clarify what my position is:
- A peaceful independence referendum sanctioned by Spain with an agreement for immediate accession to the EU if the result is positive would be the ideal situation
- That being said, Catalonian independence isn't a desirable thing from a utilitarian point of view. Catalonian independentism does not offer anything positive for any group of people, other than keeping Catalonian tax revenue in Catalonia vs redistributing it to poorer regions in Spain like Andalusia;
- Independance movements are fights for freedom when there is an oppressor. When the larger entity isn't an oppressor, the independentists are fighting for insularity, not freedom. So should self-determination be a right? Yes. Should we cheer all independence movements? No.
- Given the Spanish constitution, which was confirmed on a referendum only a few decades ago by Catalonians and Spanish people alike, and the expected Spanish stubbornness, the actions of the current Catalonian independentists was plainly negative and I don't find any reason to cheer them on.
|
On November 03 2017 05:16 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2017 05:14 Godwrath wrote:On November 03 2017 04:50 TheDwf wrote:
@Acrofales or anyone Spanish: Rajoy's government is minority, right? Is there any way it could be overthrown? Yes it could. But it is not going to happen with the current political climate. What is the stance of the PSOE on Catalunya? Do they agree with the solution of a legal referendum?
No, the PSOE is against a legal referendum on Catalunya, it is tho, receptive to changes in the constitution to provide more autonomy and/or a federal model.
Unidos Podemos is the only national party who is pro-referendum.
|
On November 03 2017 06:18 Velr wrote:
local autonimy is important, creating plenty of small states is stupid.
On baic stuff, Spain and Catalonia agree... Its just local stuff that needs to be sorted out, so let local issues be governed locally and have the big picture be governd by the big entity. Which also means that the country/big entity has to be fair.
Pretty easily said. Now we just need an angel that tells us which are the big issues and which the small ones. This is and stays the central planning trap that people go round and round. There is no judgement mechanism other than our own heads. So you either leave those things undecided, or you have some very frequent and strong form of democratic organization that the vast majority can agree with as a dynamic rulesetter. The second one is very simply not given in the Catalonian situation, that is exactly what the seperatists are challenging.
|
Some points:
Indipendentists could start using some violence if they want to succeed. No state in human history achieved indipendency without bloodshed.
On the other hand, Rajoy surely played the best cards he could. It's an interesting event to watch unfold.
I don't understand why Catalonia doesn't do a tax protest. Their GDP is higher than Greece - they could say to Madrid 'indipendence or we stop paying taxes'. South of Spain would go down the drain without those moneys and what could Madrid do in response? Arrest 2,000,000 people? Surely they would need to build quite some prisons...
|
Norway28918 Posts
Norway's succession from Sweden in 1905 was entirely peaceful. There were threats of violence, and our referendum had a 99.95% support for independence, but Swedes and Sweden realized that not granting us our desire would lead to a conflict unlikely to ever be resolved until independence was granted, so they were also overall positive.
|
yeah...too bad they were butchering each others because Norway adopted a new constitution. Blood was shed nonetheless, just not in that particular moment.
|
On November 03 2017 06:39 SoSexy wrote:
Some points:
Indipendentists could start using some violence if they want to succeed. No state in human history achieved indipendency without bloodshed.
On the other hand, Rajoy surely played the best cards he could. It's an interesting event to watch unfold.
I don't understand why Catalonia doesn't do a tax protest. Their GDP is higher than Greece - they could say to Madrid 'indipendence or we stop paying taxes'. South of Spain would go down the drain without those moneys and what could Madrid do in response? Arrest 2,000,000 people? Surely they would need to build quite some prisons...
Call me uneducated, but I have no clue how I would even "not pay my taxes". At least in Austria, not paying your taxes is only a "right" that can be executed by the bourgeois, not by someone whose taxes are those of an employed/consumer (which is why we also never hear about tax fraud by regular employees and why the consequences for tax fraud are so mild. You wouldn't hurt yourself by making laws against yourself, would you?)
|
On November 03 2017 06:39 SoSexy wrote:
Some points:
Indipendentists could start using some violence if they want to succeed. No state in human history achieved indipendency without bloodshed.
On the other hand, Rajoy surely played the best cards he could. It's an interesting event to watch unfold.
I don't understand why Catalonia doesn't do a tax protest. Their GDP is higher than Greece - they could say to Madrid 'indipendence or we stop paying taxes'. South of Spain would go down the drain without those moneys and what could Madrid do in response? Arrest 2,000,000 people? Surely they would need to build quite some prisons...
??
Sending cops to beat grandmas a day of election and now having political prisoners, that's what you call doing the best he could ?
|
Your usage of the term 'bourgeoise' is, in all honesty, unhistoric.
|
Norway28918 Posts
there was a war 91 years earlier, at the end of the napoleonic wars where Norway had been given as war-booty to Sweden (we basically changed from Danish to Swedish property because Sweden was on the side of the victors and they needed to be rewarded). The transition in 1905 was still entirely peaceful, the war in 1814 wasn't that rough either tbh, less than 1000 casualties total. ;p
|
On November 03 2017 06:56 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2017 06:39 SoSexy wrote:
Some points:
Indipendentists could start using some violence if they want to succeed. No state in human history achieved indipendency without bloodshed.
On the other hand, Rajoy surely played the best cards he could. It's an interesting event to watch unfold.
I don't understand why Catalonia doesn't do a tax protest. Their GDP is higher than Greece - they could say to Madrid 'indipendence or we stop paying taxes'. South of Spain would go down the drain without those moneys and what could Madrid do in response? Arrest 2,000,000 people? Surely they would need to build quite some prisons... Call me uneducated, but I have no clue how I would even "not pay my taxes". At least in Austria, not paying your taxes is only a "right" that can be executed by the bourgeois, not by someone whose taxes are those of an employed/consumer (which is why we also never hear about tax fraud by regular employees and why the consequences for tax fraud are so mild. You wouldn't hurt yourself by making laws against yourself, would you?)
It'd require businesses to not declare VAT and not pay the employee taxes. No sane business will ever do it given that the penalties can be immense. Individuals can't actually do much.
|
On November 03 2017 06:59 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2017 06:39 SoSexy wrote:
Some points:
Indipendentists could start using some violence if they want to succeed. No state in human history achieved indipendency without bloodshed.
On the other hand, Rajoy surely played the best cards he could. It's an interesting event to watch unfold.
I don't understand why Catalonia doesn't do a tax protest. Their GDP is higher than Greece - they could say to Madrid 'indipendence or we stop paying taxes'. South of Spain would go down the drain without those moneys and what could Madrid do in response? Arrest 2,000,000 people? Surely they would need to build quite some prisons... ?? Sending cops to beat grandmas a day of election and now having political prisoners, that's what you call doing the best he could ?
Sigh...I wasn't referring to that. I was referring to the fact that he never crumbled under pressure and managed to turn around the situation greatly. The night of the referendum the protest was about to snowball. Now it hasn't the same force anymore.
|
On November 03 2017 07:00 SoSexy wrote:
Your usage of the term 'bourgeoise' is, in all honesty, unhistoric.
What do you mean?
|
On November 03 2017 07:00 SoSexy wrote:
Your usage of the term 'bourgeoise' is, in all honesty, unhistoric.
The ones that can control whether they want to pay taxes or not are those who control most of the money, means of production and work either self-employed or employed in a position where they have a certain control over their own contract conditions. This sounds pretty much like a historical definition of the bourgeois to me.
On November 03 2017 07:02 warding wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2017 06:56 Big J wrote:On November 03 2017 06:39 SoSexy wrote:
Some points:
Indipendentists could start using some violence if they want to succeed. No state in human history achieved indipendency without bloodshed.
On the other hand, Rajoy surely played the best cards he could. It's an interesting event to watch unfold.
I don't understand why Catalonia doesn't do a tax protest. Their GDP is higher than Greece - they could say to Madrid 'indipendence or we stop paying taxes'. South of Spain would go down the drain without those moneys and what could Madrid do in response? Arrest 2,000,000 people? Surely they would need to build quite some prisons... Call me uneducated, but I have no clue how I would even "not pay my taxes". At least in Austria, not paying your taxes is only a "right" that can be executed by the bourgeois, not by someone whose taxes are those of an employed/consumer (which is why we also never hear about tax fraud by regular employees and why the consequences for tax fraud are so mild. You wouldn't hurt yourself by making laws against yourself, would you?) It'd require businesses to not declare VAT and not pay the employee taxes. No sane business will ever do it given that the penalties can be immense. Individuals can't actually do much.
Thanks, so the situation is pretty much the same as in Austria and therefore the mystery why they don't do a tax protest should be solved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
