Org Mobile Site
Thread: Catalonia
Originally Posted by Viking:
That part shows trade.
A trade deficit of 12 billion Euros on the Spanish side, yes.That part shows trade.
Also updated the above post since I didn't want to double post.
Originally Posted by Husar:
A trade deficit of 12 billion Euros on the Spanish side, yes.
Yes, and that sounds like a problem for the rest of Spain, not Catalonia.A trade deficit of 12 billion Euros on the Spanish side, yes.
Originally Posted by Viking:
As Spain has benefited from Catalonia the entire time. Some of those soldiers were Catalan; those Spanish politicians would have acted with a democratic mandate in part given to them by Catalans, and some of them may have been Catalans themselves.
If there is an imbalance in contributions, you can demand reimbursement.
You must realize this is also an argument for monetary reparations to former colonized peoples by the developed world.As Spain has benefited from Catalonia the entire time. Some of those soldiers were Catalan; those Spanish politicians would have acted with a democratic mandate in part given to them by Catalans, and some of them may have been Catalans themselves.
If there is an imbalance in contributions, you can demand reimbursement.
Originally Posted by Viking:
Yes, and that sounds like a problem for the rest of Spain, not Catalonia.
Why doesn't Spain want to get rid of Catalonia then? Yes, and that sounds like a problem for the rest of Spain, not Catalonia.
Not sure what you're trying to argue here.
I might as well argue that getting beaten by the Spanish police is entirely a problem of the Catalans, not the Spanish or the EU, but then again I'm not such an ass. Note that while I argued before that the intervention was justified in general, I didn't mean breaking individual peoples' noses for no reason.
Originally Posted by Montmorency:
You must realize this is also an argument for monetary reparations to former colonized peoples by the developed world.
I don't quite see what you are getting at. In this context, the reimbursements would be to compensate for Spain's investments in Catalonia that it can no longer expect be able reap rewards from to the same extent due to Catalonia departing. The closest colonial parallel would the former colonies asking for reimbursement from an empire that disowned them after leeching on their resources. If you are the one asking for independence, it is meaningless to set conditions for your independence. What you could have done, would be to ask for reimbursement in order to stay in the empire and not demand independence.You must realize this is also an argument for monetary reparations to former colonized peoples by the developed world.
Originally Posted by Husar:
Not sure what you're trying to argue here.
That Catalonia doesn't owe anything to Spain because of the trade balance, naturally; unless Spain has privileged Catalonia somehow on the markets.Not sure what you're trying to argue here.
Originally Posted by Viking:
That Catalonia doesn't owe anything to Spain because of the trade balance, naturally; unless Spain has privileged Catalonia somehow on the markets.
And Spain doesn't owe Catalonia independence.That Catalonia doesn't owe anything to Spain because of the trade balance, naturally; unless Spain has privileged Catalonia somehow on the markets.
Originally Posted by Viking:
I don't quite see what you are getting at. In this context, the reimbursements would be to compensate for Spain's investments in Catalonia that it can no longer expect be able reap rewards from to the same extent due to Catalonia departing. The closest colonial parallel would the former colonies asking for reimbursement from an empire that disowned them after leeching on their resources. If you are the one asking for independence, it is meaningless to set conditions for your independence. What you could have done, would be to ask for reimbursement in order to stay in the empire and not demand independence.
Why does independence in itself clear that "balance"?I don't quite see what you are getting at. In this context, the reimbursements would be to compensate for Spain's investments in Catalonia that it can no longer expect be able reap rewards from to the same extent due to Catalonia departing. The closest colonial parallel would the former colonies asking for reimbursement from an empire that disowned them after leeching on their resources. If you are the one asking for independence, it is meaningless to set conditions for your independence. What you could have done, would be to ask for reimbursement in order to stay in the empire and not demand independence.
Originally Posted by Husar:
And Spain doesn't owe Catalonia independence.
Like Catalonia doesn't owe Spain remaining a part of the country, I'd think.And Spain doesn't owe Catalonia independence.
Originally Posted by Montmorency:
Why does independence in itself clear that "balance"?
It doesn't.Why does independence in itself clear that "balance"?
This is about the agent wanting change giving what they owe so that they can claim that they do not owe the other party anything any more and can go ahead with the change in good conscience.
If you are the one being owed, then you are on the other side of the equation and the situation is reversed. To declare independence in good conscience, you don't need to give anything; it's the other side that needs to pay up before they can go ahead with a change that you do not want.
Originally Posted by :
Like Catalonia doesn't owe Spain not declaring independence, I'd think.
So it's a question of power. As always? Like Catalonia doesn't owe Spain not declaring independence, I'd think.
Originally Posted by :
If you are the one being owed, then you are on the other side of the equation and the situation is reversed.
This implies that there is a way to account for "what is owed", in which case it can be applied to any international relationship.If you are the one being owed, then you are on the other side of the equation and the situation is reversed.
And "other side" implies that the parties have already been determined, but this is one of the things still under dispute.
Originally Posted by Montmorency:
So it's a question of power. As always?
I'd think so. Power, and its application or absence thereof. So it's a question of power. As always?
Originally Posted by :
This implies that there is a way to account for "what is owed", in which case it can be applied to any international relationship.
That's ultimately a matter of definition. The main point is that if it is considered that Catalonia owes something to the rest of Spain, it could give that to the rest of Spain, if possible (and if it is not possible for Catalonia to give what it is considered owing, then you can argue that it is not fair to have this impossible repayment as a precondition for Catalonia's independence).This implies that there is a way to account for "what is owed", in which case it can be applied to any international relationship.
Ultimately, the core of this argument is about what could be done in terms of repayment, not what should be done. It doesn't lead to the conclusion that former colonial powers should pay their former colonies; it's about Catalonia clearing its name, so to speak.
Originally Posted by :
And "other side" implies that the parties have already been determined, but this is one of the things still under dispute.
Not sure what you are thinking of here.And "other side" implies that the parties have already been determined, but this is one of the things still under dispute.
Originally Posted by :
That's ultimately a matter of definition. The main point is that if it is considered that Catalonia owes something to the rest of Spain, it could give that to the rest of Spain, if possible (and if it is not possible for Catalonia to give what it is considered owing, then you can argue that it is not fair to have this impossible repayment as a precondition for Catalonia's independence).
Ultimately, the core of this argument is about what could be done in terms of repayment, not what should be done. It doesn't lead to the conclusion that former colonial powers should pay their former colonies; it's about Catalonia clearing its name, so to speak.
If it's a matter of "could", not "should", then isn't it irrelevant to the matter? That's ultimately a matter of definition. The main point is that if it is considered that Catalonia owes something to the rest of Spain, it could give that to the rest of Spain, if possible (and if it is not possible for Catalonia to give what it is considered owing, then you can argue that it is not fair to have this impossible repayment as a precondition for Catalonia's independence).
Ultimately, the core of this argument is about what could be done in terms of repayment, not what should be done. It doesn't lead to the conclusion that former colonial powers should pay their former colonies; it's about Catalonia clearing its name, so to speak.
Originally Posted by :
Not sure what you are thinking of here.
Putting cart before horse, taking Catalonian agency for granted in musing a transaction between partners.Not sure what you are thinking of here.
Originally Posted by Montmorency:
If it's a matter of "could", not "should", then isn't it irrelevant to the matter?
Husar's argument seemed to be that Catalonia cannot declare independence unilaterally because it owes Spain so much. If this is your objection, you could just require that Catalonia should repay what it owes at some point, as far as it able to (and if Spain would not accept this repayment out of principle because it does not recognise Catalonia's independence, then that would be Spain's issue).If it's a matter of "could", not "should", then isn't it irrelevant to the matter?
Originally Posted by :
Putting cart before horse, taking Catalonian agency for granted in musing a transaction between partners.
Again I am afraid I am a bit confused. Are you questioning the concept of 'Catalan agency' in a different manner than you would question e.g. the concept of 'Spanish agency'?Putting cart before horse, taking Catalonian agency for granted in musing a transaction between partners.
Originally Posted by Viking:
Husar's argument seemed to be that Catalonia cannot declare independence unilaterally because it owes Spain so much. If this is your objection, you could just require that Catalonia should repay what it owes at some point, as far as it able to (and if Spain would not accept this repayment out of principle because it does not recognise Catalonia's independence, then that would be Spain's issue).
I thought he was disputing that contemporary negative net revenue outlays between Catalonia and the rest of Spain justified Catalonian separatism. Husar's argument seemed to be that Catalonia cannot declare independence unilaterally because it owes Spain so much. If this is your objection, you could just require that Catalonia should repay what it owes at some point, as far as it able to (and if Spain would not accept this repayment out of principle because it does not recognise Catalonia's independence, then that would be Spain's issue).
Originally Posted by :
Again I am afraid I am a bit confused. Are you questioning the concept of 'Catalan agency' in a different manner than you would question e.g. the concept of 'Spanish agency'?
Just that you need equal partners to make that kind of settlement. Let's abstractly say that a unilateral offer to sweeten the separation of parties isn't valid if a potential party rejects the existence or legitimacy of such a negotiation.Again I am afraid I am a bit confused. Are you questioning the concept of 'Catalan agency' in a different manner than you would question e.g. the concept of 'Spanish agency'?
Originally Posted by Montmorency:
I thought he was disputing that contemporary negative net revenue outlays between Catalonia and the rest of Spain justified Catalonian separatism.
Yes, he was, because that is one reason cited by the Catalans.I thought he was disputing that contemporary negative net revenue outlays between Catalonia and the rest of Spain justified Catalonian separatism.
Originally Posted by Viking:
As Spain has benefited from Catalonia the entire time. Some of those soldiers were Catalan....
Indeed...As Spain has benefited from Catalonia the entire time. Some of those soldiers were Catalan....
Tough javelin infantry
Does it all matter, Spain profitted yes, always has. But economy stopped being important when Madrid decided to go all berserk on Catalonians. Madrid's only option is more violence and that will only make things worse for Madrid. They are idiots and have a big problem, unlike Catalonia the rest of Spain isn't self-sufficient. Eurocrats also have - problem, yet another, champagne on that! Another axe-cut in the tree, pieces in our time
A large area voted overwhelmingly to leave. They should be allowed to leave. I imagine that Sudan did not constitutionally have the ability to let South Sudan leave, and yet they did. South Sudan is also in a much worse financial position yet they'd rather freedom. Their choice.
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk:
A large area voted overwhelmingly to leave. They should be allowed to leave. I imagine that Sudan did not constitutionally have the ability to let South Sudan leave, and yet they did. South Sudan is also in a much worse financial position yet they'd rather freedom. Their choice.
It's then up to the Catalans to make their independence real. If they can't, there's no should. Self determination consists of two components.A large area voted overwhelmingly to leave. They should be allowed to leave. I imagine that Sudan did not constitutionally have the ability to let South Sudan leave, and yet they did. South Sudan is also in a much worse financial position yet they'd rather freedom. Their choice.
Originally Posted by Pannonian:
It's then up to the Catalans to make their independence real. If they can't, there's no should. Self determination consists of two components.
Sure. But then the rest of Spain should not be undermining them by sending in troops and making threats. It's then up to the Catalans to make their independence real. If they can't, there's no should. Self determination consists of two components.
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk:
Sure. But then the rest of Spain should not be undermining them by sending in troops and making threats.
Sure, but then they shouldn't be undermining Spain by seceding.Sure. But then the rest of Spain should not be undermining them by sending in troops and making threats.
Originally Posted by Husar:
Were they all the richest region in the country before they gained independence?
Slovenia was. I believe Croatia came next in its economic development. Were they all the richest region in the country before they gained independence?
Originally Posted by Husar:
When did they gain independence and from whom?
Do I have to lecture you on history? Google it.When did they gain independence and from whom?
Originally Posted by Husar:
I'd say a region that is at the bottom end of the country it is in has better chances for improvement than one that is already at the top.
First of all, this is an arbitrary statement that needs statistical substantiation.I'd say a region that is at the bottom end of the country it is in has better chances for improvement than one that is already at the top.
Second of all, since they were different in their development and now they are (more or less) prosperous countries, the starting point doesn't seem to matter.
Originally Posted by Husar:
Sure, but then they shouldn't be undermining Spain by seceding.
So... they are free to choose what they want as long as they choose to preserve the stats quo.Sure, but then they shouldn't be undermining Spain by seceding.
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk:
Sure. But then the rest of Spain should not be undermining them by sending in troops and making threats.
If their independence has any substance, they should be able to resist or sidestep any such moves. They opted not to sidestep by unilaterally declaring independence without outside or Spanish support. If they can't then resist Spanish action, what practical worth is their declared independence?Sure. But then the rest of Spain should not be undermining them by sending in troops and making threats.
Originally Posted by Gilrandir:
Slovenia was. I believe Croatia came next in its economic development.
Do I have to lecture you on history? Google it.
First of all, this is an arbitrary statement that needs statistical substantiation.
Second of all, since they were different in their development and now they are (more or less) prosperous countries, the starting point doesn't seem to matter.
Slovenia was. I believe Croatia came next in its economic development.
Do I have to lecture you on history? Google it.
First of all, this is an arbitrary statement that needs statistical substantiation.
Second of all, since they were different in their development and now they are (more or less) prosperous countries, the starting point doesn't seem to matter.
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk:
So... they are free to choose what they want as long as they choose to preserve the stats quo.
You're right, if they secede the world will be a better place.So... they are free to choose what they want as long as they choose to preserve the stats quo.
Originally Posted by Husar:
You're right, if they secede the world will be a better place.
And if they don't it wouldn't?You're right, if they secede the world will be a better place.
Originally Posted by Pannonian:
They opted not to sidestep by unilaterally declaring independence without outside or Spanish support.
Unilaterally, but not unanimously. This might matter if it comes to popular resistance.They opted not to sidestep by unilaterally declaring independence without outside or Spanish support.
Originally Posted by Gilrandir:
And if they don't it wouldn't?
Unilaterally, but not unanimously. This might matter if it comes to popular resistance.
Nothing is ever unanimous. But it's in their own hands, rather than blaming others like rory likes to do (ie. blaming the Spanish for intervening whilst blaming the EU for not intervening).And if they don't it wouldn't?
Unilaterally, but not unanimously. This might matter if it comes to popular resistance.
Originally Posted by Gilrandir:
And if they don't it wouldn't?
I was trying to secede from this thread because looking for your statistics prevents me from getting actually important work done.And if they don't it wouldn't?
Can't you just let me go? All I want is some self-determination regarding my being part of this thread...
Originally Posted by Montmorency:
Just that you need equal partners to make that kind of settlement. Let's abstractly say that a unilateral offer to sweeten the separation of parties isn't valid if a potential party rejects the existence or legitimacy of such a negotiation.
Spain could formally interpret the offer as coming from an autonomous region rather than an independent country.Just that you need equal partners to make that kind of settlement. Let's abstractly say that a unilateral offer to sweeten the separation of parties isn't valid if a potential party rejects the existence or legitimacy of such a negotiation.
At any rate, the point was not to argue that a reimbursement was a probable outcome. The context was the 'fairness' of Catalonia seceding, not what Catalonia could do to get Spain to recognise its independence.
Offer without either side losing face should be easy to make. Staying part of the kingdom as a seperate nation?
We know what will happened. Happened before. Pretty villages burn nicely...
https://youtu.be/QqCmFRvO8fQ
https://youtu.be/2_dYaAtHwws
https://youtu.be/QqCmFRvO8fQ
https://youtu.be/2_dYaAtHwws
Thread Ratings provided by
Thread Ratings (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO