I don’t really understand that fixation in saying “prime minister” when Spain never had prime ministers, but presidents.
PM clearly stands for President Man.
It’s Spain, they speak Spanish there. It’s clearly Presidente Muchacho.
Because usually presidents are heads of state and heads of government that are only heads of government are usually prime ministers or chancellors. Spain just had to be funny about it.
Spain shooting itself in the foot.
The extent to which some are willing to go for the sake of power…
I’m not so sure this is so terrible. Preventing further Catalonian separatist sentiment would require some level of reconciliation, and this seems like a good first step. Having Puigdemont as some kind of martyr in Brussels is not a good look for Spain and has only really emboldened the pro-independence parties.
This deal gives Sanchez an excellent angle to force some reconciliatory concessions from the separatists as well. It’s basically killed any chance at a further referendum.
I don’t think so, he failed miserably to the separatists and has done nothing remarkable so far, so he had been rather forgotten; he is not a good martyr.
The media and nationalists focused it on one man, but the amnesty is for thousands of protesters (almost all peaceful) prosecuted for crimes as serious and absurd as rebellion. There is a reason why several human rights organizations have been denouncing for some time that the right to demonstrate is under threat.
Definitely
Not criminalizing people who had a big ol’ vote, the bedrock of any democracy. Truly horrifying!
Yes, in 1977 they gave an amnesty to mass murderers and torturers. And PP still goes out of their way to defend their legacy. Can you imagine that?
As an ignorant non-Spaniard, can anyone give a quick ELI5 why people are so strongly against the separatism that they show up with 100k+? I can’t imagine getting terribly annoyed at regions wanting to leave my country? Unless it would be my own region, I suppose.
It’s a bit of an aberration. It would be as if in America, the democrats had less senators than the republicans (but both sides short of a majority) and instead decided to ally themselves with American native parties to give them swaths of land and recognise their independence. It wouldn’t be “wrong” but it is a deeply cynical move. (Context, in their agreement with the Basque Country they are essentially giving more autonomy and allowing them to essentially have their own foreign policy, tantamount to recognising independence. Regarding Catalonia they not only supported the amnesty, but also a parliamentary debate on the possibility of checking if it’s constitutional to eventually think about doing a referendum on Catalonian independence) (also, they didn’t even secure a budget agreement, they just agreed to invest Sanchez as a prime minister, so they could fail every budget he tries to pass)
Edit: clarified indigenous parties for American native parties
You forgot that it would be like if Democrats had their own culture and language for centuries, had been integrated in the country by force, saw centuries of attempted cultural genocide, including at points from being forbidden from using their own names or speaking their own language in public, and even after the country becoming a democracy being forced to allow the Republican barbaric practices. Oh, and when a democratic majority tried to make the country work on a more federal model, the army rebelled, allied with the literal Nazis, committed unspeakable crimes, ruled the country with iron fist for decades, got an amnesty for all those crimes when they lost power, and the Republican’s would still insist on keeping statues and place names named after them (well Democrats can easily imagine the last one, some aspects of fascism never change)
Youre mistaking the democrats for the American natives?
I get the parliamentary kerfuffle, but I kinda mean opposition against secession in general. As I understand it, it wouldn’t so much be like giving Native Americans random swaths of land, but giving the people living on specific swaths of land (which might be mostly Native Americans) that land, and no more influence over how the rest of the land is governed. Sorta like allowing California to become its own country, I suppose - why would other Americans have a problem with that, if the Californians wanted that?
The real problem for me is the cynicism of the move, it ain’t just selling of ideals to get into power, but quite literally parts of the country
