Scottish Lessons; Catalonia Next

Scotland’s vote was a victory of democracy: 84% of the potential voters, voted. Nothing will be as it was before. The “No, tanks”, I mean, “No, thanks” scared rabbits won, with an impressive 55%. The “No, Thanks” were helped by enormous propaganda from the London elite, and promises never meant to keep. Yet, the debate is just starting. Worldwide.

It was independence from the London plutocracy which was demanded, and partially obtained further, even before voting, when London finally panicked, and offered whatever the Scots wanted.

It was pretty much plutocracy against Scotland: the financial markets rallied after they learned Scotland was nominally to stay subjugated to wealth friendly Westminster. Sir Mick Jagger and his fiscal paradises won (“Please to meet you, hope you guess my name…“).

The real fun is going to be when Catalonia proceeds with its independence referendum. This is going to be less civilized. The right wing Spanish Prime Minister is much less reasonable than David Cameron, the British PM. Of course, this is because Cameron was (erroneously, as he found out) sure to win, whereas the Spanish PM knows that Catalonia will vote for independence: a recent march for independence had 1.8 million Catalans in the streets, more than voted for independence in Scotland.

And the present French Prime Minister, the head strong Valls, in charge of saving France from herself, is Catalan born and raised. The French PM went to Catalonia, and made vibrant pro-European speeches there, in Catalan. For centuries, Catalonia, freed by Renovated Roman Emperor Charlemagne’s armies, was part of “France” (whatever “France” means), while Spain enjoyed an horrendous Islamist occupation. In practice, that meant Catalonia was independent for centuries… Until the German, Italian and Spanish fascists conquered the Catalan nation by force, massacres and gore, during their war against the Spanish republic (1936-1939).

Nationalism is obsolete. Yet direct democracy ought to be the future. There was an important transnational component in the Scottish vote, all for “independence”. Unsurprisingly, the anti-European hysteria in London pushed Scots away, and towards Europe.

“Independence” is all relative, as the Scottish National Party, like the Catalan one, is very pro-European.

In Athens, people had power: they voted themselves on the laws they wanted. Athenians did not “vote” through an oligarchy supposedly, and somehow, representing them. The “democracies” we have now are not democracies, but representative oligarchies. It’s joining insult to injury to call the regimes we suffer under, “democracies”.

Only the Swiss have a direct legislative democracy. Each of the 26 Cantons, has its own Constitution.

The independence referendum brought considerable concessions from London to Scotland. At least rhetorically. The UK now ought to equip itself with a federal constitution. No doubt that if London does not deliver, London will be punished.

Scotland is already a nation. Should it be a state? The average state in the USA is of the same size: 6 million people. The least to do is to give Scotland much more independence than the average American state enjoys, considering Scotland’s independent history (and resistance to the Romans, who never conquered it, although they tried, hard).

This is arguably even more true with Catalonia (more or less founded by Carthage, Catalonia was long independent, or part of the Frankish empire; Barcelona is named after Hamilcar Barca, a prominent Carthaginian plutocrat).

In general, as We The People vote by themselves, for themselves, the present oligarchies will have to make concessions. Thus just driving towards real democracy will have immediate effects, as it did in Scotland.

The lesson will resonate around the world. Time to ask for more than what the Scots already have. More independence from the powers that be.

Patrice Ayme’

Tags: , , , , , ,

15 Responses to “Scottish Lessons; Catalonia Next”

  1. Patrice Ayme Says:

    (Sent to NYT]

    We need direct, real democracy, as in Athens, or Switzerland. We don’t need to be governed by a few hundred people.
    So called “parliamentary democracy” is a contradiction in the terms, when it means only a few professional representatives do all the talking.


  2. dominique deux Says:

    The Plutos have found, to their delight, that promises deliver a lot of bang for no buck at all, provided you’re not naff enough to keep them.

    See the Gattaz comedy act in France.

    I am not convinced direct democracy and referenda are one and the same, or referenda are in any way “superior” to elective representation. In France, the Constitution lists the two as expressions of the people’s will, carefully eschewing any hierarchy. In Germany, bad memories helping, referenda are outlawed, period. And the 2005 referendum has sadly illustrated how a coalition of mutually hateful yet cuddly extremes will always race with a large head start against a center-of-the-road proposal.

    Not to mention the absurdly reductive notion of a binary answer to a complex question, the unavoidable polarization and deflection of the public debate, and the monopoly of the executive on the drafting of the question put to the ballot. In that respect, at least the Swiss system provides for the people itself drafting referenda, a huge improvement.


  3. Alex Jones Says:

    The wheel continues to move in the direction of localism, and nothing will stop it.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Hopefully, Alex, hopefully. Whereas you focus on “localism”, and I agree with the fact it’s desirable, I prefer to call attention to DIRECT DEMOCRACY, that is, REAL DEMOCRACY… Because it’s more general.

      Take for example England. Suppose the English voted in a referendum on fiscal paradise, aka, tax havens associated to the UK (Anglo-Normand isles, Ile of man, Virgin Islands, etc…). They may well vote that they are OK. Yet, the same referendum, say on ALL tax havens (Monaco, Lichtenstein, etc.), on a EUROPEAN scale would probably vote them out.

      In another example, a referendum in Monaco on Monaco tax haven would be a yes… And maybe even on a French scale. But if all the EU voted, Monaco would be asked to change its ways.

      California voted in a referendum to tax the rich, turning the tide. But if the vote had been suitably RIGGED BY LOCALISM, that would never had passed. It passed, because third term governor Brown threatened to close ALL the parks, if California did not get enough tax money, scaring the people into anti-celebritism.


      • dominique deux Says:

        Yes indeed. In addition, the “wheel towards localism” cohabits with a “wheel towards upscalism” on specific issues. The outside world is an hostile one, and foreign policy, defense and (or including) border protection against various dumping practices cannot be efficient at the local scale Insisting on it is an excellent way of giving a free rein to the dominant slaving/polluting empires..

        The (EU) notion of “subsidiarity” sums it up perfectly, even though its application is far from perfect.


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Real (direct) democracy can now be applied on an imperial scale (EU-USA). And it’s fully compatible with localism. The Roman empire was VERY local. OK, I’m extremely rushed, and I have to rush in an essay/answer to the kitten problem. I’ll be back at the Terminator said.


      • Alex Jones Says:

        I consider all powers should be devolved down to localities, so that even issues of tax would be decided at the local level with no structure above it such as Californian governors or the European Union voting it out. The idea of localism as I see it is that the state or nation or entities like the EU or UN would be abolished.


        • dominique deux Says:

          Your consideration is duly noted; many, including myself, are not in agreement.


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          So that Putin, or the Jihadists, or Goldman Sachs would reign? 😉
          That’s the whole problem.
          One cannot decree the goodness of man, urbi et orbi. Even the Pope does not believe that (he prays for it, that’s different).

          The law has to be harder than man. And that means the USA, the EU, the UN.
          I may try to answer this in more details, in an essay.


          • Alex Jones Says:

            You may know I am a fan of Heraclitus, thus I answer:

            106. To Nature (All/One) all things are beautiful, good, and right. Men, on the other hand, deem some things right and others wrong.

            and in those that go against the common patterns of Nature their doom is already known:

            72. Fire in its progress will catch all things by surprise and judge them.

            ISIS for instance is already beginning to falter as more and more people and nations begin to oppose them. ISIS only has to do one act of hubris against the USA by attacking it and the USA will be onto them like a hungry cat on a mouse.


          • Patrice Ayme Says:

            Daech (“Caliphate”) faltering? They just made a huge offensive in Syria, towards Turkey. Today.
            Heraclitus is interesting, indeed, keep on bringing him on. Reminds of the (latter written) Bible:
            ” their doom is already known:

            72. Fire in its progress will catch all things by surprise and judge them.”

            …Can be found, in this EXACT words, in several places in the Qur’an (I have written and published, long ago, an 11,000 words essay on Qur’an quotes…)

            The French Air Force destroyed a number of storage facilities of Daech in the preceding days…

            What’s right to man is what makes man win over nature, namely make Nature a tool.


  4. Alex Jones Says:

    Alex Jones:
    I am sure there will be another occasion when the world is more enlightened and Scotland will succeed in becoming a nation state.


  5. Patrice Ayme Says:

    Patrice Ayme @ Alex Jones
    Indeed. Scotland will succeed in becoming a nation state.

    The real fun is going to be under STURGEON (!), negotiating with London, now that the SALMON has taken to the high seas. (What is it with all these fishy names?)

    Yet, the more powers Scotland gains, the more it will want more. Indeed Catalonia has already the powers Scotland wants, and Catalonia wants even more. It wants independence. From Madrid. And there is no reason it should not get it. (Aside from frantic opposition in Madrid.)

    The real problem is European defense. As it is European defense rests on the UK and France (both running hefty deficits, stealthy or not). As it is the UK nuclear subs don’t have (yet) to flee to France. Bu the problem remains, while Putin cools his heels (he is waiting for winter).


What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: