Spain sacks Catalan Government after declaring independence

Source Reuters

BARCELONA/MADRID (Reuters) - The Madrid government sacked Catalonia’s president and dismissed its parliament on Friday, hours after the region declared itself an independent nation in Spain’s gravest political crisis since the return of democracy four decades ago.

A new regional election will be held in Catalonia on Dec. 21, Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy said in a televised address on a day of high drama.

As well as removing Carles Puigdemont as head of the autonomous region, he also fired its police chief and said central government ministries would take over the Catalan administration.

“Spain is living through a sad day,” Rajoy said. “We believe it is urgent to listen to Catalan citizens, to all of them, so that they can decide their future and nobody can act outside the law on their behalf.”

As he spoke, thousands of independence supporters packed the Sant Jaume Square in front of the Catalan regional headquarters in Barcelona, their earlier joyful mood somewhat dampened by Rajoy’s actions.

In a stunning show of defiance of Madrid, the Catalan parliament had voted in the afternoon to make a unilateral declaration of independence.

Despite the emotions and celebrations inside and outside the building, it was a futile gesture as shortly afterwards the Spanish Senate in Madrid approved the imposition of direct rule.

Several European countries, including France and Germany, and the United States also rejected the independence declaration and said they supported Rajoy’s efforts to preserve Spain’s unity.

The crisis has now reached a new and possibly dangerous level as independence supporters have called for a campaign of disobedience. Immediately after news of the vote, Spanish shares and bonds were sold off, reflecting business concern over the turmoil.

ALARM AROUND EUROPE

Catalonia held an independence referendum on Oct. 1 which was declared illegal by Madrid and marred by heavy-handed national police tactics to stop it.

Although the referendum endorsed independence, it drew only a 43 percent turnout as Catalans who oppose independence largely boycotted it.

The independence push has caused deep resentment around Spain. The chaos has also prompted a flight of business from Catalonia and alarmed European leaders who fear the crisis could fan separatist sentiment around the continent.

Catalonia is one of Spain’s most prosperous regions and already has a high degree of autonomy. But it has a litany of historic grievances, exacerbated during the 1939-1975 Franco dictatorship, when its culture and politics were suppressed.

In Barcelona, Jordi Mercade, a 32-year-old engineer celebrating with friends, said he had mixed feelings about the day’s events.

“It’s a day for history but many of us here also know we are not independent. They have the force. We are proud to having declared independence but we know this is not something definitive.”

@FireEmblem_Man:

Holy shit

I was wondering when this broke on Gamespot. I know for some Trump is more important but this is not good but anyone thinking war is clearly not up to date.

No one wants to recognize Catalonia and when no ones want to recognize you as a independent country, then you are FUBAR.

Thought we had a user who lived in or around Barcelona. Be curious to hear how people around him feel about this.

Wow, this is huge. Even if nothing comes of it, the action itself sort of sets a precedent. I suppose technically Brexit was the precedent (at least in modern times), but wow...wonder what else will follow.

Lots of blood.

you think so? Is it violent already?

I don't know, did they want this independence that badly? I am not familiar with Catalonian's attitude in this matter.

Ok, a little melodramatic. However, a large chunk of people wanted independence, and the asswipes in Spanish government would not allow them to. Complete bullshit in my eyes, they should be allowed a legal vote, fucking dictatorship to some extent.

No, they did not want their independence this bad. If you consider that only 42% voted despite 90% of that went for their independence.

Also what happened is not as bad as some may want to make it. While the main Spanish government have used §150 in their laws, it´s not to remove Catalonia's government, it´s to make them call an election.

Which is not a bad idea, that way Spain can see if it was really only 42% or there is a silent majority who have kept quiet and does not think the same.

@mrbojangles25: It’s not really the same as Brexit. Brexit was seen as the lower clsss plebs wanting an out from the elitist upper class of the EU, while Catalonia separating is essentially over the fact that Catalonia is the “rich” part of Spain and the residents there supposedly are tired of paying for the plebs in the rest of Spain and would rather go it alone. There won’t be a civil war or anything like that.

You may want to read up on the history. It´s a bit more complex than just the "rich part wanting to be left alone from the poor part" Catalonia has always been an "independent" region and it dates back as far as the 11th century. Also check out what Franco did.

@Jacanuk: I know all of that, it’s just the current separatism stemming from Catalonia is entirely for monetary and economics reasons.

You are correct that the economic collapse is the current black , but there is a lot more behind the separatists.

Not to mention that a lot of the major companies are all fleeing Catalonia right now because of this, so they are standing to lose a lot.

Also the latest is Spain has made the VP in Catalonia the president so it's not all bad.

43 % turnout should in itself be enough to void the voting...

I wish we had that rule.....low turn out would have saved us.

Well, considering the BS that was happening during the voting, I don't think we can really say that means that much.

Should have one. Certain voting events are important enough to consider such a rule I think.

What BS? How the police interrupted it?

Keep making up facts , kinda sad but i guess you believe it yourself.

If Wikipedia is to be trusted, some elections have had less than 50% voter turnout. Although in later times, it would be the election in 1996 that should have been redone. 2000 and 1988 barely passed with 50.3%.

It's sad to read that since 1916, including that election, the voter turnout has only been over 60% 5 times or so. 3 of them being in the 1960's.

I couldn't find that much history on voter turnout in Norway, but every parliament election since 2000 have had 75%++ turnout.

Wikipedia as a source is not always the best.

And low turnout is depended on your political wish. Is it true that in terms of % its lower than in some previous elections, sure but at the same time is it true in actual ballots counted. No, in fact it´s at the highest it´s ever been.

But let´s take a look.

In 2008 62.2% VEP Voted in the presidential election or 132,609,063 Total Votes.

In 2012 58.6% VEP voted in the presidential election or 130,292,355 Total votes.

In 2016 60.2% VEP Voted in the presidential election or 138,846,571 Total Votes.

As you can see the total amount of votes is actually higher. But i know some in here love to go by headlines and CNN has a problem with bias.

Also a thing to note.

Early results in some of the key states that propelled President-elect Donald Trump to his win reveal that more voters cast ballots this year than in 2012, even though overall turnout was down. The 2016 presidential race, nearly 9.4 million ballots were cast, compared to 8.5 million in 2012. Michigan saw 4.8 million compared to 4.7 million four years ago. And in North Carolina, the 4.7 million ballots this year was about 138,000 more than last cycle.

It's laughable to me that anyone states the US doesn't have low voter turn out.

With the population increasing, naturally the amount of people voting should go up. And don't accuse me for going with CNN headlines...

Did not accuse you of anything, i pointed out that some posters do enjoy those cnn headlines and fall for them. Also did i read that correct a threat?

And yes the population increased but now you are making the same mistake the anti-trumpers do. They look at the "lower" % and contribute that to Trump. When in fact more people got to the polls compared to 2012 and 08. And as you can see by the number in 2012 , not even a "popular" president could get the increase in population to also mean the same increase in voters.

The low voter turnout didn't have anything to do with Trump. I never said it had. I said that, including the 1916 election, only 5 times the voter turnout have been over 60%. The last election was pretty much average in voter turnout by first glance at the wikipedia numbers. And no threat intended.

Reading more into it, it looks like the more educated ones votes more than the uneducated do. Women more than men.

You are certainly correct that Americans have no been eager to go exercise their right to vote, which is sad but a lot of that also comes from the fact that opposite Europe, you don´t automatically get a card to go vote, you have to go do something active and then you can vote.

A lot of the polling stations have closed doors unless you are registered.

So overall there is always been a low turnout but that is not what LJS and others meant, they meant in terms of the 2016 election and that this “low” turnout somehow made his win less legitimate.

Yup, educated voters tend to be more active which is no wonder, university has a good culture of learning people and making them understand just how important it is to go vote. No vote no right to complain.

Don't tell me what I meant. You are wrong AGAIN. Stop getting butt hurt over perceived slights and criticism to trump.

Everybody know what you meant. Playing the victim when you put your foot in your mouth gets old.

Your voting system is weird and backwards if you ask me.

What country do you reside in?

@n64dd: One of the old Viking countries.

You wont hear me disagree there.

It's kinda crazy that in a country as technology advanced as America the voting system is taken from the 1960´s

But then again Equifax lost 148 million americans data and no one seem to give a shit.

Norway plans and finance roads just like we did straight after WWII. It means a single road project is cut into several smaller projects with insecure financing, resulting often in part of the roads being upgraded, before the work stops for a couple of years.

Also quite often it is done so poorly that the first job has to be done again.

Haven't several thousand people had their identity stolen because of the Equifax data breach? That's damn serious.

That is kinda insane with the roads , especially thinking about the "oil money"

Yup, the data Equifax lost was Social Security number, CC, Birthdates , driving licenses , the whole deal we all use when applying for loans, credit cards, mortgages etc... and worst bit is they got in by using Admin Admin and then going through a Apache bug that was fixed ages ago, but the equifax IT staff "forgot" to update.

It later came out that the head of the IT department was a friend and got hired because of that, he had zero prior or current IT experience.

A lot of that money is kept outside the country. It's so much it could easily wreck our economy.

Hold the IT department or whoever is responsible for "admin Admin" to be held personally responsible for it. A fine large enough to eat up the profit for the last 5 years or so.

If only that was possible. Equifax have slipped through the cracks during all this Trump coverage.

And the leaders have sold their stocks before the news and earned their bacon home.

I honestly don't know enough about this situation to make any reasonable comments. I know some countries have provinces that have bordered on independence. Quebec in Canada, Scotland in the UK, etc. But usually it's not to their benefit to separate as they lose economic influence, clout and power. However, often times they can carve out a decent representation to keep their identity.

Gonna suck even more for you guys if this is true US govt makes it harder to sue corporates over poor IT security

@superbuuman: If that is true yes that is going to suck.

Instead of making it easier and also making sure that Americans have their most sensitive data protected , they go in the other direction.

I guess that is the problem having 60 year old white guys in power. They are still getting used to the cellphone being there.