Three cheers for democracy, peace and self-determination

A FORTNIGHT ago, while Joseph Farrell was introducing us to the writings of AG Macdonell, I took some leave and spent a few days in Spain. I was staying near Valencia when, by one of those fortuitous sequences of connection when the dominoes fall over in the right direction, I found myself in conversation with a Catalan poet and reading a translation of the manifesto he had just been working on.

This also was in the immediate aftermath of the funeral service for Paul Scott, the indefatigable writer, political activist, cultural commander, former soldier, diplomat and champion of Scottish independence. I had taken with me his little book from 1992, Scotland in Europe: Dialogue with a Sceptical Friend, and read it again in a small village 10 minutes into the mountains above the Mediterranean, a few hours south of Catalonia.

It’s dated, now, of course, but the central arguments are as valid as ever and even more urgently need to be heard and remembered.

Paul Scott puts the case as it was in 1992 succinctly: “Our culture has been denigrated and our self-confidence undermined. In these circumstances, it is not in the least surprising that many Scots have accepted the myth of English superiority, the virtues of the Mother of Parliaments and all the rest of it. It follows that they should feel we are lucky to be associated with them and that we should cling to the association.”

And further: “Given all the millions of pounds spent on propaganda, it is remarkable how many people stood up against the barrage and saw through it. In spite of all the pressures, our national self-confidence is increasing and cannot be denied much longer.”

More than a quarter of a century later, it’s salutary to drop back into the past and be reminded of the distance travelled, although, perhaps, some things haven’t changed so much. In this little book, Paul Scott also wrote this: “The fact is that the Conservative Party is not like other parties where the views of the members largely determine policy and where this imposes a certain consistency. With the Conservatives, the leader decides and can usually rely on party loyalty to get his or her own way. So under Heath, they are for constitutional change; under Thatcher and Major, they are against it. It is the English leadership which decides the policy, not the members in Scotland.”

In 2019, arguably, things haven’t changed so much as been magnified in every direction, almost beyond belief. Surely it’s no longer possible for so many folk to ignore what’s so glaringly obvious, so insulting to the thought of human potential being enhanced in the polity by any Westminster government?

At the end of his “dialogue”, Scott’s “sceptical friend” is persuaded: “I think my conclusion from all this discussion is that the Scots have allowed themselves to be tricked and conned into maintaining a constitutional arrangement which is harmful to their own interests, not for any good reasons, but to serve an out-of-date English illusion. We should take a firm decision now to reject it at the first opportunity and emerge into the modern world.”

It chimes with AG Macdonell’s sentiment, reported by Joseph Farrell (“My Scotland … and their England”, The National, April 15), that Scotland “has suffered in the past, and is suffering now, from too much England”.

So with that in mind, let me present this “Manifesto Catalonia”. It has been produced by the “Solidaritat i República País Valencià” (“Solidarity and Republic País Valencià”) a credo of republicanism and self-determination from an organisation from the País Valencià – which organises initiatives related to solidarity with Catalonia and for the freedom of those politically imprisoned, accused and exile – and the Comitè per l’Aliança de Treballadors i Pobles” (Committee for the Alliance of Workers and People), a national organisation in search of alliances between the working class and the different peoples within the Spanish State in order to open republican constitutional processes.

THE PEOPLE HAVE THE POWER – CALL FOR INTERNATIONAL SOLIDARITY WITH THE PEOPLE OF CATALONIA

THE democratic revolt by the people of Catalonia for the right to self-determination is showing up the democratic shortcomings of the Spanish state. The state is stuck on an authoritarian course, reflecting Francoist underpinnings, which is seriously undermining rights and liberties. Using the excuse of Spanish national unity, the institutional elites – starting with the monarchy – are promoting those politics, laws and economics which will protect their own privileges, whilst pitching anti-Catalan feeling and the general interest of the state against independence, as illustrated by the prosecution of the republican leaders.

“Controlling the principal mass media of communication, and using brute force, the regime of ’78 is attempting to thwart the most basic principles of democracy and seeking to block the empowerment of the Catalan people, the aim of which is to achieve a free, democratic and socially advanced republic, so that its example of democratic and civic radicalism, its passive resistance and civil disobedience, shall not spread more widely. But this mobilisation, persistent across time, with memories of involvement as well as valuable forms of democratic organisation and popular empowerment, does not just appeal to democrats and the other peoples of the Spanish state (particularly those of Valencia and the Balearic Islands).

‘IT also brings up-to-date the republican principles of liberty, equality and fraternity which form the basis of a Europe of workers and of the peoples, one opposed to the bureaucracy, exclusion and self-protection of the interests of Big Capital, which the European Union serves with its destruction of social and democratic rights, creating in turn the conditions for populist and fascist parties.

Faced with social and democratic reversal, the example of Catalonia has strengthened the consolidation of democratic blocks within which peoples, workers and progressive forces make possible the collective promotion of social rights and liberties – of access to cultural production and learning – of more democracy, greater capacity to take decisions and the redistribution of wealth and resources in the exercise of self-determination.

“To follow this road of communal struggle by the peoples and workers for social and democratic rights, and to articulate international solidarity with Catalonia in defence of democracy, we need first to proclaim the freedom of all those prisoners, accused and exiles.

“We need to denounce the resolution of the supreme court, overturn the government’s legislation restricting public demonstrations (the Mordassa law), a principal legal means of restricting freedom, and end Article 315.3, which criminalises the right to strike and is responsible for the prosecution of more than 300 workers. Article 544 of the Penal Code, which can make it an act of sedition to demonstrate, must also be ended.

It is in response to all of the above that today we call from the País Valencià for international solidarity with Catalonia in pursuit of the right to self-determination and liberty for the imprisoned, the accused and for those in political exile. We call to all democrats, those who love liberty, to the feminist movement, to the forces of culture, to workers’ movements and workers, to the young, and to organisations working for human rights.

“The cause of Catalonia is the cause of liberty, the cause of all of us.

“For international solidarity and bonds of fellow feeling between peoples!

“For self-determination and freedom!

“For today, as always, the people have the power!”

The manifesto has its immediate context and application but it seems to me, as with Paul Scott’s work, that however specific and historic it is, there is a universal application as well. And this is also true of the third passage I’d like to quote, to end on. It’s from an essay by an American colleague, Kim Stafford, from his book The Muses Among Us: Eloquent Listening and Other Pleasures of the Writer’s Craft (Athens, Georgia: University of Georgia Press, 2003). I’ll let Kim tell the story himself:

“When Dick Cheney was secretary of defence, he came to Portland, Oregon, to give a keynote address for an organisation called the World Affairs Council. Through some fluke in the selection process, the council had decided to give an award to two citizens from Portland: Phil Knight, CEO of Nike (for his contributions to world understanding through international business), and me (for my contributions to world understanding through teaching).

“The fact that my contributions had been quite modest somehow bypassed the selection committee, and there I was at the awards banquet head table with Phil, Dick, and several others. I realised as the plates were swept away that I was about to give a speech to Dick Cheney. Following his keynote, the mistress of ceremonies would invite Phil to the podium to accept his award, and then me. My acceptance speech would be my chance.

“Secretary Cheney chose as his keynote theme The Assets of Security, which turned out to include an array of innovative weaponry: catastrophic submarines, smart weapons operated from remote points, and other terrors.

“As I listened, another list began to form in my mind, what might be called ‘the assets of peace’—beginning with childhood, music, food, personal letters, compassion, parenting at home and across boundaries, the urge to dance, and poetry. As this list passed through my mind, a frightening mathematical formula presented itself.

“Dick Cheney had been my muse. Phil Knight, as I remember, accepted his award with a brief comment. He has many chances to address the multitude. But this was my one. When I rose to accept the award, my words came forth like this:

‘We live in a world where a few people could destroy us all. But a few people could not save us. The math doesn’t work that way. The only way we can be saved is for many people, and finally all people, to recognise and live by interdependence on Earth. Even though they are not funded as such, education, language study, the arts, and cultural exchanges among the divided populations of the world are the highest priority of our time. These are the assets of peace.’

“I couldn’t tell that my little speech made much of an impression on the secretary. But to measure its importance by his reaction alone would be foreign to what I was understanding there. It was not the leaders who needed to understand this from me, it was the leaders of the leaders – the people.”

And that, I think, is a perennial truth.