Monday, June 20, 2016

Watching the Spanish Debate

I recently became fascinated by the fact that in many international public opinion polls the leftiest, cuckiest answers are given by Spaniards. Spain is also one of the few European countries without any "far right" parties of note. Why?

In a few days there will be a parliamentary election in Spain, and to satisfy my curiosity, as well as to keep my ability to understand spoken Spanish from getting rusty, I watched a recent 2-hour debate between the leaders of that country's four main parties.


The current prime minister is the center-right Popular Party chief Mariano Rajoy, a man who looks like an aging, bookish hidalgo. Not a don Quijote type - too tame for that - but noble. Next to him on stage stood Pedro Sanchez, the leader of Spain's socialists, who is visually a Latin lover/soap opera hunk type of guy. On the left end of the podium was Pablo Iglesias, the leader of the leftist United We Can party. In crumpled jeans, without a jacket and sporting a ponytail he looked like a radical Hispanic student activist from a high-end US university. He may be the smartest one of the bunch though. The group was rounded out by the centrist Citizens Party's candidate Albert Rivera, who looks like a low-testosterone guido. He is the only one of the four whom I ended up disliking as a person by the end of the debate.

After brief homages to the Ell Ehheh Beh Teh victims of the Orrrlando massacre the men quickly dug into each other's public records and electoral promises.

Spain has a 21.4% unemployment rate, and its center-right government has been trying to lower it by decreasing labor protections. The lefty parties are of course opposed to this, calling the new jobs, many of them temporary, garbage. This is a classic left vs. right, quality vs. quantity of jobs debate in which I sympathize with the left.

The international economic downturn that started in 2008 hit Spain very hard and is simply called The Crisis by Spaniards. The candidates lamented that a lot of young people have left the country because of it. A web search implied that they've mostly gone to wealthier European nations, not Latin America.

When the debate inevitably turned to the subject of refugees, Sanchez and Iglesias (the left) attacked Rajoy (the center-right) for not being welcoming to them enough. I got a feeling however that if Rajoy is less pro-immigration than the others, it's not by much. I don't want to look up how many immigrants there are in Spain right now because such numbers are always extremely unreliable. Anecdotally there are a lot, from Sub-Saharia, Latin America, the Middle East and everywhere else.

The main issue on which the two leftist candidates disagreed with each other was separatism. Iglesias says that he would like Spain to remain united, but supports a referendum in Catalonia and calls the Basque country Euskadi. Sanchez calls the latter by its Spanish name "Pais Vasco" and is against any referendums. The center-right Rajoy is even more anti-separatist than Sanchez, saying that any referendum about Catalonia would have to be conducted in all of Spain. Rivera, who described himself as a Catalan, is anti-separatist.

The pony-tailed Iglesias boasted that his very lefty United We Can was the only non-separatist party that has won any recent local elections in Catalonia and the Basque region. This is similar to the Scottish situation - Scots vote either for Labor or Scottish nationalists, never for Tories, who are perceived as implicitly English in the same way that the GOP is perceived as implicitly White in the US. So I guess PP is implicitly Spanish Spanish.

At one point, while stressing the desirability of developing Spain's ties with Latin America, Rivera said "we are Europe's Latinos", using that last word in its US meaning.

The only social issues mentioned were equal pay for women and violence against women, but since no one argued over them, the cultural side of politics was basically ignored.

The only allusion to Spain's historical heritage came when Rajoy, on the defensive over his lenient handling of members of his party involved in corruption scandals, said that he doesn't want to repeat the mistakes of the past by starting a new inquisition.

The polls are showing the center-right party with a lead, but the lefty parties could form a government if they agree to enter into a coalition with each other, which they failed to do the last time, apparently because of disagreements over how to deal with separatism.

While I saw a lot of leftism in this debate, this experience did not move me any closer to understanding why there's more of it in Spain than pretty much anywhere else in Europe.

6 comments:

  1. Do you think Spain's living under a right-wing authoritarian dictatorship for a longer period than any other country in Europe has anything to do with it?

    - Yevardian

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is the main theory that people offered to me on Twitter. But I don't know.

      The USSR was socially conservative and authoritarian too, but its former peoples didn't react against that by turning ultra-liberal after it collapsed. The attitudes to homosexuality and feminism, for example, are much more conservative in the former Soviet Block than in Western Europe. I'm not just talking about the former USSR: Hungary and Poland are probably the most conservative EU states right now.

      So I don't know if that alone can explain it.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  2. It's not authoritarianism, but a reaction against right-wing ideology. The USSR was a left-wing authoritaran regime, where different countries and nationalities were unified under one ideology. The collapse of the Soviet Union and their ideology prompted a reaction against all the leftist ideology, no matter where it came from. Note also that left-wing liberalism is what is rejected, while some liberal aspects of right-wing ideology are accepted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There were two USSRs: the first one (1917 to 1935) was socially liberal. The second one (1935 to 1990) was socially conservative. Homosexuality was legal in the first USSR and illegal in the second one. The first USSR promoted free love (the glass of water theory of sexuality), the second one was family-oriented. The first USSR blew up churches, the second one cooperated with the Russian Orthodox Church. The first USSR promoted modernist, anstract "art", the second one promoted traditional realist art. The first USSR eliminated grades in schools and universities. The second one reestablished them. And on and on and on. There was a right-wing turn in 1935.

      The US fought the Cold War to reestablish leftism, aka socilal liberalism in Russia. Well, and to loot Russia too of course. These goals were achieved in the 1990s. In ither words, during the Cold War the US led the socially liberal, leftist side, while the USSR led the socilaly conservative side.

      I don't think you understand the above. The collapse of the Soviet Union wss a triumph of leftism. But not a permanent one. There's a lot of nostalgia for the second, conservative USSR in Russia.

      Delete
    2. The skeptical attitude to homosexuality and other lefty phenomena in Eastern Europe is not a reaction against the 1945-1990 period, but a legacy of it. I think you're assuming that it's a reaction. You're wrong.

      Delete