Has the mirror broken Catalonia?
We are a little disgusted. Foreign investors continue to invest in Catalonia, but the country is entering into the paralysis of fear, in the inability to make relevant political decisions. Catalonia today is a divided country, because we liked the Catalans. And I renounce the greatest of those who want to fracture: we are not fractured, nor do families throw plates in the head on Christmas Day, but there is a point of division. Where does it come from? If I do not understand that the idea of u200b u200bthe unity of the civilian population of Catalonia is a fiction in the long haul and a reality that comes from time to time. The Assembly of Catalonia, for example. All united against the Franco regime. Freedom, amnesty and the status of autonomy. All. And everyone also wanted to say those who might not want to be now. In the immigrant population, the PSUC told them that language is also an element of their liberation as an oppressed social class.
So, Catalonia was a unique city?
Yes, with absolute transversality and an inter-class option. Now, on the other hand, Catalonia tries to be again. The Omnium platform has now reached 80%. ¿For the non-independent Catalans who have signed up for this platform, will we report them to the first changes?
The book says that if it were not for friends I would not have written anything.
They said, "Why are you staying so long, Quim, why do you put the distance, how cool you are so you do not give up your emotions in all that's happening, how good you are, far from politics …" After all, there was a point of envy.
And you are not recognized in this rebuke and in that anguish.
No. I'm a Catalan, a municipal, a socialist. But it is a book more angry than anguished.
With almost everyone. With the PP and the PSOE. The PP takes the signs against Catalonia. The PSOE, for fear of losing the center, ends up confusing its silhouette with that of the PP. Very fashionable of some European socialists who have evolved into a type of socialism like Manel Valls and who make the worst version of a social democracy passed down by capitalism.
An angry federalist.
No, a Catalan nationalist who believed that as a result of the Transition there was a possible agreement between Catalonia and Spain. That even the return of Tarradellas was a bridge with republican legitimacy before the Constitution of 78. If a new Tarradellas appeared and a new Suarez (which I do not see on the horizon) we would begin to move the pieces of a puzzle that is now petrified Without wishing to proclaim me as an independent party, now I am more than 10 years ago.
So that with Spain, now, there is nothing to do.
It is very difficult to do something. Above all because those who interpret the apparatus of the state have forgotten the old transversal solidarity in defense of liberties, which meant that, in the Transition, Catalonia was loved, respected and feared, as it is now in no way.
Does it bother you that you speak differently of "regime of 78"?
It disturbs me a lot. They say, "Transition, liquidate." It was the door for Franco's regime to continue. "Friend, it's not true.
Monarchy is an election of the Franco regime. And not a single torturer or judge went to court.
We made a democracy in Europe that was then blocked because people misread the Constitution. The majority of city councils have reviewed the past. The Francoist appointment was liquidated.
Go to Spain and you are full of streets with the names of Franco.
For 40 years, the impact of the Civil War was still crazy. Pierre Vilar meets Puig i Cadafalch in exile and asks: "Do you prefer who was going, during the civil war?" And Puig i Cadafalch replied: "From both of them, the revolutionaries wanted me to kill and I had to exile, and the Franchists wanted me to get over the soul". Add another topic We can not become pro-Franco all this from the positions of sovereignism that we do not like. Because it's not true.
Declare that the Constitution has recognized Catalonia at the national level.
But it does not say anywhere, and the mother of eggs is that in Catalonia, many people understand Spain as a multinational state, but for the high administration of the state and the great Spanish parties, there is only one nation has one
This is a nuclear problem, but the Constitution, compared to the 32 Statute, opens our doors to forty years of much higher autonomy. Prat de la Riba would have danced with one foot with the national recognition that made a unitary Constitution.
The Constitution is limited to talking about nationality and does not even say what.
But what we can not do is look at what happened today in the 80s. Is it still halfway? Definitely. And then there was less than 10% of the sovereigns in Catalonia.
I conclude that it is no longer the " Catalan problem "And the" Spanish problem "But three-quarters of the Congress of Deputies see no problem.
Because they have not understood anything and therefore they commit error after mistake.
I often think I have understood everything perfectly and from the first day, but that the answer is "no".
I think they think that independence goes against the majority thought by a part of the people of Catalonia that is not publicly expressed.
Let's talk about the errors of Catalanism. You talk about self-destruction mechanisms.
In every moment of unity euphoria, Solidaritat Catalana, corresponds to its tragic week. Catalanism has now been a victim of the alleged social hegemony of sovereignty. If sovereignty is not able to recognize that it was not an internationally valid referendum (once Spain recognized that the repression of 1-O was intolerable) we are lost. We continue to say that we are Republic, but we are not. We are stuck here. I do not like the public presentation of the Crida to be held at Sant Jordi Hall. Not even ERC could feel comfortable in such an act. And also the CUP. Here, after a referendum, we have done another. It happened three times. When you move forward with a boat to the horizon, the horizon moves towards the horizon. And never take it
Perhaps they were trying to see if the state reacted.
But political dialogue arises from something else. One of the reproaches I am making to sovereignty is that the Marxist catechisms of the 1960s have not learned well: the attention to the value of opposing contradictions and the correlation of forces. Contradictions: we come across the judgment of the Supreme Court mortgages, for example. And as for the forces, there are those who say we have to be more, like Ernest Maragall and Oriol Junqueras. Carles Puigdemont, from Brussels, states that it was a mistake not to proclaim the Republic. I think, on the contrary, that it was a mistake not to recognize that it had not been proclaimed. Why did we create this fiction? Are we Republic? No. Did we declare independence? No.
Propose an agreement with the state to develop a law of clarity for the Canadian and decide which majorities should have the referendum. This is the letter to the Kings.
The solutions I propose are impossible unless someone moves a piece. There is only one thing more impossible than the independence of Catalonia, and it is federal Spain.
So what is possible?
Return to the beginning Release of prisoners and suspension of all legal actions. And, as a starting point, the entire Statute, the referendum for the people of Catalonia in 2006. Then, political dialogue leads to a political solution and breaks this tremendous judicialization of the issue. And a referendum agreed, now or in 10 years. A proposal for Catalonia and that is voted.
Are you participating in a conversation to find a solution?
No. I signed the manifest of 80% of Òmnium Cultural and, at the request of some prisoners, I paid a visit to Lledoners. Moreover, from these mediations that appeared in the background of Lehendakari, I had the impression that they were full of good will but had no interlocutors. You can accept what you want with the Lehendakari, but if there is no one in the Spanish government band on the phone to say "forward", what kind of mediation are we talking about? I want to think that Rajoy said that if the elections were called, there would not have been 155.
And who said no?
Nobody. But since they did not write it in writing, the president of the Generalitat decided not to trust it.
You, mayor of Girona, that you were to be president of the Generalitat, you and not Carles Puigdemont?
I do not think so I was a candidate in 1995. At that time I did not reach 50, and I would have been happy. I thought I could do well, but it is a last stage and I do not think I could return.
Do you remember the first time you heard about Puigdemont?
Vaguely. I was mayor of Girona and was a journalist. We never accepted the town hall, I was not a councilor in the governments I presided over. In Parliament he was a member of the culture commission when he was a councilor. I do not have a relationship that allows me to become familiar.
Did you go see it?
No. At a certain point, it was strange that he did not call, and I did, and we spoke with all the norm. But I do not think we have something to say to each other. I have the impression that this book will not like it.
Do you understand Ernest Maragall's career?
I can understand that now he thinks he can be a good mayor of Barcelona. I can barely understand the passage of a unitary leftist socialist movement within the PSC to a European candidacy through the ERC to become a member of the ERC and run for the mayor of Barcelona. I do not understand it but I do not want to judge it. I would not have done it, for a bit of shame. If anyone tells me if I want to do the Maragall operation in Girona, in no way.
These are other times, I've grown up, but not as much as Ernest Maragall. I think I could not become a mayor of Girona in the way I did it. I should learn new things, and I think one of the things we did, due to the complicated evolution of legislation, has not even been done now.