It’s a bit of an aberration. It would be as if in America, the democrats had less senators than the republicans (but both sides short of a majority) and instead decided to ally themselves with American native parties to give them swaths of land and recognise their independence. It wouldn’t be “wrong” but it is a deeply cynical move. (Context, in their agreement with the Basque Country they are essentially giving more autonomy and allowing them to essentially have their own foreign policy, tantamount to recognising independence. Regarding Catalonia they not only supported the amnesty, but also a parliamentary debate on the possibility of checking if it’s constitutional to eventually think about doing a referendum on Catalonian independence) (also, they didn’t even secure a budget agreement, they just agreed to invest Sanchez as a prime minister, so they could fail every budget he tries to pass)
Edit: clarified indigenous parties for American native parties
You forgot that it would be like if Democrats had their own culture and language for centuries, had been integrated in the country by force, saw centuries of attempted cultural genocide, including at points from being forbidden from using their own names or speaking their own language in public, and even after the country becoming a democracy being forced to allow the Republican barbaric practices. Oh, and when a democratic majority tried to make the country work on a more federal model, the army rebelled, allied with the literal Nazis, committed unspeakable crimes, ruled the country with iron fist for decades, got an amnesty for all those crimes when they lost power, and the Republican’s would still insist on keeping statues and place names named after them (well Democrats can easily imagine the last one, some aspects of fascism never change)
I get the parliamentary kerfuffle, but I kinda mean opposition against secession in general. As I understand it, it wouldn’t so much be like giving Native Americans random swaths of land, but giving the people living on specific swaths of land (which might be mostly Native Americans) that land, and no more influence over how the rest of the land is governed. Sorta like allowing California to become its own country, I suppose - why would other Americans have a problem with that, if the Californians wanted that?
It’s a bit of an aberration. It would be as if in America, the democrats had less senators than the republicans (but both sides short of a majority) and instead decided to ally themselves with American native parties to give them swaths of land and recognise their independence. It wouldn’t be “wrong” but it is a deeply cynical move. (Context, in their agreement with the Basque Country they are essentially giving more autonomy and allowing them to essentially have their own foreign policy, tantamount to recognising independence. Regarding Catalonia they not only supported the amnesty, but also a parliamentary debate on the possibility of checking if it’s constitutional to eventually think about doing a referendum on Catalonian independence) (also, they didn’t even secure a budget agreement, they just agreed to invest Sanchez as a prime minister, so they could fail every budget he tries to pass)
Edit: clarified indigenous parties for American native parties
You forgot that it would be like if Democrats had their own culture and language for centuries, had been integrated in the country by force, saw centuries of attempted cultural genocide, including at points from being forbidden from using their own names or speaking their own language in public, and even after the country becoming a democracy being forced to allow the Republican barbaric practices. Oh, and when a democratic majority tried to make the country work on a more federal model, the army rebelled, allied with the literal Nazis, committed unspeakable crimes, ruled the country with iron fist for decades, got an amnesty for all those crimes when they lost power, and the Republican’s would still insist on keeping statues and place names named after them (well Democrats can easily imagine the last one, some aspects of fascism never change)
Youre mistaking the democrats for the American natives?
I get the parliamentary kerfuffle, but I kinda mean opposition against secession in general. As I understand it, it wouldn’t so much be like giving Native Americans random swaths of land, but giving the people living on specific swaths of land (which might be mostly Native Americans) that land, and no more influence over how the rest of the land is governed. Sorta like allowing California to become its own country, I suppose - why would other Americans have a problem with that, if the Californians wanted that?
The real problem for me is the cynicism of the move, it ain’t just selling of ideals to get into power, but quite literally parts of the country