Search results

Intro -- Preface -- Contents -- Notes on Contributors -- List of Figures -- Part I Introduction -- 1 The Catalan Way to Independence and the Spanish-Catalan Conflict -- Tracing the Roots of Catalan Nationalism -- The Changing Political Climate -- Popular and National Sovereignty -- Internationalizing Catalan Independence -- Structure of the Book -- References -- Part II Understanding Sovereignty and its People -- 2 The Independence Procés in Catalonia: The Triple Spanish Crisis and an Unresolved Question of Sovereignty -- Background of the Procés -- Consolidating the Autonomous Model -- Politicisation of the Autonomous Model: The Crisis -- The Events of the Rupture: The TC's Ruling and CiU's Strategy -- The Procés: An Intense Five Years -- Five Years of Social, Political and Institutional Protest -- 2012-2015: CiU Government, 9 November, and Plebiscites -- 2015-2017: JxSí Government, 1 October, and the Declaration of Independence -- Electoral Realignment and Transformations of the Party System -- Social and Cultural Changes: The Impact on the Political Culture -- Post-Procés: Impasse of Weaknesses -- Conclusion: Managing (Post-)Conflict -- References -- 3 Banal Populism: Nationalism and Everyday Victimhood in the Spanish-Catalan Clash -- When Nationalism Meets Populism -- Exploring Affective Narratives -- Banal Populism in Catalonia and Spain -- Reiterating the Humiliated Nation -- Shaping the People-as-Nation: Victimhood and Action -- Conclusion -- References -- 4 Discussing Ethnos, Polis, Demos and Cives in the Context of Spanish Politics -- The Spanish Constitutional System and the State Administration -- Some Basic Data About Catalonia -- A Short Story of How the Crisis Was Cooked -- Eros and Thanatos of Ethnos: Spanish and Catalan Nationalisms -- Demos: Metonymies of Democracy and Rule of Law -- Sovereignty and Democracy.

Is it possible to create a majoritarian left without lapsing into reformism? Given that Eurocommunism was marked by serious limitations in the past, why is it still relevant to think about it? This article argues that Eurocommunism represented an attempt to create and own the necessary
political space to advance socialism in liberal democracies, and to search for ways of building a counterhegemonic project within civil society (which would imply cross-class alliances and a subject of change larger than the working class). The approach adopted by the Spanish left in a number
of specific moments in its past reflects the difficulties of a project to shape a political space to the left of social democrac y in modern liberal democracies. This is why Eurocommunism continually resurfaces in contemporary left debate and serially reproduces confrontational positions between
reformists and 'real' leftists or revolutionaries. What began as a preliminary attempt to re-assess the positions of the left during the transition to liberal democracy returned to debate after 2010, at a time when several fractions and political leaderships were competing to define
the way to develop left politics. First the Spanish Communist Party (PCE), and then Izquierda Unida (United Left, IU), Podemos and Sumar have been drawn into debates on how to construct a counter-hegemonic project or build a democratic majority; positions on these questions have been a way
of defining their parties, an d the basis for splits inside them This article discusses the PCE, IU, Podemos, Unidas Podemos and Sumar in the light of these recurring themes. Eurocommunism typically figures in these battles as a stand-in for reformism. The problem, however, is not these disagreements
per se, but an apparent inability to find a way to widen the space of the left to accommodate pluralism. It is difficult to imagine how positions can be consolidated given the perpetual conflicts in the left bl oc. Regardless of whether the goal is democratic socialism, and the subject the
people as a whole or the workers, attempts to expand the political space of the left, in a representative and participatory sense, will not be achieved through narrowing the internal space of organisation and debate. The left is more likely to be able to shape its narrative for thinking about
the past and dealing with the future by learning from past successes and mistakes. Eurocommunism functions as a reminder of the challenges of forging a left project aiming to govern and become hegemonic. Reproducing the logics that create enemies within the left has not been an efficient strategy
for expanding the political space.

The emergence of left populism, mainly in Southern Europe, in the decade of 2010, questioned the impression that populism in Europe was only right-wing oriented. On the other hand, the expansion of populism as a common denomination favored the perception that all populisms were the same, regardless of ideology: a threat to democracy. It explains why many left parties are reluctant towards being labelled as populist. Besides, left-wing populism connected with the one from Latin America one decade before where the tensions between democratization and authoritarianism have been widely discussed. The European public opinion usually relates the Latin American left populist governments with authoritarianism, associated with the situation in Venezuela first with Hugo Chávez and, especially, now with Nicolás Maduro. For this reason, left populism in Europe was made suspicious of being authoritarian.

In 2000 Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri announced a new global paradigm that implied the shiftfrom modern sovereignty to imperial sovereignty. Until now, they have developed a theoretical andpolitical framework to account for the organization of multitude, a counter-Empire from below, toovercome the multiple and decentralized modes of domination characterizing Empire. Sincemultiplicity and immanence are the main features of the struggles of multitude, Hardt and Negrihave rejected the return of the state, representative politics or 'the people' as subject of change. Thisposition has made it difficult to establish a deeper dialogue with other approaches like populism (orleft-populism) by Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe, despite the relevant reflections andimplications for populism contained in the work of Hardt and Negri. This article engages in acritical reading of populism from the Empire perspective where special focus is placed on theconstruction of incompatible dichotomies between globalization vs. the state, multitude vs. 'thepeople', and non-sovereignty vs. popular sovereignty. After discussing tensions and issues toreconsider from both Empire and populist theory, the conclusion points to the application of amulti-scalar and intersectional approach to populism in order to enrich its conceptualization andsolve some of its contradictions.

This article considers municipalism as a form of progressive localism, which on the one hand connects the local and the global through translocal solidarity, and on the other scales-up and becomes an alternative way of doing politics beyond the state. The main focus is on citizens'
candidatures in Spain, which have not been linked in the traditional way to a national party, and in particular on Barcelona en Comú and Barcelona mayor Ada Colau. It discusses the question of 'everyday sovereignties' - over issues such as control of water supply, energy, housing. These
are areas where cities can lead change. It also discusses cities of refuge and Barcelona's Refuge City Plan, which involves civil society in welcoming refugees to the city; and the links made through the mapping of municipalisms in the Atlas of Change and the launch of Fearless Cities.

In a world order without a sole hegemon, the dialectic relationship between the main global players and emerging powers enables nation-states to strategically favor their national interests as well as mutually beneficial alliances, whilst the multipolar world becomes strengthened. This article draws on this context of 'interdependent hegemony' to explore the existing relationship between Venezuela, as a swing state, and China, as one of the Big Three global powers. Particularly, I focus on Venezuelan efforts to develop, at the domestic and regional level, a counterhegemonic political project against the US and how China is considered a valuable ally to acquire more independence. However, this situation of interdependence can paradoxically lead to a new kind of dependence, in this case on China. To analyze these relations, I propose a conceptual framework consisting of three dimensions: 1) the international positioning towards other Northern and Southern countries and whether the relationship is conceived in terms of conflict or cooperation; 2) the economic model and how it conditions the relationship between countries and whether relationships or dependence are generated; and 3) the development of a political and economic model which can inspire or be followed by other countries. Although China's influence and increasing power in Venezuela is unquestionable in economic terms, the Venezuelan government uses its agreements with China strategically to legitimate its policies, in the name of a South-socialist alternative, and to reaffirm its international positioning.

Intercultural dialogue was introduced at the European level through policy documents of the Council of Europe and the European Commission in the 2000s. This article explores the ways in which intercultural dialogue is developed as a model to handle cultural diversity in different areas. Furthermore it discusses whether intercultural dialogue can be perceived as an alternative model to the previous integration policies marked by assimilationism and multiculturalism. A comparison is carried out of the ways in which the policies of both European organizations represent cultural diversity as a problem, their narratives concerning the need for intercultural dialogue as well as its definition. While the Council of Europe offers a concrete model, especially regarding integration, the Commission moves between the intertwined fields of culture, integration and interaction, but in doing so it fails to present an alternative.

Óscar García Agustín talks to Gaspar Llamazares Gaspar Llamazares joined the Communist Party of Asturias in 1981. Between 2000 and 2008 he was the national coordinator of Izquierda Unida (United Left). In response to the rise of the 15M movement, he and others
founded Izquierda Abierta (Open Left), with the aim of building a larger progressive coalition. The party remained within Izquierda Unida, but aimed to counteract the weight of the Communist Party within the coalition. In 2017 he co-founded the political platform Act??a (Do it) to give voice
to those who did not feel represented by PSOE and Podemos. In 2019, he left Izquierda Unida. In 2023 he was elected as a member of the Oviedo council, representing the electoral coalition Convocatoria por Oviedo, and nowadays he is spokesperson for the coalition. He has written extensively
about the left and is a defender of the legacy of Eurocommunism, understood as the defence of socialism and pluralism within the political and parliamentary system established during the Spanish Transition, and as the formation of a large progressive coalition to gradually change the capitalist
system.

The so-called 'refugee crisis' provoked a wave of solidarity movements across Europe. These movements contrasted with attitudes of rejection against refugees from almost all EU member states and a lack of coordinated and satisfactory response from the EU as an institution. The growth of the solidarity movement entails backlash of nationalized identities, while the resistance of the member states to accept refugees represents the failure of the cosmopolitan view attached to the EU. In the article, we argue that the European solidarity movement shapes a new kind of cosmopolitanism: cosmopolitanism from below, which fosters an inclusionary universalism, which is both critical and conflictual. The urban scale thus becomes the place to locally articulate inclusive communities where solidarity bonds and coexistence prevail before national borders and cosmopolitan imaginaries about welcoming, human rights, and the universal political community are enhanced. We use the case of Barcelona to provide a concrete example of intersections between civil society and a municipal government. We relate this discussion to ongoing debates about 'sanctuary cities' and solidarity cities and discuss how urban solidarities can have a transformative role at the city level. Furthermore, we discuss how practices on the scale of the city are up-scaled and used to forge trans-local solidarities and city networks.

The so-called "refugee crisis" provoked a wave of solidarity movements across Europe. These movements contrasted with attitudes of rejection against refugees from almost all EU member states and a lack of coordinated and satisfactory response from the EU as an institution. The growth of the solidarity movement entails backlash of nationalized identities, while the resistance of the member states to accept refugees represents the failure of the cosmopolitan view attached to the EU. In the article, we argue that the European solidarity movement shapes a new kind of cosmopolitanism: cosmopolitanism from below, which fosters an inclusionary universalism, which is both critical and conflictual. The urban scale thus becomes the place to locally articulate inclusive communities where solidarity bonds and coexistence prevail before national borders and cosmopolitan imaginaries about welcoming, human rights, and the universal political community are enhanced. We use the case of Barcelona to provide a concrete example of intersections between civil society and a municipal government. We relate this discussion to ongoing debates about "sanctuary cities" and solidarity cities and discuss how urban solidarities can have a transformative role at the city level. Furthermore, we discuss how practices on the scale of the city are up-scaled and used to forge trans-local solidarities and city networks.