How the Catalan government uses IPFS to sidestep Spain's legal block
la3.org
la3.org
This is an Easter Egg. Barcelona fell on September 11, 1714 during the War of Spanish Succession and with that Catalonia's freedom as well. September 11 is the National Day of Catalonia.
Also, at 17:14 of each and every game of FC Barcelona in Camp Nou Stadium, Barcelona fans claim for independence [1].
So it was not by chance that the coder chose 1714 for the encryption algorithm.
I wonder why a tooltip is supposed to disappear in the first place.
I’ve seen some depictions in paintings [1] where you can see soldiers from the Habsburg (wearing the Catalan berretinas) porting a Spanish flag... I believe it was more a war for two different models for Spain, not for independence or anything like that. Sounds like revisionism to me.
[1] http://www.msde.es/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2-Embarque-de-...
Also, is it historically accepted that, if Charles had won, he wouldn't have done the same to the other regions with fueros / constitutions?
It was still an absolute monarchy with the same monarch; it's not like the Aragonese were free to choose their own destiny. Still, the Constitutions Charles promised them to uphold must have given them something, I just don't know what it was. That's why I'd like to know how they compare to the current rights granted by the autonomía.
Of course this put severe conatrains to the royal power, and the Habsburg had been trying for a long time to get rid of the Fueros and it was the first thing the Borbons did when they took over the Corona.
> nobody was above it.
It's not like there was an independent judiciary branch with the power to enforce that against the nobles or the king. Case in point: the king decided to eliminate them and he just went and did it.
Anyway, I'm very interested in knowing if the used crypto is sound or not, and stirring a discussion around possible alternative approaches.
Ask me anything if you want to know further!
I live in Catalunya and wrote this tool for doing just that, in a easy way. It 1) starts a go-ipfs daemon locally, 2) opens up the referendum website in your default browser, via localhost.
If you're interested in accessing the website from inside Catalunya, give it a try: https://git.io/vdGUx
I am not familiar with IPFS internals, but is there no pattern to the IPFS traffic that the ISPs can shape/block?
Too bad about the entire IPFS domain being blocked, because besides the host, HTTPS traffic has safety in numbers. If only there was a way to proxy through google.com or some other popular domain too important to block.
Host IPFS nodes with http proxies on GCP and point the domain with multiple A records at those instances?
The magic term for others to google is "domain fronting". Here is a bit more info:
http://www.geektime.com/2016/12/23/signal-updates-protect-th...
There is. Domain fronting is used in China to circumvent the Great Firewall. The concept you are talking about is collateral freedom.
Fun fact: advanced networking setups like domain fronting are impossible to address in a URL/URI scheme. Check out multiaddr :) [3] A domain-fronted service could be addressed as something like `/dns4/google.com/tcp/443/tls/sni/google.com/http/example.com/ws`
[1] https://signal.org/blog/doodles-stickers-censorship/
go get github.com/whyrusleeping/gx
go get github.com/whyrusleeping/gx-go
cd your-project/
gx install
go build // or whatever you were doing :)How does the hash of the main page guarantee that content linked from that page is authentic?
The situation is very similar to password storage, where you want to not make it trivial to brute-force moderate-entropy passwords even if your database gets breached. We have functions designed specifically for that: scrypt, argon2 etc. https://www.npmjs.com/package/scryptsy is a pure JS implementation of scrypt for example.
Even with scrypt the situation is not great, but using sha for this kind of thing is no longer state of the art. If people are willing to (a) download and run a program rather than rely on the browser and (b) willing to wait half a minute or so for the result then you could easily tune the scrypt/argon parameters up to 11 but at the cost of quite a bit in the way of usability. If "must work on smartphones without extra app downloads" is a requirement you're pretty limited in what you can do this way.
Another solution might be to use real servers but host them on the "dark web" - get Tor a bit of publicity in Catalunya!
EDIT: in response to a few posts that briefly appeared and then disappeared again - IPFS is fine. SHA256 for authenticating a page is fine. I'm only objecting to using raw SHA-anything as a key derivation function as in the section "A static database".
Only for SHA-1 (which has 160 bit hashes) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA-1#Attacks
"it can be used to “fill the gaps” of information about any citizen. If you know someone’s birth date and the area where they live, you can obtain their government ID by trial-and-error on that website."
The mitigation is slowing down the number of guesses/second that an attacker can try. In a well-designed key derivation function, an attacker with 100x the resources should only be able to try out guesses 100x as fast. That's what scrypt/argon2/bcrypt/PBKDF2/... try and achieve.
SHA and other general-purpose hash functions tend to be easy to parallelize, at least in parts, and you can get huge speedups on GPUs or even better, FPGAs/ASICs. That's why no-one serious still mines bitcoins on CPUs and the big mining syndicates [hire planes](http://uk.businessinsider.com/cryptocurrency-miners-rent-boe...) to ship GPUs a little bit faster.
This has nothing to do with collisions. It's to do with hash functions being designed to be fast, and key derivation functions are designed to be slow and memory-hard.
Jeasus!! Gibson was far more prescient than acknowledged;
"the future is already here, but not evenly distributed yet"
Wow...
I had such opportunity and ability to buy bitcoins in 2012... and I missed that boat.
That quote also isn’t from Gibson. :)
You also have opportunity and ability to buy bitcoins now. And, just like in 2012, you have no idea what the price will be five years into the future.
And, they probably should’ve used HMAC-SHA2 to derive the public primary index key insead of a hash function directly.
Also how are they distributing the initial hash - physical signs? I figure the easiest threat from Spain is to get people to show up to the wrong polling stations, which don't have them on the voter rolls, and then cast doubts on the validity of a referendum that has a huge number of provisional ballots. Since you don't actually need to staff polling stations, this attack only really requires a single person setting up a cloned website and distributing a different hash (although it gets easier if e.g. the postal service is willing to help you send out the wrong hash).
The hash was distributed in URL form through twitter by both the Catalan president [2] and the catalan economy minister (who is the 2nd in command actually) [3].
[1] https://ipfs.io/ipns/QmZxWEBJBVkGDGaKdYPQUXX4KC5TCWbvuR4iYZr...
(I would rather GB stayed in one piece but if push came to shove, I'd probably do the same here in similar circumstances - there is no excuse for this heavy handed nonsense)
For example, secession (not to mention sedition or treason) is illegal in many jurisdictions, and is a natural thing for sovereign countries to want to prevent. It is also natural for the sovereign central government of a country to put limits on what a regional government can and cannot do, with the usual principle being that the regional government cannot do anything outside of the powers specifically given it by the central government (regardless of what powers the inhabitants of that region want).
You're right that "people" could "get together and conduct a poll on something", but if this was informally conducted it would be hard to prevent double voting, and not accidentally disenfranchising certain people, and there would be little recourse against these self-appointed pollsters stuffing their home-made ballot boxes.
At the same time, if a regional government spent money, or used people's personal information, for a purpose they were not legally permitted to, then those would potentially be crimes themselves, regardless of the issue of secession.
The questions worth debating are "How much autonomy should regions of sovereign countries be given?", and "If a region isn't legally given that much autonomy, what is most peaceful and just means for that region to attain it?"
As far as I can tell, Spain is going to great lengths to curtail the rights of citizens to express their opinions on secession. They're free to ignore the outcome of this vote, but raiding ISPs, shutting down political pamphlets, and reading private mail are not the actions of a democratic country—they're tactics straight out of an authoritarian regime.
Secession is also illegal in the US (and we fought a war to prove it), but you don't see federal agents arresting people for starting ballot initiatives in California or shutting down Vermont secession websites.
Texas has had secessionist movements also for some time, but it'd be also illegal to do a binding referendum, and Washington would take the required steps to stop it.
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/06/24/can-texas-legally-se...
There's a set of them on the pinning service I run (https://www.eternum.io/ipns/QmZxWEBJBVkGDGaKdYPQUXX4KC5TCWbv...), so they're in no danger of disappearing, but you'd help in case Spain banned the eternum.io node.
What exactly does this mean?
Do you mean by accessing this address:
https://ipfs.io/ipns/QmZxWEBJBVkGDGaKdYPQUXX4KC5TCWbvuR4iYZr...
Thanks! This is a great read
So far it seems it is delivering on its promise: I was able to find my voting station. Too bad I am a continent and and ocean away from home :(
If anyone wants the scripts I used to build up the system, let me know. Here's the Kubernetes YAML I used: https://gist.github.com/kordless/5625ae8abf3d3f14dd3f9c9d500...
It seems weird that the sensitive part (ID number + birth date + post code) would be encrypted the most weakly, and the public part (voting station) would be encrypted the most strongly. Maybe I'm reading this wrong or the code author involuntarily made his encryption quite weaker.
The only information you would get by knowing some of that data is where somebody is supposed to vote. An information you can already infer from the Zip code. There are, at most, four possible voting sites for each zip code. In some (several) small/medium villages there is only one voting site, so, not to much to learn from decrypting.
Besides, the census (voting places) information is usually (in normal elections), placed (via paper printed listings) on voting places. And there there is more information (full name, for example).
Forgetting about Catalonia for a moment, isn't it fundamentally amoral that a part of the country where prosperity has (by mere chance) concentrated suddenly wants to split off? Isn't this taking wealth-inequality to the next level?
Of course the people in a prosperous part of the country want to split off. Absolute democracy seems to result in an undesirable situation, because do we really want to live in a world that converges towards little selfish islands?
Is that your opinion, or do the Catalonians and people outside Spain agree?
Franco, being the same horrible dictator that killed a lot of innocent people, favoured actively Catalonia's economy over other provinces, for decades.
Is true that he discouraged them to speak in Catalonian language, but also discouraged people to speak in Galician language (and Franco was born in Galicia). At the same time give them priority in the efforts to rebuild industry and infraestructures after the civil war. Catalonia is richest than other parts of Spain, in part because Franco wanted 1) having a cluster of industries next European frontiers and roads to trade and obtain foreign divises easily, 2) money from tourism 3) conjurate the revolts giving the area a special silk-hand treatment after the first iron years passed.
Specially in the late stages of franquism, a massive exodus of workers from other parts of Spain migrated and stablished in Catalonia atracted by the favourable conditions to work and live and the "smell of freedom".
I'm aware that this counts as black heressy for millions of young people in the area, but well... nobody will stop them to read history books about post-war if they want. Ask your grandpa. Everybody in Spain has an uncle or some cousins in Barcelona.
Oppression is not something allowing you to became one of the more modern and rich places in the country; oppresion, to me, is what happened to Extremadura in the same period for example.
Anyway, I wasn't completely aware of that part of the history, thanks.
That said I don't quite agree that Catalonia wasn't oppressed. I'm not qualified to say which regions were oppressed the most, but economic prosperity isn't the opposite of oppression. If anything the real dark truth is that oppressive authoritarian dictatorships can be quite effective, and even prosperous.
Part of my family is Galician, I'm Portuguese myself. Still, instead of breaking Spain apart I would actually prefer to see the whole of Iberia working together as a union.
The main problem seems to be where the capital would be placed since only Castilians would want Madrid. I only wish that we could agree on a small but memorable place like Santiago de Compostela as centre for that union.
Fragmented even more, our Iberia has little voting power in regards to negotiating with France and Germany in the European Union. If Catalunya has to separate, so let it be. In the end of the day we are all together on the same boat, can only wish that we could row together too.
This was the reason why Portugal split from a joint Spanish kingdom centuries ago.
Then we should see the foreign interests. France and UK profit from fragmentation in Iberia. Smaller countries are easier to place against each other instead of being an economical threat to them. Portugal remains a strong UK ally over the centuries while Spain sides with France, and now further fragmented as Madrid doesn't open the hand to a decentralized model.
Really sad. People in Iberia consider themselves more or less as part of the same family (which is true to large extent). We should be working together.
I expect that the situation in Spain is much more complex than we give it credit for.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podemos_(Spanish_political_par...
EDIT: added link, changed "socialist" to "left"
PVV in the Netherlands or Dansk Folkeparti in Denmark come to mind. I don't know enough about Podemos to know where to put them, but there's nothing contradicting about left leaning parties and nationalism.
We try to squeeze too much meaning into the 1-dimensional "left-right" that it really doesn't mean anything at all.
Suddenly?
Nope. There's nothing "sudden" about Catalonia splitting off. Franco went out of his way to incentivize it, and while the governments that followed him haven't been genocidal, they haven't exactly encouraged anyone to remain.
Of course it sucks for Spain, but they very much made their own bed.
Catalans also have a different language, a strong sense of being a nation (their "local consitution" says so!), etc.. Money is one of the reasons, but not the only one, not even by a long shot.
[1] https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anexo:Elecciones_en_España#Dis...
And none of those things is being repressed, I have to add. As a Catalan friend pointed out, they speak and teach Catalan in schools, have complete freedom to vote on issues of their region, etc. I have to agree with the GP that it's mostly the economy doing a bit better than the other regions, which leads Catalonia to a "why should we have to support these others" mentality.
The pro-independence movement didn't really take off until the Spanish Constitutional Court thwarted 17 articles and redacted 27 more from the latest "Catalan constitution" (Estatut). A "constitution" which had been approved by the Catalan Parliament, the Spanish Parliament and the Catalan citizens themselves in a referendum (in that order).
Likewise, the latest Spanish education law (LOMCE) includes an article making it MANDATORY to offer a Spanish-as-the-vehicular-language education if any parents ask for it.
How is that "having complete freedom to vote on issues of their region"? You may mean "... so long as Spain as a whole is fine with them". How complete.
> It [the self-determination right] states that a people, based on respect for the principle of equal rights and fair equality of opportunity, have the right to freely choose their sovereignty and international political status with no interference.
Hence, your argument breaks down at some point. The big issue is how to define that point, because the right definition does not include qualifying criteria for what constitutes "people" and what doesn't.
Based on their strong national identity, pro-separatists in Catalonia consider that they have this right. There are many issues and arguments supporting both sides (although most state-nations are against any kind of wide applicability of the self-determination right for obvious reasons).
In any case, nobody, neither in Catalonia nor elsewhere advocates for that right for your family, your district, etc. because you don't have a national sentiment, you don't feel like a separate ethnic and so on.
We can discuss whether Catalans constitute an ethnicity separate from the Spaniards or not, whether the self-determination right applies in this case or not, and so on... but please don't use the "If Catalans can, my family should also be able too" because it is just derailing the conversation.
Will really do?
There is a group of people that mainly buy the Catalonian products. Guess who? well this is embarrassing, the evil non-catalonian spaniards. It seems that they forgot to mention it or include such small fact in their economic big plans for a brighter future (without your main clients).
This is bussiness almost becoming pure radical art. They are publicly declaring that will not stand a minute more in the same room as the scumbags that buy their products and support their families. "Keep walking customer, there is nothing to see here".
It is true if by "fly like an eagle of finances" you mean "sink as a rock full of crabs", of course.
Is not so complicated to understand. Spanish constitution grants clearly and explicitly that all citizens co-own the country and (unless this right is retired for things like committing a crime and losing their freedom) they can benefit of the use of any public space. The ramblas are also mine, as from millions of other people. Not, is not "my point of view", and not, is not "debatable". All Catalonian people are also co-owners of Doñana and this is not debatable either (not even in the hypothetical case that the current and temporal president of Catalonia wouldn't stand Andalucia).
They will lose this rights, and many other, because somebody is starting flames every day and acting as a troll for fun and profit since years
What was happened in Spain was just tyranny of a minority using people, women, elder and children as human shields with the purpose to steal people from their rights, by any means. Some people came from their home with urns closed and loaded with ballots, before voting. I ask you, second-person plural, was it funny to use your computer skills helping scammers to commit a big fraud?. Sorry, but I can't see where is the fun. Some people got beaten and there is a man in the hospital with a severely damaged eye.
What you would expect from the police in case that somebody would announce that, for a small ramson, will not distroy unilaterally the future, bussiness and current rights of millions of non-independentist people in 48 hours? Would you negociate and pay?
To fight for your constitutional rights and for the respect to the law is to fight by saving the society from falling into the law of the jungle. Is the opposite to "being selfish" and benefits everybody.
But, if Catalonia is rich due to their own industriousness, and effectively prop up other parts of the nation by sending more of their own money to the federal government, then no, I don't think there is a problem with trying to break off.
Further, the current investment of Spain's government is far beyond expected. Key infrastructures like railway, airports and ports. If Catalonia represents 19% of the GDP and 16% of population is nowadays receiving in a sustained manner 8% of the country investment.
Said that, I don't have anything to argue against the terrible situations other regions suffered from. But this should not diminish the dynamic economy in Catalonia, which would be unfair to relate to Franco.
That does not mean anything now is it ? The problem is to know if 8% is enough or not. And even if it is not enough, is there anything in the 92 other percent that is unreasonably spent ?
For example I pay way more in tax than I receive from the State. Is it a problem ? It depends: I'm not sick or in trouble there is nothing that the state can really do for me. If I were sick then I would like to receive some of my money back in healthcare. The amount should be the same than to anyone with similar problem. If I receive less, then and only then I have room for complain.
Here in the UK, the North complain about just the opposite: how much money is on already wealthy region, completely neglecting the crumbling infrastructure outside the South-East.
The economic rationale behind your post is absolutely correct. However we don't want to split because we don't want to share; we want to split because of the missuse and economic opression and the unending corruption that plagues Spain. We don't think ourselves of so-prosperous at all in that sense - and at the same time I'll admit corruption is always an issue in democracy, but Spain's case is taking it to ridiculous levels.
Let me post sources in few for what I'm saying, on the phone right now.
Did you ever consider the possibility that maybe the people in Catalonia somehow work harder/smarter/better than in the other regions of Spain? In which case the rest of Spain would be the selfish ones, wanting to mooch off Catalonia, just like a lazy brother always nagging his richer brother for money. In my experience, often when Person A calls Person B selfish, it's because Person A expects Person B to do something for Person A without Person A doing anything back in return, which to me seems particularly selfish.
That's what we all founded europe for... stronger together!
Their desire for independence has been around for hundreds of years.
But even if that wasn't the case: what's wrong with that? Why would a few million people that want to form a sovereign state have to be held hostage by the others just because they're wealthier?
But I also find it amoral for anyone to try to stop someone else from ruling themselves.
It would seem a large part of the problem is the morality of strongly enforcing strong property rights in itself.
In other words, if you see the wealth inequality as sufficiently amoral, then that should not be enough to stop independence, but there might perhaps be worthwhile arguments over what terms to negotiate independence on.
But it is harder to have sympathy when Spain as a whole has not done more to redress that wealth imbalance earlier.
I think now that the referendum has started it should be really obvious why Catalonia doesn't want to be a part of Spain.
Just look at twitter being filled with imagery of Spanish riot police beating up kids and old people while trying to stop the vote.
https://twitter.com/SERCatalunya/status/914390058383413248/p... https://twitter.com/naciopolitica/status/914383283718410240 https://twitter.com/ThIsCatalonia
Who would want to live in a country where the government sends an army of masked thugs to violently attack people who are doing nothing criminal?
The next obvious step will be end-to-end auditable voting systems.
With this referendum too, this article gives me the impression that it might be Madrid's unreasonable reaction to it that might really drive the independence here. With this kind of response, I don't blame the Catalans for wanting independence at all.
I'm told this is just normal for the region, but if this is normal then independence is eventual.
"The first casualty when war comes is truth".
This is not the same thing. My mother tongue is not my (current) habitual tongue. I don't see where the report shows the habitual tongue spoken.
Llengua o llengües que la persona ha parlat primer a casa seva. Es considera que aquesta llengua ha estat transmesa familiarment i adquirida en el procés de socialització de l'individu.
This is not the habitual language. So, where is it?
http://www.idescat.cat/cat/idescat/publicacions/cataleg/pdfd...
"Initial language" (page 45):
Catalan: 31.6%, Spanish: 55%.
"Identification language" (page 48):
Catalan: 37.2%, Spanish: 46.5%
"Habitual language" (page 51):
Catalan: 35.6%, Spanish: 45.9%
Edit: in my first comment in this thread I spoke from memory. Also, the data from the 2013 poll (official data):
https://www.idescat.cat/cat/idescat/publicacions/cataleg/pdf...
"Initial language" (page 45):
Catalan: 31%, Spanish: 55.1%.
"Identification language" (page 46):
Catalan: 36.4%, Spanish: 47.5%.
"Habitual language" (page 49):
Catalan: 36.3%, Spanish: 50.7%.
EDIT: Seems like that's the old poll. There's a new one from 2013, in which both Catalan and Spanish grew as the habitual languages. It still doesn't reach 55%, though.
This is the result of the language having been made illegal, then not illegal, then taught predominately by the school systems.
Is it possible the 55% who speak Spanish primarily fall along those demographic lines? Is it also possible that some portion of that 55% speaks both Spanish and Catalan?
Sincere question. I know very little of the situation.
I also have a friend who has been teaching English as a Foreign Language in BCN for at least a decade now, and he and his wife tell a similar story.
"In any case I would love to be able to express better myself in English" - you already have a fluent grasp of English. You spelt it's with an apostrophe which is spot on and come across as a native writer - for a given value of "native" 8) Good skills mate.
In my building in Barcelona there are 10 flats. 2 flats have occupants who speak Catalan as the mother tongue, 4 flats with occupants who speak Spanish as their mother tongue and 2 flats with foreign languages.
The language divide isn't always an indicator of their views, in the building there are Spanish speakers who want to vote yes, Catalan speakers that will vote no and a general consensus that everyone would just like the legal option to vote regardless of yes/no leanings.
And that it's really the only relevant point in this issue. All the other arguments are just distractions.
When 82% (1) of the population want to vote, the two options are, voting or an undemocratic imposition by people that doesn't live in the area.
In the context of a democratic Europe, sooner or later there is going to be a vote, ergo, whatever the result, better sooner than later.
(1) - https://twitter.com/jpfbadcock/status/911702508749443074
That is, while there are confederate flags, there isn't a active, ongoing independence movement in the US south.
I'm not sure what you mean by that but I would like to know.
Suppose that 100% of Texas wanted secession (it's just an example), what the federal government would do?
Keep a permanent occupation force like in Iraq or something like that?
It would be difficult keep talking about democracy with a straight face.
All you got to do is change the constitution.
Are any of them still serious about it now that Obama is out of office?
They're the fringiest of the fringe though.
Spain is divided into 17 communities. Each has their own cultural identity.
What I like about travelling around Spain (and I must do the Canaries and Balearics some day) is the microcosm of different regional flavours, e.g. Asturias and Galicia have bagpipes, the Basque country is a foodies delight, Andalucia has flamenco & Moorish palaces, the Canaries have a whistled language etc.
Now I get the Catalans feel "different" but when I see the graffiti around the place saying "X is NOT Spain", I wonder which Spanish identity they're referring to.
Fake Spain, such Andalusian or Castillian identified both as proper Spanish.
"Hablame en castellano, polaco".
Even in South Carolina where there was so much controversy around having it at the state house...the reason it went up in the first place was supposed to be temporary (4 years) for that purpose alone.
That it never came down when it was supposed to the real issue.
For example, they choosed school principals among independentist so now over 85% of them are Catalan language teachers that tend to be independentist. This way kids could be directed to be independentist too.
The same happened with the local media, TV3, newspapers like La Vanguardia. If you were not independent public funds were not given to you. Those private media without the public funding could not live on their own.
Since 20 years ago they control education too, and kids are forced to speak Catalan as the main language, studing a very biased History full of lies like that Catalunuya was a reign in the past. They also put big sanctions on shops labeling things on Spanish until nobody dare.
They brought nearly a million muslim people to Catalunya to work so they do not speak Spanish, like people from Spain or South America does. This makes it the higher terrorist risk area in all Spain, including Ceuta and Melilla.
The problem was not independentist forces doing this, but the central gobertment that let this happen.
Now with half the population(controlling Catalunya) against the other (supported by the Govertment) there is a significant risk of civil war there.
When "democracy" returned, some of the competences they had before the war were returned to the government.
After 6 years of demonstrations of 2-3 million (out of 7million) asking to hold a referendum and receiving NO to any request, it was announced and proposed one year ago in order to agree it with Spanish government, but they would not even discuss it. In the end the unilateral way is the only way to hold this referendum.
Why shouldn't it be allowed to ask people's preferences? Isn't it democracy? People who doesn't want independence can say NO. Laws should serve people's desires, not forbid participation and opinion.
Doesn't that happen all the time in polls and in local, regional, and general elections?
In the dictatorship Catalan was forbidden, but now Catalan in Catalonia is the only language used in schools (the teachers are told to only speak in that language even to the parents, search for "immersió lingüística"), the official buildings, hospital papers, and so on. Is this what you would call repression or not-democracy?
Now, in Spain other languages (I am using the word languages again) are official, and they are the language the teachers use at schools. Do you know what they call other languages in France or Italy? dialects! They are not official, of course, nor used as official languages in schools or public buildings.
So Spain is even more democratic than Italy and France in that issue, but people are complaining in Catalonia because of the adoctrination, and millions of euros spent by the Catalan government. Don't fool yourself. A referendum in a moment of maximum propaganda by the Catalan government is really democracy?
The conservative Catalan government, as the conservative Spanish government, have a lot of cases of corruption, and since all this irrationality nobody is talking about that. Last week Spain freed two Catalan politicians from the current governing party from going to jail because of the Pretoria case, but almost nobody mentioned that. Do you really thing this chaos is not premeditated?
Isn't this the point of autonomy? You decide what languages to teach/use in your institutions. We can discuss whether this is a good idea or not. Or whether what you say is true in reality or not. But it's the Catalans' decision, that's what autonomy is for.
> So Spain is even more democratic than Italy and France in that issue, but people are complaining in Catalonia because of the adoctrination, and millions of euros spent by the Catalan government.
Comparisons are meaningless in this situations. Maybe Spain is more "democratic" (if you say so) than France(which is not hard to beat honestly, considering the status of non-French languages in France). But one could also say that Spain is less democratic than Switzerland wrt languages, and that would be equally meaningless.
The question is whether the autonomy Catalonia receives is enough for the Catalans. That's for the Catalans to decide.
> Do you really thing this chaos is not premeditated?
Are you saying that all the Catalan citizens collaborating and organizing together have been manipulated by the elites for all these years? When did the manipulation start exactly? Would you mind sharing sources that support this?
We should remember this is a false myth. Catalan was never banned. There were many works in literature and music using Catalan as language during Franco's dictatorship (1939-1975).
For instance, you can check the full list of works that won the Lletra d'Or awards, to the best year work written in Catalan. It started in 1956. Josep Pla, one of the most importan Catalan writters won that award in 1957.
https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premi_Lletra_d%27Or
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josep_Pla
And here you can watch Joan Manuel Serrat, singing in Catalan on TVE (the Public Spanish national television). That was in 1968.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6da-yrtBIY
What Franco did was to ban Catalan language from public institutions.
Like schools. An entire generation missed out on learning Catalan at school like my own mother. Call it whatever you want but that to me feels like forbidding a language.
They brought nearly a million muslim people to Catalunya to work
Only ~520k Muslims live in Catalunya. Meanwhile, Andalucia has more than 300k and Madrid over 280k, so it's not like there's such a big difference. http://observatorio.hispanomuslim.es/estademograf.pdf
I'm not sure what do you mean but Catalonia was in fact a reign in the past (please correct me if I am wrong):
[1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crònica_de_Ramon_Muntaner
Every government has its media, they control education in a way or another, etc.
However, things get bad when your central government is perceived as acting against yourself in every single move they do.
I agree with you about the risk of this confrontation getting worse. That's why I think a referendum should be made so people can express themselves. People's Party is against, of course. They feel pretty comfortable talking about nothing but Catalonia.
Lived in Catalonia all my life, never had a teacher tell me any of the biases you are stating.
I ought to think you are the one who was directed to think like that?
Catalonia would have trouble becoming genuinely independent without approval from Spain. Even if they declared independence, and didn't face military action, they'd only have the status of other unrecognized states like Somaliland or to some extent Taiwan.
Also now for the referendum, the central government sent four thousand police officers in cruise ships to the port of Barcelona to prevent voting. Does not seem particularly grown up to me neither ...
Then I think about the secession desire of some in California. (I'm on the west coast of US). Personally I don't care. It doesn't really make historical sense, but whatever. Of course the talk is of the whole west coast seceding, and I live in Oregon. I don't want to secede, so that I have a problem with.
I suspect the main issue is money, but the secondary issue would be fear of a slippery slope of secession.
And that's before we start thinking about agriculture. Of course, in that scenario, water becomes interesting.
You shouldn't make such bold statements, less without providing any sort of evidence.
I never felt the need to downvote in HN until I read this.
Besides, not voting is also democracy. Most of the Spanish people don't want to allow these kind of referendums in Spain. Therefore, Spain is doing what the majority wants (== democracy).
In the name of what, a group can decide over another on what is it allowed to do? Because of the frontiers made after conquering when using force?
Of course that a group can decide over another group which is a subset of the former. Otherwise, any city of any country, or any group of individuals, could decide to vote and set their own rules for whatever they want.
"Otherwise, any city of any country, or any group of individuals, could decide to vote and set their own rules for whatever they want." --> And do you think this is wrong? I think self-governance is the future. Not to go against anyone, but to decide more about everything. Not to put a paper in a ballot every 4 years.
Current Catalonia vs future Catalonia is the proper comparison. The one you made is just manipulative crap.
Should the people in Hungary have asked the Habsburg government or the population of the rest of the empire whether they can have their own country? Should the Slovenians, Czechs, Poles or anyone else?
Should the Irish have asked people in Britain to kindly let them have their own country?
>Besides, not voting is also democracy. Most of the Spanish people don't want to allow these kind of referendums in Spain. Therefore, Spain is doing what the majority wants (== democracy).
Self determination, ever heard of it?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Val_d'Aran
Indeed, in the brand new Catalonian Independency Law, it's stated at the very beginning that Republic of Catalonia is (will be) a non-severable country; exactly like the Spanish Constitution article that doesn't allow Catalonian referendum... Just committing the same mistakes that they denounce?
Would help to know (for non Catalans, specially) what you hint at. My parents talk in Spanish everywhere and to anyone they want to with no problems. Have done so for all her life for my mother and more than 40 years for my father.
I assume you mean that public offices and positions require knowing and using Catalan?
For classes, IIRC it’s not mandatory (or wasn’t 15 years ago), just common. My chemistry teacher spoke only Spanish, and it was fine.
- That was two years ago
- Even then, that was a parlamentary election, not a referendum.
This <50% metric has been widely cited by the media, but it is flawed IMO.
I think it is reasonable to demand a proper referendum, whether you want independence or not.
I'm from the US and my wife is from Barcelona. Her family all speaks Catalan between each other but they are perfectly happy speaking Spanish with me (as are all of their family's friends and associates).
Between my wife and her friends, they speak probably a 50/50 mix of Catalan/Spanish.
I have never heard or seen anyone in all of Catalunya be discouraging or negative in relation to speaking Spanish.
When I was first in Spain, the calls for independence were few and far between compared to now, but the situation hasn't improved so they continue to grow.
But the basis of those calls, from what I've seen, is primarily rooted in real, economic/political issues. They aren't calling for independence because they have a different language, but because Spain is not providing them with the fair share of resources they need to succeed and grow as a region.
[1] https://www.google.com/amp/www.lavanguardia.com/politica/201...
[2] https://www.google.com/amp/www.elconfidencialautonomico.com/...
However I just see for the first time your [1], and as a totally pro-independentist person that I am, I totally condemnd that. Thats blatant catalan fuckup, that is unacceptable and that is not what my independentist rationale claim for.
1. It's false that the education in Catalonia is entirely in catalan. I've had tons of classes in spanish.
2. It's false that the use of spanish in public is discouraged. If you go to Barcelona I'd say that you're going to hear 50/50 spanish and catalan in public.
3. It's not clear if the percentage of people who defend an independent country are above or below 50%. It'd be great to verify it with a real referendum allowed by the spanish government ;)
It's OK to express an opinion, but please, don't propagate these kind of lies. They do no good to anybody.
Despite the efforts of the Catalan government, it will be much closer to 100% Catalan in the environments where they can dictate what language may be used. Do you hear 50/50 Spanish and Catalan in the media controlled by the Catalan government, for example? They push the usage of Catalan over Spanish as hard as they can, going beyond what is legally possible in some cases (see http://blogs.ua.es/sevila1/2016/05/30/nulidad-de-parte-del-p...).
I've been to Barcelona for a few days around five years ago, keeping mostly to the touristic areas. Had to skip it last year on an Interrail trip due to lack of time, sadly.
It's right that the connections are encrypted, but it's NOT correct to say that content is automatically replicated (but it's a common misconception). Instead, content who is wanted by other peers is the only content that gets replicated. You need to explicitly "pin" content to help replicate it.
This is different from Freenet where content is indeed pushed out to other peers in that fashion.
At this point, the government says that both them and the judiciary powers are just defending the democratic rules, and Catalonia's government is the one at fault for all this hassle.
The problem is that it is accepted that there's a wide majority of catalan people who want a referendum, and here we are...
In the words of General Sherman:
You people of the South don't know what you are doing. This country will be drenched in blood, and God only knows how it will end. It is all folly, madness, a crime against civilization! You people speak so lightly of war; you don't know what you're talking about. War is a terrible thing! You mistake, too, the people of the North. They are a peaceable people but an earnest people, and they will fight, too. They are not going to let this country be destroyed without a mighty effort to save it… Besides, where are your men and appliances of war to contend against them? The North can make a steam engine, locomotive, or railway car; hardly a yard of cloth or pair of shoes can you make. You are rushing into war with one of the most powerful, ingeniously mechanical, and determined people on Earth — right at your doors. You are bound to fail. Only in your spirit and determination are you prepared for war. In all else you are totally unprepared, with a bad cause to start with. At first you will make headway, but as your limited resources begin to fail, shut out from the markets of Europe as you will be, your cause will begin to wane. If your people will but stop and think, they must see in the end that you will surely fail.
People are not rational however, and the wealthy landowners were facing the extinction of their wealth... so they started a war.
As someone who doesn't know much about American history: What happened to the wealth of those Southern landowners after the war? Did they get to keep it?
The South was still devastated by the war. But being largely agrarian to begin with, loss of capital wasn't quite as hard a blow as losing a factory.
Maybe you were thinking about taxes ?
[1] "http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/basics/gdp.htm"
But not only that, the centralisation of government powers and agencies have created a problem where many big companies have to be in Madrid even if most their operations are in other parts of the country. That makes their taxes to be paid in Madrid instead of e.g. Valencia, Bilbao or Barcelona. The amount of taxes lost because of this is HUGE and much worse than the 16 billion per year above.
An independence would bring back 100% of the former and a good chunk of the latter. Hopefully that would help Catalonia grow at the pace its economy can and then it should be able to contribute back to Europe much more than now. Contributions have to be sustainable.
Edit: This comment is now at -1. Please argue instead of downvoting. You're acting against HN's rules.
In the Catalan media they appear in waves, polluting all the comments and making the discussion unbearable.
They are also holding cyberatacks to the Catalan News Agency so we cannot inform outside.
They have also closed aerial space, so drones cannot fly and take pictures of massive demonstrations tomorrow if we cannot vote.
Google censors an app from Google Play which was telling people where to vote, after Spanish court forces it: https://twitter.com/thespainreport/status/913798991539777537 https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/913812096319737857
And more geopolitical info: https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/913920102411718656
Tech people in the world: Please help us and spread the word!
http://www.expansion.com/economia/2017/09/29/59cd50b8ca47412...
Ireland from the UK, Slovakia from Czechoslovakia, Kosovo from Serbia, the bits of Poland that were in Austria-Hungary or Germany from those two empires, pretty much every single European overseas colonial possession... Not to mention all the widely-supported secessionist movements that have failed militarily in the Indian northeast, in the Chinese west, or in the Russian Caucasus.
Of course, Americans prefer to imagine that political conflict everywhere is all about money rather than actually confront the idea that people other than themselves have collective identities and cultures.
My interpretation of GP's comment was about the draconian approach towards silencing internet activity. Is it believed the raiding of ISPs, outright blocking of websites, etc is the fault of Catalonia's government or Spain's?
Edit: "Getting away with it" is mostly a question of "which side are you on?". Independentists and most non-government supporters think that what's going on is outrageous, whereas government supporters are totally fine with it.
These laws where passed mainly to fight against piracy (think thepiratebay). Of course the excuse was that it was a tool against terrorism and pedophilia though ;)
Without disobbeying, woman and black people would not vote nowadays, so history proves it is a good way to take down immoral legal laws.
EDIT: UN experts say that Spain must respect fundamental rights in Catalonia. Freedom of expression, freedom of press and power separation is at stake.
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?Ne...
This is about democracy.
Democracy is deciding new law based on current law following people's desires... Like it or not, every day meter of Catalan soil belongs as much to a Catalan woman as to an Andalusian man...
Nobody in his right mind would say that Catalonia is an oppressed region by Spain's government... Quite the opposite actually.
You don't argument why Catalonia is not opressed. Banning all the laws emerging from its parliament is not respecting.
Sorry Spaniards, we will vote. It's not about you, it's about us. It's not about us feeling superior or supremacist. It's about deciding our way, as we think too different in too many things. We can be good neighbours.
Not all laws emerging from its parliament are ruled unconstitutional by the courts. And unconstitutional laws enacted by any parliament in Spain are banned by the courts, Catalonia or not. It's not really a matter of respect.
E.g. "Catalonia is a nation". The Spanish Constitution says "Catalonia is a nationality" while the Andalusian Estatuto says "Andalusia is a nation".
TÍTULO PRELIMINAR Artículo 1. Andalucía. 1. Andalucía, como nacionalidad histórica y en el ejercicio del derecho de autogobierno que reconoce la Constitución, se constituye en Comunidad Autónoma en el marco de la unidad de la nación española y conforme al artículo 2 de la Constitución.
http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/html/especiales/NuevoGobierno...
Unless that's not the most current estatuto, you've been misled.
The count is of about 30 different articles. Here's a comment from El País (hardly pro-indy or pro-catalan) about it: https://elpais.com/diario/2007/07/05/espana/1183586424_85021...
La Constitución se fundamenta en la indisoluble unidad de la Nación española, patria común e indivisible de todos los españoles, y reconoce y garantiza el derecho a la autonomía de las nacionalidades y regiones que la integran y la solidaridad entre todas ellas.
The Andalusian estatuto almost uses the exact same words, "nacionalidad historica" in the "unidad de la nación española". Can hardly be considered against the Constitution. Agreed?
One can argue that "Cataluña es una nación" is a valid interpretation of the Constitution (I won't, because I'm not a constitutional lawyer and I don't think you are either), but you can't really use the Andalusian estatuto to support that the Tribunal Constitucional gives inconsistent rulings. (And has the Andalusian one even been challenged? I don't think the Tribunal Constitucional can strike down laws that haven't been brought to them).
And for the record, I read that, back in the day, Ciudadanos asked the Defensor del Pueblo to bring the Andalusian estatuto to the Tribunal Constitucional. Not sure if he did, or who can and cannot bring laws to their court.
Like it or not, Catalonia will break away from Spain if it wants to and there's nothing Spain can do to stop it short of murdering thousands of people. That's the choice Spain will have to make when it comes down to it.
That would be horrible, for sure, but don't worry. Using my disheveled imagination I think that asking the people responsible of breaking the laws to explain their behaviour in front of a jury could be one (very obvious) thing that Spain could do. It seems that they are doing it yet, in fact.
This does not seem like the correct definition to me.
Suppose that a country is an absolute dictatorship, with the exception that the citizens may vote on the color of a bikeshed, and their word goes for the color of the bikeshed regardless of the dictator's preference for the color of the bikeshed, and that this is all enshrined in law.
This would not be a democratic country.
Democracy is based on people voting on the decisions being made.
"deciding the new law based on the current law" is not a fundamental part of democracy?
That is not to say that I don't think that "deciding the new law based on the current law" is valuable. I strongly agree that it is valuable. But it is not, I think, an essential part of what democracy is.
The current status is complicated and a failure of politicians' ability to do their job, but the fact is that trying to split the country unilaterally is currently illegal and wrong from at least some very sound points of view (another comment put it very well: Catalonia is as much of the Andalusians as of the Catalans).
So the government is now forced to stop this - they would otherwise be letting Andalusians be robbed. It is their job to block the referendum. It was also their job to avoid this situation by creating avenues of dialogue though... So in my opinion their next task in their job is to resign.
I agree free speech laws in pretty much every country are unethical because they are arrayed in a way to ban speech that might risk the dissolution of the nation, but every single country has those laws because its governments trying to protect themselves.
Care to elucidate me on what basis that statement lies? I am a UKoGBnNI citizen who has also lived in DE for a few years in the West Germany part in the 70's and 80's and have friends who are native to DE.
In the UK we have laws banning inflammatory speech of various types that are clearly categorised and so does Deutschland. Both countries also, I think, have citizens who pride themselves on being able to pretty much speak their mind freely. I think both are very liberal states in this regard.
I do feel that some of my civil liberties have been eroded over the years but I in no way feel that my right to freedom of speech has been compromised in any way. I may live in a country that (worryingly) has more CCTV cameras pointing at me than you can shake a stick at but I do not believe that my right to express myself coherently and freely is damaged in any way. I'm not happy about say RIPA and co but we have a formal, legalised right to freedom of speech in the UK.
You are obviously not a US citizen because you seem to believe the US is one "thing" or a single country. It isn't and yet it is. It is a federation of states with a few odd bits tacked on (just like the UK - not) which means that there are federal laws, state laws, county laws, city laws, bye laws and made up by someone laws. This is also how most "normal" countries work.
So, where do you live?
Free speech laws in the US are strictly governed at the federal level, not at the city / state / county level. Your comment accordingly makes no sense. The states are legally unable to make any laws abridging freedom of speech. Every time a local entity has attempted such, it has ultimately been struck down by the federal government, which retains supremacy over many rights (and will ensure those rights with force against a local entity if necessary, as when ending segregation).
On a government level the UK regularly imprisons people for facebook/twitter posts (that would be protected by US first amendment).
Same with the most parts of the UK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_the_United... .
The US Supreme Court has never allowed something like this in the US: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201... .
In those other countries, not so much. For example, uttering "I believe that there was no Holocaust" in public.
You misunderstand the nature of the Bill of Rights and freedom of speech in the United States. The Bill of Rights are in the federal constitution and are enforceable in the federal courts, against any level of government (federal, state, or local).[1]
One of the central free speech doctrines in the United States is the prohibition on viewpoint discrimination. That means that our laws cannot treat any viewpoint differently than any other. If you are allowed to stand in front of the courthouse and scream anti-racist slogans, then you must be allowed to stand in front of the courthouse and spew all the racist hatred that your heart desires. Communists, fascists, anarchists, democrats, republicans, racists, reverse-racists, white supremacists, black supremacists, holocaust deniers, and even people calling for the overthrow of the US government, they can all speak their minds in America. There is no jurisdiction in the world that guarantees free speech as totally and absolutely as the United States does.
Americans are self-governing people. We don't need someone to tell us what we're allowed to think.
[1] This wasn't always the case, but the Supreme Court has held since the 1920s that the 14th Amendment "incorporated" the Bill of Rights to the states. Before this, most or all states had free speech provisions in their own constitutions anyway, but enforcement was not uniform. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_the_Bill_of_R...
Spain respects fundamental rights in Catalonia and anywhere else in the country; respecting them is the supreme law of the land. Anyone who violates those rights will have the courts after them the exact same way as the courts are acting against this referendum.
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?Ne...
Censorship in internet. Opening private letters. Political detentions and raids to political parties offices, searching for posters and ballots. Bringing 10000 policeman by boat to avoid a vote.
Sound quite authoritarian to me.
Threats to the press, threats to polititians. Closing websites, chasing teenagers who fork a repo in github, opening mail, spying communications.
Check Julian Assange tweets to know a bit more about it. You cannot accuse him of being a part in this conflict. https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/914029345018122240
I think there's still a stretch from "there are corrupt politicians and the monarchy and president have a lot of undue influence over the judiciary" to "Catalans don't have freedom of expressions or are oppressed".
Try to give one candy to calm a child having a tantrum in a room full of them and see what happens when the other children realize that crying, breaking toys and banging the head on the wall equals to be rewarded with sweets.
You allow somebody to break the law and jump over the constitution just because they are inconsolable otherwise. You fell in the trap. Now you must grant the same treatment to the rest. Similar referendums were demanded (and should have to be allowed in the very next day) for Euskadi, Galicia, Canary Islands, Asturias, Leon, Andalucia and only god knows what more. Two can play this game, and ten also.
The idea is not Germany allowing or not a referendum for Bavaria; or UK trying to please Scottland; the idea would be: you must now be forced to grant referendums for each single state in Deutschland or UK to make us happy "or we will stop breathing (and will create a permanent state of confrontation and street disturbs)".
If your spouse wants a divorce, if your children wish to disown you — you can't deny them just because it's an inconvenience — it is their right.
So, why deny independence? Because only the optics have changed, not the reality?
IMO that has not been true for last 70 yrs. Point to me a war that has been People vs People.
The fact of the current world is People Are Sovereign. If some >=N people domiciled in continuous region wants self-determination, thats their human right.
Just start the political movement and it'll be respected. I think it's a fair ask.
By the way, can I get your crystal ball? There's this lottery thing...
Aran has its rights explicitly recognised by Catalan Parliament, including their self determination rights, right now: https://cat.elpais.com/cat/2015/01/23/catalunya/1422013790_5...
Rahola hasn't been a politician for decades. ERC is much better than it was with her and Angel Colom.
... their loving father or something?
for Pete's sake, you, bad parent, they have rights!, and politicians that advise them well! Break the law, my minions, is funny (Specially to me, when I'll run with your money and deny to even know you... fools).
(tip: the correct answer starts with Y, but not for the spurious reasons that you claim. Is because, as citizen of your country, you have some constitutional rights. No matter if you are super-smart or a frozen cabbage sending your 11yo children to a warfield). Any nation must try to protect their citizens all the time (even from themselves if were the case). Spain is not different in that sense to any other country. Sometimes is not possible, sadly.
All residents in Catalonia have the right to vote in this referendum, regardless of their origin. So your comment is basically empty.
E.g. why would a foreigner that's been living in Catalonia for a few weeks, and plans to move away within a month to never return, have more of a say than a Catalan that spent 40 years there but had to move abroad two months ago in search of a job?
For the record: Spaniards living in Catalonia for at least 6 months can vote. Foreigners can't, like in General or Regional elections.
Even with your version my fairness argument stands. How is it fair that a Catalan expat isn't allowed to vote, and an Andalusian that might be there just for a few months is? Expats are certainly allowed to vote in General elections.
But I grant that "you're allowed to vote if you can vote in the General elections as a resident of one of the four Catalan provinces" is probably as fair as one can practically get when designing this.
The true fact is that I can't divorce from my wife without her permit and she could not divorce from me without me agreeing to sign the divorce papers. Does not match the case of one part splitting unilaterally. A better term for this case would be marital abandonment, and a even better term would be family abuse. There is not such thing like a "right to desert your family keeping the house for yourself only".
Historically the central government has extracted money and resources from Catalonia. Catalonia was one of the first regions in Spain to develop its industry and definitely the strongest on that: https://es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolución_industrial_en_Esp...
These days it is widely accepted that the Catalan people send 16 billion per year to Spain that are never returned. That wouldn't be a problem if it wasn't because our infrastructures are underfunded and only around 35% of the budgeted investments were actually executed: http://www.elnacional.cat/es/politica/estado-ejecucion-infra...
But this is not just an economic grievance. The issue is way more complex and includes (but not restricted to) language, cultural and respect issues.
Edit: This comment is now at 0. Please argue instead of downvoting. You're breaking HN's rules.
What? You totally can, at least in most countries, as long as you can prove that your wife did something wrong. Can Catalunya prove that Spain did something wrong? Yeah: Franco.
http://www.vozbcn.com/figura/2009/11/20091127nou.jpg
"Shouldn't your wife be allowed to divorce from you if she wants" with an implicit (because you abused it) would be, on the other hand, an extremely rude example. I don't think that this passive-agressive possibility was even in the mind of the people posting it.
Not only that but many modern leftist political parties advocate for self determination freedom within our constitution.
So the fact that the Catalan parliament with a simple majority of separatists are claiming unilateral referendum of independence in a free country is just to gather momentum.
It is indeed possible to change the constution, but:
1) You need 3/5ths of the camera to do so.
2) There is only one significant state-wide party supporting self determination (podemos, which a very young party that entered the scene only in the last election).
3) The major parties (PP and PSOE, which would be like the republicans and democrats in the state) are both overtly against self determination.
In any case, having to change the constitution amounts to having to get the support of 3/5ths of spain. This is hardly self-determination, don't you think?
The same restrictions exists in Catalonian Parliament for things such as changing the "Estatut". It is not right for a simple majority to enforce their will over the people their opposition represent. Therefore the referendum is not legal, nor legitimate.
Hear yourself: "the referendum is not legal". Such a nice view of what democracy is.
So willing to vote and say goodbye to this bla-bla-bla-this is not legal, that is not legal.
Good bye opressors. My deceased family in the war the dicator won will be really happy if we can finally separate. Too many open wounds you have never tried to heal.
It's easier to separate Communists from non-Communists, because each of us gets to vote to only one party, than Catalans from non-Catalans. And even though Communists are a clear minority in Spain, you'd be hard pressed to find one that equates "not having a majority in Congress" with "being victims of a tyranny".
If your family lived under the dictatorship, you should be sensitive to what they (and many others) suffered and fought, to not use lightly words like oppression and tyranny.
It is not fair and Catalonia is fighting (again) to change it.
The fantasy of "the Transición didn't take the francoists off the power" would need the likes of Felipe Gonzalez be "mentally francoist". It's no more than a feel-good fantasy.
The fact that you need to convince the majority to change something, while individuals are constitutionally protected, is really how democracies work. If anything, nationalist minorities have wielded much more power in the Spanish Congress than other minorities with more voters, due to quirks of our electoral law.
And the rich leaving the poor seems like a right wing thing to do. Maybe Franco would agree that the smaller "upper class" need protection from the tyranny of the poor. Or maybe money is not the biggest part of the equation, maybe it is just a nationalistic disgrace of the same kind that forced Castilian as language onto Basques and Catalans during Franco. Maybe we will get a Franco like situation in Catalonia where minorities are not allowed to teach/speak Castilian. I think that would be a disgrace for every decent person killed by the butchers of Franco and other "nationalists".
And what is the lesson to learn from all this, should all nations start to force minorities to speak the national language just because if we give minorities relative freedom and power they will claim independence? And possibly treat our minorities left bad?
Should Catalonia accept independence from pockets where the majority wants to be Spanish?
Can your neighborhood struck trade deals with India? Then maybe your neighborhood wants to team up with others around to do that... See where I'm going?
It already meets all the requirements to be a member, EU law is ingrained in Catalan law, it has the ability to negotiate and state structures. It just needs to be an independent country.
It would be better to be in the EU, but meanwhile that happens some bilateral trade deals with the EU should be relatively easy to accomplish.
If you're referring to recognition as a country, that's a separate and huge discussion. If Catalonia is not recognised it can't take its part of Spanish debt with it (might be up to 20% of the total) while being a rebel region not paying taxes and maybe under military occupation. How is Spain, which is still in critical condition with a debt of the size of its GDP, going to fare? This month Spain had to get a loan to pay pensions. This month!
So if Spain loses 20% of its GDP while keeping all the debt, how is it going to survive? And if Spain can't pay and falls, what's going to happen to the EU? You thought Brexit was bad? This is much worse!
A situation were the outcome of a YES vote is negotiated and Catalonia pays his dues is a win-win for every stakeholder: Catalans, Catalonia, Spaniards, Spain and the EU. Striking trade deals after that is pure pragmatism.
Just go through old papers about Slovenia or even the Baltics. It's all about realpolitik at the end and Catalonia has to be able to show its value to the world.
But one of the requirements for entering the EU is unanimous approval from the other countries. That is not going to happen for Catalunya.
Which makes think about the ramifications for the future of the EU with a yes vote in the referendum.
A relatively prosperous region in on the European subcontinent that agrees to succeed will embroil the EU with more political and economic turmoil than it already has, and open the subcontinent up to more non EU influence.
Might be a boon for multinational corporations and some governments who have something to gain from a weaker EU.
At least something tells me that the recent former Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs at the US State Dept words from a leaked phone conversation on the EU a couple years ago probably stands true today of the perspective some powerful people have in the world on the EU…
The extinction
Being smaller is stupid when you need to compete with much bigger countries in the rest of the world. It doesn't work in the practise.
I mean, by the same argument, why not let someone annex Spain? If bigger is better...
I haven't heard of any new independent country asking to be part again of the former one.
Yeah, the tiresome "seduce us (with mo' fresh money)" argument again.
I have a better idea, why you don't try to seduce me instead to call me thief (Spain stole us) and abuser (Spain oppress us and do not let us be free) and hit me all the time with a new surrealist occurrence (don't buy spanish products, here are a list of the evil companies that you must avoid if you want to be a good citizen)?
In the last 60 years, you have been offered a lot of gifs and privileges (that by the way, I don't enjoy), and is never enough. You are never, ever, happy. Always creating drama around, like an old crazy theater lady past her prime, always demanding to be loved, but giving in return dry sarcasm and a single uncaring kiss by christmas (when there are cameras around).
So thanks, but not thanks. I will pass this time. You are not so irresistible as you think and not so beautiful as you were 20 years ago. I deserve something better.
> I haven't heard of any new independent country asking to be part again of the former one.
This does not bother me, but there is always a first time for everything.
Name three "gifts/privileges" that Catalonia has been given/granted and you don't enjoy, please.
Just google it, spend a few hours reading legal documents and history of the country and will find the answer by yourself.
Then you don't have to deal with them.
A vote is happening. There is nothing that the government can do to stop it unless they send in the tanks and start killing millions.
Beware and let us know if you spot any zombie
There has certainly been some disruption, but the people are mostly still forging ahead on all fronts.
The police have open fired on some of the pro independence people, sending a couple hundred to the hospital, but that is very minor in the vast scheme of things.
A couple hundred pro independence people in the hospital isn't that big of a barrier.
This is only the beginning. Every video of the Spanish military beating up an 80 year old lady with a ballot in hand is a propaganda Victor for the independence movement. They stop 1 person from voting, via their rubber bullets, and they create a hundred more pro independence people who were previously neutral.
Another possibility could be separatists thinking last week or yesterday "this is stupid, some people could be hurt!, for nothing!, why we don't stop this farce before... dunno... a 80yo lady is beaten or so?
I bet that the lady, or the child crying, would have appreciated that line of reasoning, but it seems that for separatists the more people hurt, the better. Curious if we think about it.
The people voting know what they are doing. Many people throughout history have died for their right to do that.
More than 800 wounded in hospital. I think it is not a fantasy.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/01/dozens-injured...
2 seriously injured == millions murdered?
If you want to bang your head repeatedly against the walls and trow chairs against policemen, please don't tell me that is my fault if you end the day with some scratches, a headache, a panic attack or something worst.
There is a great solution for this, avoid being deliberately (with your little kids not less!) in a place where something illegal is happening and was publicly announced. Avoid to participate in the scam and specially to mock and challenge the police in their faces (with the obvious goal to elicit a violent reaction for advertising purposes), and you will be OK. Take care of yourself and think twice before to act.
Independentists are irresponsably scalating their constant provocation and salivating since years with the idea of a militar intervention with shiny tanks and hundreds of people murdered (preferibly non-indepentendist people). Thus they could finally justify having their much dreamed war of secession, doing a little clean of the zone, and feeling like warfare heros in their neighborhood. This is not what happened yesterday, thanks to all deities.
And today the basques had also asked for a referendum to be recognised as nation. As expected. Great.
In fact you can see it in the flag, it has a shield with the chains of Navarra, the lion of Leon, the Castle of Castilla and the colors of Aragon(which are the same of Spain and Catalunya flag) over a Granada fruit(for Granada conquest).
Basque was never a kingdom,either Galicia or Catalunya. Asturias was a kingdom, later becoming Asturias and Leon kingdom, then growing again and again against the muslims in Alandalus.
To say that Basque was a kingdom is an enormous lie that unfortunately is told in Basque country as they control their own education.
My grandfather was Basque, he spoke Batua, the original Basque language in his village. He could not speak complex abstractions or communicate with people in villages 40 kms away as every batua was different. The language was unified less than 100 years ago(with the abstractions simply being invented at this time)and called euskera, a recent invention. Now kids there are brainwashed being told that this was the language that people spoke 3000 years ago.
The places in Spain that after industrialization are rich are rewriting History in order to look better themselves, specially if you are nationalist.
Actually “batua” means “unified” and is the name given to the modern variant that you talk about.
What's next, back to deny our languages and call them dialects? Forbid em them again?
Not true with PP having more than 1/3 of the Congress seats
The second biggest party, currently in opposition, is obviously blaming the government for the whole mess, but I don't think they have any intention of voting to change the constitution.
... was drafted 40 years ago by a Franchist establishment concerned with maintaining a certain degree of continuity. It's not surprising that the people most oppressed by Franco are not particularly happy with the result.
Besides, the Wilson doctrine is usually more relevant for this sort of movements than whichever piece of paper is supposed to be law here or there. A population cannot be denied the right to self-determination, which includes splitting off if they really want to. It can be a stupid move (see Brexit), but people must be given the possibility to democratically discuss it and vote on it; because otherwise things will eventually go full Balkan, and you never want to go full Balkan.
> the people most oppressed by Franco
Let's at least agree that this is subjective.
> It was drafted by 7 hand-picked representatives, 4 of which were basically franchists
Two out of the seven writers of the Constitution were Catalan (~1/3 of the writers for ~1/6 of the population). One of them a communist. The other one, exiled during the dictatorship for supporting Catalan nationalism.
> ratified by franchist institutions before being put to a popular vote
Before being put to a popular vote, it was ratified by the Congress that resulted from the first free elections in Spain in 40 years. The francoist party of Fraga only won 16/350 seats in that Congress; comparable to the 11 seats obtained by the Catalan party of Pujol. Half the seats had been won by centrist voters, and the other half by marxist voters.
This Congress was our "assembly of people elected democratically", that could tell the writers to go back to their drafts until the result was to their liking. Those seven writers, by the way, weren't "hand-picked": they were picked by that Congress, among their members; they were all freely-elected representatives.
The prime minister was still an ex-Franchist and the UCD had plenty of old hands around. The Franchists still had huge relevance in the army. The drafters were still moving with a somewhat limited room for manoeuver.
> could tell the writers to go back to their drafts until the result was to their liking.
Not really. These things don't happen in a vacuum, the longer the process and the higher the risk that it things could go pear-shaped. There was active terrorism and of course cold war activity. Compromises were made, which were good for the times but not necessarily the best overall.
I'm just stating that no, the writers of the Constitution weren't "hand picked", rather selected by Congress among representatives elected democratically; and no, it wasn't ratified by francoist institutions, rather by a democratically-elected Congress (and later on by a referendum). That's just revisionism that gets spread to fuel Catalan nationalism.
Given there were no other options, and few people wanted to return to dictatorship, the new constitution was adopted. But that doesn't mean it wasn't a shotgun, Hobson's choice between dreadful and merely bad. Why should people continue to adhere to it?
https://www.boe.es/boe/dias/1977/01/05/pdfs/A00170-00171.pdf
Read the first two articles of that law; Spain was no longer a dictatorship. The last clause of the law enacts it as supreme law of the land.
It is following that law that the first Congress of the new democracy (with the mandate to write a Constitution) was elected, using the same procedure we keep using today to elect our Congress. In that election, the francoist party of Fraga lost immensely to the centrist and marxist parties.
If the Constitution they wrote didn't pass the popular vote of the referendum, general elections would be repeated and the process would start again.
It never was a choice between accepting the new Constitution or going back to a dictatorship. It's called "Transición" instead of "Revolución" because the francoist regime turned itself into a democracy following its own laws and procedures.
That's a very optimistic view of the situation. In practice, the instability resulting from not completing the process would have had dramatic consequences. Among other things, there was a Cold War on which could have easily started a new civil war.
> the francoist regime turned itself into a democracy following its own laws and procedures.
But exactly because the prime mover was the regime itself, there was always a chance it could go back on its steps. Compromises had to be made to ensure the transition would go through smoothly, as it's always the case.
That's why most of the actions taken have been ordered by the Attorney General and not a court... Because the ref is not illegal :)
- They don't want people to vote.
- Maybe if it's suspended you should refrain from going on with it until there's a ruling.
- They know what how they want the ruling to be, so they act like it was done already. They're just working on making it legally sound in the meanwhile.
Choose whichever you prefer, all those are guesses. The fact is that there's no ruling and that's easily verifiable.
Also, some of the operations these days are not actually ordered by TSJC but by a separate judge using an old (almost forgotten) case: http://m.huffingtonpost.es/2017/09/20/el-juez-ha-ordenado-la...
And during the first days of sites blocked no telco provided the court order they were in theory served. In fact, not all the telcos are blocking the sites.
So yeah, western democracy and all that. It all smells incredibly fishy and ad-hoc.
This is altogether a political issue, that the ruling party doesn't want the rules to be changed, but points to the constitution instead of taking responsibility for their stance.
Same with some Aboriginal communities (who in some ways control vast areas of land, greater in size that many European countries!)
They were quickly denied the right to do so on a legal basis.
It never came to fistycuffs, but it could possibly have.
Independence movements are a tricky thing.
People are different, cultures are different, ethnicities are different.
Why do you think that after 1000 years of war (in the case of the 'Germanics' - you could say 2000 years, i.e. against the Romans) - that places like 'Germany' still exist as a relatively coherent entity? Even when they were not 'a single state' they were allied.
The boundaries of Europe for some reason always seem to 'snap back' to something resembling an ethnographic map.
Why did the Greeks - who were never 'a country' in antiquity rallied together in defence against the Persians?
Far from being 'radical' it's actually the epitome of 'reasonable' and even 'pragmatic' that ethnic groups want their own states.
Every case is different: Catalonia, Scotland, Quebec, former Yugoslav states, heck - even Crimea ... but there's always at least some reason behind these movements - even if it does get caught up in 'stupid nationalism' or even, sadly, 'stupid racism' - those are usually just the extreme voices. Most people are not like that.
When has "Germany" been a "a relatively coherent entity"? The "Germanics" the Romans fought against have just as much in common with today's Germans as they do with the French or the Dutch–the French get their name from a Germanic tribe (the Franks), the principal historical difference between France and Germany is that the Germanics who invaded the Roman Empire ended up adopting the language of the people they had conquered, whereas those who remained beyond its borders kept their original Germanic language.
Moving forward, what we call "Germany" today is just the Prussian-dominated part of the Holy Roman Empire–"Austria" being the other main component–the separation of "Germany" and "Austria" is fundamentally due to dynastic politics (the Hohenzollern dynasty ruling Prussia vs. the Habsburg dynasty ruling Austria) and religion (the former being dominated by Protestants, the later dominated by Catholics)–the differences between Austrians and Germans are really no greater than the internal differences within each country, and the fact that they are two separate countries today is more an accident of history than anything deeper.
The only time that historic Germany has ever been a "relatively coherent entity" was in the Nazi period. (I think Hitler's role in Austria-Germany relations was sort of paradoxical, in that despite briefly unifying the two countries, he ended up associating the whole idea of unification with his own odiousness, such that Austria-Germany unification is a lot less likely now than it would have been had Hitler never happened.)
> The boundaries of Europe for some reason always seem to 'snap back' to something resembling an ethnographic map.
Yes and no. On the one hand, political boundaries often (but not always) end up following ethnic boundaries. On the other hand, ethnicity is often a deliberate political construction. Look at France – for many decades, even centuries, the policy of the French central government was to suppress regional ethnic/cultural/linguistic identities in favour of a homogenous notion of Frenchness. If people on opposite sides of France see themselves today as having a common ethnic identity, that is due to the deliberate policy of the French state, rather than something that happened naturally.
Every European knows that.
It's so funny to watch you kill each other over stupid arguments of "independence" dating back 1700
Grow up It's 2017
Still you managed to be the last western country to free yourself from fascism
Even Greece did better
And you still are fascists and are fighting among brothers for no real reason
Meanwhile we think we live in Europe and don't care about you being so childish
Franco is so proud of what's happening in Spain right now. He's smiling in hell watching his legacy unfold
We have a Spain-wide constitution. The Catalan government decided it has a democratic mandate by the people of its region to not abide by it. The NORMAL reaction by the state is to apply it, and stop the Catalan government from breaking it. It's only oppresive insofar laws and the judicial system are opressive.
Disclaimer: I'm a non-nationalist Spaniard living (but not born) in Catalonia. I don't particularly care about Catalan seceding or not (except for pragmatic concerns such as freedom of movement, etc.). I do care about whatever country I live in being able and willing to enforce its laws, insofar they are enacted by legitimate democratic institutions (and thus can be changed or repelled by democratic means) and there's freedom to disagree with them.
I also support a secession referendum for Catalonia. There's a very strong and majoritary demand for it that the state should address. But it needs to happen in due lawful process.
Of course, the American Revolution was also illegal by the laws of the British.
It's also oppressive in the sense of trying to rule people without their consent.
If you try to let people choose, but the other side says no, what's there left to do?
(It's my opinion that it's _not_ justified, though: there's a fair chance of getting through the necessary changes to allow a referendum and other self-government demands by following legal procedures, given the current Spain-wide political climate. I believe this is mainly a politically dishonest and populist move by the Catalan government. But that's besides the point.)
MPs all over Europe (Denmark, Switzerland, Finland to name a few) have asked the Spanish government to stop prosecuting and negotiate a referendum.
Not only it is the judge's job: it's not even legal for a judge to knowingly allow an illegal action.
We don't even have to imagine. It happened recently: Scotland. Or if you allow me to jump the pond: Québec.
Also, indyref not ruled illegal yet so it might not be that clear cut.
Not much really. I think its really stupid of the Spanish Govt. to try to stick to formal constitutional means when there is a genuine, popular mandate for independence. What they seem to be saying is that a referendum is not allowed by current laws so it is illegal to have it. And their ham handed response is only agitating the region even more, legitimizing the separatists call for independence.
OTOH if they had provided a path for an actual referendum to be held, provided democratic means for allowing independence... who knows? Maybe there wouldn't be a popular mandate in the referendum. Maybe the central government could have worked closely with those people, parties and cities that wanted to continue being part of Spain and convinced more.
Its seems really rich of the Spanish govt. to claim they are following democratic processes to enforce a very undemocratic rule. They seem to be playing with semantics to enforce their will.
Disclaimer: Total outsider view, I'm neither from Spain or Catalan nor have I ever visited. My opinions are based solely on news reports.
That remains to be seen. There are still less than 50% proponents of independence, according to what I read. The recent Spanish actions may have increased that number though.
It's interesting that you think so. I'd say the normal thing to do would be to issue a press release pointing out that the results aren't legally binding under the constitution and whoever wastes government money running a referendum on the thing might be held criminally or civilly liable.
Actually trying to STOP the thing is so expensive that it defeats the purpose of preventing the central government's money being wasted on the thing. It's so heavy-handed that it seems like it would just make Catalans who want to split more determined, and perhaps drive some to the other side. The most rational thing about it is that it might serve as a show of force to prevent other territories from doing the same. That part seems kind of sad.
If, for example, the State Of California, in the US, were to organize, without constitutional mandate, an "official" referendum calling for succession, Federal Marshall would be all over that in a blink of an eye.
And I'd agree that heavy-handed action gives the Calatan separatists quite a boost ... for the short term. But states don't really have choice about enforcing the law when a significant actor is visibly flouting that law. That's just how the law works, more or less everywhere it exists.
IE, the situation is as the GP states.
These things are rarely black and white, and laws often lack the necessary flexibility to address them.
It would not be illegal under federal law for California to hold a referendum on secession. It wouldn't mean anything at all. It would be legally equivalent to my planting a big red flag in the turf at a National Park and claiming that land in the name of Portugal. (it's a crime - littering - if you leave the flag there when you leave) The Federal Marshals could watch if they wanted to.
A number of actions taken by the state of California after the referendum would probably be illegal under federal law, unless the people of California held the referendum and passed it and the state officials in California simply ignored it. You'd expect that to cause a constitutional crisis at the state level in California, and that might eventually bubble up to the federal courts.
If the referendum passed and the state actually started to behave independently and take liberties with federal property, all sorts of things would start to go wrong for them. You don't really need to get heavy handed with federal law enforcement in that case. Not when you control the Federal Reserve Banks and pretty much everything else. There's a whole path of escalation you could follow in the courts before federal agents would start arresting people, but even if you want to get right to that you have to wait for them to commit actual crimes.
California has, in fact, held initiatives (“referendum” has a particular meaning in California law which is slightly different than it's general usage) on things which violate the federal Constitution. The federal government has done nothing about the votes, though it has a role in challenging and overturning substantive actions taken by the State based on such initiatives after they've passed.
There's no real reason to think a secession initiative would be any different.
Assemblea.cat (Assemblea nacional Catalana - Independentist association)
cridaperlademocracia.cat (Website protesting for actions perceived as political repression)
Empaperem.cat (Crowdsourced advertising campaign for the referendum)
E.g. http://www.elmundo.es/cataluna/2017/09/23/59c69496468aeb8c7f... https://www.elindependiente.com/politica/2017/09/25/la-guard...
Private organisations websites like assemblea.cat have been banned.
Lots of signs drawn, designed, printed by people have been seized by police. Including signs that only said "democracy".
Private citizens have been arrested for mirroring the websites with their own resources. That's political prosecution, stop hiding behind the law.
Please don't spread misinformation.
I very much would like to see a source for this, and, if the order to arrest them was given by the TSJC judge, what the reasoning was and whether charges were brought.
Tried to find a Twitter thread from his lawyer, but no luck. Check this out: http://www.levante-emv.com/comunitat-valenciana/2017/09/22/p...
He was also taken to police premises, put on the phone with someone from Madrid and released.
Indicted for a crime here couldn't commit as he's not a civil servant. Also the judge authorised to get his online accounts and change the passwords (wtf). A terrible attack on civil liberties.
http://www.lavanguardia.com/local/valencia/20170927/43159282...
If they can't find any evidence of such contract, I expect the charges will be dismissed and his stuff restored.
I don't think the argument that he's not allowed to do it, by his own will with his own funds, will hold in court; if I understand the law correctly. I guess at most he might be in trouble regarding the Ley de Protección de Datos, IANAL and I wouldn't know. In any case if private data-handling is fine and still the law wouldn't allow it, that law needs to be changed.
I also expect charges dismissed. A detail about his stuff is that he didn't get a receipt (as per his lawyer that was not yet present), so his things were (in his lawyer's words) "effectively stolen by the police".
This happened before the "where to vote" part of the referendum site existed. It was just an informational static site.
Many other have been called to declare with "no specific crime" in the judge notifications also for mirroring the website, including at least one member of the Catalan branch of the Pirate Party. This has been seen by some as harassment to avoid more people mirroring the website.
Trying not to be get too biased, I'd conclude that Spanish central government is trying to protect the rule of law, state-wide or regional-wide, while also protecting those who didn't vote for separatists parties, which in 2015 elections were 52%.
Catalan Parliament passed a law with more than 50% of the vote. In a Parliamentary democracy, Parliament is sovereign.
The law says that if YES wins, there will be a mandate for independence and negotiations will start with the central government.
If the result is NO the Catalan Parliament will dissolve the government and call for regional elections.
More than 80% of Catalans want a legally binding referendum, regardless of pro or against indy.
Is the Catalan government a private organization? Or is it technically a part of the Spanish state.
Private organizations can organize, fund, and promote whatever referendums they want. And the Spanish govt. would just say they don't recognize the result.
But if the organizer is not a private organization, but instead a public institution, then it's likely abuse of authority and funds.
The result would be valid (from a probabilistic point of view) if "going to vote" was independent of "voting yes". But if the there is any correlation between "going to vote" and "voting yes" then the result of the referendum will be significantly different than the result of a referendum where any individual was forced to vote.
Here there might be a correlation: people in favor or independence or more likely to go voting than others.
A similar phenomenon may have happened in the us. If there is a correlation between "lying to polls" and "voting for candidate A" then the poll predictions can become very wrong.
This isn't entirely accurate though. It's only replicated if people request it. If everyone only requests the content through `ipfs.io` then the content will only be living on the original seeder, and the IPFS gateway nodes which run GC on a regular basis.
Depending on how the content is moved, it _might_ end up on a few other nodes (a way around nats, by using a third party peer to stream content between two peers), but I believe it's only ever moved through the network, and will not be stored on the nodes. If it is, it's only there till the next GC (disabled by default I believe).
(I think your math on bits is wrong: I'm getting that log2(1010 * 23 * 365 * 4) = 33.4, not 28.)
A few notes on the crypto off the top of my head:
1. 1714 iterations of SHA-256 seems really low given that you're going to be looking this up approximately once per person. My 2010-era laptop can compute about a million hashes per second according to `openssl speed sha256`. A second or two to look this up is definitely comparable with what a human would expect the UX to be for a dynamic website run by a government; honestly I wouldn't complain about up to a minute as long as there was a clear progress bar. So you could easily change it from 1,714 hashes to 1,714,000 without impacting UX, and you should probably do that given the relatively small key space, which would give you a factor of 1000x on the brute force attack.
2. AES-256-CBC with no IV smells funny to me. I guess every message is encrypted with a different key, but the keys themselves are easily derivable (they're just a single SHA-256 hash of the lookup key, and those are all in the public filesystem). I cannot think immediately of an attack against this but maybe someone else can.
3. Your brute-force estimates are what's needed to enumerate the entire lookup key space. The practical attack here is what you've outlined, that you know someone's date of birth and zip code (which are likely in public records). and want their national ID for some identity theft. You're not trying to find some arbitrary person to steal the identity of. That means that the date of birth and zip code are fixed, and you only need to brute-force the DNI portion, which has only 10^5 * 23 possibilities. That's extremely realistic: I can compute 10^5 * 23 * 1715 hashes on my 2010 laptop in a little over an hour.
I guess they do the right thing by only using a part of the DNI string, so you still have three unknown decimal digits, and zero information about what they might be.
1. Totally right that I'm wrong, but I'm now getting 48 bits, not 33 ;)
2. That was a terrible mistake of my own. The lookup key is derived from the password, not the other way around. I've corrected the article to clarify that!
3. Yeah that's why I said you can do it with your laptop and not too much time ;)
Only using the latest part of the DNI is not that good though. The letter is actually a control character, which can be computed from the 8 numbers. Hence, if you have 5 numbers and the letter, there are only some possible 3-digit prefixes that lead to a valid DNI! How many? I would have to investigate further hehe...
Wait a second, can someone from the area explain this? Why on earth do they need your ID number just to tell you where to vote?
In my country (UK) 99% of the time all you need is a postcode and you can be told your voting place. (I say 99% because there are a few postcodes that are split across different seats and thus different people in the same post code have different polling places. Also just to note some areas are bad at publicly supplying this data. But my general point still stands.)
Your ID is bound to a place to vote based on "where you live" registration. You can't just vote from anywhere.
I'm not in any way saying you should be able to. You can't in my country either.
I'm just surprised that you need your ZIP & ID & DO to find out where you vote, because in my country you can find out where you vote with only your ZIP.
This way, if you are not in the database you know that there's a problem and can ask the authorities to get it fixed before it is too late and you cannot vote.
(This could be handled better in the UK - at the recent election there was a website for last minute registrations which got lots of traffic, and afterwards they said a very large amount of people were already registered. But there is no easy system to check if you are already registered .... so everyone just used this site to sign up again.)
BUT
The article talks about answering the question "Where do I vote?". The assumption is the registration is correct, you just want to know where to vote.
In my country, this can be answered by a information system that contains no personal information at all, so I was surprised to see the DOB & ID bit in the original post.
I'm talking about simply offering an information service that answers the question "Where do I vote?" - that's what the OP is about - and in the UK, 99% of the time you can answer that with only someone's postcode.
Ohhhhhhh, is that the information I'm missing? So you have to know both the building you vote in and the specific table you need to go to?
In the UK, you just turn up at the the right building and there are signs to guide you from there. You don't need to know in advance what table to vote from. (Unless it's changed recently - I've had a postal vote the last 2 elections. Can anyone from the UK confirm?)
That would make the question "Where do I vote?" much harder to answer. In the UK, for 99% of the population it's a simple "My postcode -> building address" lookup table that contains no voter personal information at all. But if Catalan has to have "??? -> building address and which table" that is much harder.
Thank you, that sounds like the answer I was missing then.
But Q: If you only knew the building you had to vote from, and not which table, could you still turn up at the building and be able to vote somehow? Or would they really turn you away?
It seems to me the OP set out to answer the question "Where do I vote?".
And they did this by releasing a whole bunch of personal information on every citizen online. That, no matter how good the encryption or how slight the P.I. is, strikes me as a bad idea.
Who's to say that in 6 months a flaw isn't revealed in the encryption method that leaves it all open? Or in a year there isn't a breakthrought in brute forcing and suddenly it's easy to open? And while you could argue the P.I. is slight (DOB, ZIP and ID only) maybe it's actually very powerful to bad people when combined with other data sets?
Basically, if there was any way to create a data set to answer the question "Where do I vote?" without including any Personal Information (like you can in the UK) that is so much better, because then you have an open data set you can pass around freely in as many ways as possible with no fancy crypto needed and no worries about personal information leaking. You could even print the damn thing and put it up in the town square, no fancy tech needed.
ps. Some people are talking about the question of "Am I registered to vote correctly?". That does require Personal Information in a DB, no way around that. But that's not what the original article was about. That very clearly says "Where to vote? ... how is the catalan government supposed to notify people their assigned polling stations?". Being clear about the question really does help sometimes. :-)
"The app, available on Google Play until just before 7 p.m. on Friday, helps people to find their polling station via their address"
I downloaded and checked the app (I'm in the UK and I can).
I don't speak the language, but with a few google translate checks it seems clear that it asks for an address and gives you a polling station. No Id, no DOB needed.
So was it really necessary to release a DB of voters personal information?
Having just gotten back from Barcelona, I have to say that the way the Spanish government is handling this is far from ideal. I don't very much support the Catalonian plea for independence (I haven't heard any good reasons other than "but our freedom"), but blocking sites seems... suboptimal.
As for the crypto itself, why not use bcrypt? Your users don't care if it takes three seconds, but it makes attacks entirely infeasible.
In the process, you make it available for anyone else who ask for it, but only for a limited time; until the Garbage Collector (GC) runs. If I remember correctly, the GC run once every hour or so, so you probably won't reshare the data for longer than that.
You need to pin the data if you want to keep resharing it. This effectively tells the GC to not touch it.
You still need the physical security of the ID (DNI) that includes a few security features (like your face). You can see and image here: http://www.aulaclic.es/articulos/graficos/DNIe.gif
From my point of view, this rises a far more interesting question.
Do you guys think it could be possible to use blockchain to implement a secure voting system? I do and I got a few ideas about the main issues (authentication, authorisation, validity period and others) and will be happy to discuss with anyone interested on co-developing such a system... or if you know of one already do let me know!
Seems like if every computer can be a "poling station", authoritarian regimes/governments will have a more difficult way of stopping this sort of voting from happening. And maybe, only maybe, we can enjoy a free democracy.
Somebody would just make their own public gateway, and the government would need to block another domain. Of cource, running IPFS for yourself would take away any need to use a gateway.
Under Spanish Constitution, supreme law in Spain, the right to determine the territory of Spain belongs to all Spaniards (article 2).
What some people claim as "democracy" or "the right to vote" is actually removing this right from the rest of Spaniards.
Aside from other claims and whether there are political or historical reasons, the voting has been declared illegal by the "Tribunal Constitucional", highest court in Spain. End of story, it's illegal, period. And Spain (mostly judges and police forces) are trying to defend the law.
Now a quick note on the alleged economical facts: no, Catalonia does not contribute 16 billion to the rest of the country, it's actually 2,4 billion (this is what Catalonia published last year). This is called "solidarity", and it is what contributes to other regions in Spain to grow and benefit the country as a whole. Madrid is also a significant net contributor. On the other hand, Spain holds 55 billion in debt from Catalonia, which is unable to finance by itself on international debt markets. So numbers don't add that quickly as it has been said here.
So in 1978 Catalonia's vote mattered and you're claiming today it does not.
Only all Spaniards can vote regarding the integrity and sovereignty of Spain.
If you think 1978's Constitution was approved under some form of oppression, fight that, there are clear ways to change the Constitution. But do not support any illegal activities that remove rights from the rest of the people in the country.
The root of the democracy is the respect to the law. Not "voting".
So Instead of: 10^10 * 23 * 365 * 4 = 33580 * 10^10 possible combinations , we have 10^10 * 365 * 4 = 1460 * 10^10. And we can represent it with 44 bits instead of 48.
To explore all possible combinations, we need then 1460 * 10^10 * 1715 = 25039 * 10^12 hashes, instead of 575897 * 10^12 hashes
With AntMiner S9, we can do all hashes in: 25039 * 10^12 / 28 * 10^9 = 10.3 days.
If we want to specifically scam a target neighbourhood (imagine sending an email telling people "your local bank in your neighborhood asks you to reset your password), we can choose a fixed zip code, and all this could be guessed with a less powerfull machine (someone else can do the math).
then run:
ipfs pin add QmZxWEBJBVkGDGaKdYPQUXX4KC5TCWbvuR4iYZrTML8XCR
http://www.businessinsider.com/julian-assange-catalonia-inde...
Russia wants to break apart the bloc with Germany at the center to dominate its neighbors. It's a replay of Russia's tensions with Europe that date at least to the Napoleonic wars, and include WWI and WWII.
Other way around, no? The index is the hash of the decryption key (as it should be), it's just that the index is called "key" and the key is called "lookup".
If the decryption key was the hash of the index, then it would be trivial to decrypt every entry.
wget https://dist.ipfs.io/go-ipfs/v0.4.11/go-ipfs_v0.4.11_linux-amd64.tar.gz
tar zxf go-ipfs_v0.4.11_linux-amd64.tar.gz
cd go-ipfs
./ipfs daemon &
./ipfs pin add QmZxWEBJBVkGDGaKdYPQUXX4KC5TCWbvuR4iYZrTML8XCR
How would China do it?
I'm betting against Spain on this one. Go Catalonia!
As long as one peer in the network has a outside connection, all peers could access that content via relay for example.
Just vote at the polling place most convenient to you, and announce available polling places on posters around town, or facebook & twitter if you prefer.
In Spain you don't have to register to vote every time. Just show up at the place you have to, based on the census.
I'm asking why can't you be told where to vote - the original thing the article is about - based on your postcode only. But I think I have my answer in another thread.
But I don't see any database only html code, how can I clone this website to see what is happening with my f* data?
For reference it's 147.135.130.181. Or if you want to go to the Catalan referendum page, it's http://147.135.130.181/ipns/QmZxWEBJBVkGDGaKdYPQUXX4KC5TCWbv.... Unfortunately SSL doesn't work, as the certificate is only valid on ipfs.io.
Mac/Homebrew users: brew cask install dnscrypt
Windows/Chocolatey users: choco install simplednscrypt (or alternative see [3])
Linux: should be in your package manager. Generally, searching for dnscrypt should yield some useful software. It isn't difficult to set up via command line IMO. There's probably howto's to be found via search engine as well.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNSCrypt
Maybe Mozilla should even get involved early in IPFS so that it can shape the protocols the way it would prefer them to work in its browser later on (while still ensuring the censorship-resistance vision of the project remains intact).
But I would give a thumbs up for Gopher support.
Doing so is going to add bloat that is needless to the majority of people. If they add support for Tor, people are going to expect them to add support for more protocols, from torrents to freenet to gopher.
But you can always play the victim card ans act like history never happened.