All nationalisms are the same, they begin with romantic ideas about the people, traditions, shared ideals and values, all to envelop their members in that marvel called "cultural identity", which makes its members feel so good (belonging to something bigger has always been a useful claim). But this empty idea of well-being always ends with a solid and sad reality: imposition through violence. In short, totalitarianism.
From the state nationalisms that shaped modern states to the regional nationalisms that inhabit them today, the foundations of their formation, transformation and objectives have always been the same. And all, without exception, end up as Catalan nationalism has ended up today, with the imposition of ideas through violence on those who are outside the collective.
Because yes, this is about imposing on the remnant of Catalans who do not share the independence movement. And yes, it always happens when nationalisms reach sufficient social and political strength. Because without the "people" (that diffuse concept) and the institutions, nationalism is nothing. The fire and terror that we have witnessed this week, carried out by the "puppies" pushed by the occupants of the Catalan institutions, and who have grown up under the conviction (and lies) that independence was possible and close, is an example of this.
The basic problem of nationalisms, all nationalisms, is that they are exclusionary per se, authoritarian, populist and end up falling into contradictions. Within nationalism there are the people and there are those who are not part of it, and these last are the enemy. Therefore, a nationalism that defends a given cultural identity does not fit in with that idea of multiculturalism that Europe or Spain defends so much. We have current examples in Germany, France or Poland where nationalist parties accuse "foreigners" of trying to destroy their land. Moreover, this is the reason why the European Union was founded, to prevent
nationalism from rekindling the flame of conflict between the different peoples of Europe or even between brothers. The sad thing about all this is that in light of the facts, both at national and European level, it seems that nationalisms are once again dazzling the staff with retrograde and archaic ideas, taking advantage of certain socio-political circumstances that, favorably, give them an argumentative force difficult to refute from traditional ideological positions. Nationalisms are also inherently opposed to integration. Any nationalism is opposed to losing its identity while it is diluted over time within another culture. Which is complete stupidity because every culture is a mixture of so many other cultures. This is the case with Catalan, Basque or Flemish nationalism, where they fight tooth and nail against everything that is not Catalan, Basque or Flemish. But while they do not have enough strength, they are subordinate in favor of belonging to a superior political entity. Therefore, it is the available force that determines their capacity for action (until they obtain it and the pressures and protests begin until they reach violence) and not the lack of desire.
A close example is in the Canary Islands. Canarian nationalism is expressed through parties such as Coalición Canaria, a nationalist party that establishes the following ideology on its own page: "Coalición Canaria is a nationalist and progressive force that puts the Canary Islands above all else, consolidating, with each of our singularities, our territory from the Island towards the Canarian nation. We are not a party of the right or the left, but a party committed to the advancement of the Canary Islands and their development, involved with the integrity of the State as long as it knows how to recognize the singularities of its territories". As can be seen, in the party's own ideological expression we find a preferential position of the Canary Islands and its singularities as a Canarian nation, above all else; and, in turn, the involvement with the integrity of the State as long as certain requirements are met.
Requirements that, like Catalan or Basque nationalism, will increase if sufficient social and political force is gained to the point of bordering on demand under threat of violence. In the case of Canarian nationalism, the acts of "rebellion" usually have, for the moment, a low level. For example, raising the flag of the seven stars in an institutional act when it is not the official or legal flag.
Nationalisms are also authoritarian because, after all, their main objective is to represent an entire people as a whole and without fissures. To be the true voice of the people. This leads to the fact that, at some point, any other form of cultural or social expression that does not share the majority, ends up being persecuted and excluded.
And yes, Coalición Canaria also fits the profile. Let us remember the words of Ana Oramas: "we are going to represent the pride of a land that never gives up, the pride of a people that is not willing to be ignored and crushed". Even in the initial stages, nationalisms already exclude and persecute. Who has not heard the use of terms such as "godo" to refer to those who come to the Canary Islands to take advantage of "ours"? Or the use of the flag with the seven stars as a symbol of confrontation against the State and what is "outside"? We have all witnessed it at some point.
Another relevant aspect of nationalism is its "populism" if we understand the simple definition of the concept as the defense of the interests and aspirations of a people, which fits perfectly in this article. This populism usually has roots that completely deviate from the classic terms of left and right. In the words of Elie Kedourie: "It is a mistake to ask whether nationalism is a policy of the right or the left. (...) It is neither. Its own end is national self-determination and permanent satisfaction."
The reality is that Canarian nationalism in its different versions is not very different from Catalan or Basque nationalism. Despite who it may concern. It is true that it does not have the same intensity, for now, but that does not mean that its ideological base, its positions and political principles, and its expositions, are similar. It is also true that we all like to be part of something, of a common identity that you can share with your neighbor and that allows you to interact with the people around you in search of mutual satisfaction or a common goal. But the reality is that, when you least expect it, nationalisms end up destroying that illusory fantasy of emotional and personal well-being to become the worst reflection of the human race. They end up destroying the good in people and people.
For all this, because nationalism only serves to divide, to build walls, to exercise violence over others under erroneous precepts, preventing society from evolving to a real common identity that is impregnated with all the cultural elements that have transcended history, both those that disappear and those that remain, is why I strongly oppose any type of nationalism. It doesn't matter where it comes from or what it sells you, I will never understand that a people allows itself to be carried away by this beautiful poison of identities, folklore, shared ideas and traditions, because in the end what it does is sell its soul to the machinist of hatred, division and exclusion. And this machinist takes advantage of you until he reaches his destination, totalitarianism.
Alejandro Pérez O'Pray, Political and Administrative Sciences, UNED.
